Visual Communication Blog: Entry 2

 Nowadays our popular understanding of art and the visual image is profoundly influenced by John Berger (1926-2017), who offered not just an idea but also an invitation to see and know the world differently in his book, ‘Ways of Seeing (1972)’. The first chapter mainly focusses on authenticity in the modern age and explains how ‘the way we see things is affected by what we know or what we believe’. Paintings were often made to conjure up the appearance of something that was no longer present by capturing a singular moment in time and representing this by however the painter saw it. Nevertheless, it gradually became apparent that this image would greatly outlast what it represented and thus assume new meanings through modern perception. The invention of film cameras further exacerbated this notion of time passing by isolating momentary appearances and proposed that every drawing or painting was relative to the viewer’s position in time and space. Whereas paintings were originally an integral part of the building which they were designed for, a photographic reproduction destroys the uniqueness of a painting by transporting it outside the place where it historically resided and multiplying its meaning into many disparate fragments. Instead of requiring a pilgrimage to the original, paintings now travelled to the spectator and entered the viewer’s house through photographs and televisions. Surrounded by the individual atmosphere of a million different homes gave new context to these paintings and diversified their meaning through a continual flux of the traditionally static visual field.

 Many of the ideas in Berger’s book were openly influenced by Walter Benjamin (1892-1940), whose similar theories of art were presented in his essay of cultural criticism, ‘The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction (1936)’, which coined the ‘aura’ as a unique aesthetic authority possessed by an original artwork. Although man-made artefacts have always been imitated by the hands of men practicing their craft, the aura of an artwork could not be faithfully copied since historical testimony rests on authenticity which is only jeopardised when substantive duration ceases to matter. Therefore, in an age of mechanical reproduction, not only is an artwork devalued by duplications of the original which detach it from the domain of tradition, but the artwork’s aura is also compromised by eliminating the authority normally granted by its unique existence. Nevertheless, Benjamin argued that by separating art from its basis in cult, mechanical reproduction had succeeded in emancipating the social value of artworks from their parasitical dependence on ritual. This adjustment of reality to the masses progressed exhibitions away from the private sphere of life, allowing public society to enjoy the same cultural aesthetics in an easily accessible gallery. In his essay, Berger also champions this democratisation of art, by restoring a sense of connection to the past and rediscovering the aura of shared moments. Despite lacking their original aura, he believed that meaningful art will always connect with some aspect of human experience.

Reference List

Benjamin, W. (1934). The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction. Translated from German by H. Arendt, 1968. London: Fontana. Available at: https://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/ge/benjamin.htm [Accessed 07 Nov. 2019].

Berger, J. (1972). Ways of Seeing. London: Penguin Books. Available at: http://waysofseeingwaysofseeing.com/ways-of-seeing-john-berger-5.7.pdf [Accessed 07 Nov. 2019].