If you order your custom term paper from our custom writing service you will receive a perfectly written assignment on The Ways of Seeing by Berger. What we need from you is to provide us with your detailed paper instructions for our experienced writers to follow all of your specific writing requirements. Specify your order details, state the exact number of pages required and our custom writing professionals will deliver the best quality The Ways of Seeing by Berger paper right on time.
Our staff of freelance writers includes over 120 experts proficient in The Ways of Seeing by Berger, therefore you can rest assured that your assignment will be handled by only top rated specialists. Order your The Ways of Seeing by Berger paper at affordable prices!
John Berger's arguments about Hal's painting of the Regents in The Way to Seeing are that of an objective and deliberately simple man. Many details are partially correct, but in his painstaking quest to stay objective Berger misses out on some of the bigger issues in Hal's painting.
Berger does not simply give us his interpretation of the Regents paintings by Hal. Instead, he quotes a book that is the authoritative work on Hal at the time of Berger's essay and tears it to shreds in an attempt to illustrate mystification and its effects on art. The first quote that Berger displays is one acclaiming the paintings ‘finer points.' He argues that the use of glittering adjectives describing the composition ("harmonious fusion," "unforgettable contrast," and "a peak of breadth and strength") transfer way too much attention to it. Berger admits that it is "reasonable to consider a paintings composition" but quickly states that it had been taken too far, that the critic portrayed it "as though it were itself in emotional charge of the painting." However important, Hal quite clearly did not intend for composition to be in charge of this piece. The details and facial expressions on the men and women are so articulate, they are obviously more of a focal point than the staunch dark background.
The only evidence that exists that shows the nature of the relationship between Hal and the Regents is the painting itself. Therefore, the only way we can interpret the painting is that it is, in Bergers words "a group of men and a group of women as seen by another man, the painter." This is the only conclusion that we can come to based on fact. Anything else is pure speculation. Berger seems to argue that this is how we should perceive the painting. This is inferred by Berger's syntax when he states "The art historian fears such direct judgment…" Berger's thought is indeed correct. However, by striving to be direct, Berger forgets one of his own lessons. Later in the passage, Berger states that "When a painting is reproduced by a film camera it inevitably becomes material for the film maker's argument. A film which reproduces images of a painting leads the spectator, through the painting, to the film makers own conclusions." So when Hal ‘reproduces' the original scene of the Regents, wouldn't it be ‘inevitable' that the painting would lead us to ‘his own ‘conclusions' about the men and women he portrayed? And if that is true, then Berger's art is great to be used as documentary evidence is incorrect. When looking at the Regents we can assume we are viewing Hal's personal ‘argument' about each and every Regent, whether he meant to display it or not. The same is true with every painting we have ever viewed, and many of them are mystery's like the Regents. This means that we don't know exactly how blurred the lens we are viewing the world through actually is, and therefore we cannot assume anything that we perceive in paintings is anywhere close to the actual situation we believe is begin depicted.
Normally, when this painting is discussed, it is broken down into many different aspects. For example the aforementioned critic commented "[the women] are linked by a firm and rhythmical arrangement and the subdued diagonal pattern formed by their heads and hands." Later the same critic states "…the penetrating characteristics almost seduce us into believing that we know the personality traits and even the habits of the men and women portrayed." Berger believes that these statements define mysticism. The ‘diagonal pattern' formed by the women's heads is used by no means to ‘link them.' It is more than likely a simple ascetic arrangement. Berger feels very strongly about this so called ‘seduction.' "What is this "seduction" he writes of? It is nothing less than the painting working upon us." So he feels that the seduction is an individual feeling derived from the painting appealing to your senses. The reason we feel this seduction is that the facial expressions displayed on the Regents are identical to facial expressions we see on people's faces everyday. Berger sums it by saying "It is this---not the painter's skill as a "seducer"---which convinces us that we can know the people portrayed."
Another popular argument about Hal's Regents is that the Regent in a tipped hat and unfocused eyes is drunk at the time of the painting. The art critic cited before does not believe this is the case. Berger mocks him, stating how the critic "argues that it was a fashion at the time to wear hats on the side of the head. He cites medical opinion to prove that the Regents expression could well be the result of facial paralysis." He then comments you could go on for pages and pages supporting such claims. Berger's point is that arguing either way just gets you farther and farther away from the real meaning of the painting and mystifies the big picture.
Berger would rather propose an argument that the only way to understand the painting is to stop trying to hard to understand the painting. When Hal painted the Regents his state was described as "destitute." The Regents were the people who donated supplies that saved his life. He didn't choose them out of anyone in the world. He was commissioned paint this piece. We simply do not know any more about the painting than that, so why skew Hal's unknown intentions by taking blind shots in the dark?
Overall, I feel that John Berger dances on the non-existent line between insanity and genius. Many of his thoughts are so advanced I can barley grasp them and many more are over my head. I do not agree with the notion that the reproduction of paintings has made them less powerful. True, having many reproductions of a painting takes power away from the original painting, but the overall popularity and influence of the painting spreads to the very corners of the world. Webster's dictionary defines power as "physical or mental strength or energy; influence; control." In this sense of the word, reproduction and distribution of paintings infinitely increases their "power."
Berger believes that a painting is not meant to be viewed at two different places at the same time. How can we as a culture really get to understand a masterpiece painting unless it is viewed from countless different angles and---dare I say---countless different locations and against a variety of backgrounds? Before after and in between anything? With a thousand captions and ten thousand different collage's various a teenager's walls. There is no set meaning for art, that is what defines it as great.
Please note that this sample paper on The Ways of Seeing by Berger is for your review only. In order to eliminate any of the plagiarism issues, it is highly recommended that you do not use it for you own writing purposes. In case you experience difficulties with writing a well structured and accurately composed paper on The Ways of Seeing by Berger, we are here to assist you. Your cheap custom college paper on The Ways of Seeing by Berger will be written from scratch, so you do not have to worry about its originality. Order your authentic assignment and you will be amazed at how easy it is to complete a quality custom paper within the shortest time possible!