I bought this book on two occasions because of recommendation here. I still haven't started it yet. This time I know I have two already so I'm not getting a third one.
I recommend the book over the series. It was written after the original series aired, and gives more space to some interesting topics. For instance I don't recall the series discussing museum goers beliefs about museums.
eecc 15 hours ago [-]
yep, and Sony Music Entertainment auto-ensured shareholder value was maximized
smokel 15 hours ago [-]
Interestingly, this is not copyright infringement, or at least not for the text being reproduced here. The original book (1972) mentions "The text of this book is not copyright" [1]. The image reproductions could invite copyright trolls though, so be warned.
I found Berger's writing pretty hard to digest. But thanks for the inspiration — will try again.
yzydserd 14 hours ago [-]
I came to Berger through Sontag’s On Photography. An easier companion.
16 hours ago [-]
trimethylpurine 15 hours ago [-]
Berger had no credentials or education in anthropology or any science whatsoever but invented a whole movement that I think doesn't carry any scientific weight. His reputation is truly undeserved.
I think the fact that his work has been largely adopted by media experts, and is taught as dogma in film/media studies course work at the college level should be a strong signal that our ideas as a society about sex and body image are severely distorted and deeply problematic. Not in light of his work but because of it.
purpleflashing 3 hours ago [-]
What does anthopology have to do with Berger's work? He was an art critic and an artist, what makes his work unfit for being used in film/media studies that overlap with film criticism as a disciplince that, when looked from a broad perspective, is just a brunch of art criticism? I think the connection is pretty straightforward.
John Ruskin's ideas are also used in film studies even though he formulated them before film as a medium existed.
trimethylpurine 24 minutes ago [-]
Sexual preferences are a subject well within the realm of anthropology, especially the claim is that they arise from contemporary culture, art, ritual, etc.
purpleflashing 7 minutes ago [-]
Berger doesn't claim that.
saagarjha 8 hours ago [-]
His work is most definitely not taught as dogma. I assure you, there are plenty of courses that will be happy to explain to you about the old masters.
trimethylpurine 23 minutes ago [-]
Interesting. I'm happy to know that at least in some places it's being challenged.
wonnage 11 hours ago [-]
I’m confused, so now that he is considered influential in the fields he lacked credentials for how is that in any way a negative
Unless you think those fields were scientifically rigorous until they decided to adopt his ideas?
Maybe you just disagree with the existence of “male gaze”
trimethylpurine 19 minutes ago [-]
He's most certainly not considered influential in any scientific fields. You've misunderstood my comment.
I think maybe the feminist movements adopted his beliefs and repeated them infinitely to the extent that they've become as facts without any scientific basis. Regardless, I hear people regurgitating Berger-like beliefs in art museums around the world.
Male gaze, sure. (That's not Berger's btw.)
The idea that we can draw much knowledge about the owner of the painting of a fat woman, simply from the painting, is just not based in any evidence.
Hopefully that's more clear.
tclancy 12 hours ago [-]
Can you expand on that and point me at resources in this topic? Interesting.
pmoriarty 15 hours ago [-]
> It is seeing which establishes our place in the surrounding world
Do blind people not have a place in the surrounding world?
purpleflashing 3 hours ago [-]
He elaborates on that but you can replace "seeing" with "perceiving" -- it would be a little easier to understand what Berger means, imo.
yzydserd 14 hours ago [-]
Berger’s way of ‘seeing’ is to situate yourself in the time and place, less ocular than you may assume. And then he wrote the touching Cataracts, about how he lost his vision and gained a new way to see. He regained his vision and soon died. Possibly this is why you’ve been downvoted.
trimethylpurine 14 hours ago [-]
If that's true then the down votes themselves are beautifully and ironically tone def in regards to Berger's advocacy of awareness of context and medium in which the viewer is interpreting the content.
NamlchakKhandro 11 hours ago [-]
So you're just here to tone police
trimethylpurine 6 hours ago [-]
I think Berger is. I also think it's wrong and ridiculous.
Rendered at 11:32:38 GMT+0000 (UTC) with Wasmer Edge.
[1] https://pengpedia.org/edition/ways-of-seeing-john-berger-471...
I think the fact that his work has been largely adopted by media experts, and is taught as dogma in film/media studies course work at the college level should be a strong signal that our ideas as a society about sex and body image are severely distorted and deeply problematic. Not in light of his work but because of it.
John Ruskin's ideas are also used in film studies even though he formulated them before film as a medium existed.
Unless you think those fields were scientifically rigorous until they decided to adopt his ideas?
Maybe you just disagree with the existence of “male gaze”
I think maybe the feminist movements adopted his beliefs and repeated them infinitely to the extent that they've become as facts without any scientific basis. Regardless, I hear people regurgitating Berger-like beliefs in art museums around the world.
Male gaze, sure. (That's not Berger's btw.)
The idea that we can draw much knowledge about the owner of the painting of a fat woman, simply from the painting, is just not based in any evidence.
Hopefully that's more clear.
Do blind people not have a place in the surrounding world?