“Ways of Seeing (Ep 1)”
with John Berger
With the invention of the camera, our vision is freed from the coils of our physical limitations which could only be in one place at one time. Suddenly what can be seen can also be captured and transferred through space and time. From the many aspects of life changed by the camera, one of the most significant in history was the camera’s impact to the world of paintings.
Much like a person, a painting can also only be at one place at one time. a painting can be moved but the only way a person could experience it is through looking at it directly. Therefore the context in which that painting resides in —such as the room, the building, and the city— is just as important to the meaning of the painting as the images it depicts. With the invention of the camera came also the reproduction of these paintings. For the first time a person can experience an almost perfect replica of any painting from the comfort of their own spaces. This act of reproduction not only distorts the quality of the paintings being experienced but also the possible meaning the viewer may interpret from the painting. The infinite combination and permutation of sound, size, collection, and arrangement of the reproduced paintings can create drastically different viewing experiences and therefore the meaning of a painting is now a message that can be used to persuade us.
This act of reproduction doesn’t diminish the value of the original painting rather I would say it increases it. The authenticity of the painting is now it’s most valuable asset. Anyone can see, experience, and learn about any painting by davinci but only a few can own an original davinci. So has the reproduction of paintings make it more accessible or inaccessible? For many people in the art world, accessibility is not a quality they deem desirable. Many art books aim not to make the painting more accessible for the public but to mystify it’s meaning to only those in the profession could fully understand and appreciate.