Blog #6 Response

Berger - "Ways of Seeing"

I. Summary
In his article, "Ways of Seeing," Berger attempts to give readers background info from European paintings to support is argument. He argues that the presence of women and how they are perceived by others and themselves are different from men. His supports his argument through paintings by stating that "women are depicted in quite a different way from men... the 'ideal' spectator is always assumed to be male and the image of the woman is designed to flatter him."

II. Conversation
Right away, Berger's ideas were very deep. I did not expect him to dive right into his thoughts and make such bold statements about how women are constantly scrutinizing how others see them. When I read the first couple of pages I immediately started to think about one of my responses in the last blog about McCloud's concept of a mask. I said that if I didn't have a mask I wouldn't be aware of how others perceive my actions, which would make me uncomfortable. I feel like that relates to Berger's thought that women constantly wonder what those around them think about them.

III. Assigned Exercise
QDJ1: Do you think artists of these paintings knew what they were doing when the created them? Why? Would Berger agree with you?
A: Even if the artists did not have a clear meaning to perceive women in this way, I think the thought was in the back of their mind. In a way, their placement of the women or the clothes they were wearing was engraved into their mind. They may have not put as much thought into as Berger but that was because it was their natural instinct to make the woman look, as Berger said, desirable or powerless. I think Berger would agree with me.

QDJ4: Who is the audience and what details from the essay help you to decide that?
A: I, personally, think his audience is to media and advertisement companies. I immediately thought this when Berger contrasted the two pictures of the woman side by side on page 211. He proves that the woman in the modern day photo has the same, powerless yet charming expression as the woman in the old painting. Also, on page 215 he argues that "today the attitudes and values which are expressed through a more widely diffused media - advertising, journalism, television."

AE4: How does humor define a person? Is humor something that is compensating for something else? Or as Berger states, does humor fall on gender lines? Explain your answer.
A: I can see how Berger's idea on humor were formed. He thinks that in order for a woman to want to consider herself as "funny" then she needs to put herself out there so people realize she is a humorous person and that men can just casually say a joke "for his own sake." I don't necessarily agree with Berger though. I don't think humor falls on gender lines. Now a days, women are able to just randomly spit out a joke, without trying to prove herself. In other words, I don't think women necessarily have to want to say something funny in order to be seen as humorous, they can do it for her own sake.

IV. Personal Reflection
Before I figured out who I thought the audience was (the media) I kept questioning why Berger was only proving his point through paintings. Then I realized it was because he wanted to not only argue that women are perceived differently than men, but to also prove how long this has been going on. Like I said earlier, I think the biggest eye opener was when he put the old picture and modern day picture side by side. In my opinion, that was the strongest part of his argument.