Notes on 'Ways of Seeing'

Notes on ‘Ways of Seeing’ (1972)
by Berger, J. Blomberg, S. Fox, C. et al


Chapter One

- The essay seems to take the central ideas from Benjamin’s ‘The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction’ (loss of ‘aura’, displacement of notions of ‘the original’) and situate them in a structuralist context

- Berger seems to be, much like Benjamin, be writing from a Marxist perspective. A lot of what is said seems to connect with the Situationist International. A lot of Situationist tactics are alluded to throughout the essay (e.g., detournement: ‘Because works of art are reproducible they can, theoretically, be used by anybody.’(p29) These could also be connected to postmodernism and, more recently, postproduction. The text is essentially Marxist, not postmodernist however.


- The premise of the essay, and indeed the book, divides up the world, like structuralism does, into signifiers and signifieds. Connections can be made with Lacan’s ‘mirror phase’ ‘Soon after we can see, we are aware that we can also be seen. The eye of the other combines with our own eye to make it fully credible that we are part of the visible world’ This notion of the other can be connected, and indeed is present in, (post)structuralism.

- ‘Adults and children sometimes have boards in their bedrooms or living-rooms on which they pin pieces of paper: letters, snapshots, reproductions of paintings, newspaper cuttings, original drawings, postcards. On each board all the images belong to the same language and all are more or less equal within it, because they have been chosen in a highly personal way to match and express the experience of the room’s inhabitant. Logically these boards should replace museums.’ (p30). Sums up the essay. Art should be appreciated for its use value rather than its originality, or uniqueness. This position is shared by postmodernism, neo-avant-garde and the Situationists (and etc). It is an essentially Marxist statement in this instance as it is directed towards removing the bourgeois hierarchy of modern museums and open up art to use by the lower classes.


- The comodification of art a major theme, especially painting. After mechanical reproduction any notion of originality lies in the work being the original of a reproduction, its value lies in its quantitative value not what the image contains; ‘The meaning of the original work no longer lies in what it uniquely says but what it uniquely is’. Central idea from Benjamin’s essay.

Chapter Seven

- Publicity: The colonisation of the everyday by capitalism. This is the central premise of this essay

- Publicity sells the past to the future; ‘Publicity images also belong to the moment in the sense that they must be continually renewed and made up-to-date. Yet they never speak of the present. Often they refer to the past and always they speak of the future.’ (p130). Again the debt to Benjamin is prominent, notions of mechanical reproduction are central.

- ‘Publicity is about social relations, not objects.’ (p132). Publicity is about potential: when you buy a product you buy potential for what you could be. The product embodies your relations to others, this is why publicity is never about the product itself, but potential.

- Publicity’s use of history significant: presents history as something to ‘dip into’ (again Marxist, links with postmodernism, situationism). Art and history lend the product a sense of authority and speak of social mobility. Again, the potential for what you could be.

- ‘Publicity turns consumption into a substitute for democracy. The choice of what one eats (or wears or drives) takes the place of significant political choice. Publicity helps to mask and compensate for all that is undemocratic within society. And it also masks what is happening in the rest of the world.’ (p149)