Wednesday, May 25, 2022

50 Years of ‘Ways of Seeing’

 

Featured in
Issue 227

Celebrating 50 Years of ‘Ways of Seeing’

Mariama Attah, Anna Frances Douglas and Jeremy Millar revisit John Berger’s famed television series and book

+4
BY JEREMY MILLARMARIAMA ATTAHANNA FRANCES DOUGLAS AND SEAN BURNS IN OPINION | 28 APR 22

Since its release, John Berger’s landmark television series and book, Ways of Seeing (1972), has been a consistent favourite of students, curators and artists alike. His accessible reinterpretation of Walter Benjamin’s ideas, notably in The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction (1935), which appeared 50 years ago this year, unlocked a means through which everyday people, not just academics or scholars, could access ideas of artistic representation, reproduction and image construction. Though Berger continued to produce aeons of fascinating material throughout his career, it’s Ways of Seeing to which people routinely return as a blueprint for interpreting how images old and new structure our understanding of ourselves and how we want to be seen. Here, curators Mariama Attah and Anna Frances Douglas, alongside tutor, artist and curator Jeremy Millar, return to Berger’s text and series to revisit its influence on photography. – Sean Burns 

John Berger
John Berger, Ways of Seeing, 1972, film still. Courtesy: BBC

Jeremy Millar

Many people have described the camera as a gun; for Berger, it was also a knife. It is a knife that he takes, pointedly, to a canvas in London’s National Gallery in the opening moments of the first episode of Ways of Seeing, making a neat, violent crop of the goddess’s face from Sandro Botticelli’s Venus and Mars (c.1485). Moments later, another clean cut: an edit in the film to this same face on a postcard, and then on a sheet at a printworks, alongside other works – sketches and sculptures, landscapes and annunciations – all cut similarly from their frames and laid side-by-side.

 

Of course, it is not the National Gallery but a television studio, not the real Botticelli but a reproduction, each cut made possible by a camera. Although Berger opens this first programme by saying that he wants ‘to question some of the assumptions usually made about the tradition of European painting’, it is photography, and its sibling upstart, cinema, to which his attention turns almost immediately. ‘With the invention of the camera, everything changed,’ he notes, before adding, ‘It has even changed paintings painted long before it was invented.’ It is the camera which now crops Venus’s face and ‘an allegorical figure becomes a pretty girl anywhere’.

 

If the knife might be thought too violent a metaphor, let us settle, instead, on what is here literally produced by its actions: the postcard of Botticelli’s Venus and Mars; the printed sheet; the postcards of the two versions of Leonardo da Vinci’s The Virgin of the Rocks (1483–86 and 1495–1508), usually in the Louvre and London’s National Gallery respectively, but now in a repeating pattern side by side; and, finally, the many postcards we find, alongside magazine covers and children’s drawings, pinned to a wall in a family home, Botticelli’s The Birth of Venus, (c.1484–86) amongst them — pictures not valuable but valued. Yes, the postcard seems far more in keeping with Berger’s actions here: something both gathered and shared, public and personal, something open and something given. Something on which you can write.

John Berger
John Berger, Ways of Seeing, 1972, film still. Courtesy: BBC

Mariama Attah 

 

Photography’s capacity to be quickly reproduced and easily disseminated makes it the ideal medium for enabling and gathering several meanings. In reading a photograph, we are interpreting from our own positions and experiences. As images move through the world, shared and separated from their original intention or location, they become open to perceptions and interpretations from each set of eyes they encounter.

 

In Ways of Seeing, Berger speaks of the importance of seeing and how this translates to being viewed in return. To see is to confirm that everything around us exists. There is reflection in this process. However, we are limited by our imaginations and the experiences we can call on as material to make sense of images. The personal nature of interpretation centres us as the viewer and activator in meaning-making. The gap between seeing and reading is filled with our personal and visual imaginations and relies on our agency and ability to make meaning.

 

What does this mercurial interpretation mean? We can all hold values that are different but true. Varying experiences will lead to a range of outcomes that form a nuanced understanding of the photographed world. Berger suggests that, through images, we can truly comprehend the world and our position within it. To expand on this thought, by recognizing that a multitude of personal interpretations can co-exist, we can gain a sense of how photography acts as a medium to form connections and expands our ability to understand new perspectives

John Berger
John Berger, Ways of Seeing, 1972, film still. Courtesy: BBC

Anna Frances Douglas 

 

Few books of art criticism can claim such an enduring impact 50 years after publication as Berger’s Ways of Seeing. It was, arguably, the book’s form as much as its content – seven zesty essays, three comprised solely of photographs – and its non-dogmatic yet persuasive ‘voice’ that cut right through the mystification of the discipline by professional art critics. Its message that art was ‘entangled with capitalism’, and that women were depicted differently than men ‘with the “ideal” spectator always assumed to be male and the image of the woman designed to flatter him’, attracted a different and receptive audience. Nonetheless, it’s perhaps a touch ironic that a book collaboratively produced by five men – Berger, Sven Blomberg, Mike Dibb, Chris Fox and Richard Hollis – should have had a profound effect on women artists and cultural historians exploring gender.

 

Ways of Seeing lifted the veil from the conceit that art, particularly the representation of women, was non-ideological, a view that Civilisation (1969) – also a television series and book, by art historian Kenneth Clark – sought to uphold. By contrast, in identifying the convention that, in art, ‘men act and women appear. Men look at women. Women watch themselves being looked at,’ Berger fuelled a generation of British feminist photographers to critically, though variously, engage with image-production. In the exhibitions ‘Women and Work’ (1975) and ‘Who’s Holding the Baby?’ (1978), The Hackney Flashers activist collective documented women’s labour inside and outside the home. In the early works of Jo Spence and Terry Dennett, including Jo Spence
as a sex object
 (1979), Berger’s ideas on the production of meaning and the context of seeing are discernible.

 

The women’s movement of the 1960s and ’70s preempted Berger’s contention that the conventions of a phallocentric visual economy, in which ‘women must constantly survey themselves’, were on the way out. Nevertheless, in 1972 there was limited non-specialist literature addressing women’s representation in art history, notably Linda Nochlin’s 1971 essay, ‘Why Have There Been No Great Women Artists?’ Three years after Ways of Seeing, film theorist Laura Mulvey would publish her seminal essay, ‘Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema’ (1975), detailing her concept of ‘the male gaze’, which remained foundational within cultural studies for years and spawned generations of visual activists.

 

This article first appeared in frieze issue 227 with the headline ‘Celebrating 50 Years of “Ways of Seeing”’, as part of a special series titled ‘Photography Now’.

 

Main image: John Berger, Ways of Seeing, 1972, film still. Courtesy: BBC

Jeremy Millar is an artist and head of the MA writing programme at the Royal College of Art, London, UK.

Mariama Attah is a photography curator, writer and lecturer. She is curator of Open Eye Gallery, Liverpool, UK.

Anna Frances Douglas is a co-curator and researcher for Hepworth’s Progeny at The Hepworth Wakefield, UK, and a lecturer in fine art, University of Leeds, UK.

Sean Burns is an artist, writer and frieze assistant editor based in London, UK. 

SHARE THIS

Tuesday, May 24, 2022

NFTs that don’t have anything to do with art

 

4 hot applications of 

The CEO of X Prize wants you to know that NFTs have many use cases beyond art from drivers licenses to verifying luxury goods.

4 hot applications of NFTs that don’t have anything to do with art
[Source photos: Chris Chow/Unsplash; Austin Neill/Unsplash; Rawpixel]

Non-fungible tokens (NFTs) are so much more than buzzy digital art.

Though you could be forgiven for thinking that’s all they are. After some spotty activity in the mid-2010s, NFTs burst into mainstream awareness in 2021 with a handful of multimillion-dollar art sales. This led to a hype-driven spike and fall in trading activity, with many dismissing NFTs as a passing fad.

A year later, NFTs haven’t faded away.

If anything, they’ve matured—branched out, spread their wings, worked their way beyond the art world and into numerous industries.

The true value of NFTs is their combination of uniqueness and transparency. “Non-fungible” means each one is utterly one-of-a-kind, and the underlying blockchain means all sales activity is tracked with perfect accuracy.

Here’s a brief look into how four major industries—music, e-commerce, sports, and real estate—are using that value to their advantage.

1. MUSIC

More revenue for musicians. Musicians like Kings of Leon, Shawn Mendes, and Grimes have begun releasing NFTs related to their music. In some cases, the NFTs are digital art that translates to concert tickets. in other cases, it’s the music itself. And in all cases, artists create and distribute the NFTs without going through record label middlemen.

This enables much more favorable deals (and more revenue) for artists. That’s good news: as of now, only the top 0.8% of artists make more than $50,000 in yearly streaming revenue. Healthier revenue could help reestablish the “middle class” of musicians which hasn’t really existed since the early 2000s.

Reestablishing scarcity for recorded music. Through 2001, physical scarcity was the backbone of the recorded music industry. In 2001, recorded music generated $23.5 billion of revenue. About 97% of that came from physical music sales (CDs mostly).

Then, digital sharing came along and destroyed recorded music’s scarcity. Even as recorded music’s overall revenue has rebounded, physical music’s share has only fallen since 2001. Much of the rebound is due to streaming—which, as we’ve seen, disproportionately benefits the artists at the top.

NFTs establish digital scarcity, a feat streaming services like Spotify have been unable to accomplish. Digital sales of NFT versions of an album are finite, and artists can create rules for the NFT to always receive some portion of the proceeds when the NFTs are resold. Again, that’s good news for artists, who have seen practically nothing but bad news since 2001.

2. E-COMMERCE

NFTs to accompany real-world products. NFT pioneers like RTFKT Studios are using NFTs to reimagine physical retail. Early in 2021, RTFKT sold NFTs in tandem with physical sneakers: Customers got NFTs right away and received the physical shoes about a month later. The campaign produced $3.1 million in sales in under seven minutes. It also got Nike’s attention—the legacy brand purchased RTFKT Studios for $33 million late in 2021.

Next-gen barcodes. E-commerce insiders have suggested that NFTs could replace scannable barcodes with a blockchain-native corollary. Blockchain is a more reliable record of a product’s supply chain movement and transaction lifecycle.

3. SPORTS

Virtual memorabilia. Right now, you can buy one of Willie Mays’ game-worn baseball gloves for about $21,000. But with NFTs, you could theoretically buy a digitally unique video of “The Catch,” the iconic over-the-shoulder grab Mays made at the Polo Grounds in 1954. And unlike physical memorabilia, which are easily faked, NFTs’ unique digital signatures make them impossible to counterfeit.

New revenue streams for sports teams. Just ask video gamers: digital-only content already produces tens of billions in yearly revenue. By selling digital-only replicas of prominent athletes’ gear—shoes, jerseys, etc.—sports franchises could add a brand-new line of very low-overhead revenue.

4. REAL ESTATE

Tokenizing property rights. Property owners can use NFTs to tokenize property rights—in other words, establish, track, and exchange property ownership. Think of tokenized property rights as a much more efficient deed to a house. Real estate sales currently take an enormous amount of legal oversight and regulation. Through the blockchain, NFT-based property ownership could create a more liquid real estate market, expand access to project funding, automate rent collection, and more.

Metaverse properties. NFTs could enable the sale of virtual properties located in the metaverse. This could apply to a virtual replica of Fenway Park, or to territory in an imaginary realm (like the Minecraft world, which covers 1.6 billion square miles).

These are just some of the ways that NFTs could impact existing industries. The NFT space is still extremely raw—filled with potential for those who see it as more than digital art. Like all burgeoning technologies, it will reward early movers and creative thinkers.

FINAL THOUGHTS

NFTs have the potential to be what I call a “User Interface Moment” (that I wrote about in my book, BOLD), a broader blockchain revolution that will accelerate and make more-agile, economic, and ownership transactions.

While currency is fungible and can be easily transferred, NFTs can be used to store much more complex and individual-specific information.

For example, government documents such as marriage certificates, land registrars, food-grade ratings, and driver’s licenses can all be tokenized using NFTs. In retail, consumers can use blockchain technology to verify the legitimacy of luxury goods.

When you step back and view these developments, you realize that we’re witnessing the birth of a multi-trillion-dollar economic ecosystem.


This article originally appeared on Minutes and is reprinted with permission.