More handpicked essays just for you.
How does language influence our perception of the world
How does language influence our perception of the world
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Mystification
In Berger’s essay, he uses the term “mystification”. Mystification is one way to set out describing the ways in which people perceive what they see. When people look at same painting or advertisement, they perceive and interpret differently. As John Berger says, “we are always looking at the relation between things and ourselves” (156). We see things differently from one another and in the beginning we see things, but without language and understanding, we cannot explain what it is we see. The way we see things is predetermined by different factors such as our own experiences and status.
Berger provides an example two paintings by Frans Hals. The two paintings are picture of a group of governors and a group of governesses. The paintings imply that how our society has emphasized an upper class at the period. And, high status people control the people’s view.
As Berger says, “the art of the past is being mystified because a privileged minority is striving to invent a history which can retrospectively justify the role of the ruling classes, and such a justification can no longer make sense in modern terms” (157). The upper class mystifies us to stay in control; without being able to see things in our own way, we are being deprived from our right to understanding ourselves and placing ourselves in a role of society.
The “privileged minority” mystifies works of art in order to control people’s view. Berger explains how Hals becomes after he painted the two paintings. According to Berger, “he obtained three loads of peat on public charity, otherwise he would have frozen to death. Those who now sat for him were administrators of such public charity” (158).
The last two centuries have been full of drastic changes in the human condition. Today, we tend to overlook just how drastic those changes were. Britain during the late 18th Century provides an excellent example because both the Industrial Revolution and the French Revolution were chipping away at the established social order. In Britain, the aristocracy had ruled in relative stability since the medieval period. There were power struggles but the ideology of privilege remained untouchable. British society considered privilege a reward for refinement and expected a gentleman to distinguish himself by following a specific code of conduct. However, his duty and honor depended on more than a code; he also had to feel sympathy for the weaker sex and the lower classes and know when to act accordingly. This sensibility made him “gentle” and a just participant in the governing process. In the 1790’s and 1800’s these gentlemanly ideals were eroding. Yet, while the British did not guillotine their nobles like the French did, many still said that rapid change could unravel the delicate balance of society perpetuated by a refined nobility. The rise of merchants and industrialists into the ranks of the upper class graphically illustrated a shift toward individual success and the selfish ideology of capitalism. Gentlemen through birth and education were losing ground to these nouveaux-rich and consequently the ruling class disconnected further from their communities.
Though people can look into color and composition, others can still even look into the source of the art itself. Cole goes deeper, delving into the source of the art, looking in particular into the idea of cultural appropriation and the view a person can give others. Though it is good for people to be exposed to different opinions of a group or an object, sometimes people can find it difficult to tell the difference between the reality and the art itself. Sometimes art can be so powerful that its message stays and impacts its audience to the point where the viewer’s image of the subject of the art changes entirely. Cole brings up an important question about art, however. Art has become some kind of media for spreading awareness and even wisdom at times, but in reality, “there is also the question of what the photograph is for, what role it plays within the economic circulation of images” (973). Cole might even be implying that Nussbaum’s advertisement can sometimes be the point of some media, and that sometimes the different genres of art can just be to make someone with a particular interest happy. One more point that Cole makes is that “[a]rt is always difficult, but it is especially difficult when it comes to telling other people’s stories.” (974) Truthfully, awareness and other like-concepts are difficult to keep going when a person or a group is not directly involved.
“As a new society, the country lacked the emphasis on social hierarchy and status differences characteristic of postfuedal and monarchical cultures.” (Pg.5)
Art for Art's Sake: Its Fallacy and Viciousness. The Art World, Vol.2. May 1917. 98-102
The study of past events have been a common practice of mankind since the verbal telling of stories by our ancestors. William Cronon, in his article “Why the Past Matters,” asserts that the remembrance of the past “keeps us in place.” Our individual memories and experiences shape how we act in our daily lives. In addition to influencing us at an individual level, our collective history binds us together as a society. Without knowing where we have been or what we have experienced, it is nearly impossible to judge progress or know which courses of action to pursue. The goal of the historian is to analyze and explain past events, of which they rarely have firsthand memory of, and apply the gained knowledge to make connections with current and future events.
“One is astonished in the study of history at the recurrence of the idea that evil must be forgotten, distorted, skimmed over. The difficulty, of course, with this philosophy is that history loses its value as an incentive and example; it paints perfect men and noble nations, but it does not tell the truth.”
The play Romeo and Juliet by Shakespeare is about children of feuding families falling in love, getting married behind their parents backs and then choosing to die rather then lose each other. In this play Shakespeare does an excellent job of showing the dominant theme of a social hierarchy. This theme is the dominate theme because the two main characters would not have the problems that they did if they were not aristocrats. Also if this is not so they would never of met, and they wouldn’t be worried that each other is of the same class, because at this time you only married your class unless you were rich then you married for advantage. Social Hierarchy is a practice that still exists today, is the reason for many of the social problems exist and important for everyday life in the time of Romeo and Juliet but also in today’s era.
In existential thought it is often questioned who decides what is right and what is wrong. Our everyday beliefs based on the assumption that not everything we are told may be true. This questioning has given light to the subjective perspective. This means that there is a lack of a singular view that is entirely devoid of predetermined values. These predetermined values are instilled upon society by various sources such as family to the media. On a societal level this has given rise to the philosophy of social hype. The idea of hype lies in society as the valuation of something purely off someone or some group of people valuing it. Hype has become one of the main driving forces behind what society considers to be good art and how successful artists can become while being the main component that leads to a wide spread belief, followed by its integration into subjective views. Its presence in the art world propagates trends, fads, and limits what we find to be good art. Our subjective outlook on art is powered by society’s feedback upon itself. The art world, high and low, is exploited by this social construction. Even when objective critique is the goal subjective remnants can still seep through and influence an opinion. Subjective thought in the art world has been self perpetuated through regulated museums, idolization of the author, and general social construction because of hype.
Social and political classes are overtly exaggerated in “The Time Machine”. This is represented during the present
Lower-upper class believes that money and power are very important in life. The lower-upper class members, also called 'new money,' work harder for what they have as compared to the upper-upper class because most have earned their position in the class, as opposed to being 'old money' (Norton...
The upper class represented themselves with rich, opulent and luxurious surroundings. They had large mansions, fast cars and modern technology which they showed off at large, elaborate parties.
What is history? Many believe that history is what is read in textbooks, or what is seen on the news. If Susan Griffin were asked that question, she would probably argue that history is much more than that. It is about the minds and souls of the people who went through the historical event, not simply what happened. In her essay, Griffin incorporates stories of people from totally different backgrounds, and upbringings, including herself, all to describe their account of one time period. Each person’s history is somehow connected with the next person’s, and each story contr...
In Confronting Images, Didi-Huberman considers disadvantages he sees in the academic approach of art history, and offers an alternative method for engaging art. His approach concentrates on that which is ‘visual’ long before coming to conclusive knowledge. Drawing support from the field of psycho analytics (Lacan, Freud, and Kant and Panofsky), Didi-Huberman argues that viewers connect with art through what he might describe as an instance of receptivity, as opposed to a linear, step-by-step analytical process. He underscores the perceptive mode of engaging the imagery of a painting or other work of art, which he argues comes before any rational ‘knowing’, thinking, or discerning. In other words, Didi-Huberman believes one’s mind ‘sees’ well before realizing and processing the object being looked at, let alone before understanding it. Well before the observer can gain any useful insights by scrutinizing and decoding what she sees, she is absorbed by the work of art in an irrational and unpredictable way. What Didi-Huberman is s...
...p from the world they live in, a world of separation and indicate themselves with their own realities. Art is handed over into society’s hands, as in one movement it is suggested - to fixate what is real, live like you create and create like you live; in other – abandon media’s proposed ideas and take the leadership of life in our own hands.
The members of theses higher levels are seen as groups of people that commonly interact with each other and in take each other’s opinions and concerns into account when formulating a decision. They are seen as a whole as the “upper class.” They are all a part of this social class and because of this treat people of diverse social classes differently. The people of the upper class gain an understanding of what they have in similarity to each other and use their stature to close ranks against outsiders, or people of different social