For this week, please read Chapter 7 from John Berger’s Ways of Seeing. Choose a short passage from the text that includes one or two images. Discuss the relationship between the passage and the image(s) and consider how the two are working together to make an argument. From there, assess why the argument is problematic/relevant/interesting. Keep your response to around 300 words.
37 thoughts on “Reading Response 3: Ways of Seeing (Due 9/6)”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
John Berger’s most poignant juxtaposition of images and text is the Magazine layout seen on page 152. Here, he adequately illustrates the ridiculous divide between what’s reality for any people and what our consumerist culture wants us to believe we should be:
“Nevertheless the text, the photographs taken in Pakistan, the photographs taken for the advertisements, the editing of the magazine, the layout of the publicity, the printing of both, the fact that advertiser’s pages and news pages cannot be co-ordinated – all these are produced by the same culture”
By directly comparing two visions of reality – one as experienced by people in a cruel, harsh reality and one as envisioned by a capitalist structure, he is able to call-out that nothing is really happening in advertisements. They don’t take into account present reality; publicity “excludes the present and so eliminates all becoming, all development”. A vision that exists to sell a product, according to Berger, should not become all-encompassing, as too much power would then be placed in owning things.
In Ways of Seeing, john Berger uses a series of images and arguments to question the role publicity plays in our everyday lives. Images are essential to a discussion of publicity – Berger attempts to give us an idea of what public advertisement looked like when he wrote this book. He wants us to question the ideal these ads want us to live by.
I felt as though the images used were hard to relate to the text because they weren’t used to reinforce his point. Rather, they were often used simply to illustrate a current state of being. Most of the advertisements remain unexamined; they’re just there, depicting something the author sees as far too glamorous. He doesn’t address a counterargument in the piece, which is another major detriment. I felt as though the chapter lacked depth, and was too narrow-minded as a result.
In Chapter 7 of “Ways of Seeing” by John Berger, there’s an image of men with suits and they are looking quite masculine and pompous. Berger compares the image to envy and how members of society often want others to emulate them: “You are observed with interest but you do not observe with interest- if you do, you will become less enviable.” The image and text show that in society, it is important to look presentable and be on par with the latest fashions because people won’t ostracize you in public and you will gain self-esteem. Berger continues to argue that having a polished image gives people a false sense that you are in power and are happy: “The greater the illusion (for themselves and for others) of their power. The power of the glamorous resides in their supposed happiness:” Since the men in the image are wearing new suits and look jolly, people tend to think that getting new clothes will improve their happiness and quality of life, but in the long-run, it will make them more depressed.
Berger’s argument is true in today’s world. Every time we see a commercial on clothing and other merchandise, we strongly believe that we have to own those products. For example, when a middle-aged woman turns on her television and sees a Macy’s commercial that advertises gold or diamond jewelry, she wants to own it immediately. Although the woman may not have enough money to get the product, she has a desire to get it because she thinks that it will make her look beautiful or attractive to other men. Furthermore, consumerism is an epidemic and is being initiated by the middle class. People within the middle class are more likely to spend money on newer products than rich people because they have larger households and have to keep updating appliances like refrigerators and microwaves. Due to the middle class spending tons of dollars, companies earn record-breaking profits and continue to make advertisements for their products meanwhile the rich keep their money in financial institutions.
In Chapter 7 of Way of Seeing, John Berger argues the true meaning behind the concept of visual imagery and publicity in our economy. On page 132, John Berger conveys the idea that the purpose of publicity is not to stimulate a sense of “pleasure or benefits…from the things it advertises”, but “is always about the future buyer”. Often people will think the purpose of visual images and publicity is to advertise certain products, which sets of a chain reaction that ultimately supports the growth of the national economy. While the end product remain true, John Berger argues that “publicity is about social relations, not objects”. For example, the image on page 132, advertises a collection of clothing, that when bought makes you part of an exclusive group of rich, fashionably dressed men and displays a group of men in expensive suits. Advertisement such as this, supports John Berger’s argument that publicity intends to make the average buyer feel lesser because they are without the thing being advertised. Through this example, the average buyer may feel almost excluded with they didn’t own the same type clothing as the men in the ad. When viewing an advertisement or a visual image there is this immediate reactions to imagine yourself with the thing being viewed, which causes a wanting for more because you are ultimately without it. John argues that this is not a moment of pleasure but a moment that results in the envy of a version of yourself that possesses the thing being advertised.
I feel John Berger raises many interesting points about publicity in our economy, specifically the idea that ads. and visual imagery is so frequently around us that sometimes we forget because we are so use to it. This method of publicity inspires the growth of capitalism because the most popular products and ideas of our economy are difficult to forget when they are constantly being seen and advertised. Furthermore, although, John Berger used various imagery and examples of advertisements as evidence for his arguments, there was a lack specificity on how some of the images used explained his argument.
In chapter 7 of “Way of Seeing”, John Berger uses the images presented in order to further his points. On page 133, there is an image of men wearing suits staring at the reader, know a smugness as if they know they are better than us. The passage following the image talks about how “being envied is a solitary form of reassurance.” This relates to the picture because the men in the image are well off, wearing nice suits, reading their newspapers. The caption next to the picture talks about a club that all men are not eligible for. Therefore, these men, and anyone else who can join the club will be envied as being higher tier than others. Inclusion in this club will act as a reassurance that you are better than others. In the image it appears as if the men are looking down upon the reader, the relates directly to the line in the following passage that says, “they look out over the looks of envy that sustain them.” Not only do they not care about the people who are envying them, but they are also being supported by those who envy. If they were not envied, then they would be no better than any other man.
This argument is problematic because it leads people to believe that exclusion is good. It presents the idea that it is desirable to be envied and to look down upon those who envy you. It is relevant though, as it is true and many people try to attain this envious position in life. Everyone wants to be successful in their three thousand dollar suits having people admire you from all directions. Just joining an exclusive club won’t allow that to happen though. This image is therefore misleading.
Berger’s essay expresses his worriment of the role publicity takes in our lives. Its role is glaring, palpable, and inescapable. One way it achieves this is by taking form in a variety of outlets such as magazines, newspapers, TV, radio, billboards,etc. Berger feels that advertisements are especially an issue when placed on the same level as tragic or serious events. He exemplifies this by inserting a photo of the front page of a newspaper. The upper half contains a picture of Pakistani refugees, while the lower half is an advertisement for a shower gel or soap of some sort which contains a semi-nude woman. I found the newspaper example to be the most effective use of interspersing images in his essay because this is the only photo that elicited a reaction of aversion from me. His previous passages felt confusing and vague because he would often say the same thing over and over again without moving from the general to the specific. In this passage, Berger pinpointed a specific issue he holds against publicity, which had me agreeing with his point. In a way, inserting this image is like putting a face to a villain, since I couldn’t relate to Berger’s worriment. I don’t watch TV, read newspapers or magazines, or listen to radio so I don’t believe that it’s as bad as he makes it out to be, but of course this is due to my own biases. Back when this was written, it was a different time where there was no Internet. I consume most of my media via the Internet, and I have an ad-blocker that removes advertisements from my web-surfing activities. Therefore, I don’t feel threatened by ads nor do I see them as a threat to democracy. In some capacity, it is an issue like how I pointed out with the newspaper. That is wrong because it takes the reader’s focus away from real world issues and to whether or not they should buy this soap. It demonstrates how society is becoming desensitized to serious matters such as war or famine since advertisements are put on the same platform as these issues. You could be watching a news story on North Korea launching missiles, and in the next minute it will cut to a commercial about the new iPhone. Do I feel particularly bothered by this? Perhaps on some level, but I do not feel it as big as an issue as Berger makes it out to be because this is simply how our economy is fueled.
In John Berger’s “Way of Seeing: Chapter 7” we are introduced to a myriad of images followed by a text or passage explaining the image. One such example is an image of a man being held onto by two beautiful woman, while a group of 20 men look on with envy. The title in the image reads “Already one man in 20 has a different kind of spending power.” The spending power that Berger is referring to is related to being rich enough to buy whatever you want. The passage and picture together show how having money to buy material goods will make you seem more desirable to females. Berger’s argument that “to buy is the same thing as being sexually desirable” is extremely relevant throughout history and the present. Back in the day, when men were the breadwinners of the family, and most woman stayed at home, woman married men who could keep them financially secure. Nowadays, through the use of social media, we see that this is still the case. Take for example Hugh Hefner and his multiple Playboy Mansion residents. His wealth is able to buy females to live with him. Many men, excluding me, would consider Hefner’s life a “good life” simply because he can buy whatever he wants. The fact that having money makes one more lovable, desirable, and happy is a huge problem. It can decrease the confidence of someone who doesn’t have enough wealth to buy whatever they want. This problem is causing a shift in societal ideas. Advertisements and images that put richness in a positive light will cause people to throw away their values and morals in order to purse a “good life” that can only be achieved by having enough money to buy anything one wants.
John Berger in chapter 7 of his book “Ways of Seeing,” chooses to analyze advertisements and compare them to works of the past. One claim that Berger makes is that the modern notion of “glamour,” could not have existed in the era of oil painting on pages 146 to 147. Back then, the paintings could have shown people as “wealthy, beautiful, talented, lucky,” but these descriptions are just that, descriptions, not something that is, as Berger states, “purely the creature of others’ envy.” To support this claim, he presents images of Marilyn Monroe, and a Glamour Magazine ad, while comparing it to a painting, “Mrs. Siddons,” by Gainsborough.
The images of the Glamour Magazine, and Marilyn Monroe do show that in today’s world ads are trying to encourage individuals to want to be like someone, such as the women on the cover of the Glamour Magazine, while the older “Mrs. Siddons,” merely shows her wealth, and power without an explicit depiction that shows that this lifestyle is better or desirable. However, the area that Berger is lacking is that he assumes that since there is no explicit command to desire to be like “Mrs. Siddons,” that society was not envious of her, or that society does not place value on her since she is in such a desirable position.
Such a position views the past with rose-tinted glasses. The older times had strong notions of what to aspire to be, especially among nobles and upper-class people. The painting, “Mrs. Siddons,” may reflect Mrs. Siddons characteristics, but it also does serve as a guide, or “an advert,” to upper-class and noble women of that time as to what to aspire to be. Thus, in a way she was “glamorous,” to richer women. The only difference to modern times is that now this glamor has spread to lower classes of people, who before would have little time or income to concern themselves with such things.
In John Berger’s the “Ways of Seeing”, he shows us how lots of company insert their products into public images and how it makes an effect to grab people’s attention to that product. This article contains lots of images that are supporting his argument. Most of the images contain people that are starring directly at where the painting is being drawn. I find this very interesting since one of the most powerful way to persuade people into what you are trying to say or sell, is to stare directly into their eyes. The passage is stating how publicity will make people envy each other by the way other lives their live. The other that has the ability to purchase items that not everyone are able to purchase, are the ones that are being admired and envy. Such as one of the painting that has four people in the painting. One looks like she is sitting on a chair looking at the short guy playing violin, one is playing the piano, and one is standing next to the piano and is looking at the direction of the short guy, too. We can tell that this family might be from a wealthy family from the way they dress, the room space that they have, the instrument that they are playing. Also, they have a statue in their house which made it very obvious that they have the extra money to spend on expensive decoration and not just on daily essentials. People might really admire this painting since “The power to spend money is the power to live.” This is what publicity images are trying to do. Make their products looks like what the powerful people want and what they have in their live which makes other desire that product themselves.
In John Berger’s “Ways of Seeing”, he compares publicity to the fulfillment of dreams within the working class people. Publicities use glamour and social desires in order to attract the consumer and their dreams to be envied. During a long day of work, individuals day-dream for a better and more glamorous future to result in time passing by faster. Berger illustrates this idea through a visual of women working in a dull office setting where everyone is inactive with each other due to, completing tasks independently. He continues by asserting “The interminable present of meaningless working hours is ‘balanced’ by a dreamt future in which imaginary activity replaces the passivity of the moment. In his or her day-dreams the passive worker becomes the active consumer. The working self envies the consuming self.” This demonstrates that people day-dream of them being a shopper whom is energetic about the life and is up to date with trends because these individuals view themselves as lifeless workers that have no meaning in the work they complete. To clarify, they dream to someday become a person that others will look up to and what to be. Simply, they want to be envied instead of envying someone else. The image shows the situation in which day-dreaming occurs in while the short passage explains the fantasy that these workers are hoping for. John Berger’s argument is interesting in a sense that he believes that publicity only enhances the idea that the people are not enviable; these dreams to become enviable are not created by the publicity, in fact, the dreamer is the creator. I feel that advertisements of products that illustrate a superior life for a person who purchases the item, creates an image where the person is unhappy or not complete due to the absence of the product. This results in the person to dream or imagine that if they did have the product, they will feel better with themselves and their life as a whole.
Chapter 7 of Ways of Seeing by John Berger discusses publicity and the effects it has on our society. Berger focuses on the themes of envy, glamour, happiness on pages 132 to 133 in an effort to explain why publicity continues to play such a major role in our daily lives. He includes two advertisements in this passage that are prime examples of glamour and what consumers wish to attain. One of the images shows several men in suits while the other depicts a group of women covered in jewelry. The people in these advertisements appear to be very proper and wealthy, thus representing glamour as well as exclusivity. They make people think that this is what they want for their lives because this will give them happiness and they will actually be missing out if they don’t buy what it is being advertised. Moreover, Berger states, “In this respect the envied are like bureaucrats; the more impersonal they are, the greater the illusion (for themselves and for others) of their power.” Berger compares the envied to bureaucrats to show that usually advertisements don’t try to relate to the consumer but attempt to show them what they want to be like. Otherwise, if people are able to connect with the advertisement on a personal level, they wouldn’t have envy and would realize they don’t need the product that is being sold to achieve happiness.
Berger’s ideas are applicable to modern day society and I feel that the relationship between publicity and happiness demonstrates an ongoing cycle of selling and buying. I think that advertisements often cause people to feel inadequate and that there is something missing from their lives. A main goal for many people is to have glamour and be envied by others but they are never able to achieve this so they keep on buying things that give them the illusion of glamour. These products don’t give people satisfaction or make them truly happy so advertisements continue to convince them to buy more things that the consumer believes will get them what they want.
On page 132 of John Berger’s “Ways of Seeing,” there is an advertisement for what seems to be a type of alcohol and the caption, “The shape of drinks to come.” On the majority of the poster are pictures depicting different elegant and relaxing scenes. In the three most apparent pictures, a story is built around the drink being sold. Thus, the text below the advertisement states:
“Publicity is never a celebration of a pleasure-in-itself. Publicity is always about the future buyer. It offers him an image of himself made glamorous by the product or opportunity it is trying to sell. The image them makes him envious of himself as he might be.”
The advertisement is proving exactly what the text is saying. Although the advertisement is for the drink, the pleasure is not derived from the drink. The pleasure is derived from the few desirable scenes shown. The poster wants to tell the consumer, not that they are lacking a drink, instead that they can have a wealthy and easy-going life through this drink. The faces are not the focus in any of the pictures because the message is that anyone, especially you, can be in that situation. Even the caption it provides is not referring to the bottle in which the drink comes in but the shape of the situation in which you could be enjoying it.
Berger’s argument about how advertisements target the consumer with unrealistic images and expectations not derived from the product itself is very relevant. While it is true that we barely notice these advertisements individually from the sheer amount being thrown out constantly, its message will still be delivered loud and clear subconsciously. That our current self is undesirable and something unrealistic must be achieved in order to be desirable. The set of images comparing oil paintings to the advertisements are especially effective for Berger’s criticism. It shows how similar the current standards are to what once was just a grand vision of an artist.
In chapter 7 of “Ways of Seeing” John Berger attacks the impact publicity has on society. He uses specific advertisements that further highlight his point. He states “The image then makes him envious of himself as he might be. Yet what makes this self-which-he-might-be enviable? The envy of others. Publicity is about social relations, not objects, its promise is not of pleasure, but of happiness: happiness as judged from the outside by others. The happiness of being envied is glamour.” Berger discusses the impact publicity has on envy or rather the impact publicity has on envy. He discusses how the only reason publicity is successful is because of its ability to create envy. If an advertisement were to just emphasize what you don’t have it would not be very successful. Instead advertisements create envy which make them widely successful. He later states “Being envied is a solitary form of reassurance.” This quote makes it even more evident that humans seek the envy of others. It’s worth thinking about that no one would want to spend more on a Louis Vuitton bag if it didn’t have a logo that distinguishes it’s an expensive bag. The whole idea of the logo is proving to others the bag is expensive and inherently that this person has more money than you to spend on the bag. This is further exemplified by the advertisement on page 133, about being in an exclusive club. There could be nothing special about joining the exclusive club other than having others always envious and wondering what could be going on in the club. In my experience people tend to be more interested in what they don’t have rather than what they have. An area I have expertise in is the exotic auto industry. Last year there was a special Lamborghini made that was very limited and only 40 were produced. However, even Bill Gates wouldn’t be able to purchase the car, because you had to meet certain requirements just to apply to purchase the car. This is a good example of how corporations work to make their products more desirable. Furthermore, in “Ways of Seeing” John Berger analyzes how corporations take advantage of the “Keeping up with Joneses” mentality.
This is great, Huzaifa. I appreciate how you bring new evidence into conversation with Berger’s argument. This idea of the logo is one that he doesn’t touch on, but is totally in the wheelhouse of his ideas. It would be interesting to look at how advertising works on different class groups–your Lamborghini example seems inclined to induce envy among a very specific subset of the wealthy. Perhaps glamor is as stratified as anything else.
John Berger’s “Ways of Seeing,” outlines a unique interpretation of publicity and its relation to consumer image. On page 132, he argues that publicity offers pleasure for the customer. In other words, ads, billboards and commercials try to please consumers by making them picture themselves with the advertised product. This image, Berger argues is desirable for consumers. For example, the image he uses on page 132 is an ad for liquor where it is shown being shared amongst three pairs of people. The image conveys the message that liquor brings people together, which is a desirable situation amongst consumers who view this ad. Therefore, by using this image, Berger reaffirms his argument that ads offer more mental pleasure to the customer as it cannot physically provide a tangible object to a consumer without them purchasing the product.
In the same passage, Berger also asserts that the goal of publicity is to create happiness amongst consumers based on how much envy they receive from others. Essentially, he states that the happiness caused by publicity is, “the happiness as judged from the outside by others” (132). Berger makes his argument apparent in the same image of the liquor ad. As a consumer, seeing people joyous in an ad naturally makes him/her desire that same feeling. In this particular case, it is liquor which caused the “happiness,” which in turn would make one want to buy that brand of alcohol that is being advertised in order to not only feel “happy” themselves, but make others jealous of one’s own “happiness.” By connecting the ad to his argument, Berger eloquently strengthens his claim in order to get his message about publicity across.
Personally, I find that Berger’s argument is relevant and makes sense, especially in today’s world. Today’s marketing and advertising techniques definitely center more towards technology, but still maintain the idea that the consumer derives pleasure from viewing an ad. For example, a phone commercial definitely makes consumers want to buy that certain phone, which would theoretically make their friends and family jealous of them for having the latest technology at the tip of their hands. This is the very idea that Berger highlights in his essay. The way he used images to convey his argument only strengthened his claim and it would be difficult to make sense of an essay on publicity without some sort of image of an ad to back it up.
For my response I chose the passage and accompanying images on page 133. This passage discusses envy and what it means to be enviable. To be enviable depends solely on the fact of you possessing a thing; whether that be a piece of clothing, an experience that you shared on your instagram, a book you read, or whatever. What is important in retaining this air of “envy-ability” is that you do not share this thing with others. If you did, they may discover your ruse, that the sweater was itchy, the concert boring (you were snapchatting the whole time), the book you read where you were looking up every other word- and still didn’t get it. The photos show groups of elite looking men and women who are inviting you to be a part of their “exclusive club.” The language they use feels personal, “Think of it..” they’re asking you to think about joining their club, “for which most men will be ineligible.” The reader might not stop to really understand the fact that this publicity is available for anyone to read, and everyone is digesting it the same way- if I buy this item then I too can be part of this special club.
The argument about publicity feels so relevant to me because I often find myself envying things that people flaunt on social media. Some of the people I envy the most I don’t even know that well, maybe I was introduced once by a mutual friend of ours. So I don’t even know them very well personally, but when I see their social media presence I think that I know their whole life because I’ve been following them for two years now and I envy them; for a summer spent in Greece at a refugee camp- all of those photos on the beach look so nice, and they were helping children from Syria! Wow, they’ve really got their life together. And maybe she did have a good rewarding experience in Greece this summer, but how could I know? Maybe it was a scary and revealing experience. Maybe she’s going back to her liberal arts school this year feeling weird about her privilege in life. I just don’t know, but I still feel envious of her because there’s no conversation involved.
This is what happens in a society under capitalism, where everyone is trying to make their own personal gain without a concern for how it affects others. In the social media world that translates to “what picture will get me the most likes?” “What can I post that can make me enviable?” (Because being enviable=social power) But we’re not thinking about how that post could affect those who see it. It might just seem like a picture of you looking good in a bathing suit, but it made me feel really shitty about the ice cream I ate last night! This is something I think about a lot, should we let people know when something they’ve done makes us feel bad, even if it seems irrational? Even if you know that they weren’t intentionally out to hurt us? At any rate, I think that the answer is communicating more and treating each other with humanity. Then hopefully we can all feel better about ourselves, instead of it having to be a competition.
On page 134 of “Ways of Seeing” by John Berger there is a side by side comparison of a Manet painting depicting a couple enjoying a picnic and an advertisement for a record player showing an image of the same scene. The contrast and commonalities between these two pieces work to really emphasize Berger’s argument as to how oil painting has radically influenced advertisements and publicity in contemporary culture. The advertisement is directly referencing Manet’s painting in the positioning of the people at the picnic and their character; a nude woman lounging next to a well dressed man speaking to another man holding his hand up in their direction. Berger argues that modern publicity focuses heavily on producing envy and glamour by mimicking the same emotions and idealistic scenes of happiness or tranquility that most of the public shares. Not only does the advertiser get full license to copy Manet’s scene, but the reference to a famous painting by an incredibly respected sophisticated artist makes the advertisement itself sophisticated in a modern playful way that would be very appealing to educated consumers who recognize the reference and think that it’s fun. The advertisement also does something interesting where it takes a scene from a time where record players outside at a picnic wouldn’t have been either possible or appropriate and adds them into it showing cultural and technological evolution as well as making a fun suggestion consumers can use themselves. There’s exclusivity that acts as a factor too; the people on the picnic appear to not be worried about money as they are dressed nicely and even having enough leisure time to take a picnic with good food would be a sign of success. With a record player and selection of records there as well it would appear to be even more glamorous than Manet’s scene, which brings much more publicity to the product and the craftsmanship of the advertisement.
Will-this is a nice analysis of that painting/advertisement combination, tied into your assessment of Bergers argument. You might be interested in looking into the history of Manet’s painting–“Dejeuner sur l’herbe” was quite scandalous at the time, as audiences interpreted the unclothed women next to the clothed men as prostitutes. What does it mean for an advertisement to co-opt something that is historically transgressive to sell something as banal as a record player?
On chapter 7 of John Berger’s book “Ways of seeing,” he creates an interesting argument on pages 132-133. The argument he’s making is that the market is trying to develop advertisements that are personable to bring out the emotions of pleasure and envy. The images he uses were of memorable moments that us humans live. He uses subliminal messages of the drink to take the consumer back to a time that was of pleasure. They take the consumer into an environment that stimulates pleasure where they propose a product that the consumer is not enjoying yet.
The emotion envy comes into play in his argument where the idea of the consumer envying him/herself. They envy their future selves trying the product for the first time. The imagination of the consumer leaves them in awe of what the taste or the experience could have been.
The role of the emotion envy also applies to the want of others to envy him/her because of the product. The picture on page 133 on the bottom depicts how a product can transform your outer appearance to the one in the image. It provides a reason for consumers to buy it because of the imaginative advantage it will provide them.
Today we see it in technology, especially between Apple and Samsung. Another example is soda, which is better Coca Cola or Pepsi?
On page 143, of John Berger’s, Ways of Seeing, Berger’s discusses the impact of money and its relevance to society. This discussion is accompanied by an image that states, “Derek died broke. And that broke his wife”. This play on words shows the importance of money in the widow’s life. Without the financial support of Derek, the picture insinuates, the widow’s life will be negatively impacted. Her body language within the image, indicates that her financial situation is worrisome.In his writing, Berger plainly states, “Money is life”, equating the value of money to that of life. This statement insinuates that money is the foundation for living in modern times. He utilizes the anaphora, “Not in the sense that…”, in order to clarify that money isn’t important because it can give you power, or prevent you from starving, but rather it is, “the key to, every human capacity”. It is a means for accomplishing a multitude of actions. Both the passage and image consist of several similarities, in that they both suggest money is essential to living, an argument which has been quite controversial. To a certain extent, Berger’s statement bare some truth since numerous commodities, objects and services can be obtain through the use of money. Basic necessities for life, such as water, food, and shelter, can be more easily obtained with money. However, to say that “money is life”, might be considered extreme. There are several things that cannot be attained through the use of money. Take for example, genuine human connections. True human compassion and emotion can not be obtained through the use of money. Additionally, humans have managed to thrive for thousands without the use of money. Thus, Berger’s argument is problematic, since money is not a matter of life, but rather, a matter of convenience.
In Chapter 7 of John Berger’s “Ways of seeing,” he shows how publicity manipulates consumers into buying products by latching onto their dreams and desires. In the text, Berger explains that ads displayed on billboards, commercials, magazines, posters etc. are construed in a way to make the consumer believe that by buying these products, they will inevitably be living a more happy and fulfilled life. However, everything publicity is publicising will in the end contradict itself. For example, on page 131, “It proposes to each of us that we transform ourselves, or our lives, by buying something more. This more, it proposes, will make us in some way richer – even though we will be poorer by having spent our money.” The whole idea of publicity is to make people want to buy their products so what better way to do that than to tap to what people desire most. Most of the time, their desire isn’t even their own happiness but the hope that with their new items they will gain the envy of others. I’m sure that when you buy something new you crave the compliments and stares of others, hardly ever do people do things simply for their own self enjoyment. For example, as Berger put it, “ …happiness as judged from the outside by others. The happiness of being envied is glamour. Being envied is a solitary form of reassurance. It depends precisely upon not sharing your experience with those who envy you.You are observed with interest but you do not observe with interest – if you do, you will become less enviable. ” This relates perfectly to the movie “The Joneses” where the Jones family literally becomes their own form of publicity by showing their friends what their life could be like if they bought everything the Joneses had; using the envy of others to make their sales. Publicity uses a smart tactic to ensure buyers by targeting their desires however, it is up to the consumer to realize that these products may or may not truly fulfill their desires.
This is a great response to Berger, Sarah. I like that you’re putting his argument in conversation with a film–it would be interesting to see you break down how this film relates to his idea of the glamour/envy/advertising paradigm, and how it might test it. You might work on breaking down the quote you use from Berger and thinking about how advertising specifically evokes envy in order to draw in the consumer.
On page 140 of John Berger’s “Way of Seeing,” there is an advertisement of a woman who looks crestfallen. The caption says, “Derek died broke. And that broke his wife.” Because her husband died with no money, the wife has no money to support herself or her family. This advert shows how money is an important part of life. The text under the advertisement says:
“Money is life….But in the sense that money is the token of, and the key to, every human capacity. The power to spend money is the power to live. According to the legend of publicity, those who lack the power to spend money are faceless. Those who have the power become lovable.”
Berger is basically saying that the public believes that money defines how we live. It defines the people we become and the individual we become. The woman in the picture is crestfallen because without the power of spending money, she has become a faceless nobody who has no meaning in society. She and her family will be looked down upon and even hated, according to the legend of publicity. With those issues, the woman has to care for her social standing as much or more than her ability to survive with no money. The “legend of publicity” seems to prioritize how money is used to define social standing over how money is used in survival.
I believe this kind of public view is problematic given how tightly it defines social standings in society. The rich are always looked up upon, while the poor is always pushed down to the point where they cannot get up anymore. This kind of public view has existed for years like with the aristocracy in Europe and especially the feudal lords from feudal Japan. Back then wealth was measured through the amount of land you had and obviously the feudal lords sat near the top of the social hierarchy. The people who couldn’t own land were regulated to servant status or worse. These people are faceless with no opinions or no voice even though they needed help. Berger explains most societies view of money and hints at the problem with the system.
You do a nice job of close-reading the advertisement in question, Shamira. I am interested in your observations about how advertising might tie into historical forms of power/oppression. I’d be interested to see you explore this topic further. How does publicity enforce existing power structures? How might it possess the ability to challenge the status quo?
The section I want to discuss is on the bottom of page 132. The section discusses the concept of happiness promised by publicity, and how the happiness is one totally dependent on others. The images directly support this concept by showing us how advertisements use elite groups and selective groups to make us feel like we are in need of their products. I really enjoyed reading this article and I feel almost as if the images made the writing almost easier or lighter. The images also work as a source since they show us exactly what it is that the author is trying to tell us exists. Personally, I find this argument to be exceptionally strong but I want to equate it to a very different concept. I feel that for the majority of people social media is detrimental. Imagine if you watched 4 hours of sporadic T.V. a day but instead of your favorite shows you were watching pure advertising. This is exactly what social media apps like Instagram and Snapchat are doing, except the ads are only professional half of the time (depending on how many companies/celebrities you follow) because the rest of the ads are produced by your friends and family. How many times do we finish viewing Instagram and being to feel an almost uneasy longing? The reality is that these forms of social media take us out of the lives we were living to see and ponder on the lives we could be living.
Connor–yes, you make an excellent point about the way in which Berger’s notion of “publicity” equates with social media. It is fascinating to see how instagram and other social medias have changed the way we interact with one another and reflect on our lives. In some ways, it is the best form of advertising–it allows us to show our most curated and “glamorous” selves and keeps us in a constant state of envy/dissatisfaction/FOMO. This would, I think, be Berger’s great topic if he kept writing into the 21st century.
I think that’s exactly what it does, To share a story that occurred recently over the summer, I met a blogger at a Dessert Fest I volunteered at. I was really impressed by her website and the amazing Instagram photos, especially as the total Foodie I am. I asked to do an interview for the local paper and discovered that she was looking for an intern. However the internship was nothing like what I expected and the worst part was, she doesn’t even eat pork or beef. Half of her photos were food she has never touched or reviews that only half portrayed the truth. I was so surprised and almost discouraged by the reality behind the beautiful Instagram!
P.S. What is FOMO?
In Chapter 7 of John Berger’s book titled, “Ways of Seeing,” he talks about the issue of publicity, advertisements, and the impact that both of those have on our society as a culture. He claims that publicity and the rise in advertisements is due to how society functions and the effect that consumer culture has on us. Even if we don’t look at every advertisement that gets reflected in our eyes and pay mind to it, you do subconsciously and consciously eventually notice a couple because they will pertain to your interests in some way. On the image in page 131, this singular image represents the evolution that has occurred in public eyes. The image makes you think that you have so much free will to choose what you want to buy, you don’t take notice of the fact that you don’t necessarily need to buy anything to improve your current conditions. The ads want you to think that you’ll end up in a better position because of buying their products. The image also makes others thinks that we have such a higher quality of life because we have so much more choices and options open to us.
The fact that this argument is presented to us is relevant because it represents an ongoing issue of the fact regarding these luxuries available to us. While we are successful enough to have these luxuries presented to us in a way that we may further our standing in society by having other people envying us. By being enviable, you gain happiness through the form of glamour. Using the image in page 133, by looking at an image of a place that you would be ineligible for, it creates this foundation of envy. A future where you presume that if you are able to satisfy the conditions of going into the club, you’ll transcend your current self, and as a result, feel pleasure at becoming a better form of yourself. The issue to look at here is how much of an impact does publicity actually have on society, and is this impact negative enough to warrant a change in how society functions?
This short passage was very interesting. I could relate to it in many ways. The first picture that stood out to me was the picture of the man and the two women. This picture showed the relationship between money and sex. It evoked a feeling of a man not feeling happy or self-fulfilled unless he has large sums of money. People will love you if you have money. On the other hand, this premise is not true. Publicity and media are leading to people feeling unhappy. If a buyer doesn’t buy what is on the billboard he an outlier. The next picture that was significant was of Mrs. Siddons. This painting was off a royal queen wearing opulent clothing. The Queen looks somewhat unhappy. This shows that money cannot buy happiness. Her mood and attitude is displayed well in this piece. The Queen is not smiling and the painting lacks energy. The Queen, however, is authentic. This entire passage was very scary to read because it is all very true. Publicity and advertising is flooding society’s brains with false perceptions of reality. We must become aware this and not let it destroy us. Whenever a tobacco ad or alcohol ad comes up on the tv or the computer it is generally fused with a positive image. This image, is known in society as one of optimism. The negative image coupled with the positive one makes for a very confusing sensation. This sensation takes place every day as millions of humans are totally
You are pointing to some interesting tensions in the world of advertising, Kyle–that odd conflict between something that has harmful/deleterious effects and the positive light it is portrayed in. It might be interesting to look at this idea in relation to anti-smoking campaigns, which tend to use the language of advertisements to flip the message around.
One of the most effective sections of Berger’s, “Ways of Seeing,” is the portion from pages 135-139 where he makes a strong argument through his use of images and text hand in hand. Berger introduces an idea with the text that there’s a certain continuity from the past to now in images, from those in oil paintings to those shown in magazines and newspapers. Berger points out these continuities exists for a reason and pairs this section with images detailing continuities in artwork over time. The reader can CLEARLY see distinct parallels between different pieces of artwork that keep a similar structural makeup. Berger continues on to compare the themes of artwork with advertisements and how something as simple as body position present in these forms of media can incite a certain thought in the viewer. Berger then states multiple examples of this such as gestures of mannequins versus mythological creatures and so on. The reason this argument is so effective is Berger’s pairing of text, image, and examples allows the reader to actually BELIEVE what he’s relaying is true. Other than the effective way Berger presents the argument, the argument in itself is interesting. Subconsciously, we connect certain imagery with wealth, power, etc. To have these patterns actually pointed out and brought to light is cool to see. In this section particularly, I can definitely agree with Berger’s analysis. I’m able to reflect on what I have seen and think in my own life with the comparisons made in this section. Without realising it, I’ve fallen victim to these various purposeful placements of stance, nature, luxurious items, etc. My thoughts often times do align with the expected thoughts I’m to have when viewing these images. Berger’s way of presenting his ideas with text and images as evidence is a very effective way of presenting an argument. An argument that is able to show evidence in this manner can be a very effective method of presenting one’s side.
The image that I would like to point out in Chapter 7 from John Berger’s Ways of Seeing is the first image on page 133. It is a picture of four men, dressed in nice suits and holding a newspaper, and the caption says “Think of it as an exclusive club for which most men will be ineliglible.” The text around this image is discussing how many people spend a lot of their money to buy themselves things that artificially raise their social class, simply for the purposes of being envied by other people. The image fits with this text because it is sarcastically supporting this ridiculous idea (at least in the eyes of the author), while making it seem erroneous in the background. Berger supports this view when he says publicity’s “promise is
not of pleasure, but of happiness: happiness as judged from the outside by others.” (Page 132) Here he is saying that people often spend their money on creating an illusion of happiness for everyone around them rather than actually making themselves happy or investing in assets that will make them more financially stable. This argument is actually very interesting and valid. Most of the things that most people consider their greatest “assets” (house, car, etc.) can actually be considered liabilities. A house means always paying mortgage, repairs if needed, and bigger windows if you have the money. On the other hand, if a person spends their money on acquiring assets instead of liabilities (anything that will make them money: stock, real estate, bonds), they will be more financially stable and can actually retire once their return on those investments matches what that person wants as a salary. However, this can mean sacrificing quality of life for a while in the beginning.
In Chapter 7 of John Berger’s Ways of Seeing, he explains how advertisements or publicity uses the future and dreams to convey its messages to consumers. On page 148 he details this and reinforces his point with the use of an office picture. “In his or her day-dreams the passive worker becomes the active consumer. The working self envies the consuming self.” Berger explains how the use of an office image relates to a wide audience of workers. And the work place is a great example because the repetitive nature of a work place contrasts well with many different scenarios of a future.
I found this interesting because it made me recall all the advertisements featuring an office space. Usually it ends up with one of the workers trying a particular product and it takes them on a journey of their wildest dreams. Other than where you sleep at night a mundane work space is the perfect place to dream. Many advertisers are able to play in to that to sell their products. He also explains how publicity “does not manufacture the dream” only proposes. This is why advertisers are able to use the work office scene over and over. They simply propose a new dream each time. It also reminds me of these old spice commercials. Alotough not using an office space one of the most famous ones played directly on the many dreams a person could have. From being on a cruise ship to two tickets turning into diamonds. It is easy to play into ones dreams because everyone has them.
This is an intriguing response to Berger’s work, Kameron. I think your analysis of the office space as a site that lends itself to daydreaming (and as a target of sorts for publicity) is a clever one. I would be interested to see you to take a commercial that operates out the office space and consider how it works.
In chapter 7 of “Ways of Seeing” John Berger goes into what constitutes glamour and why we feel certain things are so desirable. He claims that glamour is the result of envy, because we want others to see that we have something that allows us to belong to an exclusive club. He writes “Publicity is about social relations, not objects, its promise is not of pleasure, but of happiness: happiness as judged from the outside by others. The happiness of being envied is glamour.” which further shows how an ad might not necessarily be able to provide you with anything. Yet our own need of being envied pushes us to want to have things that others don’t and ads make us conscious of which things we yet have. Ads cannot offer you anything physical and if they in fact were to emphasize your lack of something they would be more correlated to negative feelings.
They remain successful regardless due to this ability to stir envy, and we see this in the advertisement on pg. 133 that features men in suits and refers to the exclusive club for “which most men will be ineligible”. These men look formal in their suits and give off the appearance of wealth, which is what humans are drawn to. We are drawn to wealth as we see it as a gateway to happiness and ads make us feel like we are lacking something that could be helping us reach that happiness. We trick ourselves into believing that we are part of that exclusive club by buying products advertised as ones that will make others envy you. The reality is that a few pieces of jewelry, or a suit will not change your socioeconomic status but they might create a delusion for those who do not know enough about you. Berger writes “The power of the glamorous resides in their supposed happiness: the power of the bureaucrat in his supposed authority, it is this which explains the absent, unfocused look of so many glamour images. They look out over the looks of envy which sustain them.” which illustrates why ads must remain so impersonal. Ads must remain glamorous and create the illusion that there is something close to unattainable about their products so that you feel a certain pleasure when you buy the product. If ads were very personal and related to their audience then they would not stand out and be effective. Some people may try to argue that they are above this sort of envious consumerism but even today ads manifest themselves everywhere, especially in our social media. Even Instagram posts that show people of a certain lifestyle promoting products can be us unconsciously absorbing what we do not have but want.
This is some nice close reading, Nicola, and a good incorporation of the text into your response. You point to an interesting tension between the negative impact of ads and the positive experience they project. Instagram is a great case study to look at. Don’t forget that your responses are due at midnight!
In Chapter 7 of John Berger’s book, Ways of Seeing, there’s a little passage talking about publicity versus pleasures or benefits. It’s on page 132 and it talks about how using publicity is never about the product for advertising, because the value of an ad is much greater. It’s basically saying that an ad for the public has to have people that look like they’re pleasured, because that’s what motivates people to purchase the product. I find this interesting because it is actually true. When I see an advertisement I look to be happy with the product, or else it won’t be purchased. This passage also spoke about how cars, cosmetics, all these materialistic things are to be enjoyed themselves, which I definitely agree. This doesn’t mean you can’t spend time with your loved one and have fun materialistic things, but it also means that when you’re seeking for happiness you look for something real. Something natural, or ass the passage says, ” Publicity begins by working on a natural appetite for pleasure.” This statement is definitely true, because that’s what people look for in an ad, or that’s what inspires them to purchase the product. The image definitely helped with this passage, because it shows a couple that looks happy, in pleasure, drinking together. Of course everybody wants to be happy with their loved one in the future.
This is some good analysis, Derek, and I’m glad the passage spoke to you. The connection between happiness and consumerism is totally a fascinating one, and a strong point of departure for investigation. Don’t forget the responses are due at midnight before class!