John Berger’s ‘Ways of Seeing’ Exploded a Discipline
1–10 of 20 posts
Re: John Berger’s ‘Ways of Seeing’ Exploded a Discipline
#2I'm glad to learn that the BBC also aired a response to "Civilisation".
That's one of the few TV programmes I've ever seen that I'd label as repulsive.
Re: John Berger’s ‘Ways of Seeing’ Exploded a Discipline
#3I'm glad to learn that the BBC also aired a response to "Civilisation". That's one of the few TV programmes I've ever seen that I'd label as repulsive.
Why was it repulsive?
Re: John Berger’s ‘Ways of Seeing’ Exploded a Discipline
#4> self-armed semioticians and practiced deconstructors of political signification.
Rarely is it taken a step further - to question deconstruction itself, and not assume it is an unalloyed good, and question what is targeted for deconstruction, and what is left to stand.
Re: John Berger’s ‘Ways of Seeing’ Exploded a Discipline
#5I'm glad to learn that the BBC also aired a response to "Civilisation". That's one of the few TV programmes I've ever seen that I'd label as repulsive.
Why was it repulsive?
It's violence couched in aesthetics and academic language.
If you want something, take it. Don't spend 650 minutes insulting the universe by trying to weasel your way into having earned it.
Re: John Berger’s ‘Ways of Seeing’ Exploded a Discipline
#6> self-armed semioticians and practiced deconstructors of political signification. Rarely is it taken a step further - to question deconstruction itself, and not assume it is an unalloyed good, and question what is targeted for deconstruction, and what is left to stand.
Excellent point. I had a philosophy professor who let us know that it was neither his position nor purpose to indoctrinate us regarding the soundness of ideas. He very consistently stuck to his guns and gave every argument presented to the class the the best treatment he could, and no one ever figured out what position he took personally on any of them.
I asked if he did not consider the purely rational method he embodied a form of indoctrination itself. He smiled, and very considerately ceded the point that it might very well be the case and that if so, he was not aware of it.
All my other philosophy professors were folks who - for some reason - became angry when asked questions like that.
Re: John Berger’s ‘Ways of Seeing’ Exploded a Discipline
#7So he is the father of word salad.
Re: John Berger’s ‘Ways of Seeing’ Exploded a Discipline
#8This is a really great (and relatively short) program.
Here’s a link to the first episode: https://youtu.be/0pDE4VX_9Kk
The rest of them are there as well. Go ahead and give it a watch!
Re: John Berger’s ‘Ways of Seeing’ Exploded a Discipline
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why was it repulsive?
It's violence couched in aesthetics and academic language. If you want something, take it. Don't spend 650 minutes insulting the universe by trying to weasel your way into having earned it.
I'm not an art historian, and when I watched either of the two shows I found them interesting and insightful so I really don't have a dog in this fight, but I'd like to understand the criticism of each.
I don't understand what you mean by "It's violence couched in aesthetics and academic language."
Re: John Berger’s ‘Ways of Seeing’ Exploded a Discipline
#10I loved the talk that Michael Bernstein gave at the Deconstruct Conference relating "Ways of Seeing" to "Ways of Selling", related to software specifically: https://www.deconstructconf.com/2017/michael-bernstein-ways-...