Seeing Between the Lines

Do I only know what I see because I know? Is my perception a preconceived notion, or a result of spontaneous visual processing? What do you think?

John Berger elicits these burning questions in “Ways of Seeing”, a testimony to perception and how image replications translate into meaning (or lack thereof).

A quick recap for those unfamiliar with the BBC television series:

John Berger touches upon the idea that human perception is based upon one’s preexisting knowledge and beliefs. He uses the Middle Age era as an example of biblical influence, where humans associated flames with Hell. Today, this meaning has translated across decades, due to this metaphor having been replicated in movies, paintings, photographs, and other forms of various media. Berger points out that dialogue translates perception as well, since dialogue is revealing how we see to discover how someone else sees. Berger’s neutrality is replaced when his stance takes a turn and indicates his belief that an image’s uniqueness is destroyed upon replication.

My take: The replication of images can breed a multitude of perceptions, without always translating meaning. An image alone cannot always tell the full story, despite the famous saying, “a picture is worth a thousand words.” So in my opinion, I do agree to an extent with what Berger imposes. Meaning is lost in translation.

The photograph on the right depicts beauty mogul Marilyn Monroe in a burlap potato sack.

Why is she in a potato sack anyway?

Could it be a comedic stunt imposed by her agent to promote a new clothing line? Maybe it’s branding for her next rising romcom. Having not been from that era, maybe that’s just what fashion was back then and this photo is totally “normal”.

As you can see, without a story, this image makes no sense.

This photo was actually taken after Monroe was criticized by a female newspaper columnist for wearing a low-cut red dress to a Beverly Hills party. The columnist’s perception of Monroe was that she looked “vulgar” and “cheap”, stating Monroe would “look better” in a potato sack.

Rather than spreading female empowerment, the columnist chose to tear down her fellow sex in a passion of jealousy. Without this story, Monroe’s voice would be washed down and forgotten. Although this photo was publicized to prove the beauty mogul is beautiful in any ‘fit, it actually represents a pivotal moment in the divine feminine; a woman is beautiful in her grace, and not just in her appearance. Many might have brushed off this image, not giving a second thought to meaning, since Monroe was notoriously known as a “sex symbol”. But this photo represents so much more than sexuality. It was just the beginning of the Feminist Movement.

In “Ways of Seeing”, Berger makes a reference to artists’ perceptions:

                Artists represent their way of seeing, and we interpret it into ours.

The photographer for the above image of Monroe, was an artist representing multiple perceptions. We can argue that maybe she is sexualizing a mundane, every day household food item for publicity. Knowing the back story, we can also argue that the photo was taken to ostracize and publicly humiliate the columnist. Or the photo merely represents a woman stepping into her femininity by taking a stride away from conventional beliefs of beauty.

Ultimately, we interpret the image into our own scope of perception.