Global Art History - INDA - Response #2

Please remember to not everyone focus on the same information - for example the reclining female figure is one thing, and another is the passive female versus the active male, as a framework in art, and image-making.

It would be nice to see that part of the Berger at least touched on, with references to the text, and slides we've looked at in class. I welcome any dialogue based-on and analytical of information from the chapters though. Thank you.

I agree on how people see a "social presence" of men and women differently(45). They see if a man is a man from his action. For example when a guy sees a girl carries a heavy box, he offers to help her. That girl will think that he is the man. In contrast, as Berger concludes that "Men look at women. Women watch themselves being looked at"(47), women's presence comes from their appearances, that suggest us how to treat them. As the result, women became a subject matter of nude European oil paintings such as Venus by Titian, Olympia by Manet, Nevermore O Tahiti by Gaugin, ect. These three paintings each describes a naked lady inclined on a bed. To be naked is different from to be nude. According to The Nude, Clark says that "to be naked is simply to be without clothes, whereas a nude is a form of art". Berger also suggests that " to be nude is to be seen naked by others and yet not recognized for oneself"(54). Each lady in those paintings gives similar femininity expression to the unknown spectator though their postures and the settings are a bit differ from one another, which offers the spectators vary feelings: Venus-gentleness, Olympia-boldness, and Nevermore O Tahiti-thoughtfulness. By looking at these ladies we are assuming how they "would like to be treated"(46). Evidently, this tells us how we see men's presence is not the same as women's.

It is interesting how Patmala Boondej had compared the three female figures together in the previous post. In addition to the differences that had been pointed out, I think that there is another difference to those paintings: one painting shows a nude figure, while the other two shows a naked woman.

I think there is a difference in a naked person and a nude figure. Referencing to ‘Genesis’ where the story of Adam and Eve were told which John Berger has mentioned in Ways of Seeing, Adam, the male, replied to God when he was called upon: “I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself…” (p. 48). Here, ‘Adam’ is ashamed of being naked. Berger implied that “Nakedness reveals itself. Nudity is placed on display.” (p. 54). From what I came to understand, a person became nude simply without any clothing on, but became naked when his or her skin is exposed to the eyes of others sexually and embarrassingly.

For example, I would say that 'Venus of Urbino' by Titian is representing a nude goddess, while ‘Le Dejeuner Sur L’Herbe’ by Edouard Manet is revealing a naked woman, giving hints of sensuality through the scattered fruits drawn to be hanging outside of a basket in front of her bare self. (Global Art History: Fall 2010, Slide 8, 19).

The comparison between ‘Venus of Urbino’ by Titian (1538) and ‘Olympia’ by Edouard Manet (1863) is also mentioned by John Berger. “If one compares his Olympia with Titian’s original, one sees a woman, cast in the traditional role, beginning to question that role somewhat defiantly. The ideal was broken.” (p. 63). While in ‘Venus of Urbino’ the divine Venus slightly tilted her gaze away from the viewer, the woman in ‘Olympia’, in other words Victorine Meurent the prostitute who was painted by Manet, appears to be gazing directly towards the spectator. ‘Olympia’ broke the ideal image of how a goddess was seen and painted. What the spectator sees is no longer a divine figure but a common woman who reveals her naked body to the spectator. “Manet is being confrontational to Victorian sexuality by referencing Venus with a common woman.” (Global Art History: Fall 2010, Slide 22).

What interests me is that, according to the lecture on Tuesday the 16th of August 2011 of Global Art History, ‘Le Dejeuner Sur L’Herbe’ was debated as the birth of Modern Art (Global Art History: Fall 2010, Slide 20). In this painting, only the main woman is being naked while the two men beside her both have their clothes on, which links back to what John Berger has written in Ways of Seeing: “Women are there to feed an appetite, not to have any of their own.” (p. 55).

Most of the time, women are shown to be the inferior one in a painting, looking out to the ‘viewer’ who is usually a male. “Women are depicted in a quite different way from men — not because the feminine is different from the masculine — but because the ‘ideal’ spectator is always assumed to be male and the image of the woman is designed to flatter him.” (p. 64). It does not matter whether the woman is painted to be alone or with other characters; her eyes are usually drawn to gaze at the spectator. “It is true that sometimes a painting includes a male lover. But the woman’s attention is very rarely directed towards him. Often she looks away from him or she looks out of the picture towards the one who considers himself her true lover — the spectator-owner.” (p. 56). I feel that some of these paintings are painted for a certain purpose; rather than hanging on a wall for decoration, they are painted to flatter and satisfy men who seeks consolation.


Berger, J. (1972). Ways of Seeing. London: Penguin Group.
Lamar, C. (2010). Birth of Modern Art; Global Art History Fall 2010. Retrieved August 26, 2011 from Global Art History First Class.pdf.

In chapter 3, it begins with how they view women different from men in that time period (46), which I think it’s not the same anymore now a day. There’s a line in chapter 3 which said, “Men survey women before treating them. Consequently how a woman appears to a man can determine how she will be treated” (46). For me, this is quiet true, on the other hand, women also survey men before they treat us men too. I think that people always survey on each other first before they treat one another. People do not treat everyone equally either. However, according to the book and what it said on how women are look down to, “The person who is the object of their activities – the woman – treated as a thing or an abstraction” (62). It’s quiet unfair for women.

From what I saw in the slide during class, it seems that many European artist like to draw a naked or a nude picture and “presented as an admirable expression of the European humanist spirit” (62). I don’t really get what the book is trying to say about how nude and naked are different from each other. It said, “…to be naked is simply to be without clothes, whereas the nude is a form of art” (53), but I think it’s the same. Nude and naked are both form of human without cloth. Naked can be a form of art too if we look at it as an art then it shall be an art.

For me, many things from what Berger said in chapter 3 are true, but just for the past. There’re quiet a lot of different on how we view people these day. Men and Women are more equal. They’re organizations that are form up to help protect the women’s right, so men and women can be as equal as possible. Lastly, I still think that naked and nude are the same.

Berger, John. Ways of Seeing. London: British Broadcasting Corporation, 1972. Print.

I agree with the first reply about the difference between nude and naked. Ways Of Seeing by John Berger says “To be naked is to be oneself. To be nude is to be seen naked by other and yet recognized for oneself”(54). It mean that we should be naked first and then become nude if someone see us. Nude is art because there is no sex appeal and passion. they can be everyday life activity. We always see this kind of painting in Europe not in Asian. I think it might depend on the culture for each country. Asian show the nude paintings as sexual only. They might think that nudeness is not art but rudeness.
During the lecture class of Global Art History on August23,2011.I am interested in “The Models,” Georges Seurat, 1888, Oil on Canvas. This picture reveal "a woman's presence expresses her own attitude to herself, and defines what can and cannot be done to her"(46) by their acting and feeling on the middle woman's face.

According to the passage “The social presence of women is different in kind of that of a man. A man’s presence is dependent upon the promise of power which he embodies.” (p.45). Barger express the social presence of men and women that have different types of social presence I totally agree even though nowadays everyone are equal but that is just an ideal because in the deepest of their mind women still are not equal to men in many terms and in that period men are measured by the degree of power that they offer.

I also agree with “Men survey women before treating them”(p.46) because men judge women from the appearance first if they see beautiful women they will treat that women well in contrast if women are ugly men sometime do not even want to have conversation with these women. Women are the principle category of European painting that is nude “which women have been seen and judges as sights”(p.47). “She is not naked as she is She naked as the spectator sees her”(p.50) she was naked by the way men saw her.

" ... in the sense that he pretend to be capable of what he is not"(p.46) It's very true because man presence is depend on power or capability. When man tries to pretend that he can do something is because he wants to create and show his presence. For woman, it's different. Woman's presence is her movement, everything she does will show and reflects who she is and how she wants to be treated as Berger says " Every one of her actions - whatever its direct purpose or motivation - is also read as an indication of how she would like to be treated. If a woman throws a glass on the floor, this is an example of how she treats her own emotion of anger and so of how she would wish it to be treated by others." (p.47) but when man does something, it means nothing about how he wants to be treated which Berger states an example of a joker and concluded that "Only a man can make a good joke for its own sake." (p.47).

About the joker example which says " If a woman makes a good joke this is an example of how she treats the joker in herself..."(p.47) I wonder whether is it true. I don't really agree with it. If this book is "The Way of Seeing", this is my way of seeing.

Berger, J.(1972). "Way of Seeing". 35 Marylebone High Street, London: British Broadcasting Corporation.

“Men act and women appear. Men look at women. Women watch themselves being looked at” (47). Like Berger explained in chapter3, this simple difference between men and women has been present in art.

Since beginning of time women have been depicted in art to be subservient to men. She is there to be looked at and to give the spectator (a man) pleasure. You can see this in the portrait of Nell Gwynne(52). Painted for the King, she is lying down nude with an emotionless look on her face offering up submission. Therefore, giving the King and other men who see the painting both pleasure and power over her.

Another way the difference between men and women can be seen is in the Vanity painting (51). This painting shows a beautiful nude woman. Like other women depicted in nude paintings, she is beautiful and standing there with a passive look. This painting recognizes the beauty of not only nudity but the power in nudity of a woman. I would argue that the image of her standing there alone would give a spectator (man) a sense of insecurity, therefore the mirror is in her hand and she is looking at herself. If there was no mirror in her hand, she would be there purely to give the spectator pleasure in looking at her submissive naked body. But, because of this mirror, the painting is titled “Vanity” (51). The fact that the woman is now looking at herself, this gives the spectator authority to judge and condemn her. This mere shift in action serves to keep the status of power in man over that of a woman.

I could also argue that given the challenge in the last paragraph (64) to change the image of woman to man, this painting and its message would definitely change. As we saw in class the slide “ Bathers at Asnieres” of men by the river, men are not usually painted nude. They wouldn't be like the woman holding the mirror and they certainly would not be the ones painted to give a woman spectator pleasure.

Lastly, I agree with Chayothorn in that men and women are more equal today than they were in the past. We see this in jobs and status. I think that women are definitely treated with more power than before. However, I would have to disagree with his belief that Berger's arguments in Chapter 3 are just in the past. Although women today hold more power, they are still subjected to be viewed for the spectator's pleasure. Although the picture may be a bit outdated, we can see the reoccurrence of submission in the two pictures on page 55. The woman on the right has the same expression on her face as the woman who was painted in the 19th century. This “offering up her femininity as the surveyed” is still very present today and can be seen in many different artistic expressions (55).


Berger, John. Ways of Seeing. London: British Broadcasting Corporation and Penguin Books Ltd, 1972, Print.

I agree with most of the other posts that women in the past were depicted under the control of men and the evident of this can be found on page 48 when Berger mentioned the bible that "woman is blamed and is punished by being made subservient to man", hence it is easy to understand how our society was shaped in the past as they lived their lives more accordingly to the teaching of the bible. Women were oppressed by the power of men as Berger stated "To be born a woman has been to be born, within an allotted and confined space, into the keeping of men." (p.46), thus women were restricted in their actions, surely they still have the choice to do whatever they want but the society will turn against them. This is assured as Berger mentioned on page 46, "Her own sense of being in herself is supplanted by a sense of being appreciated as herself by another.", therefore the appearance of a woman is very important to her because "How a woman appears to a man can determine how she will be treated." (p.46). Thus, by my understanding, A woman is judged by her appearance and her value in society is determined by what others think of her (the others in this case are most likely to be men) while a man is judge by his capability and his actions defined his place in society, "men act and women appear" (p. 47).

I also agree being naked is different from being nude, in the passage from the bible when Adam answered to God, "I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself..."(p.48), my understanding is that being naked is being without clothes along with a sense of shamefulness and embarrassment. However "To be nude is to be seen naked by the others and yet not recognized for oneself"(p.54), hence to be nude comes along with a sense of confidence because the body will be viewed purely as an object. There should be no connection with the nudist's identity because to be nude, is about putting the body onto a display as if it's a work of art. In artworks, women are often depicted without clothes mostly because the spectators and the artist are male (hence,the male dominated society) , nevertheless,"she is not naked as she is. She is naked as the spectator sees her"(p.50). We can see an example of this explanation in the comparison between the two paintings; "The Venus of Urbino" by Titian and "Olympia" by Eduardo Manet (Global Art History: Fall 2010, Slide 22). In Titian painting, the woman is a goddess and even though she is without any clothes we see her as being "nude" not naked, there's the expression in her face that she is relaxed and very comfortable. Of course, there's sexuality relating to the painting but we viewed her nudity more of an art form rather than a sexual object. On the other hand, in Manet's painting, "Olympia", the woman here is being viewed as "naked" to me, knowing she is a prostitute, thus there's this immediate sexuality aspect that overshadowed the art of "nudity" in this painting.

To sum up, these chapters helped me to understand how women were viewed in the past and how this differs today. It's true that women are more equal to men today but problems such as "the glass ceiling" for women in businesses still proves that our society is male-dominated. In art, it's quite easy to see why women were chosen in so many paintings, one of the reasons is to please men, both the spectators and the artist himself, "The 'ideal' spectators is always assumed to be male and the image of the woman is designed to flatter him."(p. 64). Even in paintings that display a male lover, "the woman's attention is very rarely directed towards him. Often she looks away from him or she looks out of the picture towards the one who considers himself her true lover - the spectator - owner."(p.56). The other reason is that a male body wouldn't be able to convey the alluring essence that of a woman's body and the message within the painting is likely to change, this can be proven in the experiment on page 64.



Berger, John. Ways of Seeing. London: British Broadcasting Corporation, 1972. Print.

Men and women have different kind of presence. “A men presence is dependent upon the promise of power which he embodies.”(p.45) “The social presence of woman has developed as a result of their ingenuity in living under such tutelage within such a limited space.”(p.46) They have a different ways to see things and have they own way to examine what they're interested in. “Men survey women before treating them. Consequently how a woman appears to a man can determine how she will be treated.”(p.46) It’s not only women’s look that have an affect to men’s action but also their behavior and how they want to be treated. But it doesn’t mean that women have to be judged only by men. Women can be judged by other women or maybe by themselves. “The surveyor of woman in herself is male: the surveyed female.”(p.47)

“And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig-leaves together and made themselves aprons…”(p.47) From the first nude in tradition depicted Adam and Eve. I would like to say that Adam and Eve were the first designer of mankind. Since they were the first that try to find the way to make themselves not being naked. But why they have to do that? Is it because of they’re aware for being naked? I think they not aware of being naked, it probably be that they aware of the spectator aware of each other. “Nakedness was created in the mind of the beholder.”(p.48) As a spectator, we can choose to look at the painting( in this case I mean the nude one) to be an art or to be an obscene. “…to be naked is simply to be without clothes, whereas the nude is a form of art.”(p.53) In art woman is considered as an object. So the composition of the object in the painting is also be one of the component that make a painting to be naked or be nude. “Women are depicted in a quite different way from men – not because the feminine is different from the masculine – but because the ‘ideal’ spectator is always assumed to be male and the image of woman is designed to flatter him.”(p.64)

Berger, John. "3-4." Ways of seeing. London: British Broadcasting Corporation, 1972.

"If a woman throws a glass on the floor, this is an example of how she treats her own emotion of anger and so of how she would wish it to be treated by others. If a man does the same, his action is only read as an expression of his anger" (p.47). This sentences is a great example of differences between men and women in society and I truly agree with these sentences. Women in the past should represent themselves as the same pattern. Although they got their own skill but they cannot showed it as men did. Women looked like a second-class citizen in the society, "Only a man can make a good joke for its own sake." (p.47), for this sentence it's didn't mean woman cannot, woman can did it, but the reaction from the surrounding people will treated herself as worthless woman.We can said that situation of most women on that time was situated between human and object.

“Men look at women. Women watch themselves being looked at “(47) Showing that men don’t only watch women but they also watch themselves how men watch them and maybe think about how men will treated them .
"To be naked is to be oneself. To be nude is to be seen naked by other and yet recognized for oneself" (54) it all about you that what you think about thing that you see is it nude or naked.
Culture in Asia culture we are teach to dress cover most part of body. Naked are very rude in Asia culture different form Europe that don’t care about this as much as Asia and they will look at it as an art but in Asia will look it as a pornography or something like this .
"Men survey women before treating them. Consequently how a woman appears to a man can determine how she will be treated" (46) Men will look and describe women before treating them
how he can treat her? what’s type is she? what’s the reaction she will act when he treat her? . After that he will treat her and try to control all of situation and make it to way that he want . Men often think that he can control women.

“The social presence of women is different in kind of that of a man. A man’s presence is dependent upon the promise of power which he embodies.” (p.45).
This shows the gap of the social presence between men and women in that period of time. “A man’s presence suggests what he is capable of doing to you or for you”(p.46) Supporting an idea how the man is judged, the more dominant he is the more capable he can do.

“Consequently how a woman appears to a man can determine how she will be treat”(p.46) Berger represents an idea that man judges woman from her appearance;for example, if the woman is beautiful he will treat her nicely but if not he may not even want to treat her. I totally agree with his idea of how people are judged and treated by the others.Well, It is not very difference from nowadays;Though, people say the man and the woman are equal but it still is not really equal.

In the global art history class on last tuesday, we saw some of the nakedness and nudity of women in European paintings. I think that because of the way woman was judged caused a woman to become a subject matter of nude European paintings. Like if you put a man instead of woman in that painting your attitude toward that painting will considerably change. Here is some example of the nakedness and nudity women in European paintings : Venus by Titian, Olympia and Le Dejeuner Sur L’Herbe by Edouard Manet. Although women in ‘ Venus’ and ‘Olympia’ pose similarly on the bed but paintings expressing differently.

In Venus, the goddess nude figure seems to look away form the viewer because she does not lower herself down to our level, it is a symbolic authority, to be higher and not to be seen as a human. She poses in a powerful way, she is not bother whether we see or does not see her. That is power, to render the viewer insignificant.

Whereas in Manet's painting, the women tends to look directly at us. She looks at the viewer with a welcoming look, like to tempt us into the painting. The pose she made is so relax and common, and that is an idea of how nudity and naked is different.

From The Nude, Clark says that "to be naked is simply to be without clothes, whereas a nude is a form of art".(p.53) In my opinion, either nakedness or nude is representing an unclothed form of human, but nude is more about art not involve in sexual way as much as nakedness does.

Moreover, with such a common and natural pose, we see her as a normal human being and in that sense we do feel arouse because she is human, not a God. I think that is what your text is talking about, about the presence of women within these paintings. How one tends to be treated differently due to how she is being viewed and how she reacts with the viewer. One omits power and authority above the viewer whereas the other puts itself at the same or even lower level. The reason I said low because not everyone is naked in the picture. Only women, and that tends to speak something about an equality between men and women and how men are powerful over women. That she have to be naked among the men.


Berger, John. Ways of Seeing. 35 Marylebone High Street, London: British Broadcasting Cop, 1972.

According to berger's claims in chapter 3 . I mostly agree with him."The social presence of a woman is different in kind from that of a man” (p45). In my opinion, In the past women and men are toltally different. This can be judge by many things such as the appearace, attitude, strenght and how we were raise. We as a women, always care about our appearace and how we look, we care about how the others viewing us. We cannot refuse the obvious evident that we have tons of naked pictures of women but a few naked pictures of men. By this we can see how women and men were treat diffrently from the past and we also see the life stlye of the period of art. But now a day things are change, women try to be stronger and hav the right as same as the men. The estheate in women now is not as much as the women in the past.

At last about naked and nudiness, I also agree in which berger state that there are differentiate between nude and nake. As berger mention about adam and eve that nudiness is kind of like a traditional thing, being without cloth and be passionate and memorable.

First of all, in my opinion, I’d like to make a point that there is a difference between being naked and nude. Referring from the text, “Nakedness reveals itself” while “Nudity is placed on display” (54). From how I see it, nakedness is simply being exposed and “without disguise” (54). Whereas, nudity exposes areas of the body that is meant to be exposed and intentionally consists of nakedness in a way that they want the spectator to see it.

One of the key points that Berger made in this chapter is that men and women are viewed differently. Particularly unfair to the female, which is known in the past to be in “the keeping of men”, “women must continually watch herself” and act in certain ways they want men to see them (46). Berger also made an obvious statement that “men look at women” and “women watch themselves being looked at” (47). This might be the reason why most women are usually more concerned with their appearances than men, (such as thinking that they need to be skinny). However, I have to disagree with Berger saying that men view women as an object, since you can never pretend that women don’t have feelings and they don’t interact, because of course they do. For the past centuries, women might have been of less importance, but in the recent years, they are gaining much more equality than ever.

Nevertheless, the role that women play in society still remains the same. According to Berger, the “spectator is always assumed to be male and the image of the woman is designed to flatter him” (64). Whether it is advertisement dealing with cosmetics, fashion, or other forms of beauty, most women want men to see them in a way it is shown in the ads. In the end, how a man views or speculates a woman becomes a powerful factor that drives the society even till today.

Berger, John. Ways of Seeing. London: British Broadcasting Corporation, 1972. Print.

The way of seeing and expressing to another sex is different. “And so she comes to consider the surveyor and the surveyed within her as the two constituent yet always distinct elements of her identity as a woman.”(p.46) According the book woman show her identity from “ Her presence is manifest in her gestures, voice, opinions, expression, clothes, chosen surroundings, taste- indeed there is nothing she can do which dose not contribute to her presence” (p.46). Therefore woman appearance is show how she should be treated because “Men survey woman before treating them. Consequently how a woman appears to man can determine how she will be treated”(p.46) ‘’The Models’’, Georges Seurat, 1888 from my view this picture of women face expression or the different posture show how they want to be treated (Global Art History: Fall 2010, Slide 53) Moreover, “Vanity” by Memling 1453-1494 (p.51) the woman carry mirror to enjoy her own pleasure by looking at herself, this painting was painted by man thus he want to treat her like the way he depicted, treat her with his own pleasure as she joins the spectators of herself with vanity.

From the point Khim Pisessith made “Most of the time, women are shown to be inferior one in a painting, looking out to the ‘viewer’ who is usually male. ‘Women are depicted in a quite different way from men- not because the feminine is different from the masculine — but because the ‘ideal’ spectator is always assumed to be male and the image of the woman is designed to flatter him.” (p. 64).’ It does not matter whether the woman is painted to be alone or with other characters; her eyes are usually drawn to gaze at the spectator.” I agree that the viewer who is usually male always be the surveyor, every image from female flatter male especially her eyes in the painting usually drawn to gaze at spectator.

In the reality women have more way to express themselves not the same as women in the past. I disagree with ‘Those who are judged beautiful are not beautiful.’(p.52) because not everybody judge others by their identity or some can not judge because of their position. Male and female in nowadays treated more equally. For example, if woman is a man boss. She shows bad identity, but he cannot express bad identity back to her because she might fire him.

"If a woman throws a glass on the floor, this is an example of how she treats her own emotion of anger and so of how she would wish it to be treated by others. If a man does the same, his action is only read as an expression of his anger" (p.47).this is the other example that can't be use in nowadays because of equality of sex is more powerful than ever. Woman can express emotion more straightforwardly not just to be treated.


In conclusion, some point of view is different from the past. Even though man can't treat woman as she express sometimes but man still always be the viewer.


Berger, John. Ways of Seeing. 35 Marylebone High Street, London: British Broadcasting Cop, 1972.

I, like most of the earlier posts, do agree with the statement “…presence of woman is different in kind from that of a man…” in the beginning of chapter 3 (page 45). It true that man and woman are difference in appearance, but this statement has suggested that we, male and female, look differently at each other. On page 46, “A man’s presence suggest what he is capable of doing…” and “…a woman’s presence expresses her own attitude to herself…”, these two statement suggested that when we look at male we look at his ability and capable of doing, unlike woman that we usually look at her appearance and attitude. In this chapter, Berger also suggest how in ancient time woman were treated by man as thing more that people who has feeling and treated differently depend on how man look at her—usually depend on her appearance (page 46). I agree with Pichayut, that this is one reason that woman is so concern about their appearance. To simplify it, Berger, stated that “men act and women appear,” And “Men look at women. Women watch themselves being looked at.”, (page 47).

In this chapter, Berger also suggest how women were treated in ancient time, that men have authority over women, and that women are nothing more than a thing for men to keep. “You painted a naked woman because you enjoyed looking at her, you put a mirror in her hand and you called the painting Vanity… (mirror is a symbol of the vanity of woman)”, I agree with this sentence. I think most of the people in ancient time paint these nude pictures just to satisfy their sexual desire. It also show how the women were blamed by men as vanity, even though, she might just what to check how was her appearance in other people view (page 51).

I agree that being naked and nude are two different things. From the book The Nude, by Kenneth Clark, he suggested that “…naked is simply to be without clothes, where as the nude is a form of art.”; however, if we look that way it almost the same thing, but from what I understand and the statement on page 48, where Adam said “…I afraid, because I was naked, and I hid myself…”, it show that naked come with the feeling of embarrassment and it isn’t for other to see ,unlike nude, where naked body were seen as object for other to see (page 54). Two good examples to show the difference naked and nude are ‘The Venus Of Urbino’, by Titan and ‘Olympia’ by Manet, as suggested in the book (page63).

In conclusion, in this chapter Berger has showed how women and men were looked at differently, and how women were treated by men in ancient time and were treated as an object of art. How the painting of nude women were viewed by the spectator who we assumed as men.

As I read the passage of John Berger about how man view human make me think back. Before, I have never thought that women are actually reviewing their selves for men and make they seductive to men, as it is said in the passage that “She has to survey everything she is and everything she does because how she appears to other and ultimately how she appears to men…” (Pg.46) and yes, as myself also a woman I really need. At first I thought, we behave ourselves in this way is because to the social issue only, but however, what is really in the social itself is the relationship of men and women to each other. Most of all, the women have to considered this factor is because men do judge the women through appearance as one example given in the paragraph, “Men survey women before treating them”(Pg.46) and also from the paintings of ‘The Judgment of Paris’ in page 52.

In the topic of nude paintings and picture, I think why the painting of women has to be naked or nude is because men do view beauty of women under their cloths. To know the true beauty of women, not to their cloths or how they dress, or their jewelries to show how rich are they, but however their true beauty. Therefore, I also do understand the fact that now a day lesser artwork are expressed in nude picture are because most artwork are on photograph mostly. And the photograph gives exact of what to women is, not how the men view the women in his perspective. Which sometimes, men do not view every place in women, but in some of what they want to focused on. This idea also can be reference to the passage, “The easy solution for the photographer is to turn the figure in which, by generalizing both sight and viewer and making sexuality unspecific, turns desire into fantasy.”

John Berg. "3 & 4." Way of Seeing. 35 Marylebone High Srteet, London: Britsh Broadcasting Cop., 1972.

Perhaps, the 2nd chapter is an introduction to the 3rd chapter...

John Berger starts this article by informing the different between the presence of man and woman. He said that "object is always exterior to the man" (page 45) and "Woman has to survey everything she is and everything she does because how she appears to others, and ultimately how she appears to men, is of crucial importance for what is normally thought of as the success of her life" (page 46). I do not know whether man's thought is true. I am a girl, and I fully agree with what Berger observes about women's presences. All females want to look good in male's sight, no exception. Then according to the quote of Berger on page 47 "men act and women appear. Men look at women. Women watch themselves being look at." Meaning that Women care how they are looked by men and men only look at objects, thus Women "turns herself into an object -- and most particularly an object of vision: a sight" (page 47), and "there is the origin of nudes in European painting" (page 47).

There is one of my favourite Berger's quotes that he describes about naked woman in painting:
"She is not naked as she is.
She is naked as the spectator sees her" (page 50).
Corresponding to the quote above, most of women in nude pictures send some messages to the spectator -- like -- if there is no observer, there will be no nude. But not all naked painting that are exceptions. Such as "The spectator can witness their relationship -- but he can do no more: he is forced to recognize himself as the outsider he is. He cannot deceive himself into believing that she is naked for him. He cannot turn her into a nude" (page 58). So these exceptional painting are just being naked (without cloths), not nude which is "a form of art" (page 53).


To be honest, as girl's point of view, I am not really appreciated with the idea looking woman as an object for man's pleasure. It expresses some kind of lack of feminism which is not acceptable in these liberal age. But I realized the entire reason after read his concluded sentences:

"If you have any doubt that is so, make the following experiment. Choose from this book an image of a traditional nude. Transform the woman into a man" (page 64).



Reference:
Berger,J. (1972).Way of Seeing.British Broadcasting Corporation and Penguin Books Ltd.

Chapter three said about social presence between man and woman. I agreed that, in the past, man dependent on the promise of power, which he embodies even it is fabricated and woman dependent on what others looking at her because the convention and usage tell her that she is an object to be own by a man, first her owner is father then he pass her to a man she got married, she have to presence her good attitude because she cannot be alone without a man and because man survey women before treating them (P.46) so she have to make him want to own her.

Naked and nude, I never know the different between two of them until I have read page fifty-four, it’s make me clear that naked is to be oneself without disguise but nude is displaying naked body to be seen by others similarly to dressing. There are lots of nude paintings in chapter three, most of them are naked or nude woman appeals to a viewer, who never be painted. And also in chapter four, all of them are women who nude, no men. “The ‘ideal’ spectator is always assumed to be male and the image of the women is designed to be flatter him” (P.64). This shows ways of seeing woman and man is extremely different.

I have do some experiment written in the last paragraph. I think it makes really different feeling from seeing woman nude into man nude. I don’t think it beautiful or appeals to watching. Because, somehow, man is not the type to post like in the picture in chapter three. They not match to doing it at all.

According to Berger's mention in the beginning of chapter 3 that "to be born a women has been to be born, within a allotted and confined space, into the keeping of men" and "men survey women before treating them" (p.46). I do agree with him that, in that time men is the surveyor while women is the surveyed. Although this may be true, nowadays people changed also women and men became identical. For instance, currently people judged others by monetary matter, career or education. That mean not only women is surveyed, men also has to look at themselves and how he appears.

Berger simply described that discriminate between nakedness and nudity, with nakedness simply being the state of having no cloths on while nudity being a form of artistic exposition. In addition, I also agree with "You painted a naked women because you enjoyed looking at her… (p.51). Because I think the beginning of painting is you paint what you interested in. For example, 'the judgment of Paris by Cranach 1472-1553' it expresses the same earlier idea how men look at women.


Berger,J. (1972).Way of Seeing.British Broadcasting Corporation and Penguin Books Ltd.

From what I've read from ways of seeing chapter 3 and 4. It suggest that beauty is a factor that can changes the way people treats women. just like what John Berger said " Men survey women before treating them."(46) and from what I've seen in real life makes this quote believable because in real life most of men judges women by their beauty and " Those who are not judged beautiful are not beautiful. Those who are, are given the prize."(52). I have to agree with this not because i judge people by their look but it is from what I've seen everyday.

But seeing woman as an object like what Berger have said is not true in these days. I have to agree with what Pichayut Sirawongprasert have said, men and women now have equal rights and it is not the same as the past where women have less important role in social. Now a days women become more powerful and were treats equally as men.

Berger states a very clear definition of nudity and naked in this chapter. "Nudity is a form of dress"(54) this quote makes a clear definition of nudity. For me to be nude is like wearing a mask or clothes which is like acting but being naked is different, being naked is more like to "reveals itself."(54)

In the end this chapter John Berger explained how women are different from men, and how nakedness and nudity were used to explain the true beauty in the past just like an object, and i actually enjoyed reading first 2 chapters more than this because it might be that point of views at the time are different from now ,So the view changes as the time pass according to the first chapter " The way we see things is affected by what we know or what we believe." (8 ).

Berger explain in Chapter 3 about how they view women differently from men. I do agree that at that period of time it happens, though it changes completely now a days. "Men survey women before treating them. Consequently how a woman appears to a man can determine how she will be treated" ( Berger, 1972, pp.46 ) I think both men and women survey each other before treat too, and it is true that they have to survey first. According to the beginning pages of the book which tell us in that time women did not get treated equally as men, in the other hand, it is unfair for women.

The word naked, nude are being explain differently in this book. As I read through this topic, I'm not very sure myself what really is the differences between these two words. But in the phrase "…to be naked is simply to be without clothes, whereas the nude is a form of art" ( Berger, 1972, pp.53 ) gives me a little idea why it is different, though its quite complicated to understand. The quotes "to be naked is simply to be without clothes, whereas a nude is a form of art" ( Berger, 1972, pp. 53 ) maybe linked to "Nudity is a form of dress" ( Berger, 1972, pp.54 ) i think the two quotes help the readers to understand more, and also its quite reasonable to agree with.

B. John. Ways of Seeing. the British Broadcasting Corporation. 35 Marylebone High Street. London. 1972.

Upon reading the first several pages of the third chapter, I'd come accross information about the story of Adam and Eve. Not being knowledgable about the story, it was rather interesting to know about what actually occured in the story. What I understood was that Adam and Eve existed in a Garden of some kind which bears a fruit, and for what reason that fruit was there I don't know, but they were forewarned not to eat the forbbiden fruit by Lord God himself. However, the story is told in a way that women were at fault because Eve had eaten the fruit and shared it with her significant other, Adam. It was at this moment that “the woman is blamed and is punished by being made subservient to the man. In relation to the woman, the man becomes the agent of God.” (pg. 48). And it is saying that God had made man to be more superior than the woman which is very interesting because of the events that occured throughout history.

However, the chapter resumes with telling us about how women became the image of what we were supposed to look at. It is naturally the men who is supposed to spectate and the women who are to be observed by others as a part of their sex-related personalities. This is why see women more commonly portrayed in paintings in the nude “because the 'ideal' spectator is always assumed to be male and the image of the woman is designed to flatter him.” (pg. 64) and cleverly tells us that it couldn't be any other way if we were to imagine those women as men “Then notice the violence the transformation does. Not the image, but the assumptions of a likely viewer.” (pg. 64) This gives credit to his statement on how women are much more rather to be viewed than to have vice-versa which I believe to be true.