Wangsgard 1
Ryan Wangsgard
Professor Briggs
English 1050
July 29, 2010
Artistic Diversity
Photographs have always intrigued me. In my youth, I would carry around a camera anytime I
would go to a new or interesting place. In elementary school I entered the annual Reflections Contest for
photography. In high school I had my first photography class and learned about composition, contrast,
and developing an eye for seeing. I breezed through my college photography class and started a
photography business in portrait and landscape photography, in which I have won some awards. I
thought I knew a thing or two about art due to this background, I was wrong! I have come to realize
there are many ways of viewing art and how differently it can be interpreted from one person to
another. I have also learned how someone’s ethnic background can influence their works and Ideas.
My English 1050 Reading Culture class is a diversity course and it delivered. There were selected
readings about iconic photographs, paintings both European and urban, racial and cultural issues as well
as immigration topics. It was in this class that I realized that even though I come from what may be
considered an artistic background, I knew little about art. This realization came to me as I was reading
the works of John Berger in “Ways of seeing”. Berger discusses nude European oil paintings and what the
painting is about. Berger states that women are generally the subjects because “they have been seen
and judged as sights” (209). As I read his synopsis of what a woman in a painting represents, I had to
really think about what he was saying. He was proposing a new concept to me and it was a little difficult
for me to understand at first. Berger also said “a woman’s presence expresses her own attitude to
Wangsgard 2
herself, and defines what can and cannot be done to her” (208). Berger later went on to confuse me
about, as I under stood it, women have an inner conflict with themselves. Berger stated “That part of a
woman’s self which is the surveyor treats the part which is the surveyed so as to demonstrate the others
how her whole self would like to be treated” (209). This really made me dig deep into my unphilosophical brain to try and understand what he was saying. I know that woman are complex, however
according to Berger's thoughts, he is making me rethink just how complex they may be.
Berger went on to discuss some of the most well-known nudes and how the women are
positioned and posing for the viewer of the painting. He mentioned the naked Venus, Cupid, Time, and
love painting by Bronzino. He talked about what each of these key figures represented in the painting. I
was so lost in his description of the art that I started thinking of the lyrics to a modern country song by
Brad Paisley. In the song Paisley says “You see a priceless French painting; I see a drunk naked girl” (I’m
Still A Guy). The gong in my head sounded and I thought to myself that’s it, art is diverse. The diversity of
art is what makes it so great! It can mean one thing to one person and something totally different to
another. Even though I understood this now, I still did not understand Berger's commentary. While
reading what other students in the class thought about the readings, I was glad to read Andrew Stows
comments on Berger and know that I was not the only one that felt this way. Andrew said “I have to be
honest; a lot of what berger had to say about nude art was way over my head”.
The presentment of Berger's statements and idea’s helped me to see the art world in different
shade of color than I had seen before. While I still do not understand all that his perspectives
personified, it has helped open my door a little wider into the art world.
The next reading that helped me to see the diversity that exists in art was the Phillip Gefter
selection on “Photographic Icons: Fact, Fiction, Or Metaphor?”. My love of photography had me a
excited to read this selection. I turned to the opening pages and read George’s and Trimbur’s comments
Wangsgard 3
with enthusiasm. I was now eager to read what Gefter had to say, that was until I read Gefter's opening
line of “Truth-telling is the promise of a photograph-as if fact itself resides in the optical precision with
which the medium reflects our native perception” (230). The title started to become clear to me. As time
went on and I read his statements my views became more and more distant from his own. I got the
feeling from him that if a photograph was not spontaneous then it was not a photograph, it was a fake
and should not be considered art. He was approaching things from a journalistic approach and felt
unkind toward the posed or staged photographs. I, on the other hand, feel that as a photographer you
are trying to make a statement about your subject. Sometimes taking multiple shots of the same subject
will yield very different and dramatic differences. Just because you asked a person to tilt their head, or
move a different way does not make a photograph any less valid. You are capturing a subject in a
moment of time, as they or it was and sometimes the staged or posed photographs will produce the
most impact which is what every photographer strives for.
It was with the Gefter writings that I realized that your background has a lot to do with your
point of view and how dramatically your view can differ from another's. It is the great nature vs nurture
debate. Are we the way we are because that is what we were nurtured to be or is it just our nature? Our
society and culture definitely do play a part in who we are and how we view things. This is just one
reason that there is such diversity in the art world and in society in general. Just think how boring things
would be if we all viewed things the same! Because our backgrounds help shape and influence our ideas,
we do see things differently.
A good example of seeing things differently can be found in the visual essay titled “Claiming
Interpretive Space” by Diana George and John Trimbur. This visual essay is about a graffiti artist named
Banksy. George and Trimbur said “Very little is known for certain about the graffiti artist who works at
night to create detailed, radical statements about power and conflict-local and international” (305,306).
Wangsgard 4
Living in suburbia I did not realize what beautiful and telling art this graffiti artist creates. The only time I
had even heard of Banksy was when he came to Utah during the Sundance Film Festival and created a
piece on Main St, Park City.
I had never really thought of graffiti as an art form until this time, so I was forced to decide how I
felt about it. I struggled within myself to decide is this criminal graffiti or is it art. I reviewed the pieces he
created displayed in the book followed by a Google search. Some of the creations were down right funny
while others were political in nature. A few, such as the maid lifting the side of the building (Images)to
sweep the dirt under the rug so to speak, were just neat looking. While I admit I do not understand the
statements he is trying to make in some cases, I came to the conclusion that this is interpretive artwork
at it’s best. Just as I did not understand it but may have my own ideas about what it means, others will
feel the same way. I think this is what Banksy wanted. He gives no explanation. He expects you to
interpret what you see. In some cases the message is very clear. In others you are scratching your head
while looking at the creation with interest. That is the beauty of his work. It is diverse by its nature.
Another moving reading that deals with artistic diversity is the reading of “Camera Of Dirt” by
Charles Bowden. Charles Bowden is a photographer from Juarez Mexico. He enjoys photography and
does it for the enjoyment. He does not expect his works to be hung in a gallery or be in a show
somewhere, he just enjoys photographing the events of his town. This is in stark contrast to the other
photographers that we have discussed who take their photographs in order to make their living. In one
instance Bowden states “The question is not why he keeps shooting. The question is why not?” (426).
Bowden has been able to find the beauty in a city that I would not come within 100 miles of. While
Juarez has hundreds of factories that are American owned, it is a very poor city. Bowden said “The wages
are 25 to 50 bucks a week. No one can live on them. No one” (424). The homes are cardboard. The
streets are dirt. And the labor is cheap. This is diversity at large; the American business owners are safe
Wangsgard 5
and sound in their own luxury homes thinking all is well while children are being taken advantage of in
their factories.
Bowden armed with his artistic ability and his camera has exposed these practices. He has
created some fantastic images that tell the story of his homeland. He has captured its beauty and also its
diversity through his images. One photo shows a young girl hanging her newly washed clothing on a dry
line in front of her cardboard house, while the next shows a young lady working in a factory. These two
images could not be more different for showing the diverse lives these people of Juarez live day in and
day out.
Many forms of artwork can be used to make a statement of diversity. It can be an oil painting on
canvas, graffiti on the streets of your home town, or a photograph that appears in your local newspaper.
The people who create these images are reaching out to their viewers expressing their feelings through
their chosen method of work. This is a great asset to our local, national, and worldwide communities.
The cultural differences and life experiences that each of these artists’ possess, incorporates a great deal
of diversity into the art world that can be shared and celebrated by all.
Wangsgard 6
Works Cited
Banksy. “Banksy Images”. 307-308.
Berger, John. “Ways of Seeing”. 207-216.
Bowden, Charles. “Camera Of Dirt”. 421-426.
Gefter, Phillip. “Photographic Icons: Fact, Fiction, Or metaphor?”. 230-235.
George, Diana and Trimbur, John. “Reading Culture”. 305-306.