Ways of Seeing
Ways of Seeing by John Bergerby John Berger
The most recommended of 3 art books
Recommended as an accessible, influential way to think about art and media; critics say its claims lack scientific grounding.
Recommended as an accessible, influential way to think about art and media; critics say its claims lack scientific grounding.
13 people gave an opinion
- recommend it
- 8
- criticize it
- 5
- approval share
- 62%
Recommended in 3 of 13 months
- November 2025: recommended
- December 2025: not recommended
- January 2026: not recommended
- February 2026: not recommended
- March 2026: not recommended
- April 2026: not recommended
- May 2026: not recommended
- June 2026: not recommended
- July 2026: recommended
- August 2026: not recommended
- September 2026: not recommended
- October 2026: recommended
- November 2026: not recommended (month in progress)
Why it doesn’t carry the badge
- 8 people recommend itNeeds 10 or more, not met.
- 1.6 recommenders for every criticNeeds 2 to 1 or better, not met.
- Recommended in 3 of 13 monthsNeeds 4 or more, not met.
The same three rules apply to every product, and the badge can’t be bought. How the badge works
What people say about it
The reasons people give, with the number of comments that give each one. Open a reason to read what they said.
Why people recommend it
Each mark is one comment
Influential in media and art criticism
“And they've led to all manner of supposition about art, history, feminism, and human behavior.”
Comment from 12 Oct 2026 in “Chapter 1 of "Ways of Seeing" by John Berger (1972)” “the Ways of Seeing which did become influencial in media and art criticism”
Comment from 12 Oct 2026 in “Chapter 1 of "Ways of Seeing" by John Berger (1972)” Helpful context on the original series
“It was written after the original series aired, and gives more space to some interesting topics.”
Comment from 12 Oct 2026 in “Chapter 1 of "Ways of Seeing" by John Berger (1972)” “I find it helpful to understand how it was initially made and then how modern society treats it”
Comment from 12 Oct 2026 in “Chapter 1 of "Ways of Seeing" by John Berger (1972)” Valued by readers without critical training
“Just because our education system does a poor job of teaching critical literacy doesn't mean other people aren't getting something out of this.”
Comment from 12 Oct 2026 in “Chapter 1 of "Ways of Seeing" by John Berger (1972)” “I'm a big fan of Ways of Seeing”
Comment from 12 Oct 2026 in “Chapter 1 of "Ways of Seeing" by John Berger (1972)”
What people warn about
Each mark is one comment
Dense, hard-to-follow writing
“it's sort of incomprehensible word slop that I doubt many of the people recommending it got anything from at all”
Comment from 12 Oct 2026 in “Chapter 1 of "Ways of Seeing" by John Berger (1972)” “Just scanned it and not getting anything of this word salad.”
Comment from 12 Oct 2026 in “Chapter 1 of "Ways of Seeing" by John Berger (1972)” “I found Berger's writing pretty hard to digest.”
Comment from 11 Oct 2026 in “Chapter 1 of "Ways of Seeing" by John Berger (1972)” Claims lack scientific grounding
“The idea that we can draw much knowledge about the owner of the painting of a fat woman, simply from the painting, is just not based in any science.”
Comment from 12 Oct 2026 in “Chapter 1 of "Ways of Seeing" by John Berger (1972)” “invented a whole movement that I think doesn't carry any scientific weight”
Comment from 11 Oct 2026 in “Chapter 1 of "Ways of Seeing" by John Berger (1972)” “That's not very well grounded in science.”
Comment from 12 Oct 2026 in “Chapter 1 of "Ways of Seeing" by John Berger (1972)” Marxist framing distorts conclusions
“I'll give an example of how Berger's Marxism leads him astray.”
Comment from 12 Oct 2026 in “Chapter 1 of "Ways of Seeing" by John Berger (1972)” “his Marxism spoils everything”
Comment from 12 Oct 2026 in “Chapter 1 of "Ways of Seeing" by John Berger (1972)” “that supposition is Berger's”
Comment from 12 Oct 2026 in “Chapter 1 of "Ways of Seeing" by John Berger (1972)”
Other art books people recommend
The two most recommended other art books, with the same counts for each, so you can compare like for like. The tick on each bar marks the 2 to 1 line the badge needs.
| Product | Recommend | Criticize | Approval | Months | Owned | Badge |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ways of Seeingby John BergerThis page | 8 | 5 | 62% | 3 | — | — |
| Understanding Comicsby Scott McCloud | 5 | 0 | 100% | 4 | — | — |
| The Masters of Pixel Art | 3 | 0 | 100% | 1 | — | — |
What people said
19 of the 20 comments that mention it, newest first. Each links to the original comment.
“I'll give an example of how Berger's Marxism leads him astray.”
“I find it helpful to understand how it was initially made and then how modern society treats it”
“the Ways of Seeing which did become influencial in media and art criticism”
“Just because our education system does a poor job of teaching critical literacy doesn't mean other people aren't getting something out of this.”
“Just scanned it and not getting anything of this word salad.”
“And they've led to all manner of supposition about art, history, feminism, and human behavior.”
“his Marxism spoils everything”
“I'm a big fan of Ways of Seeing”
“That's not very well grounded in science.”
“it's sort of incomprehensible word slop that I doubt many of the people recommending it got anything from at all”
“that supposition is Berger's”
“The idea that we can draw much knowledge about the owner of the painting of a fat woman, simply from the painting, is just not based in any science.”
“what makes his work unfit for being used in film/media studies that overlap with film criticism”
“I also think it's wrong and ridiculous.”
“It was written after the original series aired, and gives more space to some interesting topics.”
“I found Berger's writing pretty hard to digest.”
“invented a whole movement that I think doesn't carry any scientific weight”
“I found the youtube copy of the series to be great”
“a much more elaborate (and accessible) way to think about art”
Counts come from 1,795,640 Hacker News comments, November 2025 to November 2026. How we count. Report a mistake.