A reader , April 16, 1997: An eye opener to the real meaning of renaissance art. I knew next to nothing about art when I picked this book up. I probably still don't, but at least I can now appreciate the value that "art" held for the patrons of the arts (specifically oils) during the 16th, 17th, 18th and 19th centuries. One learns to appreciate the value these paintings held not only for the patrons who commissioned the paintings but for their peers and the other social classes of the time. Mr. Berger's theory to a degree is that these oils functioned as a sort of touch-tone of wealth and status and, in a socially fashionable, acceptable and clever way, showcased one's earthly possessions and station in life. The patron via the painting told the world: I am socially, spiritually and, on occasion, sexually superior. This commissioned "art" was a tasteful one-upmanship show. The patron called the shots where the iconography in the painting was concerned and the artist, inevitably a man of talent but with expenses, complied. This is not to say that the masters were hacks. But to coin a phrase they knew on which side their canvas was oiled. Nothing much seems to have changed today, according to Mr. Berger. And here his theory of the function of visual art comes into clear focus. Mr. Berger uses this brief but dense text to do nothing less than show up or expose the power and fraud of marketing in contemporary society. Society appears to be a universe of unhappy individuals sharing the collective belief that by possessing or rather acquiring certain social icons they will be empowered and/or achieve everlasting happiness. This is just an illusion of the genius of marketing-which is what the oils did during the age of the Masters!...

Go back to The political economy of ads unit