#10 “All photographs are there to remind us of what we forget. In this - as in other ways - they are the opposite of paintings. Paintings record what the painter remembers. Because each one of us forgets different things, a photo more than a painting may change its meaning according to who is looking at it.” ~John Berger

This one's tricky. I agree and disagree with it. I agree with him in that I definitely think it's true that the meaning of a photograph changes depending on what the viewer brings with them when viewing it. But I think it can also be true of paintings, especially abstract paintings. I don't agree with the statement that "paintings record what the painter remembers." In some cases a painting is what the painter is imagining in that instant, a painting can be very spontaneous. I'm also having trouble with the statement that "all photographs are there to remind us of what we forget." This is not true for all photography, some photography is also an imagination, a look into what doesn't really exist...there is nothing there that we could have forgotten because there was never anything there to forget. I think that his statements are accurate when referring to specific kinds of photography and paintings. For example, if he was talking about photos in which the photographer is trying to make the viewer take notice of something that is taken for granted or the images are from the past then yes we are being reminded. And if the painting is of a landscape or a portrait then yes we are seeing what the painter remembers. But this is not always the case.

 Paco Peregrin

Jackson Pollock