Art criticism is a respected and also difficult field to master, but John Berger stands out as a recent example of someone who thrived in this profession. In the 1940's Berger began painting and later taught art classes, eventually publishing numerous essays critiquing various works and espousing his personal beliefs about how artwork should be viewed (John Berger Biography 1). All of this art education gave him a unique perspective on the elitism present in his field, leading to the focus of later works. He authored a book called "Ways of Seeing" in which he wrote about how art is mystified by the cultural elite, making it difficult for regular people to understand and appreciate masterpieces. Berger's writing allows one to step back and not only look at a work of art itself, but also see the other outside influences that affect how a person perceives and understands the piece. One of these influences is the art reviewer themselves, and how their own interpretation can affect or mystify people's interpretation of a piece. Elizabeth McFadden, writing for the Rutgers Art Review, discussed Jan Brueghel's "The Allegory of Taste" from her perspective in 2014. In her review multiple instances of mystification occur, although she does not seem to be knowingly doing so. Rather the inherent prerequisite of higher level education mystifies any reader ignorant to the nuances of classical art criticism. McFadden's review mystifies Brueghel's "The Allegory of Taste" by discussing its upper class background, how the painting itself was specifically tailored towards nobility, and the unspoken but present belief that only those with advanced education and cultural understanding could properly understand and appreciate it. .
"In the end the art of the past is being mystified because a privileged minority is striving to invent a history which can retrospectively justify the role of the ruling classes, and such a justification can no longer make sense in modern terms"(Berger 11).
