Alter Benjamins Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction

"The Piece of work of Fine art on the Age of Mechanical Reproduction" by Walter Benjamin was published in 1936, the inter war menstruum. "Having experienced Fascism and the fascist use of media in Germany" [from Media & Cultural Studies Keyworks ed. by Durham and Kellner] Benjamin speaks to the transformation of the Marxian superstructure which he observed "has taken more than than a half century to manifest in all areas of culture the change in the conditions of production". Reflecting on the function of art in the 20th century, he explores a theory of art and the "useful formulation of revolutionary demands in the politics of art." [Preface] Since first reading this essay fifteen years ago, I've always been struck by its prescience and continual resonance in the digital age, and then please forgive the length of this provocation beyond the recommended 2-3 paragraph weblog postal service.

Benjamin asserts that the work of art has always been reproducible, just is quick to signal out that mechanical reproduction, i.due east., Marxian Capitalist mechanistic reproduction, through photography and film, represents something new. Benjamin discusses the profound repercussions that reproduction of works of art through photography, and the 'fine art of the moving picture' have had on fine art in its traditional form. [Department I] Given this context, what are your thoughts on Benjamin's argument that "even the most perfect reproduction of a piece of work of art is lacking in one element: its presence in time and infinite, its unique being at the identify where it happens to be," or in Benjamin-ian terms, its "aura". [Section II] Benjamin farther clarifies and defines the term "aura" of the work of art as "that which withers in the age of mechanical reproduction". Practice you hold or disagree?

For this provocation, I'll employ an example from art: does Leonardo da Vinci's Mona Lisa cease to exist the Mona Lisa if we remove her from the rooms in which Leonardo painted and her patron intended her or the Louvre where she has resided for many centuries and even so resides today? For example, more than specifically, an enlarged and interactive Mona Lisa is currently on display in the windows of fashion conglomerate LVMH at 5th Ave. and 57th Street and she fifty-fifty winks. She is featured in a collection of luxury leather products designed by artist Jeff Koons entitled "MASTERS" that retails for approx. $585.00 – $four,000.00. Here's a recent photo of the display:

Mona Lisa is too currently on brandish at my local mall via a jacket blueprint:

Do you think such reproduction erodes, or conversely, enhances the Benjamin-ian aura of this piece of work of art?

Benjamin attributes social bases for the "contemporary decay of the aura" and that these "rest on two circumstances, both of which are related to the increasing significance of the masses in contemporary life." [Section III] What are your thoughts on this?

While the gimmicky cult of the Mona Lisa carries on in our modern manner world today, Benjamin states that "originally, the contextual integration of fine art in tradition found its expression in the cult" and he clarifies, "in other words, the unique value of the 'authentic' work of fine art has its basis in ritual, the location of its original use value" and he proceeds with "an all-important insight: for the commencement time in world history, mechanical reproduction emancipates the work of fine art from its parasitical dependence on ritual." Benjamin and then points out a paradox that "to an ever greater degree the work of fine art reproduced becomes the work of fine art designed for reproducibility." Cautioning, he qualifies this with: "Simply the instant that the criterion of authenticity ceases to be applicative to artistic production, the total function of art is reversed. Instead of being based on ritual, it begins to exist based on another exercise – politics." [Section IV] Do you think the post-millennial office of art is ane of ritual, politics or both? Can y'all cite examples of works of art to illustrate your point of view?

The Internet, and our utilise of information technology, are for u.s.a., in my opinion based upon Benjamin, the ultimate mechanical reproduction of art and exhibition infinite (another important concept to Benjamin). Acting every bit the mass which "is a matrix from which all traditional behavior toward works of fine art problems today in a new grade" [Department Xv] the Internet'due south inherent mechanical reproduction is the ultimate emancipation of art, and I'd add, also its paradoxical enslavement of fine art to the new rituals of clicking, copying, pasting, scanning, uploading, downloading, swiping, posting, re-posting, tweeting, re-tweeting, liking, favorite-ing and deleting.

While it is easy for me to grasp the degradation of the Benjamin-ian aureola in the work of art, because all one has to exercise is photocopy the Mona Lisa from an art book or copy it from a website and see the loss of resolution and artful quality with each generation, one must ask rhetorically how Benjamin foresaw this without the benefit of Xerox, Photoshop, the Www, apps such as Instagram and filters. Do you observe "The Work of Art in the Historic period of Mechanical Reproduction" as forward thinking every bit I exercise? Does it hold upwardly in the digital historic period?

I cannot overlook that this provocation is assigned and intended for the readings for our Sept. eleven class, and it brings to mind some remarks made by the author of "Prozac Nation" Elizabeth Wurtzel. They struck me so and still practice at present, as reminiscent of the Epilogue in which Benjamin theorizes that state of war is the ultimate work of art. Wurtzel was asked well-nigh the events of Sept. 11, 2001 in February 2002 during an interview to promote her volume More, Now, Again by the Toronto Globe and Mail in the context of her residency close to the World Trade Centre, and she commented as follows: 'I had not the slightest emotional reaction. I thought, this is a really strange fine art project…it was a most astonishing sight in terms of sheer elegance. It roughshod like water. It merely slid, like a turtleneck going over someone'south caput.' (Her comments set off a stupor wave and likely caused her motion-picture show for "Prozac Nation" fabricated by Miramax non to be released.) For me, these comments brought to mind words of Benjamin I take difficulty typing and relaying that "war is beautiful" and that "through gas warfare the aura is abolished in a new style." Writing in his time and place, Benjamin quotes Fascism "Fiat ars – pereat mundus" (translation: allow art be created, though the world perish) which was the Fascist spin on "l'art pour l'art" (fine art for art's sake) and concludes by conjecturing "war to supply the artistic gratification of a sense of perception that has been changed by technology." [Epilogue] Exercise you find this to be the logical and probable post-Marxian evolution?

Related Video Clip: Does this video of LVMH's Titian window (particular from the painting of Mars, Venus and Cupid) decay its aura or enhance it?

Related Resources:

"Jeff Koons'south New Line" by Vanessa Friedman, The New York Times, April 11, 2017

"The Louis Vuitton ten Jeff Koons Bags May Exist My Least Favorite Designer Collab Ever" by Amanda Mull on purseblog, April 13, 2017

"Release Me" by John Harris, The Guardian, July 17, 2004

"Mona Lisa & an Iguana on fifth" by Carolyn A. McDonough, on CultureArtMedia, September 1, 2017

coltereasom1957.blogspot.com

Source: https://itpcore1fall2017.commons.gc.cuny.edu/2017/09/07/the-work-of-art-in-the-age-of-mechanical-reproduction-by-walter-benjamin/

Share this post