In Walter Benjamin's 'The Work of Art
in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction' (1936), Benjamin discusses how new
technology and new mechanical means of working are changing how we appreciate
and perceive art in various forms. He describes original pieces of work to have
an 'aura', giving them a value that will increase with age:
'The authenticity of a thing is the
essence of all that is transmissible from its beginning, ranging from its
substantive duration to its testimony to the history which it has experience'.
(1939,p.221)
An 'aura' of a piece increases as it
gets older and even if it gets a bit of wear and tear. With the rise in
mechanical reproduction, there is a lack of original work because it's so easy
now to reproduce a piece of art. This means that they lack the value of the
original, one off pieces. With a body of repeated prints, the first print holds
just as much value as the last because according to Benjamin you can not
reproduce authenticity, giving them not much value at all:
'One might subsume the eliminated
element in the term ''aura'' and go on to say; that with the wither in the ages
of mechanical reproduction is the aura of the work of art'.
(1939,p.221)
This, with the development of
photography and the rise of socialism, was concern for the art world. Benjamin
stated that 'photography freed the hand of the most important artistic
functions'(1939,p.220) arguing that photography gave artists more freedom,
allowing them to produce their own art, not just commissioned portraits. Another
reason for the contemporary decay of the aura is also due to the 'desire of
contemporary masses to bring things ''closer'' spatially and humanly'
(1939,p.223). Illustration became more accessible to society as the mechanical
reproduction sped up the print process, allowing prints to be made in large
quantities at a fast rate.
Andy Warhol was one of the first
artists around the time this was published to break away from this idea of an
aura and in to the mass print world. The shift in the way he produced work
proved a successful move for him. In fact, a large number of his works were devised
through mass production, however it could be argued that he's achieved just as
much success as those who did not mass-produce. This contradicts Benjamin's
statement. Warhol challenged the rise of republication to his advantage and
didn't see the negative side. Now almost 80 years on, the ways of producing
work have expanded dramatically, allowing society to obtain work easily on a
number of media platforms such as via the Internet. The mechanical reproduction
has not necessarily taken value away from an individual, especially from the
working class that perhaps could not get hold of an original, unique work
before this change happened. Benjamin illustrates this point by saying
‘technical reproduction can put the copy of the original into situations which
would be out of reach for the original itself' (1939,p.220).
However, Benjamin did not peak about
the mechanical reproduction in just a negative light. He saw the potential for
the future. Written at the time of the rise of Adolf Hitler, Benjamin thought
that it would be 'useful for the formulation of revolutionary demands in the
politics of art’. It would improve communication with society which was proved
through later propaganda posters. Propaganda however holds a different kind of
value altogether because it's intention is different. It has not been produced
to just be appreciated but to communicate and persuade.
Benjamin goes on to discuss
how film, newsreel and photography all enable the viewer to witness situations
in detail from a distance, therefore, meaning we can see detail, for example in
a still photography, that we may have missed seeing with our own eyes, even if
we were at the event being photographed. This is another positive of mechanical
reproduction in today’s society.
No comments:
Post a Comment