Summary of the Essay the Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction

"The Work of Fine art on the Historic period of Mechanical Reproduction" by Walter Benjamin was published in 1936, the inter war period. "Having experienced Fascism and the fascist employ 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 a half century to manifest in all areas of culture the modify in the conditions of production". Reflecting on the function of art in the 20th century, he explores a theory of fine art and the "useful conception of revolutionary demands in the politics of art." [Preface] Since get-go reading this essay fifteen years ago, I've always been struck by its prescience and continual resonance in the digital age, so delight forgive the length of this provocation beyond the recommended 2-3 paragraph weblog mail.

Benjamin asserts that the piece of work of art has always been reproducible, just is quick to betoken out that mechanical reproduction, i.e., 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 film' have had on art in its traditional form. [Section I] Given this context, what are your thoughts on Benjamin's statement that "even the most perfect reproduction of a work of art is lacking in one element: its presence in fourth dimension and space, its unique beingness at the place where it happens to exist," or in Benjamin-ian terms, its "aura". [Section II] Benjamin further clarifies and defines the term "aura" of the piece of work of art equally "that which withers in the age of mechanical reproduction". Do you agree or disagree?

For this provocation, I'll use an instance from art: does Leonardo da Vinci's Mona Lisa finish to be the Mona Lisa if nosotros 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 however 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 even winks. She is featured in a drove of luxury leather products designed past artist Jeff Koons entitled "MASTERS" that retails for approx. $585.00 – $four,000.00. Here's a contempo photo of the display:

Mona Lisa is also currently on display at my local mall via a jacket design:

Do y'all retrieve such reproduction erodes, or conversely, enhances the Benjamin-ian aureola of this 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 gimmicky life." [Department 3] What are your thoughts on this?

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

The Internet, and our use of information technology, are for usa, in my opinion based upon Benjamin, the ultimate mechanical reproduction of fine art and exhibition infinite (some other important concept to Benjamin). Acting every bit the mass which "is a matrix from which all traditional behavior toward works of fine art issues today in a new class" [Section Fifteen] the Cyberspace's inherent mechanical reproduction is the ultimate emancipation of art, and I'd add, also its paradoxical enslavement of 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 information technology is easy for me to grasp the degradation of the Benjamin-ian aura in the work of art, because all i has to do is photocopy the Mona Lisa from an art book or re-create it from a website and run across 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 World wide web, apps such as Instagram and filters. Do you notice "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction" every bit forward thinking as I do? Does information technology hold up in the digital age?

I cannot overlook that this provocation is assigned and intended for the readings for our Sept. 11 class, and it brings to mind some remarks made past the author of "Prozac Nation" Elizabeth Wurtzel. They struck me and so and notwithstanding do at present, as reminiscent of the Epilogue in which Benjamin theorizes that war is the ultimate piece of work of art. Wurtzel was asked about the events of Sept. 11, 2001 in February 2002 during an interview to promote her book More than, Now, Once more by the Toronto World and Post in the context of her residency close to the World Merchandise Center, and she commented as follows: 'I had not the slightest emotional reaction. I idea, this is a actually strange fine art project…it was a most amazing sight in terms of sheer elegance. It vicious like h2o. It just slid, like a turtleneck going over someone'southward head.' (Her comments set off a shock wave and likely acquired her motion-picture show for "Prozac Nation" made by Miramax not to be released.) For me, these comments brought to mind words of Benjamin I have difficulty typing and relaying that "war is beautiful" and that "through gas warfare the aura is abolished in a new way." Writing in his time and place, Benjamin quotes Fascism "Fiat ars – pereat mundus" (translation: let art be created, though the world perish) which was the Fascist spin on "l'art pour l'art" (art for art's sake) and concludes by conjecturing "war to supply the artistic gratification of a sense of perception that has been changed past applied science." [Epilogue] Do you find this to be the logical and probable mail service-Marxian development?

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

Related Resources:

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

"The Louis Vuitton 10 Jeff Koons Numberless 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 5th" by Carolyn A. McDonough, on CultureArtMedia, September 1, 2017

keatingfrenjudipt.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/