[GUIDE] The work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction - Walter Benjamin (1969)
First off, if you are ever going to cite this article in a social setting with other people who may or may not be familiar with his work (ie. an art event), you need to know this: Benjamin is pronounced ben-yah-MEEN, not BEN-juh-min. (Don't ask me how I know T_T)
If you're an artist and a commie, this might be an interesting read for you! It talks about authenticity, aura, and thoughts on replication.
You can find the reading in the Dropbox link below. It is located under “critical theory texts.zip” > “Durham and Kellner - Keyworks”.
Login to Dropbox. Bring your photos, docs, and videos anywhere and keep your files safe.
It's important to note that the term is "mechanical reproduction", not "digital reproduction". Mechanical reproduction refers to actual, handmade, produced replicas of the original (ie. an imitation painting of the Mona Lisa by a different artist, not a picture of the Mona Lisa). However, we will also talk about the implications of digital reproduction!
The term authenticity here refers to an artwork's precise existence in time and space. An original artwork is authentic because there is no way to ever replicate the exact conditions (time, space, environment, technique, etc.) that the artwork is created in. It occupies a unique place in the world, as does every other artwork.
If you are still confused, here's an analogy: you are authentic because there is no other you, nobody with the same exact genes, you are born at X time at Y hospital under Z conditions.
Reproductions will never be authentic to the original because it cannot replicate the conditions of the original artwork, in the same way that a clone of you can never really be you. (or can it....)
There is a bit of a paradox here: it can be argued that by reproducing a work of art, we can also call the original's authenticity into question. By reproducing it, we have undermined the authenticity of the original. But at the same time, each subsequent copy of an original artwork has its own authenticity, its own unique place in the world, and new meanings can be created from those replicas.
But there is one thing that is missing from replicas that only the original artwork possesses. This unique quality of authenticity is what Benjamin calls aura.
Here what that reminded me of:
(this meme i made is cracking me UP LOOOOL)
Anyways, aura cannot be replicated by mechanical reproduction.
Now, in an increasingly digitized world, we can't just forget that photography is now a part of the equation. Historically, photography used to be used to document, prove, and survey more than it was used as an expressive art form. Then, it became an art form, and changed the practice of art in itself.
Photography and film have their own authenticity - a photograph of a painting serves a much different purpose than a real painting. In addition, photography was the first medium to raise objects from ritual. Instead, photography began to be produced for exhibition value.
Here's what Benjamin says about that:
"... the instance the criterion of authenticity ceases to be applicable to artistic production, the total function of art is reversed. Instead of being based on ritual, it begins to be based on another practice- politics".
By ritual, he's referencing how art used to be based on ritualistic practices rather than artistic expression (like, paintings were for the church, etc.). By politics, he is referencing society.
In other words, photography did well to bring the production of art away from ritualistic intentions, but also created a new set of problems re: modernity's demand for reproducibility.
"Visual reproducibility is one of the imperatives of modernity". This is true- we always look for things that we think we know, things that seem familiar, things that are perfect and safe for us to engage with. By increasing reproduction of original artworks, we make them more common. By making them more common, we make them more familiar.
In addition, the "greatly increased mass of participants has produced a change in the mode of participation". What once used to be viewed by a few, in a limited space, now can be viewed by many in a large space (movies) or by multiple people simultaneously in many different spaces (press). Before mechanical reproduction became so prevalent in modern society, viewership was more personal.
Benjamin then concludes with the argument that mechanical reproduction leads to a distracted audience. Visual reproduction combined with the convenience of mass partnership creates people who do not think for themselves, but rather, are distracted by the temptation of continuous consumption.
Can you guess how that works to suppress social revolution?