Walter Benjamin’s Famous 1936 essay, The Work of Art in The Age of Mechanical Reproduction (influential in the field of art history and cultural studies) claims that, “In principle a work of art has always been reproducible”. Benjamin, a respected German philosopher, social and literary critic, suggests, that the invention of the camera ruined the primary meaning of art through aesthetics, aura, means of reproduction and perspective. Also, John Berger, a respected art critic, wrote a similar analysis, called Ways of Seeing (often used as university text) whose ideas on art stem from Benjamin. While Mike Poster’s essay, “The Aesthetics of Distracting Media”, provides a counter argument against the claims above.
Aura is subject to change even more now that access to the camera is so easily accessible. Considering that aura is defined as a sort of distinctive atmosphere around a person, place or thing or “the latter as the unique phenomenon of distance, however close it may be (Walter Benjamin).” How is it that the same aura or one at all can be gained once it is photographed? Cameras change the texture of art, they show what the eye before couldn’t see or neglected to. Both Walter Benjamin and John Berger seem to attest to this. For example, when, “…reproduction as offered by picture magazines and newsreels differs from the image seen by the unarmed eye” (Walter Benjamin). But this all depends on two circumstances according to Benjamin. However, Poster believes that Benjamin was wrong when he failed to account for the different affects media can have on art. Benjamin doesn’t consider the fact that the meaning of art is always ground of battle.
Now when you consider Benjamin’s correlates with what was shown in the video “Ways of Seeing”. Benjamin theories of art have over time been distorted of their original meaning and replaced with something else. Benjamin state’s that as the cameras have been created is has become rather easy to duplicate any art piece and mass-produce them to the public. John Berger in the video explains that it’s a completely different feeling when you are physically standing in front of the original drawing. Now a person may ask what is truly the difference? When you stand there you not only see the drawing but you can see the brush strokes that almost tell you the time and effort that the artist put into it. Plus, given the background story of a masterpiece you might learn that an art piece conveys a period in history is symbolic when war was raging. Mostly, when buys a frame of what looks like a classical painting, people don’t truly usually know who created the drawing and what it’s really trying to tell us. For example, Edward Alexander Wadsworth who was a famous painter who painted during World War I, paintings was called “Dazzle-ships in Drydock at Liverpool”. When you look at this painting you see an abstract drawing of what seems like a ship in a shipyard, but if you have not read the title you might have never guessed it was a World War I painting. In the video, John Berger the narrator shows how without any commentary or complementary music, people can look at this piece and view it in different ways. This is when paintings lose their original value and are replaced with what each person sees there perception. But once you add commentary or complimentary music it guides the viewer to see what the creator wanted them to see.
Perception, as defined by the Oxford dictionary is the ability to see hear or become aware of something through senses. In section three, Walter Benjamin speaks directly to the relationship between perception, contemporary masses and the reproduction of art. He begins the section with introducing to the reader to the concept of change in perception due to nature and history he gives an example then states that in view of change in contemporary perception, aura is decayed. He goes on to elaborate that aura is almost a distant notion that contemporary masses have made closer through reproduction. “Everyday the urge grows stronger to get hold of an object at very close range by way of it likeness, its reproduction.” Our perception to make everything universal and equal through reproduction and film, takes away from the art. In John Berger’s Ways of Seeing, it is explained that a camera now can reproduce any image and make it available anywhere to anyone. One of Berger's main points is that the reproduction of art can lead to the manipulation of them through music and movement. He also mentions that the image also becomes a form of information for the viewer and the image is manipulated and may no longer have it original meaning therefore the aura is destroyed. The perception of the contemporary mass changes through the manipulation of reproduced images. Our desire to have everything closer and universal and equal pulls the piece of art out of its context and positions it in a vulnerable state were it no longer hold its original meaning it no longer evokes its initial aura.
Poster contends thats Benjamin's view on art is anarchistic. Poster points out that such movement is inevitable and reproductions isn't entirely responsible. However at the end of the day the meaning of art or the aura of a pitting will always remain the same. Wether or not it is universally acknowledged the initial aura or meaning remains the same and placing anything out of its context will mean something completely different to everyone.
According to Benjamin, Mechanical Reproduction has changed the overall experience and value of an art piece in a negative way. Camera and film are the primary resources that enable the reproduction of an artwork. He states the angle of the lens captures a piece of the original meaning of the painting and the user has the ability to manipulate the work by changing size, color and image. Instead of looking at an original piece as authentic now pieces are reproduced to allow overall consumer enjoyment and profitability. In addition, he thinks a piece loses it’s meaning because you don’t get the full experience of enjoying it in its original place and time. Benjamin also states, the reproduction of a piece of art will never be as perfect as the original. The original is independent from the reproduction and will always have a significant meaning behind it. However, Mark Poster provides a counterargument regarding the reproduction of an art piece. He suggests that mechanical reproduction changes the audience in multiple ways because it brings the art to the audience instead of the other way around. Usually, art is displayed in its original space such as in a museum or art gallery but now you can enjoy it in the comfort of your own home. Also, Poster considers Benjamin’s theory of the relationship between culture and technology as “mistakes.” Poster suggests current media makes art accessible for readers and viewers, capturing the attention of millions around the globe at the same time. He says that technology has changed the culture of art. It destroys the approach to culture against the mind of the genius creator who thought to create the piece of art. Reproduction has overall destroyed the meaning of art and has eliminated originality when it comes to creating works of art.
Has the invention of the camera, really ruined the meaning of art; is a question that will continue to be fought over, just as the meaning of art pieces themselves are.
Now when you consider Benjamin’s correlates with what was shown in the video “Ways of Seeing”. Benjamin theories of art have over time been distorted of their original meaning and replaced with something else. Benjamin state’s that as the cameras have been created is has become rather easy to duplicate any art piece and mass-produce them to the public. John Berger in the video explains that it’s a completely different feeling when you are physically standing in front of the original drawing. Now a person may ask what is truly the difference? When you stand there you not only see the drawing but you can see the brush strokes that almost tell you the time and effort that the artist put into it. Plus, given the background story of a masterpiece you might learn that an art piece conveys a period in history is symbolic when war was raging. Mostly, when buys a frame of what looks like a classical painting, people don’t truly usually know who created the drawing and what it’s really trying to tell us. For example, Edward Alexander Wadsworth who was a famous painter who painted during World War I, paintings was called “Dazzle-ships in Drydock at Liverpool”. When you look at this painting you see an abstract drawing of what seems like a ship in a shipyard, but if you have not read the title you might have never guessed it was a World War I painting. In the video, John Berger the narrator shows how without any commentary or complementary music, people can look at this piece and view it in different ways. This is when paintings lose their original value and are replaced with what each person sees there perception. But once you add commentary or complimentary music it guides the viewer to see what the creator wanted them to see.
Perception, as defined by the Oxford dictionary is the ability to see hear or become aware of something through senses. In section three, Walter Benjamin speaks directly to the relationship between perception, contemporary masses and the reproduction of art. He begins the section with introducing to the reader to the concept of change in perception due to nature and history he gives an example then states that in view of change in contemporary perception, aura is decayed. He goes on to elaborate that aura is almost a distant notion that contemporary masses have made closer through reproduction. “Everyday the urge grows stronger to get hold of an object at very close range by way of it likeness, its reproduction.” Our perception to make everything universal and equal through reproduction and film, takes away from the art. In John Berger’s Ways of Seeing, it is explained that a camera now can reproduce any image and make it available anywhere to anyone. One of Berger's main points is that the reproduction of art can lead to the manipulation of them through music and movement. He also mentions that the image also becomes a form of information for the viewer and the image is manipulated and may no longer have it original meaning therefore the aura is destroyed. The perception of the contemporary mass changes through the manipulation of reproduced images. Our desire to have everything closer and universal and equal pulls the piece of art out of its context and positions it in a vulnerable state were it no longer hold its original meaning it no longer evokes its initial aura.
Poster contends thats Benjamin's view on art is anarchistic. Poster points out that such movement is inevitable and reproductions isn't entirely responsible. However at the end of the day the meaning of art or the aura of a pitting will always remain the same. Wether or not it is universally acknowledged the initial aura or meaning remains the same and placing anything out of its context will mean something completely different to everyone.
According to Benjamin, Mechanical Reproduction has changed the overall experience and value of an art piece in a negative way. Camera and film are the primary resources that enable the reproduction of an artwork. He states the angle of the lens captures a piece of the original meaning of the painting and the user has the ability to manipulate the work by changing size, color and image. Instead of looking at an original piece as authentic now pieces are reproduced to allow overall consumer enjoyment and profitability. In addition, he thinks a piece loses it’s meaning because you don’t get the full experience of enjoying it in its original place and time. Benjamin also states, the reproduction of a piece of art will never be as perfect as the original. The original is independent from the reproduction and will always have a significant meaning behind it. However, Mark Poster provides a counterargument regarding the reproduction of an art piece. He suggests that mechanical reproduction changes the audience in multiple ways because it brings the art to the audience instead of the other way around. Usually, art is displayed in its original space such as in a museum or art gallery but now you can enjoy it in the comfort of your own home. Also, Poster considers Benjamin’s theory of the relationship between culture and technology as “mistakes.” Poster suggests current media makes art accessible for readers and viewers, capturing the attention of millions around the globe at the same time. He says that technology has changed the culture of art. It destroys the approach to culture against the mind of the genius creator who thought to create the piece of art. Reproduction has overall destroyed the meaning of art and has eliminated originality when it comes to creating works of art.
Has the invention of the camera, really ruined the meaning of art; is a question that will continue to be fought over, just as the meaning of art pieces themselves are.
Adrianna, Avisely, Martin, and Vartan are currently Freshman attending CSUN.