As a Marxist, Benjamin’s concern and grief towards economic, social-political, and technological change in modern society is quite obvious in the article. By indicating that the tradition and rituals on which the “aura” used to based have been challenged by technological reproductivity, he considered that the authenticity of art now might find its bases on politics, about which I have some personal comprehension. The relationship between art and politics has been debated throughout history, while many relatively “unreproducible” installations and participatory works successfully demonstrate the notion of identification, like the 1993 Whitney Biennale. Nevertheless, in contemporary art, the works of appropriation and reenactment also play a significant part. When I was reading, the first artist coming to my mind is Cindy Sherman, who dressed as the female characters in the films and took portrait photographs. The ideas on feminist and identification in her work exactly lie on technological re-representation, and viewers might not consider that the authenticity or aura is hurt.
Starry, CHEN Quanchi 3035637395
Your reflection will be enriched by elaborating more on the relationship between art and politics. I would really like to have your take on that one with regard to Benjamin’s points in his essay. Benjamin also argues how “… as soon as the criterion of authenticity ceases to be applied to artistic production, the whole social function of art is revolutionized. Instead of being founded on ritual, it is based on a different practice: politics” (p. 25). The notion of “identity” is, indeed, present. Benjamin’s position on this matter is actually as visible in the essay. He refers to “the masses” and how when the quantity is translated to quality, it “has produced a different kind of participation” (p.39).