The fundamental concept discussed in Benjamin’s essay is the concerns on mass production of arts and elaborate his understanding toward artworks with the key terms “authenticity” and “aura”.
I personally agree that technological reproduction not only changed how art is developed and created but also modified the definition of what art was. Although back in the time ancient people could produce replicas of bronzes, terra cottas and coins, nowadays the advance technology like photography, film and lithography significantly shorten the time is needed to reproduce a work which may lead to lack of uniqueness and value of an artwork.
Besides that, the essay also briefly mentioned about the film and emphasis on the revolutionary potential of film, since the film distract your own thoughts which indicate that the viewer can focus on the message the filmmaker is trying to present.
This essay is an extraordinary example of critical thinking, it provided a different perspective to look at the development of artworks and certainly inspire me how influential the innovations could be to us.
Matsumoto Ami 3035831305
Benjamin’s attention on the authenticity and value rooted in his (and his school of thought’s) suspicion toward modernization (see p.19). He argues how “the technological reproducibility of the artwork changes the relation of the masses to art” (p.36) and how the tension between the artwork’s cult and exhibition value might lead capitalism into abolition. Another good addition to your reflection upon Benjamin’s suggestion on artwork reproducibility is elaborating more on how the replica could help us understand the original art. To what extent would the replica be useful? Would there be anything that cannot be transversed by the replicas?