Benjamin discusses the relationship between mass production and humanity in his essay. He strongly opposes modernisation, pointing out that the loss of authenticity due to mechanical reproduction of art deprives the artwork of its “aura”. This devalues the humane side of the man and the indifference in reproduced artwork would eventually lead to war.
However, I could only partially agree with him. It is undoubtedly that the reproduction would threaten the uniqueness of artwork in terms of time and space. People perceive the artwork differently from the artist himself when the artwork is presented in various way. Inevitably, people’s mode of perception changes along with time, as well as the rapid development of technology. Moreover, in my opinion, there is no direct correlation between authenticity and humanity as I believe human beings have the power to make decision and master technology instead of being controlled by it.
Wong Lok Yu Angel 3035794375
Benjamin’s concern toward modernisation and art reproducibility lies also upon the notion of proletarianization (see p.19 and p.41). Although he also believes that any work of art is reproducible, his suspicion lies on what might be triggered by such reproduction. He argues that “the technological reproducibility of the artwork changes the relation of the masses to art” (p.36). To Benjamin, what changes through time is not only how people perceive an artwork, but also how the masses consume it. He elaborates later on “distraction and concentration” (p.39-40) where “[A] person who concentrates before a work of art is absorbed by it; … the distracted masses absorb the work of art into themselves” (p.40).