Reading this article is a tough time for me, a student who have little reading literary and artistic works experience. the article is full of some professional terms that i do not understand. However, there is still some point that I can share.
In the reading, Benjamin suggests that the technological reproduction may change the way that the art develop, and the historical value will be devalued. It is because with nowadays technology, reproduce the historical artifacts are easy. These will be causing the original cultural relics lose their uniqueness. It is the point that we cannot deny. However, the reproduce technology can give a new life to the original art pieces. This can help promote the artwork all over the world since it looks the same with the real one. It can help boosting the global art level by providing inspiration.
Hung Wai Chung 3035693040
It also took me a couple of times of reading to grasp Benjamin’s idea in this piece, mainly because of his back-and-forth/dialectical writing style. But you caught Benjamin’s concerns and anxiety toward technological advancement quite well. 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). These questions have also brought criticism toward “high art”.