In his essay, Benjamin emphasized the importance of authenticity in an art piece and hence, objected to technical reproductions, regardless of the perfectness, referring to them as objects that had been deprived of historical testimony and physical duration. The basis of his viewpoint stands on the fact that technological reproduction is more enhanced than the manual counterpart and that it empowers artworks to be displayed distinctive to their original form. His understanding, as I comprehend, is restricted to his era of primitive means of technological reproduction and might be challenged by new advancements such as 3D projection and AI painting. What overturns the idea of unique existence is that people are now capable of reproducing a specific scenario to an indistinguishable extent from the original to normal audiences. Simulation of vision, sound, texture and the remaining human senses are reaching adequate levels, so the debate between reproduction or not must turn to whether authenticity is a matter of materialism or idealism. Moreover, given that man-generated machines can produce instead of reproduce works of art begs for a new genre of authenticity, which regards human viewers as the objects while technology possesses the authority to define the situation.
Chen Chun 3035974690
You have demonstrated comprehensive understanding towards Benjamin’s thoughts on reproduction and how the aura of an object is lost through such processes. I appreciate your comparison of the context of technology between when the text is written and today, and your examples of 3D projections, AI painting, and the inverted power relationship between human and technology are provoking observations in this discourse.