This article mainly discussed the impact of industrial reproducibility on traditional arts and new arts (film, photography) that are inherently reproducible. In contrast to many other intellectuals at the time (for example, Theodor Adorno), Benjamin held a positive attitude towards the revolutionary transformation in arts that technology had brought.
A key idea in this article is the concept of “aura”. The aura exists only on the original artwork based on art’s authenticity–the uniqueness of time and space where the art piece was created and was rooted in art’s ritual functions in human history. However, as technological reproduction emerged, works of art were reproduced more independently and massively to “meet the recipient halfway”, thus decaying the authenticity as well as the aura of art.
Technology also gave birth to new forms of art like films and photography. According to Benjamin, the production of the film reflects human’s desire in the industrial time to “get as close as possible” to a thing. Here he made a splendid metaphor of surgeons and witch doctors.
Not only Benjamin examined art transformations at his time, but he also made some accurate predictions. One particular was in chapter XI, where he stated that “any person today can lay claim to be filmed”. This instantly reminded me of online live stream, tik-tok, etc. Many of his descriptions of reproducible art and politic services also match with Post-War arts like Bebop/Rock n’ Roll.
SHEN Kaizhe, 3035974640
I appreciate your insightful analysis of Benjamin’s writing centered on his most crucial concept “aura.” People perceive change with social changes, or changes in ‘humanity’s entire mode of existence. Each human sensory perspective is not completely biological or natural. It is also historical and contextual. So, I am wondering how you define film since film is neither a fully technological product nor an artificial work, but a newly emerged visual approach as era shifts. Besides, live streaming and instant video, as newly emerging audio-visual patterns, are worth an expanded discussion. For instance, will they affect how we define, create and interpret art and the aura of the artwork?