Reading Response: Walter Benjamin

This article is a pure challenge for students without previous experience of reading literal and artistic works. Through the difficult words plus my guess, I have a vague feeling that the author is anti-modernization. He brags how valuable the greeks’ arts are and claims that it is all credited to the few spaces for further improvement of these works. He also devalues those ‘reproductions’ of technology. Admittedly, each essay is written with the author’s bias, I dislike his bias on the circumstance. The value of a film doesn’t decrease merely because part of it is finished by machine, human’s power

Continue readingReading Response: Walter Benjamin

[Reading Response] Walter Benjamin

The excerpt discusses the implications of technology as a tool in producing (or, reproducing) art, and explores how this may alter, even damage the aura and authenticity of art arguing how advancements in technology (namely film) lead to a decay in artistic value. Interestingly, aura is described very similarly to the living language: it can be communicated, it is dependant on culture, context; it is changeable. Does this not mean that technology can become part of the scope of aura, as it evolves over time? Perhaps what worries Benjamin, is not only the influx of machines and technology, but that society is not

Continue reading[Reading Response] Walter Benjamin

Reading Response: Walter Benjamin

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

Continue readingReading Response: Walter Benjamin

[READING RESPONSE]: WALTER BENJAMIN

I like the word ‘aura’ that used by Benjamin, which generally means an artistic tissue of the unique distance between identity and art. Benjamin wrote critically in his article and he is biased to the negative side brought by technological reproducibility. He said ‘All efforts to aestheticize politics culminate in one point. That one point is war’. I want to discuss aura. ‘Film divorce the aura’ seems a bit absolute. Though the camera substitutes the audience, new distance emerges between audience and the screen. Aura isn’t divorced, it turns into thousands of new auras. Every identity can feel an unique

Continue reading[READING RESPONSE]: WALTER BENJAMIN

Reading Response: Walter Benjamin

Benjamin is critical about the technological reproduction, which diminishes the aura of the original art, especially under capitalism. I will resonate his argument while adding my two cents on it. Reproduction undermines the aesthetic value of an art form. Reproduced rapidly with technology, art is now no long unique nor authentic, leading to the decay of its aura. Therefore, we view art differently from the past. Flickering and fast moving images have revolutionized on our perception on art. For example, the Shambles is featured in a Harry Potter as Diagon Alley. The movie is so famous that this fictional identity

Continue readingReading Response: Walter Benjamin

[Reading response] Barthes and Benjamin

Two readings Barthes, R. (1986). Leaving the Movie Theatre 1975. In The Rustle of Language ( and Benjamin, W., Jennings, M., Doherty, B., Levin, T., & Jephcott, E. (2008). The work of art in the age of its technological reproducibility gave me an in-depth insight into their view of film. Both of them reflects on how our experience of watching the film and what changed the quality of experience. For example, in the Barthes’ text he explains the importance of lighting and sound as a tool of conveying tension to audiences. This brought me to a point that in the times of pandemic, how would directors overcome

Continue reading[Reading response] Barthes and Benjamin