Walter Benjamin Responses

a) What is the “aura” of a work of art?

“That which withers in the mechanical age of reproduction.” The aura of art involves its historical testimony; it’s place in time and space, and all the references to that from its inception throughout its life. Tied to this is its authenticity, derived from these historical references, that it has an original.

b) In Benjamin’s mind, what effects did mechanical reproduction, such as film and the camera/photography, have on the viewer’s perception of art?

Because mechanical reproduction strips the aura from a work of art, in its place is a new reality composed of a plurality of copies instead of a unique existence. It also allows the work of art to leave its original context and come to the viewer in his own situation. Now [some] art is designed for its reproducibility – it is now based on its exhibition value, which is determined by politics.

As the human image withdrew from the photograph, its value became more exhibitionary and also needed context – like captions, like text in silent films. In film, more levels of removal from the art of the actor come up – the cameraman, the editor, etc. Also, both film and photos offer only on possible viewing of a situation, because it’s assembled through inhuman processes, and unless you were standing at the exact angle of the camera lens seeing and hearing all the effects, you would get another experience, like standing slightly to the left.

c) What is meant by the passage: “for the first time in world history, mechanical reproduction emancipates the work of art from its parasitical dependence of ritual”?

The ritual aspect of a work of art is part of its aura for it implies a social function, usually of elevation to the spiritual/mystical. Mechanical reproduction changes the preexisting need for art to serve this function – it becomes about the exhibitionary value, politics.

d) What mechanically or otherwise reproductive processes are changing the face of art today?

Well, I can speak for the specific art of ceramics – the process of mold-making and reproduction is changing the face of ceramics in a big way. In similar ways, it questions and undermines the traditions of ceramics that are extremely entrenched in the artistic hand and connection to the body. It’s even about transcendence. But the mechanical reproduction emphasizes the lack of human touch. It’s also gone beyond just the opposition in functional ware but to sculptural as well. An artist can make his own form and then make a mold and multiples of that and create sculpture with it. He can also get molds of functional ware and alter them for a sculptural statement.

I suppose more generally there is a furthering of Benjamin’s examples of the lay people becoming the experts through the mass accessibility of artworks. Now there is youtube and other such reality nonsense that are blurring the lines between what’s art and what’s not, who’s the expert after all and what does that mean…