Walter Benjamin, “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction”.

Walter Benjamin, born in 1892 was a German-Jewish Marxist, literary critic, essayist, translator and philosopher. His main interests were literary theory, aesthetics and technology.

Within the essay Walter Benjamin asserts that ‘in principle a work of art has always been reproducible’ (49). However, since the rise of mechanical reproduction in modern society there has been a loss of “aura” concerning original artworks. Benjamin’s definition of the word “aura” is the experience when one is in the presence of a unique and original work of art, and suggests that the ‘decay of the aura’ (52) is ‘symptomatic’ through the advancement of technology and technological processes. In other words, through the process of reproduction the quality or value of the original is somewhat jeopardized as it infers with its authenticity, and therefore reduces its “aura”.

Repeatedly artworks are photographed and reproduced in the forms of images, and reprinted in art books, the internet, magazines, and other publications. This increases the accessibility of these images to the common person and general public. Benjamin describes how mechanical reproduction in the form of a photograph ‘enables the original to meet the beholder half way’ (50). Accessibility depreciates the value of the original in some way by shortening the distance and space with the original. Rather than having to travel to the exact location of the artwork; one can simply view an image taken of it, essentially undermining the aura and authenticity of the work.

Despite the fact that an artwork can be reproduced, Benjamin maintains that ‘even the most perfect reproduction of a work of art is lacking in one element: its presence in time and space, its unique existence at the place where it happens to be.’(50) Often photographic reproductions aren’t enough or satisfying and people still yearn to view original artworks with the naked eye. A classic example would be Leonardo Di Vinci’s masterpiece the ‘Mona Lisa’. Many would have presumably seen a photographic reproduction of the Mona Lisa yet still travel great distance to see the original authentic work of art. This is further demonstrated when the Mona Lisa was stolen and still ‘a line of people had come to solemnly stare at the empty space on the wall, where the Mona Lisa had once hung’ (Rosenberg, 1). Reinforcing the idea that the “aura” of a work of art is not only inherent within the object itself but also the historical time, place and space the original holds. This suggests that perhaps original artworks still hold importance and significance in contemporary society.

However, the aura of an artwork is also strongly embedded within the social hierarchical system. Changes in modern lifestyle have made the Mona Lisa more accessible, through technological advancements such as aeroplanes, which shorten this geographical distance between the artwork and viewer. The way the Mona Lisa is also exhibited in the Louvre, being popular tourist attraction, also demonstrates the significant change in society, by appealing artworks to mass audiences. No longer are paintings hung in secluded churches or the rich mans home, only accessible to the highest order of priests or the wealthy. Paintings are being view by the masses of general public in which Benjamin suggests this mass consumption contributes to the elimination of aura.

This issue raises many questions: whether in fact multiple reproductions of an artwork necessarily jeopardize the originals uniqueness, but perhaps the copies reinforce the authenticity and preciousness of the original? If all copies and reproductions are defunct because they have no ‘aura’ or value where do they sit in contemporary society? Furthermore, could reproductions possibly have the potential to challenge and subvert enforced hierarchical structures?



References:

Walter Benjamin, “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction”, reprinted in Meenakshi Gigi Durham and Douglas Kellner ed.s, Media and Cultural Studies: Keyworks, Oxford: Blackwell, 2001, pp.48-70.

Rosenberg, Jennifer. “The Mona Lisa was stolen!” About.com 20th Century History. Pp.1-3 Retrieved 3 September 2009http://history1900s.about.com/od/famouscrimesscandals/a/monalisa.htm