Response to Walter Benjamin by Emmanuel, Alexina & Alex

It has always been possible to reproduce art, whether it be paintings, writings, clay pots, etc. For Benjamin, the significant difference is that mechanical (or technological) tools, render the process easier and faster. Industrialisation made reproduction much more accessible trough the use of mechanical tools. This made human manipulation nearly obsolete. That represents what the new society wants, why mass reproduction of art exists. Nowadays, the Mona Lisa can be seen outside of the museum, in the comfort of our own house. The aura of each object is defined, for Benjamin, as the latter's significance within society, including its production date and producer. Reproduction of such objects brings about an equality among them. The value of each reproduction is the same, as is the experience of the audience. With the reproduction comes the word "authenticity". This authenticity comes from the creation of the object. The copy can be used in a different manner than the original, like a Mona Lisa on fire or under water. This gives new possibilities to the use the art work. The concept of aura is that which gives historical value to objects. For instance, one may desire to acquire an object, knowing that it has a value well above average. The removal of certain unique aspects to artworks destroys their religious aspects. Instead, art is appreciated for the art alone, not the aura. Cult value is now lost, for to be valuable religiously or spiritually, such objects would need to remain hidden. Today's society loathes to see objects remain unseen (we are too important for that). Religious, ritualistic, or spiritual objects have almost always fallen in the trap of exhibitory value. By using the medium of film, the performers seen on screen are not affected by the audience. This empowers the audience to become a critic without having had any contact with the actor(s), as opposed to a type of participant. They "take the position of the camera; its approach is that of testing." Instead of spawning a quality perceivable trough time and space like stage actors, Benjamin suggests that film actors must become the character to evoke similar success. Everybody who sees a movie or watches TV is somewhat of an expert on the matter, as they can, at any point, become movie extras, or be interviewed to give (personal or professional) opinions. Benjamin poetically compares a magician and doctor to a painter and cameraman. He establishes that the painter creates through his unique perception of the world, leaving a discrepancy between that and reality. On the other hand, the cameraman is able to pierce society's appearances and portray true aspects of life. We need to know that artistic reproduction changes our perception and our collective reaction toward art. The exhibition of art work like paintings organize and control our reception. If you see a reproduction of this art in different situation the reception is not the same. Technology such as the film camera allows humans to analyse more closely their lives. This is because reproduction makes aspects of the world readily available. The point of creating art is to fulfill a later satisfaction. However, mechanical reproduction "kills" the aura effect of the object in that it is no longer unique. "I can no longer think what I want to think. My thoughts have been replaced by moving images." Personal taste no longer drives us to buy a work of art, but the fact that we create needs for that which others may already own. The author writes that art has the ability to ignite a social consciousness. Innately, humans are not willing to reconsider their beliefs. Art is an attractive way to stimulate audiences.

Paul Valéry says : "Two different manifestations - the reproduction of works of art and the art of the film". Can we also say a third manifestation: a new technology, like internet?
Today, the internet is not a glorious reproduction haven. Ultimately, data will only have to be placed in one location for the entire world to access. Although reproduction has permitted the world to communicate (like with the use of the printing press or movies), a new, more efficient technique is available. Benjamin says that the reproduction of art is able to stimulate reconsideration of social realities. Today, situations like the YouTube site essentially "pushes" content to the viewer. This is an evolution of Benjamin's proposed state. Individuals do not even need to make an effort to view the art in question. Reproduction becomes difficult when the subject is a type of artistic installation. This art form is dependant on time and space. These factors, along with the audience, are part of the art. This makes video reproductions of the work ineffective regarding their ability to ignite thought in the audience. Previously, it was easy to copy works and distribute them to the masses. Currently, copyright and authorship laws hinder the ability of artists to reproduce works or re-encode them to promote a new message. Humans are habituated to observing reproduction. Seeing a Hollywood actor in a local shopping mall excites most people because of the aura surrounding the star. This is the difference between simulation and reality. Who's to know that an object is not a reproduction? If you do know that the piece is real, then it's a reproduction; if you don't know that it's real, it's a simulation. If one is aware that what they are experiencing is a representation, then that fact is reality. As for mechanical production, nowadays, authors abound, brought on by the low cost of computers, publishing, etc. Previously, author circles were very small, very exclusive. Writing in and of itself was exclusive in that very few people knew their letters. Then came the advent of the Guttenberg's printer, which opened those circles. Then came the typewriter, then the personal computer. Nowadays, the publishing industry thrives, but is very selective because of huge masses of would-be writers.

Can we consider Benjamin's text as still relevent today, as it concentrates on the reproduction using video? That is to say, with the proliferation of the internet and other mixed new media, which tend to organize art in a way that is easier to access rather than to revert to reproduction to broadcast the message, is Benjamin's point of view still accurate?

Related Links:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=x4kWTjsr_nQ
http://youtube.com/watch?v=jdErqHlPw3A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jqa4LpdtOD8&feature=related