Walter Benjamin Reading Questions
- In Section II, Benjamin describes that reproductions lack "presence in time and space", as well as authenticity, and that chemical analyses can set originals apart from forgeries. Would the fact that they are different in some respect mean that forgeries are, therefore, authentic? How different must reproductions stray from the original before they become authentic in their own right?
- The text explains, "Mechanical reproduction of art changes the reaction of the masses toward art." Do you believe this holds true for average art viewers today, or have we been desensitized by the commonality of reproduced images? Does authenticity still hold the same value it once did?
A good question. One that is very scientific in nature to figure out. How different does it have to be? Well for instance, we could discuss the reproduction of a painting. Or a 'print' of it. It may intend on the intent of what the artist/merchant/etc wants to do with it. If it is intended for purposes of just being 'a proof' of the original painting without a proper place to put it, it may just be a meaningless forgery. But if it is reproduced with the intent of performing something, such as presenting the 'idea' of it in a place away or just gathering finance for the artist, there is a higher intent in place and the reproduction has more authenticity and meaning. I hesitate to say 'intent' as it is almost a cop out answer, but I think something like that is truly in the eye of the beholder.
ReplyDeleteAs much as it pains me to say, many have been desensitized to the idea of searching for art and finding it. Commonly now, it is a Google search in place of 'searching' and then finding it. Though I would also argue that a 'true' authentic critique of a work should always been based in its most intended, aura form. A Rauschenberg should never be critiqued based on a flat, JPEG image. Elements such as texture, the way light reflects against it, and true color in space are lost. And with that, the authentic meaning. While consumption of mass produced art may be more attention deficit, the methodology of judging its value remains surprisingly neutral.