How does Benjamin narrate the history of art?
Why does he think photography heralds a transformation in our attitudes to art?
The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction is not only a text in which Benjamin narrates art history in his own sense, but as the text progresses we are encouraged to think, question, and debate the course of art history as a cultural study. Therefore as to why it’s progression throughout centuries has transformed our notions, opinions and ultimately our attitudes towards artistic principles. Benjamin sought to provide a commentary on the shift in traditional arts caused by technical reproduction alongside epochs of Marxist political idealisms throughout, stating the essay as ..."Useful for the formulation of revolutionary demands in the politics of art"[1]. It is interesting to consider that Benjamin wrote this essay in the late thirties, when there was no clear indication of technological advances such as the likes of the internet and scanners, copying and providing a mass supply of images on demand, is this what Benjamin’s text sought to explain? That once the Aura of an art work is stripped of its existence through the use of photography and technology, all that’s left is the political use of images for the masses?
The essay “work of art in the age of Mechanical Reproduction” is important in the understanding of how the history of art unravels. Benjamin explains this through the use of reasoning and that it is the uprising of art politics which accompanies the transformation in art and therefore our attitudes towards the essence of the works. Benjamin was involved in left wing politics more so communism. By looking at artistic fields other than painting and sculpture Benjamin expanded the field by looking at art in the context of film and photography, developing his own conceptual history of art additionally by assessing the problems that arose. The key element in his argument is the notion of destruction in the sense of both the works authenticity and our attitudes towards it. Benjamin begins his narration of the history of art by admitting that works of art were always going to be reproducible, using the example of old masters being copied by their students, but it is the technological reproducibility which is relatively new. Benjamin points out that Lithography was a key element in the catalysing of mechanical reproduction and predecessor of photography. The loss of physicality plays a major role in the rise of photography. Lithography surely was a step in the direction of freeing the artist of labour, by having a more direct method of reproduction as designs were traced onto stone, meaning that not only was there less labour involved but the drawings could be reproduced in mass amounts. This is such an important factor in Benjamin’s narration of art, because it was only a few decades until lithography had been taken over by photography, proving this was a fundamental stage in the history of art.
This brings us onto the question of how photography contributes towards the devaluation of an artwork, and thus our perception of that original work as a reproduction. When describing importance of a works mark in history whether it be the physical changes of the work or indeed the owner. Benjamin enforces that it is the uniqueness of the arts “here and now status” that whilst in the unique place of origin grants it a unique existence, but however in the reproduction all sense of uniqueness is destroyed. The ownership can only be detected through the pieces current location and with reproductions can prove to be less unique, but physical changes to the works structure can be detected through chemical and physical analysis and through x-rays, but only on original pieces and not reproductions. This alone lowers the arts authenticity, tradition and ultimately our attitude towards reproduction of the arts. Benjamin implies that our relationship towards a certain piece can be altered through a reproduction made through photography. Our perception of a certain piece of work can be altered through photography to give us a view that is otherwise unattainable by looking at the original piece; perspective, angles, close ups and multi exposure can be experimented with, and an arranged set up, can cause us to have a different relationship with the artwork. In a reproductive sense, a photograph of the artwork can be taken to represent the piece as it is whilst putting us in the correct context of viewing the work, but because the viewer may not be in the correct atmosphere such as the setting and cultural surroundings of the piece, its authenticity is lost and even by just looking at the reproduction we become dethatched from the artwork, causing a very distanced relationship.
Another important factor in Benjamin’s history of art is the decaying of the Aura and experience through photography, which is explained by the Cult and Exhibition value of artwork, which again, is another factor in which photography heralds our attitude towards the art. Before photography an art works value is seen to be of cult value, meaning it had spiritual, religious and ritualistic purpose, which Benjamin specifies as “art being only for the gods”[2] and as time passed art was to be utilised by the spirits. They were holy objects which could be touched and worshiped as relics; they were more of a spiritual tool, whereas we use art today as more of a visual tool within social practice. It wasn’t until the renaissance period emerged along with the idea of aestheticism and beauty, when the arts cult value began declining. The rise of photography helped the emergence is the idea of the arts exhibition value which has a major role in the politics of art. Benjamin changes the direction of the history of art in a new path by explaining how modern mediums of art such as photography and film had great impact upon the masses, all dependent upon the exhibition value that art undertook. The exhibition value of art is purely aesthetic. There is an entirely different condition and relation towards the art, it has only a visual purpose and therefore the interest towards it is only visual. This occurrence was part of making the arts available to everyone wanting access to the work, Benjamin comments on how the exhibition value takes effect upon the politics.
In a Marxists view Benjamin explains that when art is at exhibition value, such as photographs becoming widely available, taken by anyone, and reproduced in high numbers, a quantative change takes place, meaning the work loses its value through mass reproduction. However when a work of art is not reproduced extensively, it has a qualitive property which makes the work become somewhat different in value and originality. The less accessible a work is, the more of an aura it withholds, so once a piece has lost its aura and value by photography it becomes subject purely to politics, whilst depleting what remains of the image within its commodity. In other words, the image has been made accessible to everyone, by everyone having the ability to do so; the image is created for the masses and has no other purpose. To back this up, Benjamin states that “in the fleeting expression of a human face, the aura beckons from early photography for the first time”[3] here he is saying that the cultural value of art was not pushed out straight away, but there was a ongoing resistance towards it, with the private image withholding some spiritual purpose which may be relic like, say of a family member who had passed away. It was the technological and mechanical reproduction which saw to the moving away from the image, leaving exhibition to take effect. Moving forward, we can see the effect this has upon the masses and in support of Benjamin’s narration of art history by looking at the next medium which accelerated our differing attitudes towards technological art, which is film. He describes the shift by saying “as the criterion of authenticity ceases to be applied to artistic production, the whole social function of art is revolutionized”[4]. Instead of being founded on ritual, it is based on a different practice: politics. Looking at the progression from traditional cultural valued images and artefacts, photography seems to have played a major role in medium transformations. Our attitudes towards art and has most certainly been a fundamental element in the rise of film making, as well as its involvement in politics which we shall now explore. Like photography film created a new method of representation, which is linked to the experience of the masses. However a different mode of perception was established through this specific form of visual reproduction, by being completely different to any other kind of art, therefore there is a difference in aura and new technologies. Which are used for social interaction and represent reality? Benjamin states that whilst the act of reproducing a photograph of a painting can be considered as a reproduced work of art “the act of producing it is not”. The work of art in film is not the creation but the editing montage stage; this is what makes it artistic. However Benjamin says that the aspect of film making is highly significant in social terms. The notion of a scene being shot more than once in the studio and then only one final piece being displayed, the audience views a reality that is devised and also unnatural. The idea of the film audience being substituted by the camera also depletes what aura the film could has. However if the scenes were at least acted out in “real time” to the audience ,there may be more of an atmospheric experience of the here and now. The stage actor identifies himself with a role and portrays no distant emotion which means there is not a loss in authenticity. The film actor very often is deprived this opportunity and is surrounded by technological apparatus which causes distraction. In political terms, Benjamin describes the notion of film as a fostering commodity, but also the notion of an audience creates class conflict between the masses, which was reinforced in Fascism. Benjamin defines the logical outcome of fascism as “an aestheticizing of political life”[5]. So here we reach an accumulation point, through the modification and reproductions of relic artefacts using photography, leading to another chapter in art history. In the rise of film making, Benjamin suggests that the utilisation of all these considered, resulted in the ultimate political struggle which is war. What communism was fighting to do was politicise the art not do what the fascists did, which was aestheticize politics through the use of reproduction in art.
After discussing Benjamin’s main points within this text, it has become apparent as to how he narrates his own conceptual history of art, but at the same time is dependent upon the explanation of the social, political and technological aspect of his argument. He talks us through the history of art, and pin points relevant stages which were important in the Age of Reproduction. Beginning when he mentions how lithography started this push in reproduction, how it caused daily life to become easily reproduced, as in newspapers and tabloids, which of course led to unrest and class divide among the masses, the formation of two classes; the proletariat and Capitalist. The focus is then steered towards the rise in photography, and how an artwork loses its authenticity and aura when seen in a reproductive form and therefore its mark of its history also becomes obliterated as it exists on the actual unique piece of work. Benjamin then describes how this affects our relationship towards the artwork, and how we become distant to it. However at the same time this is happening with photography we are able to create photographic copies of the work in various perspectives, views and angles which are not possibly attainable otherwise. The introduction of film also heralds our perception of art because Benjamin portrays how our relationship with reality cannot be shown through film because of its functionality, whereas stage performances can be perceived by the public as being more true to life, and overall more authentic, the same way standing in front of a unique piece of artwork is. Of course this then makes us not only question our relationship towards art, but also our attitudes surrounding it. Ultimately our attitudes towards the use of reproduction and its involvement in politics is Benjamin’s main argument, which he ties in with his history of art with its shift in tools being the main element in creating an escalation in political issues.
Bibliography
The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction
Comments
Post a Comment