Some caveats are necessary when considering this reading. Benjamin had not experienced the age of
the digital, where a digital artwork cannot be truly said to have an “original” from which copies are
derived. In this sense one cannot say that the “aura” of these works is devalued. Some artworks are also
produced with reproduction in mind; the aura of these artworks is tied to the concept of reproduction and
can therefore not be understood to be devalued by it either.
the digital, where a digital artwork cannot be truly said to have an “original” from which copies are
derived. In this sense one cannot say that the “aura” of these works is devalued. Some artworks are also
produced with reproduction in mind; the aura of these artworks is tied to the concept of reproduction and
can therefore not be understood to be devalued by it either.
Benjamin’s socio-cultural analysis of mechanical reproduction is however interesting, and brings to light
the ways in which capitalism can have a diluting effect on the value of original works by reproducing them
to the point of banality. Another takeaway is that regardless of whether the copy is “better” or “worse” it
should be considered independently, because it is a new piece with its own qualities.
the ways in which capitalism can have a diluting effect on the value of original works by reproducing them
to the point of banality. Another takeaway is that regardless of whether the copy is “better” or “worse” it
should be considered independently, because it is a new piece with its own qualities.
No comments:
Post a Comment