Walter Benjaminbl

Walter Benjamin: The work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction

Section 1: In principle a work of art has always been reproducible (imitations: practice, diffusing, gaining by third parties). Mechanical reproduction of a work of art, however, represents something new. The techniques of reproduction improves and it gives access to the market in large numbers and in daily changing forms. With the improvement or invention of every technique it freed humans of labour. By 1900 technical reproduction had reached a standard; to reproduce all transmitted works of art. This has a huge impact on daily live. Reproduction by then became a artistic practice on itself.

For example because of mechanical reproduction I don't have to see the real Mona Lisa. Instead I can see it in its reproductive form and from multiple spaces for example at home. Me myself can copy or alter a copy of a Mona Lisa into something else (Warhol).

- founding and stamping - woodcut; art became mechanically reproducible - printing - lithography - photography (freed the hand, could keep pace with speech) - sound

Section 2: A reproduction is lacking one element: Its presence in time and space, its unique existence at the place where it happens to be. The unique existence an art work determined its place in history mediated by the time of its existence = historical value (?) --> copy lacks this - physical conditions - track of ownership

A prerequisite (voorwaarde; een vereiste) for authenticity is to (to have) the original. The original preserved/keeps authority. But mechanical reproduction can bring out or point out other 'stuff' (in favor of manual reproduction). 1) its more independent. For example photography can make a more accurate copy, second it can also go escape/beyond natural vision (what we can see with our eyes). It can transform into something else. 2) techn. reproduction can bring a copy to other places and in another form.

Despite the advantages of the copy, it an never reach the same status as the original. It will always have a less value. Authenticity is a essence (voorwaarde/basis) of all that is transmissible from its beginning (testimony or journey & history which it has experienced). And what is really jeopardized when historical testimony is affected is the authority of the object.

An artwork has an aura. And what is lost with mechanical reproduction is the aura of a work of art. A reproduction loses its characteristics. For example a photograph of a painting whether it is good or bad will always be different (the technique of reproduction detaches the reproduced object from the domain of tradition).

Section 3: During history the way we see/perceive the world and see our place in it. This is influenced naturally but also by historical events. The aura is altered both by a natural development(?) as through social causes.

Section 4: Aura/uniqueness is 'stable', but the context where the work of art in acts can be different.

Because of the aura an unique work of art can become an object of a magical or religious cult. These works of art originated in the service of a ritual (magical, religious). The aura of these works is never entirely separated from its ritual function.