User:Grrrreat/research/notes-16-01-12: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
------------------------------- | ------------------------------- | ||
After mechanical reproduction became a major artistic technique (engraving, etching, lithography) it took until the invention of photography to make it the 'dominant cultural interface'. Before that uniqueness and singularity were major aspects to a work of art, but also easily achieved since there was no major art practice around that was inherently lacking these two factors. Therefore an 'aura' after Benjamin was easily found in many works of art. This 'aura' consisting of the historicity and authenticity of the art piece itself was prone to give the object a cult value. The auratic work of art "acts as an interface between the physical materiality of the work of art and its meaningful history". | After mechanical reproduction became a major artistic technique (engraving, etching, lithography) it took until the invention of photography to make it the 'dominant cultural interface'. Before that uniqueness and singularity were major aspects to a work of art, but also easily achieved since there was no major art practice around that was inherently lacking these two factors. Therefore an 'aura' after Benjamin was easily found in many works of art. This 'aura' consisting of the historicity and authenticity of the art piece itself was prone to give the object a cult value. The auratic work of art "acts as an interface between the physical materiality of the work of art and its meaningful history". This aura is not necessarily always linked to a work of art, but can also be found in natural objects like stones, trees etc. | ||
In times of mechanic reproduction the distinction between original and copy loses its meaning. Things are being produced in focus of their reproduction. | |||
Therefore the cult value is vanishing. It can still be restored by, for instance, printing limited, signed editions of photographs. But this practice, by trying to restore something that was not inherent to the actual work, only confirms the loss of the aura of the work itself. | |||
Revision as of 14:55, 16 January 2012
Artists have always used media in the sense of 'means for presenting information'. Media are interfaces that can mediate between us and the external world (designation), our fellow man (communication) and ourselves (self-understanding).
Walter Benjamin sez: Cult value is (was) being replaced by exhibition value of the work of art.
Nowadays the database constitutes the ontological model of the work of art. Here the exhibition value is being replaced with the so-called 'manipulation value'. This manipulation value is not limited to the realms of art or aesthetics. In the 'age of informatization' it can also be applied to the digital manipulation of nature and culture.
Cult value vs. exhibition value
After mechanical reproduction became a major artistic technique (engraving, etching, lithography) it took until the invention of photography to make it the 'dominant cultural interface'. Before that uniqueness and singularity were major aspects to a work of art, but also easily achieved since there was no major art practice around that was inherently lacking these two factors. Therefore an 'aura' after Benjamin was easily found in many works of art. This 'aura' consisting of the historicity and authenticity of the art piece itself was prone to give the object a cult value. The auratic work of art "acts as an interface between the physical materiality of the work of art and its meaningful history". This aura is not necessarily always linked to a work of art, but can also be found in natural objects like stones, trees etc.
In times of mechanic reproduction the distinction between original and copy loses its meaning. Things are being produced in focus of their reproduction. Therefore the cult value is vanishing. It can still be restored by, for instance, printing limited, signed editions of photographs. But this practice, by trying to restore something that was not inherent to the actual work, only confirms the loss of the aura of the work itself.