Aura



While perusing the internet for an adequate painting for this week's topic, I realized that what I wanted to write about was the very thing that I was doing. As I sit here looking at art from the comfort of my home, trying to decide which piece among the thousands will suit my needs, I wonder how strange it must have been before any type of mechanical reproductions were made. Art would have been left to either the wealthy or the religious, and since my social status would have been on par with a peasant, I can’t imagine that I would have been traveling around on my donkey looking for art. As funny as this sounds, it is quite literally what life would have been like for most people - devoid of art. Mechanical reproduction has made it possible for all of us to not only enjoy great works of art, but to also learn about distant cultures through space and time. I don’t believe that reproduction diminishes art, but enriches it by making it available to all.


In the essay The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction, Walter Benjamin is adamant that an object’s authenticity is so sensitive that the existence of a replica actually does it harm. He states, “that which withers in the age of mechanical reproduction is the aura of the work of art.”(4) Furthermore, “by making many reproductions it substitutes a plurality of copies for a unique existence.”(4) The last statement is factually correct, but why does a replica diminish the value of the original? I don’t believe that having access to copies takes away from the actual tactile experience of the original. In fact, if I find a photo of an art work compelling, then I’m likely to look for an exhibit where I can experience the work live. Here, the copy has enriched my life by making me aware of the object.




Claude Monet, Water Lilies (image source)


The example I finally decided on is one in the series of Claude Monet’s Water Lilies. Most of us are familiar with this artist because of our access to copies, but seeing them in a book or on a computer screen does not do them justice. These were meant to be enjoyed in person. Aren’t all impressionist paintings like this? In fact, that case could be made for any piece of art. There is a sensory experience that can only be revealed when in the presence of the original. There is no substitute for being able to see the brushstrokes in person. You can feel the richness and weight in the pigment with your eyes. The aura that Benjamin speaks of is hard to miss. It’s an energy that has been left behind by all those who have stood before it.


I taught myself to draw as a kid by copying from art books. Not only was art accessible to me as a blue collar kid, but I was able to study it. I still do this, and I will probably be doing it when I’m 100 years old. For me, copies are invaluable because it keeps the gate open. From time to time new challenges arise with the advent of new technology, but we learn to adapt. We shouldn’t be afraid to move forward. Benjamin balked at the future of art in film, and I think it was because he was afraid. The importance he put on aura isn't viable in film. When speaking on film he stated that “...man has to operate with his whole living person, yet forgoing its aura. For aura is tied to his presence; there can be no replica of it.”(10) The artistry involved in filmmaking is so different from that of painting or live performance that it’s comparing apples to oranges. In my opinion the lack of aura in film does not diminish its artistry any more than a copy of a Monet devalues the original painting. The sharing of information is a beautiful part of our world. There will always be people who can’t deal with change. They make their voices loud, but eventually they will have to learn to adapt or be left behind.

Source
  Benjamin, Walter, Illuminations, ed Hannah Arendt, translated by Harry Zohn(New York: Schocken Books, 1969), 1-26.

Comments

  1. Ashley, I really enjoy your analysis of the reading this week. First of all, your writing style is very engaging and I liked how you formatted your analysis by leading with your opinions then introducing the author’s opinions. Also, you did a wonderful job including quotes from the reading into your writing. My question for you is: you’ve established that Benjamin doesn’t think film has an aura, but do you think film has an aura? I can't find anything that needs improvement on your post. Great job!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi, India. I'm glad you like my writing style. I've been trying to add more of my own voice to my blogs this semester. Normally, I feel like I'm just regurgitating other peoples info so it was nice to hear positive feedback about it. As for whether or not film has aura, I don't think I can say that it does. That doesn't diminish the artistry that exists in film. I don't think that aura would be a qualifying factor as to whether or not a film is good. There are so many people who work on a single film that it doesn't really have the energy that I associate with aura. My understanding of the definition of aura might be wrong, but I don't feel like you can compare film to live performance or art. I really don't agree that live performance has aura either. I don't know if I am grasping his concept of what that word means.

      Delete
  2. Ashley,
    You seem to have a really great understanding of this weeks reading and I enjoyed the way that you broke it down. I honestly feel like it makes a lot more sense to me now. I completely agree with you that replicas are so valuable to make it possible for all people to enjoy artwork.The painting you chose is a great example too, I enjoy the painting just in this photo I see but it encourages me to see the original so I may be able to experience the aura of the piece. I also really like how you stated it is difficult to compare something like paintings to film because they are art forms of their own. What did you think about Benjamin's idea that technological advances are not only changing art but in his thoughts, taking away from artistry?

    -Cayla

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hi, Cayla. Thank you for the feedback. I found this topic really hard to put into words. Some of the ideas that we explore can't be summed up in a 700 word essay. I'm glad that my writing helped you with the understanding of his essay. For me, the discussions always help. Mostly, because I can't articulate as well as some of the other students. I was able to see one of Monet's Water Lily paintings at the St Louis Art Museum, and it does not disappoint! I didn't expect it to be so messy but it's meant to be viewed from a distance. It's a cool effect that you can't see in a photo.

    Your question about technology changing art is an important topic that all of us will be faced with. I'm always afraid to publish my art online because I know that China, for example, has people that surf the internet looking for art that is then appropriated to t-shirts, clothing, and tchotchkes. There's a small fashion designer that lives in the North Eastern part of the US that is constantly having her designs ripped off. She does a limited number of individual pieces and as soon as she publishes her stuff the foreign ads begin to pop up with the exact same designs. Sometimes, they even use her models with the heads cropped out. I imagine, this is one of many problems having to do with appropriation of original art pieces because everything is accessible. I guess, it's kind of like Napster in the 90's. Which was ridiculous. The Grateful Dead have allowed fans to not only tape their shows, but also encouraged everyone to share the music from the beginning. This made the live performances special and they sold out everywhere. It created a community of artist and art lovers. No one looses here. We will eventually figure it all out.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hey Ashley! Your blog post this week was really well written and super engaging. I really enjoyed when you highlighted how beneficial the internet is when we look at art work, and how much harder it would have been to see art in the past. Do you think that part of the reason some people like Benjamin feel that reproductions of art are harmful to the original is because they’re used to seeing them and they take them for granted, especially in this age?

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Difference

Positive Images

No Great Women Artists