Walter Benjamin - Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction

Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction describes the effects the development of mechanical reproduction might have on art in relation to fascist politics and revolutionary potential. Benjamin uses the concept of 'aura', which describes awe and reverence brought about by a unique art work's physical presence. The aura is of interest in Marxist aesthetics because it is not from the art object itself, but its history, cultural value, exclusiveness and authenticity; and thus the aura is a key part of art's traditional ties with bourgeois power structures, as well as art's older still association with ritual and magic. So, Benjamin suggests mechanical reproduction 'emancipates the work of art from its parasitical dependence on ritual', allowing it to be also freed from place, authenticity, etc. and bought to a mass audience - perhaps this could mean art that is 'useless to Fascism, but instead useful for the formulation of revolutionary demands in the politics of art'.

Benjamin is particularly interested in film - the relationship between the actor and audience (as opposed to earlier in theatre), and the way film was made possible by mechanical reproduction. Benjamin suggests some of the strengths of film are in the way it can 'extend our comprehension of the necessities which rule our lives', 'show rather than tell'*, and blur traditional distinctions in art**. He also discusses some of the dangers of film - ‘false aura’ (!), and the ultimate problem of a system of film production and distribution existing under capitalism.

This political analysis of film provides a template with which we can analyse contemporary film. At the time of reading it, I had just finished hurriedly catching up with the existing seasons of Matthew Weiner’s Mad Men. I think Mad Men quite easily can be thought of in terms of Benjamin’s strengths and dangers of film – to me it really pointedly shows (rather than tells!) the effects of the straight up sexism in that era (early 1960s) on both women and men; and that it is something to introduce or remind our era of this. At the same time I think it could easily be argued that it could be interpreted as glamorising the aesthetic (in the broad sense) of this era – and that we shouldn’t risk simply glamorising an aesthetic without considering its implications, history or relationship to politics. Mostly, I can’t wait for when I Blame the Patriarchy does a Mad Men post.

· * He doesn't seem to think this is true for painting? His description of painting and its functions seems quite underdeveloped to me.

· ** If I were Alex, I might make my Benjamin post about the way he suggests film can challenge even the distinction between art and science: “Of a screened behaviour item which is neatly brought out in a certain situation, like the muscle of a body, it is difficult to say what is more fascinating, its artistic value or its value for science”.

--

Works cited:

Benjamin, Walter. "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction", Media and Cultural Studies: Keyworks. Ed. Meenakshi Gigi Durham and Douglas Kellner. Oxford: Blackwell, 2001. pp.16-28.

Series 1-2. Mad Men. Prod. Matthew Weiner. AMC. Downloaded. Lionsgate Television, 2007-2008.