phoenix /danm 201 /mechrep

“Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction” Response

Walter Benjamin's primary hypothesis that mechanical reproduction significantly transforms both art production and the reception of art by the viewer is certainly one worth consideration.  Certainly his examples and exposition on the nature of these transformations have merit on the surface; it is apparent that the creation and subsequent viewing of film differs quite drastically from that of painting, or other “traditional” form of art that does not rely at its center on reproducibility.  The advent of the internet, and it's ability to reproduce ideas on a massive scale is unprecedented in all of history, and lends significant credence to Benjamin's statement that “the technique of reproduction detaches the reproduced object from the domain of tradition” (p 221).  Interestingly, this statement is only creditable in the absence of any art tradition surrounding a particular aesthetic modality; any new artistic form will ultimately build it's own traditions within both the art making process and within the art consuming culture at large.  The availability of new technology and its dissemination throughout society has instigated massive cultural shifts.  Coming to terms with these shifts is ongoing; in fact, it could be argued that we are developing cultural practices just to deal with these shifts.  Witness the reactions that individuals have to newly available technology, some are “early adopters”, others are more circumspect, taking on technology once it has gained some traction in society.  Or those that react with near hypochondriacal fears that technology is destroying their health, opposing the building of cell towers for instance.

If Walter Benjamin were writing this essay today, he would be writing with the Internet as his central focus rather than film.  When Benjamin talks about “traditional” art, he means things like painting and sculpture, arts that were often produced in and for a ritualized context.  With the internet and the new digital hegemony film, photography, and music gain a “traditional” status.  Witness what is happening with film today.  Not only can films be reproduced with ease, the production of film is no longer the realm purely of professionals.  Movie creation is something everyone can do. And in fact nearly everyone does with the ubiquitous availability of digital cameras, movie production software, and YouTube.  With the availability of YouTube, flickr, google, FaceBook, blogging, and all the myriad variations of the Internet, the “distinction between author and public” (p 232) has lost all significance.  It is rather prescient of Benjamin to presage the loss of that distinction, although he probably could not conceive how large the scale would be.