Mechanical Reproduction (Walter Benjamin)
The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction
The writing The Work of art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction by Walter Benjamin explains the repercussions of multiple copies of an art work, the capitalistic effects of idolizing artworks and how technological advances have changed the aura of artworks. Benjamin's claims are fairly reasonable but at the same time individual preferences apply.
To begin Benjamin explains that a work of art can be reproduced, artifacts of one man can be imitated by another man and masters teach their pupils to replicate them. He further explains methods of replication like stamping, printing and photography. Benjamin also presents us with the question: how does replicating works affect their presence in time and space? He claims prints and photographs of works damage the experience that is afforded when you see the original work. He also claims multiple replications of a work contribute to its capitalistic value because many people want to view the work a lot of replications are produced for the masses. Large amounts of reproductions, especially photography, has made works available to a wider and broader audience. Benjamin specifically mentions that reproduction has made artwork available to the middle class. Benjamin also discusses arua or the experience an artwork affords as well as the artworks history and origin, the artists emotions and the viewers emotion all effecting that arua. Reproduced pieces of artwork do not have the same history. Some reproduced artworks do not possess the same visual elements presented in the original like texture, matte finish or glossy finish, dimensional elements on two-dimensional surfaces or the dynamic elements of a sculpture. In other words a work being original is a required condition for authenticity.
I would have to agree that reproductions of works are much less interesting and exciting than original pieces. Viewing a piece of artwork you can visibly tell was handcrafted instead of printed or photographed and printed affords a completely different experience. When we view an original we can see evidence of the artist's process which would also be part of a work's history. We experience elements like texture that photographs do not afford us; we can also walk around some pieces and view them from all angles. Different representations of art works can affect their arua and viewing pleasure. Some reproductions do make art works that you would maybe have to travel to see or pay large sums of money to see more easily accessible to viewers. Reproductions also open art viewing to people less interested in the artists, artworks, creation process and meaning. Interactive reproductions of famous works can attract children for example. Clearly there are many pros and cons to the mass-reproduction of artwork.
Vincent Van Gogh, 1889, Self Portrait
The art work presented above is a self portrait Vincent Van Gogh painted of himself two weeks after he cut off his ear and presented it to a woman named Rachel. The art work is well known for many reasons because Van Gogh cut off his ear, or because it possibly ended a working relationship between Van Gogh and Paul Gauguin. This artwork is a great example of how the original can be different than a reproduction because in the painting the canvas to the left of Van Gogh shows remnants of a still life previously painted underneath this portrait. In reproductions of this work you may not be able to see the canvas had been reused. The reuse of a canvas contributes to the arua and history of an artwork. Van Gogh is an artist who’s process is very important to the creation of his work from his mental health struggles that produced a lot of his work to the deliberate brush strokes found in his artworks that are full of texture and depth.
Pollitt, Ben, and Ben Pollitt. “Vincent Van Gogh, Self-Portrait with Bandaged Ear.” Smarthistory, smarthistory.org/van-gogh-self-portrait-with-bandaged-ear/.
You did a good job summarizing this week's reading. I believe experiencing and viewing an original piece of art affords the viewer an opportunity to sense what the artist was going through when creating that piece, as opposed to viewing an image of a painting on a computer screen (certainly not the same). I love your Van Gogh Self Portrait that you chose to highlight. I did not know about this painting. Thank you for bringing out how the self portrait was repainted on an old canvas. Great point that a reproduction would not let the viewer see this, it almost puts you in the same room as if you were witnessing Van Gogh paint himself after he cut off his ear.
ReplyDeleteYvonne thank you! I though this art work was a good example of how the original can afford a much more genuine experience. I think Van Gogh repainting a canvas also contributes to the art works history which alines with part of Benjamin's ideals.
Delete