Pre Class Post

Benjamin Walter in his text “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction” argues that due to technical reproduction art, such as paintings and statues, change or even lose their authenticity once reproduced. I feel like it is in our day and age to have ‘things’ that don’t have much originality anymore. It is very rare to own ‘things’ even the littlest things, such as a bracelet that remains original. Through mass production and technical reproduction authenticity of things is being lost.

I remember asking a friend of mine if she had ever seen the Mona Lisa. She answered, “of course I have, it’s everywhere!” It chuckled me because of course I was talking about the original but to someone who does not know much about art I guess one could say, “well the print looks exactly the same.” This is what Benjamin seems to argue, though, that it is clearly not the same. Standing in front of an original painting and standing in front of its print is not the same. The print carries much less value and no authenticity. Prints have made art lose their value. Original, unique art carries history, an aura, an inspiration with it, whereas prints much less do.

Moving into the film genre of art technical reproduction plays a much different role according to Walter. He says that film does not ever lose its authenticity because it can be edited, remade, shortened or lengthened. What I found to be a very interesting point Benjamin Walter makes is the difference between film and stage acting. Where in film the actors do not necessarily know their audience and especially do not know their reaction to their acting the stage actor does. The stage actor has the freedom to in a way adapt to his audience. It was interesting to me to read this passage because I have done much acting in my life and have always preferred stage acting over acting in front of a camera. I find it so much more “real” to be put on the spot, feeling connected to your audience and being able to actual adapt. As Benjamin would say is stage acting is much more authentic than acting in front of a camera. Therefore after reading “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction” stage acting and screen actors compare to a painting and a film.

To go a step further I would like to add how I believe technical reproduction is also a cause of our society wanting that what ‘he/ she’ has. Ideologies have caused our society to think we need to have things to feel ‘right’. And if there is something original, something that seems of lots of value and would want other people to have it, it will easily be reproduced. Hence the original may be the original but now that ‘everyone else’ has it too (a copy of it anyways) it has lost at least a bit of its meaning and its value.

AHC