Walter Benjamin

In the reading, “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction”, by Walter Benjamin, he discusses how technology has changed art and the way people perceive it. Bringing us back to the first week of classes when we talked about aura, Benjamin believes that the aura is lost through the mechanical reproduction of art, such as taking a photograph. A painting has an aura, while a photograph does not because the photograph is an image of an image, so the originality is gone. In a painting, it’s the only one so it’s authentic, original, and most importantly, its history is still there. The authentic piece of art has an aura because of its history so Benjamin believes that by replicating art, you are taking the history away. Benjamin states that not only is the aura lost in photographs, but also in film. The painter shows the whole, while the camera shows just bits and pieces. With a painting, you can direct your eye to wherever you want and you can make up whatever story you want about it, but with film the camera directs your eye to a specific place, which creates a specific story. This creates a different perception, a distraction. Benjamin states, “the act of reaching for a lighter or a spoon is familiar routine, yet we hardly know what really goes on between hand and metal, not to mention how this fluctuates with our moods. Here the camera intervenes with the resources of its lowerings and liftings, its interruptions and isolations, its extensions and accelerations, its enlargements and reductions. The camera introduces us to unconscious optics as does psychoanalysis to unconscious impulses”(Benjamin, 237). This quote really made me think about daily life and every familiar routine, such as brushing my teeth or getting dressed, that we don’t even think about doing anymore because we’ve done it so many times. But when the camera comes into play, it really forces us to think about all the unconscious things that we do.

The stage actor and the screen actor have two very different roles. I almost see the screen actor as fake compared to the stage actor because with the screen actor, he/she is presented to the audience by a camera while the stage actor is presented in person. The camera is able to change positions and focus on certain aspects of the character to make them appear how they want them to look, but with a stage actor it’s more real and spontaneous. The film actor does have some set backs, including that they may have harsher critics because they have no personal contact with the audience and that could effect how the audience views them. From personal experience, I would rather go see a show on Broadway rather than go to a regular movie theater to see a movie because with a Broadway show, the stage actors’ presence make you feel like you are a part of the show which makes it more enjoyable. When a stage actor performs it’s different every time, which makes the performance unique to the audience, while film actors’ performances are scripted which allows the audience to only see what the director/producer wants us to see. "On my honor I have not given, nor received, nor witnessed any unauthorized assistance on this work"