This article about reproduction of art makes me think of sampling. The article is concerned about experiencing an artwork’s authenticity, or its “aura”. But the practice of sampling is concerned with finding something (old or taken out of context) and turning it into something new and different (and perhaps improving upon it). It can also pay homage to an original, which can in turn let a new generation learn about something they may not have been aware of. I think there is merit in the reproduction of sampling - if we’re going to reproduce art or music anyway, why not make it our own and alter it? There is no way to reproduce the aura of a live performance of a song, just like there no way to reproduce the aura of looking at a mountain.
Walter Benjamin seems to imply that things were better when we didn’t reproduce artwork for the masses, when we didn’t “destroy the aura” of great works by taking them out of context and ritual. What makes art so precious, especially over time? Can’t we create new, relevant auras? There might be some nostalgia at play here. His perspective seems to separate the “masses” from the artists. I think access to art and access to making art (even through reproduction) is freeing and a cornerstone of modern education. It’s messy, maybe. However, I believe authenticity and aura are still present whenever there is perspective and intention. Believe it or not, there is artistic perspective and intention on the internet!
No comments:
Post a Comment