Reproduction of Art

In the paper, Benjamin explains how our experience of the the art object is diminished in a number of ways. Primarily he talks about the invention of photography as something that somewhat diminishes art in that it means that images, rather than be painstakingly painted, can simply be snapped. Even in a situation where a photographer pays attention to composition, lighting, framing, and other techniques to elevate his photos to a type of art, the fact that it can easily be reproduced, and mass distributed diminishes some of the aura of seeing the original of say a painting in person. It becomes something that's easily googled. He also talks about how motion picture has also dimmed the aura of performance, comparing a movie to a stage performance. With a stage performance, the audience is able to see the entire space all of the time, as well as be constantly aware that what is before them is an illusion, relying on the performance of the actors to bring them into the world. However they can just as easily focus their attention anywhere else. In a movie, the view is through the camera, so we can only see what the camera sees, that is, what the filmmakers want. This gives us a more sterile, streamlined, and linear way of perceiving things.

Benjamin however also does say that mechanical reproduction can expand our experience of the art object. It's something I believe comes back to participatory art. Basically although taking a snapshot of something is a very easy and repeatable task, photographs can also be used to manipulate images, focus on specific things, such as distort or blur the view for the purpose of communicating a whole new message to be found in the original image.