Might advances in technology threaten the arts, and our relationship to them? Walter Benjamin explores the idea in his discussion of mechanical reproduction, as well as its influence on culture and creative fields. He develops a narrative surrounding the development of the field that suggests a gradual degradation of work, and a loss of certain qualities. However, this is also done in exchange for something else. Through this shift in priorities, art and architecture become more of a public service.
The first chapter of Benjaman’s work examines technological developments with respect to reproduction. He traces back to lithography, and from lithography to photography, and so on. “Photography freed the hand of the most important artistic functions which henceforth devolved only upon the eye looking into a lens...” (Benjaman, 219). What this means is that people would begin to lose touch with the work that was being produced. As technology and forms of media evolved, the connection with work amongst the public started to diminish. Benjaman touches upon this again later, in his discussion of film. He specifically touches upon the actor, and how their work loses some of its authenticity. “The audience’s identification with the actor is really an identification with the camera…” (Benjaman, 228). The audience isn’t receiving the actor’s purest performance, as with a stage play, but an edited, commodified version that’s packaged up and sold for a wider market. Likewise, the actor’s work is described as ‘separable, transportable’ and ‘out of his reach’ because of that. Advancements in technology are causing works to become less personal, and more publicized.
Another facet of this discussion appears in Benjaman’s talk of ‘aura’, or, the phenomenon of experiencing something from a distance. This phenomenon is treated as yet a sort of victim of modern developments, falling into ‘decay’ due to “The desire of the contemporary masses to bring things ‘closer’ spatially and humanly...” (Benjaman, 223). The result is further reproduction of these experiences through outlets such as magazines and newspapers.
Benjaman furthermore discusses the participation of an ever deloping audience with work in section XV. He draws a point of contrast between past and present modes of experience. “A man who concentrates on a work of art is absorbed by it...the distracted mass absorbs the work of art...” (Benjaman, 241). Due to the growing of audiences and the experience that they crave, designers have to re-think how to approach their work. “...art will tackle the most difficult and important ons where is to mobilize the masses” (Benjaman, 240). The same holds true of architecture, which is cited as being ‘consummated by a collectivity in a state of distraction’. (Benjaman, 240).
The advances in technology present a shift in the focus and possibilities behind art. Benjaman generally treats the rise in mechanical reproduction as a long term degradation of authenticity in work, and yet it also serves to broaden its reach. As this becomes more relevant to people, so too does the call for architecture as well to follow suit.
Image Credit: https://pixabay.com/photos/elevators-berlin-ludwig-erhard-haus-1598431/
Works Cited
Benjamin, Walter. “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction” Illuminations.
New York. 1936.
