There have been many debates and concerns whether mechanical reproduction in work of art is helpful or harming. Walter Benjamin raise his voice on the concept of authenticity, particularly in application to reproduction. He says that "Even the most perfect reproduction of a work of art is lacking in one element: its presence in time and space, its unique existence at the place where it happens to be" (pg.38) I understand his concern about protecting original works and value of arts. However, people and especially people nowadays are fully aware of value and 'aura' of original work of art. He was concerned that mechanical reproduction would change its context and drop value of original works. To me that is hard to understand, I think mechanical reproduction is enhance the value and authenticity. The original work of arts is not a product that we can buy at Walmart. Work of arts can not be seen as kind of product. It is one of kind from the begin with. Work of art is not and should not be depreciate because there are many reproductions. For example: there are many reproduction of vincent van gogh's art. However, the value of his art does not depreciate. Because people understand the value of original works. In my opinion, mechanical reproduction is helping original work of art, in a way that people can have more access to the works and getting to know about the art. If there are not any replica or reproduction, not many people are not be able to experience the art to begin with. Just like we discussed in class, everything change in time. I am not saying that Benjamin's idea was wrong. In fact, I think he is right. Understanding his time period at that time, mechanical reproduction was too much and too new thing to understand. Also, people in art filed were must be very up set about reproduction and replica. However, in now a days people are much better informed and understood about the value and 'aura' of original works.
No comments:
Post a Comment