1) Walter Benjamin makes a claim that, "in principle a work of art has always been reproducible. Man-made artifacts could always be imitated by men." I found this interesting because it seems like society sees art as one-of-a-kind, personable and even individual. My question is how much truth can be brought to this statement in the modern art of today? Does the society's emphasis on mass production affect art? How?
Follow ups would be: Does this affect the value of art? Is an exact replica worth the same as an original? Specifically, does digital art fit into the category of mass production because of social media and the internet?
2) Benjamin also says, "But as man withdraws from the photographic image, the exhibition value for the first time shows its superiority to the ritual value." Again, does this align with modern digital art such as movies, or add campaigns? Sometimes someone's exhibition value is enhanced by their own connection or in this case "ritual" value for it.
1) Walter Benjamin makes a claim that, "in principle a work of art has always been reproducible. Man-made artifacts could always be imitated by men." I found this interesting because it seems like society sees art as one-of-a-kind, personable and even individual. My question is how much truth can be brought to this statement in the modern art of today? Does the society's emphasis on mass production affect art? How?
ReplyDeleteFollow ups would be: Does this affect the value of art? Is an exact replica worth the same as an original? Specifically, does digital art fit into the category of mass production because of social media and the internet?
Erin, I think that this question is really excellent, especially with today’s use of artwork on social media sites, and the widespread availability of the internet. It is much easier for artist’s to spread and share their work, and it is even easier for others to copy and reproduce that artwork. I like to think that the materials that go into creating a tangible artwork will inevitably be a precursor to the piece’s price…however…if the artwork itself is spread through gigabytes and memory…its tangibility is less obvious. I think that artist’s who work in digital palettes must show a stronger sense of creativity and imagination, and that their concept is refined to tell the viewer what they want to say.
Question two brings up quite a valid point in contemporary art! One a writer/artist named Alan Kaprow would bring up... Is art... art even if it is not seen? You discuss in the question that the "exhibition" may be more powerful than the "ritual" itself (or the actual photograph being taken). There are some that say the act of 'existing' is art. This is a complex question to understand. Kudos.
ReplyDelete