The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction

“The concepts which are introduced into the theory of art in what follows differ from more familiar terms in that they are completely useless for the purposes of Fascism. They are, on the other hand, useful for the formulation of revolutionary demands in the politics of art.”

In the Preface, Benjamin lays out traditional modes of artistic analysis. He sweeps these aside to say that he will be laying out new “concepts” of the theory of art, because the old theories lent themselves to Fascist ideas. This is an instance of Benjamin using contrast, in this case between old concepts and the new ones he is proposing, to make his argument.

“In principle a work of art has always been reproducible. Man-made artifacts could always be imitated by men. Replicas were made by pupils in practice of their craft, by masters for diffusing their works, and finally, by third parties in pursuit of gain. Mechanical reproduction of a work of art, however, represents something new.”

Benjamin uses a brief exposition of the history of artistic reproduction to draw a distinction between prior forms and the new ones. He wants to highlight the novelty of the new technologies of photography and film while acknowledging in advance the possible critique that “in principle a work of art has always been reproducible.”

“For the first time in process of pictorial reproduction, photography freed the hand of the most important artistic functions which henceforth devolved only upon the eye looking into a lens.”

This statement emphasizes the novelty of photography and how it differs from etchings, engravings, or lithography. As will be developed throughout the essay, Benjamin here is extremely focused on the literal, physical mechanics of what makes photography different from the older forms of reproduction mentioned. In the past, people had to use their hands to make reproductions. Now, they only have to use their eyes in a lens.

“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.”

In many of his works, Benjamin is focused on history and ideas about time. Here, he focuses on how existence in a specific “time and space” is what makes a work of art unique. This specificity is what makes a piece of art authentic and contributes to its aura, according to Benjamin.

“Secondly, technical reproduction can put the copy of the original into situations which would be out of reach for the original itself. Above all, it enables the original to meet the beholder halfway, be it in the form of a photograph or a phonograph record. The cathedral leaves its locale to be received in the studio of a lover of art; the choral production, performed in an auditorium or in the open air, resounds in the drawing room.”

Benjamin uses contrast between older modes of artistic production, the cathedral and the public choral performance, and newer ones, photograph and phonograph. This is an example of a material dialectical reasoning. It’s not that the older forms of production are replaced entirely, rather, they are synthesized into the new forms of production: the photograph depicts the cathedral; the phonograph captures the choral performance. Both of the new forms of art bring art closer to the audience; the audience does not have to travel to see or hear the artwork.

“One might subsume the eliminated element in the term ‘aura’ and go on to say: that which withers in the age of mechanical reproduction is the aura of the work of art. This is a symptomatic process whose significance points beyond the realm of art.”

The term “aura” is a key term in the essay that Benjamin uses to discuss the difference between older forms of artistic production and newer ones. He identifies that the disappearance of the aura is “symptomatic” of the material conditions of modernity and prefigures his argument about how this change has shaped Depictions of Reality in Art and literal perceptions of reality.

“To pry an object from its shell, to destroy its aura, is the mark of perception whose ‘sense of the universal equality of things’ has increased to such a degree that it extracts it even from a unique object by means of reproduction.”

This quote incorporates one of Benjamin’s key terms in the essay with an allusion to “the universal equality of all things.” This is not a citation of a specific text but rather a reference to the way that, due to mechanical reproduction, time and space are irrelevant and no longer impact on the object. Instead of unique, discrete items, all works of art are seen as belonging to empty time and space and are commensurate with one another.

“An analysis of art in the age of mechanical reproduction must do justice to these relationships, for they lead us to an all-important insight: for the first time in world history, mechanical reproduction emancipates the work of art from its parasitical dependence on ritual. To an ever greater degree, the work of art reproduced becomes the work of art designed for reproducibility. From a photographic negative, for example, one can make any number of prints; to ask for the ‘authentic’ print makes no sense. But the instant the criterion of authenticity ceases to be applicable to artistic production, the total function of art is reversed. Instead of being based on ritual, it begins to be based on another practice—politics.”

According to Benjamin, in older modes of artistic production, the works of art created were tied to their ritual or cult function, as in the case of the statue of Venus worshipped by the ancient Greeks. Further, the people who created the work of art were artisans trained in specific technology and modes of production. In photography and film, however, the reproductive capabilities disrupt the sacred ritualistic purposes of art. This leads Benjamin to identify a new role for Art as a Political Form.

“The audience’s identification with the actor is really an identification with the camera. Consequently the audience takes the position of the camera; its approach is that of testing. This is not the approach to which cult values may be exposed.”

Benjamin makes multiple allusions in this passage. First, he alludes to the psychoanalytic concept of “identification” to discuss how audiences see themselves as the camera. Then, he alludes to aptitude testing to characterize how the audience watches the film. The audience, as the camera, is evaluating the actor based on how they perform according to certain set categories they have in mind. He suggests that this mode of engagement does not permit film to support occulted, religious use or interpretation of the work.

“[I]n the studio the mechanical equipment has penetrated so deeply into reality that its pure aspect freed from the foreign substance of equipment is the result of a special procedure, namely, the shooting by the specially adjusted camera and the mounting of the shot together with other similar ones. The equipment-free aspect of reality here has become the height of artifice; the sight of immediate reality has become an orchid in the land of technology.”

Benjamin uses the analogy of an orchid to describe Depictions of Reality in Art as a result of mechanical reproduction in art. Orchids are very rare, just as “the sight of immediate reality” is rare in a world where film and photography is ubiquitous and mediates the view. Yet this “rare” experience is actually the result of a highly intentional process as the technology is used in such a way to make itself disappear from audience awareness.

“Distraction as provided by art presents a covert control of the extent to which new tasks have become soluble by apperception.”

This quote alludes to psychoanalytic theory. In psychoanalytic theory, when a subject becomes aware of their subconscious processes, they can resolve them. Benjamin states that, because of how distracting new art forms are, there is a limit to how much the audience can resolve the power of the mechanical processes by becoming aware of them. Even if the audience knows there are special effects, they will still be distracted and taken in by them.

“The film makes the cult value recede into the background not only by putting the public in the position of the critic, but also by the fact that at the movies this position requires no attention. The public is an examiner, but an absent-minded one.”

As a result of mass media and mechanical reproduction, Benjamin argues that everyone feels themselves to be a film critic because they have been positioned to identify with/as the camera. Rather than experience a piece of art for its ability to emotionally and spiritually move, audiences are encouraged to dissect the piece rather than lose themselves in it. Yet, this analytical position of the audience isn’t even one that requires training or special focus.

“‘Fiat ars—pereat mundus,’ says Fascism, and, as Marinetti admits, expects war to supply the artistic gratification of a sense perception that has been changed by technology. This is evidently the consummation of ‘l’art pour l’art.’ Mankind, which in Homer’s time was an object of contemplation for the Olympian gods, now is one for itself. Its self-alienation has reached such a degree that it can experience its own destruction as an aesthetic pleasure of the first order. This is the situation of politics which Fascism is rendering aesthetic. Communist responds by politicizing art.”

Benjamin alludes to the Latin phrase “fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus,” which means “Let justice be done, though the world perish.” He changes it slightly to describe Fascism’s motto as “fiat ars—pereat mundus,” meaning “let art be done, perish the world.” He describes this as the natural end point of the theory of art “art for art’s sake.” Finally, he alludes to Homer here, who is the author of the ancient Greek epics The Iliad and The Odyssey, which deal with the events of the Greek gods, who live on Mount Olympus. Whereas the Greek gods would interfere with the lives of humans for their own sport, Benjamin suggests that humans can take on this “godlike” position with the use of technology.