Mike of Moderninty(or post?) - Benjamin.

Walter Benjamin's words struck a several strong chords with me as I pored over "The work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction". It was his words concerning the reproduction of a work of art, how its duplicate lacks the original's "unique existence at the time and place it happens to be." He goes on to state that said reproductions can be placed in situations and places that "may not touch the actual work of art, yet the quality of its presence is always depreciated". This depreciation is perfectly illustrated with a work of art such as Edward Munch's "The Scream". Endlessly printed and packaged, slapped on bumper stickers, lunchboxes, Frisbees and punching bags; they were everywhere. Before the marketing blitz it had somewhere in the late 80’s early 90’s I had found the painting haunting and disturbing, and understood why it had been considered great. Now it just haunts and disturbs me because the screamer reminds of an old, bald version of that kid in "Home Alone". The mass production of this iconic figure began to erode the very meaning and context of the piece away.
I had nearly this exact dialogue with a dear friend who is a multi-media artist, not by trade but by passion. She takes her art quite seriously, and has expressed to me that the idea of mass marketing and selling millions of copies of her work would cheapen her own effort at creating something original. She felt, as Benjamin did, that the duplication weakened the authentic article. I mentioned to her our reading assignment and read her a line I found quite observant and disturbing. “That which withers in the age of mechanical reproduction is the aura of the work of art." That "aura", that power of originality and oneness that a singular creation has can only exist in one state; on its own. How then does the artist feed themselves? Well, certainly we all must make a living, but shouldn't some sense of constraint and reverence for you own creation exist? The double-edged sword of commerce versus art can be quite sharp on both ends. Sign a marketing deal and you’re a sell-out and critically lambasted. Maintain you integrity and you could very well starve to death if you don’t have alternate sources of income. For some it seems that reproduction is celebration, homage of sorts. Others feel that the “aura” of art is its greatest asset and must be maintained. It is reminiscent of Benjamin’s words about how art is received on “two different planes. With one the accent is on cult value” those who prefer to keep there art amongst an inside group to preserve its uniqueness. The other group places emphasis on “the exhibition value of the work”, either for economic or social reasons – to share it with the world, in a manner of words. It is the absolute extreme of both these ideas that creates pop fads on one hand, and effete snobbery and disclusive practices on the other. Perhaps one day we will learn to find the middle ground.