“During long periods of history, the mode of human sense perception changes with humanity’s entire mode of existence. The manner in which human sense perception is organized, the medium in which it is accomplished, is determined not only by nature but by historical circumstances as well.”
Benjamin establishes a dichotomy between a stable “nature”, and anchor point in relation with the continually evolving “historical circumstance”. Later in the text he address the nature of art as something shifting along with the the historical circumstance. How closely related is the nature of different things?
“We define the aura… as the unique phenomenon of a distance, however close it may be. If, while resting on a summer afternoon, you follow with your eyes a mountain range on the horizon or a branch which casts its shadow over you, you experience the aura of those mountains, of that branch.”
“Every day the urge grows stronger to get hold of an object at very close range by way of its likeness, its reproduction. Unmistakably, reproduction as offered by picture magazines and newsreels differs from the image seen by the unarmed eye.”
The hunger for more, the fear of death, the commodity of experience, the search for “authentic nature”…. to push beyond mediation of perception to encounter truth directly…. the pure art is a delusion.
” …the unique value of the “authentic” work of art has its basis in ritual… “
How does ritual relate to habit? How does habit relate to politics or the political?
“With the advent of the first truly revolutionary means of reproduction, photography, simultaneously with the rise of socialism, art sensed the approaching crisis which has become evident a century later. At the time, art reacted with the doctrine of l’art pour l’art, that is, with a theology of art. This gave rise to what might be called “pure” art, which not only denied any social function of art but also any categorizing by subject matter.”
This last statement reminds me of Jacque Ranciere ’s statement in The Politics of Aesthetics pg 23
“The aesthetic regime of the arts is the regime that strictly identifies art in the singular and frees it from any specific rule, from any hierarchy of the arts, subject matter, and genre. Yet it does so by destroying the mimetic barrier that distinguished ways of doing and making affiliated with art from other ways of doing and making, a barrier that separated its rules from the order of social occupations. The aesthetic regime asserts the absolute singularity of art and, at the same time, destroys any pragmatic criterion for isolating this singularity, It simultaneously establishes the autonomy of art and the identity of its forms with the forms that life uses to shape itself.”
continuing with the work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction:
“Instead of being based on ritual, it begins to be based on another practice – politics.”
“Earlier much futile thought had been devoted to the question of whether photography is an art. The primary question – whether the very invention of photography had not transformed the entire nature of art – was not raised. Soon the film theoreticians asked the same ill-considered question with regard to the film. But the difficulties which photography caused traditional aesthetics were mere child’s play as compared to those raised by the film.”
“In the theater one is well aware of the place from which the play cannot immediately be detected as illusionary. There is no such place for the movie scene that is being shot. …in the studio the mechanical equipment has penetrated so deeply into reality that its pure aspect freed from the foreign substance of the equipment is the result of a special procedure… 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.”
A landscape that Mcluhan might say via technology is an extension of the body…. the road as an extension of the legs… cameras and images as an extension of the eyes… while all the while we are looking for the other… the mirror to reflect onto ourselves. This is why we exonerate nature… it reminds us that we are part of something much larger then ourselves. And all the while, the roads & highways, the buildings and homes, the trucks and trains, ships and satellites, ebb and flow in the regeneration of its own growth… attached to nature in its metabolic relations.
“One of the foremost tasks of art has always been the creation of a demand which could be fully satisfied only later.”
“Buildings have been man’s companions since primeval times. Many art forms have developed and perished. Tragedy begins with the Greeks, is extinguished with them, and after centuries its “rules” only are revived. The epic poem, which had its origin in the youth of nations, expires in Europe at the end of the Renaissance. Panel painting is a creation of the Middle Ages, and nothing guarantees its uninterrupted existence. But the human need for shelter is lasting. Architecture has never been idle. Its history is more ancient than that of any other art, and it claim to being a living force has significance in every attempt to comprehend the relationship of the masses to art.”
“Imperialistic war is a rebellion of technology which collects, in the form of “human material,” the claims to which society has denied its natural material. Instead of draining rivers, society directs a human stream into a bed of trenches; instead of dropping seeds from airplanes, it drops incendiary bombs over cities; and through gas warfare the aura is abolished in a new way.”