Aura

Aura is what separates a work of art from its reproduction[1]. An original is separate from a reproduction because of its creation. An original painting is not a copy, it is creative inspiration. There are no guidelines for an original. The point is to create something new. However, a reproduction has the rigid guidelines of having to exactly imitate something else. It has the opposite purpose of an original. This process of originality creates aura.

Art has aura because it is unique[2]. Where and how it exists in time and space is special and exclusive to this piece of art. All of this is involved in the aura. A reproduction will not exist in the same way.

An important issue to consider is whether the aura is important when viewing art. Will I have to same experience as someone who went to a museum and viewed an original painting if I see it on my computer screen. How about if I see a reproduction in a museum? How important is aura? Is seeing a reproduction better than not seeing an art work at all, or does a reproduction taint your viewing of the art?

---

[1] Benjamin, Walter. (1968). Illuminations: The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction (pp. 217-251). New York, NY: Schocken Books. Pg 220

[2] Benjamin, Walter. (1968). Illuminations: The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction (pp. 217-251). New York, NY: Schocken Books. Pg 220

Artistic Aura Vs. Cyber Aura

The aura in artwork has been long lost. The aura, or attention gripping magical rush that makes one think of a piece of art as more than a mere accomplishment, but a feat of human achievement, has been lost not only by the mechanical reproduction of the actual piece, but also by technology’s effect on culture. In DaVinci’s era, I guarantee that people could gaze in amazement at his art or sculpture and really appreciate the piece because it propelled mankind forward through artistic genius. Now teens sit in class and should dissect the piece at least so it conjures some meaning, but instead they sit there glued to their fancy cell phones waiting for a text. Amazing has become ordinary. Nothing amazes the average technologically savvy snob of today’s generation because they have been spoiled. Spoiled to believe amazing just happens and the term can be thrown around for any given reason. To people in DaVinci’s time, his artwork was equivalent to how technology is viewed today. The difference is that there is only one DaVinci compared to millions of cell phones.
Everyday there is somebody mad at their cell phone for being too slow. What this person doesn’t understand is that there is a wave shooting into space, bouncing off a satellite and racing back to earth in less than a second… could you give it some time without getting upset! People are too immature to respect and appreciate the aura a DaVinci contains because they aren’t even content with what today’s generation has. Art should be timeless, but I have little faith in humanity. The number of people that walk into a museum and a library combined in a year don’t add up to the amount of YouTube hits “Cat Flushing a Toilet” gets in a few months. The reason why world renowned museums have to charge admission is because people have lost value in pieces of art. When art loses its aura, culture loses art. Media and technology is the culprit for overproducing to the point where people can’t differentiate amazing from ordinary. I agree with Walter Benjamin when he states in his book Illuminations, “During long periods of history, the mode of human sense perception changes with humanity’s entire mode of existence”[1]. Right now humanities entire mode of existence revolves around technology; hence; sense perception toward the really special things in life is skewed leaving art to the humble enthusiast.
[1] Benjamin, Walter. Illuminations: The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction. New York, NY: Shocken Books, 1968. Print. Pg, 222

What is a(n) (cyber-) aura?

Auras and cyber-auras are interconnected but are not the same. An aura, as defined by Benjamin, has a unique aspect of time and space.[1] These aspects are the differences between experiencing an event and seeing it through reproduced means. Benjamin also states that the reproductions diffuse the experience and reduce the quality of the presence.[2] Such occurrences can be observed by looking at photographs, movies, or other mechanical productions.

Cyber-auras, however, encompass a greater audience, and may create a new unique experience for each viewer. On one hand, an internet video may be seen and interpreted by an individual with one perspective. This perspective can be shared among a larger population to induce a cyber-aura that continues on almost infinitely. An example of this phenomenon is the movie Paranormal Activity. Originally, the movie opened in only 13 theaters.[3] However, the online marketing campaign was revolutionary. Using media outlets such as Facebook, Twitter, and voting, the promotion for the movie was successful. Each person that watched the trailer obtained their own cyber-aura. This cyber-aura was then encompassed in the larger sphere of social media outlets.

The actual experience of the movie creates the mechanical aura. This mechanical aura may then be evolved into a cyber-aura by the use of internet reactions on media sites. Thus, both cyber-aura and aura are linked but are not the same. They may create a chain that is seemly infinite at a given point in time.

[1]Walter, Benjamin. Illuminations: The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction. New York: Schocken Books, 1968, p.223.
[2]Walter, Benjamin. Illuminations: The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction. New York: Schocken Books, 1968, p.221.
[3]Rosenberg, Adam. 'Paranormal Activity' To Open Nationwide After 1,000,000 Demands Are Received. MTV Movies. October 6, 2009. http://moviesblog.mtv.com/2009/10/06/paranormal-activity-to-open-nationwide-after-1000000-demands-are-received/ . Accessed February 21, 2011. Internet.

The Aura in the Mechanical Age

In order to understand art as a representation of the aura in the modern mechanical age, it is important to supply historical background into the evolution of art forms. From the perspective of Benjamin Walter, through time and space art has lost its presence and become a reproduction of its original state.[1] What once had authority in its authenticity to promote contemplation has been changed due to the loss of context. [2] No longer does an audience need to view a piece of artwork in the manner the artist intended. An example of this can be seen through the following images.
http://www.vangoghgallery.com/painting/sunflowerindex.html[3]
http://jyothsnay.wordpress.com/category/van-gogh/[4]

When searching for the famous Sunflowers by Van Gogh on Google these among various other images resulted. Both claim to be the original yet it is obvious this is an impossibility. There are differences in hue, intensity, and overall style. The first image appears to fit better contextually yet without a comprehension of its history either image might be viewed as an original.

Additionally. modernization has generated resources through cyber networks where one can even copy and display this image as a desktop background for their computer. With advancements in technology, there is no need to travel to Holland to feel a sense of 'being cultured.' This depletes artwork's power to invoke contemplation which in turn decreases its aura. Benjamin reinforces this idea when he states,

“The authenticity of a thing is the essence of all that is transmissible from the beginning, ranging from substantive duration to its testimony to the history which it has experienced. Since the historical testimony rests on the authenticity, the former, too, is jeopardized by reproduction when substantive duration ceases to matter. And what is jeopardized when the historical testimony is affected is the authority of the object.” [5]

So to, the ritual and tradition of this piece or any other dissipates through humanity's mode of perception. [6] One might perceive the second image as reality thus altering the authenticity and authority of the original. Through this process of the aura, one's existence is shaped by informative and uninformative availability. [7]

[1]Walter, Benjamin. "Illuminations:The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction". New York: Shocken Books. p. 218, 220.

[2]Walter, Benjamin. "Illuminations:The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction". New York: Shocken Books. p.220.

[3] The Van Gogh Gallery: The Art Information Resource. Tempelton Reid, LCC. 15 January 2011. 20 February 2011.

[4]Vincent van Gogh's Sunflowers could Shine Again. Sunday Mercury.net. 14 February 2011. 20 February 2011.

[5]Walter, Benjamin. "Illuminations:The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction". New York: Shocken Books. p.221.

[6]Walter, Benjamin. "Illuminations:The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction". New York: Shocken Books. p.222.

[7]Walter, Benjamin. "Illuminations:The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction". New York: Shocken Books. p.222.

The Media Industry killed Art's Aura

Amidst a changing culture and the increasing technologies of a digital age. Walter Benjamin in his article Illuminations and Theodor Adorno along with Max Horkheimer in Dialectic of Enlightenment: Philosophical Fragments, portrays the writers’ distaste of the mechanical reproduction of an artwork in relation to the jeopardy it places on the existence of that artwork’s “aura.” Benjamin begins his explanation of the aura in his passionate desciption of what distinguishes the presence of an authentic piece of art. He explains the significance of a piece’s unique place in time, and the determination of that existence throughout history as what substantiates the phenomenon for which people intake its originality (Benjamin 220-1). Adorno elaborates on this sentiment and presents the infection of sameness, likewise the death of originality, as a crucial epidemic to today’s society (Adorno 94-5).

            Adorno goes on to classify the media industry as a conforming synonym to an all-encompassing “culture industry” (Adorno 104). He quotes, “ Nevertheless, the culture industry remains the entertainment business. Its control of consumers is mediated by entertainment… ”(108). It is due to the fact that the concept of media becomes synonymous with the masses that destroys the art form at the base of its existence; that is, ruptures the aura around which art gathers significance. Benjamin urges his readers to realize that the mechanical reproduction of art has a social significance on the reaction to it. No longer do people enjoy art, they actively criticize and attempt to change it (Benjamin 234). This results from the culture industry’s inability to provide satiable value to the public. Everything in entertainment is a copy of itself. Everything within the culture industry is only unique so long as it can still fit within a predetermined framework (Adorno 112).

            This framework supported so unquestionably and then criticized so openly by the masses is the anti-aura of modern art. Art gathered its original and unalterable being from the existence of unique perspective. People did not question art because it represented a singular perception of the world surroundings (Benjamin 237). This separation of A and B artwork, A for the culture and study of the time, and B for the mild mass entertainment (the media industry of today) captures the current media industry and likewise halts the originality synonymous with Benjamin’s definition of “aura” (Adorno 114-5).

 Benjamin, Walter. Illuminations: The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical

Reproduction. New York, New York: Schocken Books, 1968. Paperback.

Adorno, Theodor W. Max Horkeimer. Dialectiv of Enlightenment: Philosophical

Fragments. Standford, California. Stanford University Press, 2002. Typeset. 

Define the “aura” and “media industry” in Cyberspace

The term “Aura” can be defined as a work of arts authenticity or originality in other words what makes that piece unique and special. On page 221 of The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction Benjamin states “that which withers in the age of mechanical reproduction is the aura of the work of art”. This can be interpreted as mechanical reproduction diminishing or taking away the work of arts authenticity and what made it so special as it is replicated again and again. Through this replication, people become familiar with the image not necessarily its original form. For example an original painting by a famous artist has a certain aura about it. When holding a photograph or copy of that painting it takes away from the original paintings rarity and it is diminishing the painting authenticity. Benjamin puts it as a “decay of the aura” on page 222. Experiencing the sight of something natural and beautiful outside for example a sunset emits an aura and one diminishes its authenticity by replicating it in a photograph or on film capturing it to be examined and held in ones hands and viewed on a closer level. The “media industry” refers to a sort of collective made up of the different media forms of communicating with the public. Parts of the industry, for example TV, Radio, film and newspapers are now available in cyberspace for people to access them instantly. People are reading the news or listening to the radio via the Internet now and reaping such benefits of having the “media industry” in cyberspace.

Works Citws:
Benjamin, Walter. Illuminations. “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction.” New York: Schocken Books, 1968. Print.