Thursday, January 15, 2004
The Frankfurt School, Marxism, and Neo-Marxism
Through mechanical reproduction, Walter Benjamin believes that reproduced items lack a certain ‘presence’ in time and space. As a result, he then introduces the idea of aura and authenticity into his article. In addition, Benjamin uses various metaphors and comparisons, such as painters vs. cameramen and magicians vs. surgeons, to demonstrate his thoughts about how the world of art has changed and is continuing to change. For Benjamin, two major influences on his article include the social contexts of the Frankfurt School, Marxism, and Neo-Marxism.
In hope of piecing together the losses of World War 1, the Frankfurt School, initially called “The Institute of Social Research”, arose in Germany. Essayist and literary critic Walter Benjamin attended the Frankfurt School during 1930s. The school, at one time, affiliated itself with the University of Frankfurt in which the first director of the school, Carl Grunberg, recognized that the purpose of the institution was to do research and not necessarily involve itself in politics - although some members of the school chose to. The Frankfurt School was mainly composed of German-Jewish philosophers, essayists, and writers such as Theodor Adorno, Marshall McLuhan, Erich Fromm, Leo Lowenthal, Herbert Marcuse, and Friedrich Pollock. Though the members of the school were highly regarded, their lives were constantly at risk as long as they stayed in Germany, particularly German-Jewish members like Benjamin, because of the presence of the NAZI. All of the studies done at Frankfurt incorporated many philosophical texts including Kant, Marx, Hegel, Nietzshe, and Freud. Philosophers such as Benjamin, Fromm, and Lowenthal had a strong interest in Jewish mysticism, which is the concern of “the nature of reality, an individual's struggle to attain a clear vision of reality, and the transformation of consciousness that accompanies such vision” (Platt, D. P.). As a result, Benjamin to tries to attain a ‘clear vision’ of reality, and recognize the transformations and changes that occurred around him, by conducting studies and writing essays such as “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction”. Benjamin had a strong interest in communication and worked closely with Adorno in this area at the Frankfurt School. They discussed concepts, texts, and ideas with one another and certainly influenced each other’s work and writings. Near the end of the 1930s, the presence of the NAZI grew and forced many of Frankfurt’s members to flee to the US. Despite the warnings, Benjamin chose to stay in Germany to finish conducting his research for his study; consequently, he died when he decided to flee.
As a result, of his study at Frankfurt, Benjamin undertook a Marxist view that influenced his writing and research. For example, in Benjamin’s article “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction” Benjamin states Marx’s thoughts and theories in the preface; hence, his study at Frankfurt, under Marxist thought, influenced his thinking.
As a result, of staying at the Frankfurt school during the increasing presence of the NAZI, Benjamin had a first hand opportunity experiencing the changes after WW1 and before WW2. Hence, his article on mechanical reproduction became focused “change” and the various effects it had on art, culture, and communication. In Benjamin’s article, he describes how the ‘aura’ and ‘authenticity’ of art diminishes over time, thus creating a change in thought and perception. These changes may be good and may be bad; Benjamin leaves the choice, of whether it is good or bad, up to the reader. Because of these changes, Benjamin believes that we need to rethink our ideas about what is art. Overall, the various social changes in society, the Frankfurt School, and the world during Benjamin’s time influenced his thought in his article.
The Frankfurt school was composed of mainly Marxist and Neo-Marxist philosophers who hoped to be able to derive a single strain of Marxism that would bring together the various streams of Marxist thought. For the most part, Marxism is a system of thought and the study of Dialectical Materialism, Historical Materialism, and Economics. For example, Marx derived a theory of knowledge that became the framework for the majority of the Frankfurt members studying in Germany. Marx believed “…that human knowledge is dependent on the quality of social institutions, but he pushed this point a step further. He argued that if growth in knowledge is tied to acting and reflecting on the world, then what counts as knowledge in any society – its “dominant truth content” as Adorno and Benjamin liked to put it – depends on the institutions that control access to the materials and activities available.” (Stamps, 1995, p.26)
In addition, he thought that the result of the economy is dependent upon the views and thoughts of the rich. The Frankfurt School followed such basic thoughts and ideas, which surprisingly had an impact on Benjamin’s thoughts about mechanical reproduction and change. Through the development of mechanical reproduction technology, access to materials and information becomes easier and easier, thus if Marx’s theory on knowledge is true, then human knowledge must be growing more rapidly because of technological evolution. Using Marx’s theory as a basis for thought and analysis, Benjamin went from the knowledge (Marx’s theory of knowledge) to mechanical reproduction to change and finally to what is changing. His article on mechanical reproduction became about how things changed. Benjamin feels that we need to rethink our ideas about art because of the rise of mechanical reproduction. Benjamin was a Marxist but more specifically, he was a Neo-Marxist - which is one of the many branches of Marxism. Neo-Marxism is not much different from Marxism. More specifically, Neo-Marxists believe “…that just because people have class consciousness, they do not necessarily have to act on it. In Neo-Marxism, ideology influences culture change and classes are based on age, gender, and kinship” (Killgrove). In other words, the ideology of society has an impact on culture change and class. Benjamin explains in his article, “ . . . This is comparable to the situation of the work of art in prehistoric times when, by the absolute emphasis on its cult value, it was first and foremost, an instrument of magic. Only later did it come to be recognized as a work of art . . . This much is certain: today photography and the film are the most serviceable exemplifications of this new function.” (The Art History Webring)
Throughout Benjamin’s article, the repeated references to aura and authenticity demonstrate his Marxist thoughts because they relate to the ideas of historical materialism and economics. Benjamin’s ideas about aura and authenticity are about the physical and innate value of an object. The historic and economic worth of an object affects society and determines what is valuable and what is not. According to Benjamin, through the destruction of aura and authenticity we will be destroying culture as well as history. Despite this, mechanical reproduction greatly increases access to knowledge and activities and thus helps us create a more evolved society; hence, Benjamin believes we need to rethink our ideas of art and communication.
Benjamin’s life had many changes as well as many influences that affect what he thinks about and how he thinks about concepts such as aura, authenticity, film, photography etc. Overall, Benjamin's article "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction" presents ideas, concepts, changes, and influences of the Frankfurt School, Marxism, and Neo-Marxism development; his article provides aspects, concepts and influences of the social context of his life and the world around him.
Killgrove, K. K., Archaeology Vocabulary. [On-line]. Retrieved from: http://www.ecu.edu/org/ags/archives/archvocab.html [2003 Dec 28].
Lawrence, A. L., The Spatial 'Aura' of Mariko Mori's Pure Land. [On-line]. Retrieved from: http://www.eiu.edu/~modernity/lawrence.html [2004, Jan 14].
Lectorsky, V. A. L., The Dialectic of Subject and Object and some Problems of the
Methodology of Science. [On-line]. Retrieved from: http://www.education.miami.edu/blantonw/mainsite/Componentsfromclmer/Com
ponent13/Dialectir/TheDialecticOfSubjectAndObject.html [2004, Jan 14].
Platt, D. P., (March 11, 1999). Jewish Mysticism. [On-line]. Retrieved from:
www.digiserve.com/mystic/Jewish [2003, Dec 28].
Stamps, J. S. (1995). Unthinking Modernity. Quebec: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
The Art History Webring (2001-2004). Walter Benjamin’s The Work of Art in the Age
of Mechanical Reproduction. [On-line]. Retrieved from:
http://www.lilithgallery.com/articles/walter_benjamin.html [2004, Jan 12].
Wikipedia The Free Encyclopedia. Nazi Party. [On-line]. Retrieved from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_Party
[2004, Jan 17].
Wolff, J. W., The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. [On-line]. Retrieved from:
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ [2004, Jan 17].
Wednesday, January 14, 2004
Avalon:
The Boundaries of Real and Illusion
In the world of Avalon, Ash, known to most as “The Noble Soldier”, enters a world where the real world collides with illusion and a search for truth. The director of this magnificent film, Mamoru Oshii, begins his film with a battle scene in which the audience is immersed in, what he likes to call, “a special world”. As a result, Avalon is not your typical action movie, nor your ordinary real-life world. After the first scene, the audience begins to understand that the world they just witnessed was just a game, thus the audience is encouraged to ask questions about what is ‘real’ throughout the movie. Hence, the search for truth is a major theme present in this film.
Ash indulges her life to this game of Avalon and only comes back to the ‘real-world’ where the meanings of things in the world disappear because of her indulgence. Her life becomes a repetitious occupation of completing missions and killing enemies in an unreal world to earn money and make a ‘living’. Ash’s own name is not even her real name. She loses her memory from playing the game so often that she has no memory of a family or her original name. The only name she can remember is Ash, which becomes her code name in the game. Such events like memory loss and forgetting what is real is part of what this movie attempts to convey to the audience as we enter the age of technological evolution.
In an interview with Mamoru Oshii, he explained that he made no distinction between the real world and the virtual, “When Ash enters the game she makes a deal, there are rules, and there is a concept. In that sense the necessity for books and faces on statues disappears. A lot of meaning, information, and data get lost that way if you focus only on the deal of the game and the repeated action that you have to perform. But for me personally this imaginary world in which Ash lives in is not really different from what I conceive as my real world. I don't make any clear distinction”. According to Oshii, the movie and special effects are supposed to be “realer than real”. Oshii’s film searches for truth just as Ash searches for truth in her life, past, present and future. This concept of finding the truth can be linked to Benjamin, being a Marxist he attempts to search for truth through essays, articles, writings, and research. For more information on Mamoru Oshii and this films click here. For more information on Benjamin and his writings and research click here.
Here is a link to another blog I found quite interesting about the movie Avalon, the blogs are written by Neil Gaiman.
Pictures of posters, DVDs and official Avalon website:
The Boundaries of Real and Illusion
In the world of Avalon, Ash, known to most as “The Noble Soldier”, enters a world where the real world collides with illusion and a search for truth. The director of this magnificent film, Mamoru Oshii, begins his film with a battle scene in which the audience is immersed in, what he likes to call, “a special world”. As a result, Avalon is not your typical action movie, nor your ordinary real-life world. After the first scene, the audience begins to understand that the world they just witnessed was just a game, thus the audience is encouraged to ask questions about what is ‘real’ throughout the movie. Hence, the search for truth is a major theme present in this film.
Ash indulges her life to this game of Avalon and only comes back to the ‘real-world’ where the meanings of things in the world disappear because of her indulgence. Her life becomes a repetitious occupation of completing missions and killing enemies in an unreal world to earn money and make a ‘living’. Ash’s own name is not even her real name. She loses her memory from playing the game so often that she has no memory of a family or her original name. The only name she can remember is Ash, which becomes her code name in the game. Such events like memory loss and forgetting what is real is part of what this movie attempts to convey to the audience as we enter the age of technological evolution.
In an interview with Mamoru Oshii, he explained that he made no distinction between the real world and the virtual, “When Ash enters the game she makes a deal, there are rules, and there is a concept. In that sense the necessity for books and faces on statues disappears. A lot of meaning, information, and data get lost that way if you focus only on the deal of the game and the repeated action that you have to perform. But for me personally this imaginary world in which Ash lives in is not really different from what I conceive as my real world. I don't make any clear distinction”. According to Oshii, the movie and special effects are supposed to be “realer than real”. Oshii’s film searches for truth just as Ash searches for truth in her life, past, present and future. This concept of finding the truth can be linked to Benjamin, being a Marxist he attempts to search for truth through essays, articles, writings, and research. For more information on Mamoru Oshii and this films click here. For more information on Benjamin and his writings and research click here.
Here is a link to another blog I found quite interesting about the movie Avalon, the blogs are written by Neil Gaiman.
Pictures of posters, DVDs and official Avalon website:
Monday, November 10, 2003
What are blogs?
Blogs are probably one of the most recent and most effective ways of getting your opinion out to the general public. Blogs are personal writings and are not commercialized by large companies trying to sell you their products. It is also a way of expression for some people. Some people use blogs as a diary except that it is public and the rest of the world could read it if they want to.
There are three different kinds of blogs that I have found, there are probably many more but here are just a few. One kind of blog is for political uses. For example, lawyers who want to get their opinion out to the people or use it to communicate with other lawyers and get their help or opinions on the subject. Another type of blog is one that is used for healthcare purposes. For example, this woman writes a blog to keep her comforted that she is not alone in her bed in the hospital. She talks to other bloggers and keeps blog of her own so that others can read and learn from her experiences. Lastly, blogs are used by scientists and professors. Scientists use blogs to communicate their discoveries or latest developments in their particular field, while professors a lot use it for the same reason they also use it to help educate their students on their findings, research and development.
Overall, blogs are generally a good thing because people get a chance to express themselves without having to go through the media. With this type of option out there, there will be no need to write to the newspaper company asking them to post up your letter. You do not have to wait for them to tell you ‘yes’ we can put it up or ‘no’ we cannot because we do not agree with what you have written. In blogs, it does not matter whether people like your opinion or not, it is going to be there. Blogs have potential to do great things, but I think it might need to have some basic rules or else some readers will get upset at what others write and that is where the problem lies with blogs.
Blogs are probably one of the most recent and most effective ways of getting your opinion out to the general public. Blogs are personal writings and are not commercialized by large companies trying to sell you their products. It is also a way of expression for some people. Some people use blogs as a diary except that it is public and the rest of the world could read it if they want to.
There are three different kinds of blogs that I have found, there are probably many more but here are just a few. One kind of blog is for political uses. For example, lawyers who want to get their opinion out to the people or use it to communicate with other lawyers and get their help or opinions on the subject. Another type of blog is one that is used for healthcare purposes. For example, this woman writes a blog to keep her comforted that she is not alone in her bed in the hospital. She talks to other bloggers and keeps blog of her own so that others can read and learn from her experiences. Lastly, blogs are used by scientists and professors. Scientists use blogs to communicate their discoveries or latest developments in their particular field, while professors a lot use it for the same reason they also use it to help educate their students on their findings, research and development.
Overall, blogs are generally a good thing because people get a chance to express themselves without having to go through the media. With this type of option out there, there will be no need to write to the newspaper company asking them to post up your letter. You do not have to wait for them to tell you ‘yes’ we can put it up or ‘no’ we cannot because we do not agree with what you have written. In blogs, it does not matter whether people like your opinion or not, it is going to be there. Blogs have potential to do great things, but I think it might need to have some basic rules or else some readers will get upset at what others write and that is where the problem lies with blogs.
Friday, October 24, 2003
Responce to "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction":
Benjamin ideas are clear and concise, especially in his arguments. They follow the rules of an argument which include the premises and conclusions. Clearly his arguments are valid (follow proper structure) but they are not really convincing, in my eyes. The arguments are not very sound (the premises are true and the conclusion is true). For example, Benjamin argues about how the aura of a work of art (let’s say acting) is lost or diminished when it is mechanically reproduced “…and this is the effect of film--man has to operate with his whole living person, yet forgetting it’s aura. For aura is tied to his presence; there can be no replica of it” (http://webct.yorku.ca/SCRIPT/2003_AS_HUMA_Y_1650__9_A_EN_A_LECT_01/scripts/serve_home) When the film industry creates movies, the actors are not presenting for the audience; they are presenting for the camera. Benjamin is therefore assuming that the aura of the actor cannot be caught or contained by mechanical objects such as a camera. In comparison, we can use this statement with the idea of painting. If any mechanical object cannot catch someone’s aura then a painting cannot catch an aura either. Benjamin would be assuming that all things have an aura, which might not match with other's beliefs. One might assume that only people or 'living' elements have an aura. I use the term living in quotes because it is a debatable term. Benjamin states, “The presence of the original is the prerequisite to the concept of authenticity.” (http://webct.yorku.ca/SCRIPT/2003_AS_HUMA_Y_1650__9_A_EN_A_LECT_01/scripts/serve_home) Therefore if we were to assume that authenticity constitutes as the aura, then we can safely say Benjamin has just contradicted himself. An original painting has an aura (according to Benjamin), but it is also a mechanical object. If you do not believe that a paint brush, used to create a painting, is mechanical then you might ask “what then constitutes as a mechanical object?” According to the scientific point of view, something that is mechanical is something that "of or pertaining to a machine or to machinery or tools; made or formed by a machine or with tools; as, mechanical precision; mechanical products" (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=mechanical). Therefore a paintbrush can be safely classified as a mechanical object.
Benjamin does not specify his ideas in this topic about what he considers a mechanical object. Therefore it is safe to assume, with regard to his arguments in this article, that he believes a mechanical object is something that can reproduce objects (paintings etc) without human help (except to start and stop). That a mechanical object is a piece of technology. In my view, mechanical object is more than just something that can make replications of something without human aid. For example, would you consider a can opener to be a mechanical object? I would. Benjamin's article only seems to make reference to mechanical objects of this age rather than to all pieces of machinery ever created.
Lastly, Benjamin states, "One might generalize by saying: the technique of reproduction detaches the reproduced object from the domain of tradition". (http://mystifly.fes.yorku.ca/)Benjamin mentions tradition in a way that seem to suggest that tradition is the path that we should follow. Today's tradition is quite different from the traditions of the past and therefore can we really classify reproduced objects outside of the domain of tradition? Today's tradition seems to be "if you want something, get a copy of it". It is not cost effective to get a real copy of a painting, especially if the original painter is dead.
Benjamin ideas are clear and concise, especially in his arguments. They follow the rules of an argument which include the premises and conclusions. Clearly his arguments are valid (follow proper structure) but they are not really convincing, in my eyes. The arguments are not very sound (the premises are true and the conclusion is true). For example, Benjamin argues about how the aura of a work of art (let’s say acting) is lost or diminished when it is mechanically reproduced “…and this is the effect of film--man has to operate with his whole living person, yet forgetting it’s aura. For aura is tied to his presence; there can be no replica of it” (http://webct.yorku.ca/SCRIPT/2003_AS_HUMA_Y_1650__9_A_EN_A_LECT_01/scripts/serve_home) When the film industry creates movies, the actors are not presenting for the audience; they are presenting for the camera. Benjamin is therefore assuming that the aura of the actor cannot be caught or contained by mechanical objects such as a camera. In comparison, we can use this statement with the idea of painting. If any mechanical object cannot catch someone’s aura then a painting cannot catch an aura either. Benjamin would be assuming that all things have an aura, which might not match with other's beliefs. One might assume that only people or 'living' elements have an aura. I use the term living in quotes because it is a debatable term. Benjamin states, “The presence of the original is the prerequisite to the concept of authenticity.” (http://webct.yorku.ca/SCRIPT/2003_AS_HUMA_Y_1650__9_A_EN_A_LECT_01/scripts/serve_home) Therefore if we were to assume that authenticity constitutes as the aura, then we can safely say Benjamin has just contradicted himself. An original painting has an aura (according to Benjamin), but it is also a mechanical object. If you do not believe that a paint brush, used to create a painting, is mechanical then you might ask “what then constitutes as a mechanical object?” According to the scientific point of view, something that is mechanical is something that "of or pertaining to a machine or to machinery or tools; made or formed by a machine or with tools; as, mechanical precision; mechanical products" (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=mechanical). Therefore a paintbrush can be safely classified as a mechanical object.
Benjamin does not specify his ideas in this topic about what he considers a mechanical object. Therefore it is safe to assume, with regard to his arguments in this article, that he believes a mechanical object is something that can reproduce objects (paintings etc) without human help (except to start and stop). That a mechanical object is a piece of technology. In my view, mechanical object is more than just something that can make replications of something without human aid. For example, would you consider a can opener to be a mechanical object? I would. Benjamin's article only seems to make reference to mechanical objects of this age rather than to all pieces of machinery ever created.
Lastly, Benjamin states, "One might generalize by saying: the technique of reproduction detaches the reproduced object from the domain of tradition". (http://mystifly.fes.yorku.ca/)Benjamin mentions tradition in a way that seem to suggest that tradition is the path that we should follow. Today's tradition is quite different from the traditions of the past and therefore can we really classify reproduced objects outside of the domain of tradition? Today's tradition seems to be "if you want something, get a copy of it". It is not cost effective to get a real copy of a painting, especially if the original painter is dead.
