Tuesday, September 9, 2008

Benjamin, Sontag, and Bourdieu

Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction by Walter Benjamin

In Plato’s Cave by Susan Sontag

The Social Definition of Photography by Pierre Bourdieu

4 comments:

Doolin said...

Caitlyn Doolin

Week One

The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction
Walter Bejamin
“...art has always been reproducible.” (321) Benjamin states this in his first sentence. Then begins to explain a process on how art began to be reproduced; the pupils (I assume artists) copy the masters, then a third party may want their own, which will entail another reproduction of the art. The greeks used stamping, terra cotta, coins and bronzing.Which seem more unique than script because was the next to reproduced; keeping copies of records. The lithography was created for this instance. Then jumping ahead a few decades the photograph. He states that photography feed the hand of the most important artistic function.
Next he discusses when art is reproduced is losing its uniqueness,along with its value of ownership to the artist. Its not just the one single piece of art. It may now be two thousandth reproduction of art. He talks about how there are two cults; art originated from the religious services (where there wasn’t much reproduction) and the second was a art was beauty from the Renaissance. I am not sure what he meant. Then he says with the rise of socialism became photography. After this he talks about two more cults: exhibition and value. I guess I feel the value cult is when art is treasure and can’t be reproduced without photography, such as statues or church stain glass windows. Then exhibition art is when you can travel with the art, bring into galleries and museums.
The two excerpts that I found interesting were:
“.. greater decrease in art significance, the sharper distinction between criticism and enjoyment of the art.” (??)
“..individual reactions are predetermined by the mass audience response.”

In Plato’s Cave
Susan Sontag
Sontag begins with”photographed images do not seem to be statements about the world so much as pieces of it, mini pieces of reality that anyone can get or relate to (4). She discusses in detail how photography can be evidence (proof), tool of power, memorialization, tourism, art, stories for the past, present, or future. She states many times that a photograph is a piece of time/reality that is captured. Its not exactly what your seeing, and it fills mental blocks.
She also talks about looking through the lens is you have the choose to intervene or not. Such as if you “shooting” images that are interesting, but morally wrong, or can’t stop, even if someone is in danger, just because you want to get the “one shot.” She said thats the observation station. (She talked about vacation in that aspect, you might always be looking for that iconic image on vacation but be missing the beauty right in front of you.) With this, horrific and tragic images that are seen more and more become unreal to the viewer, like desensitized.
She ends talking about how with the aesthetic consumption, now everyone is addicted.

The Social Definition of Photography
Pierre Bourdeu
He talks about how photography serves as a social function, which is generally associated with. Which goes into the portrait and how uncomfortable it can be for the subject. The person to person confrontation is lost. Also, he states that the photograph records reality, but its precise and fidelity can not be question. Because the photograph is used as evidence in so many ways in our society today. But the part of society (the ones not as knowledgeable in photography) do begin to question the imagery.
He also talks about popular photography in the social use. How its like a “everyone can make like kinda of image.” But on of the most interesting lines I found, “any work reflects the personality of its creator.” This just made me look at my work and my class mates. It made sense.

nicho.mcallister said...

In Plato's Cave by Susan Sontag

"Like guns and cars, cameras are fantasy-machines whose use is addictive" (14)

In our present world, or "the cave" we are being desensitized by imagery. "'Concerned' photography has done at least as much to deaden conscience as to arouse it." (21) Almost everyone nowadays owns or uses a camera. This is in part due to the fact that modern cameras are becoming easier and easier to use. Manufacturers advertise their cameras based on their complex auto settings and ease of use. This has caused an overabundance of photography and imagery throughout our society. "There is an aggression implicit in every use of the camera"(7). The "photographer" if only for that instant they press the shutter-release feels a sense of control that is rarely found elsewhere. They might even feel as though they fully control their own little photographic world in which they command time, light, and pose. This kind of control can become addictive, and since getting that feeling is made easier by new technology, even more people will be able to experience it. "...photography is not practiced by most people as an art. It is mainly a social rite, a defense against anxiety, and a tool of power." (8)

The idea that photographs can be taken as statements of fact, or something close to fact, is a tough one to grasp. "Photographed images do not seem to be statements about the world so much as pieces of it, miniatures of reality that anyone can make or acquire." (4) I don't fully agree with that statement, especially in these modern days of digital photography and photoshop manipulation. Through the use of these new technologies, almost anything can be created and made to seem real. How will these advances affect our trusting of photographs in the future? Will they still be used as evidence and proof in court hearings and so forth? Already, without the use of other manipulation, a photograph is an interpretation made of a scene by the photographer, not a factual showing of the scene since, "...the camera's rendering of reality must always hide more than it discloses" (23). Basically, what the photographer chooses to show you is what you get to see, but you have to also think, what else is he hiding?

M.H.Tucker said...

Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction -- Walter Benjamin

“The presence of the original is the prerequisite to the concept of authenticity.” (322) Why is the original needed for validation? There are those who believe, such as Benjamin, that reproduction strips authenticity. That its “aura” is lost. Benjamin argues that uniqueness and permanence can only occur in observation with the unarmed eye, that these qualities are lost with reproduction.
Strangely, reproduction for the purpose of tradition is somehow exempt in Benjamin’s eyes. He explains this when he says, “The uniqueness of a work of art is inseparable from its being imbedded in the fabric of tradition.”(325) This seems completely contradictory to the rest of the article. Signs and statues that have high value within one culture can be seen as inappropriate and immoral within others.

In Plato’s Cave – Susan Sontag

“The omnipresence of cameras persuasively suggest that time consists of interesting events, events worth photographing.”(11) What denotes interesting events? Presidential elections? Perhaps the birth of your child? What is important to one person is obviously subjective, and open to speculation. Regardless, people take photographs to “prove” that something happened and therefore, would seem to agree with Sontag that “A photograph passes for incontrovertible proof that a given thing happened.”(5)
Sontag then mentions that, regardless of limitations that may hinder certain photographers, she still believes that there is a more reliable sense of reality in photography than other mimetic objects. I’m hard pressed to agree with that statement. The debate of what is real within a photographic image is more in question now than in recent years, due to the advances of digital technology and relative ease of manipulation. It’s almost impossible to confirm reality within a photograph. However, I would have to agree with one of Sontag’s last points. “Needing to have reality confirmed and experience enhanced by photographs is an aesthetic consumerism to which everyone is now addicted.”(24) We see this confirmed every day—in our quest for proof of validity, we are often quick to say, “show me” as a substitute for “prove it.” Obviously, the debate will continue.

The Social Definition of Photography – Pierre Bourdieu

“…photography captures an aspect of reality which is only ever the result of an arbitrary selection…”(75) These words by Bourdieu, to me at least, are the most poignant and effective out of all three readings. What you decide to fill the frame with is the subjective reality you choose to show the world, and is not necessarily an accurate representation. What one person finds aesthetically pleasing may be insulting and grotesque to someone else.
Another great question posed by Bourdieu, “Can an art without an artist still be an art?”(77) Many uninformed viewers question the artistic value of photography and claim that it isn’t art. Does mechanical reproduction deprive the value of the work that a photographer puts in? In my opinion, the value of photography as an art form only increases with reproduction. Anything that is worth reproducing must have had some merit initially and as we know from psychology, the highest form of flattery is mimicry. These reproductions of works only further the impact of the originals.

nicho.mcallister said...

Stamping and bronzing for coin-making becomes woodcuts and lithography. Lithography quickly progresses into photography, which then progresses into motion pictures and sound films. With progress comes other changes as well. Through the advent of mechanical reproduction, it has become easier and easier to "reproduce" a scene. As it has becomes "easier" to capture these scenes, less respect is being paid to each particular medium. Benjamin's article Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction bases itself firmly in these beliefs. "...that which withers in the age of mechanical reproduction is the aura of the work of art" (323) This is basically saying that any work of art that can be easily reproduced... GASP... has no soul. I firmly disagree with that statement. As Matt Tucker points out in his exposition, if there is a want for that photograph to be reproduced more than once, there must be a reason for it, whether it be its visual qualities or it's "aura". Because of this I feel as though photography, if done well, has more of a soul than most other forms of art. Most of the "process points" you might get for other forms of art are pushed out the door, and only the artwork remains. "...to ask for the 'authentic' print makes no sense." (327) because they are all authentic prints.