Walter Benjamin’s “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction”

Joe Petrulionis

For the class discussion on Wednesday, July 28, 2004

            With the explosions in technology, most forms of art have become mechanically reproducible. Benjamin illustrates the evolution of quality mechanical reproduction, i.e. from woodcut to lithography to photography and to film. And these reproductions have quite a few advantages (1169). But the copy is always inferior, exhibiting a lack that Benjamin calls a loss of “authenticity.” By virtue of being a copy, even an otherwise identical reproduction is removed from the “domain of tradition” and the piece of art is “reactivated.” In a surprise ending to this section, Benjamin calls this reactivation of art a “renewal of mankind” (1170).

Discussion Question 1:  The process of mechanically reproducing art, while removing a work from its tradition and authenticity, is good for humanity. So recording a symphonic performance cheapens the work and somehow benefits or “renews” humanity.  Can this be stated in economic terms: an increase in the quantity of some item will decrease the unit price, and a decrease in price will increase demand and therefore consumption?  Is Benjamin applying the law of supply and demand to art, or is this a gross simplification? Is he equating the act of mechanical reproduction of art to impounding private property, an act of liberation?

Benjamin sees all art as originating in, or at least used for, rituals. Since the Renaissance, the worship of art used rituals from the “Cult of Beauty” (1171). But mechanical reproduction “emancipates the work of art from its parasitical dependence on ritual” (1172).  Later in this excerpt, but still in the context of this “Cult of Beauty,” Benjamin describes the “aesthetics” of politics as a work of art that is mechanically replicated to create war. “Only war makes it possible to mobilize all of today’s technical resources while maintaining the property system.” Benjamin quotes an Italian Fascist, Marinetti, who presents several melodramatic examples of why war is beautiful (1185).

Discussion Question 2: Why does Benjamin describe this “Cult of Beauty” in Fascist terms? There seem to be distinctions between the Fascist approach and the Communist approach, distinctions that are important to understanding this excerpt from Benjamin’s essay. The Fascists create a “politics of aesthetics” that results in war. The Communist approach, “politicizing art,” enables the masses to overturn the property system.  The implication here seems to be that the Communist choice results in less war. But several of these logical steps are blurred. How do the rituals of the “Cult of Beauty” protect property rights and therefore lead to war? Or should this all be read in a metaphorical sense? What is the difference between a “politics of aesthetics” and “politicizing art?”