DSDN171 Blog Assignment 6 (Week 6)

In this week’s reading Benjamin argues, “To an ever greater degree the work of art reproduced becomes the work of art designed for reproducibility. From a photographic negative, for example, one can make any number of prints; to ask for the authentic print makes no sense.” Do you agree or disagree? Do you think there is a role for the ‘authentic’ in an age of digital design and manufacture?

I agree with this statement – the development of how artwork is produced today has affected its original form – more and more often, it is purely digital. Benjamin talks about how designs were previously created by an “incision on a block of wood or […] etching on a copperplate” (Benjamin, 1992, p. 219), these methods contrasting with more progressive, readily reproducible ones. These methods did allow for reproduction of the artwork, but involved a clear original in the first place – one that society holds with more value than a copy. As the demand for easily reproducible art has grown, like Benjamin says, art has become “designed for reproducibility” – the photographic negative allows for infinite reproductions of the work, however, the uniqueness surrounding an original print, as with an original painting that may be sought after by a collector as an authentic alternative to the many copies available, has been lost.

This poses the question as to whether the original of an artwork has a place in today’s society. With everything moving to a digital form, the physicality of a work of art, being able to hold and smell a crisp, brand new book in one’s hands, rather than reading the pages off a computer screen, is being lost. The problem is, there is something special about an original - “[e]ven the most perfect reproduction of a work of art is lacking in one element; its presence in time and space, its unique existence,” (Benjamin, 1992, p. 220). But, as the very form in which the artwork is produced moves with the digital age, more and more often skipping the stage where an exclusive original is created, sadly, the ‘authentic’ print is losing its place in society. I don’t think that there could be a place for the ‘authentic’ when technology is moving as fast as it is today.

Benjamin, W. (1992). The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction (pp. 211-244) in Illuminations, trans. Harry Zohn. London: Fontana.