Monday, November 21, 2011

Aura

We have tried and tried to define Aura in our limited class section, and it is something that I think about a lot outside of class. I would venture a definition and how this interpretation of Aura works in this essay. Aura is not art. Aura one way in which we describe our ritual worship of art. Aura is the power that art holds over us, its command presence if you will. In the mechanical reproduction of art, we are taking away the aura because you cannot have multiple objects with great command presence. Instead of one great piece of art, we have several ok pieces of art, and they are only ok because there are multiple of them. Several voices do not have the same authority over the audience that one, loud booming voice does. But several voices can be moved about and have some sort of effect on an audience that would otherwise not be able to hear it.
There's a quote in Benjamin that has yet to be brought up in class that would alter everyone's way of thinking considerably. "Namely, the desire of contemporary masses to bring things "closer" spatially and humanly, which is just as ardent as their bent toward overcoming the uniqueness of every reality by accepting its reproduction" (Benjamin, 1236). We, as a contemporary mass, do not like unique things. We do not like things that are far away. These are both things that are necessary for an object to maintain its aura. When one hears of some great far away things, one builds up great hopes for this thing only to have them smashed against the wall upon actually seeing the things which one had been dreaming of. I have been using the example of the Mona Lisa because it seems really relevant. One hears so frequently about the greatness of this painting that it has almost become a trope for greatness. And how frequently does one talk to a person who has seen this glorious painting only to have this other person that that "Pictures don't do it justice"? It's because these pictures have taken away the aura of the original. Prof. Graban asked whether or not the pictures need the original. I would say no. The pictures of the Mona Lisa no longer need the Mona Lisa to server their purpose as examples of great art, and other pictures are just representations of reality. Ce n'est pas une pipe.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.