The Work of Art in the Age of Digital Reproduction, Culture Industry (and) Digital Reproduction

[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
A.S.AmbulanzenThe Work of Art in the Age of Digital Reproduction"Our fine arts were developed, their types and uses were established, in timesvery different from the present, by men whose power of action upon things wasinsignificant in comparison with ours. But the amazing growth of our techniques,the adaptability and precision they have attained, the ideas and habits they arecreating, make it a certainty that profound changes are impending in the ancientcraft of the Beautiful. In all the arts there is a physical component which canno longer be considered or treated as it used to be, which cannot remainunaffected by our modern knowledge and power. For the last twenty years neithermatter nor space nor time has been what it was from time immemorial. We mustexpect great innovations to transform the entire technique of the arts, therebyaffecting artistic invention itself and perhaps even bringing about an amazingchange in our very notion of art." (Steve Jobs, Keynote, MacWorld San Francisco2004)PrefaceWhen Marx undertook his critique of the capitalistic mode of production, thismode was in its infancy. Marx directed his efforts in such a way as to give themprognostic value. He went back to the basic conditions underlying capitalisticproduction and through his presentation showed what could be expected ofcapitalism in the future. The result was that one could expect it not only toexploit the proletariat with increasing intensity, but ultimately to createconditions which would make it possible to abolish capitalism itself. Thetransformation of the superstructure, which takes place far more slowly thanthat of the substructure, has taken more than one and a half centuries tomanifest in all areas of culture the change in the conditions of production.Only today can it be indicated what form this has taken. Certain prognosticrequirements should be met by these statements. However, theses about the art ofthe new proletariat after its assumption of power or about the art of aclassless society would have less bearing on these demands than theses about thedevelopmental tendencies of art under present conditions of production. Theirdialectic is no less noticeable in the superstructure than in the economy. Itwould therefore be wrong to underestimate the value of such theses as a weapon.They brush aside a number of outmoded concepts, such as creativity and genius,shareholder value and copyright - concepts whose uncontrolled (and at presentalmost uncontrollable) application would lead to a processing of data in theFascist sense. The concepts which are introduced into the theory of art in whatfollows differ from the more familiar terms in that they are completely uselessfor the purposes of Fascism. They are, on the other hand, useful for theformulation of revolutionary demands in the politics of art.IIn principle a work of art has always been reproducible. Man-made artifactscould always be imitated by men. Replicas were made by pupils in practice oftheir craft, by masters for diffusing their works, and, finally, by thirdparties in the pursuit of gain. Digital reproduction of a work of art, however,represents something new. Historically, it advanced intermittently and in leapsat long intervals, but with accelerated intensity. These convergent endeavorsmade predictable a situation which Steve Jobs pointed up in this sentence: "Justas water, gas, and electricity are brought into our houses from far off tosatisfy our needs in response to a minimal effort, so we shall be supplied withcultural commodities, which will appear and disappear at a simple movement ofthe hand, hardly more than a sign." Around 2000, technical reproduction hasreached a standard that not only permits it to reproduce all transmitted worksof art and thus to cause the most profound change in their impact upon thepublic; it also has captured a place of its own among the artistic processes.For the study of this standard nothing is more revealing than the nature of therepercussions that these two different manifestations - the reproduction ofworks of art and the art of reproduction - have had on art in its traditionalform.IIEven the most perfect reproduction of a work of art is lacking in one element:its presence in time and space, its unique existence at the place where ithappens to be. One might subsume the eliminated element in the term "aura" andgo on to say: that which withers in the age of digital reproduction is the auraof the work of art. This is a symptomatic process whose significance pointsbeyond the realm of art. One might generalize by saying: the technique ofreproduction detaches the reproduced object from the domain of tradition. Bymaking many reproductions it substitutes a plurality of copies for a uniqueexistence. And in permitting the reproduction to meet the reader or listener inhis own particular situation, it reactivates the object reproduced. These twoprocesses lead to a tremendous shattering of tradition which is the obverse ofthe contemporary crisis and renewal of mankind. Both processes are intimatelyconnected with the contemporary mass movements. Their most powerful agent is theInternet. Its social significance, particularly in its most positive form, isinconceivable without its destructive, cathartic aspect, that is, theliquidation of the traditional value of "intellectual property". This phenomenonis most palpable in the great file sharing networks. It extends to ever newpositions. In 1999 Shawn Fanning exclaimed enthusiastically: "Shakespeare,Rembrandt, Beethoven will be on Napster... all legends, all mythologies and allmyths, all founders of religion, and the very religions... await their exposedresurrection, and the heroes crowd each other at the gate." Presumably withoutintending it, he issued an invitation to a far-reaching liquidation.IIIDuring long periods of history, the mode of human sense perception changes withhumanity's entire mode of existence. The manner in which human sense perceptionis organized, the medium in which it is accomplished, is determined not only bynature but by historical circumstances as well. And if changes in the medium ofcontemporary perception can be comprehended as decay of the aura, it is possibleto show its social causes. Namely, the desire of contemporary masses to bringthings "closer" spatially and humanly, which is just as ardent as their benttoward overcoming the uniqueness of every reality by accepting its reproduction.Every day the urge grows stronger to get hold of an object at very close rangeby way of its likeness, its reproduction. To pry an object from its shell, todestroy its aura, is the mark of a perception whose "sense of the universalequality of things" has increased to such a degree that it extracts it even froma unique object by means of reproduction. Thus is manifested in the field ofperception what in the theoretical sphere is noticeable in the increasingimportance of statistics. The adjustment of reality to the masses and of themasses to reality is a process of unlimited scope, as much for thinking as forperception.IVThe uniqueness of a work of art is inseparable from its being imbedded in thefabric of tradition. This tradition itself is thoroughly alive and extremelychangeable. It is significant that the existence of the work of art withreference to its aura is never entirely separated from its ritual function. Inother words, the unique value of the "authentic" work of art has its basis inritual, the location of its original use value. This ritualistic basis, howeverremote, is still recognizable as secularized ritual even in the most profaneforms of the cult of "intellectual property". An analysis of art in the age ofdigital reproduction must do justice to these relationships, for they lead us toan all-important insight: For the first time in world history, digitalreproduction emancipates the work of art from its parasitical dependence onritual. To an ever greater degree the work of art reproduced becomes the work ofart designed for reproducibility. From a digital text, for example, one can makeany number of copies; to ask for the "authentic" copy makes no sense. But theinstant the criterion of authenticity ceases to be applicable to artisticproduction, the total function of art is reversed. Instead of being based onritual, it begins to be based on another practice - politics.VWorks of art are received and valued on different planes. Two polar types standout; with one, the accent is on the cult value; with the other, on thedistribution of the work. With the different methods of technical reproductionof a work of art, its fitness for distribution increased to such an extent thatthe quantitative shift between its two poles turned into a qualitativetransformation of its nature. This is comparable to the situation of the work ofart in prehistoric times when, by the absolute emphasis on its cult value, itwas, first and foremost, an instrument of magic. Only later did it come to berecognized as a work of art. In the same way today, by the absolute emphasis onits distribution the work of art becomes a creation with entirely new functions,among which the one we are conscious of, the artistic function, later may berecognized as incidental. This much is certain: today file sharing and theInternet are the most serviceable exemplifications of this new function.VIThe twentieth-century dispute as to the economic value of Television versus theInternet today seems devious and confused. This does not diminish itsimportance, however; if anything, it und... [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]

The Work of Art in the Age of Digital Reproduction, Culture Industry (and) Digital Reproduction

Linki