Walter Benjamin's Concept of Aura and Mechanical Reproduction

The word aura has a long history, and it is thought to be derived from the Greek word αὔρα" meaning breeze or breath. However, in this writing I aim to explore Walter Benjamin’s concept of aura and mechanical reproduction.

Rapid development in the field of technology has affected many fields and art is no exception. In his seminal work, The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction (1935), Walter Benjamin took the term aura and applied it to art and aesthetics. He defines aura as “A strange web of space and time: the unique appearance of a distance, however near it may be.”(1935). This “distance” signifies the uniqueness and originality of the artwork, which can only be fully appreciated in its original setting. Therefore, he links the aura of a work to its existence, particularly its specialty. In the article, he sees mass production as a threat to the aura of an artwork, exploring the effects of mass production on the uniqueness of art. For example, a beautiful picture or a book can be copied endlessly thanks to technological advancements, but it makes art more accessible, reducing its value. In his writing, Benjamin mostly focuses on photography and film and their relations between technological advancements and the nature of art. With the advent of mechanical reproduction, which are photography, film, and printing in this case, authenticity of art is diminished. Yet, Walter Benjamin is not only concerned with the aesthetic effects of mechanical reproduction but also with the political functions. He argues that the reproduction of art leads to commodification of art, placing art in a capitalist environment. With art being more and more accessible to the masses, mechanical reproduction of art can play a vital role in politics, challenging power structures. Once only limited with privileged elite groups of society, art is no longer revered or exclusive to small groups but has become a part of capitalist system and consumer society, being available to the masses. In addition, it can be used to challenge or subvert some ideologies within society. However, while recognizing its potential to be used for political control, he also considers it radical potential. He states that politicization of art can be used for social change.