Here are some quotes that I thought were important to look at in the text:
“With the concept of "artistic volition," Riegl sought to show how art tracked major shifts in the structure and attitudes of collectives: societies, races, ethnic groups, and so on. Kunstwollen is the artistic projection of a collective intention.” (p. 10)
What I understand from this is that one of effective ways to study culture is to study its art because it the art you can see all the major changes or developments. However, I don’t fully grasp the meaning of the last sentence in the passage. What does the “collective intention” refer to exactly?
“Man is, however, not solely a being who takes in impressions through the senses -he is not only passive -but also a desiring- that is, an active -being, who will interpret the world as it reveals itself to his desire (which changes according to race, place, and time). " (p. 10)
What I understand from Benjamin’s theory is that the works of art are not merely a window to the culture at the period of time when they were created, but rather they could be eye openers to the culture in the present historical era and in understanding our culture today. The reason for this is that works of art “play an import role in shaping the human sensory capacity” (p. 10) because according to him our world can best be described with the term “phantasmagoria” which is the reason for which humans are unable to perceive and understand their own world.
I’m not sure if I have the right impression from this reading, but I got the sense that Benjamin has an appreciation for the traditional art which cannot be replicated like the current art (which can easily be replicated technologically) when he speaks of the authenticity. While at the same time showing the advantages of the art which is created with technology, because it can capture/have aspects which are not possible to attain with the traditional ways of creating art. “Technological reproduction can place the copy of the original in situations which the original itself cannot attain” (p. 21).
Did I get this right? I have to admit some parts of the reading were a bit confusing for me.
Very bad
ReplyDeleteI think that if art "shap[es] the human sensory capacity" then it plays a rather more active role than simply being an "eye opener to the culture in the present historical era."
ReplyDeleteIndeed, this notion of the way in which art constitutes or determines (schemes of) perception is a rather important part of Benjamin's argument.
Also, note that he's in *favor* of the withering of the aura. He's against tradition and "art for art's sake."
Hello Fatemah, this is René. I was looking for your mail to talk about the exposition on class, but I could not find it, so I hope you can see this with some time. I recommend you to separate the text in two parts:
ReplyDeletePart I (I’d like to talk about this part if that’s ook with you):Primacy of Rhetorical Speech, Cassandra’s, Relation of Rhetoric (till page 27)
Part II (The rest). Well let me know what do you think. Again sorry for the time and day…