![]() ![]() Collection and accumulation of works of art isn’t random but it serves to tell a story of state or private power. Public museums also serve to showcase the abundance in culture of the particular country in which it is displayed. And in permitting the reproduction to reach the recipient in his or her own situation, it actualizes that which is reproduced.” By replicating the work many times over, it substitutes a mass existence for a unique existence. “The technology of reproduction detaches the reproduced object from the sphere of tradition. ![]() Walter Benjamin defends the idea that this missing property which can not be replicated is the unique place and unique existence in time of the original. No matter how perfect the reproduction, there is always something missing. What is new is the refinement of technological reproduction, which can now replicate nearly perfectly the parameters of the original artwork. Students copied the works of their masters and masters themselves disseminated their own work as far as they could. What happens to art when it is copied and multiplied, displayed everywhere, from the museum to your milk box, printed endlessly on t-shirts and stamped on one-dollar mugs? Does art get its gravitas from its uniqueness alone? Is this uniqueness diminished when the work of art is reproduced? ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |