The work of Art in the age of Mechanical reproduction / The culture industry -- Group 7

Dominic, Andrea and Alex

The first text, ‘’The work of art in the age of the mechanical reproduction’’ by Walter Benjamin explore the different changes the capitalist and highly mechanized society have imposed on art. Benjamin compare the ‘’new art’’ (video, photograph) with classical art piece and put in contrast important difference. For once, the mechanized way of production of this ‘’new art’’ is one of the main source of difference. While classical art piece clearly have aura, he poses the question whether we can say the same of the ‘’new art’’. For our team, the text raised important issues as to the impact of a mechanized society on the production of art. We agreed strongly that both the nature of the capitalist society and the mechanized mean of production had profound impact on the art pieces. With capitalism, art as opened-up to a broader audience, sometime with a loss importance given to the quality and integrity of the art pieces. However, we believe this opening as good aspect as it both the viewing and creation of the art to a broader audience then a intellectual elite. Also, because of the nature of the new media and their close relation with a mechanical production, the resulting experience of the art piece by a public is totally different. New media are more immersive and change the perception of the viewer of the art piece from active to passive. All in all however, contrary to the author who seems to consider the new medias superficial and cause of the low quality arts, after some discussions, it was agreed that the media was not necessarily the cause of the problem and that art piece as good and comparable to classical art pieces were also produced with the new media.

The second text, ‘’The Culture of Industry: Enlightenment of Mass Deception’’ by Max Horkheimer and Theodor W. Adorno presented the ultimate worst case of a capitalist society where culture is a controlled product. It must be said that members of the group did not like the reading. We found the text to dense and not well written in general. Also, we found the authors often made generalization which lowered the quality of their reflexion. In the pessimistic text, everyone is depicted as a victim and cause of a culture industry. While we agree that there is a culture of industry, we believe it only goes to a certain level as of today. Just in the province of Quebec for example, syndicalist hold high ground against the government are a good symbol of the freedom of the citizen. Through a diversified culture and openness to the world, citizen still appear to us as free of a culture industry in total control. This is even more evident when we compare our situation to 100 years ago when it was clearly the catholic church that controlled culture through a discipline system.

In conclusion, we do agree with some point of the first reading. The mechanization of society and the expansion of a capitalist society as made important changes to art. Changes of the media and it consumption can have negative aspect but all in all, they also give access to art to a much wider public. Currently, the public is often receiving the media very passively. Will individual sense need to be ‘’educated’’ to take the best out of this new art and culture mix? Seems similar to a Marx lecture…