I was a bit confused when I read the preface of this essay. I wasn't sure what I was getting myself into when I saw all of the war references in the text and how this would converge with art. However, I enjoyed most of the reading. Although it might seem a bit long, Benjamin's writing style flows easily and takes the reader into different art topics almost without noticing. Throughout the chapters, the writer talks about different methods of reproducing art, differences between original compositions and its copies, art perception, art value, photography, film, and architecture.
What I found most interesting, and the author spends quite some time on it, was his take on film. Benjamin compares and contrast film to different arts such as photography, theater, and architecture. It looks like he is not totally convinced by it. As he cites several people in the chapters, Benjamin is most critical of screen actors. According to the writer, when compared to stage actors, screen actors lack interaction with the viewers which affects what the public perceives, in particular his aura. Following this, Benjamin seems to disapprove of techniques brought by the film industry such as slow motion, close-ups, and editing. Although he has a valid point, I think film has brought a different approach to art. Film has come a long way since 1936 (when this essay was written) and the past few generations have embraced it. It might be art for the masses, but it is art nonetheless. People are still critical of movies that are not done well, be it because of poor directing or bad acting. Makes me wonder what Benjamin would think of modern art.
No comments:
Post a Comment