These are not criticism - it makes no specific point - you would first have
to demonstrate that your characterizations actually stem from Benjamin's
work -
Chair, Visual Arts and Technologies
The Cleveland Institute of Art
 



> From: Derek Allan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: <[email protected]>
> Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 17:06:23 +1000
> To: <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: Presence
> 
> Ah the good old 'I have undergrads who could do better' answer.
> 
> But what about responding to the specific criticisms I have made?
> 
> In a way I am glad this topic has come up. I had never really
> consciously recognised before just how limited Benjamin's outlook is,
> especially from a historcial point of view. It's quite surprising in a
> way, given that he was writing the 1930s and so much was known by that
> time about the attitudes of early and other cultures towards the
> objects we now call art. Malraux was certainly keenly aware of it and
> had integrated it well and truly into his thinking by then.  Benjamin
> is still wallowing around in a basically 19th century "linear" view of
> history - not surprising really, I guess, since he is obviously stiil
> so much in the shadow of Marx.
> 
> DA
> 
> On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 11:42 AM, Saul Ostrow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> And this passes for a analysis and a polemeic - please I hav eunder grads
>> who can do better than this
>> Chair, Visual Arts and Technologies
>> The Cleveland Institute of Art
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> From: Derek Allan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> Reply-To: <[email protected]>
>>> Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 09:10:55 +1000
>>> To: <[email protected]>
>>> Subject: Re: Presence
>>> 
>>> RE: 'Benjamin used the word "aura" to refer to the sense of awe and
>>> reverence one
>>> presumably experienced in the presence of unique works of art. According to
>>> Benjamin, this aura inheres not in the object itself but rather in external
>>> attributes such as its known line of ownership, its restricted exhibition,
>>> its publicized authenticity, or its cultural value. Aura is thus indicative
>>> of art's traditional association with primitive, feudal, or bourgeois
>>> structures of power and its further association with magic and (religious or
>>> secular) ritual.'
>>> 
>>> (1) I like 'presumably' experienced...
>>> 
>>> (2) In 'primitive', and 'feudal'  times there were no 'works of art'.
>>> Slight glitch in Benjamin's historical analysis there.
>>> 
>>> (3) Why should any of this have anything to do with 'structures of
>>> power' ?  As I recall, there is nothing in Benjamin to demonstrate
>>> this. (But what the heck, it sounds classy. And there are nice Marxist
>>> resonances - without actually having to invoke Marx...)
>>> 
>>> (4) Re:"such as its known line of ownership, its restricted
>>> exhibition, its publicized authenticity, or its cultural value. "
>>> 
>>> This is so hopelessly shaky historically speaking. For vast stretches
>>> of history and for large numbers of objects we now regard as art, the
>>> question of 'line of ownership' was entirely irrelevant. Ditto the
>>> notion of 'exhibition.'   The statues at Chartres were not on
>>> 'exhibition', or Buddhist sculpture or so much else. That is Western
>>> post-Renaissance thinking.  Authenticity?? The very notion would not
>>> have made sense.  Ditto a million times over for 'cultural value'.
>>> 
>>> Benjamin's' outlook is so obviously limited by the conventional
>>> leftist thinking of his times...
>>> 
>>> There is more to say but I'll leave it at that.
>>> 
>>> DA
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 8:52 PM, Saul Ostrow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>> Benjamin used the word "aura" to refer to the sense of awe and reverence
>>>> one
>>>> presumably experienced in the presence of unique works of art. According to
>>>> Benjamin, this aura inheres not in the object itself but rather in external
>>>> attributes such as its known line of ownership, its restricted exhibition,
>>>> its publicized authenticity, or its cultural value. Aura is thus indicative
>>>> of art's traditional association with primitive, feudal, or bourgeois
>>>> structures of power and its further association with magic and (religious
>>>> or
>>>> secular) ritual. With the advent of art's mechanical reproducibility, and
>>>> the development of forms such as film in which there is no actual original,
>>>> the experience is freed from place and ritual. "For the first time in world
>>>> history," Benjamin wrote, "mechanical reproduction emancipates the work of
>>>> art from its parasitical dependence on ritual."
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Derek Allan
>>> http://www.home.netspeed.com.au/derek.allan/default.htm
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> This message has been scanned for viruses and
>>> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
>>> believed to be clean.
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Derek Allan
> http://www.home.netspeed.com.au/derek.allan/default.htm
> 
> 
> -- 
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.

Reply via email to