文化研究论文 The Politics Of The Reproducibility
Photography has led to the shift between the original, authentic value of what the viewer is subjected to, to a more modern way of view. The paintings displayed the original view of the items with the same color, creativity and authenticity were also very much a part of the paintings, but with photography most of these aspects are lost in the modernity part. Photography values the exhibition value more than the cult value. The photographs do not evoke the free contemplation that a painting will. They both portray the past events but paintings have the free flowing contemplation and concentration in the viewer compared to a photograph that will carry less of such value. Photography is a reproduction of the paintings and therefore fails to achieve the original basis of paintings. The photographs shape the original political meaning of paintings through randomness storage. Unlike the historical times when the paintings were done according to specific occasions or factors, photography is done at any particular time with little consideration to reasons.
Photography also presents a distraction with mixed ideas and presents the perception of avoidance of difficult tasks. The works of art will generally capture the most difficult of tasks and will aim at the presentation of the most important factors of an item. Art is able to bring the masses together; it acts to mobilize the people through getting their attention to a particular thing. Photography on the other hand falls below these perceptions and always takes the easiest way of artistic representation. The photographs tend to present a distraction instead of a pull and these shows that the master of the art is just but a habit than really the creativity and talent in it. The public is therefore made as an observer but only absent mindedly without the proper concentration that the works of art expects. The idea is to capture and satisfy the human interest which could simply be the removal of the special function from the field of view. The images of photography therefore leave out a lot of the important details of art meaning the concept of reproducibility leads to the distortion of the original concept.
The mechanical change noted in the photography means that the reproduction of the works of art leads to the change in the method of exhibition. Photographs simply change the reaction of the public to works of art and change the perception of the works of art. It gives the masses an option of critics. The historical work of arts like the paintings and the portraits were easily accepted by the masses but the photography technology of the modern day has been faced with a lot of critics. For example in Blunden essay, he says that the 19th century disputes to whether photography is a work of art, (part 7). This shows that there is doubt in people at the authentic value of photography in comparison with art. Photography fails to create the subtle effect in the viewers that a simple portrait would. On the other hand, this mechanical production of the works of art is bound to change the public reaction to the particular piece of art, (part 12).
It can therefore be concluded that the effects of reproduction are adverse to the work of arts. It is quite unfortunate that reproducibility is inevitable especially with the new technologies that come daily with the modern world. The technology is bound to change the works of art and bring a different representation of art. The political significance shifts with every new introduction to the original piece of art. The works of art space and time concept are totally changed in the same manner.