Form, Context and the Authentic in the Digital Age
by Andrew Nealon
In light of our post-industrial, decidedly “too-big-to-fail” capitalistic system it has come time to revisit the position put forth by Walter Benjamin in his monumental “The Work of Art in the Age of its Technological Reproducibility,”1 specifically concerning the authentic ideal. Benjamin demands technological reproducibility lays the authentic work in its grave, stripping the reproduction of the contextual originality that endows the original with the aura of the authentic. However, in the age of digital reproducibility — the age of MP3, AVI and JPG — can the mass-produced physical media artifact achieve something resembling original authenticity? I put forth a new authentic ideal is a distinct possibility, as the rituals of subcultures surrounding media artifacts such as the LP and comic book have instilled in the reproduced work of art a new fetishistic aura that is not in complete disagreement with Benjamin’s understanding of the authentic aura of originality.
For Benjamin, the here and now of the original work of art is the main qualifier to determine authenticity. Reproducibility is a nullification of context that brings the work of art to the consumer, rather than demanding the consumer immerse themselves in the space, if not the time, of the original artwork. For the gramophone, which Benjamin cites in his argument, removing the auditory event from its original performance strips the event of its historical testimony — a necessary element for the authority of an original that can not be captured or transmitted to a reproduction.
However, Benjamin was limited in his scope by his place and time, as we all are. Imagine the German critic, holed up in his Paris flat in 1936, breaking up the monotony of cultural criticism by spinning a gramophone copy of the latest flute concerto. Of course he could only see the hissy, fuddled reproduction of a favorite “open air” event as an inauthentic mess of consumer fetishism. For Benjamin, the historical testimony of the gramophone was a mere stuttering whisper. But for the contemporary musicphile and LP fetishist, the same French gramophone recording of an open air flute concerto sings with comparably undeniable authenticity, as its jagged notes call out a historical testimony that cuts through the fog of tinny MP3 pop-nausea pushed by the likes of iTunes.
By reflecting on the advent of digital reproducibility, technological reproductions are given new historical testimony in their materiality. This is, of course, not a universal phenomena shared by all physical media forms. But after a century of technological reproduction, the fetishistic cults that make up subcultures surrounding media forms like the LP, the comic book, the zine and projected 8/16/32mm film install into the collective consciousness an aura of material authenticity that propels these forms, regardless of content, above all other physical media forms, allowing commercial viability (albeit niche commercial viability in some cases) and respect despite the mainstream movement of content translation to new digital forms.
Benjamin asserts “the unique value of the ‘authentic’ work of art always has its basis in ritual.”2 In the context of Benjamin’s argument, this assertion leads him to conclude that the technologically reproduced work is indeed inauthentic for the simple fact that there is no authentic original to posses or witness in presence, as reproduced things are designed not for ritual, but for consumption. Benjamin calls this production of art solely for purpose of reproduction a politicization of art that forever changes the structure of art as we know it.
There is no arguing with the fact that the technological reproduction of art changes the framework of art itself, or that capitalist fetishism leads to consumption over contemplation and appreciation. However, the digital translation of the work of art brings forth another such polarizing and paradigm shifting event for the work of art. Once again, the rules have changed. Over the last century, art has sunk in the shallow depths of mainstream kitsch, which is now being translated into digital nonexistence. By digitizing media, the physical forms held in reverence by a handful of fetishistic cults — the comic book nerds, LP audiophiles, found footage cinematographers — undergo a legitimization process that installs these forms with a new authenticity that can only be seen in the light of the testimony of the digital translation. In some sense then, the qualifier for the authentic work of art in the age of its digital reproducibility is materiality. Not only does materiality enliven the the work in real space, it also ties it to time. Each time the material is engaged, a specific event occurs in real space. Put simply, the materiality of the reproduced work of art now provides the context Benjamin demanded for the original authentic. Digital reproducibility seals physical media’s context to its form, and authenticates the forms elevated by the rituals — listening parties, comic book Wednesdays3, merch booths, Found Footage Festivals — of fetishistic subcultures. Each new issue or 7″ then becomes a fragment from which subcultures draw collective power, uniting over a common understanding of a form. The reproduced work of art meets legitimization, through ritual.
1. Throughout, referring to the second version found in: Benjamin, Walter. (2008). The
Work of art in the age of its technological reproducibility, and other writings on media.
(M. W. Jennings, B. Doherty and T. Y. Levin, Eds.) Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard
University.
2. WoA II, p.24
3. New issues and trade collections of comic books are released each Wednesday.
Millions of comics fans make their way to a local store and participate in a very specific
ritual.
