Sunday, April 19, 2015

Week 3 | Robotics + Art |

Industrialization has undoubtedly been advantageous to the making of art, science, and technology but has arguably hindered the public’s understanding and appreciation of them. Industrialization was a major factor in the re-emergence of photography in the early twentieth century as photographers could more easily develop their photos using ready-made supplies. Before the nineteenth century, most art pieces could not be reproduced without great effort; however, with the introduction of lithography, drawings could be mass-produced using carvings on stone. Then, with photography, there was no longer a need to use the more laborious albeit artistic method of lithography, reducing pictorial reproduction to simply looking through a lens. In addition to that, as stated in History of Information, “there was strong demand for increased printing speed to produce more and more copies of daily newspapers”, thus resulting in even more inventions such as the steam-powered press which allowed for even easier and faster reproduction than ever. However, while Victoria Vesna compliments this “wide distribution of the printing press made possible the rapid dispersion of knowledge”, Douglas Davis laments this in his comment: “Walter Benjamin’s proclamation of doom for the aura of originality…is finally confirmed by these events” (Lecture Part 1; The Work of Art in the Age of Digital Reproduction 1). Making art was now easier; artists no longer had to sit down and paint a beautiful landscape but instead photographed and printed it out, but at the cost of its uniqueness.

Figure 1 - "New York", a photograph by street photographer Garry Winogrand; an example of just one exposure out of thousands
http://www.metmuseum.org/exhibitions/view?exhibitionId=%7b88580b02-3a38-4983-bf83-09107d4a33a4%7d&oid=645704&ft=*&fe=1


Figure 2 - "Newspaper printing press"; an example of one of the first printing presses that made reproduction so much faster and easier
http://scm.ulster.ac.uk/~B00643919/des/image2.png

With industrialization, the understanding of art became diluted in the sense that the public was presented with an outburst of artworks that no longer felt unique. While an essay known as the Oxford Photography History compliments industrialization for allowing “the extraordinary to be seen in the commonplace”, Walter Benjamin argues that only by being at the site of the landscape can one truly feel and understand the aura (Oxford Photography History). However, with the increased availability of photographs, the urge of the public to see such landscapes are satiated by simple reproductions. The understanding of art is thus diminished; as Benjamin claims “that which withers in the age of mechanical reproducibility is the aura of the work of art” (Work of Art in the Age of Reproducibility 1).


Figure 3 - “The Sphinx, the Great Pyramid and two lesser Pyramids, Ghizeh, Egypt”, a photograph by Francis Bedford; an example of an exotic place that people would be content just to see on a newspaper
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Francis_Bedford_-_The_Sphinx,_the_Great_Pyramid_and_two_lesser_Pyramids,_Ghizeh,_Egypt_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg

Citations

  • Norman, Jeremy. "From Gutenberg’s Movable Type to the Digital Book, and Other Studies in the History of Media." History of Information. N.p., 6 Aug. 2011. Web. 18 Apr. 2015.
  • Vesna, Victoria. “Lecture Part 1.” Web. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRw9_v6w0ew>
  • Davis, Douglas. The Work of Art in the Age of Digital Reproduction. N.p.: n.p., 1995. PDF.
  • Winogrand, Garry. New York. 1950. San Francisco Museum of Modern Art, New York. The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Web. 18 Apr. 2015. 
  • Newspaper Printing Press. N.d. Pixgood.com. Web. 18 Apr. 2015.
  • "Oxford Photography History." Oxford Art Online. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Apr. 2015. <http://www.oxfordartonline.com:80/subscriber/article/grove/art/T067117pg2>.
  • Benjamin, Walter. Work of Art in the Age of Reproducibility. N.p.: n.p., 1936. Print.
  • Bedford, Francis. The Sphinx, the Great Pyramid and Two Lesser Pyramids, Ghizeh, Egypt. 1862. Cairo. Wikimedia. Web. 19 Apr. 2015.


1 comment:

  1. Hi Matthew,

    It completely slipped my mind that the reproduction of art could be linked to the creation and widespread use of the printing press. It is interesting that reproduction of art can lead to a double-edged sword of sorts: on the one hand, we have increased visibility for works of art that would've otherwise been unheard of, and on the other, we have a loss of originality. This same dilemma translates over now into our internet age, where reproductions or different renditions of the same piece of art can be found in a million different ways. It poses a question of which is more important-- longevity or originality? Just some food for thought.

    Best,
    Brenda

    ReplyDelete