1. Dialectic of
Enlightenment
a.
The enlightenment is a historical period beginning in the late 17th century and is characterized by dramatic revolutions (in science, philosophy, politics and society) that changed the medieval world-view into a more modern western world. In a more modern view of the world, the things we know are based on knowledge and rational thinking instead of myths or fantasies. [1]
b.
It’s an argument method, a discourse between two or more people holding different points of view about a subject. The two parties discuss with reason and, by hearing both sides of the argument, establish the truth. [2]
c.
Nominalism concept that defines what exist (all individual objects) and what does not exist (abstract objects). [3] I think this is important since nominalism discards and denies fantasies and myths (abstract objects) and encourage knowledge, just like the enlightenment.
d.
Myth’s tries to explain unknown phenomena’s with illusions that are often supernatural ones. I think Adorno and Horkheimer wants to dissolve myths cause its not the truth and real knowledge.
2. "The Work of Art in the Age of Technical Reproductivity"
a.
The substructure is directly connected to production and therefore you could say that it is the material and economies foundation of a society – a general production. The superstructures are all things that are not connected to production, such as religion, political institutions and philosophy – a production of culture. From a Marxist perspective the substructure is the base, if countries have good, well-functioned substructure, the slower emerging superstructure will grow and a more equal society emerge.
b.
I think that Benjamin thinks that culture have revolutionary potential in the sense that art, like film or photography, have the ability to influence people. On the other hand, I make the interpretation that he isn´t too excited about the technological progress: “I can no longer think what I want to think. My thoughts have been replaced by moving images”. I think it differs from Adorno & Horkheimer cause of the fact that they liked to spread knowledge (Enlightenment), and every technology that supports that, they therefore support.
c.
Perception can be naturally in that way that we experience the world is different from person to person. We all have our own experience because we all feel and sense different thing in life. But perception can also be determined in a historical way. The history shapes us, why would we otherwise have different cultures and religions? One example Benjamin is giving is when a great shift in population happened in the fifth century, that in turn gave birth to Roman art industry.
d. What does Benjamin mean by the term "aura"? Are there different kinds of aura in natural objects compared to art objects?
Aura definition of Benjamin: “unique phenomenon of a distance, however close it may be”. To me it means that an aura is unique and can’t be replicated, by humans or machines. It’s also independent of a distance, both in time but also in space. So an object can’t loose its aura over time or the distant and it cant be replicated. In an art object I assume that for an object to gain some sort of aura, it’s dependent on the history, cultural heritage. That differs from an aura of natural objects, like a mountain, its aura is only in the mountain itself, independent (or a lot less depended at least) on what the mountain have meant to other the cultures or who owned it before, etc.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_Enlightenment
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic
[3] http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/nominalism
a.
The enlightenment is a historical period beginning in the late 17th century and is characterized by dramatic revolutions (in science, philosophy, politics and society) that changed the medieval world-view into a more modern western world. In a more modern view of the world, the things we know are based on knowledge and rational thinking instead of myths or fantasies. [1]
b.
It’s an argument method, a discourse between two or more people holding different points of view about a subject. The two parties discuss with reason and, by hearing both sides of the argument, establish the truth. [2]
c.
Nominalism concept that defines what exist (all individual objects) and what does not exist (abstract objects). [3] I think this is important since nominalism discards and denies fantasies and myths (abstract objects) and encourage knowledge, just like the enlightenment.
d.
Myth’s tries to explain unknown phenomena’s with illusions that are often supernatural ones. I think Adorno and Horkheimer wants to dissolve myths cause its not the truth and real knowledge.
2. "The Work of Art in the Age of Technical Reproductivity"
a.
The substructure is directly connected to production and therefore you could say that it is the material and economies foundation of a society – a general production. The superstructures are all things that are not connected to production, such as religion, political institutions and philosophy – a production of culture. From a Marxist perspective the substructure is the base, if countries have good, well-functioned substructure, the slower emerging superstructure will grow and a more equal society emerge.
b.
I think that Benjamin thinks that culture have revolutionary potential in the sense that art, like film or photography, have the ability to influence people. On the other hand, I make the interpretation that he isn´t too excited about the technological progress: “I can no longer think what I want to think. My thoughts have been replaced by moving images”. I think it differs from Adorno & Horkheimer cause of the fact that they liked to spread knowledge (Enlightenment), and every technology that supports that, they therefore support.
c.
Perception can be naturally in that way that we experience the world is different from person to person. We all have our own experience because we all feel and sense different thing in life. But perception can also be determined in a historical way. The history shapes us, why would we otherwise have different cultures and religions? One example Benjamin is giving is when a great shift in population happened in the fifth century, that in turn gave birth to Roman art industry.
d. What does Benjamin mean by the term "aura"? Are there different kinds of aura in natural objects compared to art objects?
Aura definition of Benjamin: “unique phenomenon of a distance, however close it may be”. To me it means that an aura is unique and can’t be replicated, by humans or machines. It’s also independent of a distance, both in time but also in space. So an object can’t loose its aura over time or the distant and it cant be replicated. In an art object I assume that for an object to gain some sort of aura, it’s dependent on the history, cultural heritage. That differs from an aura of natural objects, like a mountain, its aura is only in the mountain itself, independent (or a lot less depended at least) on what the mountain have meant to other the cultures or who owned it before, etc.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_Enlightenment
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic
[3] http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/nominalism
I really liked your definition of an aura and especially that an object can't lose it's aura. I did not think of it that way. However, I wonder how it is with things that are not eternal - like the trees mentioned or even humans. Do we never lose our aura? And in one think about it, nothing is really eternal or at least not in the same way - everything changes over times even mountains. Do they aura change then?
SvaraRaderaHi Stephanie,
RaderaVery interesting question. I'm not sure if I believe in auras but I agree with you, nothing is eternal when it comes to objects. But atoms are eternal and maybe they have a inherent aura that appears different deepening on the object they form and therefore every objects aura changes over time.
Sofia
I think your comment on 2 b) is interesting, especially what you say about Benjamin having mixed feelings about the film medium. Film has been used as propaganda since its birth some 100 years ago, which can be seen as both good or bad, but it can also be a way of educating the world if done in a (somewhat) objective way. What are your thoughts on film as a tool for influencing people?
SvaraRadera