It was befitting to read the Benjamin text on the night of the Academy Awards – the epitome of the entertainment industry’s artifice with its “beauty contests.” This award show, one of the most widely broadcasted televised events, also demonstrates Benjamin’s concept that “Film makes test performances capable of being exhibited, by turning that ability itself into a test.” So the award show itself is the exhibition of the test that judges the exhibition of the primary test.
The here and now of the Academy Awards illustrates William’s concept of industry as a ‘self-subservient world’. Even though the film industry is largely dependent on the capital of which the general public as the audience is the source, the general public has no influence on the outcome of the show. Even the live audience is replaced with movie stars so that the film industry fulfills both sides of the performance. The multiplicity of these award shows reinforces their artifice. Among the shows, there are several “Best Films” and “Best Actors” thereby negating the uniqueness of this value.
In the time of Benjamin, I can fully comprehend his belief of the film industry enforcing fascism, and today’s industry can certainly have this same ability. However, the revolution of technology has made the capacity of film making so pervasive that phenomena such as YouTube actually perpetuate ‘group existence’ instead of ‘mass existence’. Certain videos are only seen by a small minority of a minority, making the film much more unique in that respect. Also, at this point in filmmaking, I think it’s safe to say that filmmaking is a tradition in our culture so films are now embedded in this culture, giving it value. As an art form, I believe it deserves more respect than Benjamin gives it. Of course there are countless movies that aren’t anything of substance but I think that serves to highlight the merit of the few and true.
Your blog immediately caught my attention with the title you gave it and as I read on I was not disappointed. I like the connection you make with youutube and how this video website does have the capacity to target certain audiences and like you say, the minorities of a minority. This is a good way to interpret the text and it helps me see it in a new light.
ReplyDeleteI think Benjamin has a *lot* of respect for film.
ReplyDeleteBut still Youtube videos are far from "unique" in the strict sense that Benjamin means; they are reproductions, identical to their original.
It's interesting, however, that in some sense he anticipates Youtube and blogs and so on with his discussion of the fact that increasingly readers are becoming writers.
(We might compare this to Barthes, of course.)
I agree with Jon. Benjamin's definition of originality of an art work is very different from most art nowadays. Maybe only something that was painted for the first time - like an abstract painting, can be considered original art. Or a brand new music piece. Still, as time goes by even for those, seemingly "unique" works of art there are preceding models (something it represents or is a copy of). There is less and less new material produced, almost all of modern art is reproduced.
ReplyDeleteRe Jon's comment - yes, I was really struck by this quote:
ReplyDelete"the distinction between author and public is about to lose its axiomatic character...At any moment, the reader is ready to become a writer. As an expert-which he has had to become in any case in a highly specialized work process, even if only in some minor capacity-the reader gains access to authorship" (34)
and how he basically 'predicts' the blurring of authorship, a trend which has so massively affected contemporary popular culture (Youtube, Blogs, MySpace, Reality TV, etc.)
Oh, interesting blog post, too, by the way. I do esp re the role of mass production in small group cultures. Don't think he is disrespecting film itself, rather the use of it to perpetuate fascism - today perhaps we could make a similar argument regarding the use of film, even (or especially) "the countless movies that aren't anything of substance", to dictate morality, cultural beliefs, national identity, or whatever our pet issue is..... for me, it would be the apparent ability of the Hollywood industry to limit and shape our concept of 'success' in life (Marriage, kids, nice house etc.)
ReplyDeleteyou've already received quite a few accolades, but I too enjoyed this post! What you were saying ties nicely into the comments Benjamin makes in chapter XIII.
ReplyDelete