This class was very thought-provoking because I think we tend to ignore the many deep consequences (both positive and negative) that reproduction has brought. This is because we belong to an era where reproduction has become part of our daily interactions and consumptions. However, I think that actually belonging to this era where reproduction is established makes the study of it more analytical.
I found the concept of "taking the original out of context" very interesting. We do this all of the time. I particularly liked the Mona Lisa example because I did the exact same thing. I agree that "reproduction differs from the image seen by the unarmed eye." It is curious how I feel that I am more likely to remember the picture I took of the Mona Lisa than the experience of seeing it itself. Although we did not really touch this point, it is something I thought about. We are now able to take pictures and when consuming forms of art (architecture, painting, etc.) we tend to do it to avoid forgetting. However, I think that our minds become more reliant on the reproduction (picture). The image removes whatever context we consumed the content under, and I think that it can often suppress it.
Another aspect I found interesting was the sort of birth of propaganda through the idea of reproduction. I am a huge WWII nerd, and I think that Joseph Goebbels exploited this power in a genius way. By somehow achieving a unanimous experience, you heighten the possibility of unanimous response. Nazi films are mesmerizing, particularly the Hitler Youth ones. People believed what was on screen without even knowing who the person on screen was. (same thing happens today). We don't even have to argue much on whether they were effective or not; in 1933, the organization's membership stood at 100 000. By 1936, the figure stood at 4 million.
I found the concept of "taking the original out of context" very interesting. We do this all of the time. I particularly liked the Mona Lisa example because I did the exact same thing. I agree that "reproduction differs from the image seen by the unarmed eye." It is curious how I feel that I am more likely to remember the picture I took of the Mona Lisa than the experience of seeing it itself. Although we did not really touch this point, it is something I thought about. We are now able to take pictures and when consuming forms of art (architecture, painting, etc.) we tend to do it to avoid forgetting. However, I think that our minds become more reliant on the reproduction (picture). The image removes whatever context we consumed the content under, and I think that it can often suppress it.
Another aspect I found interesting was the sort of birth of propaganda through the idea of reproduction. I am a huge WWII nerd, and I think that Joseph Goebbels exploited this power in a genius way. By somehow achieving a unanimous experience, you heighten the possibility of unanimous response. Nazi films are mesmerizing, particularly the Hitler Youth ones. People believed what was on screen without even knowing who the person on screen was. (same thing happens today). We don't even have to argue much on whether they were effective or not; in 1933, the organization's membership stood at 100 000. By 1936, the figure stood at 4 million.
Comments
Post a Comment