Dialectic of Enlightenment
1.What is "Enlightenment"?
Enlightenment is the advance of thought that aim to banish ‘myth’ or fantasy with knowledge. The concept that believes human are capable of answering question about the world/nature, obtain knowledge and be able to invent things such as printing, artillery, and the compass.
2.What is "Dialectic"?
Dialectic is a logical discussion, the art of exchanging arguments systematically with critical reasons and methods with facts and idea. In this context would be a discussion considered how human thought derived toward a more enlightened perspective.
3.What is "Nominalism" and why is it an important concept in the text?
Nominalism is tendency that denies the existence of abstract universals in favour of particulars. [1] Adorno and Horkheimer criticised the way nominalism ignored some undefined identity such as God or Popeye. that Enlightenment betray its own concept of bringing things and admits a certain thinking from metaphysics way.
4. What is the meaning and function of "myth" in Adorno and Horkheimer's argument?
the term “myth” refers to the complex magical element that is lack of understanding, the form of knowledge that exist before the age of enlightenment. Enlightenment seeks to banish myth with the progress of rational thinking. but Adorno and Horkheimer hold a disagreement. Adorno and Horkheimer see that “the Enlightenment is always involved with myth and they are not set against one another as opposed” [2]
source:
[1] http://radicalnotes.com/2012/03/02/the-political-aesthetic-in-the-works-of-adorno-and-benjamin/
[2] https://psychoanalysisandeducation.wordpress.com/2013/09/12/theodor-adorno-and-max-horkheimers-dialectic-of-enlightenment/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Work of Art in the Age of Technical Reproductivity
1. In the beginning of the essay, Benjamin talks about the relation between "superstructure" and "substructure" in the capitalist order of production. What do the concepts "superstructure" and "substructure" mean in this context and what is the point of analyzing cultural production from a Marxist perspective?
Benjamin mentioned Marx’s concept of "superstructure" and "substructure" . “Marx divided society into a substructure and a superstructure. "The substructure contains the means of production (the resources), the forces of production (the machinery to control the resources), and the relations of production (the owners of the resources and the machinery). The superstructure is everything that is not part of the economic system: art, philosophy, games, religion, etc” [1] Benjamin said that Superstructure changes through time much slower than Substructure. And this transformation of Superstructure like art and culture of production would be effected. Substructure in this context could means Capitalist way of production; reproduction or mass production. Superstructure in this context could means culture of production or arts. The point of analyzing this in Marxist point of view because it is a capitalist way of production that Marxist is infancy with but Marx also see that this capitalist development of production will bring important condition that cannot be ignored.
2.Does culture have revolutionary potentials (according to Benjamin)? If so, describe these potentials. Does Benjamin's perspective differ from the perspective of Adorno & Horkheimer in this regard?
Yes, Marxism thought that culture is the reflection of economy. [2] In the text, Benjamin mentioned that through the transformation of the superstructure over time it would effect all area of culture. The culture of art production changes through time because of the superstructure of the society. From culture of art that originate found in ritual to the revolutionary photography and the rise of socialism and to the reproduction and mass consumption. Benjamin's perspective differs from adorno and horkheimer who thinks that culture can influent society in a negative ways. Culture is a way of capitalist to profit making and is a great loss for humanity. [3]
3. Benjamin discusses how people perceive the world through the senses and argues that this perception can be both naturally and historically determined. What does this mean? Give some examples of historically determined perception (from Benjamin's essay and/or other contexts).
People perceive things through their sense not only naturally and also historically. Human Sense of perception changes through times together with social changes. The text mentioned that the perception of arts in late roman history also change through time. They develop of new kind of art apart from antiquity. Furthermore, the concept of ‘Aura’ of the artwork, overtime Mass production bring aura closer humanly toward the mass in contemporary life. “The adjustment of reality to the masses and of the masses to reality is a process of unlimited scope, as much for thinking as for perception.” [4] By time we would overcome the decay of aura in uniqueness and accept the positive of reproduction.
4.What does Benjamin mean by the term "aura"? Are there different kinds of aura in natural objects compared to art objects?
For nature they define the ‘aura’ as the unique phenomenon, the beauty of the nature in itself. for example, “while resting on a summer afternoon, you follow with your eyes a mountain range on the horizon or a branch which casts its shadow over you, you experience the aura of those mountains,” [4]
‘Aura’ as in art object is authenticity, the specialness, the Uniqueness of a work that is incomparable with the reproduced ones. For example , the printed photographs do not have the aura like the painting pictures do.
source:
[1] http://www.neo-philosophy.com/Phil101Week13.html
[3] http://www.arthistoryunstuffed.com/theodor-adorno-and-the-culture-industry/
[4] https://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/ge/benjamin.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment