http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svE2DRRopzE&feature=related
Benjamin dissects the different aspects of both traditional art and movies in his essay, "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction." Being a philosopher, Benjamin does not necessarily pick which form is best, but instead offers the different aspects of the two. He compares the cameraman to the painter through an analogy of surgeons and magicians. Benjamin states that the surgeon is beyond man because he is "penetrating into the body." With this, movies are no longer "man to man," the way a painting would be, but instead provide almost an alternate reality. Could this fact that it does not feel "man to man" be the reason movies are for the most part, considered more mainstream?
Observe the two links above, the first being a picture of a gladiator and the second being a trailer from the movie "Gladiator." There are obvious differences between the two. Benjamin describes the image of the painting as a "total one" and the movie images to be "multiple fragments" (10). One can see advantages to both views. When viewing a painting, which is a still image, you can see every angle and control the way you look at it. Movies differ for this in the aspect in the fact that "unless [one's] eyes were on a line parallel with the lens" you were assigned a viewpoint. This being said, the movie can do many things the painting cannot do. Cameras can zoom which in turn "extends our comprehension" of what we are viewing (12). As seen in the clip, shots focused in on specific characters faces give us insight to how they are feeling and creates a more connected feeling with the film. The movie clip also provides us with flash backs, and as Benjamin states, "the camera introduces us to unconscious optics" (12). Only in a movie can we enter a characters mind. A painting leaves this only to our imagination.
One could go back and forth all day about which should be considered the superior art. Both have clear positive and negatives. A painting is inanimate, allowing the viewer to dissect it from different aspects. The film is more dynamic, with constant cuts and a lot of movement. This can often give the viewer more of a sense of reality. No matter what your preference, I think it is fair to agree with Benjamin's even approach to the issue.
I definitely have to agree with almost everything that was stated here. Except for the part in which you said that the painting could be considered more of a "man to man" piece of art than the movie. On a personal level, I felt a much greater connection with Maximus in the Gladiator clip than i did with the painting of a gladiator.
ReplyDeleteI really like the Benjamin quote that you used in your blog about the camera introducing us to the unconcious optics. This quote is a perfect way to describe what movies do. They bring us into the world of different people, like glatiators, and lets us see things we normally can't see.
ReplyDelete