Theme 2: Reflection - Postseminar

For this week we were asked to read two classical texts in critical theory: Walter Benjamin's essay "The Work of Art in the Age of Technical Reproductivity" (1936) and Adorno och Horkheimer’s Dialectic of Enlightenment (1944) (chapters "The Concept of Enlightenment" and "The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception").

They were both interesting texts but before the seminar and lecture I was sorely confused - my mind did not realise that the author’s situation (place, time, etc.) was fundamental for understanding the context of the differing texts. Mainly that Benjamin was in Germany in a pre-war era. Adorno & Horkheimer fled to America and wrote their text towards the end of the war.

I now understand the that enlightenment is complemented by nominalism to only see the world as it is and not rely on concepts, theories or thoughts. When enlightenment takes over completely we get stuck in a mindset where potential for new ideas are crushed. Therefore a balance should be maintain where we try to see the world as it is but still remain open to our own interpretations.

In the seminar we discussed and learned the following:

Classic realism is the opposite of nominalism. While nominalism depicts all objects as true uncategorized objects and the world is only as we perceive it - classic realism is the theory that every single thing we experience is only a reflection of a true hidden object, for example, every chair I see is a partial reflection of one ultimate chair. These ultimate objects exist in the mind, within concepts and theories.

Another topic that ties into this is the differing opinions of Adorno & Horkheimer and Benjamin when it comes to mass media and culture. While Benjamin sees the potential in new technologies like cinema because it gives a sense of dignity to the bourgeois when they are depicted film. He also proves that there is more to discover with this new technology, like the camera for example, allowed us to realize how horses gallop. Therefore Benjamin thought these elements created revolutionary potential in media & culture.

Adorno & Horkheimer on the other hand argue that mass media is using nominalism to stabilize the world and depict it as an absolute. People see the world through cinema as it is outside - therefore they believe it is the absolute truth, everybody is bound to their roles. Adorno & Horkheimer believe that we should reintroduce a bit of the classic realism that lets us ponder on important questions, not just take the world as we experience it.

We also realized that historically determined perception is more or less contextually determined perception. The circumstances form and shape our perception.

Lastly aura is the uniqueness of an object, the circumstances in which it was used or created gives it aura. If a rockstar throws you his hat under a concert, that hat has aura since it was used by that famous rockstar - a copy of that hat has not experience the scalp of that rockstar, ergo it has less aura. Mass media allows everyone to experience that “hat” and therefore its uniqueness decays.

I would like to add as an end note that the professor who was giving the lecture and seminar performed fantastically. He was easy to understand and spoke well.