I agree with Benjamin's argument that asking for the authentic print of a print of a photo is pointless. This is because there is no one authentic print as many copies have been made and they should be all of around the same quality and all portray the same style of the photographer due to them being copies. It may be worth asking for the original negatives, but even then until they are processed into prints there is very little aesthetic worth in the negatives, unlike an original painting which has the style of the artist only in the original.
In this era of digital design and manufacture I also believe there is no role of authenticity in the products. This is because even when the authentic digital copy of a program or a song is even moved from one folder to another the file is copied to the location. This means that the authentic copy can not be moved around with out technically becoming non-authentic. The only thing that could be asked for that could be considered original is the first disc made of the software or print of the image but even then it would basically be the same thing if you bought the second or the third so there is very little point.
Authenticity does not have a role in todays digital media due to every copy being the same as the first and still conveying the exact same ideas that the creator had when the made the "original" copy.
Reference
Benjamin, W. (1992) The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction (pp. 211-244 ) in Illuminations, trans. Harry Zohn. London: Fontana.
No comments:
Post a Comment