Post Class

This post is in response to the prompt on Benjamin’s note on the term “aura.” In his notes he states: “The definition of the aura as a ‘unique phenomenon of a distance, however close it may be’ represents nothing but the formulation of the cult value of the work of art in categories of space and time perception. Distance is the opposite of closeness. The essentially distant object is the unapproachable one. Unapproachability is indeed a major quality of the cult image. True to its nature, it remains ‘distant, however close it may be.’ The closeness which one may gain from its subject matter does not impair the distance which it retains in its appearance” (DK 35).
    Reading this, I immediately referred back to my notes. I was unable to find the exact quote, nor the author of the piece. I just remember discussing that the reader and writer (audience and author or what have you) of a text are equally distant from the work. This distance is the same as the distance that Benjamin is referring to. No matter how close one may get to the work’s subject matter, this distance still remains. There is only so much we can understand about a work of art. We will all have our own interpretations of a work, but we are distanced by the aura of the work, the cult value of it. I would argue then that the author is equally distanced by this aura. Without cult value, what value would the work have left? There is still a loose connection I am trying to make here. If anyone else can see that and would like to respond feel free. I am going to keep working on it for Tuesday.