Page 85 - Cultural Theory and Popular Culture an Introduction
P. 85

CULT_C04.qxd  10/25/08  16:31  Page 69







                                                                               The Frankfurt School  69

                          One might generalise by saying: the technique of reproduction detaches the repro-
                          duced  object  from  the  domain  of  tradition.  By  making  many  reproductions  it
                          substitutes a plurality of copies for a unique existence. And in permitting the repro-
                          duction to meet the beholder or listener in his own particular situation, it reacti-
                          vates the object reproduced. These two processes lead to a tremendous shattering
                          of tradition . . . Their most powerful agent is film. Its social significance, particularly
                          in its most positive form, is inconceivable without its destructive, cathartic aspect,
                          that is, the liquidation of the traditional value of the cultural heritage (223).

                        The ‘aura’ of a text or practice is its sense of ‘authenticity’, ‘authority’, ‘autonomy’
                      and ‘distance’. The decay of the aura detaches the text or practice from the authority
                      and rituals of tradition. It opens them to a plurality of reinterpretation, freeing them to
                      be  used  in  other  contexts,  for  other  purposes.  No  longer  embedded  in  tradition,
                      significance is now open to dispute; meaning becomes a question of consumption,
                      an active (political), rather than a passive (for Adorno: psychological) event. Techno-
                      logical reproduction changes production: ‘To an ever greater degree the work of art
                      reproduced becomes the work of art designed for reproducibility’ (226). Consumption
                      is also changed: from its location in religious ritual to its location in the rituals of
                      aesthetics, consumption is now based on the practice of politics. Culture may have
                      become mass culture, but consumption has not become mass consumption.

                          Mechanical reproduction of art changes the reaction of the masses toward art. The
                          reactionary attitude toward a Picasso painting changes into the progressive reaction
                          toward a Chaplin movie. The progressive reaction is characterised by the direct,
                          intimate  fusion  of  visual  and  emotional  enjoyment  with  the  orientation  of  the
                          expert (236).

                        Questions of meaning and consumption shift from passive contemplation to active
                      political struggle. Benjamin’s celebration of the positive potential of ‘mechanical repro-
                      duction’, his view that it begins the process of a move from an ‘auratic’ culture to a
                      ‘democratic’ culture in which meaning is no longer seen as unique, but open to ques-
                      tion, open to use and mobilization, has had a profound (if often unacknowledged)
                      influence  on  cultural  theory  and  popular  culture.  Susan  Willis  (1991)  describes
                      Benjamin’s essay thus: ‘This may well be the single most important essay in the devel-
                      opment of Marxist popular culture criticism’ (10). Whereas Adorno locates meaning in
                      the mode of production (how a cultural text is produced determines its consumption
                      and significance), Benjamin suggests that meaning is produced at the moment of con-
                      sumption; significance is determined by the process of consumption, regardless of the
                                                                 11
                      mode of production. As Frith points out, the ‘debate’ between Adorno and Benjamin
                      – between a socio-psychological account of consumption combined with an insistence
                      on the determining power of production, against the argument that consumption is
                      a matter of politics – continues to be argued in contemporary accounts of popular
                      music: ‘Out of Adorno have come analyses of the economics of entertainment ...[and
                      the] ideological effects of commercial music making. . . . From Benjamin have come
   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90