Theme 2: Critical Media Studies (Reflection)

To prepare for this week's topic I read the assigned readings, did some research on Karl Marx ideas of dialectical materialism and reviewed once again Adorno and Horkheimers' Frankfurter Schule (Frankfurt School).  I contributed to the seminar group through actively discussing the concepts and ideas of nominalism and realism. 

In the seminar we tried to find answers through history- it is essential to know what background the authors have to be able to fully grasp the meaning of their words. I learned that Walter Benjamin for instance was an intelligent young jewish philosopher, who was torn between religion and communism and unfortunately did not survive the second world war (suicide in Spain). 

In his piece "The work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction" he discussed the concepts of Superstructure and Substructure, as well as dialectical concepts. Here he tried to contrast words and to find a third option; although unsuccessfully. He discussed everything in the light of the national socialism. A special focus in the seminar lied on Albert Speer, who arranged mass spectacles during Hitlers' rise as well as on Leni Riefenstein who produced films to create a fandom cult around Adolf Hitler. Benjamin wanted to unpack the nice scenery of the NS and show how media technology can be misused. 

He pursues this thought by bringing up Marxist concepts related to production/media technology: The substructure was everything related to the production, such as the machines, the owners etc.; the superstructure was the art, entertainment and so on. After discussing this in the seminar I also learned how Benjamin argued that through the evolution of cameras and the industry (substructure) the aesthetic mind (superstructure) can be changed. Thus, ordinary people were being dignified in the superstructure as well. 

He also argues that culture has a revolutionary potential in a way that movies for example can be edited and fragmented, and change the way you see things. If you see a movie from your neighborhood you might see it in a different way if it is edited and has a soundtrack. 

Benjamin was torn: In his mind, everything aesthetically related has an aura, i.e. a uniqueness or authenticity. Art was liberated through the means of reproduction, but that does also destroy the aura. So on the one hand, he was happy to see that it was not anymore a privilege of rich people to consume/see art, but on the other hand he was not all to happy about the lack of authenticity. 

Adorno and Horkheimer, who lived in the United States by the time they wrote "The Dialectic of Enlightenment" referred more to the American society than to what was going on in Europe in the 1940's. They were critical about how the people were suppressed by consumerism, not the military. They would repeat the same process over and over again, movies would portray life as it is, not as what it could be and it gave the impression of a non changeable status quo - a deception. This is where they also refer to the concept of Nominalism. 

That's where they differ from Benjamin. While Adorno & Horkheimer don't think that bringing ordinary people in front of the camera has any revolutionary potential, Benjamin thinks the opposite.