Bejamin's Aura in the Photograph

In thinking about what is lost in the reproduction of art in Benjamin's piece, "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction," I was particularly snagged on his section about photography. It was easy for me to conceptualize the loss in aura between the original Mona Lisa for example and a later replica, as our group discussed not only are different materials used because paint's chemical makeup has shifted over the centuries, but it seems natural that an original painting hold some unattainable aura whether intrinsically connected to da Vinci's hand or what Benjamin cites as "the whole sphere of authenticity" (1234). Still, because of the photograph's ability to be reproduced exactly I was forced to think more deeply about the origin of Benjamin's "aura." In other words, because I can own an exact replica of an original photograph, why would my replica be less valued and hold less aura than the original which appears to look exactly the same.

Let's consider Robert Capa's famous and controversial photograph taken during the Spanish Civil War:

The short end of this photo's history is a still ongoing discussion of whether or not this photograph is staged. It is a highly discussed original because of its representation of a very particular moment, this man's death as a part of Spanish Civil War history, and by extension his representation of all of the lives that were lost while Capa was on site shooting film coverage of the Spanish Civil War. In thinking of this photo as the original we can understand the value of its aura in Benjamin's terms, "even the most perfect reproduction of a work of art is lacking in one element: its presence in time and space, its unique existence at the place where it happens to be" (1234). Because of the moment that is captured in this original and the history it takes part in, this photo holds an aura which cannot be reproduced; no matter how exact the reproduction of the work is. This piece still holds an aura which is unattainable and therefore extremely valuable.

But how does this value change if ever there was enough proof to prove this photo was staged? This photo then could not represent to the same degree that it does as an un-staged photograph, the lives lost in the Spanish Civil War. It would be a mere representation, instead of a loud declaration of the numerous casualties of The Spanish Civil War. Its value, even as an original, would decrease and it would not have received half of the attention it entertained after its publication in Life Magazine. Still, I think Benjamin would argue that it would hold a certain amount of aura, because "the presence of the original is the prerequisite of the concept of authenticity" (1324), but it is interesting to understand that even within a world of prefect reproducibility and prefect representation the authenticity of the work of art and therefore its aura are still subject to scrutiny.