On Art As Ritual

Art began in the service of ritual.[1] Over time, art gradually emancipated itself from its obedience to ritual, and this transformation had profound implications on the perception of art. One crucial concept that played a significant role in this evolution is the idea of an artistic aura, as proposed by Walter Benjamin.[2] As art moved away from its ritualistic and religious foundations, the advent of technological reproducibility further reshaped its spiritual nature, and brought questions around its authenticity and social significance. In this essay, I will explore the transition of artistic creation from its ritualistic origins, the role of the artistic aura and the impact of technological reproducibility on the authenticity and social significance of art. My discussion will center on the idea that although the reproducibility of art has provided the opportunity for broader participation and the democratisation of artistic experience and expression – the loss of aura has deprived society of a sense of sacredness in art.

The roots of artistic creation have ritualistic origins, where art served magical purposes. Art was created to connect humans with the spiritual realm, serving as an instrument of magic or an object of worship. The uniqueness and authenticity of early artworks was intertwined with their spiritual significance, as they were believed to hold special powers and divine connections. Ritual gave art its value, and the art itself was often inaccessible or hidden from the masses, further emphasising its sacred nature.[3]

These sacred origins can be traced back to prehistoric times when art was primarily used for magic. Cave paintings and rock art found in various archaeological sites were believed to contain magical properties, capable of influencing the natural world or protecting the community. As religion developed, art began to play a central role in ceremonies and worship. Temples, shrines, and sacred spaces were adorned with elaborate sculptures, paintings, and carvings, representing gods, deities, and mythological figures. Cult images, believed to house the essence of the divine were integral to rituals – symbolising a connection between the material world and mystical realms. The imagery and motifs used in these sacred artworks carried deep cultural and spiritual significance, and their interpretation was essential for understanding the belief systems of the community. In addition to visual art, theater, music, and dance were performed to invoke the divine, tell mythical stories, or express collective beliefs.

Over time, as societies modernised, and materialist reductionism became dominant, the function and significance of art gradually shifted from its ritualistic origins. Art’s function began to encompass other aspects, such as aesthetic expression, personal and political statements, and social commentary.[4] However, the legacy of art's sacred origins offers valuable insight into the connection between art, spirituality, and meaning.

Walter Benjamin's concept of aura plays a crucial role in understanding the transformation of art. Benjamin employs the term aura to denote the genuine historical and material significance and influence of an individual artwork.[5]According to Benjamin, the aura is a unique energy or feeling of space and time surrounding an artwork (for example, the difference between visiting the Mona Lisa at the Louvre versus seeing a photograph of it online is its aura).[6] The aura is an authentic quality associated with the here and now of the original artwork that must be felt and experienced.[7] Benjamin writes:

The authenticity of a thing is the essence of all that is transmissible from its beginning, ranging from its substantive duration to its testimony to the history which it has experienced.[8]

This aura was intimately connected to the ritualistic basis of art, as the value and authenticity of an artwork was derived from its association with magic; both the sacred creation of it and the sacred experience of it – in real time. The aura imbues the singular artwork with a mystical or spiritual allure. In 'The Work of Art,' Benjamin posits that with the advent of reproduction there emerges a profound erosion of aura.[9] The distinctive and enduring nature of the work gives way to replicability, and as the aura wanes, the reverential value assigned to art progressively fades away too.[10]

Thus, the secularisation of art shifted its focus from sacred ritual to an appreciation of beauty and aesthetics, and political statements. This transformation reached a turning point with the advent of technological reproducibility, most notably with the invention of film. Benjamin argued that film, as a form of art, has the unique ability to overcome the distance between the artwork and the audience, offering a more immediate and widespread engagement – which, he argued, was a good thing. This transformation prompted a reevaluation of art's social significance. While the aura of the original artwork had waned, new forms of aura emerged – tied to the artist's intent and the resonance of the work with contemporary issues.

Technological reproducibility made art widely accessible, essentially eliminating the hierarchies that prevented the masses from consuming it. Film, as the most significant agent of this change, allowed for the mass reproduction and distribution of artistic ideas. Subsequently, as art became detached from its sacred origins, the significance of the aura also lost its lustre. An artwork no longer relied on its cult value, physical presence, artistic merit or historical testimony. Instead, mass production changed the nature of the work, blurring the boundaries between the original and its copies and placing more emphasis on overall statements and concepts; sometimes groundbreaking and visionary – oftentimes manipulative, biased or simply mundane. Furthermore, efforts to preserve the cult value of artworks were driven by economic motives such as elevating an artist to the status of a star to sell art.[11] Paradoxically, these strategies only emphasise the decline of the authentic aura inherent to the artwork itself. The phenomenon becomes particularly evident in the case of the artist-celebrity, who lacks any real artistic merit but is celebrated for their fame, illustrating the concept of being ‘famous for being famous’,[12] and the meaningless consumption of mass media. With the proliferation of hype around art, the notion of a singular authentic artwork has become elusive.

However, it could be argued that for all art has lost in authenticity it has simultaneously gained in new opportunities. Film and other mass-reproducible media has allowed for a broader participation in artistic experience and expression. Subsequently, the social significance of art has become intimately connected to its ability to reach and impact a large audience. In this context, the authenticity of art is a fluid concept. The aura is no longer solely vested in the work itself but dispersed across various iterations, interpretations, and interactions. The artist's role has evolved from that of a singular creator to a facilitator of experiences, sparking dialogues and reflections. Thus, art has become a dynamic and political force, shaping and reflecting societal norms, values, and challenges.

Nevertheless, Benjamin's essay carries a sense of melancholy as he suggests that the aura is not only fading away from art, but also the idea that we are witnessing the diminishing aura of human beings themselves.[13] However, he simultaneously posits a paradox; his belief in the intrinsic democratic and revolutionary potentials of mass media.[14] For Benjamin, these mediums not only provide universal accessibility but also empower progressive artists to infuse politics into art and inspire the masses against the fascist manipulation of politics through aesthetics.[15] Yet, it's important to acknowledge that while mass media can indeed mobilise large numbers of people, the prevailing tendency is often more towards consumerism than towards political engagement, and mass media itself is frequently used for the political manipulation of the masses. One could argue that the manipulation of the collective German psyche regarding its own aesthetic creation, played a significant role in the emergence of Nazism.[16]

So, was widespread accessibility to art worth the price of sacredness? While Benjamin would argue that it was, he lived in different times. If he could see the state of art now (a banana taped to a wall making headlines, AI generated photography, algorithm generated music, mind-numbing film and a proliferation of ‘famous for being famous’ artist-celebrities) perhaps he would change his argument. As we contemplate the evolution of artistic production from its ritualistic origins to its present emancipated state, the concept of aura remains crucial. While the traditional aura tied to the original artwork has evolved, the aura's essence – the ability to evoke emotions, provoke thoughts, and inspire a connection to deeper meaning must persist. Art must continue to hold sacredness as it engages with contemporary issues, amplifies diverse voices, and fosters cultural dialogues. The democratisation brought about by technological reproducibility, far from diluting art's value, needs to expand its reach and potential impact. Regrettably, we are not there yet.

In conclusion, the evolution of artistic production from its ritualistic origins to its emancipation from ritual has been a complex and transformative journey. With the rise of technological reproducibility, the aura's significance waned, and art took on new dimensions of mass accessibility and social engagement. Consequently, authenticity has become a fluid and evolving concept, tied more to the impact an artwork has on the masses rather than its singular and sacred existence. This transformation has forever changed how we perceive and interact with art, flattening the artistic aura while simultaneously opening up more democratic opportunities for the future of artistic expression and experience. For all we have gained in accessibility we have lost in sacredness – a high price to pay for those who worship art.

References

Benjamin, W, 1968, Illuminations: Essays and Reflections. Ed. Hannah Arendt. Translation by Zohn, H, New York: Schocken Books.

Corrigan, T, White, P & Mazaj, M, 2010, Critical visions in Film Theory, Bedford/St. Martin’s.

Jay, M 1992, The Aesthetic Ideology as Ideology; Or, What Does It Mean to Aestheticize Politics?,Cultural Critique, (21):41, https://doi.org/10.2307/1354116.

Van Den Boomen, M, 2009, Digital material: Tracing New Media in Everyday Life and Technology, Amsterdam University Press.

[1] Corrigan, White and Mazaj (2010)

[2] Corrigan, White and Mazaj (2010)

[3] Corrigan, White and Mazaj (2010)

[4] Corrigan, White and Mazaj (2010)

[5] Corrigan, White and Mazaj (2010)

[6] Van Den Boomen (2009)

[7] Corrigan, White and Mazaj (2010)

[8] Benjamin, p. 221 (1968)

[9] Van Den Boomen (2009)

[10] Van Den Boomen (2009)

[11] Van Den Boomen (2009)

[12] Van Den Boomen (2009)

[13] Van Den Boomen (2009)

[14] Van Den Boomen (2009)

[15] Van Den Boomen (2009)

[16] Jay (1992)