Eisenstein's Evolution, Benjamin's Revolution

Eisenstein's approach to the meaning of film is an evolutionary one. Within his historical approach from Japanese hieroglyphs he implies that montage is the natural form of expression in the human condition. Unlike neo-Realism, which frowned upon montage as manipulation, Eisenstein is aware that montage is unavoidable and therefore should be utilized in pursuit of the art of film-making. And boy did he utilize it! I am curious to the number of cuts between shots in October (I am also impressed with an originally-silent 1.5 hour movie).

The discussion of aura in Benjamin's "The Mechanical Reproduction of Art" interested me a great deal. I was reminded of two recent examples where aura was powerful enough for me to invest significant time and money in order to see the originals. First, I saw "Starry Night" at MOMA in New York this past December. Being one of my favorite paintings (I know I'm not original), I can instantly recall it whenever I chose in my head. I can see it in high-detail online at any time. Yet, to "feel" the aura of the work of art, I was willing to go far beyond. Secondly, going to the inauguration (though not strictly art - perhaps, performance art) was a similar experience. The aura of that event was so powerful, two million people braved the cold, lines, and expense to have a much worse (though authentic) view of an event compared to the television broadcast (the "mechanical reproduction").

The political consequences of montage (the evolutionary peak of art's earliest works of "collision") and mechanical reproduction (freeing art from the elites and allowing it to spread among all people) are dramatic and play a significant role in the 20th Century. Interestingly, not in the manner assumed by Eisenstein and Benjamin. Unlike Eisenstein's deliberate, open use of montage, film (and its related mediums) most commonly use montage discreetly. Cuts are not meant to be seen and montage lacks the presentational quality championed by Eisenstein. Benjamin's thesis on mechanical reproduction is even more relevant in today's society where not only can film by duplicated endlessly, but it can be duplicated by the masses and not just the artists. At the same time, the lack of a nationalized film industry has made film the ultimate capitalistic endeavor.

If they lived in modern-day America, I think Eisenstein might have been a music video director and Benjamin could have been a film pirate...