Ok so for this weekend and even till now I read the article again but
I am not sure I get it right. So basically what I catched is that he is
saying that machanically produced art loses its original quality but at same time
it spreads to many viewers and becomes familiar in social.
So when the art is reproduced endlessly it makes more people chance to see
what is it "like", but doesn't give passion of seeing "original".
I understand because even da Vinci's Mona Lisa, though it's mechanically produced
a whole lot throught countries still people come to see because it worth for them
to see "the original" or maybe, "real" stuff.
No comments:
Post a Comment