© Copyright khedmeh Wall
Walter Benjamin emphasizes the aestheticization of politics as a logical consequence of the process of art’s degradation. This degradation occurs as the result of the transformation of an artwork due to the technological development of society. The tendency of aestheticization of politics had reached its apogee in the Nazi state since its leaders understood the role of cultural medium as an effective toolkit of propaganda and transformed art into the means of creation and communication of ideology-driven cultural codes. Benjamin’s position is justified, valid, and relevant to the contemporary world due to the inescapable massification of art and culture as it becomes instrumental in losing its aura. Moreover, the means of technical reproduction of information transform artistic pieces into the ideological signs of power.
Benjamin emphasizes the inescapable process of aesthetization of politics in the era of mechanical reproduction in totalitarian society. According to the philosopher, “The logical result of Fascism is the introduction of aesthetics into political life” (Benjamin 19). In other words, the Nazi’s attempt to unite these two spheres aimed at the maximization of propaganda’s effectiveness. With the help of such a tool, it was easier to organize and control the masses and make them believe in what was necessary. This aetheticization enables the authority to guide the people in one direction and mobilize the resources of technology, which is an objectification of self-alienation. The former progresses to the point, in which an individual can experience personal annihilation as the highest pleasure. In other words, art serves as an instrument of argumentation and loses its nobleness and exalt character in the cultural and public life.
In fact, this aestheticization exists as an anaesthetic phenomenon. Thus, such an anesthetization “assaults perception, neutralizes the scenes, and denies the private body as an autonomous site of corporeal pleasure” (Koepnick 4). Therefore, the phenomenon of the aestheticization of politics contains the rejection of the essential connection of freedom to percept, experience, and understand in an individual way. On the contrary, what the authority makes is the imposition of cultural meanings and motivations that have nothing to do with artistic representation. Thus, the pieces of art may become the bearers of a virus – the ideological information that the authority aims to spread in the masses in order to persuade them in the legality of its claims to power. Therefore, the Nazis transformed “the genre scenes into works conveying fundamental messages” (Spielvogel 159). They started to use art for the sake of politics. In addition to that, such an approach enables the representatives of power to control collective consciousness and collective representations that are the foundations of every culture.
This instrumental usage of artistic media becomes possible in the age of mechanical reproduction. Benjamin notices that in this epoch, a piece of art loses its aura, uniqueness. Therefore, as far as the reproductive power supplies grow and the mass manifestations of art appear (photography and cinema), the social functions of art change. Practical and political functions of art replace ceremonial and sacral ones. In addition to that, the increase in the number of the participants of the process of artistic consumption leads to the transformation of the character of their participation and the way of its perception. Thus, classical art requires concentration and meditation, whereas mass art, in particular, cinema, does not emphasize the necessity of these procedures. On the contrary, it entertains, diffuses attention, and it can be an instrument of mobilization and propaganda. Thus, Benjamin considers such alienated art to be the presupposition of the aestheticization of politics in Nazi Germany.
Benjamin referred to the experience of Nazi Germany and his contemporary social and cultural happenings that took place in Europe, in particular, in Germany. He made his generalizations on the basis of his direct observations of the transformation of culture. Thus, critics could have considered his position cryptic because it is almost impossible to grasp the transformations, which take place in the present, and analyze them as a phenomenon. However, Benjamin has managed to approach culture directly in such a way.
Benjamin’s ideas are relevant even nowadays if one considers the peculiarities of modern state of culture and the role of media technologies in information reproduction. Therefore, in the epoch of postmodern, aestheticization appears in various spheres of public life and particularly, in politics. Due to the dominant influence of the means of mass information and reproduction it becomes easy to control collective consciousness by making people agree with a position, expressed by influential media. In addition to that, even though globalization has enabled the citizens of the world community to feel free to follow any ideology and choose any world outlook position, it is still possible to fasten the stereotypes and maxims with the help of media. Art as a social phenomenon takes over such political functions and it may become a communicator of unfair cultural facts in 5 paragraph essay outline high schoolpapers that aim to become collective representations.
To sum up, Benjamin has noticed a significant tendency that dominates even in contemporary culture. Thus, pieces of art in the age of mechanical reproduction lose their specific aura that defines the artistic composition itself. Due to the instrumentalization of the attitude towards culture and art in particular, the aestheticization of politics in the Nazi state becomes possible. Such an aestheticization of politics symbolized the end of the classical era of meditation and artistic perception, where concentration and cognition dominated. On the contrary, this modern tendency to control information and collective consciousness becomes possible due to the instrumental usage of art that transforms into a medium, reflecting the dogmata of governing ideology.