reproduce certain aspects of an image faithfuily;it is aThe majority of the population do not visit artquestion of reproduction making it possible, even inevitable,museums.Thefollowingtable shows how closelyanthat an image will be used for many different purposes andinterestin art is related to privileged education.that the reproduced image, unlike an originai work, can lendNational proportionofartmuseum visitors accordingto level of educationitself to them all.Let us examine some of the ways in whichPercentage of each educational categorywho visitartmuseumsFranceHollandGreccePolandPolandFrenceHollandGreecethe reproduced image lands itself to such usage.OnlyWith nosecondaryeducetional2010.510.4100.15education00.12qualification0.02EUSALASITFurther andOnlyV0hiaherprimary12.517.311.511.70.450.50education0.301.50educmionSource:Pliere Bourdieu and Alain Darbel, L'Amour de An, Editions de Minuit,Paris 1969, Appendix 5,table4The majority take it as axiomatic that themuseums are full of holy relics which refar to a mysterywhich exciudes them: the mystery of unaccountabiewealth.Or, to put this another way, they believe that originalmasterpieces belong to the preserve (both materially andspiritually) of the rich. Another table indicates what the ideaReproductionisolatesadetail of apaintingfromthe whole.The detail is transformed.An allegoricai figureof an art gallery suggasts to each social class.becomesaportrait ofagirl.Of the places listed below whieh does a museum remind youofmost?ProfessionalSkilled andManualwhite.colaanduppetworkersmanagerialworkers福%%434891ChurehbrareaturehalDepartmentstoreoentrancehealinpublle45NNuilding104.140ChurchandlibroryChurch and lecture hell2iNrary.sndlecturehal195None of theseJ0OP100 (n=53)100 (n=98)100 (n=99)Source: as above, appendix 4, table 8In the age of pictoriai reproduction the meaningof paintings is no longer attached to them; their meaningbecomes transmittable:that is to sayitbecomes Informationof a sort, and, like all information, it is either put to use Orignored; information carries no special authority within itself.When a paintingis put to use,its meaningis either modified ortotally changed. One should be quite clear about what thisinvolves.It is not aquestion of reproduction failingto2524
The majority of the population do not visit art museums. The fol|owing tsble shows how closely an ~nterest in art is related to privileged education. National proportion of art museum visitors according to level of education : Percentage Of each educational category who visit art museums Greece Poland France Holtand Greece Poland France Holland The majority take it as axiomatic that the ,~useums are full of holy relics which refer to a mystery which excludes them: the mystery of unaccountable wealth. Or, to put this another way, they helieve that original masterpieces belong to the preserve {both materially and spiritually) of the rich. Another table indicates what the idea of an art gallery suggests to each social class. % % % Church 66 45 30.5 Library 9 34 28 Lecture hall - 4 4.5 None of these ~ ~ 19,5 No repty 8 4- 9 100(n=53) 100(n=98) 100(n=99) Source: es above, appendix 4, table 8 in the age of pictorial reproduction the meaning of paintings is no longer attached to them; their meaning hecomes transmittable: that is to say it becomes information of a sort, and, like all information, it is either put to use or ignored; information carries no special authority within itself. When a painting is put to use, its meaning is either modified or totally changed. One should be quite clear about what this involves, it is not a question of reproduction failing to 24 o~ ~> sz reproduce certain aspects of an image faithfully; it is a question of reproduction making it possible, even inevitable, that an image will be used for many different purposes and that the reproduced image, unlike an original work, can lend itself to them all. Let us examine some of the ways in which the reproduced image lends itself to such usage. ¯Reproduction isolates a detail of a painting from the whole. The detail is transformed. An allegorical figure becomes a portrait of a girl 25
When a pointing is reproduced by a film cameraOCESSIONitinevitablybecomes material for thefilm-maker's orgument.A film which reproduces images of a painting leadsthe spectator, through the painting,to the film-maker's ownTOCALVARYconclusions. The painting lends authority to the film-maker.BYBREUGHELThis is because a film unfolds in time and a painting does not.Paintings are often reproduced with words around them.This is a landscape of e cornfield with birds flyingIn a film the way one image follows another, their succession,out of it. Look at it for a moment. Then turn the page.constructs an argument which becomes irreversible.BVEATIEOWIESCROWSF20In a painting all its elements are thare to he seensimultaneously.The spectator may need time to examine eachelement of the painting but whenever he reaches a conclusion,the simuitaneity of tha whole painting is there to reverse orqualify his conclusion. The painting maintains its ownauthority.2726
When a painting is reproduced" by a film camera it inevitably becomes material for the film-maker’s argument. A film which reproduces images of a painting leads the spectator, through the painting, to the film-maker’s own conclusions. The painting lends authority to the film-maker. This is because a film unfolds in time and a painting does not. in a film the way one image follows another, their succession, constructs an argument which becomes irreversible. Paintings are often reproduced with words around them. This is a landscape of a cornfield with birds flying out of it. Look at it for a moment. Then turn the page. In a painting all its elements are there to be seen simultaneously. The spectator may need time to examine each element of the painting but whenever he reaches a conclusion, the simultaneity of the whole painting is there to reverse or qualify his conclusion. The painting maintains its own authority. z~ Or
Consequentiy a reproduction, as well as makingWHEATIEOD WITSROSits own references to the image of its original,becomesitself the reference point for other images.The meaning ofan image is changed according to what one sees immediatelybeside it or what comes immediately after itSuch authorityas it retains, is distributed over the whole context in whichitappearsThi's is tre lostpiclue ther Van Gogh pauniedbefore ne killed numseifIt is hard to define exactly how the words havechanged the image but undoubtadly they have. The image nowillustrates the sentence.Inthis essay each image reproduced has becomepart of an argument which has littile or nothing to do with thepainting's original independent meaning.The words havequoted the paintings to confirm their own verbal authority(The essays without words in this book may make thatdistinctionclearer.)Reproduced paintings, like all information,have tohold their own against all the other information beingcontinuallytransmitted.Because works of artarereproducible,they can,theoretically, be used by anybody.Yet mostly--in art books,magazines, films or within gilt frames in living-rooms reproductions are still used to bolster the illusion thatnothing has changed, that art, with its unique undiminishedauthority, justifies most other forms of authority, that artmakes inequality seem noble and hierarchies seem thrilling.nFor example, the whole concept of the National CuituralHeritage exploits the authority of art to glorify the presentsocial system and its priorities.2829
It is hard to define exactly how the words have changed the image but undoubtedly they have. The image now illustrates the sentence. in this essay each image reproduced has become part of an argument which has little or nothing to do with the psinting’s original independent meaning. The words have quoted the paintings to confirm their own verbal authority. (The essays without words ~n this book may make that distinction clearer,) Reproduced paintings, like all information, have to hold their own against all the other information being continuaBy transmitted. 28 Consequently a reproduction, as well as making its own references to the image of its original, becomes itself the reference point for other images. The meaning of an image is changed according to what one sees immediately beside it or what comes immediately after it. Such authority it appears. 13ecause works of art are reproducible, they can, theoretically, be used by anybody. Yet mostly - in art books, magazines, films or within gilt frames in living-rectus - reproductions are stilg used to bolster the illusion that nothing has changed, that art, with its unique undiminished authority, justifies most other forms of authority, that art makes inequality seem noble and hierarchies seem thrilling. For example, the who~e concept of the National CuJtura| Heritage exploits the authority of art to glorify the present social system and its priorities. 28
The means of reproduction are used politicallyOMand commercially to disguise or deny what their existenceANPOURINGMILKBYVERMEER1632-1675makes possible. But sometimes individuais use thamdifferently.eAdults and children somotimes have boards intheir bedraoms or living-roams on which they pin pieces ofOriginal paintings are silent and still in a sensepaper: lettera, snapshots, reproductions af paintings,that information never is. Even a reproduction hung on a wallnewspapercuttings,original drawings,postcards,On eachis not comparabie in this respect for in the original the silenceboerd all the images belong to the same language and all araand stillness permeate the actual material, the paint,in whichmore or less equal within it,because they have been chosen inOne follows the traces of the painter's immediate gestures.a highly personal way to matchand express the experience ofThishas the effect of closingthe distance in time between thethe room's inhabitant. Logically, these boards should replacepainting of the picture and one's own act of iooking at it. Inmuseums.this special sense all paintings are contemporary.Hence theWhat are we saying by that? Let us first be sureimmediacy of theirtestimony.Their histarical moment isabout what we are not saying.literalfy there hefora ur eyes.Cezanne made a similarWe are not saying that there is nothing left toobservation fromthepainter'spoint of view.'Aminutein theexperionce before ariginal works af art except a senge of aweworld's life passes!To paint it in its reality,and forgetbecause they have survived.The way original works of art areeverything for that! To become that minute, to be theusually approached -- through museum cataloguas, guides,sensitive plate...glve the image of what we see, forgettinghired cassettes, etc.-is not the only way they might beeverything that has appearad before our time.. What weapproached. When the art of the past ceases to be viewedmake of that painted momontwhenit is before our eyesnostalgically, the warks will cease to be holy relics -althoughdapends upon what we expect of art, and that in turn dependsthey will nevar ro-become what they ware befare the aga oftoday upon how we have already experienced the meaning ofreproduction.We are nat saying original works of art are nowpaintings through reproductions.useless.3130
The means of reproduction are used politlcally and commercially to disguise or deny what their existence makes possible. But sometimes individuals use them differently. Adults and children sometimes have boards in their bedrooms or living-rooms on which they pin pieces of paper: letters, snapshots, reproductions of paintings, newspaper cuttings, original drawings, postcards. On each board all the images belong to the same language and all are more or less equal within it, because they have been chosen in a highly personal way to match and express the experience of the room’s inhabitant. Logically, these boards should replace museums, What are we saying by that? Let us first he sure about what we are not saying. We are not saying that there is nothing left to experience before original works of art except a sense of awe because they have survived. The way original works of art are usually approached - through museum catalogues, guides, hired cassettes, etc. - is not the only way they might be approached. When the art of the past ceases to be viewed nostalgically, the works will cease to be holy relics - although they will never re-become what they were before the age of reproduction. We are not saying original works of art are now useless. Original paintings are silent and still in a sense that information never is. Even a reproduction hung on a wall is not comparable in this respect for in the original the silence and stillness permeate the actual material, the paint, in which one follows the traces of the painter’s immediate gestures. This has the effect of closing the distance in time between the painting of the picture and one’s own act of looking at it. in this special sense all paintings are contemporary. Hence the immediacy of their testimony. Their historical moment is literally there before our eyes. Cbzanne made a similar observation from the painter’s point of view. ’A minute in the world*s life passes ! To paint it in its reality, and forget everything for that ! To become that minute, to be the sensitive plate., give the image of what we see, forgetting everything that has appeared before our time." What we make of that painted moment when it is before our eyes depends upon what we expect of art, and that in turn depends today upon how we have already experienced the meaning of paintings through reproductions. 30 31
all the time to promote the illusion that nothing has changedNor are we saying that all art can be understoodexceptthatthemasses, thanksto reproductions,can nowspontaneously, We are not claiming that to cut out a magazinehegin to appreciate art as the cultured minority ance did.reproduction of an archaic Greek head, because it is reminiscentUnderstandably, tha masses remain unlnterested and sceptical.of somepersonail experience, and to pin it on to a boardIfthenew language of images wereusedbeside other disparate images, is to come to terms with thedifferentiy,it would, through its use, confer a new kind offull meaning of that head.power,Within it we could begin to define our experiences moreprecisely in areas where words are inadequate. (Seeing comesThe idea of innocence faces two ways. By refusingbefore words.)Not onlypersonal experience,but also theto enter a conspiracy,one remains innocent of that conspiracy.essential historical experieniceof ourrelationtothepast:thatButto remain innocentmay also be to remain ignorant. Theis ta say the experience of seeking ta give meaning to aur lives,issueis notbetween innocence and knowledge(orbetween theof trying to understand the history of which we can becomenatural and the cuitural) but between a total approach to arttheactiveagents.which attempts to relate it to every aspectof experience andThe art of the past no ianger exists as it once did.the esoteric approach of a few specialized experts who are theIts authority is iost. In its place there is a ianguage of images.clerks of the nostalgia of a ruling class in decline. (in decline,What matters now is who uses that language for whatnot before the proletariat, but before the new power of thepurpose. This touches upon questions of copyright forcorporation and the state.) The real question is: to whom doesreproduction, the ownership of art presses and publishers, thethe meaning of the art of the past properly helong? To thosetotal policy of public art gaileries and museums. As usuallywho can apply it to their own lives, or to a cultural hierarchypresented, these are narrow professional matters, One of theofrelic specialists?aims of this essay has been to show that what is really atThe visual arts have always existed within astake is much larger.A people or a class which is cut off fromcertain preserve: originally this preserve was magical orits own past is farless freeto choose and to act as opeopleorsacred. Butit was elso physical: it was the place, the cave, theclass than one that has been able to situate itself lo history.building, in which, or for which, the work was mada.TheThis is why -and this is the only reason why -the entire artexperience of art, which at first was the experience of ritual,of the past has now become apolitical issue.wasset apartfromtherest of life-precicely in ordertobeable to exercise power over it.Later the preserve af art becamea social one. It entered the culture of the ruling ciass, whilstphysically it was set apart and isolated in their palaces andhouses. During all this history the authority of art wasinseparable from the particular authority of the presarve.What the madern means of repraduction havedone is ta destroy the authority of art and to remove it -or,rather, to remove its images which they reproduce --from anypreserve, For the first time ever, images of art have becomeephemeral,ubiquitous,insubstantial,svaiiable,valueless,free.They surround us in the same way as e language surrounds us.Theyhave entered the mainstream of life over which they nolonger,inthemselves,havepower.Yet very few people are aware of what hashappened hecause the means of reproduction are used nearly3332
Nor are we saying that all art can be understood spontaneously. We are not claiming that to cut 0U~ ~’~agazine reproduction of an archaic Greek head, because it is reminiscent of some personal experience, end to pin it on to s board beside other disparate images, is to come to terms with the full meaning of that head. The idea of innocence faces two ways. By refusing to enter a conspiracy, one remains innocent of that conspiracy. But to remain innocent may also be to remain ignorant. The issue is not be~Neen innocence and knowledge (or between the natural and the cultural) but between a total approach to art which attempts to relate it to every aspect of experience and the esoteric approach of a few specialized experts who are the clerks of the nostalgia of a ruling class in decline. (in decline, not before the proletariat, but before the new power of the corporation and the state.) The real question is: to whom does the meaning of the art of the past properly belong ? To those who can app|y it to their own lives, or to a cultural hierarchy of relic specialtsts~ The visual arts have always existed within a certain preserve; originally this preserve was magical or sacred. But it was also physical : it was the place, the cave, the building, in which, or for which, the work was made. The experience of art, which at first was the experience of ritual, was set apart from the rest of life - precisely in order to be able to exercise power over it. Later the preserve of art became a social one. it entered the culture of the ruling class, whilst physically it was set apart and isolated in their palaces and houses. During all this history the authority of art was inseparable from the particular authority of the preserve. What the modern means of reproduction have done is to destroy the authority of art and to remove it - or, rather, to remove its images which they reproduce - from any preserve. For the first time ever, images of art have become ephemeral, ubiquitous, insubstantial, available, valueless, free. They surround us in the same way as a language surrounds us. They have entered the mainstream of life over which they no longer, in themselves, have power. Yet very few people are aware of what has happened because the means of reproduction ere used nearly all the time to promote the illusion that nothing has changed except that the masses, thanks to reproductions, cdi~ now begin to appreciate art as the cultured minority once did. Understandably, the masses remain uninterested and sceptical. If the new language of images were used differently, it would, through its use, confer a new kind of power. Within it we conld begin to define our experiences more precisely in areas where words are inadequate. (Seeing comes before words.) Not only personal experience, but also the essential historical experience of our relation to the past: that is to say the experience of seeking to give meaning to our lives, of trying to understand the history of which we can become the active agents. The art of the past no longer exists as it once did. Its authority is lost. In its place there is a language of images. What matters now is who uses that language for what purpose. This touches upon questions of copyright for reproduction, the ownership of art presses and publishers, the total policy of public art galleries and museums. As usually presented, these are narrow professional matters. One of the aims of this essay has been to show that what is really at stake is much larger. A people or a class which is cut off from its own past is far less free to choose and to act as a people or class than one that has been able to situate itself in history. This is why - and this is the only reason why - the entire art of the past has now become a political issue