Abstract

Benjamin does not see or does not want to see the new “aura” that makes the art of cinema “art” which stays as the central feature of the totally renewed statute of artistic activity in the age of mechanical reproduction. In his essay of 1936, Benjamin acquires the arguments of all those authors who, between the first and second decades of the Twentieth century, had described this art and his new aura: Paul Valéry, George Duhamel, Léon Pierre-Quint, Luigi Pirandello, Bertolt Brecht, Rudolph Arnheim. It is an art for the mass that has a positive but also negative side in individual perception. Benjamin considers the new man – be it mass-man (the audience) or man-tool – recruitable for a coming revolution, but at the end of the essay he raises a question concerning the whole of contemporary art from the Dada movement to the present time: how could this completely renovated art possibly escape exploitation by those who produce it and drive it since then?