If you are into NFTs you have probably been excited about the innovation and also disillusioned at times. If you come from the traditional art world, NFT art now may not be that interesting - I mean is a pixelated image of a face or a cartoon ape really art?

What’s important is not so much the works that are being created today, but rather the implications NFTs have on the medium of art going forward. This intersection of art, technology, and finance is reshaping our perception of value, ownership, and even art itself.

To really understand what is happening, let’s look at an essay by German philosopher Walter Benjamin, "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction". We will analyze this essay and then extend the frame into what we are seeing with NFTs now.

According to Walter Benjamin, the progression of mechanical reproduction throughout history fundamentally changed the relationship between society and art.

Let’s be clear - reproduction of art is taking an original work and making copies of it in any form so more people can see it.

Benjamin argued that reproduction democratized art, shifting it from the realm of high culture to mass culture. At the same time, the reproduction did not contain the original energy or ‘aura’ of the work. For example if you had to go to the museum in Rome to see a sculpture, that was not accessible to everyone. If a cheaper copy was made in many cities, then people could generally experience the piece but not the ‘aura’ of the original.

Here's how the ability to reproduce art advanced through time:

Manual Reproduction

In the earliest periods of human civilization, the reproduction of artworks was all manual. Artisans, like those who crafted the multiple versions of the ancient Greek statue "Discobolus" around the 5th century BC, painstakingly replicated original pieces with their own hands.

Even with an uncanny resemblance to the originals, these reproductions were recognized as distinct works. Whether it was an ancient statue or a hand-copied manuscript of a literary work during the Middle Ages, the 'original' maintained its unique 'aura', a term made by Walter Benjamin in 1935. This 'aura' meant its authenticity, its presence in time and space, and journey through history, which no reproduction could replicate.

Mechanical Reproduction: The Age of Print

The shift towards mechanical reproduction started with Johannes Gutenberg's invention of movable type printing around 1440. Suddenly, literature and, eventually, visual art could be duplicated rapidly, accurately, and on a large scale. This revolutionary change meant that art and books were no longer tied to a specific location or only accessible to only the upper class.

Yet, as Walter Benjamin noted, this innovation started the decline of the artwork's 'aura.' Mass-produced pieces lacked the original's singular presence and historical context. For instance, experiencing Picasso's ‘Guernica’ in its immense, textured, original form at Museo Reina Sofía is profoundly different from viewing a smaller, flat printed replica or an image on a computer like this:

Photography

The rise of photography in the early 19th century, marked by Louis Daguerre's daguerreotype process in 1839, represented the next big step in the evolution of mechanical reproduction. Unlike traditional art forms like painting or sculpture, where the 'original' was clear, a photograph was a mechanical reproduction from its inception. It had no 'original'.

Photography, with its ability to capture a moment in time, caused a shift in societal perception. For instance, Mathew Brady's Civil War photographs, displayed in New York in 1862, brought the brutal realities of war into public consciousness in a way that was previously unimaginable.

Photographs still retain discernible value even though there is no original piece. A photographer can release limited editions of works with different sizes on specialized paper, creating an aura of exclusivity. However, compared to an individual, singular piece of artwork, the aura of a mechanically reproduced photograph is substantially diminished.

To understand the scale of value people attribute to photographs, the most expensive one ever sold at auction was in 2022, Man Ray’s ‘Le Violon d’Ingres’ which went for $12.4M.

https://edition.cnn.com/style/article/man-ray-most-expensive-photograph-auction-record/index.html

Film: The Ultimate Mechanical Art

The invention of moving pictures in the late 19th century, with Thomas Edison's kinetoscope in 1891 and the Lumière Brothers' Cinématographe in 1895, took the principle of mechanical reproduction even further. Like photography, a film had no 'original', and its capacity for mass distribution was far greater. Movies could be screened simultaneously to audiences globally, democratizing consumption to an unprecedented level.

The advent of moving pictures, and later the incorporation of audio, first seen in a full-length feature with "The Jazz Singer" in 1927, allowed for more explicit storytelling and messaging compared to still images, reducing the need for viewer interpretation.

While film symbolized the complete dissolution of the traditional artwork's unique aura, Walter Benjamin envisioned a new form of art experience. It was collective, as seen in packed movie theaters watching classics like "Gone With the Wind" in 1939, and deeply interwoven with the mass culture of the 20th century.

Digital Art

As we’ve seen, at the heart of Benjamin’s essay was the concept of an artwork’s ‘aura’. The aura was attached to its originality, authenticity, and uniqueness - which are mostly lost with mechanical reproduction techniques such as printmaking and photography. In the age of digital art, this concept takes on a new dimension.

The first instances of digital art weren't online. They were developed on large, primitive computers in the 60’s and 70’s. In the 90s when the internet started becoming more accessible, it opened a new path for digital art. Artists began creating art that existed solely on the internet.

Social media platforms in the mid to late 2000s had a significant impact on digital art. Sites like DeviantArt, Instagram, and Tumblr became popular platforms for artists to share work but ways for works to have a unique aura was limited.

If we look at an artist like Beeple, he has been creating Everydays for a long time. His works were viewed online, and maybe printed on paper or canvas. However, these digital renderings were generally not owned by others.

The rise of digital art made artworks readily available to anyone with internet access. It enabled individuals to view pieces without leaving home. The problem was authenticity and ownership. It was hard to prove who made and owned the works. This complexity made it hard to locate any aura for the pieces. They just existed wherever people looked at them online.

NFTs: The Digital Aura

This is where NFTs come in. They provide a decentralized verification process to authenticate digital artwork's originality and ownership. This is the latest step in art reproduction, creating a new form of 'aura' for digital art. Just as mechanical reproduction transformed art in the age of print, NFTs are doing the same in the age of digital reproduction — redefining the concepts of originality, ownership, and value in the digital art world.

With NFTs the ability to verify a digital object's authenticity and ownership came into existence. These tokens attach a new form of aura to digital art pieces. While anyone can view and copy the digital art, only the NFT holder owns the 'authentic' piece. Like a collectible baseball card, these digital collectibles can be bought and sold on an open market and viewed around the world instantly.

Think of Beeple's artwork, "Everydays: The First 5000 Days," which sold for $69 million at Christie's as an NFT. You can view this artwork online for free, yet the 'aura,' and hence the value, is concentrated on the ownership represented by the NFT, not on the viewing.

This digital aura is different from a traditional aura. While the aura of a physical artwork is tied to its physical existence, the aura of an NFT-backed digital artwork is tied to its unique digital token on the blockchain. This token proves the artwork's authenticity and the owner's unique claim to it, even though the artwork itself can still be copied and viewed by anyone. This makes the digital aura more about the ownership and less about the viewing experience.

Owning an NFT brings a distinctive relationship with the art and its creator, something more than just viewing the work online.

Additionally, the fact that most NFT artists are still active allows for new modes of direct engagement between artists and collectors, further enriching the aura and experience of NFT ownership.

Many NFTs - One Community

In the metaverse where NFTs live and breathe, the concept of aura takes another twist. Community involvement and participation become key factors in an artwork's aura and value.

Take CryptoPunks, for example. Each Punk is unique and owned by a different person, generating a new type of aura – one that is created by the entire community of owners. It is this sense of belonging to a community that grants each CryptoPunk its own unique aura and its value. One of the rarest Punks, #5822, recently sold at auction for $23.7M.

https://cryptobriefing.com/rare-alien-cryptopunk-nft-sells-23-7-million/

Artists like Pak are taking community involvement to the next level by creating generative art projects such as "The Merge." These projects encourage participation from the audience, thus creating a shared aura among all participants.

https://www.barrons.com/articles/paks-nft-artwork-the-merge-sells-for-91-8-million-01638918205

One NFT - Multiple Owners

The evolution of 'aura' takes another leap with decentralized governance. Imagine an artwork owned not by an individual or institution, but by a Decentralized Autonomous Organization (DAO) - a democratic entity where each participant has a voice in the decision-making process. This puts the power to shape the artwork's value and destiny on the collective.

In the traditional art world, the decisions regarding the management and display of artworks rest with museums and their governing bodies. However, the advent of DAOs has entirely reframed this dynamic. Now, a diverse collective of people from across the globe, connected digitally, can collaboratively decide the fate of an artwork.

This concept is not merely theoretical; it's being put into practice. PleasrDAO is an example of this, considering themselves 'an art collecting empire that pioneers innovative approaches to digital and community-centric art’.

Conclusion: A New Aura

From Benjamin to Beeple, the 'aura' of art has been radically transformed. It's now tied to both the art and its digital certification. The concept of aura, previously confined to a single original piece of art, has now extended to include community involvement, shared participation, and decentralized governance.

As this new era continues moving forward we need to keep asking: What does 'aura' mean now and how can it keep evolving? The intersection of art, blockchain, and Web3 offers an infinite playground for exploring this question.

NFTs are not just about tokenizing art; they are about reimagining the very essence of art's aura in the digital realm.

Thanks for reading.

There is a limited edition NFT series made specifically for this work. It is the first NFT available on the open market and owning it will make you a founding member of the babyslayr community.

Check it out:

nft://1/0xDcb1A5698665f84886e05F92C68f028CC1b09408/?showBuying=true&showMeta=true&extraParams=eyJwbGF0Zm9ybSI6Ik1BTklGT0xEIiwiZXh0ZW5zaW9uQWRkcmVzcyI6IjB4MUVCNzNGRUUyMDkwZkIxQzIwMTA1ZDVCYTg4N2UzYzNiQTE0YTE3RSIsImNsYWltSW5kZXgiOiIxMDUzMzk1MTg0In0%3D

Collect this essay here on Mirror if you liked it:

Links

• Twitter

• Instagram

• Email - babyslayr@protonmail.com

• Other recent project - Initializer Series

• Manifold Claim Page for NFT