Theme 2: Critical media studies

     What is "Enlightenment"?

    In Ancient times people tried to explain the nature, the world, themselves, etc. and answer the questions “Who?” and “How?” by myths and magic features of supernatural creatures. So ideas based on fear and impossibility of influence on things by themselves. The only solution to improve or to change something was sacrifice to gods or higher creatures.

Enlightenment is form of advanced thinking using logical explanation instead of myths. Moreover enlightenment allowed humans to escape from fear and to see themselves as masters of nature and own destiny.  

 What is "Dialectic"?

Dialectic is a method of argument for resolving disagreement. The word dialectic originated in ancient Greece, and was made popular by Plato in the Socratic dialogues. (Wikipedia)

Adorno and Horkheimer defined dialectical thinking as form of thinking in which each thing is what it is only by becoming what it is not. In other words, the fact is what it is until proven otherwise.

When there are two different opinion about one subject, dialectical method is used to find the truth by discourse.

What is "Nominalism" and why is it an important concept in the text?

In one sense, its most traditional sense deriving from the Middle Ages, it implies the rejection of universals. In another, more modern but equally entrenched sense, it implies the rejection of abstract objects (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). Abstract objects are non-spatiotemporal objects.

According to Adorno and Horkheimer “From the formalism of mythical names and statures, which, indifferent like nature, seek to rule over human beings and history, emerges nominalism, the prototype of bourgeois thinking.” That mean denies of abstract objects like gods and supernatural creatures. Consequently enlightenment is part of nominalism concept as it implies avoiding myths and relying on logical explanations.

 What is the meaning and function of "myth" in Adorno and Horkheimer's argument?

Myth is way of explanation nature, world and human being in form of stories based on fear, rituals, religion, etc. but not on experiments or observations.

In the beginning of the essay, Benjamin talks about the relation between "superstructure" and "substructure" in the capitalist order of production. What do the concepts "superstructure" and "substructure" mean in this context and what is the point of analyzing cultural production from a Marxist perspective?

Marxist theory states that society consists of substructure and superstructure. Substructure, or in other words base, includes means of production and relation of productions, superstructure in its term includes its culture, institutions, political power structures, roles, rituals, and state. (Wikipedia).

When capitalism is abolished and proletariat has power not just base or substructure changes, culture as inherent part of superstructure is changing as well. I think we can say that changing of base leads to changing of superstructure. Superstructure is sort of relations that appear within human society development. Thus from Marxist perspective the point of analyzing cultural production is to form revolutionary requirements for art, for example, reproduction of works of art.

Does culture have revolutionary potentials (according to Benjamin)? If so, describe these potentials. Does Benjamin's perspective differ from the perspective of Adorno & Horkheimer in this regard?

According to Benjamin culture has revolutionary potential because it is part of superstructure and revolutionary changes in substructure make impact on it anyway. Adjusting new technologies of production to production of art allows to develop modern demands and tendencies of art.

Benjamin discusses how people perceive the world through the senses and argues that this perception can be both naturally and historically determined. What does this mean? Give some examples of historically determined perception (from Benjamin's essay and/or other contexts).

Benjamin states that modern perception has historical and social reasons. The same objects can be perceived in different ways depending on historical events, society development, etc.

The example of historically determined perception is Venice stature: for Ancient Greek it is object of veneration, but in Medieval Ages it is evil idol.

What does Benjamin mean by the term "aura"? Are there different kinds of aura in natural objects compared to art objects?

According to Benjamin “aura” is inherent to original work of arts and cannot be replicate in reproduction since “aura” reflects presence of work in time and space, historical meaning, initial purpose of creation. There are different kinds of aura in natural objects and art objects as the aura of natural objects is defined by distance to the object, the aura of art objects is defined mainly by time, place and goal of creation.