Author? What Author?

For this project, the work of two artists whose work derives from or may better be explained by the concepts enunciated by the articles denunciating authorship by Foucault and Barthes are are to be reviewed, and the following questions addressed:

•  If the birth of the reader is at the expense of the author, is there still any of Benjamin's aura left?;
• Does any of this explain or validate the unregulated nature of the internet?;
• Does this invalidate the interest in the artist's or creator's intent at the time of making?

The notes suggest works by Levine and Sherman or find another artist. I chose works by Banksy and Sherman, shown below together with the original works on which they are based:

Banksy, The Flight to Egypt, 2009

Claude Lorrain, Flight into Egypt, 1666

Cindy Sherman, Untitled #205, 1989

Raphael, La Fornorina, 1518-19

Banksy has cult status as a secretive artist who specialises in graffiti, and, as in this case, a form of appropriation art.

Sherman is best known for photographing herself but not is a self-portrait style. Instead, she dresses up and/or takes on alternative personae. In this photographic allegory of Raphael's painting La Fornorina, Sherman dons thick make up, false breasts and stomach. She wears cheap curtain material instead of diaphanous fabric (Kimberley, undated).

Both artists add humour with their appropriations. Banksy's is as much a play on the words as a work of art; Sherman adds the humour with her slightly exasperated expression and direct stare forwards in contrast with Raphael's original: his young female subject looks to the right and wears an innocent expression. 
 

If the birth of the reader is at the expense of the author, is there still any of Benjamin's aura left?

Benjamin considered that the 'aura' of a work of art was lost in 'the age of mechanical production' for two reasons: the possibility of multiple reproduction; and that the work of art could be considered out of its previously restricted existence. A viewer can appreciate a copy of a work of art in his own sitting room, for example.

It is perhaps only a continuum of the same argument to acknowledge that an appropriated work of art takes away the aura. Indeed, quite aside from consideration of the particular examples in this project, it must be the case that divorcing a 'discourse' (to use Barthes' word, we can substitute 'work of art' here) from its author (painter, photographer, sculptor et al.) must mean there is no aura left, as we are merely looking at the structure of the work of art; an 'author free analysis' makes no reference to the how, why, when of its creation.

The agenda of Benjamin and Barthes are not dissimilar: they wish to empower the viewer (reader) and remove some of the 'aura' of the academic industry (the need to attribute, the over academisation, the long-winded and arcane analyses) that surrounds the art world. The ideas and practices of Sherman and Banksy help us do this by their witty (some might say disrepective) and down to earth representations. Banksy helps the Foucault argument by his avowed anonymity.

  

Does any of this explain or validate the unregulated nature of the internet?

The internet has further accentuated the effects of the 'mechanical reproduction' alluded to by Benjamin. We can view works of art on a screen in seconds, download them and include them in our projects for Open College of the Arts courses. We can view (sometimes listen) to what the contemporary artist thinks of his or her work, read the views of many experts on those who worked long before such easy access to information was thinkable. 

Does it explain? In short, no. The technology preceded the effect. The internet came about form the desire of the US Government to link networks and thus to access information more readily without further manipulation. The extension of it to academia was almost bound to happen as it allowed much simpler access to a wealth of material. 

It is not quite correct to say the internet is unregulated. Some societies ban (or seek to ban, as in the recent attempts of Turkey's President Erdogan to ban YouTube and Twitter) access to part or all of the internet, some effect it by not allowing the necessary hardware (North Korea, for example). Schools will ban access to chat or porn sites by use of firewalls. Where it is more or less unregulated is in the area of downloading material, and thereby potentially breaching copyright. 

There is a dialectic between the democratisation of information - making material available easily and cheaply to as many people as possible - and the rights, (needs) of those who create them to receive reward and acknowledgement. The problem with complete de-regulation, complete socialisation of the information world is that there is no incentive to create original thought, action or deed. We see this in the musical world, where the rise in boy bands and talent shows has been concomitant with the difficulty in maintaining copyright to work , to get rewarded for the copies sold. Why create original work when you can make it singing cover versions of old songs?

Does this invalidate the interest in the artist's or creator's intent at the time of making?

Slightly challenging to understand the question here. What does "this" refer to? Are we referring to the intent of the original artist (Raphael, Lorrain) or the modern one (Sherman, Banksy)? I think the question is aiming at whether the 'internet effect' to give it a contextual epithet, invalidates the interest shown in the works of Sheramn or Banksy. If so, I would say the answer is no. These two artists have benefitted from the promulgation of their work on the internet; their witty takes are in tune with current Zeitgeist of informality and less respect for so-called experts.

References: 

Kimberley (undated) Cindy Sherman: Her “History Portrait” Series as Post-Modern Parody Available from http://breadandcircusnetwork.wordpress.com/2007/07/29/cindy-sherman-her-%E2%80%9Chistory-portrait%E2%80%9D-series-as-post-modern-parody/ Accessed on 4 May 2014