1
00:00:03,080 --> 00:00:06,840
Speaker 1: Welcome to Stuff to Blow Your Mind, a production of iHeartRadio.

2
00:00:12,760 --> 00:00:15,080
Speaker 2: Hey, welcome to Stuff to Blow Your Mind. My name

3
00:00:15,120 --> 00:00:15,640
Speaker 2: is Robert.

4
00:00:15,520 --> 00:00:18,680
Speaker 3: Land, and I am Joe McCormick, and we're back with

5
00:00:18,760 --> 00:00:22,480
Speaker 3: part two in our series on the concept of authenticity.

6
00:00:22,840 --> 00:00:25,080
Speaker 3: If you haven't heard part one yet, you probably want

7
00:00:25,079 --> 00:00:27,280
Speaker 3: to go back and check that one out first. But

8
00:00:27,400 --> 00:00:30,440
Speaker 3: in brief last time, we explored a lot of the

9
00:00:30,520 --> 00:00:35,480
Speaker 3: different overlapping cultural understandings of authenticity, and we also looked

10
00:00:35,520 --> 00:00:39,400
Speaker 3: at a psychology paper that tested how well people were

11
00:00:39,479 --> 00:00:44,559
Speaker 3: able to assess authenticity in others, and the conclusion was that,

12
00:00:44,640 --> 00:00:48,080
Speaker 3: at least within the scenario tested, which was classroom interactions,

13
00:00:48,400 --> 00:00:50,479
Speaker 3: we are not nearly as good as we think we

14
00:00:50,560 --> 00:00:54,320
Speaker 3: are at judging whether other people are really being themselves

15
00:00:54,480 --> 00:00:57,160
Speaker 3: or whether they are really being authentic. Now, maybe that

16
00:00:57,240 --> 00:01:01,000
Speaker 3: finding wouldn't be reproduced in other scenario or using other

17
00:01:01,080 --> 00:01:04,120
Speaker 3: measures of authenticity, because, if you recall from last time,

18
00:01:04,160 --> 00:01:08,040
Speaker 3: the measure in that study was comparing other evaluations of

19
00:01:08,280 --> 00:01:12,840
Speaker 3: authenticity with self evaluation. So you have people say themselves like,

20
00:01:12,880 --> 00:01:15,039
Speaker 3: do you feel like you can be yourself around people?

21
00:01:15,319 --> 00:01:18,040
Speaker 3: Do your actions reflect your inner thoughts and feelings? Things

22
00:01:18,080 --> 00:01:20,959
Speaker 3: like that and then have other people judge that same person,

23
00:01:21,080 --> 00:01:24,000
Speaker 3: you know, how authentic do you think they're being. But

24
00:01:24,360 --> 00:01:28,319
Speaker 3: if it's generally true that we're worse at detecting authenticity

25
00:01:28,400 --> 00:01:32,160
Speaker 3: than we think we are, that has profound implications on

26
00:01:32,240 --> 00:01:36,360
Speaker 3: everyday life, because we make implicit and explicit judgments about

27
00:01:36,400 --> 00:01:40,240
Speaker 3: authenticity all the time, and we use these judgments to

28
00:01:40,319 --> 00:01:43,520
Speaker 3: manage our relationships, to decide who we like and who

29
00:01:43,560 --> 00:01:48,080
Speaker 3: we trust. But also those judgments are they're sort of

30
00:01:48,280 --> 00:01:52,919
Speaker 3: conceptually contagious throughout the mind, and we end up using

31
00:01:53,040 --> 00:01:57,000
Speaker 3: assessments of authenticity not just for people, but to determine

32
00:01:57,000 --> 00:02:01,480
Speaker 3: our feelings about inanimate objects and our feelings in domains

33
00:02:01,520 --> 00:02:04,360
Speaker 3: outside of personal relationships. And one of the big examples

34
00:02:04,680 --> 00:02:07,320
Speaker 3: that comes to mind for me is the domain of

35
00:02:07,600 --> 00:02:10,440
Speaker 3: art and esthetics. We promised last time we'd be getting

36
00:02:10,520 --> 00:02:12,359
Speaker 3: artsy fartsy today, so here we.

37
00:02:12,320 --> 00:02:15,560
Speaker 2: Are, and you know, we might throw in a few

38
00:02:15,600 --> 00:02:19,399
Speaker 2: references to less artsy creations, some of the things we've

39
00:02:19,480 --> 00:02:22,840
Speaker 2: talked about on Weird House Cinema before, for example, But yeah,

40
00:02:22,840 --> 00:02:25,600
Speaker 2: we're going to be talking about authenticity in the arts.

41
00:02:25,880 --> 00:02:27,520
Speaker 3: I guess some of this will come down to where

42
00:02:27,560 --> 00:02:30,000
Speaker 3: you draw the line between art and entertainment, or if

43
00:02:30,040 --> 00:02:33,639
Speaker 3: you draw a line at all. But one area in

44
00:02:33,680 --> 00:02:40,200
Speaker 3: which I think people often seem especially concerned with authenticity

45
00:02:40,360 --> 00:02:46,120
Speaker 3: in artistic expression is music. There's actually a book chapter

46
00:02:46,240 --> 00:02:49,880
Speaker 3: about psychological studies of authenticity from two thousand and six

47
00:02:50,000 --> 00:02:52,919
Speaker 3: that I've been reading through. This was a chapter by

48
00:02:53,280 --> 00:02:57,600
Speaker 3: professors Michael H. Kernis and Brian M. Goldman, and I

49
00:02:57,600 --> 00:03:01,079
Speaker 3: actually am only mentioning it because it uses an epigraph

50
00:03:01,280 --> 00:03:04,560
Speaker 3: that really struck me. It's a quote from the singer

51
00:03:04,600 --> 00:03:09,400
Speaker 3: songwriter Leonard Cohen, and the lyric goes, if by chance

52
00:03:09,440 --> 00:03:12,440
Speaker 3: I wake at night and I ask you who I am? Oh,

53
00:03:12,480 --> 00:03:15,080
Speaker 3: take me to the slaughterhouse and I will wait there

54
00:03:15,120 --> 00:03:18,880
Speaker 3: with the lamb. So this is a lyric from the

55
00:03:18,960 --> 00:03:21,720
Speaker 3: Leonard Cohen song Stories of the Street, which is a

56
00:03:21,760 --> 00:03:25,600
Speaker 3: track on his nineteen sixty seven album Songs of Leonard Cohen.

57
00:03:26,280 --> 00:03:29,799
Speaker 3: Now I think the authors selected it as an epigraph

58
00:03:29,840 --> 00:03:33,639
Speaker 3: for this chapter because it invokes the idea of personal authenticity.

59
00:03:33,880 --> 00:03:36,240
Speaker 3: There's that line, if by chance I wake at night

60
00:03:36,320 --> 00:03:38,640
Speaker 3: and I ask you who I am? It implies a

61
00:03:39,240 --> 00:03:42,320
Speaker 3: crisis of authenticity, wondering who am I? Who is the

62
00:03:42,360 --> 00:03:46,680
Speaker 3: real me? And the second half is the resolution of

63
00:03:46,720 --> 00:03:49,840
Speaker 3: that conditional If take me to the slaughter house and

64
00:03:49,920 --> 00:03:52,920
Speaker 3: I will wait there with the lamb. I don't know

65
00:03:52,960 --> 00:03:56,040
Speaker 3: exactly what that means, and I would resist saying that

66
00:03:56,080 --> 00:03:59,960
Speaker 3: it decodes to a sentiment that can be plainly expressed, because,

67
00:04:00,400 --> 00:04:03,400
Speaker 3: like a lot of good poetry, it sort of seems

68
00:04:03,440 --> 00:04:06,120
Speaker 3: to express an idea or a feeling that is real

69
00:04:06,640 --> 00:04:09,800
Speaker 3: but is difficult to say directly. Whatever it means. It

70
00:04:10,680 --> 00:04:14,720
Speaker 3: maybe suggests something about vulnerability, maybe something about the desire

71
00:04:14,760 --> 00:04:18,840
Speaker 3: to protect or to be protected, and whatever it means,

72
00:04:18,839 --> 00:04:21,320
Speaker 3: I found it really striking. So I was interested in

73
00:04:21,320 --> 00:04:24,000
Speaker 3: this quote because it's it's a song lyric that not

74
00:04:24,080 --> 00:04:28,000
Speaker 3: only concerns authenticity with the line about I ask you

75
00:04:28,040 --> 00:04:31,840
Speaker 3: who I am, but in my personal opinion, it illustrates

76
00:04:31,880 --> 00:04:35,800
Speaker 3: the quality of authenticity and music and rob you might

77
00:04:35,839 --> 00:04:38,320
Speaker 3: feel differently, you the listener might feel differently. If so,

78
00:04:38,400 --> 00:04:41,280
Speaker 3: that's fine. We all have our unique responses to art.

79
00:04:41,360 --> 00:04:46,280
Speaker 3: But whatever authenticity means in lyrics and musical performance, it

80
00:04:46,320 --> 00:04:50,839
Speaker 3: feels present to me here. And I think at least

81
00:04:50,960 --> 00:04:54,599
Speaker 3: part of what authenticity means in music and lyrics is

82
00:04:54,600 --> 00:04:57,919
Speaker 3: that it feels like the words and the melody express

83
00:04:58,000 --> 00:05:01,480
Speaker 3: a real genuine feeling in artist, and that these words

84
00:05:01,520 --> 00:05:07,680
Speaker 3: are not carelessly selected, but instead are are carefully meaningfully

85
00:05:07,800 --> 00:05:10,719
Speaker 3: picked because they are the words that best point to

86
00:05:10,760 --> 00:05:14,600
Speaker 3: that sort of dark, ambiguous, inexpressible feeling underneath.

87
00:05:14,960 --> 00:05:18,640
Speaker 2: Yeah, and am and lamb rhyme with each other. And

88
00:05:18,640 --> 00:05:21,800
Speaker 2: that's that's undeniable master at work here.

89
00:05:22,120 --> 00:05:23,960
Speaker 3: I mean, actually, I think there's a lot of interesting

90
00:05:23,960 --> 00:05:27,719
Speaker 3: stuff one could get into about how structural constraints like

91
00:05:27,800 --> 00:05:32,520
Speaker 3: meter and rhyme interact with with the expression of ideas.

92
00:05:32,560 --> 00:05:34,760
Speaker 3: Like if they sort of like force you to choose

93
00:05:34,800 --> 00:05:37,520
Speaker 3: different words, then you might otherwise, and yet those words

94
00:05:37,600 --> 00:05:39,640
Speaker 3: must in order for the poem or the song to

95
00:05:39,640 --> 00:05:42,360
Speaker 3: be good still be true. What does that do to

96
00:05:42,720 --> 00:05:43,880
Speaker 3: the way your mind works?

97
00:05:44,320 --> 00:05:46,760
Speaker 2: Yeah? Yeah, I like it. You know, it works better

98
00:05:47,120 --> 00:05:49,880
Speaker 2: that we're using the lamb instead of some other animal

99
00:05:49,920 --> 00:05:52,520
Speaker 2: that you might take to a slaughterhouse, because the lamb

100
00:05:52,520 --> 00:05:56,440
Speaker 2: also brings in its own symbolism and its own language.

101
00:05:56,480 --> 00:06:00,160
Speaker 2: So yeah, I like it. I like the line. I'm

102
00:06:00,160 --> 00:06:02,440
Speaker 2: not familiar with the song all that much, but I

103
00:06:02,520 --> 00:06:03,000
Speaker 2: like the lyric.

104
00:06:03,279 --> 00:06:05,680
Speaker 3: I think I've read that it was Cohen talking about

105
00:06:05,960 --> 00:06:09,720
Speaker 3: an experience where he went by himself to Cuba, and

106
00:06:09,800 --> 00:06:12,640
Speaker 3: at some point I think he says that he was

107
00:06:12,680 --> 00:06:15,599
Speaker 3: like at the embassy, and they send somebody to talk

108
00:06:15,640 --> 00:06:17,960
Speaker 3: to him, and they say that his mother is worried

109
00:06:17,960 --> 00:06:21,920
Speaker 3: about him or something. Anyway, So I mentioned that because

110
00:06:22,440 --> 00:06:26,320
Speaker 3: to me, this does illustrate that quality of authenticity and music.

111
00:06:27,240 --> 00:06:29,800
Speaker 3: And by contrast, I don't want to single out any

112
00:06:29,839 --> 00:06:32,400
Speaker 3: particular song or artists to like hate on as the

113
00:06:32,800 --> 00:06:36,200
Speaker 3: Encyclopedia entry for fake, but I think we can all

114
00:06:36,440 --> 00:06:39,520
Speaker 3: probably think of a piece of music we've heard and

115
00:06:39,720 --> 00:06:44,680
Speaker 3: found to have a quality of apparent insincerity which makes

116
00:06:44,720 --> 00:06:48,080
Speaker 3: the work unpleasant and uninteresting to us. Fill in with

117
00:06:48,120 --> 00:06:49,000
Speaker 3: your own examples.

118
00:06:49,400 --> 00:06:53,120
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'll get into some examples, not of like outright

119
00:06:53,320 --> 00:06:56,719
Speaker 2: like fakery or anything here in a bit, But I

120
00:06:56,760 --> 00:06:59,560
Speaker 2: think that some of the most interesting examples are examples

121
00:06:59,640 --> 00:07:02,080
Speaker 2: that are kind of in that middle ground where either

122
00:07:03,200 --> 00:07:08,800
Speaker 2: it is divided people about the artist's potential sincerity and authenticity,

123
00:07:09,560 --> 00:07:12,760
Speaker 2: or it has been something that you know that won

124
00:07:14,320 --> 00:07:18,320
Speaker 2: individually and subjectively wrestles with like do I like this,

125
00:07:18,520 --> 00:07:21,680
Speaker 2: Do I believe this artist? Other people seem to believe them,

126
00:07:21,680 --> 00:07:24,040
Speaker 2: but I'm not sure I do, And so.

127
00:07:23,920 --> 00:07:28,160
Speaker 3: Forth, yeah, yeah, Well that's interesting that you know audiences

128
00:07:28,240 --> 00:07:30,480
Speaker 3: can be divided in that way, because I mean, it's

129
00:07:30,520 --> 00:07:34,240
Speaker 3: a truism that everybody has their own subjective reaction to art.

130
00:07:34,400 --> 00:07:37,560
Speaker 3: But I think you can also see some very stark

131
00:07:37,720 --> 00:07:41,720
Speaker 3: trends in the way people relate, especially to authenticity and music,

132
00:07:41,760 --> 00:07:45,320
Speaker 3: because I would say for some of us, the relationship

133
00:07:45,320 --> 00:07:50,080
Speaker 3: between musical expression and authenticity maybe only enters the mind

134
00:07:50,120 --> 00:07:52,440
Speaker 3: every now and then, maybe when we hear something we

135
00:07:52,480 --> 00:07:58,920
Speaker 3: find especially moving and sincere seeming or especially false. But

136
00:07:59,120 --> 00:08:02,560
Speaker 3: for other people, it's like a clear, ever present, front

137
00:08:02,560 --> 00:08:05,600
Speaker 3: of mind element of our taste in music, maybe even

138
00:08:05,640 --> 00:08:09,480
Speaker 3: the single most important factor. And I'm curious, like what

139
00:08:09,640 --> 00:08:12,360
Speaker 3: makes that difference and in the people for whom it

140
00:08:12,480 --> 00:08:14,600
Speaker 3: is front of mind in their esthetics.

141
00:08:14,680 --> 00:08:19,120
Speaker 2: Why Speaking of Leonard Cohen, your inclusion of this quote

142
00:08:19,200 --> 00:08:21,400
Speaker 2: kind of send me down a rabbit hole of reading

143
00:08:21,800 --> 00:08:25,800
Speaker 2: some other tidbits from interviews with Leonard Cohen and sort

144
00:08:25,840 --> 00:08:30,840
Speaker 2: of refreshing myself about his career. But I ran across

145
00:08:31,000 --> 00:08:33,680
Speaker 2: this one quote from an Alan Twigg interview with Cohen,

146
00:08:34,160 --> 00:08:37,400
Speaker 2: and I want to read it here. Cohen says, quote,

147
00:08:37,400 --> 00:08:40,040
Speaker 2: the question is who am I? So we invent a

148
00:08:40,120 --> 00:08:43,360
Speaker 2: self a personality, We sustain it, we create rules for it.

149
00:08:43,559 --> 00:08:46,640
Speaker 2: When you stop asking those questions in those moments of grace.

150
00:08:47,000 --> 00:08:48,840
Speaker 2: As soon as the question is not asked and the

151
00:08:48,840 --> 00:08:52,000
Speaker 2: dilemma is dissolved or abandoned, then the true self or

152
00:08:52,040 --> 00:08:55,080
Speaker 2: absolute self rushes in. That's our real nourishment.

153
00:08:55,360 --> 00:08:57,760
Speaker 3: That's interesting in that it connects to what you were

154
00:08:57,760 --> 00:09:00,640
Speaker 3: saying in the last episode about the more you sort

155
00:09:00,679 --> 00:09:03,600
Speaker 3: of examine your own authenticity, the harder it can be

156
00:09:03,720 --> 00:09:04,760
Speaker 3: to let it flow.

157
00:09:05,320 --> 00:09:08,240
Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah, and I don't know. Yeah, I feel like

158
00:09:08,280 --> 00:09:11,720
Speaker 2: if I'm questioning the authenticity of a work of music

159
00:09:11,960 --> 00:09:14,560
Speaker 2: or a film or whatever kind of art I'm engaging with,

160
00:09:14,840 --> 00:09:17,800
Speaker 2: like I'm probably not that engaged with the art, you know. Yeah,

161
00:09:17,920 --> 00:09:21,920
Speaker 2: I'm caught up in a bunch of other nonsense about

162
00:09:21,920 --> 00:09:25,080
Speaker 2: the art, and I'm certainly not experiencing it in the

163
00:09:25,080 --> 00:09:27,840
Speaker 2: way that the artist probably intended me to do, unless,

164
00:09:27,920 --> 00:09:30,760
Speaker 2: of course, that is the artist's intent, that they are

165
00:09:30,880 --> 00:09:33,079
Speaker 2: challenging authenticity or something with that effect.

166
00:09:33,160 --> 00:09:36,080
Speaker 3: That's a really good point. It's like, when we do

167
00:09:36,800 --> 00:09:39,760
Speaker 3: really get into evaluating whether something is authentic or not,

168
00:09:39,840 --> 00:09:41,880
Speaker 3: it does make you have to like step back from

169
00:09:41,920 --> 00:09:46,080
Speaker 3: the experience of it. I assume a desire for perceived

170
00:09:46,120 --> 00:09:49,800
Speaker 3: authenticity in the expression of musical artists is to some

171
00:09:49,880 --> 00:09:53,280
Speaker 3: degree always present. But I was thinking about how it

172
00:09:53,360 --> 00:09:58,040
Speaker 3: seemed especially important to me when I was a teenager, Like,

173
00:09:58,240 --> 00:10:01,080
Speaker 3: when I was a teenager, the worst thing a musical

174
00:10:01,160 --> 00:10:06,040
Speaker 3: artist could be was fake, contrived pandering. What did this

175
00:10:06,160 --> 00:10:08,240
Speaker 3: mean to me? I don't know exactly. I mean, I

176
00:10:08,280 --> 00:10:11,840
Speaker 3: could think of specific artists like very I don't know,

177
00:10:11,920 --> 00:10:14,880
Speaker 3: like very commercial rock bands or something that I would

178
00:10:14,920 --> 00:10:18,440
Speaker 3: think of as very fake and seemingly and sincere. Uh,

179
00:10:19,160 --> 00:10:20,880
Speaker 3: you know. I don't know on what basis I was

180
00:10:20,920 --> 00:10:24,680
Speaker 3: deciding that, But I don't feel the same urge to

181
00:10:24,880 --> 00:10:28,640
Speaker 3: like seek raw authenticity and root out fakeness and music

182
00:10:28,679 --> 00:10:31,680
Speaker 3: that I once did, though obviously I still don't like

183
00:10:31,760 --> 00:10:35,120
Speaker 3: feeling like an artist is treating me with contempt. But like,

184
00:10:35,200 --> 00:10:37,360
Speaker 3: why is it that, as I think, maybe I'm not

185
00:10:37,440 --> 00:10:38,959
Speaker 3: a loane in this, Like, why is it that as

186
00:10:39,000 --> 00:10:43,400
Speaker 3: a teenager you're especially tuned into this meta media quality

187
00:10:43,440 --> 00:10:46,680
Speaker 3: of authenticity as opposed to more just sort of like

188
00:10:46,840 --> 00:10:49,520
Speaker 3: in the work or in the song qualities of a

189
00:10:49,520 --> 00:10:50,160
Speaker 3: piece of art.

190
00:10:50,600 --> 00:10:53,679
Speaker 2: That's interesting and I think we might get into some

191
00:10:53,720 --> 00:10:55,319
Speaker 2: of that in a bit, because it makes me think

192
00:10:55,360 --> 00:10:58,319
Speaker 2: of like the hyper social aspects of the teenager brain,

193
00:10:58,720 --> 00:11:01,480
Speaker 2: you know, yeah, that we've touched on before on the show. Yeah,

194
00:11:01,520 --> 00:11:03,319
Speaker 2: I suppose it's kind of a weird area to get

195
00:11:03,320 --> 00:11:08,200
Speaker 2: into because, you know, thinking again about artists at particular

196
00:11:08,240 --> 00:11:12,680
Speaker 2: times in their careers where they seem to divide their audience.

197
00:11:13,720 --> 00:11:16,120
Speaker 2: It's interesting how two different musical artists can take on

198
00:11:16,240 --> 00:11:19,040
Speaker 2: a persona to be received in wildly and it can

199
00:11:19,080 --> 00:11:22,800
Speaker 2: be received in wildly different ways. And the way they're

200
00:11:22,840 --> 00:11:26,280
Speaker 2: received for these persona personas or changes in their style

201
00:11:26,679 --> 00:11:29,480
Speaker 2: may also differ over time. So I think one of

202
00:11:29,520 --> 00:11:31,360
Speaker 2: the like the main examples that comes to mind is

203
00:11:31,400 --> 00:11:34,439
Speaker 2: the whole And this is not something certainly I was

204
00:11:34,480 --> 00:11:36,959
Speaker 2: not around to experience this in real time, but you

205
00:11:37,040 --> 00:11:39,320
Speaker 2: read about it and hear about it in retrospectives. But

206
00:11:39,679 --> 00:11:42,360
Speaker 2: Bob Dylan going electric in nineteen sixty five.

207
00:11:42,600 --> 00:11:45,280
Speaker 3: People allegedly shouting Judas at him. I don't know if

208
00:11:45,280 --> 00:11:49,400
Speaker 3: that really happened, but that's what I recall reading about it. So, yeah,

209
00:11:49,400 --> 00:11:53,280
Speaker 3: he had recorded like acoustic folk albums and then it

210
00:11:53,360 --> 00:11:55,840
Speaker 3: suddenly was playing with an electric guitar in a full band,

211
00:11:56,360 --> 00:11:58,800
Speaker 3: and some people didn't like that. They saw that not

212
00:11:59,000 --> 00:12:01,280
Speaker 3: just as a change in style that well, yeah, you know,

213
00:12:01,360 --> 00:12:03,280
Speaker 3: artists go through different kind of periods. It was like

214
00:12:03,480 --> 00:12:06,600
Speaker 3: that was a betrayal. He was no longer what I

215
00:12:06,720 --> 00:12:07,520
Speaker 3: signed up for.

216
00:12:08,400 --> 00:12:11,920
Speaker 2: Yeah, and it's it can feel kind of silly looking

217
00:12:11,920 --> 00:12:14,080
Speaker 2: back on it, because from our point of view, like

218
00:12:14,120 --> 00:12:16,880
Speaker 2: we know everything that came after that shift, like you know,

219
00:12:17,120 --> 00:12:20,240
Speaker 2: put out a lot of great material, great albums, and

220
00:12:20,320 --> 00:12:23,880
Speaker 2: other changes in style and explorations of different styles and ideas.

221
00:12:24,559 --> 00:12:27,760
Speaker 2: But he remained Bob Dylan throughout all of it. And

222
00:12:27,840 --> 00:12:29,920
Speaker 2: you know, some of it is maybe not everybody's favorite,

223
00:12:29,920 --> 00:12:30,920
Speaker 2: but some of it's pretty great.

224
00:12:31,120 --> 00:12:32,040
Speaker 3: I certainly think so.

225
00:12:32,800 --> 00:12:35,280
Speaker 2: Now of course that in that example, you have like

226
00:12:35,360 --> 00:12:39,920
Speaker 2: a shift in sound that I think would largely be reflected.

227
00:12:40,080 --> 00:12:42,400
Speaker 2: You know, it's not like he would he would okay,

228
00:12:42,440 --> 00:12:44,160
Speaker 2: he would say, all right, after one album, I'm gonna

229
00:12:44,160 --> 00:12:46,720
Speaker 2: put the guitar away. But you do have other artists

230
00:12:46,720 --> 00:12:49,360
Speaker 2: who have kind of like a single album that seems

231
00:12:49,360 --> 00:12:51,400
Speaker 2: to be an outlier. It seems to be like an

232
00:12:51,400 --> 00:12:54,679
Speaker 2: exploration of something different than is maybe not well received

233
00:12:54,679 --> 00:12:57,520
Speaker 2: by fans. And I think one example that came to

234
00:12:57,520 --> 00:12:59,840
Speaker 2: mind on this front is Neil Young's nineteen eighty three

235
00:13:00,000 --> 00:13:00,720
Speaker 2: album Trance.

236
00:13:01,280 --> 00:13:04,400
Speaker 3: This was actually within a stretch of Neil Young albums

237
00:13:04,440 --> 00:13:08,600
Speaker 3: where he was like changing genre every album. So during

238
00:13:08,600 --> 00:13:11,680
Speaker 3: this period, you know, Neil Young, he had sort of

239
00:13:11,720 --> 00:13:13,880
Speaker 3: he had worked in folk, he had worked also in

240
00:13:13,960 --> 00:13:18,520
Speaker 3: heavy electric rock. He'd done both. But he in the

241
00:13:18,600 --> 00:13:22,880
Speaker 3: eighties he released a country album, a blues album with

242
00:13:22,920 --> 00:13:28,560
Speaker 3: like Horns, a rockabilly album called Everybody's Rockin', and then

243
00:13:28,600 --> 00:13:31,960
Speaker 3: this I'm not necessarily saying them in the correct order,

244
00:13:32,040 --> 00:13:34,880
Speaker 3: but then also this electronic album, which is probably the

245
00:13:34,920 --> 00:13:36,800
Speaker 3: weirdest of all of them.

246
00:13:37,120 --> 00:13:40,080
Speaker 2: Yeah, he has he uses a robotic voice on some

247
00:13:40,120 --> 00:13:43,760
Speaker 2: of these tracks, and I've read that this was not

248
00:13:43,840 --> 00:13:46,280
Speaker 2: well received at the time by some fans, but I

249
00:13:46,280 --> 00:13:49,200
Speaker 2: don't know. I like some of the roboty songs on

250
00:13:49,240 --> 00:13:50,240
Speaker 2: this particular album.

251
00:13:50,400 --> 00:13:53,440
Speaker 3: Yeah, you have to be in the right mindset to

252
00:13:53,480 --> 00:13:58,600
Speaker 3: receive it, especially with songs like computer Cowboy. But but yeah,

253
00:13:58,720 --> 00:14:00,360
Speaker 3: I think there's stuff to appreciate there.

254
00:14:00,520 --> 00:14:02,720
Speaker 2: Now a couple of examples that I want to bring up.

255
00:14:02,720 --> 00:14:05,560
Speaker 2: These are ones that definitely occurred during my teenage years,

256
00:14:05,679 --> 00:14:07,480
Speaker 2: so you know, getting into that idea of being like

257
00:14:07,559 --> 00:14:14,520
Speaker 2: hypersensitive to perceived inauthenticity. So one that comes to mind

258
00:14:14,600 --> 00:14:19,000
Speaker 2: is David Bowie exploring a more experimental industrial sound on

259
00:14:19,040 --> 00:14:21,720
Speaker 2: his album Outside in nineteen ninety five.

260
00:14:22,080 --> 00:14:24,240
Speaker 3: So were there people who were like that, there is

261
00:14:24,280 --> 00:14:27,640
Speaker 3: a real David Bowie and this is not it. It is my.

262
00:14:27,640 --> 00:14:31,200
Speaker 2: Understanding that, like at the time, some of the older

263
00:14:31,280 --> 00:14:35,400
Speaker 2: David Bowie fans were not crazy about it, and their

264
00:14:35,520 --> 00:14:36,840
Speaker 2: line of thought was like, well, I don't want to

265
00:14:36,840 --> 00:14:38,240
Speaker 2: go see him in a concert if he's going to

266
00:14:38,280 --> 00:14:41,720
Speaker 2: be doing this MTV material, you know, It's like I

267
00:14:41,760 --> 00:14:43,680
Speaker 2: want to hear the hits, you know, which I guess

268
00:14:43,760 --> 00:14:46,560
Speaker 2: is always the case with artists putting out new material

269
00:14:46,680 --> 00:14:49,920
Speaker 2: and trying new things. But yeah, this was more of

270
00:14:50,120 --> 00:14:53,200
Speaker 2: an industrial sound. It was like I think right after

271
00:14:53,240 --> 00:14:55,480
Speaker 2: this album, he ends up touring with Nine Inch Nails.

272
00:14:56,040 --> 00:15:00,240
Speaker 2: So at the time, I like, I bought the album

273
00:15:00,280 --> 00:15:05,440
Speaker 2: like I did as the television commanded me, and I liked,

274
00:15:05,480 --> 00:15:06,960
Speaker 2: And I guess I still I don't really listen to

275
00:15:07,000 --> 00:15:09,800
Speaker 2: this album anymore, but I remember it having some tracks

276
00:15:09,800 --> 00:15:13,080
Speaker 2: that I dug. But at the same time, like some

277
00:15:13,160 --> 00:15:16,080
Speaker 2: of that dialogue was in my head about I wasn't

278
00:15:16,080 --> 00:15:19,400
Speaker 2: thinking of it in terms of authenticity and inauthenticity or

279
00:15:19,440 --> 00:15:22,880
Speaker 2: fakery even or even really getting deep into like David

280
00:15:22,880 --> 00:15:25,800
Speaker 2: Bowie's personas, but it was. But on some level I

281
00:15:25,880 --> 00:15:29,000
Speaker 2: was wondering, like, is this is this something he's doing

282
00:15:29,160 --> 00:15:33,720
Speaker 2: just to remain popular or is this his heart? You know,

283
00:15:33,840 --> 00:15:37,200
Speaker 2: is his Is he legitimately exploring new sounds and trying

284
00:15:37,200 --> 00:15:40,040
Speaker 2: new things? And I think it's it's my understanding now

285
00:15:40,040 --> 00:15:42,200
Speaker 2: it is the latter. Like he he is an artist

286
00:15:42,280 --> 00:15:46,560
Speaker 2: that was continually reinventing himself and trying new things and

287
00:15:46,600 --> 00:15:48,720
Speaker 2: this was just a phase of that. And you know,

288
00:15:48,800 --> 00:15:51,600
Speaker 2: he stuck with this sound for I think another album

289
00:15:51,600 --> 00:15:52,640
Speaker 2: and then he tried other things.

290
00:15:53,040 --> 00:15:56,200
Speaker 3: That is interesting. So I have no real familiarity with

291
00:15:56,280 --> 00:15:59,560
Speaker 3: Bowie's nineties output, so I don't really know anything about this,

292
00:15:59,680 --> 00:16:04,400
Speaker 3: but yeah, that an artist as a chameleon like as

293
00:16:04,440 --> 00:16:07,240
Speaker 3: as David Bowie. And you know, with all this history

294
00:16:07,240 --> 00:16:10,160
Speaker 3: of playing these different explicitly different characters, you know, with

295
00:16:10,280 --> 00:16:14,160
Speaker 3: different with names named characters, uh, and engaging in these

296
00:16:14,160 --> 00:16:16,720
Speaker 3: different styles, that there would it's he would hit some

297
00:16:16,920 --> 00:16:19,440
Speaker 3: point that people would say, Okay, now this one is

298
00:16:19,480 --> 00:16:23,120
Speaker 3: not for real, that's fake. Yeah, and that that would

299
00:16:23,160 --> 00:16:25,760
Speaker 3: have to suggest something about like the broader the way

300
00:16:25,800 --> 00:16:29,080
Speaker 3: that that genre or what he's doing in it is

301
00:16:29,120 --> 00:16:31,920
Speaker 3: received in the broader marketplace, like what the marketplace thought

302
00:16:31,960 --> 00:16:33,760
Speaker 3: about industrial music or something.

303
00:16:34,440 --> 00:16:37,600
Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah, Because another example that comes to mind, and

304
00:16:37,640 --> 00:16:39,760
Speaker 2: this is not a major moment in music history or anything,

305
00:16:39,800 --> 00:16:41,560
Speaker 2: but it's the one that stood out to me because

306
00:16:41,600 --> 00:16:44,120
Speaker 2: again I was a teenager at the time, and that

307
00:16:44,280 --> 00:16:47,640
Speaker 2: was that the band Danzig suddenly went industrial in nineteen

308
00:16:47,720 --> 00:16:50,640
Speaker 2: ninety six as well, So that's what a year after

309
00:16:50,760 --> 00:16:53,920
Speaker 2: outside and that one I remember as being a lot

310
00:16:53,960 --> 00:16:57,280
Speaker 2: more jarring, and certainly, looking back on it like it is,

311
00:16:58,200 --> 00:17:01,240
Speaker 2: it is a is a rather darch departure from the

312
00:17:01,240 --> 00:17:06,840
Speaker 2: previous material and seems like maybe it's a little less authentic.

313
00:17:08,040 --> 00:17:12,199
Speaker 2: I don't know. I'm sure Danzig fans will disagree or

314
00:17:12,280 --> 00:17:15,200
Speaker 2: agree on this. I have no point of reference here,

315
00:17:16,119 --> 00:17:18,119
Speaker 2: but you know, this kind of thing keeps happening, like

316
00:17:18,160 --> 00:17:20,080
Speaker 2: the most recent one, and I am not super well

317
00:17:20,119 --> 00:17:21,760
Speaker 2: informed on all the ins and outs of this story,

318
00:17:21,800 --> 00:17:25,040
Speaker 2: but you know, it made huge headlines that Beyonce was

319
00:17:25,080 --> 00:17:28,760
Speaker 2: going to put out a country album, and it seems

320
00:17:28,760 --> 00:17:31,560
Speaker 2: like that probably stirred up some of the same discussions,

321
00:17:31,600 --> 00:17:34,840
Speaker 2: like Beyonce do a country album? Can someone who has

322
00:17:34,840 --> 00:17:38,400
Speaker 2: not done country music albums before do a country album?

323
00:17:38,520 --> 00:17:40,680
Speaker 2: Of course they can. We just ran across some other

324
00:17:40,720 --> 00:17:45,080
Speaker 2: examples of people doing the same thing. But yeah, anytime

325
00:17:45,119 --> 00:17:48,720
Speaker 2: an artist shifts and tries something new, takes on a

326
00:17:48,720 --> 00:17:50,960
Speaker 2: new persona, etc. It raises these questions.

327
00:17:51,080 --> 00:17:53,480
Speaker 3: I don't really know anything about this example either, except

328
00:17:53,480 --> 00:17:56,480
Speaker 3: I saw some kind of headline about her maybe claiming

329
00:17:56,520 --> 00:17:58,439
Speaker 3: that it was not actually a country album.

330
00:17:59,000 --> 00:18:01,960
Speaker 2: I don't know, yeah, but you know, artists engage in

331
00:18:02,000 --> 00:18:04,240
Speaker 2: the sort of shift all the time. And it also

332
00:18:04,320 --> 00:18:06,320
Speaker 2: it reminds me a bit of our discussion about recipes

333
00:18:06,480 --> 00:18:08,679
Speaker 2: in the past. You know, whatever we now think of

334
00:18:08,720 --> 00:18:11,640
Speaker 2: as the standard recipe was at some point a shift.

335
00:18:12,160 --> 00:18:15,639
Speaker 2: And likewise, I mean, speaking of industrial music, one of

336
00:18:15,160 --> 00:18:19,080
Speaker 2: the big industrial mainstays out there has has has always

337
00:18:19,119 --> 00:18:22,560
Speaker 2: been Ministry. Ministry started out as a synthpop group. If

338
00:18:22,560 --> 00:18:25,080
Speaker 2: you go back to their first album, it is it's

339
00:18:25,240 --> 00:18:28,080
Speaker 2: very I mean, I'm you know, you can still you

340
00:18:28,119 --> 00:18:31,879
Speaker 2: can still feel the Ministry in the album, but it's

341
00:18:31,920 --> 00:18:34,840
Speaker 2: a different sound entirely. And that was just you know,

342
00:18:34,960 --> 00:18:39,240
Speaker 2: part of this particular group's evolution, and you know, it

343
00:18:39,240 --> 00:18:41,520
Speaker 2: doesn't mean it's inauthentic, it's just where they were at

344
00:18:41,520 --> 00:18:43,960
Speaker 2: that point in time. But I get I guess in general,

345
00:18:44,080 --> 00:18:46,359
Speaker 2: I'm willing to give most artists the benefit of the

346
00:18:46,400 --> 00:18:50,879
Speaker 2: doubt on these shifts and changes, though I'm sure there

347
00:18:50,880 --> 00:18:54,000
Speaker 2: are some examples that are that are maybe a little

348
00:18:54,160 --> 00:18:58,280
Speaker 2: more heavily slanted in the direction of inauthenticity. But you know,

349
00:18:58,359 --> 00:19:01,240
Speaker 2: it's not as fun to discuss those and throw a

350
00:19:01,240 --> 00:19:06,640
Speaker 2: lot of criticism at bands and performers for trying new things. However,

351
00:19:07,000 --> 00:19:09,320
Speaker 2: there was that one Garth Brooks album, as I remember,

352
00:19:09,560 --> 00:19:11,640
Speaker 2: where he took on a different persona and did non

353
00:19:11,640 --> 00:19:15,399
Speaker 2: country music Chris Gaines, Chris Gaines. Yeah, this was not

354
00:19:15,480 --> 00:19:18,520
Speaker 2: well received, as I recall, was it not? I don't

355
00:19:18,520 --> 00:19:20,720
Speaker 2: think it was. I don't think he came back to

356
00:19:20,760 --> 00:19:23,159
Speaker 2: the persona either. But again, this is an area that

357
00:19:23,200 --> 00:19:26,399
Speaker 2: I know even less about. So Garth brook fans, you know,

358
00:19:26,480 --> 00:19:28,639
Speaker 2: write in I guess and we'll we can just we

359
00:19:28,680 --> 00:19:29,440
Speaker 2: can hash this out.

360
00:19:29,920 --> 00:19:31,640
Speaker 3: How surprised are people going to be when they find

361
00:19:31,640 --> 00:19:33,679
Speaker 3: out that Garth Brooks is actually also one of the

362
00:19:33,680 --> 00:19:34,640
Speaker 3: guys in slip Knot?

363
00:19:35,800 --> 00:19:38,600
Speaker 2: That's right? They have nas son you'd never know.

364
00:19:46,480 --> 00:19:48,760
Speaker 3: But I wanted to briefly come back to the question

365
00:19:48,840 --> 00:19:53,119
Speaker 3: of why it is that music might feel like, of

366
00:19:53,160 --> 00:19:56,680
Speaker 3: all the genres of art out there, why music would

367
00:19:56,720 --> 00:20:00,720
Speaker 3: be especially subject to authenticity concern and is like, why,

368
00:20:00,800 --> 00:20:04,359
Speaker 3: you know, teenagers are really concerned about whether this singer

369
00:20:04,880 --> 00:20:08,800
Speaker 3: singer songwriter is authentic as opposed to I don't know,

370
00:20:08,880 --> 00:20:14,040
Speaker 3: you know, like painters or something. And I obviously there

371
00:20:14,040 --> 00:20:15,880
Speaker 3: could be a lot of explanations here, but I kind

372
00:20:15,880 --> 00:20:18,600
Speaker 3: of wonder if it has to do with the fact

373
00:20:18,720 --> 00:20:22,680
Speaker 3: that music is the art form most likely to be

374
00:20:22,920 --> 00:20:28,160
Speaker 3: experienced in an involuntary way. So, for example, you will rarely,

375
00:20:28,320 --> 00:20:31,000
Speaker 3: if ever, be forced to look at a painting or

376
00:20:31,040 --> 00:20:33,320
Speaker 3: watch a film. There you know, there might be social

377
00:20:33,359 --> 00:20:35,040
Speaker 3: pressure to go see a movie with your friends that

378
00:20:35,080 --> 00:20:37,359
Speaker 3: you're not really interested in, or something like that some

379
00:20:37,400 --> 00:20:40,640
Speaker 3: weird circumstance, but generally you can look at what you want,

380
00:20:40,720 --> 00:20:42,800
Speaker 3: and if you don't like what you're looking at, you can,

381
00:20:42,960 --> 00:20:45,800
Speaker 3: like you know, direct your attention elsewhere or even shut

382
00:20:45,800 --> 00:20:48,600
Speaker 3: your eyes, unless you have the aid of some kind

383
00:20:48,640 --> 00:20:51,840
Speaker 3: of technology like you know, headphones or something, which are

384
00:20:51,880 --> 00:20:55,480
Speaker 3: not appropriate to use in many say social or work scenarios.

385
00:20:55,880 --> 00:20:59,600
Speaker 3: You cannot practically shut your ears off to music the

386
00:20:59,640 --> 00:21:01,680
Speaker 3: way that you can shut your eyes or avert your

387
00:21:01,680 --> 00:21:05,520
Speaker 3: eyes from a painting. And if music is audible in

388
00:21:05,520 --> 00:21:08,840
Speaker 3: the place where you are, you're gonna hear it. Technically,

389
00:21:08,880 --> 00:21:10,960
Speaker 3: I guess this would be true of any sound based

390
00:21:11,080 --> 00:21:13,760
Speaker 3: art form because of the nature of our bodies. But

391
00:21:14,119 --> 00:21:18,159
Speaker 3: generally that's going to mean music. So music is like

392
00:21:18,600 --> 00:21:21,760
Speaker 3: especially difficult to tune out if we don't like it,

393
00:21:21,800 --> 00:21:26,439
Speaker 3: And I wonder if that makes us especially sensitive to

394
00:21:27,000 --> 00:21:29,920
Speaker 3: what we would think of as artistic deficiencies in it.

395
00:21:30,440 --> 00:21:33,199
Speaker 3: And then on top of that, a lot of music

396
00:21:33,280 --> 00:21:37,800
Speaker 3: has a linguistic element, unlike a lot of other art forms.

397
00:21:37,840 --> 00:21:41,480
Speaker 3: Because there are words in most popular music, there is

398
00:21:41,600 --> 00:21:45,960
Speaker 3: increased opportunity to scrutinize what a song is saying and

399
00:21:46,080 --> 00:21:48,600
Speaker 3: evaluate it for sincerity or truth.

400
00:21:49,240 --> 00:21:52,160
Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah, though again, just because the song is annoying

401
00:21:52,200 --> 00:21:56,439
Speaker 2: doesn't mean it's not authentic, righty, Like, I am not

402
00:21:56,520 --> 00:21:58,760
Speaker 2: a huge you know, no judgment if you're a fan

403
00:21:58,800 --> 00:22:02,000
Speaker 2: of this song, but you know the the smash Mouth song.

404
00:22:02,240 --> 00:22:03,720
Speaker 3: What is the smash Done All Star?

405
00:22:04,040 --> 00:22:07,480
Speaker 2: I mean the All Star that that song. I'm not

406
00:22:07,520 --> 00:22:10,240
Speaker 2: a fan but I do get it earwormed in my

407
00:22:10,320 --> 00:22:13,520
Speaker 2: head every now and then, and it's it's annoying. But

408
00:22:14,160 --> 00:22:17,199
Speaker 2: I don't think I would argue that that band was

409
00:22:17,200 --> 00:22:22,919
Speaker 2: being inauthentic in crafting and performing this track, But I

410
00:22:23,040 --> 00:22:25,680
Speaker 2: just it was certainly not my thing. I think another

411
00:22:25,720 --> 00:22:28,280
Speaker 2: thing about to keep in mind about all this, too

412
00:22:28,359 --> 00:22:30,160
Speaker 2: is we have to we have to bear in mind

413
00:22:30,359 --> 00:22:34,240
Speaker 2: media consumption. So like when I think back on the

414
00:22:34,359 --> 00:22:37,280
Speaker 2: music that I was exposed to in high school, like

415
00:22:37,400 --> 00:22:42,160
Speaker 2: most of it was MTV related content, and it's because

416
00:22:42,600 --> 00:22:45,199
Speaker 2: the TV was always on and MTV was one of

417
00:22:45,240 --> 00:22:48,320
Speaker 2: the channels that you could you would frequently go to,

418
00:22:48,760 --> 00:22:51,399
Speaker 2: and like, not watching the TV just did not feel

419
00:22:51,400 --> 00:22:53,199
Speaker 2: like an option. It was just, you know, it was

420
00:22:53,280 --> 00:22:55,679
Speaker 2: like the weather, it was like the ocean. You just

421
00:22:56,160 --> 00:22:58,760
Speaker 2: you engaged with it. It was just part of your environment.

422
00:22:59,119 --> 00:23:01,479
Speaker 2: And I think it is like that to varying degrees

423
00:23:01,520 --> 00:23:02,800
Speaker 2: for a lot of folks today. I mean, there are

424
00:23:02,800 --> 00:23:05,800
Speaker 2: people who still consume television like that, or even if

425
00:23:05,800 --> 00:23:09,399
Speaker 2: you're not watching television, perhaps you're consuming various advertisements in

426
00:23:09,440 --> 00:23:12,919
Speaker 2: the same way. So some of these songs or elements,

427
00:23:13,400 --> 00:23:16,840
Speaker 2: certainly there there have been more than a few commercials

428
00:23:16,880 --> 00:23:19,679
Speaker 2: that have the air of inauthenticity about them, and you

429
00:23:19,720 --> 00:23:21,879
Speaker 2: may be exposed to those over and over again.

430
00:23:22,480 --> 00:23:24,600
Speaker 3: Okay, Rob, I think it is time we must bring

431
00:23:24,720 --> 00:23:26,000
Speaker 3: Orson Wells into the picture.

432
00:23:26,880 --> 00:23:30,040
Speaker 2: That's right, Yeah, getting even more into this idea of

433
00:23:30,560 --> 00:23:34,040
Speaker 2: of fakeness, of inauthicity to the point where it is

434
00:23:34,080 --> 00:23:37,480
Speaker 2: an outright fake, which is not something we've really been

435
00:23:37,600 --> 00:23:40,320
Speaker 2: leveling at any of these artists we've discussed here, because

436
00:23:40,359 --> 00:23:42,520
Speaker 2: you know, this is more of a you could if

437
00:23:42,520 --> 00:23:44,520
Speaker 2: you were feeling particularly harsh, you might say, oh, well,

438
00:23:44,520 --> 00:23:47,440
Speaker 2: this this change, this was fake. This album was fake.

439
00:23:47,760 --> 00:23:50,600
Speaker 2: But it wasn't wasn't really fake. It was an actual fraud.

440
00:23:52,160 --> 00:23:54,440
Speaker 2: But yeah, what we're going to talk about next does

441
00:23:54,480 --> 00:23:57,159
Speaker 2: get into that territory. So, knowing that we're going to

442
00:23:57,200 --> 00:24:01,480
Speaker 2: be talking about authenticity in preparation for these episodes, I

443
00:24:01,640 --> 00:24:05,040
Speaker 2: decided to finally check out Orson Wells nineteen seventy three

444
00:24:05,119 --> 00:24:08,720
Speaker 2: film f for Fake, a film that is sometimes described

445
00:24:08,720 --> 00:24:12,679
Speaker 2: as a docudrama, other times a film essay, And I

446
00:24:12,720 --> 00:24:15,360
Speaker 2: guess I feel like maybe film essay is a little

447
00:24:15,400 --> 00:24:18,800
Speaker 2: more appropriate. It is because it's not just like a

448
00:24:18,800 --> 00:24:20,000
Speaker 2: straight up documentary.

449
00:24:20,240 --> 00:24:22,840
Speaker 3: No, I would say film essay is perfect because it

450
00:24:22,960 --> 00:24:28,919
Speaker 3: is a combination performance and a meditation on themes with

451
00:24:29,040 --> 00:24:33,040
Speaker 3: the aid of visuals and sound, and also a documenting

452
00:24:33,119 --> 00:24:35,560
Speaker 3: of certain real life characters and events.

453
00:24:36,160 --> 00:24:38,359
Speaker 2: Yeah, and it's also kind of like being cornered by

454
00:24:38,440 --> 00:24:41,480
Speaker 2: Orson Wells, probably like in a bar or a restaurant,

455
00:24:42,640 --> 00:24:44,320
Speaker 2: and he's just talking at you for a long time,

456
00:24:44,320 --> 00:24:47,520
Speaker 2: and it's it's and it's remarkable, and he's very charismatic,

457
00:24:47,920 --> 00:24:50,320
Speaker 2: and you are glad that you have been cornered by

458
00:24:50,359 --> 00:24:51,400
Speaker 2: such an interesting man.

459
00:24:51,520 --> 00:24:55,639
Speaker 3: Yeah. Ah, the French known to do magic tricks, and

460
00:24:55,760 --> 00:24:56,639
Speaker 3: he shows you some.

461
00:24:59,440 --> 00:25:01,359
Speaker 2: I was looking up a little bit about how this

462
00:25:01,400 --> 00:25:04,680
Speaker 2: film was received, and Roger Ebert in his review described

463
00:25:04,720 --> 00:25:06,679
Speaker 2: it as a film spun out of next to nothing,

464
00:25:07,200 --> 00:25:09,960
Speaker 2: and he included this quote, Orson Wells can make better

465
00:25:10,000 --> 00:25:13,000
Speaker 2: movies than most directors with one hand tied behind his back.

466
00:25:13,200 --> 00:25:15,680
Speaker 2: His problem, of course, is that for thirty five years

467
00:25:15,680 --> 00:25:17,040
Speaker 2: the hand has remained tied.

468
00:25:17,960 --> 00:25:18,480
Speaker 3: That's good.

469
00:25:20,880 --> 00:25:23,560
Speaker 2: I don't know if I'm not as enough as an

470
00:25:23,600 --> 00:25:27,160
Speaker 2: expert on Wells's film of his filmography to really comment

471
00:25:27,200 --> 00:25:29,720
Speaker 2: on that, but esteem for this particular film has grown

472
00:25:29,800 --> 00:25:32,880
Speaker 2: quite a bit since its initial release, where I think

473
00:25:32,880 --> 00:25:35,000
Speaker 2: it was kind of polarizing. Some people thought it was brilliant,

474
00:25:35,080 --> 00:25:38,520
Speaker 2: others thought it was incomprehensible. Ebert gave it three stars

475
00:25:38,520 --> 00:25:39,320
Speaker 2: in seventy seven.

476
00:25:39,520 --> 00:25:41,199
Speaker 3: It's been a long time since I've seen it, but

477
00:25:41,240 --> 00:25:43,520
Speaker 3: I remember quite liking it. My friend Ben showed it

478
00:25:43,520 --> 00:25:48,119
Speaker 3: to me years and years ago, and yeah, I was

479
00:25:48,560 --> 00:25:49,720
Speaker 3: my attention was wrapped.

480
00:25:50,240 --> 00:25:55,080
Speaker 2: Yeah. So, in short, it's a Wells hosted essentially, we'll say,

481
00:25:55,080 --> 00:26:00,560
Speaker 2: documentary just for ease of conversation here about famed and

482
00:26:00,800 --> 00:26:05,400
Speaker 2: art forger Elmir de Lori, which cites and features interviews

483
00:26:05,480 --> 00:26:09,160
Speaker 2: with a man who wrote a book about Elmir, Clifford Irving,

484
00:26:09,640 --> 00:26:12,640
Speaker 2: a man who, in turn, after his interview segments were

485
00:26:12,640 --> 00:26:15,399
Speaker 2: shot for this documentary, but prior to the completion of

486
00:26:15,480 --> 00:26:18,639
Speaker 2: the film, turned out to have allegedly written a hoax

487
00:26:18,680 --> 00:26:20,240
Speaker 2: biography of Howard Hughes.

488
00:26:20,560 --> 00:26:22,920
Speaker 3: This was a hoax autobiography, right, like.

489
00:26:22,880 --> 00:26:25,200
Speaker 2: It was Yeslay's autobiography.

490
00:26:24,520 --> 00:26:26,760
Speaker 3: Yes, claiming to be by Howard Hughes.

491
00:26:27,359 --> 00:26:31,600
Speaker 2: Yeah, based on his his handwriting and so forth. You know,

492
00:26:31,600 --> 00:26:35,560
Speaker 2: a huge, huge scandal. So these are the initial two

493
00:26:35,640 --> 00:26:39,080
Speaker 2: fingers of the cat's cradle that Wells constructs from here

494
00:26:39,119 --> 00:26:43,679
Speaker 2: on out. In this in this film on fakery, on authenticity,

495
00:26:43,920 --> 00:26:46,280
Speaker 2: and he also freely injects his own story into all

496
00:26:46,320 --> 00:26:49,840
Speaker 2: of the citing early exaggerations of his own credentials that

497
00:26:49,920 --> 00:26:52,600
Speaker 2: allowed him to rise to the top in show business,

498
00:26:52,760 --> 00:26:55,200
Speaker 2: I think, he adds, and I've been plummeting ever since.

499
00:26:56,600 --> 00:26:59,639
Speaker 2: He also brings up the nineteen thirty eight War of

500
00:26:59,640 --> 00:27:02,760
Speaker 2: the World old radio fiasco, which, of course, you know,

501
00:27:03,600 --> 00:27:06,600
Speaker 2: apparently convinced a fair number of people that it was

502
00:27:06,640 --> 00:27:09,560
Speaker 2: actually happening. And he goes on to indulge in some

503
00:27:09,640 --> 00:27:12,639
Speaker 2: overt forgery in at least the last portion of the film,

504
00:27:12,920 --> 00:27:15,639
Speaker 2: and then points out the forgery and invites us all

505
00:27:15,680 --> 00:27:16,480
Speaker 2: to think about it.

506
00:27:16,520 --> 00:27:18,679
Speaker 3: So sort of like we've been doing in this series,

507
00:27:18,760 --> 00:27:21,879
Speaker 3: he invites you to think about what is authenticity? We

508
00:27:22,040 --> 00:27:24,639
Speaker 3: use this concept, but do we understand what it means?

509
00:27:24,720 --> 00:27:26,919
Speaker 3: What is real? And what is fake? And why do

510
00:27:26,960 --> 00:27:27,360
Speaker 3: we care?

511
00:27:27,760 --> 00:27:30,040
Speaker 2: Yeah? Like, what's the difference between a masterpiece and a

512
00:27:30,080 --> 00:27:34,320
Speaker 2: masterful fake? Is almost any story indeed some kind of

513
00:27:34,320 --> 00:27:39,439
Speaker 2: a lie, a lie in Picasso's words, as sided by Wells,

514
00:27:39,480 --> 00:27:42,960
Speaker 2: Here is something that makes us realize the truth? Is

515
00:27:43,520 --> 00:27:48,000
Speaker 2: that true? That is a dependable statement? Can an authentic artist,

516
00:27:48,040 --> 00:27:50,480
Speaker 2: create a fake, can a hoax? Or create where I

517
00:27:50,480 --> 00:27:54,040
Speaker 2: suppose recreate a masterpiece? You know, there are a lot

518
00:27:54,080 --> 00:27:57,240
Speaker 2: of ins and outs to this when you start swirling

519
00:27:57,280 --> 00:28:00,000
Speaker 2: it around in you're negrony that was his favorite tree

520
00:28:00,240 --> 00:28:02,879
Speaker 2: by the way. Oh yeah, so these are these are

521
00:28:02,880 --> 00:28:06,520
Speaker 2: not really questions meant to be conclusively answered, And indeed,

522
00:28:06,520 --> 00:28:10,119
Speaker 2: I think we'll find that it all depends very largely

523
00:28:10,200 --> 00:28:13,000
Speaker 2: on the context of an individual example. So, for instance,

524
00:28:13,040 --> 00:28:16,560
Speaker 2: what sort of lie is is a given story based

525
00:28:16,600 --> 00:28:19,000
Speaker 2: upon Is it based on a malicious lie, a hateful lie,

526
00:28:19,040 --> 00:28:23,000
Speaker 2: a well meaning lie, a mere exaggeration or dramatization. There's

527
00:28:23,040 --> 00:28:26,760
Speaker 2: so much room for variation here, and you still encounter

528
00:28:26,840 --> 00:28:30,200
Speaker 2: various examples in just sort of like popular discourse about

529
00:28:31,960 --> 00:28:36,840
Speaker 2: about individuals, about performances, about you know, performance works, where

530
00:28:37,280 --> 00:28:40,560
Speaker 2: someone will say was this authentic? Is this was part

531
00:28:40,560 --> 00:28:41,960
Speaker 2: of this made up? And so forth.

532
00:28:42,640 --> 00:28:45,800
Speaker 3: I think the difference between fiction and a lie is

533
00:28:45,880 --> 00:28:51,400
Speaker 3: the knowing consent of the audience in advance, and in

534
00:28:51,440 --> 00:28:55,200
Speaker 3: most cases it's interesting that this is established through entirely

535
00:28:55,320 --> 00:28:58,560
Speaker 3: meta textual means, Like you can have a printed novel

536
00:28:59,160 --> 00:29:01,920
Speaker 3: in which no part of the text makes clear that

537
00:29:01,960 --> 00:29:05,600
Speaker 3: the events described did not actually happen, and yet somehow

538
00:29:05,600 --> 00:29:09,320
Speaker 3: we all still know. It's like from surrounding clues in

539
00:29:09,360 --> 00:29:12,280
Speaker 3: the culture, like what section of the bookstore or library

540
00:29:12,360 --> 00:29:15,000
Speaker 3: you'd find the book in, how other people talk about

541
00:29:15,040 --> 00:29:19,160
Speaker 3: the book, how it's advertised, and so forth. Meanwhile, if

542
00:29:19,160 --> 00:29:21,560
Speaker 3: you read something that you understand to be a true

543
00:29:21,680 --> 00:29:25,480
Speaker 3: account of events that happened in reality, say an autobiography

544
00:29:25,520 --> 00:29:28,400
Speaker 3: of Howard Hughes or something, and then you discover that

545
00:29:28,440 --> 00:29:31,800
Speaker 3: the events described are fictional, or that the author is

546
00:29:31,840 --> 00:29:33,520
Speaker 3: not who they claim to be, I think most of

547
00:29:33,560 --> 00:29:37,800
Speaker 3: us would feel very frustrated and betrayed by this, unless,

548
00:29:37,880 --> 00:29:40,480
Speaker 3: that is, we know in advance that we're going to

549
00:29:40,520 --> 00:29:42,479
Speaker 3: be told lies. And here I think back to an

550
00:29:42,520 --> 00:29:45,600
Speaker 3: example that's come up on the podcast a number of

551
00:29:45,640 --> 00:29:48,880
Speaker 3: times in the past year or so. I'm very interested

552
00:29:49,000 --> 00:29:55,360
Speaker 3: in the autobiography of the sixteenth century Italian sculptor Benvenudo Cellini.

553
00:29:55,920 --> 00:29:57,680
Speaker 3: We've told a number of stories about him. We talked

554
00:29:57,680 --> 00:30:02,160
Speaker 3: about him in the eisode about Diamonds, where we were

555
00:30:02,160 --> 00:30:04,920
Speaker 3: talking about his claims that someone tried to poison him

556
00:30:04,920 --> 00:30:10,000
Speaker 3: with a diamond in his food. And so, you know, Chillini,

557
00:30:10,800 --> 00:30:14,000
Speaker 3: like he writes this autobiography, which purports to be the

558
00:30:14,120 --> 00:30:17,720
Speaker 3: true story of his life, and yet I am certain

559
00:30:17,840 --> 00:30:21,560
Speaker 3: that it contains lots of exaggerations and even outright lies,

560
00:30:21,920 --> 00:30:25,040
Speaker 3: and yet I'm still interested in reading it. And I

561
00:30:25,080 --> 00:30:28,040
Speaker 3: think it's that. I think it's that I'm okay with that,

562
00:30:28,120 --> 00:30:32,000
Speaker 3: because I already know that we don't want to find

563
00:30:32,040 --> 00:30:35,880
Speaker 3: out after reading something that what we read isn't true.

564
00:30:36,200 --> 00:30:39,760
Speaker 3: We'd like to know beforehand, Like going into a lie

565
00:30:39,920 --> 00:30:43,800
Speaker 3: knowing in advance feels like a whimsical adventure. But finding

566
00:30:43,840 --> 00:30:46,840
Speaker 3: out you've been told a lie after you believed it

567
00:30:46,880 --> 00:30:48,160
Speaker 3: makes you feel like a fool.

568
00:30:48,760 --> 00:30:52,280
Speaker 2: Yeah. Absolutely, And and of course, over the course of time,

569
00:30:53,760 --> 00:30:57,040
Speaker 2: something that is a fraud, that is fooling people, it

570
00:30:57,080 --> 00:30:59,960
Speaker 2: can't eventually find new life after the fact of someone's like,

571
00:31:00,080 --> 00:31:03,240
Speaker 2: we know this is not a fraud now, and now

572
00:31:03,280 --> 00:31:05,480
Speaker 2: perhaps we can appreciate it as a work of fiction.

573
00:31:05,680 --> 00:31:10,440
Speaker 2: But that transition is not guaranteed and certainly doesn't occur

574
00:31:10,480 --> 00:31:14,240
Speaker 2: every time. But in this discussion of like, the difference

575
00:31:14,240 --> 00:31:17,560
Speaker 2: between fiction and lies, between fantasy and lies reminds me

576
00:31:17,720 --> 00:31:20,520
Speaker 2: of our discussions in the Weird House episode on the

577
00:31:20,560 --> 00:31:23,320
Speaker 2: movie The Never Ending Story based on Michael DA's novel,

578
00:31:24,080 --> 00:31:29,240
Speaker 2: and in the novel especially indicates into the idea of

579
00:31:29,880 --> 00:31:35,680
Speaker 2: the denizens of Fantasia or Fantastica, being creatures of pure

580
00:31:35,720 --> 00:31:39,160
Speaker 2: fantasy that have been dreamed into existence by humans. But

581
00:31:39,240 --> 00:31:42,600
Speaker 2: if they travel through then nothing, they are not destroyed.

582
00:31:42,960 --> 00:31:45,640
Speaker 2: They are reborn in our world, but they are reborn

583
00:31:45,640 --> 00:31:48,440
Speaker 2: as lies. So that is the way he sort of

584
00:31:49,640 --> 00:31:53,840
Speaker 2: imagined the relationship between lies and fantasy, between lies and

585
00:31:53,880 --> 00:31:57,600
Speaker 2: fiction is that the lie is kind of the same energy,

586
00:31:57,640 --> 00:32:01,280
Speaker 2: but it is twisted into this form that does not

587
00:32:02,520 --> 00:32:06,120
Speaker 2: give us hope, does not give us escape. It takes

588
00:32:06,120 --> 00:32:09,040
Speaker 2: this cruel form that is a part of the overtly

589
00:32:09,120 --> 00:32:14,360
Speaker 2: unimaginative and cruel mundane world. In citing a book like

590
00:32:14,360 --> 00:32:16,600
Speaker 2: The Neverending Store, of course, we're also admitting that, yeah,

591
00:32:16,640 --> 00:32:21,560
Speaker 2: that we're dealing with highly subjective territory here. Now, one

592
00:32:21,600 --> 00:32:24,640
Speaker 2: point that is hit upon in f for Fake is

593
00:32:24,640 --> 00:32:28,920
Speaker 2: that between the masterful fraud and the masterpiece, it's a

594
00:32:28,920 --> 00:32:32,880
Speaker 2: belief in authenticity that makes all the difference monetarily, certainly,

595
00:32:32,960 --> 00:32:36,240
Speaker 2: and Wells dwells on this somewhat, but also in terms

596
00:32:36,240 --> 00:32:39,680
Speaker 2: of esteem that is given to a particular art work

597
00:32:40,000 --> 00:32:43,360
Speaker 2: authenticity can therefore be this kind of illusion. It's only

598
00:32:43,400 --> 00:32:45,040
Speaker 2: as real as our belief in it.

599
00:32:45,680 --> 00:32:49,520
Speaker 3: Yeah, A belief in the power of authenticity in a

600
00:32:49,520 --> 00:32:51,120
Speaker 3: work of art is kind of like belief in the

601
00:32:51,200 --> 00:32:55,080
Speaker 3: value of money, Like it is very real if people

602
00:32:55,120 --> 00:32:57,280
Speaker 3: believe in it, and thus, like a whole culture can

603
00:32:57,320 --> 00:32:59,840
Speaker 3: function on top of it. But if people don't believe

604
00:33:00,000 --> 00:33:02,840
Speaker 3: money is valuable, then it ceases being useful. And I

605
00:33:02,880 --> 00:33:04,880
Speaker 3: think you could say that the same is true in

606
00:33:04,920 --> 00:33:06,560
Speaker 3: some ways about qualities of art.

607
00:33:07,240 --> 00:33:09,480
Speaker 2: Yeah, Yeah, And that's one of the reasons it can

608
00:33:09,560 --> 00:33:12,280
Speaker 2: be so hurtful and it can be so disappointing to

609
00:33:12,400 --> 00:33:15,840
Speaker 2: find out that something that you were invested in, that

610
00:33:15,880 --> 00:33:19,440
Speaker 2: you found beautiful, that you had this reaction too, is

611
00:33:19,480 --> 00:33:22,640
Speaker 2: in fact not one hundred percent of what you thought

612
00:33:22,680 --> 00:33:26,040
Speaker 2: it was. And there are variations on that theme, you know,

613
00:33:26,080 --> 00:33:30,040
Speaker 2: throughout our appreciation of all sorts of works of art

614
00:33:30,120 --> 00:33:33,040
Speaker 2: and music and so forth. Yeah, now, speaking of this,

615
00:33:33,120 --> 00:33:35,320
Speaker 2: there are it is worth knowing there are no worthy

616
00:33:35,360 --> 00:33:37,760
Speaker 2: cases of works and art collections that turned out to

617
00:33:37,760 --> 00:33:41,400
Speaker 2: be fakes. These still pop up. But there's also the reverse.

618
00:33:41,440 --> 00:33:43,960
Speaker 2: There are works previously judged to be fakes, but then

619
00:33:44,040 --> 00:33:46,640
Speaker 2: upon closer scrutiny or you know, new information or someone

620
00:33:46,680 --> 00:33:48,400
Speaker 2: else takes a look at them, they turn out to

621
00:33:48,440 --> 00:33:52,360
Speaker 2: be authentic. So it's interesting how, at least at times

622
00:33:52,400 --> 00:33:53,640
Speaker 2: this can go back and forth.

623
00:33:55,120 --> 00:33:59,240
Speaker 3: Was this the case with da Vinci's Lady with Ermine?

624
00:34:00,000 --> 00:34:01,960
Speaker 3: Feel like I was reading about that not too long ago,

625
00:34:02,080 --> 00:34:04,520
Speaker 3: that or at least for a while, there were questions

626
00:34:04,560 --> 00:34:06,760
Speaker 3: about who had really painted it or was it a

627
00:34:06,800 --> 00:34:09,040
Speaker 3: true da Vinci? But I think now it is largely

628
00:34:09,080 --> 00:34:09,680
Speaker 3: thought to be.

629
00:34:10,120 --> 00:34:12,920
Speaker 2: I'm not sure because I wasn't reading about that particular

630
00:34:12,960 --> 00:34:16,880
Speaker 2: painting in in reference to this, but there there have

631
00:34:17,000 --> 00:34:21,040
Speaker 2: been various works like that have had this story where

632
00:34:21,160 --> 00:34:23,680
Speaker 2: it's dismissed as a fake, might be a very good fake,

633
00:34:23,760 --> 00:34:26,640
Speaker 2: but then we come back and we realized that that

634
00:34:26,680 --> 00:34:29,919
Speaker 2: it's not the case. And then it's also worth noting

635
00:34:29,960 --> 00:34:32,200
Speaker 2: that I think in different artistic traditions there just there's

636
00:34:32,200 --> 00:34:36,319
Speaker 2: a different relationship with copying master works from the past,

637
00:34:36,640 --> 00:34:39,440
Speaker 2: you know, to the extent that they may be copied

638
00:34:39,480 --> 00:34:43,920
Speaker 2: as especially as a learning method for you, for artists

639
00:34:43,960 --> 00:34:44,479
Speaker 2: and so forth.

640
00:34:44,560 --> 00:34:47,480
Speaker 3: Well, that actually connects to something that I wanted to

641
00:34:47,520 --> 00:34:52,480
Speaker 3: talk about today with respect to authenticity in art. I

642
00:34:52,520 --> 00:34:56,760
Speaker 3: wanted to talk about a famous essay in the history

643
00:34:56,760 --> 00:35:01,600
Speaker 3: of art criticism by the philosopher and critic Walter Benjamin

644
00:35:01,800 --> 00:35:05,520
Speaker 3: called the Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction.

645
00:35:06,360 --> 00:35:09,600
Speaker 3: This was published in nineteen thirty five, and the core

646
00:35:09,719 --> 00:35:14,200
Speaker 3: claim of Benjamin's argument in this essay is that what

647
00:35:14,320 --> 00:35:19,359
Speaker 3: he calls mechanical reproduction, meaning techniques such as lithography, photography,

648
00:35:19,400 --> 00:35:24,520
Speaker 3: and film, have fundamentally changed the way art functions within

649
00:35:24,600 --> 00:35:28,520
Speaker 3: culture and changed what art means to us. And this

650
00:35:28,680 --> 00:35:31,640
Speaker 3: essay brings in a lot of different ideas, including religious

651
00:35:31,640 --> 00:35:36,680
Speaker 3: ideas and political ones. Walter Benjamin was a Jewish German

652
00:35:36,960 --> 00:35:39,080
Speaker 3: writing this at the time of the early years of

653
00:35:39,120 --> 00:35:42,120
Speaker 3: the Third Reich, and he was concerned with ways that

654
00:35:42,200 --> 00:35:47,040
Speaker 3: technology could change, how art would be used for propaganda

655
00:35:47,120 --> 00:35:49,640
Speaker 3: and mass manipulation and all kinds of stuff like that.

656
00:35:50,160 --> 00:35:52,799
Speaker 3: I'm going to get less into the political implications here,

657
00:35:53,719 --> 00:35:55,799
Speaker 3: so I can't cover everything in this essay, but I

658
00:35:55,840 --> 00:35:59,560
Speaker 3: did want to focus on his ideas related to authenticity.

659
00:36:00,120 --> 00:36:03,120
Speaker 3: So Benjamin talks about how like you were mentioning a

660
00:36:03,120 --> 00:36:07,760
Speaker 3: minute ago, rob art has always been in principle reproducible

661
00:36:07,840 --> 00:36:10,880
Speaker 3: to some extent A work of art made by a person,

662
00:36:11,000 --> 00:36:14,080
Speaker 3: such as a painting or a sculpture, or a performance

663
00:36:14,080 --> 00:36:17,640
Speaker 3: of a song or a dance, can always be imitated

664
00:36:17,840 --> 00:36:21,759
Speaker 3: and copied to some extent by another person. But a

665
00:36:21,800 --> 00:36:25,520
Speaker 3: copy made by mere imitation is never exact. It can

666
00:36:25,520 --> 00:36:29,560
Speaker 3: only strive to be similar by degree, and it is

667
00:36:29,719 --> 00:36:33,600
Speaker 3: difficult and laborious to reproduce. But a big part of

668
00:36:33,719 --> 00:36:37,360
Speaker 3: the training of artists in centuries past used to be

669
00:36:37,600 --> 00:36:41,360
Speaker 3: just trying to reproduce other works of art by artists

670
00:36:41,400 --> 00:36:45,239
Speaker 3: who came before. And one thing I would add is

671
00:36:45,280 --> 00:36:49,000
Speaker 3: that I think a lot of creative people even today

672
00:36:49,840 --> 00:36:53,920
Speaker 3: discover their own original creative genius first by trying to

673
00:36:53,960 --> 00:36:57,319
Speaker 3: copy things, trying to copy things when they're young, and

674
00:36:57,600 --> 00:37:02,080
Speaker 3: in the laborious process of making manual copies of somebody

675
00:37:02,080 --> 00:37:05,920
Speaker 3: else's work of art, because they can't make a perfect copy,

676
00:37:05,960 --> 00:37:09,840
Speaker 3: they end up diverging from from the original out of

677
00:37:09,920 --> 00:37:13,239
Speaker 3: necessity because they can't do it, And then in this

678
00:37:13,360 --> 00:37:17,880
Speaker 3: divergence start expressing their own unique style, which then develops

679
00:37:17,880 --> 00:37:21,080
Speaker 3: into what that person will use when creating original works

680
00:37:21,080 --> 00:37:21,560
Speaker 3: of their own.

681
00:37:22,040 --> 00:37:25,359
Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah, And we see this throughout history. Sometimes in

682
00:37:25,400 --> 00:37:29,400
Speaker 2: like rigorous art training in different cultures, but even today,

683
00:37:29,440 --> 00:37:32,560
Speaker 2: like there's the sort of the various examples of this,

684
00:37:32,920 --> 00:37:36,080
Speaker 2: some more current, but some also going back several decades,

685
00:37:36,120 --> 00:37:40,600
Speaker 2: where what begins as an exercise in fan fiction becomes

686
00:37:40,800 --> 00:37:43,319
Speaker 2: either the either the work in and of itself or

687
00:37:43,360 --> 00:37:45,240
Speaker 2: sort of the ideas that spring out of that work

688
00:37:45,680 --> 00:37:50,560
Speaker 2: become a new creation, something that is wholly original to

689
00:37:50,600 --> 00:37:54,600
Speaker 2: a given author or you know, creator of some sort.

690
00:37:54,800 --> 00:37:58,319
Speaker 3: Yeah, totally. So, I think imitation is not something that

691
00:37:58,480 --> 00:38:01,319
Speaker 3: you know, should be should be shown within art. It's

692
00:38:01,360 --> 00:38:04,840
Speaker 3: like a necessary part of the development of artistic styles

693
00:38:04,880 --> 00:38:08,160
Speaker 3: and has been, you know, all throughout history. But one

694
00:38:08,160 --> 00:38:10,160
Speaker 3: of the things is that while we've always been able

695
00:38:10,200 --> 00:38:15,520
Speaker 3: to imitate other people's performances and artworks over the centuries,

696
00:38:15,640 --> 00:38:21,359
Speaker 3: gradually higher fidelity techniques for mechanically reproducing works of art

697
00:38:21,400 --> 00:38:25,319
Speaker 3: have come online. So you might originally have things like

698
00:38:25,600 --> 00:38:28,560
Speaker 3: the crude ability to stamp coins in the ancient world,

699
00:38:28,640 --> 00:38:31,760
Speaker 3: you could reproduce a crude design over and over on coins.

700
00:38:32,320 --> 00:38:36,440
Speaker 3: Later you get woodcut printing, lithography, and finally, in the

701
00:38:36,520 --> 00:38:40,919
Speaker 3: nineteenth century, the photograph in the motion picture and early

702
00:38:40,960 --> 00:38:43,480
Speaker 3: in this essay, though this wasn't quite yet true at

703
00:38:43,480 --> 00:38:47,400
Speaker 3: the time, Benjamin quotes the French poet Paul Valerie making

704
00:38:47,520 --> 00:38:52,000
Speaker 3: a striking prediction about the future of image and sound

705
00:38:52,080 --> 00:38:58,120
Speaker 3: reproduction technology. So Valerie says in translation, just as water,

706
00:38:58,480 --> 00:39:02,160
Speaker 3: gas and electricity are brought into our houses from far

707
00:39:02,200 --> 00:39:05,759
Speaker 3: off to satisfy our needs in response to a minimal effort,

708
00:39:06,000 --> 00:39:10,040
Speaker 3: so we shall be supplied with visual or auditory images

709
00:39:10,400 --> 00:39:13,480
Speaker 3: which will appear and disappear at a simple movement of

710
00:39:13,520 --> 00:39:18,000
Speaker 3: the hand, hardly more than a sign whoa wow, whoa

711
00:39:19,040 --> 00:39:22,480
Speaker 3: reading that made me sit back because obviously that is

712
00:39:22,520 --> 00:39:24,920
Speaker 3: the world we live in now. I mean, it's we

713
00:39:25,480 --> 00:39:28,640
Speaker 3: don't stop to appreciate it often. But how historically strange

714
00:39:28,680 --> 00:39:32,439
Speaker 3: it is that we can we can summon a photograph

715
00:39:32,480 --> 00:39:36,160
Speaker 3: of almost anything that has been photographed, just by making

716
00:39:36,239 --> 00:39:37,720
Speaker 3: a few gestures with the hand.

717
00:39:38,560 --> 00:39:41,560
Speaker 2: Yeah, it is crazy, like to the point where it

718
00:39:41,719 --> 00:39:45,200
Speaker 2: feels like we are being deprived of something when we

719
00:39:45,280 --> 00:39:48,560
Speaker 2: can't summon such an image, when there is an image

720
00:39:48,600 --> 00:39:51,240
Speaker 2: that is or or you know, artwork that is lost.

721
00:39:51,920 --> 00:39:55,120
Speaker 2: I feel this way just talking about films, like so

722
00:39:55,520 --> 00:39:59,319
Speaker 2: much in the cinematic canon is available to us now

723
00:39:59,360 --> 00:40:01,359
Speaker 2: and in many case is it has been remastered, has

724
00:40:01,400 --> 00:40:06,200
Speaker 2: been made widely available digitally or otherwise. And yet there

725
00:40:06,200 --> 00:40:09,320
Speaker 2: are plenty of exceptions to this, films that haven't been restored,

726
00:40:09,320 --> 00:40:12,480
Speaker 2: that aren't as widely available, or in some cases, films

727
00:40:12,480 --> 00:40:15,279
Speaker 2: that have been lost. And there's something that just kind

728
00:40:15,320 --> 00:40:17,560
Speaker 2: of crazy about that, you know, given how much is

729
00:40:17,600 --> 00:40:19,759
Speaker 2: out there and how much, we have to realize that

730
00:40:19,800 --> 00:40:22,680
Speaker 2: there are works that are just gone to history and

731
00:40:22,719 --> 00:40:24,080
Speaker 2: we'll never be able to bring them back.

732
00:40:24,480 --> 00:40:28,080
Speaker 3: Yeah. So obviously this gets us really thinking about, you know,

733
00:40:28,160 --> 00:40:31,400
Speaker 3: the preservation of art and our access to it and

734
00:40:32,760 --> 00:40:34,800
Speaker 3: what it means when we're not able to see something

735
00:40:34,840 --> 00:40:38,799
Speaker 3: we want. But also it I think should make us

736
00:40:38,800 --> 00:40:43,439
Speaker 3: think about how this kind of access and this kind

737
00:40:43,520 --> 00:40:48,600
Speaker 3: of relationship to images of art, and this would include

738
00:40:48,600 --> 00:40:50,879
Speaker 3: all forms of art. I mean, we're talking especially about

739
00:40:50,920 --> 00:40:53,840
Speaker 3: visual art, but this would include you know, recordings of

740
00:40:53,920 --> 00:41:00,520
Speaker 3: musical performances, recordings of plays, and other types of physical performancesculpture's,

741
00:41:00,560 --> 00:41:04,600
Speaker 3: imagery of sculptures, films. Of course, we should think about

742
00:41:04,600 --> 00:41:09,680
Speaker 3: how this kind of media technologically mediated access to these

743
00:41:09,719 --> 00:41:12,960
Speaker 3: works of art changes the way we experience them and

744
00:41:13,000 --> 00:41:17,880
Speaker 3: what they mean to us. So in this essay, Benjamin

745
00:41:17,960 --> 00:41:22,640
Speaker 3: argues that when we interact with a mechanically reproduced copy

746
00:41:22,719 --> 00:41:25,960
Speaker 3: of a work of art, for example, a photographic print

747
00:41:26,040 --> 00:41:29,600
Speaker 3: of a painting, just so you can imagine something specific

748
00:41:29,640 --> 00:41:33,160
Speaker 3: in your mind, Let's say the Anatomy Lesson by Rembrandt.

749
00:41:33,680 --> 00:41:36,840
Speaker 3: I in fact copied and pasted an image of this

750
00:41:36,920 --> 00:41:40,560
Speaker 3: painting into our outline here, So let that marinate, given

751
00:41:40,640 --> 00:41:46,120
Speaker 3: what we're talking about. But so when we access, say

752
00:41:46,120 --> 00:41:48,960
Speaker 3: a photographic print of a painting like this, we may

753
00:41:49,000 --> 00:41:52,920
Speaker 3: be deceived into thinking that we are looking at the painting,

754
00:41:53,200 --> 00:41:56,520
Speaker 3: but we're not. Even though, but by some measures, you

755
00:41:56,560 --> 00:41:59,799
Speaker 3: could argue that the photograph is a quote perfect reproduction,

756
00:42:01,080 --> 00:42:04,080
Speaker 3: not subject to like the little variations and deficiencies that

757
00:42:04,080 --> 00:42:06,960
Speaker 3: would emerge if a skilled forger tried to paint a

758
00:42:07,040 --> 00:42:11,080
Speaker 3: copy of it by hand. There are still differences. First

759
00:42:11,080 --> 00:42:14,600
Speaker 3: of all, though we think of photographic reproduction as perfect,

760
00:42:15,000 --> 00:42:18,400
Speaker 3: there are things that can't really be captured very well

761
00:42:18,440 --> 00:42:22,879
Speaker 3: in a photo, such as the three dimensionality of some paintings,

762
00:42:22,920 --> 00:42:25,640
Speaker 3: Like some paintings really kind of come off the canvas,

763
00:42:26,080 --> 00:42:28,600
Speaker 3: and you know, the texture of the brushstrokes and the

764
00:42:28,640 --> 00:42:31,200
Speaker 3: pile up of the painting and stuff can cast little

765
00:42:31,200 --> 00:42:34,120
Speaker 3: shadows and so forth. So there's that, there's how the

766
00:42:34,160 --> 00:42:37,120
Speaker 3: painting interacts with light in the room, how it changes

767
00:42:37,160 --> 00:42:41,640
Speaker 3: over time, etc. However, even if we had a machine

768
00:42:41,800 --> 00:42:46,640
Speaker 3: to make three dimensionally chemically exact physical copies of painting,

769
00:42:47,480 --> 00:42:51,280
Speaker 3: Benjamin says, there would still be a difference, because he writes, quote,

770
00:42:51,600 --> 00:42:54,440
Speaker 3: even the most perfect reproduction of a work of art

771
00:42:54,800 --> 00:42:59,000
Speaker 3: is lacking in one element, its presence in time and space,

772
00:42:59,320 --> 00:43:02,560
Speaker 3: it's unique existence at the place where it happens to be.

773
00:43:03,440 --> 00:43:06,719
Speaker 3: This unique existence of the work of art determined the

774
00:43:06,840 --> 00:43:10,120
Speaker 3: history to which it was subject throughout the time of

775
00:43:10,160 --> 00:43:13,759
Speaker 3: its existence. This includes the changes which it may have

776
00:43:13,800 --> 00:43:16,960
Speaker 3: suffered in physical condition over the years, as well as

777
00:43:16,960 --> 00:43:20,759
Speaker 3: the various changes in its ownership. So, by virtue of

778
00:43:20,800 --> 00:43:24,040
Speaker 3: the fact that a physical work of art, the original

779
00:43:24,640 --> 00:43:29,279
Speaker 3: is a single object, it has a history associated with it.

780
00:43:29,640 --> 00:43:32,719
Speaker 3: That is not true of the history of the copies.

781
00:43:33,360 --> 00:43:35,480
Speaker 3: Now we might well think, well, when I look at

782
00:43:35,480 --> 00:43:38,640
Speaker 3: a painting, I don't really care if it's the physically

783
00:43:38,680 --> 00:43:42,320
Speaker 3: original copy. I don't really care whether the painter's hands

784
00:43:42,440 --> 00:43:45,680
Speaker 3: touched it. I don't care who owned this physical artifact

785
00:43:45,760 --> 00:43:48,239
Speaker 3: or where it was kept at what time. That's not

786
00:43:48,400 --> 00:43:51,680
Speaker 3: interesting information to me. And maybe you don't care about that.

787
00:43:51,680 --> 00:43:53,960
Speaker 3: That's something maybe I don't think about all that often

788
00:43:54,000 --> 00:43:56,879
Speaker 3: when I google an image of a painting. But it's

789
00:43:56,920 --> 00:43:59,640
Speaker 3: possible that the fact that we don't care about those

790
00:43:59,680 --> 00:44:03,120
Speaker 3: things is a result of existing in a world where

791
00:44:03,160 --> 00:44:07,960
Speaker 3: our response to art has been conditioned by ubiquitous mechanical reproduction.

792
00:44:08,640 --> 00:44:12,319
Speaker 2: And it's interesting to compare these experiences of encountering art

793
00:44:12,320 --> 00:44:15,440
Speaker 2: in person and seeing it online and so forth. Like

794
00:44:15,640 --> 00:44:18,640
Speaker 2: I can think of examples from my form my on

795
00:44:18,719 --> 00:44:21,120
Speaker 2: my own part, they went both ways. Like, for instance,

796
00:44:21,160 --> 00:44:24,880
Speaker 2: I first saw the paintings of Irving Norman in person,

797
00:44:26,239 --> 00:44:29,760
Speaker 2: and I was really captivated by just like they're they're huge,

798
00:44:29,960 --> 00:44:32,080
Speaker 2: and like it's a in you're you're there, You're in

799
00:44:32,080 --> 00:44:33,920
Speaker 2: this work's presence, and you just kind of feel like

800
00:44:33,960 --> 00:44:35,839
Speaker 2: you're falling into it and you get to sort of

801
00:44:36,200 --> 00:44:38,799
Speaker 2: walk back and forth checking out little details of it.

802
00:44:39,160 --> 00:44:41,600
Speaker 2: And like that's one of the great experiences of seeing

803
00:44:41,600 --> 00:44:43,440
Speaker 2: a work of art in person, is you get to

804
00:44:43,480 --> 00:44:47,879
Speaker 2: have that prolonged multisensory experience with the piece. I mean,

805
00:44:47,960 --> 00:44:50,439
Speaker 2: you know, maybe you know you shouldn't touch it, don't

806
00:44:50,440 --> 00:44:52,879
Speaker 2: go and lick it or anything, but still like they're

807
00:44:53,520 --> 00:44:55,520
Speaker 2: there are various things going on, like even things not

808
00:44:55,520 --> 00:44:57,400
Speaker 2: directly tied to the painting, like just hearing, like the

809
00:44:57,960 --> 00:45:00,960
Speaker 2: uh you know, the echoes in the museum and so forth.

810
00:45:01,600 --> 00:45:04,239
Speaker 2: And yet there are other works like I had long

811
00:45:04,320 --> 00:45:07,480
Speaker 2: been a fan of this particular work by Arnold Buchlan,

812
00:45:08,160 --> 00:45:10,640
Speaker 2: Isle of the Dead. There are various versions of this

813
00:45:10,719 --> 00:45:14,040
Speaker 2: that he painted. Is very iconic painting that is often

814
00:45:14,120 --> 00:45:20,200
Speaker 2: referenced in film of this strange dark island that is

815
00:45:20,280 --> 00:45:24,240
Speaker 2: not like the symbolism is is harder to piece apart

816
00:45:24,440 --> 00:45:26,040
Speaker 2: like it does it's not just an island. It looks

817
00:45:26,040 --> 00:45:29,279
Speaker 2: like a skull, but it is very captivating and does

818
00:45:29,360 --> 00:45:31,839
Speaker 2: seem to have this grim darkness to it. And yet

819
00:45:31,920 --> 00:45:34,520
Speaker 2: when I saw one of these versions that had been

820
00:45:34,520 --> 00:45:38,839
Speaker 2: painted by the artist in person at the met years back,

821
00:45:38,960 --> 00:45:43,520
Speaker 2: I was initially disappointed because you know, this didn't necessarily

822
00:45:43,520 --> 00:45:45,000
Speaker 2: have a lot to do with the painting itself, but

823
00:45:45,120 --> 00:45:47,360
Speaker 2: like you know, the lighting in the room for some reason,

824
00:45:47,520 --> 00:45:50,719
Speaker 2: it was It's very dark work just in terms of

825
00:45:50,760 --> 00:45:53,880
Speaker 2: just like the black pigment, and the light was catching

826
00:45:53,880 --> 00:45:56,080
Speaker 2: it in a weird way. And I think like there were

827
00:45:56,080 --> 00:45:58,640
Speaker 2: a lot of people moving through that space at the time,

828
00:45:58,760 --> 00:46:00,480
Speaker 2: so I didn't like feel like it was in its

829
00:46:00,520 --> 00:46:03,040
Speaker 2: presence and so forth. So there are all these different

830
00:46:03,040 --> 00:46:06,520
Speaker 2: factors that can influence the way that we encounter a

831
00:46:06,560 --> 00:46:11,000
Speaker 2: piece online versus in person. Though at the end of

832
00:46:11,040 --> 00:46:14,000
Speaker 2: the day, like when you encounter it online, how much

833
00:46:14,080 --> 00:46:16,680
Speaker 2: time are we really giving that work before we click

834
00:46:16,719 --> 00:46:18,560
Speaker 2: on to the next thing, Whereas if you're in the

835
00:46:18,640 --> 00:46:21,400
Speaker 2: room with it, unless you're just speeding through the museum,

836
00:46:21,480 --> 00:46:23,239
Speaker 2: you've got to give it some time. You've got to

837
00:46:23,480 --> 00:46:25,279
Speaker 2: like breathe with it for a little bit.

838
00:46:25,560 --> 00:46:29,279
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, I think that's true, and it's absolutely right

839
00:46:29,320 --> 00:46:32,520
Speaker 3: what you're saying that, like, just little variations in the

840
00:46:32,560 --> 00:46:35,160
Speaker 3: physical experience in the room of seeing an artwork can

841
00:46:35,239 --> 00:46:37,040
Speaker 3: change the way you relate to it. But you know,

842
00:46:37,080 --> 00:46:41,759
Speaker 3: there's another way that I think the mechanical reproduction has

843
00:46:41,800 --> 00:46:44,319
Speaker 3: affected your relationship to these works of art, which is

844
00:46:44,320 --> 00:46:46,640
Speaker 3: that you had seen them before you saw them.

845
00:46:47,280 --> 00:46:51,160
Speaker 2: That's right. Yeah, So the pure impact of Isildah Dead

846
00:46:51,800 --> 00:46:54,120
Speaker 2: was lost on me because I knew exactly what to expect,

847
00:46:54,120 --> 00:46:56,640
Speaker 2: and I was looking for all of these things, and

848
00:46:57,560 --> 00:47:00,920
Speaker 2: I had an experience already in mind, and clearly that

849
00:47:00,960 --> 00:47:02,880
Speaker 2: wasn't the artists intent. That we would go into it

850
00:47:02,960 --> 00:47:13,360
Speaker 2: having seen the image before, before we saw him.

851
00:47:13,680 --> 00:47:16,480
Speaker 3: So here's where we get to the idea of authenticity

852
00:47:16,520 --> 00:47:21,439
Speaker 3: as a concept in art. For Walter Benjamin, a work

853
00:47:21,440 --> 00:47:26,319
Speaker 3: of art possesses an authenticity that is related to its

854
00:47:26,400 --> 00:47:29,959
Speaker 3: physical uniqueness and history as an object or I guess

855
00:47:30,000 --> 00:47:33,799
Speaker 3: also as a performance. So an original painting or sculpture,

856
00:47:34,360 --> 00:47:36,960
Speaker 3: or a certain performance of a piece of music or

857
00:47:37,000 --> 00:47:41,880
Speaker 3: a play are all physically unique objects or situations, and

858
00:47:42,200 --> 00:47:46,640
Speaker 3: in their original form, they have this authenticity that cannot

859
00:47:46,680 --> 00:47:51,520
Speaker 3: be reproduced, that is, their original uniqueness in form. By

860
00:47:51,680 --> 00:47:55,839
Speaker 3: mass producing a photographic or filmed copy of a work

861
00:47:55,880 --> 00:48:01,719
Speaker 3: of art or performance, the technical reproduction is stripped of

862
00:48:01,760 --> 00:48:05,880
Speaker 3: that physical and situational authenticity and then propagated in this

863
00:48:06,080 --> 00:48:10,080
Speaker 3: copied format. And the sum of the qualities that are

864
00:48:10,239 --> 00:48:13,279
Speaker 3: lost when a work of art is mechanically reproduced in

865
00:48:13,320 --> 00:48:17,200
Speaker 3: this way is what Benjamin refers to as the aura

866
00:48:17,320 --> 00:48:20,600
Speaker 3: of the original the aa U r A. The aura

867
00:48:20,800 --> 00:48:24,840
Speaker 3: is all of this stuff about the physically unique original

868
00:48:24,880 --> 00:48:28,759
Speaker 3: that does not get carried over in mechanical copies. So

869
00:48:29,000 --> 00:48:33,200
Speaker 3: one commonly cited example of how the aura affects the

870
00:48:33,280 --> 00:48:36,240
Speaker 3: experience of art is by a change in the location

871
00:48:36,400 --> 00:48:40,640
Speaker 3: of the experience. Benjamin writes, quote the cathedral leaves its

872
00:48:40,719 --> 00:48:43,600
Speaker 3: locale to be received in the studio of a lover

873
00:48:43,680 --> 00:48:47,320
Speaker 3: of art. The cooral production performed in an auditorium or

874
00:48:47,360 --> 00:48:51,200
Speaker 3: in the open air, resounds in the drawing room. And

875
00:48:51,800 --> 00:48:53,680
Speaker 3: you know, this makes me think of something with regard

876
00:48:53,719 --> 00:48:56,280
Speaker 3: to movies. Actually, even though cinema is kind of different,

877
00:48:56,320 --> 00:49:00,400
Speaker 3: because cinema is an art form explicitly designed with canical

878
00:49:00,440 --> 00:49:02,920
Speaker 3: reproduction in mind. You know, you know when you make

879
00:49:02,920 --> 00:49:04,600
Speaker 3: a movie that there are going to be print copies

880
00:49:04,640 --> 00:49:06,960
Speaker 3: of it that will be taken all over and shown

881
00:49:06,960 --> 00:49:11,280
Speaker 3: in theaters all over the land. Nevertheless, I can recall

882
00:49:12,200 --> 00:49:16,680
Speaker 3: interviews I've watched and read with multiple different film directors

883
00:49:17,040 --> 00:49:21,719
Speaker 3: expressing a common sentiment, sentiment which is heartfelt anguish at

884
00:49:21,719 --> 00:49:24,239
Speaker 3: the idea of somebody watching one of their movies on

885
00:49:24,280 --> 00:49:30,280
Speaker 3: a phone. Changing the venue and format of viewing fundamentally

886
00:49:30,360 --> 00:49:34,399
Speaker 3: alters what the director meant for the audience to experience.

887
00:49:34,800 --> 00:49:37,520
Speaker 3: So if you made a movie thinking people would be

888
00:49:37,600 --> 00:49:40,160
Speaker 3: seeing it in a movie theater, and then they're watching

889
00:49:40,239 --> 00:49:44,200
Speaker 3: it on a phone, it may be a faithful reproduction,

890
00:49:44,960 --> 00:49:49,600
Speaker 3: pretty high fidelity visuals and sound of the film you made,

891
00:49:49,680 --> 00:49:51,759
Speaker 3: but it's not what you had in mind. It's a

892
00:49:51,800 --> 00:49:52,600
Speaker 3: different thing.

893
00:49:53,239 --> 00:49:57,719
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, yeah. A number of directors have said this

894
00:49:58,239 --> 00:50:02,160
Speaker 2: in recent years, and and you also hear fans say this.

895
00:50:02,200 --> 00:50:03,719
Speaker 2: I mean I've said this as well, Like I come

896
00:50:03,719 --> 00:50:05,960
Speaker 2: back from seeing Dune Part two and I say, this

897
00:50:06,040 --> 00:50:07,560
Speaker 2: is a movie you need to see on the big screen.

898
00:50:07,960 --> 00:50:09,640
Speaker 2: Now do I think it should only be seen on

899
00:50:09,640 --> 00:50:12,400
Speaker 2: the big screen. No, I'm going to watch it on

900
00:50:12,680 --> 00:50:15,000
Speaker 2: a smaller screen at some point. That's probably gonna be

901
00:50:15,040 --> 00:50:17,279
Speaker 2: my second viewing. I might even watch parts of it

902
00:50:17,360 --> 00:50:20,839
Speaker 2: on a phone. And that's my choice, you know. So

903
00:50:20,920 --> 00:50:24,239
Speaker 2: I think we sometimes it can get a little overblown

904
00:50:24,440 --> 00:50:26,319
Speaker 2: and folks can get a little carried away with it.

905
00:50:26,360 --> 00:50:29,160
Speaker 2: But I do think, yeah, there. We've talked about this

906
00:50:29,800 --> 00:50:33,400
Speaker 2: in reference to particular films on Weird House before, for instance,

907
00:50:33,400 --> 00:50:39,400
Speaker 2: when we talked about Pirana Mandir, the the Indian horror movie,

908
00:50:40,320 --> 00:50:42,960
Speaker 2: and we talked about like the intended not only the

909
00:50:43,000 --> 00:50:45,480
Speaker 2: intended scope of the picture, but sort of like the

910
00:50:45,520 --> 00:50:49,000
Speaker 2: intended viewing experience, that this was not something they didn't

911
00:50:49,040 --> 00:50:52,480
Speaker 2: make this film thinking about, you know, two podcasters watching

912
00:50:52,520 --> 00:50:55,840
Speaker 2: it by themselves in their individual households, you know, on

913
00:50:55,880 --> 00:50:58,799
Speaker 2: their laptop around their TV. No, this is something lots

914
00:50:58,840 --> 00:51:00,680
Speaker 2: of people were going to go to a movie theater

915
00:51:01,200 --> 00:51:05,600
Speaker 2: to enjoy together, find different things to enjoy in the

916
00:51:05,640 --> 00:51:07,759
Speaker 2: film depending on how old they were and so forth,

917
00:51:07,800 --> 00:51:09,960
Speaker 2: and what their tastes were, and it was going to be,

918
00:51:10,040 --> 00:51:12,440
Speaker 2: you know, like kind of a party, according to what

919
00:51:12,480 --> 00:51:14,480
Speaker 2: I read about this film's original release.

920
00:51:14,800 --> 00:51:18,040
Speaker 3: Yeah, I think that's absolutely true that some films are

921
00:51:18,160 --> 00:51:22,200
Speaker 3: made with a large viewing audience all gathered together and

922
00:51:22,280 --> 00:51:25,160
Speaker 3: experiencing it at the same time in mind. But at

923
00:51:25,239 --> 00:51:27,279
Speaker 3: least with the example of film, you could say that

924
00:51:27,400 --> 00:51:31,480
Speaker 3: film is something that is made with the understanding initially

925
00:51:31,600 --> 00:51:33,640
Speaker 3: that it's going to be it's going to be copied

926
00:51:33,719 --> 00:51:36,440
Speaker 3: and viewed in different contexts and stuff. You know that

927
00:51:36,760 --> 00:51:39,359
Speaker 3: the creators have to understand that will happen over time.

928
00:51:40,320 --> 00:51:40,520
Speaker 2: You know.

929
00:51:40,640 --> 00:51:43,120
Speaker 3: You got to wonder with like some of these older

930
00:51:43,160 --> 00:51:46,080
Speaker 3: works of art, like what the creator might have imagined

931
00:51:46,200 --> 00:51:48,719
Speaker 3: or not even just what the creator imagined, just like

932
00:51:50,040 --> 00:51:52,920
Speaker 3: whether it was in the creator's mind or not. The changes,

933
00:51:53,000 --> 00:51:55,640
Speaker 3: the kind of unexpected changes that come in how people

934
00:51:56,239 --> 00:51:59,919
Speaker 3: experience these works of art. So Benjamin says that as

935
00:52:00,000 --> 00:52:04,080
Speaker 3: a result of the necessary stripping of aura and authenticity

936
00:52:04,560 --> 00:52:08,360
Speaker 3: from a work of art in the process of mechanical reproduction.

937
00:52:09,360 --> 00:52:12,600
Speaker 3: You know, it not only affects how that copy of

938
00:52:12,680 --> 00:52:16,920
Speaker 3: the art is experienced directly, like changes our relationship to

939
00:52:17,080 --> 00:52:20,520
Speaker 3: art in general. It changes how we see what art is.

940
00:52:21,200 --> 00:52:25,279
Speaker 3: So a culture of mechanical reproduction sort of undermines the

941
00:52:25,320 --> 00:52:28,439
Speaker 3: authority and spiritual power of a work of art by,

942
00:52:28,960 --> 00:52:34,600
Speaker 3: in Benjamin's words, detaching it from tradition. And he develops

943
00:52:34,640 --> 00:52:39,400
Speaker 3: this idea of art traditions as historically intertwined with religious traditions.

944
00:52:39,520 --> 00:52:41,839
Speaker 3: For example, he talks about how a lot of art

945
00:52:41,960 --> 00:52:47,080
Speaker 3: emerged in deep history from religious practices and ritual paintings

946
00:52:47,120 --> 00:52:52,040
Speaker 3: and sculpture depicted the gods or legendary heroes or mythic encounters.

947
00:52:52,520 --> 00:52:56,120
Speaker 3: Music was sung in worship of the gods, and in

948
00:52:56,160 --> 00:52:59,120
Speaker 3: this tradition, religious art was thought to have a value

949
00:52:59,200 --> 00:53:02,640
Speaker 3: that was in dependent of its value as an object

950
00:53:02,719 --> 00:53:07,200
Speaker 3: to be perceived and admired by an audience. This traditional

951
00:53:07,239 --> 00:53:10,760
Speaker 3: religious value of art is what he calls its cult value.

952
00:53:11,480 --> 00:53:14,480
Speaker 3: And I'll read a quote from the essay here. Benjamin writes, quote,

953
00:53:14,840 --> 00:53:18,719
Speaker 3: artistic production begins with ceremonial objects destined to serve in

954
00:53:18,760 --> 00:53:22,680
Speaker 3: a cult, one may assume that what mattered was their existence,

955
00:53:22,960 --> 00:53:26,840
Speaker 3: not their being on view. The elk portrayed by the

956
00:53:26,880 --> 00:53:28,799
Speaker 3: man of the Stone Age on the walls of his

957
00:53:28,920 --> 00:53:32,840
Speaker 3: cave was an instrument of magic. He did expose it

958
00:53:32,880 --> 00:53:35,239
Speaker 3: to his fellow men, but in the main it was

959
00:53:35,320 --> 00:53:39,000
Speaker 3: meant for the spirits. Today, the cult value would seem

960
00:53:39,000 --> 00:53:42,360
Speaker 3: to demand that the work of art remain hidden. Certain

961
00:53:42,400 --> 00:53:45,680
Speaker 3: statues of gods are accessible only to the priest in

962
00:53:45,760 --> 00:53:50,000
Speaker 3: the cella. Certain madonnas remain covered nearly all year round.

963
00:53:50,400 --> 00:53:54,480
Speaker 3: Certain sculptures on medieval cathedrals are invisible to the spectator

964
00:53:54,600 --> 00:53:58,280
Speaker 3: on the ground level. With the emancipation of the various

965
00:53:58,400 --> 00:54:02,920
Speaker 3: art practices from ritual go increasing opportunities for the exhibition

966
00:54:03,200 --> 00:54:07,640
Speaker 3: of their products. Now one little note here. In the

967
00:54:07,680 --> 00:54:10,120
Speaker 3: specific example of cave art, I think we should be

968
00:54:10,160 --> 00:54:13,640
Speaker 3: clear that we don't know exactly what its function was,

969
00:54:13,719 --> 00:54:16,760
Speaker 3: and we should be careful about speculating too much there.

970
00:54:16,800 --> 00:54:19,759
Speaker 3: But certainly with the later art forms he mentions like

971
00:54:19,760 --> 00:54:22,640
Speaker 3: occurring within written history. You know the sculptures and the

972
00:54:22,680 --> 00:54:25,680
Speaker 3: statues he cites, We know that lots of them were

973
00:54:25,719 --> 00:54:30,319
Speaker 3: thought to be important because of their inherent existence and

974
00:54:30,360 --> 00:54:32,960
Speaker 3: not just because people would look at them.

975
00:54:33,560 --> 00:54:35,880
Speaker 2: That's a great point. I mean this also applies to

976
00:54:37,320 --> 00:54:42,600
Speaker 2: various ancient, prehistoric examples of art that that, for the

977
00:54:42,600 --> 00:54:45,200
Speaker 2: most part, are best viewed from an aerial vehicle.

978
00:54:46,000 --> 00:54:46,160
Speaker 3: You know.

979
00:54:46,600 --> 00:54:51,279
Speaker 2: Yeah, Like it's not necessarily that, it's not that people

980
00:54:51,320 --> 00:54:53,799
Speaker 2: were going to view it. And again we get into

981
00:54:53,800 --> 00:54:56,439
Speaker 2: the same problem of maybe not knowing exactly what the

982
00:54:56,520 --> 00:55:01,400
Speaker 2: intent was or or how they imagined viewer of this piece,

983
00:55:01,520 --> 00:55:03,560
Speaker 2: be it human or divine.

984
00:55:04,040 --> 00:55:08,160
Speaker 3: You're talking about like the Nasca designs and stuff. Yeah, yeah, yeah,

985
00:55:08,200 --> 00:55:11,680
Speaker 3: that's excellent example the things that could not be viewed

986
00:55:11,719 --> 00:55:13,920
Speaker 3: in their total form by a person at the time.

987
00:55:14,560 --> 00:55:17,000
Speaker 2: But does that mean it had to have been aliens

988
00:55:17,080 --> 00:55:20,080
Speaker 2: because that you had to have somebody flying overhead to

989
00:55:20,120 --> 00:55:21,560
Speaker 2: see it. No, not necessarily.

990
00:55:21,600 --> 00:55:23,160
Speaker 3: No, I don't think it means it had to be

991
00:55:23,239 --> 00:55:25,680
Speaker 3: aliens at all. It probably means that there was some

992
00:55:25,920 --> 00:55:28,640
Speaker 3: value of this work of art other than a person

993
00:55:28,719 --> 00:55:32,120
Speaker 3: being able to see the whole thing at once. So

994
00:55:32,280 --> 00:55:37,320
Speaker 3: considering this, Benjamin talks about how over time, artistic culture

995
00:55:37,360 --> 00:55:41,560
Speaker 3: emerged that separated these works of art, these items from

996
00:55:41,640 --> 00:55:45,640
Speaker 3: their cult value by removing them from their original context

997
00:55:45,680 --> 00:55:48,839
Speaker 3: and putting them in museums and galleries and sending them

998
00:55:48,840 --> 00:55:52,200
Speaker 3: traveling around the world and mobile exhibitions, or just by

999
00:55:52,200 --> 00:55:55,480
Speaker 3: having people observe them in their original place but without

1000
00:55:55,600 --> 00:56:00,640
Speaker 3: the original ritual context. And this shift from what Benjamin

1001
00:56:00,640 --> 00:56:05,880
Speaker 3: calls cult value to exhibition value seems to the author

1002
00:56:05,920 --> 00:56:09,600
Speaker 3: here to decrease the power and authority of the art work.

1003
00:56:10,040 --> 00:56:12,880
Speaker 3: But it also creates a culture with a different idea

1004
00:56:12,960 --> 00:56:15,919
Speaker 3: of what art is for and what makes a piece

1005
00:56:15,960 --> 00:56:19,200
Speaker 3: of art valuable and important. And you might imagine all

1006
00:56:19,280 --> 00:56:22,279
Speaker 3: kinds of examples of how this would change the way

1007
00:56:22,320 --> 00:56:26,040
Speaker 3: people evaluate and relate to art when culture tells you

1008
00:56:26,160 --> 00:56:28,280
Speaker 3: that this is a thing you go to a museum

1009
00:56:28,320 --> 00:56:31,160
Speaker 3: and look at and appreciate as an expression of emotion

1010
00:56:31,640 --> 00:56:35,719
Speaker 3: and the display of technical artistic skill, rather than a

1011
00:56:35,800 --> 00:56:39,719
Speaker 3: thing that maybe lives in a temple and somehow depicts

1012
00:56:39,960 --> 00:56:43,600
Speaker 3: channels or honors a god or a divine idea, even

1013
00:56:43,640 --> 00:56:46,080
Speaker 3: if nobody's there to look at it. And so I

1014
00:56:46,080 --> 00:56:50,759
Speaker 3: think Benjamin's idea is that mechanical reproduction causes a sort

1015
00:56:50,760 --> 00:56:54,440
Speaker 3: of continuous along the spectrum a similar shift in the

1016
00:56:54,520 --> 00:56:58,040
Speaker 3: value of art. Even further away from the traditional cult

1017
00:56:58,120 --> 00:57:01,919
Speaker 3: value of art, which is somehow related to the authenticity

1018
00:57:01,960 --> 00:57:05,640
Speaker 3: of an artwork, according again to Benjamin's definition of authenticity

1019
00:57:05,680 --> 00:57:10,480
Speaker 3: being like the original uniqueness of the artwork, and divorces

1020
00:57:10,680 --> 00:57:14,799
Speaker 3: art further from its its history, its tradition of cult value,

1021
00:57:15,000 --> 00:57:19,640
Speaker 3: divorces it from the aura, and it causes a devaluation

1022
00:57:19,800 --> 00:57:22,840
Speaker 3: of the art itself and changes its meaning. It becomes

1023
00:57:23,000 --> 00:57:27,120
Speaker 3: something else, something more like a product. Now you could acknowledge,

1024
00:57:27,160 --> 00:57:29,400
Speaker 3: as I think Benjamin did, that there could be both

1025
00:57:29,520 --> 00:57:34,240
Speaker 3: good and bad consequences that arise from changing the meaning

1026
00:57:34,400 --> 00:57:39,720
Speaker 3: of art through mechanical reproduction. Just one thing that comes

1027
00:57:39,800 --> 00:57:42,640
Speaker 3: to my mind. I don't know that this is how

1028
00:57:42,640 --> 00:57:46,120
Speaker 3: it works, but I wonder if by increasing accessibility of

1029
00:57:46,240 --> 00:57:50,280
Speaker 3: art through mechanical reproduction and sort of if Benjamin's theory

1030
00:57:50,320 --> 00:57:54,920
Speaker 3: is correct, removing it from its traditional sort of power

1031
00:57:54,960 --> 00:57:59,360
Speaker 3: and cult value, maybe that helps also broaden one's appreciation

1032
00:57:59,520 --> 00:58:02,640
Speaker 3: for art it is from outside your own cultural or

1033
00:58:02,720 --> 00:58:05,480
Speaker 3: religious tradition. I'm not sure it works that way, but

1034
00:58:05,520 --> 00:58:07,720
Speaker 3: that's possible, so you can see good sides as well.

1035
00:58:08,160 --> 00:58:11,400
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, not everybody can travel to see these

1036
00:58:12,040 --> 00:58:16,000
Speaker 2: various works in person, and therefore having some other type

1037
00:58:16,000 --> 00:58:18,880
Speaker 2: of experience with that work is ideal. I mean, it

1038
00:58:18,960 --> 00:58:22,240
Speaker 2: allows more people to experience it to some degree.

1039
00:58:22,240 --> 00:58:25,320
Speaker 3: Or in some cases, would allow anyone to experience it

1040
00:58:25,360 --> 00:58:25,680
Speaker 3: at all.

1041
00:58:26,360 --> 00:58:26,840
Speaker 2: Yeah.

1042
00:58:26,880 --> 00:58:29,240
Speaker 3: But on the other hand, though, I don't know, I

1043
00:58:29,360 --> 00:58:31,320
Speaker 3: have some questions, but I think I agree at least

1044
00:58:31,360 --> 00:58:35,000
Speaker 3: in part with what he's saying about, Like this culture

1045
00:58:35,040 --> 00:58:39,240
Speaker 3: that arises from the mass production of images of art

1046
00:58:39,280 --> 00:58:45,600
Speaker 3: works does in some way cause a devaluation of the

1047
00:58:45,640 --> 00:58:49,600
Speaker 3: power and authenticity of the original that you can imagine

1048
00:58:49,880 --> 00:58:52,440
Speaker 3: how you would experience and art work differently if you

1049
00:58:52,520 --> 00:58:55,320
Speaker 3: could not just summon on your phone a picture of

1050
00:58:55,400 --> 00:58:58,760
Speaker 3: the Mona Lisa or the Anatomy Lesson or whatever whenever

1051
00:58:58,800 --> 00:59:01,000
Speaker 3: you wanted to, or even before or that, see a

1052
00:59:01,040 --> 00:59:03,560
Speaker 3: picture of it in a book you know, or see

1053
00:59:03,560 --> 00:59:07,680
Speaker 3: a picture reproduced in a newspaper or whatever. I guess

1054
00:59:07,680 --> 00:59:10,160
Speaker 3: the irony is that I've never lived at a time

1055
00:59:10,360 --> 00:59:13,280
Speaker 3: when there was not mass mechanical reproduction of art in

1056
00:59:13,320 --> 00:59:16,120
Speaker 3: all its forms, So I can't really compare this world

1057
00:59:16,120 --> 00:59:18,880
Speaker 3: to the before times. I never lived in the before times,

1058
00:59:19,800 --> 00:59:22,480
Speaker 3: so I don't know, you know, I only know the

1059
00:59:22,520 --> 00:59:24,760
Speaker 3: world where you can buy prints of the Mona Lisa

1060
00:59:24,800 --> 00:59:25,920
Speaker 3: for five bucks.

1061
00:59:26,480 --> 00:59:28,400
Speaker 2: I guess one thing that we might compare it to

1062
00:59:28,640 --> 00:59:33,720
Speaker 2: is various art installations and also these sort of attraction

1063
00:59:34,240 --> 00:59:38,840
Speaker 2: themed art exhibits that we find a lot of times

1064
00:59:38,880 --> 00:59:42,800
Speaker 2: these days, where there is something inherent to the art.

1065
00:59:43,200 --> 00:59:45,640
Speaker 2: Maybe it's on a scale that can't be captured in

1066
00:59:45,640 --> 00:59:49,000
Speaker 2: a photograph, or it is like an environment that you

1067
00:59:49,040 --> 00:59:50,960
Speaker 2: were engaging in, or it's just something as simple as

1068
00:59:50,960 --> 00:59:53,640
Speaker 2: a sculpture garden, you know, like, yes, you can see

1069
00:59:54,120 --> 00:59:56,920
Speaker 2: like it's not two dimensional, there's a three dimensional reality

1070
00:59:56,960 --> 00:59:59,200
Speaker 2: to it. There are multiple angles from which to consider

1071
00:59:59,200 --> 01:00:03,800
Speaker 2: it for you know, it is an experience in a

1072
01:00:03,840 --> 01:00:07,240
Speaker 2: way that I think everybody can wrap their heads around.

1073
01:00:07,600 --> 01:00:11,760
Speaker 2: And maybe the challenge there is to realize that that

1074
01:00:11,760 --> 01:00:15,200
Speaker 2: that all these other forms of like two dimensional visual art.

1075
01:00:15,680 --> 01:00:18,080
Speaker 2: Of course, you know, they're often there's often more than

1076
01:00:18,080 --> 01:00:20,640
Speaker 2: just those two dimensions to consider with with with the painting,

1077
01:00:20,960 --> 01:00:25,360
Speaker 2: but still, like even famous paintings are also the sort

1078
01:00:25,440 --> 01:00:28,720
Speaker 2: of an experience, like there is there is more going

1079
01:00:28,760 --> 01:00:30,760
Speaker 2: on there even if you're not like standing in its

1080
01:00:30,760 --> 01:00:32,920
Speaker 2: shadow or getting a selfie made with it, like there

1081
01:00:32,960 --> 01:00:35,000
Speaker 2: is still an experience to be had in its presence.

1082
01:00:35,080 --> 01:00:38,680
Speaker 3: Absolutely, though again we also have to wonder, like how

1083
01:00:38,760 --> 01:00:42,520
Speaker 3: the general culture of mechanical reproduction has affected even our

1084
01:00:42,560 --> 01:00:47,000
Speaker 3: ability to relate to physical originals now right.

1085
01:00:47,000 --> 01:00:50,440
Speaker 2: Right, because when we do go to those big art installations,

1086
01:00:50,800 --> 01:00:52,560
Speaker 2: if there're one, that is, if it's an if it's

1087
01:00:52,560 --> 01:00:55,600
Speaker 2: an installation that is marketed as hey, get yourself, you

1088
01:00:55,640 --> 01:00:59,360
Speaker 2: made this environment, then we're coming back right back around

1089
01:00:59,640 --> 01:01:03,000
Speaker 2: to turn it into a mass produced image, and mass

1090
01:01:03,040 --> 01:01:05,560
Speaker 2: produced and then personalized image that then goes into your

1091
01:01:05,600 --> 01:01:06,520
Speaker 2: social media fee.

1092
01:01:07,000 --> 01:01:09,520
Speaker 3: I should add finally that there's a whole bunch of

1093
01:01:09,560 --> 01:01:12,360
Speaker 3: other stuff this essay goes into about the role of

1094
01:01:12,480 --> 01:01:15,840
Speaker 3: art and mechanical reproduction of art and how that relates

1095
01:01:15,880 --> 01:01:19,720
Speaker 3: to politics and the role of art in manipulating mass

1096
01:01:19,760 --> 01:01:21,959
Speaker 3: opinion and revolution and things like that.

1097
01:01:22,640 --> 01:01:24,480
Speaker 2: All right, before we close out this episode, I do

1098
01:01:24,520 --> 01:01:26,360
Speaker 2: want to come back to something we're talking about earlier,

1099
01:01:26,400 --> 01:01:29,840
Speaker 2: about this question of why might it be the case

1100
01:01:29,920 --> 01:01:34,240
Speaker 2: that during one's formative years, during one's teenage years, this

1101
01:01:34,320 --> 01:01:38,360
Speaker 2: question of authenticity and art was more maybe seem more important,

1102
01:01:38,800 --> 01:01:41,040
Speaker 2: and brought off the idea that it might be connected

1103
01:01:41,120 --> 01:01:47,040
Speaker 2: to the highly social aspects of the teenage brain. I

1104
01:01:47,080 --> 01:01:49,240
Speaker 2: was thinking about this because I was reading an interesting

1105
01:01:49,280 --> 01:01:52,240
Speaker 2: take on all of this from author Jason Tugau on

1106
01:01:52,360 --> 01:01:57,520
Speaker 2: Psychology Today, which tackles the subject of art forgery via neuroesthetics,

1107
01:01:57,960 --> 01:02:00,440
Speaker 2: which is a disc one that looks at the neural

1108
01:02:00,520 --> 01:02:04,080
Speaker 2: basis of how we perceive, contemplate, and even create works

1109
01:02:04,120 --> 01:02:07,640
Speaker 2: of art. So, in neuroesthetics, which is very much a

1110
01:02:07,680 --> 01:02:11,120
Speaker 2: young and continually evolving area of neurosciences, you know, because

1111
01:02:11,160 --> 01:02:14,160
Speaker 2: it depends on what we know and understand about the

1112
01:02:14,160 --> 01:02:17,280
Speaker 2: brain and neural networks and so forth, there's this idea

1113
01:02:17,680 --> 01:02:22,480
Speaker 2: that art engages the social brain, as viewing and considering

1114
01:02:22,600 --> 01:02:25,440
Speaker 2: artwork depends on some of the same networks involved in

1115
01:02:25,520 --> 01:02:27,040
Speaker 2: complex social behavior.

1116
01:02:27,320 --> 01:02:28,480
Speaker 3: Interesting, okay.

1117
01:02:29,000 --> 01:02:32,080
Speaker 2: Furthermore, focus consideration of a work of art engages a

1118
01:02:32,160 --> 01:02:35,760
Speaker 2: number of senses, invoking a pronounced consideration of space as

1119
01:02:35,760 --> 01:02:39,720
Speaker 2: well as societal, cultural, and individual context. So even if

1120
01:02:39,760 --> 01:02:43,360
Speaker 2: you and I think we can, if we really self analyze,

1121
01:02:43,400 --> 01:02:45,000
Speaker 2: we might realize this is the case. Even if we're

1122
01:02:45,000 --> 01:02:46,440
Speaker 2: at that museum and we're like, Okay, I'm going to

1123
01:02:46,480 --> 01:02:49,919
Speaker 2: stand in the presence of this art. You can't help

1124
01:02:50,000 --> 01:02:52,600
Speaker 2: but also take into account all these other things. There's

1125
01:02:52,600 --> 01:02:55,200
Speaker 2: a lot going on on some level you're going to

1126
01:02:55,280 --> 01:02:57,360
Speaker 2: be aware of how you look looking at this piece

1127
01:02:57,400 --> 01:02:59,600
Speaker 2: of art. You are going to be thinking about your

1128
01:02:59,600 --> 01:03:02,520
Speaker 2: own care, the culture from which the this art or

1129
01:03:02,600 --> 01:03:04,120
Speaker 2: artist emerged, and so forth.

1130
01:03:04,560 --> 01:03:08,960
Speaker 3: It is nearly maybe I reveal my own shallowness or

1131
01:03:08,960 --> 01:03:11,120
Speaker 3: something by saying this, but I think it is nearly

1132
01:03:11,160 --> 01:03:15,680
Speaker 3: impossible to experience a work of art without having involuntary

1133
01:03:15,760 --> 01:03:18,960
Speaker 3: thoughts while you're having the experience of what other people

1134
01:03:19,000 --> 01:03:23,480
Speaker 3: would think about it and considering your self in relation

1135
01:03:23,880 --> 01:03:27,800
Speaker 3: to these hypothetical other people whom you're imagining reacting to it.

1136
01:03:28,240 --> 01:03:32,200
Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah, And so in my experience off and have

1137
01:03:32,240 --> 01:03:34,360
Speaker 2: to sort of check back in and realize, like, no, no, no,

1138
01:03:34,400 --> 01:03:36,280
Speaker 2: but stop thinking about that, let's just look at the

1139
01:03:36,400 --> 01:03:39,720
Speaker 2: art and so forth. But so, yeah, So there's a

1140
01:03:39,760 --> 01:03:42,040
Speaker 2: lot going on when we look at art. But to

1141
01:03:42,120 --> 01:03:46,160
Speaker 2: gal citing feeling of beauty, author Gabriel Starr says that

1142
01:03:46,200 --> 01:03:49,760
Speaker 2: the result, the ideal result here when we're viewing art

1143
01:03:50,000 --> 01:03:53,000
Speaker 2: is a feeling of harmony, a harmony that can be

1144
01:03:53,120 --> 01:03:56,720
Speaker 2: disrupted if we learn that the piece of art reviewing

1145
01:03:56,840 --> 01:03:59,160
Speaker 2: is not authentic, which is to say, you know, fake

1146
01:03:59,480 --> 01:04:02,800
Speaker 2: to some or another. And and this makes sense, this

1147
01:04:02,840 --> 01:04:04,960
Speaker 2: falls along with what we've been talking about, I think

1148
01:04:04,960 --> 01:04:08,320
Speaker 2: we can easily turn to various experiences of disruption in

1149
01:04:08,360 --> 01:04:12,680
Speaker 2: our association with any given work of art or creative project.

1150
01:04:12,880 --> 01:04:14,720
Speaker 2: You know, what happens when you find out a piece

1151
01:04:14,760 --> 01:04:18,160
Speaker 2: of work is to some degree inauthentic. What about when

1152
01:04:18,200 --> 01:04:21,160
Speaker 2: you find out that the creator to some degree is

1153
01:04:21,160 --> 01:04:23,320
Speaker 2: inauthentic or they are not what you thought they were.

1154
01:04:23,920 --> 01:04:26,440
Speaker 2: Your appreciation of a work may not depend one hundred

1155
01:04:26,480 --> 01:04:29,720
Speaker 2: percent on that idea that you had about its creator's

1156
01:04:29,800 --> 01:04:34,680
Speaker 2: authenticity or character, but a change is still likely to occur,

1157
01:04:35,000 --> 01:04:37,360
Speaker 2: and I think we can all think to examples of

1158
01:04:37,360 --> 01:04:39,720
Speaker 2: that in our own appreciation of the arts.

1159
01:04:40,520 --> 01:04:45,520
Speaker 3: Yeah, there is a feeling of betrayal that comes when

1160
01:04:45,560 --> 01:04:48,640
Speaker 3: you find out something, You find out something you really

1161
01:04:48,680 --> 01:04:51,360
Speaker 3: don't like about the creator of a work of art

1162
01:04:51,400 --> 01:04:54,240
Speaker 3: that you do like. That is not present when you

1163
01:04:54,320 --> 01:04:57,120
Speaker 3: just find out something you don't like about a random

1164
01:04:57,160 --> 01:04:58,040
Speaker 3: public figure.

1165
01:04:58,640 --> 01:05:03,840
Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah, and it's it's it can be a struggle sometimes,

1166
01:05:03,840 --> 01:05:06,000
Speaker 2: you know, and at times it can feel like if

1167
01:05:06,000 --> 01:05:09,000
Speaker 2: you enjoy a particular work of art or a film

1168
01:05:09,120 --> 01:05:11,920
Speaker 2: or music, you don't want to know too much about

1169
01:05:11,960 --> 01:05:14,240
Speaker 2: the person who created it, because the more you know,

1170
01:05:14,320 --> 01:05:16,600
Speaker 2: the more likely you are to find something that you

1171
01:05:16,800 --> 01:05:19,240
Speaker 2: disagree with or don't like and then could tarnish the

1172
01:05:19,280 --> 01:05:22,080
Speaker 2: work of art. But then the other side is there's

1173
01:05:22,120 --> 01:05:24,320
Speaker 2: also lots of stuff you can find out about an

1174
01:05:24,400 --> 01:05:27,320
Speaker 2: artist that enhances your experience of a given work. So

1175
01:05:28,120 --> 01:05:33,160
Speaker 2: it's it's often it often seems like it's worth diving into.

1176
01:05:33,480 --> 01:05:38,040
Speaker 2: You know, you may find something that enhances your understanding

1177
01:05:38,080 --> 01:05:40,880
Speaker 2: of art that is already enriching your life.

1178
01:05:41,520 --> 01:05:45,200
Speaker 3: Nevertheless, I think even if you're not thinking about the artist,

1179
01:05:45,480 --> 01:05:48,680
Speaker 3: I totally see what you were saying here about this

1180
01:05:48,720 --> 01:05:53,920
Speaker 3: source claiming that our experience of art is to a

1181
01:05:54,040 --> 01:05:58,640
Speaker 3: large degree engaging the social brain. That seems very true

1182
01:05:58,680 --> 01:06:02,600
Speaker 3: to me. That whether it's you know, that music, the

1183
01:06:02,640 --> 01:06:05,200
Speaker 3: band you like, you worry if they're the real deal

1184
01:06:05,280 --> 01:06:08,600
Speaker 3: or if they're fake, Or it's movies, or it's it's painting,

1185
01:06:08,840 --> 01:06:13,040
Speaker 3: I feel like it is it's inescapable that there's some

1186
01:06:13,320 --> 01:06:16,160
Speaker 3: part of engaging with the work of art that's kind

1187
01:06:16,200 --> 01:06:18,840
Speaker 3: of like meeting a person, or it's kind of like

1188
01:06:18,960 --> 01:06:22,840
Speaker 3: considering interactions between a social group. That that rings very

1189
01:06:22,880 --> 01:06:23,360
Speaker 3: true to me.

1190
01:06:24,320 --> 01:06:26,280
Speaker 2: All Right, well, we're gonna go ahead and cut it off.

1191
01:06:26,320 --> 01:06:28,360
Speaker 2: Right here. But obviously we'd love to hear from you

1192
01:06:28,400 --> 01:06:31,120
Speaker 2: out there, because I know that listeners inevitably have thoughts

1193
01:06:31,120 --> 01:06:34,760
Speaker 2: about all of this, about inauthenticity and authenticity and fakery

1194
01:06:35,680 --> 01:06:38,320
Speaker 2: in the in the in the various mediums, the various

1195
01:06:38,360 --> 01:06:40,680
Speaker 2: art forms that we've discussed here, or in you know,

1196
01:06:40,760 --> 01:06:43,680
Speaker 2: life in general. So write in we would love to

1197
01:06:43,680 --> 01:06:46,040
Speaker 2: hear from you. Will throw out that email address here

1198
01:06:46,040 --> 01:06:47,760
Speaker 2: in a minute, but just a remind it. The Stuff

1199
01:06:47,760 --> 01:06:49,880
Speaker 2: to Blow Your Mind is primarily a science and culture podcast,

1200
01:06:49,880 --> 01:06:52,400
Speaker 2: with core episodes on Tuesdays and Thursday, short form episode

1201
01:06:52,440 --> 01:06:55,320
Speaker 2: on Wednesdays. On Mondays, we do listener mail on Fridays,

1202
01:06:55,320 --> 01:06:57,480
Speaker 2: we set aside most serious concerns to just talk about

1203
01:06:57,520 --> 01:07:00,320
Speaker 2: a weird film on Weird House Cinema. You can follow

1204
01:07:00,400 --> 01:07:03,040
Speaker 2: us on social media where if you get your social media,

1205
01:07:03,080 --> 01:07:06,240
Speaker 2: we're probably there. Rate and review the show wherever you

1206
01:07:06,240 --> 01:07:07,880
Speaker 2: have the power to do so. That really helps us

1207
01:07:07,920 --> 01:07:11,520
Speaker 2: out and we appreciate it, and I believe that's it.

1208
01:07:11,600 --> 01:07:13,360
Speaker 2: What else do you have for us here, Joe.

1209
01:07:13,720 --> 01:07:16,720
Speaker 3: Nothing else except to say our regular audio producer JJ

1210
01:07:16,880 --> 01:07:19,840
Speaker 3: Posway is out this week, so huge thanks to our

1211
01:07:19,960 --> 01:07:24,520
Speaker 3: guest producer Paul decant. Thank you, Paul. Let's see if

1212
01:07:24,600 --> 01:07:27,560
Speaker 3: you have anything you'd like to get in touch with

1213
01:07:27,640 --> 01:07:29,880
Speaker 3: us with, if you'd like to suggest a topic for

1214
01:07:29,920 --> 01:07:32,920
Speaker 3: a future episode, if you would like to send us

1215
01:07:32,920 --> 01:07:34,919
Speaker 3: feedback on this episode or any other, or if you'd

1216
01:07:34,960 --> 01:07:37,240
Speaker 3: just like to say hi. You can email us at

1217
01:07:37,360 --> 01:07:47,200
Speaker 3: contact at stuff to Blow your Mind dot com.

1218
01:07:47,720 --> 01:07:50,680
Speaker 1: Stuff to Blow Your Mind is production of iHeartRadio. For

1219
01:07:50,760 --> 01:07:53,560
Speaker 1: more podcasts from my heart Radio, visit the iHeartRadio app,

1220
01:07:53,680 --> 01:08:11,080
Speaker 1: Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.