1
00:00:06,000 --> 00:00:08,560
Speaker 1: Hey you welcome to Stuff to Blow your Mind. My

2
00:00:08,760 --> 00:00:11,119
Speaker 1: name is Robert Lamb. It is Saturday, so we have

3
00:00:11,200 --> 00:00:14,080
Speaker 1: another vault episode for you. This is going to be

4
00:00:14,560 --> 00:00:17,639
Speaker 1: Authenticity Part two. This is part two of three, originally

5
00:00:17,680 --> 00:00:22,200
Speaker 1: published three twenty one, twenty twenty four. So let's dive

6
00:00:22,280 --> 00:00:23,520
Speaker 1: right in. I hope you enjoy it.

7
00:00:27,000 --> 00:00:33,520
Speaker 2: Welcome to Stuff to Blow your Mind, a production of iHeartRadio.

8
00:00:36,680 --> 00:00:39,000
Speaker 1: Hey, welcome to Stuff to Blow your Mind. My name

9
00:00:39,040 --> 00:00:39,680
Speaker 1: is Robert.

10
00:00:39,440 --> 00:00:42,559
Speaker 3: Lamb, and I am Joe McCormick. And we're back with

11
00:00:42,680 --> 00:00:46,400
Speaker 3: part two in our series on the concept of authenticity.

12
00:00:46,760 --> 00:00:49,080
Speaker 3: If you haven't heard part one yet, probably want to

13
00:00:49,080 --> 00:00:51,440
Speaker 3: go back and check that one out first. But in

14
00:00:51,520 --> 00:00:54,800
Speaker 3: brief last time, we explored a lot of the different

15
00:00:54,880 --> 00:00:59,560
Speaker 3: overlapping cultural understandings of authenticity, and we also looked at

16
00:00:59,600 --> 00:01:03,320
Speaker 3: a psycho ecology paper that tested how well people were

17
00:01:03,400 --> 00:01:08,480
Speaker 3: able to assess authenticity in others. And the conclusion was that,

18
00:01:08,560 --> 00:01:12,000
Speaker 3: at least within the scenario tested, which was classroom interactions,

19
00:01:12,319 --> 00:01:14,399
Speaker 3: we are not nearly as good as we think we

20
00:01:14,480 --> 00:01:18,240
Speaker 3: are at judging whether other people are really being themselves

21
00:01:18,360 --> 00:01:21,080
Speaker 3: or whether they are really being authentic. Now, maybe that

22
00:01:21,160 --> 00:01:24,920
Speaker 3: finding wouldn't be reproduced in other scenarios or using other

23
00:01:25,000 --> 00:01:28,039
Speaker 3: measures of authenticity, because if you recall from last time,

24
00:01:28,080 --> 00:01:31,960
Speaker 3: the measure in that study was comparing other evaluations of

25
00:01:32,240 --> 00:01:36,760
Speaker 3: authenticity with self evaluation. So you have people say themselves like,

26
00:01:36,800 --> 00:01:38,959
Speaker 3: do you feel like you can be yourself around people?

27
00:01:39,240 --> 00:01:41,960
Speaker 3: Do your actions reflect your inner thoughts and feelings? Things

28
00:01:42,000 --> 00:01:44,880
Speaker 3: like that, and then have other people judge that same person,

29
00:01:45,000 --> 00:01:47,920
Speaker 3: you know, how authentic do you think they're being. But

30
00:01:48,280 --> 00:01:52,240
Speaker 3: if it's generally true that we're worse at detecting authenticity

31
00:01:52,320 --> 00:01:56,080
Speaker 3: than we think we are, that has profound implications on

32
00:01:56,160 --> 00:02:00,280
Speaker 3: everyday life because we make implicit and explicit judgments about

33
00:02:00,320 --> 00:02:04,160
Speaker 3: authenticity all the time, and we use these judgments to

34
00:02:04,240 --> 00:02:07,440
Speaker 3: manage our relationships, to decide who we like and who

35
00:02:07,480 --> 00:02:12,000
Speaker 3: we trust. But also those judgments are they're sort of

36
00:02:12,200 --> 00:02:16,840
Speaker 3: conceptually contagious throughout the mind, and we end up using

37
00:02:16,960 --> 00:02:20,920
Speaker 3: assessments of authenticity not just for people, but to determine

38
00:02:20,919 --> 00:02:25,400
Speaker 3: our feelings about inanimate objects and our feelings in domains

39
00:02:25,440 --> 00:02:28,280
Speaker 3: outside of personal relationships. And one of the big examples

40
00:02:28,600 --> 00:02:31,240
Speaker 3: that comes to mind for me is the domain of

41
00:02:31,520 --> 00:02:34,360
Speaker 3: art and esthetics. We promised last time we'd be getting

42
00:02:34,440 --> 00:02:36,280
Speaker 3: artsy fartsy today. So here we.

43
00:02:36,240 --> 00:02:39,480
Speaker 1: Are, and you know, we might throw in a few

44
00:02:39,520 --> 00:02:43,320
Speaker 1: references to less artsy creations, some of the things we've

45
00:02:43,400 --> 00:02:46,760
Speaker 1: talked about on Weird House Cinema before, for example. But yeah,

46
00:02:46,760 --> 00:02:49,520
Speaker 1: we're going to be talking about authenticity in the arts.

47
00:02:49,800 --> 00:02:51,440
Speaker 3: I guess some of this will come down to where

48
00:02:51,480 --> 00:02:53,920
Speaker 3: you draw the line between art and entertainment, or if

49
00:02:53,960 --> 00:02:57,480
Speaker 3: you draw a line at all. But one area in

50
00:02:57,600 --> 00:03:02,880
Speaker 3: which I think people offer and seem especially concerned with

51
00:03:03,320 --> 00:03:09,640
Speaker 3: authenticity in artistic expression is music. There's actually a book

52
00:03:09,720 --> 00:03:13,560
Speaker 3: chapter about psychological studies of authenticity from two thousand and

53
00:03:13,560 --> 00:03:16,600
Speaker 3: six that I've been reading through. This was a chapter

54
00:03:16,680 --> 00:03:21,280
Speaker 3: by professors Michael H. Kernis and Brian M. Goldman, and

55
00:03:21,440 --> 00:03:24,160
Speaker 3: I actually am only mentioning it because it uses an

56
00:03:24,240 --> 00:03:27,960
Speaker 3: epigraph that really struck me. It's a quote from the

57
00:03:28,120 --> 00:03:32,880
Speaker 3: singer songwriter Leonard Cohen, and the lyric goes, if by

58
00:03:33,000 --> 00:03:35,360
Speaker 3: chance I wake at night and I ask you who

59
00:03:35,400 --> 00:03:38,200
Speaker 3: I am, Oh, take me to the slaughterhouse and I

60
00:03:38,240 --> 00:03:41,560
Speaker 3: will wait there with the lamb. So this is a

61
00:03:41,640 --> 00:03:45,160
Speaker 3: lyric from the Leonard Cohen song Stories of the Street,

62
00:03:45,200 --> 00:03:48,000
Speaker 3: which is a track on his nineteen sixty seven album

63
00:03:48,440 --> 00:03:52,520
Speaker 3: Songs of Leonard Cohen. Now, I think the authors selected

64
00:03:52,560 --> 00:03:55,600
Speaker 3: it as an epigraph for this chapter because it invokes

65
00:03:55,640 --> 00:03:59,000
Speaker 3: the idea of personal authenticity. There's that line if by

66
00:03:59,080 --> 00:04:01,280
Speaker 3: chance I wake at night and I ask you who

67
00:04:01,320 --> 00:04:05,240
Speaker 3: I am? It implies a crisis of authenticity, wondering who

68
00:04:05,320 --> 00:04:08,640
Speaker 3: am I? Who is the real me? And the second

69
00:04:08,720 --> 00:04:12,520
Speaker 3: half is the resolution of that conditional if take me

70
00:04:12,600 --> 00:04:14,760
Speaker 3: to the slaughter house and I will wait there with

71
00:04:14,840 --> 00:04:18,640
Speaker 3: the lamb. I don't know exactly what that means, and

72
00:04:18,680 --> 00:04:22,080
Speaker 3: I would resist saying that it decodes to a sentiment

73
00:04:22,120 --> 00:04:24,760
Speaker 3: that can be plainly expressed, because, like a lot of

74
00:04:24,760 --> 00:04:28,440
Speaker 3: good poetry, it sort of seems to express an idea

75
00:04:28,640 --> 00:04:31,719
Speaker 3: or a feeling that is real but is difficult to

76
00:04:31,760 --> 00:04:36,679
Speaker 3: say directly. Whatever it means. It maybe suggests something about vulnerability,

77
00:04:36,880 --> 00:04:40,520
Speaker 3: maybe something about the desire to protect or to be protected,

78
00:04:41,279 --> 00:04:44,240
Speaker 3: and whatever it means, I found it really striking. So

79
00:04:44,400 --> 00:04:47,120
Speaker 3: I was interested in this quote because it's a song

80
00:04:47,240 --> 00:04:51,440
Speaker 3: lyric that not only concerns authenticity with the line about

81
00:04:51,480 --> 00:04:54,400
Speaker 3: I ask you who I am, but in my personal opinion,

82
00:04:54,600 --> 00:04:59,360
Speaker 3: it illustrates the quality of authenticity and music and Rob

83
00:04:59,440 --> 00:05:01,960
Speaker 3: you might feel differently. You the listener might feel differently.

84
00:05:02,000 --> 00:05:04,799
Speaker 3: If so, that's fine. We all have our unique responses

85
00:05:04,839 --> 00:05:09,920
Speaker 3: to art. But whatever authenticity means in lyrics and musical performance,

86
00:05:10,080 --> 00:05:13,919
Speaker 3: it feels present to me here. Uh And I think

87
00:05:14,200 --> 00:05:17,880
Speaker 3: at least part of what authenticity means in music and

88
00:05:17,960 --> 00:05:20,760
Speaker 3: lyrics is that it feels like the words and the

89
00:05:20,760 --> 00:05:24,680
Speaker 3: melody express a real genuine feeling in the artist, and

90
00:05:24,720 --> 00:05:28,960
Speaker 3: that these words are not carelessly selected, but instead are

91
00:05:29,560 --> 00:05:33,640
Speaker 3: are carefully meaningfully picked because they are the words that

92
00:05:33,800 --> 00:05:38,520
Speaker 3: best point to that sort of dark, ambiguous, inexpressible feeling underneath.

93
00:05:38,880 --> 00:05:42,560
Speaker 1: Yeah, and am and lamb rhyme with each other, and

94
00:05:42,560 --> 00:05:45,680
Speaker 1: that's undeniable master at work here.

95
00:05:46,040 --> 00:05:47,839
Speaker 3: I mean, actually, I think there's a lot of interesting

96
00:05:47,880 --> 00:05:51,640
Speaker 3: stuff one could get into about how structural constraints like

97
00:05:51,720 --> 00:05:56,560
Speaker 3: meter and rhyme interact with the expression of ideas. Like

98
00:05:56,640 --> 00:05:59,360
Speaker 3: if they sort of like force you to choose different words,

99
00:05:59,360 --> 00:06:02,080
Speaker 3: then you might otherwise, And yet those words must in

100
00:06:02,160 --> 00:06:03,920
Speaker 3: order for the poem or the song to be good

101
00:06:03,960 --> 00:06:06,920
Speaker 3: still be true. What does that do to the way

102
00:06:06,920 --> 00:06:07,800
Speaker 3: your mind works?

103
00:06:08,240 --> 00:06:10,679
Speaker 1: Yeah? Yeah, I like it. You know, it works better

104
00:06:11,040 --> 00:06:13,800
Speaker 1: that we're using the lamb instead of some other animal

105
00:06:13,839 --> 00:06:16,440
Speaker 1: that you might take to a slaughterhouse, because the lamb

106
00:06:16,440 --> 00:06:20,360
Speaker 1: also brings in its own symbolism and its own language.

107
00:06:20,400 --> 00:06:24,520
Speaker 1: So yeah, I like the line. I'm not familiar with

108
00:06:24,600 --> 00:06:26,919
Speaker 1: the song all that much, but I like the lyric.

109
00:06:27,200 --> 00:06:29,599
Speaker 3: I think I've read that it was Cohen talking about

110
00:06:29,880 --> 00:06:33,640
Speaker 3: an experience where he went by himself to Cuba, and

111
00:06:33,720 --> 00:06:36,560
Speaker 3: at some point I think he says that he was

112
00:06:36,600 --> 00:06:39,520
Speaker 3: like at the embassy and they send somebody to talk

113
00:06:39,560 --> 00:06:41,839
Speaker 3: to him, and they say that his mother is worried

114
00:06:41,880 --> 00:06:45,799
Speaker 3: about him or something. Anyway, So I mentioned that because

115
00:06:46,360 --> 00:06:50,240
Speaker 3: to me this does illustrate that quality of authenticity and music.

116
00:06:51,160 --> 00:06:53,720
Speaker 3: And by contrast, I don't want to single out any

117
00:06:53,760 --> 00:06:56,320
Speaker 3: particular song or artists to like hate on as the

118
00:06:56,720 --> 00:06:59,920
Speaker 3: Encyclopedia entry for fake, but I think we can all

119
00:07:00,000 --> 00:07:02,599
Speaker 3: I'll probably think of a piece of music we've heard

120
00:07:03,320 --> 00:07:08,320
Speaker 3: and found to have a quality of apparent insincerity which

121
00:07:08,360 --> 00:07:11,840
Speaker 3: makes the work unpleasant and uninteresting to us. Fill in

122
00:07:11,880 --> 00:07:12,920
Speaker 3: with your own examples.

123
00:07:13,320 --> 00:07:17,040
Speaker 1: Yeah, I'll get into some examples, not of like outright

124
00:07:17,240 --> 00:07:20,000
Speaker 1: like a fakery or anything here in a bit, but

125
00:07:20,560 --> 00:07:23,000
Speaker 1: I think that some of the most interesting examples are

126
00:07:23,040 --> 00:07:25,320
Speaker 1: examples that are kind of in that middle ground where

127
00:07:25,720 --> 00:07:31,760
Speaker 1: either it is divided people about the artist's potential sincerity

128
00:07:31,840 --> 00:07:36,040
Speaker 1: and authenticity, or it has been something that you know

129
00:07:36,200 --> 00:07:41,760
Speaker 1: that won individually and subjectively wrestles with like do I

130
00:07:41,920 --> 00:07:45,000
Speaker 1: like this, Do I believe this artist? Other people seem

131
00:07:45,040 --> 00:07:47,600
Speaker 1: to believe them, but I'm not sure I do, and

132
00:07:47,640 --> 00:07:48,119
Speaker 1: so forth.

133
00:07:48,400 --> 00:07:52,320
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, well, that's interesting that you know audiences can

134
00:07:52,360 --> 00:07:54,480
Speaker 3: be divided in that way, because I mean, it's a

135
00:07:54,520 --> 00:07:58,160
Speaker 3: truism that everybody has their own subjective reaction to art.

136
00:07:58,320 --> 00:08:01,480
Speaker 3: But I think you can also see some very stark

137
00:08:01,640 --> 00:08:05,640
Speaker 3: trends in the way people relate, especially to authenticity and music,

138
00:08:05,680 --> 00:08:09,240
Speaker 3: because I would say for some of us, the relationship

139
00:08:09,240 --> 00:08:14,000
Speaker 3: between musical expression and authenticity maybe only enters the mind

140
00:08:14,040 --> 00:08:16,360
Speaker 3: every now and then, maybe when we hear something we

141
00:08:16,400 --> 00:08:22,840
Speaker 3: find especially moving and sincere seeming or especially false. But

142
00:08:23,040 --> 00:08:26,480
Speaker 3: for other people, it's like a clear, ever present, front

143
00:08:26,480 --> 00:08:29,520
Speaker 3: of mind element of our taste in music, maybe even

144
00:08:29,560 --> 00:08:33,400
Speaker 3: the single most important factor. And I'm curious, like what

145
00:08:33,559 --> 00:08:36,280
Speaker 3: makes that difference and in the people for whom it

146
00:08:36,400 --> 00:08:38,520
Speaker 3: is front of mind in their esthetics.

147
00:08:38,600 --> 00:08:43,040
Speaker 1: Why, speaking of Leonard Cohen, your inclusion of this quote

148
00:08:43,120 --> 00:08:45,840
Speaker 1: kind of sending down a rabbit hole of reading some

149
00:08:45,920 --> 00:08:49,920
Speaker 1: other tidbits from interviews with Leonard Cohen and sort of

150
00:08:50,200 --> 00:08:55,079
Speaker 1: refreshing myself about his career. But I ran across this

151
00:08:55,120 --> 00:08:58,280
Speaker 1: one quote from an Alan Twigg interview with Cohen, and

152
00:08:58,679 --> 00:09:01,400
Speaker 1: I want to read it here. Cohen says, quote, the

153
00:09:01,480 --> 00:09:04,319
Speaker 1: question is who am I? So we invent a self,

154
00:09:04,360 --> 00:09:07,280
Speaker 1: a personality, We sustain it, we create rules for it.

155
00:09:07,480 --> 00:09:10,560
Speaker 1: When you stop asking those questions in those moments of grace.

156
00:09:10,920 --> 00:09:12,760
Speaker 1: As soon as the question is not asked and the

157
00:09:12,760 --> 00:09:15,920
Speaker 1: dilemma is dissolved or abandoned, then the true self or

158
00:09:15,960 --> 00:09:19,000
Speaker 1: absolute self rushes in. That's our real nourishment.

159
00:09:19,320 --> 00:09:21,679
Speaker 3: That's interesting in that it connects to what you were

160
00:09:21,679 --> 00:09:24,560
Speaker 3: saying in the last episode about the more you sort

161
00:09:24,600 --> 00:09:27,520
Speaker 3: of examine your own authenticity, the harder it can be

162
00:09:27,640 --> 00:09:28,680
Speaker 3: to let it flow.

163
00:09:29,240 --> 00:09:32,160
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah, And I don't know, ye, I feel like

164
00:09:32,200 --> 00:09:35,640
Speaker 1: if I'm questioning the authenticity of a work of music

165
00:09:35,880 --> 00:09:38,840
Speaker 1: or a film or whatever kind of art I'm engaging with, like,

166
00:09:38,880 --> 00:09:41,360
Speaker 1: I'm probably not that engaged with the art, you know. Yeah,

167
00:09:41,840 --> 00:09:45,840
Speaker 1: I'm caught up in a bunch of other nonsense about

168
00:09:45,840 --> 00:09:49,000
Speaker 1: the art, and I'm certainly not experiencing it in the

169
00:09:49,000 --> 00:09:51,760
Speaker 1: way that the artist probably intended me to do, unless,

170
00:09:51,840 --> 00:09:54,679
Speaker 1: of course, that is the artist's intent that they are

171
00:09:54,800 --> 00:09:57,000
Speaker 1: challenging authenticity or something to that effect.

172
00:09:57,080 --> 00:09:59,920
Speaker 3: That's a really good point. It's like, when we do

173
00:10:00,000 --> 00:10:03,679
Speaker 3: you really get into evaluating whether something is authentic or not,

174
00:10:03,760 --> 00:10:05,760
Speaker 3: it does make you have to like step back from

175
00:10:05,840 --> 00:10:10,000
Speaker 3: the experience of it. I assume a desire for perceived

176
00:10:10,040 --> 00:10:13,720
Speaker 3: authenticity in the expression of musical artists is to some

177
00:10:13,800 --> 00:10:17,200
Speaker 3: degree always present, But I was thinking about how it

178
00:10:17,280 --> 00:10:21,200
Speaker 3: seemed especially important to me when I was a teenager.

179
00:10:21,840 --> 00:10:24,560
Speaker 3: Like when I was a teenager, the worst thing a

180
00:10:24,640 --> 00:10:29,839
Speaker 3: musical artist could be was fake, contrived pandering. What did

181
00:10:29,880 --> 00:10:32,079
Speaker 3: this mean to me? I don't know exactly. I mean,

182
00:10:32,120 --> 00:10:35,760
Speaker 3: I could think of specific artists like very I don't know,

183
00:10:35,840 --> 00:10:38,800
Speaker 3: like very commercial rock bands or something that I would

184
00:10:38,840 --> 00:10:41,480
Speaker 3: think of as very fake and seemingly and sincere.

185
00:10:42,280 --> 00:10:43,280
Speaker 1: Uh you know.

186
00:10:43,320 --> 00:10:45,480
Speaker 3: I don't know on what basis I was deciding that,

187
00:10:45,679 --> 00:10:49,440
Speaker 3: But I don't feel the same urge to like seek

188
00:10:49,600 --> 00:10:52,840
Speaker 3: raw authenticity and root out fakeness and music that I

189
00:10:52,880 --> 00:10:56,200
Speaker 3: once did, though obviously I still don't like feeling like

190
00:10:56,240 --> 00:10:59,320
Speaker 3: an artist is treating me with contempt, But like, why

191
00:10:59,360 --> 00:11:01,280
Speaker 3: is it that as And I think maybe I'm not

192
00:11:01,360 --> 00:11:02,880
Speaker 3: a loan in this, Like why is it that as

193
00:11:02,920 --> 00:11:07,319
Speaker 3: a teenager you're especially tuned into this meta media quality

194
00:11:07,360 --> 00:11:10,600
Speaker 3: of authenticity as opposed to more just sort of like

195
00:11:10,760 --> 00:11:13,400
Speaker 3: in the work or in the song qualities of a

196
00:11:13,440 --> 00:11:14,160
Speaker 3: piece of art.

197
00:11:14,520 --> 00:11:17,600
Speaker 1: That's interesting, and I think we might get into some

198
00:11:17,640 --> 00:11:19,240
Speaker 1: of that in a bit because it makes me think

199
00:11:19,240 --> 00:11:22,240
Speaker 1: of like the hyper social aspects of the teenager brain,

200
00:11:22,640 --> 00:11:25,400
Speaker 1: you know that we've touched on before on the show. Yeah,

201
00:11:25,440 --> 00:11:27,080
Speaker 1: I suppose it's it's kind of a weird area to

202
00:11:27,080 --> 00:11:31,640
Speaker 1: get into because, you know, thinking again about artists at

203
00:11:31,679 --> 00:11:35,880
Speaker 1: particular times in their careers where they seem to divide

204
00:11:35,920 --> 00:11:39,640
Speaker 1: their audience. It's interesting how two different musical artists can

205
00:11:39,679 --> 00:11:42,679
Speaker 1: take on a persona to be received in wildly and

206
00:11:42,720 --> 00:11:45,920
Speaker 1: it can be received in wildly different ways. And the

207
00:11:45,960 --> 00:11:49,559
Speaker 1: way they're received for these persona personas or changes in

208
00:11:49,600 --> 00:11:53,160
Speaker 1: their style may also differ over time. So I think

209
00:11:53,160 --> 00:11:54,880
Speaker 1: one of the like the main examples that comes to

210
00:11:54,920 --> 00:11:58,120
Speaker 1: mind is the whole And this is not something certainly

211
00:11:58,200 --> 00:12:00,200
Speaker 1: I was not around to experience this in real time,

212
00:12:00,200 --> 00:12:03,160
Speaker 1: but you read about it and hear about it in retrospectives.

213
00:12:03,160 --> 00:12:06,160
Speaker 1: But Bob Dylan going electric in nineteen sixty.

214
00:12:05,800 --> 00:12:09,040
Speaker 3: Five, people allegedly shouting Judas at him. I don't know

215
00:12:09,080 --> 00:12:12,560
Speaker 3: if that really happened, but that's what I recall reading

216
00:12:12,600 --> 00:12:15,680
Speaker 3: about it. So, yeah, he had recorded like acoustic folk

217
00:12:15,760 --> 00:12:18,640
Speaker 3: albums and then it suddenly was playing with an electric

218
00:12:18,640 --> 00:12:21,959
Speaker 3: guitar and a full band. And some people didn't like that.

219
00:12:22,000 --> 00:12:24,280
Speaker 3: They saw that not just as a change in style

220
00:12:24,360 --> 00:12:26,280
Speaker 3: that well, yeah, you know, artists go through different kind

221
00:12:26,320 --> 00:12:29,120
Speaker 3: of periods. It was like that was a betrayal. He

222
00:12:29,280 --> 00:12:31,440
Speaker 3: was no longer what I signed up for.

223
00:12:32,320 --> 00:12:35,839
Speaker 1: Yeah, and it's it can feel kind of silly looking

224
00:12:35,880 --> 00:12:38,000
Speaker 1: back on it, because from our point of view, like

225
00:12:38,040 --> 00:12:40,800
Speaker 1: we know everything that came after that shift, like you know,

226
00:12:41,040 --> 00:12:44,120
Speaker 1: put out a lot of great material, great albums, and

227
00:12:44,240 --> 00:12:47,800
Speaker 1: other changes in style and explorations of different styles and ideas.

228
00:12:48,480 --> 00:12:51,679
Speaker 1: But he remained Bob Dylan throughout all of it. And

229
00:12:51,720 --> 00:12:53,840
Speaker 1: you know, some of it is maybe not everybody's favorite,

230
00:12:53,840 --> 00:12:54,840
Speaker 1: but some of it's pretty great.

231
00:12:55,040 --> 00:12:55,960
Speaker 3: I certainly think so.

232
00:12:56,720 --> 00:12:59,200
Speaker 1: Now of course that in that example, you have like

233
00:12:59,240 --> 00:13:03,840
Speaker 1: a shift in sound that I think would largely be reflected.

234
00:13:04,000 --> 00:13:06,320
Speaker 1: You know, it's not like he would he would okay,

235
00:13:06,360 --> 00:13:08,080
Speaker 1: he would say, all right, after one album, I'm gonna

236
00:13:08,080 --> 00:13:10,640
Speaker 1: put the guitar away. But you do have other artists

237
00:13:10,640 --> 00:13:13,280
Speaker 1: who have kind of like a single album that seems

238
00:13:13,280 --> 00:13:15,320
Speaker 1: to be an outlier, It seems to be like an

239
00:13:15,320 --> 00:13:18,600
Speaker 1: exploration of something different than is maybe not well received

240
00:13:18,600 --> 00:13:21,440
Speaker 1: by fans. And I think one example that came to

241
00:13:21,440 --> 00:13:23,839
Speaker 1: mind on this front is Neil Young's nineteen eighty three

242
00:13:23,880 --> 00:13:24,640
Speaker 1: album Trance.

243
00:13:25,200 --> 00:13:28,319
Speaker 3: This was actually within a stretch of Neil Young albums

244
00:13:28,320 --> 00:13:32,520
Speaker 3: where he was like changing genre every album. So during

245
00:13:32,520 --> 00:13:35,600
Speaker 3: this period, you know, Neil Young, he had sort of

246
00:13:35,640 --> 00:13:37,800
Speaker 3: he had worked in folk, he had worked also in

247
00:13:37,880 --> 00:13:42,440
Speaker 3: heavy electric rock. He'd done both. But he in the

248
00:13:42,520 --> 00:13:46,800
Speaker 3: eighties he released a country album, a blues album with

249
00:13:46,840 --> 00:13:52,480
Speaker 3: like Horns, a rockabilly album called Everybody's Rockin', and then

250
00:13:52,520 --> 00:13:55,920
Speaker 3: this I'm not necessarily saying them in the correct order,

251
00:13:55,960 --> 00:13:58,760
Speaker 3: but then also this electronic album, which is probably the

252
00:13:58,840 --> 00:13:59,960
Speaker 3: weirdest of all of them.

253
00:14:01,040 --> 00:14:04,000
Speaker 1: Yeah, he has he uses a robotic voice on some

254
00:14:04,040 --> 00:14:07,680
Speaker 1: of these tracks, and I've read that this was not

255
00:14:07,760 --> 00:14:10,200
Speaker 1: well received at the time by some fans, but I

256
00:14:10,200 --> 00:14:13,120
Speaker 1: don't know. I like some of the roboty songs on

257
00:14:13,160 --> 00:14:14,160
Speaker 1: this particular album.

258
00:14:14,320 --> 00:14:17,360
Speaker 3: Yeah, you have to be in the right mindset to

259
00:14:17,400 --> 00:14:22,520
Speaker 3: receive it, especially with songs like Computer Cowboy, But yeah,

260
00:14:22,680 --> 00:14:24,280
Speaker 3: I think there's stuff to appreciate there.

261
00:14:24,440 --> 00:14:26,640
Speaker 1: Now a couple of examples that I want to bring up.

262
00:14:26,640 --> 00:14:29,480
Speaker 1: These are ones that definitely occurred during my teenage years,

263
00:14:29,600 --> 00:14:31,400
Speaker 1: so you know, getting into that idea of being like

264
00:14:31,480 --> 00:14:38,160
Speaker 1: hypersensitive to perceived in authenticity. So one that comes to

265
00:14:38,200 --> 00:14:42,400
Speaker 1: mind is David Bowie exploring a more experimental industrial sound

266
00:14:42,800 --> 00:14:45,640
Speaker 1: on his album Outside in nineteen ninety five.

267
00:14:46,000 --> 00:14:48,160
Speaker 3: So were there people who were like that, there is

268
00:14:48,200 --> 00:14:51,080
Speaker 3: a real David Bowie and this is not it.

269
00:14:51,080 --> 00:14:54,160
Speaker 1: It is my understanding that, like at the time, some

270
00:14:54,320 --> 00:14:57,520
Speaker 1: of the older David Bowie fans were not crazy about

271
00:14:57,560 --> 00:15:00,320
Speaker 1: it and their line of thought. I was like, oh,

272
00:15:00,320 --> 00:15:01,640
Speaker 1: I don't want to go see him in a concert

273
00:15:01,680 --> 00:15:04,960
Speaker 1: if he's going to be doing this MTV material, you know,

274
00:15:05,120 --> 00:15:07,080
Speaker 1: it's like I want to hear the hits, you know,

275
00:15:07,120 --> 00:15:09,640
Speaker 1: which I guess is always the case with artists putting

276
00:15:09,680 --> 00:15:13,240
Speaker 1: out new material and trying new things. But yeah, this

277
00:15:13,400 --> 00:15:16,120
Speaker 1: was more of an industrial sound. It was like, I

278
00:15:16,160 --> 00:15:18,440
Speaker 1: think right after this album he ends up touring with

279
00:15:18,560 --> 00:15:23,240
Speaker 1: nine inch Nails. So at the time, I like, I

280
00:15:23,280 --> 00:15:26,640
Speaker 1: bought the album like I did as as the television

281
00:15:26,840 --> 00:15:30,080
Speaker 1: commanded me, and I liked and I guess I still

282
00:15:30,080 --> 00:15:32,400
Speaker 1: I don't really listen to this album anymore, but I

283
00:15:32,440 --> 00:15:35,120
Speaker 1: remember it having some tracks that I dug. But at

284
00:15:35,120 --> 00:15:38,120
Speaker 1: the same time, like some of that dialogue was in

285
00:15:38,200 --> 00:15:40,840
Speaker 1: my head about I wasn't thinking of it in terms

286
00:15:40,880 --> 00:15:45,600
Speaker 1: of authenticity and inauthenticity or fakery even or even really

287
00:15:45,600 --> 00:15:48,200
Speaker 1: getting deep into like David Bowie's personas, but it was.

288
00:15:48,280 --> 00:15:51,080
Speaker 1: But on some level I was wondering, like is this

289
00:15:51,760 --> 00:15:56,200
Speaker 1: is this something he's doing just to remain popular or

290
00:15:56,280 --> 00:15:58,440
Speaker 1: is this his heart? You know, is his Is he

291
00:15:58,640 --> 00:16:01,760
Speaker 1: legitimately exploring new sound and trying new things? And I

292
00:16:01,760 --> 00:16:04,600
Speaker 1: think it's it's my understanding now it is the latter.

293
00:16:04,760 --> 00:16:08,360
Speaker 1: Like he he is an artist that was continually reinventing

294
00:16:08,480 --> 00:16:11,320
Speaker 1: himself and trying new things, and this was just a

295
00:16:11,360 --> 00:16:13,600
Speaker 1: phase of that. And you know, he stuck with this

296
00:16:13,720 --> 00:16:16,040
Speaker 1: sound for I think another album and then he tried

297
00:16:16,080 --> 00:16:16,560
Speaker 1: other things.

298
00:16:16,960 --> 00:16:20,120
Speaker 3: That is interesting. So I have no real familiarity with

299
00:16:20,160 --> 00:16:23,480
Speaker 3: Bowie's nineties output, so I don't really know anything about this,

300
00:16:23,640 --> 00:16:28,040
Speaker 3: but uh, yeah, that an artist as a chameleon, like

301
00:16:28,120 --> 00:16:30,600
Speaker 3: as as David Bowie, and you know, with all this

302
00:16:30,760 --> 00:16:33,960
Speaker 3: history of playing these different explicitly different characters, you know,

303
00:16:34,000 --> 00:16:37,920
Speaker 3: with different with names named characters, uh, and engaging in

304
00:16:37,960 --> 00:16:40,400
Speaker 3: these different styles, that there would it's he would hit

305
00:16:40,560 --> 00:16:43,160
Speaker 3: some point that people would say, Okay, now this one

306
00:16:43,240 --> 00:16:46,720
Speaker 3: is not for real, that's fake. Yeah, and that that

307
00:16:46,760 --> 00:16:49,360
Speaker 3: would have to suggest something about like the broader the

308
00:16:49,400 --> 00:16:52,800
Speaker 3: way that that genre or what he's doing and it

309
00:16:52,880 --> 00:16:55,600
Speaker 3: is received in the broader marketplace, like what the marketplace

310
00:16:55,640 --> 00:16:57,680
Speaker 3: thought about industrial music or something.

311
00:16:58,360 --> 00:17:01,520
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. Because another example that comes to mind, and

312
00:17:01,520 --> 00:17:03,720
Speaker 1: this is not a major moment in music history or anything,

313
00:17:03,720 --> 00:17:05,800
Speaker 1: but it's one that stood out to me because again

314
00:17:05,840 --> 00:17:08,280
Speaker 1: I was a teenager at the time, and that was

315
00:17:08,359 --> 00:17:11,560
Speaker 1: that the band Danzig suddenly it went industrial in nineteen

316
00:17:11,640 --> 00:17:14,560
Speaker 1: ninety six as well, So that's what a year after

317
00:17:14,680 --> 00:17:17,840
Speaker 1: outside and that one I remember as being a lot

318
00:17:17,880 --> 00:17:22,959
Speaker 1: more jarring. I'm certainly looking back on it like it is.

319
00:17:22,119 --> 00:17:26,080
Speaker 1: It is a rather starch departure from the previous material

320
00:17:26,520 --> 00:17:32,000
Speaker 1: and seems like maybe it's a little less authentic. I

321
00:17:32,040 --> 00:17:36,520
Speaker 1: don't know. I'm sure Danzig fans will disagree or agree

322
00:17:36,560 --> 00:17:40,119
Speaker 1: on this. I have no point of reference here, but

323
00:17:40,240 --> 00:17:42,119
Speaker 1: you know, this kind of thing keeps happening, like the

324
00:17:42,160 --> 00:17:44,399
Speaker 1: most recent one, and I am not super well informed

325
00:17:44,400 --> 00:17:45,800
Speaker 1: on all the ins and outs of this story, but

326
00:17:46,240 --> 00:17:49,080
Speaker 1: you know, it made huge headlines that Beyonce was going

327
00:17:49,119 --> 00:17:52,760
Speaker 1: to put out a country album, and it seems like

328
00:17:52,800 --> 00:17:55,560
Speaker 1: that probably stirred up some of the same discussions, like,

329
00:17:56,440 --> 00:17:58,879
Speaker 1: Beyonce do a country album? Can someone who has not

330
00:17:58,880 --> 00:18:02,520
Speaker 1: done country music album before do a country album? Of

331
00:18:02,520 --> 00:18:05,040
Speaker 1: course they can. We just ran across some other examples

332
00:18:05,080 --> 00:18:09,159
Speaker 1: of people doing the same thing. But yeah, anytime an

333
00:18:09,240 --> 00:18:13,200
Speaker 1: artist shifts and try something new, takes on a new persona,

334
00:18:13,200 --> 00:18:14,880
Speaker 1: et cetera, it raises these questions.

335
00:18:15,000 --> 00:18:17,399
Speaker 3: I don't really know anything about this example either, except

336
00:18:17,400 --> 00:18:20,400
Speaker 3: I saw some kind of headline about her maybe claiming

337
00:18:20,440 --> 00:18:22,359
Speaker 3: that it was not actually a country album.

338
00:18:22,920 --> 00:18:25,879
Speaker 1: I don't know, Yeah, but you know, artists engage in

339
00:18:25,920 --> 00:18:28,120
Speaker 1: the sort of shift all the time. And it also

340
00:18:28,240 --> 00:18:30,240
Speaker 1: it reminds me a bit of our discussion about recipes

341
00:18:30,400 --> 00:18:32,600
Speaker 1: in the past. You know, whatever we now think of

342
00:18:32,640 --> 00:18:35,560
Speaker 1: as the standard recipe was at some point a shift.

343
00:18:36,080 --> 00:18:39,560
Speaker 1: And likewise, I mean, speaking of industrial music, one of

344
00:18:39,080 --> 00:18:43,040
Speaker 1: the big industrial mainstays out. There has has has always

345
00:18:43,040 --> 00:18:46,480
Speaker 1: been Ministry. Ministry started out as a synthpop group. If

346
00:18:46,480 --> 00:18:49,000
Speaker 1: you go back to their first album, it is it's

347
00:18:49,160 --> 00:18:52,160
Speaker 1: very I mean, you know, you can still you can

348
00:18:52,200 --> 00:18:55,840
Speaker 1: still feel the Ministry in the album, but it's a

349
00:18:55,880 --> 00:18:59,120
Speaker 1: different sound entirely, and that was just, you know, part

350
00:18:59,119 --> 00:19:03,440
Speaker 1: of this particular groups evolution. And you know, it doesn't

351
00:19:03,440 --> 00:19:05,600
Speaker 1: mean it's inauthentic, it's just where they were at that

352
00:19:05,800 --> 00:19:08,160
Speaker 1: point in time. But again, I guess in general, I'm

353
00:19:08,200 --> 00:19:10,560
Speaker 1: willing to give most artists the benefit of the doubt

354
00:19:11,200 --> 00:19:14,919
Speaker 1: on these shifts and changes, though I'm sure there are

355
00:19:14,920 --> 00:19:18,359
Speaker 1: some examples that are that are maybe a little more

356
00:19:18,520 --> 00:19:22,199
Speaker 1: heavily slanted in the direction of inauthenticity. But you know,

357
00:19:22,280 --> 00:19:25,159
Speaker 1: it's not as fun to discuss those and throw a

358
00:19:25,160 --> 00:19:30,560
Speaker 1: lot of criticism at bands and performers for trying new things. However,

359
00:19:30,920 --> 00:19:33,240
Speaker 1: there was that one Garth Brooks album, as I remember,

360
00:19:33,480 --> 00:19:35,560
Speaker 1: where he took on a different persona and did non

361
00:19:35,560 --> 00:19:36,240
Speaker 1: country music.

362
00:19:36,440 --> 00:19:37,120
Speaker 3: Chris Gaines.

363
00:19:37,560 --> 00:19:40,119
Speaker 1: Chris Gaines. Yeah, this this was not well received, as

364
00:19:40,160 --> 00:19:43,080
Speaker 1: I recall, was it not? I don't think it was.

365
00:19:43,440 --> 00:19:45,520
Speaker 1: I don't think he came back to the persona either.

366
00:19:45,680 --> 00:19:47,640
Speaker 1: But again, this is an area that I know even

367
00:19:47,680 --> 00:19:50,760
Speaker 1: less about. So Garth brook fans, you know, write in

368
00:19:51,080 --> 00:19:53,000
Speaker 1: I guess and we'll we can just we can hash

369
00:19:53,040 --> 00:19:53,400
Speaker 1: this out.

370
00:19:53,800 --> 00:19:55,560
Speaker 3: How surprised are people going to be when they find

371
00:19:55,560 --> 00:19:57,600
Speaker 3: out that Garth Brooks is actually also one of the

372
00:19:57,600 --> 00:19:58,520
Speaker 3: guys in slip.

373
00:19:58,320 --> 00:20:02,080
Speaker 1: Knot I have nasan you'd never know.

374
00:20:10,400 --> 00:20:12,679
Speaker 3: But I wanted to briefly come back to the question

375
00:20:12,760 --> 00:20:17,040
Speaker 3: of why it is that music might feel like, of

376
00:20:17,080 --> 00:20:20,600
Speaker 3: all the genres of art out there, why music would

377
00:20:20,640 --> 00:20:24,919
Speaker 3: be especially subject to authenticity concerns like why, you know,

378
00:20:25,040 --> 00:20:30,000
Speaker 3: teenagers are really concerned about whether this singer songwriter is

379
00:20:30,080 --> 00:20:33,240
Speaker 3: authentic as opposed to I don't know, you know, like

380
00:20:33,320 --> 00:20:38,240
Speaker 3: painters or something. And I obviously there could be a

381
00:20:38,280 --> 00:20:41,440
Speaker 3: lot of explanations here, but I kind of wonder if

382
00:20:41,480 --> 00:20:44,679
Speaker 3: it has to do with the fact that music is

383
00:20:44,800 --> 00:20:48,000
Speaker 3: the art form most likely to be experienced in an

384
00:20:48,080 --> 00:20:52,720
Speaker 3: involuntary way. So, for example, you will rarely, if ever,

385
00:20:52,840 --> 00:20:55,720
Speaker 3: be forced to look at a painting or watch a film.

386
00:20:56,160 --> 00:20:58,040
Speaker 3: You know, there might be social pressure to go see

387
00:20:58,040 --> 00:21:00,120
Speaker 3: a movie with your friends that you're not really interested in,

388
00:21:00,200 --> 00:21:03,399
Speaker 3: or something like that. Some weird circumstance. But generally you

389
00:21:03,400 --> 00:21:05,240
Speaker 3: can look at what you want, and if you don't

390
00:21:05,359 --> 00:21:07,520
Speaker 3: like what you're looking at, you can, like you know,

391
00:21:07,640 --> 00:21:11,320
Speaker 3: direct your attention elsewhere, or even shut your eyes unless

392
00:21:11,359 --> 00:21:13,720
Speaker 3: you have the aid of some kind of technology like

393
00:21:13,800 --> 00:21:16,800
Speaker 3: you know, headphones or something which are not appropriate to

394
00:21:16,960 --> 00:21:20,560
Speaker 3: use in many, say, social or work scenarios. You cannot

395
00:21:20,680 --> 00:21:23,919
Speaker 3: practically shut your ears off to music the way that

396
00:21:23,960 --> 00:21:26,040
Speaker 3: you can shut your eyes or avert your eyes from

397
00:21:26,040 --> 00:21:29,760
Speaker 3: a painting. And if music is audible in the place

398
00:21:29,800 --> 00:21:33,120
Speaker 3: where you are, you're gonna hear it. Technically, I guess

399
00:21:33,119 --> 00:21:35,520
Speaker 3: this would be true of any sound based art form

400
00:21:35,920 --> 00:21:38,800
Speaker 3: because of the nature of our bodies. But generally that's

401
00:21:38,800 --> 00:21:43,760
Speaker 3: going to mean music. So music is like especially difficult

402
00:21:43,840 --> 00:21:45,960
Speaker 3: to tune out if we don't like it, And I

403
00:21:46,040 --> 00:21:51,199
Speaker 3: wonder if that makes us especially sensitive to what we

404
00:21:51,240 --> 00:21:54,760
Speaker 3: would think of as artistic deficiencies in it. And then

405
00:21:54,920 --> 00:21:57,720
Speaker 3: on top of that, a lot of music has a

406
00:21:58,040 --> 00:22:01,720
Speaker 3: has a linguistic element, unlike a lot of other art forms.

407
00:22:01,760 --> 00:22:05,399
Speaker 3: Because there are words in most popular music, there is

408
00:22:05,520 --> 00:22:09,879
Speaker 3: increased opportunity to scrutinize what a song is saying and

409
00:22:10,000 --> 00:22:12,520
Speaker 3: evaluate it for sincerity or truth.

410
00:22:13,160 --> 00:22:16,080
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. Though again, just because the song is annoying

411
00:22:16,119 --> 00:22:20,359
Speaker 1: doesn't mean it's not authentic. Right, Like I am not

412
00:22:20,440 --> 00:22:22,680
Speaker 1: a huge you know, no judgment if you're a fan

413
00:22:22,720 --> 00:22:25,920
Speaker 1: of this song, but you know the the smash Mouth song,

414
00:22:26,160 --> 00:22:27,240
Speaker 1: what is the smash Done.

415
00:22:27,200 --> 00:22:29,640
Speaker 3: All Star, I mean the all Stark.

416
00:22:29,480 --> 00:22:32,960
Speaker 1: That that song. I'm not a fan, but I do

417
00:22:33,040 --> 00:22:35,480
Speaker 1: get it earwormed in my head every now and then,

418
00:22:35,680 --> 00:22:39,200
Speaker 1: and it's it's annoying. But I don't think I would

419
00:22:39,440 --> 00:22:45,119
Speaker 1: argue that that band was being inauthentic in crafting and

420
00:22:45,160 --> 00:22:48,040
Speaker 1: performing this track, But I just it was certainly not

421
00:22:48,119 --> 00:22:51,359
Speaker 1: my thing. I think another thing about to keep in

422
00:22:51,359 --> 00:22:53,640
Speaker 1: mind about all this too is we have to bear

423
00:22:53,680 --> 00:22:57,600
Speaker 1: in mind media consumption. So like when I think back

424
00:22:57,720 --> 00:23:01,040
Speaker 1: on the music that I was exposed to in high school,

425
00:23:01,119 --> 00:23:05,560
Speaker 1: like most of it was MTV related content, and it's

426
00:23:05,680 --> 00:23:09,040
Speaker 1: because the TV was always on and MTV was one

427
00:23:09,040 --> 00:23:12,239
Speaker 1: of the channels that you could you would frequently go to,

428
00:23:12,680 --> 00:23:15,240
Speaker 1: and like, not watching the TV just did not feel

429
00:23:15,320 --> 00:23:17,119
Speaker 1: like an option. It was just you know, it was

430
00:23:17,200 --> 00:23:19,600
Speaker 1: like the weather, it was like the ocean. You just

431
00:23:20,080 --> 00:23:22,679
Speaker 1: you engaged with it. It was just part of your environment.

432
00:23:23,040 --> 00:23:25,400
Speaker 1: And I think it is like that to varying degrees

433
00:23:25,440 --> 00:23:26,720
Speaker 1: for a lot of folks today. I mean, there are

434
00:23:26,720 --> 00:23:29,719
Speaker 1: people who still consume television like that, or even if

435
00:23:29,720 --> 00:23:33,320
Speaker 1: you're not watching television, perhaps you're consuming various advertisements in

436
00:23:33,359 --> 00:23:36,800
Speaker 1: the same way. So some of these songs or elements,

437
00:23:37,320 --> 00:23:40,919
Speaker 1: certainly there have been more than a few commercials that

438
00:23:41,040 --> 00:23:43,760
Speaker 1: have the air of inauthenticity about them, and you may

439
00:23:43,800 --> 00:23:45,800
Speaker 1: be exposed to those over and over again.

440
00:23:46,400 --> 00:23:48,520
Speaker 3: Okay, Rob, I think it is time we must bring

441
00:23:48,640 --> 00:23:49,920
Speaker 3: Orson Wells into the picture.

442
00:23:50,800 --> 00:23:55,440
Speaker 1: That's right, Yeah, getting even more into this idea of fakeness,

443
00:23:55,840 --> 00:23:58,800
Speaker 1: of inauthicity to the point where it is an outright fake,

444
00:23:59,400 --> 00:24:02,119
Speaker 1: which is not something we've really been leveling at any

445
00:24:02,160 --> 00:24:04,600
Speaker 1: of these artists we've discussed here, because you know, this

446
00:24:04,680 --> 00:24:06,960
Speaker 1: is more of a you could, if you were feeling

447
00:24:06,960 --> 00:24:09,359
Speaker 1: particularly harsh, you might say, oh, well, this this change,

448
00:24:09,440 --> 00:24:12,400
Speaker 1: this was fake, this album was fake. But it wasn't

449
00:24:12,480 --> 00:24:16,880
Speaker 1: wasn't really fake. It was an actual fraud. But yeah,

450
00:24:16,960 --> 00:24:18,800
Speaker 1: what we're going to talk about next does get into

451
00:24:18,800 --> 00:24:21,520
Speaker 1: that territory. So, knowing that we're going to be talking

452
00:24:21,520 --> 00:24:25,960
Speaker 1: about authenticity in preparation for these episodes, I decided to

453
00:24:26,000 --> 00:24:29,679
Speaker 1: finally check out Orson Well's nineteen seventy three film F

454
00:24:29,880 --> 00:24:33,680
Speaker 1: for Fake, a film that is sometimes described as a docudrama,

455
00:24:34,560 --> 00:24:37,880
Speaker 1: other times a film essay. And I guess I feel

456
00:24:37,880 --> 00:24:40,920
Speaker 1: like maybe film essay is a little more appropriate. It

457
00:24:41,000 --> 00:24:43,920
Speaker 1: is because it's not just like a straight up documentary.

458
00:24:44,160 --> 00:24:44,200
Speaker 2: No.

459
00:24:44,440 --> 00:24:46,920
Speaker 3: I would say film essay is perfect because it is

460
00:24:46,960 --> 00:24:53,080
Speaker 3: a combination performance and a meditation on themes with the

461
00:24:53,119 --> 00:24:57,159
Speaker 3: aid of visuals and sound, and also a documenting of

462
00:24:57,240 --> 00:24:59,480
Speaker 3: certain real life characters and events.

463
00:25:00,119 --> 00:25:02,280
Speaker 1: Yeah, and it's also kind of like being cornered by

464
00:25:02,359 --> 00:25:05,399
Speaker 1: Orson Wells, probably like in a bar or a restaurant

465
00:25:06,560 --> 00:25:08,240
Speaker 1: and he's just talking at you for a long time,

466
00:25:08,240 --> 00:25:11,439
Speaker 1: and it's it's and it's remarkable, and he's very charismatic,

467
00:25:11,840 --> 00:25:14,239
Speaker 1: and you were glad that you have been cornered by

468
00:25:14,280 --> 00:25:15,640
Speaker 1: such an interesting man. Yeah.

469
00:25:15,800 --> 00:25:19,800
Speaker 3: Ah, the French known to do magic tricks, and he

470
00:25:19,960 --> 00:25:20,520
Speaker 3: shows you some.

471
00:25:23,080 --> 00:25:25,280
Speaker 1: I was looking up a little bit about how this

472
00:25:25,320 --> 00:25:28,600
Speaker 1: film was received, and Roger Ebert in his review described

473
00:25:28,640 --> 00:25:30,600
Speaker 1: it as a film spun out of next to nothing,

474
00:25:31,119 --> 00:25:33,880
Speaker 1: and he included this quote, Orson Wells can make better

475
00:25:33,920 --> 00:25:36,920
Speaker 1: movies than most directors. With one hand tied behind his back,

476
00:25:37,119 --> 00:25:39,600
Speaker 1: his problem, of course, is that for thirty five years

477
00:25:39,600 --> 00:25:40,960
Speaker 1: the hand has remained tied.

478
00:25:41,880 --> 00:25:42,400
Speaker 3: That's good.

479
00:25:43,080 --> 00:25:47,399
Speaker 1: Yeah, I don't know if I'm not as enough as

480
00:25:47,400 --> 00:25:50,800
Speaker 1: an expert on Wells's film of his filmography had really

481
00:25:50,800 --> 00:25:53,360
Speaker 1: comment on that. But esteem for this particular film has

482
00:25:53,400 --> 00:25:56,639
Speaker 1: grown quite a bit since its initial release, where I

483
00:25:56,640 --> 00:25:58,480
Speaker 1: think it was kind of polarizing. Some people thought it

484
00:25:58,520 --> 00:26:01,800
Speaker 1: was brilliant, others thought it was comprehensible. Ebert gave it

485
00:26:01,840 --> 00:26:03,240
Speaker 1: three stars in seventy seven.

486
00:26:03,440 --> 00:26:05,119
Speaker 3: It's been a long time since I've seen it, but

487
00:26:05,160 --> 00:26:07,439
Speaker 3: I remember quite liking it. My friend Ben showed it

488
00:26:07,440 --> 00:26:11,240
Speaker 3: to me years and years ago, and yeah, I was

489
00:26:12,480 --> 00:26:13,640
Speaker 3: my attention was wrapped.

490
00:26:14,160 --> 00:26:18,800
Speaker 1: Yeah. So, in short, it's a Wells hosted essentially, we'll

491
00:26:18,800 --> 00:26:23,800
Speaker 1: say documentary just for ease of conversation here about famed

492
00:26:23,840 --> 00:26:28,199
Speaker 1: painter and art forger Elmir de Lori, which sites and

493
00:26:28,240 --> 00:26:31,440
Speaker 1: features interviews with a man who wrote a book about Elmir,

494
00:26:32,200 --> 00:26:35,959
Speaker 1: Clifford Irving, a man who, in turn, after his interview

495
00:26:36,000 --> 00:26:38,800
Speaker 1: segments were shot for this documentary, but prior to the

496
00:26:38,840 --> 00:26:42,080
Speaker 1: completion of the film, turned out to have allegedly written

497
00:26:42,080 --> 00:26:44,159
Speaker 1: a hoax biography of Howard Hughes.

498
00:26:44,480 --> 00:26:48,760
Speaker 3: This was a hoax autobiography right, like it was autobiography, yes,

499
00:26:48,800 --> 00:26:50,679
Speaker 3: claiming to be by Howard Hughes.

500
00:26:51,280 --> 00:26:55,520
Speaker 1: Yeah, based on his his handwriting and so forth. You know,

501
00:26:55,520 --> 00:26:59,480
Speaker 1: a huge, huge scandal. So these are the initial two

502
00:26:59,520 --> 00:27:03,000
Speaker 1: fingers of the cat's cradle that Wells constructs from here

503
00:27:03,040 --> 00:27:07,919
Speaker 1: on out in this film on fakery, on authenticity. And

504
00:27:07,960 --> 00:27:10,320
Speaker 1: he also freely injects his own story into all of

505
00:27:10,359 --> 00:27:14,119
Speaker 1: the citing early exaggerations of his own credentials that allowed

506
00:27:14,160 --> 00:27:16,919
Speaker 1: him to rise to the top in show business I think,

507
00:27:16,960 --> 00:27:21,639
Speaker 1: he adds, and I've been plummeting ever since. He also

508
00:27:21,880 --> 00:27:24,080
Speaker 1: brings up the nineteen thirty eight War of the World's

509
00:27:24,160 --> 00:27:28,680
Speaker 1: radio fiasco, which of course, you know, apparently convinced a

510
00:27:29,560 --> 00:27:31,919
Speaker 1: number of people that it was actually happening. And he

511
00:27:32,000 --> 00:27:34,919
Speaker 1: goes on to indulge in some overt forgery in at

512
00:27:35,000 --> 00:27:37,480
Speaker 1: least the last portion of the film, and then points

513
00:27:37,520 --> 00:27:40,400
Speaker 1: out the forgery and invites us all to think about it.

514
00:27:40,440 --> 00:27:42,600
Speaker 3: So sort of like we've been doing in this series,

515
00:27:42,680 --> 00:27:45,840
Speaker 3: he invites you to think about what is authenticity. We

516
00:27:45,960 --> 00:27:48,560
Speaker 3: use this concept, but do we understand what it means?

517
00:27:48,640 --> 00:27:50,840
Speaker 3: What is real and what is fake? And why do

518
00:27:50,880 --> 00:27:51,480
Speaker 3: we care.

519
00:27:51,680 --> 00:27:53,960
Speaker 1: Yeah, Like, what's the difference between a masterpiece and a

520
00:27:54,000 --> 00:27:58,240
Speaker 1: masterful fake? Is almost any story, indeed some kind of

521
00:27:58,240 --> 00:28:02,400
Speaker 1: a lie a lie in Picasso's words, as cited by

522
00:28:02,840 --> 00:28:06,080
Speaker 1: by Wells, here is something that makes us realize the

523
00:28:06,119 --> 00:28:10,520
Speaker 1: truth is that true? Is that is that a dependable statement?

524
00:28:10,760 --> 00:28:13,440
Speaker 1: Can an authentic artist create a fake? Can a hoax?

525
00:28:13,560 --> 00:28:17,399
Speaker 1: Or create where I suppose recreate a masterpiece? You know,

526
00:28:17,440 --> 00:28:19,240
Speaker 1: there are a lot of ins and outs to this

527
00:28:19,280 --> 00:28:23,200
Speaker 1: when you start swirling it around in your negrony. That

528
00:28:23,320 --> 00:28:26,040
Speaker 1: was his favorite drink by the way, Oh yeah, So

529
00:28:26,080 --> 00:28:28,760
Speaker 1: these are these are not really questions meant to be

530
00:28:28,960 --> 00:28:32,679
Speaker 1: conclusively answered, And indeed, I think we'll find that it

531
00:28:32,720 --> 00:28:36,399
Speaker 1: all depends very largely on the context of an individual example. So,

532
00:28:36,440 --> 00:28:39,760
Speaker 1: for instance, what sort of lie is is a given

533
00:28:39,800 --> 00:28:42,160
Speaker 1: story based upon Is it based on a malicious lie,

534
00:28:42,200 --> 00:28:45,600
Speaker 1: a hateful lie, a well meaning lie, a mere exaggeration

535
00:28:45,800 --> 00:28:49,600
Speaker 1: or dramatization. There's so much room for variation here, and

536
00:28:49,760 --> 00:28:52,600
Speaker 1: you still encounter various examples in just sort of like

537
00:28:52,680 --> 00:28:58,600
Speaker 1: popular discourse about about individuals, about performances, about you know,

538
00:28:59,400 --> 00:29:03,560
Speaker 1: performance works, where someone will say was this authentic? Is

539
00:29:03,600 --> 00:29:05,920
Speaker 1: this was part of this made up? And so forth.

540
00:29:06,560 --> 00:29:09,719
Speaker 3: I think the difference between fiction and a lie is

541
00:29:09,840 --> 00:29:15,320
Speaker 3: the knowing consent of the audience in advance, and in

542
00:29:15,360 --> 00:29:19,120
Speaker 3: most cases it's interesting that this is established through entirely

543
00:29:19,240 --> 00:29:22,760
Speaker 3: meta textual means. Like you can have a printed novel

544
00:29:23,080 --> 00:29:25,840
Speaker 3: in which no part of the text makes clear that

545
00:29:25,880 --> 00:29:29,520
Speaker 3: the events described did not actually happen, and yet somehow

546
00:29:29,520 --> 00:29:32,640
Speaker 3: we all still know. It's like from you know, surrounding

547
00:29:32,720 --> 00:29:35,560
Speaker 3: clues in the culture, like what section of the bookstore

548
00:29:35,640 --> 00:29:38,360
Speaker 3: or library you'd find the book in, how other people

549
00:29:38,440 --> 00:29:42,600
Speaker 3: talk about the book, how it's advertised, and so forth. Meanwhile,

550
00:29:42,920 --> 00:29:45,120
Speaker 3: if you read something that you understand to be a

551
00:29:45,160 --> 00:29:48,400
Speaker 3: true account of events that happened in reality, say an

552
00:29:48,440 --> 00:29:52,040
Speaker 3: autobiography of Howard Hughes or something, and then you discover

553
00:29:52,200 --> 00:29:55,560
Speaker 3: that the events described are fictional or that the author

554
00:29:55,640 --> 00:29:57,360
Speaker 3: is not who they claim to be, I think most

555
00:29:57,360 --> 00:30:01,720
Speaker 3: of us would feel very frustrated and betrayed by this, unless,

556
00:30:01,800 --> 00:30:04,400
Speaker 3: that is, we know in advance that we're going to

557
00:30:04,440 --> 00:30:06,400
Speaker 3: be told lies. And here I think back to an

558
00:30:06,440 --> 00:30:09,520
Speaker 3: example that's come up on the podcast a number of

559
00:30:09,560 --> 00:30:12,800
Speaker 3: times in the past year or so. I'm very interested

560
00:30:12,920 --> 00:30:19,320
Speaker 3: in the autobiography of the sixteenth century Italian sculptor Benvenudo Cillini.

561
00:30:19,800 --> 00:30:21,600
Speaker 3: We've told a number of stories about him. We talked

562
00:30:21,600 --> 00:30:26,080
Speaker 3: about him in the episode about Diamonds, where we were

563
00:30:26,080 --> 00:30:28,840
Speaker 3: talking about his claims that someone tried to poison him

564
00:30:28,840 --> 00:30:34,800
Speaker 3: with a diamond in his food. And so, you know Cillini, like,

565
00:30:34,920 --> 00:30:38,360
Speaker 3: he writes this autobiography which purports to be the true

566
00:30:38,480 --> 00:30:41,840
Speaker 3: story of his life, and yet I am certain that

567
00:30:41,920 --> 00:30:45,920
Speaker 3: it contains lots of exaggerations and even outright lies, and

568
00:30:46,000 --> 00:30:49,200
Speaker 3: yet I'm still interested in reading it. And I think

569
00:30:49,200 --> 00:30:51,920
Speaker 3: it's that I think it's that I'm okay with that

570
00:30:52,040 --> 00:30:55,880
Speaker 3: because I already know that we don't want to find

571
00:30:55,960 --> 00:30:59,800
Speaker 3: out after reading something that what we read isn't true.

572
00:31:00,120 --> 00:31:03,680
Speaker 3: We'd like to know beforehand. Like going into a lie

573
00:31:03,840 --> 00:31:07,719
Speaker 3: knowing in advance feels like a whimsical adventure. But finding

574
00:31:07,760 --> 00:31:10,760
Speaker 3: out you've been told to lie after you believed it

575
00:31:10,800 --> 00:31:12,080
Speaker 3: makes you feel like a fool.

576
00:31:12,640 --> 00:31:16,200
Speaker 1: Yeah. Absolutely, And of course, over the course of time,

577
00:31:17,680 --> 00:31:20,959
Speaker 1: something that is a fraud, that is fooling people, it

578
00:31:20,960 --> 00:31:23,960
Speaker 1: can't eventually find new life after the factor. Someone's like,

579
00:31:24,040 --> 00:31:27,160
Speaker 1: we know this is not a fraud now, and now

580
00:31:27,200 --> 00:31:29,400
Speaker 1: perhaps we can appreciate it as a work of fiction,

581
00:31:29,600 --> 00:31:34,360
Speaker 1: but that transition is not guaranteed and certainly doesn't occur

582
00:31:34,400 --> 00:31:38,160
Speaker 1: every time. But in this discussion of like the difference

583
00:31:38,160 --> 00:31:41,480
Speaker 1: between fiction and lies, between fantasy and lies, reminds me

584
00:31:41,640 --> 00:31:44,440
Speaker 1: of our discussions in the Weird House episode on the

585
00:31:44,480 --> 00:31:47,240
Speaker 1: movie The Never Ending Story based on Michael DA's novel,

586
00:31:48,000 --> 00:31:52,440
Speaker 1: and in the novel especially indicates into the idea of

587
00:31:53,800 --> 00:31:59,120
Speaker 1: the denizens of Fantasia or fantastica being, you know, creatures

588
00:31:59,160 --> 00:32:02,040
Speaker 1: a pure fantasy and that have been dreamed into existence

589
00:32:02,040 --> 00:32:05,600
Speaker 1: by humans. But if they travel through then nothing. They

590
00:32:05,600 --> 00:32:08,880
Speaker 1: are not destroyed. They are reborn in our world, but

591
00:32:08,880 --> 00:32:11,760
Speaker 1: they are reborn as lies. So that is the way

592
00:32:11,800 --> 00:32:16,760
Speaker 1: he sort of imagined the relationship between lies and fantasy,

593
00:32:16,840 --> 00:32:20,200
Speaker 1: between lies and fiction, is that the lie is kind

594
00:32:20,200 --> 00:32:23,320
Speaker 1: of the same energy, but it is twisted into this

595
00:32:23,440 --> 00:32:27,760
Speaker 1: form that does not give us hope, does not give

596
00:32:27,800 --> 00:32:31,440
Speaker 1: us escape. It takes this cruel form that is a

597
00:32:31,440 --> 00:32:37,520
Speaker 1: part of the overtly unimaginative and cruel, mundane world. In

598
00:32:37,520 --> 00:32:39,520
Speaker 1: citing a book like The Neverding Store, of course, we're

599
00:32:39,560 --> 00:32:43,280
Speaker 1: also admitting that, yeah, that we're dealing with highly subjective

600
00:32:43,360 --> 00:32:46,840
Speaker 1: territory here. Now one point that is hit upon in

601
00:32:47,640 --> 00:32:51,440
Speaker 1: f for fake is that between the masterful fraud and

602
00:32:51,520 --> 00:32:54,760
Speaker 1: the masterpiece. It's a belief in authenticity that makes all

603
00:32:54,800 --> 00:32:58,800
Speaker 1: the difference monetarily certainly, and Wells dwells on this somewhat,

604
00:32:58,880 --> 00:33:01,600
Speaker 1: but also in turn of the of esteem that is

605
00:33:01,680 --> 00:33:05,240
Speaker 1: given to a particular art work. Authenticity can therefore be

606
00:33:05,360 --> 00:33:08,200
Speaker 1: this kind of illusion. It's only as real as our

607
00:33:08,280 --> 00:33:08,960
Speaker 1: belief in it.

608
00:33:09,600 --> 00:33:13,400
Speaker 3: Yeah, A belief in the power of authenticity and a

609
00:33:13,440 --> 00:33:15,040
Speaker 3: work of art is kind of like belief in the

610
00:33:15,120 --> 00:33:19,000
Speaker 3: value of money. Like it is very real if people

611
00:33:19,040 --> 00:33:21,200
Speaker 3: believe in it, and thus, like a whole culture can

612
00:33:21,240 --> 00:33:23,800
Speaker 3: function on top of it. But if people don't believe

613
00:33:23,880 --> 00:33:26,760
Speaker 3: money is valuable, then it ceases being useful. And I

614
00:33:26,800 --> 00:33:28,800
Speaker 3: think you could say that the same is true in

615
00:33:28,840 --> 00:33:30,480
Speaker 3: some ways about qualities of art.

616
00:33:31,160 --> 00:33:33,400
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, And that's one of the reasons it can

617
00:33:33,480 --> 00:33:36,200
Speaker 1: be so hurtful and it can be so disappointing to

618
00:33:36,320 --> 00:33:39,760
Speaker 1: find out that something that you were invested in, that

619
00:33:39,800 --> 00:33:43,360
Speaker 1: you found beautiful, that you had this reaction too, is

620
00:33:43,400 --> 00:33:46,560
Speaker 1: in fact not one hundred percent of what you thought

621
00:33:46,600 --> 00:33:49,959
Speaker 1: it was. And there are variations on that theme, you know,

622
00:33:50,000 --> 00:33:53,960
Speaker 1: throughout our appreciation of all sorts of works of art

623
00:33:54,040 --> 00:33:56,960
Speaker 1: and music and so forth. Yeah, now, speaking of this,

624
00:33:57,040 --> 00:33:59,240
Speaker 1: there are it is worth noting there are no worthy

625
00:33:59,280 --> 00:34:01,680
Speaker 1: cases of work and art collections that turned out to

626
00:34:01,680 --> 00:34:05,320
Speaker 1: be fakes. These still pop up. But there's also the reverse.

627
00:34:05,360 --> 00:34:07,880
Speaker 1: There are works previously judged to be fakes, but then

628
00:34:07,960 --> 00:34:10,560
Speaker 1: upon closer scrutiny or you know, new information, or someone

629
00:34:10,600 --> 00:34:12,319
Speaker 1: else takes a look at him, they turn out to

630
00:34:12,360 --> 00:34:16,280
Speaker 1: be authentic. So it's interesting how, at least at times

631
00:34:16,320 --> 00:34:17,560
Speaker 1: this can go back and forth.

632
00:34:19,040 --> 00:34:23,319
Speaker 3: Was this the case with da Vinci's Lady with Ermine?

633
00:34:23,719 --> 00:34:25,359
Speaker 3: I feel like I was reading about that not too

634
00:34:25,400 --> 00:34:27,520
Speaker 3: long ago, that, or at least for a while, there

635
00:34:27,520 --> 00:34:30,239
Speaker 3: were questions about who had really painted it, or was

636
00:34:30,280 --> 00:34:32,239
Speaker 3: it a true da Vinci, But I think now it

637
00:34:32,320 --> 00:34:33,600
Speaker 3: is largely thought to be.

638
00:34:34,040 --> 00:34:36,840
Speaker 1: I'm not sure because I wasn't reading about that particular

639
00:34:36,880 --> 00:34:41,480
Speaker 1: painting in reference to this, but there have been various

640
00:34:41,520 --> 00:34:45,960
Speaker 1: works like that have had this story where it's dismissed

641
00:34:46,000 --> 00:34:47,880
Speaker 1: as a fake, maybe a very good fake, but then

642
00:34:47,880 --> 00:34:51,400
Speaker 1: we come back and we realized that it's not the case.

643
00:34:51,840 --> 00:34:54,239
Speaker 1: And then it's also worth noting that I think in

644
00:34:54,280 --> 00:34:57,319
Speaker 1: different artistic traditions there just there's a different relationship with

645
00:34:57,440 --> 00:35:02,239
Speaker 1: copying master works from the past, to the extent that

646
00:35:02,280 --> 00:35:06,160
Speaker 1: they may be copied as especially as a learning method

647
00:35:07,280 --> 00:35:08,399
Speaker 1: for artists and so forth.

648
00:35:08,480 --> 00:35:11,400
Speaker 3: Well, that actually connects to something that I wanted to

649
00:35:11,440 --> 00:35:16,400
Speaker 3: talk about today with respect to authenticity in art. I

650
00:35:16,440 --> 00:35:20,680
Speaker 3: wanted to talk about a famous essay in the history

651
00:35:20,680 --> 00:35:25,520
Speaker 3: of art criticism by the philosopher and critic Walter Benjamin

652
00:35:25,719 --> 00:35:29,440
Speaker 3: called the Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction.

653
00:35:30,280 --> 00:35:33,520
Speaker 3: This was published in nineteen thirty five, and the core

654
00:35:33,640 --> 00:35:38,160
Speaker 3: claim of Benjamin's argument in this essay is that what

655
00:35:38,239 --> 00:35:43,279
Speaker 3: he calls mechanical reproduction, meaning techniques such as lithography, photography,

656
00:35:43,320 --> 00:35:48,439
Speaker 3: and film, have fundamentally changed the way art functions within

657
00:35:48,520 --> 00:35:52,440
Speaker 3: culture and changed what art means to us. And this

658
00:35:52,600 --> 00:35:55,560
Speaker 3: essay brings in a lot of different ideas, including religious

659
00:35:55,560 --> 00:36:00,560
Speaker 3: ideas and political ones. Walter Benjamin was a Jewish German

660
00:36:00,880 --> 00:36:03,000
Speaker 3: writing this at the time of the early years of

661
00:36:03,040 --> 00:36:06,040
Speaker 3: the Third Reich, and he was concerned with ways that

662
00:36:06,120 --> 00:36:10,959
Speaker 3: technology could change, how art would be used for propaganda

663
00:36:11,040 --> 00:36:13,560
Speaker 3: and mass manipulation and all kinds of stuff like that.

664
00:36:14,080 --> 00:36:16,719
Speaker 3: I'm going to get less into the political implications here,

665
00:36:17,640 --> 00:36:19,719
Speaker 3: so I can't cover everything in this essay, but I

666
00:36:19,760 --> 00:36:23,480
Speaker 3: did want to focus on his ideas related to authenticity.

667
00:36:24,000 --> 00:36:27,040
Speaker 3: So Benjamin talks about how like you were mentioning a

668
00:36:27,040 --> 00:36:31,680
Speaker 3: minute ago. Rob art has always been, in principle reproducible

669
00:36:31,760 --> 00:36:34,800
Speaker 3: to some extent. A work of art made by a person,

670
00:36:34,920 --> 00:36:38,000
Speaker 3: such as a painting or a sculpture, or a performance

671
00:36:38,000 --> 00:36:41,560
Speaker 3: of a song or a dance, can always be imitated

672
00:36:41,760 --> 00:36:45,640
Speaker 3: and copied to some extent by another person. But a

673
00:36:45,719 --> 00:36:49,400
Speaker 3: copy made by mere imitation is never exact. It can

674
00:36:49,440 --> 00:36:53,480
Speaker 3: only strive to be similar by degree, and it is

675
00:36:53,640 --> 00:36:57,520
Speaker 3: difficult and laborious to reproduce. But a big part of

676
00:36:57,640 --> 00:37:01,279
Speaker 3: the training of artists in century past used to be

677
00:37:01,520 --> 00:37:05,280
Speaker 3: just trying to reproduce other works of art by artists

678
00:37:05,320 --> 00:37:09,160
Speaker 3: who came before. And one thing I would add is

679
00:37:09,200 --> 00:37:12,920
Speaker 3: that I think a lot of creative people even today,

680
00:37:13,760 --> 00:37:17,839
Speaker 3: discover their own original creative genius first by trying to

681
00:37:17,880 --> 00:37:21,239
Speaker 3: copy things. Trying to copy things when they're young, and

682
00:37:21,520 --> 00:37:26,000
Speaker 3: in the laborious process of making manual copies of somebody

683
00:37:26,000 --> 00:37:29,840
Speaker 3: else's work of art. Because they can't make a perfect copy,

684
00:37:29,880 --> 00:37:34,400
Speaker 3: they end up diverging from the original out of necessity.

685
00:37:34,600 --> 00:37:37,960
Speaker 3: Because they can't do it, and then in this divergence

686
00:37:38,440 --> 00:37:42,240
Speaker 3: start expressing their own unique style, which then develops into

687
00:37:42,320 --> 00:37:45,080
Speaker 3: what that person will use when creating original works of

688
00:37:45,080 --> 00:37:45,479
Speaker 3: their own.

689
00:37:45,960 --> 00:37:49,279
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah, And we see this throughout history, sometimes in

690
00:37:49,320 --> 00:37:53,320
Speaker 1: like rigorous art training and different cultures, but even today,

691
00:37:53,360 --> 00:37:56,480
Speaker 1: like there's the sort of the various examples of this,

692
00:37:56,840 --> 00:37:59,960
Speaker 1: some more current, but some also going back several decades

693
00:38:00,040 --> 00:38:04,319
Speaker 1: where what begins as an exercise in fan fiction becomes

694
00:38:04,719 --> 00:38:07,239
Speaker 1: either the either the work in and of itself or

695
00:38:07,280 --> 00:38:09,200
Speaker 1: sort of the ideas that spring out of that work

696
00:38:09,600 --> 00:38:14,480
Speaker 1: become a new creation, something that is wholly original to

697
00:38:14,520 --> 00:38:18,520
Speaker 1: a given author or you know, a creator of some sort.

698
00:38:18,719 --> 00:38:22,239
Speaker 3: Yeah, totally. So, I think imitation is not something that

699
00:38:22,400 --> 00:38:25,239
Speaker 3: you know, should be should be shunned within art. It's

700
00:38:25,280 --> 00:38:28,760
Speaker 3: like a necessary part of the development of artistic styles

701
00:38:28,760 --> 00:38:32,080
Speaker 3: and has been, you know, all throughout history. But one

702
00:38:32,080 --> 00:38:34,040
Speaker 3: of the things is that while we've always been able

703
00:38:34,120 --> 00:38:39,440
Speaker 3: to imitate other people's performances and artworks, over the centuries,

704
00:38:39,560 --> 00:38:45,279
Speaker 3: gradually higher fidelity techniques for mechanically reproducing works of art

705
00:38:45,320 --> 00:38:48,680
Speaker 3: have come online. So you you know, might originally have

706
00:38:48,760 --> 00:38:51,840
Speaker 3: things like the crude ability to stamp coins. In the

707
00:38:51,880 --> 00:38:54,759
Speaker 3: ancient world, you could reproduce a crude design over and

708
00:38:54,800 --> 00:38:59,080
Speaker 3: over on coins. Later you get wood cut, printing, lithography,

709
00:38:59,480 --> 00:39:02,480
Speaker 3: and final in the nineteenth century, the photograph in the

710
00:39:02,480 --> 00:39:06,600
Speaker 3: motion picture, and early In this essay, though this wasn't

711
00:39:06,640 --> 00:39:09,760
Speaker 3: quite yet true at the time, Benjamin quotes the French

712
00:39:09,800 --> 00:39:14,120
Speaker 3: poet Paul Valerie making a striking prediction about the future

713
00:39:14,440 --> 00:39:19,520
Speaker 3: of image and sound reproduction technology. So Valerie says this

714
00:39:19,560 --> 00:39:24,000
Speaker 3: is in translation, just as water, gas and electricity are

715
00:39:24,040 --> 00:39:27,319
Speaker 3: brought into our houses from far off to satisfy our

716
00:39:27,360 --> 00:39:30,680
Speaker 3: needs in response to a minimal effort, so we shall

717
00:39:30,719 --> 00:39:35,200
Speaker 3: be supplied with visual or auditory images which will appear

718
00:39:35,280 --> 00:39:38,680
Speaker 3: and disappear at a simple movement of the hand, hardly

719
00:39:38,719 --> 00:39:43,680
Speaker 3: more than a sign whoa wow, whoa reading. That made

720
00:39:43,760 --> 00:39:46,960
Speaker 3: me sit back, because obviously that is the world we

721
00:39:47,000 --> 00:39:50,000
Speaker 3: live in now. I mean, it's we don't stop to

722
00:39:50,040 --> 00:39:53,160
Speaker 3: appreciate it often. But how historically strange it is that

723
00:39:53,200 --> 00:39:57,520
Speaker 3: we can we can summon a photograph of almost anything

724
00:39:57,600 --> 00:40:01,040
Speaker 3: that has been photographed, just by making a few gestures

725
00:40:01,080 --> 00:40:01,640
Speaker 3: with the hand.

726
00:40:02,480 --> 00:40:05,480
Speaker 1: Yeah, it is crazy, like to the point where it

727
00:40:05,640 --> 00:40:09,080
Speaker 1: feels like we are being deprived of something when we

728
00:40:09,200 --> 00:40:12,520
Speaker 1: can't summon such an image, when there is an image

729
00:40:12,520 --> 00:40:16,279
Speaker 1: that is or you know, artwork that is lost. I

730
00:40:16,280 --> 00:40:19,720
Speaker 1: feel this way just talking about films, like, so much

731
00:40:20,000 --> 00:40:23,360
Speaker 1: in the cinematic canon is available to us now, and

732
00:40:23,400 --> 00:40:25,800
Speaker 1: in many cases it has been remastered, has been made

733
00:40:26,400 --> 00:40:30,560
Speaker 1: widely available digitally or otherwise, and yet there are plenty

734
00:40:30,560 --> 00:40:33,319
Speaker 1: of exceptions to this, films that haven't been restored, that

735
00:40:33,360 --> 00:40:36,520
Speaker 1: aren't as widely available, or in some cases, films that

736
00:40:36,600 --> 00:40:39,319
Speaker 1: have been lost. And there is something just kind of

737
00:40:39,320 --> 00:40:41,680
Speaker 1: crazy about that, you know, given how much is out

738
00:40:41,719 --> 00:40:43,839
Speaker 1: there and how much we have to realize that there

739
00:40:43,880 --> 00:40:46,799
Speaker 1: are works that are just gone to history and we'll

740
00:40:46,840 --> 00:40:48,000
Speaker 1: never be able to bring them back.

741
00:40:48,400 --> 00:40:52,000
Speaker 3: Yeah. So obviously this gets us really thinking about, you know,

742
00:40:52,080 --> 00:40:55,320
Speaker 3: the preservation of art and our access to it and

743
00:40:56,680 --> 00:40:58,720
Speaker 3: what it means when we're not able to see something

744
00:40:58,760 --> 00:41:02,719
Speaker 3: we want. But also it I think should make us

745
00:41:02,719 --> 00:41:07,440
Speaker 3: think about how this kind of access and this kind

746
00:41:07,480 --> 00:41:12,520
Speaker 3: of relationship to images of art, and this would include

747
00:41:12,520 --> 00:41:14,799
Speaker 3: all forms of art. I mean, we're talking especially about

748
00:41:14,840 --> 00:41:17,759
Speaker 3: visual art, but this would include you know, recordings of

749
00:41:17,840 --> 00:41:21,880
Speaker 3: musical performances, recordings of plays, and other types of physical

750
00:41:21,920 --> 00:41:26,960
Speaker 3: performances of sculptures. Imagery of sculpture is films. Of course,

751
00:41:27,640 --> 00:41:31,960
Speaker 3: we should think about how this kind of media, technologically

752
00:41:32,000 --> 00:41:35,279
Speaker 3: mediated access to these works of art changes the way

753
00:41:35,400 --> 00:41:40,160
Speaker 3: we experience them and what they mean to us. So

754
00:41:40,320 --> 00:41:44,239
Speaker 3: in this essay, Benjamin argues that when we interact with

755
00:41:44,320 --> 00:41:48,440
Speaker 3: a mechanically reproduced copy of a work of art, for example,

756
00:41:48,520 --> 00:41:52,400
Speaker 3: a photographic print of a painting, just so you can

757
00:41:52,400 --> 00:41:55,920
Speaker 3: imagine something specific in your mind, let's say the Anatomy

758
00:41:56,000 --> 00:41:59,880
Speaker 3: Lesson by Rembrandt, I in fact copied and pasted an

759
00:42:00,080 --> 00:42:03,319
Speaker 3: image of this painting into our outline here, So let

760
00:42:03,320 --> 00:42:08,520
Speaker 3: that marinate, given what we're talking about. But so when

761
00:42:08,560 --> 00:42:11,880
Speaker 3: we access, say a photographic print of a painting like this,

762
00:42:12,480 --> 00:42:15,760
Speaker 3: we may be deceived into thinking that we are looking

763
00:42:15,920 --> 00:42:19,680
Speaker 3: at the painting, but we're not. Even though, but by

764
00:42:19,719 --> 00:42:22,040
Speaker 3: some measures, you could argue that the photograph is a

765
00:42:22,120 --> 00:42:27,120
Speaker 3: quote perfect reproduction, not subject to like the little variations

766
00:42:27,160 --> 00:42:30,200
Speaker 3: and deficiencies that would emerge if a skilled forger tried

767
00:42:30,239 --> 00:42:32,960
Speaker 3: to paint a copy of it by hand. There also

768
00:42:33,080 --> 00:42:36,320
Speaker 3: there are still differences. First of all, though we think

769
00:42:36,320 --> 00:42:40,280
Speaker 3: of photographic reproduction as perfect, there are things that can't

770
00:42:40,320 --> 00:42:43,560
Speaker 3: really be captured very well in a photo, such as

771
00:42:43,600 --> 00:42:47,799
Speaker 3: the three dimensionality of some paintings, Like some paintings really

772
00:42:47,880 --> 00:42:50,520
Speaker 3: kind of come off the canvas, and you know, the

773
00:42:50,880 --> 00:42:53,279
Speaker 3: texture of the brushstrokes and the pile up of the

774
00:42:53,320 --> 00:42:56,320
Speaker 3: painting and stuff can cast little shadows and so forth.

775
00:42:56,840 --> 00:42:59,399
Speaker 3: So there's that. There's how the painting interacts with light

776
00:42:59,480 --> 00:43:03,680
Speaker 3: in the room, how it changes over time, etc. However,

777
00:43:04,200 --> 00:43:07,560
Speaker 3: even if we had a machine to make three dimensionally

778
00:43:07,800 --> 00:43:12,520
Speaker 3: chemically exact physical copies of painting, Benjamin says, there would

779
00:43:12,520 --> 00:43:15,880
Speaker 3: still be a difference, because he writes, quote, even the

780
00:43:15,880 --> 00:43:19,280
Speaker 3: most perfect reproduction of a work of art is lacking

781
00:43:19,280 --> 00:43:23,480
Speaker 3: in one element, its presence in time and space, its

782
00:43:23,600 --> 00:43:26,480
Speaker 3: unique existence at the place where it happens to be.

783
00:43:27,360 --> 00:43:30,640
Speaker 3: This unique existence of the work of art determined the

784
00:43:30,760 --> 00:43:34,040
Speaker 3: history to which it was subject throughout the time of

785
00:43:34,080 --> 00:43:37,680
Speaker 3: its existence. This includes the changes which it may have

786
00:43:37,719 --> 00:43:40,839
Speaker 3: suffered in physical condition over the years, as well as

787
00:43:40,880 --> 00:43:44,680
Speaker 3: the various changes in its ownership. So, by virtue of

788
00:43:44,680 --> 00:43:47,960
Speaker 3: the fact that a physical work of art, the original

789
00:43:48,560 --> 00:43:53,000
Speaker 3: is a single object, it has a history associated with

790
00:43:53,040 --> 00:43:56,640
Speaker 3: it that is not true of the history of the copies.

791
00:43:57,280 --> 00:43:59,400
Speaker 3: Now we might well think, well, when I look at

792
00:43:59,400 --> 00:44:02,560
Speaker 3: a painting, I don't really care if it's the physically

793
00:44:02,560 --> 00:44:06,240
Speaker 3: original copy. I don't really care whether the painter's hands

794
00:44:06,360 --> 00:44:09,600
Speaker 3: touched it. I don't care who owned this physical artifact

795
00:44:09,680 --> 00:44:12,160
Speaker 3: or where it was kept at what time. That's not

796
00:44:12,320 --> 00:44:15,600
Speaker 3: interesting information to me. And maybe you don't care about that.

797
00:44:15,600 --> 00:44:17,880
Speaker 3: That's something maybe I don't think about all that often

798
00:44:17,920 --> 00:44:20,799
Speaker 3: when I google an image of a painting. But it's

799
00:44:20,840 --> 00:44:23,560
Speaker 3: possible that the fact that we don't care about those

800
00:44:23,600 --> 00:44:27,040
Speaker 3: things is a result of existing in a world where

801
00:44:27,080 --> 00:44:31,880
Speaker 3: our response to art has been conditioned by ubiquitous mechanical reproduction.

802
00:44:32,560 --> 00:44:36,239
Speaker 1: And it's interesting to compare these experiences of encountering art

803
00:44:36,239 --> 00:44:39,360
Speaker 1: in person and seeing it online and so forth. Like

804
00:44:39,600 --> 00:44:42,719
Speaker 1: I can think of examples from my my on my

805
00:44:42,719 --> 00:44:45,160
Speaker 1: own part, they went both ways. Like, for instance, I

806
00:44:45,160 --> 00:44:50,359
Speaker 1: first saw the paintings of Irving Norman in person, and

807
00:44:51,080 --> 00:44:53,680
Speaker 1: I was really captivated by just like they're they're huge,

808
00:44:53,880 --> 00:44:56,000
Speaker 1: and like it's a in you're you're there, you're in

809
00:44:56,000 --> 00:44:57,840
Speaker 1: this work's presence, and you just kind of feel like

810
00:44:57,880 --> 00:44:59,719
Speaker 1: you're falling into it and you get to sort of

811
00:45:00,120 --> 00:45:02,719
Speaker 1: walk back and forth checking out little details of it,

812
00:45:03,040 --> 00:45:05,520
Speaker 1: and like That's one of the great experiences of seeing

813
00:45:05,520 --> 00:45:07,360
Speaker 1: a work of art in person is you get to

814
00:45:07,400 --> 00:45:11,799
Speaker 1: have that prolonged multisensory experience with the piece. I mean,

815
00:45:11,880 --> 00:45:14,359
Speaker 1: you know, maybe you know you shouldn't touch it, don't

816
00:45:14,360 --> 00:45:16,759
Speaker 1: go and lick it or anything. But still like there

817
00:45:17,560 --> 00:45:19,800
Speaker 1: are various things going on, like even things not directly

818
00:45:19,800 --> 00:45:22,319
Speaker 1: tied to the painting, like just hearing, like the you know,

819
00:45:22,360 --> 00:45:25,919
Speaker 1: the echoes in the museum and so forth. And yet

820
00:45:25,960 --> 00:45:29,160
Speaker 1: there are other works like I had long been a

821
00:45:29,200 --> 00:45:32,480
Speaker 1: fan of this particular work by Arnold Buchlan, Isle of

822
00:45:32,520 --> 00:45:35,080
Speaker 1: the Dead. There are various versions of this that he paint.

823
00:45:35,239 --> 00:45:39,480
Speaker 1: Is very iconic painting that is often referenced in film

824
00:45:40,120 --> 00:45:44,680
Speaker 1: of this strange dark island that is not like the

825
00:45:44,880 --> 00:45:48,719
Speaker 1: symbolism is is harder to piece apart like it does

826
00:45:48,800 --> 00:45:50,480
Speaker 1: it's not just an island. It looks like a skull,

827
00:45:51,640 --> 00:45:53,600
Speaker 1: but it is very captivating and does seem to have

828
00:45:53,680 --> 00:45:56,560
Speaker 1: this grim darkness to it. And yet when I saw

829
00:45:56,719 --> 00:45:59,120
Speaker 1: one of these versions that had been painted by the

830
00:45:59,200 --> 00:46:03,120
Speaker 1: artist in person at the met years back, I was

831
00:46:03,120 --> 00:46:07,600
Speaker 1: initially disappointed because you know, this didn't necessarily have a

832
00:46:07,600 --> 00:46:09,400
Speaker 1: lot to do with the painting itself, but like, you know,

833
00:46:09,480 --> 00:46:12,319
Speaker 1: the lighting in the room for some reason was it's

834
00:46:12,440 --> 00:46:15,239
Speaker 1: very dark work just in terms of just like the

835
00:46:15,280 --> 00:46:18,080
Speaker 1: black pigment, and the light was catching it in a

836
00:46:18,120 --> 00:46:20,279
Speaker 1: weird way. And I think like there were a lot

837
00:46:20,280 --> 00:46:22,759
Speaker 1: of people moving through that space at the time, so

838
00:46:22,840 --> 00:46:24,920
Speaker 1: I didn't like feel like it was in its presence

839
00:46:25,120 --> 00:46:27,400
Speaker 1: and so forth. So there are all these different factors

840
00:46:27,400 --> 00:46:30,800
Speaker 1: that can influence the way that we encounter a piece

841
00:46:31,520 --> 00:46:35,239
Speaker 1: online versus in person. Though at the end of the day,

842
00:46:35,280 --> 00:46:38,480
Speaker 1: like when you encounter it online, how much time are

843
00:46:38,480 --> 00:46:40,840
Speaker 1: we really giving that work before we click on to

844
00:46:40,920 --> 00:46:43,160
Speaker 1: the next thing, Whereas if you're in the room with it,

845
00:46:43,719 --> 00:46:45,880
Speaker 1: unless you're just speeding through the museum, you've got to

846
00:46:45,880 --> 00:46:48,360
Speaker 1: give it some time. You've got to like breathe with

847
00:46:48,440 --> 00:46:49,200
Speaker 1: it for a little bit.

848
00:46:49,480 --> 00:46:53,200
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, I think that's true, and it's absolutely right

849
00:46:53,239 --> 00:46:56,440
Speaker 3: what you're saying that, like just little variations in the

850
00:46:56,480 --> 00:46:59,080
Speaker 3: physical experience in the room of seeing an artwork can

851
00:46:59,160 --> 00:47:00,960
Speaker 3: change the way you really to it. But you know,

852
00:47:01,000 --> 00:47:05,680
Speaker 3: there's another way that I think the mechanical reproduction has

853
00:47:05,719 --> 00:47:08,239
Speaker 3: affected your relationship to these works of art, which is

854
00:47:08,239 --> 00:47:11,680
Speaker 3: that you had seen them before you saw them that's right.

855
00:47:11,880 --> 00:47:16,120
Speaker 1: Yeah, So the pure impact of Island Dead was lost

856
00:47:16,160 --> 00:47:18,120
Speaker 1: on me because I knew exactly what to expect, and

857
00:47:18,160 --> 00:47:21,560
Speaker 1: I was looking for all of these things, and I

858
00:47:21,640 --> 00:47:25,080
Speaker 1: had an experience already in mind. And clearly that wasn't

859
00:47:25,080 --> 00:47:27,080
Speaker 1: the artist's intent that we would go into it having

860
00:47:27,080 --> 00:47:36,080
Speaker 1: seen the image before before we saw the image.

861
00:47:37,600 --> 00:47:40,400
Speaker 3: So here's where we get to the idea of authenticity

862
00:47:40,440 --> 00:47:45,359
Speaker 3: as a concept in art. For Walter Benjamin, a work

863
00:47:45,360 --> 00:47:50,239
Speaker 3: of art possesses an authenticity that is related to its

864
00:47:50,320 --> 00:47:53,879
Speaker 3: physical uniqueness and history as an object or I guess

865
00:47:53,920 --> 00:47:57,719
Speaker 3: also as like a performance. So an original painting or sculpture,

866
00:47:58,280 --> 00:48:00,880
Speaker 3: or a certain performance of a piece of music or

867
00:48:00,920 --> 00:48:05,799
Speaker 3: a play are all physically unique objects or situations, and

868
00:48:06,120 --> 00:48:10,560
Speaker 3: in their original form, they have this authenticity that cannot

869
00:48:10,600 --> 00:48:15,440
Speaker 3: be reproduced, that is, their original uniqueness in form. By

870
00:48:15,600 --> 00:48:19,719
Speaker 3: mass producing a photographic or filmed copy of a work

871
00:48:19,800 --> 00:48:25,640
Speaker 3: of art or performance, the technical reproduction is stripped of

872
00:48:25,680 --> 00:48:29,799
Speaker 3: that physical and situational authenticity and then propagated in this

873
00:48:30,000 --> 00:48:34,000
Speaker 3: copied format. And the sum of the qualities that are

874
00:48:34,160 --> 00:48:37,200
Speaker 3: lost when a work of art is mechanically reproduced in

875
00:48:37,239 --> 00:48:41,120
Speaker 3: this way is what Benjamin refers to as the aura

876
00:48:41,239 --> 00:48:44,799
Speaker 3: of the original, the aau r A. The aura is

877
00:48:45,040 --> 00:48:48,920
Speaker 3: all of this stuff about the physically unique original that

878
00:48:48,960 --> 00:48:53,160
Speaker 3: does not get carried over in mechanical copies. So one

879
00:48:53,400 --> 00:48:57,759
Speaker 3: commonly cited example of how the ara affects the experience

880
00:48:57,760 --> 00:49:00,400
Speaker 3: of art is by a change in the location of

881
00:49:00,440 --> 00:49:05,160
Speaker 3: the experience. Benjamin writes, quote the cathedral leaves its locale

882
00:49:05,200 --> 00:49:08,400
Speaker 3: to be received in the studio of a lover of art.

883
00:49:08,440 --> 00:49:11,440
Speaker 3: The choral production performed in an auditorium or in the

884
00:49:11,480 --> 00:49:15,960
Speaker 3: open air resounds in the drawing room. And you know,

885
00:49:16,000 --> 00:49:18,520
Speaker 3: this makes me think of something with regard to movies. Actually,

886
00:49:18,600 --> 00:49:21,200
Speaker 3: even though cinema is kind of different, because cinema is

887
00:49:21,239 --> 00:49:25,600
Speaker 3: an art form explicitly designed with mechanical reproduction in mind.

888
00:49:25,719 --> 00:49:27,279
Speaker 3: You know, you know when you make a movie that

889
00:49:27,320 --> 00:49:28,800
Speaker 3: there are going to be print copies of it that

890
00:49:28,840 --> 00:49:31,560
Speaker 3: will be taken all over and shown in theaters all

891
00:49:31,560 --> 00:49:38,240
Speaker 3: over the land. Nevertheless, I can recall interviews I've watched

892
00:49:38,239 --> 00:49:43,200
Speaker 3: and read with multiple different film directors expressing a common sentiment,

893
00:49:43,280 --> 00:49:47,160
Speaker 3: which is heartfelt anguish at the idea of somebody watching

894
00:49:47,200 --> 00:49:51,560
Speaker 3: one of their movies on a phone. Changing the venue

895
00:49:51,760 --> 00:49:56,480
Speaker 3: and format of viewing fundamentally alters what the director meant

896
00:49:56,560 --> 00:49:59,680
Speaker 3: for the audience to experience. So if you made a

897
00:49:59,719 --> 00:50:03,040
Speaker 3: movie thinking people would be seeing it in a movie theater,

898
00:50:03,239 --> 00:50:05,960
Speaker 3: and then they're watching it on a phone, it may

899
00:50:06,000 --> 00:50:11,000
Speaker 3: be a faithful reproduction, pretty high fidelity visuals and sound

900
00:50:12,080 --> 00:50:14,640
Speaker 3: of the film you made, but it's not what you

901
00:50:14,680 --> 00:50:16,520
Speaker 3: had in mind. It's a different thing.

902
00:50:17,160 --> 00:50:21,680
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, yeah. A number of directors have said this

903
00:50:22,160 --> 00:50:26,080
Speaker 1: in recent years, and you also hear fans say this.

904
00:50:26,120 --> 00:50:27,640
Speaker 1: I mean I've said this as well, Like I come

905
00:50:27,640 --> 00:50:29,880
Speaker 1: back from seeing Dune Part two and I say, this

906
00:50:29,960 --> 00:50:32,080
Speaker 1: is a movie you need to see on the big screen. Now,

907
00:50:32,120 --> 00:50:33,640
Speaker 1: do I think it should only be seen on the

908
00:50:33,640 --> 00:50:36,680
Speaker 1: big screen. No, I'm going to watch it on a

909
00:50:36,719 --> 00:50:39,000
Speaker 1: smaller screen at some point. That's probably gonna be my

910
00:50:39,080 --> 00:50:41,360
Speaker 1: second viewing. I might even watch parts of it on

911
00:50:41,440 --> 00:50:44,920
Speaker 1: a phone, and that's my choice, you know. So, I

912
00:50:44,920 --> 00:50:48,480
Speaker 1: think we sometimes it can get a little overblown and

913
00:50:48,680 --> 00:50:50,360
Speaker 1: folks can get a little carried away with it. But

914
00:50:50,520 --> 00:50:54,320
Speaker 1: I do think Yeah, we've talked about this in reference

915
00:50:54,360 --> 00:50:57,480
Speaker 1: to particular films on Weird House before. For instance, when

916
00:50:57,480 --> 00:51:03,320
Speaker 1: we talked about Pirana Mandir, the the Indian horror movie

917
00:51:04,239 --> 00:51:06,880
Speaker 1: and we talked about like the intended not only the

918
00:51:06,920 --> 00:51:09,400
Speaker 1: intended scope of the picture, but sort of like the

919
00:51:09,440 --> 00:51:12,919
Speaker 1: intended viewing experience. That this was not something they didn't

920
00:51:12,960 --> 00:51:16,400
Speaker 1: make this film thinking about, you know, two podcasters watching

921
00:51:16,440 --> 00:51:19,759
Speaker 1: it by themselves in their individual households, you know, on

922
00:51:19,800 --> 00:51:22,719
Speaker 1: their laptop around their TV. Now, this is something lots

923
00:51:22,760 --> 00:51:24,600
Speaker 1: of people were going to go to a movie theater

924
00:51:25,120 --> 00:51:29,799
Speaker 1: to enjoy together, find different things to enjoy in the film,

925
00:51:29,840 --> 00:51:31,799
Speaker 1: depending on how old they were and so forth, and

926
00:51:31,800 --> 00:51:33,880
Speaker 1: what their tastes were, and it was going to be

927
00:51:33,960 --> 00:51:36,040
Speaker 1: you know, like kind of a party, according to what

928
00:51:36,160 --> 00:51:38,400
Speaker 1: I read about this film's original release.

929
00:51:38,719 --> 00:51:41,960
Speaker 3: Yeah, I think that's absolutely true that some films are

930
00:51:42,080 --> 00:51:46,120
Speaker 3: made with a large viewing audience all gathered together and

931
00:51:46,200 --> 00:51:49,080
Speaker 3: experiencing it at the same time in mind. But at

932
00:51:49,160 --> 00:51:51,200
Speaker 3: least with the example of film, you could say that

933
00:51:51,320 --> 00:51:55,400
Speaker 3: film is something that is made with the understanding initially

934
00:51:55,520 --> 00:51:57,560
Speaker 3: that it's going to be it's going to be copied

935
00:51:57,640 --> 00:52:00,400
Speaker 3: and viewed in different contexts and stuff. You know that

936
00:52:00,680 --> 00:52:03,320
Speaker 3: the creators have to understand that will happen over time.

937
00:52:04,239 --> 00:52:04,480
Speaker 1: You know.

938
00:52:04,560 --> 00:52:07,040
Speaker 3: You got to wonder with like some of these older

939
00:52:07,080 --> 00:52:10,000
Speaker 3: works of art, like what the creator might have imagined

940
00:52:10,120 --> 00:52:12,640
Speaker 3: or not even just what the creator imagined, just like

941
00:52:13,960 --> 00:52:16,840
Speaker 3: whether it was in the creator's mind or not. The changes,

942
00:52:16,920 --> 00:52:19,560
Speaker 3: the kind of unexpected changes that come in how people

943
00:52:20,160 --> 00:52:23,879
Speaker 3: experience these works of art. So Benjamin says that as

944
00:52:23,920 --> 00:52:28,000
Speaker 3: a result of the necessary stripping of aura and authenticity

945
00:52:28,480 --> 00:52:30,920
Speaker 3: from a work of art in the process of mechanical

946
00:52:31,160 --> 00:52:35,560
Speaker 3: mechanical reproduction, you know, it not only affects how that

947
00:52:35,880 --> 00:52:39,760
Speaker 3: copy of the art is experienced directly, it like changes

948
00:52:39,840 --> 00:52:43,080
Speaker 3: our relationship to art in general. It changes how we

949
00:52:43,160 --> 00:52:47,279
Speaker 3: see what art is. So a culture of mechanical reproduction

950
00:52:47,800 --> 00:52:51,400
Speaker 3: sort of undermines the authority and spiritual power of a

951
00:52:51,440 --> 00:52:56,280
Speaker 3: work of art by, in Benjamin's words, detaching it from tradition.

952
00:52:57,480 --> 00:53:01,319
Speaker 3: And he develops this idea of art tradition as historically

953
00:53:01,320 --> 00:53:04,919
Speaker 3: intertwined with religious traditions. For example, he talks about how

954
00:53:05,160 --> 00:53:08,640
Speaker 3: a lot of art emerged in deep history from religious

955
00:53:08,680 --> 00:53:13,239
Speaker 3: practices and ritual paintings and sculpture depicted the gods or

956
00:53:13,360 --> 00:53:18,040
Speaker 3: legendary heroes or mythic encounters. Music was sung in worship

957
00:53:18,200 --> 00:53:21,799
Speaker 3: of the gods, and in this tradition, religious art was

958
00:53:21,800 --> 00:53:25,120
Speaker 3: thought to have a value that was independent of its

959
00:53:25,239 --> 00:53:28,520
Speaker 3: value as an object to be perceived and admired by

960
00:53:28,600 --> 00:53:32,600
Speaker 3: an audience. This traditional religious value of art is what

961
00:53:32,640 --> 00:53:36,239
Speaker 3: he calls its cult value. And I'll read a quote

962
00:53:36,280 --> 00:53:40,160
Speaker 3: from the essay here. Benjamin Writ's quote, artistic production begins

963
00:53:40,200 --> 00:53:43,719
Speaker 3: with ceremonial objects destined to serve as a cult. One

964
00:53:43,760 --> 00:53:47,480
Speaker 3: may assume that what mattered was their existence, not their

965
00:53:47,560 --> 00:53:51,160
Speaker 3: being on view. The elk portrayed by the man of

966
00:53:51,200 --> 00:53:53,320
Speaker 3: the stone Age on the walls of his cave was

967
00:53:53,360 --> 00:53:57,080
Speaker 3: an instrument of magic. He did expose it to his

968
00:53:57,160 --> 00:53:59,680
Speaker 3: fellow men, but in the main it was meant for

969
00:53:59,719 --> 00:54:03,400
Speaker 3: the spirits. Today, the cult value would seem to demand

970
00:54:03,480 --> 00:54:07,000
Speaker 3: that the work of art remain hidden. Certain statues of

971
00:54:07,000 --> 00:54:10,160
Speaker 3: gods are accessible only to the priest in the cella.

972
00:54:10,680 --> 00:54:15,319
Speaker 3: Certain madonnas remain covered nearly all year round. Certain sculptures

973
00:54:15,320 --> 00:54:18,799
Speaker 3: on medieval cathedrals are invisible to the spectator on the

974
00:54:18,840 --> 00:54:23,160
Speaker 3: ground level. With the emancipation of the various art practices

975
00:54:23,200 --> 00:54:28,200
Speaker 3: from ritual go increasing opportunities for the exhibition of their products.

976
00:54:29,600 --> 00:54:32,719
Speaker 3: Now one little note here in the specific example of

977
00:54:32,800 --> 00:54:34,600
Speaker 3: cave art, I think we should be clear that we

978
00:54:34,680 --> 00:54:38,120
Speaker 3: don't know exactly what its function was, and we should

979
00:54:38,160 --> 00:54:41,920
Speaker 3: be careful about speculating too much there. But certainly with

980
00:54:42,000 --> 00:54:45,040
Speaker 3: the later art forms he mentions like occurring within written history.

981
00:54:45,080 --> 00:54:48,080
Speaker 3: You know, the sculptures and the statues he cites. We

982
00:54:48,239 --> 00:54:50,839
Speaker 3: know that lots of them were thought to be important

983
00:54:51,040 --> 00:54:55,680
Speaker 3: because of their inherent existence and not just because people

984
00:54:55,760 --> 00:54:56,880
Speaker 3: would look at them.

985
00:54:57,480 --> 00:54:59,759
Speaker 1: That's a great point. I mean this also applies to

986
00:55:01,239 --> 00:55:06,520
Speaker 1: various ancient, prehistoric examples of art that that for the

987
00:55:06,520 --> 00:55:11,520
Speaker 1: most part, are best viewed from an aerial vehicle, you know. Yeah, Like,

988
00:55:11,840 --> 00:55:15,240
Speaker 1: it's not necessarily that that that it's not that people

989
00:55:15,239 --> 00:55:17,719
Speaker 1: were going to view it. And again we get into

990
00:55:17,760 --> 00:55:20,359
Speaker 1: the same problem of maybe not knowing exactly what the

991
00:55:20,440 --> 00:55:24,799
Speaker 1: intent was or or how they imagined a viewer of

992
00:55:24,840 --> 00:55:27,520
Speaker 1: this piece, be it human or divine.

993
00:55:27,960 --> 00:55:32,080
Speaker 3: You're talking about like the the Nasca designs and stuff. Yeah, yeah, yeah,

994
00:55:32,120 --> 00:55:34,960
Speaker 3: that's an excellent example the things that like could not

995
00:55:35,080 --> 00:55:37,440
Speaker 3: be viewed in their total form by a person at

996
00:55:37,440 --> 00:55:37,799
Speaker 3: the time.

997
00:55:38,440 --> 00:55:40,920
Speaker 1: But does that mean it had to have been aliens

998
00:55:41,000 --> 00:55:44,000
Speaker 1: because that you had to have somebody flying overhead to

999
00:55:44,040 --> 00:55:44,360
Speaker 1: see it.

1000
00:55:44,480 --> 00:55:46,800
Speaker 3: No, not necessarily, No, I don't think it means it

1001
00:55:46,840 --> 00:55:49,200
Speaker 3: had to be aliens. At all, it probably means that

1002
00:55:49,239 --> 00:55:51,680
Speaker 3: there was some value of this work of art other

1003
00:55:51,800 --> 00:55:54,000
Speaker 3: than a person being able to see the whole thing

1004
00:55:54,040 --> 00:55:59,320
Speaker 3: at once. So considering this, Benjamin talks about how over time,

1005
00:56:00,280 --> 00:56:04,920
Speaker 3: artistic culture emerged that separated these works of art, these

1006
00:56:04,960 --> 00:56:08,399
Speaker 3: items from their cult value by removing them from their

1007
00:56:08,440 --> 00:56:12,200
Speaker 3: original context and putting them in museums and galleries and

1008
00:56:12,239 --> 00:56:15,799
Speaker 3: sending them traveling around the world and mobile exhibitions, or

1009
00:56:15,880 --> 00:56:18,640
Speaker 3: just by having people observe them in their original place

1010
00:56:18,760 --> 00:56:23,879
Speaker 3: but without the original ritual context. And this shift from

1011
00:56:23,920 --> 00:56:29,359
Speaker 3: what Benjamin calls cult value to exhibition value seems to

1012
00:56:29,400 --> 00:56:32,719
Speaker 3: the author here to decrease the power and authority of

1013
00:56:32,760 --> 00:56:35,799
Speaker 3: the artwork, but it also creates a culture with a

1014
00:56:35,880 --> 00:56:39,479
Speaker 3: different idea of what art is for and what makes

1015
00:56:39,520 --> 00:56:42,560
Speaker 3: a piece of art valuable and important. And you might

1016
00:56:42,600 --> 00:56:45,920
Speaker 3: imagine all kinds of examples of how this would change

1017
00:56:45,960 --> 00:56:49,480
Speaker 3: the way people evaluate and relate to art when culture

1018
00:56:49,520 --> 00:56:51,440
Speaker 3: tells you that this is a thing you go to

1019
00:56:51,520 --> 00:56:54,600
Speaker 3: a museum and look at and appreciate as an expression

1020
00:56:54,640 --> 00:56:59,200
Speaker 3: of emotion and the display of technical artistic skill, rather

1021
00:56:59,280 --> 00:57:02,239
Speaker 3: than a thing that maybe lives in a temple and

1022
00:57:02,400 --> 00:57:06,840
Speaker 3: somehow depicts channels or honors a god or a divine idea,

1023
00:57:07,239 --> 00:57:09,880
Speaker 3: even if nobody's there to look at it. And so

1024
00:57:09,920 --> 00:57:13,960
Speaker 3: I think Benjamin's idea is that mechanical reproduction causes a

1025
00:57:14,480 --> 00:57:18,240
Speaker 3: sort of continuous along the spectrum, a similar shift in

1026
00:57:18,280 --> 00:57:21,600
Speaker 3: the value of art, even further away from the traditional

1027
00:57:21,640 --> 00:57:25,120
Speaker 3: cult value of art, which is somehow related to the

1028
00:57:25,160 --> 00:57:28,880
Speaker 3: authenticity of an artwork, according again to Benjamin's definition of

1029
00:57:28,920 --> 00:57:32,120
Speaker 3: authenticity being like the original uniqueness of the art work,

1030
00:57:32,800 --> 00:57:37,560
Speaker 3: and divorces art further from its its history, its tradition

1031
00:57:37,640 --> 00:57:41,640
Speaker 3: of cult value, divorces it from the aura, and it

1032
00:57:41,760 --> 00:57:46,040
Speaker 3: causes a devaluation of the art itself and changes its meaning.

1033
00:57:46,120 --> 00:57:50,200
Speaker 3: It becomes something else, something more like a product. Now

1034
00:57:50,200 --> 00:57:52,720
Speaker 3: you could acknowledge, as I think Benjamin did, that there

1035
00:57:52,720 --> 00:57:56,600
Speaker 3: could be both good and bad consequences that arise from

1036
00:57:57,200 --> 00:58:03,080
Speaker 3: changing the meaning of art through mechanic reproduction. Just one

1037
00:58:03,120 --> 00:58:06,040
Speaker 3: thing that comes to my mind. I don't know that

1038
00:58:06,120 --> 00:58:08,480
Speaker 3: this is how it works, but I wonder if by

1039
00:58:08,680 --> 00:58:12,480
Speaker 3: increasing accessibility of art through mechanical reproduction and sort of

1040
00:58:12,920 --> 00:58:17,480
Speaker 3: if Benjamin's theory is correct, removing it from its traditional

1041
00:58:18,120 --> 00:58:21,800
Speaker 3: sort of power and cult value, maybe that helps also

1042
00:58:21,920 --> 00:58:25,120
Speaker 3: broaden ones appreciation for art that is from outside your

1043
00:58:25,160 --> 00:58:28,960
Speaker 3: own cultural or religious tradition. I'm not sure it works

1044
00:58:28,960 --> 00:58:30,840
Speaker 3: that way, but that's possible, so you can see good

1045
00:58:30,880 --> 00:58:31,640
Speaker 3: sides as well.

1046
00:58:32,080 --> 00:58:35,280
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean not everybody can travel to see these

1047
00:58:35,960 --> 00:58:39,919
Speaker 1: various works in person, and therefore having some other type

1048
00:58:39,920 --> 00:58:42,800
Speaker 1: of experience with that work is ideal. I mean, it

1049
00:58:42,880 --> 00:58:46,160
Speaker 1: allows more people to experience it to some degree.

1050
00:58:46,120 --> 00:58:49,240
Speaker 3: Or in some cases, would allow anyone to experience it

1051
00:58:49,280 --> 00:58:49,600
Speaker 3: at all.

1052
00:58:50,280 --> 00:58:50,760
Speaker 1: Yeah.

1053
00:58:50,800 --> 00:58:53,160
Speaker 3: But on the other hand, though, I don't know, I

1054
00:58:53,280 --> 00:58:55,240
Speaker 3: have some questions, but I think I agree at least

1055
00:58:55,280 --> 00:58:58,920
Speaker 3: in part with what he's saying about, Like this culture

1056
00:58:58,960 --> 00:59:03,160
Speaker 3: that arises from the mass production of images of art

1057
00:59:03,200 --> 00:59:09,520
Speaker 3: works does in some way cause a devaluation of the

1058
00:59:09,560 --> 00:59:13,520
Speaker 3: power and authenticity of the original that. You can imagine

1059
00:59:13,800 --> 00:59:16,760
Speaker 3: how you would experience and artwork differently if you could

1060
00:59:16,800 --> 00:59:19,400
Speaker 3: not just summon on your phone a picture of the

1061
00:59:19,440 --> 00:59:22,800
Speaker 3: Mona Lisa or the Anatomy Lesson or whatever whenever you

1062
00:59:22,880 --> 00:59:25,400
Speaker 3: wanted to, or even before that, see a picture of

1063
00:59:25,480 --> 00:59:27,880
Speaker 3: it in a book you know, or see a picture

1064
00:59:28,000 --> 00:59:32,200
Speaker 3: reproduced in a newspaper or whatever. I guess the irony

1065
00:59:32,360 --> 00:59:34,600
Speaker 3: is that I've never lived at a time when there

1066
00:59:34,680 --> 00:59:38,080
Speaker 3: was not mass mechanical reproduction of art in all its forms.

1067
00:59:38,160 --> 00:59:41,000
Speaker 3: So I can't really compare this world to the before times.

1068
00:59:41,200 --> 00:59:44,720
Speaker 3: I never lived in the before times, so I don't know,

1069
00:59:44,840 --> 00:59:47,240
Speaker 3: you know, I only know the world where you can

1070
00:59:47,240 --> 00:59:49,800
Speaker 3: buy prints of the Mona Lisa for five bucks.

1071
00:59:50,400 --> 00:59:52,320
Speaker 1: I guess one thing that we might compare it to

1072
00:59:52,560 --> 00:59:57,640
Speaker 1: is various art installations and also these sort of attraction

1073
00:59:58,160 --> 01:00:02,560
Speaker 1: themed art exhibits that that we find a lot of

1074
01:00:02,560 --> 01:00:06,600
Speaker 1: times these days where there is something inherent to the art.

1075
01:00:07,120 --> 01:00:09,560
Speaker 1: Maybe it's on a scale that can't be captured in

1076
01:00:09,560 --> 01:00:12,920
Speaker 1: a photograph, or it is like an environment that you

1077
01:00:12,960 --> 01:00:14,880
Speaker 1: were engaging in, or it's just something as simple as

1078
01:00:14,880 --> 01:00:17,520
Speaker 1: a sculpture garden, you know, like, yes, you can see

1079
01:00:18,040 --> 01:00:20,840
Speaker 1: like it's not two dimensional, there's a three dimensional reality

1080
01:00:20,880 --> 01:00:23,240
Speaker 1: to it. There are multiple angles from which to consider it,

1081
01:00:23,640 --> 01:00:27,720
Speaker 1: and therefore, you know, it is an experience in a

1082
01:00:27,760 --> 01:00:31,160
Speaker 1: way that I think everybody can wrap their heads around.

1083
01:00:31,520 --> 01:00:35,680
Speaker 1: And maybe the challenge there is to realize that that

1084
01:00:35,680 --> 01:00:39,120
Speaker 1: that all these other forms of like two dimensional visual art,

1085
01:00:39,560 --> 01:00:42,000
Speaker 1: of course, you know, they're often there's often more than

1086
01:00:42,000 --> 01:00:44,960
Speaker 1: just those two dimensions to consider. With the painting but

1087
01:00:45,080 --> 01:00:49,400
Speaker 1: still like even famous paintings are also the sort of

1088
01:00:49,440 --> 01:00:52,960
Speaker 1: an experience, like there is there is more going on there,

1089
01:00:52,960 --> 01:00:55,240
Speaker 1: even if you're not like standing in its shadow or

1090
01:00:55,240 --> 01:00:57,120
Speaker 1: getting a selfie made with it, like, there is still

1091
01:00:57,120 --> 01:00:58,920
Speaker 1: an experience to be had in its presence.

1092
01:00:59,000 --> 01:01:02,600
Speaker 3: Absolutely, though again we also have to wonder, like how

1093
01:01:02,680 --> 01:01:06,440
Speaker 3: the general culture of mechanical reproduction has affected even our

1094
01:01:06,480 --> 01:01:11,000
Speaker 3: ability to relate to physical originals now right.

1095
01:01:10,920 --> 01:01:14,360
Speaker 1: Right, because when we do go to those big art installations,

1096
01:01:14,720 --> 01:01:16,480
Speaker 1: if there're one, that is, if it's an if it's

1097
01:01:16,480 --> 01:01:19,520
Speaker 1: an installation that is marketed as hey, get yourself, you

1098
01:01:19,600 --> 01:01:22,400
Speaker 1: made this sor in this environment, then we're coming back

1099
01:01:22,480 --> 01:01:25,240
Speaker 1: right back around to turning it into a mass produced

1100
01:01:25,280 --> 01:01:28,800
Speaker 1: image and mass produced and then personalized image that then

1101
01:01:28,880 --> 01:01:30,400
Speaker 1: goes into your social media feed.

1102
01:01:30,920 --> 01:01:33,160
Speaker 3: I should add finally that there is there's a whole

1103
01:01:33,200 --> 01:01:35,640
Speaker 3: bunch of other stuff. This essay goes into about the

1104
01:01:35,960 --> 01:01:39,160
Speaker 3: role of art and mechanical reproduction of art and how

1105
01:01:39,200 --> 01:01:41,720
Speaker 3: that relates to politics and the role of art in

1106
01:01:42,760 --> 01:01:45,840
Speaker 3: manipulating mass opinion and revolution and things like that.

1107
01:01:46,600 --> 01:01:48,400
Speaker 1: All right, before we close out this episode, I do

1108
01:01:48,440 --> 01:01:50,280
Speaker 1: want to come back to something we're talking about earlier

1109
01:01:50,320 --> 01:01:53,760
Speaker 1: about this question of why might it be the case

1110
01:01:53,840 --> 01:01:58,160
Speaker 1: that during one's formative years, during one's teenage years, this

1111
01:01:58,240 --> 01:02:02,280
Speaker 1: question of authenticity and art was more maybe seem more important,

1112
01:02:02,720 --> 01:02:04,960
Speaker 1: and brought up the idea that it might be connected

1113
01:02:05,040 --> 01:02:09,000
Speaker 1: to like the highly social aspects of the teenage brain.

1114
01:02:10,840 --> 01:02:12,680
Speaker 1: I was thinking about this because I was reading an

1115
01:02:12,720 --> 01:02:15,560
Speaker 1: interesting take on all of this from author Jason Tugau

1116
01:02:16,040 --> 01:02:19,680
Speaker 1: on Psychology Today, which tackles the subject of art forgery

1117
01:02:19,960 --> 01:02:24,040
Speaker 1: via neuroesthetics, which is a discipline that looks at the

1118
01:02:24,080 --> 01:02:27,560
Speaker 1: neural basis of how we perceive, contemplate, and even create

1119
01:02:27,680 --> 01:02:31,400
Speaker 1: works of art. So, in neuroesthetics, which is very much

1120
01:02:31,440 --> 01:02:34,680
Speaker 1: a young and continually evolving area of neurosciences, you know,

1121
01:02:34,840 --> 01:02:37,520
Speaker 1: because it depends on what we know and understand about

1122
01:02:37,960 --> 01:02:40,600
Speaker 1: the brain and neural networks and so forth, there's this

1123
01:02:40,800 --> 01:02:45,800
Speaker 1: idea that art engages the social brain, as viewing and

1124
01:02:45,840 --> 01:02:49,240
Speaker 1: considering artwork depends on some of the same networks involved

1125
01:02:49,280 --> 01:02:50,960
Speaker 1: in complex social behavior.

1126
01:02:51,240 --> 01:02:52,400
Speaker 3: Interesting, okay.

1127
01:02:52,920 --> 01:02:56,000
Speaker 1: Furthermore, focused consideration of a work of art engages a

1128
01:02:56,080 --> 01:02:59,640
Speaker 1: number of senses, invoking a pronounced consideration of space as

1129
01:02:59,640 --> 01:03:03,800
Speaker 1: well as societal, cultural, and individual context. So even if you,

1130
01:03:04,280 --> 01:03:06,240
Speaker 1: and I think we can if we're if we're really

1131
01:03:06,560 --> 01:03:08,640
Speaker 1: self analyze, we might realize this is the case. Even

1132
01:03:08,640 --> 01:03:10,200
Speaker 1: if we're at that museum and we're like, Okay, I'm

1133
01:03:10,200 --> 01:03:12,840
Speaker 1: going to stand in the presence of this art. You

1134
01:03:12,840 --> 01:03:15,840
Speaker 1: you can't help, but also take into account all these

1135
01:03:15,880 --> 01:03:18,560
Speaker 1: other things. There's a lot going on you on some level.

1136
01:03:18,640 --> 01:03:20,720
Speaker 1: You're going to be aware of how you look looking

1137
01:03:20,760 --> 01:03:22,680
Speaker 1: at this piece of art. You are going to be

1138
01:03:22,680 --> 01:03:25,480
Speaker 1: thinking about your own culture, the culture from which the

1139
01:03:25,640 --> 01:03:28,040
Speaker 1: this this art or artist emerged, and so forth.

1140
01:03:28,480 --> 01:03:32,880
Speaker 3: It is nearly maybe I reveal my own shallowness or

1141
01:03:32,880 --> 01:03:35,040
Speaker 3: something by saying this, but I think it is nearly

1142
01:03:35,080 --> 01:03:39,600
Speaker 3: impossible to experience a work of art without having involuntary

1143
01:03:39,680 --> 01:03:42,880
Speaker 3: thoughts while you're having the experience of what other people

1144
01:03:42,920 --> 01:03:47,400
Speaker 3: would think about it, and considering your self in relation

1145
01:03:47,800 --> 01:03:51,720
Speaker 3: to these hypothetical other people whom you're imagining reacting to it.

1146
01:03:52,160 --> 01:03:56,120
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah, and so in my experience off and have

1147
01:03:56,160 --> 01:03:58,280
Speaker 1: to sort of check back in and realize like, no, no, no,

1148
01:03:58,320 --> 01:04:00,560
Speaker 1: but stop thinking about that, let's just look the art,

1149
01:04:01,120 --> 01:04:04,640
Speaker 1: and so forth. So there's a lot going on when

1150
01:04:04,680 --> 01:04:07,560
Speaker 1: we look at art. But to gall citing feeling of

1151
01:04:07,640 --> 01:04:11,760
Speaker 1: beauty author Gabriel Starr says that the result, the ideal

1152
01:04:11,800 --> 01:04:15,160
Speaker 1: result here when we're viewing art is a feeling of harmony,

1153
01:04:15,240 --> 01:04:19,400
Speaker 1: a harmony that can be disrupted if we learn that

1154
01:04:19,480 --> 01:04:22,080
Speaker 1: the piece of art reviewing is not authentic, which is

1155
01:04:22,120 --> 01:04:24,720
Speaker 1: to say, you know, fake to some degree or another.

1156
01:04:25,360 --> 01:04:27,480
Speaker 1: And and this makes sense, this falls along with what

1157
01:04:27,480 --> 01:04:29,760
Speaker 1: we've been talking about. I think we can easily turn

1158
01:04:29,760 --> 01:04:33,919
Speaker 1: to various experiences of disruption in our association with any

1159
01:04:33,960 --> 01:04:37,080
Speaker 1: given work of art or creative project. You know what

1160
01:04:37,200 --> 01:04:39,360
Speaker 1: happens when you find out a piece of work is

1161
01:04:39,720 --> 01:04:42,680
Speaker 1: to some degree inauthentic. What about when you find out

1162
01:04:42,680 --> 01:04:45,920
Speaker 1: that the creator to some degree is inauthentic or they

1163
01:04:45,920 --> 01:04:48,720
Speaker 1: are not what you thought they were. Your appreciation of

1164
01:04:48,720 --> 01:04:51,040
Speaker 1: a work may not depend one hundred percent on that

1165
01:04:51,160 --> 01:04:55,000
Speaker 1: idea that you had about its creator's authenticity or character,

1166
01:04:55,320 --> 01:04:59,160
Speaker 1: but a change is still likely to occur. And I

1167
01:04:59,160 --> 01:05:01,600
Speaker 1: think we can all think too examples of that in

1168
01:05:01,640 --> 01:05:03,680
Speaker 1: our own appreciation of the arts.

1169
01:05:04,440 --> 01:05:09,439
Speaker 3: Yeah, there is a feeling of betrayal that comes when

1170
01:05:09,480 --> 01:05:12,560
Speaker 3: you find out something, You find out something you really

1171
01:05:12,600 --> 01:05:15,280
Speaker 3: don't like about the creator of a work of art

1172
01:05:15,320 --> 01:05:18,160
Speaker 3: that you do like. That is not present when you

1173
01:05:18,240 --> 01:05:21,040
Speaker 3: just find out something you don't like about a random

1174
01:05:21,080 --> 01:05:22,000
Speaker 3: public figure.

1175
01:05:22,560 --> 01:05:26,960
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, and it's it's, it's it can be a

1176
01:05:26,960 --> 01:05:29,080
Speaker 1: struggle sometimes, you know, and at times it can feel

1177
01:05:29,120 --> 01:05:32,600
Speaker 1: like if you enjoy a particular work of art or

1178
01:05:32,600 --> 01:05:34,640
Speaker 1: a film or music, you don't want to know too

1179
01:05:34,720 --> 01:05:37,440
Speaker 1: much about the person who created it, because if you

1180
01:05:37,560 --> 01:05:39,560
Speaker 1: the more you know, the more likely you are to

1181
01:05:39,600 --> 01:05:42,040
Speaker 1: find something that you disagree with or don't like and

1182
01:05:42,080 --> 01:05:44,400
Speaker 1: then could tarnish the work of art. But then the

1183
01:05:44,440 --> 01:05:47,120
Speaker 1: other side is there's also lots of stuff you can

1184
01:05:47,120 --> 01:05:50,400
Speaker 1: find out about an artist that enhances your experience of

1185
01:05:50,440 --> 01:05:54,840
Speaker 1: a given work. So it's it's often it often seems

1186
01:05:54,880 --> 01:05:59,440
Speaker 1: like it's worth diving into. You know, you may find

1187
01:05:59,440 --> 01:06:03,080
Speaker 1: something that enhances your understanding of art that is already

1188
01:06:03,960 --> 01:06:04,800
Speaker 1: enriching your life.

1189
01:06:05,440 --> 01:06:09,120
Speaker 3: Nevertheless, I think even if you're not thinking about the artist,

1190
01:06:09,400 --> 01:06:12,600
Speaker 3: I totally see what you were saying here about this

1191
01:06:12,640 --> 01:06:17,840
Speaker 3: source claiming that our experience of art is to a

1192
01:06:17,920 --> 01:06:22,560
Speaker 3: large degree engaging the social brain. That seems very true

1193
01:06:22,600 --> 01:06:26,520
Speaker 3: to me. That whether it's you know that music, the

1194
01:06:26,560 --> 01:06:29,120
Speaker 3: band you like, you worry if they're the real deal

1195
01:06:29,200 --> 01:06:32,520
Speaker 3: or if they're fake or it's movies or it's painting.

1196
01:06:32,760 --> 01:06:36,960
Speaker 3: I feel like it is. It's inescapable that there's some

1197
01:06:37,280 --> 01:06:40,080
Speaker 3: part of engaging with the work of art that's kind

1198
01:06:40,120 --> 01:06:42,760
Speaker 3: of like meeting a person, or it's kind of like

1199
01:06:42,840 --> 01:06:47,000
Speaker 3: considering interactions between a social group that rings very true

1200
01:06:47,040 --> 01:06:47,280
Speaker 3: to me.

1201
01:06:48,240 --> 01:06:50,000
Speaker 1: All Right, well, we're gonna go ahead and cut it

1202
01:06:50,040 --> 01:06:52,160
Speaker 1: off right here, but obviously we'd love to hear from

1203
01:06:52,200 --> 01:06:54,720
Speaker 1: you out there, because I know that listeners inevitably have

1204
01:06:54,760 --> 01:06:58,160
Speaker 1: thoughts about all of this, about inauthenticity and authenticity and

1205
01:06:58,200 --> 01:07:02,400
Speaker 1: fakery in them, in the various mediums, the various art

1206
01:07:02,440 --> 01:07:06,360
Speaker 1: forms that we've discussed here, or life in general. So

1207
01:07:06,520 --> 01:07:08,479
Speaker 1: write in we would love to hear from you. We'll

1208
01:07:08,600 --> 01:07:10,760
Speaker 1: throw out that email address here in a minute, but

1209
01:07:10,840 --> 01:07:12,160
Speaker 1: just a remind it. The Stuff to Blow Your Mind

1210
01:07:12,240 --> 01:07:14,520
Speaker 1: is primarily a science and culture podcast, with core episodes

1211
01:07:14,520 --> 01:07:17,920
Speaker 1: on Tuesdays and Thursday, short form episode on Wednesdays. On Mondays,

1212
01:07:17,920 --> 01:07:20,040
Speaker 1: we do listener may on Fridays, we set aside most

1213
01:07:20,040 --> 01:07:22,160
Speaker 1: serious concerns to just talk about a weird film on

1214
01:07:22,240 --> 01:07:25,280
Speaker 1: Weird House Cinema. You can follow us on social media

1215
01:07:25,400 --> 01:07:29,040
Speaker 1: wherever you get your social media, We're probably there rate

1216
01:07:29,080 --> 01:07:30,680
Speaker 1: and review the show wherever you have the power to

1217
01:07:30,720 --> 01:07:33,040
Speaker 1: do so. That really helps us out and we appreciate it,

1218
01:07:33,560 --> 01:07:36,160
Speaker 1: and I believe that's it. What else do you have

1219
01:07:36,240 --> 01:07:37,080
Speaker 1: for us here, Joe?

1220
01:07:37,640 --> 01:07:40,680
Speaker 3: Nothing else except to say our regular audio producer JJ

1221
01:07:40,800 --> 01:07:43,760
Speaker 3: Posway is out this week, so huge thanks to our

1222
01:07:43,880 --> 01:07:48,440
Speaker 3: guest producer Paul Decant. Thank you, Paul. Let's see if

1223
01:07:48,520 --> 01:07:51,480
Speaker 3: you have anything you'd like to get in touch with

1224
01:07:51,560 --> 01:07:53,800
Speaker 3: us with, if you'd like to suggest a topic for

1225
01:07:53,840 --> 01:07:56,840
Speaker 3: a future episode, if you would like to send us

1226
01:07:56,840 --> 01:07:58,840
Speaker 3: feedback on this episode or any other, or if you'd

1227
01:07:58,880 --> 01:08:01,160
Speaker 3: just like to say hi, you can email us at

1228
01:08:01,280 --> 01:08:11,600
Speaker 3: contact at stuff to Blow your Mind dot com.

1229
01:08:11,640 --> 01:08:14,600
Speaker 2: Stuff to Blow Your Mind is production of iHeartRadio. For

1230
01:08:14,680 --> 01:08:17,439
Speaker 2: more podcasts from my heart Radio, visit the iHeartRadio app,

1231
01:08:17,600 --> 01:08:34,479
Speaker 2: Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.