Journal of Communication and Computer 13 (2016) 153-158 doi:10.17265/1548-7709/2016.04.001 Art in the Age of Digital Reproduction: Reconsidering Benjamin’s Aura in “Art of Banksy” Canan Akın and N. Sezin Kıpçak İstanbul YeniYuzyil University Radio and Television Programming Department, Turkey Abstract: Since Walter Benjamin wrote his renowned essay “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction” in 1936, the aura of an artwork has always been an issue of debate. Benjamin describes aura as “an art work’s unique existence at the place it happens to be” and claims that the aura of an art work is born out of the combination of factors such as uniqueness, tradition, distance and authenticity. Benjamin announces the “death of aura” as a consequence of new technologies which enable artworks to be reproduced mechanically. Benjamin’s claim is primarily true in works of art in digital form, including graffiti art reflected on screens via digital technologies. Graffiti art, which reacts against the commodification of all things including time and space, is commodified when it is displayed in an environment which is different from the one its meaning was rooted and thus is deprived of its aura. This paper aims to discuss how Benjamin’s “aura” finds its reflections in Graffiti art. It proposes that commodification of “graffiti” artworks and displaying them in new sites via digital technologies leads to vanishing of their aura. In the light of Benjamin’s views, the exhibition titled “The Art of Banksy”, which had its world premiere in Istanbul in January 2016 will be examined on its capacity to evoke aura. Key words: Aura, Benjamin, Banksy, graffiti. “Even the most perfect reproduction of a work of art is lacking in one element: its presence in time and space, its unique existence at the place where it happens to be” WalterBenjamin 1. Introduction Although it has been 80 years since Walter Benjamin wrote his famousessay “The Work of Art In the age of Mechanical Reproduction”, his concept of “aura” is still an issue of discussion in our present days. Living in an age artworks were reproduced mechanically by means of photographs or films, Benjamin claimed that the new technologies which enable artworks to be reproduced mechanically led to the death of their aura. Describing aura as, “an artwork’s unique existence at the place it happens to be” (Benjamin, 2007: 20) Benjamin assert sthataura of an artwork is specific to the context in which it is createdanddisplayed. Benjamin’s conception of theaura of an artwork is theresult of the synthesis of Corresponding author: Canan Akin, assistant professor, research field: new media and art. its uniqueness, tradition, distance and authenticity. Today, we are witnessing the digital era and Benjamin’s claim about the aura of an artwork is primarly true in works of art in digital form, including graffiti art reflected on screens via digital technologies. One of the key features of graffiti is its being site specific, which means a particular visual communicates a meaning in time and space. Another unique key feature of graffiti is its reacting against the commodification of all things, including time and space. However, when graffiti is exhibited in galleries and museums, it becomes a commodity and loses its aura even as it tries to exist as anti-commodity. In Benjamin’sview, despite leading to the death of aura, mechanical reproduction has some positive aspects such as enabling large masses of audiences to have an access to artworks which are in distant places. More people have the chance to experience the reproduced D DAVID PUBLISHING