Walter Benjamin, in his writing ‘The author as producer’ in the book ‘Understanding Brecht’, touches a great range of topics including the progressive role of writer as producer in the process of social struggle. In the same time the transformation of art and publication forms were witnessed under the situation of technique development.
Benjamin starts with his statement that ‘right’ literary tendency is inevitable tied to political correctness. Here the author raises the inquiry of the relationship between the commitment and the quality of literary works. He demonstrates that the problem must be inserted into the context of living social relations, which are determined by production relations. The author proposes to ask the position within the work, before going further into the question of productive relations, which naturally leads to the literary technique of its time.
To my understanding, here we could extend the concerned to a larger range including more types of art forms: art movement, architectural movement etc. Without the leading technique which enable progressive thoughts, the revolutionary seeds would not have chance to grow in any other circumstances.
Benjamin then lists some example of Russia writers and new writing forms, namely, the newspaper. The writer, Sergey Tretyakov, implement his mission by both literary creation and active interaction undertaken with private farmers. (It reminds of me of Lu Xun, a leading figure of Chinese literature at almost the same time with Sergey Tretyakov, who regards himself as using pen as weapon aiming to waken the masses. Lu Xun, compared to the strategies implemented by Sergey, insisted the new language and was associate with social movement. While, according to Benjamin’s example of Sergey, Lu Xun and Sergey would be different from its political commitment.) According to Benjamin, any genres are cling to the situation of its time. The appearance and disappearance of certain literary forms could not be perceived as a solitude object.
Benjamin introduces two movements – Activism and New Objectivity in order to show that political commitment functions in a counter-revolutionary way as long as the writer experience his unity with the proletariat only in the minds and not as a producer.
He shows example of how modish techniques enable publication of different medias to serve political purpose, and increasingly the power of publication and reproduction becomes limited to smaller groups. Forms of music reproduction were seen being changed, the photographs were being consumed sometimes ridiculously based on human misery.
Then the author analysis what standards should be assessed as a writer, which is so much similar to the academic production today – the citation of one’s literary work which represent whether its eligible to be seen as model for other writers. (Here I would reserve my question: is it the only criteria to measure the accomplishment of a writer?)
It seems interesting that Benjamin turns to introduce Brecht’s idea of Epic Theatre seamlessly. Contrasting to traditional theatre which used to create illusion for audience, Epic theatre uncover conditions – conditions of living reality. It was realized by interrupting the dramatic process, compelling spectators to take up a position towards the actions. Such montage technique creates the unique viewpoints of exposing the present. Such effect may have the chance alienate both actors and audience from the roles they were set to play, thus for both of them it creates a detached feeling inside.
To conclude, Benjamin goes back to the inquiry he brings at the beginning, and confirms that when precisely one understands his position in the social process, he will less like be set off as an opposing character. Benjamin seems to be addressing his ideas to reactionary activists, literary producers and art- work producers.
gg 