Why do we value authenticity and what really is “authentic”? I really don’t have answers to these questions and the purpose of this posting is to see what others have to say about these interesting questions.
First---the value we put on authenticity. Let me cite an example.
The other day, I was looking at the images of a fake Piazza of San Marco (the central part of Venice) created in Macau. It was in a TV program, on one of the travel channels. It looked quite real, with buildings that resemble those in the real thing.
Now, most of us would much rather go to the real Piazza in Venice than the fake one in Macau—or for that matter the one in Las Vegas, even though they all look somewhat similar.
Why would we insist on going to the real thing, when it is much more expensive and time consuming, not to mention inconvenient, as compared to an imitation? Now if your answer is---because these imitations look fake and the experience is not all that realistic. OK, then would our behavior be the same when technology is able to provide completely realistic experience of such a visit without leaving our chair? Would we still prefer to go do the real thing?
Is our snobbery at work here or is there something else?
That brings me to the next question…that of what is authentic or real?
Is today’s Venice (the real one) really real? I don’t think today’s Venice, with its hoards of tourists and streets filled with expensive shops---no different than those found in most other large cities---resembles “real” Venice of our imagination. In that case, wouldn’t a virtual reality tour of real Venice be more real than visiting actual Venice?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I find that authentic has an attraction for us if we can sense or know that something is authentic. If I do not know (or sense) that a painting is the "real" or "original" van Gogh or Rembrandt, I get the same satisfaction from the authentic or the fake/copy. Similarly, we crave for the original St. Marco Square in Venice since we know that it is the original - even if it is very touristic and different than what it once was. Our imagination helps in the process since we associate the authentic place or thing with its history and give it an added meaning. In addition, the entire atmosphere and the "life around" authentic places is holistic and different than the artificially created Las Vegas version.
ReplyDeleteWhen it comes to authentic nature or a natural phenomenon, I think, we humans can somehow detect the natural from the artificial - because we somehow can "read" the language of nature. I believe, I can always see the real nature from artificially created.
There maybe some snobery in having seen the authentic, but I think that a lot of it also is due to "knowing" that this is (or is not) the authentic one.
Sharad
Sometimes, I am more interested in "copy". Let us take an example of Grotte de Lascaux. The original cave men paintings were getting deteriorated by the exhalation of he tourists so French Government authorized a copy nearby where they meticulously recreated the original one sq. cm by one sq. cm. They even used the primitive paints rather than using current technology. How cool is that?
ReplyDeleteIn some areas, authenticity is clearly snobbery. Timex vs. Rolex. Avon vs. Givenchy, Does one really give you a better performance? This is our human nature. We want to prove that I am better than the other guy so we use this authenticity as one of the tools.
In travel the authenticity plays a different role. Our being in the real place rather than watching Travelogue on screen is not the same. For example, in Ashok's pictures, when he visited Beethoven's place, he was experiencing the Maestro's feeling. One would not feel the same emotions in watching the same on TV.
Bharat