(Mis)applying Benjamin’s “aura” to translation theory

In his 1936 essay “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction,” Walter Benjamin develops the concept of “aura” – defined as that part of an artistic object’s existence that is tied to its authenticity and presence – to claim that it cannot be multiplied or transmitted. He argues that reproducing a work of art, such as enabled by photography or film, destroys that aura because “the technique of reproduction detaches the reproduced object from the domain of tradition. By making many reproductions it substitutes a plurality of copies for a unique existence.” With nearly a century separating us from Benjamin’s ideas – a period in which we have largely moved from mechanical to digital reproduction – does the concept of aura have any lasting relevance? This essay argues that while Benjamin’ s materialist theory of art cannot be uncritically applied to lingual translation (which involves an imagined transfer of meaning), “auratic effects” are nevertheless central to the experience of translationality, defined as a visceral sense of connection with another time, place, object, or person, evoked through material encounters.