Walter Benjamin and Siegfrizd Kracauer

Walter Benjamin and Siegfrizd Kracauer characterize an aspect of film as a 'distraction' and both men have different ideas on what they mean by distraction but also have many similarities. Their essays The Mass Ornament, Hotel Lobby, Cult of Distraction and The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction all discuss their views on distraction and how cinematic capacities capture certain aspects of 'modernity.' Modern life was a life that was feared by the people it was fast changing and hard to adapt to, and with that came many accidents and it was shown through many devices including film.

In Walter Benjamin's The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction, Benjamin feels that 'distraction' had many "meanings" when it came to the masses. Benjamin thought distraction caused a decline in middle class society, Benjamin who felt that capitalism was due to changing modern times, saw film as a medium that was a distraction on the modern world and it was training for coping with the stimuli that the modern world brought. Film was high demand amongst the masses and the distracting element was that frame by frame the image or picture was constantly changing place and focus which would grab the viewer's attention. Film editing allows for a consistent change of the image on the screen creating a "shock" effect which according to Benjamin should be taken with a heightened presence of mind. The "shock" effect given off by film led to the commercialization of films and gained popularity within the masses. Film has to much editing so it may be a distraction, because we are not given enough time to absorb it.

Benjamin uses the comparison of a painter and a filmmaker the painter's work of art is his/her painting and within this work of art one can abandon themselves in it. The filmmaker's work of art is his/her film when viewing the screen one cannot abandon them self in the film because it is constantly changing. According to Benjamin art demands concentration from the spectator, but this does not provide a platform for film analysis. Distraction and concentration are polar opposites, and for example a concentrated man in front of art is absorbed by it the masses absorb it as well. A distracted person according to Benjamin forms habits, one example that he uses is how the masses have the ability to master other tasks in a distracted state allows for a habit and could lead art as a tool to mobilize the masses. Benjamin's essay states that Dadaistic people distracted the masses by making works of art the center of scandal in a goal to outrage the people. Dada was a European artistic and literary movement that flouted conventional aesthetic and cultural values by producing works marked by nonsense, travesty, and incongruity (Webster).

Film also allows the filmmaker to be a surgeon. The filmmaker captures film in fragments which then allows him to act like a surgeon as to where he sees fit to put these fragments together to make a final product. Through film the filmmaker can manipulate the masses by means of distraction. For example Dziga Vertov's Man with a Movie Camera

Kracauer and Benjamin both saw that film as a broad escalation of sensational amusement and it was a sign of the changing times. The two men feared the changing times had similar views on distraction. Distraction could be seen as a reflection of the uncontrollable anarchy of the world. Benjamin agreed with some of Kracauer's views on distraction but Kracauer went into more detail on what he felt would distract the people.

"The large picture houses in Berlin are places of distractions" - Kracauer What Kracauer means by this is that movie theaters of his time served as a distraction for the spectator. Everything from spotlights to 3-D visuals where there to distract the viewer from the 2-D screen, like a painting losing its appeal if it were next to a movie image 2-D films cannot be surrounded by 3-D objects. Kracauer believed that mass theaters were like hotel lobbies, they were shrines to the cultivation of pleasure. The Film Berlin is a distraction of the German culture, the shots of the crowds is a distraction it is a comparison of herds. Kracauer believes that anything shown on the screen in a movie theater is a distraction, where one views the screening may distract the spectator, there are many "actors" that play the role of distraction.

"Distraction - which is meaningful only as improvisation, as a reflection of the uncontrolled anarchy of our world..." - Kracauer. This means that the shallow thrill and sensory stimulation is paralleled with urban city life and the change in technology. The distraction one experiences at a movie theater acts like a buoy. A buoy in the sense that if it were not for these distractions the viewer's attention would be lost in an "abyss" and they need constant stimulation, music and spotlights help keep them above the "water." Kracauer wanted movie theaters to keep distracting the masses but thought they should do so not by fancy trappings and frills that take away from the film but, felt that it should aim toward a radically form of distraction that exposes a collapse instead of masking it for what it really is.

Benjamin saw cinema as an emblem of modernity and called this "the modernity thesis." Cinema can represent modernity, it can