[고3] 2025년 3월 모의고사 30번 - 지문 구성, 그림 설명, 원문 비교

[고3] 2025년 03월 – 30번: 기계복제가 전통 예술의 아우라를 훼손함

 

Surely one reason that copies have lost their sense of human connection, abundance, and intimate relation is that modern technology has made copying so easy. The methods of copying available to us have never been more powerfully abundant. This seems true even as a sense of loss has attended our ever more powerful means to reproduce what we care about. Walter Benjamin has famously formulated this loss as an "aura": that which is lost in mechanical reproduction. The aura of a work of art, he suggests, cannot be copied by mechanical technology. By around 1900, he writes, "technical reproduction had reached a standard that not only permitted it to reproduce all transmitted works of art and thus to cause the most profound change in their impact upon the public." The ability to copy mechanically "substituted a plurality of copies for a unique existence," Benjamin argued. In addition to transforming art and the public's relation to it, Benjamin asserted that mechanical reproduction has the power to rend traditions by interfering with the authority of objects "embedded in the fabric of tradition." This threat to tradition was twofold and concerned the presence of objects, Benjamin believed.

 

 

구분	내용 설명	원문
주장	복제가 너무 쉬워져서, 복제물은 사람과의 연결이나 특별한 느낌을 잃어버리게 되었다.	Surely one reason that copies have lost their sense of human connection, abundance, and intimate relation is that modern technology has made copying so easy.
근거	지금 우리가 가진 복제 기술은 역사상 가장 강력하고 풍부하다.	The methods of copying available to us have never been more powerfully abundant. This seems true even as a sense of loss has attended our ever more powerful means to reproduce what we care about.
정의	발터 베냐민은 이런 상실을 '아우라'라고 부르며, 기계 복제는 예술의 고유함을 없앤다고 했다.	Walter Benjamin has famously formulated this loss as an "aura": that which is lost in mechanical reproduction. The aura of a work of art, he suggests, cannot be copied by mechanical technology.
증거	베냐민은 1900년경 기술 복제가 예술의 영향력을 바꿔 놓았다고 말했다.	By around 1900, he writes, "technical reproduction had reached a standard that not only permitted it to reproduce all transmitted works of art and thus to cause the most profound change in their impact upon the public."
주장	기계 복제는 예술의 독특한 존재를 복수의 복제로 대체해 전통과 권위를 해친다고 주장했다.	The ability to copy mechanically "substituted a plurality of copies for a unique existence," Benjamin argued. In addition to transforming art and the public's relation to it, Benjamin asserted that mechanical reproduction has the power to rend traditions by interfering with the authority of objects "embedded in the fabric of tradition." This threat to tradition was twofold and concerned the presence of objects, Benjamin believed.

 

 

 

 

 

	문제 지문	원문 지문
1	Surely one reason that copies have lost their sense of human connection, abundance, and intimate relation is that modern technology has made copying so easy.	Surely one reason that copies have lost their sense of human connection, abundance, and intimate relation is that modern technology has made copying so easy.
2	The methods of copying available to us have never been more powerfully abundant.	The methods of copying available to us have never been more powerfully abundant.
3	This seems true even as a sense of loss has attended our ever more powerful means to reproduce what we care about.	This seems true even as a sense of loss has attended our ever more powerful means to reproduce what we care about.
4	Walter Benjamin has famously formulated this loss as an "aura": that which is lost in mechanical reproduction.	The well-known bibliophile, translator, and cultural critic Walter Benjamin (1892–1940) has famously formulated this loss as an “aura”: that which is lost in mechanical reproduction.
5	The aura of a work of art, he suggests, cannot be copied by mechanical technology.	The aura of a work of art, he suggests, cannot be copied by mechanical technology.
6	By around 1900, he writes, "technical reproduction had reached a standard that not only permitted it to reproduce all transmitted works of art and thus to cause the most profound change in their impact upon the public."	By around 1900, he writes, “technical reproduction had reached a standard that not only permitted it to reproduce all transmitted works of art and thus to cause the most profound change in their impact upon the public.”
7	The ability to copy mechanically "substituted a plurality of copies for a unique existence," Benjamin argued.	The ability to copy mechanically “substituted a plurality of copies for a unique existence,” Benjamin argued.
8	In addition to transforming art and the public's relation to it, Benjamin asserted that mechanical reproduction has the power to rend traditions by interfering with the authority of objects "embedded in the fabric of tradition."	In addition to transforming art and the public’s relation to it, Benjamin asserted that mechanical reproduction has the power to rend traditions by interfering with the authority of objects “imbedded in the fabric of tradition.”
9	This threat to tradition was twofold and concerned the presence of objects, Benjamin believed.	This threat to tradition was twofold and concerned the presence of objects, Benjamin believed.

 

* 원문 참고 어휘

• bibliophile 애서가, 책을 좋아하는 사람
• imbedded 박힌 (= embedded)

 

 

관련 자료 바로가기

[고3] 2025년 3월 모의고사 - 한줄해석

[고3] 2025년 3월 모의고사 - 한줄해석 (좌지문 우해석)

[고3] 2025년 3월 모의고사 - 지문 요약 by ChatGPT-4o

[고1~고3] 2025년 3월 모의고사 - 지문 정리 (문제 제작용 hwp 한글 파일)