arrested by the rational of technology, and given a means to end function of promoting theeconomic ideal. Adorno doubts the possibility of art changing for good the relations of production caused by capitalism as this should not be arts sole purpose along with the sheerimpracticality of this idea. Yet authentic, free thinking culture is a thing of the past. A faintrecollection is still talked about but without impact in the current state of affairs. Repetitionis constant; everything we are exposed to is approved by all. So arts critical potential as acritique of society has been lost. Is this true in every case?
I now wish to take the example of Bertolt Brecht as an artist who sought to directly resistcapitalism. If successful, then Brecht surely serves as an example of free expression undercapitalisms supposed constraints on art. Brecht attempted this with the application of his
, which is a theatrical method Brecht is always associated with. It tells anarrative, the emphasis being placed on situation as opposed to the personality of thecharacters. Brecht advocatedthe philosophy of Karl Marx which emphasizes a void in theproletariat caused by the capitalist agenda. This void is of a persons genuine desires beingreplaced with false ones; a primary cause of alienation.In
Brecht; The Dramatist
Ronald Greyargues, Brecht suggests that before his day theatre audiences were passive, hypnotized bythe performance, ready to accept whatever the actors gave out as the truth. (Page 73,2006). It seems Brecht wanted to give his audience members a feeling of alienation to allowthem to see society for the bourgeois system that it is.
is an exampleof Brechts portrayal of alienation. He wrote the work and described it as the kind of performance bourgeois audiences liked to see. By doing this he highlighted what abourgeois work really is and, as Grey puts it, by writing a work so close to being a