P. 1
Autonomy of Art, about Adorno´s Theory

Autonomy of Art, about Adorno´s Theory

|Views: 13|Likes:
Published by mardegainza

More info:

Published by: mardegainza on Oct 18, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





Autonomy of Art: Looking Back at Adorno's Asthetische Theorie Author(s): Peter Uwe Hohendahl Source: The German Quarterly

, Vol. 54, No. 2 (Mar., 1981), pp. 133-148 Published by: Blackwell Publishing on behalf of the American Association of Teachers of German Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/405347 Accessed: 21/08/2008 14:14
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=black. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.


Except for a few voices in the liberal and conservative camp. but otherwise the text needed only formal revisions. Adorno's faithful disciple and editor. which were carried out by Rolf Tiedemann. One might have expected that the East German critics would denounce Adorno's theory as a typical example of Western ideologywhich they did. his Asthetische Theorie. only the authentic work of art overcomes the stultifying atmosphere of the cultural industry met with disbelief and outspoken disapproval. Adorno meant to rewrite the introduction. It was particularly Adorno's insistence on the autonomy of the art work and his well known indictment of Tendenz and political art which angered the Left. If the members of the Frankfurt Institute considered Asthetische Theorie as Adorno's legacy. Adorno who taught the younger generation the critical approach to literature and music. the left movement in Germany owed most of its theoretical insights to the Frankfurt School and especially to Theodor W. In his last work he reiterated his critique of unmediated Engagement and once more presented modernism and the avant-garde as the only viable responses to the increasing brutality of advanced capitalism. The charges varied.Autonomy of Art: Looking Back at Adorno's Asthetische Theorie' PETER UWE HOHENDAHL Theodor Adorno's major contribution to the philosophy of art.2 The work was almost completed when the author died in 1969. Yet it was precisely this aspect which marred the reception of the book. Adorno evidently had not changed his position. The hostility was so strong that the German Left dismissed the book out of hand and left the appropriation to the conservatives who at this point were inclined to use some of Adorno's arguments for the defense of their aesthetic and moral beliefs. but there was almost a consensus among the critics of the left camp that Adorno's last book did not offer the materialist theory of art that everybody was looking for. in the final analysis. When Asthetische Theorie came out. the West German student movement had 133 . it turned out to be an Erbe which was clearly unwelcome. His renewed claim that. the response was surprisingly negative. What were the reasons for this bizarre development? After all. Tiedemann rightly felt that Asthetische Theorie deserved immediate publication since it was the legacy of Critical Theory. more alarming was the unfriendly or at least cool reception among the West German Left. appeared in 1970.

and their theoretical work was appropriated to develop an alternative position. Trotsky. the West German students tried to solve this problem by forming more structured political organizations or moving closer to established political parties (DKP). serious impact on the social system which they critiqued and attacked. At the same time.3 They redefined their goals in terms of immediate political action and tried to establish a closer connection with the working class.134 PETER UWE HOHENDAHL reached the climax of its public influence. We have to understand this emotionally charged debate as a political rather than philological discourse. The heart of the matter for the New Left was a defense of Benjamin's oeuvre against the authority of Adorno and its integration into the dogma of the Frankfurt School. transcended idealism and developed a truly materialist theory of art. Since the Left placed the emphasis primarily on those elements in Benjamin's work which agreed with Brecht and overlooked other . Unlike the American students. they had one thing in common: their dislike of the Frankfurt School and its interpretation of Marxism. The members of the Frankfurt School were openly condemned as bourgeois and their theory denounced as liberal middle class ideology. reflects the yearning of the New Left to grasp and to revive the element of political praxis in aesthetic theory. As much as these various groups fought among themselves and disagreed about strategy. In 1970 the student movement.4 The interest in Benjamin. especially Asthetische Theorie. The remarkable public recognition did not translate into a lasting. turned against its initial belief in spontaneous political expression and rallied around more orthodox leader figures like Lenin. 56/57). as irrelevant for the Marxist project. Using the yardstick of orthodox Marxism. made Adorno definitely unpopular with a movement that struggled to transform the social structure of West Germany. however. which support the Communist party. entering its second phase. Critical Theory became the victim of this reorientation. or Mao-Tze-Tong. this critique was more than anything else a self-critique and therefore carried out with uncommon harshness. particularly in his essays of the thirties. critic and editor. on the other hand Walter Benjamin who moved closer to Brecht. the extremely complicated personal relationship between Walter Benjamin and the younger Adorno. The liberal element in Adorno's writing-not only his concept of genuine culture. It was either Lukacs or Brecht and Benjamin who became the new cultural heroes. which clearly owed much to the eighteenth and nineteenth century and showed the Bildungsbirger in Adorno. Ever since the famous Benjamin-issue of alternative in 1967 (no. it faced its first major crisis. was presented as a clear-cut opposition: on the one hand the smug Adorno who tried to suppress certain parts of Benjamin's oeuvre because they did not agree with his understanding of Benjamin's essential philosophy (which cannot be denied). Adorno's left critics found it easy to dismiss his late work. who became Benjamin's disciple. but also his defense of individual freedom against the demands of the state and political parties. Since the New Left had been under the influence of the Frankfurt School at least until 1969.

which he advanced already in letters during the thirties. The unity of theory and praxis. Adorno defended this stance against the demands of the students. not as an accidental relapse. Although this debate has not yet come to an end-the question of Benjamin's Marxism seems to be as undecided as ever-there is a growing consensus among the Left and its various factions. This last . Adorno refused to apply his own theory to the political realm. their analysis of advanced capitalism did not include the revolutionary perspective of traditional Marxism. shortly before his death. but rather as the logical outcome of the historical process.8 And this emphasis becomes irrational when imposed on philosophy. as the liberal mind preferred to see this development. This is not to make Adorno less controversial and thereby more acceptable to the established forces of the academy. Indeed the social theory of the Frankfurt School which started out in the thirties as a Marxist project became increasingly pessimistic with respect to Marx' prognosis that capitalism would ultimately self-destruct and give way to a socialist society. unlike Lukacs.6 It is time to take another look at Asthetische Theorie and Adorno's essays on literature. While Benjamin scholars have realized that we have to get out of the old mold. Adorno's critique of these essays. In their Dialektik der Aufklarung Horkheimer and Adorno argued that the historical unfolding of ratio would lead to the increasing domination of nature by man who then would become the victim of his own structure of domination. in a singular historical situation-the struggle between the student movement and the West German establishment. calls for a reappreciation. This rereading cannot simply dismiss the arguments of the early seventies and pretend to face the text for the first time. According to the Left.5 the discussion about Adorno's theory seems to linger without any direction. tends to privilege action. Adorno denounced the call for praxis as dogmatic and insisted that the uncompromising rigor of theory which defends its realm against the onslaught of positivism offers the truly critical opposition. Horkheimer and Adorno concluded in the forties that the Enlightenment. as I have tried to show. The Frankfurt School reached a position where man can analyze the logic of history but not organize political opposition. which was supposed to bring freedom and emancipation. Since Horkheimer and Adorno. that the initial approach and the way it shaped the discourse has lost its usefulness and its critical edge.Looking Back at Adorno's Asthetische Theorie 135 traditions. could only fuel the aversion against the devious influence of Adorno's aesthetic elitism.7 Faced with fascism in Germany and Italy on the one hand and monopoly capitalism in the USA on the other. He indulged in pessimism. had given up the belief that the proletariat would revolutionize the given social structure. if we want to appropriate Benjamin's writings for the eighties. he argued. but it must be conscious of the limitations which were imposed on the interpretation at that time. which only the nostalgic observer can overlook. As late as 1969. had resulted in barbarism and slavery. The perspective which guided the interpretation and critique of Adorno in the early seventies was rooted. The historical distance from these events.

It is not accidental that Adorno's last book deals with aesthetic rather than social problems. particularly in Hegel. Although Adorno refused to view his attitude as pessimistic. This perspective might look more attractive today than ten years ago when there appeared to be hope that the age of capitalism might come to an end. who admired the early Lukacs. To put it more concretely: he rejects the attack on modernism because it is rooted in an ontological. Modern writers are not decadent and therefore unable to synthesize content and form. The same can be said about Georg Luk&cs. coming from reflection theory and a general concept of realism he favors those forms of literature which express the interest and concerns of the proletariat-in other words social realism. His concern with social questions leads to aesthetic rather than political theory. In his essay "Erpresste Versohnung"9 he distanced himself from Lukacs' theory of realism and at the same time harshly critiqued Lukacs' concept of the organic work of art. he adopted Lenin's reflection theory which is supposed to support Lukacs' concept of the organic work of art as the only authentic form of art. from where do we look at it? Let me begin with a broad description of Adorno's philosophy. Still. the question: what does Asthetische Theorie offer to us today? should be coupled with the complementary question: what do we offer to Adorno's theory. i. When Lukacs moved from an idealist to a Marxist position and attempted to work out a materialist basis for his criticism. Adorno denounces Lukacs' struggle against modernism. His late work tends to dwell on the importance of art. Adorno offers the authentic work of art as that emphatic opposition which can no longer materialize in political organizations. rather . Adorno's use of the category of negation became abstract and thereby lost its critical edge. as the regressive part of Hegel's influence-a reduction of the work of art to considerations of content. ahistorical understanding of the organic work of art. writers like Kafka and Joyce. However. But is this kind of relevance a good reason for us to return to Adorno's criticism? Is Adorno perhaps becoming fashionable again because his aestheticism and his pessimism appeal to the readers of the troubled eighties? By asking these questions I do not want to discredit the legitimacy of our present interests and simply restore the authority of Adorno and the Frankfurt School.. Adorno's philosophy of art is his final answer to the dilemma of social praxis. refused to accept this argument. Lukacs also historicizes art and literature. His oeuvre is clearly grounded in the tradition of German Idealism.e. Adorno rejects this more traditional part of Hegel's aesthetics and insists that the rigorous historical approach should be extended to basic aesthetic norms and rules. we cannot overlook that the gap between theory and praxis is widening in his later writings. Adorno. but the results are strikingly different.136 PETER UWE HOHENDAHL effort to preserve the priority of theory came close to the very position that the Frankfurt School castigated as traditional in the thirties. Adorno on the other hand defends modernism precisely because he shares the historical approach with the Hegelian tradition.

unlike Lukacs. conceive of it in terms of reflection. Adorno is a distant and skeptical observer of Winckelmann's ideas. although Adorno is never quite clear whether this period has come to an end or not. and Hegel and emphasizes the autonomy of the art work. which tends to view aesthetic principles as metahistorical. changes of style and genres. Adorno's Asthetische Theorie is his final effort to grasp and theoretically refine the dialectic of the social and the aesthetic sphere. The left Hegelians. beginning with Heine. used Hegel's model of history to understand the evolution of literature as representative for the development of social and political history. "Die vom Klassizismus veranstaltete . Its author is clearly on the side of those historical forces which undermine the rule of European classicism. In his famous lecture on poetry and society of 195710 Adorno referred to the collective Grundstrom in the poems of Brecht and Lorca without indicating however whether this grounding in a collective spirit marks the beginning of a new progressive era or the decline of poetry as a medium of philosophical truth. When literary theory in the late eighteenth century developed the notion that art is autonomous. Adorno is much closer to Hegel's intention when he applies the historical critique also to the basic aesthetic categories-including the concept of autonomy. slavery and oppression are the reality which have to be suppressed before we can enjoy the notion of perennial beauty and harmony in Greek art. I shall come back to this ambiguity later. but he is very much aware of its dangers.Looking Back at Adorno's Asthetische Theorie 137 they try to work out the dialectic of social change and aesthetic innovation. it consists of a dialectical process in which the individual work is seen against the background of conventions and norms. Adorno follows the idealist tradition of Kant. This insight is certainly not new. Looking back at Greek classicism Adorno points out the material conditions of Greek history which were anything but ideal: brutal warfare. Schiller. By historicizing the major categories of aesthetic theory Adorno brings these realms closer together again. Ultimately art and society belong to the same stream of history. the intention was to free the art work from the demand of social praxis. Adorno's theory not only defends and legitimizes modernism and the avant-garde. Authenticity is reached only through the negation of the affirmative tradition. it may well be called a theory of the avant-garde. The legitimacy of this category is limited to the period between the eighteenth and the twentieth centuries. This stress on novelty should not be mistaken for an apology of the fashionable. What we call the history of literature. Adorno's approach stands in this tradition. it rather indicates that the aesthetic material itself is drawn into the historical process. is not just a sequence of facts and events. he does not. Unlike the aesthetic theory of the later nineteenth century in Germany. While he insists on the dialectic of art and society (the art work is also a social fact). First I would like to develop another important aspect of Adorno's theory: the correlation between the aesthetic and the social sphere. The result is an abstract opposition between the social and the aesthetic sphere.

It is the explication of the work of art which offers the insight into the social conditions that defined the production of the work of art. This seemingly historical polemic. this sounds like Goldmann's theory. als daB sie jene edle Einfalt und stille GrOBeausstrahlten. has a methodological aspect which I want to bring to the foreground: Adorno. "Rede ilber Lyrik und Gesellschaft" he unfolds the notion that the social meaning of the poem is expressed through its language. The choice of the sundial as the key metaphor signals that for Adorno the important element in the text is its expressive force and much less the author and his/her intentions to build up a coherent vision of the world. yet this similarity is deceptive. Thus the emphasis is placed on the . but we have to note the distinction: the interpretation of the poem refers to the meaning of history. Again. The poem relates to social history only indirectly. The correspondence between art and society. at least implicitly. The object of this critique is the neo-humanism of Weimar and its glorification of Greek art. die eher-archaisch-erschrecken. Adorno would never identify the work of art with an individual social group or class. This critique of classicism becomes important because it is at the same time a critique of a model which was further developed by Lucien Goldmann. In his essay. speaks here against the model that was used by the early Lukacs to situate the novel form. not to the facts or the objective structures. This procedure which is typical of Goldmann's criticism. The difference becomes apparent when Adorno defines his approach as immanent. he is careful not to press the correlation into the homology model. Adorno undercuts the fundamental assumption of Lukacs' Theorie des Romans that early Greek literature was grounded in social conditions which were free of alienation.'1 Adorno's theory looks similar. Daher blicken die klassischen Bildwerke mit jenen leeren Augen. 241). und noch der Baudelaireschen" (p. The two realms are mediated by philosophy-more specifically the philosophy of the early Marx. The individual author enters the sphere of criticism only as the human voice. geschweige denn spater. Was heute an der Antike sich aufdrangt. the historical subjectivity that objectifies the expression through the work. welche das empfindsame Zeitalter auf sie projizierte. Authentic are only those works which are representative of the whole.138 PETER UWE HOHENDAHL Einheit des Allgemeinen und Besonderen war schon in attischen Zeiten nicht erreicht. however. For Goldmann the task of the critic and sociologist of literature is to establish a homology between the social and the literary structure. is unacceptable to Adorno on grounds of principle. Unlike Goldmann. transcends the particular group or class. ist grundverschieden von der Korrespondenz mit dem europaischen Klassizismus in der Ara der FranzOsischen Revolution und Napoleons. Adorno calls the poem a philosophical and historical sundial: by deciphering the structure of the poem the critic decodes the meaning of social history. While Adorno shares with Goldmann the interest in formal structures and rejects any kind of Inhaltssoziologie as vulgar materialism. The critic is starting out from the text rather than beginning with an analysis of the social structure. the aesthetic and the social meaning.

they propel the evolution of art to the point where the avant-garde artist negates the very principle of the art work itself. is quite unnecessary. Monads are closed. throws light on the social meaning. Here Adorno. The increasing contradictions of reality show up as dissonances of form. as it turns out. By stressing the formal aspect of literary history Adorno arrives at a position which is close to that of Russian Formalism. nicht der Einschu3 gegenstandlicher Momente. In Asthetische Theorie Adorno tries to unfold this argument. There are also important differences. In spite of his outspoken critique of the traditional dialectic which moves from thesis to antithesis and finally ends with a synthesis. nach ihrem Bedilrfnis das Verhaltnis von Ganzem und Teilen zu modeln. die der Kunst gestattet. 16). they have. He also argues that aesthetic criticism should primarily be concerned with questions of technique. so to speak. and finally try to relate these sequences would be shunned as undialectical and positivistic. the expectations and the contradictions of the human race. since the outside world is already contained in the monad. Adorno insists on the totality of history no less than Hegel or Luk/cs. then at the political or economic evolution. While Adorno shares the concern of the Russian Formalists with technique.Looking Back at Adorno's Asthetische Theorie 139 objective side: The authentic work of art is given the status of a permanent testament of human history-it embodies the hopes and the sufferings. The detailed analysis of seemingly technical points. daB asthetische Form sedimentierter Inhalt sei" (p. his interpretation of history follows a model which is quite different. definiert das Verhaltnis der Kunst zur Gesellschaft" (p. Or another definition: "Nur vermOge der Trennung von der empirischen Realitat. no windows and therefore offer no immediate access to reality. This. Adorno's philosophy is still grounded in Hegel's philosophy of history. Adorno then applies this idea to the understanding of aesthetic forms: "Die ungelOsten Antagonismen der Realitat kehren wieder in den Kunstwerken als die immanenten Probleme ihrer Form. 14). in other words close reading. because it deprives the work of art of its emphatic truth value (Wahrheitsgehalt). Therefore the approach of Tynyanov12 that the critic has to look first at the literary sequence. introduces the concept of the monad. Das. 15). wird das Kunstwerk zum Sein zweiter Potenz" (p. As we shall see. is unacceptable to Adorno. Adorno would have rejected the formalist notion that literary history can be fully understood in terms of its intrinsic evolution. Thus only those works deserve to be called authentic which question their own formal structure. following Walter Benjamin. By comparing art works with monads Adorno tries to explore the dialectic of art and reality. He notes: "Opponiert sie der Empirie durchs Moment der Form-und die Vermittlung von Form und Inhalt ist nicht zu fassen ohne deren Unterscheidung-. so ist die Vermittlung einigermaBen allgemein darin zu suchen. The concept of history which the formalists propose. The comparison with Russian Formalism is fruitful with respect to considerations of form. These unanswered questions provide literary and art history with their dynamic force. Adorno's interest in . although analytically sound.

He is less sympathetic to studies which try to understand art in terms of communication. a contextual reading. the notion of change and innovation must not be fetishized. The individual author and his/her intentions receive rarely more than fleeting . Darum ist das Verhaltnis der Kunst zur Gesellschaft nicht vorwiegend in der Sphare der Rezeption aufzusuchen. die vielfach aus gesellschaftlichem Grunde von den Kunstwerken und ihrem objektiven gesellschaftlichen Gehalt ganzlich divergieren" (p. but historical categories. anstatt mit der Ermittlung und Klassifizierung von Wirkungen sich abspeisen zu lassen. Das Interesse an der gesellschaftlichen Dechiffrierung der Kunst muB dieser sich zukehren. he presupposes a model of history in which the various spheres-the social. Adorno's theory puts a high premium on aesthetic innovation. ist ihrerseits gesellschaftlich als Produkt der Arbeitsteilung. the interest in the origin and production of art.14 Adorno's emphasis on production as the key to the understanding of the art work deserves closer scrutiny. However. This hostile remark against reception studies is primarily directed against positivism in musicology which tried to develop a quantitative method in order to demonstrate the success and significance of music. on the other hand. genres are not fixed entities. the interest in its structure. and the interest in its impact and reception. Thus Adorno's claim to Immanenz should not be interpreted as a German version of New Criticism. Close reading is for Adorno. What does he mean? Certainly not the kind of studies which were popular in the late nineteenth century. Adorno privileges.140 PETER UWE HOHENDAHL literary evolution is not that of the historians who are satisfied when they have demonstrated how a genre changes or a motif is expressed in different ways. when the critic explained the work of art by documenting its sources and demonstrated the roots in the biography of the author. the aesthetic-are part of a unified process. Among the three approaches to the work of art. as we have seen. When Adorno postulates that the sociologist of art must begin with the text. Formalized professional scholarship insists on the rigorous definition of its object. the political. the separation of the researcher and his/her material. the equivalent of Emil Staiger for instance. Adorno argues: "Die Objektivation der Kunst. Patterns. Es ist dieser vorgangig: in der Produktion.13 Adorno himself was clearly interested in reception and wrote a number of important essays on the sociology of hearing. without paying attention to their dialectical relationship in which the subject is very much part of the object and. Its meaning can be understood only as a part of a larger historical context. 338f). Stressing the intrinsic approach means the opposite: it is the attempt to overcome the reification of traditional interpretation. the seemingly objective material the result of the subject's activities. forms. the structural procedure. the philosophical. When we talk about Adorno's approach we have to realize that he refuses to offer an objectified scientific method which can be abstracted from the individual act of understanding and then applied to various works. von der Gesellschaft drauBenher ihr Fetischismus. strange as this may sound.

I want to give an example from Asthetische Theorie to demonstrate what Adorno has in mind. This is a significant move. does not deny the validity of this aspect. His interpretation wants to rescue Stifter's work from his conservative admirers who find their own ideology confirmed in the message of the novels. It is not accidental therefore that Stifter's reading public consisted to a large extent of educated conservative German Burger. Adorno wants to emphasize artistic labor: the concrete struggle of the artists with the techniques which are available at a certain time. die Nietzsche bewunderte" (p. blattern ab. is followed by another one which demonstrates Adorno's understanding of the authentic value within the conservative ideology. The legitimacy of . Luktcs denied Stifter the status of a major German writer. 346). Adorno would agree with Lukacs' argument that Balzac's intentions and the meaning of his novels were not identical. Objektivitat erstarrt zur Maske. knowing well that this category is part of the liberal ideology: the self-promotion of the artist who has to deal with the market place. however. Adorno defines production of art in terms of the general economic and social conditions under which the artist has to workfeudal patronage. die ihm seine halb esoterische Popularitat verschafften. yet ultimately the thematic conservatism of Stifter's novels is seen as part of a larger context. let us say. Adorno agrees with neither side. Typically enough. Biography is in most cases treated on the anecdotal level. The sociologist who concentrates on the plot and the characters of. Durch die Exzentrizitat des Mittleren schimmert das verschwiegene und verleugnete Leid des entfremdeten Subjekts hindurch und die UnversOhntheit des Zustands" (p. Secondly. Damit jedoch ist nicht das letzte Wort tiber ihn gesagt. This statement. Adorno clearly differentiates between the meaning that Stifter wanted to express in his writings and the Gehalt which is hidden in the structure of the work. Both his critical prose and his works of fiction express a moderate and cautious stance.15 The overriding themes offer plenty of evidence for this thesis. the competition of the capitalist market or the situation of culture industry in advanced capitalist societies. seine Uberlegenheit tber alle Literatur trOstendenZuspruchs und beflissen landschaftlicher Geborgenheit und erwirbt ihm die authentische Qualitat. He carefully refrains from praising the genius. Nachsommer can read this novel as a typical example of the conservative mood of the eighteen-fifties. Adorno's reading links the conservative component to the industrial revolution of the fifties. 346). beschworenes Leben wird zum abweisenden Ritual. to be sure. while the left camp remained indifferent or hostile. By focusing attention on the process of production the critic at the same time reveals its meaning and truth value. Adorno is fully aware that this effort is problematical when he notes: "Die Schichten. Adorno.Looking Back at Adorno's Asthetische Theorie 141 attention. "Ideologische Oberspannung verleiht dem Werk mittelbar seinen unideologischen Wahrheitsgehalt. There is no doubt that Adalbert Stifter was a conservative author. VersOhntheit und VersOhnlichkeit zumal seiner Spatphase sind outriert. In the case of Stifter Adorno sets the utopian element apart from the conservative ideology of the author.

its truth value (Wahrheitsgehalt) transcends this historical moment. He firmly holds that those works of art which deserve to be called gelungen. und damit der Rang der Kunstwerke. The category of negativity is crucial for Adorno's philosophy. for example Racine's tragedies. as socially accepted modes of artistic expression. Adorno argues in a key passage of Asthetische Theorie.e.e. Through its negativity the work of art secures its authenticity and sets itself apart from the convention of its time and genre. 285). This bias shows that Adorno's criticism is not just another form of ideology critique. Dadurch indessen fallen Wahrheitsgehalt. Adorno on the other hand. Qualitat nicht dem Historismus anheim" (p. In this respect Goldmann's theory is certainly closer to Marxist orthodoxy. since the category of autonomy is central to the . Goldmann's procedure focuses on a specific social and historical situation. Although the authentic work of art is grounded in its historical moment. das fortgeschrittenste BewuBtsein der Widersprtlche im Horizont ihrer mOglichen VersOhnung" (p. makes use of ideology critique in order to undermine ossified structures and reified thought patterns. This is the reason why Adorno never feels quite comfortable with older literature or music. truth value] verhalt sich nicht relativ zur Geschichte derart. is the equivalence of the advanced historical consciousness.. daB er. they indirectly also affirm the social status quo. i.e. Artistic innovation. for instance the situation of the noblesse de robe in France. genuine and excellent. This truth value. In the final analysis he maintains a base/superstructure model.. mastering the material.142 PETER UWE HOHENDAHL Nachsommer is its negation of the new industrial society. on which their rank ultimately rests is historical through and through. struggling against the general trend towards conformity. For Adorno they are less valuable because they belong to a specific social setting and are not fully autonomous. The aesthetic analogy of this advanced consciousness are the forces of production within the art work. seitdem das Potential von Freiheit aufging. They are still embedded in social and cultural traditions of individual social groups and classes. Their truth value appears to be more limited. Wohl hat eine solche Variation statt: und Kunstwerke von Qualitat etwa vermogen durch Geschichte sich zu entblattern. Against any relativistic notion Adorno maintains that there is an objectively correct historical consciousness. Indeed.. I quote once more from the same passage: "Vielmehr heift richtiges Bewuf3tsein. cannot be reduced to the status of documents which reflect the ideas of a particular class. "Er [i. It should be obvious by now that Adorno's theory summarizes the development of the last century. i. and then relates his findings to the structure of individual works of literature. The works of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries rely heavily on conventional devices and moreover fulfill immediate social functions. 285). Whether this philosophy can be applied to medieval art seems doubtful to me. Its examples are the composition of SchOnberg and his disciples and the evolution of modern poetry since Baudelaire. einfach mit der Zeit variierte. Adorno deemphasizes conventions because. the craftsmanship of the artist. in other words.

Sie wohnt aller asthetischen Erfahrung inne. Adorno's shorthand for two types of aesthetic theory. the critics must not confine themselves to subjective experience. Still Adorno is convinced that modern art and literature are in need of aesthetic theory. He defines the goal of aesthetic theory in the following way: "Asthetik heute mif3te iiber der Kontroverse zwischen Kant und Hegel sein. So Adorno. barbarisch ist. Appreciation as a mode of criticism is not enough. ohne sie durch Synthese zu glatten" (p. Then the question arises: How can we develop a systematic aesthetic theory when most of the traditional categories on which this theory was built have become obsolete? The fact that recent history has liquidated basic concepts like the beautiful makes any attempt to systematize aesthetics highly problematical. Because of this ambiguity the late work of Adorno tends to . clearly relates back to the tradition of philosophical aesthetics and turns explicitly against the concept of experience offered by positivism and pragmatism. in spite of his skepticism against rational discourse. ahnlich wie von dem des Systems oder der Moral" (p. nicht in blanker Unmittelbarkeit zu besitzenden Momente der Kunst bediirfen des Bewuf3tseins und damit der Philosophie. And Adorno was quite aware of this problem. wofern sie nicht kunstfremd. because it privileges rational discourse and therefore imposes its concepts on art in such a way that art loses its status as an independent mode of expression. because theory itself is no less historical than literature and music. 528). This brings us back to my initial question. Since philosophical criticism aims at the truth value of art. Nor can he return to Kant's aesthetic theory which is concerned with aesthetic experience. Kunst erwartet die eigene Explikation" (p. Especially the complexity of modern art calls for a theoretical approach. 493). This reference to Kant and Hegel. The task is to decipher objective meaning and this can be accomplished only with the help of a theoretical framework. 524). By the same token Adorno cannot hark back to a more traditional genre theory which rests on metahistorical norms. If we mean to take Adorno's philosophy of art seriously. we cannot evade this question. The philosophical concepts of criticism are at the same time indispensable and inadequate. although modernism and the avant-garde are no longer grounded in idealism. After I have outlined what Adorno has "to offer. In the introduction to Asthetische Theorie he states: "Vom Begriff der philosophischen Asthetik geht ein Ausdruck des Veralteten aus.Looking Back at Adorno's Asthetische Theorie 143 basic argument. Adorno notes: "Gerade die aufs Subjekt nicht zu reduzierenden. Baumeister and Kulenkampff have argued that Adorno could no longer follow Hegel's philosophy of art which places the emphasis on content rather than form. He suggests that the categories of idealism still help us capture the emphatic meaning of modern art and literature." we have to ask ourselves where we stand and how we relate to this theory today. locates the realm in which Adorno tries to work out the tension between theory and history.'6 Those elements of the work of art which cannot be grasped by theoretical concepts are indeed the most meaningful ones for Adorno who is distrustful of rational discourse. Adorno is fully aware of the dilemma.

This position allows Adorno to cling to the concepts of the work of art (Kunstwerk) and truth value (Wahrheitsgehalt) as his categories. This crisis undermined the belief in the autonomy of art which Adorno defended against Tendenz. it becomes the task of the authentic art work to stand in and defend the tower of truth. Wedekind. He takes most of his examples from works that were written or composed between 1890 and 1930. This animosity was partly caused by the frustration of the student movement. Eichendorff. The lack of appreciation which the younger generation showed in 1970 must be related to a broader phenomenon. Today. since the process of deciphering and preserving. has lost most of its emancipatory functions. The notable exception is his interpretation of Beckett's Endgame (1957)-a play which speaks very much to the mood of Adorno's late years. The radicals called for the end of literature and criticism. is not sufficient. They appropriated the arguments of Horkheimer's and Adorno's Dialektik der Aufkldrung that there is no room for genuine culture in advanced industrial societies and therefore rejected the notion of aesthetic opposition. however. although it does not share Hegel's negative attitude toward postclassical art. The students were looking for a leader in their political struggle and had to realize that Adorno was unwilling and also unprepared to step into this role. yet he fails to pursue this perspective in any rigorous manner. in the phase of late capitalism. is the only way in which truth in an emphatic sense can be revealed. for Adorno the last bastion that has not yet capitulated. This explanation. and Benjamin. such as Heine. This debate in my opinion is only the foreground for a deeper problem which had been lingering after World War II. Adorno's philosophy of art is closely related to the avant-garde of the early 20th century. Here and there he cautiously alludes to the end of the avantgarde. Between 1967 and 1970 West Germany witnessed an almost unparalleled breakdown of the literary system. Balzac. they discovered Benjamin's writings and followed his thesis that the autonomy of art. I started this essay with some remarks about the hostile reception of Asthetische Theorie in the early seventies. Benjamin had argued: "In dem . This vision owes its force to Hegel. His literary criticism favors authors of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. as Adorno claims. George.17Occasionally Adorno would play with the idea that the concept of autonomy of art might not be fully appropriate for the period that followed World War II. As I mentioned earlier. is the sphere where the deception of instrumental reason is without consequence. in other words criticism. Kraus. Seldom does he refer to later works. since the capitalist system had turned them into meaningless toys of the establishment. which was grounded in its ritual function. When philosophy. Genuine art. faded away with the advent of mechanical mass reproduction. I mean the fate of the avant-garde. however.144 PETER UWE HOHENDAHL identify philosophy and art. For Adorno art and philosophy are inseparable but not identical. it would be futile to suppress this question: did the neo-avant-garde still have the same critical edge which Adorno saw in the works of the previous generation? The New Left answered this question in the negative.

2' He takes issue with BUrger's presentation of Adorno's theory of aesthetic innovation. Not all critics and theorists have consented to Btrger's thesis. to overcome the gap between the aesthetic and the practical sphere and to regain the political impact by destructing the traditional aesthetic autonomy. Precisely .. By 1975 it was clear that this movement had failed to reach its goal. Adorno stresses the precarious state of modern art and emphasizes the negative impact of capitalism on culture. yet he maintains that the function of art has basically not changed since the advent of modernism. in spite of his hostility towards Lukacs. I cannot go into the political and philosophical reasons for this failure. They wanted to tear down the walls of the aesthetic ghetto and apply the arts to the political realm. in a response to BUirger. looking at the Frankfurt School from a stance which has modified some of the basic tenets. Martin Ltidke for instance. Adorno placed the emphasis on the raison d'etre of tensions and contradictions."'8 This thesis guided the theoretical efforts of the student movement. shares basic philosophical assumptions with him. according to Bilrger. i. We notice that Adorno's philosophy of art has become historical. To put it differently: Adorno's theory takes the institution of art for granted.e. has questioned whether Theorie der A vantgarde does justice to Adorno's category of modernism (Moderne). BUirger describes the avant-garde movement in terms of a self-critique which denounces the complacency of modern aestheticism. Adorno's aesthetic theory reads like a somewhat belated summary of modernism-a recapitulation which is not quite ready to accept the extreme conclusions of the avant-garde of the twentieth century. Compared with this radical stance where art moves towards its own destruction.20 It was the aim of the avant-garde movement. but it is ultimately beside the point. and finally tries to show that Btirger's critique is not really intrinsic. As soon as we focus on this question we begin to realize what separates our situation from that of Adorno in the sixties.Looking Back at Adorno's Asthetische Theorie 145 Augenblick aber.19 My argument is exclusively concerned with the critique of Adorno's Asthetische Theorie. da der MaBstab der Echtheit an der Kunstproduktion versagt. but rather inspired by the social theory of JiUrgenHabermas. I find Ltldke's rejoinder persuasive as an interpretation of Asthetische Theorie. Their disagreement about realism and modernism is based on a common notion of the autonomous work of art. While Lukics tilted towards a model of organic works of art. The literary system slowly but surely returned to the status quo ante. enables BUrger to situate Adorno's aesthetic theory historically. hat sich auch die gesamte Funktion der Kunst umgewalzt. In Btirger's analysis the sharp edge of the historical dialectic finally turns against Adorno himself. An die Stelle ihrer Fundierung aufs Ritual tritt ihre Fundierung auf eine andere Praxis: namlich ihre Fundierung auf Politik. Peter Birger advanced the argument in his Theorie der Avantgarde (1974) that Adorno failed to critique the concept of autonomy. as it emerged from the crisis of the literary system. Adopting a Habermasian position. BUrger convincingly demonstrates that Adorno. W. Following Benjamin.

Looking back at this period today and viewing it within the broader context of preceding and following literary history. would not fit. which was then historicized by Bilrger. i. He laments this development as a loss. ist daftir mitverantwortlich. There is no stringent correlation between social and art history.24 In a way. with Heinrich Heine as the prime example. is marked by a legitimate coexistence of different styles and tendencies. in the final analysis. because it would have deprived him of any meaningful approach to history. Still he refuses to unfold the implications of this argument. this argument has farreaching consequences. He was not prepared to accept this interpretation. This idea then. never covered more than a part of the actual literary production of the nineteenth century.146 PETER UWE HOHENDAHL because he stands outside of Adorno's theory he can point out that the logic of this theory is limited to a specific period of European art. that the production and reception of literature between 1780 and 1910 is basically determined by the concept of autonomous art. his thinking is deeply rooted in the concept of a unified historical process. seems to blind him with respect to the divergence of artistic trends and movements. In his essay "Das Altern der Neuen Musik" Adorno is ready to concede that modern music was more radical in its beginnings than in its later phases. especially History and Class Consciousness.22 Aesthetic autonomy as an episode of history: this perspective looks more familiar to us than to Adorno.e. It undercuts Adorno's key metaphor: the art work is no longer the sundial of history. While Adorno certainly rejected a reductive reading of history and was also skeptical of historical laws. since the project of the Enlightenment has failed. comes from the historical determinism which he inherited from the Hegelian and Marxian tradition."23 This reference to the objective spirit indicates that Adorno. Much of the Restoration period (1815-1848). The link between this tradition and the Frankfurt School is the work of Georg Lukbcs. is obviously derived from Adorno.. according to Btrger. To some extent BUrger himself still operates within the confines of Adorno's model. Yet I would like to go one step further. What is problematical in Adorno's philosophy of art. Although it may not be obvious at first sight. His major thesis. we realize that Adorno's idea of autonomy. der sein Metier besorgt. relies on a Hegelian model of history in which all strands relate to one single center. Those orthodox Marxists who denounced Adorno's theory as liberal ideology. failed to notice that they did not share his . in other words. however cautiously Adorno proceeded. The application of this model. The period after 1945. this argument puts the blame on history for not following the course that the philosopher has mapped out for it. ohne an der Bewegung des objektiven Geistes recht teilzuhaben. His remark about Bartok's later work is quite typical of this attitude: "Die Naivetat des Fachmusikers. leads him to the notion that the evolution of modern music is regressive because there is less personal freedom and an increasing amount of alienating bureaucracy in our society. On the whole I find Btirger's critique and its strategy sound and convincing.

As Russell Berman puts it in a recent article: "This historical scheme. for the new is only more of the old. R. "Ober die literarische Evolution" in Texte der russischen Formalisten. The following quotations from Asthetische Theorie are from this edition. Gesammelte Schriften. Bd. 1977). 41 (Fall 1979). 537-44. 3 For the development of the West German student movement and its impact on literature see Literatur und Studentenbewegung. W. 17 (1979). Kritik.Looking Back at Adorno's Asthetische Theorie 147 concept of the work of art and his approach to criticism. ed. 3-25. vol. 105-27. 1. 13 Adorno. ed. Recherches dialectiques (Paris. 94-103." in Adorno. 9 Gesammelte Schriften." in Adorno. pp. for the loss of history would imply a fragmentation of experience which would decrease its meaning. Pour une sociologie du roman (Paris." New German Critique. 393-431. Anson Rabinbach. pp. "Thesen zur Kunstsoziologie. Jauss and turn to a system of aesthetic experience? Both Bubner and Jauss. 17 (1979). This way they hope to regain a less problematical theory of art. "Resignation. Jilrgen Habermas. pp. 5 Cf. Adorno. 6 Among the recent contributions to Adorno see Richard Wolin. in his Kleine Apologie der asthetischen Erfahrung. Literatur in Umbruch. 10"Rede ilber Lyrik und Gesellschaft. pp. 1978). 145-50. W. but based their aesthetic theories on the same understanding of history: history as a dialectical process in which the concrete is by definition part of the whole. Nach dem Protest. Anrew Arato and Eike Gebhardt (New York. 48-68."25 Although Berman in my opinion underestimates the difference between Adorno and orthodox Marxism. 12 Jurij Tynjanov. 27 are prepared to eliminate history. Martin Ltldke (Opladen. 3-14. an attempt to retain the universal history of Hegel and Marx. Ohne Leitbild (Frankfurt. 11Lucien Goldmann. Jurij Striedter. pp. 11. 8 Adorno. evidently precludes the possibility of perceiving the qualitatively new. vol. 1979). For a precise account of the development of the political theory of the Frankfurt School see The Essential Frankfurt School Reader. ed. Cornell University This essay was first presented as a lecture at Dartmouth College and Smith College in February 1980. "Bewultmachende oder rettende Kritik-Die Aktualitat Walter Benjamins. Kleine Schriften zur Gesellschaft (Frankfurt. I would not be willing to pay this price." Gesammelte Schriften. 1970). Asthetische Theorie. ed. 1959). 1971). as Bubner26claims? Or are we to take the advice of H. "Critique and Commentary/Alchemy and Chemistry: Some Remarks on Walter Benjamin and this Special Issue. pp. pp. 15-29. 175-223. 1972)." New German Critique. Martin Ltdke (Frankfurt. vol. 1970). pp." in Zur Aktualitdt Walter Benjamins (Frankfurt. also Philip Brewster and Carl Howard Buchner. pp. (Miinchen. pp. Cf. 1969). What are we to learn from this critique? Does it mean that any project of defining aesthetic theory in historical-philosophical terms has become impossible. 2For a full account of the genesis of Asthetische Theorie see Rolf Tiedemann's "Editorisches Nachwort" in: Theodor W. 1964). For Adorno there is no philosophy without Universalgeschichte. 11. pp. "The De-Aesthetization of Art: On Adorno's Asthetische Theorie. "Language and Critique: Jtirgen Habermas on Walter Benjamin. 7 (Frankfurt: Suhrkamp Verlag." Telos. 251-80. . he has a valid point.

27-71. das Endspiel zu verstehen" in Gesammelte Schriften. 156. Biedermeierzeit. 140. Illuminationen (Frankfurt. Antworten auf Peter Burgers Bestimmung von Kunst und bitrgerlicher Gesellschaft. 281-331. 24 Dissonanzen. example Uwe-K. 1972). 26 Rildiger Bubner. Austrian-born Dr. p. 5 (1973). 20 Theorie der Avantgarde (Frankfurt. 188-202. Friedrich Sengle. 1962)." Neue Hefte fir Philosophie. Burgers Theorie der Avantgarde" in: Theorie der Avantgarde. Five million three hundred and fifty thousand of the coins have been minted. 21 Lildke. pp. formerly professor at Brooklyn College and now lecturing at New York University. Martha Steffy Browne.1972. 25 Berman. Ketelsen. 1971). W. vol. "Adorno. 1. "Geschichtsphilosophie und philosophische Asthetik. "Adalbert Stifter: Der Nachsommer (1857). 23 Adorno. 1974). 15 For 27 Konstanz. 157. p. Die Vernichtung der historischen Realitat in der Asthetisierung des btrgerlichen Alltags" in Romane und Erzahlungen des birgerlichen Realismus ed." Neue Hefte fur Philosophie. Marxism and Art. ed. 18 Walter Benjamin. (Frankfurt. p.148 14 PETER UWE HOHENDAHL Adorno. "0ber einige Bedingungen gegenwartiger Asthetik. 11. 1976). 83-109. 17 Adorno. Einleitung in die Musiksozologie (Frankfurt. pp. pp. pp. Martin Ludke. vol. 5 (1973). 165. Paul Michael Litzeler und Egon Schwarz (Konigstein. 38-73. 16 Thomas Baumeister und Jens Kulenkampff. 1980). (Stuttgart." Telos. "Die Aporien der materialistischen Asthetik-kein Ausweg? Zur kategorialen Begrtlndung von P. "Versuch. First Class. 1961). . 117-27. ed. Dissonanzen (GOttingen. Horst Denkler (Stuttgart. 34 (Winter 1977-78). pp. 22 Cf. Walther von der Vogelweide (1170-1230) is now memorialized on the face of a new Five-Mark coin issued to commemorate the 750th anniversary of his death. pp. Zu Adornos Asthetischer Theorie. p. 1980). recently was awarded the Ehrenkreuz fur Wissenschaft und Kunst. 9 See my forthcoming essay "Politisierung der Kunsttheorie: Zur asthetischen Diskussion nach 1967" in Literatur in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland seit 1965. 74-104. pp.

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->