ma Te10s Karl Korsch Fevoutoney Theory Eted by Doegas Kelner ‘here growng nara a Europe and ho United Saosin ho work ‘Parma Gowan sal poten phlosapht Kat Koch is ought ovaos an llumnaingprepecive onthe proces of eoluon and rortoneyotiton recor hii ard ssh ret English enoogy ltt mon inpotat wigs Kelhers subsite itrodueton, he {istecmprshansie cia nrpretalen of Korechio appow nels ‘vanes ie and wok and ote i pola near ho sc00- pital eatnt n whic eos, ‘sa pages S145 Essays on Modern European Revolutionary History Toe Water Prescot Webb Memoria Lectures, No. XI Edted by Dede K. Lacke’ and Kenreth Roy Php “Ths colectn fosutow en valous aspects oF European revautonary Flo tem 78Btothe pesant Sarioy H.Pamarcscusses the ns Fesoten 11798: antnany Baker sides th efecto rene? rade ‘hon organza Fmand Pelt Denis Rea subjects Yon ‘avian evoorary ibvon Oya A Parra exarnnes eviews {!uropeenrevclutonaes on the Amicon Revolution, and GoDrgo Bar Caran. dr roe about the Couto! Juice ofthe Evopean , Ezonomie Coney eo pages, 8795 Alienation, Praxis, and Techne in the ‘Thought of Kari Marc Bykosis Aes “Tansied by Peralé Brazing repay abled Fresh in 196, nthe quesien of alonaton in Mare 34 pages, $1250, lnone othe standard orks Univers of Texas Press Bax7o10 ‘ast T8712 INTRODUCTION TO ADORNO'S “THE ACTUALITY OF PHILOSOPHY” by Benjamin Snow Daring the 1960s, Adorno’ “negative dali” became iendfed with the crea theory ofthe Frankfurt Iai, of which be had become the row illstzious member, Yee ical Uheory was never a fully aula Philosophy meaning the same thing forall the members ofthe Tastut. Tt trae more of et of shred sumptions that distinguished thet approach Tom bougen or “tendons!” theory" Within this common frame, the ethodology of individ members could and did vary. Tha, te term tical theory lacks historical precision, refering generally tothe Ise’ theoreleal orientation dasing the tiriyadd years of Max Horkbeimers Sirecionhip. ‘Akhoogh Adorno later cleiy felt comfortable being called a “etcal theorish" he Fit oulined the dixioguishing characterises of Bis own. tnethod sven years before be became a fll edged Inttte member. The ‘ccaion wat the inaugural lecture marking bis entry into the phileeophy ‘uly ofthe University of Frankfurt, “The Acuaiy of Pilsophy.” which ‘mained unpablahed und after hi death and appears in wanton here. ‘Aethetime (May 1981) Hoskhcimer had been che Istitue's director for oaly ‘Mfewsnomts, andthe new renation in real methodology that he brought {oitwas jst beginning te take shape. Of coure, even then HorRimer's eas Thad much in common with Adora's, due to heir clove peronal and intellect friendship. They hed both moved toward Marxiomin he late 1920s ‘uc the impact of dalectical matration led them in diferent directions “orkihcimer cured tovardshesocial eiences, while Adorno, instead of joining bis fend at the Inatate, chow ta accept an academic poston "The young Adoro saw helt raphilosopher and an arti. nota sal: scienin, and he wat then lerly more excited by the Herary criticism of Water Benjamin than by the empirical soil research projects of the Frankfurt Instat. Nor was the Inteutes evaluation of Adorno much more ‘rth’ ies worth noting that two artes which be submited vo the state journal the Zeer fr Soalorchung, inthe 1890s repeatedly signee aera ero en oe Ree Sat Ce estar am iia icecieiaiaiseririany dominance aE Ean te nay 2 ae yh withers oem s ery oer ate LoS See ees Seer ciinecanepmetenteur nonce Sateen sakesied pare Yost? An, lihogh te ade by Adora wich wre scped= "tn guacho Lage er Mu” (98) ad "Urher Jnr (ot) voting impor tote Sopen Ife ortf hosje etenry pe walr o le Tegudand Hae Ta emer snd he cl codon af mae eee then’ cons i cunt hw eae poe ice uncon ope caeg he mas ua Tn omcing Ste Gn fom Ara sclerotic a fasag i gain ot Tete phloepty timc toed mina Adora bor piepy wana suite ay! ba bone cone at nea weno (Coespenitl ent ptnpher bad lokiotheal oer toad uth Agha cr, at, ected trea apr fray, plwpy steps dice wa iinted or Hes EEIIS Tin obo of the ole tended ave ato ers) soc. lege pe of te aie (ena pop” a es ry seperate inert, henner eae ot Inu etn hk fhe al intron ee ey sad Sopa ren “Lins, diced» alc proc hi hoy. Indeed bdr sino Hench nee of ely [Sie are elopnenn be ullng of eh een ey “rapped emer im eet easiness ih ree oon aw Beale tia choenmtan sores ea arate: sees Se eee ae ee Fes jiictceaaepean nh aca pono Soccer iat as ge ee =o sy Rca ee etree ioe at ong Rae Seine ies meee ey reg etal arch tort [ove be er ted tes "eng swe pron ee pei ch Feit enieancetarunia site talon pty ae cr a os SS Se ee ‘Phlowpil hor and the pace ofthe nie een pens" Ud pal) ereopucTION 70 ADORNO / 5 Hegelian fashion, he belived shat truth rtealy challenged the cour of hit: tory rather than merging wth i Convinced chat socal contradictions ap peared win the material of phlowphyin a mediated frm and hat the p> ‘role, ike the arti, had to Beabuctatly moder,” grasping these contra: ‘Getions in er move current and Gi an age of daiategratin) their most ‘ntagonsc maniexations, Adorao tock up the struggles bequeathed bythe preceding generation efphiloropher. By placing himelfwiehin thelrrans, be prewed (he antaomie of thelr chorea tothe pont where she dialectical, egation of delim might be achieved. Thi challenge fom within, on the bass of pilroplys own inherent, hiorically developed logi, in oder to breakout of bourgeois eal and into revolutionary materialism was what ‘Adorno meact by “inmanen erie” andi constituted the substance of hi" idea of “ogi of disintegration.” "This program bound Adem to Benjamin more than to Horkhlmer. Al ‘ough lorteimes to, claimed shat bourgenis theory weretobeetfectively ‘halenge it had sabe fm "within," to him thismean simply that bourgeois theory could not he dimised by merely adapting an external, ant bourgeois ‘metaphysics Rather, oe ha to expose the gap between bourgecs theory and {a owa realy. In hs enaye Horaheimer confronted bourgeois conceps (of jistice, exon, individaalm) withthe actualy of bourgeois vce (fa jsice, iationalism, monopoly captain). pointed to the discrepancy ‘erwec the potential affluence of present productive forces and che exiting, teary, and demonstrated that Lbnsphlowph, fr example, betrayed i ‘intent of protest beaver, in funeoningas a suppor forthe ciel sats (qu, ieconverged with the very posi ie attacked Buc unl Adorno, Fertheimer did nor gt deepyfvolved inthe technical controveris of com temporary pilsophy.” Hence, although alos ll his ales inthe Ze [chef jor Svafoschng uring te 190s mere cxiques of bourgeois pil only they werent themsevepllosphica”in the strict serac ofthe ter Keeping ne fowt ouside the diipine, be traced themes and concept dt Ccipively through te hittory of the bourgeois era his hnowledge of itor ‘was ersperioy to Adori's~sothat heirscial uncion might be revealed. Pte tet surtng fs eh tele On the eee dea Sereteten CALNE Semecmict eerste’) = ene "TOPs Englshnomnary of Herthelne wings te sey 136, ac Martin Joy, The aca pnt ry of he ron el and hh et Roa, ‘Pesos ake: Ce, Brows 08 pe 7 hence ne oa Hee hor a hurt “er sale meatal ei ef des hip inca ‘ian epee." eere, "eon cer C8 iSelect cid ney oan hres tn pet Say arse se Se ai eee mer TE The dticion can be rated by comparing Adora rte eae he conceptus 7 reL0s ime hs ved ven hry ad i, sing on utes concwrcr dyn sone tha Br eaE attr fw Lala? tener ibe Die. hse ork onthce appecned ®By concn, Adorn sept te eal Metbcnmuctieefburgereseciy beth ey worse ours ical cepa wa ore Speck th Telia, tore cel stp han they. Tic fcenceteween ern and ordi methods imple i teen guna for dreiting 2 tees way. Hodtine ergot {oi St pipet mora entender devlped byte [Sy toute tacny tat he was achng™ Ase explained “I we fhe Thay isen hy anich he bogs ex awn order x ‘Sang’ fe competion, harmony of tress ano andi we flow {homo tee og eoncion they marie thee iver onteaiction and therctoe thet fel oppostion tthe Bourges oder" The wraacendent ‘SSpewottdentom wich allowed mera aint tween he and the sgh mained cecal Horeimer despite advocacy of empire tte: Adero wouter rea wih you te inary hig wes inigation trerinjnee”apahe ned that oie asin thease eie Fh wel borg neon: prince for hip ‘Eheraternia een Ate er Neo Gade Staelin ee Bedale ae poopy ory eanen’ dae st pm ser tm ripe By oe ‘pple cee reo In yo “eer” ter and vende) pce Gee “cee nd ‘ibs Suan as Se tog We Inge PE ae an ate we nen rn ill bt Sawn ERT eens opel sok ita) Bera Suni Horta et a ‘ithe. ‘ete hepa agreement. ee Jay, The Dulecical Imagination, op Inatpretng once mt ¢ eens of ecto spp ja 2 SecA pt el ec py ary on po, Sig fs tee Soe ney be, oa toe game aa ae nn ey ce "2 pee cal Serban cto rer gional paceman SSSR Rethenee intial sed Gose Thery” of ek peeiOe Teka” pH ce dnd ae hr Hea iin apy Roe ae Sie Toe che ete the mel tds nackte Eon have TibelipdideiCsay di ites own ‘RIA ote Maree pa wrpopuctioN 70 ADORNO 7117 If the impulse for Horkheime’ socal eric was an ehical, quai: religious humanism, Adorno war primarily concerned with the problem of| ‘wath Forhim, notsuesefrightor wrong. but judgmentsof ru or fale were ‘he necezary ground forthe vllation of theory. In anera wea metaphysis had lost allegimacy, Adorao kept asking the metaphysical question jt 38 Jnanera which bad proclaimed God dead, Horthmer refed to dismis che ™ moral problem of goed and ev. “Adorno, dhe exaplyilan with no fh a metaphysie: Hoeelmer, the smorain nth no bei i Divine Providence: to deseribe chem thus may in {act expres what separated ther intellectual pala not only inthe 190% bat throughout chels lvesas well” The dference accounts for Herkhelmers seater concern wth the gap between “imputed” and empiial proletarian ‘cnsiousnes fre considered that inthe moders ea, moral pans was ‘ccesry polities! prass. Indeed, the fallare of the proletariat to achieve evolutionty conscousness Beeame the fecur of the Intute research Alring the fie desde of Horkheimer' directorship whereas Adam's ‘rerrding interest inthe quetions of the tathof theory or the validity of art ‘rarer ally remove ftom the question of proletariat conciousnest eased the very ide of callectve revolutionary subject to dropout ef his Cheory = Sill the polarity between metaphyscian and moral should not be treed toe dcongly, a it wat never eategrial, Their work wan eel ‘complementary, and became increasingly 49 ater TSSB. Even f Adorno enka ep reas Sn Setter So arios ete Sey Sea peas et cae emeaeooeee eern Sree Seer te, eee eau naman ot haan Deano ogra acters sone prpranita te sine cats Seem Plonine we ta peed seen homin chaos te ema Se ca Ui Se aariehaa AIA Alc cas tet beech er em shone wedi ot SSirpuaphe nd ie Aofaben sos Ieee fr Satine GOS op: Pa gener aay ceria ett rane eer eae tt irl ‘sh Tice hr op op _ rae tn = “ler ture MRI med and deopenen i hoy reed erecriginal choice was to teach philosophy rather than to join Horkhelmer's Insitute, he acknowledged fom the fist the Gependeace of his kind of hiloropy onthe tndiogs of social scence research.” jst as Hescier {Considered speculaive theory indispensable to the proces of research. One ‘war doing socolgiel philosophy; the other, piovophical sciclogy. Moreover Horkcimer shared Adorn’ interest if not Me preoccupation, with the ‘atk of eatablsing « new ground for gialetical, materials. Tony. In fact, Adorn's correspondence males it cleat that hope of cellaborasing wi Horkeimer on this task was one reason why Adorno Tinally decided in 1988. to ola the Intute inthe United Seas, Ts interesting tha the deeiption of erica theory which appeared inthe Insite’ journal in 194) (nthe Gist English su) reflected Adorno’ more rigorous conception of immanent critic, as well aa very Benjainian Iotlon ofthe inductive method of arriving at erath2”indicsons that the ‘change nthe Intute’ theory at that tie was mach theres of power ‘hfe fllwing Adorn'sarsval at ie was a response to world even, while ‘Adornos oer paso remained remarkably onsite over te “Thisis not to ages that Adorn had no new ideas afer he age of thi “The theme of domination which became central in is writings after 1940 was et lee Add ht hy te ps enh Haase Ege tks poy dal to 4, ce aces bea aay Geents eateban Dnt se es SS ee arrancones MeowelC aac Mowe pence gre St pee ets ES, eaten cant Are tem tie dese We ve bah wal fal oF Vac serena tein rte ao ak Se iety Ateee drenae etme tee og SEC fers ace aera oes SE yet aes ee ee ae iva al “Thus Sender thee tiatraen aebas eho eticet et el hop fh aly iain Sh octane tie nee ebutiepiesreg ar tacrat mah sees ieee aaa ae sets estes ether ore Soa "ecient tment enya ne abide eters tne praaettereic ee miod Mcmetctedetemag npeesccieteetetn Sorcerers gemoes poayeer rae SSS eee GSE rset ne ta nrnopuerion TO ADORNO 7119 ‘eal indebted tothe Insitute’ theoretical and emplecal work during the 1880s onthe problem of authority —work which Adomo cared father in bisconribaton to The Authoritarian Personality Nor did hove ideas which ‘emalined constant in bis theory emerge fl blown Ike Minerva ot of his SJouthfl heads one Hat the seve fom i easly waitings chat his formulation ‘teonceps preceded his own full understanding of theis potentialities. Oly tft years of working with them wa be able wo develop out oftheir abstract pbs a fll, comeree meaning. "The gol of teansendng Melia by lading ir concept va thee on lave logic tothe pin of rel igudaten was one Hea to which Adorno lepereturing, Ashe wrote inthe prefaceto Negative Dialectic "To wse the strength of the sabjeee to break through the fallacy of constatve “Subjects thi wat the author fet be his task eer since he care teu hisown mental impulses" This was the mpetos for his oar study on Masel, Zor Motabni der Eskenntnitheore and twas the tak which he fis proposed for philosophy in hie inaugural Teetre Thuded, iti tempting to auggent that Adomo may have ad this later document Before him when he wat writing the inoduction to Negative Dialects, so great the similarity of ther phlowphical intent "The ‘Actalty of Philesophy” mart be viewed therefore as a key document for Invroducing the mot important concept in Adoroo's thought and of the “egatve dialectic nto which bis piowopy evolved “s_Sin herAchoi nd Fein Ma Hone (a: Fs Akan, 1980. we ne gt betes ht ele the dan ef steve yep ‘ot Rend nay se encanto 9) se a ples le ‘ibdiane stegted woe Hicinc cod el we “Fr woe tnen ess mac nae hon op te ih Sites Ia ad ied pie 256, 32 ln tert ae the ‘eotnen linn fh a, Titans Eject pa‘THE ACTUALITY OF PHILOSOPHY* ‘by Theodor W. Adorno ‘Whoever choot plilorphy at a profenion today must fi reject the jon that ever philosophical enterprines began wich thatthe power of thong is auficen to grasp he totality of the real. No using reason Could redacver Helin 2 realty whore order and frm Suppresses every ‘lnim to rensony only polemicaly docs reaton prevent ill to Ue koower 25 {oval realty, while ony im races aad rains ise prepared to hope that twill, ‘er come aca correct and jan realy. Philosophy which resents eal as, ‘Sach today onl weil velty and etermalies ie prevent condition. HOE (0 ery anmer, tach & funeon ie already implicit in the questionthat ‘Guetion which today it called radical and which realy the least radical of Ais the question of being (Sei) self, a expresty formulated bythe new ‘Sniolgial aeprint, and at, despite ll contractions, fundamental to the Heslat sperms, now allegely onercome. ‘This question astmes as posits of its annwer that being Melt Is approplae to thought and Enilable tot tha the dea of exsing being (des Seienden) ean be examined. “The adequcy of thinking aboot being as totaly, however, has degenerated and contequenily the ide of exiting being bas itself become impervious to ‘qeeoning for the idea could sand only over around and closed realy asa Sarin clear tanaparence, and hat now pethape faded from view fr all Une, ‘rer since the images of our ife are guaranteed uvough history alone. The {es of being bas become powers in pilaophy; i fenothing more han 2 ‘empty form-prncple whose archaic dig helps cover any content Swhauoerer Te fullneof the real, arta, doesnot et itelf be subsumed Under he idea of beng which nigh allocate meaning tot; nor cam the Hea ‘fein being be bale up oto elements fray. I (dhe idea of being] is Tet fox ping, and herby scan to the totality of the real esac at "The history of pilwophyielf bears wines to this. The evs of idealien comer athe same time aster in plenophy's pretensions o totaly. The ‘Seloneme rata [natonorneus reason ]this wa the thesia of evry ideale ‘prem war suppored wo be capable of developing the concept of reality, nd “easy oh wei tomas erg paee eres ‘pela 8c ih Bejoiened wDi Hitinsce ot eh Senne kee ees Scent tree caionaacneianda eS Seemann Sige ac ae aloe sae Sigal steam ‘me acreaurry oF mosoniny / 11 tn fac al reality, from out of ial. This chess has disintegrated. The Neo- “ansanism ofthe Marburg Sehoo, whieh labored most renuouly to gain ‘he content of realy from logial categories, has indeed preserved feltcontsned form asa stem, Dut has thereby renounced every ight over ‘eal and has withdrawn into a ermal region in which every determination Of content is andemoed to virally dhe farthest point of am unending ‘roe, Within ideal, the paiion oppeed to the Marburg School, Simmels Lebensphiosophie wih is prycologinic and ierationale orien: ations, has admiedly maintained contact with the reais with which i eal, but in doing ha lo ll claim co rake sense out of the empirical world which presen upon‘, and Becomes resgued tthe ising” as a blind ‘Ind unelightoned concept of nature which ivan attempts fo aise the Cinder, lusory qamcendence of the "more than life." The voucher ‘German School of Rickert, ily, which mediates between the extreme, purports that it values” represent more concrete and applicable philo- {pial rera than the ideas of the Marburg School, and has developed a toethod which ve empirical realy in relation, however questionable, 10 hove vals. Bu the locus and sour of the values remains undetermined: they le beween logical nese ad poychologeal mpi somewhere, ot binding within realty, nottanaparent within the mind, an ontology of Sppearances which sas lite able to bear the question of value trom-whence iithat of valueforwhat. Working apart from the atempts a grand. ‘esoutons of deli philowophy are the setentsie philosophies, which give ‘p from the begining the bai dealin question regarding the constitution ‘of reality and, all within the frame of 4 propadeutcs of the separate, Soveloped dacplines, grant validity ony to the natural sienees, nd thereby ‘mean to potest svure ground in the given, be it he nity of consciousnes (Geansternsasommentang), of be ie the research of the separate Sisplines, Losing contact with the historical problems of phlosophy, they forgot that in every sumption thee own statements are inextricably bound to historical problems andthe hitory of thowe problems, and are nec to Be ‘esahed independent of then Texted nt thi scation the effort ofthe philsople spe wich is Jevowa tout i preveat day under the name of phenomenology: the effort, following the diteration of the ies yer and with the fxrament of ideals, the autonome radi, co gain a transsubjectve, binding order of ‘being Its the deepest paradox ofall phenomenological inteacons that, by ‘meas ofthese categries produced by mubjetve, ost Carteian thought they sive to gain just that cbjetvisy which thee Intentions eigiaally ‘oppoted, Ils hs no aclden that phenomenology in Huser took precisely Ts serting pont fiom tranacendestal ideal, and the Tate products of ‘Phenomenology ar al the lew able to disavow this rgin, the more they 7 t2 once it. was the authentically productive and Graf dicorery of Hiueri—mote important than the exeraally more effective method of, ‘Weseniha fencrtalituton] that he secogized in che meaning of thems m0s semana jn, easton, Satria er tt can et Se ne ee Spates tra ne fra en eta arate : elite STE te Teen ce elm eos eR cer red peta a sqatem of transcendental idealism, ‘which Huse lial formulated: Mat seen Sm ee Seat ecto ae ee Peta enya "a daa uo hen ey ls le ‘ip oan tS ‘ee Secmn a eg Hl Be Ra oe an penn i ‘che sphere of that which is adequately within his reach. The ee eae suet at cn heey pn got al cae toners ean lant enc cotradict. thi interprston, The ‘Sey ean ey ch we al he ie vee sowerlenness of transcendence, hen one can certainly sstr9ns, A wet ee as nen og ce ee et on i Sen es gece fae Se eta fe nem sed ea a ee gem ‘wherein i ot a an te en ae on rt i cea remem i ae ideas end rea, he overcoming. of which el anes pre, aie maceabmetaphyil aie iva a (Drang) with a relationship. eee hush abandoned reality lina impale [THE ACTUALITY OF PamLosornY / 128 tothe eae fea tha ack and problema, an este om for only the wes wace of hope. Wit Sdcer, matsa pienomertogy es ‘ductal ete ull Only the meta of he imp eh oe fem the etlgal design the ely renuning etry oer which ha {Sey fonda hi of Wen at coat ne rewed unter teat of ts sltrvocaion of phencnolgy, Teidggers tery so proc cl diteenly thn apart fe Be pathos ofthe epning which i eornble or excel et. With Heeger ar es os pbltnd wring, te queion of cte eo and be being bn ren eplced by eben, The calnge ‘finacevaloagy ntact thereto ey win he dep ‘Thich sacs for hart woo able net in he open fle ef feos cen pi moet loge fal back on presale lata plan fora objec ctl Frodets by Were tkng” the cient poy of ten Krcepeerd) Bur Kicheguad plan i epualy showered, No Gly freon cigs ben eo ech Kegel arbre ‘Erect tet eph which pened vp tow Sat ofthe depo stich tjectayetleatl Sucre dene ncheerorned he sign of bingmichinsjecty ico Saigo hell Te know of 0 Sih way to ceape ts helah yc than bys “eap ic weneeneace ‘ch rota nether od peat of hgh lt c,d ‘hich tars igh dcrmiaion prado that hve he abetne ‘Sod mut sciee aif an ttn blend, te cote of ecient for sje. erie sete he Bible word On ru the amumpion of sn ental wodlecical an hsercaly prelate “cay ahaa (whande) realty Meegge ale to evade sch & consyurne: Honea leap and undneeal nepuon ga) ot sihectne being ir ao Heeger imate Jacfcaon, wih the we Siem tat he aay of he exng thse Voronin. whereby . Heidegger remains bound to phenomenology and breaks in principle with ‘ierkegard's idealist speculation, avoids he transcendence of ble which is irsped spontancouly with the sacrifice of subjective mind, and inkead Fecognices solely the transcendence 10 a vali “thas Being” (Son) in death. With Heidegger's metaphysis of death, phenomenclogy seals a development which Sceler already inaugurated withthe theory of fmpalie Te cannot be concealed that phenomenology ison the verge of ending In pecuely that ital againae which ic originally decated battle: the tranocendence of death with Simmel i ditingused from Heidegger solely in that itemains within psychological categories whereas Heidegger pes a ontological ones, However, in the material fel, for example inthe analyst of theansity phenomenon, i would bebatd to fad a suze wey to distinguish tem. Tn accordance with thi interprsation of the tamiion of phenomeno: logy ine. italm, Heidegger could evade the second reat theat 10phenomensiogial ontology, that posed by histories, only by ontlogsing Fo tel. ping i forth a hat which constituted the exsence of man srheeby the fort of mates phenomenology to dicover the eernal in man puradovialy solved an eeral only temporality remained. The claims of henomenclogy aze tated only by thor eategries, from dhe able rule [towhich phenomenology wanted thought to be exempt: mee eabjectivity nd mere temporal. With the concept of "thrownness™ (Ceworfentei). Subic i set forth asthe ukinate condition of man’ Beng, life by ielt ‘Decors at bind and meaning ar only ie was in Lebensphilesophi, and (esth i tncapableof slong a posve meaning here ss there. The aim to tuly made by thought is throwa back upon thought ie, and i it {ally shatcred there too. AI that i needed ie an understanding of the fuvrownes ofthe Heideggeran existential eateporie of towne, anit, death, whieh are infact no able to banish the fullest of what sling, lind the pre concep off” completely wee the Heldeggeranontclogical ‘lueprint. Hy appearances are not deceiving, then wth this farther erclopment, phenomenolgial philwophy ie preparing for its own final {Esegraton. For the acond time, plosophy sands powerless before the {quentlon of beng. I can no more deseribe being as fee standing 2nd funda Thentl than i wat able ever to develop it fom out of tell have dacused the most recent history of philosophy. not fora genera imtellecual history orientation, but because only out of the torial tntanglement of questions and answers doce the question of philosophy’ ‘Terunlity emerge precy. And that ply means after the failure of fons fora grand and etal phils: whether philosophy sel a al actual. By Steualtyendentood net tt vague "macariy or mata on the basis cf non-binding conceptions regarding the general intellectaalstuaion, but ‘uch mote: whether, after the failure ofthe last ea efforts, there exis a ‘Mequacy between the phioropie question and the possiblity oftheir being Srowered at all; whether the authentic resus ofthe reent history of these problems is the enential woanaverablly of the cardinal philosophic ‘uslons, The quenion i in no way thetoecal, but should be taken very erally, Every plosphy which today does not depend en che scutty of ‘rent intelectual and social conditions, but instead upon truth, wes ioe {cing the problem of Eguidstion of phitooply. The siences, particlary the logical and inathematical aclnces, have set about the Tigldaton of Philosophy. wich am earnestness which Iavdly ever existed before. This fxmentnea fap significant Deease the eparate sciences, including the mathematical natral sciences, have long ance rid themsches of the ‘turaliie conceptual apparatus that, in the 1 century, made chem Inferior to ideas theories of knowledge, and they have totally annexed the ‘contents of cognitive cite, With the lp of sharpened rts, cognitine methods, the mot advanced loge am thinking af the new Vienna School Beit proceded from Schick, abd l now carried 9 by Carp and Dubilay in deve connection with Rowell andthe logical analyes—s attempting 10 TUEACTUALITY OF rumLOsOPHY /- 1238 cep all authentic, widerseaching bnowledge of experience in exclusive {seine ad tre to search forall proposions which in any way reach out Teyond the cirde of experience and ie relay, solely in txuolgis, in analycalpropoiions. According to thi, the Kantian question at the onsitation of a pron syntete ut would be tery mesninglest, ‘becaute there iaolutely no such hing a this ind of judgment: every move beyond that which i vetifable bythe power of experience i prevented; hilwophy becomes tlely an occasion for ordering and contoling the eprate since, withow being allowed to append anything esetal from ilo theirindings,Asocited at complement and supplemect tothe ideal cf such sbuclatelyacerife phlomphy-not, be sure, for the Vienna ‘School, but for every view which want to defend philosophy from the claims ‘lan exclusively siete method—while in face ite recogni that thi ‘him ia concep of plosphy as an artform, whose lack of binding force tefore ruth nexeled only by tft with art and it own aesthetic ero. It would be beter ut guide ples ance an forall snd ‘isole i ico the particular dtcpines than to come ts ald with 2 pode Heal which means nothing ore than poor omamental cover for fly thinking Te mat be end here that the thse that all philowophie questioning in principle an be disotved into that of he separate sciences eve today inno ‘ray piloepaly prsuppostionles asi makes vel outro be. I would ‘Srp ke to recall wo problems which could not be mastzed on the bats of this thes, Flot. che problem of the meaning ofthe “ven” sell, dhe fundamental etegry Of ll empisidsm, which maintains che question ofthe ccompanying subject, which in tom cam only be answered lworco- Philosophical, because the subject of che given i not ahistorical iden> tical and transcendental, but rather assumes changing and historically comprehensible forms. This problem is not even posed in the frame of ‘rplro erica, Including che mom moder, but intend it naively accept the Kantian point of departure, The other problem i familiar i, bat tobved only arbitrary and without any atingency. The problem of the tuknown conslouses, che alien go, can be made accesible fr empitio throug analogy, composed subsequently on the basis of one's fn experience, whereat in fact the empinioereal method already ‘neceelly sues whnown consciouiess in the language ie Bas at ‘lupo Solely by posing thn problems, che theory of the Viena Schoo is draw into precy that phleophie continuity from vehich it wanted £0 Gistance if Ye that sae nothing again the extraordinary importance of this School Ivew ie significance let in cht i might have macceflly onverte pileepy Sato scence than In that it rigorous formalaton ofthe ‘Sienieim phlosphy sharpens the contours ofthe contents of phiesophy fot mabject to loge and the eparate sciences, Philosophy wll not be ttersformed int scence, but under the presue of she empiist attack it ‘eilbanish from itself al quesoning which, as specially sientfi, belongsefvigh to he eparnte ences and cond poopie queioning To nt trean to rgge tu plea soul ie wp o even slacken ht cmc tri eprne ene ich bas aly epee, and the naiament of hich counsemong them unas renlo che mst een elect ute the cone. Phlowpiy wil beset undertand the content snd concicion of rblens ont within te prea anlng ie spun sce, als ot be slowed a aif bore ic Scene by acing th “rsh” m hed nd mediating pon tem {fom wnt dnee Rather pcnophe roles wil le ses ad ina ‘Sain srs tnedecbly,oced wn te mot ops quero of te Spree tenee, Pnophy Singles fem cenen ne bya ghee {Gilet pec, athe Uonal vow al today sume or throught {acon of He categorie so though the neta of fs materia: The Sena fener more the spuae ainsi lig at feet a and deopen ndings, ndesrcblesod vate, ste pleophy peers tefl dig ch tgs pom 83 ther neele uring Pliny ps the Se of seer (Msnsche) frac thet of phloephy fe nepetatn, ln thi semaine he pe ritap the cvelningprsdor: pilopy pent ad with dhe eam Trinh, nt proce nerpeinely witht ever pomtang are yO Inepreaton; btng move genre than Teen. dppesting aces wre he idle gure of hat whch exits and ther aoe ‘Thehisory of plnphy nating other ian the Naor of uchenvinng “Thu etchar few “en,” ma alway begin one ae hereto anwcrdo wet he ks tvesd which eae tine Rave mn, 0 {trough wich he neste pers completed whieh could want te Ser ino 8 ex flow, dhe. ha tee oferpreation inno way cole wih the problemof esnng ith whichic is monly contd, It uc ot he ak Erphoophy eo procoe sch a meaning Potiey, Yo porcay ray a Speanngl and thereby uly he Every ech jutiendon of at wc iiss yrokibed bythe fegettaon ia being ane Wa our images of fesse alg mye welb Gotten oie re Ti cemtlnedfeealy an oot of mere lnage of pecepon The txt ‘tick plop bao rend incomplete, comteccoy snd fragmentary Ted mech in fay be anered upto bind demons fat pete te ing otto ak preci othe we, By eding om beer let 0 ‘ogni the demonic ocean to bah the A the me ne teen ‘inerprettion dcr not mean fo nigger second, secret wr whieh reopened up through an sup ofappenancen The dai ofthe nell tle swd temples overall by Kant ad onl fom the pos nin penpectve was aribtcd to Pato, ow eave o ews tl ie {tnauiedsod open othe nod hs uation beter stcibed fo the ea ‘trearch than at of ierpetson~the ds of teaeare, which amare Shevedacton ofthe uenton gen snd own elements whee eng [ME ACTUALITY OF PuILOSOREY 127 would seem nocetary exept the aniwer, He who interprets by searching Dehind he phenomenal world fora work nist (Welt an ik) which for isfoundaton and suppor, ace mistakenly ke srneane who wants ofnd in the riddle the reflection of «being which lies bind i being neored in the side in which ee comaind. Tastead, che function of rile olin i tolight up the vidal esa ike lightning and to negate (aufeuheben), ot to pent behind the riddle and imiae t. Authentic philrophie interpre: tason doesnt mest up wih a feed meaning which alteady ties behind the (Goein, but lights it ep suddenly and momentary, and consumes tat he Stine tine. Just at siddlesolvng i constuted, im that the angular and opened clements ofthe question are brought ino various groupings long ‘nagh force to clove together ina igure out of which the sluion spring {neh wile the question iappearr—so posh has to bring its elements, ‘hich ie recives fom the sence, ato changing corstelatios, of, t0 sy i ‘wih les strologia sd acenifically more caren expresson no changing Vial combinations, until hey fall into a figure which can be read a8 a rower, while athe tame time the queslon disappears. The task of lslovphy is ott earch for conceal and mane intentions of realy, {Buc to fnterpet unintentional realty, in that, by the power of consructing figures ov images (Bilder). out of te ilted cleats of reality, i negates (Gute) questions, the exact arculaion of which i the tsk of wines? a task to which philosophy alvayr remains bound, because its power of §laminaion notable to catch Bre oderwise than on thee slid question, Here one can dicorer what appears af such an astounding and strange ify exiting between Snterpreie philosophy and that type of thinking hich moe strongly reject the concept ofthe imteatinal the meaning {he thinking of materialism. Tnerpretation ofthe nintentional through & Jocapostion ofthe analyieall elated elersnts and illumination ofthe eal by the power of such interpretation i dhe program of every authentically ‘tera knowledge program to which the materialist procedure does all the more jae, the more i dances ieelf fom every "meaing” of it ‘object and the les it rlses tue to an plc, quasreligious meaning. For Tong ago, interpretation divorced il from all questions of meaning or, in ‘other words, dhe nmol of plosphy are decayed. I philbvphy mus eam {o renounce the uetion of totaly, dhe implies hat it must lear do ‘chou he mabeli fonction, in whieh for longtime, atleast in ideals, Ue parila appeared to represent the generals Ie mut give up the grea problema, the se of which once hoped fo guarantee the totality, whereal {lay between the wide mets of big question, interpretation slips away. If toue inerpretation succeeds only throagh a jurtaeston of che males ~ ‘ements, thenit no longer bara roe dhe grea problems inthe waditional Sense or only inthe sent that ie Gepoits within a eonerete finding the tral, ‘question which that finding prevouly seemed to represent symbole. EGE War Brin, Unfrangderdicn Troe (Berk, 129, MA eneuty ptt qiw 7 mets ‘construction out of sal and unintentional elements thus counts among the ‘anc stumpsors of plosophic interpretation; tarning to the "refine ofthe Dhsca wold” (Ahab der Bicheturygel) which Freud proclaimed, has ‘aly beyond the vesln of peychounae, jas as he earning of progrsive Toca philosophy to evnomic bs valid not merely due to the empirical Iapeririy of economics, but ju as much Because of the immanent euitemenis of pilewphi interpretation iuelf. Should piloopy today ask hhut the abselat relationship beween the thingin-itelf and appearance, rt granpa more caren formulation, about imply the meaning of being, Arild cher revain formal and unbinding, or would spl Wel into ‘maldtade of posible and arbitrary world-view postion (wltanichanicher Standpunkie) Corpor, however give an example as 2 thought expesiment, without sopping ite seual feasibiixy—suppost it were posible to group the aeecnuet a vocal analy in ich armanner that he way they cate together {made s figure which certainly dos ot lie before ws organically, Dut which ‘host Sat be pied: the commodity structure. Thi wou! hardly sole the ‘Riginivel problem, not even in the seme that womehow the social ‘onan might be revealed under which the thing-in-iuef problem came {iro eximenee, as Lakics even thought the solution tbe? forthe truth ‘Content af» problem iin principle dllerent from the historical and pyco- {ogi conditions ou of which trom. Butt might be poate that, fom a ficient contraction ‘of the commodity structure, the shing-in-ivel ‘robiem abeoltey Sisappeated. Like a oare of light, the torical figure of nmodity and of exchange value may fee dhe form ofa reality, the hidden ‘mesning of which remained closed to inveigason of the thing-inituelf ‘Problem, because there is no biden meaning which could be redeemable From sone ime and frctime hiorial appearance. I don't want gre ny material staternencs bere, but only point out the dietion for what T Porene athe task of plowphie faterpretation. But even simply the oret formulation ofthese ata would exalt evra sings cencering ‘Dore question of plop prindple, the explicit expresion of which I Toul ike to avoid: Nome tis: that the fonction which the traditional Flop toquiry expected fiom met-hiswical, spmboially meaningful ews i accomplaved by inner hiarially constituted, nonsmbole oes, ‘With dis however the atonship beowen ontology and history would abo ‘be dferenly posted, im principle, without thereby allowing the device of futologzng hstory as totality in the form of mere "hinorcy.” whereby Chery pec eeion between interpretation and the objet would Be lo Gh ee a mashed historcem would remain. Instead ofthis, acording thy conception, histcry would no wore be the place frm which ideas arc, aed out viependenly and disappeat again. On the concay, the trial nage (geehichiche der) would atthe same time be deals idea, the configuration of which consisted intentional truth (nentonloe EGF Geog Lad, Gi wd Racmbwnstnn (189> rucacroatsry or aosoray / 179 Wakrhet, rather than that truth appeared in iory a8 intention. But break olf the hooght here: fr nowhere are general statements more qoenionabe than in 2 pilsophy which wants wo exclude abstract and {everal statements and fequzes them only in the neces of tranon. esd, 1 would lie to point out a second ewenil connection between Ihnerpriv philosophy atd matsaiom Tsaid thatthe riddle’ anver was totthesmeaning” ef the riddle inte ese that both could ext a the same Time, ‘The answer was contaned within the iddle, and the vile portrayed ‘nly sown appearance and contained the answer within uel ax acention Far mote the anger stands in srct aie wo the riddle, needs co be Constructed puto the riddles elements, and detoye he ride, which i not ‘meaningful, but meanest, a8 soon asthe answer is decisively given to "The movement which occurs in this proces is executed in earnestness by nateriasm, Eamnesnes means bere that the answer does not remain {Dumakenly ia the Cosed sea of owed, but that praxis is ranted tif ‘The lmerpretaton of given realty 2nd is abeltion se connected to each, tier, nos ef course, he seae tha reality enegoed in the ence, Bat that ou ofthe constevtion of » configuration of realty the demand for its [reaitys}tealehange saya follows prompely. The change-cansing gesture of {he riddle proces not le mere seston ae such—provides the image of evolutions to which mateialin praxis alone has acces. Materialism bas Inemed ths relationship with a name that it philosophically certified: Uisectcs Only dialectical, x scoms to me, i philosophic fnterpretaon ‘posible. When Mara reprotched the philosophers, saying that they had only Tirioulinerpreted the world, and contrpesed to them thatthe pont was Tochange then the sentence receives it lepcimaey no only ou of polical prats Bt also out of philrophie dear. Only inthe annihilation of the ‘een i the authenticity of philoropic Itepreation fist succesfully Grover, and mere thought by Hef eannot accomplish this [authentic]: {hevefve the anna of the question compels praxis ei operDuous to puate our expliily » conception of pragmatam, ia which theory and ‘Pas etwine with each afer a they do inthe diac Tam cel conscious ofthe ienpesiity of developing the program which 1 presented yuan impoasbility wbich stems ot ony fom the limita of ‘ibe, bur exis generally, Beease precy a «program it doesnot allow {tel tobe worked out in completenes and generality. Neverthe, Tleay fecit sump dutyto pve you several soggenions. Fst” the idea of philosophic Interpretation doesnos shrink back from zat Tiqidation of philesophy which tome seemosignlled by the collapse ofthe la philosophic elims to teal. For the srt exclusion ofall ontological qusionsin the tradionl verse, the veidance of evarian general concep, abo perhaps the eoncep of map, the «exclusion of every conception ofa self sulicien ality of nd (Ges), or of sell contined "tory of mind”; the concentration of plop queens ‘On concrete lane horial complene from which they afe not t0 be Adrached —these postulates indeed become extremely similar to dsluionim / mos ‘ofthat which has long been called philesophy- Whereas at least the official) ‘Contemporary philosophic thinking har long bept its dinance fom these demands, ori any cae has attempted asimilate them singly i @ watered down form, oe ofthe fist and most actual asks would appear to Be the {auleal eich of the ruling philosophic thinking, Tam not afraid of the proach of unfruiulnegaisy~an expres which Gored Keller once ‘Gursacted asa "gngeibread expresion” (Hefferhuchenausdruct). If ‘hilesphic interpretation ca infact oly prosper dialectical, then the fist istecal pic of tack given by a plop which cultivates precisely hoe protons whove removal appears more presingly necessary than the ltadhion ef anew aniwer to 20 many old ones, Only an essentially Undlacedeal phlospiy, one which meat atrial truth, could mainain that the old problems could simply be removed by frgesting them and. Maing fr from the begining. In fact, the deception of beginning is recy that which in Hetegger®pilonophy comes under eels fst of En Only in the strictest inlecial communication withthe most recent ‘elation temps of philsophy and of phlowphle terminology ean real ‘Shang in plilowphic conslonrnes previ. This communication wil have to {ate ir specie scientific material preponderantly from sociology and, 28 the iterprene grouping proce demands, erstalize out the small, unin tenons) clement whe are noneibeles sll bound. to philosophic materi ‘One ofthe most powerfl academe philosophersof the present [Teidegge] fata wohave answered the question ofthe tladonship between philesophy la sociology somewhat Uke this: while the plhloopher is he an architect ‘tho presents and develop the blueprint of howe, the scllogst sik the at burglar who climbs te wal fom outside and takes out what he can ‘each, Lwauld bellied to acknowledge the comparison and to interpret ‘ose the fonction he gave saclelogy for pibophy. For the house, eis ‘ighouse, has long since decayed i foundations and threaten nt only to ‘esr al hove nie , but eo caus al he things to vanish which are sored ‘win i, mach of which i inseplacable. Ifthe cat burglar scale these Thing, te singular, ded often half forgtien things, he does a good (eed povided that they ae only tecued be willscrcelyholé onto ther for long, since they ar for him ony of cane worth. Of cours, the appreciation of socnlogy by plesophic interpretation requires some limitations. The point of interpretive plilowophy B to construct key, before which reality Frlag open. Arto the size of the key categories, they ae specally made 9 ‘rder. The old ideal chove eategoris too large: so they did not even come ‘lo to fitting the keyhole, Pore piloropie secclogm chooses them £0 fall the key indeed goes in, but the door doe open. A great aumber of {ecilopias carry nominalim s far thatthe concepts beceme 10 small to Sign the ethers with themscves, to-enter with them into a constellation ‘What remains isa vas, inconsient connection of simple there deter rations which seals at every copitve ordering and in no way provides 3 [THEACTUALETY OF amLOSOPEY / 131 ceiteal citeion. Thu, for example, the concept of cat is mulled and, ‘placed by countess descriptions of aparate groups so that they can m0 Tanger be atranged int overlapping uni, alhough they infact appear a8 ‘chin empire! reality Similarly. oe of the mos important concep, that St ideoiogy# i robbed of hs eating edge by defining i formally ao the Srrangemert of catent of conslousess in regard to particular groupe, stout slowing the question to arise any longer ast the rath or fi of The contents themselves, This scology daniieskself asa Kind of general {elas the generality f which ca be no more recognized by philosophic [terpretiion tan can ty eter generality, apd forthe erzecton of whieh Dhilsophy posieses a suiiene means in the dialectical method. In rogtd co the manipulation of conceptual material by philsophy. 1 sgenk porposely of frouping and Wial arrangement, of constellation and CSestrcton. The bso images, which do not conattte the meaning of ting (Dust) but deve and revive ite queedons ae nt simply self-gven, ‘Ty donot orgenically ready in hinory; no showing (Schou (Hassel) or Tneulcon a equiedto become sare of them. They are not magically sent by the gods fo be taken in and venerated, Rather, they must be produced By numa Lcngs and ae legitimated in the lst analy alone bythe fact that atcyepotlce about them in striking conlusiveness (iden (Huser), Tere dicy divoree themaches centrally from the archaic, the mythic beeype (Ur bid) which pehoanalslighs upon, and which [Ladwi] ‘lages hopes to presmrve ar eategoris of out knowledge. Should they be ‘Sjalen to dhem in a hundred characteris, they separate themselves a {ke pot where hove [archetypes] describe cei atalitic orbit in the beads ct human beings. The historical images aremanageable and compel, {hutuments of human reason, even there where they sem 0 align themseves hjectvely, as magnetic centers of objec being. They are modes, by Scan of which tert, examining nd tetng, approaches a reality which ‘fuses subi to as, jetean imitate he partern ofthe model every tine, provided tha patterns printed corecy- One may sce here an tempt 0 Fetish thar old concept of pllomphy which was formulated by Bacon Sd pasionately contended around the te of Leni, a coneepon which Feat devised asa fads that of hears ineenen [at of invention}. Every fother conception of models would be gnosic and indefensble. Bot the “rgenon ofthis avs nvenend! fe fantany. An exact fantasy; fantasy which ‘ies scl within he material which the cence present toi, and reaches ‘beyond them only in the salle aypecta of their arrangement: apeca ranted, which fantasy ioelf out originally generate. If the idea of Phlosophic interpretation which ied to develop fr you sald then can Eeexprened athe demand to anser the quetons ofa pre:given reality each, Snes through a fanny which rearangee the elements of the question ‘iehou going beyond the circumference of the elements, che exactitude of Irhich has a conral in the disappearance of the question Kiev frig el Main, Hanoy and Cepia (92ms ros 1hoow ll wel hat any, perhaps most of you are nein agreement with wat Tam prsetng here Not ely acne (king but ll more Tandamntal entlogy contacvs my conviction as to de erent ts of DPhlooply. But shiaking whch ai treatin mith the object, and no at ity elated In Tac, ccstened to prove ight to cx moby reftng te objecsons which ae wold agaist and which comider themes efrabl, bt by i rune, the ese in which Gothe toed the erm, Novel, may Til eres adres a word tothe mo nrrem objections, no shave onstac chem, bet othe preventative of fandamentl ontology format them, an as they ft ed mee formulate {he theory acorn owe up ut ther, Lhd proceeded wll the Faso pile iteroretaton. “The cena etion that my conception, to is bused ona concept of mans rp Beng (Entoudes Deyo, out fd ana eure the power of hay, alge shen fom puting thse invariant frthcleny and It tvm cowed ited 1 benowed upon hires facciy, or te acrangerca, the power whch actualy belongs to the Invariant, soa fine principle, pscced ily wih toil Yroducd. tring’ detoyed. in philosophy every permanent anda Tbtimted cto an asa ltr game (dee), an tensor the prime php [phlnpby of fe principle] io ey ia verona rae totes objects oly by admitng of their coment but I defend se phlompiiclly legitimate. 1 wil net decide ‘Sethe «pac coneptm of tan sd beige atthe bate of my Teor, bat do deny the nce of esotng to thi conception. Ie is an Hea demand, hv an secate being. only pre Chup bye San acerpich, eva Caren demand, which belies le ees) trae Ahntng tthe fom of ts houg presupposition ah axioms. However, Pievophy which no longer makes the auton of autonomy. which 99 ager tee reat ote grovel inher, bt nad asics lays ed fovever da thea ging of sconomeos reason lees hugh a being hich nr adeqeate ot nd ano be id ot rata ave eal {ich pln wil ot go the entre pa othe rational presapesiocs, ‘tc inend wll op tere bere edule ray reas in pon eI Proved farther io the rg of presupposition, deni wl be abe to teach hem ony formally, and ate price fat cay in which i cal tans ac ad The breakin of what nied; hovever, cca conrete orca hari hc tad the movement of tought is ‘rewppoio The produchty af thinking ale to prove iif ely {inital eval enretenen Both thought and Mor come to cmmaniction within the modch, Regarding fone to achieve + form forvuch communication, 1 lady pat up with the reproach of enya, The English empiric called hr philophie writings ey, a4 did Lei, Benue the power af fey dale rea, pen wich ther inking sock, contoured apo hem he ko experimentation Not nt ‘TUE ACTUALITY OF PuOsOPAY / 131 the pos Kanan centry wa the rk of experimentation ost, along with the power ef tality, Thus fram a form of great philesophy the esay became an Ftsgnifcant form of aesetc, in which concretion of interpretation foneticles taker refuge a8 appearance (Schein), over which authente ‘hilosoply in the grand dimersons of its problems a Lag since Toe. Aispos Te with the disintegration of all scurey within great pilosphy, caperimentmahes its enty, ie hereby tr onto the Limited, contoured and Ciuybolic interpretations of echo ets then that dows not appear to be ondrmnable, provided thatthe objet are choven corte that they 326 (Cal Forth mind (Cet) iindeed net capable of producing o grasping the totality ofthe real but tmay be pase to penetrate the deal texplode in mina the tate of merely exiting reali. Working Papers in Cultural Studies 10 ON IDEOLOGY “The fist part of the 1677 lve wal nays elfornt concepts of isology ‘atin the met tadion, The theorie comideed wl inde aru ‘Anse, and Pouantaat Asis of ee ls af presantod jo the seond jure These Invche the ieclopeal spats othe ers in education, wetaue EF tact! notions of working as eommurity’ and commentary onthe problems of ology in mast sesthetes, £1.75 AVAILABLE APRIL 1977 ‘CENTRE FOR CONTEMPORARY CULTURAL STUDIES UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM BIRMINGHAM 1S