Refine
Document Type
- Article (5)
- Part of a Book (1)
- Preprint (1)
- Review (1)
Language
- Italian (5)
- German (2)
- Portuguese (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (8)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (8) (remove)
Keywords
- Benjamin (8) (remove)
Institute
Starting from Warburg, the distinguishing mark of an image, considered as identity-difference of visible and invisible, is its offering itself as an implementation of a temporality, and at the same time of a memory that is immanent in the sensible structure of the image. It’s what we find both in Benjamin and in Adorno: in both cases, it is just because the image is marked by a “internal time” that it is able to have a critical function towards reality, and at the same time an utopian character that is all the same with its non-renounceable testimonial task.
Both Walter Benjamin and Theodor W. Adorno consider ‘aesthetical experience’ as an “image experience” assuming a power of images “to set free forces” directed to produce or support aesthetical-political (Benjamin) or aesthetical-critical (Adorno) requirements. Profane illumination, ‘thinkimages’, phantasmagory, dialectical images, decayed ‘aura’ and technicalized images in Benjamin’s theory of aesthetical modernity. Expressive feature or “mimetic” eloquence in nature and art countering reality, dismantled ‘aura’ in contemporary desacralized work of art, but also persisting ‘aura’ in its meaningful dimension in Adorno’s aesthetical theory.
As an exemplum of that kind of “modern” art, in terms of Adorno, Kafka’s work is marked not only by its strictly “realistic” character, but also by the unavoidable critical and testimonial value of that realism. According to this perspective, both in Adorno and in Benjamin the testimonial aspect of Kafkian writing – that is of a writing as “dialectical image”, as memory of the unfullfilled possibility – it’s all the same not with its symbolical or “epiphanical” aspect but instead with its “allegorical” one.
Do deserto de gelo da abstração ao filosofar concreto: correspondência Adorno-Benjamin (1928-1940)
(2013)
Trata-se de uma resenha crítica da controvertida correspondência entre Theodor W. Adorno e Walter Benjamin – dois dos mais expressivos representantes da chamada primeira geração de teóricos críticos associados ao Instituto de Pesquisa Social. Além de remeter suas cartas à respectiva experiência intelectual de cada um deles, este artigo busca oferecer uma análise fundamentada dessa instigante interlocução filosófica, para além da rígida bipolarização entre "adornianos" e "benjaminianos", que, via de regra, tem predominado em sua recepção especializada, dentro e fora do Brasil. Para isso, procura-se enfatizar o contraponto produtivo entre a Dialética negativa de Adorno e o projeto das Passagens de Benjamin, tomando como centro gravitacional o processo construtivo deste último trabalho – cerne tanto das afinidades, quanto das insolúveis dissonâncias entre os dois autores. Esta pesquisa tem o apoio da FAPESP.
This study points out the methodological centrality assumed by the notion of “physiognomy”, both in Benjamin and in Adorno, namely the idea that the forms of the works of art, and generally those of the visual phenomena, are direct “expression”, in a micro-monadological way, of an historical-social sense, not otherwise attainable. On the one hand Benjamin’s physiognomy shows a particular interpretative “openness” to its objects, on the other that of Adorno remains subjected to an epistemological model of “totality”, from the Hegelian-Marxian tradition, which risks compromising the hermeneutic efficacy of its own original philosophical approach.
The essay by Adorno and Horkheimer about The Culture Industry (in the volume Dialectic of Enlightment) represents for Alberto Abruzzese the starting point of a reasoning on the intellectuals' role, the crisis of humanistic and academic knowledge and the new “screen and network” society. The author uses The Culture Industry as a text on the western civilization's sunset and at the same time on the metamorphosis of mass cultural production. Abruzzese refers to those scholars who deepened these issues with passion and acumen. From Benjamin to Canetti, from Debord to Foucault, from Lukacs to McLuhan: Abruzzese analyses a whole research path in media culture with the frankness of a personal self-examination.
Die folgenden Überlegungen sollen zeigen, wie die vielfältigen Bewegungen des Films, insbesondere in gewissen neueren SpielfIlmen, die ich mit dem Begriff des expressiven, ethnografischen Realismus fassen möchte, an der Oberfläche >Denkbilder< im Sinne von Walter Benjamin skizzieren. Dafür werde ich zuerst das Verhältnis des Kinos zu den Ideen, d.h. auch das Verhältnis des Sichtbaren zum Unsichtbaren, darlegen und im Rahmen der künstlerischen Moderne verorten, um mich anschließend dem angesprochenen Modus des Realismus zu widmen, der den Körper der Filmfiguren ins Zentrum stellt. Mein Leitgedanke für diesen zweiten Abschnitt läßt sich folgendermaßen umreißen: In der Figurengestaltung, die durch eine exzessive Körperlichkeit bestimmt ist und also den Inbegriff des fIlmisch Konkreten, den primären Schauwert darstellt, wird das audiovisuelle Bild wie die Figur als Zeichen gesprengt. In der filmischen Bewegung ergibt sich so gleichzeitig die Möglichkeit zur Abstraktion: Liest man die Figuren stärker als Phänomene der Präsenz und weniger in ihrer Psychologie, verkörpern sie ein bewegliches Denken, das die Sprache umgeht, und konkretisieren letztlich Formen des Nichtdarstellbaren an der Oberfläche des Films.