Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (65)
- Doctoral Thesis (2)
- Review (1)
Language
Has Fulltext
- yes (68)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (68)
Keywords
- Adorno (68) (remove)
The paper discusses the problem of the possible relation between psychoanalytic concepts and social critique in the perspective of Adorno's social thought. The title refers to Adorno's idea that psyche as individual spontaneity has now lost the weight it used to have in the liberal era. As a brief introductory remark, I clarify the status of theory for Adorno, i.e., the circularity between interpretation and description as grounded by the nature of the social object itself. Then I analyse his core idea of “social objectivity” as an impersonal mechanism which is at the same time produced by men and reified, heteronomous for them, and I argue that, for Adorno, the discontinuity existing between individual and society prevents an immediate shift of psychoanalytic concepts to the social world: the example of fascism clearly proves that the determining social forces today, while instrumentally exploiting deep psychical materials, are not themselves psychological. In the final part, I show how, for Adorno, psychology and sociology nevertheless need to be mediated with each other, while avoiding the superficial synthesis the so-called “revised psychoanalysis” aims to, and I point out some similarities between psychoanalytic practice and social critique as conceived by him.
The events of 1968/69 initiated a dispute between Adorno and Marcuse over the (alleged) separation of theory and praxis. While Marcuse “stood at the barricades” Adorno sought recluse in the “ivory tower”. Marcuse and German students perceived Adorno’s move as departure from fundamental postulates of critical theory as laid down in Horkheimer’s 1937 essay. Adorno died amidst the process of clarifying his differences with Marcuse and thus the “unlimited discussions” between the two remain unfinished. This paper sets to examine how both Marcuse and Adorno remained dedicated to the unity of theory and praxis, albeit in different ways. I argue that Adorno did not separate theory and praxis; instead, he perceived the gap between critical theory and concrete historical situation. Adorno rejected simple and unreflective translation of theory into praxis. Hence his attempt to recalibrate critical theory. Marcuse’s and Adorno’s differences lie in their different evaluation of the student movement and this (mis)evaluation was context related. My second argument is that Marcuse/Adorno disagreement is partly caused by the absence of the two from the concrete historical context.
La experiencia del arte en todas sus variedades tiene siempre una dimensión cognitiva. También las experiencias estéticas negativas la tienen, muy especialmente en el arte contemporáneo. Éstas pueden estar determinadas por el contenido y o los medios de la obra o por los efectos de la misma. Lo que da lugar a una variada tipología de experiencias del arte con uno o más aspectos negativos. La teoría estética de T.W. Adorno nos proporciona diversas herramientas para repensar esta variedad de la cognición artística. En la medida que se trata de una estética negativa, categorías de la misma como las de carácter enigmático, autonomía, resistencia o comunicación de lo incomunicable, nos ofrecen vías para entender el lugar de las experiencias negativas en el arte contemporáneo y su función cognitiva.
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.
Die vorliegende Arbeit zielt auch darauf ab, aus der Analyse des Konzepts der Mimesis eine Reihe von theoretischen Kanten zu gewinnen, die als normative oder transformierende Gesichtspunkte betrachtet werden können. Das heißt, Standpunkte, auf die die Theorien der Gegenwart noch zurückgreifen können, nicht nur um eine diagnostische Analyse des sozialen Ganzen vorzunehmen, sondern auch um Vorschläge zur Veränderung des sozialen Charakters zu unterbreiten. Diese Möglichkeit kann noch als normativer Ansatz in Adornos Werk bezeichnet werden. Solche theoretischen Perspektiven sind notwendige Folgen der Analyse des Begriffs der Mimesis.
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.
Neste artigo, propõe-se uma confrontação entre a teoria dos signos de Gotthold E. Lessing, tal como exposta em Laocoonte ou sobre as fronteiras da pintura e da poesia (1766), e os dois ensaios de Theodor W. Adorno sobre as relações entre música e pintura (de 1950 e 1965). Pretende-se, com isso, demonstrar a presença decisiva de elementos da estética clássica alemã no pensamento adorniano do pós-guerra; em particular, observa-se o modo pelo qual a teoria racionalista de Lessing atua na abordagem dialética adorniana a respeito da irredutibilidade formal dos meios artísticos e das possibilidades de sua convergência. À luz de tal confrontação, discutem-se, em um segundo momento do artigo, os temas da conferência de Adorno de 1966, A arte e as artes, que, em certa medida, consubstancia a discussão dos ensaios anteriores sobre música e pintura. Assinala-se, nesse contexto, a continuidade da posição teórica de Adorno e se apresentam as diferenças entre o processo de pseudomorfose e o de imbricação (Verfransung) dos meios artísticos, segundo o filósofo.
La mala conciencia del éxito : apuntes sobre la Viena moderna y la estética de Theodor W. Adorno
(2007)
El presente artículo pretende examinar cómo algunas de las premisas establecidas en la Dialéctica de la ilustración, y desarrolladas por Theodor W. Adorno en su posterior teoría estética, hunden sus raíces en el panorama cultural del fin de siècle vienés. Se mostrará cómo la ruptura entre el arte de vanguardia y el gusto del público, convertido en consumidor, había sido ya expresada por el escritor satírico Karl Kraus, así como por el arquitecto Adolf Loos y los compositores de la Segunda Escuela de Viena. La paradoja que reside en la realización de un arte dirigido a un público que debe rechazarlo y la consecuente «mala conciencia» ante el éxito del artista moderno, quiere ser el núcleo argumental de este artículo.
Este artigo visa discutir os modelos de síntese pressupostos pela dialética negativa de Adorno através de aproximações de temáticas maiores da filosofia de Karl Marx. Isto nos permitirá qualificar melhor a natureza materialista da dialética negativa adorniana, abordando inclusive o impacto político de certas elaborações conceituais.