Overall Argument
for this Appendix
My main focus in my analysis on Adorno in the
body of the text is the claim made by Adorno at the end of CCS that “to write
poetry after Auschwitz is barbaric” (34). This claim has been interpreted in a
myriad of ways: as a question (Brodsky 55), for example, and as a seemingly
self-contradictory claim about the concurrent possibility and impossibility of
talking about atrocities (Mandel 222-3).
Although some of these interpretations appeal to Adorno’s general argument in CCS that culture is complicit in the perpetuation of a highly problematic society (Mandel, for example), even these interpretations ignore the nuances of Adorno’s argument and miss what culture is for Adorno in the first place. In my analysis, I appeal to the common themes in CCS, yet I draw them seemingly out of thin air. In this appendix, I will conduct a critical summary of CCS in order to first argue that Adorno’s overall argument is that, even as culture and cultural criticism appear to work at reforming Western society, they implicitly support fundamental elements in it.
This implicit support is problematic because some of these elements (specifically society’s push to turn everything and every person into a commercial object) are prerequisites for atrocities like Auschwitz. I will also argue that Adorno’s argument is based on a few main premises. First, the forces that drive contemporary Western society and culture are implicit and ignored by everyone, including critics and cultural critics. This ignorance is problematic for Adorno because it allows the perpetuation of a problematic society and culture, despite the fact that the contemporary world can be described in terms of a historical process of dialectical movements, such that every aspect of the world contains some level of contradiction.
Thus, even though culture and cultural criticism are complicit in society, they also have the potential to alter their own ideologies and those of society. Adorno thinks that culture and cultural criticism should work to alter their ideologies because these ideologies support the perpetuation of contemporary Western society, where this society is overwhelmingly commercial, such that people increasingly view all other people (and all cultural artifacts) as nothing more than objects with more or less commercial value. Tied to this objectification is society’s preference for the total/universal over the particular/individual, where (for Adorno) both are important.
Although some of these interpretations appeal to Adorno’s general argument in CCS that culture is complicit in the perpetuation of a highly problematic society (Mandel, for example), even these interpretations ignore the nuances of Adorno’s argument and miss what culture is for Adorno in the first place. In my analysis, I appeal to the common themes in CCS, yet I draw them seemingly out of thin air. In this appendix, I will conduct a critical summary of CCS in order to first argue that Adorno’s overall argument is that, even as culture and cultural criticism appear to work at reforming Western society, they implicitly support fundamental elements in it.
This implicit support is problematic because some of these elements (specifically society’s push to turn everything and every person into a commercial object) are prerequisites for atrocities like Auschwitz. I will also argue that Adorno’s argument is based on a few main premises. First, the forces that drive contemporary Western society and culture are implicit and ignored by everyone, including critics and cultural critics. This ignorance is problematic for Adorno because it allows the perpetuation of a problematic society and culture, despite the fact that the contemporary world can be described in terms of a historical process of dialectical movements, such that every aspect of the world contains some level of contradiction.
Thus, even though culture and cultural criticism are complicit in society, they also have the potential to alter their own ideologies and those of society. Adorno thinks that culture and cultural criticism should work to alter their ideologies because these ideologies support the perpetuation of contemporary Western society, where this society is overwhelmingly commercial, such that people increasingly view all other people (and all cultural artifacts) as nothing more than objects with more or less commercial value. Tied to this objectification is society’s preference for the total/universal over the particular/individual, where (for Adorno) both are important.
In
addition to these premises, to understand Adorno's argument, it is necessary to
understand what he means by culture. While examining the above premises, I will
argue that there are three primary aspects of culture, as Adorno understands
it. First, culture has a specific ideology as a result of its interaction with
Western society, namely that all cultural artifacts (just like all other
things) are nothing more than commercial goods. At the same time, culture also
considers itself a product of only the mental world, when in reality it is
rooted in both the mental world and the material world – it is a product
of both a human mind and physical materials outside of that mind.
It refuses to admit to its relationship with the material world in order to avoid the guilt of being complicit in the societal problems that Adorno has identified (i.e. its objectification of everything and everyone). Yet, it is precisely because culture is rooted in both the mental and material worlds that culture is also a form of cultural criticism, which means that it has the power to rebel against Western society even though at present it only serves this society.
It refuses to admit to its relationship with the material world in order to avoid the guilt of being complicit in the societal problems that Adorno has identified (i.e. its objectification of everything and everyone). Yet, it is precisely because culture is rooted in both the mental and material worlds that culture is also a form of cultural criticism, which means that it has the power to rebel against Western society even though at present it only serves this society.
