critical theory society

8/7/2019 Critical Theory Society

1/27

C"PY'lgluedMalenal

CRIT ICALT H E O R YAND AREADERSOCIETYMAX HORKHEIMERERICH FROMMLEO LOWENTHAL

HERBERT MARCUSEFREDERICK POLLOCK

T.W.ADORNOJURGEN HABERMASSIEGFRIED KRACAUERWALTER BENJAMIN

EDlITDAND WITH AN INTRoDucnoN BYSTEPHEN ERIC BRONNER AND DOUGLAS MACKAY KELLNER


2/27

Published in 1989 byROUlledgeAn imprinl of Routlcdge, Chapman.nd HaiL Ino29W.'IJ5S""cl

Publi,hedinO"'alBrilainby

CopyrightClI989byRoullcdge,Chapm.nandH.II,Ino

All rignIS re.. rved. Nop ... ofthi,boo~ rn"ybe reprinled or reprodud or utililOd inanyform or by an ekclIonic. meohank.1 or OIhe, me,ns, now ~nown or here.flor in"emed,inoluding phOl""opying and recOiding. or in "ny inform.tion "orngc or ret rievalsystern.withool permi


3/27

Contents

AcknowledgmentsIntroductionSrephen Eric Bronner and Doug/lis MacKay Kellner

I The Institute for Social Research and irs Original ProgramI The State of Contemporary Social Philosophy and the

Tasks of an Institute for Social ResearchMa.xHorkheimer 2S

2 Psychoanalysis and SociologyErich Fromm 31

3 On Sociology of LiteratureLeo Lo ...emhol 40

4 Notes on Science and the CrisisMllXHorkheimer s a

5 Philosophy and Critical TheoryHerber/Marcuse 58

lJ Fragmems of a Theory of Society6 The Jews and Europe

Ma.xf/orkheima7 State Capitalism: Its Possibilities and Limitations

Frederick Pollock 95


4/27

8 From Ontology 10 Technology: Fundamental Tendencies oflndustrtalSocietyHubulMarcuse 119

9 The Culture Industry ReconsideredT/'f!l}dor W.Adomo 128

10 The Public Sphere: An Encyclopedia ArticleJurgn, Habermas 136

III Cultural Criticism and the Critique of Man CuhureI I The Mass OrnamentSiegfriedKracauer12 Lyric Poetry and Society

Thuxlor W. Adorno 15513 Surrealism: The LIS1 Snapshot of the European IntelligentsiaWalluBenjamin 1 7 214 Historical Perspectives on Popular Culture

Leo Lowem/w/ 18415 PcrennialFashion-c-Jazz

Theodor W . Adorno 199IV Critical Theory and Psychology

16 Politics and PsychoanalysisErich Fromm

17 Introduction 10 The AuthoriwriUlI Per:wnlllil}'Theodor W. Adorno e/ al. 219

18 The Obsolescence of the Freudian Concept of ManHerbnlMflrcuu 233

19 The Crisis of PsychoanalysisErich Fromm 247

V Crilical VisionsTheses on the Philosophy of HistoryWailerBenjamin

21 Notes on Institute ActivitiesMat Horli:heimer '"

Copyrl{lh,edMa'c"al


5/27

COPY"ghtedMate"a l

2 2 S ocietyTheodor W. Adorno2 3 Liberation from the A ffluent S ocietyH~rb('TrMllrCUSf'

267276

24 T he R eification of the P roletariatHerbenMarcuse 288

25 T he Tasks of a Critical Theory o f S o cietyJiirgMHlJbermas 2 9 2

Annotated Biblio);l


6/27

IntroductionStephen Eric Bronner andDouglas MacKay Kellner

CrilicaITheat)'amISociery:A Reader provides a selection of particu-larly important essays by memben; of the Institute for Social ResearchFounded in 1 9 2 3 in Frankfurt. Germany. it became the first formallyunaffiliated Marxist-oriented institute in Europe. Under its most influentialdirector. Max Horkheimer. its members anempted to revise both theMarxian critique of capualism and the theory of revolution in order 10confrontthosenewsocialandpoliticalcondilionswhichhadevolvedsinceMarxsdealh.lntheproceSS~"crilicallheory"ofsocielyemergedlode3Iwith those aspects of social reality which Marx and his orthodox followersnegfected or downplayed.

The term critical/heory itselfwas only coined in 1937. afterthe majorityof the Institute'S members had already emigrated to the United Statesfollowing the triumph of Hitler. The concept was initially a type ofcode which. while differentiating ns adherents from prevailing forms oforthodoxy, also tended to veil their radical commitments in an environmentthat was hostlte to anything remotely associated with Marxism. But theterm stuck and soon was used to encompass and define the general theoryof contemporary society associated with Max Horkheimer. Herbert Mar-cuse. T. W. Adorno. Leo Lowenthal. and Frederick Pollock-as well aswith Jurgen Haberrnas and others who later undertook to continue thetradition

We have assembled this reader in the belief' that critical theory canpromote important developments in socialtheory today. Growing dlssatis-faclion with the academic division of labor and the dominant views in thevarious disciplines have led 10 inneased imerest in both theoretical andpolitical attcrnativcs. Criticallheoryoffe.rsamul1idisciplinaryapproachto society which combines perspeclives drawn from political economy.


7/27

21 StophenEric Brnnncr.nd Dougi., M"cK.y Kell ....rsociology. cultural theory. philosophy. amhropology. nd histor)', IIthusovercomes the fragmentation endemic to established academic disciplinesin order to address issues of broader interest.An antidote to the frequently noncritical quantitative approaches withincontemporary social science. critical theory also provides a potentiallymore useful and politically relevant alternative thancufTently fashionableapproacheslikee~istenlialismandphenomenology.poststructuralismandpostmodernism, as we!! as the various versions of humanist idealismwhich are periodically recycled and repackaged. By contrast. criticaltheory maintains a nondogmatic perspective which is sustained by aninterest in emancipation from all forms of oppression. as well as by acommitment to freedom. happiness. and a rational ordering of society.Eschewing divisions between the humanities and the social sciences. itthus sets forth a nonnative social theory that seeks a connection withempirical analyses of the contemporary worldFundamentally inspired by the dialectical tradition of Hegel and Man.criticaltheoryisintrinsicallyopentodevelopmentandrevision_1nherentlyself-critical. it offers a well-articulated standpoint for tbematizing socialreality-unlike the current postmodem theories which attack all fonnsofthought inan undifferentiated manner. Against all relativisticandnihijistice~cesses.criticaltheoryseeksancmancipatoryaltemativetotheexistingorder.

The diversity of interests and insights among critical theorists made rhechoiceof texts for this bookparticularly difficult. Our selecnon was guldedby an attempt to emphasize the most characteristic theorists and themeswilhinthetradition_WealsosoughttobalancethehistoricalimportancI'of any given text with its contemporary relevance. Finally. withoursacri-ficing intellectual quality. we tried to choose texts which were somewhatless esoteric than some for which the critical theorists are infamousThis reader focuses. for the most part. on the "inner circle" of the firstgeneration of critical theorists. which consisted of Horxhcimer. Adorno.Marcuse. Lowenthal, Pollock. and Erich Fromm. Yet we have also in-duded texts by Siegfried Kracauer and Walter Benjamin, who were tovarying degrees associated with critical theory, as well as selectionsfromJurgen Haberrnas. who is clearly the most significant member of theSC(;ondgeneration.Unfortunately.spaceconstraintsforcedustoomittextsby contemporary critical theorists such as Oskar Negt, Alfred Schmidt.Claus Offe. and Albrecht weltmer. We also could not include works bysuch significant members of the Institute as Karl Wittfoge!. Franz Neu-mann, One Kirchheimer, Franz Borkenau, and Henryk Grossmann. aswell as related theorists like Karl Kersch and Ernst Bloch, who were


8/27

occasionally supported by the Institute or-in Korsch's case-cpublishe dbyitsjoumaJ.

This volume has been designed both to provide an imroductionto crincaltheory and to inspire the advanced student. The selections have been org antzediruo five secticns whlch. we believe. highlight the most significantaspects of critical theory. Pan I opens with some key texts which set forththe original program and research agenda of the Institute for Social Re--search. This section. like the others, contains important texts which havebeen translated into English for the first time and which should provi deaninfonnativeintroductiontotheprogramand,copeoftheoriginalenterprisePart II isconstructedaroundthetheoryofsocietywhich the Institutes oughtto develop. while Part III auempts to elaborate the cultural criticism an dcritique of mass culture for which its members have become justly famousPart IV contains provocative contributions 10 their project fora new soci a!psychology, while Part V advances certain "critical visions"' which attemptto link critical theory with politics and provide perspectives for future in-quirywithintheframeworkofthislradition.

Each section is organized chronologically, and many of the essayscomment on previous positions set forth within the Institute. Yet evenwhen they address similar issues. it will become apparent that sharpdifferences existed between members of the Institute. In fact. criticaltheory is 1I0t a single doclTine or unified wortdview.dnstead. itis a set ofbasic insights and perspectives which undermine existingrtruths'tev en asthey foster the need fora theory of society that remains to be complet edIn this spirit. while not systematically evaluating the psitions se t forth ineach essay. our introduction will attempt to illuminate the socio-histori calmatrix wherein critical theory evolved and indicate the relevance of basicissues addressed with respect to the project as a whole

Our first section contains essays concerning The Institute for SocialResearch and its original program. When the Institute was founded in1923,the "heroic" period of the Russian Revolution as well as the prolet ar-ian revolts which followed World War I had come to an end. The WeimarRepublic, established following the abdication of Kaiser Wilhelm IJ. wasinitially threatened by uprisings from the left and the right. By 1923.however. the period of revolutionary upsurge had waned and intensediscussion had begun concerning the"failure of the revoluticnvan dvrhecrisis of Marlli_'m. Many members of the Institute maintained ties withthe various parties of the Left and-under the leadership of the AustrianMarxist Carl Griinberg--dcveloped a research program centering aroundthe character of the labor movement. the capitalist economy. the newexperimems with planning in theSovicl Union. as well asmose vsubjec-


9/27

41 StophenErk Bronnc,"nd Dougl.s M.oK"y Kclll>t'nve" conditions which subverted a proletarian victor),in Gennany, Duringthe period of Grunberg's tenure, a rather orthodox Marxism penneuledthe [nctitute and was carried overv to a greater or lesser degree, in manyof the writings from the thirties. Nevertheless, a shin in direction rookplace when Max Horkheimer became director in 1930, following Grtin-berg's retirement due ro a strokeThe son of a German industrialist. a philosopher by training, Hork-heimer was also interested in sociology a, well asa wide runge of otheracademic pursuits, ltwas under his leadership that the Institute developedthe project for which it would become internationally renowned. A highlyeffective academic entrepreneur. hegatheredaround himmany individualswho would eventually achieve fame in a variety of disciplines. UnderBerkheimer's direction, the Institute undertook 1 0 develop a theory ofsociety, and it is fitting that the first selection in our volume should beHorkheimer's previously untranslatcd inaugural lecture "The Stale ofSocial Philosophy and the Tasks of an Institute for Social Research'Here, Horkheimer defines the tasks of the Institute and sets forth themultidisciplinary program which would characterize It. Presenting theInstitute's position against more mainstream conceptions of social theoryand science. Horkheimercallsforamultidisciplinaryimegralionofp hiles-ophy with the sciences in the hope of providing a theoretical instrumentfortransfonningpolitics, society,thceconomy,andeverydaycontempo-raryIife.Oneofthedislinguishingfeatures-andnoveities--ofthenewapproarhwas its attempt to develop a critical social psychology. For thisraskvthelnsutute appointed a Freudian psychoanalyst. Erich Fromm, wbo wouldbecome one of the most widely read social theorists of the postwarer-


10/27

disciplines. ilcontained articles by Fromm on psychology, by HenrykGrossmann and Pollock on economics. and by Adorno on music, as wellas a host of others. From this issue. we decided to include L eo Lowenthal'ses~ay "On Sociology of Literature" and Horkhcimer's "Notes on Scienceand the Crisis." Both of these articles argue lhat application of the Marxianhistoricalmatcrialistapproachtothcrelevantdisciplinesprovides the beststarting point for inquiry and research

Lowenthal, who would become an important critic of literature andmass culture at the University of Cali fomi a at Berkeley. argues againstdominant idealist and philological positions. Instead, he favor.; an ap-proach which interprets lexls and determines the meaning of culturalobjects within their social and historicalcontext. Refusingtc siudylitera-lure es a self-contained object. Lowemhal was unable to provide either anexplanation for literary transcendence or nonnative aesthetic criteria inthe manner of Lukacs. Nevertheless, he became 0 pioneer in the develop-ment of the sociology of literature-c-as well as a member of Horkhetmer's"inner circle" who played n key role in man~ging Institute affairs

Horkheimer himselftcnded to publish the ~cy programmatic statementsofthclnstitute. "Notes on Science and the Crisis" is one of those pieceswhich addresses a par t icular historical situation and it s impact on the Insei-tUle'srescarchagenda.The"crisisrefcrstotheworldeconomicdepressionof 1929. whose persistence was producing ever more massive unemploy-ment as well as social and political instability. In his article. Horkheimere~plainshowscienceandtechnolugyarcpotentiallycmancipatoryforcesorproduction even as they are fettered by the irrationality of the capit alisteconomic system. The implicit presupposition is that a more rational formofsocialorganizationwouldu~scienceandtechnologytodramatical!yimprove human life. It was only in their later work that members of theInstitutewouldassumeamorccrilicalstanceontlieroleofscience.technol-ogy,andthenOlionofprogresswithwliichbothbourgeoissocietyand'"actuallye~islingsocialism"(RudolfBahro)identified

Even initially. however, the Institute's theorists believed that only bycalling the most basic assumptions intoqueslionwould il become po ssible10provideanadequa!ecriticalthcoryofsocielY, Ina 1937essay,"Ph nose-phy and Critical Theory." Herbert Marruse pointed 10 the imponance ofcritical rationalism Iorihe lnstirute'stheoreticalemerprise. lndee d.alongwith Hor~lieimer's classic "Traditional and critical theory:' this essaycontains one of the most comprehensive programmatic statements of tlielnseitute's euernpts tosynthesiu philosophy. the sciences, and a radk alpolitical perspective.

Wheretl1lditionalsocialscicncesbascdonpositivistassumptionswishto exclude normative concerns from social scientific inquiry, and banishthem to the realm ofmClaphysics or obscurantism, Marcu ..;ehighlig htsthc


11/27

61 Stophcn Eric Bronne' and Douglas MacKay Kcl)r.e,importance of concepts such as reason, freedom, and happiness forerit lealtheory. Recognizing the need for empirical research. [hough ullimatelyunable 10 define its role within the new project. Marcuse emphasizes thatspeculative reason is the yardstick with which to measure the degree ofsocial rationality or irrationality inherent in any given form of social orpolitical organization

Despite his inability 10 specify institutions by which an emancipatedorder might reproduce itself. Marcuse is aware that freedom is not lic enseand that a rational ordering of society will universally expand the oppo rtu-nittes for the exercise ofindividual autonomy. Such notions are crucial tothe tradition of philosophical idealism which Marcuse wants to link witha materialist heritage whose importance derives from hs concrete emphasison individual happiness and well-being. A materialist stance sugg ests tharfreedom. h~ppiness.andreasonarenotspiri!Ual features of the individualInstead,theyareconcretepolentialitiesforsatisfactionthatdemandreal-ization.1t isthis commitment to the "good life" which critical theoryplaces at the forefront, and then uses to call existing repressive c cnditicnsinto question. Thus. according tothe new standpoint. a materialist projectof social reconstruction requires a foundation in critical rationalism whichalone can forwardthe utopian projection ofa free societyThis utopian commitment of critical theory points to the fervent desireof tts proponents for an emancipatory ahemative durtng a period whenthe Great Depression was spreading throughout the capitalist world andfascism was threatening to engulf Europe. In this vein. it is impossible tooverestimate the importance of fascism for the development of criticaltheory. Since most of the Institute's members were Jews and Marxists.the Nazis quickly forced them into exile. in 1934,afternumerouscom pli-cations. its headquarters were finally moved from Frankfurt to ColumbiaUniversity, in New York, which offered office space and institutionalsupport. Upon coming to the United Slates the Institute's members begantheir inquiry into the roots of the fascism and the manner in whichsocializinginstitulion5--especially the family-induced individuals t0accept even the most irrational forms of social and political authority. itwas also while in exile at Columbia University that the Institute's membersoevetoped their particular style of "ideology critique" which analyzes thesocial interests fdeofogies serve by exposing their historical roots andassumptions. no less than the distortions and mystifications which theyperpetuate. Indeed. this was the time when the Institute began to program-matically form its conception of critical social theory

Pan (J is emitlcd Fragment~ ofa Theory of Society" because. in reality.the Institute never produced that comprehensive theory of society wh ich


12/27

its members sought. While they provided elements for a lheory of lherransitiun from markeUentrepreneurialto new fonns of stale and monopolycapiealism.uheir posuions cn these developments were quite dive rse andtheir various insights never coalesced into a coherent theory, Conse-quently, though these fragments provide some of critical th~ory's mostirnportamccntnburions. the failure 10 articulate a more fully developedsocial theory points 10 the limilalionsoflheoriginal programsket ched outby Horkheimer

The section opens with the first English translation of Horkheimer'sessay "The Jews and Europe." Written in 1938. as Hitler was preparingfor war, it prefigures many of the basic concerns which would later definecritical theory even as it shows how a certain orthodox Marxism remainedpart of the original project. Consistent with the generalthinking of theInstitute's members, the essay views fascism as an outgrowlh of capimlismmoving from its liberal to its monopoly stage; thus. in an of t-quo ledpassage, Horkheimer writes: "Whoever is not willing 10 talk about capital-ism should also keep quiet about fascism'

Although the topic nominally involves European Jewry, Horkheimerbasicallyimerprets anti-Scrnitisrn in terms of its usefulness for monopolycapitalism. In considering it as a mere ideological facade for the elimina-tion of an entire sphere of circulation, defined by small banks and thevesligesofamarke1.Horkheimergrosslyunderestimalesthecentralityofanti-Semitism to the Nazi projeCl-a flawed interpretation that later Insti-tute studies would reclify. The essay, however, also renects Horkheimer'sdeep despair over a future in which he foresaw mass-mobilized groupssubmitting to new fomlsoftotalitarian domination.

All oflhe Institute members were in agreememrhat fascism had emergedfrom a capitalism in crisis and that it evidenced anew form ofthe ca pitalistSlate. Still, there were sharp arguments within the Institute over whetherthe new fascist slate was basically independent ofthe economy or merelya tool of monopoly capitalist interests. Franz Neumann. perhaps the mostpromine~t scholar in the Institute, published the classic Be/,emQlh (1941).which argued lhat fascism was a foml oftotalilarian slate capitalisnlNeumann had been a famous labor lawyer in Weimar Gennany. as wellas an important member of the German Social Democratic party. In hiswidelydiscussedlx>ok,heslressedlhecominuingprimacyoftheeconomyover the state in the fascist era. Against him, the Institute economistFrederick Pollock argued forvthe primacy of the political" and claimedthai the state was assuming power over the economy in the current era offascism and welfare-state capitalism

The interested reader might consul! Neumann's Behemoth and contrastil wilh Pollock's article "State Capitalism," which is included in thepresent volume. Pollock's article is historically important insofar as it


13/27

8JS'.ph


14/27

new menioos ot social control were producing a "one-dimensional" societywithout opposition. It also seemed that new forms of political. social.and especially cultural conformity were becoming lnstitutionafiz ed. Thisdevelopment of a "totally administered society" led Adorno and Hork-hcimertoproclaim"thcendoftheindividual"andtostresstheimportanceof preserving subjectivity in order to fulfill the goals of liberalism andsocialism alike, The eradication of subjectivity. they believed. was abetrayal of the promise of modernity. which was itself predicated on thebelief that the augmentation of science and technology would improvehuman control over nature and produce more freedOm. individuality.andhappiness,lnstead.thccriticaltheoristsargued.theinstiwtionsandpractices ofvadvanced industrial society" were apparently produc ingevergreater conformity and social domination. Thus in his highly esotericNegal;"e Dtateaics and Aesthetic Th~of)'. Adorno attempted to resurrecta repressed subjectivity against mass society and its philosophic alexpres-sions like existentialism and positivism

Still. it was ultimately Marcusc who provided the mOSt comprehensiveformulation of this position in One-Dimensional Man, In his now-classicanalysis. advanced industrial society integrates and absorbs all fcrces ofopposition so that tbevsubjective'tccnditicns for conflict between classes.as well as between the individual and sociely. vanish at the very timethatthe "objective" realuy ofe~ploitation and injustice intensifies, Thatargument would perhaps come to define the idea of the Institute more thanany other. and so we include here an article by Marcuse. "From Ontologyto Technology: Fundamental Tendencies of lndustrial Society't=-trans-fated from French into English for the firsl lime-which provides a sketchfor One-Dimensional MIlIt. In this essay. Marcuse anilly~es the new formsof socialcontrol invcne-dimensional society" and the diminution of the"othcrdimension"ofsocialcritique.rebellion.andutopianthinkingwhichpresent ahemativeslO the existing order

Marcuse describes a universe in which technology and sciemific ratio-nality prcduce a new world of thought and behavior. Where thought hadpreviously functioned to provide alternatives to the existing society. inthe new technological universe. it exists merely to make the prevailingsystem more efficicnt and raise technical means over normative endsIndeed. precisely because moral and critical ends lose their force. thedominant modes ofthinking analyzed by Marcuse make individuals 3 dapltOlheexistingorderratherthanfo5terthcircapacitiesforcriticaljudgmcnt

Oneofthekeyln~ti!Ulepositionswasthatthc"cuhureindustries"werenow playing an increasingly important role in managing consciousnessand obscuring social conflict. First sketched in Adorno and HorkheimcrsDillleelic o/llligIJlenme1ll. written during the early 194& and publi~hedin 1947. this standpoint became an essenlial component of critical theory


15/27

10 I Stephen Eric Bmnne,.nd Dougla, MO ICK .y K ellncf

and inaugurated a new discourse about rhe role of mass communicati onand culture in the ccnstinniun of' ccntemporary socielies. According 10Adorno and Horkheimer. the culture industries were organs of massdeccplionwhichmanipu!aledindividualsimoacceplingthecurrenlorgani-zaticn ot sociery. In their view. the culture industries were thereforeengaging in sophisticated forms of toeoiogtcat indoctrination, using "en-renatmnem" 10 sugar-coat the ideological content of oppression. whileeroding cultural standards in order to quell any forms of expression w hichmight comest the given order.

This critique of rhe culture induSlries appears in an article by Adorno.arguably the rnostbrilliam and multitalentcdofall the Institute 's mernbers.entitled "The Culture Industry Reconsidered." He argues that "mass cut-lure" is nol a "popular culturevrising from the experiences and concern sof the people. but rather a fonn of adminiSlered culture imposed fromabove, The theorists of Ihe Frankfurt School were among the first toprovide a critical approach 10 mass culture. and this article summarizesmany of their insights regarding the new socio--cultural fonm by whichncocapualisr societies legitimate and reproduce themselves

[n this vein, Jiirgcn Habermas, a student of Adorno and Horkbeimer.carriedthroughaground-breakinghistorica!andtheoreticalinveSIigationof the Iransitionfrom liberal democratic societies of the eighteenth andnineteenth centuries to modem capitalism. Where in an earlier stage ofcapitalisl society,lhe individual developed his ideas in a free "pub liesphere" which protected him from the state. advanced induslrial soci elyhas redefined that sphere in terms of an artificially induced public op inionwhich binds Ihc individual 10 the existing order and undermines h is critica!capacities. The study was published in German as SlrUl:rurai Change ofIhe Public Sphere (Slmklurwandel der O!felil/ichkeil). and we includehere a translation of Ihe German encyclopaedia article "The PublicSphere:' which summarizes Habennas's position

This essay provides both a historical sketch of the transition to ourcurrent media-dominated society and a nonnative model for a more demo--cratic public sphere, It is also important because the concept ofa "pub liesphere" would animate Habermass later philosophical endeavors. includ-ing his attempt 10 elaborate a theory and practice of"'undistoned"' comm u-nication. as well as his allempt 10 reinvigoratc democratic life by brtn gingnormative social judgments to bear on putatively technical forms of de ci-sion-maklng by elites. Such free and unrestrained communication wouldfoster public debate, asweli as Ihe democralizalion of everyday lif e andthe promulgation of generalizable inlereSIS necessary to ascertain andinstitutionalize "the common good."

The distance between Habermas's work and thai of the first generationof critical Iheorists points 10 the increasing heterogeneity of the F rankfurt


16/27

School and the significant differences within crilical Iheory. While Adornoand Horkheimer became increasingly critical of the Enlightenmemtradi-lion and the project of modernity with which it was connected. Habermaseventually came 10 the defense of both the Enlightenment and modernityitself. The collaboration of Adorno and Horkheimcr during the early1940s. in fact. marked a distinctive shift in the dcvelopment of criticaltheory. Surrendering attempts to develop a Marxian theory of societyoriented toward radical social transformation. they became concerned withhow modernity was rooted in forms of domination which went hack tothe Greeks. DialeClic of Enlig/ul'mnl'lII thus represents a shift away fromintcrdisciplinarysocialtheorytophilosophyandculturalcriticism.aroundwhich much of critical theory would center during the next two decades.

The growing fragmentation of critical theory. which would culminatein the break-up of the Institute. was in part a result of the historicalsituation. During World War II. Marcuse. Lowenthal. Neumann. andothers wentto Washington to work forthe U.S. government in the struggleagainst fascism. while Adorno and Horkheimer moved 10 Californiawhere they pursued their theoretical endeavors. Af1er the war they re-turned. with Pollock. to Gennany while the others remained in the UnitcdStates. Henceforth. the differences between the one-time colleagues wouldmultiply and a variety of positions would eventually emerge among thosewho had participated in the original institute.

Critical theorists are perhaps most celebrated for their cultural criti cismand critique of mass culture. The third section of our reader thereforeprovides some key e~amples of this crucial dimension within their theoryit opens with a fascinating article by Siegfried Kracauer , "The MassOrnament:' Kracauer was a close friend of Adorno and intimate withother members of the Institute-though he was never fonnally affiliatedAfter a brief career as an architect, he hccame a well-known writer andcultural critic in Weimar Germany. In the United States. he would becomefamous for his outstanding works of film criticism. which include FromCo/igori ro Hitler and Theory of Film

oOThe Mass Ornament" was written for the Frllllkfurier Zeirlln!! and laterappeared as the title essay in an importam collection of Kracauer's work.First published in 1927. it presents a model of cultural criticism whichstands indirect relation to the cultural concerns of the Institute. The criticaltheorists shared Kracauerosconvictionlhat typical artifucts cfm ass cultureand other surface manifestations ofa society can disclose its basic traitsas well a~ the most imponant historical trends of an epoch. Through : 1closeanalysisofthc"TillerGirls,o-apopularrevueofdancinggirlswhowere featured in movies, newsreels. and variety shows during the I 920s-


17/27

121 S'"phcn Etic Brunner and Dougla, MaoKay KelhlOl

Kracauer uncovers some basic feutures of comemporary capitalist socic tyHe argues thai the geometric pallerns and highly orchestrated movementsrenectthe massiflcation of audiences before spcctacies otrnevor stractionfactories't=-Kracauer's term for the culture industries

Kracauer's study seeks to provide a physiognomy of the emerging mas ssociety following World War I. At the same time, it anticipates theemergence of totalitarianism by portraying the ways in which masses canbe mobilized and manipulated through mass culture Although the ankleis extremely dense and quite difficult. we believe that its richness andsuggeSlivcne,sjustifytheinlellectuaJeffonsitscomprchensionrequiresIndced,to rhe extera that the essay develops thc an ofdcciphering impor-tant soctal insights from obscure and offbeat phenomena. en encounrerwilhitmightcvenyieldsurprisingnewinsightsintosuchsocialphenom-ena as movies, massification. capitalism. mythologies, and fairy tales

In a similar vein, T. W. Adorno's "Lyric Poetry and Society" extendsthe sociological approach to literature outlined in the earlier article by LeoLowenthal. Adorno argues that even in lyric poetry. seemingly the mostethereal mode of high culture. social tendencies areevidenl. He acutelynotes that approaches which interpret poetry as one of the most sublimeescapes from the cares of everyday life themselves point to an oppressi veorganization of society which requires transcendence. The article revealshow culture can provide sources of critical knowledge, and attest stctheInstitute's concern fora subjectivity threatened by the modem world.Through a close reading of poems by German poets like Goethe. Rilke,Marike, and Stefan George, Adorno demonstrates how social insights canbe unearthed from the form. rhythm. and images of lyric poetry us wellas from its content. Adorno's article therefore also embodies criticaltheory'scJaim that authentic an provides both a form of opposition to theestablished society and a utopian mode of reconciliation with natureIndeed, as their hopes for revolutionary political change diminished.Adorno and Marcuse in particular celebrated thevaesthetic dimeng ion'tasadomainofemancipatorye~pericneethat posed one against and beyondestablished consciousness.

In general. critical theorists prilcd the modernist avam-garde overthe exponents of realism_ Walter Benjamins vSurrcalism" reveals thatcommitment to the avant-garde, but also the potential importance ofsuch movements to political revoluticn-c-which sharply distinguishes hisposition from that of Adorno. Benjamin was radieali~ed through hisrelationships with the maverick Marxist Ernst Bloch and a Russian revolu-tionary named Asja Lacis. He also became close to the Marxist playwrightBertolt Brecht, whose theater he championed as a model of revolutionaryan. Benjamin never officially joined the Instilute. but he received a smallstipend which helped finance his studies in Paris during lhc early years of


18/27

COPYlighled Male,,~1

the fascist epoch. Long a devotee of French culture. Benjamin believedthai surrealism retained great revolutionary potential by virtue of it svpro-fane illumination' of everyday life and its intoxicating experiences ofbn:ak.TlJplure.andecslasy.Benjamin opens his article b)' reflecting on the origins and nature ofsurrealism end al1empling to illuminate the movement through discussingsome of its most important advocates such as Andre Breton. In general.Benjamin believed that certain kinds of art provided a virtually mystica I"reveletion'toftruths and insigtns conceming social life which are h iddenfrom the everyday consciousness-a position which he shared with Ad-orno and Kracauer. Nevertheless. in contrast to Adorno, who rigidlyseparated art from mdical politics. Benjaminbeliel'edthatcertnine~peri-cnces which broke with everyday consciousness and routine could prom orerevolutionary awareness and action. It is for this reason thm Benjaminwanted (0 illuminate and appropriate tIM! energies of surrealism for therevolutionary movementofthc day.

"Surrealism" is typical of Benjamin's frequent willingness to judgedifferent types of art in terms of their revolutionary potennur or lac k ofIt.Unlike other critical theorists. for instance. he advanced a profound beliefin film's ability to promote socially critical consctousness-carleasr underIhepropercircumstances. More than that. however. this piece evidencesthe most radical expression of critical theory's revolutionary message.Anticipating the "situationist" auernpt to transform everyday life and thevalues of individual cKperielice. us well as the cultural politics of the1960s. i t praisesvsurrealisrn'tfor rebelling against thevinner pcvert y"ofthe individual and exploding the vennes of "norma!"' perception from astandpoint which manifest5thc"imoxication"ofthe revolution

In "Historical Perspectives on Popular Culture:' Leo Lowenthal pro-vides a clear conrcxtualizaticn otme Institute's Iheory of mass culture.Attacking the uncriucal empirical approaches to culture and society thatwere particularly dominant in the United States. he s h a r p r y conuasu themto the hislorical and crincal approeches orrhe lnsritute. Situalingprese ntdebates over the nalUreand value of popular cultun: in tbe comrastingattitudes toward leisure of Pascal and Momuigne. Lowenthal shows howIhefonnerbclievedlhatpopulurenlcrtainmcntdislractedindividuaJsfrolllIheirreligiousvocution.Moniaigne.byconlnlst.mainiainedlhatmodemlife required a certain amount of relax ali on and diversion which popularculture could provide-and which thus made it beneficial for individualsand society. Stripping Pascal's critique of muss culture or u s n:ligiousovertones. Lowenthal defends a critical approach 10 the study of massculture. The artlclc concludes with a concise summaryoflhc approachesto popular culture developed by me lnstitute , and sugge5tiollscon ceminghow theyean be utilizedto [Irovide more adequate analyses.


19/27

141 SlepncnEric 8ronnerand Dougl'" M.cKay Kellner

The anack on conformity and the culture industry. however. has ilSblindspolsandlimilations, In "Perennial Fashion-lazz"Adornopr ovidesone of the most controversial and sharply criticized attacks on mass cu Itureproduced by lhecriticallheorists. Wherea> many people believe thatAmericanjazz creates a type of rebellious. nonconformist musicalexpert-ence , Adorno argues that i t actually reveals the conformist tendenciesshared by all forms of fashion and the culture industry. For Adomo. rath erthan providing a fresh and innov~tive musical idiom. jazz merely exhibits"incessantly repeated formulae'tand accelerates the trends toward stan-dardization.commercialization.andreificationimplicitinallmasscuhure.Thus. in Adorno's view. jazz is "utterly impoverished" while its f~nsjoyfully experience nothing more than "psychological regression"Adorno's uncompromising critique raises the much-debated issue ofthe cultural elitism which allegedly informed the Institute'S perceptionsof mass culture. Indeed. there is no doubt that the "innercirde" wascomposed of highly cultured European intellectuals and radicals whofound life in the United States extremely distasteful. Clearly. th cyblamedmass culture for making the working classes blind to their own explo ita-tion. and thus forcre~tingobstacJestoradicalsocial change. Despite theirbiases. however. it was nonethelessthe critical lheoristswho providedthefirstset of sustained and systematic insights into the important new rolesthat mass communications and culture were playing in contemporarysocieties. It was precisely their status as European exiles which enabledthem 10 gain insights imothe ideological nature and social functions ofmass culture. which were missed by American theorists and radicals. whosimply look mass culture for granted as a fact of social life. and sooverlooked its increasingly important social functions

By the same token. their status as exiles also caused thctritical th eoriststo ignore cen~in key aspects of American life. such as the continuationof political and cultural struggle during that difficult period,and thecontradictions within mass culture which frequently exhibil socially cri ti-cal clements. By assuming that the transformation of an artwork into acommodity destroys its emancipatory function. many critical theoristsreached the conclusion that popular culture had no emancipatory potem ialwhatsoever. That is why most uf them have traditionally been so emphaticin maintaining the division belween"high" and "low" (or massj cui tureEven so. they never provided categories for differemiating among culturalartifacts or the diverse purposes which they can serve

Against this view il is preferable to perceive cuhure as a contestedterrain with poten!iaJly subversive elements. StiJI.lheaesthetictheoriesoflheFrankfun School contain many valuable aspects. and their analy SeSof cultural texts are among their major contributions. The commitment10aesthelics was genuine. Indeed. both Adorno and Martusesincerely


20/27

believed that only the aesthetic realm could preserve a subjectivity threat-enedbythe\,erystructureofadyancedilldumialsoo:icty.

The freedom and ~utonom~ of the individual was always a centralconcern of the Institute. and the attempt by Erich Fromm to synthesizeMarx and Freud in terms of a critical social psychology was obviouslymeant to compensate for the neglect of consciousness and ihe vsubjectiv e'factor in orthodox Marxism. Ina 1 93 1 articietitledPoliticsDndPs~cho-anal~si$,"FrommarguesfortherelevanceofpsychOlinalyticperspectivesto revolutionary politics. claimingthatpsychoallal~sisprovides a theorywhich can help explain mass behavior and political events as well ~sthe actions of an individual. While suggesting how rhe socio-econorrncanalysis of events typic~l of Marxism can be combined with psychoana-lyric explanation. he argues against interpretations which claim that thetwo theories are incompatible. Indeed. Fromm believes thatthe~ can worktogether to explain the ways that instinctual drives and psychic altitudescan be mobilized to support political movements and leaders.

Fromm's essay was written when the Nazis were seizing power inGermany. The Institute responded by auempting to provide an explanationof the appeal and power of fascism. One of the distinguishing aspects oftheir analysis was their discussion of how psychological dispositionstoward authoritarianism nurtured submission to fascist domination. In acollective work published in 1 936 . Studies in Authorityund lile Family,the Institute member.; explored some of the ways that tile patriarchalfamil~engenden:d3uthoritariantraits"'hichwouldpredisposeindiyidualsto embrace fascism. In fact, Iht: Institute becarnc involved in a number ofsuch studies ....hichsoughttoanal~uho .... various established institutionsand ideologies promote the development of personalities susceptible tomanipulation and authoritarian domination.

After the defeat of Iascism. in conjunction with 8 Berkeley researchgroup, Adorno and other members of the Institute for Social Researchundenook a collective inquiry of the psychological propensities towardauthoritarianism in the United States. The result was a major wort, TheAwlJQriloriun Personality, from which we include the introduction. HereAdorno and his colleagues outline the project of their social researchc aswell as the basic assumptions and methods utilized in the study. There isno doubt that the undertaking itself was motivated by the fcar that a newchnMlctcrtype. the authoritarian personality. was emerging. In a mannersomewhat inconsistent with the Institute's position on mass culture. how-eyer, the authors conclude that cducation mightprev~nt a duplicmion ofthe European experience.

The researche~ devised an e!aborutc SCt of questionnaires. which were


21/27

!61 Sph


22/27

COPYlighled Male,,~1

criticalsocial psychology becomes another way 10explain the creation ofone-dimensional societyWhile all critical meortsts agreed upon the importance of developing arndicalsocial psycbolcgy-c-and tbe need to synthesize Marx end Freud-there were significant differences among the Institute-s members on thenature of psychoanalysis and the role it should play, Todemonstmtethis.we conclude our secnon oncrilical theorynnd psychologywithnsel ecnonfrom Erich Fromm's "Crisis of Psychoanalysis." Fromm. who was apracticing analyst. claims that ncrisis has resulted from the transformationof Freud's critical categories like the unconscious into instruments ofconformity and adjustment. In this essay, written long after his breakwiththe Institute. Frommattacks Marcuse's useof Freudian thoory and vividIydemonstrates the profound differences within the tradition of criticaltheory.Although the full story of Fromm's break.with the Institute has yetrobe rotd. iocreasingly biller polemics broke out between him and hisformer colleagues. The split iniliallysurfaced in public in 1955 with thepublication of Marcuse's Eros (Jnd Ctvitizauon, which attacked Frommusa nee-Freudian revisionist whose theory was putativelyconformis r andidealist. Fromm countered with a sharp critique of Marcuse. who. in tum.riposted with a defense of his position in the pages of Di$S


23/27

18 I S'cphcn Eric Bronner"od Dougla< MarKay Ktllnerdevelopoedanadequaletheoryofsocialchangenorachievedlhalunilyoftheory and practice which rhey so frcqucntly championed.

The Frankfun School's political perspectives lended 10 be rather ab-street. and its members never based tbeir crinque of advanced indu sirialsociety on any positive theory ofreVQ]ulion. Butthey did produce a setofwhalmighlbelemlCd"criticalvisions"regardinglhemulablechamcterof history. society. and the future. In this concluding section. we haveselected texts which articulate some of these perspectives. In one way oranother. all of them point 10 the legacy of critical theory and the impe Iusil might offer to future social inquiry wilh an emancipatory intent.In his controversial and paradoxicalvTbeses on Ihe Philosophy ofHistory:' Walter Benjamin seeks 10 confrontthe triumph of fascism aswell as what he considers the atavistic assumptions of an orthodox Marx-i,mwhichmainlainsth3lthecapitalisttransitiontosocialism.and then toa superior communist order. is somehow "incvhable." Opposed to allunilinearconceptionsofprogress.whileawareofthecontemporarybaITiers toemancipatory change. Benjamin proposes the need to rememberand compensate for the evils and suffering of the past. This recollectionof past suffering is what he befieves wtll provide an inspiration for struggleagainsl oppression in the present. It is thereforevthe image of enslavedancestors rather than that of liberated grandchildren'twhich offer sthe bestimpetus to continue ihe quest for emancipation. To move forward. il istherefore necessary to look backwards so that an emancipated futureultimatelycomesloreslunaphilosophicalreappropriationofthepa5t

Writing in 1940. as the Nazi war machine blitzed through Europe.Benjamin saw modernity as an unending calUstrophe and thus viewedmorc optimistic theories of history with contempt. Providing a consider-ably more critical perspective on western culture than Morcuse in"Phil os-ophy and Critical Theory ." Benjamin claimed thai even high culture wasoften merely the ideological cloak for barbarism. and that it was alway sthevictors-however barbaric-a-who wrote history and estahlished systems ofthOlJghl to legitimate iheirsystems of cppression. Shortly after p ublishingthese theses. Benjamin himself was forced to flee the Nazi occupation ofFrance. andcommiued suicide on the Spanish border when il appearedthai he would be captured by the fascists. Ironically that action spurredIheSpanishborderofficialstoaliowtherestofBenjamin'~grouptoescapeinto freedom

By this lime, Horkheimerand his associates were already establishedin New York. His "Notes on Institute Activities" sketches some of thedefining features of critical theory in Ihe new context as well as itsrelevance for contemporary research lind politics. The validity of its


24/27

CopY'I\II"~dMale"al

concepts is. first. determined by their ability to comprehend historicalprocesses and the trends for social transformation. In this vein. Hork-heimer describes the inductive character ofcrilicaltheory and how ilpresents society as a system in which every pan should be interpretedfrom th e srandpolrsofrbc whole. At the same time. however. he maintainsthat critical theory also projects alternatives to the existing society byengaging in what the Frankfurt School theorists call "immanent cri-tique ..-amethod ....hichjudge5societybytheverynonnsoffrt.'o!domandhappiness which it professes tc eccepr.

Although Adorno would laler make some very different and moresubjeclivistassumptionsinNegali,eDill/eclics.thisper:spectiVI' is furtherarticulated in his 1963 anicle "Society," Revealing how Critical Theoryretains a positive relation to the MllfXian heritage. Adorno argues that thevery concept of "society" is historical in nature. and that it should no tbeused simply to denote abstract relations of individuals 10 one another.Instead. "the specifically social" refers to -ue imbalance of institutionsover human beings ..... Society .. thus refers to the system ot soclal organiza -tion and the ways that social institutions. roles. practices. and the organ iza-tion of the economy come to dominate the activity of human beings inspecific historical ccnstullutions. Following Marxian arguments. Adornocan therefore claim that society is the living background Ior every empi riocal occurrence and that the capitaiisl market system imposes commodityandexchangerelationsoneveryindividualact---evenasitfuelsanoverrid-ing raticnalization process which provides an apparatus of social con trotAgainst those who argue that the Marxian concept of class is no longerrelevant to social processes. Adorno insists that ....e still live in a worldfundamentallyorganizcdaroundclassn::lutionsandcharacteriudbyc1assstruggle. Thus. even as particular members of the Frankfurt School likeHorkheimer were turning sharply to the right and uway from Marxism. aconnecuon 10 that old tradition and the lnstitutes standpcint befo reWorldWar II continued to exist.

Of all the critical theorists. ;1 was probably Herbert Marcuse whomostsystematicallyauempt~dtorelatetheorytopoliticsandconsistrntlycontrasted critical perspectives on the current social order with those ofan emancipated future. In "Liberation from the Affluent Society:' hesketches what in retrospect emerges as a vision of liberation which articu-lates many New Left perspectives of the 1960'5. The address begins byasserting the importance of those radical cultural currents which seemed 10eOrlstitutea"greatrefu5al"ofthecompet;livc.materialistic.and bellicosevalues of advanced industrial society. It is important to remember thatMareose'sotopianrationalisme~ertedapo""'erfulinfluenceinthesixties.During that time. even while believing that the working class remainedthe sine qua non for revolutionary rransforrnation. Marcusc wus One of

COPY'ouhledMaleMat


25/27

l { ) ' Slcphtn I':rk Bronnef.nd [lougla, MacK.y Kellnerthe prime exponents of what became known as "the marginal groupstheory:' which suggested that the catalysts for radical action by workerswould be those groups least integrated into the given order-c-studerus.raciul minorilics. women. ClC. This argument anticipated militant move-mentsandstruggles in France and ltaly , even thoogh the reaction whichwas gmhcrtng force in the 1970s began to make Marcuse ever moreskeptical about the "prclctariar't-c-a skepticism central tohis 1978 article"The Rciflcation of the Proletariat." which we have also included

During the 1970s. Marcuse cominued to believe that u linkage betweencritical theory and the new social movements was possible. It was in thisperiod that he desperately searched for a revolutionary agent to replaceIheindustrialprolelurialPUltingasidetheundifferentiatedandradicalindictment ofa liberal advanced industrial society central to his and theInstitute's earlier work. Marcusc stressed the importance of democraticstruggles and political reforms. Supporting McGovern in the 1972 presi-dcnlial election. he continued hissuppon for national liberationstrugglcsin the third world. and even looked !O rhe "Eurocornmunist" panies-which were tactically seeking 10 separate themselves from Brezhnev'sSoviet Union in Spain. France. and Italy-for a radical response to c 011-temporary capit~list societies. Yet. in --The Reificanon of the Proletariat."which was published shortly before his death in 1979. Marcuse alsoanalyzed the vright turn'twhich would come 10 characterize the prev ailingpolitical climate of the 19805. Allhough Marcuse is doubtful that thetr~ditiollalindustrial"proletariat"continueslObethemainforceofrevoJu-tion in advanced capitalist countries. he somewhat uncritically believesthaI a growing working class with expanding consciousness and politi calawareness will provide a new base for radical social change in ccntempo-rary society even as he points to a set of emerging social movements ascatalysts fora new era. Though he has nothing to say about the matter ofpolitical organization. Marcusc correcuy insiststhat revising Mar xisru andcriucal theory inthe light of new conditions does not constitute a betrayalYetlheaniciealsopointstohowfarfromtheirearliersocialislrevOlution-ary perspectives the critical theorists had traveled. Indeed. the FrankfurtSchool never developed adequate criteria to judge the political potentialof different movements in different historical epochs and. withfewe xcep-lions, stood apan from the major politicul controversies of the postwarera While Marcuse gained world renown as the defender of the New Leftill the 1960s. n is Habennas who developed the most consistent politicalpositioll following the decline of the student movement of the sb-ues.Throughout his publicarlonsin the 19805. he has defended the democraticand rationalist heritage of the Enlightenment and reinterpreted criticaltheory accordingly. IlIlhe process. he has intervened ill some of the


26/27

rnost impor1ant debates within German intellectual circles. rdnging fromattempts by arch-conservatives like Ernst Nolle to turn their backs on theNazi past in thevhistcrians' coruroversy." to lhose of postmodernist swhohave sought 10 fosrcr n pseudo-radical spirit of nihilistic relativ ism. Ourreader thus doses with a selection from Habcrmes's "The Tasks of aCritical Theory of Society." which forms pan of the conclusion 10 histwo-volume Theory ojCm""HlIIicllIi>'e Actio" (1981).

In this selection. Habermas explores the central themes of critical t heoryafter World War I!. and then indicates some unfinished tasks for thecontemporary era. These include the need 10 analyze I) the new mechn-nisms of polincal integration within post-liberal socienes: 2) th e fcrrns offamilial ~ociulization and ego-development; 3) the role of mass mediaand mass culture: and4} the potential for crisis and the contemporarypossibilities for protest especially with respect to the "new social move-ments" which have assumed such politicul importunee

Whelherlheseareactuallylilecl\lcialissucsremuinsopenloqueslionAfter all. Habermas concentrates exclusively on the reproductive mecha-nisrns of advanced industrial society. Missing are those concerns whichdirectly relate 10 the produdion process itself and itscorrespondin glogicofaccumulation. Though his emphasis on the role of new social movements islaudatory. the issue of class cannot be ignored. It is thus important toaddressparti


27/27

CfJy.l!llil .... Male,,~1Political Sci~nce/Philosophy/Sociology

The Institute for Social Research, usually referred to as the FrankfurtSchool,was the first Marxist-oriented research institute in Europe. Itsmembers attempted to revise both the Marxian critique of capitalismand the theory of the revolution in order to confront the new socialand political conditions that had evolved since Marx's death. As aresult they developed a "critical theory" of society to overcome thoseaspects of social reality which Marx and classical Marxism neglectedordownplayed.Composed for upper-level undergraduates, graduate students and abroad intellectual readership, the main purpose of this book is toprovide a general overview of Ihe perspectives which comprise the.modern tradition of critical theory.At the same lime, it explores the contributions of such crucialthinkers as Theodor Adorno, Walter Benjamin, Max Hotkbeimer,lurgen Habermas. and Herbert Marcuse 10various fields ofintellectual inquiry---sociaI psychology, cultural criticisrn,philosophy, and political theory, among othersSTEPHENERtCBRONN~Ris Associate Professor of Political Scienceat Rutgers UniversityDOUGLASMACKAy KELLNERs Professor of Philosophy at theUniversity of Texas, Austin.

Co",,,o..ign:EleolrioPendlSludloISBN 0-415-900'11-7

Routledge2 9 West 35SIrcetNew York. NY 10001

critical theory society

Documents