The Scholar, the Intellectual, and the Essay: Weber, Lukács, Adorno, and Postwar Germany Peter Uwe Hohendahl the German Quarter

The Scholar, the Intellectual, and the Essay: Weber, Lukács, Adorno, and Postwar Germany

Peter Uwe Hohendahl

The German Quarterly, Vol. 70, No. 3. (Summer, 1997), pp. 217-232.

Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0016-8831%28199722%2970%3A3%3C217%3ATSTIAT%3E2.0.CO%3B2-H

The German Quarterly is currently published by American Association of Teachers of German.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/journals/aatg.html.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission.

JSTOR is an independent not-for-profit organization dedicated to and preserving a digital archive of scholarly journals. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

http://www.jstor.org Mon May 28 03:37:07 2007 PETERUWEHOHENDAHL Cornell University

The Scholar, the Intellectual, and the Essay: Weber, Lukacs, Adorno, and Postwar Germany

Since the late 1980s the intellectual has Is there a difference between the approach been under attack-not only in this coun- and style of an intellectual and that of a try, but also in Europe, and especially in scientist or a member of the political elite? Germany. There is a sense of a general ma- Of course, this distinction already presup- laise on both sides of the Atlantic: The criti- poses a specific definition of the intellectual cal function once attributed to the intellec- as different from the scientist and the poli- tual seems to have evaporated. There is tician. This presupposition contains im- ground for a critical reassessment of the plicit cultural structures and values which role of the intellectual, but it should not are commonly taken for granted in local begin with a formal definition of the con- discussions and, therefore, frequently re- cept, since such a definition would remain main unnoticed. abstract and therefore obscure important Ever since the turn of the century, the cultural difference^.^ For this reason, I will German debate, for example, has been in- initially concentrate on the history of twen- formed by a fairly specific definition of the tieth-century Central Europe and only in intellectual, which has relied on a number conclusion broaden the scope of my ex- of oppositions that have been less signifi- ploration by turning to the present inter- cant in the American case.2 My choice of national debate about the function of the authors and texts reflects this bias toward public intellectual and the social position a literary and aesthetic understanding of of the intelligentsia. the concept, which shines through even in The following discussion will focus on a radically political determination of the three moments in Germany's intellectual intellectual as we find it in the case of Georg and social history, namely, the intervention Lukacs after 1918.Within the German dis- of the young Georg Lukacs in the philo- course, the intellectual is as much defined sophical and literary discussion of the turn by what he or she is not as by specific posi- of the century; the discussion about the role tive features. Intellectuals are, for in- of the intellectual in the work of Theodor stance, to be distinguished from members W Adorno after his return to Germany in of the academy, whereas in the American 1949; and, finally, an assessment of the in- case this distinction would be less impor- tellectual in the present German context, tant unless underscored by the modifier for instance, in the contribution of Peter "public intellectual."3 Biirger's most recent interventions and commentaries. What interests me in this discussion is not so much the philosophical ideas and systematic statements of these authors, but the question of style. What I want to begin my discussion of Lukacs interests me, in other words, is a formal with a detour to Max Weber's famous lec- problem: How does the intellectual write? ture on the role of science and the scientist.

The German Quarterly 70.3 (Summer 1997) 217 218 THEGERMANQUARTERLY Summer 1997

A grasp of Weber's project will help us to "staatskapitalistische Unternehm~ngen,"~ distinguish more clearly between scientist in which the individual scholar and teacher and intellectuaL4 This (especially in the has a restricted and highly specialized func- German context) crucial distinction con- tion. In this context, the production of re- cerns the specific mode of the search for search and knowledge follows accepted truth as well as the question of social prac- methodological rules that do not allow tice. Given the rapidly increasing profes- much individualization. There is no room sionalization of the social sciences and the for the talented dilettante: humanities during the nineteenth century, the concept of science emphasizes strict Nur durch strenge Spezialisierung kann der wissenschaftliche Arbeiter tatsach- boundaries which are determined in terms lich das Vollgefuhl, einmal und vielleicht of methodological rigor. This search for nie wieder im Leben, sich zu eigen ma- strict demarcations also pertains to aca- chen: hier habe ich etwas geleistet, was demic literary criticism. Although Weber dauern wird. Eine wirkliche endgiiltige was primarily interested in the status of und tiichtige Leistung ist heute stets: eine the social sciences, his definition of science spezialistische ~eistun~.~ has important ramifications for other disciplines as well, since it contains the gen- It is noteworthy that Weber uses the term eral idea of Wertfreiheit, i.e., the notion that "labor" [Arbeit] for scientific research and scientific studies do not engage in value calls the scholar explicitly a "worker" [Ar- judgment. Scientists are expected to keep beiter], unlike the dilettante, who is char- their distance from the objects of their re- acterized by the fact that he or she has search. ideas but is incapable of carrying out re- At the end of World War I these demar- search methodologically and systematically. cations became a particularly urgent ethi- For Weber, the definition of science as cal and epistemological problem for Weber. specialized work is part of a much larger Clearly in response to a revolutionary situ- historical pattern. As he puts it: "Der wis- ation in Germany, which had undermined senschaftliche Fortschritt ist ein Bruchteil, established institutions as well as accepted und zwar der wichtigste Bruchteil, jenes value^,^ Weber tried to define the respon- Intellektualisierungsprozesses, dem wir sibility of the scientist within a modern, seit Jahrtausenden unterliegen, und zu rationalized, and demystified world. In an dem heute iiblicherweise in so auljerorden- attempt to build up a wall against the poli- tlich negativer Art Stellung genommen ticization of the university, Weber designed ~ird."~This development results in a proc- a concept of science that would exclude ess of differentiation in which scientific metaphysical grounding. Not that the work is clearly distinguished from religion quest for such a ground was treated as and art. The latter two are concerned with meaningless; rather, Weber argued that in- values, but not, according to Weber, with stitutionalized Wissenschaft had to refrain scientific truth as aform of truth which can from ultimate questions of values and goals be defined in terms of methodological re- in order to carry out its mission. In other search. At the same time, Weber is aware words, the role of the scientist, both in the of and even underscores the fact that many humanities and the social sciences, had to contemporaries are deeply dissatisfied be clearly distinguished from that of the with the procedures and results of the sci- artist or the religious and political leader. ences, longing for a kind of truth that the The modern university, Weber argued in disciplines of science cannot provide be- 1919by pointing to the American model, is cause they remain abstract and fail to an- no longer simply a community of inde- swer the ultimate test. Since scientific pro- pendent scholars. Modern universities are gress has discarded traditional goals like HOHENDAHL:Scholar, Intellectual, Essay 219 access to God, the search for authentic be- Die Seele und die Formen and Theorie des ing, and the search for true happiness as Romans. As much as the later work of illusory, modern civilized man is left with Lukacs, especially Geschichte und Klassen- a void. It is the very process of differentia- bewubtsein, reflects the impact of Weber,12 tion and rationalization which calls into the metaphysical approach of the early question the belief in scientific truth as the Lukacs remains much closer to the roman- ultimate an~wer.~ tic tradition and idealist philosophy.13 Yet, By emphasizing the strength, but also it is not the question of tradition and influ- the limitations of science and the role of the ence that concerns me. Rather, what is at scientist, Weber simultaneously opened up stake is the question of appropriation and the question of the ultimate ground of the question of style. In the case of the early knowledge as well as the ultimate commit- Lukacs, both are more or less identical. ment of the individual seeking for truth Their common ground is the essay form. and happiness.10 It is in this context that The form of the essay, as Lukacs argues in Weber makes a few comments on the mod- Die Seele und die Formen, becomes the ern intellectual. Their tone is negative; the most appropriate vehicle for the intellec- modern intellectual-in contrast to the sci- tual.14 While Weber contrasts the intellec- entist-is seen as someone who longs for tual with the scientist, on the one hand, and ultimate truth and redemption and, there- the religious or political leader, on the fore, returns to forms of religious beliefs other, Lukacs views the essay as the ideal that he or she had already outgrown. The expression of the intellectual, who stands result is bad faith, an attempt to furnish between the artist, on the one hand, and one's interiority with the furniture of an the philosopher, on the other. To be more older religion, which is no longer compat- precise, it is the essay form which defines ible with the process of rationalization We- the intellectual. For Lukacs, the essay con- ber had described before.ll tains a form of knowledge that transcends the research of the scientist; it asks ultimate questions which Weber's scientist must refuse, but it is not bound to the rigor of systematic philosophy. In the context of this essay, it is not my What Lukacs shares with Weber is the intention to analyze the contradiction of delineation between science and other Weber's position. What interests me is, first forms of knowledge; yet, he approaches this of all, the critique of the intellectual from distinction from avery different viewpoint. the point of view of institutionalized mod- In Lukacs's attempt to characterize and ern science. According to Weber, intellectu- validate the essay form as the appropriate als fail because they are searching for a so- mode of expression of criticism, the oppo- lution which was adequate only in the past. sition of science and non-science is modi- Secondly, and more importantly, Weber's fied and then replaced by the distinction lecture points to a problem for which he has between philosophy and the essay and be- no answer: the nature of knowledge outside tween the essay form and the artwork. This the realm of science. The inauthenticity of shift has significant epistemological and some modern intellectuals does not make ethical consequences for the under- this question irrelevant. In fact, one might standing of the role of the intellectual. well reverse the question by asking: Is the While Weber reinforces the hegemony of hegemony of science, as claimed by Weber, scientific discourse, although he concedes legitimate? This may be a more appropriate the possibility of other forms of knowledge, way to address the thought of the early the young Lukacs keeps his distance from Lukacs, especially in the period between the institutionalized discourse of the sci- 220 THEGERMANQUARTERLY Summer 1997 ences and emphasizes the need for a variety At the center of Lukacs's discussion of of discursive exchanges, among them the the essay, we find the question of language form of the essay. Its problematic and un- and style. For him, the essay is neither a stable nature, which Lukacs underscores, scientific article which communicates the allows the essay to explore and to search results of research nor a tractate which dis- for moments of truth where Weberian sci- seminates theoretical knowledge in a sys- ence has fallen silent: "Die Ironie, dalj der tematic manner. Both modes are non- Kritiker immer von den letzten Fragen des ironic. The essay is an ironic form, i.e., a Lebens spricht, aber doch immer in dem mode of coded speaking in which language Ton, als ob nur von Bildern und Buchern, and meaning are not identical, in which the nur von wesenlosen und hubschen Orna- concrete object under discussion and the menten des grol3en Lebens die Rede ware" overall thematic concern of the essay re- (SF19).For Lukacs, the irony of the essay main, and consciously so, in a relationship is its self-conscious discrepancy between characterized by tension. For this reason, mode of expression and thematic concern, the distinction between content and form, between its tentative language and its im- which Lukacs conflates with the distinc- plicit insistence on the possibility of meta- tion between science and art, does not apply physical truth. Its author is the critic who to the essay. This makes the form ambiva- approaches the question of truth indirectly lent and, from Lhe point of view of art and through the interpretation of the artwork science, problematic. Yet it is precisely this or the literary text, not the philosopher who problematic nature that enables the essay responds to the need for a systematic ex- to succeed where the scholarly treatment planation of truth. While Lukacs's essay on falls short, and the artwork must remain the essay does not question the feasibility silent, for "Die Dichtung an sich kennt ofsuch a systematic search (one might even nichts, was jenseits der Dinge ware; ihr ist say that it presupposes it), it displaces the jedes Ding ein Ernstes und Einziges und systematic impulse of traditional philoso- Unvergleichliches. Darum kennt sie auch phy to the margins, focusing instead on die Fragen nicht: man richtet an reine what it conceives of as the problematic lin- Dinge keine Fragen, nur an ihre Zusarn- guistic means of the essay. menhange" (SF 12). The essay asks the One would completely misunderstand kind of questions that the artwork cannot Lukacs's discussion ofthe fragmentary and articulate and the scholarly article cannot incomplete character of the essay if one legitimately raise: They instigate the search took it to be an admission of its insignifi- for metaphysical truth. cance. On the contrary: What Lukacs In his own analysis of the essay form, wants to bring into the foreground is the Adorno later suggested that Lukacs misun- importance and legitimacy of the essay derstood the character of the essay when form. Through its indirect nature, the es- he conflated the essay with poetry (Dich- say can touch upon and explore the truth tung). But this criticism misses the point. content (to use the later Adornian term) While Lukacs explicitly discusses the prox- of the object under consideration. Clearly, imity of the two modes, he actually keeps however, for Lukacs, this object is little them separate, using the argument that more than an Anlab and not central to the the essay is based on, and makes use of, ultimate concern of the essay, which means poetry, i.e., the moment of form in poetry that Lukacs problematizes the means and becomes the content of the essay: "Denn the tools of the search, but not the search hier kann aus dem Endziel der Poesie ein itself, as, a generation later, Adorno will call Ausgangspunkt und ein Anfang werden; into question the very possibility of estab- denn hier scheint die Form, selbst in ihrer lishing the truth value of criticism. abstrakten Begrifflichkeit, etwas sicher HOHENDAHL:Scholar, Intellectual, Essay 221 und handgreiflich Wirkliches" (SF17).For on Lukacs's part to identify the artwork Lukacs, in the writings of the essayist, po- with the essay. etic form becomes fate, that is, it becomes Anticipating Lukacs's later dialectical a moment of distinction between signifi- method, one might suggest that the essay- cant and insignificant aspects. It estab- ist and critic mediates between the poet lishes a critical mode which is lacking in and the scientist or philosopher. This inter- poetry itself. pretation would, then, underscore the im- In Lukacs's emphasis on form, then, we plicit drive toward systematic philosophy must recognize two distinct but equally im- in the early Lukacs. From the perspective portant aspects: form as the mode of rep- of his later Marxist work, this interpreta- resentation in the artwork, which is the tion makes sense. Yet this reading does a object of discussion in the essay, and form certain amount of violence to Lukacs's as a shorthand for the discursive mode of early work, especially to Die Seele und die the essay itself. They are equally impor- Formen. Lukacs's "her Wesen und Form tant, since only in and through their com- des Essays: Briefe an Leo Popper" cele- bination can the search for truth succeed. brates the unique role of the critic and its The essay, in other words, establishes its difference from that of the philosopher. To independence (which remains always prob- put it differently, it celebrates the role of lematic) through its focus on the poetic the intellectual whose function cannot be form, which, then, becomes the basis of re- conflated with that of the scientist or the flection. Thus, the essay is twice-removed philosopher.l5 from life. While the artwork touches on and In his critique of science and systematic preserves life experience, the essay reflects philosophy, the Lukacs ofDie Seele und die on its representation. Formen criticizes, but also affirms, Weber's Lukacs embraces what Weber denies definition of science insofar as the critic is and shuns: the possibility of a different closely linked to the aesthetic realm. While logic which does not respond to the law of Lukacs suggests that the essay form does contradiction. Since the essay is grafted on not exclusively deal with artworks and lit- the artwork, traces its moments, and re- erature (referring to Montaigne), his own flects on its form, it remains in the realm work clearly emphasizes the importance of of the concrete and the particular. Its con- the aesthetic. Aesthetic criticism becomes ceptual mode, Lukacs argues, is the image the core of intellectual activity. The intel- and the symbol. Hence the essay refrains lectual is defined-and here Weber would from conceptual generalization as we find quite agreein terms of art criticism it in philosophy and science. The mode of within the literary public sphere. It is un- generalization which Lukacs finds in the derstood that the critic is not an academic, essay is that of vision and suggestion: but located in the general public sphere, without, however, having a specific place or Es ist also nicht moglich, dalj zwei Essays a very clearly defined social function. In einander widersprechen: jeder erschafft fact, compared with an older liberal model ja eine andere Welt und auch, indem er, um eine hijhere Allgemeinheit zu erlan- of literary criticism, Lukacs's intellectual gen, dariiber hinausgeht, bleibt er in Ton, has, more or less, lost the power of repre- Farbe, Betonung doch immer in der er- sentative speech.16 The essay form articu- schaffenen Welt; er verlaRt sie also nur im lates this loss as the absence of a clearly uneigentlichen Sinne. (SF22) defined public that the critic wants to address. It is not incidental that Lukacs's es- Through this immanence, the essay re- say on the essay chooses the format of a mains connected with the artwork, a close letter to a personal friend. For Lukacs, the link which Adorno mistook for an attempt bourgeois public has shrunk to a circle of 222 THEGERMANQUARTERLY Summer 1997

friends who can decode and appreciate the hints of the essayist. It is well known that Lukacs embraced There is no need to rehearse once more this position only for a short time. Already the path of Lukacs from his early commit- in Theorie des Romans, he searched for a ment to a revolutionary Marxism through new grounding of the critical voice and his compromise with Stalinism and his late later, after his conversion to Marxism in recovery of a more critical position after 1918, he looked back at the relativism of 1956. In all phases, Lukacs remained com- his early work with embarrassment.17 The mitted to the Marxist project, in which the philosophy of history, proposed in Theorie role of the Party is central. For him, the des Romans, allowed Lukacs to grasp a to- political intellectual remained anchored in tality where the essay perceived only par- a collective subject, i.e., the proletariat, and ticulars. It also encouraged a modified defi- received his or her legitimacy from this nition of the critic and the intellectual. link. In the German context, it was Adorno Armed with a coherent philosophy of his- who drew the theoretical consequences of tory, which grants a telos to social evolu- Lukacs's early writings when he rede- tion, the intellectual-still in the guise of signed Critical Theory after World War the literary critic-can speak again in the II.18 Part of this reconfiguration was the name of a broader idea, i.e., the historical refunctioning of the role of the intellectual, process. In Geschichte und Klassenbewu/3t- a common thematic concern of his postwar sein (19231, this reversal is complete: Here essays. Adorno's criticism specifically re- the critic speaks in the name of Marxist turned to the cultural sphere in order to theory, which asks him to identify with a re-articulate the locus of the intellectual. collective subject, that is, the proletariat. Once more the essay form becomes the fo- The path from the essayistic position of cus for a reassessment of intellectual com- 1910 to a Communist position a decade mitment.lg Of course, Adorno was fully later was, for Lukacs, a question of com- aware of the intertextual situation; his fa- mitment and responsibility. Still, we have mous piece "Der Essay als Form," pub- to keep in mind that, in the case of Lukacs, lished in 1958, is organized as a critical dia- the political configuration of the intellec- logue with the early Lukacs, returningcon- tual, as it emerges in Geschichte und Klas- sciously to the latter's pre-Marxist phase, senbewuptsein, is predicated on a moment that is, to a time before he committed him- of overcoming-namely, overcoming the self to a collective project.20 For Adorno, specific definition of the intellectual as a the unspoken question is: To whom and in critic of art and literature. Again, the com- whose name can the intellectual speak? parison with Weber could be helpful. We- Moreover, what language can he or she use ber's definition of the political and the poli- in the context of the discursive system of tician would exclude the Lukacsian revolu- advanced Western societies? It is notewor- tionary as a prophet and visionary who thy that Adorno returned to the problemat- stands outside the structure of modern so- ics of the early Lukacs-notwithstanding ciety. For Weber, it would be an aesthetic or the historical as well as epistemological rift religious and, therefore, illegitimate fea- that so clearly separated them-because ture, since it fails to acknowledge the dif- what, from the perspective of the mature ferentiation of modern society. Lukacs, was at best the reflection of youth- ful ambivalence and uncertainty, took on a new urgency in the eyes of Adorno after the devastating critique of the Enlightenment project in Dialektik der Aufilarung-a critique that already presumed the moral col- HOHENDAHL: Scholar, Intellectual, Essay 223 lapse of the Communist project in the So- about the task of the intellectual. Adorno's viet Union. reading of Lukacs's essay pays little atten- Epistemologically and politically, Dia- tion to the latter's ideological investment lektik der Aufilarung underscored ques- in the basic concepts of Lebensphiloso- tions, among them the role of the critic and phie-by and large, he replaces the concept the mode of articulation. While Horkhei- of Leben with that of Geist-instead, he fo- mer and Adorno insisted that their own cuses on the methodological aspects. For project continued the tradition of the En- him, the essay form provides a forum for a lightenment, they rigorously subverted the fundamentally non-systematic discus- authority of reason and the social appara- sion-theoretically informed, but not de- tus based on the use of reason, thereby also termined by a systematic unfolding of a questioning the ground of the critic. They conceptual apparatus. This means that the clearly did not escape a performative con- question of style and language is even more tradiction insofar as they carried out their central to Adorno than it was to the early critique in the rational language of system- Lukacs. It foregrounds a skeptical resis- atic philosophy. The tension is also re- tance to the heavy-handed terminology of flected in the destabilization of the critic: academic philosophy and specifically re- For and to whom were Horkheimer and flects Adorno's opposition to Heidegger's Adorno speaking in Dialektik der Aufildi- ontology, which Adorno presents as typi- rung? Written between 1941 and 1944 in cally German and pre-Enlightenment: exile with little hope of publication, the study served first and foremost as a means In Deutschland reizt der Essay zur Ab- of self-clarification-a critique of the pro- wehr, weil er an die Freiheit des Geistes mahnt, die, seit dem MiRlingen einer seit ject that the Frankfurt School had formu- Leibnizischen Tagen nur lauen Aufkla- lated during the 1930s.~~More than Hork- rung, bis heute, auch unter Bedingungen heimer, it was Adorno who, after his return formaler Freiheit, nicht recht sich entfal- to Germany, attempted to come to grips tete, sondern stets bereit war, die Unter- with the epistemological, as well as political ordnung unter irgendwelche Instanzen consequences of Dialektik der Aufilarung. als ihr eigentliches Anliegen zu verkiin- Generally critics have argued that he for- den. (GS 11:lO) mulated his response in Negative Dialektik and ~sthetischeThe~rie.~~ Thematically, What Adorno sees as the failure of the Ger- this is certainly correct. However, this an- man Enlightenment is the very tradition swer overlooks the question of articulation of systematic philosophy from Leibniz to (language).For Adorno, the essay form was Heidegger. Clearly in the spirit of Nietz- not accidental-a means of expressing oc- sche-whose name is not mentioned- casional thoughts. Rather, the essay form Adorno insists on a different process of en- became the center of his philosophical pro- lightenment, a different mode in the ject-as can be gleaned from the organiza- search for truth. This is the reason why tion of ~sthetischeTheorie. the question of methodology preoccupies For this reason, Adorno's essay on the Adorno. The method of the essay is seen essay-a performative salto mortale- as a subversion of traditional philosophical must be taken very seriously; it addresses argumentation. "Damit suspendiert er the role and function of critical interven- zugleich den traditionellen Begriff von tion, that is to say, the question of the in- Methode. Der Gedanke hat seine Tiefe tellectual. Of course, Adorno, using the es- danach, wie tief er in die Sache dringt, say form for this discussion, is fully aware nicht danach, wie tief er sie auf ein anderes of the implications for his own position- zuriickfiihrt" (GS 11:18-19). Yet, this sub- the fact that he writes as an intellectual version is not to be equated with a mere 224 THEGERMANQUARTERLY Summer 1997 lack of rigor, for instance, a sellout to the truth content (Wahrheitsgehalt) remains feuilleton (which Adorno perceives as the an open one, therefore also exposed to error potential danger of the essay form). The as part of the learning process. The central intellectual rigor of the essay, Adorno sug- metaphor for the essay is the configuration, gests, suspends traditional methods of where concepts "einander tragen" (GS philosophical thought; it makes use of the 11:21) rather than the building or the fragmentary, as well as discontinuous na- Geriist. Switching the metaphor, Adorno ture of the form. Its precision, which also speaks of a "Kraftfeld" (GS 11:22). Adorno emphatically defends, is that of This means that the thought processes are configurations. "In ihr bilden jene kein loaded with tensions, coming together at a Kontinuum der Operation, der Gedanke particular point, without any guarantee of schreitet nicht einsinnig fort, sondern die continuity. "Diskontinuitat ist dem Essay Momente verflechten sich teppichhaft" wesentlich, seine Sache stets ein still- (GS 11:21). Hence, the success of an essay gestellter Konflikt" (GS 11:25). depends on what Adorno calls the "Dichte Clearly, for Adorno the essay form is der Verflechtung" (GS 11:21). more than a genre that is useful for certain Even if Adorno had not explicitly subject matters, while other questions call pointed to it, the anti-Cartesian drift of his for different forms and methods. Peter Biir- essay is hard to overlook. "Insgesamt ware ger is right when he argues that Adorno's er zu interpretieren als Einspruch gegen description of the essay is largely informed die vier Regeln, die Descartes' Discours de by his philosophical 0utlook.~3Hence, Bur- la me'thode am Anfang der neueren, abend- ger treats it as a philosophical program landischen Wissenschaft und ihrer Theorie which outlines Adorno's understanding of aufrichtet" (GS 11:14).As Adorno argues, non-identity and negative dialectics. While neither does the essay follow the rule that his assessment captures the methodologi- the object has to be divided into manage- cal and theoretical dimension of Adorno's able parts, nor does it encourage a meth- essay, Burger fails to address its performa- odological search and analysis, beginning tive and political status. Adorno also situ- with the simple facts, and then moving on ates himself in the postwar debate about to more complex configurations. Finally, the role of the intellectual. In this context, the essay resists the demand for complete Adorno accentuates his opposition to the analysis, which Kant later reiterated as a German academic tradition, both its philo- methodological principle. This resistance sophical and its philological variety. When leaves the essay form vulnerable and open published in 1958, Adorno's essay implied to criticism, as Adorno readily concedes. a negativeverdict against theacademic tra- Why, then, does Adorno defend the es- dition and its alliance with the social and say, even insisting on its superior value? At political establishment. This position is this point, I have to introduce the concept mostly articulated through stylistic provo- of experience (Erfahrung), which has the cations, polemical and hyperbolic formula- same centrality as the concept of life for the tions-which attest to Nietzsche's pres- early Lukacs. Adorno refuses to define his ence in the text. term; thus, his readers have to grasp its The essayist's performance calls into sense by paying close attention to the mo- question the apparatus of the academy, its ment of negation in his discussion of the unspoken alliance with the existing politi- Cartesian rules. What emerges are two mo- cal order-under the guise of freedom of ments-the insistence on particular ob- research and scientific objectivity. The es- jects and particular knowledge, and the ac- sayist, once more, turns out to be a critic ceptance, even praise, of uncertainty. To who addresses ultimate questions while put it more pointedly, the search for the dealing with specific, frequently marginal HOHENDAHL:Scholar, Intellectual, Essay 225

issues. What the mature Adorno shares tionary situation, the intellectual had to re- with the young Lukacs is a preoccupation define his or her role vis-g-vis what Adorno with aesthetic questions. Yet thereis, I sub- called the totally administered society.25 mit, a stronger sense of marginality in The structure of the essay becomes the only Adorno's essays, an uncertainty about the viable strategy of the intellectual: Subver- possibility of communication. Adorno's es- sion replaces opposition; the act of writing says do not present themselves as part of a (as a performance) replaces social praxis. dialogue. While the subjectivity of the critic asserts itself at every moment in the text, the role of the recipient remains underde- veloped.As arule, Adorno does not set himself up to teach by addressing his readers In 1968 neither his disciples nor the stu- (with the exception of "Lyrik und Gesell- dent movement as a whole were inclined to schaft"). Rather, it is in the act of reading accept this position. Working with the as- itself that the learning process is preserved. sumption that the political and social crisis The style of Adorno's essays has, of of the late sixties in the Federal Republic course, a profound effect on the conception of Germany tended toward a revolutionary of the intellectual. It subverts any notion climax, they postulated a more active and of an organized collective project, as it was stronger role for theory.26 In particular, developed by the Institute for Social Re- they returned to a model of theory and search in the 1930s. It is not accidental, I praxis that Adorno had abandoned in the believe, that Horkheimer and Adorno did 1940s. Not surprisingly, then, Adorno re- not revive the Zeitschrift fur Sozialfor- jected the interventionist project of the schung after the war, as Herbert Marcuse radical students in 1968, calling instead for had hoped.24 As a critic, Adorno made no radical theoretical self-refle~tion.2~In effort to speak in the name of the Institute, Adorno's model, the intervention of the in- which he codirected after its resurrection tellectual retreats to the moment of reflec- in 1949. The work of the Institute, mostly tion in the act of writing-a position that empirical studies, and Adorno's writings the students found profoundly unsatisfac- ran side by side without intersecting too tory. frequently. The irony is that Horkheimer, In the meantime, the student rebellion Adorno, and their disciples were called a of 1968 has been declared a failure. Es- school when they had less of a common pro- pecially after 1989, there has been a grow- gram than in the 1930s and early 1940s. ing mood among German intellectuals to One could possibly argue that the next eclipse the generation of 1968 in the name generation, for instance, Habermas, Negt, of a renewed national identity. Has the Kluge, and Claus Offe, were searching defeat of the German Left vindicated again for a common critical program based Adorno's position, as some American crit- on a revised version of Western Marxism ics have claimed?28 Clearly, Adorno's con- and then integrated the writings of their cept of the intellectual as an agent of sub- teachers into the position of the "school." version is more in agreement with more For Adorno, the notion of a philosophical recent American attempts to redefine the school became increasingly alien, not to role of the intellectual. It is interesting to mention the commitment to a specific po- note that, in Germany, Peter Burger has litical party. As Adorno explained, revolu- argued that Adorno's understanding of the tionary social theory had missed its histori- essay is part of a closed past and cannot calmoment of practice and could not regain serve as a model for us today. While Burger it through forced efforts on the part of the underscores the significance of the essay theorist. In other words, in a postrevolu- form for contemporary thought, he also 226 THEGERMANQUARTERLY Summer 1997 criticizes Adorno's concept as no longer social environment. Nor did he ever fore- corresponding to our situation ("Problem- ground his own precarious status as a Jew- lagen),29sincehe remained wedded to a sys- ish kmigrk who returned to Germany after tem ofantisystematicphilosophy, i.e., nega- the Holocaust, an outsider who had become tive dialectics. Rightly, Biirger notes the an insider in the world of the German man- two sides of Adorno's model-the formal darins-a world that was carefully restored and the methodological aspects-but he after the Nazi period and began to crumble mistakenly concludes that Adorno ulti- only in the late sixties under the pressure mately sides with philosophy. Instead, I of the student movement. Unlike Ben- want to suggest, Adorno carried the essay jamin, Adorno and Horkheimer were pro- form into systematic philosophy and ulti- fessors of philosophy and civil servants mately undermined the traditional concept with pension rights at the University of of writing philosophy.30 In Aesthetische Frankfurt. Was his defense of strictly non- Theorie, this direction becomes more radi- collective intervention no more than a de- cal than in Negative Dialektik. Adorno un- fense of the status quo ofpostwar Germany, dercut the genre of the German mandarins, as some radical students charged? although he was part of the academy and, The revolutionary impetus requires, of in certain respects, quite eager to play his course, collective action and, therefore, professional role. In his repeated critique some notion of a collective subject, such as of the German academy, Adorno claimed a political organization. Traditionally, in- for himself the role ofthe public intellectual tellectuals have played a crucial role in the who intervenes where the apparatus has organization and theoretical articulation of become unable to extricate itself, yet he re- revolutionary parties-especially on the fused the gesture of speaking for a group Left. Adorno's resistance to this role, which or a collective subject. If at all, the Adornian Lukacs had emphatically embraced, points intellectual, as a reader of artworks, can to a shift that needs exploration. As we have claim to disclose a truth content. It is this seen, in Adorno's model of the essayist and privileged link to the aesthetic sphere critic, any allegiance to a social group or (which Adorno shares with the early class has been subverted. The hope lies in Lukacs) that I see as both the strength and the performative act of writing-regard- the limitation of Adorno7smodel. Its form less of the audience. It was quite consistent of legitimation connects it closely to the with this model that Adorno later refused postrevolutionary phase of modernism, to support the politicization of the radical which, however, remained determined by students and their efforts to organize po- the moment of the past revolution and its litical resistance. He argued that, histori- equivalent in the aesthetic avant-garde. cally, the moment for collective revolution- The recent criticism of Adorno's under- ary action had passed-leaving the post- standing of mass culture by British culture revolutionary intellectual only with the theorists and American postmodernists,31 means of theoretical refle~tion.3~The in- in spite of its reductive tendency, captures dictment of political action partly reflected this aspect in Adorno's position-a contin- the mood of the late Adorno, his concern ued resistance to the changes in mass cul- with the completion of his own work. But ture itself, a fixation on the 1930s and such personal motives do not explain the 1940s, when the intellectual was called decoupling of theory and praxis and the upon to reveal the false ideology of the cul- consistent emphasis on the power of critical ture industry. language. By revoking the elements of po- The Adornian model of the intellectual litical activism, Adorno returns to the in- is mostly silent about its material aspects. ception of the culture of critical discourse, Adorno gave his critical voice no concrete but without its initial belief in the totaliz- HOHENDAHL:Scholar, Intellectual, Essay 227 ing strategy of philosophy. Still, it is worth tion and decentering, Burger's fictional noting that Adorno holds on to the eman- narrative offers a plurality of voices with cipatory aspect of the project. In fact, I differing, conflicting positions. Unless one would argue that Adorno cannot escape decides reductively to identify the author this propensity without losing his intellec- with the voice of the first-person narrator, tual identity. Even in the subversion of the the plurality of voices invites the reader to enlightenment project, critical discourse negotiate between a number of subject leaves its imprint-as a call for a new and positions. In this structure, the plight of better Enlightenment. In this respect, the individual intellectual becomes a prob- Adorno may be more representative than lem of interior communication that mimics he himself assumed, for, as Alvin W. Gould- the conflicting voices in the critical dis- ner puts it: "The paradox of the New Class course of the contemporary German public is that it is both emancipatory and elit- sphere. Precisely by staging the end of the ist."33 leftist project in a fictional narrative, Bur- ger keeps it alive. In this respect, but in this respect only, he would concur with Karl Heinz Bohrer's celebration of the aesthetic as the moment of overcoming and redemp- Has this project finally come to an end? ti0n.3~ Is Adorno's essay on the essay no more than Are we justified, then, in predicting the a moment of past history, as Peter Burger end of the intellectual, the end of a culture suggests? What, then, remains of the power of critical discourse, and, more broadly of speech, which Gouldner rightly per- speaking, theend of Gouldner's New Class? ceives as the core of the project? In a Once we extend the question in such a way fascinating fictional account, entitled Die as to include the fate of an entire social Tranen des Odysseus, Peter Burger has group, the present lament over the future described the end of the German Left as an of the intellectual seems overblown and ex- inability to speak and write, as a falling aggerated. Actual shifts and changes silent which becomes analogous to a death within the New Class are depicted as radi- while, at the same time, the voices on the cal breaks and losses. The loss of particular Right are becoming louder and more stri- functions, which depended on specific his- dent.34 At the center of the narrative we torical contexts, is turned into the end of find the pathology of the subject/narrator an era. A comparison with the American who experiences the breakup of intellec- situation might be helpful in under- tual communication in his small discussion standing the meaning of such shifts. An group and, subsequently, observes his important theme of the recent American own pathological status--depression and debate has been the decline of the public feelings of worthlessness. Significantly intellectual and his or her replacement by enough, however, the subject continues to academic functionaries. Russell Jacoby has speak and write. The critical discourse argued that these academics, secured by turns on itself, i.e., the failure of a project tenure and disciplined by the pressure of becomes the target of the analysis. How- their academic institutions, have aban- ever, it is noteworthy that this analysis is doned the commitment to the public at no longer carried out in discursive lan- large and have moved away from the social guage, but in the form of fiction. The shift and cultural causes that, a generation ago, to an aesthetic mode of articulation has, it defined the project of public intellectuals, seems to me, fundamental implications for i.e., of journalists and freelance writers.36 the subject position. While the critical dis- While such a shift from public to academic course of the essay allowed for fragmenta- intellectuals has possibly taken place, the 228 THE GERMANQUARTERLY Summer 1997

indictment fails to take into account the possesses the scientific knowledge and structural transformations of the Ameri- technical shlls on which the future of mod- can public sphere, which has also changed ern forces of production depend. "37 While the academic public sphere. Contrary to Gouldner underscores the progressive popular sentiment, American universities character of the New Class as a whole and have become considerably more public credits its members with a universalist and since the 1960s and, consequently, more po- rational outlook, he also emphasizes the litical. As a result, academics have taken importance of its own class interests and over functions that were formerly in the notes that "the New Class is hardly the end hands of journalists and freelance writers. of d0mination."~8Its power is derived from But in this process, academics have not cultural capital; in other words, it is linked simply become public intellectuals-hence to the culture of critical discourse. Yet, this the complaint that the critical function has culture is more ambiguous than its radical disappeared. left wing has been prepared to concede: It When we look at the larger picture, how- is emancipatory and elitist or, more pre- ever, that is, at the social formation for cisely, it is potentially elitist through its which Gouldner and others have intro- emancipatory perspective. This is not a duced the term "New Class," these shifts matter of controlling the material means must not be overrated. They primarily con- of production; rather, it concerns the level cern the position of the humanists, espe- of discourse and epistemology. Historically, cially literary intellectuals who tend to be intellectuals as a social group have at- more vocal in the public sphere. One of the tempted to dominate the definition of truth reasons why this critique became particu- and thereby set up a new power hierar- larly strident in Germany was precisely the chy.39 traditional emphasis on the literary and My assessment of intellectuals as a so- aesthetic character of the intellectual's cial group has underscored two points: its work, an emphasis that so strongly comes deeply contradictory character, and its con- to the foreground in Adorno's writings and tinuing internal divisions. Both are closely is also evident in Biirger's recent assess- connected. The present indictment of the ment of the essay form. If one replaces the intellectuals in Germany, for instance, is old dichotomy between the scientist and carried out, to be sure, by conservative in- the intellectual with the opposition be- tellectuals or neo-conservatives, just as the tween the expert and the public intellec- critique of the German mandarins-i.e., tual, the contemporary hostility becomes the conservative academic intellectuals- more understandable. Given the high de- was pursued by the Left.40 The tendency gree of complexity of advances in industrial to identify intellectuals with the left politi- societies, the posture of the writer or poet cal spectrum has possibly encouraged the as a moral critic fails to carry the weight it notion of an ideologically unified group. It used to have even a generation ago. There should be noted, however, that these in- no longer seems to be an obvious mandate fights, which have been so prominent since for the writer to assume leadership. 1989, signify more than just a struggle for Yet, the fact that the nature and char- control over the critical discourse-this is acter of the culture of critical discourse is obviously the case-they ultimately articu- presently contested should not be con- late the above-mentioned contradiction, strued prematurely as the end of the intel- which can best be described as a performa- lectual or of the intelligentsia as a social tive one. While intellectuals have defined group. As Gouldner has pointed out, ad- themselves in terms of a critical discourse vanced Western societies heavily depend on which separates them from immediate ma- them for their efficiency: "The New Class terial interests, they have also insisted on HOHENDAHL:Scholar, Intellectual, Essay the control over the production and dis- Asked within intellectual culture at a spe- semination of this discourse, which, then, cific time, for example, today, in this coun- becomes their property and power base. try or in Germany, the answer will stress a Yet, it is peculiar to the ethos of intellectu- particular position within the configura- als that this very contradiction comes un- tion of the present debate, for instance, the der scrutiny and becomes the focus of in- continued viability of the universal project ternal tensions between conflictinggroups. of modernity or the call for a new cultural Formally, the contradiction can be re- authority based on traditional high cul- solved in two ways: Either the internal de- ture. This analysis, then, focuses on the on- bate emphasizes the need for status and going internal struggle for dominance; hierarchy vis-a-vis other classes at the ex- however, this conflict does not necessarily pense of the universal nature of the critical affect the future of the social group at large. discourse, a conservative move toward The internal struggle is part of its articu- class consolidation, or it can stress the per- lation vis-a-vis other classes and the social formative contradiction itself, calling for a system as a whole. The fate of the intelli- critical reassessment of the intellectual dis- gentsia as a social group calls for a different course. In this resolution, the intellectual kind of analysis in which the tensions and subverts his or her own basis and poten- underlying contradictions are viewed as tially moves toward its self-destruction. moments of a larger social and cultural dy- Precisely this move, the calling into ques- namic, which may well be crucial for its tion of the intellectual's mission and the survival. subversion of the culture of critical dis- In the recent German debate about the course on which this mission rests, also re- fate of the intellectual, Helmut Schelsky's affirms this very mission and, thereby, the work seems not even to play a minor role claims, as well as the status, of the social -possibly because it belongs too much to group. Hence, both Adorno's insistence on the 1970s-but this debate shares Schel- the essay form and Biirger's shift to a fic- sky's preoccupation with the meaning and tional self-assessment of the intellectual, use of culture. At its center we find the through their gestures of undermining search for the production of meaning and claims for a representative mission, also re- the epistemological, as well as socio-cul- instate the moment of critique that has tural, conditions of this production. To use grounded the role of the intellectual in the Schelsky's terms, the contemporary con- first place. troversy concerns the function of "Heils- In concrete historical situations, such wissen" and "Orientierungswissen" rather as the German development since the fall than that of "Arbeits~issen."~~This con- of the Wall, a firm distinction between a flict has been constructed either as an op- conservative and a subversive resolution of position between the insistence on moder- the contradiction is not easy, since, in indi- nity and rationality versus a return to tra- vidual cases, aspects of subversion can ditional values, on the one hand, or as a overlap with aspects of conservative oppo- struggle between a political and a radically sition. (The recent work of Botho StrauD aesthetic interpretation of the world, on would be a good case in point.) In other the other. Other positions and dichotomies words, the internal division among intel- could easily be added. While these positions lectuals is as ambiguous as their social po- give us an indication of the scope of the sition. Hence the question as to whether controversy, they do not fully grasp the there is a need for intellectuals in the fu- stakes of the debatethese come into the ture, and whether they have amission, can- foreground only when we look more closely not be answered unambiguously. Their an- at the discourse itself. It is the culture of swer depends on the level of the analysis. critical discourse, its boundaries and its 230 THEGERMANQUARTERLY Summer 1997 legitimacy, which is at the heart of the mat- it is evasive and fails to develop a clear-cut ter. Consequently, the question of style and position which can influence public debate writing has received much attention, be- and thereby make a difference. In this con- cause in the German tradition this problem text, the essay can be perceived as part of defines the essence of the intellectual's in- the implicit elitism that Gouldner attrib- tervention. Even those voices who mean to utes to intellectuals as a social group. This deny the legitimacy of such interventions argument strikes me as persuasive only and call for their abolishment or reconfigu- when the concept of the intellectual has ration depend on critical discourse and use been narrowly defined in literary terms, as its language. This is precisely the double was frequently the case in Germany. But bind that makes the present attack on the even here the Weberian split between sci- intellectual both important and frustrat- entist and intellectual, which Adorno still ing. The frustration stems from the grow- took seriously, has lost its structural impor- ing reification in the polemic against the tance. If one understands writers and lit- intellectual-as if those who call for the in- erary critics as a mere segment of the larger dictment of the intellectual were not part group that Gouldner calls the New Class, of the same social group and its problems. then the intervention of the essay form Important, however, would be a critique takes on a different meaning. The essay which deconstructs the fundamental cate- encourages the vital process of self-reflec- gories on which the culture of critical dis- tion that the New Class needs to fulfill its course is based, thereby arriving at a more critical cultural and social function. The es- differentiated understanding of the prob- say as a subversive form resists dogmatic lem. thought structures and undercuts the It is in this context that Adorno's analy- power of linear arguments. As Burger sis of the essay form (of course, essayistic notes: "Auch der Essay hat seine Gesetze. itself) is relevant again, beyond its initial Das vielleicht strengste verbietet ihm, Bi- historical meaning in the context of the lanz zu ziehen, den Ertrag einstreichen zu early years of the Federal Republic, but not wollen. Seine Denkbewegung sperrt sich as a preparation for a more systematic the- gegen den Versuch, sie, wie man sagt, auf ory, as Biirger suspects. Instead, a renewed den Punkt zu bringen."42 For this reason, reading would foreground the performa- it cannot and should not claim responsibil- tive moment, i.e., the subversive character ity for the totality of the social. Still, the of the essayistic position, and its antisys- pluralism of conflicting voices does not sig- tematic nature. This reappropriation might nal either a mere satisfaction with main- well reposition itself vis-a-vis Adorno's ges- stream compromise or a celebration of un- ture of distance toward the artwork and decidability; rather, it evokes the need for allow for a greater proximity of the discur- intertwining individual experience and the sive and the fictional mode as we find it in movement of critical thought. Burger's novel. The gain would be the possibility of a plurality of conflicting voices, shown in a process of negations, criticism, Notes and countercriticism, which moves toward a reassessment of the inherited culture of lFor an overview see K. H. Wewetzer, "In- critical discourse-a reassessment, not a telligenz, Intelligentsia, Intellektueller," Hi- rejection, of its critical aspect. The plurality storisches Worterbuch der Philosophie, ed. undercuts the move towards a hardening Joachim Ritter and Karlfried Griinder, 9 vols. of a single position. (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesell- Any suggestion of pluralism, however, schaft. 1971-95) 4: 445-61. is potentially exposed to the criticism that 2See Hauke Brunkhorst, Der Intellektuelle HOHENDAHL: Scholar, Intellectual, Essay im Lande der Mandarine (Frankfurt a. M.: und die Formen: Essays (NeuwiedIBerlin: Suhrkamp, 1987). Luchterhand, 1971) 7-31. Page references to 3For a detailed historical analysis, see Gan- this edition are given in parentheses (SF). golf Hubinger and Wolfgang J. Mommsen, eds. 15His essays on Kassner and Kierkegaard Intellektuelle im deutschen Kaiserreich. (Frank- attempt to work out this difference. While the furt a. M.: Fischer, 1993); Michael Stark, ed. piece on Kassner foregrounds the nature of the Deutsche Intellektuelle 1910-1 933 (Heidel- critical voice (calling it Platonism), the essay berg: Lambert Schneider, 1984). on Kierkegaard focuses on the ethical problem. 4Max Weber, "Wissenschaft als Beruf," Ge- The ultimate question, however, is similar in samtausgabe, Abteilung I: Schriften und Re- both cases: How is authentic life experience den, ed. Horst Baier et al., 22 vols. (Tubingen: possible? Using Kassner as the exemplary es- Mohr 1992) 17: 72-111. See Wolfgang J. sayist and critic, Lukacs again highlights the Mommsen, "Max Weber: Ein politischer In- mediated character of the link. For the Platon- tellektueller im Deutschen Kaisserreich," ist Kassner, the world is available only through Gangolf and Mommsen 33-61. forms created in the past. The critical voice 5For a discussion of the radical Left see depends on the formal construct of the past. Hans-Harald Miiller, Intellektueller Linksradi- His own creation is a shadow of life (SF 41). kalismus in der Weimarer Republik (Kronberg: While Kassner's voice is that of the Platon- Scriptor, 1977). ist, Kierkegaard's voice-another incarnation 6Weber, "Wissenschaft als Beruf' 74. of the critic-is that of the Asket who pretends 7Weber, "Wissenschaft als Beruf' 80. to be the seducer of his fiancee in order to keep 8Weber, "Wissenschaft als Beruf' 86. a rigorous distance to ordinary (relative) life. gSee also Max Weber, Wirtschaft und Ge- Kierkegaard's ethical rigor is philosophical,yet sellschafi (Koln: Kiepenhauer and Witsch, it turns against systematic philosophy (par- 1964) 1034-1102. ticularly that of Hegel). For Lukacs, Kierke- 1°For Weber, this is primarily a question of gaard's life is marked by absolute rigor, a rigor leadership, more specifically,a matter of a clear that must ultimately turn to God as the only distinction between teacher and leader. Again, appropriate object of his love. Still, Kierke- Weber wants to place the emphasis on the lim- gaard's exemplary life, his heroic battle with its of the role of academic teachers. They are his own time, remains a particular instance, not to be confused with political or religious possibly typical, but not generalizable. At the leaders, since they cannot offer access to ulti- end of the essay, Lukacs relativizes the mate knowledge or values. Thus in the case of Kierkegaardian gesture, just as he relativized the theologian, Weber carefully distinguishes Kassner's Platonism. The critic, using the es- the task of systematizing the Christian belief say form, necessarily subverts his own claim system and the religious dogma itself, which and (in the person of Kierkegaard) submits to the theologian has to accept as a given. Simi- the indeterminable nature of life experiences. larly, aesthetic theory (and here Weber refers The ethical position of the critic is punktuell, to the work of the early Lukacs) is concerned determined by the circumstances of his or her with artworks, but presupposes the existence object. What stabilizes this position is the mo- of art. Once the theorist decides to transcend ment of form enacted through and within the the level of description and becomes involved poetic vision. with the aspect of revelation, he or she has left 16See Russell A. Berman, "Literary Criti- the sphere of science. cism from Empire to Dictatorship, 1870- llSee also Max Weber, "Religionssoziolo- 1933,"A History of German Literary Criticism, gie," Wirtschafi und Gesellschafr 417-88. 1730-1980, ed. Peter Uwe Hohendahl (Lin- 12See Martin Jay, Marxism and Totality coln: U of Nebraska e 1988) 277-357, espe- (Berkeley: U of California T: 1984) 81-127. cially 300-12. 13See Peter Uwe Hohendahl, Reappraisals: 17For the early Lukacs see Mary Gluck, Shifting Alignments in Postwar Critical The- Georg Lukacs and his Generation 1900-1 918 ory (Ithaca: Cornell UT: 1991) 31-52. (Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1985). For the 14Georg Lukacs, "her Wesen und Form critical self-appraisal, see Lukacs's 1962 pref- des Essays: Briefe an Leo Popper," Die Seele ace to The Theory of the Novel, trans. Anna Summer 1997

Bostock (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1971) 11-23. GS 10.2: 794-802. 18See Jay 241-75; Fredric Jameson, Late 28See for instance, Michael Sullivan and Marxism: Adorno, or, The Persistence of the John T. Lysaker, "Between Impotence and 11- Dialectic (London, Verso, 1990); J. M. Bern- lusion: Adorno's Art of Theory and Practice," stein, The Fate of Art: Aesthetic Alienation New German Critique 52 (Fall 1992): 87-122. from Kant to Derrida and Adorno (University 29Burger,Dm Denken 9. Park: Pennsylvania State UP, 1992). 30See Hohendahl, Prismatic Thought lgSee Peter Uwe Hohendahl, Prismatic 217-41. Thought: Theodor W Adorno (Lincoln: U of 31See, for example, Jim Collins, Uncommon Nebraska E 1995) 45-72. Cultures: Popular Culture and Postmodernism 20Theodor W. Adorno, "Der Essay als (New York: Routledge, 1983). Form," Noten zur Literatur, vol. 11 of Gesam- 32Adorno,"Resignation." melte Schriften, ed. Rolfe Tiedmann, 20 vols. 33AlvinM! Gouldner, The Future of Intellec- (Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp, 1973-84), 11: tuals and the Rise of the New Class (New York: 9-33. Unless otherwise noted, all references to Oxford 1978) 84. Adorno's works are from this edition and are 34Peter Burger, Die Tranen des Odysseus given in the text in parentheses (GS). (Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp, 1993). 21Rolf Wiggershaus, Die Frankfurter 35Karl Heinz Bohrer, Plotzlichkeit: Zum Schule: Geschichte, Theoretische Entwicklung, Augenblick des asthetischen Scheins (Frank- Politische Bedeutung (Munich: dtv, 1988) furt a. M.: Suhrkamp, 1981). 364-83. 36Russell Jacoby, The Last Intellectuals: 22See, for instance, Jameson and Bern- American Culture in the Age of Academe (New stein; see also Christoph Menke, Die Sou- York: Basic Books, 1987). veranitat der Kunst: ~sthetischeErfahrung 37Gouldner 83. nach Adorno und Derrida (Frankfurt a. M.: 38Gouldner 83. Suhrkamp, 1991). 39See Zygmunt Bauman, Legislators and 23Peter Burger, Das Denken des Herrn: Interpreters: On Modernity, Post-Modernity Bataille zwischen Hegel und dem Surrealis- and Intellectuals (Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1987). mus (Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp, 1991) 7-14. 40For a prominent example of leftist criti- 24Wiggershaus 515-19. cism in Germany, see Jurgen Habermas, The 25See Theodor W Adorno, "Gesellschaft," New Conservatism: Cultural Criticism and the GS 8: 9-19; "Spatkapitalismus oder Industrie- Historians' Debate, ed. and trans. Shierry We- gesellschaft" GS 8: 354-70. ber Nicholsen (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1989). Sabine von Dirke, 'Xll Power to the 41Helmut Schelsky, Die Arbeit tun die an- Imagination": The West German Countercul- deren: Klassenherrschaft und Priesterherr- ture from the Student Movement to the Greens schaft der Intellektuellen (Opladen: Westdeut- (Lincoln: U of Nebraska P, 1997) 29-66. scher Verlag, 1975) 122-23. 27See Theodor W Adorno, "Resignation," 42Burger,Das Denken 165.