/lit/ - Literature

>>5957921
bump for snobbery masked in complicated prose

>>5957921
>implying /lil/ reads criticaltheory

>>5957921
what is your mother tongue ?

>>5958471
English

I'm not sure of the angle I'd take on that. I'm by no means up on Adorno, but do recall that he opposed jazz music (popular with blacks) as it, to paraphrase, casualized music. If music is inaccessible to the every day joe and only the avant-garde is tolerable music, what would 'music' as Adorno quantifies it be resisting? Stuff like Opera/classical as we know it is associated with homogenous upper-class society so what is it striving to deconstruct, in his eyes?
Completely out of my depth here but enjoy writing your college essay OP

>>5958689
thats interesting - for adorno, the intelligent man (such as himself and his friends) are the subjects of the resistance. i dont think he cares about the average joe resisting commodification - after all, adorno is a blatant and self-conscious elitist. for himself though, he thinks listening to say schonberg and looking at rothkos and reading kafga and watching beckett is what gives him a glimpse of utopia - the world is fucked, but it also doesn't have to be fucked, and maybe it won't be as fucked in the future. my main questions regard the exact process of listening to an atonal composition (with its dissonance and 'ugliness') and from that resisting commodification through the Other. but you have a very good counterpoint - since only the select few who are already aware of how fucked this world is can comprehend this art, how is it any resistance in the first place

>>5958689
>>5958716
Wait, you're mixing him up a little. I didn't comment before because I've mostly read him when it comes to his dislike for art reproduction but I think maybe we can work this shit out.

Adorno was okay with some jazz, mainly bebop and the european take on the genre. He opposed what could be qualified as popular music but no because people shouldn't get art but because the easy reproduction made the unique work less unique.
He was all for people going to see jazz musicians, he didn't like jazz records and radio reproductions. Just like he was all for art but not for photographs of art.

He was still a marxists and he believed that the revolution came from the masses, but he though the masses should ascend to the level of snobs through art, not take the art down to the masses. Art was a means to motivate people to become better and revolt.

On the other hand Benjamin had the idea that certain lesser, for them, process we see as art now had a chance too. Photographs could make you understand the world and cinema could make you feel in the role of the hero which is perfect for propaganda.

You could read Art in the Times of Mechanical Reproduction by Walter Benjamin, he was the main opponent to Adorno inside the Frankfurt school and his ideas, even if really dated, are interesting to know.

Hope that could help a bit.

>>5958761
Also, I opened the gif and somehow expected it to be animated, how silly.

>>5958761
yeah reading the benjamin paper now. can you maybe point me to where he talks about the process of contemplating art as revoutionary? i cant entirely see the mechanics of it and thats the most important part i want to deconstruct for my essay (e.g. the -how- art is resistance). and yes i wish that gif was adorno head bobbing to berg

>>5958810
adorno that is

>>5958818
I had a really long post and accidentaly erased it.
I just have a few notes and snippets with me since it's summer break here, but you should check On the Fetish-character in music and the Regression of Listening if you haven't. I believe that's where someone might get that he didn't like jazz, he discusses cultural industry and how that forces a certain homogeneization that takes away any strenght art has.

You might also want to check Dialectic of Enlightment by our good Adorno and his pal Horkheimer. That texts goes in deatil about why he sees the marketization of art as a huge problem.

Hope some of that helps! Please post anything interesting you find.

bump for decent discussion

Art that is merely "beautiful" implicitly condones and perpetuates the world as it is. Everything has both a positive and negative element. The positive reinforces the world and the negative denies some aspect of the world. It is in the negative moment of a work of art that resistance can be found. Basically. Art can't just sound nice or look nice and feel good and be "great" in its authority. It shouldn't because the world from which it arose is awful.

Adorno would be into art by Francis Bacon and music by Death Grips.

>>5960637
read this too

http://elenarazlogova.org/hist452w07/adorno.pdf

>>5958892
>On the Fetish-character in music and the Regression of Listening
>>5960645
>http://elenarazlogova.org/hist452w07/adorno.pdf
It really sounds like the obvious answer to OP, right?