Adorno

For Adorno, the dialectic is of prime importance. He suggests that the beautiful must always contain within it an element of the "other" which promises hope and offers a pleasant memory of what Art truly is. This is why the "ugly" plays a significant role in solidifying the beautiful (art). Finally, Adorno is interested in how art can always be revolutionary, since it possesses the "other" already in it.

Like Marcuse, Adorno is writing for an audience of academics who are likely familiar with Marxist and aesthetic theory. He seems to value art for art's sake, and value (German) literature/theory in particular. In addition, Adorno seems to value art and literature -- and it seems that he values less the creation of literature and art, but rather the interpretationa or experience of encountering it. Adorno seems to want to supplant Marxist theory by critiquing Benjamin, and instill the idea that art can, in fact, have revolutionary potential. Finally, he incorporates the dialectic as the key to understanding his aesthetic theory.

I am interested in the question of hope that both Marcuse and Adorno address in their discussions of beauty. Where, exactly, does hope exist? Why is it important? How does this relate to nostalgia?

I am also interested in how art can have an essence, or, rather, how it can contain that which has past. It seems to recall Hegel here. If art does indeed recall its own beginning, and contains in it the memory of its greatness, how can we access it? Who accesses it?