CRITICAL THEORY, in a specific sense means a speculative approach of Frankfurt school, especially of Thedore Adorno, Max Horkheimer, and Jügen Herbermas; it is named by Horkheimer. It is a critique of modern society.
The theorists see that human beings do not live upon logical laws unlike natural science. It seeks radical change in society which liberate individual human beings, by dialectically inspecting and eliminating trick of ideology and by leading people to be able to judge by themselves.
It is originally based on the philosophies of Marx, Hegel; for example, it states that it is necessary that the society becomes classless to achieve the goal. It however does not talk of tasks to be done, as critical theory is to speculate how society can theoretically be freer. In a more general sense, the term can describe a wide range of attempts/non-scientific theories for understanding human society, social action, human sciences, etc. in a critical way.
FRANKFURT SCHOOL is a group of intellectuals including philosophers, sociologists and economists which had a connection with the the Institut für Sozialforschung (Institute for Social Research) in Germany. It was founded in 1923 within he University of Frankfurt in Frankfurt am Main with the support of Felix Weil and the Frankfurt University.
The key individuals of the school are Theodor Wiesengrund Adorno, Max Horkheimer, Herbert Marcuse, Walter Benjamin and Jügen Habermas. The institute is known for its approach which is often referred as Critical Theory which shows their own version of Marxism as it had a link with Moscow-based Marx-Engels Institute before-the-war. In 1930, Horkheimer became a Director of the school. Three years after that–in 1933, the power of the Nazi’s Party drove the Institut into exile as its members were consisted of a considerable number of Jewish; therefore they moved to Switzerland and then to the USA to find a new settlement at Columbia University. In 1950, the Institut returned in Germany. In 1958, Adorno was appointed Director.
The school does not belong to any political party, but it was always sympathetic and associated with the ideas of the Left; meanwhile communist parties related philosophies such as Stalinism and so-called institutionalised form of Marxism, Dialectical Materialism were disapproval to the members. Social democratic parties, proletariat and also utopian retionalism were also disapproval. The school stood against the rise of Fascism. The school left major impact on the New Left.
Whilst the traditional thoughts on the Enlightenment project which talk of human’s progress and process toward emancipation as a linear process, insisting that the true liberty can be achieved once certain reason release yuma beings from fallacies and superstitions, the school warned that although reason may free human from superstition, myths and the like, there is a danger that the reason–instrumental reason itself may become a new belief which restricts human beings. Those concerns are seen in Horkheimer and Adorno’s theory, Dialectic of Enlightenment.
The core interest of the school was to free human beings by leading public to be aware of the facts and factors of modern society which sustain human from true freedom and which disrespect personal and cultural true values. Therefore it was critical to positivist and scientific philosophies, pointing out that it loses and limits the interest for incalculable values.
For it tries to control consumers to be obsessed with commodities which are designed for mass consumption, the school condemned what Adorno and Horkheimer named Culture Industry. Chiefly, the term culture industry is addressed to the entertainment industry which produces works designed for mass consumption typified by Hollywood movies and commercial (popular) music. The members of school thought that this culture industry is becoming another tyranny which prevents people from social freedom by blinding them to independent values and prisoning consumers in their market and capitalism.
Nevertheless, some of the school members came to find it hopeless that individuals of the society of today become critical to what encompasses them. Those members are often called as pessimistic members of Frankfurt school.
Eventually, psychoanalysis took a part in characterising the works of the school. With the influence of character analysis by Fromm and Reich, it is thought that there is a hope to demonstrate the path to human liberation, for psychoanalysis would explain phenomenas caused by the characteristics of human personality like Authoritarian Personality which craves for being dictated and thus supports fascism. Also psychoanalysis is said to open people’s critical sights which is blurred by the elements of modern society.
ADORNO, Theodore Wiesengrund (1903-69) was a German sociologist, musicologist, philosopher, critic of contemporary culture, and a leading member of the Frankfurt school. His impact upon critical theory and the school is significant, especially the negative aspect toward communist parties’ falling into the dogmatic ideology. He is the one of pessimistic members who saw no escape from the unfreedom which the modern world holds as a result of Enlightenment project. His works include The Dialectic of Enlightenment (1941), Negative Dialectics (1966), The Authoritarian Personality (1950), and his Collected Works (1970 – 86).
HORKHEIMER, Max (1895 – 1973) was a German philosopher, who was Director of the Institut für Sozialforschung and the leading member of the Frankfurt school. As he is best known for The Dialectic of Enlightenment, he made the outline of the critical theory.
BENJAMIN, Walter (1892 – 1940) was a Jewish-German literary critic, philosopher, and member of the Frankfurt school. His works published in 1955 flourished his fame among German New Left and English-speaking world in 1969 and 1978. His introduction and interpretation of flâneur as the model which represents the nature of modernity and his celebration of surrealists is well-known. It is said that his stance and his association with the Frankfurt school are complicated whilst he is renowned figure for Western Marxism.
Viewing: From Tom and Jerry to Itchy and Scratchy– the analysis of cartoons and capitalist production.
“Cartoons were once exponents of fantasy as opposed to rationalism. They ensured that justice was done to the creatures and objects they electrified, by giving the maimed specimens a second life. [Could this be a reference to the cat’s nine lives in Sylvester the Cat-egorical Imperative?] All they do today is to confirm the victory of technological truth reason over truth. A few years ago they had a consistent plot which only broke up in the final moments in a crazy chase, and thus resembled the old slapstick comedy. Now, however, time relations have shifted. In the very first sequence a motive is stated so that in the course of the action destruction can get to work on it: with the audience in pursuit, the protagonist becomes the worthless object of general violence. The quantity of organized of organized amusement changes into the quality of organized cruelty. The self- electors of the film industry (with whom it enjoys a close relationship) watch over the unfolding of the crime, which is as drawn-out as a hunt. Fun replaces the pleasure which the sight of an embrace would allegedly afford, and postpones satisfaction till the day of the pogrom. In so far as cartoons do any more than accustom the senses to the new tempo, they hammer into every brain the old lesson that continuous friction, the breaking down of all individual resistance, is the condition of life in this society. Donald Duck in the cartoons and the unfortunate in real life get their thrashing so that the audience can learn to take their own punishment.”
***
One day, on my way home from Central London, a guy who was sitting next to me suddenly drew my attention. He looked like an average well-built British guy, and was opening a handy-sized plastic bottle of soda which might taste good and popular as I see the bottle everywhere on this planet. After he took a first sip of the soda, he took out a small bag of potato crisps which is labelled with the popular brand’s name, opened it, and began eating crisps — or just nibbling. As he was just consuming the snack at a slow speed without doing any other actions, not even reading the text on the bag, I wondered what is going on in his inside. Is he having a deep thought, controlling unendurable shock in his mind, or just enjoying the pleasure which the snack gives him? Whilst I was pondering over what I would think when I have a bag of crisps, he sped up eating and finished the bag at last with pouring the last tiny bits by hanging it upside down and tapping the bottom of the bag so that the bits fall into his mouth. Next, he pulled out a chocolate bar, again, of a popular brand from somewhere in his clothes, tore the package and ate, then finished his soda. By this time, I was already feeling pretty much entertained by seeing him performing as a genuine typical common-consumer-in-Britain (to me), and he was good enough to give me another show. As a passenger in front of his seat left the car, he stood up a little, then picked up a newspaper, Metro or Evening Standard and began reading it apparently vaguely. (Apologies if it sounded way too violently discriminative, but I was pleased to see the whole action and himself and throw an invisible applause.)
I wonder if Adorno and Horkheimer see him as a victim of Culture Industry who is unconsciously taken his freedom of choice and chance of enlightenment and threatened by its totalitarianism.
In the lecture, we examined what a newspaper is consist of by ripping off all the advertisements in it, and we saw editorial’s tricks which seem to call subliminal effects of advertisements in the paper by designing layout effectively. If the companies’ earns are increasing from those advertisements, indeed the theory still could explain consumers in capitalism society today.
Nevertheless, I doubt if this theory’s reliablity lasts for another decade, as it seems that the relationship between consumers and industries is changing. For example, we could assume that nowadays, people who choose entertainment without/less advertisement is increasing, as there are numerous ways to avoid watching advertisement to enjoy selected entertainment products. Furthermore, from my experience, I feel that our attitude toward typical advertisements is changing; interestingly, I recently started looking at advertisements as something of nostalgia, but not something I would be related to as a consumer of the products (But note that it happens only when I accidentally happen to see advertisements, as I normally avoid them. I don’t watch YouTube especially when they have ads in the beginning.) And I think that this is happening due to the rise of newer media as Culture Industry became possible because of the new media of Adorno’s era. Therefore, I predict that we will soon have the phase to think of a new version of Dialectic of Enlightenment.
***
RSA Animate – Choice
RSA Animate – Choice
Duration: (10:44)
User: thersaorg – Added: 16/06/11
2MED521 Modernism and Postmodernism 