Scan barcode
habibireads's review against another edition
5.0
Disclaimer:
This review is written by a mere mortal, or say, an ordinary reader. An account of personal responses I had while reading, not a full-blown thesis by some post-grad philosophy student. You can tell by the level of appallment cited as follows.
Further disclaimer:
5 stars is for thought-provoking engagement not for liking. Because If I say one thing, I did not like it. I hated nearly every sentence of this book. For important reasons, however, it has stayed with me.
-
I expected cynicism prevalent to most works of philosophers*. Still, I was not prepared to take this one. To put it simply: Adorno killed me. Reading him* is the worst experience I've had as a creative. Ironically, he wrote a lot of critic on art. On music. This book discusses the hullabaloo that is the enlightenment and contains his take on mass media and the deceptions akin to it.
My problem with Adorno is he does not excuse any work of art. He lords over the whole damn collective of entertainment industry and all culture. I would only realize this much later, after many reflections, but not before going through all five stages of grief first. Who knew you can experience that much with a book?
He says everything is predetermined by those in power, as in the movies you'll see next month, the feelings you'll have over the next pop song, and certainly the next items on your book list. He says ordinary people actually have no power over their own choices. He argues that only those on top get to decide, be it in grander schemes or individual ones. Worse, he says all of these mechanisms is keen to use humans as means to other purposes, usually political, usually reeking of ideologies that serve only the status quo, and those who make money from it. Adorno asserts through and through: humans are the means not the endgame.
I was depressed after reading. And I couldn't hold a defiance complete enough to deny his terms, not even a little argument I could say to myself in consolation. This made my depression about the book linger for days, weeks, and ultimately through the end of the year.
Any avid consumer or follower of trends is bound to feel guilty after some dose of Adorno's sharp lectures. I felt guilty. I was reluctant to take part in any appreciation of art, much more making it. I was seriously afraid I would find Adorno in everything and screaming he's right. Well, he's right to see through similar, tasteless plots, pop songs that sound just like the other one on top of the charts last month, and, my favorite, the same damn blockbuster hits working on unchanging tropes. I understood he's right but was not so ready to confront just how right he is.
It put me in a rot thinking I will never read another book, or see the next Marvel movie, or listen to any more Taylor Swift. Everything is the same, it echoed in my head. Everybody goes with the flow. And anyone who challenges this, Adorno says, is bound to a fate of isolation if not exile.
For too long, I had exactly the estrangement that creeps up on you after seeing The Matrix for the first time.
Adorno painted the world as The Matrix except the only pill available is the red one.
The way I got through all the drama from a single book, is from passages cited from a great work of literature, Homer's Odyssey. See the irony of literature saving the day, after all. It is heavily referenced in the book, from it springs forth Adorno's metaphors of the enlightenment. It is from his deliberation of the symbols remarkable of Odysseus' journey that I found my own redemption after paragraphs and paragraphs of pessimistic views of humanity and its evolutions.
And with these essential metaphors in mind, I was later more able to take the criticisms apart and use them as a lens in seeing the world, deceptions included. It is difficult to keep some hope when reading a piece of work so serious in pointing out every bad thing about society, as Adorno indeed flourishes in doing. But looking closely, the book provides the very clues to making it through the learning of ugly truths it poses. There is encouragement that becomes comfort in looking with a careful, critical eye, because the other option, seeing blindly, is not anymore a choice.
-
*I can't point out the exact series of circumstances that lead me to think reading philosophers was a good idea. I just know that in 2017, I let fiction slide off a bit from my radar and became more focused on the news and current events. As a result of more closely looking at the workings of the world, one inevitably is begged to go back to the thinkers that first noticed there are important things to understand about it all. And so I found myself clicking link after link onmarxists.org. And so I found Adorno et, al.
*And Horkheimer, and the rest of the Frankfurt school gang, really; but for the purpose of this fervent review, Adorno is the front man.
This review is written by a mere mortal, or say, an ordinary reader. An account of personal responses I had while reading, not a full-blown thesis by some post-grad philosophy student. You can tell by the level of appallment cited as follows.
Further disclaimer:
5 stars is for thought-provoking engagement not for liking. Because If I say one thing, I did not like it. I hated nearly every sentence of this book. For important reasons, however, it has stayed with me.
-
I expected cynicism prevalent to most works of philosophers*. Still, I was not prepared to take this one. To put it simply: Adorno killed me. Reading him* is the worst experience I've had as a creative. Ironically, he wrote a lot of critic on art. On music. This book discusses the hullabaloo that is the enlightenment and contains his take on mass media and the deceptions akin to it.
My problem with Adorno is he does not excuse any work of art. He lords over the whole damn collective of entertainment industry and all culture. I would only realize this much later, after many reflections, but not before going through all five stages of grief first. Who knew you can experience that much with a book?
He says everything is predetermined by those in power, as in the movies you'll see next month, the feelings you'll have over the next pop song, and certainly the next items on your book list. He says ordinary people actually have no power over their own choices. He argues that only those on top get to decide, be it in grander schemes or individual ones. Worse, he says all of these mechanisms is keen to use humans as means to other purposes, usually political, usually reeking of ideologies that serve only the status quo, and those who make money from it. Adorno asserts through and through: humans are the means not the endgame.
I was depressed after reading. And I couldn't hold a defiance complete enough to deny his terms, not even a little argument I could say to myself in consolation. This made my depression about the book linger for days, weeks, and ultimately through the end of the year.
Any avid consumer or follower of trends is bound to feel guilty after some dose of Adorno's sharp lectures. I felt guilty. I was reluctant to take part in any appreciation of art, much more making it. I was seriously afraid I would find Adorno in everything and screaming he's right. Well, he's right to see through similar, tasteless plots, pop songs that sound just like the other one on top of the charts last month, and, my favorite, the same damn blockbuster hits working on unchanging tropes. I understood he's right but was not so ready to confront just how right he is.
It put me in a rot thinking I will never read another book, or see the next Marvel movie, or listen to any more Taylor Swift. Everything is the same, it echoed in my head. Everybody goes with the flow. And anyone who challenges this, Adorno says, is bound to a fate of isolation if not exile.
For too long, I had exactly the estrangement that creeps up on you after seeing The Matrix for the first time.
Adorno painted the world as The Matrix except the only pill available is the red one.
The way I got through all the drama from a single book, is from passages cited from a great work of literature, Homer's Odyssey. See the irony of literature saving the day, after all. It is heavily referenced in the book, from it springs forth Adorno's metaphors of the enlightenment. It is from his deliberation of the symbols remarkable of Odysseus' journey that I found my own redemption after paragraphs and paragraphs of pessimistic views of humanity and its evolutions.
And with these essential metaphors in mind, I was later more able to take the criticisms apart and use them as a lens in seeing the world, deceptions included. It is difficult to keep some hope when reading a piece of work so serious in pointing out every bad thing about society, as Adorno indeed flourishes in doing. But looking closely, the book provides the very clues to making it through the learning of ugly truths it poses. There is encouragement that becomes comfort in looking with a careful, critical eye, because the other option, seeing blindly, is not anymore a choice.
-
*I can't point out the exact series of circumstances that lead me to think reading philosophers was a good idea. I just know that in 2017, I let fiction slide off a bit from my radar and became more focused on the news and current events. As a result of more closely looking at the workings of the world, one inevitably is begged to go back to the thinkers that first noticed there are important things to understand about it all. And so I found myself clicking link after link on
*And Horkheimer, and the rest of the Frankfurt school gang, really; but for the purpose of this fervent review, Adorno is the front man.
promisedlands's review against another edition
5.0
not a big believer in claiming things are the Most Important Book of Our Times, but the dialectic of enlightenment is provably the most important book of our times
davidmencik's review against another edition
4.0
Iako smatram da je poglavlje o kulturnoj industriji odlično napisano knjiga nije ostavila preteran utisak na mene. Neke ideje su ostale poprilično nejasno prikazane pogotovo u prvom delu knjige koji treba da dokaže kako je prosvjetiteljstvo prešlo u varvarstvo.
terrynye's review against another edition
4.0
As with most philosophy, it's a terrible experience to read, but important to have read.
poirotketchup's review against another edition
4.0
Writing in the immediate wake of Nazi rule, Horkheimer and Adorno ask how Enlightened Western civilizations turn to fascism. Their answer that the Enlightenment mindset itself has totalitarian elements and that strict rationality's uncompromising nature creates a trap that forces us to participate in our own oppression.
Horkheimer & Adorno's pessimism can easily be excused, as can their missed calls on jazz music and Hollywood film. But in the end, their overarching narrative reaches too far, sees no hope, and turns absurd as even Donald Duck is seen as an instrument of totalitarianism.
Horkheimer & Adorno's pessimism can easily be excused, as can their missed calls on jazz music and Hollywood film. But in the end, their overarching narrative reaches too far, sees no hope, and turns absurd as even Donald Duck is seen as an instrument of totalitarianism.
joeri's review against another edition
5.0
In this timeless work, Adorno and Horkheimer show how the Enlightenment carries within it the tendency for its own destruction, or, to use their terms, its dialectical turn into its opposition.
Enlightenment, Adorno and Horkheimer argue, understood as the advance of thought, with its aim to liberate humanity from nature, has not led to the total emancipation of humanity. On the contrary. The Enlightened earth, they show, is radiant with triumphant calamity. Contrary to what optimistic Enlightenment adherrents claim, we are not entering a more humane state, but are instead sinking into a new kind of barbarism. The triumphunt calamity for Adorno and Horheimer is the result of and exists in the appropriation of Enlightenment's instrumental reason and rationality to oppress and subjugate people to administrative forms of control and by economically exploiting them. Instrumental rationality has only helped to do this much more efficiently. Additionally, this form of instrumental reason is also used to legitimize this process by referring to 'rational ends'. The stark conclusion is that while we have now the means and capacities to end social injustice and poverty, instrumental reason is alas used as a new means to enslave people.
The instrumental rationality and form of Reason developed and used by the Enlightenment to lead us onwards toward progress and emancipation, has had its starker sides, in other words. Western Reason, Adorno and Horkheimer show, has a selfdestructive tendency. The domination of external and internal nature and society in total by Reason and instrumental rationality, has taken on hegemonic forms. Reason hence has become inextricably entangled with domination. Enlightenment as such did not only lead to more social progress, but also increased enslavement.
Despite this critical stance, Adorno and Horheimer wish still to save Enlightenment. To acheive this, however, the dark sides of the Enlightenment must first be exposed and countered.
This book to me seems very urgent in contemporary times, given the one-sided and naïve evaluation of Enlightenment ideals.. Many scholars and popular public intellectuals today still believe that as long as we complete the process of Enlightenment, we will approach a rational realm of freedom with much less suffering. They as such do not seem aware of the social domination and other negative sides of the Enlightenment, such as the subjugation of science by capitalism and the use of science and industry as a means to reproduce the status quo, in which people are still enslaved and economically exploited.
If we are indeed to enter a more humane state, we must foster the progressive sides of Enlightenment while simultaneously being aware of its oppressive sides.
Enlightenment, Adorno and Horkheimer argue, understood as the advance of thought, with its aim to liberate humanity from nature, has not led to the total emancipation of humanity. On the contrary. The Enlightened earth, they show, is radiant with triumphant calamity. Contrary to what optimistic Enlightenment adherrents claim, we are not entering a more humane state, but are instead sinking into a new kind of barbarism. The triumphunt calamity for Adorno and Horheimer is the result of and exists in the appropriation of Enlightenment's instrumental reason and rationality to oppress and subjugate people to administrative forms of control and by economically exploiting them. Instrumental rationality has only helped to do this much more efficiently. Additionally, this form of instrumental reason is also used to legitimize this process by referring to 'rational ends'. The stark conclusion is that while we have now the means and capacities to end social injustice and poverty, instrumental reason is alas used as a new means to enslave people.
The instrumental rationality and form of Reason developed and used by the Enlightenment to lead us onwards toward progress and emancipation, has had its starker sides, in other words. Western Reason, Adorno and Horkheimer show, has a selfdestructive tendency. The domination of external and internal nature and society in total by Reason and instrumental rationality, has taken on hegemonic forms. Reason hence has become inextricably entangled with domination. Enlightenment as such did not only lead to more social progress, but also increased enslavement.
Despite this critical stance, Adorno and Horheimer wish still to save Enlightenment. To acheive this, however, the dark sides of the Enlightenment must first be exposed and countered.
This book to me seems very urgent in contemporary times, given the one-sided and naïve evaluation of Enlightenment ideals.. Many scholars and popular public intellectuals today still believe that as long as we complete the process of Enlightenment, we will approach a rational realm of freedom with much less suffering. They as such do not seem aware of the social domination and other negative sides of the Enlightenment, such as the subjugation of science by capitalism and the use of science and industry as a means to reproduce the status quo, in which people are still enslaved and economically exploited.
If we are indeed to enter a more humane state, we must foster the progressive sides of Enlightenment while simultaneously being aware of its oppressive sides.