Theme 2: Critical media studies

"Dialect of Enlightenment" by M. Horkheimer and T.W.Adorno 

1. M. Horkheimer and T.W.Adorno defined enlightenment as “widest sense”; “triumph of the factual mentality”; totalitarian interaction between human and nature (“Dialectic of Enlightenment: Philosophical Fragments”, 2002, p. 2-4). Enlightenment is the way to demolish myth and “establish man as the master of nature” (M. Horkheimer and T.W.Adorno, “Dialectic of Enlightenment: Philosophical Fragments”, 2002, p. 1).  Hence, enlightenment is based on standard of calculability, utility and invention. In other words, facts overcome the heritage of metaphysics: rituals, demons, illusions. Enlightenment supports rationalist and empiricist point of view. At the same time myth and enlightenment is closely related.  

2. Dialectic is the way to define the thing. According to dialectical thinking, the contradiction is the core in order to define the object. Firstly, you need to deny what is not the object willing to get the definition of what it is exactly. But dialectic involves more than rejection of the determination. Dialectic way of thinking encourages analysis of object features which is the background to admit

falseness.

3. Nominalism is a philosophy which stays that object has any sense and matter. Objects are commonly agreed definitions. Regarding this point of view, nominalism perspective denies metaphysics. Nominalists call objects as nomen, “the non-extensive, restricted concept” (M. Horkheimer and T.W.Adorno, “Dialectic of Enlightenment: Philosophical Fragments”, 2002, p. 17). Enlightenment is described as “nominalist tendency”. Both nominalism and enlightenment perspectives eliminate metaphysics. Nominalism does not analyze the matter of object while enlightenment is about the disclosure of the proper definition.

4. Looking from enlightenment perspective, myth is profane deception and unclarified matter, unprofound theory. Enlightenment has to overcome myth, but “myth becomes enlightenment” (M. Horkheimer and T.W.Adorno “Dialectic of Enlightenment: Philosophical Fragments”, 2002, p. 7). It means that myth raises the questions which are being articulated by enlightenment but in the end “it falls as judge under the spell of myth” (M. Horkheimer and T.W.Adorno “Dialectic of Enlightenment: Philosophical Fragments”, 2002, p. 8). Myth will not exist if it is not articulated, and enlightenment is the way to spread myth. Regarding to this M. Horkheimer and T.W.Adorno point, the question can be raised: if there is any possibility to dissolve the myth? As I understood, it is an endless process.

"The Work of Art in the Age of Technical Reproductivity" by W. Benjamin 

1. The concepts "superstructure" means public areas which are under power and control. For example, culture is superstructure. Substructure is interpreted as the means to develop, maintain and spread the concept of superstructure. For instance, media is one of substructure.  According to Marxist perspective, culture is a part of superstructures in society. The Marxist theory is based on “rendering the great mass of humanity “propertyless <…>” (Karl Marx, “The German Ideology”, 1845). To reach this goal all public spheres (superstructures) have to be made simultaneously and be enrolled in the mass production (substructures). Under these circumstances, the society will be evolved into “universal development of productive forces” (Karl Marx, “The German Ideology”, 1845). Looking from Marxist perspectives, culture as a superstructure must be controlled willing to suppress the masses “which bring culture within the sphere of administration” (Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer, “The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception”, 1944).  

2. Culture has revolutionary potential due to its power to influence masses. W. Benjamin described culture as an art of political regime which helps to bring and formulate revolutionary demands. W. Benjamin emphasized the film as the “powerful agent” to demolish cultural heritage and establish perception in favor of regime. According to W. Benjamin, reproduction of art demolishes ritual and makes new politics practice. Reproduced culture loses the primal ritual instead of that establishes and maintains cult of authority. Revolutionary will not occur without masses and culture is a tool to control masses and direct them in the favorable way. Perspective of Adorno & Horkheimer confirms Benjamin’s view to culture as a way to govern masses. Especially, films and radio “used as an ideology to legitimize the trash they intentionally produce” (Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer, “The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception”, 1944). Adorno & Horkheimer defined reproduction of art like “ideological truce” to help the political leaders to avoid revolutionary protests.

3. To W. Benjamin’s view, periods of history influenced art and how it was perceived. Social movements, philosophical schools determined rules of art and set up public norms. For instance, ancient Greek culture was based on gods’ depiction according to gold ratio. In ancient Greece, beauty was a divine symmetry. Besides historical time, artifact as itself has “unique phenomenon of a distance” which is called aura and exists only in natural circumstances, something which is far behind but can be admired in the particular moment. To W. Benjamin’s mind, naturally perception is “sense of the universal equality of things”.

4. According to Benjamin, aura is unique phenomenon of a distance. It consists of art uniqueness in time and in tradition. Aura is a part of cult, it appears during the ritual in the previous mainly religious and spiritual ceremonies. It is not able to reproduce aura because the reproduction lacks of time and cultural historical heritage. Both aura in natural objects and in art objects lie in uniqueness and distance. But aura of art objects is based on ritual.