Adorno's Authenticity text

[Ralph Dumain]

Sorry for any possible confusion.   My comments about Bourdieu were 
directed to his book THE POLITICAL ONTOLOGY OF MARTIN HEIDEGGER.  Over the 
weekend I read Adorno's THE JARGON OF AUTHENTICITY.  I must say I found 
Bourdieu a much more enjoyable read, but this is hardly an objective 
evaluation or serious criticism.  They are quite different works, but they 
both involve Heidegger's use of language.

Bourdieu's book was quite fascinating, in that he focused on Heidegger's 
terminology from the perspective of its covert dual functioning, within the 
demarcated field of "philosophy" and in the common ideological parlance of 
the day.  Heidegger sought to insulate his work from mere empirical 
criticism or reference, always removing it to a plane of esoterism removed 
from profane everyday understanding.  Yet his success with the German 
intelligentsia was bolstered by the resonances of his terminology with the 
reactionary ideological usages of his words in common 
parlance.  Heidegger's coded language, despite hieratic pretensions, is 
what makes his ontology political through and through, regardless of his 
actual affiliation with the Nazi party.

Bourdieu's approach, as you know, is based on his sociological concept of 
the "field".  Adorno does not work on the same basis, though he invokes the 
concept of division of labor to explain the philosophical specialist's 
proclivities.  Adorno finds similar self-protective measures in Heidegger's 
work as Bourdieu does.  Adorno is concerned about the debasement of 
language--jargon--its emptiness of real content, now filled by catch 
phrases of indefinite meaning which serve a duplicitous ideological 
function, in the manner of advertising slogans.  Though Heidegger wanted to 
insulate his nostalgic retreat to Being (sentimentalizing preindustrial 
rural life in the process) the vulgar everyday world of the "They", his 
vacuous ideas are of the very essence of capitalist exchange value.  There 
is a fundamental paradox in trying to maintain the ethos of the mythic in a 
demythologized world.  Heidegger attempts to insulate himself in advance by 
proving that his would-be interpreters must of necessity misunderstand him, 
but Adorno finds him out.

The most difficult aspect of reading Adorno's book is his references to 
German discourse of the time (presumably the early '60s).  He refers to the 
abuse of language in everyday political and social discourse and the 
resonance of same in Heidegger's work, but without acquaintance of the 
former I get only a nebulous picture of what Adorno's allusions 
mean.  Furthermore, I do not know the dominant intellectual or specifically 
philosophical trends of the time, though it appears as if German 
existentialism is still dominant or at least prevalent.

Adorno dissects Heidegger's rural phoniness and use of keywords and 
concepts such as commitment, curiosity, idle chatter, dignity, and 
death.  Adorno intensively analyzes the relation between wholeness and 
death (involving also the "they" and exchange), finding therein the sour 
fascist violence at the root of Heidegger's entire philosophy.  Adorno's 
quotations from Heidegger reveal the fraudulent, empty claims of 
Heidegger's jargon.  The only philosopher who comes off looking worse is 
Jaspers.

At 01:11 PM 4/21/2003 -0400, Lou Caton wrote:
>Hi Ralph and list,
>
>Below you mention that Bourdieu and Lukacs have critiques either on the notion
>of authenticity itself or on Adorno's text on authenticity.  I wasn't 
>quite sure
>which it was (?)  In either case, I'm still interested.  Could you send along
>the details so that I might print a copy of either one?  Have you read them?
>What do you think?
>
>Lou Caton
>lcaton@wisdom.wsc.ma.edu