On Adorno’s Idea of Music through Content, Failure and the Wounded Order of the Culture Industry
The musical philosophy of Adorno holds a critical significance within the context of aesthetic theory and social critique. His understanding of negative dialectics extends music into a realm open to abstraction and critique. Adorno evaluates music not merely as a source of aesthetic pleasure but also as an art form capable of creating social and intellectual meaning. Emphasizing the subjective role in aesthetic experience, he advocates for individuals to engage emotionally, intellectually, and socially through music. His critique of the culture industry posits that commodifying music absorbs and annihilates its artistic potential. Adorno’s perspectives on tonal and atonal music present a framework for evaluating music within the societal context, addressing social decay and resistance.
Subjective Reiffications in Aesthetic Experience
Adorno’s intellectual corpus underscores the distinctive position occupied by music in his philosophical framework. This distinctiveness emanates from the fact that music, in contrast to visual arts, stands as the sole art form where the “existence of content is debated concretely”¹ (Kömürcü, 2010, p. 14).
The unequivocal and pure concept of art is applicable solely to music (Adorno, 2005, p. 30).
In the realm of music, the transcendental existence of content seems to enable Adorno’s iconic thoughts on dominant forces, social contradictions, and culture to find reflection, potentially giving rise to ideas that transcend the purely theoretical. Adorno, in contemplating art and music, sensed a deficiency in the sociological development of musicology, emphasizing the importance of understanding the historical tensions embedded in the material of music and evaluating the evolution of musical material within its historical context (Johnson, 1995, p. 295). Most significantly, Adorno perceives music as a pristine tool for critiquing elements of banality and ordinariness.
Adorno’s aesthetic theory challenges traditional aesthetic concepts, establishing a relationship with speculative tradition by proposing a dialectical understanding of artistic truth. Furthermore, he challenges the conventional dichotomy between form and content in art by emphasizing their interconnectedness (Melaney, 1997, p. 40). Adorno’s approach to aesthetics explicitly rejects accepting any fixed or absolute truth — this rejection is rooted in negative dialectics. This approach facilitates a dynamic and critical understanding of the relationship between art, society, and history (Melaney, 1997, p. 40). Adorno particularly emphasizes the role of subjective reifications in aesthetic experience. Criticizing Kant’s attempt to ground aesthetic experience in universality and examining the use of subjectivity in the philosophy of immediate existence and the concept of essential intuition, Adorno challenges Kant’s aesthetic attempt to “universalize” experience within subjectivity (Melaney, 1997, p. 43). Adorno’s understanding of the non-identical in art and aesthetics challenges traditional notions of identity and universality, refusing to merge beauty with vague universal identity concepts and highlighting the identitylessness of things as remnants of beauty in nature (Melaney, 1997, p. 46). According to Adorno, Kantian aesthetics “subjectivize” and cannot integrate its belief in autonomy with an understanding of the historical significance of art. Additionally, Adorno opposes Hegel’s reduction of art to the movement of subjective spirit, suggesting that Hegel’s philosophy may inadequately integrate the artwork into the dialectical process (Melaney, 1997, p. 41).
Certainly, Adorno approaches music through a dialectical lens. However, the dialectic he introduces and defines at this juncture is negative dialectics. This dialectic, unlike what is encountered in Marx or Hegel, is not a linear progression leading to synthesis. In Adorno’s thought, the “identity (synthesis) emerging in the thesis-antithesis-synthesis process” is not a successful outcome but rather a loss (Yıldırım, 2016, p. 6–8). In this dialectic, it is evident that the antithesis consistently prevails, and the synthesis results in a flawed outcome. However, according to Adorno, this should be a perpetual cycle — a never-ending process. In Adorno’s view, all of Western philosophy is nothing but the “domination of the subject over the object” (Yıldırım, 2016, p. 7). Negative dialectics liberate the subject from the malady of subjectivity and critically engage with subjectivity. The purpose is not to reverse the damaged hierarchy between subject and object but to put an end to the subject > object hierarchy inherent in Hegelian dialectics. The dialectic, where the subject establishes hegemony over the object, results in a harmonious identity with the antithesis, which, upon examination, has not created an enlightened mind post-modernity (Akkol, 2018, p. 117). The synthesis stage, perceived as ‘identity’ emerging from the thesis-antithesis stage considered as ‘contradiction,’ is seen as “not a success but a flaw” (Celayiroğlu, 2004, p. 4). Expecting critical theory in Adorno’s thought to move beyond dialectics, Celayiroğlu notes that it involves “rejecting an externally imposed reason while not simply accepting the apparent reality” (Celayiroğlu, 2004, p. 4–5).
According to Adorno, human consciousness tends to reduce values, emotions, and thoughts to concrete objects. “Values such as freedom, peace, tolerance, justice, equality, conscience, brotherhood, and thoughts about all human emotions are ultimately objectified and reduced to the position of objects” (Akkol, 2018, p. 129). Objectification, in this context, is a malady inherent in the human mind. Furthermore, the mass consciousness that renders values, emotions, and thoughts ‘plastic’ and transforms them into commodities also “renders lifeless and commodifies music, one of the most vibrant productions about humanity” (Akkol, 2018, p. 129).
The Content of Music and the Failure of Artwork
To comprehend how Adorno’s thought becomes personalized in music, it is crucial to examine the discourse on musical content. In this regard, it is asserted that Adorno largely embraced Hegel’s views. According to Hegel, “even though music lacks an objective appearance, it inevitably possesses content” (Kömürcü, 2010, p. 14). The abstraction of musical content also abstracts musical expression. It is through this process that the concept of the ‘musical object freeing the artist’ is attained. In other words, the artist, particularly in music, liberates themselves and intertwines with the subjectivity of the musical object far more than in visual arts. Thus, when it is acknowledged that content in music, albeit abstract, exists, we find ourselves referring to content stemming from the artist’s subjectivity, directly or indirectly linked to Adorno’s conception of an artist connected to social reality (Kömürcü, 2010, p. 14). According to Adorno, the world in which music is heard directly shapes the perception of music (Akkol, 2018, p. 114). Consequently, factors such as family, immediate surroundings, place of birth and residence, beliefs, preferences, social class, and societal and economic status play a crucial role in shaping an individual’s perception of music.
On the other hand, in Adorno’s thought, content should be “enlightening and liberating from a dialectical perspective” (Kömürcü, 2010, p. 14). Enlightening and liberating music primarily rejects the boundaries of conformity shaped by harmony and harmony, instead embodying elements of contradiction and conflict. According to Adorno, reification and affirmation jeopardize enlightenment and liberation in music (Kömürcü, 2010, p. 15). Therefore, music content should avoid reification and affirmation. In this case, it is necessary to closely examine these two concepts that reflect Adorno’s dialectical understanding.
Affirmation can be thought of as achieving reconciliation through the effort to synthesize different elements, defending the correctness of the whole, rather than exposing dialectical contradiction (Kömürcü, 2010, p. 15). For Adorno, however, dialectics that work this way, where synthesis operates through the reconciliation of conflicting elements, is damaged and misleading:
“The exaltation of splendid victims is nothing other than the exaltation of the splendid system that ultimately victimizes them” (Adorno, 2005, p. 29).
Reification involves interpreting an object in a way that gives meaning to its existence concerning other objects associated with it independently. Artwork connected to ideology through affirmation and reification becomes alienated. According to Adorno, the task of art is to “reveal what has been prevented from being seen/felt within ideology” (Jay, 2001, p. 216). Adorno defines the inclusion of any concept or specific ideological view dictated by the artist’s subjectivity in the content of music as a failure of the artwork.
Indeed, as Adorno points out, aspects involving affirmation and reification contribute to the relationship between mass culture and ideology (Figure 1), “concealing the bad economic determination of existence and accomplishing this by soothing and narcotizing people” (Adorno, 2005, p. 45).
The situation where art is connected to ideology indicates an artist within ideology while objectifying it. According to Adorno, whether an artist is within an ideological framework or not, they must absolutely “not exalt” (Adorno, 2005, p. 220). In this respect, Adorno diverges from Orthodox Marxist critical theorists (Kömürcü, 2010, p. 15).
In presenting the idea that art should not guide its audience, in contrast to Kant’s principle of ‘purposeless purposiveness,’ which can be defined as based directly on the subject, Adorno has produced a thought corresponding to: The artwork must be purposeless (Kömürcü, 2010, p. 16). This is because “a work of art directed towards a purpose finds the point that will move it outside itself” (Cassirer, 1996, p. 335, as cited in Kömürcü, 2010, p. 16). Moreover, an artwork worthy of interest is a failure since the power of an independent artwork comes from itself (Soykan, 2000, p. 69). According to Adorno, a work of art must be “absolutely autonomous” in terms of content. This autonomy is only possible by avoiding reification and affirmation and being independent of concepts.
Therefore, for Adorno, art should not exalt, should not guide, should carry an enlightening and liberating dialectic in terms of content, and should be independent of concepts.
Music in the Wounded Order of the Culture Industry
Adorno, through the concept of culture industry defined within the Dialectics of Enlightenment, depicts a societal condition where almost everything is integrated into the process of industrial production (Akkol, 2018, p. 117). According to Adorno, there is no distinction between the culture industry and the machine industry: both aim for mass production (Akkol, 2018, p. 118). There is a connection between cultural industry and ‘order,’ but at this point, it is crucial to question the concept of order itself:
“Order, in itself, is not inherently good. However, ‘good order’ may be perceived as legitimate” (Adorno, 2003, p. 82).
According to Adorno, the industry brings about an ‘order,’ but this order, though not inherently good, serves the interests of privileged circles. Moreover, music has transformed into a cultural element controlled by interest groups. In this aspect, the culture industry has absorbed the pure essence of music, rendering it damaged. The natural structure of music is “far more disorderly than the simplified form of shallow order” (Akkol, 2018, p. 119). The commercialization of music, the creation of a homogeneous mass where the recipient becomes a consumer, and the normalization of this mass with the idea of purchasing, all reflect the influence of the culture industry:
“The ideology of culture industry is so powerful that it has replaced the consciousness of the masses it has adapted with non-thinking” (Adorno, 2003, p. 81).
The mechanism of commodification by the industry blurs the lines between low and high art in commercial media. In the commercial medium, there is no difference between high and low art because both share a common ground in terms of marketability (Akkol, 2018, p. 123). According to Adorno, a danger arises: both the artist and the recipient find themselves amid a societal situation where music works as a commodity for the industry and small works of art with an opposing perspective are swallowed by the commercial mechanism. The mediocrity caused by the industry’s marketability is detrimental to both low and high art (Adorno, 2003, p. 76).
Thus, Adorno critiques the commodification of music and its use to reinforce dominant social and cultural norms by shedding light on the dynamics of the culture industry (Melaney, 1997, p. 40). He explicitly points out that popular music is a product of the culture industry, designed to cater to the lowest common denominator for profit. The culture industry, which numbs the masses and condemns them to an eleven-year-old mindset, is “conforming individuals to themselves” (Adorno, 2003, p. 76).
In this context, the concept of the instrumentalization of music needs to be addressed. Adorno examines the process of the instrumentalization of music in three stages: production, distribution, and consumption (Akkol, 2018, p. 114). As music becomes a commodity in these three stages, it loses its originality and undergoes a kind of alienation (Akkol, 2018, p. 114–115). This process signifies the departure of music from being a pure work of art to becoming part of an industrial cycle. In this situation, music becomes material for the creation of demands and contributes to the construction of desire:
“The cycle of production, consumption, and reproduction institutionalized by culture industry is a perpetuating process of institutionalized, organized, and rationalized production” (Celayiroğlu, 2004, p. 13).
Adorno sheds light on the issues of ‘instrumentalization and alienation of music’ that music faces, providing significant contributions to the sociology of music in many ways (Akkol, 2018, p. 112). To escape from this alienation, music must find a solution:
“Music should not be in front of society in a state of helpless horror and arrogant ignorance. If social issues are represented within music according to its formal laws, its social function will be more fully fulfilled” (Adorno, 1989, p. 30–31).
According to Adorno, tonal music does not offer a valid way out. Tonal music, which has “completed its historical and social task,” indicates a decadence (Aytimur, 2017, p. 495). Tonal music forms the light music branch, reinforcing the quality of marketability in pursuit of passion, simplicity, and understandability.
Adorno integrates tonal music with decadence through its conciliatory and affirmative aspects, positioning atonal music against tonal music. Atonal music shows the existence of a “new” form that allows the “rejection” of elements causing social distress, instead of compromising or affirming them (Aytimur, 2017, p. 496). Therefore, transitioning from the tonal plane, as seen by Adorno, to the high plane of atonal music, which represents its formal laws, is a reasonable idea. Influenced by Schoenberg’s analytical method, Adorno believed in revealing the double structure and tension in both the historical and individual aspects of musical material (Johnson, 1995, p. 295). Music should always be an art form containing antinomy, but the negation, possible with negative dialectics, must always continue. Music must contain contradiction inherently, emancipate itself from interest, and surrender entirely to its essence.
Furthermore, Adorno believed that the music experience is abstracted from reality, and the methods used to understand the specific social features of music are insufficient. He advocated for a music analysis that considers both the notes and the social context, emphasizing the need for an analysis that does not limit itself to notes but takes into account the social context of music (Johnson, 1995, p. 299).
The Cadence
Theodor W. Adorno, in his works on music, critically addresses the societal function of music and the relationship between musical structure and sociality. According to Adorno, music is a force that reflects and shapes society. Therefore, it is crucial for music to critically reflect societal conditions and induce change in society.
Adorno elucidates the societal function of music through the concept of the ‘culture industry.’ According to him, the culture industry transforms music into a commodity, thereby eliminating its critical potential. Music produced by the culture industry is easily consumable, standardized, and devoid of critical thought.
Furthermore, Adorno introduces the concept of ‘dialectical music’ to define a genre of music that critically reflects societal reality and can instigate change in society. According to Adorno, dialectical music dismantles traditional musical forms, creating a new and distinct musical language. This music brings forth contradictions and issues in society, encouraging the listener to engage in critical thinking. Adorno’s contributions to the field of music sociology are significant, as his works aid in understanding the societal function of music and the relationship between musical structure and sociality. Additionally, Adorno’s critical approach unveils the intricate connection between the societal function of music and its musical structure.
In conclusion, Adorno’s philosophy of music entails a critical approach to the societal function of music and its relationship with musical structure. His thoughts hold a prominent place in the field of music sociology and remain relevant in contemporary discourse.
Footnotes
[1] Indeed, for Schopenhauer, music has no direct connection with the world of events: “Music is the copy of the will” (Fischer, 1995, p. 183). Schopenhauer approaches music from a perspective where he perceives it as a phenomenon that lacks any direct relationship with the world of events. His famous statement encapsulates this perspective: “Music is the copy of the will” (Fischer, 1995, p. 183). This expression posits that music is not merely an abstract means of expression but also a manifestation of the inner world of humans, particularly their will. Schopenhauer contends that music possesses a unique quality that sets it apart from other forms of art. While other artworks provide concrete representations of objects and events, music is an abstract language that does not directly represent objects. Instead, music expresses emotions, internal states, and, notably, the will. According to this viewpoint, music penetrates the depths of human inner life and offers an emotional experience. Schopenhauer’s understanding of music positions it not only as a beautiful work of art but also as a key to understanding the inner essence of human existence. In this context, music, with its abstraction and emotional depth, emerges as a reflection of the will from Schopenhauer’s philosophical perspective.
[2] In a table extracted from a YouTube tutorial titled How to Imitate a Whole Lot of Hollywood Film Music In Four Easy Steps the letter ‘M’ represents the major ‘m’ represents the minor. The numbers between two letters symbolize the count of chromatic half-steps ascending in the octave. This table is designed to create a two-chord progression by selecting any note, for instance, when choosing the C note, the abbreviation ‘m5M’ indicates playing C minor followed by F major chords. In this case, hearing the sequence of C minor and F major chords will evoke a sense of curiosity, wonder, and transcendence.
References
Adorno, T. W. (1989). Introduction to the Sociology of Music. London, UK: Continuum Publishing.
Adorno, T. W. (2003). Kültür endüstrisini yeniden düşünürken. Cogito Dergisi, 36: 76–85.
Adorno, T. W. (2005). Minima moralia. (Çev: Orhan Koçak ve Ahmet Doğukan). İstanbul: Metis Yayınları.
Akkol, M. L. (2018). Müzik sosyolojisinde T. W. Adorno’nun yeri, Alternatif Politika, 10 (1): 111–130
Aytimur, R. G. (2017). Adorno’nun diyalektik müzik düşüncesi, Akademik Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 5(61), 493–505.
Celayiroğlu, T. Ş. (2004). Adorno’ya Göre Müzik ve Kapitalist Üretim Süreci İlişkisi [Yüksek Lisans Araştırması, Hacettepe Üniversitesi].
Kömürcü, İ. (2010). Adorno’nun estetik kuramı bağlamında müzik eserlerinde içerik analizine yönelik bir model önerisi. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 2(2), 10–19.
Melaney, W. D. (1997). Art as a form of negative dialectics: “theory” in Adorno’s aesthetic theory. The Journal of Speculative Philosophy, 11(1), 40–52.
Scott Murphy. (2015, July 11). How to Imitate a Whole Lot of Hollywood Film Music In Four Easy Steps [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSKAt3pmYBs
Soykan, Ö. N. (2000). Müziksel dünya ütopyasına Adorno ile bir yolculuk. İstanbul: Bulut Yayıncılık.
Jay, M. (2001). Adorno. (Çev: Ünsal Oskay). İstanbul: Ara Yayıncılık.
Johnson, J. (1995) Analysis in Adorno’s Aesthetics of Music Reviewed Work(s). Music Analysis, 14(2), 295- 313.
Yıldırım, M. (2016). Adorno’da Bir Özdeşlik ve Totalite Eleştirisi Olarak Negatif Diyalektik Kavramı [Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Ankara Üniversitesi].
