Gwatter06, Horkheimer and Adorno

The reading excerpt by Horkheimer and Adorno was fairly dense and packed with an abundance of information. Even though it was quite the read, I feel as though it was fairly comprehensible and I was able to link what these authors were discussing with multiple concepts and theorists that we’ve been recently covering. The first intriguing concept that I came across in the reading was quoted in saying, “Culture today is infecting everything with sameness. Film, radio, and magazines form a system. Each branch of culture is unanimous within itself and all are unanimous together” (41). The last part of that quote I thought said the most, that each “branch of culture is unanimous.” I believe that the authors are explaining that subcultures do exist within our societal structure but become single minded and conform to the system after others latch onto to the characteristics of those subcultures. This then in turn creates all subcultures within the system to be single minded or unanimous together. This closely relates to Hebdige’s concept of the recuperation of the sub-culture in where as he explains that subcultural signs become mass-produced and lose its entities of originality and authenticism. Hebdige was quoted in saying, “as soon as the original innovations which signify subculture are translated into commodities and made generally available, they become ‘frozen.” I believe this directly exemplifies Horkheimer and Adorno’s notion of subcultures being unanimous. I was also able to notice the relation of this concept to Lyotards understanding of Avant-Gardism as “dead.” Lyotard explains that once something becomes avant-garde, something tries to replicate or follow this new idea and in turn kills it. The next intriguing concept that I came across in the excerpt was their notion of culture industry and it’s significance. The authors explained that, “for the present the technology of the culture industry confines itself to standardization and mass production and sacrifices what once distinguished the logic of the work from that of society” (42). This relates to Althusser’s notion of state apparatuses, as the authors explain that “any need which might escape the central control is repressed by that of individual consciousness” (42). This directly relates to Althusser’s ideological state apparatus as the authors link society repressed consciousness to central conformity relinquishing power to those controlling the economy. This leaves us to question whether or not hegemonic ideology is escapable in any aspect of society, if at every turn the ability to deviate from conformity is counteracted by societies consistent characteristics.