Aesthetic Autonomy and Praxis: Art and Language in Adorno and Habermas


Authors
Jennifer A. McMahon
University of Adelaide
Abstract
Abstract Aesthetic autonomy has been given a variety of interpretations, which in many cases involve a number of claims. Key among them are: (i) art eludes conventional conceptual frameworks and their inherent incompatibility with invention and creativity; and (ii) art can communicate aspects of experience too fine?grained for discursive language. To accommodate such claims one can adopt either a convention?based account or a natural?kind account. A natural?kind theory can explain the first but requires some special scaffolding in order to support the second, while a convention?based account accommodates the second but is incompatible with the first. Theodor W. Adorno attempts to incorporate both claims within his aesthetic theory, but arguably in his aesthetic theory each is cancelled out by the other. Art?s independence of entrenched conceptual frameworks needs to be made compatible with its communicative role. Jürgen Habermas, in contrast, provides a solution by way of his theory of language. I draw upon the art practice of the contemporary Icelandic?Danish artist Olafur Eliasson in order to demonstrate this
Keywords aesthetic autonomy  Habermas  Adorno  Olafur Eliasson
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1080/09672559.2011.539365
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Beauty.Jennifer A. McMahon - 2019 - Oxford Bibliographies Online: Philosophy.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Kant, Adorno and the Work of Art.M. W. Skees - 2011 - Philosophy and Social Criticism 37 (8):915-933.
Why Did Adorno "Hate" Jazz?Robert W. Witkin - 2000 - Sociological Theory 18 (1):145-170.
A Portrait of the Artist as an Aesthetic Expert.Christy Mag Uidhir & Cameron Buckner - 2014 - In Gregory Currie, Matthew Kieran & Aaron Meskin (eds.), Aesthetics and the Sciences. Oxford University Press.
Art, Self and Knowledge.Keith Lehrer - 2011 - Oxford University Press.
The Artwork and the Promesse du Bonheur in Adorno.James Gordon Finlayson - 2015 - European Journal of Philosophy 23 (3):392-419.
Aesthetics.Harold Osborne - 1972 - London: Oxford University Press.
Mimesis in Adorno’s Aesthetic Theory.Bed P. Paudyal - 2009 - Journal of Philosophy: A Cross-Disciplinary Inquiry 4 (8):1-10.
Non-Perceptual Aesthetic Properties: Comments for James Shelley.Noël Carroll - 2004 - British Journal of Aesthetics 44 (4):413-423.
The Inclusive Interpretation of Kant's Aesthetic Ideas.Samantha Matherne - 2013 - British Journal of Aesthetics 53 (1):21-39.
The Aesthetic Function of Art.Gary Iseminger - 2004 - Cornell University Press.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2011-06-16

Total views
1,259 ( #1,526 of 2,250,038 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
212 ( #1,817 of 2,250,038 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature