Adorno’s ‘use-value-in-itself’ assumption departs from and contradicts Marxian theory

Evidence

According to Adorno, alienation causes objects to no longer serve use in a strong sense. The need fulfilled by use no longer precedes things, which now tend first to be produced and only subsequently assigned some use. Already here, a highly problematic conception of use-value emerges which can be seen throughout Adorno’s work. This conception assumes a transhistorical ‘usevalue-in-itself’ inherenttothings beyondeconomic determinants,whileeffectively denying that certain things lend themselves to being used in various ways: hence, Adorno’s claim that the ‘contents of the intérieur’ are ‘alienated from the purposes they represent’ and therefore ‘deprived of their own use-value’. Setting aside the assumption that there could exist something like a ‘genuine’ use-value which certain commodities have lost – an assumption absolutely incompatible with Marxian theory – the notion of ‘use-value-in-itself’ leads to Adorno’s inability in this passage to trace the need for ornamental embellishment manifested in the bourgeois intérieur back to socio-economic causes. What he views as ‘real need’ is simply need which has been socially deformed in the concept of use-value. — Dirk Braunstein, Adorno’s Critique of Political Economy, 230

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the broader revisionist literature (e.g., Postone) that reads Adorno’s critique of political economy against the grain of orthodox Marxian value theory — this criticism positions Adorno as a weaker Marxist here than the revisionist framing expects. — connects to: Adorno’s use-value destruction thesis contradicts Marx’s commodity definition — Dirk Braunstein, Adorno’s Critique of Political Economy, 440; Adorno’s Fetish-Character essay omitted Marx’s question of the specific form of socialisation. — Dirk Braunstein, Adorno’s Critique of Political Economy, 452; Adorno and Horkheimer revised their culture-industry claim to avoid equating use-value with actual use — Dirk Braunstein, Adorno’s Critique of Political Economy, 882 (+3 more)
• DEFINE: Defines Adorno’s contested concept of ‘use-value-in-itself’ and its incompatibility with Marx.

Broader Connections

• Adorno’s use-value destruction thesis contradicts Marx’s commodity definition #corroborates (0.85) — Dirk Braunstein, Adorno’s Critique of Political Economy, 440