Adorno’s aesthetic theory leaves a plural, unresolved set of standards for judging art.

Evidence

How did Adorno himself come to terms with the jumble of possible standards by which to judge works of art that he had by now introduced: quality; degree of technical advancement; idiosyncrasy in contrast to everything traditional; richness in meaning, i.e. in what was written, composed, painted; content in terms of the philosophy of history; truth content; opposition that had been given form; degree of freedom? — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 680

Categorization

• DEFINE: Enumerates Adorno’s eight evaluative criteria (quality, technical advancement, idiosyncrasy, richness of meaning, philosophy-of-history content, truth content, formed opposition, degree of freedom).
• XREF: connects to: Adorno’s criterion for living art is circular, resting on a residue of subjectivity. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 540; Adorno judged modern art by its refusal to fully separate from what it abolishes — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 2720; Adorno could not specify criteria distinguishing resigned from oppositional art. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 2195 (+1 more)
• yield-rescued: below the book’s yield-target cutoff, included anyway for connecting to: Adorno’s criterion for living art is circular, resting on a residue of subjectivity. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 540; Adorno judged modern art by its refusal to fully separate from what it abolishes — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 2720; Adorno could not specify criteria distinguishing resigned from oppositional art. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 2195 (+1 more)