Adorno and Benjamin monopolized the Institute’s materialist aesthetics

Evidence

Although the positions in the criticism of ideology taken up by Marcuse and Lowenthal appealed to Horkheimer very muchthe essays were written, after all, while the authors were in close contact with himno more articles by either of them on the topic of art or materialist aesthetics appeared in the ZfS. The subject became the monopoly of Benjamin and Adorno. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 243

Categorization

• XREF: Institutional fact that maps onto the reader’s notes on the Frankfurt School’s internal division of intellectual labor and the marginalization of Marcuse and Lowenthal from aesthetics. — connects to: Adorno, Horkheimer, Bloch and Benjamin shared one historical-materialist program — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 209; The Institute’s aesthetic method narrowed to modernism as critical experience — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 243; Benjamin and Adorno monopolized the Institute’s aesthetic criticism after 1937. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 914 (+2 more)
• yield-rescued: below the book’s yield-target cutoff, included anyway for connecting to: Adorno, Horkheimer, Bloch and Benjamin shared one historical-materialist program — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 209; The Institute’s aesthetic method narrowed to modernism as critical experience — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 243; Benjamin and Adorno monopolized the Institute’s aesthetic criticism after 1937. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 914 (+2 more)

Broader Connections

• Benjamin and Adorno monopolized the Institute’s aesthetic criticism after 1937. #corroborates (0.93) — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 914
• Horkheimer and Adorno’s collaboration fused two distinct materialist methodologies #complicates (0.78) — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 662