Adorno dismissed the Marxist Benjamin as a Brechtian distortion of Benjamin’s true nature.

Evidence

Adorno never understood why since 1967 there had been criticism of the edition of Benjamin’s works that he had brought out during the 1950s, and why he had been accused of suppressing the materialist Benjamin, the Benjamin who defended the decisive role of art in the class struggle. The `Marxist’ Benjamin had always appeared to Adorno to be something un-Benjaminian that could only be explained by Brecht’s influence, an anti-art trait that did not suit Benjamin. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 680

Categorization

  • XREF: Links to the Adorno-Benjamin-Brecht triangulation already encountered in the Institute’s handling of Benjamin’s legacy. — connects to: Brecht’s Svendborg circle was blamed for Benjamin’s pro-communist aesthetic turn. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,
, 212; Adorno dismissed Benjamin’s stance as a psychodynamic defense mechanism. — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination: A History
, 1515; Adorno saw Benjamin’s Marxist side as an un-Benjaminian artifact of Brecht’s influence. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,
, 2717 (+3 more)
  • SEED: Angle: how an editor’s fidelity to a dead friend’s ‘true’ thought becomes an act of censorship — the politics of posthumous editions.
  • yield-rescued: below the book’s yield-target cutoff, included anyway for connecting to: Brecht’s Svendborg circle was blamed for Benjamin’s pro-communist aesthetic turn. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,
, 212; Adorno dismissed Benjamin’s stance as a psychodynamic defense mechanism. — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination: A History
, 1515; Adorno saw Benjamin’s Marxist side as an un-Benjaminian artifact of Brecht’s influence. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,
, 2717 (+3 more)

Broader Connections