Dialectical criticism occupies a non-position between immersion and externality

Evidence

The position of dialectical criticism is a non-position; it can neither immerse itself in the object in the manner of idealizing, redemptive criticism, nor take a stand outside culture by comparing it with a fictitious absolute. To take up the former stance would amount to acceding to the cult of the mind; while to take up the latter stance would be to reveal hatred of it. ‘The dialectical critic of culture must both participate in culture and not participate. Only then does he do justice to his object and to himself.’ — Theodor W. Adorno, The Culture Industry, 53

Categorization

• DEFINE: The stance of the dialectical critic is defined here: both participate and not participate. This is the analytical posture the reader must adopt to fairly test Adorno against new culture.
• XREF: connects to: Hegelian dialectic is systematically non-transcendental because it admits no outside — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel: Plasticity,…, 274; Dialectical sublation operates as speculative mourning over past selves.; Dialectical criticism reveals rather than fabricates the bond between private and social realities. — Fredric Jameson, Marxism and Form, 775 (+5 more)