For Adorno, destroying reified language and submitting to another language coincide

Evidence

The technique of concatenation, achieved through strict outward form, and modelled on Pindar and other Greek poets, was a convincing example of how extreme linguistic discipline could lead to the liberation of something one apparently only needed to submit oneself to. Destroying language and submitting oneself to it thus appeared to be one and the same thing. But `language’ was being used in two different senses here. What was to be destroyed was everyday, communicative, reified language. The language one was to submit oneself to was a different one. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 2250

Categorization

• DEFINE: Distinguishes two senses of ‘language’ in Adorno: reified communicative language to be destroyed versus a poetic language of submission.
• XREF: Echoes the reification critique running through the whole Frankfurt School project. — connects to: Radical linguistic discipline both destroys reified language and submits to a purer one; For Adorno, solving a riddle destroys rather than reveals its meaning — Dirk Braunstein, Adorno’s Critique of Political Economy, 197; Adorno reads reification as human self-domination through self-created compulsion — Dirk Braunstein, Adorno’s Critique of Political Economy, 88 (+6 more)

Broader Connections

• For Adorno, dialectical thinking requires self-consciousness be inscribed in the sentence structure itself #expands (0.85) — Fredric Jameson, Marxism and Form, 115
• Adorno’s dense style is a deliberate intransigence against cheap readability #corroborates (0.82) — Fredric Jameson, Marxism and Form, 18
• Adorno reads reification as human self-domination through self-created compulsion #expands (0.80) — Dirk Braunstein, Adorno’s Critique of Political Economy, 88
• For Adorno, solving a riddle destroys rather than reveals its meaning #expands (0.78) — Dirk Braunstein, Adorno’s Critique of Political Economy, 197