Fromm’s marginalization intensified through competition with Adorno and Horkheimer’s preference for his theoretical line.

Evidence

From the moment Adorno arrived in New York, Fromm had heavily criticized precisely those areas in which, in Horkheimer’s eyes, he was more and more clearly being surpassed in theoretical productiveness during the second half of the 1930s. What Horkheimer had perhaps hoped forthat Fromm would waive his tenured contract or his salary while remaining attached to the Institute or at least at its disposaldid not come about. Fromm made enquiries about the research on the working class and he was sent a copy of it. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 293

Categorization

• XREF: Ties to the book’s earlier material on Adorno’s arrival and the shifting internal hierarchy of the Horkheimer circle. — connects to: Adorno’s 1934 return displaced Fromm as Horkheimer’s chief theoretical interlocutor.; Horkheimer prized Adorno’s aggressive polemical edge precisely where he found Fromm lacking.; Fromm diverged from Horkheimer and Adorno by affirming a philosophical anthropology of human nature. — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination: A History…, 321 (+2 more)
• yield-rescued: below the book’s yield-target cutoff, included anyway for connecting to: Adorno’s 1934 return displaced Fromm as Horkheimer’s chief theoretical interlocutor.; Horkheimer prized Adorno’s aggressive polemical edge precisely where he found Fromm lacking.; Fromm diverged from Horkheimer and Adorno by affirming a philosophical anthropology of human nature. — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination: A History…, 321 (+2 more)