Our Surrogate Identity

Horkheimer and Adorno make the claim that "the inferior work has always relied on its similarity with others--on a surrogate identity" (1115). This idea is carried throughout their argument about popular culture. Literature, film, art, whatever it may be, it is only an imitation (mimesis anyone?) of everything else already existent. As they say, "that which is expressed is subsumed through style into the dominant forms of generality, into the language of music, painting, or words, in the hope that it will be reconciled thus with the idea of true generality" (1115). Therefore, art is merely a failure to recreate a generality.

However, they do comment upon what a good work can look like. Good art "does not consist of the harmony actually realized, of any doubtful unity of form and content, within and without, of individual society; it is to be found in those features in which discrepandy appears: in the necessary failure of the passionate striving for identity" (1115). Rather than art being something that attains to an understanding, or "obedience to the social heirarchy," it is something that achieves "self-negation" (1115). This is true art.

I wonder, though, if this idea is actually possible, considering the fact that Horkheimer and Adorno believe that everything is a part of culture industry, and "in the culture industry this imitation finally becomes absolute" (1115). There are no other options but for inferior work.

In the mind of Adorno and Horkheimer, works such as Eugene O'Neill's Long Day's Journey Into Night don't achieve anything except to fulfill one of the demands of society. This play, while a realist play (which is probably not something our theorists would feel positively about), still does exactly what they ask for in good art. They ask for a failure while attempting to find identity. This play is one that considers the family, and discovers the conflict of identity within each of the characters. It considers the problem of imitation, as Edmond imitates his brother Jimmy, and falls into one pattern of society. The play looks at Mary, the mother, who is struggling with morphine, as someone who has lost her identity within the new class of her husband, the world of the theater, and the world of her morphine dreams. While this play looks at all of these issues of identity, it provides no answer. The play is moderately relatable in parts, but not in a manner that would cause an audience to step out of the play into real life, and not clearly see the difference. It is such that makes the audience stop and think, ponder and consider life and its meaning.

I rebel against the idea that, due to culture industry, there is absolutely nothing left that is truly good art, and that means something more than just another part of the industry. So, I wonder, would Adorno and Horkheimer approve of plays such as Long Day's Journey Into Night? Would they consider more postmodern works as things that transcend culture industry, or just another aspect of the industry?