메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색
질문

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
Kim, Jaecheol (Hansung University)
저널정보
새한영어영문학회 새한영어영문학 새한영어영문학 제56권 제2호
발행연도
2014.5
수록면
59 - 81 (23page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색
질문

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
By revisiting the Lukacs-Adorno debate on modernism, this essay surveys the aesthetic theories of Lukacs and Adorno: in particular, this essay critically investigates Adorno’s aesthetics presented in Aesthetic Theory from the Lukacsian perspective. The scope of this essay also covers a critical investigation of the recent critical trend that Adorno is more favorably received by critics than Lukacs after the rise of post-structuralism. This is because critics tend to esteem Adorno’s “negative dialectic” as a sort of deconstructive practice while considering Lukacs’s notion of totality as an expression of Stalinist totalitarianism. Nonetheless, what we should not fail to notice in this regard is that the Lukacs-Adorno debate has its own significance not just because it is the culmination of the modernist debate but behind it resides critical issues such as how we should take the social engagement of writers and how art could be an expression of social praxis. The essay will begin with a brief survey of Lukacs and Adorno’s aesthetic theories, and then it critically examines Adorno’s essay “Reconciliation under Duress” which allegedly shows the way Adorno successfully confutes Lukacsian theory. Nonetheless, Adorno’s theory in “Reconciliation under Duress” is possible only when he forecloses the possibility of art’s social engagement―thus making an argument of “Negation under Duress.” In the final section of this essay, I read Beckett’s Endgame in terms of and from the perspectives of Lukacs and Adorno’s aesthetic theories. Endgame becomes a significant work to frame the debate not only because the debate itself formed around Beckett’s work but also the play which negates any possible engagement of art to its existential condition (i.e. the society), thus praised by Adorno, shows the way Adorno’s aesthetics forecloses any sort of social praxis.

목차

I. Aesthetic Theories: Georg Lukacs and Theodor Adorno
Ⅱ. “Reconciliation under Duress” or “Negation under Duress”
Ⅲ. Lukacs and Adorno on Endgame
Ⅳ. Epilogue
Works Cited

참고문헌 (23)

참고문헌 신청

이 논문의 저자 정보

이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0