106 Part II: A Change of Scene
patterns emerges most clearly, in Adorno’s view, in the policies of im-
perialism and fascism. ‘Where theories of the unconscious are rooted in
Nietzsche’s philosophy of power they take a terrible revenge in the real
world. In Spengler’s philosophy the connection between the metaphys-
ics of the unconscious, the philosophy of power and destiny, the critical
state of society and of the political actuality is expressed in exemplary
fashion.’^40 With this statement at the end of his discussion of the uncon-
scious, Adorno moves beyond a purely epistemological analysis.
Was this concern with social implications the true reason for the
rejection of his dissertation? Cornelius confined himself to the objection
that Adorno had done no more than paraphrase his own ideas – an
objection not without foundation. However, he could easily have coun-
tered this criticism by pointing to the illuminating reconstruction of
psychoanalysis in the third chapter.^41 This did not happen, however, and
there are signs that even Horkheimer, who as Cornelius’s assistant had
originally lent his support to Adorno’s plans, was unwilling to cast his
vote against the established professor.
Thus the beginning of the year 1928 was anything but auspicious for
Adorno. Further troubles, partly professional, partly private, were to
follow the blunt rejection by Cornelius. After the Frankfurt fiasco, he
needed to distance himself so as to be with his fiancée, Gretel Karplus.
However, he was not only in search of solace. He wanted to find out
whether he would be able to obtain a post as music critic with the
Ullstein Press. He had the support of Rudolf Kastner, who was in charge
of the music column for the Berliner Morgenpost. Nothing came of this,
however, since it turned out that there were no editorial vacancies.
Even so, Adorno set to work producing numerous reviews of opera
performances and concerts which he then published in the Neue
Musikzeitschrift under the engaging title ‘Berlin Memorial’. He reviewed
a piano concert in the Beethovensaal; the soloist was Egon Petri, who
was said to have played ‘the swansong of the romantic piano’. A differ-
ent view prevailed in his review of the concert in the Sing-Akademie
under Hermann Scherchen. He praised both the conductor and the
work he performed: Anton von Webern’s Six Orchestral Pieces.
According to him, they ‘are among the greatest and most substantial
works of the modern orchestral repertoire’. He also gave his approval
to Otto Klemperer’s productions of Don Giovanni and Fidelio, on the
grounds that he combined an extremely down-to-earth approach with
an ability to make traditional works appear relevant. In contrast, he
sharply criticized Bruno Walter’s interpretation of Mozart’s Il Seraglio
because his ‘refined music-making’ was aimed at ‘connoisseurs’. He also
pulled Stravinsky’s Oedipus Rex to pieces. The only merit of Klemperer’s
production at the Kroll Opera was that it enabled everyone to see the
complete failure of a composer who had wished to destroy the classical,
but who was nevertheless sustained by it. ‘Black masses are held here,
and nothing shows more clearly that music has lost its way than the fact