The Institute of Social Research 143so, there were distinctions between religious socialists such as Paul Tillich
and Carl Mennicke and the followers of Stefan George (such as Ernst
Kantorowicz and Max Kommerell), and both of these groups looked
down their noses at the members of the Institute of Social Research
(Felix Weil and Fritz Pollock). Colleagues assigned to the ‘fashionable’
subject of sociology were looked upon with particular suspicion, for
they all inscribed the word ‘critique’ on their banner, but were unable
to agree among themselves. The circle around the distinguished regis-
trar, Kurt Riezler, thought of itself as standing above the opposing
factions, and Riezler saw it as his task to act as conciliator.^43 In general,
Adorno would scarcely have found the Stefan George circle much to
his liking, with its mixture of elitism and traditionalism, but he did
find himself attracted to the group of George followers in Frankfurt
who were led by the literary scholar Max Kommerell and the historian
Ernst Kantorowicz. Kantorowicz’s inaugural lecture was a fashionable
university event, one that Adorno was not going to miss. This led Karl
Korn, who was also present, to comment on the young man ‘with the
unusually intense and intelligent eyes’ and to mistake him for someone
from the George circle.^44 On the whole, however, Adorno felt more
attracted to the opposing camp, the philosophers and sociologists who
thought of themselves as the radical critics of society and as staunch
upholders of the achievements of cultural modernity. Even before reach-
ing the lofty heights of the Habilitation, Adorno had been privileged
to join that circle of committed, left-leaning intellectuals that met
irregularly in the Café Laumer to discuss the burning issues of the day,
but also such matters as university appointments, new books and the
wrong decisions made by the city in cultural affairs. The predominant
figures at these meetings were Kurt Riezler, Paul Tillich, Max
Horkheimer, Friedrich Pollock, the newly appointed sociologist Karl
Mannheim, the economist Adolf Loewe and the educationalist Carl
Mennicke. Adorno remembered these meetings as a typical Frankfurt
phenomenon of the 1920s: ‘We frequently went for one another like
wild animals; it is difficult to picture our lack of restraint, but the fact
is that we did not scruple to assault one another with accusations of
being too ideological or else too lacking in principles, but all of that
took place without in the least damaging our friendships.’^45 Needless to
say, different alliances were formed at various times, but quite soon
Mannheim had the misfortune to become the main target and one who
constantly left himself open to attack. According to Peter von Haselberg,
‘his book Ideology and Utopia provided serious competition to the
social philosophy that Horkheimer wished to inaugurate and fill with
substance.’^46 Adorno did not hesitate to take sides against Mannheim,
who had occupied the chair in sociology since January 1930. Adorno
not only shared Horkheimer’s reservations about Mannheim’s concept
of ideology, but he even attempted to outdo Horkheimer’s criticism
of it.