Between Oberrad and Amorbach 41younger generation. The theme of the play, topically enough, was the
situation of the individual who sacrifices himself in order to keep the
wheels of modern technical warfare turning. In the culture section of
the Frankfurter Zeitung, Heinrich Simon, the editor, published a euphoric
account of a performance of the play. Adorno did not allow himself to
be deterred from expressing an opinion that went against the prevailing
judgement. Under the general direction of Karl Zeiß, innovators such
as Georg Kaiser could gain a hearing, with plays such as Die Bürger
von Calais (The Burghers of Calais), and plays by Carl Sternheim
and Paul Kornfeld could be produced. Such writers were without excep-
tion social critics who denounced the double morality of a declining
bourgeoisie, while proclaiming the self-discovery of an ethical, unac-
commodated subjectivity which often took the form of an impassioned
expressionism. Adorno’s highly nonconformist judgements on these plays
show that he engaged in a very personal way with the artistic questions
of his day and that his self-confidence deserved to be taken seriously.
He was deeply involved in the culture of his native city, its theatre, its
concerts and the opera.^54 But also his early membership of exclusive
groups of artists and intellectuals and the generous funding of his own
individual interests did not prevent him from taking note of political
events during the Weimar Republic. Quite the reverse. In a discussion
of the concerts of the Chamber Music Festival in Frankfurt in the
summer of 1923, at a time when of the half a million inhabitants of
the city some 70,000 were unemployed, he began his article with the
observation that the catastrophic economic and political situation of the
German Reich had deteriorated to the point where it was no longer
bearable. He commented further on the Franco-Belgian occupation of
the Ruhr after the suspension of reparations payments to the Allies.
It was all the more astonishing, he noted, that despite these grave diffi-
culties and despite the city’s chronic financial problems it had been
possible to organize an outstanding programme of seven chamber con-
certs. Indeed, this was perhaps even more remarkable given that ‘it had
been necessary to curtail expenditure on externals.’ The only cause for
regret was that no modern French music could be included because
of the political complications with Germany’s western neighbour. The
concert-going public was nevertheless richly compensated by the per-
formance of works by Schoenberg, Schreker, Stravinsky, Bartók, Busoni,
Delius and Hindemith.
Everything was ruled out that might have distracted the public’s
attention – from sumptuous theatrical decorations to the num-
erical power of the arrogant modern orchestra and the cult of
the virtuoso conductor. We owe it to Hermann Scherchen that the
festival was able to be held at all and that it could concentrate on
serious artistic matters without needing to make concessions to
the coarse pleasure-seeking needs of the larger public.^55