610 Notes to pp. 470– 473
107 Adorno and Lenk, Briefwechsel, p. 157f.
108 Adorno to Marcuse, 24 January 1969, Herbert Marcuse Archive,
Stadt- und Universitätsbibliothek, Frankfurt am Main.
109 Adorno and Lenk, Briefwechsel, p. 160.
110 See the Editor’s Afterword in Aesthetic Theory, p. 361ff.
111 Since publication the volume, which appeared in the series suhrkamp
taschenbuch wissenschaft, has sold 68,000 copies.
112 See Adorno, Aesthetic Theory, p. 259.
113 Ibid., p. 107 and p. 129f.; cf. Adorno and Lenk, Briefwechsel, p. 163. The
planning of a volume on aesthetics to appear in Suhrkamp goes back to
- Publication was envisaged for 1964. See Siegfried Unseld to Adorno,
29 December 1960. See Adorno, ‘So müßte ich ein Engel und kein Autor
sein’, p. 223.
114 Adorno, Aesthetic Theory, p. 129.
115 Ibid., p. 226.
116 Ibid., p. 136.
117 Ibid., p. 83.
118 Adorno, Negative Dialectics, p. 15.
119 Adorno, Aesthetic Theory, p. 53ff. Neither in the Dialectic of Enlighten-
ment nor in the Aesthetic Theory did Adorno really elaborate the concept
of mimesis. See Jürgen Habermas, Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns,
vol. 1, p. 512. For the concept of mimesis, see Josef Früchtl, Mimesis:
Konstellation eines Zentralbegriffs bei Adorno; Britta Scholze, Kunst als
Kritik: Adornos Weg aus der Dialektik, p. 136ff. Jürgen Ritsert claims
that the opposing concepts ‘mimesis’ and ‘ratio’ run through Adorno’s
Aesthetic Theory like a red thread. In the Dialectic of Enlightenment the
defining pair of concepts is myth and enlightenment; for Negative Dialectics
it is identity and non-identity. According to him, mimesis ‘consists in the
subject’s practice of surrendering to the stubbornness and particularity
of the object, seeking as it were closeness to the individual object.’
Alternatively, mimesis can be understood as ‘the sensitivity of the senses
(aesthesis) and hence the receptivity of the subject to the inexhaustible
plenitude of individual impressions.’ Ritsert concludes that Adorno links
mimetic experience with the ‘thinking in configurations’ that makes its
appearance in Negative Dialectics. Jürgen Ritsert, Ästhetische Theorie
als Gesellschaftskritik, p. 29ff.; cf. Christoph Menke, Die Souveränität der
Kunst, p. 109ff.
120 Adorno, Aesthetic Theory, p. 289.
121 Ibid., p. 54.
122 Ibid., p. 110.
123 Ibid., p. 39.
124 Ibid., p. 135.
125 Ibid., p. 73.
126 Ibid., p. 71f.
127 Ibid., p. 66.
128 Ibid., p. 12; cf. p. 84.
129 See especially ibid., p. 182; cf. also Adorno, ‘Die Kunst und die Künste’,
GS, vol. 10.1, p. 432ff.; see also ‘Über einige Relationen zwischen Musik
und Malerei’, GS, vol. 16, p. 28ff.; furthermore, Christine Eichel, Vom
Ermatten der Avantgarde zur Vernetzung der Künste, p. 27ff. On Adorno’s
