So for Adorno, the social context of art is critical, while at the same time, the artist can exercise autonomy in relation to the context. He talks about social contexts being embedded in the form. Then you dig around, what does he mean by form? My take from that is that the artist isn\u2019t outside. Adorno was concerned about the artist staying aloof of any kind of capitalist aesthetics, he understood the power of mass media and mass marketing and what that aesthetic is doing to people. But at the same time bring with him in the form – almost like botanic form – bring that social context with him. The relationship between art and politics is expressed in Adorno\u2019s concept of the form, reflecting the \u201cdouble character\u201d of art, \u201cThe liberation of form, which genuinely new art desires, holds enciphered within above all the liberation of society, for form \u2013 the social nexus of everything particular \u2013 represents the social relation in the artwork.\u201d His understanding of autonomy was on the one hand separate, but on the other hand it carried, if you will, the dream of the revolution into art and into the confrontation with contemporary society. So, the artist had to be outside to be a critic but at the same time he had to have the right perspective.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"