随着20世纪新兴科学技术尤其是机械复制技术不断渗入艺术领域，艺术的生产和接受都呈现出了新的形式和特征。对于这一转型所引起的艺术功能的变化，阿多诺从文化工业的意识形态理论出发，指出机械复制艺术完全为资本逻辑所控制，其功能也随之由原来的独立批判沦落为资本主义的欺骗与整合；本雅明则敏锐地捕捉了机械复制技术所蕴含的革命性与创造性，期望通过“艺术的政治化”来实现新型艺术的颠覆功能。阿多诺与本雅明的观点针锋相对，但理论宗旨和命运又可谓殊途同归。两人的理论交锋奠定了其后西方马克思主义文化研究的视域与平台，同时也揭示了马克思主义的革命和解放理论所面临的理论困境和现实挑战。%With the application of newly-emerged technology in 20＇h century, esp. the skill of mechanical reproduction to art field, artistic production and acceptance began to show new forms and features. As the transformation has changed the function of art, Adorno pointed out that the art of mechanical reproduction has been completely controlled by capital logic and its original independent function of criticism reduced to capital deceiving and integration, while Benjamin seized keenly the feature of being ＂revolutionary and cre- ative＂ which the skill contains. He expected to realize the subversive function of the new art form through ＂art politicizing＂. Though they opposed strongly to each other, Adorno and Benjamin carried the same goal in theoretical exploration and faced same destiny at the end. Their debate laid foundation for the latter study of Marxist cultures in the West and discovered the theoretical difficulties and practical challenges that theory of Marxism about revolution and emancipation has to face.
展开▼
