The Significance

of theAvant-Garde
for
A Reply
Contemporary
Aesthetics:
to Jiirgen
Habermas
by Peter Biirger

Ever since the appearance of his firstbooks publishedduringtheearly

1960s,JiirgenHabermas has devoted his effortsmore thanany othercontemporaryphilosopher toward making the traditionof the European
Enlightenmentfruitfulfor the thoughtand practice of the present. In
he uncoveredthesocio-historical
der Offentlichkeit*
condiStrukturwandel
tions which contributedto the decay of that major politicalcategoryof
bourgeois society.Then in Theorieund Praxis**he examinedthechanging
relationshipbetween science and social action. In both works he was
concerned with locating the possibilitiesand limitationsin regard to a
contemporarycontinuationof the project of the Enlightenmentwhich
Kant had described with the concept Miindigkeit,the coming of age.
Throughouthis studiesHabermas has neverlost sightof the factthatthe
can only be successful
effortsto salvage the hopes of the Enlightenment
today to the extentthat these endeavors include a critiqueof bourgeois
forHabermas thatMarx's analysis
society. It has alwaysbeen self-evident
of capitalismmustnot only be taken into consideration,but mustalso be
checked and correctedin lightof historicalexperiencesince theend of the
19thcentury.'
Habermas's speech "Modernity versus Postmodernity,"which was
whenhe was awarded theAdorno prize,2testifiesto the
given in Frankfurt
continuityof his thought.He takes a decisive stand to maintainthe
"project of modernity,"and he is just as decisivein his oppositionto the
coalition of various typesof conservatismwhichhe examineswithtimely
diagnostic precision.Withinthisframeworkhe develops his culturaland
* The Structural
Transformation
of thePublicSphere(1962). Not availablein English.
For a summary
see Jiurgen
3 (Fall
Habermas,"The PublicSphere,"NewGermanCritique.
1974),49-55.
** Theoryand Practice(1963).

stressthispointtocounter
subtleandnotso subtleattacks
1. The factthatI mustexplicitly
in WestGermanyon Habermas'sallegeddogmatism
is itselfa commentary
on "academic
freedom"in thatcountry.
2. See "Die Modemrne:
edition
Nr.
Ein unvollendetes
Project,"Die Zeit,Nr.39,(American
39, September
26, 1980).
19

20

Biurger

whichpointto a wayout of theincreasing

esotericism
theoreticalreflections
of art (Esoterisierung
der Kunst),and he elaborateswhata non-specialized
reception of art would look like. I should like to discuss Habermas's
Frankfurtthesisin a criticalway, but I wantto make it clear thatI am in
basic agreementwiththe social and scientificgoals whichhe has formulated. I am also consciousof the extentto whichmyown workis indebted
to Habermas.
Stimulated by his re-examinationof Max Weber's works Habermas
sees the developmentof the modernage as "the differentiation
(Ausdifferenzierung)of the value spheresof science, morality,and art," and he
characterizesthe project of modernityas the endeavor to develop the
spheres "in theirrespectiveinherentlogic" (Eigensinn)whileat thesame
time using theirpotential"for a reasonable (verniinftig)
organizationof
of hiscultural
everydaylife." In thisway he can emphasizethe continuity
and theoreticalreflectionswith the modernistproject by stressingthe
necessityof a specializedelaborationof artisticproblemswhileat thesame
time envisioninga type of receptionwhich "uses" aestheticexperience
of a life-historical
situation."Habermas's
"explorativelyforthe illumination
argumentis quite convincingand consistentwithhis thoughtto theextent
that it suggestsan outline for overcomingthe aporias of contemporary
culture, an outline derived preciselyfromthe traditionof the European
modernizationprocess. However, I ask myselfwhetherthisconsistencyof
argumentdoes not demandtoo higha prize: thesmoothingout of ruptures
in the developmentof culture.Ruptures,afterall, can be key pointsof
of culture.I should like
knowledgebecause theyreveal the contradictions
to summarizemy ideas in the followingthreeparagraphs.
1. I am not certainwhetherone can talkabout a paralleldevelopment
of the three"spheres" (science,morality,and art) as Habermasdoes when
in the spheresof thehe posits sublationclaims (Aufhebungsansprciche)
oretical knowledgeand moralitywhichwould parallel the sublationclaim
of the avant-garde.Habermas neglectsthe factthat thereare structural
differencesbetweentherespectivespheresand thatthespheresthemselves

differin socialstatus.Whileautonomous
artcarrieswithittheidea ofits

self-transcendence
this cannot be said to be true of science in the same
And
way.
morality,contraryto autonomousart, has always claimed to
human
guide
practice.This thenfocusesattentionon what the Weberian
differentiationmodel conceals: the differentimpact potential of the
separate spheresand theirinterdependence.Here it seems to me thatthe
primacyof science visa vistheothertworealmsis a centralproblemwithin
the social modernizationprocess. When autonomousartconstituteditself
at the end of the 18thcentury,thiswas also an attemptto counterthe
advance of empiricalscientificprocessesin the treatment
of nature.
2. Both sides of what Habermas calls the project of modernity(the
developmentof the separate spheresaccordingto theirown logicand the
use of theirpotentialfora reasonableorganizationof everydaylife)have

Aestletics
Avant-gardeand Contemporary

21

notas partsofa
at leastin therealmofliterature,
manifested
themselves,
and
of conflicting
movement
uniformprojectbut ratheras a historical
of
the
culture
and
divertissement
tendencies.
Againstcourtly
antagonistic
which
literature
of
a
the
developed concept
representation Enlightenment
of everydaylifeas its goal. The
declaredthe reasonableorganization
ofliterary
notionofpracticaluse becametheguiding
production
principle
newhistorical
ofdecisively
and reception.It was underconditions
experiof
worldviews,thefragmentation
ofreligious
ences- thelossofvalidity
ofa
of thenegativeconsequences
and thediscernment
humanactivities,
- thatart constituted
book market
rapidlyexpandingprofit-oriented
Therewasan insistence
at theendofthe18thcentury.
itselfas autonomous
the
artistic
of
on theinternal
spherewhichfromthattime
logic(Eigensinn)
ofimpactbysharply
aesthetics
on rejectedtheEnlightenment's
opposing
needsofeveryday
thenotionthatarthadtofulfill
life.3Eversince
practical
to linkup with
was institutionalized,
ofautonomy
theaesthetics
attempts
and
include
to
and
of
literature
the Enlightenment's
cognitive
concept
critics
and
writers
moralquestionsin arthavebeen fought
(examples
by
and of Sartre'slittirature
would be the rejectionof Zola's naturalism
is a
and
of
commercial
the
field
in
popularliterature
engagde).Only
and
allowed
life
individual
of
the
from
history
perspective
reception
"autonIn
society
developedbourgeois
denigrated. fully
thereby
implicitly
cometo opposeeachother,they
omy"and "use" ofarthaveincreasingly
of modernity
will not be so easilyreconciledas Habermas'construction
suggests.
holds
aestheticism
thatlate19-century
inarguing
3. Habermasiscorrect
in
of
art
of
the
an
for
bourgeois
a keyposition
understanding development
reachesitshigh
society.The processtowardevermoreradicalautonomy
effective
becomes
for
the
demand
where
in
aestheticism
autonomy
point
Butthismeans- andhereI
content.
on thelevelofartistic
and manifest
to its
of artaccording
disagreewithHabermas- thatthedevelopment
of
internallogicgivesriseto a problem:thedangerofa semantic
atrophy
radical
revoltrespondsto aestheticism's
the works.The avant-garde's
claim forautonomywithan attemptwhichis no less radical.It is the
artintothe
claimsand to reintegrate
attemptto sublatethe autonomy
life.
of
practice everyday
as synoand "avant-garde"
Habermasuses the terms"modernity"
the
veils
This
however,
Adorno's
terminology,
usage.
nyms,following
Insofaras they
movements.
of the avant-garde
historicalachievements
intothe
today,theyare integrated
producedworkswhichare recognized
artinto
But theirradicaldemandto reintegrate
of modernity.
movement
is
Habermas
Here
false
sublation.
a
as
is
life
justas
rejected
everyday
ed. byChristaBirger,PeterBirger,
3. See Aufkliirung
Offentlichkeit,
undliterarische
am Main,1980).
and JochenSchulte-Sasse
(Frankfurt

22

Bi'irger

explicitas Adorno: "Nothingremainsfroma desublimatedmeaningor a

effectdoes notfollow."As a resultwe
destructuredform;an emancipatory
are leftwith a question: what does the failureof the sublationclaims of
avant-gardemovementsmean? Habermas recognizesthatthedemandfor
sublation carries a legitimateprotestagainsta world in whichhappiness
condemnsit
evidentlyis neitherprovidednoranticipated.He nevertheless
unrelentingly.If the outlined historicalargumentis correct(the avantgardist revolt as an answer to aestheticism'sradical demand forautonomy), then the avant-gardeattackon the autonomousstatusof artresults
fromthe logic of artisticdevelopmentsin bourgeoissociety.This attack
thencontainsthe same contradictions
as aestheticism,
but itresolvedthem
in an opposite direction;it is extremelyimportantto understandthisifwe
are to comprehendthe meaningof art in our society.
Even the failureof thedemandforsublationshouldnotbe regardedas
a mistakewithoutresults.On the contrary.If it is possibletodayto think
about freeproductivity
foreveryone,thenitis certainly
due to thefactthat
the avant-gardists
questionedthe legitimacyof the term"greatartwork."
The &criture
automatiquestillcontainspossibilitiesforthedevelopmentof
a freeproductivity
whichgoes farbeyondthe surrealists'own endeavors.
notionof montagenumerousrealmsof
Finally, withoutthe avant-gardist
contemporaryaestheticexperiencewould be inaccessible.
To sum up. The unsuccessfulattackon theautonomousstatusof artis
thatevent in thedevelopmentof artwhichfirstbrokewiththeaestheticsof
autonomy,and it has providedus withthe possibilityforovercomingthe
latter's limitations.Even Habermas's and Wellmer'sidea that aesthetic
situationsand to change
experiencecan be used to illuminatelife-historical
and normativeorientations- even thisreliance
cognitiveinterpretations
on pre-autonomous(enlightened)aestheticsis unthinkablewithoutthe
avant-gardistassault whichshook up the aestheticsof autonomy.Without
holds foran underdenyingthe importancewhicha theoryof continuity
standingof the modernizationprocess,I would insistthata contemporary
theoryof culturecannot do withouta dialecticalcomprehension
of ruphistorical
tures,especiallybecause it is importantto preventthisimportant
categoryfrombecominga pawn in the theoriesof the Young Conservatives.
Translatedby AndreasHuyssenand JackZipes