From the Eclipse of Reason to Communicative Rationality

Also CSST Working Paper #114.http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/51305/1/541.pd

Building a National Literature

Building a National Literature boldly takes issue with traditional literary criticism for its failure to explain how literature as a body is created and shaped by institutional forces. Peter Uwe Hohendahl approaches literary history by focusing on the material and ideological structures that determine the canonical status of writers and works. He examines important elements in the making of a national literature, including the political and literary public sphere, the theory and practice of literary criticism, and the emergence of academic criticism as literary history. Hohendahl considers such key aspects of the process in Germany as the rise of liberalism and nationalism, the delineation of the borders of German literature, the idea of its history, the understanding of its cultural function, and the notion of a canon of major and minor authors. </p

On the Reception of GDR Literature: Introduction

Introduction to issue with articles from a November 1988 workshop in Washington, D.C. sponsored by the American Institute for Contemporary German Studies and the Goethe House New York

Werner Mittenzwei, ed.: Dialog und Kontroverse mit Georg Lukacs

Leipzig: Reclam, 1975. 475 p

Hegel, Adorno and the origins of immanent criticism

‘Immanent criticism' has been discussed by philosophers of quite different persuasions, working in separate areas and in different traditions of philosophy. Almost all of them agree on roughly the same story about its origins: It is that Hegel invented immanent criticism, that Marx later developed it, and that the various members of the Frankfurt School, particularly Adorno, refined it in various ways, and that they are all paradigmatic practitioners of immanent criticism. I call this the Continuity Thesis. There are four different claims that interest me. (i) Hegel is the originator of immanent criticism. (ii) Hegel's dialectical method is that of immanent criticism. (iii) Adorno practises immanent criticism and endorses the term as a description of his practice. (iv) Adorno's dialectical method is fundamentally Hegelian. In this article, I offer an account of immanent criticism, on the basis of which, I evaluate these four claims and argue that the Continuity Thesis should be rejected

Dynamic clustering of dynamin-amphiphysin helices regulates membrane constriction and fission coupled with GTP hydrolysis

Dynamin is a mechanochemical GTPase essential for membrane fission during clathrin-mediated endocytosis. Dynamin forms helical complexes at the neck of clathrin-coated pits and their structural changes coupled with GTP hydrolysis drive membrane fission. Dynamin and its binding protein amphiphysin cooperatively regulate membrane remodeling during the fission, but its precise mechanism remains elusive. In this study, we analyzed structural changes of dynamin-amphiphysin complexes during the membrane fission using electron microscopy (EM) and high-speed atomic force microscopy (HS-AFM). Interestingly, HS-AFM analyses show that the dynamin-amphiphysin helices are rearranged to form clusters upon GTP hydrolysis and membrane constriction occurs at protein-uncoated regions flanking the clusters. We also show a novel function of amphiphysin in size control of the clusters to enhance biogenesis of endocytic vesicles. Our approaches using combination of EM and HS-AFM clearly demonstrate new mechanistic insights into the dynamics of dynamin-amphiphysin complexes during membrane fission

The Institution of Criticism

German radicals of the 1960s announced the death of literature. For them, literature both past and present, as well as conventional discussions of literary issues, had lost its meaning. In The Institution of Criticism, Peter Uwe Hohendahl explores the implications of this crisis from a Marxist perspective and attempts to define the tasks and responsibilities of criticism in advanced capitalist societies. Hohendahl takes a close look at the social history of literary criticism in Germany since the eighteenth century. Drawing on the tradition of the Frankfurt School and on Jürgen Habermas's concept of the public sphere, Hohendahl sheds light on some of the important political and social forces that shape literature and culture. The Institution of Criticism is made up of seven essays originally published in German and a long theoretical introduction written by the author with English-language readers in mind. This book conveys the rich possibilities of the German perspective for those who employ American and French critical techniques and for students of contemporary critical theory.</p

Building a National Literature: The Case of Germany, 1830–1871

Building a National Literature boldly takes issue with traditional literary criticism for its failure to explain how literature as a body is created and shaped by institutional forces. Peter Uwe Hohendahl approaches literary history by focusing on the material and ideological structures that determine the canonical status of writers and works. He examines important elements in the making of a national literature, including the political and literary public sphere, the theory and practice of literary criticism, and the emergence of academic criticism as literary history. Hohendahl considers such key aspects of the process in Germany as the rise of liberalism and nationalism, the delineation of the borders of German literature, the idea of its history, the understanding of its cultural function, and the notion of a canon of major and minor authors