Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 16:26:04 -0400
From: Ralph Dumain <rdumain-AT-igc.org>
Subject: Re: Translations of the Dialectic of Enlightenment


The two passages compared are not yet enough for me to spend the money on 
the new translation, though when I feel the need for crystal clarity I 
suppose I will have to do so.  I am now reading my copy of the old Cummings 
translation, through the first chapter so far.  The less murky new 
translation does not help to ease my discomfort with the passage cited, 
which requires another sort of decoding after reading it.  That is, for me 
to make sense out of this passage, I have to transform it into my own frame 
of reference, as I do not believe that the authors' claim about the 
Enlightenment as myth is an acceptable claim literally speaking.  And of 
course they never knew squat about the 'man of science', only an 
ideological image of him.  Do you think that the new translation will make 
this book more palatable to me?

At 09:38 PM 6/20/2003 +0100, Lloyd SPENCER wrote:
>Thanks to Claus Hansen for his note making tentative comparisons between the
>translations. It is certainly useful to have the tough philosophical
>terminology left strange. But otherwise the two translations were remarkably
>close. I am looking forward to looking at the new translation more closely.
>
>Lloyd
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Claus Hansen" <clausdh-AT-tdcspace.dk>
>To: <frankfurt-school-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu>; <marcusb49-AT-excite.com>
>Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 4:11 PM
>Subject: Re: Fwd: Dialectic of Enlightenment translations
>
>
>Dear all
>
>I have also only read passages of the new translation but I have both and my
>first impression is that the new translation is a lot better than the old
>one
>which cannot surprise given the development in readings on Adorno in
>English since 1972 when the first translation appeared. The new edition
>also has a lot of extra notes that give an insight into the changes A & H
>made
>to DoE in order for them not to appear to marxist in their exile in the
>States.
>There are also a few essays that deals with DoE and its relation to the
>Frankfurt School development in that period.
>
>This is a passage from the new and the old
>
>"Myth becomes enlightenment and nature mere objectivity. Human beings
>purchase the increase in their power with estrangement from that over
>which it is exerted. Enlightenment stands in the same relationship to things
>as the dictator to human beings. He knows them to the extent that he can
>manipulate them. The man of science knows things to the extent that he
>can make them. Their 'in-itself' becomes 'for him.' In their transformation
>the
>essence of things is revealed as always the same, a substrate of domination"
>(DoE 2002 Edition p. 6).
>
>"Myth turns into enlightenment, and nature into mere objectivity. Men pay
>for the increase of power with alienation from that over which thet exercise
>their power. Enlightenment behaves toward things as a dictator toward men.
>He knows them in so far as he can manipulate them. The man of science
>knows things in so far as the can make them. In this way their potentiality
>is turned to his own ends. In the metamorphosis the nature of things, as
>a substratum of domination, is revealed as always the same" (DoE 1972
>Edition p. 9).
>
>What is instructive is the differences in the passage I have made italic.
>In the
>old edition it is virtually impossible to understand what A & H are saying
>while
>it is (IMHO) much easier in the new edition. I think one of the problems
>with
>the old translation of both DoE and Negative Dialectics is that they do not
>translate the philosophical terminology (for instance 'in-itself',
>'for-him', 'reason',
>'understanding', 'intuition' etc.) as they are done in the english
>translations of Kant
>and Hegel making it impossible to see when A & H are refering to and
>building on Kantian and Hegelian understandings of the world.
>
>Hope this helps,
>
>Claus
>
>At 15:03 16-06-03 +0100, L Spencer wrote:
> >Perhaps before you get round to a review you would just give us a
> >few pointed comparisons. A few lines (old vs. new) to give us a
> >sense of whether there has been much movement.
> >
> >Lloyd Spencer
> >
> >
> >On 15 Jun 2003, at 20:31, Andrew Perrin wrote:
> >
> > > I have the new translation and have read parts of it. I have been
>planning
> > > to write a review of the new translation for _Social Forces_ (of which I
> > > am book review editor). I have no idea if or when I'll actually get
>around
> > > to it though.
> > >
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > Andrew J Perrin - andrew_perrin-AT-unc.edu - http://www.unc.edu/~aperrin
> > >  Assistant Professor of Sociology, U of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
> > >       269 Hamilton Hall, CB#3210, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3210 USA
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sun, 15 Jun 2003, Ralph Dumain wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > >To: marxistphilosophy-AT-yahoogroups.com
> > > > >From: "marcus battle" <marcusb49-AT-excite.com>
> > > > >Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2003 17:38:59 -0400 (EDT)
> > > > >Subject: [marxistphilosophy] a lurker chimes in...
> > > > >Reply-To: marxistphilosophy-AT-yahoogroups.com
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >greetings all,
> > > > >
> > > > >my name is marcus battle and i am entering the third year of my ph.d
> > work
> > > > >here at the university of memphis.
> > > > >
> > > > >now that the introduction is out of the way, i have a pretty straight
> > > > >forward question...well, a couple actually--first, i heard from a
>prof.
> > > > >here that there is a new translation of The Dialectic of
> > Enlightenment and
> > > > >i was wondering if anyone on the list has checked it out yet. second,
>if
> > > > >so, i would very much like to know a) what the problems were with the
> > > > >previous translation and b) how this one is an improvement (if at
> > all). i
> > > > >haven't read the book but, having suffered through another round of
> > > > >comprehensive exams, was entertaining the idea of reading it. then i
> > found
> > > > >out about the new translation, and was wondering whether reading the
>old
> > > > >one would even be worth it in the end.
> > > > >
> > > > ><end transmission>
> > > > >
> > > > >marcus
>
>____________________________________________________________________________
>"Hos mange mennesker er det allerede en uforskammethed, nr de siger 'jeg'"
>(T.W. Adorno)