本文以阿多诺的《美学理论》作为切入点，阐释阿多诺的“否定性”美学思想。阿多诺美学思想的根本特性即否定性，这不仅表现在艺术作品中，还表现在对异化社会现状的批判。在技术垄断的时代，研究阿多诺的否定性美学思想，研究作为社会抵抗形式的艺术，有助于启蒙个体的反思和批判精神，有助于揭示技术对人的控制以及保卫人的自由。

本文主要从以下五个章节进行论述：

首先，第一章主要对阿多诺否定性美学的研究背景、研究现状、研究方法以及研究意义进行了简要概述。目的在于对阿多诺的否定性美学有一个整体的把握和了解，进而发现研究值得进一步挖掘的地方。特别需要指出的是，本章着重对研究的历史背景和问题导向进行了深入剖析，用以理解阿多诺提出“否定性”美学的现实原因以及驱动阿多诺进行美学研究的根本问题。

其次，第二章主要研究阿多诺否定性美学之“否定性”问题。这一章的工作重心是从概念上对否定性美学之“否定性”作深入的厘清，旨在阐明“否定”概念的来源以及阿多诺的“特定的否定”，以此区别黑格尔的“否定”概念。特别值得注意的是，较少有阿多诺研究者专门对阿多诺的否定性概念进行深入的剖析，分析阿多诺的“否定”概念的来源以及其特殊的意义，转而直接把“否定”概念当作不言自明的阿多诺的思想前提。事实上，阿多诺的“特定的否定”是非常值得深入研究和首先需要厘清的概念，因为阿多诺的“否定”概念并不是黑格尔意义上的“否定”概念。这也是本文的创新之处。

再次，第三章主要探究“否定性”在艺术作品中的表现。这一章的核心任务是考察艺术作品是如何体现阿多诺的否定性美学思想的。借助“反艺术的”、“震颤的”和“具有谜语特质的”艺术作品，阿多诺揭示了否定性艺术的根本特性。特别需要阐明的是，“反艺术”的特性表面上在于反对和谐美好统一的审美幻象，实际上在于反对被美化了的现实世界；“震颤”的特性首先在于伟大的艺术作品对主体带来的深切体验，根本上在于伟大的艺术作品唤醒主体类似史前时期的恐惧；“谜语特质”的特性不仅表现在艺术如谜一般既揭示又掩盖，更在于艺术的真理性内容就在艺术的外在表现形式之中。

再次，第四章主要探讨阿多诺否定性美学思想的现实性批判。这一章的工作重点是揭示阿多诺的否定性美学对现实的批判。它主要体现在两个批判维度：其一是文化批判；其二是语言批判。文化批判主要体现在对文化工业的批判，语言批判主要体现在提出奥斯维辛命题，对不合时宜的欢愉性语言进行批判。特别值得关注的是，本章首要地对“大众文化”和“文化工业”进行了区分，将批判的矛头对准工业化的文化，从而深入剖析工业化的文化受到技术与资本的控制，实质上文化工业就是意识形态的统治。

最后，第五章主要对阿多诺的否定性美学思想作总体上的评价：一方面，肯定其作为一种社会抵抗形式，阿多诺的美学思想具有强烈的否定性力量；另一方面，认清其不过是一种乌托邦的思想，阿多诺的否定性美学思想对社会的影响终究是间接的。

This article takes Adorno's "Aesthetic Theory" as the starting point to explain Adorno's "negative" aesthetics. The fundamental characteristic of Adorno's aesthetics is negation, which is not only manifested in works of art, but also in the criticism of the condition of alienated society. In the era of technological monopoly, the study of Adorno's negative aesthetics and the study of art as a form of social resistance can help enlighten individuals' spirit of reflection and criticism, and help reveal the control of technology over individuals and defend individual's freedom.

This paper mainly discusses the following five chapters: 

Firstly, the first chapter gives a brief overview of the research condition, background, significance and methods of Adorno's negative aesthetics. The purpose is to have an overall grasp and understanding of Adorno's negative aesthetics, and then to discover the area worth further excavation. It should be pointed out that this chapter focuses on the in-depth analysis of the historical background and problem orientation of the research, in order to understand the realistic reason for Adorno's "negative" aesthetics and the fundamental problem that drives Adorno's aesthetic research.

Secondly, the second chapter mainly discusses the "negation" of Adorno's negative aesthetics. The core task of this chapter is to make a conceptual in-depth clarification of the "negation" of negative aesthetics, aiming to clarify the origin of the concept of "negation" and Adorno's "determinate negation", so as to be differentiated from Hegel’s concept of "negation". It is particularly noteworthy that few Adorno researchers have conducted in-depth analysis of Adorno's concept of negation, analyzed the origin and determinate significance of Adorno's concept of "negation", and turned to consider "negation" as a self-evident thought premise. In fact, Adorno's "determinate negation" is a concept that deserves further study and needs to be clarified first, because Adorno's "negation" is not a "negation" in Hegel's sense. This is also the innovation of this paper.

Thirdly, the third chapter mainly discusses the expression of "negation" in works of art. The core task of this chapter is to examine how works of art embody Adorno's negative aesthetics. Through "anti-artistic", "shuddering" and "enigmatic" works of art, Adorno reveals the fundamental character of negative art. What needs to be clarified in particular is that the characteristic of "anti-art" is, on the surface, that it opposes the aesthetic illusion of harmony, beauty and unity, but in fact it is opposed to the beautified real world. The characteristic of "shudder" lies first of all in the deep experience of the subject brought by the great work of art, and fundamentally in the fact that the great work of art awakens the subject's fear similar to that of prehistoric times. The characteristic of the "enigmatic quality" is not only manifested in the fact that art is like a mystery that both reveals and conceals, but also lies in the fact that the truth content of art lies in the external expression of art in the form.

Fourthly, the fourth chapter mainly discusses the realistic criticism of Adorno's negative aesthetics. The core task of this chapter is to reveal Adorno's criticism of reality by negative aesthetics. It is mainly reflected in two critical dimensions: one is cultural criticism; the other is language criticism. Cultural criticism is mainly reflected in the criticism of cultural industry, and language criticism is mainly reflected in the proposition of Auschwitz and the criticism of inappropriate pleasant language. What is particularly noteworthy is that this chapter firstly distinguishes between "popular culture" and "cultural industry", aiming the criticism at industrialized culture, so as to deeply analyze that industrialized culture is controlled by technology and capital, and in essence cultural industry is the domination of ideology. 

Finally, the fifth chapter makes a general evaluation of Adorno's negative aesthetics: on the one hand, it is affirmed as a form of social resistance and has strong negative force; on the other hand, it is recognized as a utopian thought, because its influence is indirect after all.

阿多诺原著
[1] Theodor W. Adorno. Aesthetic Theory[M]. Gretel Adorno and Rolf Tiedemann ed., Robert Hullot-Kentor trans., Minneapolis, Minn.: University of Minnesota Press, 1997.
[2] Theodor W. Adorno. Negative Dialectics[M]. E.B. Ashton trans., New York: Continuum, 1973.
[3] Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno. Dialectic of Enlightenment[M]. Gunzelin Noeri, Edmund Jephcott trans., Stanford University Press, 2002.
[4] Theodor W. Adorno. Commitment[M]. in: Notes to Literature(Volume Two). ed. Rolf Tiedemann. trans. Shierry Weber Nicholsen. New York: Columbia University Press, 1992.
[5] Theodor W. Adorno. Hegel: Three Studies[M]. trans. Shierry Weber Nicholsen. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1993.

[6] Theodor W. Adorno. Negative Dialektik[M]. in: Gesammelte Schriften(Bd.6). Frankfurt/M: Suhrkamp Verlag, 1997.
[7] Theodor W. Adorno. Dialektik der Aufklarung[M]. Fischer Taschenbuch Verlag GmbH, 1989.
[8] Theodor W. Adorno. Noten zur Literatur[M]. Suhrkamp Verlag Frankfurt am Main, 1974.
[9] Theodor W. Adorno. Minima Moralia. Reflexionen aus dem beschaedigten Leben[M]. in: Gesammelte Schriften: Band 4. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag, 2003.
[10] Theodor W. Adorno. Metaphysik: Begriff und Probleme[M]. in: Nachgelassene Schriften(4. Teil, Bd. 14). Frankfurt/M: Suhrkamp Verlag, 1998.

[11] 阿多诺. 美学理论[M]. 王柯平译. 上海：上海人民出版社, 2020.
[12] 马克斯·霍克海默、西奥多·阿尔多诺. 启蒙辩证法 （哲学断片）[M]. 渠敬东、曹卫东译. 上海：上海人民出版社, 2020.
[13] 阿多尔诺. 否定的辩证法[M]. 张峰译. 上海：上海人民出版社, 2020.
[14] 阿多尔诺. 否定辩证法[M]. 王凤才译. 北京：商务印书馆, 2019.
[15] 阿多诺. 黑格尔三论[M]. 谢永康译. 上海：上海人民出版社, 2020.


阿多诺研究专著
[1] Fredric Jameson. Late Marxism: Adorno, or, the Persistence of the Dialectic[M]. London＆New York: Verso, 1990.
[2] Lambert Zuidervaart. Adorno’s Aesthetic Theory: The Redemption of Illusion[M]. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press, 1991.
[3] Andrew G. Weinstei. After Adorno: The Essayistic Impulse in Holocaust-Related Art[M]. New York University, 2006.
[4] Tanja Mirjana Juric. The Aesthetics of Ethical Subjectivity: Ethics ＆ Aesthetics in the Work of Immanuel Kant[M]. University of Toronto, 2005.
[5] Günther Mensching. Historische Notiz zur Dialektik[M]. in: Figuren der Dialektik. Hrsg. Hartwig Schmidt. Berliner Wissenschaft-Verlag, 2004.
[6] Rolf Tiedemann. Gegenwärtige Vorwelt: Zu Adornos Begriff des Mythischen(1). in: Frankfurter Adorno Blätter Ⅴ. edition text+kritik. München, 1998.

[7] 张一兵. 无调式的辩证想象：阿多诺《否定的辩证法》的文本解读（第二版）[M].南京：江苏人民出版社, 2016.
[8] 谢永康. 形而上学的批判与拯救——阿多诺否定辩证法的逻辑和影响[M]. 南京：江苏人民出版社. 2008.
[9] 常培杰. 拯救表象：阿多诺艺术批评观念研究[M]. 北京：人民出版社, 2020.
[10] 张亮. “崩溃的逻辑”的历史建构：阿多诺早中期哲学思想的文本学解读[M]. 南京：江苏人民出版社, 2013.
[11] 杨小滨. 否定的美学——法兰克福学派的文艺理论和文化批评[M]. 上海：上海三联书店, 1999.
[12] 孙斌. 审美与救赎：从德国浪漫派到T. W. 阿多诺[M]. 上海：复旦大学出版社, 2014.
[13] 刘阳军. T.W.阿多诺否定美学探奥：从灾难反思入手[M]. 北京：中央编译出版社, 2019.
[14] 马丁·杰. 法兰克福学派的宗师——阿道尔诺[M]. 胡湘译. 湖南：湖南人民出版社, 1988.
[15] 伊格尔顿. 美学意识形态[M]. 王杰、付德根、麦永雄译. 北京：中央编译出版社, 1997.
[16] 施威蓬豪依塞尔. 阿多诺[M]. 鲁路译. 北京：中国人民大学出版社, 2008.
[17] 洛伦茨·耶格尔. 阿多诺：一部政治传记[M]. 陈晓春译. 上海：上海人民出版社, 2007.
[18] 细见和之. 阿多诺：非同一性哲学[M]. 谢海静、李浩原译. 河北：河北教育出版社, 2002.
[19] 马克·杰木乃兹. 阿多诺：艺术、意识形态与美学理论[M]. 乐栋等译. 远流出版事业股份有限公司, 1991.
[20] 乔治·斯坦纳. 语言与沉默——论语言、文学与非人道[M]. 李小均译. 上海：上海人民出版社, 2013.
[21] 詹明信. 晚期资本主义的文化逻辑：詹明信批评理论文选[M].张旭东编. 陈清侨等译. 上海：生活·读书·新知三联书店, 1997.
[22] 汉斯·罗伯特·姚斯. 审美经验与文学解释学[M]. 顾建光译. 上海：上海世纪出版集团, 2006.
[23] 魏格豪斯. 法兰克福学派[M]. 孟登迎译. 上海：上海人民出版社, 2010.

其他原著
[1] 康德. 历史理性批判文集[M]. 何兆武译. 北京：商务印书馆. 1990.
[2] 黑格尔. 逻辑学（上卷）[M]. 杨一之译. 北京：商务印书馆, 2010.
[3] 黑格尔. 哲学史讲演录（第2卷）[M]. 贺麟、王太庆译. 北京：商务印书馆, 1997.
[4] 李凯尔特. 文化科学和自然科学[M]. 涂纪亮译. 北京：商务印书馆, 1986.


阿多诺研究论文
[1] 张一兵. 阿多诺：让海德格尔自己反对自己——《否定的辩证法》解读[J]. 南京大学学报(哲学·人文科学·社会科学版), 2001, 06: 61-68.
[2] 张亮. 什么是现代艺术的本质——阿多诺的艺术真理论及其与海德格尔的潜在对话[J]. 文艺研究, 2006, 01: 34-40.
[3] 孙周兴. 物之经验与艺术的规定[J]. 学术界(月刊), 2019, 257: 92.
[4] 施立峻. 阿多诺美学的总体性及其难题[J]. 上海交通大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2010, 18(05): 69-75.
[5] 张静静. 人类苦难与艺术困境——论阿多诺的“奥斯威辛”命题[J]. 安徽大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2012, 36(02): 26-31.
[6] 张文浩. 辩证法就是对非同一性的一贯认识——论非同一性思维在阿多诺批判理论中的渗透[J]. 中北大学学报(社会科学版), 2006, 01: 30-34.
[7] 张科晓. 艺术真理问题视域中的海德格尔与阿多诺[J]. 内蒙古社会科学(汉文版), 2015, 36(04): 30-35.
[8] 王耘. 反启蒙：阿多诺否定美学的宗旨[J]. 湛江师范学院学报, 2003, 04: 34-37.
[9] 沈雁飞. 试论阿多诺的否定性美学[J]. 江西社会科学, 2002, 01: 94-95.
[10] 刘月新. 法兰克福学派美学与接受美学[J]. 中州学刊, 1997, 01: 89-93.
[11] 马驰. 艺术所能做到的只是否定异化的社会——论阿多诺的美学思想[J]. 黄河学刊, 1998, 12(02): 22-26.
[12] 李兵. 接受美学与巴赫金对话理论的关联及互动[J]. 贵州社会科学, 2007, 02: 53-55.
[13] 吕正兵. 媒体文化的清醒剂:否定性美学[J]. 涪陵师范学院学报, 2006, 01: 25-28.
[14] 闫一平. 艺术的否定性[D]. 北京：中国政法大学, 2014.
[15] 王耘. 论阿多诺否定美学的涵义[D]. 西安：陕西师范大学, 2001.
[16] 张科晓. 艺术真理问题视域中的海德格尔与阿多诺[D]. 吉林：吉林大学, 2017.
[17] 吴友军. 批判的人学：对阿多诺《否定的辩证法》的本质理解[D]. 吉林：吉林大学, 2004年.