M imesis and the A esthetics of M usical E xpression

ABSTRACT The aim of this article is threefold: first, to ask what we mean when we use concepts like imitation, representation and expression; second, to broaden the concept of imitation to take on the implications of the dynamic, historical and anthropological notion of mimesis as opposed to the largely static, ahistorical conceptions of mere ‘representation’ and ‘resemblance’ common to musicology and to analytic philosophy; and third, to show the dialectical relationship of mimesis to concepts of expression, construction, rationality and form in Adorno's later aesthetics and in his theory of musical reproduction. The concept of mimesis that is the focus of this article has as its key features embodiment, mimetism and adaptation. It is argued that concepts of expression are seen to retain features of mimesis, and that expression in artworks is a structural phenomenon. The claim is made that mimesis can be seen as an embodied impulse, a mode of ‘identifying with’ rather than primarily as ‘imitation of’ or ‘representation of’ something external to itself. The argument draws on anthropological theories of mimicking and miming, in particular those of Caillois and Benjamin, which had considerable influence on Adorno's thinking. It is argued that music (whether as musical work or as musical event) oscillates between its own internal rationalised constructional ↔ unrationalised mimetic moments, and that the experience of its expressivity arises from this tension.