Toward the end of The Frankfurt School in Exile Thomas Wheatland reflects on the legacy of German proponents of Critical Theory active in the United States in the period of the 1930s through the 1960s, including for at least some of that time Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, Erich Fromm, Franz Neumann, Friedrich Pollock, Paul Lazarsfeld, and especially Herbert Marcuse, among others. He observes that in the 1970s and 1980s adherents of the views associated with this group quickly found homes within the American academy, but that they "disappeared from the public intellectual arena." It is tellingly supportive of this conclusion that the reading audience for this book likely will be primarily academic specialists.
The Frankfurt School in Exile is probably best approached as a supplement to the more comprehensive histories by Martin Jay or Rolf Wiggershaus, but persons unfamiliar with those works will not be lost entirely since Wheatland provides sufficient background on both the institutional history and the ideas. He covers the American phase exhaustively, offering several fresh insights.
In 1934 The Institute for Social Research ("The Frankfurt School," then in exile in Geneva and headed by Horkheimer) relocated to the United States and attached to Columbia University. Wheatland uncovers new information on how this affiliation came about, with the alliance seeming to represent a win-win for both parties.
The relationship did not remain entirely congenial, however, since Columbia thought part of what it was getting was an empirical research capacity in sociology. Wheatland describes the vicissitudes of the attitudes of what he calls the "Horkheimer Circle" toward empiricism (versus theory), moving from resistance, to accommodation, then back again to an opposition to positivistic social science. Ultimately, though, Horkheimer, Pollock, and Adorno returned to the University of Frankfurt in 1949 and contributed to the adoption of American research methods in German sociology.
The Institute did not produce all that much in its years at Columbia, and much of what it did put out was in German, including articles for the theoretically oriented Zeitschrift für Sozialforschung. In 1939 Horkheimer and Fromm, who was the most well-known of the group in America (at the time), had a falling out over financial and possibly intellectual matters and Fromm moved on.
Wheatland explores the connections between the Horkheimer Circle and the "New York Intellectuals" (the author's capitalization; a sample of who he means includes Philip Rahv, Lionel Trilling, James Burnham, Clement Greenberg, Mary McCarthy, Hannah Arendt, Irving Howe, Irving Kristol, Daniel Bell, etc.). He concludes that overall there was only limited meaningful contact, which he attributes to Horkheimer's determination to insulate the Institute from politics. He covers what calls a "narcissism of small differences" dispute between Horkheimer and Sidney Hook (Horkheimer was critical of pragmatism, Hook of dialectical materialism). He also addresses some of the mass culture issues of interest to both groups, and relates a largely unsuccessful overture by Dwight McDonald to ally with the Institute on this subject.
Wheatland's final two chapters are on the relationship between the Frankfurt School, Marcuse in particular, and the New Left in the 1960s. He concludes that Marcuse may have been more influenced by the New Left than the New Left was by him. Based on personal experience I was prepared to resist this conclusion, but in the end I found Wheatland's case convincing.
A portion of the book was published previously as a journal article, and certain of the chapters give the appearance of having been prepared for that purpose. One consequence is that readers must tolerate a bit of repetition, where one wonders whether the author has forgotten that he has told us that before.
It is somewhat frustrating as well that many of the issues that interest the author turn out to lack documentation. I counted numerous apologies for "scarce archival material," "missing transcripts," and so on, hardly the author's fault but not the way one wants to fill up a history book. In some cases Wheatland was able to apply memoirs or oral interviews to help fill the gaps.
All in all, this is a valuable contribution to the history of social thought during a unique period of intersection of differing intellectual traditions.