If any social function can be ascribed to art at all, it is the function to have no function.

Do you agree with Adorno here? If so, the juxtaposition of the drawing with Adorno's text would seem to demonstrate the political impotence of the former (since it attempts to have a direct social function). Is this your intention?

J.l.
yes. I think that the image stands a critique of Adorno's position. I support Adorno's claim about art's 'twofold reflection: on the being-for-itself of art, and on its ties with society' but not the claim that 'the mystery of art is its demystifying power.'

I find it too modernist and too concerned with high art

I find it too modernist and too concerned with high art

Completely agreed, but then your answer to my question should have been 'no', correct (unless I've misunderstood your response)? I originally thought you were using the authority of Adorno to critique the image, instead of the other way around.

I have heard Adornians argue that high-art critiques society only through its autonomy or separation from so-called 'low culture,' and that any attempt by a work of art to engage social issues directly (i.e., political art) threatens art's autonomy and renders its critique moot.

Of course, if that's what Adorno meant, then why was he so infatuated with Kafka -- whose The Castle was clearly intended to criticize the dehumanizing nature of bureaucracy?