If one is gazingly the typical Bourgeois viewer then one would follow the idealist aesthetic of Kant which privileges the subject over the object. As the scribble would be comparable between the author and the viewer’s mimetic abilities (interpretable). If one were to see those scribbles of Cy Twombly in Adorno’s prioritizing materialist aesthetic then one would see that his “truth content” lies in the art objects ability to have its own subjective moment. That the art object is in essence alive and does not depend on our gaze. It is the artist skill that gives to a work a spirit that is neither mimetic or interpreted from the point of view of the viewer. What we get with Theodore Adorno is a shared experience of art, not a inert thing but something which has its own cognitive sense. How that applies to a post modern production is another topic for another consumable comment box.

Of course Adorno was of that Idealist frankfort school… amongst other thinkers of a modernist time…regardless, I still think his ideas hold a lot of murky water.