NEW GERMAN CRITIQUE NUMBER 78 * FALL 1999 G ERMANRMEDAN SRTUIDUES
GEISLER AND MATTSON * AFTER THE BARDIC ERA
HUMPHREYS * GERMANY'S "DUAL" BROADCASTING SYSTEM
HICKETHIER * A CULTURAL BREAK: TELEVISION IN GERMANY
GEISLER * WEST GERMAN MEDIA THEORY
BOLZ * FAREWELL TO THE GUTENBERG GALAXY
ZIELINSKI * FISSURES - DISSONANCES - QUESTIONS - VISIONS
SCHUMACHER * GERMAN "B-TELEVISION" PROGRAMS
MATTSON * THE GENERATION OF PUBLIC IDENTITY
HUHN * LUKACS AND THE ESSAY FORM
o 473 > 744., 80557 1
PRICE: U.S. 12.00 /CANADA $15.00
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:22:27 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions NEW GERMANCRITIQUE An Interdisciplinary Journal of German Studies
Special Editorsfor ThisIssue: MichelleMattson, Michael Geisler
Editors:David Bathrick (Ithaca), Miriam Hansen (Chicago), Peter U. Hohendahl (Ithaca),Andreas Huyssen (New York), Biddy Martin (Ithaca), Anson Rabinbach (Princeton),Jack Zipes (Minneapolis).
ContributingEditors: Leslie Adelson (Ithaca), Susan Buck-Morss (Ithaca), Geoff Eley(Ann Arbor), Gerd Gemiinden (Hanover), Agnes Heller (New York), Douglas Kellner(Austin), Eberhard Kni6dler-Bunte (Berlin), Sara Lennox (Amherst), Andrei Markovits(Ann Arbor), Eric Rentschler (Cambridge), James Steakley (Madison).
ManagingEditor: Michael Richardson (Ithaca).
AssistantEditors: Jill Gillespie (Ithaca), Andrew Homan (New York),Franz PeterHugdahl (Ithaca), Kizer Walker (Ithaca).
GraphicsEditor: Brendan K. Bathrick(New York).
Publishedthree times a yearby TELOS PRESS,431 E. 12thSt., New York,NY 10009.New German Critique No. 78 correspondstoVol. 26,No. 3. C New Ger- manCritique, Inc. 1999.All rightsreserved. New GermanCritique is a non- profit,educational organization supported by the Department of GermanStudies ofCornell University.
Addressall editorialcorrespondence to: New GermanCritique, Department of GermanStudies, 183 Goldwin Smith Hall, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853.For New GermanCritique format and style information, please visit our homepage:http://www.arts.cornell.edu/ngc
The annualsubscription rate is $35.00individuals; $80.00 institutions. All for- eignsubscribers 15% extra.All backissues are availableat $14.00a copyfor individualsand $30.00 a copyfor institutions. For subscriptions and back issues writeto: NEW GERMANCRITIQUE, Telos PressLtd., 431 East 12thStreet, NewYork, New York,10009. Articlesappearing in thisjournal are annotatedand indexedin Historical Abstractsand AmericanHistory and Life.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:22:27 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions NEW GERMAN CRITIQUE
Number78 Fall 1999
SpecialIssue on: GermanMedia Studies Table ofContents
Introduction:After the Bardic Era - GermanTelevision Since 1984...... 3 MichaelGeisler and Michelle Mattson Germany's"Dual" Broadcasting System: RecipeFor Pluralism In The Age of Multi-Channel Broadcasting?. . 23 PeterHumphreys A CulturalBreak or Perhaps Things Didn't Go ThatFar. Televisionin Germany:Commercialization, GermanUnification and Europeanization...... 53 KnutHickethier FromBuilding Blocks To RadicalConstruction: WestGerman Media Theory Since 1984...... 75 MichaelGeisler Farewellto the Gutenberg-Galaxy...... 109 NorbertBolz Fissures- Dissonances - Questions- Visions...... 133 SiegfriedZielinski Fromthe True, the Good, the Beautiful to theTruly Beautiful Goods - AudienceIdentification Strategies on German"B-Television" Programs...... 152 HeidemarieSchumacher Tatort: The Generationof Public Identity in a GermanCrime Series ...... 161 MichelleMattson Lukicsand the Essay Form...... 183 TomHuhn
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:22:27 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 2 Contributors
CONTRIBUTORS
NORBERT BOLZ teachesin thedepartment of Designand Art Educationat the University of Essen. MICHAEL GEISLER teachesin theDepartment of Germanat MiddleburyCollege. KNUT HICKETHIER teachesin the Department of Literaturwis- senschaftat the University of Hamburg. TOM HUHN teachesin theDepartment of Philosophyat Wes- leyanUniversity. PETER HUMPHREYS teachesin theDepartment of Economics andSocial Sciencesat the University of Manchester. MICHELLE MATTSON teachesin theDepartment of Foreign Languagesand Literatures atIowa StateUniversity. HEIDEMARIE SCHUMACHER teachesin theDepartment of Theatreand Media Sciences at the Universityof Erlangen- NiUrnberg. SIEGFRIED ZIELINSKI is therector of the Kunsthochschule ffir Medienin Cologne.
In theprevious issue of New German Critique on "German-Jew- ish ReligiousThought," biographical information for one of the guesteditors, who was also an author,was mistakenlyomitted fromthe contributor's page. Please note the following: PETER ELI GORDON is a postdoctoralfellow in theSociety of Fellowsat PrincetonUniversity.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:22:27 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE AMERICANJOURNAL OF SEMIOTICS A QUARTERLYRESEARCH PUBLICATIONOF THE SEMIOTIC SOCIETY OF AMERICA
- Recent9ssues RefiguringDebris Semiosis and Cultural Construction Historyand Semiotics Signs in Musical Hermeneutics Trickster:Cultural Boundaries and Semiosis French Semiotics
f- 3orthcoming 9ssues - RhetoricalSemiotics Signs of Culture and Communication Semiotics Identities Kenneth Pike: A Sign Chinese Semiotics The Body as Sign Semiotics of the Image Semiotic Pedagogy H----Advertising and yack 9ssues ------informationis available fromRichard L. Lanigan, Editor, SEMIOTICS, Speech Communication Department, South- ern Illinois University,Carbondale, IL 62901-6605, USA. Tel: (618) 453-2291 Fax: (618) 453-2812 E-mail:
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:22:27 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions IN FORTHCOMING ISSUES:
KATHERINE EGGERT , Spenser's Ravishment: Rape and Rapture in The Fairie Queen
ELIZABETH LEGGE - Pantomime Horses and Method Actors: Stereotypes and Contemporary British Art
CATHERINE G. KODAT , Saving Private Property: Steven Spielberg's American Dream Works
- WILLIAM IAN MILLER Weak Legs
- IDITH ZERTAL From the People's Hall to the Wailing Wall: A Study in Memory, Mass Hysteria, and War
"Representations counts, quite simply, as the most important interdisciplinary journal in the humanities" -Susan McClary
Subscriptions: Individuals $40, Students$28, Institutions$IZo Outside NorthAmerica, add $2o postage
TO ORDER, WRITE: Representations Universityof California PressJournals Division 2000 Center Street,Suite 303, Berkeley,CA 94704-1223 or FAX: 510/642-9917 (VISA/MC only) E-mail: [email protected] www.ucpress.edu/journals
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:22:27 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions diacriticsA Review Criticism of Contemporary
Editedby Joan Ramon Resina Cornell University
Diacriticsis thepreeminent forum for exchangeamong literary theorists, literary critics,and philosophers.Each issuefeatures articlesin whichcontributors compare and analyzebooks on particulartheoretical worksand developtheir own positionson thetheses, methods, and theoretical implicationsof thoseworks. Published quarterlyin March,June, September, and December.
Publishedby The Johns Hopkins 9 University Press Annual Subscriptions: $28.00 individuals, $82.00 institutions. Foreign Postage: $8.00, Canada & Mexico; $9.30 outsideNorth America. Send orders with payment to: The JohnsHopkins University Press P.O. Box 19966,Baltimore Maryland21211-0966, U.S.A. MD residentsadd 5% tax.Orders shipped to Canada add 7% GST (GST #124004946RT.)
To place an order using Visa or MasterCard,call toll-free 1-800-548-1784, fax: (410) 516-6968, or email address: [email protected]
http://www.press.jhu.edu/press/journals/dia/dia.html tX2K
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:22:27 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Introduction:After the Bardic Era - German TelevisionSince 1984
MichaelGeisler and Michelle Mattson
Only 18 yearsago, in 1981,British media critics Richard Collins and VincentPorter wrote in theirmonograph on the WDR Arbeiterfilm: "West Germanbroadcasting has a plausibleclaim to beingthe most successfulinstance of publicservice broadcasting in theworld."' Even then,this statementwould probablyhave raiseda few eyebrowsnot only among Americantelevision executives, but among American media criticsas well. Yet, at the time,it was defensibleas a critical position.Politically, socially, and aesthetically,German television, in what,to historicizea famousterm coined by JohnFiske and JohnHart- ley, could be called its "BardicEra"2 was withouta doubtamong the mostlively and innovativebroadcasting structures in theworld.3 If the
1. RichardCollins and VincentPorter, WDR and theArbeiterfilm: Fassbinder, Ziewerand Others(London: British Film Institute, 1981) 4. 2. JohnFiske and John Hartley, Reading Television (London: Methuen, 1978) 85-100. 3. In "FromPublic to Private:Television in theFederal Republic of Germany," (NewGerman Critique 50 [Spring/Summer1990]: 41-55) RoswithaMfiller makes a first attemptat correctingthis tradition by aligningthe autonomouspublic spherecreated jointlyby the German television charters and the 1961 Fernsehurteil ofthe German Con- stitutionalCourt with Habermas's model. MUller points out that "liberal pluralism - which is how one mightdescribe both Habermas's model of communicationand the broadcast- ingcharters of the FRG - provided,for a shortperiod of time, a spectrumof viewpoints largeenough to accommodateprograms to whicheven Brechtwould have subscribed" (MUiller46). We wouldput it morebluntly: Despite numerous attempts at politicalinter- ferenceand bureaucratic structures that often turned innovative planning into a nightmare, Germantelevision between 1961 and 1984(and perhapsbeyond) provided an openarena of unparalleledaccessibility - an opportunityto establisha trulydemocratic public mediumthat was systematicallyignored by the vast majority of German intellectuals. 3
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:04 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 4 Afterthe Bardic Era successof a particulartelevision culture is to be measuredaccording to such criteriaas innovativeprogramming structures, active and produc- tive (i.e., interventionist)participation in the social debates of the period,contribution to the arts as a whole,and a diversifiedspectrum of offeringsthat appeals to differentsocietal sub-groups (including minori- ties),then German television of the 1960sand 1970scertainly lived up to itsmission. (This, by the way, despite constant grumbling from a cul- turalelite that disparaged the medium on thebasis of a hand-me-down FrankfurtSchool distrust of all industrialmodes of production). To citejust a fewexamples: *In 1958,a televisionplay by DieterMeichsner, Besuch aus derZone provokeda discussionabout the relative achievements of bothGerman statesthat sent shock waves all the way to the West Germanparlia- ment. Similarly,writer Wolfgang Menge's and directorWolfgang Petersen'stelevision play Smogkicked off a debateon West German environmentalpolicy that led to significantchanges in theenvironmen- tal protectionlaws of severalGerman states and almostcertainly helped catalyzethe rise of environmentalconsciousness that was to articulate itself,at leastin part, in the ascent of the Green party. *In the early1960s, the televisionnews magazinePanorama (origi- nallyadapted from the British program by the same title), under its radi- cal-democraticmoderator Gert von Paczensky,aggressively took on the restorationpolicies of theAdenauer government. It is probablynot over- statingthe case to say thatPanorama 's aggressivepolitical reportage, in tandemwith the muckrakingjournalism of the Spiegel staff,helped establishedthe notion of a freepress and freepublic media in a country thathad notbeen used to either.More importantly, it did so vis-a-visa governmentthat, as Adenauer'sill-fated plans fora government-run televisionchannel had shown,still thought of publicbroadcasting as some kind of electronicoutlet for governmentcommuniques. Pan- orama' coverageof theSpiegel crisis, especially the mass demonstra- tionsagainst the incarceration of Spiegeleditor Rudolf Augstein (special issue of 1 January1962) was a significantfactor in the creationof a publicdebate about freedom of thepress. The debateforced the admin- istrationto abandonits overt attempt to censurethe German press.4
4. On theturbulent political and journalistic history of the early days of Panorama, see GerhardLampe and HeidemarieSchumacher, Das 'Panorama'der 60erJahre. Zur Geschichtedes erstenpolitischen Fernsehmagazins der BRD (Berlin:Spiess, 1991 ).
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:04 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichaelGeisler and Michelle Mattson 5
*Theso-called film-television agreement, renewed in four-yearinter- vals since 1974,provided a stablefinancial base forGermany's strug- glingfilm industry without which the phenomenal international success of New GermanCinema probably would not have occurred.As Karl Prtimmpoints out, "The New GermanCinema, admired all over the world,and presentedwith pride by the GoetheInstitutes, is, among otherthings, also a resultof thisrevirement. Since the 1970s,there has not been one importantand successfulGerman film that was not pro- ducedwithin the framework ofthis agreement."5 *Establishedin 1962,the ZDF experimentaltelevision workshop Das kleineFernsehspiel provided a showcasefor groundbreaking, innovative filmmaking(as well as some interminablyboring flops). Among those whowere given exhibition space early in theircareers are Robert Wilson, WolfgangPetersen, Rosa von Praunheim,Jim Jarmusch, Helma Sanders, HelkeSander, Antonio Sknrmeta and many other filmmakers from around theworld. Even in theUnited States, the Kleines Fernsehspiel was noted as oneof the most important testing grounds for young directors.6 *Throughoutits broadcasting history, but cresting around the late 1970s and early 1980s,German television has been an activecontributor to Germany'sattempts to cometo termswith the Nazi past,frequently set- tingthe agenda for this debate. Examples are Egon Monk's and Gunter R. Lys's televisionplay Ein Tag (ARD: NDR, 1965), whichdepicts a typicalday in a Germanconcentration camp, or the1979 broadcast of the U.S. televisionseries Holocaust. The latterinitiated a nationwidesoul- searchingand clearedthe way forcountless documentary and fictional programsproduced by German television itself.7 *In 1984,Edgar Reitz and PeterSteinbach's 15 1/2-hourepic televi- sion series Heimat (ARD: WDR/SFB) became the focal pointof a nationalobsession with what could be called theproxemics of identity
5. KarlPrUimm, "Film und Fernsehen - Ambivalenzund Identitat," Geschichte des deutschenFilms, ed. WolfgangJacobsen, et al. (Stuttgart:Metzler 1993) 514. To put thingsin perspective,however, one also needsto keep in mindthat the agreementhas recentlycome under fire from German critics who believe that it was preciselythis financ- ing guaranteethat made it possiblefor German filmmakers to becomecomplacent and self-absorbed,producing marginal films that never found an audience.This fundamental neglectof the market is heldresponsible for the continuing creative crisis of German cin- ema sincethe mid-1980s. 6. Cf. KathleenHulser, "A TV WorkshopThat RelishesRisk," The New York Times15 Aug. 1982. See also AndreasSchreitmiiller and EckartStein, eds., Freispiele. Das kleineFernsehspiel - Freiraumim Programm (Munich: TR Verlagsunion,1986).
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:04 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 6 Afterthe Bardic Era
formation,i.e. thelocal, regional and national boundaries of "home."8 The scenariosketched out above would be hardto believefor anyone who zaps across Germany'stelevision channels of today.He or she wouldfind, instead, at least38 differenttalk show entries, from PRO7's ArabellaKiesbauer (typical topic: "Kleine Miinnerbringen's nicht" - "LittleMen Don't Do it For Me") to SATI's latenight Harald Schmidt Show (a sexed-upGerman version of David Lettermanwith a cultfol- lowingamong intellectuals); a never-ending string of Americanmovies and televisionseries, the vast majorityof themfrom media monopo- list'sLeo Kirch'sarchives, circulating endlessly in one of severalcable/ satellitechannels controlled by theKirch Group; some 30-odd different gameand variety shows and more or less kinky"erotic" shows from the shrillcamp of transvestiteLilo Wanders(Ernie Reinhardt)'s Wa(h)re Liebe (VOX) to the openlypornographic liebe siinde(PRO7) where formermoderator Matthias Frings once encouragedhis (presumably mostlymale) audienceto presstheir penises against the screen to allow thetherapeutic effect of a spiritualhealer to endowthem with ever-last- ingvirility via theairwaves. Conversely,our hypotheticalzapper would have to look hardto find the criticaltelevision plays that were Germantelevision's hallmark in the 1960s and 1970s,the ambitious mini-series (Berlin Alexanderplatz, Heimat,Die GeschwisterOppermann) of the1980s, and thehard-hitting newsmagazines (Panorama, Report, Monitor) and carefully crafted doc- umentaries(Brodman, Fechner, Wildenhahn, Breloer) that have been the prideof Germanpublic television throughout its history.One can still findthese entries9 (or other,similar ones); butthey tend to getcrowded out by populardaytime and nighttimesoaps and therenaissance of the Germanfamily series: they are too costlyto produceand theiraudience shareis too smallfor them to competeagainst Hollywood's production
7. On Germantelevision's attempts toaddress the issues of fascism and the Holocaust, andthe role of the U.S. televisionseries, see MichaelE. Geisler,"The Disposal of Memory: Fascismand the Holocaust on West German Television," Framing the Past. The Historiogra- phyof German Cinema and Television, ed. Bruce A. Murrayand Christopher Wickham (Car- bondale:Southern Illinois UP, 1992) 220-60.On thelarger political and aestheticissues involvedin cinematicand videographicmemory construction, see Eric Santner,Stranded Objects.Mourning, Memory and Film in Postwar Germany (Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1990). 8. Cf. New GermanCritique 36 (Fall 1985), specialissue on Heimat.See also Santner,Stranded Objects and Anton Kaes, From Hitler to Heimat. The Return of History as Film(Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1989). 9. Cf.,for instance, Heinrich Breloer's two-part Todesspiel (ARD 1997),a semi- documentaryaccount of the events surrounding the "German Autumn" of 1977.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:04 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichaelGeisler and Michelle Mattson 7 valuesand the homespun "healer and dealer" formulae. So whathappened on theway to "TelevisionWithout Frontiers" - the EC ideal of the freeexchange of informationover the airwavesthat would hastenEuropean integration and culturaldiversity? To under- standthe developmentsthat led to thecurrent broadcasting landscape, one has to rehearsea fewhistorical parameters10 that determined Ger- mantelevision culture until 1984. In 1952, regulartelevision broadcasting resumed in Germany,start- ing in theBritish sector (Hamburg) and spreadingsoutheast from there. This is of morethan geographical and historicalsignificance, since the Britisheffectively defined the nature of Germantelevision (and radio) broadcastingfor the next three decades, adapting a modifiedversion of theBBC structurefor the new Germanservice. The idea was to estab- lish a non-commercial,subscription-based network of televisionsta- tions under public law [offentlich-rechtlich],supervised by repre- sentativesof a broadspectrum of societalinterests, yet removed from directcontrol of thestate. The problemis that,from the beginning, this ideal chafedagainst the deep distrustheld by all politicalparties in Germany,against a trulyindependent broadcasting system. Since the days of the WeimarRepublic, i.e., precedingeven theNazi policyof "coordination"[Gleichschaltung], German politicians had seen broad- castingas thedomain of thestate. The Alliesfought an uphilland, ulti- mately,losing battleagainst this perception.llThe miracleis that, despitethese early attempts at politicalcontrol, German broadcasting stationswere able to carveout forthemselves a nicheof independence 10. Foran informative,concise survey of the history of German television as wellas thecurrent broadcasting landscape, see JohnSandford, "Television in Germany,"Televi- sion inEurope, ed. JamesA. Colemanand Brigitte Rollet (Exeter: Intellect, 1997) 49-60. 11. Cf. Hans Bausch,ed., Rundfunkin Deutschland,vol. 3, Rundfunkpolitiknach 1945(Munich: Deutscher Taschenbuch, 1980) 46ff. The argumentis thatthe British High Commissioner,Sir HughCarleton Greene, was "too accommodating"in his negotiations withGerman politicians. That may be true,but blaming the decline of Germantelevision cultureon theAllies' 'failure'to tell Germansmore clearly what to do withtheir new democraticinstruments reveals a strangenotion of the democratic process. For an Ameri- can accountof the same problem see theinterview with Robert Lochner in Dietrich Wag- ner's documentary,Mein Job hiefjimmer Germany. (HRIII 1996). As U.S. Control Officerfor Radio Frankfurt during the post-war years, Lochner helped to rebuild the Hes- sischeRundfunk - and raninto the same kind of politicalopposition to a broadcasting cultureunrestrained by governmentcontrol that Greene did in Hamburg.The sameholds truefor the Suideutsche Rundfunk and the Bayrische Rundfunk. In everyone ofthese cases theAllies enforced the establishment of a (relatively)independent broadcasting structure againsttenacious resistance by German politicians.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:04 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 8 Afterthe Bardic Era andhold on to itso tenaciouslyfor so long. They did so by playingcompeting societal and politicalinterests againsteach other:since representatives of the major social forceshad been given a voice on the network'sgoverning bodies, the Rund- funkrate[broadcasting councils] for the ARD and theFernsehrat [tele- vision council]for the ZDF, the networkswere able, fora while,to createa sphereof relativeartistic autonomy at thecenter of the inter- sectingand competingpressure groups. Most notably,they could alwaysrely upon the separatist interests of theGerman states to act as a counterbalanceagainst attempts at centralistcontrol by the governing powersin the Bundestag,since the regionaladministrations jealously guardedtheir constitutional autonomy in culturalaffairs against any encroachmentsby Bonn. This became evidentin 1961, when the Lander stoppedan initiativeby theAdenauer administration to estab- lish a new televisionnetwork under government control by takingtheir case to theGerman Constitutional Court, which, in itslandmark Fernse- hurteilof 1961,expressly reaffirmed the independence of publictelevi- sionfrom political interference. The Fernsehurteil,which marked a quantumleap in Germandemoc- ratization,12paved the way fortwo decades of relativelyunencumbered development.During this time German television was able to findits own voice and builda traditionof first-ratepolitical reportage, aestheti- cally and politicallytrailblazing television drama and miniseries,and a broadspectrum of diversityprogramming that evolved thanks to therel- ative insignificanceof ratingspressures (since the subscriptionsystem guaranteedtelevision stations a stablefinancial base on topof theirlim- itedcommercial revenues). In theearly decades of Germantelevision this uneasy balance of pow- ers workedbecause the representativesof the variousinterest groups were chosenprimarily for their experience, expertise, or at least inter- est in themedia and onlysecondarily according to politicalfault lines. This gave way,however, during the late 1970s and early1980s, to a finelytuned system of proportionalrepresentation on the basis of politi- cal affiliationthat reflected the power structure of each of theGerman states.This systemof proportionalrepresentation [Proporz] under- minedboth the political and artisticautonomy of theGerman networks longbefore commercial competition became a factor.
12. Especiallywhen considered in the historical context of the 1962 Spiegel crisis.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:04 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichaelGeisler and Michelle Mattson 9
Yet despitethe growing influence of the political parties on thegovern- ingbodies of Germanpublic television, some (notably the CDU) feltthat televisionwas stilltoo independent.The conservativerollback of the autonomyenjoyed by the public networks unfolded in three major stages: 1. As soon as the CDU/FDP coalitioncame to powerin 1982, they used theFederal authorityover the postal service (which, for reasons datingback all theway to theWeimar Republic, has authorityover the airwavesand all technologicalaspects of telecommunication)to grant a wide arrayof cable licensesto commercialbroadcasters, while at the same timeinvesting heavily in a nationwidecable infrastructure,thus circumventingstate interests instead of confrontingthem head-on as the Adenaueradministration had tried.This crucialdevelopment is covered in detailin Peter Humphreys's contribution tothis issue. 2. When the opportunityarose to redefinethe structureof public broadcastingin theformer GDR, chancellorKohl dispatchedone of his friends,the arch-conservativeRudolf Miihlfenzl to makesure not only thatthe new East Germantelevision networks were modeled after the existingstructure in theWest, but also thatconservatives held thebal- ance of powerin the6oveming bodies of thenew East Germanmember stationsof theARD. East Germanattempts to createnew, more inde- pendentforms of journalistic expression from within the existing broad- casting structureswere thus quenched in statu nascendi. This contributedto the impressionof a culturaltakeover by the West.Yet one needsto rememberthat, despite all thefascinating experimentation goingon in GDR televisionduring the interregnum period,14 the appara- tus itselfwas fatallycompromised. It had a veryproblematic history, it had notmanaged to rid itselfof theold Communistcadres, and it had failedto comeup witha viableadministrative structure that would have preservedsome autonomywhile developing new formsand genresthat wouldhave made it both competitive and compatible with the West Ger- man and Europeannetworks.15 Nevertheless, to manyEast Germans
13. Thenew stations are: ORB (OstdeutscherRundfunk Brandenburg) for the state of Brandenburg,and MDR (MitteldeutscherRundfunk) for the three states of Saxony, Saxony- Anhalt,and Thuringia; the fifth state, Mecklenburg-West Pomerania, joined up withNDR. 14. Cf., forinstance, Cordt Schnibben's reportage "Vom Lada zum Lambada," about the legendaryTV activismof elf 99. (Der Spiegel 49 [1989]; repr.in Cordt Schnibben,Seltsames Deutschland [Munich: Knaur 1992] 254-63). 15. For an excellent,concise survey of thistransition period, see KnutHickethier "Das Zerschlagender Einrichtung,"Mauer-Show, ed. R. Bohn,K. Hickethier,and E. Miiller(Berlin: sigma, 1992) 71-93.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:04 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 10 Afterthe Bardic Era
(and to mostof theWest German Left) Kohl's and Miihlfenzl'sheavy- handedapproach to theseproblems smacked of mediacensorship and, even froma moreneutral vantage point, the impressionremained that, when the last East Germanchannel ceased operationsat the end of 1991,the East Germanstates had "losttheir voice." KnutHickethier's articlein thisvolume provides a moredetailed description of thefactors thatinfluenced the developmentsin East Germantelevision after the demiseof the Communist government. 3. The lateststep in the escalatingwar over controlof the German airwaveswas a directfrontal attack on theARD itself,the oldestnet- work,and yetthe one that,traditionally, has beenmost critical of CDU policy.In Januaryof 1995,the Minister Presidents of Bavaria(Edmund Stoiber,CSU) and Saxony(Kurt Biedenkopf, CDU) jointlypublished their"Theses on a StructuralReform of PublicBroadcasting" in which they arguedthat the Grundversorgung("essential programming ser- vice") definedby theFederal Constitutional Court as thedomain of the publicnetworks (i.e., ARD and ZDF) couldbe providedby thecentral- ist ZDF in conjunctionwith the regionalist network now constitutedby theARD's "ThirdPrograms."'6 The ARD as a nationaltelevision ser- vicewould have been abolished under this scenario. Despiteflanking support from Kohl, the proposal ran into such heavy opposition17that it was dropped- at leasttemporarily, owing in partto its transparentlypolitical subtext: Stoiber and Biedenkopfhad reserved theirmost severe criticism for the largest of theARD memberstations, WDR, whichhad been the mostleft-leaning among the publictelevi- sion stations.Nicknamed "Rotfunk" [Red Channel]in morethan one CDU positionpaper, the WDR has alwaysbeen the focus of conserva- tivecriticism. Yet thisfairly straightforward attempt to gag publictele- vision journalismby eliminatingthe entireARD was perhapstoo transparentor, at the very least, ill-timed to succeed. Whilethe new SPD/Greencoalition has yetto makeits mark on Ger- man mediapolicy, one would expectthat ARD and ZDF will at the
16. It is no coincidencethat this trial balloon was floatedby two Lander Minister Presidents,rather than coming from Bonn. Learningfrom the fiascoof the Adenauer administration'sattempt to pushthrough a centralistgovernment television channel - whichviolated the constitutionally guaranteed cultural hegemony of theLander and was thereforeopposed even by conservative Lander governments - Kohl madesure to start thisnew attack through the proper venues: the representatives ofthe German states. 17. Some ofthis debate is documentedin Wilhelmvon Sternburg,ed., Tagesthema ARD. Der Streitum das ErsteProgramm (Frankfurt/Main: Fischer, 1995).
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:04 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichaelGeisler and MichelleMattson 11 veryleast have a littlebreathing space, givenboth parties' traditional supportof thepublic television model.18 However should the ratings of eitherpublic television network drop down to - or below- thethresh- old of a 10 percentaudience share, a scenariothat is nottoo far-fetched giventhe heavy competition from commercial broadcasters and transna- tionalsatellite sources, the Federal Court's constitutional protection will no longerbe worthmuch.19 Againstthis general backdrop, we wouldpoint to some specificfac- torscontributing tothe current crisis in Germantelevision: 1. In a best-casescenario, the European (not just German)concept of televisionas an institutionserving the public interest(comparable to schools,universities, hospitals or publictransport), makes television a fas- cinatingarena for public discourse - as Germantelevision was in the 1970sand 1980s.On theother hand, it also makesit a targetfor govern- ment-takeoverschemes, as the 1961 "Deutschland-Fernsehen-GmbH" fiascoor Margaret Thatcher's attempts atcensuring the BBC demonstrated. 2. The resultingscenario has been a media cultureestablished by courtorder. Much as the GermanSupreme Court's valiant efforts to ensurea livelyand independenttelevision culture in thepublic interest mustbe admired,one ironyof thisprocess has gone largelyunnoticed: The much-heralded"television" rulings of the Bundesverfassungsge- richtof 1961,1971, 1981, 1986, and 1994,even as theyestablished and thenrepeatedly reaffirmed their "guarantee" of a minimalsupply of independenttelevision programs in the public interest,20nevertheless
18. This supportis explicitlyarticulated in the CoalitionAgreement between the SPD and Btindnis90/Die Griinen (20 Oct. 1998). SectionX, "A New Politicaland Cul- turalOpenness," states as oneof the new administration's goals "the preservation of a plu- ralisticmedia landscape and a strongerpublic broadcasting service. .. ." Cf. thetext of the CoalitionAgreement on theGreens' web site:http://www.gruene.de/sache/30_rechts.htm. 19. In themid-1990s, both public television stations came dangerously close to that, losingmost of their(formerly captive) viewers to commercialbroadcasters, especially RTL. Forthe moment, it seemsas ifat leastARD hasbeen successful at notonly stopping, butreversing this downward trend: in thefirst half of 1998,ARD, forthe first time since the 1980s,pulled ahead of everyoneelse in theratings - includingRTL. However,this was partlythe result of major sports events (the soccer world championship) and therail- roaddisaster at Eschede.During both events, ARD andZDF moreor less divided the tele- visionaudience between them, almost shutting out the commercialcompetition. (Cf. anon.,"Comeback der Dinos," Der Spiegel26 [1998]:76-78). 20. Formore detailed information on therole of the Federal Constitutional Court in theregulation of Germanbroadcasting see PeterJ. Humphreys, Media and Media Policy in Germany.The Press and Broadcastingsince 1945 (New York:Berg 1990),and Hum- phreys'supdated article in thisissue.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:04 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 12 Afterthe Bardic Era continueda traditionof top-down democratic evolution. 3. Germany'sproverbial high-culture/low culture dichotomy kept manyintellectuals at arm'slength from the medium. While this is not uniqueto Germany,there has beena virtualexplosion of seriousschol- arshipon mediatheory in Englandand the UnitedStates, whereas in Germany,television scholarship tends to go eitherthe social or politi- cal science route,or is simplycontent to dismissthe mediumin a FrankfurtSchool-derived critique of industrialproduction. Among the Germanistsnow holdingLehrstiihle in Germany,there are veryfew who have engagedin a seriousanalysis of thenew mediumon thepro- gramminglevel, and only a handfulwho have done so consistently (some of themare represented in thisvolume). While this has no imme- diateimpact on thequality of televisionprogramming, the absence of a publicforum has leftthe critique of televisionforms and genreslargely to newspapercritics and the producersthemselves. This, in turn,has madeit muchharder for public television writers, producers and execu- tivesto identifyand supportpromising programming innovations and formatsthat might have provideda viable counterbalance(in political, aesthetic,and mass-appealterms) to thenew banalitiesof commercial programming.Michael Geisler's articlegives a more comprehensive analysisof the dominantinfluences on Germanmedia theory, and the newdirection it has takenover the last ten years. 4. Connectedto thisis thefact that German television does nothave a "rerunculture." To be sure,American films and televisionseries seemto be circlingendlessly in thedark recesses of Leo Kirch'scom- mercialchannels (and not onlythere), and thereare a few successful Germancrime series, most notably Tatort, that are rebroadcaston a fairlyregular basis. But thereis nothingon Germantelevision that would compareto the Americanrerun culture where one can revisit practicallyevery moderately successful series, from Hill StreetBlues to Mary TylerMoore and The TwilightZone on any given day of the week. This is significant,we wouldargue, because these reruns are an importantpart of televisionculture itself. Through them, and through theirintertextual links to contemporarysocial and politicalnorms, the mediumconstructs not only its own history,but a considerableportion of thenational narrative. Where this rerun culture is absent,the kind of semi-ironical,semi-serious discourse that clusters around the historicity of specifictelevision forms, and thatdraws its metaphorsfrom certain
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:04 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichaelGeisler and MichelleMattson 13 televisionprograms (e.g., a "Leave it to Beaver world")is also miss- ing. This deprivestelevision programming as a wholeof any sense of continuity,opening it wide to the kindof strip-miningof formsand genresnow goingon in Germany.The absenceof an establishedand widelyaccepted popular television culture, as well as the earlypromi- nenceof Americantelevision fare after the introduction of cable,have contributedto a sense of aversionand disaffectionamong German media specialiststoday. Both Heidi Schumacher'sand KnutHicketh- ier'sarticles in this issue address these concerns. 5. One could arguethat, just as the New GermanCinema lost its competitiveedge under the benevolent tutelage of Germantelevision, so Germanpublic televisionitself had thrivedfor so long underthe umbrellaprovided by the German Supreme Court (and an SPD adminis- trationloathe to embracethe new media) that the sudden wave of com- petitioninundating German air and cable space in thesecond half of the 1980s caughtthe two broadcastingbehemoths of ARD and ZDF com- pletelyunawares. Ill preparedto counterthe lowest-common-denomina- torprogramming of theircommercial rivals, public television program executivesreacted in knee-jerkfashion by pullingall thestops on their own programmingin an effortto competewith the commercial stations on thelatter's own territory. 6. One factorthat is oftenoverlooked is themedium's innate ability to confoundcritical approaches by simplyoutrunning them. This is particu- larlynoticeable with regard to thenew media,but this non-simultaneity of criticalmedia discourse was alreadyapparent in thegrotesque miscal- culationsof Germancinema owners and televisionproducers in the 1960s.While the former tried to stuffthe new genieback intothe cath- ode raytube from which it had sprungby boycottingit ("Not a single footof filmfor television!"), thus precipitating the demiseof the Ger- manfilm industry in the1960s, television producers reacted to thethreat and to theirown inadequateprojections of theirfuture programming needs,by relyingon one singlesource, indeed one man,for most of their foreignprogramming needs: the Bavarian distributor Leo Kirch.In retro- spect,it becomes increasingly apparent that this son ofa Frankonianvint- ner,a cleverand sometimesruthless wheeler-dealer, was theonly man in all of Germanywho saw veryearly on thatthe futureof the entertain- mentindustry would belong to thosewho couldprovide the stories for theelectronic narrator. Since the advent of the new media, the pressure to comeup withsomething, anything, to fillthe thousands of programming
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:04 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 14 Afterthe Bardic Era hoursa weekthat make up theworld's second largest television market (afterthe United States) has becomeeven more acute, and Kirchis ide- ally situatedto controlthe market. Unless the German Federal Cartel Officefinds a way of curbingKirch's activities, there is now thevery realdanger of a Kirchmonopoly over the German media landscape.21 On 3 July1996, Leo Kirchacquired the world rights (with the excep- tionof theU.S. market)to thesoccer world championships of 2002 and 2006 (for3.4 billionDM). Only fivedays later,he announceda far- rangingpartnership with British media tycoon Rupert Murdoch that will strengthenboth Murdoch'sand Kirch's strangleholdsover the Euro- pean TV markets.22Kirch's most recent coup was to outflankhis arch rival,the BertelsmannGroup in theirongoing struggle for domination of theGerman television market, especially the new opportunitiespro- vided by high-resolutiondigital television. Bertelsmann,the world's second largestmulti-media concern after Time-Warner, had hoped to establishits own presencein thedigital TV arena,but was forcedinto an embarrassingmarriage of conveniencewith Kirch's DF1 when it realizedthat Kirch simply controls too muchof the archival material the new channelswill dependon.23 However, far from removing the threat to mediapluralism, this mega-fusion of Germany's24two biggestcon- glomeratesactually increases it, because Kirch (SAT1, PRO7, KABEL 1) and Bertelsmann(RTL, RTL2, VOX, SUPER RTL) togethercontrol almost90 percentof Germany'scommercial television programming, nearlyall Germanlicenses for new Americanproductions as well as the exclusiverights to live broadcastsof thesoccer matches played in the GermanSoccer Association's top league, the Erste Bundesliga.25
21. See PeterHumphreys's article in this issue. 22. See the Spiegelcover "Wer regiertden Himmel?"Der Spiegel 29 (15 July 1996):23. 23. Anon.,"Bertelsmann verbuindet sich mit Kirch,"Siiddeutsche Zeitung (SZ- Online)23 July1996, and the editorial in the same issue."Kartell unter Kirchs Kuratel." 24. On Kirch'slinks to otherEuropean media conglomerates and Germanmedia withinthe European context in generalsee KnutHickethier, "The Media in Germany," Marketsand Myths.Forces for Changein theEuropean Media, ed. AnthonyWeymouth andBernard Lamizet (London: Longman, 1996) 123ff. 25. As ifthat were not enough, the two media giants recently agreed on a coordi- natedbroadcasting schedule that would have eliminated any sense of real competition from theGerman airwaves (except for the public television stations). Cf. "'Das WortMonopol meiden',"Der Spiegel9 (1998): 92ff.However, for the time being, the Bertelsmann/Kirch pay-TVmonopoly was thwartedby Karelvan Miert,the European Union's Competition Commissioner."'Wir lassen Kirch nicht allein,'" Der Spiegel23 (1998): 108-09.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:04 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichaelGeisler and MichelleMattson 15
To put all of thisinformation into perspective, one needsto keep in mindthat the current travails of Germantelevision are probablysymp- toms of the same kind of modernizationshakedown that plagued the Americantelevision landscape throughout much of the 1980s.And just as was thecase in theUnited States then, it is nothard to findin Ger- man televisionof todayniches in whichthe best of traditionalGerman televisionhas survived,as well as some innovativeprogramming initia- tives.Even thoughthe "flagship"of Germanpublic broadcasting, the Fernsehspiel[television drama] has been publiclyburied by numerous nostalgicTV critics,these announcements were, as usual,"rather prema- ture."The traditionsurvives, though on a less spectacularbasis than before.True, Die zweiteHeimat, the 1992 26-hoursequel to Reitz'ssuc- cessfulHeimat series of 1984,was an expensivecritical and commercial disappointmentthat will make publictelevision producers think twice beforecommitting themselves to a similarlyambitious venture in the future.On theother hand, Dieter Wedel's four-part miniseries Der grof3e Bellheim(ZDF, 1993) successfullyfused social criticismwith political satirein revealingthe problems caused by thetransition from the pio- neersof theGerman economic miracle to a new generationof business schooltrainees who lack boththe vision and thepersonal commitment thatdrove the early tycoons. Productions like Nico Hoffmann'sself-ref- erentialmedia thriller Der Sandmann(RTL2, 1995),which won the cov- etedAdolf Grimme Award in Gold and Urs Egger'sambitious two-part adaptationof JosefHaslinger's Opernball (SAT1, 1998) suggestthat even thecommercial channels are beginningto recognizethe need both to continuethis long tradition of topical,relevant television drama and to providesome nichewhere young talents may be givena chanceto try new formsand modes of articulation(as RTL2 has done with its umbrellaseries "Die jungenWilden"). There are even indicationsthat someof thecommercial channels are tryingto remodeltheir notoriously uninformativenews shows along the lines of themore serious newscast- ingprovided by the public channels.26 And of course,the electronic news magazinesproduced by some of Germany'sand Switzerland'smost respectableprint publications (Spiegel-TV, Zeit-TV, Format NZZ) add independentviewpoints and top-notchinvestigative reportage to thetele- visionnews and information portfolio of the German-speaking countries.
26. TitusAmu, "Sie wollenso seriUswie die 'Tagesschau'sein," Suiddeutsche Zei- tung(SZ-ONLINE) 31 Aug. 1996.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:04 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 16 Afterthe Bardic Era
Germanmedia scholars seem ambivalent about the potential ramifica- tions of the developmentof niche programming.Schumacher, for instance,is rathertroubled by thistrend, fearing it will meanthat ever fewerviewers will actuallywatch qualityprogramming, while an increasingnumber will succumbto themanipulative, the inane, and the sensationalistic.Hickethier, on the otherhand, sees the resistanceof certaintelevision genres, primarily news programming, to Americaniza- tionand audiencedisaffection with re-broadcast American series as a signthat the German television community will refuse to lowerits stan- dardsin thelong run, preserving a regionally and culturallyunique tele- vision character.Finally, whatever the ultimateverdict on Kluge's "culturemagazines" (Zehn vor elf and Die Stundeder Filmemacher) maybe, it shouldnot go withoutnotice that there is roomfor this type ofprogramming on Germancommercial television broadcasting. This issue on the changingmedia landscape in Germanysince 1984 openswith a sectiondesigned to givea broaderoverview of thecurrent mediaconfiguration. The firstthree articles all coverthe major develop- mentsthat have occurred during this period. Peter Humphreys recaps and analyzesthe legal and politicaldevelopments that created today's broad- castingsystem. Knut Hickethier looks at theeffects commercialization has had on programdevelopment. Closing out theopening section, Michael Geislerreviews and previewsGerman media theory, both the theoretical paradigmsthat dominated German media discourse into the 1980s, as well as thenew directions it has takenwithin the last decade. The secondpart introducesthe theoretical work of two authors which Geisler examines in his overview,Norbert Bolz's interpretationof Benjamin's media aesthet- ics fromhis Theoryof theNew Media,and SiegfriedZielinski's provi- sionalconclusions about our relationship to thenew media from his book Audiovisions.Cinema and Televisionas Interludesof History.We have decidedto close withthree more circumscribed contributions about spe- cific issues:Heidi Schumacher'sinterpretation of current programming trendsas a moveto a thorough-goingcommercial aesthetic for all tele- vision production;Peter Lutze's examinationof AlexanderKluge's "guerrilla"assault on televisionvia television;and MichelleMattson's analysisof the way in whicha verypopular German crime series, Tatort,represents and constructs issues of current political interest. Humphreys'sarticle unpacks the agendasand decision-makingpro- cesses thatled to today'sbroadcasting system. He discussesthe de-reg- ulationthat allowed forthe installationof a vast commercialcable
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:04 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichaelGeisler and MichelleMattson 17 network,the relevantpolitical background, including the ideological splitbetween the SPD and CDU, thecrucial roles of theGerman fed- eralpostal ministry and of Germany'ssupreme court, which has consis- tentlyhanded down decisiverulings throughout Germany's post-war broadcastinghistory. Humphreys also delineateshow Germany'srather unique de-centralizedbroadcasting system, in conjunctionwith weak regulationson printmedia ownership, have led to theconcentration of mediapower in Germanyin thehands of a fewmedia dynasties, most predominantlythe Leo Kirchmedia empire and theBertelsmann/WAZ group.Finally Humphreys outlines the impact of thesedevelopments on publicbroadcasting in Germany,its increasinginability to justifythe high consumerfees chargedto individualhouseholds by the federal postalminister, and its still precarious future. Hickethieralso toucheson these legal and systemicbroadcasting issues,adding a briefdescription of whathappened to televisionin East Germanyfrom 1989 to 1991, when it was essentiallyobliterated throughits integrationinto the existingstructures of West German broadcasting.However, he primarilyassesses the impact that the intro- ductionof commercialbroadcasting has had on whatwe see whenwe watchGerman television. He examinesthe much-toutedEuropeaniza- tionof television,both as a real developmentand as a rhetoricalges- ture.Hickethier also providesa valuable discussionof programming trends;looking first at earlyprogramming efforts in thelast half of the 1980s,and thenat how theemphases have shiftedin the90s, now that commercialbroadcasters have establishedthemselves firmly within the medialandscape. His analysiscovers long-term trends away fromnarra- tive to interactivetelevision, the reconceptualizationof television genres,and the losses public broadcastinghas incurredthrough the competitionwith the commercial networks. Geislerthen walks us throughmedia-theoretical discourse in Ger- many.He arguesthat the FrankfurtSchool's wholesaleindictment of industriallyproduced texts constituted the dominantparadigm in Ger- manyinto the 1980s.He furthermaintains that this indictment blocked theevolution of significantnew approaches to themedia for most of the 1960s and 1970s. It was onlyin themid-1980s that Friedrich Kittler's work,together with the emerging influence of poststructuralism,began to transformthe way Germanmedia theorists thought about their field. Ideologicalcritique gave way to a McLuhanesqueobsession with the materialityof communicationand the structuraland epistemological
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:04 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 18 Afterthe Bardic Era changeswrought by thenew media.Technophobes turned into techno- philes,heralding the end of Humanism(Norbert Bolz) and thesuspen- sion of thephysical body in cyberspace.Yet withfew exceptions (e.g., HartmutWinkler, Siegfried Zielinski,), the agenda remainsthe same: Germanintellectuals harbor a deep-seatedaversion to directencounters withmass-cultural phenomena. Hans MagnusEnzensberger articulates thiswell, when he cynicallyconcludes that "noise," "boredom," and the eliminationof content,is the onlytrue "message" of television.And PeterHandke's or Botho Strauss'selitist broadsides against the mass media(and themasses!) serve as drasticreminders of the factthat the processof democratizationpercolates from the bottom up, notthe other way around.Conversely, Zielinski's and Winkler'sinvestigations into thehistorical relativity of theepistemological "revolutions" wrought by audiovisual(Zielinski) and digital(Winkler) technologies demonstrate thatthe Germantradition of takinga coupleof criticalsteps back and resituatingtopical developments in a largercontext can stillopen up entirelynew avenues of inquiry. We have includedsections from Norbert Bolz's and SiegfriedZielin- ski's workin orderto providean exampleof the workGeisler dis- cusses. The excerptfrom Bolz's Theoryof theNew Media represents Bolz's interpretationof Walter Benjamin's media theory and its posi- tive potentialfor helpingus to re-conceptualizethe relationshipof humanbeings and the new media. Bolz sees in Benjamin'sfldneur, movingthrough the Paris arcades (and throughBenjamin's Arcades Project)the prefiguration of the net surfer losing himself or herselfin cyberspace.This, however, with one significanttransformation: while the passivityof the observerremains, the detachmentof thefldneur's wandering,critical eye vanishes.Tactility (real or imaginary)and prox- imitytake the place of criticism.Benjamin's famous dictum of the"loss of aura" thustakes on a propheticmeaning: at stakeis the "aura" of autonomousart as a discourse.It is onlyfitting, then, that Benjamin's texts,like McLuhan's,are mosaic,bricolage, at timesbordering on casuistry.Benjamin's work thus becomes "the interfacebetween the GutenbergGalaxy and theworld of thenew media"- an aspectlong repressedby Critical Theory. Bolz arguesthat the adventof the new media marksa historical momentas significantto humanhistory as was the discoverythat the earthis notthe center of theuniverse. While the Copernican revolution dethronedhuman beings from their cosmic centrality, Bolz suggeststhat
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:04 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichaelGeisler and Michelle Mattson 19 the new media have de-centeredhuman beings fromepistemology itself:we are no longerthe sole originatorsor processorsof knowl- edge. Insteadof viewingthe new media as somethingartificial, as somethingdistinct from human beings, he proposesthat we rethinkthe veryconcept of thenatural and thehuman to includethe new technolo- gies. He maintainsthat we mustlearn to "functionalizethem as exten- sions" of ourselves.Only when we do this,will we be able to realize theemancipatory potential they hold for us. Zielinski'sreflections on how we have respondedto developmentsin mediatechnology could easilyhave servedas the concludingremarks forthis special issue, since they offer us a verysober appraisal of where "we are at" withthe new media,and moreimportantly the kindsof questionswe need to be askingboth about their import in humanlives and ourown - as yetinadequately - creativerelationship to them.How- ever,his discussionpicks up in a sensewhere Bolz leavesoff, attempt- ing to specifythe actual individualand social implicationsthe new mediahave forour lives.He triesto confrontthe doomsayers of today thatsee in themedia nothing but a loss of thereal, a reductionof the human.Zielinski argues that while the new media have certainlyshifted and re-orderedthe boundaries of ourexperiences, they do noteliminate thesocial spacesin whichhuman interaction happens. Reality, he main- tains,is stillvery much a constructionof humansubjectivity. While he acknowledgesthat the moretraditional loci of social interactionhave diminishedin importance,he exploresthe ambiguitiesand multiva- lencesthat the conceptof "mobileprivatization" (Raymond Williams) can entailfor opening up differentkinds of publicfora and groupiden- tities.In Benjaminianfashion, Zielinski emphasizes the potentialcre- ativitythe new mediacan releasein theuser, providing an opportunity to createan individualizedproduct from their disparate offerings. The threesubsequent articles all thematizeor echo elementsintro- ducedand discussedin theopening section. Heidi Schumacher'sarticle aboutnew trends in televisionprogramming examines how the commer- cializationof broadcastinghas led to its literalcommercialization. She shows that televisionprogramming development in Germanyhas adoptedthe threebasic tenetsof marketingaesthetics: 1) catchingthe attentionof theviewer; 2) involvingthe viewer through "participatory" structureson an emotional- ratherthan critical-analytical - level; and 3) anchoringthe viewerto specifictelevision products, ensuring that certaintelevision programs become part of the viewer'sdaily rituals.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:04 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 20 Afterthe Bardic Era
This marksa majorrupture in Germantelevision production, distribu- tionand reception.Instead of seeingthe increasing presence of interac- tivetelevision as a movetoward democratizing television, Schumacher emphasizesthe loss of criticaldistance that goes handin handwith this typeof "interactive"programming (Bolz suggeststhat this loss of criti- cal distanceis a resultof thenew media'stactile characteristics). Yes, televisionviewers now see televisionmore as theirown personalvehi- cle of expression,but it has lostits publicservice potential in thepro- cess. Schumacher'sarticle provides an example of a responseto commercialbroadcasting as theend of Germantelevision's golden era. She maintainsthat only after commercialization has Germantelevision becomea mass medium.Although one can stillfind quality program- mingin the sea of broadcastinginanity, she fearsthat it will come to serveonly a subgroupof television viewers. Zielinskiwould caution us, however,that we cannotpredict or con- trolthe use an individualwill makeof whatthe media transmit, and he wouldremind us thatwe haveyet to exploitfully the potential the new technologiespresent. In Lutze's discussionof Kluge's televisionwork, the issue of individualreception and the explorationof the creative potentialof new mediatechnology are also paramount.Lutze outlines forus boththe historyof Kluge's participationin televisionand the motivationsfor his involvement.He also givesus a detaileddescription and analysisof one Kluge production,"16 filmsin 24 minutes."His analysisreveals how indebtedKluge is to theadvent of newproduction technologies,and how,in fact,his explorationof thesenew technolo- gies have influencedthe furtherdevelopment of Kluge's own aesthet- ics. Lutze underscoresthe tremendousburden that Kluge's particular aestheticstrategies have alwaysplaced on theviewer, arguing that this has becomeeven more pronounced in someof his work for television.27 BothLutze's studyof Klugeand MichelleMattson's article on Tatort discuss specifictelevision texts, how theyare structured,and what implicationssuch structureshave in termsof receptiontheories and audienceshare. Their contributions offer possible ways to talk about televisionon a theoreticallevel, while still addressing the actual mate- rial of television.Whereas Lutze looks at morechallenging experimen- tal televisionprogramming, Mattson analyzes an exampleof popular
27. Due to spaceconstraints, Peter Lutze's article will appear in a subsequentissue ofNew German Critique.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:04 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichaelGeisler and MichelleMattson 21
Germanprogramming. Her discussionof the long-runningTatort (a productof one of Germany'spublic stations) discusses first the appar- entcontradictions in themessages various episodes send out, and then examinesthe structural and aestheticchoices made in theproduction of theseshows that contribute to theapparent self-contradiction of the epi- sodes in question.She arguesthat the problems and peculiarities of tele- visionproduction are as mucha resultof aestheticchoices as theyare oftheir institutional positioning within the culture industry. Overall the issue's aim is to look at Germanbroadcasting since roughly1984 froma varietyof perspectivesand on numerouslevels. The contributionsconstitute a heterogenouscollection of articlesthat rangefrom the abstract theoretical to moreconcrete textual and produc- tionanalysis. We have includedthese disparate and at timeseven con- tradictoryvoices in orderto offera samplingof the very broad spectrumthat the studyof Germanmedia encompasses. Although tele- vision and televisionproduction receive most of the attentionhere, manyof thearticles go beyondquestions specific to televisionto con- sideraspects of broaderimport. Since it is highlyunlikely that Ger- manywill everreturn to a purelypublic broadcasting system, we hope thisissue will add to an understandingof what German television as a vastlyinfluential medium does and how it operateswithin radically alteredparameters. Nonetheless, there is everyreason to believe that somedaytelevision as we knowit will becomeobsolete, and thatwe mustexplore now the individual and social implicationsthe entire array ofnew media entail.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:04 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Germanys "Dual " BroadcastingSystem. RecipeFor Pluralism In TheAge of Multi-Channel Broadcasting? *
PeterHumphreys
The last decade and a half have seen a paradigmatictransforma- tion of German broadcastingfrom the traditionalpublic-service monopolyto a dual public/privatesystem. The introductionof the "new media,"cable and satellite,part of the widercommunications revolutionin the advanced industrialworld,l greatlyexpanded the opportunitiesto launchnew programservices, undermining thereby the "scarcityof frequency"argument for continued public broadcast- ing monopoly.Hitherto European thinking had held thatterrestrial frequencieswere insufficientlyavailable fora trulycompetitive and pluralisticbroadcasting market. The risk of overcrowdingthe air- waves had been a further,purely technicalrationale for public monopoly.Satellite television and its re-transmissionin multi-chan- nel cable systemsabridged national and - in Germany- state [Lander] broadcastingsovereignties. In Germany,as elsewhere,this stateof affairsnecessitated a re-regulationof broadcasting.However, it underminedregulatory effectiveness and encouragedan elementof
* This articledraws on researchinto media concentration and itsregulation con- ductedby the author at ManchesterUniversity between 1996 (January) and 1998(Decem- ber) and financedby theBritish Economic and Social ResearchCouncil under its Media Economicsand Media Culture research programme (Grant No. L 12625109). 1. This communicationsrevolution is ongoing.Currently digital "platforms" are beinglaunched in westernEurope. Digital broadcasting multiplies the number of possible channelseven more than cable and satellite have already done. 23
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:24 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 24 Germany's"Dual" BroadcastingSystem competitivederegulation as the statescompeted to attract(or retain) mediainvestment. In Germanythe process of introducingprivate commercial broadcast- ing was a matterof considerablepolitical conflict and publicdebate. Manyfeared its negativeimpact on radioand television.Public-service broadcastinghad rationalesunderpinning it other than simply the argu- mentconcerning scarcity of frequencies.There had longexisted a con- sensusthat broadcasting had publicgoods characteristics.Moreover, in Germanybroadcasting was regardedas morethan a medium:the consti- tutionalcourt saw it as a vital"factor" for the functioningof democ- racy,society and culture.Because of thisfunction, the public-service broadcastershad been constraineduniversally to providea comprehen- sive,diverse, and balancedrange of programmingthat catered to a wide rangeof citizens'needs. Although the public-service broadcasters sup- plementedtheir license fee incomewith limited advertising, without commercialcompetitors they were free from the pressure to providea servicegeared to maximizethe audiencesthat could be deliveredto advertisers.The public broadcasters'explicit remit was to delivera qualityservice providing more than mainly mass-entertainment. More- over, this public-serviceparadigm had allowed for a "separationof mediapowers" [publizistische Gewaltenteilung] between a privatecom- mercialpress that was accountableto themarket (and mostlyto those with marketpower) and the public-servicebroadcasters which were accountableto the citizenry(through their regulatory structures - see below). Therefore,among the benefitsof public-servicebroadcasting was the factthat it counterbalancedthe concentration of privatepress powerin relativelyfew corporatehands and therebypromoted plural- ismin the mass media system at large.2 The accountabilitymechanisms for broadcasting - in place in West Germanysince the early post-war years and extended to theformer East Germanysince 1990 - markedGerman public-service broadcasting as a distinctivemodel. For obvioushistorical reasons, it was moreself- consciouslydemocratic and pluralistic than many other systems in west- ern Europe.The principaldemocratic/pluralist feature of the German regulatorysystem was thekey role playedby "broadcastingcouncils" [Rundfunkrate]within the individual regional broadcasting corporations
2. On pressconcentration see theregular reports by Walter Schaitz and Horst R6per inthe journal Media Perspektiven.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:24 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions PeterHumphreys 25 and the televisioncouncil of the ZDF.3 These broadcastingcouncils each containedvarying numbers of representativesfrom "socially sig- nificantgroups" such as culturalbodies, churches, employers associ- ations,trade unions, and so on,along with political representatives. This "internalcontrol" [Binnenkontrolle] assured that the channelswere "internallypluralistic" [Binnenpluralismus]. Germany'sparadigmatic transformation ofbroadcasting structures over thelast decade was partof a Europe-widetrend toward the abolition of thetraditional public-service broadcasting monopoly and theopening of the regulatorybarriers to privatecommercial entrants. In France,the country'sleading public-service broadcasting company was even priva- tized.In Italy,the commercialization of broadcasting has beendescribed as a "wild deregulation."In Germany,by contrast,the abolitionof the public servicemonopoly was counterbalancedby unmistakeablere- regulatoryfeatures.4 The federalconstitutional court ruled in 1986 that the constitutionalityof private commercial broadcasting depended on therebeing a continuedcentral role forthe public-service broadcasters and a guaranteethat the latter'stechnical, organizational, and financial requirementswould be met[Bestands- und Entwicklungsgarantie]. Suc- cessiverulings of thecourt confirmed and developed this guarantee. Fur- ther,the new commercialbroadcasters remained subject to a "relatively denseregulatory code of conduct."5The commercialbroadcasters were franchizedand supervizedby a new tierof stateregulatory authorities [Landesmedienanstalten],which supplied public accountability. They had pluralistboards composed of representativesof the sociallysignificant groups.In this respectthey appeared to be modelledon the above-
3. Therewere nine of thesecorporations in WestGermany. Unification with the formerEast Germanyin 1990brought the number to eleven.However, in 1997two of the southGerman corporations merged, leaving a totaloften. Cooperating together in the Arbe- itsgemeinschaftder offentlich-rechtlichenRundfunkanstalten der BundesrepublikDeut- schland(ARD), theyprovided the First German TV channel(generally referred to simplyas "ARD"). The secondchannel was providedby ZweitesDeutsches Fernsehen (ZDF). The ARD corporationsprovided their own regional channels, the "Third Channel(s)." 4. PeterHumphreys, "Political Structures and Broadcasting Marketisation: A Com- parisonof Britainand WestGermany," The Marketand theState: Studies in Interde- pendence,eds. MichaelMoran and Maurice Wright (Houndmills, Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1991) 200-18; and Humphreys,Mass Media and Media Policy in WesternEurope (Manchester:Manchester UP, 1996). 5. Silke Ruck,"Broadcasting Law in Germany,"European Journal of Communi- cation7.2 (June1992): 219-39.This is a specialissue on Media andthe Changing Land- scapeof Western Europe edited by Wolfgang Hoffmann-Riem.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:24 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 26 Germany's"Dual" BroadcastingSystem mentionedpublic-service broadcasting councils. Their principal tasks werelicensing and program supervision; their key purpose was to ensure thatprivate broadcasting was sufficientlypluralistic, especially with regardto balanceand diversityof opinionalthough this might now be achievedacross a rangeof program services ("external pluralism"). However,the principle of publicseparation of powerhas been relin- quished.As will be seen,Germany is conspicuouslylax aboutcross- mediaownership. The maininvestors in commercialbroadcasting have beenpress and othermedia companies, notably a fewgiant ones. More- over,Germany has notescaped a Europe-widecrisis of theeffectiveness of regulation.To a significantdegree, this has resultedfrom the fragmen- tationof regulatoryjurisdictions between the statesin the contextof transfrontiersatellite broadcasting,6 and fromthe intensecompetition betweenthe states to attract(or retain)media investment. Inter-state com- petitionfor media investment[Standortwettbewerb] appears to have impededthe pursuit of more effective regulation.7
TheForces Seeking Deregulation Apartfrom the technological factor, there was also an ideologicalfac- torfor the radical reform of broadcastingstructures. The 1980s was a decadeduring which the doctrine of thefree market was embracedby a numberof westEuropean governments, albeit with varying degrees of enthusiasm.In broadcastingpolicy, this inspired an energeticattack on the public-servicebroadcasting monopoly. The new receivedwisdom was thatallegedly paternalistic and bureaucraticstructures and prac- tices of broadcastingshould give way to new ones providinggreater "consumersovereignty." The CDU/CSU were also keen to coun- terbalance"red broadcasting"[Rotfunk], in otherwords broadcasting allegedlybiased towardtheir political rivals, the Social Democratic party(SPD). Rotfunkhad, in theirview, been featured too muchin the mediaoutput of the public broadcasters.8 The interestsof certaininfluential economic lobbies reinforced ideo- logical and politicalmotives. In Germany,as elsewherein western Europe,a powerfulcoalition of businessinterests drove policy during the 1980sin a deregulatory,marketizing direction. The consumerelectronics 6. Togetherwith re-transmission bycable systems. 7. Standortpolitikis "locational policy" in economics. 8. Humphreys,Media and MediaPolicy in Germany:The Press and Broadcasting Since1945 (Oxford and Providence: Berg, 1994) 202-03.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:24 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions PeterHumphreys 27 industry,the cable and satellitetelevision lobby, the telecommunications industry,the advertizingindustry, and Germanpress groupskeen to diversifyin themedia field, all exertedpressure for the openingup of commercialbroadcasting opportunities. The new media,overcoming the technicalrationale for public monopoly, raised their hopes that commer- cial broadcastingwould be permitted.However, the incumbencyof a SPD-led federalgovernment thwarted their plans duringthe 1970s. In 1982 a changeof nationalgovernment to a CDU/CSU-ledcoalition sud- denlypresented a new possibility for the realization of their goals.9
FederalInroads into Broadcasting Policy; TheBundespost Drives Policy in the1980s The broadcastingrevolution in Germanydid notreally get going until theCDU/CSU cameto powerin Bonn in 1982.10Although Germany's federalorder made broadcasting part of the"cultural sovereignty" [Kul- turhoheit]of the states,the change of powerto a CDU/CSU/FDPfed- eral governmentmattered greatly. The SPD, which had been continuouslyin powerfrom 1969-82, had been hostileto privatecom- mercialbroadcasting and, mainlyfor this reason, unenthusiastic about introducingcable televisionon a mass basis. Since telecommunications was a federaljurisdiction the SPD had beenable to use itsincumbency of thefederal Bundespost ministry to imposewhat the CDU/CSU called a "cable blockade"(although the SPD did agreeto a limitednumber of experimentalcable televisionpilot projects). However, with the change of powerin Bonnto theCDU/CSU/FDP coalition control over the post officepassed to CDU ministerChristian Schwarz-Schilling, who in line withhis party'smedia policy,was highlyenthusiastic about the new mediaand the commercial opportunities they opened up. From1983 to 1985 theBundespost poured one billionDM perannum intoan ambitiousnational cable infrastructuralprogram; from 1986, the Bundespostincreased its investmentto 1.5 billionDM per annum.The
9. See Hans Kleinsteuber,ed., Medien:Thema Kabelfernsehen (Berlin: Wissen- schaftsverlagVolker Spiess, 1980); Axel Zerdick, "Okonomische Interessen und Entwick- lungslinienbei der Durchsetzungneuer Informations- und Kommunikationstechniken," Rundfunkund Fernsehen 30.4 (1982): 478-90;and Humphreys, Media and Media Policy in Germany194-203. 10. In 1982the FDP, theSPD's coalitionpartners, switched sides. This ushered in an extendedperiod of CDU/CSU/FDPfederal government which by virtue of severalfederal electionvictories continued until 1998. Following a generalelection in thatyear, an SPD/ Greencoalition took office.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:24 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 28 Germany's "Dual " BroadcastingSystem
CDU-controlledBundespost also madeavailable satellite channel capac- ity,and released local terrestrialfrequencies across the country. Thus, the CDU/CSU/FDPfederal government in Bonnprovided the private sector withwhat would quickly become an abundantinfrastructure forcommer- cial broadcasting.The Bundespostaction aimed thereby to inspireconfi- dence among the new investors,to promotethe commercialmedia policiesof CDU/ CSU states,and to overwhelmthe resistanceof the recalcitrantSPD statesto the liberalizationof broadcasting.This activ- ism by thefederal authorities opened the way forthe CDU/ CSU states to introduceprivate commercial broadcasting and exertedgreat pressure on theSPD statesto do thesame, not least for reasons of Standortpolitik.
TheFederal Constitutional Court Helps to Break the States Deadlock: A "Dual" System The interventionof anotherfederal institution - thefederal constitu- tionalcourt - was also fundamentalto thereform process. Firstly, in 1981 thecourt had pronouncedthat in viewof thenew technicalpossi- bilitiesprivate commercial broadcasting, as long as it wereto be suit- ably regulated,could no longerbe obstructedon the groundsof "scarcityof frequencies,"thereby giving states the green light to legis- late commercialbroadcasting. Secondly, in 1986 thecourt gave impor- tantclarification as to how the emergingpublic/private "dual system" shouldfunction and be regulated.1l While the Bundespostwas busy providingmassive infrastructural investmentto overcomethe scarcity of frequencies,the regulatory pol- icy makingprocess for the new broadcastservices became deadlocked politically.Regulatory policy for broadcasting was a competenceof the states.They enactedtheir own broadcastinglaws. Indeed,from 1984 onwardthe individualstates enacted a wave of legislationfor private commercialbroadcasting. However, by definitionindividual state laws could not providean adequateregulatory framework for new national services.For the latter, an inter-statetreaty was required.12 The problemwas thatduring 1983-86 the statepoliticians remained seeminglydeadlocked over what kind of national-levelregulations were 11. "FRAG Urteildes Bundesverfassungsgerichtsvom 16 Juni.198,1" BverfGE 12, and"Urteil des Bundesverfassungsgerichtsvom4. November1986, BverfGE 73. See Hum- phreys,Media and MediaPolicy in Germany 339-40. 12. Thusin 1961a Staatsvertraghad beennecessary to foundthe ZDF, thesecond nationalchannel co-managed by the states. Staatsvertrdge were also necessaryto establish thosepublic broadcasting corporations that are shared by states.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:24 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions PeterHumphreys 29 called for.13By and largethe CDU/ CSU primeministers were keen to providethe most favorable regulatory conditions for commercial broad- casting.The SPD primeministers, too, were eager to attractnew com- mercialmedia investmentbut theywere underpressure from their party'srank-and-file not to concedetoo muchderegulation. This con- frontationover the outstanding national rules - in essenceabout where to strikethe balancebetween private enterprise and public-service- was becomingdangerously polarized by themid-1980s with the CDU/ CSU primeministers threatening to withdrawtheir stations from the ARD (the public-servicebroadcasting network) and warningthat they mightrefuse to supportthe raisingof the licensefee upon whichthe publicbroadcasters depended (the level of the licensefee was decided collectivelyby state politicians). The deadlockwas brokenby severaldevelopments. First, increas- inglyirrespective of ideologicalcolor the states were becoming engaged in whatmight be called "competitivederegulation" to attractprivate media investment(i.e., Standortpolitik).The SPD stategovernment of Hamburg,anxious to maintainthe citystate's statusas one of Ger- many'spremier media centers, led theway towarda "new realism"in SPD policy.14Secondly, by themid-1980s, the Bundespost's infrastruc- turalprogram was makingit moreand morepossible that the CDU/ CSU statesmight go theirown way in any case. Thirdly,the states' inabilityto agreeupon new rules strengthened the hand of thosecalling forthe federalgovernment to interveneon theissue of satellitebroad- castingon the groundsthat at stakewere importanteconomic matters ratherthan cultural ones. The threatof federalintrusion into their pol- icy domainalways served to rallythe states. The issue was finallyset- tledby intervention ofthe federal constitutional court. One avenueof oppositionhad alwaysremained particularly promis- ing forthe SPD: recourseto thefederal constitutional court. In thepast, theconstitutional court had beenvery clear about the public mandate of broadcasting.It had ruledquite explicitly that broadcasting was notto be leftto the"free play of forces"[freies Spiel derKrafte]. Among the court'score principlesfor broadcasting were the need to providefor
13. PeterGlotz and Reinhold Kopp, eds., Das Ringenum den Medienstaatsvertrag der Lander(Berlin: Volker Spies, 1987); and WinandGellner, Ordnungspolitik imFernsehen: BundesrepublikDeutschland und Grossbritannien (Frankfurt/Main: Lang, 1990) 230-40. 14. Hoffinann-Riem,"Medienstadte im Wettbewerb; am Beispiel Hamburgs," Medien Journal2 (1989): 66-76;Humphreys, Media and Media Policy in Germany, ch 6.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:24 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 30 Germany's"Dual" BroadcastingSystem
"diversityof opinion"and therequirement of independenceboth from the stateand fromother powerful social forces.15Precisely in orderto prompta courtintervention on thecontroversial matter of commercial broadcasting,the SPD thereforeappealed against lower Saxony's new broadcastinglaw (the firstof the deregulatoryCDU statelaws) argu- ing, amongother things, that it insufficientlyguaranteed balance and diversityon thepart of thenew commercialbroadcasters and provided too few powersto the new regulatorsof the privatesector. The SPD complaintalso pointedto thealleged weakness of thelaw's provisions againstmedia concentrationand cross-mediaconcentration in particu- lar,and to theexcessive role the law grantedto lowerSaxony's govern- mentin thefranchizing of newcommercial operators, thereby infringing uponthe hallowed principle of independence from the state.I" The constitutionalcourt's subsequent intervention in 1986 provedto be decisive.Along withthe Bundespost'sactivism, it helpedto over- come thepolicy immobilism of Landerpolitics and to retrievea mini- mumnational consensus. In rulingupon the specific contested features of thelower Saxony law (whichwas in factdeemed "essentially" to be constitutional),the constitutionalcourt in factlaid down some funda- mentalcore provisionsfor the introduction of the"dual" public/private broadcastingsystem. In particular,the public-service broadcasters were to remainthe bedrock of Germanbroadcasting with a dutyto continue universallyto providethe basic services.This meantthe comprehen- sive provisionof highquality programs spanning entertainment, infor- mation,and education,catering to social and culturaldiversity, and providingbalanced pluralism. To thisend, the public-service broadcast- ers had to be given guaranteesconcerning their technical, organiza- tional,staffing, and financialrequirements. In fact,the public-service broadcasters'provision of thisbasic service[Grundversorgung] was the preconditionfor the exemption of theprivate commercial broadcasters fromthe same high programmingrequirements and fromthe same degreeof close regulation(that is, "internalcontrol"). However, the pri- vate commercialbroadcasters still had to observea minimumstandard of pluralism:all opinions,including minority ones, should"have the possibility"of beingexpressed. Moreover, adequate measures should be takento preventthe appearance of "dominantinfluence over the expres-
15. Ruck,"Broadcasting Law inGermany" 222-23. 16. Humphreys,Media and Media Policy in Germany 243-44.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:24 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions PeterHumphreys 31 sionof opinion"[vorherrschender Meinungsmacht]. In other words, ten- denciestoward media concentration should be counteracted.Pluralistic "external"regulatory bodies (and thecourts) were to ensureall this.17 These keyprinciples, including the crucial "guarantee of theexistence and furtherdevelopment" [Bestands- und Entwicklungsgarantie] of the publicsector, were confirmed by several subsequent court rulings.18 The 1986 courtruling provided the basis forthe successfulnegotia- tionof the inter-state treaty. This 1987 inter-statetreaty (refined in 1991 - see below) producedthe rules for a "dual" broadcastingsystem alongthe linesrecommended by theconstitutional court's 1986 ruling. Accordingly,the new private sector broadcasters were to be allowedto benefitfrom a significant,but still controlled, measure of deregulation. The privatecommercial broadcasters were still requiredto supply diverse and balanced programmingalthough now this might be achievedacross the range of new services("external pluralism") rather than,as traditionallyhad been the case, withinthem ("internal plural- ism"). Withinthese framework rules, it fellto the individualstates to maketheir own detailed regulatory provisions.
De-Regulationor Re-Regulation? The 1980switnessed a floodof legislative activity by the states as well as theestablishment of a wholenew layerof statesregulatory authori- ties forthe privatesector. Following unification there were fifteenof thesestate media authorities, one foreach stateexcept Berlin and Bran- denburgwhich shared one. These private sector regulatory authorities are membersof a federalassociation (Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Landesmedi- enanstaltenin der BundesrepublikDeutschland) and cooperatethrough several organs includingthe standingconference of the individual authorities' directors [Direktorenkonferenzder Landesmedienan- stalten].19The detailsof theindividual states' laws forprivate commer- cial broadcastingvaried considerably, but they all attemptedto provide forcontinued programming diversity, the provision of which it was forthe
17. Foran evaluationsee KlausBerg, "The fourth TV judgementof the Federal Con- stitutionalCourt," EBUReview XXXVIII/3 (1987): 37-43. 18. "Urteildes Bundesverfassungsgerichtsvom4. November1986 - 1 BvF 1/84," repr.in Media PerspektivenDokumentation IV (1986). All the FederalConstitutional Court'skey rulings on broadcastingup to 1991are summarized in Humphreys,Media and MediaPolicy in Germany 338-42. 19. For detail,see ALM, "Jahrbuchder Landesmedienanstalten 1997/98" (Munich: ReinhardFischer, 1998).
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:24 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 32 Germany's"Dual" BroadcastingSystem
Landesmedienanstaltento oversee. Some (SPD) laws required"internal pluralism"from the privatebroadcasters, some (CDU/CSU) optedfor externalpluralism, and the rest adopted mixed or transitional models.20 The Landesmedienanstaltengenerally had supervisoryboards that werecomposed pluralistically of representativesof the socially signifi- cantgroups like the public-service broadcasting councils. However, the Landesmedienanstaltendiffered from the broadcastingcouncils within thepublic broadcasting corporations in thatthey were external authori- ties placed above theprivate broadcasters within their area ofjurisdic- tion. The Landesmediensanstaltendid not have the same range of powers as the broadcastingcouncils. Most obviously,whereas the broadcastingcouncils usually appointed the director-general of a public corporation,the Landesmediensanstaltenhad no influenceover the appointmentof a broadcastingorganization's chief executive. They only had a supervisoryand reactiveinfluence over programming,without any say in routineoperating decisions, financial matters, and so on. However,responsible for franchizing and overseeingthe new private commercialsector, they were endowedwith the power to finebroad- castersand the ultimate sanction of revoking or non-renewal of licenses. Withoutdownplaying the unquestionably significant re-regulatory ele- mentsof Germanbroadcasting reform compared to certainother west Europeancountries,21 much of this re-regulatory activity simply reflected thefederalized nature of regulatorycompetences in Germany(that is the need formultiple state laws and regulatoryauthorities). Hoffinann-Riem suggestedthat re-regulation could also have a symbolicfunction: serv- ing to provide"a politicallyand economically'well-ordered' entrance intoa newage ofbroadcasting inaccordance with the market model."22
MultimediaDiversification One area of conspicuousregulatory weakness was thefailure to curb the concentrationof mediapower produced by the diversificationand
20. SusanneHiegemann, "Die Entwicklungdes Mediensystemsin der Bundesre- publik,"ed. Bundeszentralefir politische Bildung, Privat-kommerzieller Rundfunk inDeut- schland,(Bonn: BzpB, 1992) 31-88,here 66; Humphreys,Media and Media Policyin Germany343; andPorter and Hasselbach, Pluralism, Politics and the Marketplace (London/ New York:Routledge, 1991) 57- 59. 21. See Humphreys,Mass Mediaand Media Policy in WesternEurope, ch 5. 22. WolfgangHoffmann-Riem, "Law, politicsand thenew media: trends in broad- castingregulation," The Politics of the Communications Revolution in WesternEurope, eds. KennethDyson and Peter Humphreys (London: Frank Cass, 1986) 144.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:24 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions PeterHumphreys 33 expansionstrategies of majormedia companies. Ever since the late 1950s thepublishers of thepress had lobbiedfor the abolition of thepublic-ser- vice monopolyso thatthey might diversify into broadcasting operations. Duringthe course of the1980s, the press became extensively involved in thenew commercial broadcasting sector, both in televisionand radio, and at local,regional, and nationallevels. Since broadcastingrequired heavy investment,unsurprisingly, thelarger press corporations took the lead.23 The new privatecommercial television sector quickly assumed fea- turesof oligopolisticcompetition between two giant "broadcasting fam- ilies" [Senderfamilien],notably the Springer/Kirchgroup against Bertelsmannin alliancewith the Luxembourg-based broadcasting multi- national,the Compagnie Luxembourgeoise de Tle1diffusion(CLT). The Springer/Kirchalliance controlledone of Germany'sprincipal new mainstreamcommercial channels, SAT1. The Bertelsmann/CLTalli- ance ownedRTL (firstknown as "RTL Plus"),the other principal new mainstreamcommercial channel. Moreover, Germany's third major new mainstreamcommercial channel PRO7 was controlledby Thomas Kirch,media mogul Leo Kirch'sson. In 1994,between them these three private commercialchannels - SAT1, RTL and PRO7 - accounted for80% of totaltelevision advertising revenue, and 90% of television advertisingrevenue in theprivate sector. Further, as Kleinsteuberand Petershave observed,these two new rival"broadcasting families" were loosely identifiedwith the two main politicalparties: Springer/Kirch withthe CDU/CSU; CLT/Bertelsmannwith the SPD. KirchGruppe was basedin CSU Bavaria,Bertelsmann in SPD NorthRhine-Westphalia.24 Bertelsmannwas one of the world'slargest media concernsand by farthe largest in Europe.Its globalinterests spanned printing, book, and magazinepublishing, the recordindustry, and recentlyalso broadcast- ing and filmand televisionproduction. The Kirch Group was Ger- many's leadingtrader in programmerights. It also had a significant stake (35%) in the Springerpress concern,Germany's leading pub- lisherof dailynewspapers, with a virtualmonopoly in thepopular tab- loid market[through ownership of the Bild-Zeitung].Intense rivalry
23. HorstR6per and UlrichPRtzold, Medienkonzentration in Deutschland: Medien- verflechtungenund Branchenvernetzungen (Disseldorf: European Institute for the Media, 1993) 184. 24. Hans Kleinsteuberand BettinaPeters, "Media mogulsin Germany,"Media Moguls,eds. Jeremy Tunstall and Michael Palmer (London & New York:Routledge, 1991) 184-205,here 188.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:24 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 34 Germany's"Dual" BroadcastingSystem betweenBertelsmann and Kirchdid notprevent them sharing the pay- TV servicePremiere. Nor did it preventthem trying to launch,in 1994 and againin 1997/8,a jointventure to providea digitalplatform which would offera rangeof new mediaservices by meansof a conditional access system(using smart cards and decoders).25 Fromthe viewpoint of mediapluralism the problem was clear.A pri- vate televisionoligopoly had appeared,with considerable cross-media links.Press interests were also heavilyinvolved in local radiostations in Germany.Springer had radiointerests in differentparts of thecoun- try.The WAZ pressgroup, a shareholderin RTL, acquireda web of privateradio interestsin its home regionNorth Rhine-Westphalia. Anothermajor regional player was theBavarian 'Gong group.'Holtz- brinck,one of Germany'smost importantmagazine publishing con- cerns and a 15% shareholderin SATi, was involvedin radio in Germany'ssouth and also its "fivenew states."In southernGermany "double monopolies,"where dominant local publishershad radio sta- tions,were not uncommon.26Roper and Patzold commented:"The morethese structures consolidate, the more difficult it becomesfor pol- icy-makingto establishlimits."27
TheInadequacy of GermanAnti-Concentration Regulation The 1987 firstinter-state treaty on broadcasting,modified by a sec- ond suchtreaty in 1991,28had attemptedto containconcentration in the privatebroadcasting sector within reasonable bounds. Holdings in indi- vidual privatetelevision channels were limitedto below 50% (and below 25% in two additionalones), the intentionbeing to promote internalpluralism through the joint ownership of channels[Anbieterge- meinschaften].External pluralism was promotedthrough a provision
25. Thesejoint venture attempts were blocked by the European Commission on the groundsthat their market dominance would raise entry barriers to other EU companies. 26. HorstRtiper, "Formationen deutscher Medienmultis 1992," Media Perspektiven 2 (1993): 56-74;Riper and Patzold, Medienkonzentration inDeutschland 189-96. 27. "Umso mehrsich diese Strukturen verfestigen, um so schwierigerwird es furdie Politik,Grenzen festzulegen." (Rtiper and Patzold 187). 28. "Staatsvertragzur Neuordnungdes Rundfunkwesens(Rundfunkstaatsvertrag) vom 12.Mirz 1987,"reproduced in Media Perspektiven. Dokumentation, II (1987) 81-102; "Staatsvertragtiber den Rundfunk im vereinten Deutschland vom 31. August1991," repro- duced in Media Perspektiven.Dokumentation IIa (1991): 105-72.The second treaty extendedthe West German model of broadcasting tothe Five New Ldnder following Unifi- cationin 1990.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:24 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions PeterHumphreys 35 thatlimited the number of broadcastinglicences that could be heldby a single enterpriseto a single national"generalist" channel [Vollpro- gramm]plus one "information-relevant"special interest channel [Infor- mations-Spartenprogramm]each in radioand television.Moreover, the thresholdfor achieving "external pluralism" in theprivate broadcasting sectorwas thenational availability of threeseparately-owned generalist channels.Until this threshold was achieved,each channelhad to fea- ture"internal pluralism" in its programming.However, the regulatory frameworkhad contained a numberof crucial weaknesses. Firstly,with regard to cross-mediaownership the treatyhad seemed sensitive,above all, to therequirements of capitalinvestment in thenew privatecommercial broadcasting sector, and the press had beenan active investorfrom the start.Thus, althoughthe ConstitutionalCourt had warnedthe legislatorsto guard againstthe appearanceof "double monopolies",the inter-state treaties of 1987 and 1991 prescribedno pre- cise cross-mediaownership rules, leaving this matter to thediscretion of individualstates which were naturally disinclined to determedia invest- mentthrough overly strict regulation and evendesigned laws in sucha way as to positivelyencourage investment from the press. None of the statebroadcasting laws containedany specificreference to otherforms of multi-mediaownership (such as Leo Kirch'sdiversification from pro- grammesupply into ownership of national commercial television).29 Secondly,the federalstructure of the Germanbroadcasting system broughtwith it particularproblems. Article 11 of theinter-state treaty of 1987 providedfor the unhindered re-transmission of national broadcast- ing servicesso long as theymet legal requirementsand thesewere deemedto be a matterfor the licensingstate. This principlewas con- firmedby Article35 of the 1991 inter-statetreaty (which brought Ger- man law into line withEuropean rules on transfrontierbroadcasting providingfor the unhinderedtransmission of all Europeanprograms meetingagreed minimumregulatory standards). A nationalsatellite broadcastingservice could therefore apply for and receivea licensein a statewhere the cross-mediaownership rules were suitablylax. By the sametoken, those states that provided the most relaxed regulatory condi- tionswere the best placed to attractnew media investment. Thus, as early as 1984the Rhineland-Palatinate, hadfranchized SATi, a channellargely
29. Porterand Hasselbach121-27; also see Humphreys,Media and MediaPolicy in Germany276-78.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:24 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 36 Germany's"Dual" BroadcastingSystem
ownedby publishers of the press, including the mighty Springer concern. The individualLandesmedienanstalten still disposed of the rightto licensethe usage of the still"scarce" terrestrial frequencies and - if demandexceeded supply - also to allocatespare cable channelsin theirareas of jurisdiction.However, the Landesmedienanstalten came underpolitical pressure to prioritizethe economicinterests of their respective states in the competitionto attract- or retain - media investment[Standortpolitik]. Therefore, the large media companies exerteda degreeof structuralpower over politicians. Porter and Hassel- bach suggestthat regulatory authorities favoured license applicants who promisedto sitespecific activities in theirparticular state. "The Lnder triedto outbideach otherfor the investmentfavours of privatetelevi- sion stations,especially the two largest,SAT1 and RTL plus."30Simi- larly,Sinchez-Tabernero etal noted: Itwould be difficult for any state government notto consider the inter- estsof a 'local' mediagiant like Springer in Berlinand Hamburg, WAZor Bertelsmann inNorthrhine-Westphalia andKirch in Bavaria. ... [R]egionalpoliticans [have found] themselves under pressure to createa friendlylegal and economic framework forcommercial radio andtelevision run by the publishers. Nearly every province's [sic] governmenthas triedto attract at leastone of the commercial televi- sionheadquarters to their state to strengthenit as a locationfor the growing'cultural industries'."31
The Landesmedienanstaltenwere even criticizedfor being the politi- cians' "puppets"or as helpless"paper tigers," incapable of controlling the new multimediaempires.32 Zerdick neatly summarized the prob- lem: "the objectivesof the state'smedia laws, orientedless toward media policy thantoward locational policy, [had] led to a state of affairsin whichtoo manyLandesmedienanstalten controlled too few broadcasterswho, at thesame time, [were] being courted avidly by the
30. Porterand Hasselbach, Pluralism, Politics and theMarketplace 21. 31. AlfonsoSinchez-Tabemero etal., Media Concentration inEurope. Commercial Enterpriseand thePublic Interest (DiUsseldorf: European Institute for the Media, Media MonographNo. 16, 1993) 179. 32. Marie-LuiseHauch-Fleck, "Marionetten der Macht: Medienanstaltender Liindersehen die Konzentrationbei denPrivatsendern tatenlos zu," Die Zeit25 (12 June 1992): 29; VolkerLilienthal, "Kampf der Papiertiger: Leo Kirchund Bertelsmann bauen ihrenImperien aus. Die Medienkontrolleureerweisen sich bislang als hilflos',"Die Woche (15 Sept.1994): 41.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:24 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions PeterHumphreys 37 respectivestate governments."33 Finally,concentration was madedifficult to policeby the opaque inter- lockingwebs of interests[Verflechtung] that characterized not onlythe ownershipstructures but also even less transparentkinds of linkage (such as finance,program supply) between the new commercialbroad- casters.The PRO7 case presenteda classic illustrationof the problem. ThomasKirch, Leo Kirch'sson, held a 47.5% sharein the television channelPRO7 and 3% morewere held by PRO7's managingdirector, formerlya top executiveof Leo Kirch's.It was generallyassumed that PRO7 was dependenton the KirchGroup for finance and programme supply.Control of PRO7 would mean thatthe Kirch Group,which alreadyhad a major(direct and, through Springer, indirect) holding in thegeneralist channel SAT1, wouldbe contraveningthe inter-state treaty rule limitingenterprises to controlof one nationalgeneralist channel [Vollprogramm].However, the regulatoryauthority which licensed PRO7 did notaccept that PRO7 was partof Leo Kirch'smedia empire and did notintervene. This issuewas discussedat thelevel of thecon- ferenceof directorsof the privatebroadcasting regulatory authorities [Landesmedienanstalten]andseveral votes failed to resolvethe issue.34 Moreover,the federal cartel office was decidedlynon-interventionist in thefield of broadcasting.In Germany,the federal cartel office is an inde- pendent,para-state body responsible for safeguarding economic competi- tion.Although it has no responsibilityfor ensuring media pluralism per se, whichwas thetask of theLandesmedienanstalten, it is obviousthat throughits competence in thefield of generalcompetition policy the fed- eral carteloffice is a potentiallyimportant agency for ensuring media diversity.Indeed, its powers of interventionspecifically in thepress sec- torhad been sharpenedin 1976. Concernedabout press concentration, theSPD-led government of thetime had loweredthe turnover thresholds fortriggering the federal cartel office's intervention far below the level forother economic sectors (25 millionDM insteadof 500 millionDM). Sincethis innovation the cartel office had playeda usefulrole in at least restraining- if not entirelycurbing - press-concentration.However, withrespect to thenew commercialbroadcasting sector Riper and Pat- zold have notedthat the federalcartel office has failedto act against
33. Axel Zerdick,"Zwischen Frequenzen und Paragraphen:die Landesmedienan- staltenals institutionalisierterKompromiss," Bertelsmann Briefe 129 (1993): 60-62,here 61. 34. Lilienthal,"Kampf der Papiertiger. . . " 41.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:24 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 38 Germany's"Dual" BroadcastingSystem some obvious"double monopolies" where local commercialradio ser- viceswere owned by locallydominant publishers. In thesecases, it justi- fiedits non-intervention by arguing that the competition provided by the publicbroadcasters meant that there could be no marketdominance. Fur- ther,the cartel office has allowedcross-media concentration to proceed on the groundsthat press investmentactually strengthens the private broadcasters'ability to competewith the public broadcasters.The establishmentof competitionfor the latter, R6per and Patzold concluded, was the carteloffice's prime concern in thematter. Further, it did not have any competencefor acting against media concentration on plural- ismgrounds, only when economic competition was adverselyaffected.35 It has beenpointed out by Heinrich, in fairnessto thecartel office, that it lacksappropriate powers to intervenemuch in thebroadcasting field. For example,PRO7's (ThomasKirch) launching of theKabelkanal fell beyondthe scope of mergercontrol since strictly speaking, according to the purelyeconomic criteria employed by the carteloffice, it counted merelyas internalcompany growth. Further, the federal cartel office did not have the legal powersto act againstthe obviousaccumulation of mediapower by the Kirchfamily since no actualcompany connection couldbe provenbetween Thomas Kirch's control of PRO7, and through PRO7 also of the Kabelkanal,and Leo Kirch's (his father's)media empire(indeed the Landesmedienanstalten, too, failedto agreeon this matter- see above). For criticsof Germany'smedia oligopoly, these cases seemedto demonstrateclearly the need for stricter anti-concentra- tionregulations geared specifically to the situation in the media field. The turnoverthresholds triggering the carteloffice's intervention mightbe loweredexactly as had been done alreadyin thecase of the press.Further, the award of broadcastinglicenses to broadcastingorga- nizations(in whichmajor cross-media interests were involved) might be treatedas suitablecases for"merger control" as Germany'smonopoly commissionrecommended. For theirpart, the Landesmedienanstalten,
35. R6perand Patzold193-94. It should,however, be pointedout thatthe Cartel Officedid later express strong reservations about plans by the major private TV companies Bertelsmannand Kirch Group to jointly control a digitalpay-TV platform. As willbe seen, thisproject was blockedby Brusselsin 1998. Subsequently,the German Cartel Office madeclear that it wouldnot allow theruling to be circumvented.Cartel Office director DieterWolf explained that pay TV madeit mucheasier for the Cartel Office to become involvedsince it is moreeasily conceived of as an economicmarket. In thecase of 'free TV', on theother hand, it is unclearwhether the market is constitutedby the audience or by theadvertisers. See "Bei Verst6Benhohe Bulgelder," Focus 25 (15 June1998): 214-15.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:24 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions PeterHumphreys 39 whichwere primarilyconcerned with safeguarding editorial pluralism, mightbe endowedwith the CartelOffice's powers of inquiryinto the internalaffairs of the broadcastersin orderto ensuregreater transpar- encyconcerning ownership and influenceand to allow themto explore the real controlrelations within a broadcastingoperation (so farthey had been limitedto sendinga "questionnaire"to the broadcastersto elicit informationabout these matters).Also, the deficiencyof mea- suresagainst vertical and cross-mediaconcentration needed seriously to be addressed.36Above all, concentrationcontrol needed to be supplied at an appropriatehigher level than that of theindividual Landesmedien- anstaltenin orderto prevent"soft competition policy" from serving as an instrumentofStandortpolitik.37
Towarda MoreEffective Harmonization of Anti-Concentration Regulation?Or Acceptanceof Faits Accomplis? Controversyover the widely-perceivedfailure of the Landesmedien- anstaltenled to seriousdiscussion from 1994 onwardabout how the con- centrationrules might be reformed.In their"Liibeck resolutions" of 17 September1994, the fifteen Landesmedienanstalten recommended that a new Staatsvertragshould adopt a simplersystem of "controlby audi- ence share."Accordingly, the current rules limiting shareholdings would be replaced.Instead the total share of thetelevision audience (public and privatesector) gained by channelsin whichan ownerhad an interest(of over 5%) mightbe limitedto 25%. The purportedadvantage of this "audience-sharemodel" would be thatit wouldrender unnecessary the customarywebs of overlappingownership and otherlinks and thereby encouragegreater transparency ofownershi and control relations.38 In 1996, afterconsiderable negotiation, the primeministers of the Landeragreed upon a moreliberal (i.e., less restrictive)version of this
36. See JfirgenHeinrich, "Keine Entwarnung bei Medienkonzentration. Okonomische undpublizistische Konzentration imdeutschen Fernsehsektor 1993/94," Media Perspektiven 6 (1994): 297-310.Also see DieterD6rr, "Kontrolle braucht Durchsetzungsbefugnisse. Defizitedes Verfahrensrechtsbei der Medienkonzentrationskontrolle," MediaPerspektiven 2 (1995): 42-47. 37. Heinrich298. 38. DirektorenkonferenzderLandesmedienanstalten, Beschluss der Gesamtkonferenz der Arbeitsgemeinschaftder Landesmedienanstalten in Ltibeck am 17. September1994 (LiibeckerBeschlilsse). 39. Fordetail see PeterHumphreys and Matthias Lang, "Regulating for Media Plural- ismand the Pitfalls of Standortpolitik: The Re-regulation ofGerman Broadcsting Ownership rules,"German Politics 7.2 (August1998): 176-201.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:24 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 40 Germany's"Dual" BroadcastingSystem
"audienceshare" model. As usual,the result of their negotiations marked a compromizebetween the economic and cultural policy goals of thestates. Reflectingthe former,the third inter-state broadcasting treaty40 allowed anyenterprise to acquireas manybroadcasting operations as itwants, and to gain 100% controlof these,provided that the aggregate audience share of itsnation-wide operations remains below 30% of thetotal national TV audience.Excepted from the equationwould be the audienceshares of channelsin whichan enterprisehas a shareof less than 25%. By thismea- sure,critics observed, the broadcasting interests of theBertelsmann and Kirchconcerns could remain intact, an outcomethat concurred with the interestsof Germany'stwo largest states, namely North Rhine-Westphalia (Bertelsmann'sbase) andBavaria (Kirch Gruppe's base).41 On theother hand, those seeking stricter anti-concentration regulation had gainedthe obligationon any nationalchannel that registered an audienceshare of 10% to makeprovision for the inclusion of indepen- dent'window programs' (i.e., smallbroadcasters who are independent of their'host' majorbroadcaster) within its schedule.These program windowsshould amount to 260 minutesper week, including at least75 minutesof primetime. Ideally, these 'windowprograms' were to be selectedconsensually by the regulators and the broadcaster. In theevent of disagreementthe regulators have theright to makethe finalchoice froma short-listwhich is, however, determined by the broadcaster. In orderto help overcomethe problemof regionalStandortpolitik thathad dogged regulationat the statelevel (see above), the 1996 inter-statetreaty established a joint, independentorgan of the 15 Liinder-basedregulatory authorities, called the "Commissionfor the Investigationof Media Concentration"[Kommission zur Ermittlung der Konzentration].The KEK's role is to identifycases wheremedia pluralism has been - or risks being - dangerously impaired by media concentration.However, its jurisdiction is invokedby individ- ual Land-basedregulatory authorities (i.e., the licensingauthority for
40. DritterStaatsvertrag zur Anderung rundfunkrechtlicher Staatsvertriige vom 26.8./ 11.9.1996,reproduced in Media Perspektiven. Dokumentation I (1996). Fora verydetailed criticalanalysis see MartinStock, Horst Rcper and BerndHolznagel, Medienmarkt und Meinungsmacht(Berlin: Springer, 1997). For a shortercritique see Humphreys,"The goal ofpluralism and the ownership rules for private broadcasting in Germany:re-regulation or de-regulation,"Cardozo Arts & EntertainmentLaw Journal16.2-3 (1998): 527-55. 41. MichaelRediske, "Ein Kartellamt die Medien,"die tageszeitung4870 (9 Mar. 1996) 10. ftir
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:24 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions PeterHumphreys 41 the broadcasterin question)in cases of new applicationsfor private broadcastinglicences or if thereare significantownership changes in theexisting licence holding enterprises. Also, in conductingits investi- gationsthe KEK is reliantupon the cooperation of theLandesmedien- anstalten,whose investigativepowers were now on a level footing withthose of the federalcartel office. Furthermore, the KEK's ruling maybe overridden,but only by a three-quartersmajority (i.e., 12 out of 15) of theLand-based Regulatory Authorities [Konferenz der Direk- torender Landesmedienanstalten, KDLM]. The KEK has beencriticised for its insufficient political independence [Staatsferne]on thegrounds that its six membersare appointedby the Liinderprime ministers. Three were proposed by the SPD, threeby the CDU/CSU. Chosenas chairmanwas a formerSPD economicsminister of NorthRhine-Westphalia and Presidentof thatLand's CentralBank. This seemedto symbolisethe pivotalrole, as the leadingSPD voice pushingfor de-regulation, played by thatLand (whereBertelsmann is based) in thepolitics of thereform of mediaownership rules. Unsurpris- ingly,the KEK was soonattacked for implied bias: politiciansand regu- latorsin Bavaria,home state of theKirch Group, questioned the KEK's prolongedinvestigation of theKirch family's interests compared to the conspicuouslyquick retrospective approval that it gave to the January 1997merger of Bertelsmann's television subsidiary ufa and the CLT.42 In fact,the KEK encounteredconsiderable difficulty in pursuingits investi- gationof the KirchGroup, not leastbecause of legal appeal by Kirch againstthe mode and scope of the investigation.Apparently assuming thatthere was a connectionbetween PRO7 (ThomasKirch) and the Kirch Group,the KEK had asked the regulatoryauthority that had licensedPRO7 to sendout a questionnaireto determinethe full extent of the Kirch Group's programmesupply to the broadcastingsector at large.43According to thenew rules,dominance in this'media-relevant relatedmarket' would also be takeninto consideration by the KEK ifthe KirchGroup's audience share should be foundto just fallshort (amount to a geringfi~gigeUnterschreitung) of the pluralismendangering 30% ceiling.The latterwould only be thecase if PRO7 was consideredpart
42. KEK, Jahresberichtder Kommissionzur Ermittlungder Konzentrationim Medienbereich.Berichtszeitraum 15. Mai 1997bis 30. Juni1998: 22-26. 43. Accordingto the EuropeanCommission the KirchGroup, with its stockof 15,000films and 50,000 hours of programmes intotal, was the leading German supplier of TV entertainmentprogrammes. Funkkorrespondenz 27-28 (3 July1998): 21.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:24 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 42 Germany's"Dual" BroadcastingSystem of the KirchGroup. However, critics observed that the KEK had not deemed it necessaryto conducta similarinvestigation into Bertels- mann'sposition in publishingand thepress.44 The outcome,however, went in the KirchGroup's favour;eventually the KEK decidedthat whileThomas Kirch's TV interestswere indeed to be consideredas part of the KirchGroup, there was stillsome leeway before pluralism was threatened.45Thus, the principal decisions that the KEK madeduring its firsttwo years seemed to confirmthe view of thosewho had suggested thatthe new regulatoryframework was designedto legitimisethe Ber- telsmann/Kircholigopoly that dominated German private television. It is true,soon afterit commencedwork in May 1997 theKEK did determinethat both RTL Plus (Bertelsmann)and SATi (Kirch)chan- nels each exceededa 10% shareof thenational TV audienceand there- foreshould make provisionfor 'windowprograms.' However, it has also to be pointedout that the KEK had beengiven no ultimateauthor- ity- onlyan advisoryrole - in respectof thechoice of 'windowpro- gramme'operators. The finaldecision here remains in therealm of the individualLand-based regulatory authorities and is thereforea matter thatremains vulnerable to considerationsof regionalStandortpolitik. Also, theindications are thatthe KEK wouldprobably have intervened overthe plans of Bertelsmannand Kirchtogether to embarkon a joint- ventureto launcha digitalpay-TV platform,46 but in the eventthe projectwhich involved the controversial merger of Kirch'sexisting dig- ital pay TV companyDF 1 withPremiere, the analoguesubscription channelwhich Bertelsmann and Kirchalready shared, was blockedby theEuropean Commission's competition authority in May 1998. Predictablyenough, the KEK has beenthe object of considerablecrit- icism frommany sides, for being too strong,for being too weak,for beinga half-measure.By 1998 influentialvoices werecalling for fur- therderegulation, pointing out thatGermany suffered from an over- abundanceof regulatorsthat was detrimentalto the Germanmedia
44. "Kirch-Gruppewehrt sich gegen KEK-Ciberpriifungen," epd medien 51.4 (July 1998): 12-13; "Kirch wehrtsich gegen Wettbewerbsbeht-rde:'Ungleichbehandlung/ Rechtstreitum eine Fragebogenaktion',"Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung I July1998; "BefangeneKontrolleure?" Focus 27 (29 June1998): 15. 45. KEK, Jahresberichtder Kommissionzur Ermittlungder Konzentrationim Medienbereich.Berichtszeitraum 1. Juli 1998 bis 30. Juni1999: 21-24, 39-46. 46. See LutzMeier, "So kannman etwas verspielen: Der Vorsitzende der Konzentration- skommissionKEK siehtdie Digitalplinevon Kirchund Bertelsmann skeptisch. Arger iber Medienanstaltenwegen Standortpolitik bei Senderfenstem," dietageszeitung 1 Nov. 1997.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:24 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions PeterHumphreys 43 industry'sdevelopment.47 For its part,the KEK complainedabout the insufficientcooperation it had receivedfrom certain state [Land] regula- toryauthorities whose help it neededin conductingits investigations. Therealso surfacedtension between the stateregulators and the KEK overhow muchor how littlediscretion the latter should enjoy in decid- ingat whatpoint a broadcastinginterest's audience-share was 'onlyjust below' the30% ceilingand thereforeshould trigger consideration of its cross-mediainterests. The Landesmedienanstaltenargued that only when a company'saudience-share reached 28% mightthe KEK be requiredto commenceany suchinvestigation, and neitherBertelsmann norKirch Group quite reached this figure. The KEK, however,did not wantto be boundby fixedquantitative thresholds.48 Thus, the new reg- ulatoryarrangements do not appearto have avoideddifficult jurisdic- tional conflictsbetween the regulators,nor does the Standortpolitik motivatedpolitics appear to haveended.
The "Dual System":A NewPublic/Private Balance? Quicklybecoming one ofthe more densely cabled countries in Europe, Germanyentered the 1990s with no fewerthan three substantial general- ist,private commercial television channels: RTL, SATi and PRO7. The early1990s saw the launchof VOX and RTL 2, followedshortly by SuperRTL. Germanycould also boastan expandingrange of thematic servicessuch as the sportschannel Deutsches Sports Fernsehen (DSF), and a numberof specialistchannels providing news, music, pro- grammesfor women, children, ethnic minorities, and so on. In addition, thecountry had a hostof local cableservices and foreignchannels. Also, regionalpublic-service channels were being broadcast nationwide by sat- ellite.Germany also had Premiere,an analoguepay-TV service with 1.6 millionsubscribers (in 1998); in 1999,as PremiereWorld, this service
47. WolfgangClement, the SPD PrimeMinister of North Rhine-Westphalia, ques- tionedthe 'regulatory jungle' in Germany.In theview of Kurt Faltlhauser, a state minister in CSU Bavaria,a KEK thatamounted to a bureaucraticimpediment to thedevelopment ofthe media in Germany'had no future',Medien Dialog 16 (June1998): 4. The chairman of the CDU's mediapolicy committee Anton Pfeifer stated that the KEK shouldnot becomea 'bureaucraticobstacle to thedevelopment of themedia in Germany,""CDU tadeltdie KEK", epd medien11 (14 Feb. 1998): 17-18.Professor Dr. Wolf-DieterRing, thedirector of the Bavarian Landesmedienanstalt, was also vocal in criticismof the KEK, MedienDialog 12 (1998): 5. 48. "KEK gegenfixe Zahl fiireine 'geringfilgigeUnterschreitung,"' Funkkorre- spondenz46.48 (27 Nov. 1998):24-25.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:24 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 44 Germany's"Dual" BroadcastingSystem was being transformedinto a digitalTV platformby its owner,the KirchGroup (Bertelsmann having pulled out in 1999).
Table 1: Germany'sPrivate Television Oligopoly TheBertelsmann Broadcasting 'Family'
Channel Mainshareholders Audience Mainshareholders Audience 1993(%) Share(%) 1998(%) Share(%) 1993 1998 RTL CLT: 47.9 18.9 Ufa/CLT:89* 15.0 Ufa:37.1 BW TV: 11 ** RTL2 CLT:24.0 T InsignificantUfa/CLT: 33.4 3.8 Ufa:7.8 1 I SuperRTL Notyet - Ufa/CLT:50 2.6 foundedI Vox Ufa:24.9 Insignificant Ufa/CLT:24.9 2.8 Canal+: 24.9 Canal+: 24.9 NewsCorp: 49.9 NewsCorp: 49.9
* In 1997Ufa, Bertelsmann's TV subsidiaryand CLT merged. ** BW TV GmbHwas 80% ownedby Bertelsmann, 20% byWAZ.
TheKirch Broadcasting 'Family'
Channel Mainshareholders Audience Mainshareholders Audience 1993(%) Share(%) 1998(%) Share(%) 1993 1998 SAT1 Kirch:43 14.9 Kirch:59 12.2 Springer:20 Springer:40 * APF:20 * DSF Kirch:24.5 1.3 Kirch:100 1.1 Springer:24.9 PRO7 T. Kirch:47.5 9.2 T. Kirch:58.4 8.5 G. Kofler:3 ** I Kabel1 PRO7:45 1.6 PRO7:100 4.1 I G. Kofler:10 1 I
* KirchGroup had a 35% stakein the SpringerVerlag, which had 35% of Aktuell PresseFernsehen (APF). ** ThomasKirch was Leo Kirch'sson. GeorgKofler was a formerexecutive of the KirchGroup.
Source:1993 data is fromEuropaiisches Institut, 'Bericht tiber die Entwicklung der Meinungs- vielfaltund der Konzentration imprivatem Rundfunk', in Die Landesmedienanstalten,ed., Die Sicherungder Meinungsvielfalt (Berlin: Vistas , 1995)166 and 167; 1997and 1998.The 1998data is fromJahrbuch der Landesmedienanstalten 1997/1998, published in September 1998by the Arbeitsgemeinschaft derLandesmedienanstalten (ALM) 296-297,309.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:24 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions PeterHumphreys 45
The take offof commercialtelevision meant that the public-service broadcasters'share of the viewingaudience declined appreciably. In 1990 the threepublic-service channels (ARD, ZDF, and the third regionalchannels) still accounted between them for an audienceshare of no less than68.7%. However,by 1995the public broadcasters' audience sharehad fallento about40%, whereit stabilised; in 1998,the figure was stilljust above40%. The mainbeneficiaries of this decline were the three main commercialchannels, SAT1 (Springer/Kirch),PRO7 (Thomas Kirch),and RTL (Bertelsmann/CLT).4As well as erodingthe audience sharesof the publicservice broadcasters, the new privatecommercial broadcastershad had a negativeimpact on theiradvertising revenues.
Table 2: AdvertisingIncome of Public and Private Broadcasters in millionDM
Public 1 1989 1 1991 1 1993 1 1995 1 1997 1 ARD 935.4 761.2 444.9 301.8 308.1 ZDF 679.1 1 718.8 1 370.5 1 345.1 1 308.0 Total 1 1,614.5. 1,480.0 1 815.5 1 646.9.[ 616.1
Private 1989 1991 1 1993 1995 1997 RTL 294.4 1.010.8 1,844.4 1 1,960.1 2,238.0 SATI 1 307.4 1 802.2 1 1,288.1 1,623.8 1 1,661.0 PRO7 14.5 165.1 670.0 1,333.9 1,580.0 Others 26.0 42.4 [ 311.1 777.3 1,343.1 Total 1 642.3 1 2020.51 4,113.61 5,695.1 6,822.1 Source:Media PerspektivenBasisdaten: Daten zur Mediensituationin Deutschland 1994,10 and21; 1995 10 and 19; 1998: 13 and21.
As Table 2 (above) shows,the public-service broadcasters' advertis- ing revenuesregistered a conspicuousdecline in thedual broadcasting system.In the dual system,they were permittedto continueto run
49. Media Perspektiven.Basisdaten (1991): 70; Media Perspektiven.Basisdaten (1994): 76; MediaPerspektiven. Basisdaten (1998): 73.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:24 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 46 Germany's"Dual" BroadcastingSystem twentyminutes of advertisingper day. However,in the liberalized broadcastingmarketplace they could no longercharge monopoly prices fortheir advertising airtime. The latterwas no longerin scarcesupply. Whilethe public broadcasters were prevented from carrying advertising after8:00PM and also on Sundays,the private broadcasters could carry it forup to 20% of theirair-time, including Sundays. The privatecom- mercialbroadcasters could undercut the public broadcasters' advertising ratesand stillsee theiradvertising revenue spiral upward. By contrast, thepublic broadcasters were adversely affected by this competition. As Table 3 (below) shows,between 1989-97 the public-broadcasters' licensefee incomemore than doubled. However, three important quali- ficationsare requiredlest this be misconstruedas compensationfor the
Table3: License-feeIncome ofPublic Broadcasters in million DM
1989 1991 1993 1995 1997
ARD 1 3,685.1 4,427.3 6,906.6 7,288.7 1 8,314.1 ZDF 896.7 1,064.7 1578.9 1,654.2 2.438.9 Total 42581.8 5,492.01 8,485.5 8,942.9 10,753.0
Note:At thebeginning of the 1980s the monthly license fee was 3.80 DM (radio)and 9.20 DM (television).By 1992 it had been raisedfour times and stood at 8.25 DM (radio)and 15.55 DM (television).In 1997 it was againraised to 9.45 DM (radio)and 18.80 DM (television).Since 1988the regulatory authorities for private television have taken2% ofthe license fee income.50 public broadcasters'dramatic loss of advertisingrevenue. Firstly, the increaseoccurred partly because Germanunification simply increased thenumber of license-feepayers. The numberof televisionhouseholds increasedfrom around twenty-five million to aroundthirty-two million. (For theEast Germansthe license fee was raisedin stagesso thatthe full effectwas not registereduntil 1993). Secondly,there were considerablecosts involved in restructuringbroadcasting in the former East Germany.Thirdly, the public-servicebroadcasters were encum- beredby farhigher production costs than the private sector. Together
50. Source:Media PerspektivenBasisdaten: Daten zur Mediensituationin Deut- schland1998: 11-12.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:24 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions PeterHumphreys 47
ARD and ZDF accountedfor around 30,000 employeesin radio and televisionin 1998,whereas the entire private sector employed less than 10,000.51Moreover, the public broadcasters were bound, by theirpub- lic-serviceremit, to investin expensiveprogram categories and to main- tain extensive in-house productionfacilities. The public-service broadcasters'programming strategies were constrainedby the need to provideinternal pluralism, and respectthe diverseviews of the trade unions,churches, business associations, and other"socially significant groups"represented in theirbroadcasting councils. Their public-service remitentailed devoting considerable resources to informationaland cul- turaloutput that was comparativelycostly to produce.RTL, SATi, and the otherprivate broadcasters were muchfreer to followfashion and populartaste. They could relyfar more heavily on buyingrelatively inexpensiveentertainment fare (such as U.S. seriesalready amortized in thehome market) and schedulinggame-shows, chat shows, and thelike, whichwere especially cheap to produce. Also, behindthe larger commercial stations stood giant media compa- nies withdeep pockets.The privatebroadcasters, therefore, could afford to outbidthe public broadcasters for those popular program categories thatwere bothstrategic and expensive,such as therights for recently releasedfeature films and popular sports events (such as soccerand ten- nis). Theywere able, too, to lurepopular stars and presentersaway from thepublic broadcasters by offeringmore lucrative contracts. At thesame time,the public broadcasters found it harderto affordthe more popular filmsand seriessince the increased demand from the new privatesector forthese program categories significantly inflated their price.52 A commonlyheard complaint among Germany's liberal intellectual class was thatthe ratings seemed to be thenew yardstickof successat theexpense of programquality and of otherpublic-service values.53 Of course,the public-service broadcasters depended less obviouslythan the privatebroadcasters on ratingssuccess. For the privatebroadcasters, afterall, the ability to attractadvertising revenue was a matterof lifeand death.All thesame, although free from such direct existential worry, the Germanpublic broadcasters have beenprofoundly unsettled by thenew
51. EuropeanAudiovisual Observatory, Statistical Yearbook 1999 (Strasbourg: Coun- cil ofEurope, 1999) 76. 52. GunhildFreese, "Sttihleriicken inder ersten Reihe," Die Zeit15 (9 Apr.1993): 24. 53. See, forexample, Freddie R6chenhaus, "Wie viele Programmeertrigt 1 Men- sch?"Die ZeitDossier 48 (26 Nov. 1993): 13-15.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:24 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 48 Germany's"Dual" BroadcastingSystem competition.Above all theyfear that the licensefee, from which their main incomederives, will lose its legitimacyif theirratings should declinetoo much.According to theARD chairman(in 1994) JobstPlog, theARD wouldbe hardpressed to justifyits license-feeincome if the ARD FirstChannel's audience share should fall as low as 10% (before theintroduction ofcommercial broadcasting stable at around42%, since 1994 ithas fluctuatedaround the 15% figure).54Yet, if the public broad- casterswere to chase the privatebroadcasters "down-market" (that is, audience maximizationthrough scheduling mainly popular program- ming)in orderto competemore successfully for the ratings, they would servetheir enemies with another excuse to attackthem. In fact,the Germanpublic-service broadcasters soon foundthem- selves accusedby pro-commercialinterests of havinggone down-mar- ket.At the same timethe pro-commercial lobby claimed that the new privatebroadcasters had themselvescontributed positively to program diversityand thecountry's culture industries. A "convergence,"the pro- commerciallobby argued, was occurring.On thesegrounds, the lobby called for,among other things, the eventual abolition of advertisingby thepublic-service broadcasters. The privatebroadcasters had, of course, a blatantlyself-interested motive for making this demand.55By the mid-1990sa radicalpolitical front seeking reform of thepublic-service broadcasterswas buildingup momentum.Bavaria's primeminister Edmund Stoiber(CSU), backed by Saxony's prime ministerKurt Biedenkopf(CDU), suggestedthat the ARD's FirstChannel might be closed down.Georg K*fler, the proprietor of PRO7, Germany'sthird most successfulcommercial channel, supported this proposal.Others called forthe privatizationof ZDF. One explanationfor the renewed ideologicalonslaught against the public-service broadcasters, suggested by ARD chairmanJobst Plog, was thatit was an attemptby the right to deflectthe mediapolicy debate away fromthe increasingly controver- sial issue of media concentration.Stoiber's attacks,56 in particular,
54. Interviewin Die Woche(10 Mar. 1994):34. 55. See Marie-LuiseKiefer, "Partikularinteressen als Leitlinie: zu den rundfunk- politischenVorstellungen des VPRT,"Media Perspektiven 10 (1992): 614-23. 56. Marc Pitzke,"Macht und Moneten,"Die Woche(29 Oct. 1994): 6; Gunhild Freese,"StUthleruicken in der ersten Reihe"; Marlene W6ste, "ARD UnderPolitical Pres- sure,"BULLETIN 12.1 (1995): 23-24. Fora detailedcritique of theStoiberlBiedenkopf proposalssee Marie-Luise,"Wettbewerbsverstdndnis im Stoiber/Biedenkopf Papier - hilfreichfoir die Rundfunkvielfalt,"Media Perspektiven 3 (1995): 109-14.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:24 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions PeterHumphreys 49 mightbe seen in thislight as an attemptto protectthe interests of the prominentBavarian media entrepreneur Leo Kirch. As suggested,this ideological onslaught drew much of its forcefrom theconvergence thesis, according to whichthe public-service broadcast- ers were losingtheir distinctive public-service character and therefore shouldlose theirfunding privileges (notably, their right to supplement theirlicense fee with advertising revenue). However, an importantcross- nationalsurvey, looking at theprogramming of 53 publicand commer- cial channelsin westernEurope during two weeksof Januaryin 1991, foundthe Germanpublic broadcastersperformance to be exemplary. The Germanpublic broadcasters provided a balancedoverall schedule of 50% "serious"and 50% "popular"programming. What is more, unlikemost other west Europeanpublic broadcasters they even main- tainedthis balance duringprime time. Germany's commercial broad- casters,by contrast,scheduled over three quarters popular programming overalland in peak-viewing time this increased to 93 percent.57 Empiricalresearch by Udo KrUigerat theInstitute for Empirical Media Researchat Colognecovering the ten year period 1985-1995 suggested that the public broadcastersprovision of informationprogramming remainedstable at a fairlyhigh level (around40% in primetime) throughoutthe period, whereas the private commercial broadcasters, on theother hand, furnished a much lower proportion (15% in primetime) and much of what countedas informationwas non-political,human interesttype "infotainment" and "realityTV." 58 Morerecent studies by Udo KrUgerhave confirmedthis overall pattern.59 Although not unaf- fectedby commercialisationtendencies (they were 'modernising'their programformats), the ARD and ZDF have maintainedbalanced pro- gramschedules, with fairly high levels of informationcontent. By con- trast, in the programschedules of the commercialbroadcasters
57. Els De Benset al., "Televisioncontent: Dallasification ofculture?" Dynamics of MediaPolitics, eds. Karen Siune and Wolfgang Truetzschler, (London: Sage, 1992)75- 100. 58. Udo Krtiger,"Tendenzen in den Programmender grossen Fernsehsender 1985 bis 1995"Media Perspektiven 8 (1996): 418-40;see also Kiefer,"Partikularinteressen als Leitlinie." 59. See Udo KrUger,"Boulevardisierung der Informationim Privatfernsehen," Media Perspektiven7 (1996): 362-74;Krtiger, "Programmanalyse 1997: Modernisierung bei stabilenProgrammstruckturen", Media Perspektiven7 (1998): 314-30;Krtiger, "Sta- bile Programmstrukturentrotz besonderer Fernsehereignisse: Programmanalyse 1998," MediaPerspektiven 7 (1999): 322-39.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:24 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 50 Germany's"Dual" BroadcastingSystem entertainmenthas faroutweighed information. Moreover, whereas the publicservice broadcasters' information programs are devotedmainly to themesfrom politics, economics, culture and science,much of thecom- mercialbroadcasters' information programming has consistedof non- political,human interest type information (Boulevardthemen). A studyby BarbaraPfetsch, comparing the presentation of television news in 1885/6immediately after the deregulation of televisionand in 1993 whenthe dual systemwas well establishedconfirmed that there continuedto exista markeddifference between the public-service broad- castersand theprivate broadcasters at thelevel of theoverall structure of programming.The publicchannels' provision of generalinformation actuallyincreased over the period. As forthe private channels, "instead of catchingup withthe information level of public channels, [they were] increasinglyengag[ing] in the marginalizationof politicalinforma- tion".60However, at thelevel of thetelevision news genre specifically, Pfetschdetected a convergence:the privatebroadcasters appeared to have followedthe role model of thepublic-service broadcasters regard- ing newscontent, increasing the amount of politicalinformation within news shows,while the public broadcasters were adopting the style and modeof presentation ofthe commercial channels.61 Beset by mountingpolitical attacks and unnervedby growingfinan- cial problems,Germany's public-service broadcasters received an importantboost from the country's highest authority when in February 1994 thefederal constitutional court made yet another of itsmonumen- tal rulingsin the fieldof broadcastingpolicy.62 Characteristically the court,called uponto settlea somewhatnarrow issue,63 took the oppor- tunityto takeup a muchbroader position on thefuture funding of the
60. BarbaraPfetsch, "Convergence through privatization? Changing media environ- mentsand televisedpolitics in Germany."European Journal of Communication11.4 (December1996): 427-51, 438. 61. Pfetsch449. 62. The "Urteildes Bundesverfassungsgerichtsvom22 Februar1994 -1 BvL 30/ 88" is reproducedin Media Perspektiven.Dokumentation 1 (1994). An evaluationin Englishis providedby Anja Bandschuh,"Federal Constitutional Court Rules on Licence- Fee. New Supportfor German Public Broadcasters," BULLETIN 11.1(Mar. 1994): 1-2. 63. The case had itsorigins in a 1984complaint by the Humanistische Union and theGreen party against the financing of cable television pilot-projects from a (verysmall) shareof the license fee, the "cable penny." The Courtsaw thisas an invitationto deliber- ate muchmore widely about the future of thelicense fee and thekey role of thepublic broadcastersin the dual system.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:24 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions PeterHumphreys 51 public-servicebroadcasters by the license fee. Essentiallythe court stressedthe need forthe public broadcastersto be grantedenough incometo permitthem to performall theirkey functions.The public broadcasters'role was all themore important in view of theshortcom- ings of the commercialbroadcasters regarding their inadequate "breadthof content"and "thematicvariety."64 This importantruling underpinned,therefore, the principlefirst expressed in the court's famous1986 rulingintroducing the dual system,that the conditio sine qua non forallowing partially deregulated private commercial broad- castingwas the"existence and furtherdevelopment" of thepublic-ser- vice broadcasters.Commercial broadcasting was onlyconstitutional so long as the public-servicebroadcasters provided the "essentialbasic provisionrequired by the constitution"[verfassungskonforme Grund- versorgung].The rulingmade plain thatthe politiciansshould not screwdown the license fee in orderto rigthe market in favourof pri- vate commercialbroadcasting. Furthermore, this 1994 rulingof the federalconstitutional court stipulated that the license fee should in futurebe freefrom politicking; the politicians should not misuse their abilityto set the licensefee. To thisend the courtrecommended new proceduresfor setting the license fee, including the establishment of a genuinelyindependent basis forthe committee that oversees the whole process.This recommendationwas subsequentlyimplemented in the 1996 thirdinter-state treaty on broadcasting(which also introducedthe newownership rules - see above). By the mid 1990s,the centralfocus of controversyhad movedon fromthe licence fee issue to settleon thequestion of thescope of pub- lic-servicebroadcasters to become involvedin providingnew media services.Thus, the private broadcasters association, the Association for PrivateBroadcasting and Telecommunication[Verband Privater Rund- funkund Telekommunikation],complained about the launch by thepub- lic-servicebroadcasters of new thematicservices, notably a children's channelcalled Kinderkanal and a documentaryand currentaffairs chan- nel called Phoenix.The privatebroadcasters viewed the launch of such channels,funded by thelicence fee, as unfaircompetition and illustra- tive of the public broadcasters'ambition to use public fundingto expandinto the emerging new mediamarkets. This matterwas settled
64. See "Urteildes Bundesverfassungsgerichtsvom22 Februar1994 - 1 BvL 30/ 88" (40-41),repr. in Media Perspektiven. Dokumentation 1 (1994): 21.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:24 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 52 Germany's"Dual" BroadcastingSystem by a rulingin February1999 of the EuropeanUnion competition authoritythat the public funding of theseservices was permissibleon publicservice grounds.65 Later in 1999, the public-servicebroadcasters' digital broadcasting ambitionsreceived a boost when the primeministers of the Lander finallyagreed a fourthinter-state treaty on broadcasting.The primary purposeof thislatest Staatsvertrag was to incorporatea revisedEuro- pean broadcastingdirective into German law (on suchmatters as sports eventsthat should be reservedto universalservice providers, rather than pay-TV).At thesame time, though, the treaty introduced a "must carry" provisionfor two analoguechannels on Germany'scable systemsto be allocatedto theARD, and one to theZDF, forthe purpose of providing up to aroundtwo dozen digital broadcasting channels (including the pub- lic broadcastersexisting services).66 Thus, as Germanygradually entered thedigital broadcasting age, theprime ministers of theLander appeared to be honouringthe constitutional"guarantee" of the public-service broadcasters'"existence and further development." Duringthe negotiationsover this fourthinter-state treaty, however, the CDU/CSU Landerhad maintainedtheir pressure for a structural reformof theARD. In additionto seekingthe abolition of advertising by publicbroadcasters, leading CDU/CSU politicianswanted to gain a commitmentto theeventual abolition of theFinanzausgleich, the finan- cial subsidyby whichthe larger ARD corporationsguaranteed the sur- vival of small ones, notablySaarlindischen Rundfunk serving the Saarland(a small Land) and Radio Bremenserving Bremen (a city- state).Such a measure,if adopted,would compel a structuralreform of theARD. However,in theevent the prime ministers of theLinder post- poned makingany decisionson thesehighly controversial issues to a futurefifth inter-state treaty. Therefore, the future balance between pri- vate and publicbroadcasting in Germanyseemed destined to remaina livepolitical issue.
65. JeanetteSteemers, "Changing Channels: The redefinitionof public service broadcastingfor the digital age", Paperpresented to theJoint Research Sessions of the EuropeanConsortium for Political Research, Mannheim, 26-31 March 1999. Available on theECPR website:
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:23:24 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions A CulturalBreak or PerhapsThings Didn't Go ThatFar. Televisionin Germany: Commercialization,German Unification and Europeanization
KnutHickethier
1. Germantelevision before 1989 Since 1985 a "dual broadcastingsystem" has existedin the Federal Republicof Germany- commercialtelevision existing alongside pub- lic broadcastingstations.1 Because Germanyhad experiencedonlypub- lic televisionsince the re-institution of German television in 1948, the introductionof commercialtelevision represented a fundamental,radi- cal changein the cultureof the Germanspeaking world. Responsible forthis introduction were the developmentof cable and broadcasting technologyas well as pressureimposed by expansion-orientednews and mediaagencies. The mainpromoter was theChristian-Liberal coalition, whichcame intooffice in 1982 and immediatelypushed for an exten- sive cable wiringof the FederalRepublic. Starting in 1982, the two maincommercial stations SAT1 and RTL plus weresuccessively intro- ducedinto the individual federal states. Deregulation of television in the FederalRepublic never went so faras to abolishall legal restrictions
1. For the developmentof the mediain theFederal Republic of Germanyas a whole,see KnutHickethier, "The Media in Germany,"in TonyWymouth/Bernard Lam- izet,eds., Markets& Myths.Forces for Changein theEuropean Media (London/New York:Longman, 1996) 100-33. 2. Therewas a phaseof television operation in Germany between 1935 and 1943.See WilliamUricchio, ed., Die Anfiingedes deutschen Fernsehens (Ttibingen: Niemejer, 1991). 53
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:02 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 54 Televisionin Germany imposedon theindustry. On thecontrary, the federal states created their own mediadepartments to controlthe commercial stations. These state mediaagencies (not to be confusedwith "television commissions" since theyare simplyoversight agencies) also issue licensesfor program operationsand could,potentially, withdraw them, although that has not occurredin spiteof considerableconflicts with individual commercial televisioncompanies. These controlauthorities were supposedto have at least curtailedif not stoppedthe impendingconcentration in the mediaindustry. However, as developmentshave indicated,this was not to be thecase, becauseGerman television viewers are partof a highly desirablemarket for which international concerns fiercely compete. The build-upof commercialtelevision continued until about 1989/90, when,in the beginningof the 1990s,RTL becamethe firststation to challengethe dominant public networks and then,in 1993,became the marketleader just ahead of thepublic-supported ZDF and ARD net- works.Despite a ratherslow startand all prognosticationsagainst it, commercialtelevision quickly achieved a dynamicbreakthrough. By the secondhalf of the 1980s,the presence of commercialtelevi- sion had alreadyaltered the paradigm of televisionbroadcasting. Since the end of the 1940s,broadcasting's cultural mission had been given highestconsideration, but now, in thesecond half of the 1980s, the con- cept of marketshares became dominanteven for public television. Today,the cultural component, receiving only occasional consideration by themedia market, is almostperceived as an impedimentto themar- ket's unlimitedexpansion. Public networksclearly want to be freed fromsome regulations (e.g., regardingthe limiting of advertisingtime), becausethey are seen as a restrictionofthe related programing. Until 1989 commercialprogramming time slots were predominately filledwith regular feature films and series,mainly from America, which had alreadybeen shown often on thepublic networks and forwhich the broadcastrights were primarily in thehands of moviemiddleman Leo Kirch.Paradoxically these series were oftenbroadcast in the dubbed versionpaid forearlier by thepublic supported networks. Because these "old programs"could not make much of an impressionand could hardlyattract a new largeaudience, the private stations began to broad- cast seriesand featurefilms not previouslyaired on publicnetworks because,among other reasons, they were too violentor sexuallyexplicit fortheir family-oriented programming.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:02 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions KnutHickethier 55
This developmentwas seen as followinga long-establishedpattern in theUnited States, although there commercial television had existed along- side publictelevision from the very beginning. It was thusnot simply a matterof copyingwhat had alreadyexisted in Americantelevision. Thanksto programinventories amassed through forty years of public broadcastingas well as theirownership of largeproduction companies3 andaccumulated programming experience, public networks naturally con- tinuedto producequality programming, ambitious network films and con- scientiousdocumentaries. Although it did not receive the medial attention thatcommercial networks received for their outrages, public television was still slow in makingstructural changes in its programming.The growingtrend towards more entertaining programs was slowto develop.
2. GermanUnification as a shortterm media episode In 1989,this intense commercialization process was interruptedby the fall of the Wall and the collapseof the GDR. No one in the West or East was preparedfor it. The FederalRepublic was so steepedin its Westernorientation and preoccupationwith west Europeanproblems thatno forethoughtor models were available for the possibility of Ger- man unification.Nor had eitherpublic television or the privatenet- worksplanned for anything like this.4 Since the 1950s, the cold war betweenthe GDR and the Federal Republic had been waged primarilyby the media. The politicsof detentehad notbeen able to eliminatefundamental differences, and in the 1980s ideologicalpolarization was stilleffected principally by the media.Most of all, the"spill over" transmission of WestGerman televi- sionand radioprograms into almost all of theGDR presentedEast Ger- mans witha view of a "better"Federal Republic in contrastto the realityof their situation.5 Yet even beforethe wall fell,with the accompanyingremoval of
3. The largestEuropean film and televisionproduction company, the Munich based Bavaria-Atelierbetriebsgesellschaft,is owned by the publictelevision networks WDR and SDR, whilethe similarly large Studio Hamburg belongs to NDR. 4. See, moreextensively, Hickethier, "Die Zerschlagungder Einrichtung. Der Weg vomStaatsfernsehen der DDR zumRundfunktfderalismus in den neuen Bundeslindern," in RainerBohn, Knut Hickethier, and Eggo Mtiller,eds., Mauer-Show.Das Ende der DDR, die deutscheEinheit und die Medien.(Berlin: Sigma, 1992) 71-94. 5. On generalconditions see thebest presentation about German-German relations at thattime: Peter Bender, Episode oder Epoche: Zur Geschichtedes geteiltenDeut- schland(Munich: Deutscher Taschenbuch, 1996).
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:02 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 56 Televisionin Germany
ErichHonecker and JoachimHermann, the Politburo member responsi- ble formedia, the first careful changes were made in East Germantele- vision.When the Wall fell,critical news coveragebecame a partof East Germantelevision, allowing East Germancitizens to use their owntelevision for information. From November1989 to March 1990 - when it appearedthere wouldbe a reformedGDR and withit, an independent,reformed East Germantelevision - a new structuringof programson East German televisiontook place. A new commissionwas createdafter the pattern of the "RoundTable" to developa plan to reformthe East German mediaand to discussand formulatea media bill. It was to be structured along the same lines as the law governingtelevision in the Federal Republic.In theprocess of selfdetermination they saw thepossibility of formulatingtheir own identity,6even if it was debatablethat East Germancitizens had an independentcultural identity. In thisprocess of self discoverythe mediawas veryimportant and the news broadcast AktuelleKamera was pleased with its growingnumber of viewers alreadyin Decemberof 1989. A moreopen news policy,a different styleof presentation(changing the attire of themoderators and thestu- dio design),creating new programsor alteringexisting ones (Donner- stag-Gesprach,Klartext, Prisma, AK Zwo) and the transmissionof previouslyforbidden TV-films (Geschlossene Gesellschaft, Ursula, Monologeines Taxifahrers)were to demonstratetheir own capacityfor change.In spiteof all this,there still existed a broad-basedsocietal dis- trust,especially towards the leaders in thetelevision industry. The abil- ityto adaptto new conditionscould not hide the fundamental dilemma of East Germantelevision: its structureand organizationof personnel were essentiallythe productof the old regime,which had dictated everythingto thelast detail, and whichconsequently left the legitimacy ofEast Germantelevision in a fragilestate. The rushtowards German unification was seenin theFederal Repub- lic as a chanceto intervenedirectly in thechanging East Germanmedia landscape.It was clear thatunification should bring with it a unified mediasystem; the only question was whethera changedand fundamen- tallyreformed East Germantelevision industry could be integratedinto thedual systemin theFederal Republic. This non-commercial"Eastern
6. EdithSpielhagen, "Medial aufgeschlossen, real ausgeschlossen. DDR, Medien undkulturelle Identittit," epd/Kirche und Rundfunk 41.45 (1990): 7ff.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:02 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions KnutHickethier 57
TV" would have inevitablystrengthened the publiccomponent of the dual systemin theFederal Republic. This was opposedmainly by media concernsof the Federal administration bent on expansion,but also by the Christian-Liberalcoalition of theFederal Republic. A "thirdmodel" was totallyunthinkable for these media politicians and media representatives. Whilethe Western private enterprise organization media looked at East Germanyas a yetunconquered market, the public media pursued, in the beginning,rapprochement through cooperative effort, as it had been establishedwith othermedia systemsin otherfederal states. Since November1989, ARD and ZDF had been cooperatingeffectively with East Germantelevision through broadcasting ARD and ZDF programs (e.g., Presseclub)through East Germantelevision facilities in East Ber- lin. ARD programswere also incorporatedinto East Germantelevision programing(Brennpunkt: Die Stimmungkippt um). The cooperativepro- gramprinciple was supportedby those responsible for ARD programing. As long as Germanunification was seen as unfeasible,the onlyoption was theslow cooperation and integration ofEast and West television. The new CDU-led GDR government,elected in March1990, had at firstno clearconception as to how to restructurethe television system. Instead,under the directionof Hans Bentzien,East Germantelevision undertookits own mediaoffensive: returning to thename it heldbefore 1971 - DeutscherFernsehfunk (DFF) - and formulatinga "Statuteof the TV networkDeutscher Fernsehfunk." During this power vacuum confrontingmedia politics,East Germantelevision saw itselfas an independenttelevision network alongside ZDF and ARD and it demandeda self-actuatedphase of reformation and new organization.7 Oppositionto thiscame fromtwo sides. Those responsiblefor ARD and ZDF programmingand politiciansin the FederalRepublic pre- sentedproposals for a neworganization of East Germantelevision. The DeutscheFernsehfunk was declaredto be "non-reformable"and infil- tratedby membersof the PDS (hence communists)and so they demandeda federalrestructuring. This was joined by endeavorswithin theGDR to breakup thegovernment center in Berlin,in orderto more stronglypromote their own newlydeveloping regional state interests. The planto retainthe DFF as an independentthird public broadcasting systemwithin a unifiedGermany became increasing less likelyuntil it was finallycrushed among the conflicting interested factions. 7. See "UnverwechselbarPro. Epd-Interviewmit DFF-Programmdirektor Wolf- gangVietze," epd/Kirche und Rundfunk 41.28/29 (1990): 5-9.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:02 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 58 Televisionin Germany
The discussionwas overwhelmedby the goal of boththe Federal administrationand those responsiblefor West Germanbroadcasting, namelyto establishthe dual broadcastingsystem in the stillexisting GDR. Pressurewas openlyapplied in variousways. ARD and ZDF demandedto broadcasttheir programs throughout the GDR withbetter qualitythan they previously had been able to fromBerlin. Finally, in mid May, the CDU (West) committeeof expertsdealing with federal mediapolitics, presented an integrationplan withthe "benchmark fig- ures for media arrangementin a unifiedGermany," while the SPD favoreda step-by-stepintegration of GDR televisioninto the system of the FederalRepublic. The mediarepresentatives and mediapoliticians of the FederalRepublic wanted a quick unificationfor the media as well. Throughoutit was mostimportant that the media structure of the FederalRepublic remained for the most part unchallenged. This engenderedgreat uncertainty in therepresentatives of East Ger- mantelevision involved in programdevelopment because the need for personnellayoffs were always part of thediscussions. The facilitiesof theDFF andthe East Germanradio network were seen as oversizedand no longerfinanceable. Paragraph 36 of theUnification Contract, ham- mered out in the summerof 1990, proposeda transitionalperiod betweenthe day of GermanUnification (3 Oct. 1990) and the end of 1991, afterwhich federal principles should be in operationinstead of those of the DFF and statebroadcasting systems should have been established.Among the peculiarities of television's development was the factthat at theend ofthe old East Germantelevision, in thesecond half of 1990,the popularity of theDFF programshad risenso drasticallyin thenew federalstates that it surpassedthat of thepreviously dominant ARD and ZDF networks.Its growingpopularity as a networkwas due to the factthat it was able to concentrateon theproblems of thenew federalstates as an insider,not as an outsideobserver. Apparently, this popularitywas motivatedby an attemptto holdon to an identitywhich manyof thenew federalcitizens felt to be severelythreatened by "land annexing"West Germans. For many,the DFF offered"special help by EastGermans for East Germans in coping with life."8 The establishmentof state broadcastingnetworks patterned after Westernmodels proved to be a lengthyprocess. The statesof Saxony,
8. Holm Freier,"Lebenshilfe. Das ostdeutscheFemsehen und die Einheit,"epd/ Kircheund Rundfunk 41.77 (1990): 3.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:02 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions KnutHickethier 59
Saxony-Anhaltand Thuringia(each led by a CDU administration)cre- ated a joint statebroadcasting network - "MitteldeutscherRundfunk." Brandenburgand Mecklenburg-Vorpommemvacillated for a long time abouthow to organizetheir television system, until finally, Mecklenburg- Vorpommernjoined the interstatetreaty of the existingNorth German BroadcastingNetwork, while Brandenburg decided by the end of 1991to formits own network - OstdeutscherRundfunk Brandenburg - a very smallstation (judged by thenumber of viewersand hencelimited finan- cial means).The excessiverush to close theDFF and the limitedtime allowedthe new networks to be establishedand achievecompetence, cre- atedsuch chaos that much was foreverlost in theprocess. The produc- tionfacilities in the studios were for the most part dismantled. The changeovertook place in an extremelyshort period of time(com- pared,for example, to thediscussion leading up to the introductionof commercialtelevision), so thatthe East Germanviewers felt them- selves runover roughshod,and rightlyso. Withthe collapse of East Germanmedia "the countrylost its voice," accordingto East Berlin publicistChristoph Dieckmann.9 In the DFF - despiteits shortcom- ings - East Germanshad recognizedthemselves, felt their problems addressedby peoplewho had thesame background,the same heritage, thesame sense of lifeand the same fate as themselves.The "voice"was squelched because the new state broadcastingnetworks could not becomethe mouthpiece for East Germans in sucha shorttime. Consequently,a gap developedduring an importantphase of unifica- tion and uncertaintyarose about how thingswere to continue.The resultswere not what had beenhoped for in 1989.When the GDR came to an end,many in the oppositionhad dreamtof takingcontrol of the media.At theend of thetransitional period it becameapparent that the people of the new federalstates had a new broadcastingsystem imposedupon them. The decidingfactor in Germanmedia development was thatthe orga- nizationalchange in the televisionlandscape was politicallymotived. The deregulationwhich had been introducedin theWest to accommo- datecommercialization was delayedhere once again,solely for the pur- pose of layingthe groundworkfor the introductionof commercial stationsin thenew federalstates. The publicnetworks were kept very
9. ChristophDieckmann, "Heimweh nach Ideologie? Zur Relativitait von Befindli- chkeiten,"epd/Kirche und Rundfunk 41.45 (1991): 4.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:02 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 60 Televisionin Germany busy integratingthe new stationsand interfacingwith their structures, whilethe commercial networks, working from the West, used thistime to enlargetheir market to includeall ofGermany. In retrospect,German unification proved to be onlya transitoryepi- sode in the commercializationof Germantelevision which, with the additionof theGDR territory,had becomethe largest television market in Europe.Gone wereall hopesfor a reciprocallearning experience in thetelevision industry (such as thedramaturgical exactness and careful, aestheticpresentation of televisionfilms, which West Germanfilm makerscould have learned fromtheir counterparts in the former GDR).10 Justas no positiveelement of the East Germanstate was adoptedby the new FederalRepublic, so it was thatnothing of East Germantelevision was to remain.That in theend onlyone crimeseries (Polizeiruf110) and the good-night-storiesof the Sandmannchensur- vived,must be seenas an historicalirony. Additionally,television, as a formof organizedpublic communication, completelymissed the opportunityto assumethe role of moderatorin mediatingthe cultural and mentaldifferences which broke out between East and Westafter 1989. Obsessed with commercialization, it was con- cernedonly with increases in shortterm market share, no longeraccept- ing anyresponsibility in helping to solve integrationissues as had been donewith great success by WestGerman broadcasting (radio and televi- sion) afterWorld War II in thereconstruction of the desolated remnants ofthe country and the integration of 12 millionrefugees in the1950s and 1960s. Afteran initialtreatment of the themeof Germanunification, WestGerman interest in theproblems of East Germansand theirdepic- tion on televisionwaned. The numerousconflicts regarding disputed propertyownership, unemployment, Stasi offenses, etc., no longerinter- estedthe majorityof thepopulation of the formerFederal Republic or the West Germanfilm producers. As interestin theseissues declined, theyquickly returned to othertopics. Fictional television film lost inter- est in East-Weststories as well. Instead,after 1992 the mainconcern againbecame the rivalry between the public and commercial networks.
3. Europeanizationof television? Since 1993, the commercializationof televisionhas dominatedthe publicdiscourse so extensivelythat the question of Europeanizationof 10. See BirgitPeulings et al., eds.,Das Endeder Euphorie. Das Fernsehspielin Ost undWest nach der deutschen Einigung. (Hamburg, 1996).
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:02 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions KnutHickethier 61 themedia has becomea peripheralissue, of interestonly as a compo- nentin furtherintensifying competition which the opening of the Ger- man television market might create for internationalmedia conglomerates."Also no longerof interestis theprospect of network- ingas discussedin the 1970srelative to increasedEuropean co-produc- tion and realized in the 1980s with the formationof a "European ProductionCompany" by a numberof West Europeantelevision net- works.Everything in the 1990s has been and continuesto be geared towardsthe concentrationof mediapower and influence.Media poli- tics has becomegeopolitics in Europe:The Christian-LiberalFederal governmentwanted the German media to be as strongand influentialas possiblein Europe. On theother hand, international media concerns continue to be inter- estedin becomingestablished in the Germanmarket. Nonetheless, the Germanmarket also appearscomplicated and riskyto internationalcon- cerns,who buy theirway into Germannetworks, but who also fre- quentlyget out quickly after negative results. In 1995,Rupert Murdoch withdrewfrom an arrangementwith Bertelsmann only six monthsafter he enteredinto it. Time/Warnerhas signalleda similarwithdrawal. Althougheveryone is discussingthe globalization and internationaliza- tionof television,practical results have not been realized, because it has notyet been established that such an internationalizationshould be con- sideredan improvementor a detrimentto social communication.12The once so ambitiouslyheralded Europeanization of the media has pres- entlybeen limitedto the public culturalchannels: for the German- speakingareas (Germany, Austria, German-speaking Switzerland) there is a culturalchannel (3SAT), whichto a greatextent, broadcasts reruns fromparticipating central networks of thesecountries, thereby provid- ing a glimpseat programsof othercountries. Its effectiveness,how- ever, is diminishedsince theseprograms are forthe most part also beingaired by the cable networks. A differentsituation exists with the German-French cultural channel ARTE, which came into being througha governmentalpolitical arrangement.Though it originallymeant to includeother countries as well, it nevergot beyondGerman-French cooperation. This channel
11. See TonyWymouth/Bernard Lamizet, as above. 12. See also Hans J. Kleinsteuberet al., eds., EG-Medienpolitik.Fernsehen in Europazwischen Kultur und Kommerz (Berlin, 1990).
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:02 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 62 Televisionin Germany presentsnumerous documentary films, cultural features, and demand- ing featurefilms as well as theater,ballet and dance broadcasts.In spiteof manyproblems, it is extolledas a culturalchannel, whose spe- cialtyis "themeevenings," when the entireevening program is dedi- catedto a theme("The Night,""Artist and Model,""Europe," etc.). Its shareof the viewingaudience remains small, partly because the films are voicedover. Undoubtedly it offersprogramming, primarily for cul- turallyinterested patrons, which gives insightsinto different customs and mentaltraditions through its manyFrench contributions (including documentaries)with unsynchronizedtranslations (only subtitlesor voice-over)which are quiteuncommon in Germany.Translation is the cruxof theproblem of a trulycooperative European program as was envisionedas earlyas the 1950s. This idea has been continuallyfrus- tratedand defeated by the multilingual nature of Europe.
4. Programdevelopment trends in the1990s The mostimportant characteristic oftelevision development, aside from theexplosive nature of theexpansion of televisionofferings (from about 40 hourson weekdayson threechannels in 1980 to about400 hourson approximately25 channelsin 1995),has beenthe increasing structuring of programstowards entertainment. This is linkedwith a broadening rangeof offerings.The commercialstations have alwaysbeen searching forneglected program niches (e.g., early morning or nighttelevision) and havemilked program genres for all theirpossibilities. Often they dared to touchupon themesand utilizedpresentation modes which public net- workscould notpursue without breaking their cultural contract and the restrictionswhich had been set for them. This resulted in a dismantlingof therules of decencyto whichtelevision had voluntarilysubscribed up to thistime and an abandonmentof theaccepted rules of journalism. A few generaltrends of these program changes can be noted: a) A tendencytoward the sexualization of programofferings: through the introductionof softporn, erotic shows, as well as talkshows and magazineprograms preoccupied with guests' love lives. b) A brutalizationof portrayals:a strongeremphasis on thepresenta- tionof forceand positionsof powerin fictionas well as in modesof journalisticreporting, including a move towardsensationalism to the pointof open humiliation and "confrontainment." c) Formatswhich could be groupedunder the term "boulevard jour- nalism,"specializing in rumor and gossip, reports on publicfigures, etc.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:02 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions KnutHickethier 63
d) A furthervariant is theproliferation of belittlingand inanehumor: all formsof making fun of people - fromcomedy to satire.13 e) A newertrend is trivialtelevision, namely, banal, cheaply produced subjectmatter being turned into program formats. Initially these pro- gramswere airedat theperiphery of establishedprograms (during the nighthours). ORB initiatedthis type of nighttimeprograming with a live broadcastfrom an aquariumwith which it garnereda largeshare of the marketin thisrather sparsely used time slot. Broadcasts of subwayrides, ocean sounds,a cracklingfireplace and such topicsbecame programs thatfilled the hours. However, the idea thatthis old conceptof televi- sion,namely to "see intothe far-offdistance," could be establishedin such a way thatone could participatein distanteveryday city life, in natureor otherthings, is contradicted:live programsare seldomaired, butrather well-established, incessantly replayed, canned material. When, forexample, the Hamburgcity channel "Hamburg 1" tappedinto the activityon cityplazas duringthe day through permanently installed cam- eras,this was notdone in an attemptto createa totallynew programing idea,but rather because of a dearthof broadcast-worthy material. Even thoughaquariums, subway rides, the rushingof ocean waters are only programmingplace-holders, these areas can be developed: everydaysituations, ordinary, customary things are shown.With that, stationsspeculate on the curiosityof viewers.Automatic television camerasare placed in busycity plazas in hopes thatsomething might happenand theviewer would then be therelive. The trendtowards the trivialand banal was extendedto otherforms, for example vacation television:the WDR broughta dailyreport from Mallorca, the favorite Germanvacation spot. f) Televisionentertainment increasingly targets specific groups, pay- ing specialattention to themarked difference between the old and the young.Juxtaposed with such new trends in entertainmentare traditional, ratherleisurely, light programing with folk music, old hits,brass bands, opera,and other entertainment preferred by a moremature audience. g) Thisre-emergence of folkmusic on television(for which , interest- ingly,no similartrend is noticeableto thesame extentin radio)seems to be connectedto a noticeableincrease in the numberof viewers
13. See Hickethier,"Fernsehen und Satire- unvereinbar?"Text und Kontext. Zeitschriftfizrgermanistische Literaturforschung in Skandinavien, Sonderreihe 37 ("Die Schwierigkeitder Satire") (Copenhagen/Munich: Fink, 1996) 107-39.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:02 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 64 Televisionin Germany selectingprograms produced in Germanyover those American series, featurefilms and made-for-televisionmovies that were so popularafter theinitial introduction of commercialtelevision. A growingsegment of the populationwants to see familiarsurroundings, famous, familiar stars,and storieswhich, though out of theordinary, are somehowcon- nectedto thehere and now. (This is wheretelevision is markedlydiffer- ent fromtheater films in Germany).The result is an increased productionof seriesand television movies in theGerman language. It is in thiscontext that the increased interest in folkmusic must be seen.It reflectsand fostersthe searchfor the familiarin contrastto thehectic "Americanized"world of big cities and work places. Not accidentally,therefore, sociology too has determineda specific life'smilieu (the "harmony milieu"),14 in whichthere is an interestin pre- servingtraditional relationships and an orientationtowards "old" and "German"forms of television.15 There is also an associatedcounter move- mentto thetrend of standardizingtelevision programing through the pur- chase of Americanfeature films and series.Many viewers do wantnew, fast-paced story telling and "modem"themes, but with a familiar,home- townatmosphere and not somewhere in San Franciscoor Los Angeles.
5. Phases ofprogramchange Historically,several different phases can be recognizedin thedevel- opmentof thedual broadcastingsystem, characterized by a fundamen- talchange in commercialprograming: First,in themid-1980s, commercial networks established themselves throughincreased airings of old featurefilms and series fromLeo Kirch'scopyright empire. The networkswere thereby able to establish a presenceand could thenprobe the marketand profilethemselves throughspecial offerings. This inevitablybrought about a "fatiguefac- tor": Since programminghad become supersaturatedwith old series and featurefilms, it was impossibleto achieve a large shareof the viewermarket. Once marketpresence had been establishedand reruns had runtheir course, the commercial networks set theirsights on other genres,especially in thearea of entertainment.Different stages in this developmentcan be identifiedchronologically. First, the traditional 14. See GerhardSchulze, Die Erlebnisgesellschaft(Frankfurt/Main/New York, 1992)292ff. 15. It is significantthat for years undisputedly "boring" and stereotypical series like Derrickhave been registering on averagethe highest viewer ratings.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:02 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions KnutHickethier 65 quiz programswere changedinto game shows. Then theytried to monopolizesports coverage by outflankingthe public networks in the acquisitionof licencesfor broadcast rights. Thereafter, they relied on an increasednumber of independentlyproduced series and TV films, and finally,starting in 1995, theycompeted directly with the "flag- ship"of the public networks, the news broadcasts. After1987/88, they also begansearching for completely new genres, whichmight diversify established programming. This searchconsumed a greatdeal of timeand energybecause new genresare notfound just "lyingaround." Nor did the perusalof the Americanformat reservoir yieldmuch for various reasons (due to culturalbarriers or legal limita- tions,such as with court-TV).The apparentblossoming of "reality- shows"also revealedthat in spiteof manyyears of orientationtowards Americantelevision genres there was stilla strongresistance to thekind ofprograms which could be identifiedas "American." The strategyof morefully probing the potential of existingprogram formswas moresuccessful. This process can be seen in almostall types of programs.The "talkshows and conversationprograms" genre was stretchedto the extreme:on the one handtowards heightened aggres- sion (a battleof wordswith quick repartee) and on the othertowards minimizingaggression (fireside chats). However, these forms of diversi- ficationcontinued to be tiedto thegoal of profitmaking in commercial television.Experimentation did not last verylong, that which did not increasemarket shares was quicklyeliminated from the program.
6. Long rangechanges: From narrative to interactivetelevision At firstit seemedthat these program changes came about only because the availablestock of fictionalprograms would soon be depletedand new productionof narrativeprograms (feature films, television-movies, television-playsand series)could not keep pace withthe proliferation of new channels.There were also morefundamental reasons for the change in programmingstrategy, in thata longrange change in televisionoffer- ingsmade its appearance. The amountof storytelling, or fiction,on tele- visionbegan to diminish.Non-fictional entertainment increased in scope and significance.The structuralbasis forthis can be foundin thediffer- entiatedresponse and approachability ofviewers. The natureof fictionis to createaction within seemingly confined areas,which we observeas thoughthe actionof characterscontinued
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:02 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 66 Televisionin Germany unobservedby theviewers. It is, afterall, an old conceptin entertain- ment- one thatwas developedby thetheater with its peep showbox andlater perfected by the movies in featurefilm. Because of its orientationtowards the viewer,television fiction has certainlimitations. The modeswhich allowed the viewer to be drawnin almostphysically through "inductive tension," as has beendeveloped in Hollywoodmovies, especially in StevenSpielberg films, is limitedin thetransfer to television.The smalltelevision screen, the everpresent surroundingsof thedaily life, limit the effect such involvement strate- giescan have through the tube. Game shows,in principle,function completely differently than fic- tion,directly confronting viewers with the suggestionof live involve- ment,in thatthey create a feelingof bringinga differentsegment of the outsideworld into the here and now. It does not seem as if one were lookingin on the game activitythrough a kindof fourthwall, rather, everythingin thegame show is directedtowards the viewer, and even thepresence of a studioaudience helps to drawthe viewer in. Here is a kindof entertainmentin which television fundamentally differentiates itselffrom the movie theater. The live effectis somethingwhich is not partof the movie experience.Herein lie the dimensionsof the new developmentin television,namely, in thisability of the medium to fully explorethe aspect of personalcontact. Such formsof "direct"involve- ment,as cultivatedby gameshows, have another advantage in thatthey cost less to produce.They show through their high degree of serializa- tionpotential a proclivityfor repeating models which can be expanded intoother program formats. As a extensionof thisidea, the concept of interactivetelevision is based upon its abilityto producedialogue: the mediumoffers not only a new surfacetreatment, but it allows interac- tion,even if it only appears so. Thattelevision allows the medium to movein anotherdirection, away fromdramatized television events directed at theviewer, has shownus thatother basic televisionprograms are uniquein thisaspect of con- frontingthe public directly:such as news broadcasts,magazine and adviceprograms, and announcements. The emergenceof new programformats such as the "realityshow" (knownas "reality-TV"in Germany),shows how flexibleand expand- able thisnew appellativeform of televisionis. The formatof thereality showfictionalizes, in principle,the reporting so as to linkthe form of a
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:02 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions KnutHickethier 67 forced,dramatic narrative with appellative forms portrayed in a way thathas the appearanceof authenticity.However, such programswear out fasterthan the traditional kind - preciselybecause of theirdirect, frontalapproach, their being tied to thehere and now and therequire- mentof live or quasi-liveproduction. That makes it possiblefor fiction to alwaysremain on television.
7. Delimitationofprogram forms and genres A strongerorientation towards entertainment in programminghas necessitatedpushing back the limits on programform and mixingforms and formats.Its immediategoal is a new combinationof attractiveness and noveltybecause the traditional genres have becomestale and worn out.This is a suresign of television"fatigue." However, such an expla- nationseems to springfrom an old attractionconcept linked to the movietheater. In televisionthe trend is rathermore towards a fundamen- tal changein thestructure of offerings.The programgenres which domi- natedinto the 1980s can be seen as formsstill strongly dependent on modelsfound outside of television.Since the mid-1980s a development has emergedwhich moves more strongly towards new televisioncon- ceptsand awayfrom traditional models to producetheir own distinctive forms,as foundin thediversification of talkshows which are increas- inglybeholden to modelsand traditions originating on television.16 The structuraltendencies which stand out amidstthis program genre changecan be observedin the area of sportsentertainment. Although sportson televisionhas beenlimited to a fewpopular ones, new ones are addedif viewers get an certainemotional kick out of them.Just as "bun- gee jumping"and the new Fassadenlaufen[climbing buildings] has gainedpopularity, since 1995,the new typeof "wrestling"programs on RTL2 has generateda greatdeal of excitement.Here again,this is pri- marilyan emotionalexperience, which is notunproblematic for children if theydo notrecognize the stagedcharacter of such fights.Other for- matsalso endeavorto outwittraditional viewing conventions as in the case of inserted"reality show" segments or somecontributions to news programs.Today, with small portable cameras it is easy to shootthese cheapthrills directly: We jumpin as viewersand don'tlet the parachute open till the last minute,or we followthe cameraas it scans down a
16. Forgreater details see Hickethier/JoanBleicher, eds., Trailer, Teaser, u. Co. Pro- grammverbindungenimdeutschen Fernsehen. (Berlin, 1996).
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:02 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 68 Televisionin Germany facade.All experienceindicates, however, that exposes of thiskind still won't producea sufficientthrill. Such an inductivethrill capable of reachingthe human core does notcome by merelyholding a cameraup close butrather through a veryextravagant and expensivemode of pro- ductionpracticed almost perfectly now in Hollywood.Such a modeof bungee-televisionhas therefore not yet been recognized as a newformat. Whenit comesto conveyingclose, personal information, especially in therealm of politicalreporting, the production of new programshas, if anything,taken a stepbackward recently. The developmentof "info- tainment"has stagnated.One of thereasons for this dearth of anynew formatdevelopment is thatpolitical news coverageis tied to a rela- tivelyrigid set of rules,which are also recognizedby a portionof the viewingpublic. These rulesof news coverageimpede any formatting whichsteps outside of traditionalbounds. The separationof news and commentary,the principle of balancedreporting, the value of newsetc., cannotbe easilyeradicated from European culture.
8. Trendsin fiction: Made-for-TVplays, films, movies, series In themid-1980s it was fearedthat commercial sponsors' entry into themarket might lower the production standards of televisionplays and films.This promptedthe publicnetworks to somewhat"rush ahead" and unilaterallychange their production of fictionby investingmore heavilyin series,purchasing and airingmore feature films, and cancel- ing, or at least extendingthe productiontime of expensivetelevision plays.The end of televisionplays, or of originaltelevision fiction, was predicted,yet very little of that can be seenin actualprograming. Instead,the production of fictionhas experienceda differentiationof formswith a greaterdistinction between the series, the television film, the spectacularmovie filmand the fictionalexperiment. The televi- sion filmdepicting everyday tales or moreextended epic development in the mini-series,has becomeas well establishedas the docudrama, thereenacted criminal case, or thedocumentary/fictionalized presenta- tion of scandals such as HeinrichBroloer has done with his films about the Barschelaffaire, the demiseof the Coop Concern,or the muchdebated two-part documentary film Todesspiel, aired in 1997 on the twentiethanniversary of the "DeutscheHerbst," which deals with theabduction of Schleyerand theLufthansa plane "Landshut," as well as the suicideat Stammheim.It has been notedsince the end of the 1980s thatviewers have variedpreferences not onlyin the evaluation
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:02 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions KnutHickethier 69 of individualgenres and themes but also in specificforms. a) The interestin watchingmega-movie productions (such as the Spielberg"Indiana Jones" variety), capable of piquingthe viewers curi- osityhas notwaned because the viewers purposely use televisionto see moviesthey missed at themovie theater for whatever reason. b) Viewershave become increasinglydisinterested in older feature filmsbecause it is quiteevident that they are onlybeing used as "filler material"for the otherwise empty time slots. There is also an increased disinterestin Americanseries which often have alreadybeen shownon publictelevision. In addition,there is a loss of interestin Americansto- ries whichdepict a way of lifesomewhat removed from the storiesin Germanproductions. In thebeginning of the1990s it was statisticallyrecognized that view- ers wereincreasingly interested in storieswhich took place in thecon- temporaryworld. Especially impressive, time and again,has been the numberof viewerswatching long-established German series. The most successfulprograms by farare Derrickand Tatort.The continuedhigh ratingsof Derrick(approx. 30%) - a markedlyconventional and decid- edly slow program- has been impressive,considering the ongoing debateabout picking up the pace of the programand makingit more appealing.The dominanceof Germanprograms has spurreda massive productionboom and it is alreadyapparent that the series which top the programlineup on RTL and SAT1 are preeminentlyof Germanprove- nance. With that,the debate over nationaltelevision quotas in the upcomingEuropean Union has, for the present at least,been eliminated. The subjectmatter of theseseries is no differentfrom those on public televisionbecause the commercialnetworks utilize not onlythe same authors,directors, and actorsbut also the same productioncompanies. The seriesare predominantlyabout country doctors, pastors, teachers, wine growers,lawyers, commissioners, and detectives.These profes- sional groupsare not chosento examinethem from new and different perspectivesbut because they come in contactwith a widerange of peo- ple and situationsand therefore,can be usedto developa multiplicityof stories.RTL, forinstance, offers a numberof television films in itsseries SchicksalhafteBegegnungen [Fateful Encounters], as does SAT1 and also, morerecently, PRO7, thoughit shouldbe notedthat these produc- tionsare no longercalled television plays, but rather television movies, sincethis term seems to be moreattractive and stimulatingto thepublic. They are, nonetheless,nothing more than television films. "Television
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:02 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 70 Televisionin Germany movies"are said to be commensuratewith theater movies, taking on spectacularthemes such as rape,child abuse, abortion,serial killers, plotsrun amok, etc. which are stronglysensationalistic or at leasthave a melodramaticfoundation. In contrastto thepublic television film (say, of the 1970s) thesedo notplace as muchvalue on journalisticresearch and a senseof realityas theydo on a morefluid narrative style, emo- tionaleffects, and a returnto themore entertaining narrative style of the movietheater. In thelong run, this independent production of television filmsenhanced the status of thisprogram niche. Though the tendency is noticeablytowards contemporary, spectacular stories, a mixtureof action and melodrama,there have also beennumerous, high quality television movies.Der Sandmann,a movie about a serial killer(staring Gotz George) by RTL2 receivednothing less thanthe prestigiousAdolf- Grimme-Prizein Gold. Competitionbetween public and commercial televisionfilm production has markedlyincreased. Compared to an aver- age costof about2.5 millionDM fora televisionfilm at theend of the 1980s,it has risento about3.5-4.5 million DM atthe present time. c. Noteworthyalso is the developmentof the daily series,the soap opera,which for a longtime did notseem to be acceptableor produc- ible. AfterRTL withits GuteZeiten, schlechte Zeiten [Good times,bad times]proved that it could hold an audienceover an extendedperiod time,the publictelevision networks ARD and ZDF followedsuit. An ironyof fatewould have it thatthese series are beingdirected prima- rilyby formerDEFA and GDR televisionplay directors,even though GDR televisionfor many years massively opposed the "series"pro- gramformat, denouncing it as a capitalistic,Western form of deca- dence. The centerof interestin the Germandaily soaps are young people. GuteZeiten, schlechte Zeiten became so successfulbecause a groupof 17-25year olds was featuredextensively for the first time. The problemsof thisage group(the threat of unemployment,the search for adventure,drug problems, etc.) were a continuingtheme even if pre- sentedin an exaggeratedmanner. The samething holds true for the suc- cessorsoaps of thepublic networks - Marienhofand VerboteneLiebe [ForbiddenLove]: Thesetoo deal primarilywith young people and their fightfor their own existence,with intrigues, malicious behavior, drug abuse, seductionand rape.No attemptis made to imitatereal lifenor does theviewer really expect it. The ARD seriesLindenstrajfe, running weekly since 1986 and depictingall age groupsmore extensively,
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:02 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions KnutHickethier 71 appearssomewhat old-fashioned and worn.17 This serializationof fictionis movingtoward a long-termchange in thedirection of fictionaltelevision offerings, because it is a formspecif- icallydeveloped for television, with set design,production effects and actinggoing contrary to thoseused in theproduction of illusionin the- atermovies. Often, daily soaps are barelyable to coverup the stereo- typical,pedestrian decor, the bad play, the diminishedillusionary effectscreated by standardizedfilming techniques. However, especially amongyoung viewers, it is just thatwhich seems to producethe sug- gestionof authenticity,of an increasedparticipation in theworld of the series runningparallel to theirown real world, strengtheningthe impressionthat the onlooker is catchinga glimpseof whatis happen- ing or at least,could be happeningelsewhere. This trendis growing. Meanwhile,there are also real families,who presentthemselves to the publicin seriesor otherperiodic productions. For example,the West- deutscheRundfunk produces a series,aired at extendedtime intervals, abouta workingfamily (Die Fussbroichs)which recounts and depicts theirreal life storiesin frontof the camera.That some "acting"is includedis evident,but these stories do reflecta greatdeal of thereal livesof theparticipants who play themselves. Because "amateuractors" are utilized,this form of serialproduction cannot pretend to be an alter- nativeto thedaily soaps, but rather a specialsituation, since the partici- pantscan not be permanentlyin front of the camera. In thedaily soaps, we finda suggestionof a timeequivalency - not yet a directparticipation in live action,but somethinglike a parallel worldwhich develops alongside the normal world of theviewer, a bitof thecosmos into which the viewer can immersehimself from time to time as he desires- a streamof fictionsimilar to thatof thedaily news and politicalinformation which have a similarserial character to the soaps.
9. Thedownside of convergence The developmentstraced here can be observednot only on commer- cial television,but also, to a lesserdegree in thedomain of publictele- vision.One is temptedto speakof a long-termconvergence of thetwo, because the parametersof the both systems,commercial and public 17. Thisyouth-orientation does not imply that young viewers are the majority of the viewingaudience. The segmentof the 2 to 5 milliondaily viewers who are over29 years old is significantlyhigher. Even the segment of those over age 50 is stillgreater than the numberof viewers between ages 14 and29.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:02 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 72 Televisionin Germany networks,are notfundamentally different. Nevertheless, we haveto ask ourselves:what is lostin this development? All areasof educationalprograming have beengreatly reduced in the last ten years:various forms of televisionfor schools, for adult educa- tion,have to a largeextent been eliminated from the programs or have been relegatedto the "ThirdPrograms." Offerings which are meantto appeal to a veryspecific or smallaudience have been greatlyreduced. Broadcastsof theater productions have been almost totally eliminated. In thelast ten years, there has beena shockingreduction of formalexperi- mentsand film-orientedattempts at innovation.The ambitiousKleine Fernsehspiel(ZDF), whichgave young filmmakers their initial chance at filmproduction, has lostmuch of its originalsignificance and can now hardlybe foundon theprogram. A longrange trend towards standardiza- tion of modes of productionand presentation- withthe associated modes of perception- is apparentlyat work.Everything in the pro- gramingwhich is inclinedtowards separation and distinctionof theindi- vidual,towards contemplation of thatwhich is beingpresented, towards intensivepersonal involvement, springing from the orientationof indi- vidual "works"is beingreduced. In the forefrontof creatingthe pro- gramflow is thatwhich accents continuation and non-irritating viewing. For manyyoung people, the conventionsof the Hollywoodfeature filmhave becomethe deeplyingrained standard of perception.Other modesof storytelling encounter strong opposition. Nowadays, the nar- rativeapproach of Germanfilm writers such as of AlexanderKluge are hardlyunderstood. The story-tellingconcepts of theDEFA featurefilms have similarlybeen all butedged out by theHollywood standards. This representsa great aesthetic loss.
10. Thefuture of television on thedigital net On July28, 1996, largelyunnoticed by viewers,digital television made its debutin Germany,when the Kirch group introduced with D1 its firstpacket of 19 newprograms, received on Pay-TVthrough a spe- cial decoder.The firstprogram to be airedthis way on fivedigital chan- nels was theFormula 1 race fromthe track at Hockenheim.Although thatdid not trulyestablish digital television, (since viewerswere not able to getprogram decoders for this initial event), it neverthelessintro- ducedthe next step in the developmentof Germantelevision, because Kirchhas a huge stockof programsat his disposaland mostPay-TV
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:02 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions KnutHickethier 73 rightsfor featurefilms in the Germanlanguage. Even Kirch's long- time,most significantcompetitor, the Bertelsmann/CLT-Groupcould not keep up and aftera long struggle,finally got intothe boat with Kirch.Whether this will bringto fruitionthe predicted all-new dimen- sion of televisionremains to be seen.Until now, it has broughtwith it onlymore of the same old stuff.There are no new programideas, and the viewersare becomingincreasingly disinterested in watchingthis mass of programs.Television, which used to bringsignificance to its programsby merelyairing them, now threatensto becomea grandgrab bag of offerings:And becauseI, as a viewer,cannot see everythingthat I wouldlike to see,I increasinglytend to leaveit alone altogether. The developmentof thissimultaneous run of commercialand public televisionover the past ten years has shownthat, although international involvementsare becomingincreasingly important, and althoughconcen- trationis increasingand commercializationhas broughta fundamental changein television,public reaction is stillquite incalculable. These new conditionsdo bringabout changes in culturalhabits, as do thethemes with whichtelevision programs deal, but in spiteof thata unifiedmedia under Americandomination is notin theoffing. Interest in regionaldistinctive- nessis stirringeverywhere. More important than global media offerings is theinterest in thepeculiarities of thecultural region, still primarily deter- minedby a commonlanguage and "sharedexperiences." Gradually, that whichis notshown on television is againbecoming important. Withthe commercializationof televisionhas come a strongorienta- tiontowards entertainment. Quite a soberingthought; especially when one views it a lot and experiencesit as the endlessrecurrence of the same. Significantly,however, in a fewprogram genres such as in news coverage,commercial stations are makinga clearattempt to imitatethe standardsof thepublic networks. Except for a fewcosmetic variations, the ghostlycreature known as "infotainment,"wherein the news is fic- tionalizedand sensationalized,has notestablished itself in the interim. Viewersare clearlyinterested in programinnovations, but whenthey continueto go againstreigning moral conventions and expectations, theyare not tolerated for long. This developmentcan be seen mostclearly in the area of fictional televisionfilms: For a long timecommercial stations avoided produc- ing theirown televisionfilms because it did not seemto be profitable. However,when they noticed that the German public had no interestin
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:02 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 74 Televisionin Germany thosestations which showed nothing but films produced elsewhere, they relentedand orientedthemselves for the long termtowards the stan- dardsestablished by traditionaltelevision films and plays.This brought abouta convergenceof publicand commercialtelevision offerings and publictelevision networks have been hardpressed to legitimizetheir establishedsubscription fees. They have been obligedto rethinktheir strengths,namely, presenting culture on television. The confusioncreated by so manynew programs has also createdthe impressionthat German television has becomeshallow and superficial. This holdstrue for the overallimpression because the pallet of offer- ings has expandedso enormously.This programexpansion has led especiallyto an increasein entertainment,to banality and trivialization, to moresexuality and brutality.There are still,however, high quality programsin a varietyof formsand genres, but they are more difficult to find.There is also more critiqueof the programs;all has not been acceptedwithout question for a longwhile. For thisreason, pessimistic commentsabout the declineof culturehave to be viewed carefully. Much has changedin recentyears but not only in a negativedirection - in retrospect,the last ten years appear as a turbulent,exciting, very energeticand also, qualitativelyspeaking, very important epoch of the historyof German television.
Translatedby Ronald Nabrotzky
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:02 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FromBuilding Blocks To Radical Construction: WestGerman Media TheorySince 1984
MichaelGeisler
If one werein a particularlyungenerous mood, one mightstart out this articleby registeringa curious silence. That silence lasted roughly from 1970,the last year in whicha Germanthinker made a significantcontri- butionto themedia debate, to theend of the 1980s, when a spateof new theoreticalvoices began to makethemselves heard.' They took their cue
1. HereI am bracketing(at least)three major theoretical constructions with media implications:Oskar Negt and Alexander Kluge, Public Sphere and Experience: Toward an Analysisof the Bourgeoisand ProletarianPublic Sphere,trans. Peter Labanyi, Jamie OwenDaniels, and Assenka Oksilof, fwd. Miriam Hansen (Minnesota: U of MinnesotaP, 1993), originallypublished in 1972; the updatedsystems theory of Niklas Luhmann, Social Systems,trans. John Bednarz Jr. with Dirk Baecker, fwd. Eva M Knodt(Stanford: StanfordUP, 1995) - originallypublished in Germanin 1984; and,of course,Jtirgen Habermas,The Theory of Communicative Action, trans. Thomas McCarthy (Boston: Bea- con, 1984-1987),originally published in Germanin 1981. All threeare ultimatelycon- cernednot primarily with media, but with larger social constructions that implicate media. Kluge's conceptof an oppositionalpublic sphere focused less on televisionthan on film, and,as such,has beenanalyzed in detailby MiriamHansen, "Alexander Kluge, Cinema and the Public Sphere:The ConstructionSite of Counter-History,"Discourse 6 (Fall 1983). Luhmann'ssystems theory presents a terminologicalproblem: to Luhmann,the technologicalmanifestations we commonlyrefer to as "media"are epiphenomenacom- paredto hisanalysis of "media discourse" through such concepts as love,money, religion, etc. Finally,Habermas's Theory of CommunicativeAction while striking a slightlyless pessimisticnote vis-&-vis the mass media than the traditional Frankfurt School had done, neverthelesssees technologicalmass media as at besta derivative,commercialized, cor- ruptedversion of the enlightenment-based ideal of "unrestraineddiscourse" articulated in theprint media. Cf. Norbert Bolz, Am Ende der Gutenberg-Galaxis (Munich: Fink, 1993) 78. Moreimportantly, all three of these works are not primarily concerned with theories of electronicmedia, and a discussionof the (limited) role of media within their overall theo- reticalparameters is notfeasible within this more narrowly defined context. 75
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:43 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 76 WestGerman Media Theory fromthe advent of new,interactive media, especially the spread of per- sonalcomputers and the new communicative practice of the internet. Dur- ing the same period,significant new contributionshave come came fromBritain (John Fiske, Tony Bennet, and theBritish "Cultural Stud- ies" School),Italy (Umberto Eco), France(Jean Baudrillard, Paul Vir- ilio),The Netherlands(len Ang),and, of course,increasingly the United States (Neil Postman,Joshua Meyrowitz, Brian Winston,E. Ann Kaplan,Robert Allen, or JaneFeuer - to namejust a few).In thisarti- cle, I outlineboth the ruptures and continutiesof recentGerman media theorybefore suggesting a possible explanationfor the nearlytwo decadesof comparative silence. For almosthalf a century,the FrankfurtSchool's criticalbroadsides againstthe "cultureindustry" were considered to be one of the domi- nantparadigms of westernmedia theory. The theoreticalgroundwork was laid as earlyas 1944 in Adomo's and Horkheimer'sDialectics of Enlightenment.Although not as popularas MarshallMcLuhan's (Teddy Adomodoing a cameoappearance in a WoodyAllen film?), they were farmore well-grounded in countlessanalyses of everyaspect of mass culture,from television plays to pop music. The unexplainedblip on theFrankfurt School's radardisplay of total mediamanipulation was WalterBenjamin's essay "The Workof Artin the Age of MechanicalReproduction," written with institute funds in Parisin 1935.Benjamin had taken a moredifferentiated position toward themedia, arguing that by undermining the traditional modes of dissem- ination(loss of the"aura," and withit theconcept of authenticity)the modemmass media were also destroyingthe practice of top-down com- munication.(In fact,the restrictiveand oftenpositively idiotic copy- right regulationsin the broadcastingfield could be read as nonsynchronousattempts to preserveconcepts of authorshipand authenticityinthe age ofdigitized information). It was fromBenjamin's notion of a new qualityin publicdiscourse thatHans MagnusEnzensberger's famous 1970 Kursbuch essay took its cue. Withaltogether uncharacteristic modesty, Enzensberger titled his piece "Constituentsof a Theoryof theMedia." Above all, it is a scath- ing indictmentof the Germanleft's nonsynchronoustechnophobia. Tucked away in small printon the second page is Enzensberger's deconstructionof the centralparadox (or perhaps,the hiddenagenda) underlyingwhat Jim Collins refers to as the "GrandHotel" theory of
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:43 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichaelGeisler 77 culture:the contentionthat industrialized mass cultureis a totalitarian systemof interlocking,but hierarchically organized discourse practices, withthe manipulated workers in theirdreary hovels at thebottom, and thebosses in their lofty penthouses at the top.2 The FrankfurtSchool theorists juxtaposed a realmof resistiveautono- mousart which alone can penetratethe manipulative smoke screen [Ver- blendungszusammenhang]of industrial culture (but which,by its elitist character,is inaccessibleto many)and an ideologicallyoverdetermined mass culturewhich encompasses the entire life experience ([Lebenswelt] in Schiitz'sterms3) of its pacifiedsubjects. In doingso, theyactually duplicatedthe dehumanizingstructures they purported to critique.As Enzensbergerput it: "Anyone who thinks of the masses only as theobject of politicscannot mobilize them. He wantsto pushthem around. A par- cel is notmobile; it can onlybe pushedto and fro."4Yet, accordingto Enzensberger,this is preciselythe venue that leftist media theory in Ger- many,following in the footsteps of Adorno and Horkheimer, had taken. Long beforeJim Collins coined his apt metaphor,Enzensberger pro- ceeded to do whatBritish culturalists later turned into mass travel:he "checkedout of the Grand Hotel."5 Accusing the "new" German Left of harboringsome veryold-fashioned bourgeois sentiments towards mass culture,along with a nostalgiclonging for a pre-industrialreading cir- cle (thinkof theconclusion of Bradbury'sFahrenheit 451), he drewon argumentsadapted from systems theory as well as his own familiarity withrecent technological developments to suggestthat industrial cul- turewas by no meansas monolithicas the FrankfurtSchool-inspired iconoclastswould have it:
... [I]tcan be demonstratedthata linkedseries of communications or, to use thetechnical term, switchable network, to thedegree that it exceedsa certaincritical size, can no longerbe centrallycontrolled
2. Collinstook this image from Fritz Lang's Metropolis.See JimCollins, Uncom- monCultures. Popular Culture and Post-Modernism(New Yorkand London:Routledge, 1989) 7ff. 3. AlfredSchtitz and ThomasLuckmann, The Structures of theLife-World, trans. RichardM. Zanerand H. TristramEngelhardt Jr. (Evanston: Northwestern UP, 1973- 1989)Strukturen der Lebenswelt, 2 vols. (Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp, 1979). 4. Hans MagnusEnzensberger, "Baukasten zu einerTheorie der Medien," Kurs- buch20 (March1970): 160. Translatedas "Constituentsof a Theoryof theMedia," The ConsciousnessIndustry. On Literature,Politics and theMedia, ed. MichaelRoloff (New York:Continuum, 1974) 97. 5. Cf.Collins, Uncommon Cultures 16-27.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:43 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 78 WestGerman Media Theory
butonly dealt with statistically. This basic "leakiness" of stochastic systemsadmittedly allows the calculation of probabilities based on samplingand extrapolations; butblanket supervision would demand a monitorthat was biggerthan the system itself. ... A stateof emer- gencyis thereforethe only alternative toleakage in the consciousness industry;but it cannot be maintainedinthe long run. Societies in the lateindustrial age rely on the free exchange of information;. .. Every attemptto suppressthe random factors, each diminution ofthe aver- age flowand each distortion ofthe information structure must, in the longrun, lead to an embolism.6
Fromthe Rodney King videotape to MiguelLittin's clandestine video reportageabout Pinochet's Chile,7 and fromthe role playedby televi- sion imagesin theopening of theBerlin Wall to Yeltsin'sshrewd man- agementof CNN's coverageduring the attemptedcoup of 1990, the media,in particulartelevision, has provenEnzenzberger's point many timesover (albeit in somewhatdifferent political contexts than Enzens- bergerhad envisioned).And yetthis most original German contribution to the media debatesince Benjamin'sart workessay is almostrou- tinelyneglected in recentAmerican surveys on mediatheory,8 while the FrankfurtSchool contributions have become a staple.9 And yet the continuingrelevance of Enzensberger'sessay has been impressivelydocumented in SiegfriedZielinski's Audiovisions: Cinema and Televisionas Interludesof History. Zielinski gives a well-documented interpretivetechnological history of visual media,from the originsof
6. Enzensberger,"Constituents ofa Theory ofthe Media" 98-99. 7. Cf. GabrielGarcia Mairquez, Clandestine in Chile. TheAdventures of Miguel Littin,trans. Asa Zatz (New York:Holt, 1988). 8. Thismay have something to do withthe fact that Enzensberger picked up on one particularelement in Benjamin's media theory that has rarely played a significantrole in media debateson thisside of the Atlantic: the insistence on replacingthe critique of media reception byan emancipatorycritique of mediaproduction, i.e., the need to turn viewers into producers. 9. Cf. forinstance the opening chapters (by Colin MacCabe and Laura Kipnis, respectively)of HighTheory/Low Culture, ed. ColinMacCabe (New York:St. Martin's, 1986); JimCollins, Uncommon Cultures; Logics of Television,ed. PatriciaMellencamp (Bloomington:Indiana UP, 1990);Modernity and Mass Culture,eds. James Naremore and PatrickBrantlinger (Bloomington: Indiana UP, 1991);John Storey, An Introductory Guide to CulturalTheory and PopularCulture (Athens: U of GeorgiaP, 1993). A significant exceptionis MarkPoster, The Second Media Age (Cambridge, U.K.: Polity,1995) 3-16. In an unusuallybalanced - if brief- accountof variousmedia paradigms, Poster not only historicizesthe Frankfurt School critique without underestimating itsrole as a trailblazer formodem media criticism, he also takesdue noticeof bothBenjamin's and Enzens- berger'sradical departures from Frankfurt School dogma.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:43 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichaelGeisler 79 cinemato theadvent of interactivemedia. This kind of "integrativehis- tory"(Zielinski's term) enables the author to provideus withan histori- cized readingof bothcinema and television,the consecutiveprimary media [Leitmedien]of the past fiftyyears. Zielinskigives a sober assessmentof the radicalrestructuring process currently underway in theentertainment industry. Video recorders,photo CDs, laserdiscs, and cable and satellitereception, not to mentionthe Web, have rendered projectionsof a monolithicculture industry technologically obsolete. "Despitestrongly centralized economic and political power at thetop of the hierarchy,the new video marketis decentralizedvis-a-vis its addresseesand can hardlybe controlledat all at the base."l0 Without givingup theirstatus as commodities,the new technologiesactually increaseprivate control over the use of media,making the establish- mentof moreor less organizedcounter-public spheres even more likely thanat thetime when Enzensberger first envisioned this. What seems to be evolving,then, is a textureof overlapping,interacting media dis- courses,with the potentialspectrum extending all the way fromanar- chic patternsof communication(with the attendantthreat of a balkanizedsocietal discourse) to negotiatedrealms of audiovisualenvi- ronmentsin whichpublic and privatespheres of productionand recep- tionare distinguishedby consensusand conventionrather than by a top- downproduction and distribution apparatus. Enzensberger'sessay marksthe juncture between the modernistand postmodernistparadigms in Germantheory. While the Brechtianturn towardsinterventionist aesthetics (complete with a very Brechtian schemajuxtaposing the "repressive" and "emancipatory"uses of media) harkensback to Enzensberger'sleftist origins, the notion that compet- ing discursivepractices may coexist,interact with each other,and be governedby structuralrather than political rules anticipates the post- modernistturn of the cultural studies movement. WhileFrankfurt-School derived indictments of mass mediacontinue to be publishedin Germany,the arenaof significantdebate within media studieshas shiftedover to thepostmodemists and radicalconstructivists. Once theyhad overcometheir initial hesitation toward postmodemist thought,the avantgarde of German media threorists hastened to embrace 10. SiegfriedZielinski, Audiovisionen. Kino undFernsehen als Zwischenspielein derGeschichte (Reinbek: Rowohlt, 1989) 240. Mytranslation. 11. My bestguess would be thatthe 1983 publicationof ManfredFrank, Was ist Neostrukturalismus(Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp 1983) might serve as a timemarker here.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:43 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 80 WestGerman Media Theory the new Frenchcuisine. Similarly, the publicationin 1986 of S. J. Schmidt'sDer Diskursdes radikalenKonstruktivismus12 provided a new paradigmfor a fundamentalcritique of themedia, this time based not on suspicionsof viewer manipulation but on theidea that any kind of content- based critiqueof mediacommunication could yield meaningful results if thereis nothingfor the media to communicate.The fringebenefit of this approachwas thatmedia theorists were able to continuein theircomplete disinterestin the actual textualityof media,only now this disinterest appearedunder the guise of epistemology instead of ideological critique.
Kittler's DiscourseSystems The ground-breakingwork of thisperiod is FriedrichKittler's Gram- mophon-Film-Typewriter,a book which,after its firstpublication in 1986,actually enjoyed a certaincult status on Germanuniversity cam- puses fora while.To theextent that Kittler's Nietzschean montage of aphorismsmay be reducedto a unifiedposition, the book is an interpre- tivesocial historyof thethree primary media [Schliusselmedien] or dis- course systems[Aufschreibesysteme] mentioned in the title. This historicalaccount is filteredthrough a secondary,somewhat less sys- tematichistorical narrative which describes the various ways in which these media were discursivelythematized in literature,or, as Kittler wouldcall it,the "self-inscription" of these media in theprint medium. Implicitin his selectionis theunstated belief that the innovative range of thesethree key media encompasses, or at leastanticipates, the entire mediarevolution from 1880 to thepresent day - andbeyond. At firstblush, this does not seem to be a radicallynew approach. Thereare a numberof editionsand analyses(in Germanas well as in English)which have collected,chronicled, or analyzedliterary reac- tionsto the competingpractices of photographyor film.13For Kittler, however,this historiographical or thematic aspect of his workis onlyof incidentalimportance. He employsthis filter because, as he argues,
Howwe gotto this point, which can no longerbe expressedin writ- ing,is still- but barely- accessibleto the writtenword. [This
12. SiegfriedJ. Schmidt,Der Diskursdes radikalenKonstruktivismus (Frankfurt/ Main: Suhrkamp,1986) [TheDiscourse ofa RadicalConstructivism]. No Englishtransla- tionyet published. 13. Cf. forinstance, Kino-Debatte. Texte zum Verhaltnisvon Literaturund Film 1909-1929,ed. AntonKaes (Ttibingen:Niemeyer, 1978); also Prolog vor dem Film. Nach- denkeniiber ein neues Medium 1909-1914, ed. JtirgSchweinitz (Leipzig: Reclam, 1992).
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:43 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichaelGeisler 81
book]collects, comments on, and links [verschaltet] those passages andtexts in which the novelty of technical media inscribed itself on theold printed page. Many of these pages are old or have even been forgotten;but especially in thefounding era of technical media the terrorthey evoked was so overwhelmingthat literature recorded it moreprecisely than in today's media pluralism where everything may continueto go on as longas itdoesn't block the integrated circuits of SiliconValley on their way to world domination.14
The passagehints at, rather than clarifies, Kittler's project: the proposi- tionis to go back in timebehind our currentepistemological blinders and tryto look throughthe sensitized eyes of contemporarywriters and philosopherslike Nietzscheand Rilke, in the hopes of discovering changeswrought by thenew mediain the deep structureof cognition itself.At thetime when the "three primary media" first began to sepa- ratethe communicative acts of listening,seeing, and writinginto three distinctprocesses of mechanicalreproduction, the imminentstructural changesin ourway of perceiving(or rather,constructing) reality could still be discernedindividually, before an ever-increasingflow of mechanicallyreproduced data jumpedthe barrierbetween the senses, makingit forever impossible to sortthings out. Kittler'saphoristic style, steeped in Nietzscheand GermanRomanti- cism,rather than postmodernist bricolage, yields some fascinating obser- vations,mostly on the interfaceof technology,cognition, and the formationof scientificparadigms. The analogybetween Rilke's idea to use thestylus of a gramophoneto tracethe coronal suture [Kronennaht] of thehuman skull not only betrays the age-old desire to makenature itself sing,15it also representsthe same fascination with the self-inscription of life,the obsession with imposing meaning on seeminglyrandom "noise" thatunderlies the evolutionof Freudianpsychoanalysis (along with the
14. FriedrichKittler, Grammophon-Film-Typewriter (Berlin: Brinkmann und Bose, 1986)4. Translationmine. To thebest of my knowledge Kittler's book has notbeen trans- latedinto English except for a briefarticle, "Grammophone, Film, Typewriter," trans. Dorotheavon Miickewith the assistance of PhilippeL. Similon,October 41 (Summer 1987): 101-18.None of theexcerpts quoted here can be foundin thatshort piece. How- ever,there exists a translationof his related text which deals with some of the same issues withina slightlyearlier time frame and froma morestrictly literary vantage point. See DiscourseNetworks 1800/1900, trans. Michael Metteer with Chris Cullens, fwd. David Wellbery(Stanford: Stanford UP, 1990). Yet manyof thespecific examples quoted in Grammophon-Film-Typewriteralso appear in DiscourseNetworks; for example an abbre- viatedversion of the Rilke passage can be foundon 315ff. 15. Kittler,Grammophon-Film-Typewriter 63ff.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:43 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 82 WestGerman Media Theory obviousreference to the"psychic apparatus," Kittler assembles an impres- sivearray of media metaphors in Freud'scontemporary writings). Similarly,Kittler looks at thetypewriter not as a simplewriting uten- sil, but ratheras a mediumthat affects the very nature of the writing processitself almost as radicallyas theinvention of theprinting press had donefour centuries earlier. Kittler's exploration of theearly history of mechanicalreproduction reminds us that,if we embracethe notion thatmedia affect cognition and the way we constructreality, we needto backtrackquite a waysbeyond the advent of new media,the introduc- tionof computersand eventhe invention of television,radio, film, and photographyto understandthe epistemological changes wrought by any devices thatmechanize oral or writtendiscourse. Drawing on reflec- tionsby Nietzsche and Heidegger, Kittler sees thetypewriter as an early formof digitalization.By deconstructingwhat used to be a holisticpro- cess: thinking,writing, and readingwhat one hasjust written,the type- writeralters our relationto thetexts we produce,although perhaps not quite as radicallyas Kittlerwould have it. Once the act of writing "ceases to becomean act of readingafter only a fractionof a second," he argues,"it also ceasesto be theproduct of a subject."16 Kittlerseems to believethat his threeprimary media mark the begin- ningof a longprocess of exteriorizationof physical experience, culmi- natingin digitalreality and thedisplacement of humansfrom the center of epistemology.It is at this point that his radical constructivist approachlinks up to the culturalpessimism underlying the Frankfurt School and,with a fewnotable exceptions, most German media theory. Time and timeagain, Kittler's hidden agenda shows through: beneath theveneer of cyberpunkphilosophy, his book is a workof mourning,a lamentover the displacementof the printedword as the dominant mediumof contemporarydiscourse. At his aphoristicbest, Kittler extendsJoshua Meyrowitz's structural analysis of the interdependence betweenmedia technologyand social epistemologybackward in time beyondthe adventof television.17At his worst,his gloomyrantings aboutthe disappearance of thehuman subject from modern media dis- courseremind the reader of countlesscultural doomsayers from Ahas- verFritsch to Neil Postman.
16. Kittler,Grammophon-Film- Typewriter 298. Mytranslation. 17. JoshuaMeyrowitz, No Sense of Place. The Impactof ElectronicMedia on Social Behavior(New Yorkand Oxford: Oxford UP, 1984).
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:43 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichaelGeisler 83
In his introductionto a 1988 Suhrkampvolume on the"Materiality of Communication,"K. LudwigPfeiffer outlines what mightbe consid- ered to be the "program"of thisnew school of Germanmedia criti- cism. Accordingto Pfeiffer,the authorsin thisvolume examined "the materialsurfaces" of communication,since the "processesof meaning formationhave degeneratedto the level of stylization."Meaning may be derivedonly from the surfaceof the storagemedia themselves, no longerfrom the content.The contemporarymedia theoristmust trace "thecommunicative but unspoken historical functions of (writing-)uten- sils and codes,of performance,rituals and nonverbal communication, of bodies,technologies, and
18. K. LudwigPfeiffer, "Die MaterialitAtder Kommunikation?"Materialitat der Kommunikation,eds. Hans UlrichtGumbrecht and K. LudwigPfeiffer (Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp1988) 15f.NB: Thereis nowan Englishpublication, Materialities ofCommuni- cation,eds. Hans UlrichGumbrecht and K. LudwigPfeiffer, trans. William Whobrey (Stanford:Stanford UP, 1994). Thisis not,however, simply a translationof theGerman volumequoted above, but rather a mixof severalarticles taken from that and the follow- up volumeParadoxien, Dissonanzen, Zusammenbriiche (see below,note 19). Since the Englishedition contains a numberof substantivechanges, and in particularsince one of thearticles I mentiondoes notappear in theEnglish edition at all, I havedecided to quote fromthe original German volumes. The translations are mine. 19. Ralph Krayand K. LudwigPfeiffer, "Paradoxien, Dissonanzen, Zusammen- briiche:Vom Ende undFortgang der Provokationen," Paradoxien, Dissonanzen, Zusam- menbriiche.Situationen offener Epistemologie, eds. Gumbrechtand Pfeiffer(Frankfurt/ Main: Suhrkamp,1991) 27.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:43 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 84 WestGerman Media Theory
The samekind of guerrillaaesthetics informs parts of FlorianR6tzer's introductionto his 1991 collectionof essayson thework of artin the age of digitalsimulation [Digitaler Schein]. R6tzer suggests that cata- strophicbreakdowns in media-generatedcyberspace have become an anthropologicalnecessity: "It is onlyin theaccident, that is, in thecolli- sion of physicalbodies witheach other,that the differencebetween simulationand realityflashes up."20 Only in extremeexperiences - of pain,of death- is thebody absolutely certain of itsown materiality and thatof theworld surrounding it.Anything less thanthat will not point a way out of Plato's cave. Most of thecontributors to the volume edited by R6tzeroscillate between a fascinationwith the potential fulfillment of theRomantics' dream of an all-encompassingwork of art [Gesamt- kunstwerk]and the fear of losing the materiality of experience:
Therebellion of modem art against its own appearance [ihren Schein], theexodus from the frame, the desire to connect art and life, or at least to absorbfragments ofreality into the realm of art or to reducethe respective"media" to their elementary structures, theconcentration on thematerial, on discovered things and on the body ... is art'sreaction tothe modem process of derealization and dematerialization.21
In whatis arguablythe most radical take on thisprocess, Vil6m Flusser positsthe suspensionof the differentiationbetween "appearance" and "reality"(which includes the realityof humanexistence itself) as the pointof originfor a "newanthropology." This new anthropology eman- cipates"us" (whoever"we" wouldbe in thisnew epistemology) to real- ize finallythe Romantic dream of a "secondcreation," one in whichno aspectof ourenvironment is "given" (datum) but everything is "made" (factum),and "reality"competes with various virtualities only by virtue of its greaterresolution.22 "The Worldas Will and Idea" - I suppose that,for a Germanist,the loss of materialreality would come withthe consolationprize thatGerman philosophy would supplymost of the foundationalnarratives for this projected reality. From the Romantics to Schopenhauerand Nietzsche,the reigning paradigms would once again be steepedin Germanthought. It is interestingto notethat several of
20. FlorianR6tzer, "Mediales und Digitales. Zerstreute Bemerkungen und Hinweise einesirritierten informationsverarbeitenden Systems," Digitaler Schein. Asthetik der elek- tronischenMedien, ed. FlorianR6itzer (Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp 1991) 55. 21. Rtitzer,"Mediales und Digitales" 45. Translationmine. 22. Vil6mFlusser, "Digitaler Schein," Digitaler Schein 147-59.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:43 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichaelGeisler 85 the contributorsto R6tzer'svolume arrive at the same conclusion:that aestheticswill be thenew (old) dominantparadigm of thispost-Carte- sianworld, a conclusionalso reachedat theend ofNorbert Bolz's more systematicallydeveloped theory (see below).23It is hardnot to suspect thatthe practicalagenda underlyingthese radical constructivist read- ings of thenew media-generatedreality is drivenby German(and not onlyGerman) philosophers' desperate desire to regainrelevancy struc- tureslost to the naturalsciences on one side and themore quantifica- tion-orientedsocial scienceparadigms on theother. A media-generated epistemologyin whichaesthetics secures for philosophy once again its place in the sun as the 'universaldiscipline' must be a vistatoo entic- ing forthe disinheritedgrandchildren of the FrankfurtSchool to pass up. The ironyis that,if thiswere truly the direction in whichwe were heading,this, too, would have alreadybeen anticipatedby a German writer,albeit not a philosopher.Aesthetics (or semiotics)is the domi- nantparadigm of HermannHesse's "Castalia,"and themethodological pursuitin whichthe scientificelite of thatprovince is engagedis, of course,The Glass Bead Game. In a distortedway, this bungy-jumping in virtual reality sounds like a distant,nostalgic echo of Enzensberger'sconcept of "leakage." Yet whereEnzensberger saw in thecracks of a seeminglyall-encompassing cultureindustry the chancefor an alternative,counter-hegemonic dis- course(with affinities to Kluge'snotion of the "counter-public sphere"), some of Germany'scontemporary media theoristsmerely express a yearningfor disaster,perhaps in the hopes of meetingdeath with a chunkof authentic reality clenched between their teeth. And Enzensbergerhimself is no help.His mostrecent contribution to the media debate,gleefully cited by culturalcynics, is entitled"The Zero-DegreeMedium, or WhyAll theComplaints About Television Are Pointless."In a satiricaltour-de-force through various recent media theo- ries (includinghis own),Enzensberger comes to theconclusion that we were all barkingup the wrongtree. All the hand-wringingand mind- twistingabout manipulation and control, education, and resistance to var- ious typesof moreor less pernicioustelevision programming misses the pointwhich is (accordingto Enzensberger)that television comes into its own as a mediumonly when it transportsabsolutely nothing. Every
23. Flusser,"Digitaler Schein" 158f;also DietmarKamper, "Der Januskopfder Medien.Asthetisierung der Wirklichkeit, Entrilstung der Sinne," Digitaler Schein 98.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:43 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 86 WestGerman Media Theory attemptto infusetelevision with meaning is basedon a fundamentalmis- understandingabout the nature of themedium: "We turnthe television on in orderto veg out."Television, according to Enzensbergeris used primarilyas "a well-definedmethod of applyingan enjoyablebrain- washing;it is a self-medicatedform of individualhygiene. The zero- degreemedium is theonly universal and widely distributed form of psy- chotherapy....[It] is thetechnological approximation ofnirvana."24 Enzensberger'srien ne va plus readingof televisionculture is givena serioustheoretical spin in one of the mostinteresting post-Frankfurt School contributionsby a Germanmedia critic. Lorenz Engell's 1989 VomWiderspruch zur Langeweile.Logische und temporale Begriindun- gen des Fernsehens[From Resistance to Boredom:The Logical and TemporalRationale of Television]25starts out witha similarobserva- tionas Enzensberger,that is, thatmost users of televisionswitch on the set to veg out,but Engell gives thisvegging out a radicallydifferent interpretation.He sees in the viewer'suse of televisionas a way of "killingtime" a resistiveact againstthe colonization of "free"time by the leisureindustry. "Boredom" in thisreading becomes Langeweile, that is, a period of unstructuredtime, a reservationof (negatively defined)autonomy in an otherwiseuninterrupted flux of meaningfor- mation.Time spentvegging out beforethe television set is timeheld back fromthe dictate of relevance[Sinndiktat] of utilizingevery minute of theday in an effectiveor usefulmanner. Engell is quiteaware of the dialecticalcorollary of inscribinga resistiveaesthetics into television culture:if, indeed, television is one of veryfew islands of unstructured activityin an otherwiseentirely colonized environment (and if major forcesin societynot only do notoppose this, but actually foster the fur- therdistribution of media usage), thenthe freedomfrom meaningful activityprovided by televisionmay actuallybe the negativecomple- mentof thedictate of relevanceitself - at whichpoint we wouldbe withina blockor two of familar manipulation theories. Ultimately,Engell does notprovide an answerto his own objection, withdrawinginstead to a vagueformulation about the disturbances caused
24. Hans MagnusEnzensberger, "Das Nullmediumoder Warum alle Klagenfiber das Fernsehengegenstandslos sind," Mittelmafl und Wahn(Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp 1989) 101f. 25. Lorenz Engell, VomWiderspruch zur Langeweile.Logische und temporale Begrfindungendes Fernsehens(Frankfurt/Main, Bern, and New York:Lang 1989).Here- afterreferred to as Widerspruchinthe notes.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:43 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichaelGeisler 87 by televisionwithin the framework of a colonizedenvironment.26 Thus he displacesthe conflict onto a different,more philosophical plateau: the provocativethesis that viewers do notwatch television despite its some- timesboring subject matter, but precisely because it is boring.This is the pointat whichEngell's painstaking philosophical inquiry intersects with Enzensberger'sglib cynicism. Viewers tune in in order to tune out. Yet Engelltakes Enzensberger's throwaway note at facevalue by ask- ing whyviewers would purposelysubject themselves to an activity manyof themdescribe as boring.To understandthis, one needsto be remindedof the Germanword for boredom, Langeweile - literallya long while,a periodof unstructuredtime. After making a numberof Heideggeriandistinctions between various categoriesof boredom, Engell focusesin on the experienceof boredomas bothtime modula- tionand thesuspension of (or escape from)relevance: "In boredomlies thelogic of contradictions,a logic which knows no preferences,such as theessential and the accidental."27 This is an interestingpoint to make,since it mightlead to a reevalua- tionof television's"flow" (a conceptmuch more accurate today than at thetime when Raymond Williams first articulated it)28 as a formof dis- tractedattention (to harkback to Benjamin'sart work essay), except that distractionand attention enter into an oxymoronicpattern of restful activ- ity.The resistivereading of theflow would then consist of theselected relevanceschosen by each individualviewer. Engell cautionsagainst misunderstandingthis desired boredom as simplythe result of "boring" programs(e.g., "slow" programswhere nothing happens); on the con- trary,flashy, 'thrill-a-minute' entertainment programs, which may very well be perceivedas interestingby theviewer, "do notlead away from boredom. . . but rathermore deeply into it." Television,itself situated at theintersection between different time flows (the externally directed time flowof workand theinternally directed time flow of leisure),explodes the experienceof a "natural"time flow by the way it manipulatesthe
26. "Even wheretelevision does not openlydisturb or revealthe productionof meaningand time,it is a counterbalanceto theproduction of meaningor thedictate of meaning,a meaning-freespace of practical communication. If, as such,it is a defensively usedresidual or an offensivethreat to meaningand time; or if, instead, it enables the func- tioningof meaningproduction as itsnecessary compensation [...], i.e., supportsit, must remainan openquestion at thispoint." (Engell, Widerspruch 309). My translation. 27. Engell,Widerspruch 234f. 28. RaymondWilliams, Television: Technology and CulturalForm (New York: Schocken1975) 78-118.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:43 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 88 WestGerman Media Theory conceptof lineartime not only through standard narrative techniques, but also throughthe insertion of commercialsand trailers,through multiple redundanciesand feedbackloops (reruns and theconscious repetition of basic conflictconstellations in serial forms),and throughthe tension betweenthe "live" ideologyof the mediumand the actual time lag betweenrecording and broadcasting.The pleasureof watchingreruns on televisiondepends in parton the cognitivefact of selectivememory whichmakes us experiencea textwe have seenbefore as new,because the (formerlyirrelevant) structures we have forgottenmay now bond withrecent experiences to formnew patterns of relevancy. Together with thesuspension of our normal experience of temporal flow, this creates an aestheticizedexperience of playingwith contingencies which we enjoy notbecause of whatit is, butbecause we controlit: it is a worldwe cre- ate withour remote control - hencethe pleasure of zapping: "When the boredomof televisionis suspendedin genuinedistraction, the pleasure we experienceis derivednot from the program, the broadcast, or itscon- tent,but rather the activity of television, of reception itself."29 Unfortunately,Engell's interestinginversion of thetraditional valua- tionattached by Germantheorists to escapistactivities (or non-activi- ties, as the case may be) is shroudedin a nearly impenetrable philosophicalcloud thatdraws on everymajor westernphilosopher fromAristotle to Heidegger,to supporthis relativelystraightforward positivisticobservations. More importantly,his defenseof television as a resistiveactivity made up of timemodulation and chaos modula- tion,31like Kittler'snostalgic retro-analysis of autodynamicsystems, programmaticallyavoids any encounterwith the textualityof the mediumit examines.
NorbertBolz in theCyber-Arcades StandingKittler's elegy forthe humansubject on its head,Norbert Bolz has stakedout whathas to be the mostradical position on this issue. At the core of his threevolumes on mediatheory, Theorie der
29. Engell,Widerspruch 255. 30. It is interestingto note that Engell, who relies heavily on Heideggerfor his dis- courseon boredom[Langeweile], takes no less thanfive pages to justifyhis use of Heideggeras a foundationfor his argument,in lightof thelatter's affinities to fascism. (Engell,Widerspruch 11-15). Bolz (see below)seems to be abovesuch concerns. 31. Obviously,remote control zapping is thepropaedeutic for surfing the links of theinternet.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:43 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichaelGeisler 89 neuenMedien (1990), AmEnde der Gutenberg-Galaxis(1993), andDas kontrollierteChaos (1994) lies theprovocative contention that it is not media (new or old) that causes rupturesin human interactionbut humansthemselves, or, moreprecisely, the shortcomings of humanism as an epistemologicalparadigm. In Theoryof theNew Media,Bolz calls on Nietzsche,Benjamin, and McLuhanto supporthis claimthat media theory, where it is practiced as an extensionof traditionalmodes of culturalcritique, simply misses its mark.Media, and especially"new media,"may only be approxi- matedthrough the catalyst of an aestheticsthat is closerto theoriginal Greekterm of aisthesis,than to the connotationsof evaluation,taxon- omy,and critical detachment implicit in modem theories of aesthetics. In Nietzsche'sfascination with the synestheticaffects provided by Wagner'sGesamtkunstwerk, Bolz discoversa theoryof thenew media avantla lettre.According to Nietzsche,Wagner reconciled the physical and intellectualcomponents of sensualexperience which had beensepa- ratedin westernculture under the influenceof Hellenisticphilosophy. Justas Wagner,Nietzsche's Wagner that is, suspendedsuch critical fic- tionsas thedistinctions between work and performance,music and lan- guage,style and contentin the synestheticexperience of the Gesamt- kunstwerk,so thevirtual realities created by thenew mediaplay their songsdirectly on ourbare senses, bypassing that sphere of criticaleval- uation,often referred to in Englishas "appreciation,"on whichany brandof criticaltheory might pin its hopes. In Bolz's words:"Wag- ner's is the firstmusic to get on yournerves. All we need to do is to hook up the barednerve ends withelectronic wires to enterinto the worldof the new media."32 In the worldthat Bolz made,Benjamin takes on the role of Virgil, leadingthe neophytethrough the new mediareality. Where Nietzsche confrontedthe future possibility of cyberspaceone-on-one, in his lonely strugglewith Wagner, madness, and, if we believe Kittler,his type- writer,Benjamin's fldneur loses himselfin the greatParisian arcades the way a hackermight go surfingon the internet.Benjamin's Pas- sagen thus appear as early incarnationsof virtualenvironments. In Bolz's words,they are, "the interfacebetween the GutenbergGalaxy and theworld of thenew media."Benjamin's famous acceptance of the
32. NorbertBolz, Theorieder neuen Medien (Munich: Raben, 1990) 44. All transla- tionsfrom Bolz's textsare mine.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:43 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 90 WestGerman Media Theory
liberatingpotential of thenew mediathus becomes both less visionary and idiosyncraticand moresynchronous and postmodern.It is simplya wayof coming to termswith the new media-generated reality:
Thereno longerexists a differencebetween the mechanical and the organicworld; technology becomes as naturalas humanlimbs; without contradiction,humans merge with their instruments; dead matter is seamlesslyimplanted into living organisms. People with physical hand- icaps,who depend on prosthesesand no longersee themas foreign objectspoint the way to the video future. The extensions ofman we call mediaare no longer out there. Therefore, doing justice to the technolog- icalreality of the new media implies two things: first, the instruments mustbe subjectedto collectiveinternalization [Innervation]; secondly, thecollective body must be organized within the technological sphere.
Andin a considerableleap of faith(or, perhaps more adequately, a leap of metaphor),Bolz fusesVirilio and Benjaminwhen he arguesthat coming to termswith the epistemological revolution caused by thenew mediais notmerely an emancipatoryact but an anthropologicalnecessity. Bolz per- ceivesthe synesthetic, Dionysian potential of thenew mediaas a primal humandesire, a needfor collective rapture which, if not expressed in and throughthe (new) media,will jump the tracks and explodein war:"War as distortedcommunication with the cosmos - withthis thesis Benjamin walksall overany kind of pacifist reasoning. For the only thing that could preventan orgyof destructionwould be a successfulcosmic communica- tionthrough the technological organization ofthe human body."34 Even if one remainsskeptical about Bolz's (or Benjamin's)war games, his McLuhanesquereading of Benjamin's aesthetictheory revealslayers of mediasavvy that far transcend the traditional interpreta- tionof Benjamin'sart work essay as merelya departurefrom Frankfurt School doctrine.Bolz's readingsuggests that the differencebetween Benjaminand, for instance, Adorno, goes fardeeper. Benjamin's famous dictumabout the loss of theaura thus marks the difference between the workof mourning[Trauerarbeit] and melancholy.Benjamin's mourn- ingfor the loss of theaura is partof theprocess which eventually leads himto embracethe aesthetic challenges provided by new technologies; whereasAdorno, the "leftist melancholic," as Bolz calls him(drawing on Benjamin'sfamous indictment of "New Objectivity")is leftbehind,
33. Bolz, Theorieder neuen Medien 98. 34. Bolz, Theorieder neuen Medien 100.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:43 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichaelGeisler 91 hopelesslyshackled to theremains of his modernistideals: "Leftist mel- ancholyrevels in paradoxessuch as the idea that,in thesetimes, only anachronismcould be trulysynchronous."35 In his subsequentbooks, Am Ende der Gutenberg Galaxis and Das kon- trollierteChaos, Bolz focusesmore on a radicallyliteral reading of McLuhan'stheories,36 ("one needsto discernthe rhetoric of thepresent fromits technologies, not from its discourses")37 recycled through Niklas Luhmann'ssystems theory and the conceptsof radicalconstructivism. Luhmannreplaces the sender-message-receiver models employed in tradi- tionalmetaphors of face-to-face interaction with a three-selectionmodel based on information,communication and understanding.Although each one of thesethree selections is completelycontingent in itself,operative informationprocessing does occurbecause of multiplefeedback loops (the societal"context" of a message)and the interdependence[Verket- tung]of any communicationin any given 'medium'(in Luhmann's terms)with other 'media.' The keyterm is Verkettung[linkage] since the successof communication(in thesense that it leadsto practicalaction in empiricalreality) depends on interpenetration(understood as "environ- mental"stimuli that provoke different autopoetic systems into generat- ing interpretivepatterns) and multiplerecursivity - a feedbackloop throughwhich a givensituational theory is continuallyrun for purposes oftesting and adaptation. Communication,then, seen as an operativeconcept rather than an epistemologicalone, dependson thesimultaneous processing of stimuli froma vast(potentially infinite) number of heterogeneoussources. This processitself hinges on a largenumber of individualsperforming the same operationsin analogousways, operations which are organizedby "media."By "media"Luhmann means not the electronicdevices usu- ally referredto by thatname, but rathersuch social constructionsas "power,""money," "love," "art," or "religion."This is wherethe affini- ties to McLuhan'sconcept of the "end of the Gutenberggalaxy," i.e., theend of theprint paradigm come into play. The printedword, through its mostdistinctive storage medium, the book, has createda paradigm
35. Bolz, Theorieder neuen Medien 104. 36. Cf. HerbertMarshall McLuhan, The GutenbergGalaxy. The Making of Typo- graphicMan (Toronto:U ofToronto P, 1962)and UnderstandingMedia. TheExtensions ofMan (New York:McGraw-Hill, 1964). 37. Bolz,Am Ende der Gutenberg-Galaxis. Die neuenKommunikationsverhiltnisse (Munich:Fink 1993) 7.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:43 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 92 WestGerman Media Theory of sequential,hierarchical information processing that has dominated westernepistemology ever since Gutenberg invented the printing press. It has enabledthe rise of westernculture, but it has becomeincreas- inglyrestrictive. Hidden underneath this paradigm of sequentialinfor- mation processing,however, there has always been a desire for plenitude,for the more contingent,recursive, simultaneous mode of communicationprovided by sensoryperception before its complexity is reducedand organized by language.38 Citingan arrayof 'hypermediatexts avant la lettre,'from the Bible to Nietzsche,Joyce, and Benjamin,as frustratedattempts at simulatingpar- allel informationprocessing in a strictlyserial medium, Bolz buildshis case thatthe simultaneous, non-hierarchical, parallel processing of enor- mousamounts of datamade possible by hypermedia is much more analo- gousto theway the human senses 'originally' perceive their environment thanthe sequential epistemology superimposed on themby theartificial deviceof theprinted book. "The humaneye can processtwo gigabytes persecond," he writesin Das kontrollierteChaos, suggesting that forcing this supercomputerto work with the minimalinput supplied by a printedtext is a wasteof RAM capacity.In theage of hypermedia,the bookhas become"the bottleneck of human communication."39 This is notto say thatthe book has notplayed a crucialrole in the evolutionof informationprocessing: after all, "Gutenberg'scultural technique"was responsiblefor bringing order and clarityinto a world thatwas underthe fascinatedspell of magic imagery.40Nor is Bolz iconoclastenough to suggestthat the printedbook has becomecom- pletelyobsolete. It will survive,he predicts,in the formof portable hardware(no one wantsto reada romanceon thebeach from a screen, no matterhow small and handy),as a mythicalrepository of human
38. Whathappens between the 'raw' receptionof environmentalstimuli and the structuredprocessing of these stimuli as perceptionis thetouchstone of radical constructiv- ism- and,since it is basedon that,of Luhmann's systems theory. The autopoiesismodel ofradical constructivism posits that there is no meaningfulway of speaking of sensory per- ceptionas independentof thestructuring work of consciousness.Since the human brain, physiologicallyspeaking, is a "closedsystem," it receivesenvironmental input only as undifferentiateddisturbances, towhich it then gives meaning by way of its internal process- ingstructures; only then can we speakof perception.Without this autopoetic structuring, environmentaldata would remain meaningless - noise.In doingso, humanconsciousness tradesquantity for meaning. This process occurs again on thelevel of language. 39. Heinzvon Foerster, Sicht und Einsicht (Braunschweig, 1965) 62; citedin Bolz, Gutenberg-Galaxis205. 40. Bolz,Das kontrollierteChaos 117.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:43 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichaelGeisler 93 identityformation (reading a book suggestsorder, linearity, a begin- ning and an end, organizationin an increasinglyrandomized world) and, mostimportantly, it will continueto play a vitalrole as a cogni- tive filterfor the deluge of data withwhich hypermedia threatens to overloadour processing capacity.41 But it will no longerbe theLeitme- dium,i.e., it will cease to determineour epistemology. Hypermediaenable humans to processinformation in a way thatfeels more'natural,' by associations,links, nonlinear, contingent access. Yet evenas we indulgein the delight of exploringthe ever more remote rami- ficationsof ournatural curiosity, we recoilin an archetypalfear that was suppressedfrom our collective memory by the hierarchical order and clar- ityof theprinted book: thefear of themagic image and thechaos that hidesbehind its inscrutableface. This, in turn,conjures up fearsof our own obsolescence,exacerbated by the arrivalof electronicdevices that performsequential information processing far more efficiently than we could everhope to. Hence our fearof robotics,computers and artificial intelligencerecounted in innumerablenarratives from science fiction to GiinterAnders's classic lamenton The Obsolescenceof Man.42Bolz's refusalto join in withthis chorus is perhapshis most significant contribu- tionto mediatheory (especially in thecontext of German philosophy!). In citingso manyinstances of simulatingnonsequential information process- ingwithin a culturedriven by a sequentialepistemology,43 Bolz makesa crediblecase thatintellectuals' fears of the new technologies are notonly unfounded,but actuallycontradicted by intellectualhistory itself. Scan- ning,selective information processing, nonlinear thinking, linkage, simul- taneityand all theother new "culturaltechniques" required by thenew mediaare neithernew norinimical to humanintelligence. They merely appear foreignto an epistemologybased on hierarchicallearning - whichis whychildren, who havenot yet acquired the cultural technique of thebook, have suchan easytime with computers. To anyonefamiliar withthe FrankfurtSchool's way of thinking(all the way up to and includingHabermas's Theory of CommunicativeAction and Kittler's
41. Bolz, Das kontrollierteChaos 119-21. 42. GiintherAnders, Die Antiquiertheitdes Menschen,2 vols. (Munich:Beck, 1988) 7thed. 43. In additionto the works mentioned above, he also cites,among other things, the encyclopedists,the romantic fragment, Wagner's notion of the Gesamtkunstwerk, thepan- orama,Benjamin's arcades, the footnote, and the Zettelkasten. The mostovert attempt at implementingthe aesthetic of the notecard is, of course, Arno Schmidt's Zettels Traum.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:43 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 94 WestGerman Media Theory recherchedu livresperdu), Bolz's mediatheory would appear to marka Nietzscheanturn in Germanintellectuals' - and perhapsnot only Ger- manintellectuals' - discourseabout media. Yet even as Bolz breaksthe mostpersistent taboo of post-WWII Germanmedia discourse - thatmass media cannot be examinedin any othercontext than that of ideologicalcritique - he harkensback to a traditionwith very problematic affinities. For Bolz undergirdshis radi- cal departurefrom standard German media discourse with a rhetoricof dehumanizationthat conjuresup bad memories.His 'Good-byeto Gutenberg'is also a 'Farewell to Humanism.'Holding humanism responsiblefor a seriesof apocalypticvisions that prognosticate "the end of humanity,"Bolz arguesthat humanism itself, as an anthropocen- tricepistemology, gets in theway of evaluatingthe impact of thenew technologieswith an unjaundicedeye:
Theliterary culture of Humanism has shackledus withlofty concepts of truthand historyThis has blockedus from casting a soberglance at thetechnical reality of the new media. And yet things are so simple. Thegreat telematic network that spans the world emerged from the tinyprimary cell of a yes/noswitch. The Library and the Post Office, theArchivist and the Courier Service, Broadcasting and Telecommu- nicationall functionaccording to thesimple principle of the synapse orthe relays. Truth and History themselves are only sign posts, relays andarchives. Because we do notwish to see that, the new media sur- priseus as unwantedinventions. Thus we have wonderful new techno- logicalopportunities and are lookingdesperately for a meaningful wayof applying them.44
Bolz is shiftinginto high gear hereto revealhis grandvision - part McLuhan,part cyberpunk: a synergyof humansand machine,a new synthesisof humancreativity (defined as emergentresults of nonlinear linkages),and thespeed and storagecapacity of thecomputer enhanced bythe interconnection ofhypermedia. If Bolz's celebrationsof cyberpunkecstasy serve as an antidoteto the technophobiaso deeplyingrained in mostGerman intellectuals, they might well marka turning-pointin German media discourse; and his attackon Humanismas an obsoleteparadigm is welltaken as a reminderof the his- toricityof eventhe most basic metaphorsunderlying western epistemol- ogy.And yet, even if we needto part with the comforting humanist fiction
44. Bolz,Das kontrollierteChaos 194.(Italics in the original - M.G.)
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:43 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichaelGeisler 95 thatthe universe centers on thein-dividual, the single human being under- stoodas thesource and finaldestination of all humanattempts at under- standingthe universethat surroundsthem, does it make sense for humansas enunciatingsubjects of scientificmodels to positcommunica- tionsystems in which they, as humans,would no longerparticipate?45 But thereis another,more sinister echo hauntingBolz's anti-human- ism; and beforeI explorethis, I mustadd thatBolz himselfseems to be awareof this (mis)reading. In Das kontrollierteChaos he writes
To avoida misunderstandingcommon at this point let me emphasize thatsuch a polemicagainst the Humanist concept of man ["den Men- schen"des Humanismus]is obviously not aimed at humanbeings themselves.Rather, I wish to sayby this that human beings can live freelyonly once they have emergedfrom theshadow of Humanism.46
Yet it is at theleast a verypeculiar sense of intertextualityif Bolz sup- portshis brandof philanthropicanti-Humanism with quotations from two characterwitnesses whose affinities to one particularbrand of anti- humananti-humanism are commonknowledge: Martin Heidegger and Carl Schmitt.I am notsaying that, in certaincontexts, a criticalappro- priationof some of Heidegger'sand Schmitt'sconcepts could not be productive,but to citethese two as expertwitnesses against a possible misinterpretationof one's anti-humaniststance strikesme as daring recklessnessvis-A-vis the montage effects created by textual proximity. To avoid beingmisunderstood myself here: I am not suggestingor insinuatingthat Bolz sharesthe politicalaffinities of Carl Schmitt. AlbertSpeer,47 or evenMartin Heidegger. On thecontrary, in myopin- ion Bolz's threevolumes represent the most well-argued, most innova- tive, and most liberatingchallenge to the taboos concerningthe discourseon media establishedby FrankfurtSchool-derived Ideolo- giekritik.We have waitedfor a longtime for a voice strongenough to
45. Undercertain conditions, one mightactually answer 'yes' to thatquestion - if we conceiveof artificialintelligence first and foremostas objectificationsof thehuman mind,in whichcase computers,hypermedia, AI, roboticsand neural networks are simply stepson an evolutionaryladder of which the human body is merelyanother, earlier rung; butthat takes us intothe realm of sciencefiction, and themost prominent proponent of thisview was a sciencefiction author (albeit also a scientist):Isaac Asimov. 46. Bolz, Das kontrollierteChaos 185. 47. It does nothelp that Bolz laterpairs up AlbertSpeer as "thefather of the archi- tectureof light"with Le Corbusier,as iffascism's major role in historyhad beento con- tributeits share to the great project of modernity. See Bolz, Das kontrollierteChaos 221.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:43 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 96 WestGerman Media Theory questionthat particular paradigm. I merelywish to registera certaindis- comfortat the perceivedneed to throwout humanismaltogether,48 whileat the same timerelegating "truth" and "history"not just to the statusof negotiable,historicized texts (which is a debatableposition),
48. In hiscollection of essaysfocusing on a comparativeanalysis of what he terms the"First" and the "Second Media Age," Mark Poster presents an historicizedreading of thedifferences between the epistemologies engendered by technologies based on a central apparatusof distributionand theauthorial position privileged by printculture versus the essentiallytwo-way, decentralized, shifting enunciation of interactivemedia starting with thetelephone (see footnote9). Posteraligns the former with modernism and itsdominant communicationtheories which purported to liberatethe autonomoussubject (which is positedas givena priori)from ideological constraints imposed upon her or himby the "consciousnessindustry" (Adomo/Horkheimer to Juirgen Habermas) and the latterwith thepostmodernist condition in which"the constitution of thesubject through language, morespecifically through the language patterns of the mode of information"becomes the centralfocus of interest.See Poster,The Second Media Age 73. The postmodernistnew mediaput an end to themodernist quest for the autonomous individual or the ideal of "unrestraineddiscourse" because they pull the epistemological rug out from under the pre- misesunderlying the project of modernism by questioning the a priorinature of the auton- omoussubject itself in revealing it as an historicalconstruction. By contrast,the Society of the Internetrequires a discourseof shiftingidentities, reciprocal communication, and entirelynew modes of producing,distributing, and evaluatinginformation (just think of thegatekeeping problem in an age of unrestrictedelectronic distribution). The subjects participatingin thisdiscourse become themselves unstable signifiers of individualiden- tity,repositioning themselves constantly to adaptto differentmodes of interaction.As Posterputs it, "Electronically mediated communication opens the prospect of understand- ingthe subject as constitutedinhistorically concrete configurations ofdiscourse and prac- tice.It clearsthe way to seeingthe self as multiple,changeable, fragmented, in short as makinga projectof its own constitution" (Poster, The Second Media Age 77). Interestingly enough,there are a numberof analogies between Poster's reading of the current changes inthe media landscape, and those of Bolz. In differentways, both posit that the epistemol- ogy of modernismis becomingobsolete, both portray the enlightenment/modemist ideal of the autonomousindividual as an ideologicalconstruct, both call intoquestion the Humanistparadigm, Poster implicitly, and Bolz explicitly.Yet despitethe fact that both Bolz and Postersee Benjamin'sdeparture from traditional Frankfurt School dogma as a pivotalmoment in modemcommunication theory, Bolz thenfeels the need to fallback on Nietzsche,Heidegger, and Carl Schmittto shoreup hisanti-humanism, whereas Poster's approachconjures up echoesof KarlMannheim's theory of knowledge.Bolz castsabout fora methodologicalplank amid the shifting sands of postmodernist cyberpunk and finds it in aestheticsas thenew (old) Leitwissenschaft.Poster, on theother hand, suggests that (to avoidthe charge of "theorizingonly an endlessplay of discourse analysis") the inter- playbetween the materiality of themode of informationitself and thesocial practiceit engendersin everydaylife provides both a theoreticaland a historicalgrounding to ana- lyzethe changes in social and communicativeinteraction. That position, it seemsto me, willultimately be moreproductive because it harks back to Benjamin's sensitivity towards thepractice of communicationinstead of tryingto finda confirmationof unmediated humanexperience in waror catastrophe,positing the disappearance of the body, or look- ingto re-install the hegemony of aesthetics as thedominant mode of inquiry.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:43 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichaelGeisler 97 but to "sign posts" and "relays"- and thento call on Schmittand Heideggerto supportone's humane agenda (to avoidthe word "human- ist" here). It is Bolz's sense of intertextualitythat I would call into question,rather than his politics.49
Winkler'sBafflements It is a supremeirony that the most original, historicized, and dispas- sionateanalysis of thenew media technologies to emergefrom the Ger- man discourseshould once again come out of Frankfurt- albeitthis timenot fromsociology but fromthe relatively new filmdepartment. Modestlysubtitled Towards a Media Theoryof Computers,Hartmut Winkler's1997 bookDocuverse50 starts by taking several epistemologi- cal stepsbehind premises normally accepted as givenby the German mediadebate. Winkler couches his sweepingcritique of Bolz's and,to a lesserextent, Kittler's positions by professingto be "baffled"by what he sees as a centralparadox of the debate on thenew media: first, that
a publicwhich, for the past 100 years, seemed to be hookedon picto- rialmedia, on visuality, sensory experience and immediate 'uses and gratifications,'is now about to dropthe entire paradigm to turnto a mediumwhich - eventhough the current multi-media-hype maystra- tegicallycover up this fact - is absolutelynot sensuous and absolutely notvisual and offers very little immediate satisfaction.51
49. In thesame vein as Bolz, PeterWeibel conjures up a worldof artificial environ- mentsin whichthe physical materiality of thehuman body is theticket for admission into thenew cyberspace.The new mediaenable humanity to conquertime and space,to be anywhere,at anytime, simultaneous, ubiquitous. The Faustianpact, however, stipulates thatonly the senses may travel, the body must stay behind. The telephonethus becomes a disembodiedvoice, the video camera a disembodiedeye; and in theworld of virtual real- ity,a disembodiedbody can travelfreely, anywhere in theworld. Yet, according to Wei- bel,this pact is notso muchdreaded as desired:"... telematiccivilization is humanity's greatesteffort so farat defeating death through the partial suspension of distance and dura- tion.. . The 'telos' of telecivilizationis the suspension of death'sdomain, as we experi- ence itthrough the limitations of ourbodies, of nature,of time, of space.The actualgoal of thedisappearance of distanceis thedisappearance of thebody. The goal of thedisap- pearanceof thebody is actuallythe disappearance of death."Here, as in Bolz's theories, thedisappearance of thehuman subject is theprecondition for the new mediapractice. PeterWeibel, "Vom Verschwinden der Ferne," Vom Verschwinden der Ferne. Telekommu- nikationund Kunst, eds. PeterWeibel and Edith Decker (Cologne: DuMont, 1990) 37. 50. HartmutWinkler, Docuverse. Zur Medientheorieder Computer(Regensburg: Boer, 1997). Winkleradopts the term "Docuverse" from Theodor H. Nelson,Literary Machines(Sausalito: Mindful, 1987) 4. Citedin Winkler,Docuverse 10. 51. Winkler,Docuverse 10.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:43 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 98 WestGerman Media Theory
His secondbafflement is thatthis paradox had not been noticedby anyof theother contributors to the media debate. Neither Bolz's McLu- hanesqueeuphoria at thetwilight of the "GutenbergGalaxy" nor Kit- tler'smourning over the suspension of printculture in themateriality of autopoeticsystems account for the fact that the computer, at leastin the manifestationswe are dealingwith for the time being, is a sequential medium(just like language)and, whatis more,a language-basedand language-drivenmedium, whether that language is code or verballan- guage.The gap betweenthe enormous social and politicalexpectations projectedonto the web and its actualuse value as a new communica- tion mediumprovides Winkler with his firsthypothesis, i.e., thatthe internetis a "wish machine."52Indeed, once thatterm is introduced, romanticprojections from various euphoric treatises on the internet abound:the boundless plenitute of unlimitedmemory storage, instanta- neousaccess, uncensored and nonhierarchicalcommunication, and uni- versal linkagestands revealed as the blue flowerof the information society;Flusser's and Bolz's cyberpunkphantasies of sheddingthe limi- tationsof the humanbody in the postmaterial,cosmic synesthesia of virtualreality appear as nothingmore than the reversed side of a thread- bare old cloak: the familarGerman fascination with the Gesamt- kunstwerk.And at this pointWinkler takes a Blochianstep beyond simplydeconstructing these wishful phantasies as ideologicaldelusions to ask whatthe underlying lack is. Winklerthen unfolds his sweepingmaster narrative of a cyclicalmedia history,in whichall technicalmedia, starting with photography and film, figureas successivemechanical implantations designed to redressalways the same dissatisfaction:the balkanizationof the experientialreality in the wake of the ever-increasingdivision of labor,or, in less marxist terms,societal differentiation. Anticipating accusations that he is simply reintroducingreductive models, Winkler hastens to add thathis concern is not the alienationbetween workers and theirproduct, but the strain exertedon thecollective memory by the centrifugal pull of divergentlife worlds.Drawing on linguistics,anthropology, and cognitivescience, Winkler develops a dichotomousmodel of language in which "language_l" stands for articulatedtexts, materializedin linear sequences,and "language_2"represents the "systemic part" of language, a non-linear,virtual structure, an n-dimensionalnetwork extant only as a
52. Winkler,Docuverse 11.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:43 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichaelGeisler 99 repositoryin the collectivememories of all languageusers.53 In tradi- tional(small) social groups,reality and identityappear as given,shored up by multipleredudancies created by geographicproximity, lack of dif- ferentiation,and rigorouslycentralized religious practices and concomi- tanthierarchic discourses. Differentiation shatters every aspect of this practice:linguistically, through increasingly specialized sub-systems, epistemologically,through the centrifugalforces of secularizationand disparateexperiential spheres, mentally through the perceivedloss of identityand reality.It is thissense of a growingdistance to theunifying sphereof thecollective repository Winkler calls "language2" thatis at thebottom of the"Sprachkrise" of thelate nineteenth century. With the quantumleaps in differentiationbrought about by therapid industrializa- tionof themid-nineteenth century, writers like Hugo von Hofmannsthal senseda growingalienation which they attributed to "conventional"lan- guage,but which should, Winkler argues, more properly be locatedat the collectivememory structure atthe center, a centerwhich no longerholds. In responseto thissense of loss,media (photography, film, television) wereentrusted with the task of reunifyingthe center with the fringes.54 (Winkleris smartenough to sidestepthe determinist temptation of sug- gestingthat the media were invented for that purpose!) In theseemingly unambiguousconcreteness of the photographicimage (in realitythe resultof preciselythe opposite,that is, the multivalenceof the iconic sign),writers and artistsbelieved to have foundthe rosettastone of a universalsignifying practice. This is thereason, Winkler argues, why the visualmedia tend to stickto basic humanexperience such as love and hate,success and failure,beauty or death:not because verbal language is 'inherentlymore complex,'but because thesebasic experienceshark back to the multipleredundancies of the small-groupexperience, we meetin theseplaces to pretendonce morethat we shareone worldin common.55But thisis notjust an individualpalliative. The conceptof thebourgeois public sphere is unthinkablewithout the centripetal power ofmedia to offsetthe centrifugal force of internal differentiation. However,as each new 'self-inscriptionof material reality' eventually
53. Winkler,Docuverse 28ff. 54. AlthoughWinkler does notseem to be awareof this, the centripetal function of all mediaas outlinedin thissection (204ff.) corroborates what John Fiske and John Hart- ley had identifiedas the"clawing back" functionof (morespecifically) television. See Fiskeand Hartley, Reading Television (London: Methuen, 1978) 87ff. 55. Winkler,Docuverse 208.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:43 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 100 WestGerman Media Theory turnsout to be subjectto thesame kind of 'conventionalization'as the originallanguage, or, in otherwords, as each newmedium develops its own signifyingpractice, once it is usedin communicativediscourse, pic- turescease to be "wortha thousandwords" but become 'stale,' 'worn,' 'meaningless'-just likethe language they were supposed to replace. This is thehistorical moment at whichthe computer enters the stage, and,with it, the internet. The promise(not, as Winklershows later, the reality)of the computeris nothingless than the reconciliationof "language_1"with "language_2," of bridgingthe painfulgap between individualmemory and collective memory, discrete and communal signi- fyingpractices. The utopianvision is theexternalization of language,a projectwith closer affinities to theFrench encyclopedists or thelibrary of Alexandriathan to Wagner'sGesamtkunstwerk. The radicalre-read- ingcontained in thisconcept is thatthe internet, as a medium,is notso mucha beyond,a transgression,but a kindof Hegelianloop, a returnto the 'GutenbergGalaxy' - albeiton a differentepistemological dimen- sion. The (implicit)hope is thatcollective memory, through the unlim- itedaccumulated storage capacity of the World Wide Web can be stored externally,instead of being dispersedthroughout humanity and thus largelyinaccessible to a givenindividual or even groupof individuals. Once all of "language2" becomesexternalized, differentiation loses its "horror"(at leaston theexperiential level), because the "docuverse" will providea universallyaccessible collective memory that never "forgets," suppresses,or displaces anything stored in itsmemory banks. It is importantto keep in mindthat Winkler describes not the reality of the internet,as he sees it, but a phantasyproduced by a desireor "lack" [Wunschkonstellation].Not only does he remindthe reader repeatedlyof this,he is also quickto pointout the delusional character of thisprojection: the WorldWide Web does indeed"forget" (data is deleted,new applicationseventually have no downwardcompatibility beyonda few generations)and "suppress"(he proposesa research projecton the selectioncriteria of searchengines), and thepractice of documenting"hits" on certainlinks even suggests a processakin to the processof "condensation"by which language piles significations one on topof the other to createrelatively stable signifying conventions. The fascinatingparadox behind these latter observations is that, even as Winklerpresents them in an attemptto deconstructthe myth of theinter- net as Gesamtkunstwerkor as the finaldeath knell for the Gutenberg
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:43 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichaelGeisler 101
Galaxy,they nevertheless suggest that the concept of theinternet as an exteriorizedcollective memory may be utopianonly to theextent that it is notthe ultimate medium or theend of anything(just as 1990 was not the "End of History"nor 1968 the "End of Literature").However, at leastas a usefulmetaphor that allows us to perceiveits uses and poten- tial abusesmore clearly, the concept appears far more convincing than eitherKittler's ruminations about world domination by the "integrated circuitsof SiliconValley" or Bolz's cynicalevocation of a dehuman- ized virtualuniverse. Despite its sweepingvision, Winkler's argument is also farmore down to earththan either of its predecessors'. Paradoxically,the strongestlink in Winkler'sargumentative chain mayalso be itsweakest. The observationthat informs his firstand most basic bafflement,that is thatthe medium to competewith (and perhaps replace)television culture is au fondsequential, non-sensuous, the apo- theosisof the GutenbergGalaxy, rather than its liquidatordrives the meta-reflectionthat resultsin Winkler'selegant reinterpretation of media historyand the place of the computerin it.56However, Win- kler'sdefinition of languageappears to oscillatebetween a narrowcom- monplacedefinition of thelinguistic system that is articulatedin writing and in variousalphabets and a farmore overarching concept of a soci- etal code thatwould includethe formeras a subsystem.Yet in an inductiveargument harking back to Derridaand Lacan, Winklerfeels compelledto nail down the discrete,isolationist nature of computer- based communicationonce and forall. Fromhere, it is onlyone step furtherto proclaimthe 'masculine' inscription of thecomputer by draw- ing an Klaus Theweleit'sobservations regarding male fearsof trans- gression,context, flow.57 In constructinga gendered, medium-specific theoryof the computerWinkler not only risks simply being overtaken by empiricalreality, he also comesclose to thetechnological determin- ism he so eloquentlycritiques in thepositions of Bolz and Kittler(and whichhe himselfotherwise avoids).
56. One mayquibble with the epic grandeurof Winkler's'linguistic turn' or even thefact that this is yetanother German monocausal explanation. He neverconsiders alter- natives,even though some of his ownobservations suggest that, for instance, quasi-reli- gious motivationsmay play a role in theinternet craze, or when,in dismissingBolz's synestheticeuphoria by repeatedly pointing to the non-senuous experience of engaging the web,he overlookssimple experiential facts such as thehaptic qualities of movingand "clicking"the mouse or the sense of empowerment derived from actively manipulating a mediuminstead of being simply a passive"addressee." 57. Winkler,Docuverse 321f.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:43 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 102 WestGerman Media Theory
The keyto thispuzzling phenomenon lies in theHeideggerian essen- tialismthat leads Winklerto conflatethe computer and the internet. Just as language,as Winklerpoints out himself, is by no meansas 'digital,' 'linear,'and 'sequential,'as Bolz et al. suggest,so the WorldWide Web, I would suggest,is qualitativelymore than merely another com- putingapplication. If we stopto considerwhat people actually do with thetwo media, then the computer may (or maynot) be digital,discrete, isolationist- theunderlying technology certainly is. Butthe internet, if measuredin termsof thesocial practicesit has createdso far,is cer- tainlylinked, contiguous, and intertextual.58 WhileWinkler may well be correctin his skepticismtowards the uto- pian dreamsprojected onto the Web, thisdoes not meanthat what is emergingin themillions of linksand cross-connectionsmade possible by thenet is nota new kindof medium,a mediumthat shares certain characteristicswith the material carrier that drives and storesit, but that transcendsthis base just as filmtranscends its materialbase, photogra- phy. It is at this point,I believe,that Winkler is hamstrungby his expertiseas a programmerthat otherwise serves him so well. His off- hand,and somewhatarrogant, dismissal of all theactivities engaged in by usersof applications(as opposedto theinitiates who writethe code) as "paint-by-numbersstuff'59 ironically underestimates both groups: the usersof applicationswho are deniedany creativityand the program- merswhose templates,he seems to be implying,are so limitedthat nothingcreative can be accomplishedthrough them. On theother hand, if we treatthe computerand the web as two differentphenomena, related,but not coextensive, we mightfind a handlethat enables us to retainthe productivebafflement that produced Winkler's fascinating historicalmeta-narrative, without resorting to gendereddeterminism: the soberinsistence on thecomputer's (and, as he sees it,the Web's) affini- ties to linguisticcode, to sequence,discreteness, and isolation,enable Winklerto come up witha convincingexplanation for both the utopian and dystopianprojections onto the net; yet the mechanistic guise of the no-nonsenseprogramer may have preventedWinkler from recognizing the new communicativepractice superimposed on the internetby its internationalcommunity of users.This practicemay or maynot prefer 58. Perhapsone needsto live and teachin a geographicallyisolated area, as I do (Middlebury,Vermont), to appreciatethe structural revolution brought about by the inter- net(and satellitetelevision). 59. Winkler,Docuverse 377.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:43 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichaelGeisler 103 linearityand the GutenbergGalaxy to visuals,synesthetic effects, and cyberspace,or the two may coexist(the mostlikely scenario, in my opinion).Winkler's insistence on discretenessand isolation,that is, a "masculineinscription" of theWeb as the epistemologicalcorollary of the underlyingtechnology is alreadybeing contradictedby the new communicativepractice. Yet Winkler'sreally pathbreaking accomplish- ment,in myview, lies in theconstruction of a plausiblehistorical sce- nariofor the evolution of theinternet as a new communicativepractice, a scenariothat provides an overarchingnarrative at equal distancefrom Kittler'sbelletristic larmoyance and Bolz's trendyleaps of faith. Justas Zielinskihad done fortelevision, Winkler's historical sweep situatesthe computerwithin the structuraland epistemologicaltrajec- toryof mediahistory without suggesting that the WordWide Web is the telosof thisnarrative - a trajectorywhich is simultaneouslysub- jectedto a radicaland highlyoriginal re-reading. This makesWinkler's book,in myopinion, the most productive contribution to mediastudies to comeout of Germany in manyyears.
Conclusion It is curiousto notethat German media theory, including the positions outlinedabove, brackets the discourse of television (and, with a fewnota- ble exceptions,the structures of themedium as well).Between the 1960s and the late 1980s,the period that historians, borrowing a phrasefrom JohnFiske and JohnHartley, may one daycall television's"Bardic Era" (thatis, thetime in whichtelevision served as themajor conduit of pub- lic discourse),60Enzensberger's "Building Blocks" essay was the only substantialpronouncement on mediatheory to emergefrom Germany. (Andthat essay did notspecifically address television either). It was not, and thismakes Winkler's insistence on thelinguistic turn of theinternet so intriguing,until the new textualityprovided by theweb promisedat leasta partialreturn to theGutenberg Galaxy that German theory raised 60. Untilthe market penetration of cableand satellite systems, television, with very fewnationally broadcast programing choices, could be saidto havereplaced the newspa- peras thecentral catalyst for the negotiation of social, political, and cultural issues. This is no longertrue, since the assumption that on anygiven night a significantnumber of our acquaintanceswould have had the same experience (a notunlikely situation during televi- sion's "Bardic"phase) no longerholds. The term"Bardic Television" is JohnFiske's and JohnHartley's. See ReadingTelevision (London: Methuen 1978) 85-100.At the time, the authorswere describing a contemporary practice. Since satellite and cable have caused the cultureof broadcasting to implode,I havedecided to use theterm "Bardic era" instead, to reflectthe historicity ofthe paradigm.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:43 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 104 WestGerman Media Theory itsvoice again (characteristically toproclaim the end of that paradigm). Enzensberger'smore recentsatirical recantation ("the zero-degree medium")stands emblematic for the paradigm change in contemporary Germanmedia theory. Taking McLuhan's glib and over-quoted phrase at face value, the Germansare askingjust whatkind of a messagethe mediumis. The interestin exploringthe materiality of themedium, which reallyis thepoint where the agendas of mostof theauthors discussed in thisarticle converge, has yieldeda numberof new takeson seemingly familiarmedia and concepts;it has made significantcontributions to a cognitivehistory of themedia61 and to our understandingof thepara- digmshift we havebeen undergoing since the invention of thefirst auto- dynamicdevices (or Aufschreibesystemein Kittler's terminology). It is a paradigmshift that is not yet completed,which makes it all the more urgentthat we tryto hold on to what we cancomprehend en route. However,in surveyingthe contributionsmade by Kittler,Bolz, and otherGerman theorists in recentyears, one cannothelp feeling that the new hypermediasavvy, no matterwhether it articulatesitself in the formof criticismor praiseof thesenew formsof communication,is merelya continuationof the FrankfurtSchool debunkingof the mass media by othermeans. For the greatadvantage of dealingwith the media as paradigm-formingtechnologies is thatone need not concern oneselfwith representation. In fact, as we have seen,Pfeiffer and Gum- brechtexclude any kind of interpretiveendeavor programmatically from theparameters of whatthey consider legitimate media research, as does Engell,albeit for different reasons. After all, if it changesour episte- mology,television is television,no matterwhether what we actuallysee
61. Severalcontributions in Materialitat der Kommunikationprovide essential ele- mentsfor such a cognitivehistory of mediadiscourse along the lines of Kittler'sor Bolz's project,but on a moremodest empirical scale. Particularlyinteresting is Monika Elsner's and ThomasMiiller's reconstruction of the public debates surrounding the introduction of televisionin Germanyin the early 1950s. At that time, the shock effect of the new technol- ogyproduced insights that were later forgotten or levelledby the habitualization ofa multi- mediaenvironment. The dominantmetaphor of thetime, television as a "windowon the world,"suggests an unconsciousawareness of reconstituted boundaries between inside and outside,public and private sphere, in short,television collapses the borders between "para- mountreality" and "finite provinces of meaning," as outlinedby Berger and Luckmann, The Social Constructionof Reality(New York:Doubleday, 1966) 25. Yet in doingso, the mediumdid not merely contribute towards the entropy of the bourgeois public sphere, it also performeda service: "By reconcilingand integrating the sphere of intimate privacy and and a media-generatedpublic sphere, television created a newlycohesive world view for the maintenanceof which it would become irreplaceable inthe future." See MonikaElsner/Tho- masMiller, "Der angewachsene Fernseher," Materialitat der Kommunikation 403.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:43 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichaelGeisler 105 is Ilse Wernerwhistling a songto entertainrecuperating German troops crowdinginto a Nazi Fernsehstubeduring World War II, or MaryTyler Moore establishingherself as the firstsingle woman professional on Americantelevision, or WolfgangMenge and WolfgangPetersen dra- matizingthe grim realities of a Ruhrarea smogalert. Similarly, hyper- media are dealt within apocalypticor celebratorymetaphors, or as a giantscam perpetrated on thenaive curiosity of unsuspectingintellectu- als (alwaysexcluding the respective author, of course)by unscrupulous politiciansand mediamoguls. No one in Germanyever seemsto ask whatpeople actually do withthe internet.62 This is theresult of taking McLuhan'srejoinder to Anglo-Saxoncritics also to look beyondrepre- sentation("the medium is themessage") so verbatimas to excludethe textfrom the parameters of analysis.63 Whatremains is to ask whyGerman theorists have so muchto say aboutmedia and so littleinterest in theirarticulations. Why has thetext droppedentirely from the screenof theirvision? One mightraise an objectionto thisquestion, that is, thattextual analysis is notthe domain of thetheorist, that it is bestleft to thecritic or thehistorian. However, thisrestriction never seemed to stopliterary theorists, from Erich Auer- bach to JuliaKristeva, from referring to specifictexts in detail as emblematicof certainparadigms and I suspectthat it wouldhave been thoughtludicrous had they not done so. Norhave media theorists in other countriesdisplayed this kind of phobiavis-a-vis the text: One needsonly to look at JoshuaMeyrowitz's No Sense of Place (whose enthusiastic receptionin Germanyactually seems to havekicked off the current redis- coveryof McLuhan'stheories) to see thateven a social scientistwith a clear focuson "mediumtheory,"64 can make veryproductive use of
62. Thisincludes Winkler as well- althoughan importantqualification is in order: in contradistinctionto Kittler, Bolz, and Gumbrecht/Pfeiffer,Winkler explicitly rejects a technologicalparadigm that is simultaneouslydehistoricized and dehumanized (cf. his cri- tiqueof Derrida,Docuverse, 281). He rejectsequally phobic projections of technology as fetishor 'secondnature' and a Kierkegaardianleap of faith back to a universecontrolled by individualhuman action. However, he maintainsthat the new 'datauniverse' may appear to us as inaccessibleto individualintervention, but, since it is an objectificationofour col- lectivememory, itremains open to collectivecorrection and control (Docuverse 336-37). 63. To comprehendthe absurdity of thatattitude we merelyneed to imagine,for a moment,that before the adventof the 'new' media,philosophers, literary critics, and socialanalysts had done the same: we mightthen have a never-endingstream of treatises, fromthe Renaissance to theNeo-Kantians, on the(corrupting) paradigm changes being wroughtby the book, without as muchas a passingglance at thetexts themselves. 64. On thedifference between "media" and "medium"theory, see Meyrowitz,No Senseof Place 16.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:43 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 106 WestGerman Media Theory textualitywithout losing sight of his structuralproject. And John Fiske's TelevisionCulture has demonstratedthat a thoroughfamiliarity with its articulationsmay actually be helpfulin mappingout the discourse of tele- vision.65Yet in Germany,ignorance of the texts seems to be theticket for admissionto thediscourse. The keynote was struckearly on by Theodor W. Adornohimself. By wayof explainingwhy he had basedhis analysis of early(U.S.) televisionproductions only on thescreenplays, without lookingat theactual broadcasts, Adorno proclaimed that these texts, since theywere productsof industrialmass production,need not be closely examinedin theway a literarywork of artwould be.66 This is a recipe mostGerman media theorists67 have followed to the present day.68 The simpleanswer to thequestion raised above would thus be thatGer- many'straditionally rigid segregation between E-Kultur and U-Kultur, thatis, betweenhigh and popularculture, put the blinderson German theorists.Although, to some extent,all Europeancultures share in this dichotomousscheme, the Frankfurt School's (and in particularAdorno's) insistenceon the autonomouswork of art as the only repositoryof resistanceagainst the dehumanizing effects of industrialculture shored up the intellectualelite's conservativetastes at a timewhen, in most westerncivilizations, those boundaries were beginning to dissolve.As a
65. JohnFiske, Television Culture (London and New York:Methuen, 1987). 66. TheodorW. Adomo,"Fernsehen als Ideologie,"Rundfunk und Fernsehen4 (1953); repr.in Eingriffe. Neun kritische Modelle, 5th edition (Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp, 1968)81-98. 67. Obviously,this is a generalizationthat would need differentiation.Siegfried Zielinski,for instance, with the volume quoted in thispaper, has clearlychosen a topic (historyof technology)that would logically exclude close analysesof individualtexts; whereashe hasdemonstrated with past publications that he is byno meansdisinterested in textuality.Similarly the many outstanding works on thehistory of Germantelevision (by HelmutKreuzer, Knut Hickethier, Karl Prlimm,Heinz-B. Heller, Bernd Zimmermann, andmany others) obviously do notbelong in this category. 68. Cf. KarlPrtimm's scathing indictment ofthe apocalyptic phantasies and "gothic novels"spun by Kittler et al., inthe attempt to 'link'cinematography, computer technology, theWorld Wide Web and technological warfare in a kindof hyper conspiracy tale which sit- uatesthe viewer in a permanentlyobjectified position as thetarget of, variously, audiovisual transmissions,the physiological assault of hypermedia,or thephysical assault of guided missiles.To Virilio,Kittler, and Bolz, the actual articulations of modernmedia, i.e. thetexts are merelyrandom emanations generated by the same ideologicalsmokescreen which masksthe secret point of convergence of all media'implantations' - technologicalwarfare. Sincethe texts are thus mere random phenomena - 'noise'- thereis no pointin analysing them.See inthe special issue on "LiteraturverfallimMedienzeitalter," ed. HelmutKreuzer, thearticle by Karl Priimm, "Lesereisen in die Gutenberg-Galaxisund in die Medienwelt," LiLi- Zeitschrififiir Literaturwissenschaft undLinguistik 87/88 (1992): 86-96.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:43 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichaelGeisler 107 resultthe media,in Germany,has neverentered intellectual discourse as a referentialsystem or a storehouseof metaphorsor images.Hence thereis no ongoingintellectual discourse on mediasas texts.Until the 1980s,a generationof Germanstudents had been systematicallytrained to avoid theanalysis of televisiontexts as a positivisticwaste of time. Thisbias for"autonomous" culture naturally would leave Germantheo- ristsill-equipped to dealwith contemporary notions of textuality. At thetime when structuralism and semioticsbegan to developa criti- cal apparatusfor the analysis of televisiontexts (as distinctfrom film), thisreluctance to engagethe medium on thelevel of thetext left Ger- manswithout a criticalpractice and thuswith little to contributeto a criticaldebate thatwas searchingfor definitionsof textualpractice whichwould accountfor (instead of simplycondemn) industrial pro- duction,resistive or negotiatedreadings, serial narratives,and other transformationsof traditional categories of authorshipand readership.It was notuntil the mid-1980s, with the "Bardic" phase drawing to a close in most advanced televisioncultures, and with hypermediaslowly replacingtelevision as theleading technology, that German intellectual history,from the romantics to Nietzscheand Wagner,once again pro- videdthe key metaphors for understanding the new epistemology. The moretroubling historical continuity in whichespecially Kittler's and Bolz's theoriescould be seen is a certaintendency in German thought,from Heidegger to Luhmann(on whose systemstheory Bolz drawsquite substantially), to examine structures by abstractingfrom the practiceof humaninteraction. Contemporary German media theory pro- grammaticallybrackets human individuals and their articulations from its purview(Bolz andWeibel), is transfixedby "autodynamicsystems," i.e., the "self-inscription"of media (Kittler and manyof the contributorsto Materialitatder Kommunikation)onto presumablypassive substances (includinghuman minds?), or proceedsfrom the assumptionthat the onlyemancipatory use one can makeof a particularmedium is to use it as some formof new age therapy,which, once again,precludes its use for purposesof communication(Enzensberger's second essay and Engell).This sortof theoreticalparadigm would appear to be at a disad- vantagewhen dealingwith a practicethat is industriallyproduced, sociallyarticulated and negotiated,and steepedin popularmyth. Or, to putit differently:a theoretical tradition fixated on theautonomous work of art and the individualauthor would naturallybe moreinclined to believe in theend of theindividual than in textualityas social practice.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:24:43 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Farewellto theGutenberg-Galaxy*
NorbertBolz
The accelerationof technicaldevelopment around 1800 releasedpro- cessesthat the categories of theGutenberg-Galaxy could no longerade- quatelydescribe. From then on, speedis producedand createsa kinetic high.Fashion replaces style, advertising replaces art, and "filmicreality" takes the place of aestheticbeauty [sch6ner Schein].1 Today, it has becomea commonplacethat designers and directorsare the actual agents of socialcreativity, rather than artists. In orderto do justiceto thisinten- sifyingdevelopment, aesthetics must undergo a reorientation:from a the- oryof arttoward a theoryof themedia-technological aisthesis. Walter Benjamin'sPassagenwerk gives us thefirst indications of sucha theory. It is an interfacebetween the Gutenberg-Galaxy and the world of the new media- Benjamin'sold-fashioned name for it is thestudy of thresholds [Schwellenkunde]."Two culturesor technologiescan, like astronomical galaxies,pass throughone anotherwithout collision; but not without con- figurationalchange. Similarly, in modemphysics there is theconcept of 'interface'or the meetingand metamorphosisof two structures.Such 'interficiality'is the very key [ ... ] to ourtwentieth century."2 At thebeginning of thenineteenth century the machine is theform in whichproduction accelerates so muchthat it actuallyforces a "tremen- dous intensificationof life's tempo."3 While the bodily organs of human
* Reprintedcourtesy of Raben-Verlagvon Witteen.Excerpted from: Norbert Bolz, Theorieder neuen Medien (Munich: Raben, 1990) 89-156. 1. WalterBenjamin, "Pariser Passagen," Gesammelte Schriften vol. 5, ed. Rolf Tiedemannand Hermann Schweppenhliuser (Frankfurt//Main: Suhrkamp, 1972) 1026. 2. MarshallMcLuhan, The Gutenberg Galaxy (Tortonto: U TorontoP, 1962) 149. 3. Benjamin5:497. 109
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:25:41 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 110 Farewellto theGutenberg Galaxy beingsdrastically restrict the number of toolswith which they can work at any one time,the machinetool is freeof theseorganic shackles. A humanbeing can onlyinterfere in a uniformand continuousproduction movement.The simultaneityand "continuityof special processes" desanthropomorphizework. Marx calls thisits immediatesocialization. Whathe meansis thatthe accumulated experience of humanbeings is thrownoff kilter by the speed of production,and the coordinationof handand eye onlybecomes a disturbancein a worldwhere "cyclopic machines"produce machines. "The communicationand transportation organizations[ ... i are adjustedaccording to themethod of production in big industrythrough a systemof riversteam boats, railroads, ocean steamersand telegraphs."4Thus, big industry,as a systemof uniform, continuous,and simultaneousspecial processes, determines the new life rhythms.Only againstthis backdropcan one understandBenjamin's observationthat "the acceleration of traffic,the tempo of newstransmis- sion,through which the individual newspaper editions replace the previ- ous ones,work toward the eventual elimination of all discontinuation,of anysudden end."5 The discontinuityof death is no longera meaningful worldexperience - whereasthe series of theperpetually novel is all the moreso. Sensationbecomes the measure for the new tempo of life,with whichbooks can no longerkeep pace likeonly placards and posters can. The textenvironments of thisposter world change constantly and give thephysiognomy of big citiesthe character of newspapercolumns. They are as omnipresentas electriclight. This puremedium without a mes- sage eliminatesall time-spacefactors of traditionalhuman relationships byneutralizing the difference between day and night, between inside and outside."In a word,the message of electriclight is totalchange. It is pure informationwithout any contentto restrictits transformingand informingpower."6 The horrorof those contemporaryto this media innovationwas deep enoughto guidethem to a recognitionthat they regainedonly a hundredyears later: the medium itself is themessage. The messageof electriclight is thesimple information of its radiation. The messageof a news itemis the inhumanspeed of its transmission. The good sensein a contemporary'sfear of thetelegraph and the electric
4. Karl Marxand FriedrichEngels, Marx Engels Werke,vol. 23 (Berlin:Dietz, 1972) 401, 405. Cf. critically,Marshall McLuhan, Understanding Media (New York: McGraw-Hill,1964) 38. 5. Benjamin5: 115. 6. McLuhan,Understanding Media 52.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:25:41 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions NorbertBolz 1]] lightbulb is thathuman beings could "go blindfrom an over-satiationof electriclight and go mad fromthe tempo of news transmissions."7In 1848 Kierkegaardraised the theologicalwrath of thisprophecy to the demonizationof the dailynews as the trueanti-Christian power. The anonymousjournalist appears to himas thelowest refuse of manbefore God becausehe is theopponent of all thinfspersonal. For him, the daily newswas thefirst agent of anonymization.Man says,"everywhere there is no one."Naturally, the new mediaalso bearthis stigma "of themost horrifyingdisproportionate means of communication."Note, however, theGutenberg-Galaxy is not the evil. Kierkegaardonly incriminates the unconditionaldependence of the mass media on the dictatesof the moment.Thick books - no matterhow anti-Christiantheir content - do notparticipate in theevil of theinformation industry, they do notpartici- patein thedeadly sin of the addiction to sensation.Even the second great untimelyobserver of the new media's birth saw thismoment as a timeof falsesensitivity, an excessof omnipresentcuriosity: "There is onlyone sortof seriousnessleft in themodem soul. It is directedtoward the news, whichthe newspaper or thetelegraph bring. To makeuse ofthe moment, and,in order to profit from it, to judge it as quicklyas possible!"10 In thenew massmedia, the idleness of thefldneur liberates itself from thescene of the boulevard. The new media even make the work-like char- acterof idlenessitself recognizable: it makesthe information industry and thenews services possible. "The culturalcritic, reporter, and photojour- nalistrepresent a climax, in whichwaiting, being ready and consequently readyto shootbecome ever more important in contrastto otheraccom- plishments."The passive omnipresence ofthe fldneur corresponds directly to themessage of the new media - thatis, to themedia themselves. Thus Benjaminwas able to lookback and discovera "divinationof theradio." Fourierhad thefabulous idea ofputting idlers, "who just hangabout" to work"sniffing out news stories and spreadingthem about" so that"peo- ple couldsave the time they would lose readingjournals."11
7. Benjamin5: 114. 8. Theterm Bolz usesis "Anonymisierung" making anonymous - trans. 9. Kierkegaard,Tagebacher, vol. 2: 207; cf. Tagebiicher,vol. 3: 155 and Ernst Jiinger,"Der Arbeiter,"Werke 6 (Stuttgart:Klett, 1960) 138,277. 10. FriedrichNietzsche, Samtliche Werke 1, eds. GiorgioColli and MazzinoMon- tinari(Munich: Deutscher Taschenbuch, 1980) 462. Cf.McLuhan, From Cliche' to Arche- type(New York:Viking, 1970) 38, 197. 11. Benjamin5: 793,964.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:25:41 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 112 Farewellto theGutenberg Galaxy
The less therecipient is able to interpret,the greaterthe stimulation fromthe information(over)flow. The historyof formsof transmission demonstratesthat the medium itself is themessage. Reciprocal commu- nicationis supplantedby information,and informationis supplanted by sensation.The mass media's principlesof distributionenforce them- selvesdecisively: "The novelty,brevity, comprehensibility and aboveall thedisconnectedness of theindividual news items" secures "the closure of informationto experience."12Sensation is theprinciple of selection thatcreates events with news value out of data.The mass mediafunc- tion as a schematicthat predetermines what is real betweenhuman beingswith no experienceand the randomness of theworld. They do so in sucha mannerthat the suggestion of ubiquity,i.e., theoperative fic- tionthat we participatein a commonreality, makes the peculiar passiv- ity of the newspaperreader and the televisionviewer into the fundamentalform of social behavior."We neverdeal withthe world in itstotality, but rather with specific news items. The worlditself becomes real in the news onlyas contingency,more specifically as a threefold negation:as an awarenessthat the related events did nothave to happen at all; and as an awarenessthat they did nothave to be reportedat all; and as an awarenessthat one does notreally even have to listento them, andthat occasionally, for instance on vacation,one does not listen."13 The narrowlyrestricted transmission of news,which is determinedby theselection process of sensation,creates a newrhythm for the perception oftime, for which there is no longerany sense of becoming.The prepara- toryschool for this new sense of time is thecinema. With the fitful rhythm ofimage sequencing [Bilderfolge], fade-overs and montage, it satisfies "the deepestneed of thespecies to see theflow of developmentexposed."14 It is crucialto understandthat in thisinstance the cinema acquires a media- theoreticalsignificance for Benjaminthat transcendseverything else becauseits technical peculiarities correspond exactly to modemproblems ofform. Thus he definesfilm as "theunfolding of all formsof perception, temposand rhythmsthat lie alreadypreformed in today'smachines, to suchan extentthat all theproblems of contemporary artfind their final for- mulationonly in thecontext of film."The semanticallyrelated vocabulary - formof perception, preformation, and formulation - pointto thestrict
12. Benjamin,"fber einige Motive bei Baudelaire"1:610f. 13. Niklas Luhmann,Soziologische Aufklrung, vol. 3 (Cologne: Westdeutscher, 1974) 315. 14. Benjamin5: 1013.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:25:41 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions NorbertBolz 113 objectiveconnection of thetechnical standard, apperceptive change, and mediatheory. It is easyto see thecontext of form that Benjamin sees as nature rewardfor the solutionof a formu- s "logical purelyobjectively lated problem."The consequencesfor modernity were, however, that "theforms that are definitivefor our epoch lie hiddenin machines."15In thisway, historicalmaterialism attacks media theory.In otherwords, Benjaminpresents himself not as a forerunnerof McLuhan,but rather as a studentof Marx- a criticalturning point that brought media the- ory more blindnessthan insight. For "Marx based his analysismost untimelyon the machine,just as the telegraphand otherimplosive formsbegan to reversethe mechanicaldynamic."16 Nonetheless, we have to thankMarx forthe tremendous insight into the formalprocess of themeans of production.At first,the new (mechanical) form stood in theshadow of theold (bodily)form, but then increasingly came "to be determinedby the mechanicalprinciple," to the pointthat it "com- pletelyemancipates itself from the traditional bodily form of the tool."17 The desanthropomorphization,theexplosion of thebodily form, is con- sideredthe real technical reason for the fact that the paradigmatic forms of modernityare machines.When naturerewards the logical solutionof objectivelyposed problemswith form, then the body,as formfor the meansof productionin an age of big industry,can no longerbe consid- ereda naturalform of theworld's fabric. This formis notfound in the humanbeing, but rather in the machine. Only with this presupposition does Benjamin'scentral aesthetic question gain any positivesignificance: "Whenand how do theworlds of formin film,in mechanicalengineering, and in thenew physicsetc. that came aboutwithout our doingand that haveover-powered us manifestthemselves to us? Whenwill we reachthe social conditionin whichthese forms, or thosethat develop from them, openthemselves to us as naturalforms?" Only the reception of thenew mediaas naturalforms of beingin theworld makes the emancipatory use possible,which draws out the "natural consequences of the apparatuses."18 Still, even the limited,monopolistically self-conscious use of media assumesultimately new criteria of aestheticvalue. No one comestoo late, you canjoin a programat anytime, you can turnit offat anytime; each episodeis self-referential,i.e.,it refersto nothingbut the medium. In this 15. Benjamin5: 217,498. 16. McLuhan,Understanding Media 38. 17. Marx23: 404. 18. Benjamin2:1506 and5: 500.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:25:41 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 114 Farewellto the Gutenberg Galaxy sense,the video-clip is theoriginal phenomenon ofthe program. HenriBergson demonstrated in Matidreet Mdmoirethat every con- creteobservation in its apparentsimplicity comprises a multiplicityof moments:the past continues in thepresent and in thisway laysclaim to a certainduration. This determinesperception as a functionof time. Whenthe consciousnessof timeexpands in a rush,the world changes becausemore is perceived.Ernst Jiinger speaks of theapproaches to the orphiczero point."Even the individual,for whom the clock ran only half as fast,would perceivetwice as much as normal.That would heightenhis skill;he wouldbe unbeatablein roughphysical activities like boxing.The ancientstell us of an athletewho defeatedhis oppo- nentssimply by dodgingthem. Jazz musicians know of drugsthat make one's timingperfect."19 Benjamin concludes very appropriately that if we "wereto respondto certainthings more leisurely, to othersagain morequickly, if we livedaccording to a differentrhythm, there would be nothingpermanent for us, butrather everything would happen before ourvery eyes, everything would happen to us." Thisupheaval of apper- ceptionafter which the worldwould no longerexist, but ratheraffect us, has threenatural agents: the dream, the child, and thecollector. "For in thedream, too, the rhythm of perceptionand experienceare changed to such a degreethat everything - even whatappears to be themost neutral- happensto us, affectsus." A dreamscene made of meaning- less elementsis theother stage on whichthe disorderly child creates his idiosyncraticsystems of order:"[The child]knows nothing enduring; everythinghappens for him; means him; meets him; happens to him." He or she turnsout to be a collector.The elementthat binds the dream, the childand thecollector of thenew media'stechnical reality is their tactileinstinct. The dream,of course,consists only of images,but what is decisiveis the shockof theirsequencing. The collector,of course, viewshis objects,but the decisive aspect is thathe has them.Marx rec- ognized this reductionin the meaningof possessionas the simple expressionof thealienation of all humansenses, as thespecific process of becomingstupid under the conditionsof privateproperty. "Human beingshad to be reducedto thisabsolute poverty in orderfor them to be able to bringforth their inner wealth."21 This fantastic- or one
19. Jinger,"Siebzig verweht" 1: 28; cf."Siebzig verweht" 2:271. 20. Benjamin,"Einbahnstral3e" 4: 115 and 5: 272. 21. Marx& Engels,Ergdnzungsband 540.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:25:41 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions NorbertBolz 115 mightsay, dialectical - transformationof tactility from the alienation of all senseto theinterplay of senses is fulfilledin the collector. Thus,we can formulatean antithesisthat will be consequentialfor media theory:"Fldneur optical, collector tactile."22 Under the condi- tionsof thenew media,the fldneur turns out to be thephotographer; the collector,however, turns out to be the agentof the cinematographer. Susan Sontagthus continues a strainof Benjamin'sthoughts when she recognizesthe flaneurin thephotographer through the constellationof curiosity,detachment and omnipresence.She thenconcludes with a key conceptfrom McLuhan, which is not renderedin the Germantransla- tionof On Photography."Photography first comes intoits own as an extensionof theeye of themiddle-class fldneur, whose sensibility was so accuratelycharted by Baudelaire."23 Wherethe only concern is whatis seen,steadfastness, resistance, and thrust- thatis, thecharacteristics of the tactile - do notappear. How- ever,in thedeparture from the Gutenberg-Galaxy, themoder privilegeof theoptical gives way to a newtactility. The distanceof theperspectival relationshipto the worldmakes way forobjective closeness. And with that,criticism has reachedits final hour, since criticism presupposes per- spectiveand the appropriate distance. The criticcould take a positionand enjoythe ease of unconstrainedobservation. None of thisis possiblein theworld of thenew media. Their representations hearken to theimpera- tiveof a "mathematical,fact-based style,"24 that does notdeal well with individualdifferences of opinion.The factthat one wouldrather read the sportssection than the editorial page is one of theclearest symptoms of criticism'sdemise. Benjamin not only recognized this, but also deridedas foolsthose "who lament the demise of criticism."Tactility and proximity takethe place of opticity[Optizitat] and critique."Objects have attacked [ .. .] humansociety." They come "dangerously close to us,"and the sen- sationaspect of thisis "theirobstinate, abrupt closeness."25 But this radi- cal tactilityof thenew media changes no less thanthe space of theworld itself:they make distances disappear. What began in thenineteenth cen- turywith advertising reaches completion today in thevideo-clip: an aist- hesiswithout distance - eyeand image collide. Aisthesis is no longerthe perceptionof a gaze,but rather the tactile-digital fingering ofthe monitor. 22. Benjamin5: 274. 23. SusanSontag, On Photography(New York:Farrar, Straus & Giroux,1977) 55. 24. Juinger,"Der Arbeiter"276. 25. Benjamin,"Einbahnstraf3e" 4: 131f.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:25:41 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 116 Farewellto the Gutenberg Galaxy
Sincethe disappearance of distanceis a functionof theworld's accel- eration,it behoovesus to thinkabout this tactility of the new media againstthe backdrop of thehistorical period as well. "Todaya concert in Londonis close forthe owner of a radio.In broadcasting,contempo- raryexistence is goingthrough an appresentation[Apprdsentation] of its inside-outness[Um-herum], a peculiarly expanding encroachment of the world[ ... i In all formsof theincrease in speedin whichwe are more or less voluntarilyand compulsorilyparticipating, there lies the con- questof distances.Structurally, this particular conquest of distancesis (and I ask thatthis be understoodas value-free!)a frenzyfor close- ness."26Today the telematic [telematische] speed of transmissionsfrom all overthe world has allowedtheir proximity to becomecomplete. The frenzyfor closeness dictates the preeminence of tactility. It is crucialfor us to see thatthis concept stands at thecenter of mediatheory not only forBenjamin, but also 30 yearslater for McLuhan. Jean Baudrillard developedthe most precarious aspects of his mediatheory in precisely thiscontext. Thus we read aboutvideo culture:"The observationof a humanface is completelydifferent from the tactile reading of a video terminal.In thelatter case it is a digitalfingering, whereby the eye, like a hand,feels its way along an unending,broken line. The relationshipto a conversationalpartner in telecommunicationsis the same as the knowledgegained in dataprocessing: tactile and fingering.[ ... ] The paradigmof sensate,mental observation has altereditself completely. For thistactility has nothingto do withthe organic sense of touching, butrefers instead simply to theimmediate contact of eyeand image,the end of the aestheticdistance of the gaze."27This strictorientation of mediaaesthetics to theconcept of tactilitygoes back to theart histori- cal researchof Riegl,Wrfflin, Fiedler and A. v. Hildebrandt.But even then,contemporary psychoanalysis characterized psycho-sexual stages in tactileterms, so thatWalter Ong speaksof a "resolutionof the human life-worldin more or lesscovertly tactual and kinesthetic categories."28 The departurefrom the Gutenberg-Galaxypresupposes no simple intellectual,historical demarcation, but ratherfollows from a radical
26. Heidegger,Prolegomena zur Geschichte des Zeitbegriffs(Frankfurt/Main: Klos- termann,1979). 312; cf.Heidegger, Sein undZeit (TUbingen: Max Niemeyer,1993) 105 and Paul Virilio,Der negativeHorizont: Bewegung, Geschwindigkeit, Beschleunigung (Frankfurt/Main:Fischer, 1995) 145. 27. JeanBaudrillard, Videowelt undfraktales Subjekt 120f. 28. WalterJ. Ong, The Presence of the Word (New Haven:Yale UP, 1967) 107
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:25:41 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions NorbertBolz 117
"refunctionalizationof the human apparatus for apperception." The dis- tractedreceptive stance of themasses is thenew paradigmof aisthesis, whichis now completelydominated by thetactile. "This is particularly obviousin music,in whichan essentialelement of itsmost recent devel- opment,jazz, findsits most important expression in dancemusic. [ ... ] However,nothing reveals the powerful tensions of ourage moreclearly thanhow thistactile dominance makes itself felt in optics.This is what happensin filmthrough the image sequencing[Bilderfolge] and its shockeffect. Even fromthis perspective film proves to be currentlythe mostimportant object of that theory of perceptionthe Greeks called aes- thetics."29 The cinemais theschool of thenew tactileapperception. It functionalizesthe shocking closeness, the principle of sensation.Sensa- tion,that is, therabid way in whichthe new mediaphysically attack us, the skin-on-skincontact of eye and screen,is thetechnical principle of thecinematographic apparatus of recording.Filming is actuallyan intru- sion, it forcesitself operatively into its objectand takesout of it "a manifoldlyfragmented" image. The recordingapparatus thus forces itselfso "deeplyinto the fabric of thesituation"30 that every image car- ries the tracesof the mediumitself. To thisextent the thesisthat the mediumis themessage is well founded.It becomesflagrant in themass- medialdistribution of nationaland internationalpolitics. The structure andthe operation of the recording apparatus covers the actual process so extensively,that one can no longerspeak meaningfullyof themas an intrusion.The secrettools of powerno longerdetermine politics, rather, it is thepose in frontof thecamera. The mass mediatransform every- thingthey record into a brewof theirown technicalmeans.31 "Today, whereveran eventtakes place, it is surroundedby lenses and micro- phonesand is illuminatedby theexplosions of flashes.In manycases theevent itself becomes the backdrop for the transmission; in thisway,
29. Benjamin,"Das Kunstwerkim Zeitalter seiner technischen Reproduzierbarkeit" ErsteFassung 1: 466, 1049- Cf. TheodorAdorno, Gesammelte Schriften, vol. 14,Disso- nanzen:Einleitung in die Musiksoziologie 34, 37. 30. Benjamin,"Kunstwerk" 1: 458f 31. Jiinger,"Uber den Schmerz" 7: 189f.35 yearslater, Luhmann repeats this diagno- sis, in fairlyguarded formulations: "When photographers run around or kneelin orderto catchthe right angle for a snapshot,when cameras begin to whir and click, flashes or flood- lightsilluminate the acting people, shooting instructions must be whispered,and when mis- takesare made and thencorrected, all thiscan divertattention from the main action or completelycall into question the primacy of the main action." Luhmann, Legitimation durch Verfahren(Frankfurt/Main:Suhrkamp, 1983) 127.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:25:41 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 118 Farewellto theGutenberg Galaxy it becomesprimarily an object.We alreadyknow of politicalprocesses, parliamentsessions, and competitions,whose actual meaning consists in beingthe object of a globaltransmission. The eventis boundneither to its particularspace nor to its particulartime since it can be replayed anywhereand as oftenas desired." That,however, is justa trivialside effectof the tremendous triumph in the realmof perception,for which we have the new media to thank. Becauseits recording apparati force their way so deeplyinto reality, they make spatialstructures perceivable that have heretoforebeen inaccessi- ble to humanconsciousness. And how does thecamera force its way into reality?Through close-ups, reductions, time-lapse pictures, slow-motion, stop-motion,and montage- and,above all notguided by theconscious intentof theauthor, but rather under "the direction of thelens." It opens up "a wholeother nature" beyond the "normal spectrum of sensoryper- ception,"an unconsciouslysaturated space thatBenjamin, in analogyto theaccomplishments of psychoanalysis,calls theoptical unconscious.32 The eye of thecamera does notbring into clearer focus what has already beenseen unclearly, but rather it reveals in familiarphenomena the here- toforeunknown structural characteristics. Film is forBenjamin a prism in whichthe grayness of theeveryday world is segmentedinto a mean- ingfuland sensuallyperceptible spectrum of color;"the abrupt change of positionovercomes a milieuthat has eludedevery other attempt to open it up." The actualobject of this"prismatic work" is thehuman collec- tive,the masses in motion.33The prismaticwork of filmon thespace of the collectivebody, which analyzes the architectonic character of mass kineticsis the concreteantithesis to the massesas monumentalorna- ment:The BattleshipPotemkin against Triumph of the Will.That film undertakesthis prismatic work on thespace of thecollective body pre- supposesthat human organs and the apparatiof technologydo not merelystand in a functionalcontinuum, but rather are indissolublycou- pled.When Benjamin speaks of technologyas an organ,he refersto the same situationthat Ernst Jiinger defined as organicconstruction and McLuhanas extensionof man. There is no longerany difference between the mechanicaland the organicworld; technology has the self-evident characterof bodyparts; human beings meld together without contradic- tionwith their tools; inorganic materials are builtinto organic materials
32. Benjamin,"Kunstwerk" 1: 461. 33. Benjamin,"Erwiderung an OscarA. H. Schmitz"2: 752f.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:25:41 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions NorbertBolz 119 withoutany problems. Human beings, who are dependenton prostheses and who no longerthink of themas foreignobjects, point out theway intovideo culture. The humanextensions called media are notout there. Thusdoing justice to thenew media implies two things: First, it involves a collectiveinnervation of the apparatus;second, the collectivebody mustbe organizedby technology.Marx had alreadylinked the revolu- tionaryelimination of privateproperty to the developmentof social organsin whichinteraction with others would become an organof the individualhuman body. Against this backdrop, we can understandthe twocentral concepts of Benjamin'spolitics: "that of therevolution as the innervationof thetechnological organ of the collective; (compare this to the childwho learnsto graspthings by tryingto graspthe moon) and thatof 'crackingopen the teleologyof nature'."34Children trying to graspthe moon are comparableto thenormal case of an "incoordination of proximityand distance,"35 as Hermannvon Helmholtzdiscussed them in his Handbuchder physiologischenOptik [Helmholtz's Treatise on PhysiologicalOptics]. Benjamin transforms this into a sensory-physio- logicalmetaphor of his politics:The metaphysicsof therevolution is a child-likegrasp for the moon - it mustfail. But it is onlythrough this failurethat the childlearns to graspat all, thatis, to reassurehim- or herselftactilely that the person next to himor heris there.Just as the child,who is stillguided by utopianprinciples because s/he is stillsen- soriallyphysiologically uncoordinated, innervates his or her organs,so too willthe collective moving toward revolution innervate its technologi- cal extensions.For Benjaminthis is not onlya revolutionaryopportu- nity(that - as usual - is lost),but also an anthropologicalnecessity (withwhich - at therisk of ourown downfall- we cannotnot com- ply). For technologyand the media have developedexplosively in modernitywith the elementalpower of a secondnature. And human beingsare throwninto this world of gadgets."From now on you are, infinitelyfurther than you think, the subjects of instrumentsthat - from themicroscope to radioand television- have becomethe elements of yourexistence."36 The cinematographicgadget is in such an excellent positionfor Benjamin because it teachesforms of apperceptionthat are fundamentalfor the integrationof technology."Film servesto train
34. Benjamin5: 777. 35. HansBlumenberg, Hohlenausgange (Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp, 1989) 498. 36. JacquesLacan, Les seminairede JacquesLacan. (Paris:Seuil, 1973)76.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:25:41 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 120 Farewellto theGutenberg Galaxy humanbeings in thosenew formsof apperceptionand reactionsthat are conditionedby the familiarity with an apparatusthe role of which is ever increasingin humanlife. Transforming this huge technological appara- tusof ourage intothe object of humaninnervation - thatis thehistori- cal taskin the service of which film has its true significance."37 Up untilnow thisreception has failedand it findsits firstexpression in thedreams of demise,either the fall of themajor capital cities of the nineteenthcentury or the entireWestern world, and then,only a few yearslater, in thedestructive orgies of WorldWar I. In termsof media technology,war is nothingother than the acceleratedtechnological transformationthat punishes human beings because theydo not use thesetremendous technological tools adequately. That means learning to functionalizethem as extensionsof themselves.Those data streamsand energysources that go unusedprivately and socially"justify them- selves by renouncingharmonious collective action in war thatoffers proofwith its destructionthat social realitywas notyet mature enough to make technologyits organ,that technology was not yet powerful enoughto controlthe elementalpowers of society."38So farwe have achievedfull employment only in the workof destruction.Benjamin devoteda certainspeculation to thiswork in whatis probablyone of his mostirritating, and moststupendous texts. Whoever manages to follow thereflections of One WayStreet [EinbahnstraJ3e] to their end will ulti- matelyreach To the Planetarium.The basic idea is thatthe ancient intoxicatingexperience of thecosmos that was forcedout by theoptic- ityof modernscience returns in theintoxicating carnage of worldwar. War as a twistedform of communicationwith the cosmos - withthis thesisBenjamin quashes every form of pacifistreasoning. For theonly thingthat could save us fromthe frenzyof destructionwould be suc- cessfulcosmic communication in thetechnological organization of the collectivehuman body. We must,therefore, learn to recognizein the developmentof thenew mediaand technologiesa collectivesurgery of thesocial body. The reasonwhy gadget-lovers today are onceagain fas- cinatedwith war lies in the factthat real cosmic experiencesin the modem era have come about only in the mediumof war. "Human masses,gases, electrical currents were strewn out on thefield, high fre- quency currentstraversed the landscape,new starsappeared in the
37. Benjamin,"Kunstwerk"1: 444f. 38. Benjamin3: 238.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:25:41 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions NorbertBolz 121 heavens,the skyand the seas trembledwith propellers [ . . ]. In the nightsof destructionduring the last war a feelingshook the human skeletonthat seemed to resemblethe happiness of theepileptic. And the revoltsthat followed were the firstattempts to bringthis new body undercontrol."39 This is whatBenjamin's revolutionary slogan about theinnervation of the new media and technologies means. His second key conceptsounds no less fantastic:'cracking open nature'steleology.' Nature, he argues,is closedup in thehard shell of whatis calledNature, and the iron jaw of newbarbarians, monsters and cannibalswill be necessaryin orderto crackthis nut. Human beings become objectsin the process;that frees them from inwardness and emancipatestheir politics from ethics. In thisway, the humor of anthro- pologicalmaterialism supplants the morality of humanistidealism. "The diminutive,fragile human body," that the world war tossed onto a "powergrid of destructivecurrents and explosions,'40where it had to puton gas masksand climbinto tanks, is farremoved from mankind. Because whatis at stakehere is survivingcivilization itself in theshell of thenew mediaand technologies.Benjamin relies not on the experi- ence of suffering,but rather on humor;not on thetears of the critical consciousness,but rather on thelaughter of thebarbaric collective. On the basis of a fewMarx quotes,he greetsthe fantasistFourier as the heraldof the new media and technologies.He does so because he is workingagainst a conceptof laborthat fixes the controlof natureas anthropologicaland thatcorresponds to a teleologicalconceptualization of nature.Fourier was not a revolutionary,but rathera transformerof the earth[Erdverwandler]: The poles will melt,the sea will turninto lemonade,wild animalswill befriendhuman beings, and an android will producethe land of milkand honeyin whicha moralitywill no longerbe necessary."As an explanationof Fourier'sextravagances we mustbring in MickeyMouse, in which,in totalagreement with his ideas, the moral mobilizationof naturecompletes itself. In Mickey Mouse humortakes on politics[die Probe auf die Politik].It confirms how rightMarx was to see in Fourier,above all, a greathumorist. Crackingopen the teleology of nature follows humor's dictates."41
39. Benjamin,"Einbahnstraf3e" 4: 147f. 40. Benjamin,"Erfahrung und Armut" 2: 214. 41. Benjamin5: 781. cf. Hans Magnus Enzensberger,Mausoleum: Siebenund- dreifigBalladen aus der Geschichtedes Fortschritts(Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp, 1975) 60,which reduces the spirit of Fourier's utopia to the beautiful formulation: "Fabula rasa."
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:25:41 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 122 Farewellto theGutenberg Galaxy
MickeyMouse as themass medialdidactic play [Lehrstack]of liber- atednature - one mustunderstand that for Benjamin the film fairy tale [Filmmdrchen]technologically implements the essentialparts of Fou- rier'svision. The animationof theinanimate in thecartoon is theplay modelfor the innervation of thetechnical. What is decisivehere is that the miraclesof the filmfairy tale "come about withoutmachinery, improvised,from the body of MickeyMouse, its partisans and persecu- tors,out of the mostmundane furnmiture as well as froma tree,from clouds or fromthe ocean. Natureand technology,primitiveness and comforthere become completely one." In totalaccord with Fourier, in theworld of MickeyMouse "a carweighs no morethan a strawhat and thefruit in thetree rounds out as quicklyas a hotair balloon."42With thatthe teleology of nature has beencracked open. The theodicyof MickeyMouse gives us considerableinsight into Benjamin'santhropological materialism; his materialis thehuman col- lective,his anthroposa transformable,functionalized, electrified figure. "MickeyMouse provesthat the creature lives on evenwhen it has laid aside all of itshuman attributes. It breaksthrough the hierarchy of cre- ationthat is gearedtoward human beings."43 However,that such a crackingopen of nature'steleology has direct politicalsignificance becomes clear only when one sees itagainst the hori- zon ofa Benjaminianspeculation that short-circuits media theory and psy- choanalysis.Along with Freud, Benjamin assumes that our civilization is builton repressionand that mass-psychotic tensions build up concurrently withdevelopments in modemtechnology. Still, modem technology, the spearthat caused the wound, heals it as well.For film techniques explode the limitsof normalsensory perception in thesame way thatpsychosis does. In a word:Film makes technically palpable the stereotypes and the catastrophesof psychotic,hallucinatory, and dream-likeperception. How- ever,"the possibility of psychicimmunization" comes with this: Chaplin and MickeyMouse as a vaccineagainst Hitler. It cracksopen the natu- ral teleologyof social catastrophes.In orderto preventa "naturaland dangerousripening" of madness,their "forced development" in film leads to an "earlyand healingoutbreak" of mass psychoses.44This
42. Benjamin,"Erfahrung und Armut" 2: 218f. 43. Benjamin,"Zu Micky-Maus"6: 144. Comparethe astonishing yet inconsequen- tial insightof Adorno:"No longeris thehuman the key to humanity."Adomo, Soziolo- gischeSchriften 8:68. 44. Benjamin,"Kunstwerk" 1: 462.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:25:41 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions NorbertBolz 123 therapeuticfunction of thenew mediareveals itself only beyond human beings.Benjamin sees technologicalpredecessors in Fourier'sandroid, whom he sees as a relativeof de Sade. Benjamin'sinsight into the "constructivemoment inherent in everysadism" opens up a perspective in whichthe 120 Days of Sodomshields itself with the structure of the phalanstery."Through his efforts,the sadist could come acrossa part- nerwho longsfor exactly those humiliations and pain thathis tormen- tormetes out to him.With one blow he could findhimself in one of thoseharmonies that Fourier's utopia pursues."45 In thisway, the patho- logicalvectors of individualpsychology gain a constructivefunction in thehuman machine of the collective.However, in ordernot to funda- mentallymisunderstand this organicconstruction, one mustavoid all mechanisticmetaphors. McLuhan's concept of thegadget-lover makes clear how constructively-orientedsadism transforms the human organ- ism intothe imageof themachine. "Man becomes,as it were,the sex organsof themachine world, as thebee of theplant world, enabling it to fecundateand to evolveever new forms.The machineworld recipro- catesman's love by expediting his wishes and desires."46 A notein the Pariser Tagebuch from January 21, 1930reveals how Ben- jaminviewed the constructive element of sadism:Of Proust,he writesthat he handledcuriosity like a sadisticinstrument with which he drilledques- tionsinto life. A noteabout a conversationin theMoskauer Tagebuch from18 January1927 situatesthis finding in theoverarching context of Benjamin'sresearch program - a startlingshort-circuit between the baroque,de Sade and Proust,that illuminates like a flashthe life beyond humanbeings. Concerning Proust's "wild nihilism," which converges with theoverall direction of his book on the Trauerspiel,he writes,it "bores intothe well-ordered cabinet in the soul of thePhilistine that bears the inscription'sadism' and mercilessly hews all else intopieces, so thatnoth- ingremains of thespotless, well arrangedconception of depravation,but ratherevil revealsever so clearly'humanity,' yes even 'goodness'as its truesubstance." That it is in thiscase a lesbianscene fits well intothe schemeof Fourier'srefunctionalization of sadistic and masochistic tenden- cies.This corresponds to theutopian glance Benjamin casts on the"demise of love" thatfinds its best expression in thecheerful cynicism of prosti- tution.Just as the new mediarupture the normalspectrum of sensory
45. Benjamin5: 786. 46. McLuhan,Understanding Media 46.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:25:41 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 124 Farewellto theGutenberg Galaxy perception,the techniquesof the collectivebody transgress the normal spectrumof sensuality.Even the"sexual revolt against love'47 seeksto crackopen the teleology of nature.Berl's book aboutthe death of bour- geois thoughtgives Benjamin's speculations their final form. He writes aboutde Sade's revolutionarynegation of what nature deems normal: "The metaphysicalimportance of sadismis thehope that the revolt of manwill takeon suchan intensitythat it will compel nature to change her laws.'48
CriticalTheory overlooked Benjamin's anthropological materialism thatconceives of technologyas an organof the 'sadistically're-con- structedcollective human body. In so doing,Critical Theory intention- ally barredits own access to the realityof the new media.The taboo phrase 'cultureindustry' shattered the interfaceBenjamin introduced betweenthe Gutenberg-Galaxy and theworld of thenew media;the cri- tique of ideologysuppressed media aesthetics.For example,when, Adorno,the philosopher of music, notes that, "In thewindowless monads of technologythere thrives that which the composer misrecognizes as the realmof his own personalintellectual freedom,'49 he sacrificesa deci- sive insightto thealibi-dialectic of CriticalTheory. Technology, stand- ingbefore such chimeras as Geist[spirit], freedom, and subjectdissolves and becomespart of Geistitself. Adomo saves himselfthe troubleof analyzinggadgets. His essentiallysubstantive concept of technology cov- ers over the mediaa prioriof aestheticproduction. Thus, while Ben- jamin understandstechnology as a medium,Adorno defines it as Geist incognito.Here the universe and Geist part company.50 The thresholdbetween the Gutenberg-Galaxyand the worldof the new mediamarks the demise of aura.The decisivemedia-technological conditionfor the end of aura is themass reproductionof imagesthat absorbthe real in thatthey duplicate them endlessly: "From medium to mediumthe real becomes volatized,it becomes the allegoryfor
47. Benjamin5: 617. 48. EmmanuelBerl, Mort de la PensdeBourgeois (Paris: R. Laffont,1970) 173. 49. Adorno and Hanns Eisler, Kompositionfilr den Film (Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp,1976) 15: 388. 50. TheGerman here reads: "Hier scheiden sich Weltalter und Geister." It is a playon theGerman phrase - "Hierscheiden sich die Geister,"meaning: here opinions differ. In the sentencethe plural of Geist refers to different opinions rather than Hegel's metaphysical con- structof worldspirit Geist. The word-playallows Bolz to highlightthe distinction between Adorno'ssupposedly more metaphysical position and Benjamin's more mundane one - trans.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:25:41 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions NorbertBolz 125 death."51In a thoroughlyaestheticized world, in whichthe real blends togetherwith its own image,there can no longerbe anycritical transcen- dencefor art. This explains Adorno's melancholy. The spleenof hisAes- theticTheory "is a sufferingfrom the loss of aura."52That makes Adorno thelast great representative of aesthetic passion in theGutenberg-Galaxy. He cannotcarry out the command to tie intothe new media.Rather, he continuesto emendthe good old projectof aestheticmodernity. Benjamin is completelydifferent. Around 1930 he makesthe following note about thebreak through of "television,phonograph, etc." into the world of aes- theticforms. "Quintessence: We did notreally want to recognizeit. Why not?Because we areafraid, justifiably: that everything will be exposed:by thedescriptions from the television, by thewords of thehero through the phonograph,and by the moral of the story through the next best statistic." In theface of thenew mediawe cannotsave aura.But then comes Ben- jamin'sturning point where he saysavant la lettrea definitefarewell to Adorno'sculture industry lament. "Tant mieux. (So muchthe better.) Don't cry.The nonsense of the critical prognoses. Film instead of narrative."53 The differencebetween Benjamin's position and Adorno's on the Gutenberg-Galaxyis that betweenmourning and melancholy.Ben- jamin's Passagenwerkis a workof grievingthat will set us loose from modernity.Adorno, on theother hand, remains a "leftistmelancholic"54 chainedto thedead objectof his eruditionin theGrand Hotel 'Abyss'. Leftistmelancholy seeks pleasurein such paradoxesas the one that todayonly the anachronism is trulycontemporary or one thatclaims that educatedintellectuals are thelast bourgeois and at thesame time the last enemiesof thebourgeois. Or, unsurpassinglydialectical, the contempo- rary"dissolution of thesubject" binds the possibility of experienceback tothe "old subject,. . . thatis stillfor itself, but no longerin itself."55
51. JeanBaudrillard, L 'change symboliqueet la mort(Paris: Gallimard, 1976) 112. 52. Benjamin5: 433. 53. Benjamin2: 1282. 54. Benjamin3: 281; cf. GrandHotel Abgrund 7-13. - Baudrillard,Die fatalen Strategien147 (Munich:Matthes & Seitz,1985); Fatal strategiestrans. Philip Beitchman and W.G.J.Niesluchowski; ed. JimFleming (London : Semiotexte/Pluto,1990). Baudril- lardtherefore misjudges Benjamins Trauerarbeit, when he countshim among the "melan- cholymodems" - merelyin orderto celebrateBaudelaire as "themuch more modem (thoughmaybe one couldonly really be modemin the nineteenth century)" investigator of thenew values of seduction and fascination. 55. Adomo,Minima Moralia: Reflexionen aus dembeschadigten Leben (Frankfurt/ Main:Suhrkamp, 1970) 4: 14.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:25:41 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 126 Farewellto the Gutenberg Galaxy
On the otherhand, Benjamin's grieving process, his programfor an awakeningout of modernityas a worldthat is ruledby phantasmago- rias,says a determinedfarewell to theGutenberg-Galaxy. In so doing he underminesthat Adomian definition of the intellectualas a bour- geoisdeserter. The Moscow Diary makes note of a grandscheme to
presentthe history of the intelligentsia materialistically as a function andstrictly inthe context of a 'historyof illiteracy.' Its beginnings lie inthe modem period, since the medieval forms of governance cease to becomeforms of clerically driven learning, however constituted, for thegoverned. Cuius regio eius religio destroys the spiritual authority of secularforms of governance. Such a historyofilliteracy would teach us thata revolutionaryenergy has emerged among the uneducated classes fromtheir centuries-old religious chrysalis, and the intelligentsia would acknowledgeitself no longeras onlythe army of those who deserted thebourgeoisie, but rather as theavantgarde forilliteracy.56
Againstthis backdrop, state-run projects for the literacy and learningof thecollective body would be exposedas strategiesfor the exorcism of fantasy,skepticism, common sense, and willfulness.Just when Nietzschedescribed Wagner's total work of art as a mediumthat no longerknew anything of the oppositionbetween educated and unedu- cated,the concept of illiteracywas inventedin orderto stigmatizethe last enemy of the Gutenberg-Galaxy."At the same time Edison inventedthe electric light bulb and the phonograph, Siemens the electri- cal locomotive,Linde therefrigerator, Bell thetelephone and Ottothe gas engine.The connection is obvious."57 Whenthe intellectuals- insteadof beingno longerin themselves, butbeing rather still for themselves citizens that sabotage themselves conceiveof themselvesas theavantgarde of 'illiteracy,'then their atti- tude towardthe media changesfundamentally. For the publicityof knowledgeis not separatefrom it. Hegel's challengeto disruptthe
56. Benjamin,"Moskauer Tagebuch" 6: 31Of 57. Hans MagnusEnzensberger, Mittelmaj3 und Wahn (Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp, 1988) 66. Cf.Adorno, 8: 104f.Levi-Strauss had also alwaysstressed that the appearance of writingwas a conditionof thefoundation of empiresand favoredhuman exploitation; above all, writtencommunication had hithertoserved enslavement. The introductionof compulsoryschool attendance must also be understoodin thiscontext: "The struggle againstilliteracy is thereforeconnected with an increasein governmentalauthority over thecitizens. Everyone must be able to readso thatthe government can say: Ignoranceof thelaw is no excuse."Claude Levi-Strauss, Tristes tropiques, tr. John and Doreen Weight- mann(New York:Penguin, 1974).
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:25:41 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions NorbertBolz 127 appearanceof esotericismin thename of generalcomprehensibility is stilltimely. "The comprehensibleform of scienceis thepath to itthat is offeredto all and thatis accessibleto all.,,58Reflections on themedia a prioriof scientificpublicity parallel Hegel's thought.In the era of the Gutenberg-Galaxythe popularizationof knowledgewas bound to "formsof intercourse"that were drawn from scientific research - what was difficultwas leftout. Under the conditions of thenew media"pop- ularization"has become "a task [ ... ] withits own specificform prin- ciples."59Structurally, media like television and radiodemand that even the interestsof the 'illiterate'make their way intothe organizationof thesubstance of knowledge.That also transformsthe concept of educa- tionin itsvery essence. Why should we go to schooland interruptour education?Now thatchildren lose themselvesto thetotal environments of thelarge cities and theinfinite data processes of thenew media,the educationalinstitutions of the Gutenberg-Galaxyno longerhave a future."[S]wamped by informationoverload," the preschoolchild sits likea hunterin frontof thetelevision screen. "Pattern-recognition is the roleof the researcher and explorer."60 Benjamin'sPassagenwerk and McLuhan'smedia theory have triedto do justice to this phenomenonin theirwriting styles. They are not books any more,but rather mosaics of citationsand thoughtfragments - writinglike film.Today's intellectualwork at the computerfulfills WalterBenjamin's prognosis of theend of handwritingas theascent of a constellationcharacteristic for the new media. Tactility,command, and theinnervation of technology:"The typewriterwill notestrange the handof theintellectual from the pen untilthe exactitude of typographic formationsmakes its way intothe very conceptualization of his or her books.Presumably one will thenneed new systemswith the abilityto createvariable type faces. They will replacethe hand current now with theinnervation of the commanding finger."61 The eliminationof handwritingis the decisivegrammatological cae- suraof the modem era. Since the burden of "the pointing-writing hand" is relievedby media technology, the hand is no longera signof man,rather it is thecommanding finger. The wordis no longerthe word of man,but
58. G. W. F. Hegel,Phanomenologie des Geistes(Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp, 1986) 17. 59. Benjamin,"Zweierlei Volkstiimlichkeit" 4: 671. 60. McLuhan,From Cliche to Archetype 201, 182. 61. Benjamin,"Deutsche, trinkt deutsches Bier!" 4: 105.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:25:41 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 128 Farewellto theGutenberg Galaxy ratherinformation. The grammatologicalunity of pointing,drawing and signthat is thehand is dissolving.For this reason we findin Heidegger's reflectionson the signlessbeing of Lethein Parmenidesan historical deductionof thetypewriter's essence. "It is no coincidencethat the inven- tion of the printingpress occurs at the beginningof the modemera. Wordsbecome letters, the outline of thescript disappears. The lettersare 'set',what is setis 'pressed'.This mechanism of settingand pressing and 'printing'is thepredecessor of thetypewriter. The breakthroughof the mechanisminto the realm of theword lies in thewriting-machine." In thatthe typewriter makes the human hand into the innervating organ of a keyboard,it coversover what writing means and takesaway the script fromthe word of man.From this point on, one has handsin orderto ser- vice the keyboard.With the rise of writing-machinesthat have made scriptanonymous, the world of thehand, the word and man is lost."The modemindividual does notjust happen to write'with' the typewriter and 'dictate'(the same word as 'Dichten'62)'into' the machine." 63 This will not shockanyone who can no longerread his or herown handwriting.Whoever has 14 Dioptrienand Rauschmusikin his ear, like Nietzsche,loses all connectionto the pointing-writinghand. He philosophizesnot with the quill in hand,but rather with the hammer in his ear. It is preciselythe estrangementfrom one's own handwriting thatgives Nietzsche the insight into the media technological a priori of thought.After he triedhis handat thetypewriter he realizedwhat can hardlybe news to the intellectualwho sits in frontof the computer screentoday. We readin a letterto HeinrichKiselitz fromFebruary of 1882:"Our writing utensils work with our thoughts as well." The mediatechnological a prioriof thoughtand perceptionbecomes manifestwherever it comesto an interfaceof Gutenbergtechnology and new media- forinstance when a learnedbook worm enters the "mod- em broadcastingstudio" of a "radio station."In the new mediumof radio,Benjamin tells of the fate of the Gutenberg medium, the book. In a storycalled "To the Minute"- because it showshow rigorouslythe manuscriptcomes under the dictates of airtime - Benjamin,who cannot managethe synchronization ofmanuscript length and airtime, breaks his
62. The wordDichten is theGerman expression for the writing of poetry. 63. Heidegger,Parmenides (Frankfurt/Main: Klostermann, 1982) 119, 125f.Cf. UmbertoEco, UberGott und die Welt:Essays undGlossen (Munich: C. Hanser,1986) 252: "Whateverwe writeon thetypewriter will never be as importantas theradical other art,in whichthe technology of typing has taught us howto see writing."
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:25:41 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions NorbertBolz 129 speechoff abruptly and now standsdumb before the microphone that is still on. He is still speechlessduring the broadcastand the interface becomesa deadlythreat. "In thisbooth, which is dedicatedboth to tech- nologyand thehuman beings that are ruledby it,there came overme a fearthat is relatedto theoldest that we know."64Heinrich B611 was the firstto portraythis fearin a satiricsoftening: Dr. Murkes Collected Silences. Only in the built-inpauses is therenothing to hear. The mediumbroadcasts its own background noise. Only the acoustically real, notthe imaginary unity of the 'cultural word,' is putinto the archive and broadcast.A noteby Benjamincasts a brightlight on this."Lindberg's reception;The stockmarket;The noiseat theslaughter house (Marinetti / Thatis thenew static)."65In thelistener's booth, this new staticchanges the functionof thevoice. Underthe conditionsof the mass media,its message is its own omnipresence.The technicalimplementation of soundand listeningexposes us to thepresent with an intensityhereto- foreunknown. The JesuitWalter Ong, who smelledhere good chances forthe presence of God's word,notes: "The live humanvoice on tele- phone or radio createsa [ ... ] sense of an urgentpresent [ ... ]. Voice is 'real.' And voice is on theair todaymore than ever before."66 Ong, however,no longerknows anything of thefright that marks the birth of thisnew medium.Walter Benjamin wrote it down.It's 'twinbrother' was thetelephone. And thus, it belongs in thescenario of a Berlinchild- hood around1900: The birthof thenew voice fromwithin the appara- tus happenedin thedark. Telephone conversations were "noises of the night"for the child. "In these timesthe telephonehung theremal- formedand banned"to a darkcomer that the child reached, hardly able to speak,and aftermuch groping around, only after the "alarm signal" of itsringing went off. Gathered together here are all thedecisive ingre- dientsof the media'smagic formula: sensory deprivation, the shockof alarm,the tactile, the cramped innervation of theapparatus. In thisway thenew mediadoes actuallylead intothe heart of tribal darkness. Then "I was at themercy of thevoice thatspoke. Nothing lessened the eerie powerwith which it forceditself on me. Unconscious,I sufferedas it tookaway from me a senseof timeand dutyand intention.As it voided my own deliberation,and as the mediumof the voice followed,that
64. Benjamin,"Auf die Minute"4: 763. 65. Benjamin2: 1283. 66. Ong,The Presence of the World 298.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:25:41 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 130 Farewellto theGutenberg Galaxy fromsomewhere in thedistance took control of itself.I gave in to the firstbest suggestion that came at methrough the telephone."67 The urgencyand the suggestiveness of this scene owe notto thedepth of thememory of thischildhood experience, but rather to its interface withthe surrealist reception of the new media. Le Paysande Paris from 1926 bringsout fantasy as an allegoricalfigure that defines itself, a pre- conditionfor the possibility of theworld, as a frigidillusion. Whether it is theautomobile, the cinema, or theblue sky- thereare onlysenses, mediaand drugs.The surrealistdeals withlanguage and image.In this way he clearsout themisunderstanding that the media are instruments of communication."The telephone seems to be useful:just don'tbelieve that,look insteadat how theindividual clamps hold of thereceiver and criesout Hello! Whatis he if notan addictof sound,totally drunk on conqueredspace and on thetransmitted voice?" Literatureabolishes itself in surrealismin thatit traversesthe differ- ence betweenwriting with the pen and theso-called immediate forms of communicationsuch as the telephone.Literary scholars who have recognizedthe signs of the timehave been askingsuch unscientific [unwisschaftlich]questions as forinstance about the functionof the telephoneoperator in Proustor of thephonograph in Rilke.It is "the questionof theeffects of themost advanced telematics on whatwould stillremain of literature."68It is thenconsistent to ask, as does Derr- ida, whetherthe telephonictechne works separately from the appara- tus itself by inscribingthe diffiranceinto the phone. Modem sensitivity[Innerlichkeit] would then be nothingbut phoningwithout the telephone- just as terminologicallyexact as it declaresitself in Beingand Time,where Heidegger analyzes conscience as a phonecall. Wouldthat then make being unto death being on thetelephone? It's a joke I do notaccept, answered Derrida to theoperator who askedhim if he would accept a collect call "fromMartin Heidegger (she said Martineor Martini)."A collectcall fromHeidegger - is it a joke, whenone is alreadyconnected to thisphantom through infinite relays [Relais]? It presupposesonly that Heidegger finally became aware of the media technologicala prioriof his own anti-literarythinking. A puzzling sentenceby McLuhan clears up the joke with Derrida:
67. Benjamin"Das Telephon"4: 242f.Benjamin shows how the telephone became a weaponof everyday life: "Bi robedarf'4: 132. 68. JacquesDerrida, La cartepostale (Paris: Flammarion, 1980) 219.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:25:41 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions NorbertBolz 131
"Heideggersurf-boards along on theelectronic wave."69 A collectcall fromMartin Heidegger - thatis one of theabsurdities thatwould have been phonedon foreverif therehad been no rational- izationof media falloutby the quantificationof communication.As manypieces of communicationas possibileshould go throughas few wiresas possible.What is said is unimportant.The recognitionof the modulationof a humanvoice thatproduces the semblanceof under- standingsuffices. "Meaning - no one is payingattention to it." There- forethe encodingof informationhas nothingto do withresources of meaning,but insteadwith quantified communication. The meaningis notfundamental, rather it is themateriality of thesigns. Under the con- ditionsof the new media, communication is no longerdefined by sense, but ratherby jam. That is, the thresholdbeyond which nothing runs throughthe wiresany morethat what one could interpretas a call - wherethe modulationof the other'svoice is no longerrecognizable. "This is the firsttime that confusion as suchappears as a fundamental concept,this tendency within communication is to cease beingcommu- nication,that is to say, no longerto communicateanything at all."70 Jamis theentropy of information- in theGutenberg-Galaxy it is the unthinkable,for the new media it is theirfundamental concept.
Translatedby Michelle Mattson
69. McLuhan,The Gutenberg Galaxy 248; Derrida,La cartepostale 25;cf. Derrida, Ulyssegramophone:deux mots pour Joyce (Paris: Editions Galilee, 1987) passim. 70. Lacan,Le moidans la thedoriede Freudet dans la techniquede la psychanalyse 1954-55(Paris: Seuil, 1978) 105.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:25:41 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Fissures - Dissonances - Questions - Visions*
SiegfriedZielinski
1. Culturalcritics and otherprofessional interpreters of semiotic systems pinpointa fundamentalchange [Wende] in historywithin the disparate formsof 'computation'- as theapologists prefer to call thesymbiosis of communicativetechnologies and high-speedcalculators. The diverse 'discoursesof disappearance'of all possiblerealities and slices of real- ity thatwere writtenand publishedin the 1980s were based on this commonassumption.1 They proclaim a totalloss of sensoryexperience, thecomplete melding of realityand appearance,of facticityand fiction- ality,of thereal and the illusory. With forceful language and an arrayof overflowingmetaphors not seen forquite some time,they lament the successiveloss of languageand othersemiotic systems as signifying material,as ifthe creatively organized alphabetic rank and filehad to be musteredone last time againstthe hegemonyof both the numerical seriesof zeroesand ones and thevisual. Ultimately, meaning would be completelylost as a relationaryquality between signs. In cacotopic visions,the subject,along with its abilityto act and its sovereigntyin
* This is a translationof the final chapter of Audiovisionen- Kino undFernsehen als Zwischenspielein der Geschichteby SiegfriedZielinski, first published in 1989 by Rowohlt,Reinbek bei Hamburg.In 1999 a revisedEnglish translation, Audiovisions - CinemaAnd TelevisionAs Entr'actesIn Historywas publishedby AmsterdamP. This revisededition does not include this final chapter of the German version. 1. Cf.Klaus Bartels, "Das Verschwindender Fiktion. Ober das Alternder Literatur durchden Medienwechsel im 19. und20. Jahrhundert,"inRainer Bohn, Eggo Miller,and Rainer Rupperteds., Ansichteneiner kiinftigenMedienwissenschaft (Berlin: Edition Sigma,1988) 239f. 133
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:26:14 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 134 Fissures- Dissonances- Questions- Visions relationshipto objects,disappears in a worldthat is now governedby mere 'simulacra' (Baudrillard).The circulationof signs has fully replacedthe circulation of goodsand has supposedlybecome the domi- nantform of social exchange.The worldhas permutatedinto a medium, or is at least well on its way to becomingone. Or in thosecases in whichthe military is consideredthe dominant superstructure, electronic diversionbecomes simply occupational therapy before the big bang,a way of meaninglesslypassing the time left over beforethe inevitable information-technological'overkill.' The pointat whichsimulation can potentiallysubstitute for every- thingalgorithmically representable is undoubtedlyan unheard-ofcul- turalprovocation (and self-evidentlyalso a social one; sinceunder such conditionsthe entirerealm of productionand labor are restructured, even moreso thanentertainment and education).However, coming to termswith this transformation must not necessarilymean developing strategiesfor counter-enlightenment [Gegenaufkldrung], with which the generalanxiety that many people experiencein the confrontationwith theobscure mechanical world and its principlesof organizationis ulti- matelyonly heightened. Thinking about the historical limits of rational actionand at the same timebeing cognizant of the factthat human beingshave used reasonto catastrophicends does notnecessarily mean thatwe haveto rejectreason altogether on an intellectuallevel. No mat- terhow displacedor evenfluid the familiar boundaries become between sensoryand mediaexperience through technical systems and the ways humanbeings are boundto them- or morespecifically let themselves be boundto them- thesocial space in which(even media) interaction takesplace is notthereby eliminated, even when one conceivesof it as a constructedreality that is largelysubjective in nature.On thelevel of advancedaudiovisions the media undergo an enormousboost in signifi- cance,the power of whichis nowherenear fully exploited. It is, how- ever,a powerthat is potentiallybroken by or boundto apparatusesand programsthat are producedand sold in themarket. It is relatedto bod- ies of goods and bodilygoods that must be advertisedand whosecircu- lation has to be supported.It is connectedin its use to manifest structuresin themacroarchitecture of cities, villages and settlementsas well as to theinner and microarchitectureof living spaces, unfolding in interdependentrelationships with production and reprodutiveactivities, with the way people dress,eat, move about and presentthemselves
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:26:14 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions SiegfriedZielinski 135 sociallyin thoseplaces bothwithin and outsideof theirown fourwalls. Regardlessof how thesediscourses and partialpractices are themselves configuredas systemsof signification. To thinkof the social andthe private as reciprocalalso alwaysentails consideringtheir contradiction as an essentialcategory of the move- mentbetween the two. Our interactionwith highly developed informa- tion and entertainmenttechnology is only in its infantstages, particularlyas it pertainsto theiruse amongnon-experts. It is fartoo earlyto be able to settleon a definitiveposition, especially since we can alreadydiscern a numberof dissonanceswhich make it clear that even thehegemony of thenew dispositiveorder has its limits,perhaps evenmore so thanhas beenperceptible as yetin thehistory of audiovi- sual media.Just as 'dromology,'a theoryof speed- suchas Paul Vir- ilio triedto developin his fascinatingphenomenology of the military and thecinema - mustalso systematicallyconsider the airplane crash thatat theend of the 1980s has becomethe norm of highspeedtravel, so too the fissuresand contradictionsare essentialthat reveal them- selvesin thedevelopment of theculture industry's superstructure. There is hopein this insight as well.
2. Justhow muchmore ground the media will gainin postmoderncoun- triesand how much it will be able to conquerthe minds and hearts of the people dependslargely on the directionthe remainingsocial practices withwhich audiovisual discourse intersects will take. The phenomena we have observedin the developmentof mediaare almostexclusively manifestationsof thosesocieties that are economicallyand industrially fiurthestadvanced. They will notremain untouched by the new move- mentstoward ethnic, cultural, economic, and politicalself-determination thathave foundmanifest expression at theend of the 1980s in different countriesunder the hegemonyof the majorblocks. Even if we stay closerto home,we can, forinstance, share Richard Sennett's expecta- tion thatthe 'tyrannyof intimacy,'the ideal psycho-socialbreeding groundfor the expanding imaginization of thesubjects in theelectronic fortressesof singularizedliving, will be robbedof their fertilizer through therenaissance of thecities, the re-conquest and reactivizationof urban life spaces as "thefocal point of an activesocial life,the place where conflictof interestsand the balancing of interestsare carriedout, and the
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:26:14 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 136 Fissures- Dissonances- Questions- Visions space for the developmentof humancapabilities and possibilities."2 AlexanderKluge latcheson to thiswhen he demands:"The mosteffec- tive antidotesfor an excess of telecracyare illuminatedcities in the evening:the classic public sphere, and in itunmediated life among those present."3Whenever people have worked to reinstitutionalizeor institu- tionalizenew publicspheres, attempts to breakout of exclusivelyinti- mateidentificatory connections have found new goals. Thisprocess seems to havegotten underway already. The loss of classi- cal large-scalecommercial outdoor-culture is being counteracted in urban centerswith a growingdiversity of activitiesorganized from 'below': experimentaltheaters; mobile or stationarysmall stageson whichthe varietdwith its heterogeneousentertainment offerings is beingreacti- vated;live musicin caf6s,bars or in redesignedworkshops and factory halls; cabaret;puppet theater for children; flea markets;trading centers; streetfestivals; the rediscovery of publicparks as placesfor communica- tionand public stagings (invigorated substantially by migrantsfrom coun- trieswhere it is commonto bringculture to publicspaces). Professional marketershave longsince joined in thismovement in concertedefforts withthe community planners of late capitalism. City centers have become giantparcelled-out commercial landscapes into which the traditional, rig- idlystructured department stores have been integrated.Lighted arcades everywhere,passageways, and commercialevent spaces, in whichplebe- ian residentsof thesuburbs and theinner city housing complexes rather thanwell-to-do fldneurs - take a strollalongside national as well as internationalshopping tourists. And eventhe traditional broadcast media are of necessityparticipating in thisprocess. They need the livelycul- turalevents as programattractions and are increasinglymoving toward organizingthem themselves for taping or live broadcast. The developmentof mediatechnology may have itselfalready con- tributedto improvingthe chances for a renewedredeployment of pub- lic culturalactivities. The devicesfor recording, playing, and storing audiovisionsindependently from the organized timetables of the event planners,make it easierfor people who generallyenjoy entertainment and expandedcultural experiences outside the hometo decide against
2. RichardSennett, Verfall und Ende des OffentlichenLebens. Die Tyranneider Intimitat(Frankfurt, 1983) 428. 3. AlexanderKluge, "Die Macht der Bewultseinsindustrieund das Schicksal unsererOffentlichkeit. Zum Unterschied von machbar und gewalttiitig," in Klaus von Bis- marck,ed., Industrialisierung des Bewufltseins(Munich: Piper, 1985) 125.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:26:14 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions SiegfriedZielinski 137 participatingin a superimposedtime schedule.The successfulmass- marketingof thesedevices at the end of the 1970s/beginningof the 1980s led to a reorientationtoward leisure time activities more directly tiedto eventsand experiences.The chancesthat the renaissance of out- door-cultureis nota merepassing fad, but rather open for further devel- opment,are even betterthe more the classical familyloses its significanceas a bulwarkagainst public experience and themore col- lectiveinteraction with multiple connections become more prominent. 'Mobile privatization'is the termRaymond Williams coined at the beginningof the 1980s to describethe necessary conditions for the gradual formationof a newidentity for subjects. "The identitythat is offeredto us is a newkind of freedomin thatarea of our lives that we havesquared off fromsocial determinationsand demands.It is private.It includesa great deal of consumption.Much of ithas to do withthe home, with where one lives. Much of it requiresthe mostproductive and imaginativehuman impulsesand activities - furthermorein a veryreasonable way when com- paredwith the competing demands of orthodox politics.'4 Where this iden- tityformation remains a purelyaffirmative one it leads to thatkind of singularizationthat we have describedas an open door forthe culture- industrialdispositif. But 'mobile privatization' is ambivalent. It may also be linkedto alternative life styles and can be generalizedin a groupcontext. Of course,the new formsof individualizedsociality are determined now less by thetraditional forms of social organizationsuch as political partiesor unionsthan by morespecialized, more personalized, and scin- tillatinglyheterogeneous interest articulations: dedicated to subversiveor defensivegoals, they range from computer clubs, film clubs, neighbor- hood or culturalassociations to women'sgroups, history workshops and environmentalinitiatives, the 'WorkingGroup of CriticalPolice Offic- ers' or theBerlin Agitprop - 'Officefor Unusual Measures' to thepri- vatelyorganized groups for those minorities at society'souter edges like immigrants,the disabled, gays and lesbians,or seniors'groups. A public sphereis reconfiguredin such social contexts, not in thesense of larger, less manageable,dispersed structures, but rather more decentralized and intimate.The new communicationstechnologies offer such groupsthe abilityto produceboth their internal and externalcommunications. They offerpossibilities that are alreadybeing used extensively,not only in the formof video recordings and printed materials (even the nomadic Berber
4. RaymondWilliams, "Mobile Privatisierung," Das Argument26 (1984): 261.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:26:14 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 138 Fissures - Dissonances - Questions- Visions in theFederal Republic now have theirown newsletter),but also in the use of electronicdata processing in theinternet. For instance,during the strikeof winter1988/89 students at theFree University in Berlincreated 'StrikeNet,' a computermailbox system, through which they could quicklyand reliably spread the latest news: networking through media in orderto supportand to complementthe real network. In France'swidely usedvideo text system the - at timessubversive - gamewith the 'Pub- lic-Dataprocessing-System'(Volks-EDV) has longsince become an elec- tronicvariant of the nation's daily sport [Alltagssport].
"Theunity of the public and the intimate would be a powerfulform of organization."5
At theend of the 1980sit is grippingto watchat theuniversities how a new generationof computerscientists, communications technicians or electricalengineers are tryingto appropriatethe new technologies.The avantgardeamong them have long since overcome the stage of pure fas- cinationwith the machines.They want to couple mechanicalorienta- tionwith a strongcultural orientation and are easily sensitizedto the wealthin (media) history.The mostlamentable deficit in all of thisis thatthere are simplynot enough academic teachers that have theneces- sary interdisciplinaryknowledge to offer.Nonetheless many students have begunto work creativelyon theirfuture modes of articulation throughthe integration of highlyadvanced communication and informa- tion technology.They have begunto practicedirectly with the new technologicalobjective systems [Sachsystemen]. If one fixesone's gaze rigidlyon theclassical dispositifs, one will notsee themanifold results of suchactivities, or will see themonly occasionally in theirmore spec- tacularepisodes. It will thenbe thetask of futurearcheologists to rec- ognizethem as symptomaticofthe foundational era of the new media.
3. The sorrowthat has come fromthe end of the cinema'shegemonic role in filmicrepresentation should not become excessive, and, above all, shouldnot be paralyzing.Not aftertwo worldwars, that also - especiallyalso in Germany- tookplace in the movietheaters, after the cinemaof Adenauer,McCarthy, and Reagan,at a pointin filmic
5. OskarNegt and AlexanderKluge, Geschichte und Eigensinn (Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp,1981) 339.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:26:14 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions SiegfriedZielinski 139 discourseat whichgreat cinematic events apparently can only come togetherwhen they are supportedby sumswith which the countries of theso-called Third World have to financetheir yearly budgets for edu- cationor social welfare.Cinema was and is also a cinemaof aggres- sion. Cinemawas and is also propagandafor goods, ideologies,and emotionaldrivel. Cinema was and is as alwaysone of themost power- fuladvertising agents for lifestyles. This, of course,does notmean that it doesn'toccasionally also haveother kinds of experiencesto offer.But the times when the subjectsin Barthes's'cubus' were not doubly robbed- of themoney they paid at theticket counter and of thetime spentbefore, during and afterthe film - have becomesingular excep- tions generallyonly accessible to a few at ritualizedfestivals of cinephilicand commercialincest, on the occasion of gala premieres withopening night opera audiences in New York and Paris,or wher- ever an avantgardecinema thrives. And such exceptionswill continue to be possibleas longas thereare, for instance, television directors and creatorswho tryto assuagethe guilty conscience they have acquiredin theirwork on the TV-dispositifwith the artisticproductions for cine- maticmythology, or who need the culturallymore reputable cinematic productso thattheir less ambitiousmerchandise can bask in the glow theyborrow from the artwork's aura. If filmmakerstake seriously their own penetrantly demonstrated claims to the sublime,to worksdestined for canonization, then they ought to welcome the furtheralteration of the homeviewer'sscreen into the audiovisualcenter for opulent visual and acousticexperiences, as well as theinstallation of therectangular image-frame in theHiVision variant of audiovision:the 'salon' ofthe late twentieth century. Art demands as one of its funadamentalprecepts "the possibility to evaluateit as objectsof contemplativeconsideration" (Benjamin), the concentratedcollision of workand consumer,that is best achievedin isolation,in the private sphereaccording to the traditionof the culturallyconscientious bour- geoisie.Why should this have changedin the age of electronicrepro- duction?Especially when one considersthat the performative aspect of the filmis no longersacred in today'scinema. How manyof those who continueto workas writersand journalists on thecinematic myth have longexpanded their libraries with cassettes or video discs of their favoritedirectors, actors, cameramen or composers,to whomthey can now turnat a whim,immersing themselves in the illusionof move- ment,just as theycould with their printed editions of Ambler,Chandler
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:26:14 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 140 Fissures- Dissonances- Questions- Visions or Hammett,Proust, Joyce or Zola? Isn'tthe main thrust of therenewed, culturallypessimistic lament about infinite reproduction in the age of electronicsjust moregrief about yet another privilege they have to give up to thecommon folk? Or does it havemore to do withthe anxiety of thecreators that their visual and acoustictricks are no longerfleeting in the materialityof audiovisions,but can ratherbe scrutinizedand reviewed,that they will now have to withstand the analytical gaze? The traditionalwork of artwas deprivedof its classicalaura in its mechanical-chemicalreproduction and in becomingavailable for a col- lectivizedreception. But technicallymore advanced productive forces have creatednew venuesfor artistic expression which, in turn,created new auraticconditions. And formerguarantors of a more distanced receptionsuch as film had in the cinema have themselvesbeen bestowedwith an auraticdimension in theprocess of theirbourgeoisifi- cation.Benjamin's 'artwork'-essay urgently needs revisions. The ubiquityof the cinematic space, that has goneas faras itsdissolu- tion intomobility, has also made it possibleto breakopen the forms encrustedin the dispositifof industrialculture, to breakfree from the artificiallyimposed norm of thetwo-hour movie, and to createand offer bothindoors and outdoors,at differentlocations, and fordifferent occa- sionsdiverse filmic experiences of varying length. Maybe even a reactiv- izationof thatplebeian mode of occasionalentertainment within the contextof otheroutdoor-pastimes, dancing for instance, or chatting,or meetingfriends? Must this necessarily take on the formof imageand soundblasting with which discos tempt their predominantly younger cus- tomers?And futureelectronic places forviewing film in smallerspaces formore intimate public gatherings: since social anonymitywould be at least partiallyeliminated, there would be less promisein displaying taboo sexualityand/or violence. Although routinely criticized for their lack of imagination,would electronic filming and projectionnot also be productivefor the organization of morespatially remote viewing experi- ences in thesenew cinematicspaces? Finally, since these would not be as capital-intensive,could they not also be utilizedfor the temporal orga- nizationof divergentpublic groups,for the distributionof cinematic materialfor which the promotional costs were not as highas theproduc- tioncosts, or also foraudiovisions that aim specificallyto fracturethe dominantdiscourse? Perhaps the futureof the cinemalies morein the interventionistappropriation ofheretofore uncultivated social spaces than in therenewal of cinematic forms and the exploration of new subjects.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:26:14 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions SiegfriedZielinski 141
4. Thereis even less reasonto grieveover the decline of theprogram- minghegemony held by classictelevision structures. Over the last three and a halfdecades, the organized block of publicbroadcasting stations has provenitself resistant to externalcritique and suggestionsfor reform.Ever sincethe analytical dissection of thismedium at thehands of criticaltheorists and neo-Marxists,some of the qualitiesof public television,which are nowtending toward dissolution, have been consid- eredindisputable guarantees for the oppression of individuals:its indis- solublebond to institutionalizedpolitical power, the circular effect along withits organizationalpotential, the immediacy of address,its temporal limitationsand therelated structural dependency into which public tele- vision forcedits viewers.Against this backdrop the apparentloss of social significancethat this most institutional of institutionalizedmedia is experiencingcan onlybe seenas a netgain. The multifunctionalityof the televisionapparatus, its instrumentalizationfor the processesof labor,administration, calculation, play, self-portrait, the illusionary satis- factionof pornographicneeds - in brief:the heterogeneity of its uses goes handin handwith the relativization of its mythicstatus as "win- dow on theworld" through which supposedly one can view globalreal- ityand, in reverse, this global reality can peek into our living rooms. The incipientanarchy of televisionchannels and theirbitter competi- tionopens the possibility for ideological error, or at least allows us to plan on therupture. The homogeneousapparatus that supposedly sucked in everythingand flattenedthe aesthetic playing field, and theone which Adornoand Horkheimer'sDialectic of Enlightenmentpresupposed (and hadto presuppose)no longerexists as a monolithicblock. One reasonfor thisis thatthe subject itself has becomemore differentiated. The homo- geneousmass public,in the nebuloussense of a social norm,increas- inglyrevealed itself to be a fiction- even fromthe perspective of the cultureindustry. In thesearch for new consumertarget groups (to which theculturally well-versed also belong,as well as thosewith alternative lifestyles[Alternativen], non-alienated labor, socially and self-awareindi- viduals),television also searchesfor a distinctprofile to contrastwith the institutionsof publicbroadcasting and forthe cheapest possible ways to fillup airtime.As a result,those previously shut out of the television communityhave foundavenues for self-expression.Alexander Kluge formulatesthe strategyfor such alternativeprogramming as follows:
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:26:14 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 142 Fissures- Dissonances- Questions- Visions
"Effectivecounter production must play offthe strengthsof its oppo- nent."6With the DevelopmentCompany for TelevisionPrograms (DCTP), a cooperativeproject with the Japaneseadvertising agency Dentsu,he has managedto carveout forhimself and fora fewof his colleaguesairtime in thelargest private broadcasters. In thesesegments he can air his listeningand viewingschools for the sensitivizationof televisionviewing, he can tell his oftenvery private 'film stories' that seem sometimeslike leafing through a familyalbum, and he can talkat lengthwith people who have somethingto say. These 'news and sto- ries,'like the news programs of "Spiegeltv", demonstrate what current, interventionistjournalistic work can accomplish.And the largermedia groupsare no longeralone. Channel4 is the name of a collaborative groupof engagedindependent film and video groupsin NorthRhine- Westphaliathat has workedout long-termcontracts with RTL plus and SATI. In 1989 thosecontracts gave themonly appromixmately1260 minutesof airtime;but this is afterall roughlyequal to twenty-eighttra- ditionaltelevision features. Their first broadcast was programmatic:the televisionpremiere of Giinter Wallraff's Lowest of the Low.
5. New dependenciesand relationshipsfor cultural interaction unfold with theartifacts of advancedaudiovisions. Working with the media machines and theirsignificatory praxes requires new qualificationsthat seem to havelittle in commonwith those traditionally desired and consideredsuf- ficientfor the perceptiveparticipation in mass culture.The bitterand apocalypticreactions among certain cultural critics to the new media deriveat leastpartially - consciouslyor unconsciously- frompainful experiencesof culturalincompetence and an inabilityto actthat they must havefelt in the confrontation with the materiality ofaudiovisual discourse. Knowledgeablemanagement of the rhythmicinterweaving of audial and visualimages, for instance, requires an expertin popularvisual and musicalculture, who has beensocialized from early childhood in a cin- ematicworld, in theaesthetic of acceleration.It mustbe someonewho knows intimatelythe fetishes,insignia, icons, and symbolsof youth subcultureand its commercializedexpressive potential. Only to those who simplycannot read these codes, who do nothave theinterpretive mortarof the consumer,do thesestructures appear to be completely
6. AlexanderKluge 339.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:26:14 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions SiegfriedZielinski 143 fragmentedand pureaggression. The searchfor the expression of these dreamgoods and thesedreams as goodsin thereal liferelationships of theiryoung users must dead end if it does not startwith their experi- ence of realityas mediatedexperience, in whichthe continuousdeci- pheringof signs plays a decisiverole. Yet moreserious is thecultural transition that relates to dealingwith thesemachines. Even connectingand turningon a stereosystem or pro- grammingthe channelsin thenew cable box causes tremendousprob- lemsfor many people. Sovereign use of theremote control for the new set of artifacts,for the joystick, the mouse,keyboard, digitalized tim- ers, or the scannersfor preprogrammed recording, networking system componentsinto integratedmedia machinesdemands the combined media competencyof an electricalengineer and a computerscientist. The increasingimportance of electronicsin today'shouseholds has in fact been fosteringsuch skills over the last decades. But additional capabilitiesand skillswill be necessaryif we wantto overcomepure consumptionand move towardthe individualproduction of audiovi- sions.On theone handthe realization of suchcultural pleasures will not comeabout simply with the knowledge of outputpower, bits and bytes, data buses,interfaces, features, track density, shutters, blitters, returns or loops. On theother hand knowing just how importantsuch signifiers are will increasinglybecome the precondition of enjoyment.The will to and thedesire for losing oneself in contemplation,for thrills and kicks, educationand distraction,combined with the willingness to workwith one's handsand to thinkmathematically: a process, which has already happenedin the scienceswith the adoption of quantitativemethods - somethinglike theproletarianization of the academicdaily grind - a process that manifestsitself in media practice.Furthermore, these expandedqualifications need not be acquiredjust forleisure time activi- ties.They will be expectedas a matterof coursefrom the growing army ofthose working in the information and service sectors.7 WoodyAllen's insertionof his face in Zelig minglingwith the Nazi crowds,or the hero of The Purple Rose of Cairo steppingoff the screenwhile the heroineenters the imaginaryrealm of the cineastic play was toutedas a strokeof genius.But whyshouldn't the computer
7. On therestructuring ofthe labor sector, see RolfOberliesen, Information, Daten und Signale. Geschichtetechnischer Informationsverarbeitung (Reinbek bei Hamburg: Rowohlt,1982) 249ff.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:26:14 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 144 Fissures- Dissonances- Questions- Visions user sittingat his or herkeyboard at homenot be able in principleto have the same possibilitiesfor media interaction as the brilliantdirec- tor?Even ifmany would at firstrush off to battlewith 'Rambo,' set off with'Momo' in searchof thelost time, travel with 'Alice' to wonder- land,or insertthemselves into an audiovisualpornographic excess. In thissense too it is meaningfulto speakof a newfoundational era: the glass imagesof theLaterna magica, the photo strips for the praxinoscope or thezoetrope as well as thephenakistiscope itself [Lebensrader] were, witha certainamount of finesse,easily reproduced and modified.With thepotential elimination of theindustrially created separation of produc- tionand consumptionin thenew artefacts,similar preconditions - at a moreadvanced level - arewaiting to be re-engaged.When everyday real- ityis increasinglypermeated by media, machines for the expanded appro- priationof mediality take on at least the potential for emancipatory uses.
6. As theimportance of themedia grows, interactive media productions thatpresume participation in and contributionsto audiovisual discourse acquirenot lesser, but yet more important functions, not in spiteof, but ratherbecause they are moredifficult to practiceunder such altered cir- cumstances.The areas of frictionfor future projects of the avantgarde are twofold:they must on theone handreflect the fact that we are deal- ing witha powerfulattempt to expandculture industrial hegemony, as well as workingthrough the increased importance of themedia's mate- rialityby helping to makeits significance visible. The avantgardemovement, with the Dadaists as itshigh point, consid- eredthe conditio sine qua nonof modemart to be theanti-industrial - thatwhich did not fitinto commercial streamlining, which broke with convention.This concept,repeatedly thematized by creativefilmmakers, mustnow be rethoughtand reactivated.Increasingly we findprominent 'culturalsponsoring' from banks, big industriesand serviceproviders and artistswho are willinglyletting themselves be used to explorethe poten- tial and thelimits of thehigh-tech venues for representation and expres- sion that these companies are producing.With this, art/culture, technology,and commerceare meltingtogether more and moreinto a symbiosisthat is difficultto distill.In thiscontext, interventionist media productionscould entaila critiqueof the institutionand not continued supportfor it by perfecting the aesthetic surfaces of itsoutput. That would
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:26:14 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions SiegfriedZielinski 145 also entaila revitalizationofthe ability for self-criticism in the social sub- set of art/culturewhich Peter Buirger, in his Theoryof theAvant-Garde, describedas characteristicfor the latter'shistorical development.8 This does notnecessarily imply a completerejection of thecommodity form, butinsists rather on the tension between avantgarde and advertisement. "Culturalcritique of thelarge mass media that create television is only effectivewhen it appearsin productform. Ideas cannotfight material productionwhen the latter has occupiedthe images."9 In principlewhat Kluge sayshere is correct.But the quasi subversiveentry into the appa- ratusunder commercial conditions, the entry he chose forhimself with DCTP, is onlyone alternative,one thatfurthermore constantly faces the dangerthat its interventionist moments will be sweptalong in thetelevi- sual currentof blissfulconsumption - in the apparatusthat "homoge- nizes everything"(Adomo/Horkheimer). One mustadd to and protect thiskind of work through efforts outside of the apparatus itself. The fixa- tionon broadcastingwill becomeincreasingly obsolete as thoseaudiovi- sions mediatedby broadcastingbecome themselves only one formof distribution.The diversifiedmarkets for filmic material are now more accessibleto counter-productionsthan was truejust two decades ago, whenthe potential for such a practicewas hailedprematurely. The fact thatcommunications technology has becomesmaller, cheaper, and more decentralizedwhile performancehas increasedand along withit the growthin generalmedia-technological competence have made the condi- tionsfor counter-productions much better. The neo-conservativefiscal policyof fosteringentrepreneurial endeavors is bearingfruit widely, even in mediamarkets. Why shouldn't this also be possiblefor audiovision? Thereis one primaryexplanation for what we have herecome to know and appreciateas 'New BritishCinema,' the growingmovement of regionallyanchored 'workshops' for the productionand distributionof interventionistmedia products:Thatcherism in the economyand the appropriationof communicationstechnology by many decentralized groupsand associationsof individuals.In theensuing tensions the path forwork on audiovisualcritique and interventionistmedia materialis narrow.But it is passable.The workof the fourthEnglish TV-channel has been provingthis since 1982. Organizedas a privatechannel, and
8. ComparePeter BUrger, Theorie der Avantgarde(Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp, 1974)28f. 9. Kluge 125.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:26:14 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 146 Fissures- Dissonances- Questions- Visions financedby thesurpluses from the immense advertising revenues of the commercialtelevision enterprises, 'Channel Four' has becomea globally recognizedsymbol for innovative, high quality modem television.10
7. Advancedaudiovisions? We are confrontedwith a discrepancythat we have oftenobserved in history:A newdevelopmental stage for tech- nologicaltools and objectsof culturalinteraction faces a dearthof con- cepts abouthow best to workwith them, about how to exploitthem fromthe perspectiveof continuedwork on projectsof enlightenment and thewidening of culturalpleasures. Already at theturn of thecen- tury,Georg Simmelcharacterized this quite precisely as the discrep- ancy between "objectivized[objektiv gewordenen] and subjective culture,"as theinability to exhaust"Geist objectified." Media materialityis highlycompressed, technologically advanced, and accessible.Tiny cameras no biggerthan the head of a pin can enter into organisms,or projectsimulated movements in the architectonic dimensionsof a house wall: we can now visualizemicro and macro- cosms. High-speedcinematography allows us to observethe fastest seriesof movements;even homevideo aficionadoscan dissectobjec- tivetime by drawingit out withslow motioneffects. What we gener- ally cannotsee we can makeconcrete in the syntheticimage. We can connectdifferent temporal planes not onlyone afteranother, but also one on top of the other,or parallelto one anotherin one visual sequence.Dimensions, directional movements, perspectives are avail- able forvisual (re)constructionin astonishinglymanifold ways. There are hardlyany limits left to howwe can unleashtechnological organs of perception.But whatdo we actuallysee on thevideo terminals,moni- tors,and projectionscreens of theglobally commodified audiovisions? 'Culturallag' as theprinciple for production even in moredeveloped visualizationsof culture-industrialproduction: film material about Wall Streetfor instance is setinto images and dramaticscenarios that appear to have been borrowedfrom a catalogueof Hollywoodantiques. As if
10. Comparehere also GabrieleBock andZielinski, "Der britischeChannel 4. Ein TV-Veranstalterim Spannungsverhaltnisvonprivatwirtschaftlicher Basis und kulturellem Auftrag,"Media Perspektiven 1 (1987): 38-54. 11. GeorgSimmel, Philosophie des Geldes(Leipzig 1900) 479f. Quoted here from MichaelParmentier, "Asthetische Bildung zwischen Avantgardekunst und Massenkultur," NeueSammlung 28 (1988): 63.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:26:14 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions SiegfriedZielinski 147 one couldgrasp even a fragmentof the world-wide financial market and its effectson people's livesby stylizingsome of itsagents as heroesof a postmodernwestern. In 1988,'The LittleTelevision Workshop' ['Das kleineFernsehspiel'], known for avantgarde television in the Federal Republic,used highlyadvanced technology to produceWith other eyes in 1988, a movieabout genetic research in a laboratorythat seemed to be liftedfrom a Frankensteinfilm. Against the backdrop of medically sterilewalls, a naive,ludicrous psychopath bedecked with a whitelab coat waves aroundtest tubes sloshingwith peculiar fluids and eery vapors:the mythic witch's brew to visualizethe most pressing ethical, scientificand technologicalprovocation of the late twentiethcentury. Tales aboutdedicated clergymen [Pfarramtsgeschichten] from Swabia - spicedup withissues of alternativelifestyles - are dutifullyserial- ized; the Hessian Scholermannfamily of the 1950s is transportedto Linden Streetin Nowheresville,Germany; lawyers are cast as the heroesof Kreuzberg'severyday reality; and forthe umpteenth time the lone cop is showndoing battle with the rest of theworld - naturally, underthe banner of the common market - as 'Euro-Cop.' Those who maintain- as is currentlyin vogueamong German image producers- thatreality just doesn'toffer any grippingstories any more,have long since disengagedthemselves, in orderto workundis- turbedat theirartistic craft, to dedicatethemselves to audiovisualpot- tery. Greenpeace and Robin Wood stage much more thrilling productionsin thereal world than an entireyear's worth of fictionalpro- ductionoffers at the end of the 1980s. Whereare the filmsthat go beyondand directlyoppose the public relations departments of therele- vant industries,that examine the researchprocesses and goals in bio- chemistryand neuro-biology?Where are the filmsthat dissect and fictionalizecomplex information systems and theirimpact on society, that concernthemselves with the intersectionof humanbeings and machinesas a uniquesocial-psychological focal spot, that take on such issues as theremote exploration of theatmosphere and hydrospherein physics- withall of theirfascinating images? So farit has generally been leftto thenews media to thematizethe reactor catastrophes as the rulein thepurportedly perfected safety of thenuclear system. Where are the filmsthat identify with the life rhythmsof youthculture, without immediatelyalso wantingto sell thema whole arsenalof productsas well? Whereis Vertov'sMan witha Movie Camerabrought up to the
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:26:14 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 148 Fissures- Dissonances- Questions- Visions currentlevel of electronicsand computeranimation? As a contemporary "I see!," a visionof today'ssocial reality?Where are thefilms without literatureand (professional)actors about, for instance, the metropolises at theend of thetwentieth century, films that would take the project of the symphonicdocumentarists from the twenties into a new age? Why are such topics leftto the advertisingagencies? Who uncoversthe taboosand nightmares of the 1980s and 1990sand exposes them as ruth- lesslyas theDadaists and Surrealistsdid fortheir time? Beyond the fur- thertightening of the spiral of sex andviolence that can hardlybe tighter thanit is alreadyin thevisual realm. Where is thetelevision channel that uses themobility and the speed of the machines to offertruly live televi- sion,and in so doingdevelops the originality of themedium? Not as an occasionalor syntheticelement within an otherwiseconservative stream, butrather as a constant,ever-renewing institution. Underthe sign of the information age itis truerthan ever before that real- ityhas becomea function,about which photographic reproductions tell us lessand less. "It is notthe most important thing to discovernew things, it is mostimportant to create new relations between things that already exist."12 Thepotential for the combination of theobjective and the abstract with the aid of computeranimation or electronictrickery - as alreadypracticed intensivelyin architecture,design, industrial cinematography, in scientific researchand in thearts - has yetto be exploitedfor the creation of fic- tionaland factualsocial and private realities. Established computer anima- tionhas as yetset primarily simulated things in motion.Hans Richter, Man Ray, or FernandLeger had alreadydone this.What is neededis the attemptto use the expanded array of tools to make social conditions dance. "For thisreason the creation of a centralfilm laboratory for the real- izationof manuscriptscontaining new ideas,perhaps even with private capitalsupport, will soon be a self-evidentdemand, that will have to be realized."Moholy-Nagy13 wrote this in 1927 in theintroduction to his filmsketch "Dynamics of a Metropolis." In thehegemonic center of theclassical and obsolete dispositifs of cin- ema andtelevision there are fewattempts to utilizethe tools of advanced audiovisions,to use themfor more than just heighteningshock effects. Godardkeeps on working,Kluge keeps on working.Coppola throws
12. NamJune Paik, Art for 25 MillionPeople - BonJour, Monsieur Orwell - Kunst undSatelliten in der Zukunft (Berlin: Daadgalerie, 1984). 13. Lazl6 Moholy-Naigy,Malerei - Fotografie- Film.(Berlin: 1927, rpt. 1967) 120.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:26:14 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions SiegfriedZielinski 149 himselfagain and againinto the filmic adventure of productionsthat are located somewherebetween highly developed audiovisual technology and synthetickitsch. In the filmshe has made forthe media future he seemsintentionally to have riskedthe ignorance of his contemporaries; his electronicmovie experiment One from the Heart (1981) willpresum- ablynot be adequatelyappreciated until the 1990s.It is symptomaticof the primarilyeconomic orientation of the Europeanizationdebate, so effectivelydeveloped in therealm of publicrelations, that the big inno- vatorsof filmicdiscourse in westernEurope are noteven mentioned in this context,let alone distinguished.But Godardkeeps on working, Kluge keepsworking on theproject of thecontinual reformation of the audiovisual.And other innovators have joined them, who have setout on the difficultpath between avantgarde and advertisement.Peter Green- away,for instance, who has confusedboth professional and amateurcrit- ics withhis dazzlingimages harking back to scientificcinematography, his asceticsymmetrism, and a narrativestructure that is based on num- ber games.He is one of fewcineasts who has workedintensively with thecreative possibilities of theelectronic screen, who has turnedEnglish bathroomsinto true televisual orgies (in 26 Bathrooms),or who has combinedmusic and visionfor the small screenin new syntheses(in Four AmericanComposers). There is also DerekJarman, who withthe visualizationof BenjaminBritten's "War Requiem" has notonly created an ephemeralmonument to himselfearly on, buthas also compellingly demonstratedhow a grandlystylized, loudly droning and leisurelycin- ema aestheticcan be compressedthrough the brutal material violence of theelectronic into an antimilitaristicspectacle for a youngaudience. But themost exciting things are happeningat themargins of thecul- tureindustry's gravitational center. The filmessay, excellentlyrepre- sentedin theFederal Republic by Bitomsky,Costard, Farocki, or Krieg, withtheir quiet yet revolutionaryreflections on machines,computers, money,structures and perceptions, has been,if not completely revamped, at least furtherdeveloped with the aid of electronictechnologies. One examplewould be GeoffDunlop's L 'objetd'art a l'dge dlectronique,an homageto WalterBenjamin and a criticaldiscussion of his mostfamous theses.A fewhave discovered and stylistically honed the electronic cam- era as a sensitivetool forobserving everyday processes, for instance in verydifferent ways, the AmericansSkip Blumbergor Paul Garrin.In StepsZbigniev Rybczynski allows film/history and the present to collide
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:26:14 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 150 Fissures - Dissonances - Questions- Visions in an unbelievableprovocation. Into the filmsequence par excellence, theOdessa stepsfrom Eisenstein's Battleship Potemkin, he has syntheti- cally inserteda groupof Americantourists, who seem to be enjoying the scene withghoulish delight. Rybczynski learned his craftworking withvideo clips and thusperfected for himself the uses of chromakey and matching.He demonstratesimpressively in Steps how such elec- tronicmatting and mixingtechniques can openup newworlds of audio- visual perception:a playfullyinterventionist way to deal with film experience,media and politicalreality that are bound so closely together.The currentattempts of Americansand Sovietsto approach one anotherhas at timesappeared to be a giganticstaged media event morethan anything else. Out of Orderis madeof thesame stuffas the dreamsof today'syouth, without however attaching some brandname or a pricetag to everyimage. Just the opposite is truein fact,since the mainactors and creatorsof thismodem video-musical come fromBir- mingham'sunemployed. Over the last yearsthe directorand camera- man JonnieTurpin has helped themto masterelectronic means of expression.With imaginative creativity these young people have com- bined social satire,an insistenceon theirright to meaningfulwork, unvarnishedwit, political accusationswith their life styles,their rhythms,their musical identifications: video not just as packagingfor a sleepingaid, butrather as stimulatingsocial and culturalinjection, that nevertries to coverup its own media-generatedconstruction. It shows subjectivelyexperienced reality, it showsfiction. Justa few examplesfrom the heterogeneouswealth of audiovisions thathave alreadybeen produced. There is littlehere that bears the curse of the all-too-familiar.The unconventionalcreates for itselftangible expressionand recognitionwith the aid of new productiontechniques. The numberand the aestheticbandwidth of theseelectronic missives, skits,and designshas increasedto such a degreethat one can barely surveythe field and thatone can getonly a fragmentedglimpse of them at therelevant festivals - fromaggressive scratch videos and homages to the oscilloscopeto forcefulpoetry about magnetic tape. Brevityis less a questionof stylethan a consequenceof the materialeconomy. Internationallythe scene is not wealthyand is not well-supportedby officialcultural budgets. Frequently the artistsmust enter into short- termsponsoring contracts with the equipment manufacturers. They are, however,flanked by a quantitativelygrowing establishment of artificial
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:26:14 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions SiegfriedZielinski 151 electronicart productions that are beginningto reachthe elitemarkets throughlow-priced editions that are establishingtheir own international distributionsystems, and are conqueringmore and morespace in the musealtemples of the fine arts. The timeof the moving picture machines was stilldominated by crafts- men.The cultureindustry moved into the realm of audiovisualreproduc- tiononly gradually with the establishmentof the cinema.It thentook over the hegemonicrole, ruptured and opposedtime and again by the avantgarde,which in turnwas eitherlargely absorbed by the culture industryor whichultimately sold outto it.With the rise of televisionthe cultureindustry appropriated the private, familial realm, but in so doing createdgaps and fallowareas in thepublic arena that could then be re- occupied.At the level of advancedaudiovisions there is practiallyno longerany filmicdiscourse outside of the cultureindustry. The tension betweeninstitution and opposition has beensuspended in therealm of the technologicalmateriality of themedia and transferredinto the apparatus itself.It is herethat the conflict will be sustainedand played out. Michael Jacksonis thoroughlya product of theculture industry: in facthe is one withit. But Tom Waitsalso belongsin its fold;he will nothowever be absorbedinto it and withhis expressiveand sensualpotential cannot be completelydigested by it.At a timein whichwe can no longerimagine a mediaworld beyond commodification, the difference between the dispar- atecommodity spheres becomes increasingly important. As faras significatorypractice goes, we are,on thelevel of advanced audiovisions,still very much at thebeginning.
"Westand before a hugepile of words and misapplied symbols, and nextto it there is a giganticrepository full of new discoveries, inven- tionsand possibilities, allof which promise a better life."14
Translatedby Michelle Mattson
14. SiegfriedGiedion, Die Herrschaftder Mechanisierung. Ein Beitragzur Anony- menGeschichte, ed. HenningRitter (Frankfurt, 1982, 1987; Oxford, 1948) 770.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:26:14 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Fromthe True, the Good, the Beautiful to theTruly Beautiful Goods - Audience IdentificationStrategies on German"B-Television" Programs*
HeidemarieSchumacher
Germantelevision threatens to become,for the most part, the bearer of advertisingmessages. This trendis explicitin the presentationof goods duringblocks of advertisingand in the promotionof merchan- dise throughproduct placement. But, more importantly, it is implicitly visiblein thetendency of programmingconcepts to conformto adver- tisingstrategies and of individualprogram segments to adoptthe aes- theticsof commercials.An inane positivenessradiated by every participant,the inclusion of clips,soft focus, and catchymusic, among otherdevices illustrate a development which I consciouslyrefer to as B- TV (in analogyto B-movies). Neil Postmanformulated the thesisof televisionprogramming as a derivativeof advertisingor inverted,advertising as a parameterof televi- sion programmingfor American television in themid-1980s.1 Siegfried Zielinskidescribed German television in the age of competing"new media"as "advertisementtelevision."2 Just as relevantis thequestion to
* Reprintedcourtesy of SchiirenVerlag, Marburg. First printed in Medienwissen- schaft3 (1995): 1-8. 1. Neil Postman,Amusing Ourselves to Death: A PublicDiscourse in theAge of ShowBusiness (New York:Viking, 1985). 2. SiegfriedZielinski, Audiovisionen. Kino undFernsehen als Zwischenspielein derGeschichte. (Reinbek: Rowohlt, 1989). In Englishas: Audiovisions: Cinema and Tele- visionas entr'actes in History, trans. Gloria Custance (Amsterdam : Amsterdam UP, 1999). 152
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:26:36 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions HeidemarieSchumacher 153 whatextent new aesthetic parameters will develop with the emergence of tabloidtelevision. New studiesof advertisingtelevision point to theinter- connectionof sales aesthetics and other communication offerings. Public televisionas a societalinstitution passed its climaxwith its 1984 deregulation.Today the majorityof the available channelsare commercial.A look back at thefifteen-year old "dual system"revealed thatcommercialization has moved Germantelevision into the phase dominatedby marketforces and froma monopolisticto an oligopolistic structure.The legal guaranteefor the continuance of publicbroadcast- ing stationscould notprevent the current spectrum of televisionoffer- ings - born as it is fromthe spiritof competition- frombeing dominatedby marketleaders. And thusthe programming of thepublic broadcastersbecomes more and more marginalized. At a recentCologne Media Forum,primarily focused on theeconomic considerations of our mediafuture, the apt title of one paneldiscussion was "PrimarySource orMarginal Medium? The Future of Public Broadcasting." Mass appealnot only brings in thebucks, it also has an impacton the programmingconcepts of thetraditional stations: in orderto maintain the legitimacyof the currentfee structures,increasingly, the public broadcastingstations are respondingto the successof the commercial channels.Among commercial stations, which can operatewithout the burdenof provinglegitimacy and can thusfocus solely on profitability, competitionfor market share (viewers) has led to the developmentof channelsand formatsthat - just likeadvertisements - concentrate above all and withall possiblemeans on establishingviewer loyalty. An RTL- commercialformulated it in positiveterms: "RTL has discoveredsome- thingentirely new for television. The viewer." The strategyof cozyingup to the customerdirectly influences the designof theprivate networks' offerings. There are showtitles like Up Close [Hautnah](SAT 1), The People Behind The Headlines - Up Close and Personal(SATI); and sloganslike "We're Here For You," [Wirsind fir sie da] "We're LookingForward to Seeing You," [Wir freuenuns aufSie] or "See (?) You Soon" [Wirsehen (?) uns!].Above all, thereis enhancedaudience participation in the studiosas "guests" or "stars"in such programsas Dream Wedding(RTL), Man Oh Man (SATI), OnlyLove Matters(SAT1), and in the numeroustalk shows dominatethe playing field. The establishmentof viewerloyalty as a basis formaximizing profit
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:26:36 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 154 German"B-Television" Programs by advertisersnecessarily led to changesin today'stelevision aesthetics: breadthat any cost determinesconcepts and realization.Only now has TV becomea trulymass medium.Bemoaning the demise of television cultureis now largelya middleclass lament,not the dirge of thosewho tunein everyday to RTL, SATi orPRO7. The legitimacyof traditionalbroadcasting (its publicmandate) incurs therisk of reachingonly specific audience groups (older viewers, those seekinginformation and thoseinterested in culturalofferings). This has putpublic broadcasters in a difficultsituation: a targetaudience that is too diverseis disadvantageousfor program planning in a competitive environment,special interestprogramming (e.g., ARTE, a channel devotedto challengingcultural material) appeals to viewergroups that are simplytoo small.A case in pointis VOX, a commercialchannel thatstarted out with a demandingqualitative concept, yet was forcedto join theentertainment bandwagon in order to survivefinancially. RTL, the broadcasterwith the most viewers and the largestadvertis- ingincome in Europe,set the initial standards for "B-TV." In the 1980's it includedlow budgetentertainment shows and soft-pornprograms like Berlusconi'sTutti Frutti. Since the beginning of the 1990sthere is real- ity-TV,(sensationalistic journalism), daily soaps, highlypersonalized infotainment,talk shows, and dailygame showsthat have madeup the foundationof "leastobjectionable programming" characteristic of RTL and SAT1. It is a programmingconcept that offers the lowest common denominatorfor broaderaudiences. Because of theirlow production costs, RTL, SAT1 and PRO7 are countingon mixed formatshows pulled togetherfrom infotainmentand personalitydriven shows: Schreinemakers,Gottschalk, Ulrich Meyer, Arabella Kiesbauer, Ilona Christenand Hans Meiserare the namesthat mark this development. The lure of materialgain continuesto draw viewersinto daily game shows(SATI's advertisingslogan: "Television doesn't make you dumb, it makesyou rich")while aggressiveexternal advertising vies forthe favorof theviewers. Daily broadcasts,such as thenever-ending series / soap operaGood Times,Bad Times(RTL) or theinfotainment magazine Explosive(also RTL) createviewer loyalty and viewing habits. A corollaryof thisincreasing competition is thecompeting commis- sioned research.Examples can be seen in two texts:Report on the State of TelevisionCommissioned by the Presidentof the Federal Republicof Germanyand theconvergency study done at thebehest of
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:26:36 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions HeidemarieSchumacher 155
RTL.3 The studydone forthe federalpresident - an analysisof the dual systemfrom a publicperspective - came to theconclusion that commercialstations show primarilyviolence, pornography, and enter- tainment.The Mertenstudy, however, contends that public program- mingshows just as muchentertainment as commercial programming. A lot of moneygoes intothis research dedicated to mutualmonitoring. It would make moresense to initiatepublicly funded research that does not cast aspersionson thecompetition, but instead accepts the existing separationof A- and B- segmentsand servesto developofferings that are sophisticatedand attractivefor viewers. These studiescould result in thedevelopment of mediacompetencies that allow fora criticaldif- ferentiationbetween disparate program offerings. The pedanticallycon- descendinglessons conveyedvia the researchstudies funded by the publictelevision stations will not prevent commercial broadcasters from continuingbusiness as usual. And whilethe publicbroadcasters con- tinueto rantand rail,the commercialchannels have long since intro- duced new formatswhich change so rapidlythat the righteous indignationcomes too late because the programscriticized have usu- ally alreadybeen terminated.Short term and inexpensivelyproduced broadcastschange almost seasonally because such instantor fastpro- grammingformats have thedistinct advantage that they can be dropped justas quicklywhen they fail to generatea largeenough audience. Whatare the majortendencies that characterize market leaders like RTL, SAT1, PRO7, and VOX in theprocess of attractingthe television consumer?I arguethat the strategic convergence of televisionadvertis- ingand program forms constitutes a main feature of this development. Marketshare is insuredby adheringto specificprinciples: 1) Grabthe viewer'sattention; 2) establishan emotionalinvolvement for audience members;and 3) maintainand anchorthe viewer's interest. These prin- ciples - derivedfrom communication psychology - are the founda- tions upon whichmost aspectsof currentcommercial programming developmentrest. Advertising speaks firstand foremostto the emo- tionsof the consumer,a conceptto whichmany program offerings in the commercialchannels adhere. Viewer attentionis steeredthrough frequentformatting changes and throughspectacular offerings, even 3. Berichtzur Lage des Fernsehensfiir den Prdsidenten der Bundesrepublik Deut- schlandpresented by JoGroebel et al.; ed. IngridHamm. (Giitersloh: Bertelsmann Stif- tung,1994); and Klaus Merten,Konvergenz der deutschenFernsehprogramme. Eine Langzeituntersuchung1980-1993 (Miinster: Lit, 1994).
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:26:36 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 156 German"B-Television" Programs whenthe material itself is totallybanal. Sensationalist moderators, film clips,trailers made in the mannerof commercials,sexual or material lures,the transgression of publictaste boundaries as well as thepublic displayof theemotional outbursts of participantscreate the background forthe affectivecharge [Aufladung] of programofferings. In addition, promotionalsports, extensive external advertising campaigns (broad- castingmagazines, billboards, radio, illuminated display cases in rail- roadstations, etc.) attract attention to the individual programs. Viewerloyalty is establishedprimarily through the representationof familiaremotional situations and theeveryday problems of theviewers. The preferencefor everyday themes, the inclusionand presentationof afflictedindividuals and theverbal construction of the greatestpossible intimacysignal this intent. People identify with topics most closely when theyfeel a positiveconnection to theirown personal feelings or when they maylisten to someonewith a problemtalk about their experience or put themselveson publicdisplay. Thus, more and more viewers get to partici- patedirectly in talkshows, infotainment shows, reality soaps, and reality reportsabout accidents, illnesses and catastrophes.An additionalingredi- ent in this formulais the exploitationof emotionallycharged scenes: reunionsafter a longseparation, reconciliations, confessions of love and marriageproposals, the failureof peace offerings,or the descriptionof verypersonal problems on programswith a counselingformat. The dis- tanceof the medium establishes intimacy by directly integrating the viewer throughpublicly expressed private details in frontof a rollingcamera. This tendencyto focus on hithertoprivate and everydaythemes is best expressedin a simpleformula: with the exception of US-reruns,private stationsbroadcast predominantly private affairs. Authors like Meyrowitz4 have emphasizedthat the general role of televisionis to drawout those aspectsof sociallife that usually take place in thebackground of the social stage.What cultural sociologists have diagnosedas the "Fall of Public Man"5seems to convergehere with the development of a happeningsoci- ety[Erlebnisgesellschaft], in its media corollary of happeningtelevision [Erlebnisfernsehen].In terms of televisionaesthetics, these tendencies revealedthemselves in twoways: first, as a genericshifting, i.e., as calcu- latedtoying with the increasingly porous distinction between fiction and
4. JoshuaMeyrowitz, No Sense of Place: The Impactof ElectronicMedia on Social Structureand Behavior(New York:Oxford UP, 1985). 5. RichardSennett, The Fall ofthe Public Man (New York:Norton, 1992, c. 1976).
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:26:36 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions HeidemarieSchumacher 157 non-fiction;and secondly,as a transformationof uni-directional television production(broadcaster to viewer)into television production that involves viewersin theformation and executionof televisionbroadcasts and gives themaccess to televisionas a mediumfor the articulation oftheir most pri- vateand intimate experiences. This development has bornfruit. For exam- ple, it is obviousthat it no longermatters to manyviewers that private problemsin call-incounseling shows or infotainmentshows are notdis- cussed in the correspondingsocial arena(family, spousal relationships, workplace)but are exposedand workedthrough in frontof millionsof people.The participantsact as iftelevision existed for their own personal use, a factthat also appliesto publicbroadcasting (SWF's LammleLiveor West3'sDomian). The viewersare offeredsomething very specific with which they can identify.The participantsbecome actors or guests ("Stars").Their normal existence turns public, that is to say,it becomesa mediaexperience. The manygame shows accordingly present participants in preciselythis manner. As the participantsapproach the shiny,glitzy stageof RTL's showThe Price is Rightunder the thundering applause of thechampagne-hyped live audience, the host shouts: "You AreHere!" The changedrole of theconsumer is notthe only new aspectof this development.Television now generatesnew realitiesby intervening directlyin theactual life of itsparticipants. Linda de Mol (RTL) is the host of televisionweddings and Kai Pflaume(SATi) servesas the postilliond'amour in maritalor relationshipconflicts. This trendwas firstintroduced through the 1980's talkshows that invited both celeb- ritiesand otherguests to talkabout their personal histories. Not only the confessionalbroadcasts, but also "realityTV" and the "reality soaps,"with their participant-observer format, dish up intimaciesin the name of consolidatingviewer loyalties. So-called "Confrontainment" shows like The Hot Seat (RTL) and / or Objection(SATi) perpetu- ated theuse of emotionalarousal. In theseshows the medial presenta- tion of the participant'semotional outbursts was of greaterrelevance thanthe topics of their debates. The firstwave of reality-TVshows (i.e., "disastertelevision") may have passed (Emergency[RTL] now airsonly as reruns),but the traces of such showsare clearlyvisible in new genres.Their unusual, sensa- tionalist,and fear-inducingelements are theunderlying basis and ref- erence for numerousother infotainmentshows and sensationalist specialreports: the focus being whatever is spectacularalong with the
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:26:36 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 158 German"B-Television" Programs emotionaloutbursts of thoseinvolved. The reality-shows(centered on missingpersons or participanttell-all segments like Please Call [Bitte meldeDich], ForgiveMe [Verzeihmir], Only Love Matters[Nur die Liebe zdhlt],Looking for Heirs [Erbengesucht]) are in a good posi- tion to establishinteractive viewing firmly. Viewers are luredin as possibleheirs, lost familymembers or spouses.Commercial TV com- petes herewith the servicesoffered by othercommercialized commu- nicationsystems. The confessional,conflict resolution, and searchshows [Such-Shows] rely on vieweridentification with what is being shownand thereby developa cultureof pseudo-emotions. 'Emotions' - or morespecifically, emotionaloutbursts - are exhibitedprimarily in exceptionalsituations, i.e.,under spectacular conditions. Well-versed moderators of infotainment showslike Schreinemakersor Linda de Mol have developedinterview strategiesthat strike at theunmediated emotional state of theparticipants, andare thus able to produceand stage expressions of emotionquite effec- tively.The gameshow contestants are coachedby professionalanimators and permanentlygrinning assistants to presenta smilingface and pseudo- cheeriness.Additionally, the willingnessto talk aboutpersonal experi- encesin frontof the camera is oftenpromoted by the prospect of winning dreamhoneymoons, cars, home furnmishings ornew wardrobes. The strategyof creatingviewer loyalty through emotional sensations is also mirroreddramaturgically in such sensationalistspecial news broadcastslike The Reporters[Die Reporter](PRO7), The Editorial Room [Die Redaktion](RTL2), or Case Files 95 [Akte95] (SATi). These supposedlyinformational programs favor sex and crimetopics (prostitution,drugs, mafia, etc.) and employa highlyaffective commen- tarystyle, a clip aesthetic,as well as a musicalaccompaniment bor- rowed fromthe crime film genre.A jumpy camera,overcharged moderationand hypereplace interesting images or missingfootage: just like thetabloid press, the so-called news shows that appeal to consum- ers' desiresfor authentic experience do notseek to conveyinformation, butrather excitement, emotion and entertainment. It is well-knownthat advertising often works with sexually connotative material.'B-TV' also livesoff the enticing topic of sex. Afterthe cheap sex filmrevivals of the 1970s,sex becamea regularprogramming fix- tureat theend of the 1980s.After Erika Berger's pseudo-education pro- gramGive Love a Chance(RTL) therecame suchbroadcasts as Mathias
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:26:36 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions HeidemarieSchumacher 159
Frings'sLovely Sin [Liebe Siinde](formerly VOX, NOW PRO7), Lilo Wanders'The 'Good' Love [Die Wa(h)reLiebe] (VOX) or PlayboyLate Night(RTL). Sexuallyoriented programming now has a firmspot in the electronickiosk. Even if theyare graduallyrunning out of topics,and even if thetalk of sex is nowhereas clinicaland uneroticas it is in the "cold mediumof television,"they can stillhook into that primal motiva- torof sensualviewing, voyeurism.6 Even in sex programsviewers are increasinglytaking the microphone or are drawnin via telephonecoun- seling.Five timesa week theNBC-superchannel has shownReal Per- sonal, an advice programabout sexual problemswith host Bob Berkowitzand a varyingroundtable of experts.The titleitself encapsu- latesthe message of 'B-TV': realpeople and their'real' (!) problemsare thefocus here. Advertisingcampaigns anchor viewer loyalties by frequentlyinsert- ing advertisingspots throughout the day as well as by usingcelebri- ties - conditionswhich the commercialformats can fill splendidly. They produce continuityvia daily programslots as well as the enhancedmarketing of themoderator's personality. Five timesa week Ilona Christen,Hans Meier and ArabellaKiesbauer look in on us in the commercialchannels - in the meantime,the public stationARD has caughtup withthis trend in Fliege or Schimpf.The anchorscre- ate a parasocialrecognition effect. Personality-driven shows thatlast more thantwo hours like SchreinemakersLive combinewhat were once disparategenres such as advice shows,talk shows, entertain- mentand counselingshows. The dissolutionof genericboundaries and the hybridizationof programformats produce an effectthat is surely welcometo thecommercial program providers. It improvesthe seam- less transitionfrom program to advertisementand vice versa.Both the dailytime slots and theevening performances linked to a well-known name guaranteethat efforts to keep viewerswatching succeed amidst theoverall channel chaos. The host'spersonality, to whichone gradu- ally becomesaccustomed, embodies a certainprototype, and sinceone sees him or her daily - just as one does one's life partner- he or she becomesa constitutivepart of our dailyhabits, spreading not only inanity,but also a sense of security.The highlysuccessful and like- wise daily entertainmentprograms of David Lettermanand JayLeno providedthe modelwhich Thomas Gottschalk and Harald Schmidtat
6. MarshallMcLuhan, Understanding Media (New York:McGraw-Hill, 1964).
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:26:36 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 160 German"B-Television" Programs
SATi initiallysought to imitate.Along withone's daily soap, one's dailyinfotainment show or thedaily game show,television as 'B-TV' also providesfixed portions of ourdaily routines. Whereas in thepast viewerscould only be relied upon to tune into The NationalNews [Die Tagesschau]day afterday, these new genreshave in the mean- timebecome the spaces in whichpeople assemblefor their daily tele- visualgatherings. The commercialstations' viewer loyalties are securedwith material temptations,with promises of real gains in theform of lucrativewinnings. Productplacement series that unabashedly display the whisky bottle, the cigarettebrand or thefacial cream and whichare writtenand produced accordingto productplacement priorities are theovert expression of a kindof television refunctionalized as a supermarket. Appealsto vieweremotions and the activeparticipation of the con- sumerenhance 'B-TV's abilityto exploitthis supermarket.Critical media studiesshould ask to whatextent such formatsdetermine the structureof overallprogramming and how viewerscan be empowered to see throughsuch strategies.
Translatedby Karin Schoen and MichelleMattson
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:26:36 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Tatort:The Generation of Public Identity in a GermanCrime Series*
MichelleMattson
The academicstudy of television,as a subdivisionof the studyof popularculture, is rifewith dissension over both television's character and itsimpact. Is it merelythe epitome of manipulativemass culture? Is itthe locus of subversivereception strategies?1 Or is it somehowa com- binationof theabove: the contested site for the formation of publiccon- sciousness?2No matterwhere critics place television,it seemsno one feelscompletely comfortable dealing with the subject,and virtuallyall of themare miredexplicitly or implicitlyin the struggleto legitimize theirarea of study.The expressionof suchdiscomfort can assumemyr- iad aspects:from the wholesale condemnation of televisionproduction and receptionas thepernicious vehicle of mass subjugationand disem- powerment,to overlyeager readings of television(and/or all venuesof
* I am gratefulboth to the GermanAcademic Exchange Service (DAAD) for fundingmy research in Germanyon thistopic, and to theInstitute for Theater and Televi- sion Studiesat the Free Universityof Berlinfor access to theirextensive television archives. 1. See e.g.,John Fiske and JohnHartley, Reading Television (London: Methuen, 1978) andFiske, Understanding Popular Culture (Boston: Unwin Hyman, 1989), as well as Fiske,Reading the Popular (Boston: Unwin Hyman, 1989). 2. See e.g.,the article by HoraceNewcomb and Paul M. Hirsch,"Television as a CulturalForum," Television: The CriticalView, ed. Newcomb(New York: OxfordUP, 1987)455-70. 161
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:28:56 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 162 TheGeneration ofPublic Identity popularculture) as the"stuff' out of whichthe public selects and cre- atesits own formative narratives of social reality. This articleassumes the moremoderate position that television is one factoramong many in theformation of publicconsciousness. The issue here is not if but how televisionproduction incorporates and mediatespolitical reality. Whether it is exploitativeor liberating,inter- pretivelyrestrictive or fraughtwith the inner contradictions that create the spaces throughwhich (subversive) readings are possible,televi- sion is probablythe major sourceof imagingin westernindustrial societiestoday - includingGermany. As suchit behoovesthose of us interestedin thesocial distributionof meaningto addressthe mechan- ics oftelevision at itsmany levels. My inquiryfocuses on one particulargenre of Germantelevision - crimeshows - and,for the time being, on one particularseries: Tatort, a long-running,well-established, and popular detective series. Given the limitationsof a circumscribedstudy, Tatort is an ideal subjectfor such a study,in partbecause of some unusualfeatures of the show's produc- tion.The "series"is actuallya collectionof series,as each regionalnet- workof theARD (Arbeitsgemeinschaftder Offentlich-rechtlichen Rund- funkanstaltDeutschlands) produces a limitednumber of episodes yearly.Regional productions focus on criminalinvestigations carried out by particulardetectives in largeurban centers of the variousnet- works' domains: Munich,Duisburg, Berlin, Hamburg, Leipzig, or Vienna,for instance. The networksmay submit only a limitednumber of episodesper year, with the number contributed dependent on thesize of thespecific regional affiliates. Thus, the WDR (WestdeutscherRund- funk),as thelargest, was themajor contributor - at leastin the 1980s. Recentlythe scope of theprogram has been expandedto includeSwit- zerlandand Austriaand thenew east Germannetworks, so production quota distributionhas surelychanged. Because it is not a monolithic productionwith a steadyteam of writersand producers(or actorsfor thatmatter), the programoffers a diversityotherwise non-existent in Germanseries television programming. My engagementwith the series grows out of a long-standinginterest in questionsof politicalaesthetics and aesthetic strategies, and in partic- ular in aestheticobjects accessible to large-scaleaudiences. Tatort has been one of the longest-runningand mostpopular crime series in the Germancontext: in 1994 theshow celebrated its 300thepisode, which
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:28:56 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichelleMattson 163 meansthat it has been on the air forroughly 30 years.Before cable televisionmade its way to Germany,Tatort could claim that 70 percent of televisionviewers tuned in to the monthlyproduction. Even after cable expansion,it continuesto drawsubstantial segments of theview- ing public.According to Der Spiegel,Tatort's audience percentage lay around20 percentas of October1994.3 And in additionto its audience shareand thespectrum of materialthe show offers, Tatort is significant because of whatI would call a re-evaluationand restructuringof the WDR-Tatortin the late 1970s and early1980s,4 which resulted in its thematicturn to topicsof currentpolitical relevance. This tendencyhas since spreadto the otherregional networks involved in theproduction of Tatort,and in factto Germantelevision series generally. One advantageof the Tatortproduction structure is thatregional pro- ductionscan grapplewith political and social issues of particularrele- vanceto theirregion, heightening the diversity of perspectivesthe series as a wholeoffers the television audience. Thus, MDR (Mitteldeutscher Rundfunk),one of the new easternGerman networks, for example, has repeatedlytreated issues arisingfrom the unificationprocess and the confrontationwith the historyof the East Germanstate. In the early 1980sthe popular Detective Schimanski from Duisburg introduced Ger- man audiencesto the industrialflavor of the Ruhrregion. The show's producersaccomplished this through visual means,with repeated shots of hugefactories spewing forth clouds of greysmoke, and by meansof a wholehost of charactersfrom Schimanski's working-class background. One couldalso safelysay that pre-Schimanski cop showsseldom probed thecity's seamier underside and back alleysso exhaustively.The Ham- burg-basedTatort of thelate 1980sand early1990s, as a finalexample, oftenthematized ethnic conflicts in theregion, which has a largeKurd- ish population.Each programdevelops and highlightsin variousways theregional characteristics of its focus city. Furthermore, the series as a whole also reflectsthe regional structure of theARD, whichis consti- tutedof severallocal broadcastingstations, each of whichhas a specific and independentregional identity in additionto beingpart of thelarger nationalnetwork. At leastto some extent,then, the seriesfulfills Ger- manpublic broadcasting's task of equal representation.
3. Der Spiegel(24 Oct. 1994):238. 4. Thiswas particularlytrue of the WDR-Tatort in thisperiod, when G6tz George was stillplaying the role of the exceedingly popular Kommissar Horst Schimanski.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:28:56 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 164 TheGeneration of Public Identity
Although"cultural" programs designed to cover moreintellectually challengingissues have longaddressed political questions, German tele- visionseries intended to reacha wideraudience and to offerpalatable amusementhave onlyrelatively recently begun to focuson important currentissues in publicdiscourse. The trendtoward a greaterintegration of explicitlypolitical material in genericprogramming is both encourag- ingand intriguing.At thevery least, this development has madethe pro- gramsmore interesting(a counter-exampleduring the periodcovered herewould be thedreadfully dull crime series "Derrick," which seems to have been createdand producedin a historicalvacuum). But it raises numerouslarger questions, too, about the character of politicalrepresen- tationwithin mainstream German television programming. This articleanalyzes two aspectsof the Tatortseries, both of which relateto thetelevisual mediation of politicalreality to theGerman pub- lic. The firstpart of the articleadvances a limitedhistorical argument withregard to theseries' portrayal of "theforeigner" in Germansociety fromthe early1980s to themid-1990s, and how the changingrole of immigrantsin Germanyreflected a concomitantchange in Germantele- visionproducers' awareness of differentethnic and nationalgroups over the last two decades. The secondpart represents an initialattempt to describein moretheoretical terms how Tatortrepresents political real- ity,and what the consequences of such representation are or could be.
I. The ForeignPresence in Tatort Althoughfluctuating throughout the centuries, the numbers of immi- grantsin Germanyhave alwaysbeen greatenough to createa 'for- eign" presencein "German"society. Currently more than seven million non-citizenslive withinthe German borders. By farthe majority of for- eignnationals has legal-residencestatus. Their presence in Germanyhas resultedfrom historical developments in thepostwar German economy. Fromthe mid- to late 1950s,West Germany actively recruited workers fromvarious countries to its south(Greece, Turkey, Italy). Tremendous laborshortages in a boomingWest German economy made immigrant laboressential to Germany'scontinued productivity (even todayimmi- grantscontribute at least 10 percentto theGerman gross national prod- uct). Withthe oil crisisof the early1970s, and the growingthreat of recession,the Germangovernment put a stopto the importof foreign laborin 1973.From this point on theonly means for a workerfrom out-
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:28:56 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichelleMattson 165 sidethe European Union to gainentry into the German labor market was throughthe asylum process. The late 1970smarked the gradual and then rapidincrease in the number of people seeking asylum in Germany. The late 1970s also witnessedthe firstlarge migrationwaves into Germanyby refugees from third world countries. Until then, the right to asylumhad mainlybeen claimedby people fleeingthe statesof the communistbloc, i.e., fellowEuropeans or, at the very least, fellow whites.These new masses of refugees,however, no longerracially, politicallyor culturally resembled the native German population. The inadequateand insecureintegration of theimmigrant labor popu- lationand thereality of increasinglyobvious ethnic differences in Ger- man societyignited what one could call a fast-burningfire. Although the incomingKohl administrationmade some very well-publicized effortsto rid Germanyof the growingrefugee population, it was not until1993 thatthe administrationfound a meansto makeat least the problemof refugeesgo away. The CDU governmentdid not seriously attemptto createan environmentin whichthe remainingand highly diverseethnic and nationalgroups could approachone anotherand potentiallywork toward establishing a commonliving space.5 Recent effortsin 1998 and 1999 by thenew rulingcoalition to ease dual-citi- zenshiprestrictions have been thwartedagain by conservativefears of immigration. However,beyond government policies and programsdirected at the problemsof the immigrantcommunity, there have also been many attemptswithin the sphere of culturalproduction to cometo termswith thechanging character of Germansociety, in a senseto co-createa pub- lic consciousnessof Germany'sforeigners. These efforts have notbeen limitedto therealm of so-calledhigh culture. The ARD's Tatorthas run a numberof episodesthat incorporate and thematizeissues relating to theposition(ing) of the immigrant population. Several Tatort-episodesfrom the early 1980s reflectthe perceived increasein thenumbers of immigrantsin Germany,but I will comment onlyon a particularepisode of theWDR-Tatort, before discussing how thisfacet of socio-politicalreality is mediatedin the early1990s. The 1984 episodeentitled "Zweierlei Blut"6 ["Two Kindsof Blood"] offers us theopportunity to examineboth the apparent level of awarenessand
5. See forexample Heiko Kmrnerand UrsulaMehrlander, eds., Die neue Aus- landerpolitikin Europa(Bonn: neue Gesellschaft, 1986), and UrsulaMinch, Asylpolitik in derBundesrepublik Deutschland (Opladen: Leske + Budrich,1992).
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:28:56 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 166 TheGeneration ofPublic Identity
integrationof immigrantsin WestGermany in theperiod immediately afterthe Tendenzwende7in Bonn politics,as well as to discusswhat couldbe at stakein the aesthetic strategies of the production itself. The basic storyis as follows.Detective Schimanski8 and his partner Thannerare assignedto investigatethe death of an Italianimmigrant, who was apparentlymurdered at a stadiumduring a soccermatch. Ini- tially,the prime suspect is a youngman who is theson of theItalian's Germanlover and a memberof a "Rocker"group, primarily character- ized as violentfans of theMSV-Duisburg, the local soccerteam. The suspectgoes intohiding, which gives the detectives enough air timeto discoverthat the murderer was actuallythe manager of the stadium. The Italian,who had been channelingillegal foreignlabor for German industrythrough the stadium manager, had triedto use his knowledge to blackmailthe stadiummanager and apparentlyother Germans involvedin this black market as well. Althoughthe plot is set in motionby themurder of an Italianimmi- grant,and the motive for the murder is theillegal import of foreignlabor intothe Germany economy, the writers chose not to endowa singlefor- eigncharacter in theepisode with a speakingpart. In additionto thebody ofthe dead Italian, the audience sees groupsof maleforeign laborers col- lectinggarbage at thestadium, and anothergroup, primarily women with thenow familiarhead scarves,9 tending fires, laundry, and minute garden plotsbehind a dismallylarge industrial complex. These characters receive littlemore than curious or distractedglances from the Germanpolice- men;they seem to functionas props,mere objects within the scenery. 6. "ZweierleiBlut," written by FelixHuby and FredBreinersdorfer and directed by Hajo Gies. I am gratefulto theWDR archivesfor allowing me accessto a production copyof this episode. 7. In thiscontext this term denotes a politicalswing to theright in theFederal Republicin the early 1980s. 8. Schimanskiwas probablythe most loved, or at leastmost popular detective in theentire Tatort series. The character of the anti-intellectual, disheveled, rebellious, work- ing-classdetective and his investigationsinto the lowerreaches of Duisburg'ssociety addeda wholenew array of themes and characters to the show. After reviewing Tatort epi- sodes froma 25-yeartime span, the conclusion is almostunavoidable that this particular character,portrayed by thisparticular actor radically changed the content and formof Tatortproductions. 9. The headscarves were part of the cliche of howforeigners in Germanylooked at thetime. The headscarf became a symbolfor Turkish nationals living in Europe,but is notnecessarily a partof theethnic image of Italianwomen in Germany.On television's ratherunique ability to takea specificiconic sign and generalizeit to producea broader significance,see Fiskeand Hartley 52.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:28:56 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichelleMattson 167
The viewers'impression of theforeigner as stageprop is heightened by the episode's clear attemptsto put a discreetdistance between the Germangood guys,Schimanski and Thanner,and thefew figures who actuallyhave, or did have a relationshipto the dead man or to other immigrants.Thanner expresses a certainamount of disbeliefand disap- provaltoward the Italian'sGerman lover, when he findsout thatshe actuallylived with Tonio. Later, when asked by the stadium manager if he has had anycontact with Turkish laborers, Thanner responds "Nein, mir reichendie Hollander"["No, the Dutch are enoughfor me"]. AlthoughThanner makes this remark with an apparent,but dryself- irony,the overalltone of the episodelends credibility to the assump- tionthat he not onlydoes not wantany contactwith foreigners from Mediterraneanand Near Easterncountries, he seemsto findeven fel- lownorthern Europeans irksome. One finalexample of how the writersactively sought to createa respectabledistance between the officersand Germany'simmigrant populationis a scene in whichSchimanski, who has spentthe after- noon babysittingthe daughterof an Asian friend,takes the littlegirl withhim to the criminalcourts building to speakto a stateprosecutor fromthe division of economiccrimes. The prosecutorasks Schimanski if the girlis his daughter,and Schimanskiresponds in a surprisedand slightlyannoyed tone: "Nein, sehe ich so aus?!" (Althoughthe phrase can be a relativelyharmless "No, do I look likethat?!" it is also often used in an indignantway: "No, whatdo you takeme for?!")It is one thingto lend a helpinghand occasionally,but quite anotherto have familialties to foreigners. In whatwould seem an effortto ensurethat the public not confuse the loyaltiesof this crime-solvingteam, the writersdesigned the plot to focusprimarily on Schimanski'sproblematic personal and professional relationshipwith the band of violentGerman soccer fans. In theirdress, language,and behaviorthese youth clearly display right-wing extremist tendencies,and yetthe main force of thecase is directedtoward prov- ing thatthey are not in factthe guiltyones, but ratherjust an overly zealousgroup of young German soccer fans. Schimanski,who is revealedto be an enthusiasticsoccer fan himself, infiltratesthe group as just a "regularguy." Although the club eventu- allybeats him almost to deathand leaveshim lying naked and bleeding in thecenter of thesoccer field, one of thegang members, the younger
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:28:56 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 168 TheGeneration of Public Identity brotherof the primesuspect, manages to give Schimanskian earnest lectureon the values of fairnessand loyalty,revealing the "civilized" core of thedecidedly uncivil rowdies.10 And, in fact,the conclusion is compellingin thatthe onlyreason Schimanski is beatenby the club membersis forhis deception.Although perhaps entirely unintentional, the structureof theplot and thedescription and positionof thischarac- terconstellation (i.e., thesoccer rowdies) within it in effectmanages to redeema socio-politicallyvery problematic group. The titleof theepisode reinforces this conclusion. "Zweierlei Blut" lit- erallyrefers to thefact that the blood found on themurder victim is not his own. This leads Thannerto suspectthe young soccer fan, Kurti, of murder,as thelatter is firstseen in a barwith a conspicuousbandage on his arm.The issueof twoblood types of courseturns out to be a redher- ring.Even thoughKurti and the Italianfought at the stadium,it was Toniowho woundedKurti. The stadiummanager then seizes theinitia- tiveand uses thecover of the fight to makesure that Tonio does notsur- vive a falldown the stairs. Thus, even though the title superficially refers simplyto anotherclue in thecase, thecombination of theepisode's por- trayalof immigrantsand thesoccer fans, as well as theideological and physicaldistance established between the police and the communityof foreignlaborers opens up thepossibility of a differentreading. In thefinal moments of thestory, Thanner manages to locateKurti's hidingplace, only to discoverthat the boy is seriouslyill froman infec- tion caused by neglectof the knifewound. While he stillstubbornly insiststhat Kurti is themurderer and on thisbasis triesto bullya con- fessionfrom the boy, Schimanskihas alreadyfigured out the stadium manager'srole in thecrime. Ultimately the audience comes to perceive Kurtias three-foldvictim: the victim of theintrusive Italian, the victim of the Germanwho has illegallybeen consortingwith foreign immi- grants,and of theGerman police, who have takena full90 minutesto realize the innocenceof the youngsoccer fan. On a subtextuallevel, then,the titleunderscores the dissimilaritiesbetween the blood of the
10. This is a revealingscene. After Thanner and Schimanskihave an argumentat theopening of the episode, Schimanski storms off. The audiencenext sees Thannerdaw- dlingabout the apartment distractedly whistling the German national anthem, when he suddenlysees Schimanski'sface on thetelevision screen exuberantly cheering on the MSV. The scenegives the viewer absolutely no reasonto questioncritically the juxtaposi- tionof the two men's activities, and given the outcome of the episode, viewers could cer- tainlyreach the conclusion that there is nothingnegative in the combination to criticize.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:28:56 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichelleMattson 169 criminalforeigner, along with those who fraternizewith him, and that of the truevictim of the foreigner'spresence - the patriotic,if some- whataggressive, German soccer fan. It seemshighly unlikely to me thatthis reading would be sanctioned by eitherthe show's authorsor its producers,so one mustask oneself whysuch an interpretationis so tantalizinglyobvious. It is thisquestion thatI will addressin the finalsection of thepaper. At thispoint I am moreinterested in examiningthe differencesbetween the portrayalof theforeigner as a somewhatmalicious backdrop in 1984 andthe integra- tionof the immigrantin 1991. These differencesreveal the remarkable changesin thegeneral public's awareness of ethnicand nationaldiver- sityin Germansociety that have occurred in sucha shorttime-span. In January1991, a BR (BayerischerRundfunk) episode of Tatortenti- tled "Animals"lllaunched the careersof two new MunichDetectives, Ivo Batic and FranzLeitmayr. The episode's moreexplicitly political moves are twofold:one is marginally,the other manifestly intentional. The firstis theprogram's attempt to createa broaderportrayal of Ger- man society,to incorporateotherwise peripheral societal groups, while at the same timeattempting to maintainits currentaudience. The most overtof theseelements is Batichimself, a formerYugoslavian national. The secondis theissue of experimentson and crueltyto animalsfor the sake of consumerculture. I will returnto thisaspect of theprogram in thesecond half of the paper. The productionbackground of the episode is as follows.Bavarian televisionstudios had recentlyhad littlesuccess withtheir detectives and the new crime-solvingduo of Ivo Batic (played by Miroslav Nemec) and FranzLeitmayr (portrayed by Udo Wachtveitl)represented theefforts of theARD to salvageMunich as a havenfor television jus- tice. In choosingto bestowthe cityof Munichwith German televi- sion's firstYugoslavian detective, the producerswould seem to have madea bold and impressiveprogramming decision, and one shoulddef- initelynot underestimate the importance of this move. 12
11. "Animals,"written by Max Zihlmannand Veithvon Ffirstenbergand directed by WalterBannert. 12. Fiske and Hartleyoffer a somewhatdifferent explanation for such effortsto insurethat the television community includes as manypeople as possible.They refer to thisas claw back,which they see as partof television's "bardic" role: "It is to drawinto its own centralposition both the audience with which it communicatesand the realityto whichit refers." Fiske and Hartley 86f.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:28:56 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 170 TheGeneration ofPublic Identity
BeforeI proceedwith my arguments, let me brieflydescribe the story in question.A certainHerr Pelzer owns a cosmeticsmanufacturing com- pany whichperforms ghastly experiments on animals,supposedly in orderto determinethe safety of thefirm's products for use on humans. One of thecompany's former models, a passionateanimal rights activ- ist,cannot abide thecompany's practices. She goes to Batic to engage his assistanceon theadvice of anothermodel, who happens to be Batic's formerlover and thecurrent lover of Pelzer.When Detectives Batic and Leitmayrinform her that the problem lies outsidetheir jurisdiction, she decidesto takejustice into her own hands. She anda photographerbreak intothe cosmetics plant at nightto releasethe animals being held cap- tive thereand to documentthe inhumaneconditions in whichthe ani- mals are kept.Pelzer, who is stillat work,walks from his officeto his car withhis attackdog. Whenhe hearssomeone inside the plant,he releasesthe dog and sendsit offto findthe intruder.Naturally, he is muchdismayed a fewmoments later to findthat the dog has actually killedhis formermodel. Meanwhile, the photographer takes pictures of Pelzerkneeling over the body with the dog at his side.Pelzer shoots the dogand dumps the woman's body at a secludedspot along the Isar. While Batic and Leitmayrtry to unravelthe murder,the photogra- pherand the model's last loverattempt to blackmailPelzer withthe photographs.This all culminatesin a finalshowdown in a ruralarea near Munichin whichthe photographeris beaten,the model's lover killed,and Pelzerwounded. As theshow ends, Pelzer and his loverare sped offin an ambulance,Leitmayr leaves fora ski-weekendwith his girlfriend,and Batic is leftto gaze philosophicallyat the dissipating chaosof the crime scene. Aside fromthe familiartrappings of mostcrime series (a high-rank- ing policeman,a murder,an arrayof colorfulcharacters, a chase scene and confrontation),the Munich Tatort introduces new elementsthat are clearlydesigned to expandthe show's constituency.Perhaps the most notable innovationis the fact that DetectiveBatic is Yugoslavian (Croatianspecifically). My readingof theshow is thatBatic's national originis an acknowledgmentofthe ethnic and nationalplurality in con- temporaryGerman society, and thusrepresents an effortto addressthe changingcharacter of that society. However,the program also pursuesother strategies in orderto create and broadenits constituency.It attemptsto reachthe Germanyuppie
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:28:56 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichelleMattson 171 audiencethrough the two stylishand hip leadingmen, but it also takes the occasional swipe at Munich's extremelywealthy circles (most readilyapparent in Leitmayr'sproblematic relationship to his very wealthygirlfriend and herfriends) so as notto alienateany of its less conspicuouslywell-to-do constituent groups. At all of the appropriate moments(car chase,close-ups of thedetective in an emotionallytrying situation,etc.), popularrock music accompaniesthe video, and the show ends not withthe familiar,but dated,Tatort theme, but witha slick,melancholy love ballad. The slightlydisheveled, Croatian-Ger- mandetective in his tastefullyand eclecticallydecorated apartment was likelyto be a successwith German television viewers. While "ZweierleiBlut" indicatesa burgeoningawareness of the increasedethnic diversity on thepart of theshow's producers,the por- trayalof foreign elements does notextend further than mere visual cita- tion.In the creationof theYugoslav detective, the Munich Tatort has gone well beyondthe workof theirWDR predecessors.Although the problemsof theGastarbeiter in Germanyhave mostcertainly been the- matizedin variouscultural media, it was exceptionalwhen Batic was introducedto see an individualof foreign, indeed, of Slavic originpor- trayedin a positionof such importance in German bureaucracy. Such acknowledgmentand acceptanceof ethnicdiversity in popular culture,however, goes onlyso far,and thenew Tatortis no exception. Batic mayhave beenborn in Yugoslavia,but he is now a Germanciti- zen. His blue eyes and his impeccableGerman - withhis equally impeccableBavarian accent - clearlydistinguish him from the greater numberof foreignnationals in Germanywho are,of course,busy com- mittingthe crimes Batic mustthen solve. The conventionalwisdom of Tatort'sproducers seems to be thatthe Germanpublic will tolerate social pluralityonly insofar as theforeigner has successfullycompleted theprocess of social integration or is activelyattempting to do so.13 In fact,in a 1993 episodeentitled "Kainsmale" ["The Mark of Cain"], a secondaryplot line involvesthe visit of Batic's two auntsfrom the formerYugoslavia. The portrayalof the two women clearlydistin- guishesbetween the Slav who is alreadycivilized by Germanculture and the sociallyand culturallyinferior Slavs who are in Germanyto 13. I mustnote that as thischaracter has developed since his first appearances as the Bavariandetective, more extensive and nuanced use has beenmade of his ethnicand cul- turalbackground than was initiallythe case, althoughalways under the premise that his Germannessoverrides his Slavicness.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:28:56 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 172 TheGeneration of Public Identity
escape- if onlybriefly - theterrors of civilwar. One of theaunts is overweight,tackily dressed, oddly coifed and overmade-up. The audi- ence sees hereating a greasyWurst, dishing out home-spun folklore to Leitmayr,and, finally,displaying - at leastjudging by Batic's reac- tion- excessiveemotion in a publicplace. The otheraunt is a cowed and dowdyfigure who is not allowedto speak at all. It is difficultto avoid the conclusionthat - familyties or no familyties - Batic is relievedto puthis nowvery distant relatives back on thebus and return to hiscircle of familiar German faces. Anotherrelevant episode has Baticand Leitmayrattempting to smoke out theChinese underworld from Munich's streets. This not onlycalls attentionto a segmentof thecity's population of whichmost of itsciti- zens are probablyunaware, it also underscoresthe image of Baticas the good foreignerwho will rid Munichof themuch more numerous and moredangerous bad foreigners.14Again, the character of Baticmay be a tributeto theproducers' willingness to acknowledgethe ethnic diversity of today'sGermany, but it comesat theprice of reducingthe non-Ger- man aspects of this characterto secondary,albeit colorfulpersonal quirks."Ethnicity" (however, problematic the term) is allowedonly inso- faras itdoes not go beyondthis secondary, well-circumscribed limit. A VienneseTatort-production will be my finalexample of how the program'svarious branches address the reality of social diversity.The episodein questionis from1992 and is entitled"Kinderspiel" ["Child"s Play"].15In thisepisode Detectives Fichtl and Susi Kernare thrustinto a storyvery reminiscent of Dickens'sOliver Twist. While showing the Praterto an Americanpolice investigator,who just happensto special- ize in youthcriminality, Detective Kern is attackedby a band of very youngHungarian pickpockets. When she grabshold of one of theboys, anotherstabs her with what he claimsis an AIDS-infectedsyringe. For therest of theepisode, Kern is placedon sick leave and so strikesoff on herown ratherunconventional investigation to findthis boy, while Fichtland the American carry on theofficial investigation.
14. "Die chinesischeMethode," written by VolkerMaria Arendand Andreas Missler-Morell,directed by Maria Knilli. An interestingaside here is thatpress reviews of thisepisode varied tremendously over the potentially xenophobic overtones of theplot. See forexample Peter Hoff, "China-Town an derIsar-Metropole," Neues Deutschland 12 Nov. 1991;Die Welt12 Nov. 1991;Uta-Maria Heim, Tagesspiegel 12 Nov. 1991; Rose- marieBOlts, Frankfurter Rundschau 12 Nov. 1991;and Manfred Riepe, "Zierfisch Mafia" die tageszeitung11 Nov. 1991. 15. "Kinderspiel,"written by Peter Zingler and directed by Oliver Hischbiegel.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:28:56 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichelleMattson 173
EventuallyKern essentially kidnaps one of theboys, who is also the bestfriend of the one whostabbed her. With "tough love" she winsover thishardened delinquent, and he agreesto takeher to theorphanage in Budapestto whichthe other, Istvan, has beenreturned as punishmentfor threateningto exposethe Austrian boss of thethievery operation. Dur- ing thecourse of thetrip, as Susi learnsthe hardships these young boys have had to face in theirshort lives, she growsvery fond of theboy in hercharge, Jule, and even hints that she may wish to adopthim. In thefinal dramatic scene, Jule, Susi Kern,Fichtl and theAmerican race franticallyto reachIstvan before one of theAustrian's hired hench- mensilences him. Istvan literally slips through Fichtl's hands and fallsto his death.Naturally, before he actuallydies, Istvan says to Kern:"Don't worry,the needlewas clean."Detective Kern and Julewalk offto be alonewith their grief, while the others tend to theremaining details. Althoughthe program obviously tries to humanizethe bands of East- ernEuropean and gypsyyouth that were causing a greatstir in Vienna in theearly 1990s, the portrayal of thegypsies and theHungarian youth is throughoutat cross-purposeswith such a humanizingintent. Both the gang's aged gypsyboss as well as theHungarian "priest" who suppos- edly runsthe orphanagein Budapestare portrayedas nothingbut the crassestcliches. The gypsyboss is colorfullydressed, disheveled, and unkempt,while his wife(or companion)appears wrapped in longflow- ing scarves,and othergarments stereotypically associated with gypsy culture.The "priest"is perpetuallydrunk, often shown passed out with his pantszipper open, a pornographicmagazine on his lap, and dozens ofempty beer bottles scattered around him on thefloor. Even thoughthe episode reveals the desperate circumstances that led theseboys to a lifeof crime,they too remainin theirgroup identity a roving,foreign threat to the staidand civilizedold-world ambiance of Vienna.This image of the boys is particularlytenacious, inasmuch as the viewingaudience is awarethat such groups do in factexist, and do in factdisturb the quiet of manyEuropean streets. Moreover, the opening storyline of theAIDS-infected syringe, whether intentional or not,must on some level conflatetwo issuesin thepublic consciousness, increas- ing the threatthese foreigners pose: not only are theyvicious little thieves,they also carrythe plague - and this,naturally, from east to west. Given the politicalrhetoric and generalpublic frenzyover the presenceof immigrantsin westernEurope of theearly 1990s, especially
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:28:56 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 174 TheGeneration of Public Identity the proposedmeasures to containthe migrationof gypsypopulations, thisconflation becomes even more pernicious. Despitethe fact that those actually responsible for the activities of the gangdepicted in theepisode are Austrians,the latter are notthe central focusof theprogram. In addition,the Austrian ring-leader is portrayed by an actorwho is notonly obese, but marked as slimy- rightdown to his slick-backedhair. In choosingthese characteristics for this figure, theshow's writersand directorhave madeit ultimatelyapparent to the audiencethat even the Austrian criminal has somethingodd, excessive, or abnormalabout him. The script'ssuggestion that the Austrian policewoman will adopt Jule, rescuinghim from the harrowing ordeal of his Hungarianpast, and thus also redeeminghim froma lifeof crime,supports my openingasser- tionthat this particular Tatort episode allows fordivergent ethnic iden- tityeffectively only to theextent that the hegemonic culture can erase it. WhereasDetective Batic of Munichis allowedto retainelements of his non-Germanidentity as long as theydo not interferewith his assumedGerman identity, ethnicity in thisproduction is acceptableonly afterit has been completelyreconfigured for the Austrian Tatort cast. As German-nesshas historicallybeen determined primarily through the mother,the only female detective in thegroup has to be theone to suf- ferfrom the theft-related attack and thento raisethe issue of adoption. As a mother,she wouldre-naturalize the Hungarian youth she is consid- eringadopting. Only that separation from his previousforeign identity can insurethat he does not remainentangled in the criminalunder- world.Istvan, with no one to sponsorhim, has to die to be redeemed, and theother boys are lockedwithin the confines of theirEastern Euro- pean criminalityas theAustrian police have no jurisdictionin Budap- est,and hence,essentially cannot touch the operation.What is leftof multi-culturalism,then, is a de-nationalized,de-ethnicized image of glo- bal childhoodinnocence. Whenread togetheror againsteach other,the three episodes evince differentlevels in theperception of theforeign presence in German(and Austrian)society, and implydifferent ways of addressingthis presence. Social awarenessof ethnicand nationaldiversity in Germanyin the early1980s, that is to say, in theearly Kohl years,was nothingmore thanan awareness;immigrant laborers were there and thushad to be partof a realistdepiction of theurban landscape. After almost a decade
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:28:56 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichelleMattson 175
of increasingand at timespassionate public debate on theissue of asy- lum seekersand otherimmigrants in Germanyand, for that matter, in Austria,the two episodesfrom 1991 and 1992 demonstratenot onlya heightenedawareness of ethnicdiversity, but also differentefforts to cometo termswith that diversity. That these efforts are extremelyprob- lematicin theirpolitical implications brings me to thequestion of aes- theticstrategies in television production.
II. AestheticStrategy and theMediation of the Political The representationof the foreigner in thethree examples I have dis- cussedwould tend to affirmthe popular thesis that television does noth- ingbut regurgitate and manufacture hegemonic ideology. And, ultimately, thatmay be exactlywhat these programs do. Of moreimmediate interest forthe presentinvestigation, however, is the questionof how thiscan happen,given the obvious efforts of Tatort'swriters and producerspre- ciselyto avoid perpetuating oppressive readings of social reality. One can certainlysee theliberal or evenleft-leaning intentions in the storiesof thethree episodes. In "ZweierleiBlut" the writers set out to exposethe illegal use of immigrantlabor in theGerman economy, and theyare, after all, intenton solvingthe murder of a foreignnational. In "Animals,"and moregenerally in the BR's choice of a Yugoslavian detective,the producers advance the proposition that there are individu- als offoreign descent in Germanywho not onlywarrant respect, but who are also capableof protectingand servingGerman society. Finally, the Austrianproduction "Kinderspiel" makes a real effortto createa morenuanced picture of gypsyand EasternEuropean youth, with the obviousintent of reducingthe public's perception of an EasternEuro- peanthreat to Viennese (and/or western European) society. It is, however,just as apparentthat there are elementswithin the pro- ductionof theseprograms that not only thwart such progressive efforts, butin factnegate them. John Fiske and JohnHartley would assert that such innercontradictions are partand parcelof a mediumthat is torn betweenits oral characterand the literate conditioning of the writers and producers.For Fiske and Hartley,such contradictions appear as a logi- cal consequenceof television'sattempts both to "assurethe cultureat largeof itspractical adequacy in theworld by affirmingand confirming its ideologies"and to "expose... anypractical inadequacies in thecul- ture'ssense of itselfwhich might result from changed conditions in the worldout-there, or frompressure within the culture for a reorientationin
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:28:56 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 176 TheGeneration of Public Identity
favourof a new ideologicalstance."l16 Although I runthe risk of falling preymyself to evaluatingtelevision according to "literate"versus "oral" criteria,my theoretical suspicions at thispoint are thatthis confusion is ultimatelyan aestheticissue, and morespecifically a questionof certain strategiccomposition choices. They may be inextricablylinked to the natureof television production, but they are not necessarily inevitable. Therehave been manifold attempts to theorizeand to practicea politi- cal aestheticthroughout the last 150 years. Upon recently re-reading Peter Btirger'sTheorie der Avantgarde, this text's implications for the question ofpolitically engaged aesthetic practices struck me as particularlyintrigu- ing.My interestowed not so muchto Birger'sdescription of avant-garde art,but rather to his willingnessto lookat artfrom a functional,analyti- cal perspective,rather than from a proscriptiveinterpretive framework thatwould dismisstelevision production out of hand as aesthetically regressive.17In his conclusionto the book,Buirger argues, on the one hand,that the political engagement of an "organic"work of art must form itsunifying principle in ordernot to destroythe structure and coherence of thework as a whole.He sees, on theother hand, "non-organic" (or non-representational)works of art,whose structure is determinedby the strategyof montage,as openingup possibilitiesof politicalexpression thatdo not requirethe subordinationof the politicalto the workas a whole.The structureof suchartworks allows discrete elements within the workto functionsingly as wellas mediatedthrough the work as a whole. BiUrgerspeaks of montageas a principleinherent to film,which either"recreates" realist or naturalistimages, or whichcan be used consciouslyto disturbsuch realistimages or to createones thatare contraryto empiricalperception.18 Whichever strategy is chosen,how- ever,it does not alterthe factthat the filmicmedium has no choice butto workthrough montage. This obviouslyapplies to televisionas well, sinceit too is essentiallya filmicmedium.1 The inevitabilityof televisionproduction as "montiert"raises a wholewealth of otherques- tionspertinent to thetopic of a politicalaesthetic. I will tryto fleshout thisproblem by turningback to the otherplot 16. Fiskeand Hartley 88. See also 124fand 159-70. 17. PeterBiirger, Theorie der Avantgarde (Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp, 1974) 117- 33, in particular125-27. Other theorists would, of course,also be pertinenthere, but my ownideas arose from thinking through BUirger's work in this context. 18. Bfirger99. 19. Withcertain fundamental differences, which Fiske and Hartley point out repeat- edly.See forinstance Fiske and Hartley 123f.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:28:56 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichelleMattson 177 line in theTatort episode "Animals." What intrigued me initiallyin this storywas notjust thechoice of an immigrantfor police detective,but also the show's incorporationof a contemporarypolitical topic. The questionis whatfunction these issues assume in theprogram. It is my contentionthat the politicaldebate on the necessityof live animal experimentsas well as thepresence of a foreigncharacter in the epi- sode serve two purposes.In termsof this specificproduction they become merelyone moretool withwhich to expandand cementthe viewerbase and to createa visual and ideologicalspace withinwhich the new detectivecan establisha televisionidentity. In termsof cul- turalproduction as a wholethey serve the purpose of defusingpolitical activismand conflict and of promoting social stability. The verylimited scope of the issue at hand is itselfrevealing. The scriptwriters chose not to addressthe issue of medicalresearch on ani- mals,but rather to restrictthe topic to animalexperiments in thecosmet- ics industry,an issue area in whicha largernumber of viewerswould certainlybe willingto questionthe necessityof such experiments.A graphicvideo showing the torture of animalsat thehands of researchers providesjust the sensationalist documentary material needed to appealto the sentimentsof thehypothetical average television viewer. Whenever thewriters could legitimately do so, theyshow Batic holding an animal, pettingit, comforting it.This rather minor descriptive device functions to conveyvisually to the audiencethat Batic is a good guy,that he too lovesanimals and would be loatheto see themneedlessly tortured. And yet,the program never exceeds the boundaries of generalpublic acceptance.It neverchallenges the audience, nor does it asserta deter- minedposition on theissue itself. At one pointin theshow Batic forces his formerlover, the one who is now involvedwith Pelzer, to viewthe above-mentionedvideo tape (and thusforces the Tatortaudience to do so as well). She is so movedby whatshe sees thatshe quiteliterally collapsesin frontof thetelevision screen. It is, however,only a fleet- ing momentof compassion.The verynext day she returnsto Pelzerto pursueher goal ofbecoming the company's next model. This should,one wouldthink, incense both the detective and the audi- ence, but Batic,the epitomeof social tolerance,virtually pleads with thiswoman at theend of theshow - as she is climbinginto the ambu- lanceto be withPelzer - to turnto himif she shouldneed anything at all. DetectiveBatic demonstratesthat compassionfor one's fellow humanbeings overrides any political position an individualmight have.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:28:56 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 178 TheGeneration of Public Identity
Ultimatelyhe functionsto reconcilethe opposing factions, a rolehe can assume because his potentiallythreatening ethnic otherness has been neutralized.This last conciliatorymove exposes the political conflict at thecenter of theplot to be itselfonly an integrativedevice. The show's positionon thesubject of animalexperiments goes onlyas faras most of itsconstituents would and abandons even that position in thename of avoidingany disruptive social friction. Fiske and Hartley'sconcept of "claw back" casts an intriguinglight on thismovement. In ReadingTelevision they write:
If a subjectcannot be clawedback into a socio-centralposition the audienceis leftwith the conclusion that some point in their culture's responseto reality is inadequate.The effect is toshow, by means of thisobserved inadequacy, that some modification inattitudes orideol- ogywill be required to meet the changed circumstances.20
In this episode, however,everything and just about everyoneis "clawed back" into the communalfold. I would in fact argue that Batic's refusalto push thiswoman away emphasizeshis abilityas a characterto bringthings and peopletogether, to fillin whateverspaces mighthave opened up for socio-criticalself-reflection. Rather than drawingthe audience's attention to an inadequacyin thissociety's treat- mentof animals,the episode can easily functionmerely to reassure viewerswith the fact that no oneis "leftout." Conceivably,the writers of "Animals"could have writtenan episode thatwas predominantlyabout the topicof live animalexperiments in scientificresearch. Instead, the political issue here - as in theother epi- sodes examinedabove - becomesmerely another tool withinan inte- grative,synthetic production strategy. Repeatedly, facets of current politicaltopics which could antagonize the audience and perhaps serve a sociallycritical function are generallyeither bypassed for less divisive topicsor are restrictedto sucha greatextent that their portrayal in the publicmedia could not possiblyalienate any memberof the viewing audience.This is notto saythat these particular shows or eventelevision in generalare notand nevercan be sociallycritical. However, particu- larlygiven the characteristic institutional constraints on thiskind of tele- vision production,political topics, especially ones which lend themselvesto sensationalism,are easilydefused as politicalissues and
20. Fiskeand Hartley 87.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:28:56 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichelleMattson 179 thusreduced to thestatus of aesthetic means. The veryfact that television - to a certainextent in contradistinc- tion to cinema- is so dependentupon bothaudience approval and audiencepopularity would seem to necessitatea restrictionof overtly partisanmaterial. One couldeven venture to say thattelevision produc- tion is subjectto the same dialecticof toleranceas are representative democracies.That havingbeen said, shouldtelevision producers or writersof populartelevision programs wish to maketheir work partici- pate consciouslyin public,political discourse, they have to take into considerationvarious aesthetic questions.21 Neitherthe Tatort series in general,nor the "Animals" episode in par- ticularare aboutthe abuse of animalsin theculture industry. What they are is entertainment.There is, of course,nothing "politically incorrect" about entertainmentper se. Even BertoltBrecht, the championof a politicallyengaged and activistaesthetic practice, believed that the pri- maryfunction of his medium,the theater, was entertainment.22Further- more,if, as Buirgersuggests, individual elements of a montagecan functionin somesense independently of thework in itsentirety, then a televisionprogram would not have to focusexclusively on its political expressionin orderfor that moment to be politicallyeffective.23 However,the fact that they can functionindividually ignores the fact thatthey are also alwaysmediated through the work as a whole.It is, I believe,due to this circumstancethat the overtlyliberal political ele- mentsof theTatort episodes discussed here and theirattempts to gener- ate a morenuanced, even positive public image of Germany'sforeigners ultimatelyonly serve to engrainprejudice. Perhaps because of thetime
21. Fiske and Hartleywould disagree here with the assertion that "producers" of television"products" can playsuch a consciousrole in the structuring ofpublic conscious- ness. Theywrite, also citingS. Hall: "The peoplewho are responsiblefor what we call 'production'of outputmediate the messages but they do notoriginate them. They 'draw topics,treatments, agendas, events, personnel, images of the audience, 'definitions of the situation'from the wider socio-cultural and political system, and so theycannot constitute a 'closed system.'.. . Thuswe can saythat there is notsingle 'authorial' identity for the televisioncommunicator." The waythey operationalize the term "authorial" here would implythat there is ultimatelyno suchthing as "authorial"identity, for why should the workof a novelistwho mediates the culturally recognizable form of languagein a novel be so vastlydifferent from a televisionscript writer? When they argue that "culture com- municateswith itself' via themediation of television, they run the risk of taking television "producers"out of the circle of communicators. Fiske and Hartley 82f. 22. BertoltBrecht, "Das KleineOrganon," Gesammelte Werke 16 (Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp,1967) 663. 23. Whatexactly being "politically effective" would entail is a differentquestion.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:28:56 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 180 TheGeneration of Public Identity
constraintsinherent to open-endedseries television production,24 the producersrarely seem either to see theirwork as a wholeor to be aware of thepossible ramifications of themediation of theindividual elements withand througheach other.(For instance,in the"Animals" scene dis- cussedabove, strategies of figurecharacterization seem to conflictwith the politicalposition the episodemoves to take.) For thisreason, the politicalelements of theseshows are eitherreduced to beingonly one moremeans with which to createcharacters and stories,or theysubvert themselvesin their interaction with the whole. Perhapsit would be usefulto returnto Birger's commentson the politicalin organic(or realist)works of art.He maintainsthat if an organicwork of artis meantto be a politicalwork, then the political mustinform every facet of thework, rather than be just one of itsmany elements.25Given thatmost television series productions are created witha realistaesthetic strategy, Buirger's comments could pertainto themas well.Applied to a fictionaltelevision program this would mean thatthe show's producerswould have to view the expresslypolitical componentof theirwork as itscentral moment and positionthe various (re)presentationalelements around it. A 1994 Munich Tatort-episodeentitled "Klassenkampf' ["Class Wars"]26provides a solid exampleof how thiscan work."Klassenka- mpf"'follows the developmentssurrounding the deathof a youngstu- dentwho had tiesto right-wingextremist circles. As it turnsout, he has actuallybeen killed by a mild-mannered,anti-authoritarian teacher, who simplylost control when the student refused to stoptaunting him. In the meantime,however, the student's death has set in motionan escalating conflictbetween the right-wing extremists and a bandof so-calledfor- eignyouths that the neo-Nazis suspect of having killed their comrade. Conflictsand tensionsin Germanycaused by anti-foreignersentiments in the populationstructure every aspect of the episode. The writers explorehow far-reachingsuch xenophobic tendencies are, and how they
24. This is differentfrom the mini-series, where the runis pre-determined,thus allowingthe producers and writers to see eachepisode as partof a whole.I shouldstress at thispoint that I am referringonly to mainstreamtelevision shows and notto themany multi-facetedand aesthetically ambitious German series that have sought and had consid- erablepublic impact. See MichaelGeisler's references in the introduction tothis issue. 25. BUrger125. 26. "Class Struggle"would be thetraditional translation of thisterm from Marxist philosophy,but given the context of theepisode, "warfare" seems a moreapt metaphor. "Klassenkampf"was writtenand directed by Friedemann Fromm.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:28:56 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MichelleMattson 181
manifestthemselves in thelives of individuals,even the lives of people whowould seem to haveno connectionto theseconflicts. They touch on thesources of xenophobia, on itseffects on individualself-esteem, on the oftenunconscious recycling of xenophobicrhetoric by individualswho do notthink of themselvesas prejudiced,and on theconstruction offor- eign-nessitself. Although the episode represents an ambitiousattempt to shed lighton thesenumerous constellations of issues,the writers never strayfrom the topic at hand,and do notattempt to addressother prob- lemscurrent in publicdebate. In thisway they have avoidedthe confla- tion of issues thatcan, as in "Kinderspiel,"lead to a confusionor subversionof an episode'sthrust. "Klassenkampf" makes an unambigu- ous statementabout anti-foreigner sentiment and violence in Gemany. In contrast,when political expression is reducedto thestatus of toolor meanswithin an overallstrategy of integrationand synthesis,the politi- cal itselfis effectivelyneutralized. In thisway, whatever the Tatortepi- sodes "ZweierleiBlut," "Animals,"and "Kinderspiel"might have contributedto publicdiscourse on thequestions they raise is overshad- owed eitherby momentsof self-contradiction,or by an expresslyconcil- iatorystance. In otherwords, the way television mediates the political to thepublic is determinednot solely by the homogenizing forces of the cul- tureindustry, but also bythe aesthetic strategy of the work in question.27
27. This does notrule out tendentiousness. Politically tendentious art - fromany- whereon thepolitical spectrum - can be effective,to thedegree that institutional con- straintsallow. In fact,my entire presentation of thevarious treatments of bothpolitical issuesand issuesof nationalidentity presupposes a certainkind of liberalor left-leaning ideologyon thepart of television producers. While the episodes I treatin thebody of this articlein themselvesoffer ample support for this assumption, there are other possible sce- narios.For instance, the series writers and producers may in fact hold such political views, butnot be interestedin makinga politicalstatement intheir programming, and are, instead, solelyinterested in usingcurrently hot topics to drawin as broada publicas possible. An alternativesituation would be one in whichan episode'swriters or directorstake a positionon an issuethat is morerepresentative of conservative, even right-wing political agendas.This would be at leasta plausiblereading of a Tatortepisode from 1998 called "Bildersturm,"written by Robert Schwentke and Jan Hinter and directed by Niki Stein. It dealtwith "Verbrannte Erde," the photo exhibit on crimesof the Wehrmacht which toured centralEurope in 1998.Such episodes can be internallycohesive and potentially very per- suasive.While this might lead to a modificationofthis article's central thesis, it would not changethe fact that the thematization ofpolitical topics in televisionshows is muchmore effectivewhen these topics constitute the central and centeringfocus of theprogram in question.The use ofsuch a strategydoes not, however, determine the political perspective fromwhich a particulartopic is presented.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:28:56 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Lukccsand theEssay Form
TomHuhn
There is a curiousdisjointedness beetween the firstand last para- graphsof Lukacs's introductorypiece forthe collection Soul and Form. It is a furthercuriosity that this "essay" on theessay, entitled "On the Natureand Formof the Essay" attempts,cunningly, to protectitself fromfurther reflection and critiqueby havingitself described not as an essaybut as a letterto Leo Popper.What I wantto exploreis thenature of thisdisjoint. And whatI hopeto suggestis thatthe trajectory, so to speak,of thisdisjoint in Luccs's essay,recapitulates the disjointed tra- jectoryof Europeanaesthetics between Kant and Adorno.Lukacs fig- uresthen as a crucial,though disjointed, link between Kant and Adorno, and thislinkage, and itsdisjointedness, is clearly performed within "On theNature and Form of the Essay." Lukcs writesin the opening paragraph of his essay:
Forthe point at issuefor us nowis notwhat these essays can offer as 'studiesin literaryhistory,' but whether there is somethingin themthat makes them a newliterary form of its own, and whether theprinciple that makes them such is thesame in eachone. What is thisunity - if unitythere is? . .. The questionbefore us is a moreimportant, more general one. It is thequestion whether such a unityis possible.1
And Lukics concludeshis essay withthe followingsentence: "The critiqueof thisbook is contained,in all possiblesharpness and entirety,
1. GeorgLukAcs, Soul and Form,trans. Anna Bostock (Cambridge, MA: MIT, 1974) 1. Hereaftercited parenthetically within the text. 183
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:30:10 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 184 Lukdcsand theEssay Form
in thevery approach from which it sprang"(18). In shortthen, the dis- jointof theessay consists of an openingsearch for unity conjoined with a concludingassertion that the totalityof the book - all of the impulsesof thebook along with their critique - is alreadycontained in the originaryapproach out of whichthe book sprang.Unity is prefig- urednot merely in thequest for - or critiqueof - unitybut in what- everprecedes that quest and critique.But the totality and unityasserted by Lukacshere is importantlynot Hegelian. It is insteadthe particular, idiosyncraticunity specific to the aesthetic.And it is in regardto the exactnature of this unity that I am concernedhere. Lukdcs'sopening quest for unity is veryquickly transformed into a questionof identity.Lukacs now asks afternot whatsort of unitythe collectedcritical essays might have - indeedthis is a questionhe con- sidersrelevant only to the misguidedsearch for determining whether criticismis an artor science.He insteadasserts that the "real question" is "whatis an essay?What is itsintended form of expression,and what are theways and meanswhereby this expression is accomplished?"(1- 2). Lukacs's essayis no longerabout the status of criticismbut instead concernsthe natureof the formin and accordingto whichcriticism appears.And further,by placingan emphasison expression- what mightbe termedthe dynamic aspect of critique- Lukdcsthereby con- tinueshis implicitcritique of the static aspect of form. But theessay takes yet another interesting turn at theend of its sec- ondparagraph:
Butif I speakhere of criticism as a formof art, I do so inthe name of order(i.e., almost purely symbolically and non-essentially), andsolely on thestrength of myfeeling that the essay has a formwhich sepa- ratesit, with the rigour of a law,from all otherart forms. I want to try anddefine the essay as strictlyas possible,precisely by describing it as anart form. (2)
Firstlet me commenton thecuriosity of thequalifications offered by Lukacs:he "speaks""in thename of order"of criticismas a formof art. His further,parenthetical qualification is to writethat this speaking of his in thename of orderis symbolicand non-essential.Further still, he writesthat he "speaks"of theessay as a formseparate from all otherart formsbased "solelyon the strengthof my feeling."A Freudianmight well describethis abundance of qualificationsas over-determined.And
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:30:10 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions TomHuhn 185 what,we mightwell ask, determines this over-determination? It is perhapsLukdcs himself who bestanswers this question two para- graphslater: "We are not concernedhere with replacing something by somethingelse, but with somethingessentially new, somethingthat remainsuntouched by thecomplete or approximateattainment of scien- tificgoals"(3).2 In short,what concerns us is a particularbreed of partic- ularity,and it is thenature of thisaesthetic particularity that determines Lukics's qualifications.That is, Lukics is searchinghere for some new figureor cipher of what might stand for aesthetic particularity. The forceof thisparticularity expresses itself in his determinationto ceaselesslyand repeatedlyqualify his ownassertions about the aesthetic, aboutthe form of art.He cannot,for example, rest with merely having describedthe essay as an artform; he mustinstead repeat this particu- larizinggesture by differentiatingthe essay yet again fromall other formsof art.So too his gesturetoward his own "feeling"as the basis forhis assertions about the essay is likewisea repetitionof a particularizing dynamic.And Lukacs pointsto himself,via thisfeeling of his, not so muchout of the convictionthat his particularityis some legitimating engine,but rather as an analogyin attemptingto describe aesthetic form. That is, his particularityas an individualis the most ready-to-hand exampleof somethingthat cannot be exchangedfor somethingelse, separatefrom everything else, but nonetheless has "therigour of law." This bringsus, in tworegards, directly back to Kant'sefforts to char- acterizethe aesthetic.That is, Lukics's lookingtoward himself for an allegoryof the aestheticform of theessay, of somethingoutside him- self,is a reiterationof Kant'sclaim that aesthetic judgment is bothsub- jectiveand universal.The subjectiveuniversality of Kant'saesthetics is reiteratedin LukAcs'sassertion of the"strength' and quasi-lawfulnessof his own "feeling".But thereis a furtheraffinity between Lukics and Kant's gesturestoward the aesthetic. And thisaffinity has to do witha particularmistake, indeed, a mistakennessso fundamentalas to in fact be theoriginating moment of aestheticjudgment. I am referringto what in Kant's aestheticsis termed"objective subreption." And I wantto suggestthat objective subreption is thecrucial, defining moment of the aestheticand thatit has too oftenbeen dismissedor ignoredby Kant's
2. This sentimentis strikinglyakin to Adomo's statementthat "Since in reality everythingstands under the spell of equality, of absolute interchangeability, everything in artmust appear to be absolutelyindividual." Theodor W. Adorno,Quasi una Fantasia, Essayson ModernMusic, trans. Rodney Livingstone (London: Verso, 1992) 114.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:30:10 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 186 Lukdcsand theEssay Form commentatorsand by writerson the aestheticin general.To Lukics's credit,his "On theNature and Formof theEssay" appearsprecisely as an encounterwith the problem of objectivesubreption, and furtherthat thisis whatAdorno finds so valuablein the essay. Whatthen is objectivesubreption? It is deceptivelysimple, though its implicationshave yet to be fullygrasped. Simply put: it is themisrecog- nitionof some subjectivestate or qualityas an object.That is, it is the momentin aestheticjudgment when something is judgedbeautiful. And accordingto Kant,this momentis characterizedby mistakingsome objectfor something subjective. Recall that aesthetic experience for Kant is the innerharmony of the faculties,and yetthat harmony can only occurwhen the subject of it insteadlocates it outsideherself. The consti- tutivemoment of the aestheticis thusa mistake,indeed a necessary mistake,for without this mistake there is no aestheticjudgment whatsoever. If humanbeings were completely transparent to themselves, what they wouldsay, according to Kant,in frontof someartwork or landscapeis somethinglike the following: I am now experiencinga harmony of my innerfaculties. But thatexperience can't be had nor thatstatement made,unless it is insteadmistakenly taken to be an experienceof an object.The humanbeing thus says not "I am beautiful"but "That is beautiful."A perfectlylucid, transparent and self-knowledgeablehuman beingwould of courseiterate the former. But it is preciselythe opacity of humanbeings toward themselves which requires that the experience of thatwhich is mosthuman (or subjective)instead be displacedonto an object.It is thusno accidentthat things sometimes are beautiful.No accident,yet nonetheless thoroughly mistaken. In short,the constitutive momentof aestheticexperience - and mightwe notalso say aesthetic judgment?- is misrecognition,the objective subreption whereby sub- jectivityloses (and sortof recovers)itself in somethingother. Finally, thisexperience is of coursefor Kant something universally subjective. This momentis afterall also premisedupon the possibility of a preex- istingsensus communis, which is to say thatthis moment of mistaken subjectivityis at thesame time a profoundlysocial moment. Humansubjectivity is thusin the aestheticdoubly mistaken: it mis- takesan objectfor itself and it mistakessomething social forsomething individual,particular, and personal.I believethat the gist of Kant's projectin the thirdCritique is to revealthe constitutivenature of the concealmentof boththe subjective and the social in aestheticjudgment.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:30:10 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions TomHuhn 187
But to have successfullyrevealed these in the thirdCritique would therebyhave been somethinglike an impossibleundoing of the entire dynamicof aestheticjudgment, indeed it would signalthe undoingof aestheticculture altogether. It is in Kant's accountof the sublimethat we findevidence of the impossibilityof layingbare and revealingthe mistakennesscentral to aestheticjudgment. It is in thesublime that he giveswhat is in effecta diagramof thegenesis of subjectivity,of humancoming-into-being out of theexperience of extractingpleasure from the internal domination of (thefear of) nature.Without offering a detailedaccount of theKantian sublime,suffice it to say thatfor Kant the sublime presents the possibil- ityof a self-generatingsubjectivity, a kind of vitalism that necessitates a certainconcealment and opacityat itscore suchthat a programof self- generationmight be set in motion.(One mightrecall in thiscontext Kant's remarksin his accountof the sublimein regardto the distinc- tionbetween civilization and barbarism,or his commenton theneces- sityof war for a healthycivilization). And whatrelevance does thisdigression into Kant's aestheticspossi- blyhave forwhat could be calledLukics's aestheticsof theessay? The answer,I believe,lies in thecontinuity between Kant and Lukics with regardto theshape of thefailure within each of theiraesthetics. I also wantto argue,however, that Lukics putsforth the form of theessay as an attemptedresolution to Kant's aesthetics.I will furthertry to show thatit is in Adorno'sresponse to Lukaicsthat we findan importantfor- mulationof the nature of the failed aesthetic in Kantand Lukaics. Firstthen, let us returnto the openingimpulse in Kantand Lukics: bothbegin with a quest forthe unity of the aesthetic.And thisquest mightalso be characterizedas a searchfor the boundariesof the aes- thetic,as a searchfor those principles which would produce the realm of theaesthetic as a unifiedtotality, as somethingidentifiable by dintof its havingan identity.This characterizationof the aesthetic next becomes foreach of themthe product of oppositionand exclusion.For Kantaes- thetictaste acquires its traits only in oppositionto physicalpleasure and/ or intellectualinterest. (Recall whatKant takesto be the dangersof charmand emotionfor taste.) Aesthetic taste is notso muchposited by Kantas it is ratherthe residue remaining after his havingdescribed all thatit cannotbe or takepart in. Likewise,for Lukics the formof the essaycannot be likeanything else, evenother forms of art.While Kant
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:30:10 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 188 Lukdcsand theEssay Form namedthose things and tendencies against which aesthetic taste is to be identified,Lukics dispensesaltogether with the namingof particulars and insteadsimply insists on thedynamic of definingthe essay form as necessarilyin oppositionto everything.He is thusa farmore thorough - perhapseven too thorough - Kantianin his aesthetics of the essay. Lukics's Kantianismis so thoroughthat it failsto providehim with thecomfort Kant allowed himself in his own aesthetics:the comfort of judgmentcompleting its circuit. Let me explain:Kant claims that it was his discovery,in 1787,of a facultyof judgment that propelled the writing of a thirdCritique. And what was perhapsmost crucial about that discov- eryis thatit allowedKant to distinguishbetween two sorts of judgment: determinantand reflective.The formerof coursebeing judgment deter- minedin cognitioneither by sensationor the conceptsof the under- standing,or morelikely some combination thereof. Reflective judgment, however,is notdetermined at all. Indeed,we mightinstead say thatit is self-determining,insofar as a reflectiveaesthetic judgment "determines" some objectto be beautiful.In short,reflective judgment works in a directionopposite that of determinantjudgment; it is an active,positing judgmentrather than the vast majority of ourjudgments which are the passivejudgments determined by cognition.Kant, in his aesthetics,was contentto outlinethe dynamicof reflectivejudgment; so too can we imaginehim satisfied with reflective judgment expressing and complet- ingitself in theform of an objectivesubreption. That is, reflectivejudg- mentcompletes its circuit by "determining" a beautiful object. But we cannotimagine a similarsatisfaction for Lukaics because the place fromwhich he seeksthe unity of theaesthetic is notsimply, as it was in thecase of Kant,the place of reflectivejudgment. It is instead theplace in whichreflective judgment is unsatisfiedwith itself - it is the place in whichthe judgments made by reflectionare once again submittedto reflection.Kant's concern was judgmentsof taste,Lukics's concern,we mightsay, is makingjudgments upon taste; his reflective judgmentis directedagainst reflective judgment. The comfortand solace Kantaccords himself by locatingthe unity of aestheticjudgment withinthe determining, constituting act of reflectionis simplynot avail- able to Lukricsbecause the aesthetic form under scrutiny by Lukaicsis preciselyjudgment itself. Put differently:Kant succumbed to thecom- fortof subreption,even in themidst of diagnosingits dangers.Lukics, on the otherhand, would like to succumbexcept that the formof the
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:30:10 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions TomHuhn 189 essayprohibits him from allowing reflective judgment to forgetitself in thedetermination of an object.The formof theessay is preciselya dia- lecticalinterchange with subreption. Put differently:the essay formis the locale where the post-Kantiansubject/object dialectic exercises itself.Or, stilldifferently: the technique of theessay makes it themost advancedform of contemporary subjectivity. Lukics writes:"But in reallyprofound criticism there is no life of things,no image,only transparency, only something that no imagewould be capableof expressingcompletely. An 'imagelessnessof all images'is theaim of all mystics... ." (5) How temptingthe fluidity and immedi- acy of transparency,and yetthe irony of sucha desireis thatits fulfill- mentdepends upon the obliterationof just thosejudgments which, to recallE. M. Forster'sgreat shibboleth, only connect. Lukics continues:
I shallgo further:the separation of imageand significance is itself an abstraction,for the significance is always wrapped in imagesand the reflectionof a glow frombeyond the imageshines through every image.Every image belongs to ourworld and the joy of beingin the worldshines in itscountenance; yet it also remindsus of something thatwas once there, at some time or another, a somewhere, itshome, the onlything that, in thelast analysis, has meaningand significancefor thesoul. Yes, in theirnaked purity they are merely abstractions, those twolimits of human feeling, but only with the help of such abstractions canI definethe two poles of possible literary expression. And the writ- ingswhich most resolutely reject the image, which reach out most pas- sionatelyfor what lies behind the image, are the writings of the critics, thePlatonists and the mystics. (5-6)
The essay,what we mightwell call the formof criticism,diligently remainsdissatisfied with every image and bit of significanceput forth as impedimentto its restlessness.And yetthe essay itself,insofar as it is the formof criticism,has alreadysuccumbed in some degreeto just thatcomplaisance with stasis, the comfort and distractionof imageand meaning.The ironyof the essay is its own dissatisfactionwith itself. The essay notonly "passionately" reaches for whatever may be behind the image,the essay is also passionatelyambivalent about images, for thoseimages are not onlyimpediments but also just thatwhich goads the searchfor imagelessness and transcendence.What Lukaics calls the "countenance"of the image displaysa reflectionof the face of the world,and yetat thesame time something from beyond that very world
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:30:10 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 190 Lukcicsand theEssay Form
"shinesthrough every image." Perhaps the essay is somethinglike the intellectual'svision of thattoo shinycountenance. The problemwith the image,and perhapslikewise with the essay, is thatthey reflect too much.The problemfor the essayist of the essay is howto distributeand disposeof the abundance of reflection. The "form"of theessay is thetentative solution to thisover-abundant reflection.The formis meantto containand hold still the reflective judg- mentwhose abundance has turnedupon itself. The essayitself, if I may be allowedthis locution, is somethinglike rampantreflection, while its formis theequivalent of objectivesubreption - of thesubjective dyna- mism of pure reflectionmomentarily halted in the misrecognitionof itselfas an object,in this case form- indeed,the form of reflection. Lukacs reformulatesthis dilemmaregarding the formof reflection accordingnow to thetemporal figure of destiny:3
All writingsrepresent the world in the symbolic terms of a destinyrela- tionship;everywhere, theproblem of destiny determines the problem of form.. Thereforethe separation which I am tryingto accomplishhere appears,in practice,merely as a shiftof emphasis:poetry receives its profileand its formfrom destiny, and form in poetryappears always onlyas destiny;but in the works of the essayists form becomes destiny, itis thedestiny-creating principle. (7)
It is, I wantto argue,precisely here where the disjoint in thetrajectory of aesthetictheory from Kant to Adomois mostapparent, for what Lukacs attemptsto accomplishwith the temporal figure of destinyis a unificationand totalization that aesthetic judgment ought to avoid:
The critic'smoment of destiny,therefore, is that moment at which thingsbecome forms - themoment when all feelingsand experi- enceson thenear or thefar side of formreceive form, are melted downand condensed into form. It is themystical moment of union betweenthe outer and the inner, between soul and form. (8)
Withmore time I wouldargue that what Lukacs describes here as a momentof mysticalunion is best comparedwith what Kant calls the
3. For theargument regarding the figural nature of time,see Paul de Man, "The Rhetoricof Temporality,"Blindness and Insight:Essays in the Rhetoricof Contemporary Criticism,2nd rev. ed. Intr.Wlad Godzich (Minneapolis: U ofMinnesota P, 1983) 187-228.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:30:10 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions TomHuhn 191
"sacredthrill" in the experienceof the sublime.But more important thanthe figuresaccording to whichpleasure is characterizedin aes- theticjudgment is thetendency of judgment itself. For Lukics thatten- dency,now describedas destiny,points directly toward redemption and salvation:"This has shown,however, that salvation is necessaryand is thereforebecoming possible and real. The essayistmust now become consciousof his own self,must find himself and buildsomething of his own out of himself'(15).The disjointis as follows:Lukaics has lost completelyjust thataspect of aestheticjudgment which in Kantconsti- tutedthese peculiar judgments: that they are made fromthe assumed thoughconcealed - positionof everyman.That is, preciselywhat dis- tinguishesliking something from judging it beautifulis the presump- tion of a universal,disinterested liking. But Lukics discardsthis foundational,constitutive element and insteadprescribes the self-dis- coveryof theindividual essayist. And fromthis salvation is to follow? It is thusno accidentthat Lukics failsto say just who or whatis to receivesalvation. In short,Lukaics embraces the closureof aesthetic judgmentin just thatform - theessay - whichalso attemptsto resist it. Near the end of his essay he seemspoised to retracthis embrace: "The essay is a judgement,but the essential,the value-determining thingabout it is notthe verdict (as is thecase withthe system) but the processof judging" (18). Adorno'sstrategy, if we mightcall it that,is to arguethat central to the essay is just that disjointednesswithin aesthetic judgment that Lukacs would have the essay redeemthrough a mysticalunion. The temporalityof the essay,for Adomo, is not a trajectorythat finds its goal and redemptionin somesort of destiny,but rather seeks the oppo- site: to cut shortand breakoff its continuity.The essay seeks self effacement,not mystical resolution: "[The essay's] self-relativizationis inherentin its form:it has to be constructedas thoughit could always breakoff at any point.. . . Discontinuityis essentialto the essay; its subjectmatter is alwaysa conflictbrought to a standstill.'4The essay insistsupon temporality: for Lukics it is an insistenceupon the totality and unityof temporalityas expressedby and in thenotion of destiny; forAdorno the essay's insistenceupon temporalityis insteadin the directionof particularityand mediation:"For the essay all levels of
4. TheodorW. Adorno,Notes to Literature, vol. 1,ed. RolfTiedemann, trans. Shi- erryWeber Nicholsen (New York:Columbia UP, 1991) 16.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:30:10 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 192 Lukdcsand theEssay Form mediationare immediateuntil it beginsto reflect."5That is, the essay, as theform of judgment, is reflectiveof theparticularity of mediation. It is thoughtdirected against itself, or, as Adornohas it: "the essay's innermostformal law is heresy."6I wantto suggestthat Lukacs was in factaware of theheretical nature of the formof theessay and thata certaindiscomfort with it led himto try,though only half-heartedly, to ameliorateits fragmentednature. And the best evidencethat Lukacs fullyappreciated the fragmentaryand non-redemptivecharacter of the essaylies in thepassage Adorno quotes from him:
Perhapsthe great Sieur de Montaignefelt something like this when he gavehis writings the wondermlly elegant and apt title of "Essay." The simplemodesty of this word is an arrogantcourtesy. The essayist dis- misseshis own proud hopes which sometimes lead him to believe that he hascome close to theultimate: he has,after all, no moreto offer thanexplanations ofthe poems of others, or at bestof his own ideas. Buthe ironicallyadapts himself to thissmallness - the eternal small- nessof the most profound work of the intellect in faceof life - and evenemphasizes itwith ironic modesty (9-10).
This ironicadaptation to smallness,to particularity,might also be consideredmimesis (imitation), just thatnotion so centralto aesthetics since Plato. In thislight, Lukacs's conclusion- "The critiqueof this book is contained,in all possiblesharpness and entirety,in the very approachfrom which it sprang"(18) - mightnow be construedless as a desirefor unity and totality and rather as an attemptto retreat,mimet- ically,back intowhatever smallness from which our desiresfor unity, identityand wholeness are given shape.
5. Adomo11. 6. Adomo23.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:30:10 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions GraduateFaculty Philosophy Journal The GraduateFaculty Philosophy Journal is publishedin association with the DepartmentofPhilosophy, theNew School for Social Research. The Journal isa forum forthe communication ofideas conceming continental philosophy and its tradition. VOL. 21 NO. 2
HANS-JOACHIMKRAMER Fichte,Schlegel, and theInfinite Interpretation of Plato (Translatedby Christopher Colvin) JOHANNESFRITSCHE Heideggerin the Kairos of "The Occident' TOM ROCKMORE RecentDiscussion of Heidegger and Politics CHRISTOPHERP. LONG The Hegemonyof Form and the Resistance of Matter
HANNAHARENDT MEMORIAL SYMPOSIUM MIHALYVAJDA BetweenPariah and Parvenu:Hannah Arendt on Assimilationofthe Jews MARGARETCANOVAN LastingInstitutions: Arendtian Thoughts on Nationsand Republics APRILFLAKNE 'No Longerand NotYet': From Doxa to Judgment AGNESHELLER The ThreeLogics of Modernity and theDouble- Bindof Imagination PIERREKERZSBERG The Echoof Evil CHRISTOPHMENKE Modernityand Subjectivity:From an Aesthetic Pointof View REVIEWESSAY RICHARDJ. BERNSTEIN JanAssmann's Moses theEgyptian: The Memory ofEgypt in WestemrnMonotheism
BOOKS REVIEWEDAND RECEIVED
Allcommunications should be addressedto the Editor, Graduate Faculty Philosophy Journal,Department ofPhilosophy, New School for Social Research, 65 FifthAvenue, NewYork, NY 10003. The Journal isbiannual. Domestic rates: Individuals: $15.00/year; Students:$12.00/year; Institutions: $35.00/year.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:30:42 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 'TELOS A QuarterlyJournal of Critical Thought Since May 1968, Teloshas beencommitted to thedevelopment ofan American Critical Theory and the analysis of American and internationalissues froma broadgeopolitical perspective. Number115 Spring1999 Articles: DavidPan: Adorno FailedAesthetics s ofMyth RussellA. Berman:Religion and CriticalTheory RickJohnstone: Ethnic Purges and Neighborly Pacts AnthonyKing: Legitimating Post-Fordism: On Giddens'Later Works JohnW. Tate: Posting Modernity to thePast? Notes,Documents, Commentaries and Reviews: SimonOliver: Theology as a Pseudo-Ecology?Reply to Marangudakis KavehL. Afrasiabi:On CivilizationalParallelisms Benoistand Champetier: The French New Right in the Year 2000 PeterSchneider: Intervention inKosovo RickJohnstone: The Lessons ofAuschwitz and the Lessons of Uri G. L. Ulmen:Russell Berman's Enlightenment orEmpire Paul Piccone:Russell Jacoby's The End of Utopia CatherinePickstock: John Keane's Civil Society JohnBokina: Rildiger Safranski's Martin Heidegger SophieBerman: Susan Haack's Manifesto of a PassionateModerate CurtisL. Hancock:Peter Radpath's Cartesian Nightmare
Subscriptionsinclude 4 issuesper year and cost$40 for individuals and $95 for institutions.Foreign and Canadianorders add 15%. Checks/MoneyOrders must be in USfunds, drawn from US banks. Back issuescost $14 each ($30for institutions).No CreditCards. Back issuesavailable: 13, 17-18,20-51, 53-112. For subscriptions, backissues or information,write to:
TelosPress Ltd. 431 E. 12thStreet NewYork, NY 10009 phone:212-228-6479 fax: 212-228-6379 e-mail:[email protected]
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:30:42 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions RECENT BACK I S S U E S
77 German-Jewish Religious Thought
D.SORKIN: THE MENDELSSOHN MYTH * A.ARKUSH: MENDELSSOHN'S QUESTIONABLE JUDAISM * M.BRENNER: POLEMICS OF GERMAN-JEWISH IDENTITY * S.HESCHEL:REVOLT OF THE COLONIZED * L.BATNITZKY: THE JEWISH UNCANNY * P.GORDON: ROSENZWEIG AND HEIDEGGER* S.MOSES: LITERARY CRITICISM AND KABBALAH * J.SKOLNIK: KADDISH FOR SPINOZA
76 Weimar Visual Culture
F.SCHWARTZ: CATHEDRALS AND SHOES J.LUNGSTRUM: THE DISPLAY WINDOW * M.FINEMAN: ECCE HOMO PROSTHETICUS * E.DA COSTA MEYER: LILLY REICH'S DESIGNS * D.APEL: PHOTOGRAPHIC NARRATIVES OF WAR
Issue 75
N.BERMAN: HOFMANNSTHAL IN NORTH AFRICA * S.SPECTOR: EDITH STEIN'S PASSING GESTURES * Y.M.BODEMANN: REPRESENTATIONS OF AUSCHWITZ *N.FUGMANN:KIEFER'S SPATIAL HISTORIOGRAPHY * R.LECK: SIMMEL'S AFTERLIFE * J.MCCORMICK: LUKACS AND SCHMITT ON RATIONALIZATION * M.PENSKY: MINIMAL ADORNO
74 Nazi Cinema
M.HANSEN: FOR KARSTEN WITTE * K.KREIMEIER: KARSTEN WITTE 1944-1995 * W. SCHOTTE: THE DEATH OF KARSTEN WITTE * E.RENTSCHLER: THE PASSENGER AND THE CRITICAL CRITIC * K.WITTE: THE INDIVISIBLE LEGACY * K.WITTE: HOW FASCIST IS THE PUNCH BOWL? * K.WITTE: TOO BEAUTIFUL TO BE TRUE * P.PETRO: THE CLASSICAL AND THE POPULAR * A.ASCHEID: THE CASE OF LILIAN HARVEY * M.KLOTZ: EPISTEMOLOGICAL AMBIGUITY AND THE FASCIST TEXT * S.LOWRY: IDEOLOGY AND EXCESS IN NAZI MELODRAMA * L.KOEPNICK: SCREENING FASCISM'S UNDERGROUND * A.KAES: FILM, MIGRATION,ANDTHE URBAN EXPERIENCE
SPECIAL BACK ISSUES
13 FEMINIST ISSUE * 17,34,39,48 WALTER BENJAMIN * 19,20,21,38,70,77 GERMANS AND JEWS * 22,26,33 MODERNITY AND POSTMODERNITY * 24,25,60 NEW GERMAN CINEMA * 35,62 JURGEN HABERMAS * 40,51,76 WEIMAR CULTURE * 41 CRITIQUES OF THE ENLIGHTENMENT * 42 LUKA'CS * 43 AUSTRIA * 44 THE HISTORIKERSTREIT * 45 BLOCH AND HEIDEGGER * 46 MINORITIES IN GERMANY * 49 ALEXANDER KLUGE * 52 GERMAN REUNIFICATION * 59 ERNST JUNGER * 61 LUHMANN * 63 FASSBINDER * 65 CULTURAL STUDIES * 67 LEGACIES OF ANTIFASCISM * 68 LITERATURE * 69 RICHARD WAGNER * 71 MEMORIES OF GERMANY * 72 ALTERNATIVE POLITICS IN GERMANY * 73 HEINER MULLER * 74 NAZI CINEMA
BACK ISSUES ARE $14.00 ($30.00 FOR INSTITUTIONS).FOR MORE SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION AND A FULL LIST OF BACK ISSUES, WRITE: TELOS PRESS, 431E. 12th ST. NEW YORK, NY 10009.COST OF A SINGLE ISSUE: $12.00.
This content downloaded on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:30:42 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions