© Tasos Zembylas & Claudia Dürr, 2008
CONFLICTS AND SCANDALS IN THE GERMAN-SPEAKING
LITERARY WORLD
INTRODUCTION
The terms "scandal" and "conflict" contain many semantic overlaps and they are often used as
synonyms: the meaning of any term develops from its usage. Without denying this
observation, however, we wish to emphasise two special cases: there are instances in which
literary texts are suspected of having broken explicit agreements and codified rulings. In the
ensuing dispute both authors and plaintiffs cite constitutionally protected rights. Courts of law
are then called upon to examine the putative legal offence and, if necessary, to weigh the
rights of one party against those of the other one in order to reach a judgement. In such cases
we explicitly refer to conflicts. We include in this any literary conflict with any relevance to
criminal or civil law, even if the respective issue is settled out of court.
On the other hand, we reserve the term "scandal" for instances in which a literary text or a
performance offends non-codified rules (social conventions, moral standards, symbols of
identity) of groups within society. The allegation of "offending" shows that the disputed behaviour is unacceptable to the groups concerned. In this sense, scandals often touch on moral
issues; consequently, scandalising is accompanied by moralisation.
In the following article, we shall look at conflicts and scandals that took place in the three
German speaking countries, Germany, Austria and Switzerland, in recent decades. The great
variety of literary conflicts and scandals invites us to attempt grouping them according to
certain similarities. The following six groups are not defined by "essential" or "typical"
characteristics of conflicts or scandals, but rather by structural aspects, such as relation to
explicit or implicit norms, the way conflicts are conducted, purposefulness (or intentionality)
of the individuals and organisations involved, as well as chosen means.
1st source of friction: Freedom of artistic expression versus other fundamental rights
2nd source of friction: What society expects of intellectuals and writers
3rd source of friction: Literature as social criticism – opposing the consensus of hegemony
4th source of friction: The relationship between literature and the state – the idea of artistic
autonomy
5th source of friction: Social and aesthetic standpoints; antagonism in the literary world
6th source of friction: Stage-managed (pseudo-) scandals as a means of publicity.
Before going further to discuss these different forms of conflict we shall present some general
thoughts that can make our approach comprehensive.
WHY ART MATTERS – SOME REFLECTIONS ON PUBLIC DEBATES AROUND
WORKS OF ART
The sociology of arts has been to some degree interested on arts conflicts, but this issue
usually becomes more relevant in times when controversies are publicly discussed – think for
instance of the “culture wars” in the USA during the late 1980s (Bolton 1992, Heins 1995).
Steven Dubin (1992, 1999) should be specially mentioned for his analysis of several cases
focusing on the question of who strikes the match to ignite one controversy or another. He
finds that "homo censorious overestimates the effects of exposure to cultural expression and
assumes the effects to be immediate and irreversible" (Dubin 1999: 256).
Arts sociological studies are grounded on the belief that treating art – the promotion of or the
combat against arts is a social process (see Zolberg 1990: 124f.). However, with reference to
Conflicts and Scandals in the German-speaking Literary World
2
Pierre Bourdieu’s works (1984, 1996), a specific theory of social friction and antagonism –
influenced by Gramsci's theory – brings elements of violence, domination and symbolic battle
into play, which imbue conflicts around the arts with a political meaning.
Indeed, art conflicts and scandals often revolve around values that are central to our society.
The examination of pertinent examples can therefore reveal the political struggles hidden
behind the particular cases as well as the levels of acceptance with regard to artistic
expression prevailing at a particular time and in a particular context. The cause of such
conflicts is a matter of interpretation: it is often possible to trace the spark that ignited the
conflict to either one of the parties involved or to delve deeper into the past and identify other,
earlier areas of tension as the catalyst. Every description is consequently laden with a certain
degree of ambivalence, which means that differing interpretations of a case are legitimate.
We would like to note that public conflicts are not necessarily an indication of social
dysfunction, disintegration or division; on the contrary, it is false social harmony, brought
about by massive suppression of existing conflicts and antagonism, that indicates social and
political malfunctioning. Art as the social field of symbolic production, as a medium for the
articulation of experiences and ideas as well as a forum for the self-representation of individuals and social groups, is a catalyst for social interactions. Interactions and negotiations
about the meaning and value of symbolic work will include frictions, since the public
presentation and valuation of some entity (an object, concept, or performance) matters
politically. "Political" in this sense means that the respective content and values, which are
publicly negotiated, affect the interests of several persons (individuals or groups). Such
conflicts interact with aspects of political domination and cultural hegemony and are therefore
by no means negligible or marginal.
However, conflicts over the interpretation and evaluation of symbolic articulations should not
be reduced to sociological explanation or to analysis of public rhetoric only. Analysis of some
causes of conflict calls for epistemic insight into the process of ascribing meaning and value.
The constitution of meaning and value is not a subjective act of consciousness or a
psychological process in terms of empathy. Rather, understanding is more fundamental; it
primarily represents a practical function of the mastery of artistic language-games.1 The
"seeing as" – an apt characterisation of perception and of understanding – indicates that acts
of interpretation and valuation do not glean objectively given meaning, but are rather based on
schemes and contain sediments of previous acts. Thus the production of meaning is linked to
habits and typicality. These are generally effective before reflection, that is, they cannot be
fully grasped by individuals.
The embeddedness of understanding in shared traditions and trajectories of learning, in
existing cultural practices and institutional frames does not, however, imply any determinism.
In any process of understanding and valuation, the relative indeterminacy of acts and symbols
creates leeway for interpretation and critical weighing that may be filled, thus leaving each
process of understanding open. For this reason, we constantly find a diversity of interpretation
of artistic expressions and performances.
Differing interpretations and valuations do not necessarily end in public conflict. In order to
explain the emergence of literary conflicts we have to grasp the particular goals and of
prevalent interests which account for the individual conviction that it is worth fighting over
interpretations of literary works. Such convictions and interests refer us back to the
description of the concrete social constellation of the actors involved in the respective
conflict. Additionally, the aspect of individual commitment2 to the literary field is significant.
1
"[T]o imagine a language means to imagine a form of life." And "[true or false] is what human beings say
that is true and false, and they agree in the language they use. That is not an agreement in opinions but in
form of life." (Wittgenstein 1953, § 19 and § 241.)
2
Commitment is generally linked to identification with and embeddedness in a social field. For this reason
Harrison White (1993, 7.) claims that "artworks are tangible realisations of culture, in support of identity".
Conflicts and Scandals in the German-speaking Literary World
3
Pierre Bourdieu's theoretical model of the cultural sector describes social relationships and the
effects of structures by using the metaphorical concept "field": "The field is a network of
objective relations (of domination or subordination, of complementarity or antagonism, etc.)
between positions (…). Each position is objectively defined by its objective relationship with
other positions (…). All positions depend in their very existence, and in the determinations
they impose, on their occupants, on their actual and potential situation in the structure of the
field – that is to say, in the structure and distribution of those kinds of capital (or of power)
whose possession governs the obtaining of specific profits (such as literary prestige) put into
play in the field." (Bourdieu 1996: 231.)
The artistic field is described a battlefield where individuals and groups struggle for the accumulation of cultural capital, influence and domination. According to their particular views and
assumptions about situations, positions and opportunities they create alliances to cope more
successfully with the constant conflicts and antagonism within the field. For this reason the
artistic field is in permanent unrest.
Our affinity to Bourdieu's approach regarding the analysis and interpretation of conflicts and
scandals in the literary world is grounded on the specific advantages of his theory. While the
production-of-culture approach (H. Becker, R. Peterson, D. Crane) in general puts less
emphasis on aspects of power, political domination and cultural hegemony, most
post-structuralist theories developed at the same time as Bourdieu's oeuvre tend to
underestimate the relative autonomy of actors in the literary field (see Bourdieu's side blow
against the "Althusserans" in Bourdieu 1996: 179). However, this autonomy is fragile and
depends on the structures of the field, since the commitments of individuals in the field imply
internalisation of most constitutive rules and beliefs – the "illusio"3 – held by the literary
community. Also, all participants, regardless of their position within the field, strongly
depend on internal mechanisms, that is to say, on ways of participation and inclusion, on
forms of evaluation, appreciation, rewarding and sanctioning, that exist in the literary world
(see Bourdieu 1996: 225f., 232).
1st source of friction: Freedom of expression in art versus other fundamental rights, taking
personal rights as an example
Examples of allegations occasionally made in conflicts over personal rights are violation of
the ban on denigration of religious teachings, violation of the law protecting children and
young people (i.e. accusations of pornography or obscenity), or the allegation of racism or
incitement to public violence. Personal rights are violated by the disclosure of intimate private
information, or by criticism expressed in such polemical and personal terms that it is felt to be
slanderous, libellous, or defamatory. In such cases, each party to the conflict cites fundamental rights protected by the constitution and international agreements like the European
Convention on Human Rights (1950). This means that according to the letter of the law, in
theory, each side has an equally strong position (here we refer to the continental legal system
whose structure and procedures differ from the English and US common law system). The
conflict can be conducted both in court or in the media in full view of the general public.
Crucial for the legal argument is the nature and intensity of the alleged violation of personal
rights along with recognisable similarity (degree of identification of real persons) or dissimilarity of the literary characters. The courts must carefully weigh the colliding legally protected
rights of one party against the opposing parties' need for protection. For this reason, both
immanent textual analysis and contextual exegesis of the incriminated text play an important
role.
3
"Illusio" means "collective adhesion to the game that is both cause and effect of the existence of the
game". (Bourdieu 1996: 167.)
Conflicts and Scandals in the German-speaking Literary World
4
Current legal disputes are often compared with two prominent cases: First, with the satirical
portrait of Gustaf Gründgens in Klaus Mann's novel "Mephisto"4 (written in 1936), which was
banned in 1971 by the court of last instance (Verfassungsgerichtshof) following a petition //
an appeal by Gründgens's adopted son; the novel infringed on the right to privacy of the actor
and theatre manager Gründgens, who was recognisable as the Nazi careerist Hendrik Höfgen
in the novel. The second prominent case concerns Thomas Bernhard's "Holzfällen" (translated
as "Cutting Timber: An Irritation" as well as "Woodcutters"). The text lashes out not only at
Austria's most cherished cultural institutions, but also at Bernhard's own artistic contemporaries, depicted by the narrator as "those unappetising painters and sculptors and writers and
musicians and actors, those horrendous provincial artists who converge on Vienna in droves."
(Bernhard 1984: 93) Most of the narrator's invective is directed at the host of a midnight
dinner, the composer named Auersberger, whom the narrator once revered as the "Novalis of
sound" (Bernhard 1984: 38), but whom he now considers to be a "pathetic little bourgeois"
(Bernhard 1984: 97) who has ruined his talent with alcohol and careerism. When, in 1984, the
novel was first published in Austria, Bernhard's former patron and friend Gerhard
Lampersberg, who recognised himself in the figure of the composer Auersberger, was so
outraged that he filed a suit for libel and managed to have the book banned for some time. The
ban was lifted a few months later by the Vienna Oberlandesgericht (provincial high court and
court of appeal).
Example: A temporary injunction was taken out against Maxim Biller's "Esra" (2003)
shortly after its publication and upheld by the Landesgericht (provincial court) in
Munich because the novel violated personal rights of Biller's former girlfriend and her
mother. The book relates the breakdown of the relationship between Adam, a writer,
and his Turkish girlfriend. The text itself raises the issue of the limits to artistic freedom: "From the beginning, Esra had told me never to write anything about her" (Biller
2003:14), the novel reads. The book also includes a passage in which Esra tells the
first-person narrator plainly that she does not want to show him her breasts, so that she
would not read about exactly this somewhere, later, because she says, "I want to be
private with you." Thus it seems that the text deliberately transgresses limitations and
implicitly announces its future ban. In December 2005, sale of the novel in bookshops
and through mail-order companies was prohibited by court order, because even after
the text had been modified there was still insufficient dissimilarity; both characters, as
winners of widely known awards and, as such, public figures, were still readily
identifiable. Matters were compounded by the descriptions of details of the couple's sex
life, the daughter's serious illness and an extremely negative portrayal of the mother's
character.
In current jurisdiction there is a tendency for greater tolerance in the satirical portrayal of
politicians if this serves the expression of political criticism rather than the satirical portrayal
of the respective private individuals. Violations of personal rights are judged more severely if
the court has the impression that the author is acting out of vengeance or for other personal
motives. The question therefore is whether the intentions cited by the author and inferred from
the text constitute moral grounds for the accusation of violation of a third party's privacy. Max
Biller, for instance, denies that his novel is a roman à clef; he claims that it was not his
intention "that real people recognise themselves or feel insulted"5. However, doubts were
4
Gustaf Gründgens was one of the most famous German actors in the 1930s. Klaus Mann was the son of
Thomas Mann (Literature Nobel Prize winner in 1929). His novel "Mephisto" is a critique of political
opportunism during the Nazi regime.
5
Biller, Maxim: Statement for the court proceedings regarding "Esra". Written for the Landesgericht
Munich. Berlin 21.3.2003, published also in "Volltext. Zeitung für Literatur", June/July 2003: 7.
Conflicts and Scandals in the German-speaking Literary World
5
raised whether disclosure of such intimate details was necessary to fulfil his declared
intention, which was to tell "a great, beautiful and tragic love story"6.
The administration of justice reflects the status and significance of fundamental rights – even
if the verdicts are casuistic. In this sense the disputes are public conflicts. However, media
coverage of such conflicts can be very limited if those involved are not well-known personalities or are not interested in publicity. In some cases, however, one of the parties to the
conflict may try to portray the court proceedings or the opponent's behaviour as a scandal in
the mass media, assuming that the general public will share the plaintiff's personal resentment
and hoping to receive public sympathy and solidarity.
Those who turn their case into a scandal adopt the role of victim in order to challenge their
opponent's aims. Strategic measures of this kind are not likely to affect the outcome of the
court proceedings because those are largely formalised procedures that are practically immune
to the influence of outside propaganda. However, what can be achieved by a media campaign
is an out-of-court settlement and withdrawal of the action.
2nd source of friction: What society expects of intellectuals and writers
Every society has a set of moral behaviour imperatives that apply to everyone without
exception. However, some professions are confronted with them more often than others:
intellectuals (scientists, artists) are expected to be sincere and genuine. This expectation is a
result of the role of intellectuals that has evolved over time as guardians of intellectual
matters, as seismographs of the Zeitgeist, as social conscience. This applies especially to those
intellectuals who frequently state publicly where they stand on important social and political
issues.
Example: In August 2006, Günter Grass (winner of the 1999 Nobel Prize ) admitted in
an interview about his forthcoming book "Peeling the Onion" that at the age of 15 he
had voluntarily joined the Waffen-SS, an elite formation of the Nazi army during the 2nd
World War. Grass was trained to operate the gun of a tank and fought in an SS –
battallion until its surrender to U.S. forces at Marienbad. In 1945, when the war was
over, Grass was 17 years old. "It happened as it did to many of my age. We were in the
labour service and all at once, a year later, the call-up notice lay on the table. And only
when I got to Dresden did I learn it was the Waffen-SS" Grass said in a BBC Interview.7
One should note that Grass, as long-time SPD (German Socialist Democratic Party)
supporter, had often been involved in political debates and controversies about German
"Vergangenheitsbewältigung" (coming to terms with the German past, especially with
the atrocities of National Socialism). Conservative journalists and politicians expressed
strong indignation and criticised that it had taken more than 60 years for this
confession; they therefore challenged his image as a progressive, left-wing person and
moral authority. Grass explained that he had been unable to talk about this issue earlier
because of his feeling of "profound shame".8 In contrast to many of Grass's critics,
several public persons defended him precisely because he had always been publicly
critical of Germany's Nazi past.
Casting doubt on the credibility and sincerity of an author may lead to conflicts and scandals.
Failure to meet implicit expectations with regard to behaviour can, under certain circumstances, be considered so serious that criminal proceedings may result (for example in the
case of intention to defraud). Scandals of this type usually unfold in the mass media, under the
gaze of the general public (with the involvement of investigative journalists, critics and
intellectuals). Accusations concentrate on two aspects: concealment of facts and the strategy
6
Ibid.
See http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4785851.stm; 15.1.2008
8
See http://www.sueddeutsche.de/,ra5m2/kultur/artikel/268/107161/; 10.12.2007
7
Conflicts and Scandals in the German-speaking Literary World
6
employed to refute the accusations (denial, then a half-confession, then playing down the
importance of the matter).9
Example: In 1995, Binjamin Wilkomirski's book "Fragments. Memories of a Wartime
Childhood" was published by the Jewish division of Suhrkamp publishers and won
several awards. The author, hitherto unknown, became an expert in the psychology of
Holocaust survivors. He steadfastly maintained that his memoirs were authentic.
However, in 1998, the "Züricher Weltwoche" (Daniel Ganzfried) expressed the strong
suspicion, on the basis of documents obtained from the Swiss authorities, that
Wilkomirski's "Jewish identity" and his childhood in a concentration camp were, in fact,
fictitious. When further documents proved beyond any doubt that his identity was a
fabrication, the author claimed that readers had always been free to choose whether
they saw his book as literature or as a record of personal experiences.10
Controversial debate about an issue damages the public reputation of those concerned and
alters the way their work is perceived. Some of the attacks on the author, who until that time
had been highly respected, may cast doubt not only on his or her moral integrity but also on
the literary quality of his or her work. In fact the aesthetic verdict on Wilkomirski's memoirs,
once they had been shown to be a fake, was devastating (see Maechler 2001).
Scandals of this nature can have various effects. The public pays attention to them because it
demands a measure of social responsibility. The individual protagonists make use of such
public forums to take a stand. In addition, economic interests can also play a role. For
instance, a publisher on the one hand may try to push up sales and, on the other hand, try to
maintain the image of being a "serious publisher".11 Literature specialists often tend to discuss
the respective conflict at a theoretical level – in the case of Wilkomirski, for example, by
referring to a literary strategy. So-called post-modern arguments denying the binding character of utterances generally miss the moral dimension of social reality, as well as the practical
dimension of culture.12
3rd source of friction: Literature as social criticism – opposing the consensus of
hegemony
Every society has certain views which are sacred for it – Charles Taylor (1985: 13-44) calls
them "strong evaluations" - and which play a central role in social cohesion. We describe such
central beliefs and values within a social order as "hegemonial cultural consensus", because
they generally require full acceptance. In the German-speaking countries an example is
condemnation of National Socialist atrocities, condemnation of sexual coercion and
exploitation in any form and recognition of democracy as the legitimate form of government.
Occasionally, there may be writers who see themselves as "critical thinkers" and who dare to
expound on delicate subjects, knowing that they will meet with little approval by society.
Such breakers of taboos express a kind of social criticism that is essentially normative and
9
Christa Wolf, one of the most prominent authors of the former GDR, in 1990 published the book "Was
bleibt" ("What Remains"), which had been written in 1979, describing the constant observation of a female
writer by the "Stasi" (an abbreviation for "Staatssicherheitspolizei", the GDR security police). At the same
time, however, there was public discussion about her political activities and her image as resistance fighter
(see Anz 1995: 45-55). In 1993, when several Stasi files became accessible, Christa Wolf admitted that she
had been a Stasi collaborator from 1959 to 1962 – but without knowing it. The wave of anger that followed
the revelation of her Stasi collaboration swept beyond the literary world; the tabloid "Bild" ran the
headline, "Our most famous female author Christa Wolf: I was an IM ("Informelle Mitarbeiterin") … but I
didn't know it" (see Bild, 22.1.1993, quote from Vinke 1993: 146). Although the Stasi file on Wolf later
proved her political integrity, the media never followed up the story.
10
"Nobody has to believe me." Interview with Wilkomirski. In Tages-Anzeiger, 31.8.1998.
11
In 1999 the Jewish division of Suhrkamp Publishing House withdrew the bestseller "Bruchstücke" from
sales.
12
Regarding criticism of the textualistic paradigm, see Zembylas 2004a: 76-96.
Conflicts and Scandals in the German-speaking Literary World
7
which therefore often provokes criticism expressed in rather moralising terms (e.g.
megalomania, presumptuousness, ignorance...). This style of language increases the affective
associations of the controversial statements, often leading to emotional overheating of the
debate.
Example: Following his speech at the Peace Prize ("Friedenspreis") awarding ceremony at Paulskirche in Frankfurt in 1998, Martin Walser (who referred to intellectuals
as "the nation's conscience") found himself faced with allegations of anti-Semitism and
nationalism, because he had criticised what he called the "instrumentalisation of the
Holocaust" and the "monumentalisation" of German shame and had argued for a new
German national pride. One of his opponents was the well-known literary critic Marcel
Reich-Ranicki, a survivor of Holocaust. The long-standing conflict between Walser and
Reich-Ranicki had already attained political and fundamentally aesthetic dimensions
after Walser and his autobiographical novel "Ein springender Brunnen" (1998) had
been accused in the television programme "Literarisches Quartett" of insufficient
explicit distance to National Socialism. Walser's controversial speech also served as a
personal riposte to this criticism. Reich-Ranicki, for his part, responded in his
autobiography "Mein Leben" (1999).13 In 2002, Walser's novel "Tod eines Kritikers"
(The Death of a Critic), which was widely interpreted as literary retaliation against
Marcel Reich-Ranicki, caused outrage. Frank Schirrmacher, co-editor of the "Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung", refused to print excerpts of the new novel in the newspaper
before it went on general sale, as had been planned, and, in an open letter, described
himself as "disgusted" at the "game played with the repertoire of anti-Semitic clichés"14.
This criticism of Walser broke out at a time when the debate about a new anti-Semitism
(in connection with compensation for forced labourers, a Holocaust memorial in Berlin
and the public debate in Germany on the Middle East conflict) was reaching the height
of its media coverage.
On the one hand, deliberate breaking of taboos and non-conformist thinking offend attitudes
encompassed by the term political correctness while, on the other hand, they claim a
privileged position for themselves. The game played by those wishing to provoke follows the
logic of "I can see something that you can't see...". At the same time, everyone else is accused
either implicitly or explicitly of ideological blindness or an affirmative stance, conformity and
cowardice. Those who feel offended by the challengers accuse them not only of arrogance but
also of a lack of (self-) knowledge: the text reveals the subconscious thoughts and latent
wishes of the author who is not aware of them. In other words, "We, too, can see something
that you can't see…".
Immanent text analysis15 alters the way in which and where a conflict is conducted, but it
cannot fully answer the question about the validity of the accusations (it is always possible to
refer to the fictional nature of literature, of the characters' voices etc.), so it usually cannot
decide the conflict.
Strong identification with one's own position – the protagonists of the conflict quickly adopt a
very firm stance on the issue and leave themselves little room for manoeuvre – means there is
no willingness to compromise. The conflict is conducted on the basis of "all or nothing". An
inherent aspect of the basic pattern of this type of conflict is that the radical views of the
"renegades" isolate them and hardly anyone takes their side – at most, the wish is expressed
that they should be treated leniently.
13
Walsers "trotziges Bekenntnis zum Wegschauen von nationalsozialistischen Verbrechen" (defiant
support of turning a blind eye to Nazi crimes) supposedly had been an "exhortation to follow his
example". Walser's speech had "deeply hurt him ".
14
"I was so disgusted" – "FAZ" co-editor on his rejection of Walser's text. In: Der Spiegel, no. 23/2002.
15
For the Walser case, see Borchmeyer 2003; Lorenz 2005.
Conflicts and Scandals in the German-speaking Literary World
8
Example: Peter Handke set off a storm of protest in Europe with his long essay, "A
Journey to the Rivers: Justice for Serbia" (1996), a pro-Serbian work about the civil
war that accompanied Yugoslavia's disintegration. Quality newspapers were outraged
that Handke portrayed everyday life in Serbia with poetic epithets like "lovely",
"beautiful", "pleasant", "orderly" while mass graves were being dug out at Srebenica.
Handke spoke about "that story" instead of a massacre. As early as in 1991, when his
utopia of a Greater Yugoslavia seemed to be thwarted by Slovenian demands for
independence, he pleaded against all current and future attempts to leave the Yugoslav
union. Subsequently, Handke mainly criticised one-sided reporting on the war by the
international media. He explained his political motivation autobiographically, because
he was the grandson of a Slovenian farmer and his mother belonged to the Slovenian
minority in the Austrian province of Carinthia. His political plea, "Justice for Serbia",
was widely declared to be "insane" by the media and the general public. Scorn was
poured on him and polemical reactions came from all sides (he was not to be taken
seriously, he needed psychiatric treatment16). He was compared to Ezra Pound and
Louis-Ferdinand Céline, who had both tarnished their literary reputation by their
political support for Mussolini and Hitler, respectively. Other writers publicly distanced
themselves from him; in an open letter one of his former partners called him an
ideologist of Fascism.17
Disputes of this kind may strengthen or weaken the hegemonial consensus which is the
subject of discussion.
4th source of friction: Literature and the state – the idea of artistic autonomy
Both individuals from the literary world as well as politicians sometimes accuse authors of
maintaining too friendly relations with dominant politicians in order to obtain financial
rewards. Such accusations are based on the postulate of artistic autonomy which states that
literature must not be subject to the authorities and that the state is forbidden to exploit art for
(party) political ends. Any accusation made in this context is a moral one; the aim of the
criticism levelled at the opposing party is to discredit it morally.
Differentiation between the reasons cited, which can be directly inferred from statements
made, or from the protagonists' tacit intentions, which must be interpreted on the basis of their
social or political position and actions, is crucial to this analysis. At the level of the alleged
cause of the dispute it is usually the literary text which is debated, although the intentions
behind it are often quite different and relate explicitly to power politics or party politics.
Example: In 1995, the Austrian Freedom Party, FPÖ (a populist far-right party), repeatedly used the term "Staatskünstler" (state artist) in the run-up to early elections for the
National Assembly, with the aim of mobilising opposition against publicly funded art
(for which the Austrian Social Democratic Party, SPÖ, was responsible). Under the
pretext of fighting against those who "defile their own nest" and against "wasting
taxpayers' money", the FPÖ began to conduct slander campaigns, attacking artists who
had spoken out against the political positions of the FPÖ (particularly against its open
xenophobia and tacit agreement with former and new Nazi sympathisers). In the course
of this, however, the FPÖ tried to present itself as a patriotic party and moral authority.
16
This remark was made by Christian Meier, president of the Deutsche Akademie für Sprache und Dichtung, following Handke's announcement that he intended to give back the Büchner Prize he had won in
1973 (see also the dpa (German press agency) report "Akademie-Chef: Handke ist Fall für Psychiatrie",
9.4.1999) and by Günther Nenning (Spiegel no. 13/1999). Quoted from Michael Scharang: Kriegsschauplatz Handke. In: Die Zeit, no. 16/1999.
17
"You ideologist of Fascism". Marie Colbin lived together with Peter Handke in Salzburg for many years.
In an open letter she made serious allegations against him. In: Format, 22.5.1999, no. 21.
Conflicts and Scandals in the German-speaking Literary World
9
What is important is where, when and by whom the accusation of being a "state artist" is
made. Generally speaking, it is made publicly, which means that the ensuing scandal unfolds
publicly and in the media. The attention of society outside literary circles is gained by
arguments that are unrelated to literature. Often enough the contention that arts funding is in
some way obliged to be in the public interest leads to the conclusion that a right exists to
influence the production, distribution and reception of art. Efforts to win public support often
go hand in hand with defamation of writers in the mass media, which is expressed in terms
such as these: "State artists like [Peter] Turrini18 are now worried about losing their subsidies
coming out of the already over-milked pockets of the taxpayer and they are moaning like that
notorious former privileged East German cultural clique whose ideology w as so close to their
own."19
The protagonists make use of dramatic techniques to make it appear there is a genuine
scandal. Often enough self-victimisation is used as a means of gaining sympathy.
Example: In 1994 the Austrian magazine "News" published in advance the chapter "Die
Versammlung" [The Gathering] from Gerhard Roth’s new novel "Der See" [The Lake].
The discussion of an assassination attempt on a right-wing populist politician provoked
a violent protest reaction by the FPÖ, not least because of the interview with the author
that was included.20 In it, Roth did not explicitly distance himself from the interpretation
that the politician portrayed in the novel was Jörg Haider, and emphasised the parallels
that are drawn in the novel between this figure and Hitler. For the FPÖ, the analogy
went too far, and interpreted the literary text as an immediate call to kill. In the framework of a parliamentary discussion, Gerhard Roth was described as a “state artist”
and the FPÖ demanded that Roth should pay back all the grants and prizes he had
received from the government.
Beyond the particular characteristics of the specific case, the cause of the conflict is not
always genuine, since this kind of conflict arises from pre-existing political antagonisms and
animosities characterised by certain persistence. Since this kind of conflict is less an issue of
literature or of the two parties' literary preferences, its analysis should concentrate more on
the respective social and political standpoints.
5th source of friction: Social and aesthetic standpoints. Antagonism in the literary world
Valuations are omnipresent in the cultural sector. Aesthetic valuations are results of an
evaluative interpretation that frequently does not achieve general agreement – in specific
cases it even provokes conflicts. The emphasis on the interpretative origin of value
judgements points to their contingency and negotiability. Values and valuations that we
update and put forward are generated in connection with specific social practices, positions
and commitments; as such, in general they say little about the object of our judgement but
primarily about our practical relationship to it.
Aesthetic values and valuations are for several reasons contingent but not arbitrary. Pierre
Bourdieu refers to the nomos of the literary field that is the strong belief to some fundamental
aesthetic values that becomes part of individual identity and commitment. Struggles over
aesthetic standards are therefore inherent to the literary field. "The reality of all cultural
production and the very idea of writer may find themselves radically transformed by the sole
fact of an enlargement of the ensemble of people who have their say on literary things."
(Bourdieu 1995: 224)
18
Peter Turrini is an Austrian playwright.
Cato: "Staatskünstler und die Krone". In: Neue Kronen Zeitung, 29.1.1997, p. 3.
20
On the reception of Gerhard Roth's work, see "Gerhard Roth" in Text und Kritik, Vol. 128/1995, in
particular pp.74–85.
19
Conflicts and Scandals in the German-speaking Literary World
10
According to Bourdieu's model we can describe the literary world as a structured domain of
positions. On the basis of the underlying theory of action, the protagonists of a conflict are
motivated by their own interests, i.e. they attempt to safeguard or increase their status, and
therefore develop strategic behaviour. Literary critics, for example, wish to draw attention to
themselves and communicate their writing and judgement skills effectively. Because they too
function on a market and have to hold their own on it. Only someone who can distinguish
themselves as an expert in the literature business has a chance of being reasonably
economically successful too.
Example: When in 2000 a dispute broke out between two well-known critics, Marcel
Reich-Ranicki and Sigrid Löffler, in the television programme "Literarisches Quartett"
about the sexually trivial language used in Haruki Murakami's novel "South of the
Border, West of the Sun" – or, similarly, some years earlier, about the purportedly
pornographic style of Elfriede Jelinek's "Lust" (she won the 2004 Literature Nobel
Prize) – the issue at stake was less the texts themselves but rather recognition or legitimacy of the critics' personal power of judgement and canonisation of their personal
evaluations.
There is nothing intrinsically scandalous about literary disputes of this type; only the way in
which the conflict is conducted, or the behaviour of the two sides (e.g. insulting remarks) may
sometimes be interpreted as morally unacceptable.
Example: Franz Josef Czernin and Ferdinand Schmatz, along with Walter Klier and
Stefanie Holzer, all Austrian authors participating in the experimental literary subfield, tried to show that it is possible to improve one's standing in the literary world
(this means, on the one hand, finding a good publisher and, on the other hand, getting
good reviews) by churning out (what they consider as) poor quality texts that cater to
the popular taste. However, the battle to ascertain the dividing line between "good" and
"bad" literature, fought with dubious means, also provoked allegations of lying, deceit
and self-promotion, with the aim of grabbing the public limelight.
The debate is not so much centred on personalities and does not have the opponent's
convictions as primary target. The aim rather is to win the sympathy of the "significant other"
(George Herbert Mead). In this type of conflict, literary aesthetics functions as a normative
point of reference. In this, the figure of speech "literary quality" is of particular importance
because it conveys aesthetic judgement with greater intensity (see also disputes among critics
in the media). The discussion is not conducted merely on the basis of arguments or literary
studies, however. Since the primary aim is strengthening the protagonists' position within the
field of literature, we must attribute a performative function to "literary quality" (see Zembylas 2004: 215-217).
Example: Günter Grass's novel "Too Far Afield" (1995) is situated in Berlin in the
1960s, when work on the Berlin wall started, and it reflects German history from 1848
until the present, ending with German unification in 1989. It is clearly a political novel.
"Der Spiegel", one of the most prominent weekly magazines in Germany, chose Marcel
Reich-Ranicki to review this novel. Reich-Ranicki, who had conducted several controversies with Grass in the past, published a devastating article ("Der Spiegel", No.
34/1995) in the form of an open letter to the author, thereby choosing the best way of
putting the critic's perspective in the spotlight (this was also clearly depicted by the
front cover). Even before the book went on general sale, predominantly negative
discussions were taking place in all important magazines and literature programmes.21
In the case of Grass it was certainly also the text's political dimension that caused such
dismay. In addition however, a further central aspect was that those participating in the
literary debate very soon began to discuss their own role as literary critics and public
21
For a documentation of reactions in the media see Negt 1996.
Conflicts and Scandals in the German-speaking Literary World
11
persons, in other words they conducted a meta-debate about the loss of genuine reading
culture, the blindness of literary criticism, clever handling of media sensations etc.
In discussions like this – we deliberately avoid calling them conflicts because public interest,
which must not be confused with media coverage, is mostly absent – both sides have
something to gain (e.g. publicity). Others not directly involved in the dispute (publishers and
authors, for example) also profit from increased media attention: both Haruki Murakami's
novel "South of the Border, West of the Sun" and Elfriede Jelinek's "Lust" very quickly
became best-sellers, as did "Too Far Afield".
6th Stage-managed (pseudo) scandals as a means of publicity
Arts conflicts can be provoked artificially. They are, as Lewis Coser described them, "unreal"
conflicts (1972, 55–64). The central figures in this kind of scandal generally are authors or
their publishers, and journalists, whose interest in the respective text is less literary review but
rather popular forms of yellow-press journalism (articles, interviews), concentrating on the
personality of the author. The scandal is set in motion by a public appearance, a report or a
judiciously placed piece of information – only rarely is the text on its own enough to start it.
Authors make use of media-friendly strategies, e.g. they stage a violation of the rules of polite
behaviour and bourgeois virtues that emphasize mental or physical control (e.g. by appearing
drunk at public lectures or not being able to read their own texts properly), so they are
labelled "bad boys" or "bad girls" (see Airaksinen 1999: 16f.).
Example: This category includes the affirmation of taboos as practised by a group of 30
year-old German authors, the so-called pop authors (e.g. Joachim Blessing, Christian
Kracht, Benjamin von Stuckrad-Barre), in the late 1990s. In Internet appearances and
lifestyle reports they presented themselves as representatives of a generation so utterly
bored by affluent living, by consumption of luxuries, drugs and leisure time, that they
would "volunteer to go to war if it were summer 1914". (Bessing 1999: 138)
Michel Houellebecq's styled himself as an aggressive cynic, who in his public statements blurred the lines between the characters' and the author's speech (advocating, for
example, sex tourism), and who broke every rule of "political correctness" while claiming to be absolutely serious and quite prepared to accept any legal consequences (in
2002 charges were brought against him because of anti-Islamic statements). It is not the
texts themselves but his way of presenting them in public which causes a lot of public
attention for his work.
This kind of strategic self-promotion gratifies the needs of a "Society of the Spectacle" (Guy
Debord), that is to say they satisfy a demand for seemingly sensational content. The media
reports are thus the result of deliberate co-operation between authors and journalists
concocting a "story". The incidents – whether real or invented – are only scandalous for a
fictitious class of bigoted readers.
As a rule, the aim is to increase sales by means of a personality cult which is either "positive"
(lifestyle report) or "negative" (reports of escapades). The stage-managed scandal serves first
and foremost to make the author more widely known and, as a result, to publicise the book in
question, too. The apparent or "as-if" scandal is thus a product of the culture industry and is
useful for the promotion of (commercially oriented) literature aimed at a mass audience. To
this end, it usually fulfils certain preconditions at the aesthetic level as well (preponderance of
first-person narratives, a tendency towards mimetic narrative styles, language based on
current jargon (pop, fashion, cinema, advertising, etc). The literary world thus adopts
marketing instruments that have proved successful in other commercial culture markets (e.g.
in the music industry), too. In this case, a pseudo-scandal does not produce any losers – the
only question to be answered is that of effectiveness.
Conflicts and Scandals in the German-speaking Literary World
12
However, there are specific instances of contrived scandals aimed at achieving publicity
which do not primarily serve marketing targets. Authors or publishers distribute information
about a forthcoming publication strategically and to carefully selected recipients in order to
attract public attention. In such cases, the focus is on the subject matter of the text, which
usually promises political dynamite. By distributing non-literary, immanent subject matter,
the authors or publishers try to influence public attention and to prepare the field for
reception.
Example: This happened in the case of Thomas Bernhard's play "Heldenplatz". It had
been commissioned to celebrate the Burgtheater's 100th anniversary, which coincided
with the year commemorating the 50th anniversary of Austria's annexation to Hitler's
Germany. "Heldenplatz" presents a Jewish prominent family who are mourning the
death of a family member, a professor, who committed suicide because he could not
stand the Nazi atrocities committed in the 1940s. The brother of the deceased Professor
Schuster (the latter being the play's central character) as well as other family members
recapitulate the historical events. They get carried away into uttering long monologues,
tirades defiling the Austrian state. The play ends with Prof. Schuster's wife believing to
hear a crowd of people gathered on the square ("Heldenplatz") outside, who are
shouting "Sieg Heil". On the stage it is not quite clear whether she is just imagining
this, because the shouting is real.
The contents of the play were to be kept secret until the first performance. Some months
before this, in 1987, precisely the most provocative passages appeared in the weekly
magazine "Profil". The quotation contained verbal attacks against the Austrian Socialists and Catholics, the universities and newspapers, the federal president and the
federal chancellor; the Austrians were collectively called Nazis – without explaining
that all those insults were literary exaggerations, artistic language. The federal
president at that time, Dr. Kurt Waldheim, who felt personally attacked, declared:
"Freedom of literature and art is a great achievement of democracy. However, when
this freedom is misused like by the play "Heldenplatz", then the Burgtheater is not the
proper stage for its presentation. I think this play is a serious insult of the Austrian
people and I therefore reject it." He subsequently demanded an injunction against
showing the play, as well as the resignation of the theatre's director, but the minister of
culture, an SPÖ member, invoked artistic freedom and rejected Waldheim's demands. In
the evening of the first performance, right-wing demonstrators piled up horse manure
outside the theatre's entrance; others distributed leaflets calling for a boycott of the
play near the theatre, while inside, in the auditorium, members of right-wing student
corporations shouted comments on the play going on, blew whistles and chanted
slogans like "Gott schütze Österreich" (May God save Austria) in order to disrupt the
performance.
However, scandal does not always achieve the impact intended by the scandal-mongers (as
was also the case with the first night of Jelinek's play "Raststätte oder sie machen's alle"
(1994), or with Peter Turrini's play "Tod und Teufel" (1990)). When this happens, the authors
(or their publishers, or the theatres), who are labelled "taboo breakers" must put up with being
accused of having deliberately speculated with a scandal – and with not having provided one.
Thus, generally speaking, a scandal is successfully produced if the protagonists manage to
present their anger as something that the general public will and should share. In this way the
matter becomes a public affair.
AFTERWORD
Taking as our starting point the varied inter-relationship between literature, political power
and public media – relationships that range from co-operation to confrontation – we have
Conflicts and Scandals in the German-speaking Literary World
13
analysed different forms of conflict and attempts to produce scandals. In many cases the text
is only the catalyst that causes already existing conflicts to break out and become visible.
Apart of the sociological dimension of conflicts we have also taken into consideration the
juridical dimension of conflicts, because the state has a monopoly on the legitimate use of
physical force (i.e. coercive power) to enforce a legal claim. The nexus we have made
between human interactions and socio-political frames implies a linkage between the microand the macro-level of analysis.
Our study of the potential for conflict in literary actions and texts leads us into a realm beyond
the classic focus of literary studies. Here we discover the levels of acceptance of literary
expression prevailing at a particular time and in a given social constellation. Public arts
conflicts and scandals cannot be understood apart from the circumstances in which they
appear, i.e. they are context-bound. Focusing particularly on public literary discourses in
German-speaking countries, we identified a number of topics that are central in the collective
memory and collective identity of these societies: first and foremost, critical reflection of the
National Socialist era and discourse connected with collective guilt (e.g. Grass, Walser,
Jelinek, Bernhard). Particularly in Germany, but also in Austria, people experienced intensively how dangerous involvement of intellectuals in party-political and ideological purposes of
the state can be. There is widespread agreement that intellectuals should better keep at a
certain distance from everyday politics. This demand, however, conflicts with the personal
identity of some authors as committed intellectuals. For instance, Günther Grass's public
support of the SPD (German Social Democratic Party), or Elfriede Jelinek's sharp attacks
against the Austrian president, Kurt Waldheim (1986-1992), with respect to his involvement
with the National Socialist armed forces. These authors caused public offence and critics tried
to harm their moral reputation by accusing them to be "state artists", implicitly linking them
with "state artists" in former communist countries who had to represent and idealise the
regime and its leaders. For these reasons we show that the analysis of such conflicts and
scandals is a form of social analysis.
However, we have tried not to reduce conflicts and scandals to a conception of interestsfollowing or of power relations. Of course, literary works as well as other cultural articulation
express particular claims to recognition, but at the same time negotiate the general status of
our presence in the world. With Ernst Cassirer, in calling humans an "animal symbolicum" we
have followed the anthropological point of view towards symbolic conflicts. We have argued
that public conflicts are inevitable within social communities.
Conflicts represent a social challenge: Being engaged in a culture of criticism, the
development of strong arguments to support claims, and the ability to listen to other voices in
a sensitive manner are aspects that can facilitate processes of individual and social learning –
thus, we become learning communities. The payoff is a richness of experience, social competence and, subsequently, a more circumspect way of dealing with foreignness and otherness –
that is, the conflicting issues of contemporary societies. If those involved succeed in fostering
more understanding toward those who think differently, that alone would represent a
significant contribution to the quality of social and political life.
REFERENCES
Airaksinen, T., 1999. Scandal as Relic, in: Holler, M. (ed.) Scandal and its Theory, Homo
Oeconomicus, XVI(1), pp.7-20.
Anz, T., 1995. Initiation des Streits, in: ibid. (ed.) "Es geht nicht um Christa Wolf". Der
Literaturstreit im vereinigten Deutschland, pp. 45-55. Frankfurt a. M.
Bernhard, T., 1984. Holzfällen: Eine Erregung. Frankfurt a.M.
Biller, M., 2003. Esra. Roman. Köln.
Conflicts and Scandals in the German-speaking Literary World
14
Bessing, J. (ed.), 1999. Tristesse Royal. Das popkulturelle Quintett. Berlin.
Bolton, R. (ed.), 1992. Culture Wars. Documents from Recent Controversies in the Arts. New
York.
Borchmeyer, D. (ed.), 2003. Der Ernstfall. Martin Walsers "Tod eines Kritikers". Hamburg.
Bourdieu, P., 1984. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Cambridge.
Bourdieu, P., 1996. The Rules of Art. Genesis and Structure of the Literary Field. Cambridge.
Coser, L., 1972. Theorie sozialer Konflikte (Orig. The Function of Social Conflicts, 1956).
Neuwied.
Dubin, S., 1992. Arresting Images. Impolitic Art and Uncivic Actions. New York.
Dubin, S., 1999. Displays of Power. Controversy in the American Museum from "Encola
Gay" to "Sensation". New York.
Heins, M., 1995. The Taxpayers Money: Why Government Funding of the Arts Doesn't Mean
Government Control, in: Peter, J., Crosier, L. (eds.) The Cultural Batterfield. Art
Censorship Public Funding, Gilsum, pp. 47-52.
Lorenz, M., 2005. "Auschwitz drängt uns auf einen Fleck". Judendarstellung und Auschwitzdiskurs bei Martin Walser. Stuttgart.
Maechler, S., 2001. The Wilkomirski Affair: A Study in Biographical Truth. New York.
Negt, O. (ed.), 1996. Der Fall Fonty. "Ein weites Feld" von Günter Grass im Spiegel der
Kritik. Göttingen.
Taylor, C., 1985. What is Human Agency? in ibid.: Human Agency and Language. Philosophical Papers I, Cambridge, pp. 13-44.
Vinke, H. (ed.), 1993. Akteineinsicht Christa Wolf. Zerrspiegel und Dialog. Eine Dokumentation. Hamburg.
White, H., 1993. Careers and Creativity. Social Forces in the Arts. Boulder.
Wittgenstein, L., 1953. Philosophical Investigations. Oxford.
Zembylas, T., 2004. Kulturbetriebslehre. Grundlagen einer Inter-Disziplin. Wiesbaden.
Zolberg, V., 1990. Constructing a Sociology of the Arts. New York.