Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Silence in Analogue and Digital Communication in Western Modernity. Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Its Variety and Change.

Interdisciplinary Conference, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg

Halle, Germany, 12-14 December 2024

This conference seeks to explore how changes in the conditions, means, and opportunities of communication in the Western world since 1800 have affected the perception and the evaluation of silence and concealment. Silence is understood broadly as the absence of communication where it could have been expected or relevant, and as encompassing forms of concealment. Our object of investigation is therefore not limited to synchronous oral communication, but includes a multitude of written, oral, and multimodal forms of analogue and digital communication in a broad spectrum of historical and societal contexts.

The relevance of silence as a phenomenon of communication and the changes affecting uses, function and evaluation become manifest in Western modernity in at least five ways:

First, silence is part of an evolving communicative landscape in the constitution of modern societies as literacy increases and mass media develop along with different modalities of mediated communication, digitisation and social media. In this context, increasing production of, and exposure to, communication has led both to rising expectations on communication and to disappointment when expected communication fails to occur.

Second, processes of democratisation have increased the demand for information and transparency and for the inclusive and active participation of citizens in political processes and discourse since the long 19th century. As the volume of public discourse grew and expectations of and demands on communication rose, silence came increasingly to be scandalised. Moreover, refusal to engage in communication and discourse can be criticised as forsaking one’s right of political participation. Even modern dictatorships have to acknowledge expectations of participation and develop processes of pseudo-consensual communication. In turn, refusal to engage can be seen as resistance.

Third, for people with diverse ethnic, ability, or gender backgrounds, the availability of forums for expression and resonance becomes crucial, as members of diverse groups work for inclusion and against silence in analogue and digital communication. However, the very same strategies are being used to increase the acceptance of anti-democratic, exclusionary agendas, alleging a left-liberal hegemony and accusing the mainstream media of stifling freedom of expression and restricting access to discourse for some segments of political opinion.

Fourth, together with increased opportunities of and demands on communication, hopes have risen that communication itself can help solve problems and alleviate conflict. Political dialogue and negotiations, conflict mediation and therapeutical talking cures are designed to avoid or overcome problems, while communicative reticence is seen as an obstacle to achieving this.

Fifth, since the second half of the 20th century especially, social and cultural liberalisation has brought the de-tabooisation of traumatic experience, mental health, bodily functions, gender and sexuality, illness and disability. It would be interesting to investigate how such changes are negotiated in debates about what can(not) be said and in attempts to (re)draw borders of possibility and acceptability.

Papers are invited addressing the themes sketched above (or potentially others) while looking into the uses, functions, perceptions, and evaluations of silence in analogue or digital communication with a view to historical change. Questions such as the following could be pursued:

  • What are the functions of silence in different situational, institutional, and media contexts? How do such functions change before the background of various broader processes of social change?
  • Which societal, political or other consequences arise from controversial debates about the meaning and legitimacy of silence?
  • Which cultural values are associated with silence (and with communication as its implicit counterpart) in analogue and digital communication, and with what implications?
  • In which contexts and at what times do expectations of and demands on communication raise and fall? What consequences does this have for the ways in which silence is evaluated?
  • How do opportunities of communication and silence relate to societal diversity and  inclusion and/or marginalization?

Conference languages will be German and English. Papers will last 20 minutes, followed by 10 minutes of discussion. Please submit an anonymised abstract of up to 500 words (excluding references) via email to silenceinhalle@mail.de by 30 June 2024. You will hear back from the organising committee by the end of July 2024. We are planning to publish selected contributions after the conference.

There will be no charge for registration. Support for travel and/or accommodation expenses may be available for early-career researchers without financial backup from an institution. If this applies to you, please contact us at silenceinhalle@mail.de.

Organising committee: Annamária Fábián (Bayreuth, Germany), Theo Jung (Halle, Germany), Torsten Leuschner (Ghent, Belgium), Armin Owzar (Paris, France), Melani Schroeter (Reading, UK), Igor Trost (Passau, Germany), Stefanie Ullmann (Cambridge, UK), Judith Visser (Bochum, Germany).

A new German-language handbook on John Stuart Mill has just been published by J.B. Metzler Verlag under the title J. St. Mill-Handbuch: Leben – Werk – Wirkung.

In it, I have written a contribution on a text that Mill published as a series of newspaper articles in 1831, titled The Spirit of the Age. By placing this essay in the context of Mill’s own intellectual development, of the contemporary political situation in Britain and France, and of current debates in Mill-scholarship, I try to provide some entry points for a better understanding of a text that is no easy read but very worthwhile.

While Mill himself was quite harsh on this early publication later in life, it encompasses some fascinating reflections on the relation between authority and freedom, on the development of civilization, and on the social role of intellectuals.

Mill’s original text is available in the Online Library of Liberty through this link. It comes highly recommended.

My chapter is available here.

Many thanks to the editor Frauke Höntzsch for the compilation of what looks to be a great research compendium on one of the most intriguing intellectual figures of the Victorian era.

In April, I will be speaking in Dresden, at the conference “Das Königreich Sachsen 1848/49 – Dynamiken und Ambivalenzen der Revolution” (April 24-26, 2024), organized by Prof. Dr. Susanne Schötz, Prof. Dr. Andreas Rutz and Werner Rellecke.

The program can be downloaded here.

All are welcome and attendance is free.

Conference abstract in German:

Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren,
 
vom 24. bis 26. April 2024 veranstalten die Professur für Wirtschafts- und Sozialgeschichte der TU Dresden, die Sächsische Landeszentrale für politische Bildung und das Institut für Sächsische Geschichte und Volkskunde eine internationale Tagung in Dresden, die sich den revolutionären Ereignissen von 1848/49 im Königreich Sachsen widmet. Niemals zuvor haben sich hier so viele Menschen für Freiheit, Recht und Einheit begeistert wie während der Revolution von 1848/49. Männer und Frauen verliehen ihrem Wunsch nach bürgerlichen Rechten, größerer sozialer Gerechtigkeit und einem vom Volk gewählten sächsischen wie nationalen Parlament auf vielfältige Weise Ausdruck. Sachsen war in dieser Zeit der am dichtesten besiedelte und industriekapitalistisch am weitesten entwickelte deutsche Mittelstaat. Hier hatte sich eine starke Demokratiebewegung entfaltet, zahlreiche Arbeitervereine entstanden und Frauenrechte wurden zum Thema. Doch wie anderswo behielten auch in Sachsen die konservativen Kräfte die Oberhand. Die Tagung spürt den Verflechtungen, Dynamiken und Ambivalenzen des Geschehens aus unterschiedlichen Perspektiven nach. Sie interessiert sich für revolutionäre Karrieren und staatliches Handeln ebenso wie für transnationale und transatlantische Aspekte sowie Formen des Erinnerns und der Revolutionsbewältigung.
 
Die Tagung findet in Präsenz in der Sächsischen Landeszentrale für politische Bildung, Schützenhofstraße 36, 01129 Dresden statt. Das vollständige Tagungsprogramm und den Link zur Anmeldung finden Sie hier: www.isgv.de/tagung1848
Die Anmeldung ist ab jetzt freigeschaltet und noch bis zum 16. April 2024 möglich.
 
Wir freuen uns auf Ihren Besuch!
 
Im Namen des Tagungsteams
 
Prof. Dr. Susanne Schötz

In 2022, I attended the workshop “Ruling the Assembly. Procedural Fairness, Popular Emotion, and the Access to Democracy (19th-20th Centuries)“, organized by Dr. Anne Heyer (Leiden), Dr. Anne Petterson (Nijmegen) and Prof. Dr. Henk te Velde (Leiden) in Amsterdam. It explored how politicians and citizens tried to resolve the tension between reasonableness and accessibility of political debate, both in and outside Western European parliaments. What did political newcomers have to do in order to be listened to? What meaning did parliamentary rules have for citizens participating in public political discussions? And above all, how did they develop norms and practices for the conduct of democratic politics?

Some of the workshop’s contributions, including my own, have now been published in a special issue of the journal Parliaments, Estates and Representation.

My own contribution is titled

In All Seriousness: Laughter in the German Reichstag, 1871-1914

It can be accessed (Open Access) free of charge here.

Abstract

The ideal of parliamentary debate is often construed in terms of a disimpassioned exchange of arguments. Yet in its actual practice, emotions play a key role. As recent studies of French, Belgian, British, and other parliaments have shown, a closer look at the uses and understandings of laughter in the plenary debates can provide a useful entry point for a better understanding of the difficult to grasp atmospheric dimension of debates. Focusing on a case that has hitherto received little attention – the early decades of the German Imperial Reichstag – this contribution considers the varying modes of parliamentary humour, laughter and ridicule and their significance in the context of rhetorical struggles and processes of political in- and exclusion. In comparative dialogue with research on other parliaments (contemporary and otherwise), it contributes to a more precise characterisation of the internal dynamics of an institution still very much in flux, both in terms of its inner structures and its position within the wider framework of imperial politics. While contemporaries made a sharp distinction between exclusionary laughter and inclusionary mirth (Heiterkeit), a closer look at the plenary interactions shows that while parliamentary laughter performed many different functions, on the whole it primarily constituted a mechanism of de-escalation. Even the sharpest wit and ridicule helped generate an atmosphere in which political conflict could be negotiated without further escalation. As such, parliamentary humour did not stand in opposition to (rational) debate, but rather played a key role in the management of difference and conflict that the parliament was created to facilitate.

For the journal French Studies, I reviewed the volume “Éloquences révolutionnaires et traditions rhétoriques (XVIIIe et XIXe siècles)” edited by Patrick Brasart, Hélène Parent and Stéphane Pujol.

The review can be found online here.

In the last few years, I’ve been in close collaboration with Professor Melani Schroeter (University of Reading), one of the foremost experts on silence and communicative norms and the author of the groundbreaking Silence and Concealment in Political Discourse (2013) which was formative for my own interest in the history of political silences.

In the past year, we have managed to gain funding from the Leverhulme Trust for a collaborative research project titled “Between Voice and Silence: Communicative Norms in Diaries 1840-1990“, which has started in October 2023, involving two more colleagues: Clara Lloyd (Reading) and Pia Schmüser (Halle).

At the same time and in some ways as a preliminary study to this longer-term project, we have also co-written an article on communicative norms in a very different setting: the British Parliament. This article has now been published in the journal Language and Communication, and can be accessed through this link.

Abstract

As a metaphor for political power, participation, and legitimacy, the concept of ‘voice’ is central to considerations of representative politics during the modern era. Little is known about how political actors themselves understood and referred to their own voices, those of others, and their respective significance for representative politics. This article focuses on the British Parliament, which was since the eighteenth century regarded as a paradigmatic incarnation of political voice and as the pinnacle of modern representative government. Based on a corpus of Hansard debates from 1800 to 2005, we analyse MPs’ explicit references to ‘voice’ in parliamentary debates. We aim to explore the salience of ‘voice’ for MPs and of different aspects of voice as a vehicle for expressing political will. We also shed light on how metadiscursive references to ‘voice’ change over the course of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.

Schroeter, Melani / Jung, Theo: Speaking Up and Being Heard. The Changing Metadiscourse about ‘Voice’ in British Parliamentary Debates since 1800, in: Language & Communication 94 (2024), 41–55. DOI: 10.1016/j.langcom.2023.12.002.

Together with my colleagues Till Kössler and Robert Buch, I’ve organized a panel discussion on the cultural, political, social and philosophical implications of recent developments in the field of Artificial Intelligence. Under the title “Künstliche Intelligenz und das Ende des Menschen?” / “Artificial Intelligence and the End of Humanity?” we have invited

to reflect on the broader significance of this technological shift, which is too often discussed only in terms of euphoric optimism or apocalyptic worries. How does our perspective on ‘humanity’ change against the background of the increasing prevalence of self-thinking machines? The discussion brings different voices
from culture and science into conversation with one another to develop a sharper perspective on what the future co-existence of man and machine might entail.

The discussion is organized in partnership between the Landeszentrale für politische Bildung Sachsen-Anhalt and the Landesforschungsschwerpunkt Aufklärung – Religion – Wissen. Moreover, it is part of the “Transformationslabor Hochschule” which is funded by the Stifterverband der deutschen Wissenschaft e.V.

The event will take place in the neue theater Halle on January 18, 2024 from 7:30 pm. Attendance is free and all are very welcome.

As the 1848 revolutions’ anniversary slowly draws to a close, a few more academic conferences on the topic are planned for 2024. I’m participating in two of them.

In April, I will be speaking in Dresden, at the conference “Das Königreich Sachsen 1848/49 – Dynamiken und Ambivalenzen der Revolution” (April 24-26, 2024), organized by Prof. Dr. Susanne Schötz, Prof. Dr. Andreas Rutz and Werner Rellecke. The preliminary program can be downloaded here. All are welcome and attendance is free.

Then in September, I’m participating in the workshop “Freiheit und Gewalt: Politikkonzeptionen und Aktionsformen demokratischer Bewegungen in Europa in der Revolution von 1848/49” (September 26-28, 2024), organized by the Forschungsstelle für Neuere Regionalgeschichte Thüringens (PD Dr. Marko Kreutzmann), the Chair of Western European History at the Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena (Prof. Dr. Thomas Kroll), and the Gesellschaft zur Erforschung der Demokratie-Geschichte in Weimar (Dr. Christian Faludi).

More information to follow.

Next Tuesday, November 7th, I am invited to the Villa Lessing in Saarbrücken to hold the Kommission für Saarländische Landesgeschichte‘s annual lecture.

In my presentation titled 1848/49 nach 175 Jahren: Kritische Perspektiven auf eine demokratiegeschichtliche Vereinnahmung, I will address the increasingly ubiquitous framing of the revolution as a “democratic departure”, reflecting on its implications and pitfalls.

All are welcome and attendance is free. The lecture will also be broadcast on Youtube and Zoom (more information on access is available here and here).

Edit: the lecture has now been made available on Youtube here.

For the Jahrbuch zur Liberalismus-Forschung, I wrote an article on the Boulangist Crisis during the French Third Republic.

Building on the work of Bertrand Joly and others, I use the case to develop a fresh perspective on a particular variety of antiliberalism that became prevalent across Europe during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Framing the political issues of the time against the backdrop of a fundamental opposition between ‘words’ and ‘deeds’, a whole spectrum of political groups began to define their own position in contrast to the image of a ‘politics of mere verbiage’, encompassing a whole range of phenomena, from liberalism and parliamentarism to public discussion and the political press. The Boulangist Crisis, during which a former army general briefly came to political prominence and was generally believed to be preparing a coup against the Third Republic, exemplifies the ways in which contemporaries came to perceive the political issues and conflicts of the time through the lens of the opposition between words and deeds.

The article is available in open access and can be downloaded here.

Source: Wikimedia Commons.