Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Twentieth Century’

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).

Read Full Post »

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.

Read Full Post »

In October 2023, a new research project titled “Between Voice and Silence: Communicative Norms in Diaries, 1840–1990”, funded by the Leverhulme Trust, will be established as a cooperation between the Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg and the University of Reading.

In this context, we are looking for a Researcher (m-w-d) in part time (80%) for a period of 3 years (EG 13-TVL).

More information on the project can be found here.

The call for applications (in German) can be found here.

Deadline: August 11, 2023.

Read Full Post »

On December 3, 2022, my PhD supervisor Willibald Steinmetz turned 65. At a small reception for colleagues and friends in Bielefeld, he was presented with a celebratory edited volume of essays on dreams titled Erträumte Geschichte(n): Zur Historizität von Träumen, Visionen und Utopien.

In my contribution, titled

Der Traum der quantitativen Psychologie und die Geschichte: neue Perspektiven für die Digital Humanities

[The Dream of Quantitative Psychology and History: New Perspectives for Digital Humanities]

I consider some recent developments in the field of historical dream research against the background of the new tools recently emerging from the field of digital humanities. As very extensive databases of dream reports have become available (some including more than 50.000 reports), the question of their analysis has come to the fore in new ways. In a first step, I sketch the historical development of the quantitative historical dream research that has been booming in recent years. Second, I critically examine the field’s methods, which have increasingly moved into areas of sophisticated data mining on the basis of self-learning algorhithms.

My text not only considers an area of research that Willibald Steinmetz has been active in (e.g. here) recently, but also re-engages with some fundamental questions of heuristics and hermeneutics that he addressed in his own PhD thesis, Das Sagbare und das Machbare. I’m grateful to Willibald Steinmetz for his unwavering support and friendship throughout the years and to the editors, Jens Elberfeld, Kristoffer Klammer, Sandra Maß and Benno Nietzel, for their excellent work organizing the volume and the whole celebration.

Read Full Post »

On Friday, 21 October, I will be part of the workshop “Ruling the Assembly. Procedural Fairness, Popular Emotion, and the Access to Democracy, 19th-20th Century”, held in the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences in Amsterdam.

The organizers, Anne Heyer (Leiden), Anne Patterson (Nijmegen), and Henk te Velde (Leiden), seek to explore how politicians and citizens in the 19th and 20th century tried to resolve the tension between reasonableness and accessibility of political debate, both in and outside Western European parliaments. Political practices are central to this analysis. 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? To answer these questions, they develop a political-cultural approach in which the rules of political debate are not self-evident, but rather the subject of an ongoing political struggle about the democratisation of the political system.


Programme

9.30-10.00: Registration

10.00-10.30: Introduction: Two Traditions of Deliberation? Henk te Velde, Leiden University

10.30-11.15: Keynote | Public Politics and Public Spheres in the Making of Democracy, Jon Lawrence, University of Exeter

11.15-11.30: Coffee break

11.30-12.15: The Art of Making Oneself Heard: Political Audibility in and beyond Europe’s Second Chambers in the Late Nineteenth Century, Josephine Hoegaerts, University of Helsinki. Discussant: Maartje Janse, Leiden University

12.15-13.30: Lunch

13.30-14.15: In All Seriousness: Laughter in Bismarck’s Reichstag, Theo Jung, Freiburg University. Discussant: Ido de Haan, Utrecht University

14.15-15.00: Gatherings of Laughter: Public Meetings in the Early Stages of Democratization, Belgium, 1872-1893, Martin Schoups, Ghent University. Discussant: Adriejan van Veen, Radboud University

15:00-15.30: Coffee break

15.30-16.15:  Ruling the Rally in the Name of Democracy: Political Parties and ‘Popular’ Voices in West Germany’s Electoral Communication, 1940s to 1960s, Claudia Gatzka, Freiburg University. Discussant: Carla Hoetink, Radboud University

16.15-16.45: Learning from the Outside: Parliament’s Response to Popular Meetings in Germany and The Netherlands, 1870-1914, Anne Heyer, Leiden University & Anne Petterson, Radboud University

16.45-17.00: Conclusion

17.00-18.00: Drinks


Attendance is free. More information on registration can be found here.

Read Full Post »

Depoliticization before Neoliberalism: Contesting the Limits of the Political in Modern Europe

All too often, depoliticization is reduced to a very recent phenomenon, an effect of ‘Neoliberalism’. In a workshop to be held in Nijmegen on April 1-2, 2022, organized by Adriejan van Veen (Nijmegen) and myself, we aim to place the concept in a wider historical perspective. On the basis of a broad spectrum of European cases from the late eighteenth century until today, depoliticization no longer appears as a monolithic and autonomous process, but rather as a complex bundle of practices and discourses contesting the boundaries of the political sphere.

For further information on the themes and questions we will be addressing, please refer to our call for papers here.

[Edit April 28, 2022: Oliver Weber wrote a detailed report on our workshop for the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung titled “Entpolitisierung. Hinter unserem Deich sind wir keineswegs sicher”. It is available online here.]

Guests are more than welcome to attend, either off- or online (via zoom). Please contact the organizers for registration and further details.

Venue: Vergader- en Conferentiecentrum Soeterbeeck Elleboogstraat 2 5352 LP Deursen-Dennenburg

Workshop Program

Friday April 1

Introduction (9:30 – 9:55) Theo Jung and Adriejan van Veen

Keynote (9:55 – 10:40) Ido de Haan

Panel 1: Timeless Realms: Art and Religion beyond Politics (10:45 – 12:30)
● Tamar Kojman: Constructing an Apolitical Realm after the 1848/9 German Revolutions
● Jan-Markus Vömel: Unpolitical Islam? Stategies of De-Politicization Surrounding Islam in Turkey
● Klara Kemp-Welch: Antipolitics and Art in Late-Socialist East-Central Europe

Lunch (12:30 – 14:00)

Panel 2: Perspectives on Political Abstention (14:00 – 15:45)
● Oriol Luján: Articulating Political Unease in 19th Century Europe: Abstention and Blank Vote as Forms of (De)Politicization
● Adriejan van Veen: Passive Citizenship? Civil Society and Political Abstention in the Netherlands, 1780–1840
● Zoé Kergomard: Depoliticizing “Apathy”? Institutional Reactions to Non-Voting in France under De Gaulle (1958–1969)

Coffee (15:45 – 16:15)

Panel 3: Discourses of Competence and Functionalism (16:15 – 18:00)
● Ruben Ros: Technocratic Anti-Politics in Dutch Interwar Political Culture (1917–1939)
● Koen van Zon: Depoliticisation through Participation? Consultation and Consensus Formation in European Community Policy-Making, 1960s–1980s
● Wim de Jong: Politicizing the Police? The Problem of Depoliticization in the Public History of Democratic Municipal Policing in the Netherlands, 1945–2019


Saturday April 2

Panel 4: Protecting the System from Politics (9:00 – 10:45)
● Mart Rutjes: Depoliticizing the Will of the People: Limiting the Franchise for Political Opponents in the Netherlands 1780–1800
● Stefan Scholl: Doubly Politicized? Semantical Struggles around the Relation between Economics and Politics in the Weimar Republic and National Socialism
● Anna Catharina Hofmann: An Administered Society? Planning and (De-) Politicization in the Late Franco Dictatorship, 1964–1973

Coffee (10:45 – 11:05)

Panel 5: Ruling by Ideas and Dreaming of Rational Government (11:05 – 12:50)
● Matthijs Lok: Moderation and Depoliticization after the Revolution: the Case of the Idéologues
● Eva Visser: Planning the Technate. The Apolitical Politics of the 1930s’ Technocratic Movement
● Jussi Kurunmaki and Jani Marjanen: Ideology, Politicization and Depoliticization in Parliamentary Rhetoric

Lunch (12:50 – 14:00)

Final discussion (14:00 – 15:00)

Read Full Post »

Next semester, I’m offering two courses at Freiburg University (one online, one in person).

The Age of Revolutions: Transatlantic Political Upheaval (1776-1848)

This in-person seminar considers current debates on the entanglements between the era’s political revolutions and asks if it makes sense to speak of a ‘Revolutionary Era’.

Laughing Matters: Spotlights on the Cultural History of Humor since the Early Modern Age

This online reading course presents an introduction to the history of humor. Focusing on the political significance of joking and laughing as a mode of interaction, it asks how historians can integrate this aspect of social life into broader narratives on the character of specific constellations and eras.

I’m looking forward to returning to the class room. As usual, I’ve started collecting online resources on these topics on the Pearltrees website. These collections can be found here:

Read Full Post »

All too often, depoliticization is reduced to a very recent phenomenon, an effect of ‘Neoliberalism’. In a workshop to be held in Nijmegen on April 1-2, 2022, we aim to place the concept in a wider historical perspective. On the basis of a broad spectrum of European cases from the late eighteenth century until today, depoliticization no longer appears as a monolithic and autonomous process, but rather as a complex bundle of practices and discourses contesting the boundaries of the political sphere.

As organizers, my colleague Adriejan van Veen (Nijmegen) and I are pleased to invite paper proposals from all fields of modern European history and its neighbouring disciplines.

Call for Papers

Depoliticization before Neoliberalism: Contesting the Limits of the Political in Modern Europe

In recent decades, public commentators and political scientists alike have observed a widespread delegation of tasks from democratic to technocratic, international and market bodies. This ‘neoliberal’ displacement has often been pinpointed as the cause of dissolving ideological cleavages and of growing public disenchantment with politics. Yet while the shift of responsibilities from political to allegedly non-political spheres was long thought to have led to widespread political disengagement, recent upsurges in populism and identity politics have called this view into question. Are such recent developments to be understood as a repoliticization, in reaction to previous depoliticization? Or was the political never quite as deflated as we thought? Against this background, questions about the boundaries of the political sphere have again reached the top of both public and scholarly agendas.

Missing from such debates, however, is an expanded historical perspective on the complex entanglements of depoliticization and politicization processes. Research on political history often focuses on the many manifestations of politicization: the rise of political parties, mass movements, and popular leaders. Yet phenomena of depoliticization – the removal of particular issues from political agendas, the manufacturing of tacit political and ideological consent, and citizens’ non-participation – are often less visible and therefore far less studied. In recent years, historians of neoliberalism have started to explore this terrain, demonstrating how the institutional dismantling of the Keynesian welfare state involved the re-framing of contentious issues in terms of ‘natural’ globalization and economic ‘necessity’, placing them beyond the realm of collective deliberation. This workshop’s goal is to expand such insights beyond the narrow margins of the late 20th and 21st centuries: to study depoliticization processes and their interdependencies with politicization as an integral facet of European modernity since about 1750.

The workshop’s aims are threefold. The first is to improve our understanding of the contemporary dynamics of depoliticization and politicization by studying earlier iterations of their entanglements. Which discursive strategies and performative practices did historical actors from the late 18th to the 20th centuries employ to depoliticize certain issues? Is it true that depoliticization, as one prominent account puts it, ‘has to happen in a slow and unobtrusive way and that it is most effective when contemporaries do not even realize that it is taking place’ (Steinmetz/Haupt eds. 2013), or can it also be a publicly expressed strategy, as recent studies on neoliberalism have indicated? Under which conditions were past attempts at depoliticization successful? And when were non-contentious issues or processes eventually (re)politicized?

Secondly, the workshop aims to rethink the strong normative bent of current debates. Neoliberal delegation, citizens’ political abstention, and populism and identity politics are often approached as problems – aberrations of a mass democracy of engaged individuals respecting the boundaries of liberal debate. But this ideal is not only historically contingent; it is highly questionable if it has ever been fully realized. This workshop focuses on the plurality of historical contexts in which depoliticization and politicization processes took place, and on the diversity of actors, ideas and practices that drove them. How can these be compared between democratic and non-democratic regimes, and between various historical timeframes and geographical regions? To which spheres (economic, bureaucratic, legal, religious, scientific, private, etc.) did historical actors aim to displace contentious political issues and tasks, and how were such attempts contested and countered?

Thirdly, by analyzing the complex entanglements between depoliticization and politicization, this workshop seeks to enhance our understanding of ‘the political’ as a facet of historical modernity. The idea of the political as a specific sphere of social interactions has been contested since its emergence in the late 18th century. Depoliticization and politicization processes can therefore not simply be understood as a ‘decrease’ or ‘increase’ of activities aimed at this fixed realm. Instead, attempts at depoliticization or politicization should be seen as struggles between historical actors with very different conceptions of which institutions, actors, and practices count as ‘political’ and which do not. This leads to the questions how historical actors waged these struggles, which discourses and practices they implemented to achieve their respective aims, and which institutional or other changes resulted from such contestation of the limits of the political.

Submission guidelines

The workshop welcomes papers conducting (comparative) case studies on depoliticization in relation to its counterpart politicization. Cases can be drawn from any area in Europe and timeframe between the mid-18th and late-20th century. We also welcome papers on cases of global interactions with European areas, for example in transatlantic and (post)colonial settings. Paper proposals should include a preliminary title, an abstract of 250-300 words, and affiliation and contact details.

Abstracts can be submitted to adriejan.vanveen@ru.nl by October 1, 2021. Successful applicants will be notified before November 1.

The workshop will feature pre-circulation of first draft papers and oral presentations with subsequent discussion. It will take place at Radboud University, Nijmegen, on April 1–2, 2022, and/or partly or fully online, depending on the COVID-19 situation. Travel and accommodation expenses will be covered. The workshop is funded by the Thorbecke Fund of the Royal Dutch Academy of Sciences (KNAW). A publication is intended.

Contact

For futher details, please contact the workshop organizers.

Dr. Adriejan van Veen (Radboud University Nijmegen), adriejan.vanveen@ru.nl
Dr. Theo Jung (Albert Ludwig University Freiburg), theo.jung@geschichte.uni-freiburg.de

Read Full Post »

In the summer semester of 2020, I will be teaching a course titled

Surviving – Experiencing – Writing: Diaries from National Socialist Concentration Camps

[Überleben – Erleben – Schreiben: Tagebücher aus nationalsozialistischen Konzentrationslagern]

These diaries provide a unique insight into the prisoners’ experiences in the camps as well as in the way they tried to cope with them through the medium of diary writing.

Building on research by Renata Laqueur, Alexandra Garbarini, Amos Goldberg, and especially Dominique Schröder – whose book on the topic has been announced for publication in June of this year – the primary goal of this course will be to give the students the opportunity to work directly with the sources.

In the current circumstances, this course will be the first one I will teach fully online, using a number of different tools. I’ve also started a collection of websites on the course topic available online.

Read Full Post »

The new edition of Francia-Recensio includes a review by my hand of the edited volume

Fanny Platelle, Hélène Roth (dir.), Le déclin dans le monde germanique. Mots, discours et représentations (1914–2014), Reims (Éditions et presses universitaires de Reims) 2018

27000100209800L

 

The volume considers discourses of decadence, decline, and degeneration in the german-language world since the First World War. On the one hand, it aims to go beyond the normal focus on the late 19th century Kulturkritik. On the other, it includes a number of as yet unexplored thematic fields like architecture and city planning.

My review can be found here.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »