Browse

1 - 10 of 288 items :

  • Cultural Theory x
Clear All

Abstract

Much has been written about dreaming, but deep, dreamless sleep still seems to receive little attention within cultural studies and social science. This article analyses Georges Perec's A Man Who Sleeps and Ottessa Moshfegh's My Year of Rest and Relaxation in terms of the phantasm of metamorphosis enabled by sleep. These two novels show that the polarity of waking and dreaming can be relativized and shifted to the polarity between waking-dreaming/sleeping: This shift becomes particularly productive when it comes to the question of losing and finding ones identity, but also when we try to shed light on the relationship between (ideological or biographical) subjectification and self-overcoming. At the centre of this article is the notion of the sovereignty of sleep, which could allow both day life and dream life to be lifted out of joint.

Abstract

Der Beitrag hinterfragt die Konstruktion und Vermittlung der Erinnerung an die DDR. Heutzutage ist die Interpretation der DDR-Geschichte in den Medien, in den meisten staatlichen Museen sowie in erfolgreichen Kinoproduktionen immer noch stark durch das totalitaristische Paradigma geprägt. Diese Darstellung steht im Widerspruch zur Alltagswahrnehmung der meisten ehemaligen DDR-Bürger. Obwohl sich die Forschung seit langem für Aspekte der Alltagsgeschichte interessiert, sind solche Elemente in den meisten aktuellen Darstellungen der DDR kaum vorhanden. Andreas Dresens und Laila Stielers Film Gundermann (2018) ist ein Beispiel für den Versuch von Ostdeutschen, die Deutungshoheit über ihre Geschichte zurückzugewinnen. Insgesamt beeinflusst die Unterrepräsentation der Ostdeutschen in Schlüsselpositionen der Gesellschaft auch die Möglichkeiten, auf die Darstellung dieser Vergangenheit einzuwirken.

Cette contribution s’interroge sur la façon dont la mémoire de la RDA est construite et transmise. Aujourd’hui, l’interprétation de l’histoire de la RDA se fait toujours essentiellement à partir du paradigme totalitaire, que ce soit dans les médias, dans la plupart des musées financés par l’État ou dans les productions cinématographiques à succès. Cette représentation est en décalage par rapport à la perception de la RDA telle qu’elle fut vécue de l’intérieur par la grande majorité de ses citoyens. Alors que la réflexion sur l’histoire du quotidien est présente depuis longtemps dans le monde de la recherche, les aspects qui en relèvent sont peu présents dans les représentations actuelles de la RDA. Le film Gundermann (2018) d’Andreas Dresen et Laila Stieler est un récent exemple d’une tentative entreprise par les Allemands de l’Est pour récupérer un pouvoir d’interprétation de leur passé. Globalement, la sous-représentation de ces derniers dans les positions-clés de la société influe également sur les possibilités de prise de parole sur ce passé.

This paper examines the construction and mediation of the GDR memory. Today, the interpretation of the GDR history in the media, through most of the state museums as well as successful movies, is still strongly influenced by the totalitarian paradigm. This representation contradicts the everyday perception of most former GDR citizens. Although research inspired by Alltagsgeschichte has long been interested in aspects of everyday history, such elements are scarcely present in most current representations of the GDR. Andreas Dresen’s and Laila Stieler’s film Gundermann (2018) is an example of East German attempts to regain sovereignty over the interpretation of their history. Overall, the under-representation of the East Germans in key positions in society also influences the possibilities of impacting the portrayal of this past.

Abstract

Wie können wir dreißig Jahre nach dem Fall der Berliner Mauer einen angemessenen Blickwinkel finden, um ein möglichst genaues Bild der DDR in Frankreich zu vermitteln? Wie können wir diese Frage problematisieren, um sie auf originellere Weise anzugehen als nur durch das Studium des Repressionsapparates? Wie können wir uns von der Erzählung der ‘Erfolgsgeschichte’ der Bundesrepublik und der ‘Misserfolgsgeschichte’ der DDR, die ihr Gegenstück wäre, distanzieren? Wir schlagen mehrere Wege zur Eröffnung dieser Debatte vor, in Form von drei Leitgedanken: sich auf die Akteure konzentrieren, die Bedeutung des dritten Wegs betonen und die Ergebnisse der neueren Forschung über die DDR benutzen, da die Geschichte der DDR heute meist nicht mehr so geschrieben wird wie es in den 1990er Jahren der Fall war.

Trente ans après la chute du Mur, comment trouver un angle adéquat pour véhiculer en France les représentations les plus justes possibles sur ce qu’a été la RDA ? Comment problématiser cette question pour l’aborder de façon plus originale que la seule étude de l’appareil de répression ? Comment sortir du récit de la Erfolgsgeschichte de la République fédérale et de la Misserfolgsgeschichte de la RDA qui en serait le pendant ? Nous proposons plusieurs pistes pour ouvrir ce débat, sous la forme de trois idées directrices : mettre l’accent sur les acteurs, sur la notion de troisième voie, et utiliser les résultats de la recherche récente sur la RDA, car on n’écrit pas aujourd’hui l’histoire de la RDA comme dans les années 1990.

Thirty years after the fall of the Wall, how can we find an adequate angle to convey the best representations of what the GDR was like in France? How can we problematize this question in order to approach it in a more original way than just studying the Stasi? How can we get away from the narrative of the Erfolgsgeschichte of the Federal Republic and the Misserfolgsgeschichte of the GDR, which would be its counterpart? We propose several possibilities in order to open this debate, in the form of three guiding ideas, focusing on the actors, emphasizing the notion of a third way, and using the results of recent research on the GDR, because the history of the GDR is no longer written today as it was in the 1990s.

Abstract

This article explores the media environment in Turkmenistan from a comparative perspective, analyzing periods when this Central Asian nation was ruled by President Saparmurat Niyazov and his successor Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedov. It examines critical trends of the media system’s development since the early 1990s and onward based on the political culture established under the ruling of these two state leaders. The paper argues that media plays a primary role in building a cult of personality of Saparmurat Niyazov, which was further implemented and developed by the administration of Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedov. A case study of the Turkmen TV channels, in particular, is focused on styles of presenting materials, the language and propaganda techniques (clichés, slogans, labels), used to promote the cult of personality. The article analyzes the behaviors of the constructors and supporters of the cult of personality using the concept of the political culture in authoritarianism. Thus, the paper outlines that with some moderate dynamics in the media system, President Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedov continues to strictly control media – the policies established by his predecessor, who used methods of total control and censorship of all media outlets in the country.

Abstract

This paper focuses on the case analysis of the memorial to the victims of state terror – the Wall of Grief (Stena skorbi) – which was unveiled on the eve of the 100th anniversary of the November 7, 1917, coup d’état. Using this example, we have attempted to elaborate a structure for a more complex analysis of the memory of past regimes’ manifestation and to create a methodological base for their comparison. We have based our research on the discourse theory by the so-called Essex School, the social semiotics by Kress, and the procedures of the critical discourse analysis. The procedure that we have considered relevant consists of the following: (a) description of the social context in which the memorial was manifested as a piece of evidence; (b) semiotic analysis of the memorial artifact; (c) analysis of verbal practices, as well as written and spoken texts that “explained” the memorial; and (d) analysis of nonverbal practices, namely, rituals. On the basis of our case study, we have come to the conclusion that when carrying out a semiotic analysis and the analysis of verbal and nonverbal practices in the case of the Russian public discourse, it is especially relevant to pay attention not only to widening vs. narrowing of the chronological framework, generalization vs. concretization, and specification of the traumatic experience but also to the question of framing of the memorial. In regard to the semiotic analysis, the extent of indexicality is considered to be very important in the sense of the bodily connection with an element of the commemorated event that bestows “truthfulness” and authenticity on the memorial. We assume that particularly present-day Russia, where explicit attempts to reinterpret the history of the authoritarian communist state and attempts to instrumentalize the totalitarian period according to the vector of the current political direction may be seen, is a relevant object of this kind of research.