Materielle Kultur
Filtern
Erscheinungsjahr
- 2013 (4) (entfernen)
Dokumenttyp
Volltext vorhanden
- ja (4) (entfernen)
Gehört zur Bibliographie
- nein (4) (entfernen)
Historians have analyzed films, novels, records, theater plays etc. primarily in reference to their meaning and reception. This article makes a case for moving the focus to the actors, structures and processes that shape symbolic objects before these are consumed. To this end, we present a framework established in US sociology to study the fabrication, distribution and evaluation of symbolic content. We discuss the production of culture perspective as an approach that appears to be particularly useful for historical research and, by reviewing selected works from the sociological literature, demonstrate how this perspective can be applied to phenomena like popular music and literary fiction. We focus on genres as bundles of conventions as one lens through which historians may analyze the creation, reproduction, evaluation and consumption of culture.
As a striking phenomenon of Soviet consumption, Beriozka stores appeared in the late 1950s and existed until the end of the 1980s. This chain of stores was a state trade organization selling goods that were otherwise in short supply (cars, fashionable clothes, household appliances, etc.) for special ‘checks’ used as equivalents of foreign currency by special groups of Soviet citizens. Similar stores existed in other socialist countries. The article shows that these stores on the one hand became an element of the existing system of state-granted entitlements. The customers were Soviet citizens who earned money abroad as well as people who did not go abroad but received remittances from foreign sources. On the other hand, the development of the black market (barely persecuted by the state) made it possible to purchase Beriozka checks for roubles; so it granted access to sought-after goods (among them even goods from the West) to a wide range of consumers. Paradoxically, Beriozka was criticized and much frequented at the same time.
Der ostdeutsche Fotograf Christian Borchert (1942–2000) verstand sich als „Chronist seiner Zeit“. Seine Serie „Familienporträts“ wurde schon vor 1989 in der DDR und in der Bundesrepublik im Kontext bildender Kunst gezeigt – trotz oder sogar wegen der sachlichen, dokumentarischen Perspektive auf die DDR-Gesellschaft. Mittlerweile ist Borchert unverrückbar in den kunsthistorischen Kanon eingegangen, und seine Bilder fehlen auf kaum einer Ausstellung zur Fotokunst in der DDR. Besonders 2009 fand anlässlich der 20-jährigen Jubiläen des Mauerfalls und der „friedlichen Revolution“ eine Fülle von Ausstellungseröffnungen zur DDR-Fotografie statt. Sozialdokumentarische Bilder konnten – als vermeintlich ideologiefreie „Wirklichkeitsbilder“ rezipiert – problemlos im Kunstkontext untergebracht und zugleich als aussagekräftige Quellen der Vergangenheit präsentiert werden. Der Interessenschwerpunkt lag dabei auf der „inoffiziellen“ Fotografie aus der DDR. Diese Tendenz hält bis heute an, und so ließ auch die 2012 eröffnete Ausstellung „Geschlossene Gesellschaft“ in der Berlinischen Galerie, wo einige der „Familienporträts“ vertreten waren, die „offiziellen Bildwelten“, den Bereich der angewandten Fotografie und der Amateurfotografie außen vor. Zwar bildete die sozialdokumentarische, erzählerische Fotografie, die sich ab den 1970er-Jahren als Autorenfotografie emanzipiert hatte, in der DDR tatsächlich den Kern der künstlerischen Fotografie, doch haben sich deren Spezifika grundlegend aus der sozialistischen Fotografieästhetik entwickelt. Dass zwischen „non-konform“ und „offiziell“ nicht klar zu trennen ist, lässt sich mit Christian Borcherts Familienbildern sehr gut belegen.
The supposedly commercial products of the culture industry are increasingly facing sales difficulties because growing numbers of self-assertive consumers are downloading products at will, thus no longer following the given rules of the market. Not only multinational record companies, but also representatives of ‘high’ culture are adamant in their criticism of the current ‘culture for free’ tendency. The latter can hardly be characterized as profit-oriented – nor would they describe themselves that way – but they contend that bootleg copies are a threat to their livelihood, and that the culture of piracy paves the way for harebrained mass products. The discussion encompasses copyright laws and the ways consumers are appropriating cultural products as well as the question whether or not these tendencies will fundamentally change the production of culture. Such debates are charged with cultural criticism, but in essence of economic nature. In addition, the cultural sector is faced with the accusation of waning societal relevance. In the arts and features sections of newspapers and magazines, journalists and essayists bemoan that pop culture is no longer ‘the voice and mirror of political and social change, like twenty or thirty years ago’. Although popular culture may have evolved from its original return and distribution strategies as well as its constitutive (at least for some) connection to youth and protest movements, a medially conveyed, market-driven culture that is accessible to a wide audience remains a characteristic feature of modern societies and their self-perceptions.