Pop ist

jene Sensibilität, die den schöpferischen Produkten jeder Kunstart – Schreiben, Malen, Filmen, Musikmachen – die billigen gedanklichen Alternativen verweigert: hier Natur – da Kunst und hier Natur –, da Gesellschaft, woraus bisher alle Problematik genommen wurde. Der jetzt erreichte Stand technisierte Umwelt wurde als „natürliche“ Umwelt genommen, Kinoplakate, Filmbilder, die täglichen Schlagzeilen, Apparate, Autounfälle, Comics, Schlager, vorliegende Romane, Illustriertenberichte.

– Rolf Dieter Brinkmann, „Angriff aufs Monopol“, 1968

Schreiben über Oslo und Utøya. Von unserer Schwierigkeit, die richtigen Wörter zu finden

Die Überforderung, die richtigen Wörter für die Ereignisse von Oslo und Utøya zu finden, ist ein Erfolg des Täters. Umso wichtiger finde ich es, dass wir uns jetzt nicht in vorschnellen Ratschlägen und Schlussfolgerungen ergehen, sondern unsere Überforderung erkennen, gestehen und diskutieren. [1]

Mit welchen Begriffen wir Dinge und Sachverhalte benennen, hat wesentlich mit der Bedeutung zu tun, die wir ihnen zuschreiben. Journalisten und andere Menschen, die öffentlich sprechen und schreiben, haben dabei eine besondere Verantwortung.

Deshalb hat mich in den vergangenen Tagen manchmal geärgert, welche Begriffe einzelne Journalisten gebraucht haben. Dieser Ärger wurde dadurch nicht weniger, dass ich selbst bei der Wortwahl unsicher bin. Im Folgenden die vier für mich zentralen Begriffe und mein Versuch, mit ihnen umzugehen. Bei zwei von ihnen sind meine Kritikansätze so eng verbunden, dass ich sie in einem Punkt ansprechen werde:

After Oslo and Utøya

[T]here are among us rage-hardened, powerless people who resort to the gun and the bomb. [...T]here are powerful people who deplore the gun and the bomb, but who do not hesitate to profit from their use. And when the gun goes off or the bomb explodes, the powerful will deplore the actions of the powerless, and they will reassure the rest of us that We are not like Them, who are violent and crazy and whose acts have no reason beyond unfathomable madness.

»The bomb that didn’t go off«, Charles P. Peirce’s angry essay about public indifference to right-wing terrorism in the United States, was published only one day before a gun and a bomb did go off, with a right-wing terrorist killing more than 90 people in Oslo and on Utøya Island in Norway.

Peirce suggests a link between the (flawed) attacks of right-wing terrorists in the U.S. and a public debate that fails to regulate its passions, allowing for hatred not only to be sown but in some cases even to be tolerated. The diagnosis sounds familiar. And while we must be careful about hasty generalizations, it does give food for thought.

Zwei schöne, leichte, kluge, amerikanische Sommer-Romane* (jeweils kurz kommentiert)

Namentlich:

• Colson Whitehead: Der letzte Sommer auf Long Island (Originaltitel: Sag Harbor)
• Gary Shteyngart: Super Sad True Love Story

Alles weitere am anderen Ende des Links.

Besprochen werden die deutschen Übersetzungen, die beide sehr gelungen sind, obwohl sie adoleszente Erzähler zu bewältigen hatten. Insbesondere Ingo Herzkes Shteyngart-Übersetzung hat mir imponiert: Eine Zwanzigjährige, die Jugendsprache verwendet, klingt bei ihm glaubwürdig, ein Vierzigjähriger echt uncool. So soll es sein. (Doch dass es gelingt ist keine Selbstverständlichkeit!)

*ein Sommer-Roman ist ein Roman, den man gut im Sommer lesen kann (z.B. weil er schön, leicht und klug ist)

Post-American superheroes in times of re-nationalization

Exhibit A: Captain America, standing tall and unashamed of his name. (CC-Photo by yum9me, via flickr)

These days, when there is much talk about the new nation of Southern Sudan (its birthday is expected to be tomorrow!), a potential Palestinian state, and the re-introduction of border posts in Europe (not to mention our dear German chancellor who’s toying with national stereotypes), I find it increasingly difficult to get excited about the idea that we might be entering a truly  cosmopolitan, „post-nationalist“ era any time soon. The only ones who are still truly post-nationalist are American superheroes.

Well, at least that’s the impression I got reading in a New York Times blog that „Captain America“, once invented to defend the United States against nazism and now a star in a major Hollywood production, will be re-named for marketing purposes in Russia, Ukraine and South Korea. In these countries, „Captain America“ won’t be called „Captain America“ but rather „The First Avenger.“ Apparently, executives are afraid that these three countries’ perceived anti-American sentiments could otherwise keep people from wanting to see the movie. According to the NYT blog post, it’s not the first time something like this happens:

In 2006, a nervous Warner Brothers changed the well-known Superman line “truth, justice and the American way” to “truth, justice and all that stuff” in “Superman Returns.” Paramount dropped the tagline “A Real American Hero” for its 2009 film about G.I. Joe, replacing it with “The Rise of Cobra“.

Also, we shouldn’t forget that just recently, Superman renounced his American citizenship (a scan of the comic panel can also be seen here). Which, in a way, was also part of a marketing plot, though one deeply embedded in the comic’s narrative, as Superman’s writers have him say:

I’m tired of having my actions construed as instruments of U.S. policy.

All of this seems a bit retro, though,  a bit Obama 2008 („I speak to you not as a candidate for President, but as … a fellow citizen of the world“ — yeah, right). But maybe that’s perfectly fine, as today post-nationalist, cosmopolitan theorizing might be in utter need of some consolidation and support from post-American superheroes.

What’s next on Tahrir Square? Why protests will resume on friday.

Everybody close to Tahrir Square should consider going this Friday. The revolution starts a-new. The times they are a-changing, a-gain. But this time for real. At least, that’s the goal of „The 2nd revolution of anger“, AFP reports. Organizers are angry to find themselves confronted with what political scientist Ellis Goldberg once predicted would become „Mubarakism without Mubarak“:

Protesters, who first took to the streets to demand the overthrow of Mubarak, began shifting their anger towards the ruling military council, accusing it of using Mubarak-era tactics to stifle dissent.

Jason Brownlee has more on this. According to his analysis, there are at least two major problems on the road to democracy in Egypt. One is concerning the upcoming September elections:

 Looking ahead to elections, the revolutionaries who had brought Mubarak down would be seriously—and perhaps permanently—disadvantaged versus candidates from the Society of Muslim Brothers and the ex-ruling National Democratic Party, who benefit from extensive networks and name recognition in their constituencies. Because the next parliament is set to choose delegates to a constitutional assembly, new political forces could find themselves locked out indefinitely.

The second problem is the current rule of Egypt’s Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, in junction with the country’s massive police state aparatus. Both, Brownlee suggests, may stifle democratic aspirations:

If the Egyptian repressive apparatus were a country it would be more populous than Qatar (including non-citizens). Estimates of recent years put the Ministry of Interior’s personnel at 1.5 million, not including informants. [...] His resources are equally prodigious. While forty percent of Egyptians lived on less than $2 a day, the annual budget of Minister of Interior Habib Al Adly (1997-2011) had recently topped $1 billion

I, once more, find myself wondering about what Europe’s role is in all this. Western governments vowed to pour millions into civil society initiatives in North Africa, but I’m a bit afraid that once more, there might be substantial delay between promising money and actually delivering. Meanwhile, while some of our politicians talk about the popular uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt as though they were finished business (and may indeed seem so, looking at Syria, Yemen, Libya…), Egypt’s current woes and struggles are strangely absent from the news in Germany.

Shouldn’t it be the primary lesson of the popular uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt, that at least from now on, we keep our eyes and ears open and actually listen to what people on the ground are saying? If the „Arab Spring“ turns into an „Arab Four Seasons“ there’s no excuse in claiming winter took us by surprise.