Enlarge image
Photo: Uwe Zucchi / dpa
One, two, many shames
This week one probably has to say something about »Documenta 15«, which was dubbed a bit robustly as »Antisemita 15« in another column and as »Art Exhibition of Shame« by »Bild«, which was the familiar Höcke terminology in an uncomfortable way suggests, but in any case brings an inappropriate significance into play, as it is often conflated with the trash – often with racist connotations – on the »image« level.
Otherwise, small selection of headlines: "How could that happen?", "Anti-Semitism in Postcolonialism", "The Southern Cross", "The Shame of the Documenta", "Rocky Horror Picture Show", "Art is free, but... «, »Why did Roth turn a blind eye to hatred of Jews?«
Which brings us to the "Resignations" section.
Of course, the Lord Mayor and the State Minister of Culture immediately informed the audience that the shame was completely unforgivable, inexcusable, intolerable and inhumane, together with the hint that that is exactly what they had always said.
So a resignation can be ruled out.
As always, Ms Roth is badly affected, so she doesn't have to resign either, when she was once the "manager" of, er, the king of Kreuzberg!
Mr. Steinmeier does not resign either, since he gave a welcome speech at the show of shame, but put it on record that he really had to think about it for a long time.
Exemplary!
Mr. Chancellor was lucky;
he was able to cancel in time.
responsibilities
The actual perpetrators, so-called "collectives" with some kind of "cultural identity", but - therefore - without individual responsibilities, will soon also resign, albeit probably only by flight to Indonesia.
Surprisingly, one has to say, the cries of horror are concentrated entirely on the above-mentioned German supervisors: Somehow the enthusiastic organizers and politicians have apparently violated their duty to take care of their naughty children from the Global South.
This is a "repair" approach that seems familiar.
The columnist colleague also made it clear in the beginning: »There is a broad acceptance of anti-Semitism in Germany.« I am not sure whether I would have phrased it that way, although, according to information from empirical social research, it should be correct.
However, everything and even this is relative, and when it comes to “acceptance of anti-Semitism” I would spontaneously think of a few examples outside of Germany.
But it doesn't matter, because the banner of the Documenta shame was, as far as can be seen, in no way viewed, approved, erected, etc. by a broad acceptance. Before going into the "broadness", one should sound out the height and depth .
And that the breadth of Germany has now been identified within two days as the source of a "shame" that consisted of insufficient control over some "collectives" of stupid southern world children,
cheerfulness
A few particularly bizarre gags must also be noted in this serious matter, if only not to completely lose the good mood.
To explain the depiction of Jews as pigs as an authentically Indonesian and therefore quite orderly cultural view, which only seems inappropriate in Germany, was an intellectual-art-theoretical achievement that can no longer be undercut.
The same applies, of course, to the half-cooked “well, somehow” comments made by the local identitarian “culture” gossips: “Why should the global South concern itself with the problems of German anti-Semitism?” reads the last one Kraft wok an exculpation question to embarrassment spot one.
This is nonsense, of course, but it illustrates quite nicely what Bazon Brock aptly said in his comment on "Deutschlandfunk" about the nature of »identity« art, which tends to be totalities: liquidation of the European world concept of individual significance, dignity and responsibility without representation of »cultural« power .
The tricky thing, which closes itself off to all-round good-heartedness, is precisely that the conception of art production and reception as a kind of socio-pedagogical concept is once again accompanied by high enthusiasm values for one's own moral enlightenment.
The children and grandchildren of the Indonesians who were tortured and murdered in the interests of and with the help of the "West" enter the ring as a cultural collective, a dwarf show of the world circus, singing in a choir;
the impresario's wife is touched.
The idea of covering it up was no less wonderful.
Did the Hessian police actually order this, the city of Kassel, the Minister of State for Culture or the administration of the exhibition?
Who owns the location at Friedrichsplatz, is it rented?
Who's in charge?
In any case, an action that Christo + Jeanne-Claude would have enjoyed!
I remember how I spent two days in the first week of July 1995 on the lawn in front of the Reichstag and had never before or since seen it so unveiled.
The idea of covering the Indonesian culture banner in black as a memorial to mourning that one cannot talk about whether a pig-headed Jew is part of Germany or part of Indonesia can be summed up in the conventional terms of art,
art
Nevertheless, the fact that the “scandal” clamor was celebrated for four days and the “banner” and the entire event were given the ennobling nickname “controversial” doesn't quite settle the matter.
Because, as unexpected as that may sound, "anti-Semitism" as such is not forbidden;
just as little as »anti-Islamism«, »anti-Americanism«, anti-something.
In this country, people can be as anti as they want;
this is considered to be one of the most important "values" that the Bundeswehr fought to protect in Afghanistan.
Which is a decent anti-Islamist who paints or buys some nice Mohammed drawings that show the Prophet as a cucumber-nosed, bomb-carrying terrorist sitting in a bathtub full of blood.
And celebrates under the headline "Now even more so!" (08.01.
2015) as a front fighter for artistic freedom.
If any so-called culture sees this as the ultimate blasphemous imperialist humiliation, bad luck!
As is well known, one should not equate different things.
However, do not diligently treat the same thing as incomparable.
So you have to look a little more closely than just react to the first outrage at more or less absurd accusations, conspiracy claims and devaluations with well-rehearsed reflexes that serve more to exculpate – or better: disengage – than contribute to understanding.
The »Judensau« of Wittenberg (and elsewhere) is, as we recently found out from a supreme court, firstly art, secondly monument, and thirdly sufficiently neutralized in terms of insult by means of a floor tile and a sign.
Personally, I would have voted differently if I had had a say in the decision: I did not find the »alienation« and distancing of the sculpture on the outside wall of the church – obviously meant to be insulting – by means of a sign to be insufficient, but would have suggested removing it and placing it in a »museum « context – for example in the interior of the church – in which it would lose its demonstratively hateful and insulting effect even more in favor of an art-historical-political consideration.
The courts - regional court, higher regional court and federal court in civil matters - decided differently.
That is certainly justifiable and acceptable.
The right - here: § 1004 BGB: claim for removal - is not there to ensure a permanent objective and content-related cleansing of the past.
It is precisely for this reason that it seems surprising to me that the "Jewish pig" from Kassel was not discussed at all in this context.
Whether an object of fine art has to be removed or not is not a question of the concept of “good” art.
This view, which is still widespread in the population, has long been outdated in law.
Art is not the opposite of insult or hate speech.
People used to think: something is either art or an insult, art or pornography.
offense
In the case of the two portrayals discussed in Kassel, it is legally important whether it is a question of insults in the form of so-called "collective insults" (§ 185 StGB) or acts in the area of "incitement to hatred" (§ 130 StGB), here in particular in the variant of »incitement to hatred« while endangering the »public peace«.
On the painting in question (“Banner”), clichéd devaluations, condemnations and disparaging claims are put together in a rather childish way.
Apart from the idiotic labeling of a Jew with the insignia of a Nazi organization that murders Jews, one can of course describe the secret service »Mossad« as a bloodthirsty enemy, just as all other insults against states or state organizations, authorities, etc. are by no means forbidden per se.
The posters,
Caricatures, depictions of blood-soaked Uncle Sams, woman-murdering Soviet soldiers or child-torturing cigar-smoking dollar sacks are legion.
"Anti-Semitism" is something different, historically and currently: Here, "state", social, actual or alleged atrocities are not presented and exploited as such, but as a mere illustration of "Jewishness".
The distinction is not as difficult as is sometimes claimed.
but presented and exploited as a mere illustration of »Jewishness«.
The distinction is not as difficult as is sometimes claimed.
but presented and exploited as a mere illustration of »Jewishness«.
The distinction is not as difficult as is sometimes claimed.
That is why the depiction of the "Mossad" Jew as a pig without a doubt in principle constitutes an insult - no different than the "Judensau" from Wittenberg - and is meant as such.
If Indonesia doesn't see it that way, then you have to put the picture on Friedrichsplatz in Indonesia and not in Kassel.
Anyone who publicly exhibits disparaging works of art in Germany must be judged according to German law.
advertisement
Thomas Fisher
to be right
Miscellaneous from the world of criminal law: The best SPIEGEL columns by the ex-federal judge
Publisher: Droemer HC
Number of pages: 304
Miscellaneous from the world of criminal law: The best SPIEGEL columns by the ex-federal judge
Publisher: Droemer HC
Number of pages: 304
Buy for €20.00
price inquiry time
06/24/2022 2:20 p.m
No guarantee
Order from Amazon
Order from Thalia
Order from Weltbild
Product reviews are purely editorial and independent.
Via the so-called affiliate links above, we usually receive a commission from the retailer when you make a purchase.
More information here
It is also not far off that the offense of hate speech according to Section 130 Paragraph 1 No. 1 of the Criminal Code has been fulfilled.
For both facts, however, before an initial suspicion can be confirmed, the "context" must be extensively included and evaluated.
Whether the "pigs" depiction in Kassel - in the overall context of a world conspiracy of the capitalist "West" against the oppressed and exploited "South" - is directed against a domestic group of the population within the meaning of § 130 StGB (here: the German and in Germany living Jews) must be asked and examined.
It's not far off, but it's not immediately certain.
That brings us back to Wittenberg and Karlsruhe: If the Wittenberg sow loses its character as an insult through distancing public statements and only acts as a "memorial against insults", the same should actually apply to the Kassel pig, if one wanted and did it .
So not a "memorial of mourning over the impossibility of discussion" by means of covering, but a memorial of anti-Semitic hate speech through public, formal distancing.
That would also have been a possibility, and in my opinion not the worst!
However, it would have assumed that the authors, like their paternalistic legal guardians, wanted, could and must bear real, individual responsibility.
Instead of cheering over the southern collective children's painting: embarrassing demonstration of malicious unwillingness to reflect.
That would really hurt a proper state ministerial identity and could be cause for modesty.
disaster
As a result, the disaster is multi-layered.
On the one hand, it concerns the authors.
"Being from Indonesia" is great, but it doesn't release you from individual responsibility.
Even the support of the murderous dictatorship of President Suharto by "the West" - including a decades-long close friendship with the Chancellor of the unit Kohl - changes nothing.
Dr.
Kohl, whose thing the “mea culpa” was not known to be, was never asked to resign from anything or himself because of the lack of any distancing from his buddy Suharto, who had at least 500,000 “communists”, a third of the population of East Timor and hundreds of thousands of other people killed even to be ashamed in public.
On the other hand, it concerns the organizers, who, in my opinion, have demonstrated a remarkable degree of idiocy, consistently.
As a reminder, the fish stinks from the head.
In my opinion, however, the most important disaster is the bankruptcy of a childishly "identitarian" feel-good care policy that likes to admire itself for its sentimental evasive manoeuvres.
I hope we will have to think long and hard about this.
The concrete pig's head was really just the heap of excrement into which the trembling-lipped, deeply moved turning point in time was bound to inevitably stumble sooner or later.
