Research Area 4: Visual Culture

The area of visual culture studies (which is not far removed from Bildwissenschaften, a concept from German-speaking art history whose exact delineation and claims to be a leading discipline within cultural studies are the subject of debate) offers a vast horizon of inquiry, insofar as it explores cultures of both the past and the present no longer primarily on the basis of "text", but on the basis of "image". For some time it has been generally accepted across many disciplines that "images" do not, by any account, simply reflect their cultural environment and as it were translate "texts" into a "pictorial language", but are themselves active, formative factors in the production of power and knowledge, in communication and the shaping of identity of both individuals and groups. The freedom that visual culture studies has gained in radically expanding its object of investigation (at least when compared to the traditional canon of art history) has come at a price; a restriction of focus to the content and function of images and, an insistence on the "readability" of images. Issues of definition, however, present more recent challenges for Bildwissenschaft and visual culture studies. For example, questions of what exactly an "image" is and how it differs from other things that are visible; the "other" side of an image that not only "shows something" but also always "shows itself" and whose cohorts are the acts of looking, perception, and the formation of "mental images"; the aesthetics and material nature of visual media; and the relationship between visuality and textuality that is never easily separable.
Since winter semester 07/08 current members of this research area – whose interests include art history, literary studies, comparative literature, and history – have held discussions on these issues, enriched further by questions about visual evidence and authenticity (above all of the photographic image), the visuality of the object (Ding) and, finally, about transcultural extensions and the ensuing methodological and disciplinary issues. We examined pertinent programmatic and theoretical contributions, notably from Hans Belting, Roland Barthes, Gottfried Boehm, Ilka Brändle, Norman Bryson, Harun Farocki, Georges Didi-Hubermann, Sibylle Krämer, Klaus Krüger, Helmut Lethen, Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Dieter Mersch und Birgit Mersmann.
The research area's critical investigations of theory rely on neither a fixed canon of readings nor a narrowly defined set of objectives. New GCSC members who enjoy thinking "wildly" and are fundamentally open to different critical approaches should have no problems jumping in at this point. New avenues of discussion and suggestions for projects are welcome at any time!
RA Visual Culture
Die RA, deren Mitglieder zurzeit u.a. aus Kunstgeschichte, Literaturwissenschaft, Komparatistik und Geschichte kommen, diskutiert seit dem WS 07/08 diese Probleme, bereichert um weitergehende Fragen nach visuellen Evidenz- und Authentizitätsproblematiken (hier v.a. des fotografisch erzeugten Bildes), nach der Visualität des „Dinges“, schließlich nach transkulturellen Ausweitungen und damit einhergehenden methodischen und disziplinären Problemen. Wir debattierten einschlägige programmatische und theoretische Beiträge u.a. von Hans Belting, Roland Barthes, Gottfried Boehm, Ilka Brändle, Norman Bryson, Harun Farocki, Georges Didi-Hubermann, Sibylle Krämer, Klaus Krüger, Helmut Lethen, Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Dieter Mersch und Birgit Mersmann.
Der kritischen Theoriearbeit der RA liegen weder ein fixer Lektürekanon noch eine eng gefasste Programmatik zugrunde. Neuen GCSC-Mitgliedern, die Lust auf „wildes“ Denken und eine grundsätzliche Offenheit im Umgang mit unterschiedlichen Ansätzen mitbringen, sollte der Quereinstieg keine Mühe bereiten. Neue Richtungsimpulse und Anregungen auch für konkretere Projekte sind jederzeit willkommen!