In recent years, the terms \u2018cancel culture,\u2019 \u2018political correctness,\u2019 \u2018call-out culture,\u2019 and \u2018censorship\u2019 have dominated debates about freedom of speech and scientific research, discussions about memorial sites and the removals of monuments as well as critiques of museum exhibition practices. During the Black Lives Matter movement in the United States, England, and Belgium, protesters were faced with allegations of censorship, moralism, and iconoclasm after monuments to Confederate generals and slave traders became a central focus of the protests. Similar accusations had already begun circulating in 2018, as the #MeToo movement triggered a critical reassessment of artworks on public display, and several exhibitions worldwide were closed, postponed, or had individual exhibits removed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The concept of censorship can be filled with very different meanings and appropriated by different interest groups. In the narrow sense, it describes only the structural and state-defined form of information control. In contemporary cultural debates, however, censorship is understood much more broadly as a discursive instrument used in different forms of social negotiation (e.g., regulation, moderation, boundary shifting, repression) in dealing with cultural heritage.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Heritage processes are negotiation processes, because the handling and interpretation of a collectively shared heritage is permanently contested. In the process, there are omissions, rewritings, or additions; not only of what constitutes a heritage object but also its social construction. Dissent and conflict are constitutional elements of this negotiation of material and intangible constructions of heritage and identity. By reinvestigating such heritage constructions through the concept of censorship, it offers the possibility to look at what is positively established as heritage or identity. On the other hand, this perspective also directs the focus to what is considered negative, or undesirable, what is suppressed, excluded, rejected or prevented.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The fifth annual conference of the DFG Research Training Group 2227 \u201cIdentity and Heritage\u201d aims to contribute to the understanding and historization of censorship debates, the contexts out of which they arose, their dissemination, and the actors involved. Patterns of argumentation and perception associated with the censorship debates are examined from the perspective of the history of discourse, conflict, media and theory.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Bauhaus-University Weimar<\/em> Join our digital conference via Livestream (Zoom)<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n 10:00 10:40\u201312:40 10:40 11:20 12:00 12:40\u201314:20 14:20\u201316:20 14:20 Lukas Rathjen (Zurich) 15:00 Anatol Rykov (St. Petersburg) 15:40 Natalie Reinsch (Hannover) 16:20 10:00 10:20\u201312:20 10:20 11:00 11:40 12:20\u201314:00 14:00\u201316:00 14:00 Patricia Lenz (Zurich) 14:40 15:20\u201316:00 16:00\u201317:30
Library Building, Steubenstr. 6 (Audimax)<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\nProgram<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
25. November 2021<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Welcome and Introduction<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
Panel I<\/strong>: Identity and Heritage: Censorship Debates as a Constitutive Element<\/strong> (Moderation: Svenja H\u00f6nig, Berlin)<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Arnold Bartetzky (Leipzig)
Zensur von unten? Aktuelle Auseinandersetzungen um unbequeme Denkm\u00e4ler und umstrittene Kunstwerke<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
Rachel Gy\u00f6rffy (Budapest)
Zwischen Ikonoklasmus und Nostalgie: Rekonstruktivismus in Mittel- und Osteuropa. Kuratorische Praxis, Cancel Culture oder Musealisierung? Eine Ann\u00e4herung<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
Klara Ullmannova (Prague)
\u203aPost-war\u2039 Architecture in Czechia as Heritage. <\/strong>Present-day Discourses<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
Lunch break<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
Panel II<\/strong>: Discourse and Differentiation: A Long-Term Perspective on the Concept of Censorship<\/strong> (Moderation: Oliver Trepte, Weimar)<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Nachkriegsverschiebungen. Humanistische Rhetorik zwischen Erbe und Zensur<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
Censorship and Global Art Theory<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u00bb\u2026 der gn\u00e4dige Schleier des Vergessens \u2026\u00ab. Der Zensurstreit zwischen Horst Brandst\u00e4tter und der Stadt Stuttgart im Jahr 1987 als Aushandlungsprozess um das mit der Person Hanns Martin Schleyer verschr\u00e4nkte Erbe des Linksterrorismus und des Nationalsozialismus<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
Conclusion Day 1<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n26. November 2021<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Come together and Introduction<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
Panel III<\/strong>: Power to Interpret and Dissent: Conflicting Heritage Constructs<\/strong> (Moderation: Zvi Efrat, Tel Aviv)<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Friederike Landau-Donnelly (Nijmegen)
Ghostly Heritage: Exploring Conflictual Sense(s) of Place in Vancouver\u2019s Chinatown<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
Anna Angelica Ainio (London)
Leave Them as They Are: The Disfigurement of Robert E. Lee Monument<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
Nasima Islam (Calcutta)
Formation of the \u203aMiya\u2039: Examining how censored identities are talking back in the Indian state of Assam<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
Lunch break<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
Panel IV<\/strong>: Situation and Preservation: Institutional Practices<\/strong> (Moderation: Darja Jesse, Berlin)<\/p>\n\n\n\n
After \u00bbFreedom of Expression?\u00ab \u2013 Japanese Artists Caught Between Nationalism and Pre-Emptive Obedience<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
Irakli Khvadagiani (Tiflis)
Owning the Past \u2013 to Control the Present. Post Soviet Know-how in Georgia<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
Coffee break<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
Panel discussion<\/strong>: Censorship and Public Spaces in Times of Monument Removals<\/strong> (Moderation: Jochen Kibel, Berlin)<\/p>\n\n\n\n