“Punk is a Symptom”: Intersections of Philosophy and Alternative

OriginalPaperUDC[130.2:329.18]:316.723(497.4)ReceivedJanuary10th,2012

Helena MotohUniversityofPrimorska,FacultyofHumanities,Titovtrg,SI–6000Koper

[email protected]

“Punk is a Symptom”: Intersections of Philosophy and Alternative Culture in the 80’s Slovenia

AbstractAll over Former Yugoslavia the eighties were marked by an appearance of a great number of new alternative culture movements, while at the same time significant new ideas were introduced in the field of philosophy and theory in general. The proposed paper focuses on a particular example of dialogue between theory and culture in this period: on the three special issues of the journal Problemi in 1981, 1982 and 1983 that were dedicated to the punk movement, i.e. the so-called PunkProblemi. It begins by analyzing the editorial to the first of these three issues, and its alleged “agreement” with the thesis that punk should be viewed as a symptom. The discrepancy between the critics of punk and the viewpoint of the editorship of the Problemi and their contributors is further explored through the analysis of the articles published in the three special editions. Finally the PunkProblemi are juxta-posed to developments in theory in the early eighties, especially the works on the theory of ideology, i.e. Mladen Dolar’s texts on fascism.

Key wordsformerYugoslavia,alternativemovements,eighties,punk,theoriesonfascism

Themainopenpublicspacefortheintroductionofnewideasandtrendsinpost-WWII Slovenia were literary journals. Initially focused on literaturethesejournalssoonstartedtoincludeamorevariedselectionofgenresandtopicsandreachedamuchwiderreadership.OneofthefirstjournalsofsuchimportancewasBeseda [Word],publishedfrom1951till1957whenitwassuppressedandforbidden.Thesamegroupofcriticalauthorsstartedpublish-inganewjournallaterthesameyear,calledRevija 57[Journal 57],onlytobeforbiddenayearlater.Thethirdintheseriesofcriticaljournals,Perspektive [Perspectives],1wasfirstpublishedin1960,bringingtogetherauthorsfromthetwopreviousjournals.Thecombinationofpoliticalcritiqueandcontem-poraryliteraturemanagedtoendureforfouryears,whenitwasforbiddenaswell.2WhenPerspektive weresuppressed,anotherjournalthathadpreviously

1

Cf. LevKreft,Zjeban od absolutnega: per-spektivovci in perspektivaši: portret skupine,Znanstvenopublicističnosredišče,Ljubljana,1998.

2

ThebanwasduetotheintendedpublicationofsomecriticaltextsontheconditionsoftheSlovenianruralpopulationandsomeliterarypiecesthatcrossedthelineoftoleratedcriti-

cism,e.g.thepoemDuma [Word]byTomažŠalamun,aparodyofanolderOtonŽupančičpoemwiththesametitlethatstarts“Iwalkedour landanddrank itsbeauty”.Šalamunre-wrote it as:Fuckedby theAbsolute/ fedupwithvirginsandotherdyingsufferers/Iloveyouoneighbors,meek fantasiesofGod theFather/ I love you o integral characters ofsweet gazing/ inmymind grace yielded// oproudpossessorsofanxieties/otrainedintel-

SYNTHESISPHILOSOPHICA54(2/2012)pp.(285–296)

H.Motoh,“PunkisaSymptom”:Intersecti-onsofPhilosophyandAlternativeCulture…286

stayedmostlywithin theconfinesofallowed literaryproduction,Problemi [Problems], welcomedthegroupofwritersfromPerspektive.Around1968thisgroup–alongwithafewcriticalauthorsfromyoungergenerations–tookover the editorial board of Problemi and transformed it into the most im-portant journalof its time, introducingavant-garde literature trends(reism,ludism)andestablishinglinkswithcontemporaryartists.Twomostnotableearlycooperationsofthiskindwerethelate1960spublicationofOHO-Kata-logmovement’seditionofProblemiandearlyeightiespublicationof three“punk” issues of the journal (Punk Problemi), where the newly emergingmusic, art and socialmovementwas given a platform to present its ideaswhilebeingcriticisedbythemainstreamofficialmedia.Theyalsoincludedpresentationsofothernewartgroups(i.e. theatreGroup442/443andtheirPupilijaFerkeverkprojects)andaspecialissuepresentingNeueSlowenischeKunstin1985.Inmid-seventiestheeditorialteamstartedtodiverge,atrendthatbecameevidentduringthe1974polemicbetweenIvoUrbančič,athinkerofHeideggerianprovenience,andSlavojŽižek,whoatthetimealreadydis-tancedhimselffromHeideggerianismandstartedhisworkinLacaniandirec-tion.ThelooselydefinedHeideggeriangroupleft thejournal inearly1980stoestablishNova revija[TheNewJournal],whileProblemi wereprogressivelyshiftingtowardsstructuralismand–later–Lacanianorientation.Itwasaroundthesejournals3thatnewgenerationsofthinkersgatheredandintroducedideasofexistentialism,criticaltheory,structuralism,psychoanaly-sisandmanyothernewphilosophicalandculturaltrends.Itwasthepublica-tionof thesethatprovidedapublicspace,wherealmostcompletefreedomofexpressionwassporadicallyallowed,althoughonoccasionsseverelysu-pervisedandcriticizedbytheregime.4TherelationshipthatthejournalshadwiththeofficiallineafterthepersecutionofPerspektive, wasverycomplex,mostlytheymanagedtokeepafinebalance,beingsometimessharplycriti-cal,butstillavoidingdirectpersecutionorprohibition.5Publicationofthesecriticaljournalswasalsoofgreatimportancebecausetheywereregularlyin-cludingtranslationsofforeignauthors,oftenlongbeforetheywerepublishedinbookformat.6

Thejournalsalsoprovidedalinkthatprovedcrucialforthedevelopmentofcriticalthoughtfromthebeginningsin1950stothedevelopmentofstructur-alist,poststructuralistandLacaniantheories,namely,alinkbetweentheoryand literature/arts.Thecritical journalsof the1950s,1960s, and1970s allbegan as literary journals and thenopened to topics of literary theory andcriticism,philosophy,arttheoryandfinallysocio-politicaldiscussions.Moreimportantly,thesameauthorswereoftenactiveinmanyofthesegenres.Thefirstgenerationthatprominentlyshowedthistendencywastheso-called“criticalgeneration”of the1950s.Active inBeseda and later inRevija 57 and Perspektive,many of these authors successfully combined theirmod-ernistliterarywritingwiththeoryandart,especiallytheatre.Bornmostlyinthe1930stheywerethefirstgenerationafterthewartocollectivelydepartfromtheofficialmodeofwriting.7AfterthebanofPerspektive,theProblemi group8stayedtruetotheparadigmofcultural involvementofitspredeces-sors,buttookitevenfurther.Itwasnotonlyliteraturethattheyincluded,theyalsoconnectedwiththenewdevelopmentsontheartscene,firstexampleofwhichwasthecooperationwiththeOHOmovement9in1960s,resultinginOHO-Katalog(OHOCatalogue),aseriesofpublicationsconsistingmainlyoftheoreticaltextsandvisualandconcretepoetry.10Inverybroadterms,inthehistoryofSlovenianartOHOgroupmarkstheshiftfrommodernismto



avant-garde,thesamechangebeingrepresentedindifferencesbetweenjour-nalsPerspektive andProblemi.Inlatesixties,Problemi haveagainprovidedaspaceforthepresentationofayounggroupofauthorsfirstcallingthemselvesGroup441,11whichbeganbystagingavant-gardepoetryreadingsandsoonbecameproblematicforthestate.12TheirworkswerepresentedinDecember1968asaspecialissue“442”,similartotheOHOCatalogueedition.

lectualswithsweatylittlehands/ologicians,vegetarianswiththethickestglasses/omuz-zledrectors/oideologueswithyourwhoringideologies/odoctorsmunchingonpunctua-tionmarksandŠkofjaLokapastries/omum-mified academicians patting passion andpain/PascalwhotriedandBachwhopulleditoff/olustyinexpressibledried-uplyricist/ohorticulture,theenlightenedandthehappyswallows/osocialismàlaLouisXIVorhowtoshelterthepoorlittlecreatures/oonehun-dred thirty-fiveconstitutionalbodiesorhowtokeep/adeadcatfromstinking/otherevo-lutionaryzealofthemassesor/whereisthesanatoriumtocureourimpotence//Iwalkedourlandandgotanulcer/landofCimpermansandpimplygroupies/landofserfsmythsandpedagogy//oflintySlovenians,objectofhis-torycrippledbyacold/(translatedbyTomažŠalamunandChristopherMerrill,http://www.writinguniversity.org/index.php/main/author/tomaz_salamun1/).

3

Someotherimportantjournalswere:Sodob-nost,Teorija in praksa,Prostor in čas, lateralsoNova revijaetc.

4

Miško Šuvaković, Anatomija angelov: razprave o umetnosti in teoriji v Sloveniji po letu 1960, Znanstveno in publicističnosredišče,Ljubljana,2001,p.33.

5

This strategy did not, however, always suc-ceed, and the official structures used manydifferenttacticstoobstructtheirwork.Prob-lemi and Tribuna were repeatedly criticizedforengagingwiththenewcriticalmovements.Tribuna was targeted after the student dem-onstrationsin1971,whereoneofitsauthors,FraneAdam,wasaccusedofhavingdisplayedananti-regimeslogan.Thejournalwassubse-quentlyobstructedfrompublicationforafewmonths. In theearly1980sProblemi and itseditorMladenDolarwereaccusedofhavingsupported the alleged nazi-punk movementbypublishingPunk Problemi.

6

First wave of such translations was done inthesixtieswiththetranslationsofstillpartlycontroversialexistentialistauthors,SartreandCamus.Themostimportantwaveoftransla-tions,however,followedfrom1970onwards(texts by Horkheimer, Marcuse, Althusser,Husserl, Heidegger, Saussure, Derrida, Or-

well’s Animal Farm and also the first post-WWII translation of Nietzsche’s Birth of Tragedy, later Foucault, Deleuze, Guattari,Adorno,Gramsci,Balibarandawholerangeof translations of Freud, Lacan and Alain-Miller.)

7

ThegroupcontinuedtobeactivealsoafteritsJournal 57 was officially forbidden,mostlywithin an experimental theatre group,Oder 57[Stage57],whichstartedbystagingworksby controversial Slovenian playwriters andforeign authors (Ionesco, De Ghelderode).Despite the differences in artist orientationswithin the group, they stayed active until1964.

9

The variety within the group that publishedProblemi wasbecomingmoreandmoreobvi-ous and finally it caused their division laterin the 1970s. Therefore we should strictlyspeakingbetalkingabout“groups”withintheProblemi.

10

OHO movement was formed in 1966 by agroupofyoungartistsandwriters,whowant-edtobreakwith themodernist traditionandstartedtheirfirstprojectsfocusingontheideaof“object”and theconceptionofreism, theprimacyofthingsorobjects.Inthelate1960sthey shifted their focus to the conceptualworld of structural relations and further totheideasoftheprocessartmovement,doingartprojectsinmannerofartepoveraandlandart.Later,theyalsoexploredothertheoreticalbackgrounds, structuralism, poststructural-ism,anti-psychiatryandevenGermanideal-ism.OHOgroupwasradicallytransformedin1971whenitsmembersmovedfromLjubljanatoasmallKarstvillage,Šempas,wheretheyestablishedanexperimentalcommune,called“FamilyinŠempas”.Famously,anothercom-mune,calledG7,wasestablishedin1971inasmallvillagenearLjubljana,,butnoneofthetwoprovokedmuchofficialharassment.

11

Žižekalsocontributedhistextstothesepub-lications.

12

Cf. AldoMilohnić,IvoSvetina(eds.),Prišli so Pupilčki: 40 let Gledališča Pupilije Fer-keverk, Maska, Slovenski gledališki muzej,Ljubljana,2009.



Problemi and their editorial boardwere also active in thenextgreatwaveof alternative culture movements of the early eighties that could be veryschematicallydividedintothreeinterconnectedtrends:punkmovement,FV112/15,andLaibach/NSK.Allhappeningatthesametime,intheearlyeight-ies,thesethreewereasharpbreakwiththeavant-gardemovementsofthesix-tiesandseventies,butalsoauniquereflectionofthecontemporaryYugoslavpolitical, economical and social crisis. In the secondhalf of the seventies,asareflectionofcurrentpoliticalandeconomicissuesandonlyafewyearsafter firstBritish punk bands, a group of youngsters gathered to form thefirstSlovenianpunkband,Pankrti[Bastards].ProvokedbytheopenlycriticalsongssuchasComrades, I don’t believe youorTotal revolution (… is not a solution)andbyprovocativebehaviourofyoungpunkers,stateorgansstartedtorepress,censorandpersecutetheprotagonistsofthemovement.Thisre-pressionreacheditspeakin1981withthe“Nazi-punkaffair”,whenagroupofyoungsterswerearrestedunder fabricatedchargesofhavingestablisheda national-socialist party, andmanymorewere questioned and harassed.13Nevertheless, in the fewyears following thePankrti first concert in 1977,manynewgroupssprungupandbytheearlyeightiesthepunkmovementwaswide-spreadinLjubljanaandothercities.Judgedasananti-culturalphenom-enonbythepoliticaloppositionandasfascistanddestructionisttendencybythepro-regimeliterati,14thepunkmovementwasobstructedfromobtainingaspaceforrepresentationinmediabutitalsotooktherepresentativeroleforthenewlyemergingsocialmovementsthatsoughtreformsandchangewiththeirpacifist,ecological,feministandotherprogrammes.Whilepunkmovementconsistedmostlyofveryyoungpeople,another re-latedartandculturalstudentmovementappearedatthesametime.15GroupFV112/15 that started off as an alternative theatre allegedly got their en-igmaticnamebyrandomlychoosingamongslogansfromthedictionaryofloanwords.16Soonthisgroupmanagedtotakeoveronenightperweekina students’ disco club which became the hub of the new alternative videoandmusicproduction.DiscoFVanditsactivities17alsoprovidedaspacefordevelopmentofnewartgenres, specific for thisgenerationof artists: theyintroducedvideoartandgraffitiart,whilealsoexploringtherelationbetweenartandpornographyandintroducingpornographicmaterialintoartforms.18

ThethirdmovementthatshockedSloveniaandYugoslaviaat thetimewasthenewmusicgroupLaibach, started in1980.Later it joined itsaffiliatedgroups,thepainters’collectiveIRWIN,groupofdesignersNeueKunsthand-lung/NovikolektivizemandtheSistersScipionNasiceTheatretoformNeueSlowenischeKunst(NSK)in1984.19IfFVwassubversiveforitspopularity,choice of video genre, use of pornography and its affiliationwith the gaymovement; and punkwas subversive for its youth rebelliousness, LaibachandlatertheNSKwereconsideredmostdangerousbecauseoftheirdeliberateallusionstothenational-socialism,anactthatwentagainstthetotalprohibi-tionoftheNazisymbolsinpost-warYugoslavia.ThenameLaibachwasal-readyindicative,fortheyhadchosenthenamethatwasusedfortheoccupiedLjubljanabytheGermansduringtheWWII.Questioningtheinterlacingofartandideology,theyplayedwiththeoldsymbolsincompletelynewcontexts,thusinventingtheallegednewartmovement,calledretrogardism.20A1983deliberatelyshockinginterviewtheygaveforthenationaltelevisioncausedanotherwaveofcriticism.In1987,duringawidedebateon theproposals for theabolishmentof theRelayofyouthceremonies,anotherscandalbrokeoutinconnectionwiththe



NSKcollective.Itsdesigners’subgroup,NeueKunsthandlung/Novikolektiv-izem,participatedinacompetitionfortheofficialrelayposterandwonwitharemadeversionofaNazipropagandaposterbyRichardKlein.Theinitialen-thusiasmoftheselectingcommissionwasovershadowedwhenthereferencewasrevealedandthegroup,togetherwiththeSlovenianYouthorganisationleaders that firstchose theposterbecametargetsof thewidespreadattackagainst“fascistelements”,arepetitionofthenazi-punkscandalandtheinitialcriticismsofLaibachintheearly1980s.Duringthe“Nazi-punkscandal”andtheLaibach/NSKaffair,accusationsofNaziorientationbecameausefullabelfordiscreditingnewlyemergingsocio-politicalopposition,whiletheissueofNazismorfascismwasbeingdebatedonalllevelsofintellectualscene,inpoliticsandinmedia.21Interestinglyeno-

13

ThestateorganswereespeciallyprovokedbyapublicationofoneoftheGroup441authors’poems in student journal Tribuna, namely,Ivo Svetina’s “Slovenska apokalipsa” [Slo-venianapocalipse].Theywentontobecomean avant-garde theatre group with perform-ances(all in1969)suchasMold of Pupilija Ferkeverk,shortfilmBrains gratin of Pupil-ija FerkeverkandfinallyPupilija,Papa Pu-pilo and the Little Pupilos.This,mostfamousperformancebythegroup,nowcalled“443”,includedmanysubversiveelements,mostno-tablynudityandtheslaughteringofa livinghenandwasproclaimedathreattothepublicmoralityandaccusedofanimaltorture,whilefirst Tribuna in 1968 andProblemi in 1969wereaccusedofhavingsupportedthesesub-versiveelements.

14

Fordetails,seeanexcellentcollectionoftextsand documents from the period: Punk pod Slovenci, Univerzitetna konferenca ZSMS,RepubliškakonferencaZSMS,KRT,Ljublja-na,1984/1985.

15

Cf. BožoRepe’spaperin:TineHribar,PeterLovšin, Peter Mlakar, Igor Vidmar (eds.),Punk je bil prej: 25 let punka pod Slovenci,Cankarjevazaložba,Ropot,Ljubljana,2003.

16

TheFV112/15regularlyincludedpunkbandsintheprogramofthediscoclubtheyran.

17

Thedictionarywasknownbythenameofitsauthoras“FranceVerbinc” (thus“FV”), theslogan“c’estlaguerre”,wasprintedonpage112,line15(thusthenumbers).

18

MembersoftheFVgroupalsoformedanal-ternativemusicband,Borghesia that defineditselfasamultimediaproject,combiningmu-sicwithvideoart,usingnewtoolssuchasVHSandcomputers.Itwashowevervideoartthatdeterminedmostoftheactivitiesofthisgen-erationofartists.OthergenresincludedXeroxcollageandgraffiti,bothfrequentlysubversive

informandcontent.FordetailsonFV112/15cf. PetjaGrafenauerKrnc,NikolaiJeffs,Ne-ven Korda, FV: alternativa osemdesetih = alternative scene of the eighties,Mednarodnigrafičnilikovnicenter,Ljubljana,2008.

19

Different alternative movements started toappearinconnectiontoFV112/15,mostno-tably the movement against the discrimina-tion of homosexuals, a unique phenomenon inYugoslaviaandcommunistpartofEuropeatthetime.Apartfromthespecialgay/lesbiannightsinDiscoFVtheyalsoorganisedMag-nus,afestivalofgayandlesbianfilmin1984.In this context the boldness of the Magnus’demands is evenmore fascinating: they de-mandedthechangeoftheselegalregulations,additionof thearticleagainstdiscriminationofhomosexualsintheConstitution,introduc-tionofthesetopicsintheschoolcurriculaandtheyalsodemandedYugoslaviatoactinterna-tionallyagainstthestatesthatstillpersecutedhomosexual orientation (Romania, USSR,Cuba, Iran). Cf. http://www.slovenskapom-lad.si/1?id=168.Atthetime,homosexualsexwas still illegal in somepartsofYugoslaviaandtabooedinothers.

20

FordetailsonNSKcf. (ed) Neue slowenische Kunst. Irwin, Moderna galerija, Ljubljana,1993; Inke Arms (ed.), Irwin retroprincip,Mladinskaknjiga,Ljubljana,2006etc.

21

Their first performances, using forbiddensymbols,Germanphrases,armysmokebombs(inBelgradein1982)andotherprovocationsunavoidablycausedcriticismamongthestateorgans and resulted in a series of measurestakenagainsttheLaibachactivities,mostno-tablyfromtheearly1983on.Citycommitteeof the Socialist union of working people ofLjubljanademandedthatLaibachshouldob-tainapermissionbythecityofLjubljanatouse itsGermanname,whichdefactomeantthatLaibachwasofficiallyforbiddentoper-forminpublic.



ugh,fewyearsbeforethat,MladenDolarwasalreadyworkingonthesubjectaspartofhisBAthesisContradictions and Alternatives in Marxist Analyses of Fascism. First of his papers on the topic was published in Problemi in1978.22AbookThe Structure of the Fascist Domination23 followedin1982,oneyear after theNazi-punk scandal.Twoyears later, the bookFilozofija skozi psihoanalizo[PhilosophythoughPsychoanalysis],24acollectionofma-terialsfromaseminar,organisedbytheSigmundFreudSchoolinLjubljana,includedachapter“Ideologija,cinizem,punk”[Ideology,Cynicism,Punk].ThistextcomplementsDolar’sinterpretationoffascismbutshiftsitsinterpre-tativestressontheself-managementsystemasthebackgroundandtargetofthecritiqueofpunkmovementandofLaibach/NSK.EvenbeforeDolar’sbookandthetextonpunkmovementwerepublished,acloselinkwasestablishedbetweenProblemi groupandtheyoungergroupofpunkers.Namely,in1981,theveryyearof“nazi-punkscandal”,thenewmovementwasgivenspacetopresentthemselvesinaspecialeditionofthejournalProblemi,calledPunk Problemi,beingfollowedbytwoconsecutiveeditionsinthenexttwoyears.Thesecondofthese,issuedin1982,causedparticularupheaval,when theeditorsof the issuerefused toquietlycensorpartsofpunkbands’lyricsthatwereprintedinthejournal,butinsteadpub-lishedpageswithblackrectanglesmarkingthecensoredparts.25

Picture 1.Partsofpages3and4fromPunk Problemi,1982,withthecensoredtextcoveredinblack



Theviewpointtheeditorialboarddecidedtotakewasveryinteresting:theyagreedwithaninterpretationofpunkmovementas a symptom, butnotinawaythatsymptomaticreadingwasunderstoodbythemainstreamcriticism.Inhiseditorialtothefirstissuein1981SlavojŽižekmockingly“agreed”withthecriticsthatpresentedpunkasasymptom,butdisagreedontheirdiagnosis,usingtheterm“symptom”inacompletelynew,Lacanianway,markingthebeginningofacompletelynewchapteroftherelationshipbetweensocio-po-liticalreality,artsceneandthecriticaljournals.Contemporarycriticsofpunkmovementusedtheterm“symptom”inameaningofasignofanunderlyingdisease.Thustheirdiagnosiswasthatpunkwarnsusofanalarmingdangerof“nihilist”,“foreign”oreven“anarchistandfascist”26tendenciesamongtheyounggeneration,aspreadingdiseasethatneedstobe“cured”,therebyalsotaking care of the symptom.The “benevolent” critics seemingly refrainedfrompointingafingeratthepunkers,choosinginsteadtolayblameontheanomaliesofthesociety.Žižek’seditorialinterpretedsymptominpsychoana-lyticterms:

“Symptomisaphenomenonthat–viewedfromanordinary,habitualperspective–seems‘fo-reign’,‘irrational’,‘aninvasionofimmorality’.Thesymptom,however,revealsanintrusionofthesuppressed‘truth’ofthemostcalm,mostnormaleverydaylife,ofexactlythatlifethatissoshockedandannoyedbyit.Symptomreturnsoursuppressedtruthinapervertedform.(…)punkliterallyenactsthesuppressedaspectof‘normality’andthereby‘liberates’,itintroducesadefamiliarizingdistance.”27

Hetookthiscomparisonfurtherandproposedatreatmentsimilartothatofthepsychoanalytictherapy:

“Ifthedistinctionbetweennon-dogmaticanddogmaticMarxismhasanymeaning,thisdistin-ctionmust(also)meanthat–whenresearchofthesocialphenomenaencountersasymptomaticpoint–‘thesymptom’isaboveallallowedtospeak,withoutbeing‘understood’(reducedtowhatisalreadyknown)inadvance.Suchistheaimofthepresentissue.”28

Understandingofpunkasasymptomthereforeenablesustoseethe“normal-ity”of thesocialrealityfromadistance, inorder toexposewhathasbeensuppressedfor this reality to function.Thesolution to theallegedproblemofpunk is not to simply “understand” and rationalize thephenomenon, asEgo-psychologywouldhaveitinitsinterpretationoftheFreud’swo es war formula,butto“letthesymptomspeak”.This,psychoanalyticviewonpunkcanberelatedtotheparallelinterpreta-tions in the two textsmentionedabove,Dolar’sbookprovidingaviewon

22

Cf. Punk je bil prej,op.cit.

23

MladenDolar,“Onekaterihvprašanjihinpro-tislovjih v marksističnih analizah fašizma”,Problemi, Razprave, year 16, no. 177/180(1978),p.49–111.

24

Mladen Dolar, Struktura fašističnega gos-postva. Marksistične analize fašizma in pro-blemi teorije ideologije, DDU Univerzum,Ljubljana,1982.

25

Filozofija skozi psihoanalizo, DDUUniver-zum,Ljubljana,1984.

26

This was obviously too provocative for theofficial line. Mladen Dolar, the editor ofProblemi atthetime,wasaccusedofhavingallowedthepublicationofpornographicma-terial–therewereindeedbodypartsondis-play–andforcedtopayafine.

27

Thisshowsthe(deliberate?)conceptualcon-fusioninlabelsgiventopunkbyitscritics,ofwhomtheinterchangebilityofanarchismandfascism is only one example, cf. Punk pod Slovenci,op.cit.

28

Slavoj Žižek, “Editorial” in:Problemi, year19(1981),no.205/206.



fascismwhichdepartsfromthemainstreamMarxistanalyses,andthebookchapter“Ideology,Cynicism,Punk”,whichinterpretspunkasareactiontothecynicismofthesystem.CriticismofIch-Psychologie isalsoapointinDolar’sbookonfascismthatcanprovideadifferentperspectiveontheNazi-punkquestion.Inhisbook,DolardrawsatrajectoryfromtheanalysisoftheMarxistviewsonfascismasanagencyof themonopolisticcapital, throughthe interpretationsof theFrankfurt school and the psychoanalytic explanations in Freud and Freud-based theories of Reich and Fromm.Within this trajectory he provides aninterestingfocusonFreud’sMassenpsychologie und Ich-AnalyseandAdor-no’sinterpretationofit.Understandingthemassastheaggregateofindividu-als,whohavethesameobjectastheirIchidealandtherebyidentifyingwitheachother,makestheidentificationwiththedesireoftheothertheprincipalmechanismoffascism.BasedonthisnotionDolarmakesaninterestingparal-lelinthelastchapter,tryingtocomparethemodelofdespotismasanalysedbyAlainGrosrichard29withfascism.Thecomparisonendswithatwist:

“Ifthephantasmoftheeasterndespotismprovidedakeytotheunderstandingofthepowerinthetimeofabsolutism,namely,theEuropeanpowerofthattime,ifitwasitsminiaturemodel,itsmetaphor,thatnonethelesssaturatedevenitsreality;ifitrevealeditspublicsecrets–thenfascismprovidesthekeytoanotherreality,anotherinnereconomy(…)Ithinkthatfascismisaboveallaphantasmrealised,averyexistentmetaphor,aphantasmofthecontemporarycapi-talistsociety,itsownimage.”30

Historicalheritageoffascism,claimsDolar,ispreserved“notinthosemove-mentsorregimesthatseemmostsimilarbytheirappearance”,butliveson“inlatecapitalismassuch”.31Thekeyquestion,accordingtotheauthor,isthus:“howdoesfascismcontinuetodaywithdifferentmeans”?Another implicationofDolar’s text leadsus to thesecond text,mentionedabove. If phantasm of eastern despotism reflected European absolutism,andfascismisametaphorforcapitalistsociety,whatmetaphorissocialismreflected in? The chapter “Ideology, Cynicism, Punk”,32 edited by SlavojŽižek33answers thisquestion.Itstartswith theaccusationsoffascismthattargetedyounggroupLaibachaftertheirprovocativeTVperformanceinJune1983.Themainstreamcriticismfocusedontheallegedlyfascistelementsintheirappearanceandperformanceand,whileadmittingthattheirperformancewasintendedassocialcritique,labelsitasanundesirabletypeofcritique,onethatshows“anarchoiddespair”34and“dehumanization”.Itdemandsinsteadforconstructiverationalcriticism,whichispreciselytheviewthattheProb-lemi authorsconfronted.ThetextexplainstheeffecttheLaibachperformancehadontheTVaudiencesandcriticsby theirmimickingof the ideological ritual,withoutdistancingthemselvesfromitbyironyorcriticism.Thisact,claimsthetext,isexactlywhatisnotpermittedwithinthesystem.Theideologydoesnotrequiretheindividual tobelieve in therituals,butexpectsconformisminnoteverad-mittingtheirdisbelief.Pascaliansolutionwherebeliefisconstitutedthroughhabitreproducestherulingideologyinamachine-likemanner.ThisiswhatprovokedsuchangerinspectatorsandcriticsofLaibachTVinterview–theyexposedtheritualitselfinitsbaremechanicalfunctioning:

“ThekeypointofLaibachperformance,ofthe‘blind’,‘mechanic’readingoftotalitariantexts,isinthewaytheyshowtheimmanentdecentralizationoftheideologicalspeech,theviewofthebarenon-thinking‘automatism’,‘machine’,throughwhichtheideologyisreproduced,(…)blockingtheefficiencyofthedeceit,self-concealmentthatisindispensibleforthesuccessfulreproductionofideology.”35



Ideology is being reproduced through a detachment; its perpetrators nevertakeitseriously;butstillbehaveasiftheywould.Thishowever,isonlyonesideoftheideologicalsplit,asthepretendingsubjectsdobelieve thatwhattheyfaketobelieveistrue.Here,thetextcontinuesthePascalianthemebyexplaining de Sade’s example (throughKlossovski): de Sade pretendsnot to believethatGodexists,whileknowing thatitdoesexist–inthisequationtheknowledgeoftheGod’sexistencegetssuppressed.36Thecontemporary“totalitarian”ideology,ontheotherhand,showsadifferent,moreradicaltypeofdistance:

“Totalitarianuniverseisauniverseofpsychoticsplit,(…)anecessaryknowledgethatwe“de-ceive”doesnotharmthebeliefinthesuccess-effectofthisdeceit.”37

Here the text introduces Sloterdijk’s triad of cynical consciousness: naiveideology–kynicism–cynicism,wherethedescribedlogicisidentifiedwiththethird.Thecynicalconsciousness,asinterpretedbySloterdijk,38isnotthenaïvemisguidedideologicalbeliefinthespiritofMarx’ssie wissen es nicht, aber sie tun es,norisittheun-manipulatedManipulatorwhohimselfdoesnotbelievethelieshe’stellingthecrowds.Thecynicalconsciousnessisthesie wissen was sie tun, aber sie tun es,theanswertothedirectcriticismofthe“nakedemperor”aspresentedbywhatSloterdijknamesthe“kynicism”,mercilessparodyandsarcasmintendedtoshowthecontradictingrealitybe-hindthecurtainsofideology.Fascism,claimsthetext,wasnotamerema-nipulation,forthecynicismofpower“mustnotbereducedtotheelementofthecynicaldetachmentofdisbelief”,39HitlerreallybelievedthatJewswerethe archenemy.Thus this ideological consciousness cannot be revealed byrational“enlightenment”,italreadyis enlightened:

“Thecynicalsubjectisfullyawareofthefalsityoftheideologicalcomplexthatitfollows,butfollowsitanyway–reflectionisalreadyincludedinitsposition.”40

ThispathologicalsplitiscrucialforthethirdpartoftheSloterdijkthreefolddivision.Thecynicismistoacertaindegreeareactiontothekynicaldistance,asynthesis thatalready includes thecriticism.Bothaspectsof thiscynicalsplitarehowever,ideological:

29

Ibid.

30

Cf. Alain Grosrichard, Structure du sérail: la fiction du despotisme asiatique dans l’Oc-cident classique,Seuil,Paris,1979.

31

Dolar, Struktura fašističnega gospostva, op.cit.,pp.155–156.

32

Ibid.

33

Filozofija skozi psihoanalizo, op. cit., pp.100–129.

34

Thequotedchapterandafewothertextsareprobablyalsoauthoredbyhim,althoughtheauthorshipisnotexplicitlstated.Apartfromthe longerchapters thecompilation includesothermaterials,debatesetc.

35

Op.cit.,p.102.

36

Ibid.,pp.107–108.

37

Ibid.,p.111.

38

Ibid.,p.112.

39

Cf. his Kritik der zynischen Vernunft, Suhr-kamp,Frankfurt, 1983 (English trans.Criti-que of Cynical Reason,Verso,London–NewYork,1988.)

40

Filozofija skozi psihoanalizo,op.cit.,p.113.



“…thecynicalconsciousnessofthefactthatofficialideologyservesaparticularinterest,isnolessideologicalthantheofficialideology,perhapsevenmore.”41

AsoneofhisexamplesSloterdijkalsowritesaboutthecynicalpotentialoftheworkersmovement’sreferencetoitsownobjectivehistoricalroleandtheideologicalnecessityitgivestoaparticularpoliticalgroup.The“Ideology,Cynicism,Punk”takesthisSloterdijk’spointevenfurther.Self-managementsystem,officiallyinterpretedashavingrevealedthefalsityofthisideologicalpositionofthePartyinreal-socialisminfactfunctionswithinthesamecyni-calsplit:

“Here the statepowerdoesnot–aswas thecase in theusual real-socialism–persuade theworkersthatitadequatelyrepresentsthem,thatitleadsthesocialprocessaccordingtotheirwillandintheirbestinterest,butinsteadpersuadesthemthatitisthem,theworkers,whodirectlymanagethesocialprocess,namely,ifweproceedtotheparadoxicalconclusion,thatthey,thepowerinthestrictsense,actuallydon’t exist.”42

This ideological falsity is not, however, limited to the level of an abstractmystification,asetofideasthatwouldhavetoberepeatedandadheredto.Instead, ithasactual,materialconsequences, thesplit is thusnot“between‘reality’andits‘ideologicalmask’,butinthemidstofrealityassuch.”43Inthesystemofthefalseself-managementthestatepoweronlyfearsonething– that thissystemwouldstart tobe takenseriously.Therefore thematerialrealityoftheself-managementisorganizedinsuchawaythattakingitseri-ouslyisdiscouragedasmuchaspossible:

“…whatatafirstglancemightseemasthefailureofthestatepowertomakeustakethe‘self-managementritual’seriously,isactuallytheconditionofitsfunctioning:whenweyawnduringthemeetings,whenwekeeptoourselvesetc.andthinkthatbydoingsowe’represervingcertaininnerfreedomanddetachment–itispreciselytherethatthepowerwantsustobe.”44

Acynicismofpowerthatqualifiesfascismasmuchastheself-managementsystem,issubvertedbyLaibach/NSKandpunkmovementintwodifferentways,thusmakingthesamequalificationofbothashaving“fascisttenden-cies” even more inappropriate. If Laibach/NSK subverts the ideology bydoingpreciselywhat thecynicismofpower is trying toprevent itspeoplefromdoing, namely, taking it seriously, thepunkmovement usesdifferentstrategies. In its attempt to reveal the cynical character of the state powerituses first akynical strategy: ironyand sarcasm that target thehypocrisyoftherulingritual.Asthetextsuggests,however,thereisanother,perhapsevenmoreprovokingstrategyusedbythepunkmovement,abreakwiththemodelofreturntotheauthenticself.Thequestforauthenticityofthepreviousgenerations’hippiemovement–isseenbythepunkersasafalseandimpos-sibleflight,nothingmorethanafunnypose.Theposition,the“pose”ofthepunkersthusreflectspreciselytheimpossibilityofthisauthenticityandthefalsityofescape, thereby“addressing thecynicallyspitsubjectof theself-managementsystemandenablingittogetridofitshabitualsubjection”45tothesystem’sautomatism.



Helena Motoh

»Punk je simptom«: sjecišta filozofije i alternativne kulture u Sloveniji osamdesetih

SažetakDiljem Jugoslavije osamdesete godine su obilježene pojavom niza novih alternativnih kulturnih pokreta, dok su istodobno značajne nove ideje uvedene u područje filozofije i teorije općenito. Ovaj se rad fokusira na specifičan primjer dijaloga između teorije i kulture u ovome razdoblju: na tri specijalna izdanja časopisa Problemi iz 1981., 1982. i 1983. godine, koji su bili posvećeni punk pokretu, tj. takozvani PunkProblemi. Rad započinje analizom uvodnika prvome od ovih brojeva, i njegovom navodnom »slaganju« s tezom da punk treba promatrati kao simptom. Diskrepancija između kritičara punka te stajališta uredništva Problema i njihovih suradnika se dodatno istražuje kroz analizu članaka objavljenih u tri specijalna izdanja. Konačno, Punk Problemi su supostavljeni razvoju teorije u ranim osamdesetima, naročito u djelima o teoriji ideologije, tj. tekstu o fašizmu Mladena Dolara.

KljučneriječibivšaJugoslavija,alternativnipokreti,osamdesete,punk,teorijeofašizmu

Helena Motoh

„Punk ist ein Symptom“: Schnittpunkte von Philosophie und alternativen Kulturen in Slowenien der Achtzigerjahre

ZusammenfassungDie Achtzigerjahre waren jugoslawienweit durch das Auftreten einer Vielzahl frischer alterna-tiver Kulturbewegungen gekennzeichnet, während zeitgleich tief greifende Eingebungen in das Gebiet der Philosophie bzw. Theorie in genere eingeführt wurden. Der vorgelegte Artikel rich-tet sein Hauptaugenmerk auf das Paradebeispiel für den Dialog zwischen Theorie und Kultur in diesem Zeitraum: auf drei der Punkbewegung zugeeigneten Sonderausgaben der Zeitschrift Problemi von 1981, 1982 und 1983, die sogenannten PunkProblemi. Die Arbeit setzt an mit der Studie des Leitartikels der ersten der einschlägigen Ausgaben und dessen vermeintlichen „Einverständnisses“ mit der These, der Punk solle als Symptom angesehen werden. Die Diskre-panz zwischen Punkkritikern und dem Standpunkt der Chefredaktion der Problemi nebst deren Mitarbeitern wird fernerhin ausgesponnen durch die Analyse der in den angeführten Specials herausgegebenen Artikel. Abschließend werden die PunkProblemi mit der Theorieentfaltung der frühen Achtziger kontrastiert, im Besonderen in den Werken zur Ideologietheorie, d. h. in Mladen Dolars Text über den Faschismus.

SchlüsselwörterehemaligesJugoslawien,alternativeBewegungen,Achtzigerjahre,Punk,TheorienüberdenFaschis-mus

41

Ibid.,p.114.

42

Ibid.,p.118.

43

Ibid.,p.120.

44

Ibid.,p.123.

45

Ibid.,p.124.

46

Ibid.,p.129.



Helena Motoh

« Le punk est un symptôme » : les intersections de la philosophie et de la culture alternative dans la Slovénie des années 80

RésuméPartout à travers la Yougoslavie, les années 80 ont été marquées par l’apparition d’une série de nouveaux mouvements culturels alternatifs, tandis qu’en même temps de nouvelles idées im-portantes ont été introduites dans le domaine de la philosophie et de la théorie en général. Cet article se concentre sur un exemple particulier de dialogue entre la théorie et la culture pendant cette période : sur trois éditions spéciales du journal Problemi en 1981, 1982 et 1983, dédiés au mouvement punk, appelés PunkProblemi. L’article commence par analyser l’éditorial de la première de ces trois éditions et son soi-disant « accord » avec la thèse que le punk devrait être vu comme un symptôme. La divergence entre les critiques du punk et du point de vue de la direc-tion éditoriale des Problemi ainsi que de ces collaborateurs est davantage examinée à travers l’analyse des articles publiés dans les trois éditions spéciales. Enfin, les PunkProblemi sont juxtaposés aux développements théoriques au début des années 80, notamment dans les travaux sur la théorie de l’idéologie, c’est-à-dire des textes de Mladen Dolar sur le fascisme.

Mots-clésex-Yougoslavie,mouvementsalternatifs,années80,punk,théoriesdufascisme

Documents

“Punk is a Symptom”: Intersections of Philosophy and Alternative