Désiré Arnold 2

1. What is ‚violence’?

Kunczik says it is “an intentional physical or/and psychical damage to a person, a living being or a thing, through another person.” 1 (15) Theunert considers violence only between human beings. “Offenders and victims are always one or more persons.” 2 (89) Kunczik says one also could differentiate between concrete violence and fictional violence, as well as between natural and artificial violence. Concrete violence is about shown behaviour, which results in violence, either physical or psychical. Fictional violence is only the presentation of it. And so natural violence means the real and genuine violence, for example shown in movies. And at last the artificial representation means the un-real representation, for example shown in cartoons.

2. History of Violence in the Media

Historically spoken, violence in the media is not a phenomenon of the present; already the ancient Greeks were confronted with it. Kunczik (19) states that each new medium was judged negatively in the beginning.

It all started with Plato. In his work “Politea” he accuses tales and myths to stand in contrast to an honourable adult life, and so children and youngsters should be kept away from these. At this point Aristotle, a former student from Plato sets in. He formed a thesis called thesis of catharsis. 3 So one can see that the topic violence already derives from the ancient world. For example Homer and his “Odyssey” as well as Aneas and his work “Aneis”. Also the Grimms and Busch made use of violence in their tales. This goes on to Shakespeare and his plays, for example in “Hamlet” they fight, an act of violence, or “Macbeth”.

Goethe as well used a kind of violence, when his “Werther” 4 commits suicide. Critics of that time feared many suicides (and many suicides are said to have happened after reading this work).

Kunczik explains to that “while a murder in Shakespeares or Homers works is seen as a part of the whole work of art, a so called Bildungsgut” the same murder on television is seen as “low mass culture” 5 (22) Kunczik develops a rule ; the longer an author is dead the higher is the chance, that violence is accepted as art.

Violence in the news has always been present. It started in the 16 th century in Germany, when the “Newen Zeytungen” showed violent actions. In England in the 18 th century there were

1 „beabsichtigte physische und/ oder psychische Schädigung einer Person, von Lebewesen und Sachen durch eine andere Person“ 2 „Ausübende und Betroffene sind immer eine oder mehrere Personen“ 3 Katharsisthese 4 „Die Leiden des jungen Werther“

Désiré Arnold 3

books that were said to be the seed of badness (Kunczik 23). A. Pope stated that the youth will be spoilt 6 through these books. Going over to the 19 th century people were offended by violent books of vampires, werewolves, and as well of “Frankenstein”. At the start of the 20 th century people developed the cinematograph and the field to violence in the media was broadened; and Vogelgesang states “an endless catalogue of threats was anticipated in 1926, e.g. sexual disorientation, seduction, as well as incitement to crimes…” (100) 7 . The result of that was the creation of associations for youth care, morality, well-being etc. . . . 8 Kunczik seems to be right in saying that every new medium was and will be judged negatively at first.

In the 50s it was the Rock’n Roll, that was to blame for the brutalization of the morality 9 , the 60s and 70s had had the new medium comic and animated cartoons, in the 80s it were the new video games, the 90s were influenced by upcoming horror-movie (Vogelgesang 100).

3. Examples/ Effects

I already mentioned Aristotle before; he made up a theory called theory of catharsis. It

was based on the drama theory and it said that seeing an aggressive action, causes a decreasing to use aggressive actions by oneself. So that through dynamic understanding, going through the seen situation, one’s own readiness to use violence decreases. (Kunczik 61) But Kunczik admits that this theory is not tenable. “A decreasing of aggression because of seeing things of violent content (...) does not occur. 10 Kunczik also quotes Feshbach and Singer saying: “The dramatic arts … may help purge the audience’s feeling without eliminating the sources of frustration or even may provide substitutes for motivated behaviour.” 11 The theory of catharsis was developed further by Sigmund Freud. 12 . Psychoanalyst explain that there is certain shoot to aggression and violence, and so seeing violent actions can be used as an outlet of one’s own aggression that had to be suppressed (Kunczik 63). A quite interesting point is that there are theoreticians who believe that children

5 „Während ein Mord bei Shakespeare oder Homer als Bestandteil eines Kunstwerkes ein so genanntes Bildungsgut darstellt“….“Ausgeburt niederer Massenkultur“ 6 verdorben 7 „1926 wird ein schier endloser Gefahrenkatalog prophezeit, so zum Beispiel sexuelle Desorientierung, Verführung und Anstiftung zum Verbrechen“ 8 Jugendpflege, Volkswohl, Sittlichkeit, etc.

9 Verrohung der Sittlichkeit 10 „Eine durch das Ansehen violenter Medieninhalte bewirkte Aggressivitätsminderung aufgrund des Abfließens des Aggressionstriebes erfolgt nicht“ 11 Feshbach and Singer, R.D. Television and aggression: An experimental field study. San Francisco, 1971, page 156.

12 Freud, Sigmund. Abriß der Psychoanalyse. Das Unbehagen in der Kultur. Frankfurt a.M., 1971/ 1938, page 43.

Désiré Arnold 4

should watch violent TV programmes, e.g.Bettelheim. 13 Children should watch these things, so that they could live out their own aggression without damaging their surrounding. Therefore I would argue that there are two points to say about the catharsis theory. One the one hand there might be, for example, children that can be effected by violent actions in the media. When these children see violent actions in the media, they might be aware of the effects of using violence. And therefore they probably would not make use of violence. But on the other hand there could be children, with a different socialization background than the first group, and those are effected by seeing violent actions in the media the other way round. They take the shown violence as an idol, as a model how to use violence and what effects it would have. As a result I would argue that the socialization aspects have a greater influence on children then the media, as the socialization process develops children’s attitude towards television and towards the differentiation between reality and non-reality. As a result the media effects go hand in hand with the socialization. During the socialization process the ground is developed. Children are firstly socialized by the parents and family, secondly by the school and in the third row by the peer group. Hence these three parts are responsible for the reception of the media, the family and the school should make up the children’s mind to differentiate and to whether use the violence in the media as outlet of their own aggression or to bypass the violence without any effects. I think schools and parents should restart to help their children developing interests, hobbies and so on except the home entertainment ‘television’. Children do not need to see violent media to let out aggressions, they could go to a sports club and by doing so they would be able to easily let out their aggressions. At last I claim that the catharsis theory can be effective in some cases of course, but these some cases can only determined by psychologists. And I have to agree with Kunczik that the theory of catharsis is no longer tenable, as it does not work for all media-users.

Secondly I would argue that for example the field of ‘Reality TV might have a cathartic effect. People watch these formats, wanting to see horror, or disgust or even people that are faced with their phobias. I think the audience comes through dynamic understanding to the point never to do this to themselves.

Hand in hand with the catharsis theory goes the stimulation theory. This one focuses on the violent act. Violent presentations stimulate the readiness to use violence. Vogelgesang believes that “noticing 14 brutal acts stimulates the aggressiveness of the audience” (102). 15 So

13 Bettelheim, B.. Brauchen Kinder Fernsehen? in: Televizion, 1, 1988.

14 wahrnehmen

15 „…wahrnehmen von brutalen Gewaltakten beim Zuschauer Aggressivität stimuliert…“