Action Clean Canvas

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The clean screen campaign - meaning the cinema screen - was an initiative launched in the 1960s with the aim of, after a tentative start, the increasingly rapid sexualization of the mass media through censorship and control measures , but not least to be prevented by amending the Basic Law .

prehistory

The reason was the unobjectionable release of the scandal film Das Schweigen by the FSK in December 1963. The film was classified as a work of art , which also included three relatively detailed and direct sex scenes that had not been shown in cinemas in Germany before.

The responsible public prosecutor in Duisburg received over a hundred charges of indecency against the film, but they were not prosecuted. With Vilgot Sjömans 491 , another “Swedish film” appeared in German cinemas soon after, which was rejected by conservative circles despite numerous cuts prescribed by the FSK .

Efforts to take state censorship measures against the films that were perceived as objectionable were unsuccessful. In the appendix to the appraisal of the state law of September 7, 1964, the Bavarian public prosecutors commissioned to examine the film 491 stated : "Affirming the establishment of the FSK means practically at the same time renouncing the removal of FSK decisions by way of criminal proceedings ."

The foundation

Since the FSK seemed to have failed and the state's hands were tied, the Clean Canvas campaign was launched in Schweinfurt in September 1964 . In a signature campaign, the signatories demanded “morally clean and moral films” and rejected immorality “under the guise of art”. The FSK was called upon to strictly adhere to its own principles. A total of 23,456 citizens from the city and the district of Schweinfurt signed the campaign. An article with the title This will make an impression in Bonn appeared in the Schweinfurter Volkszeitung on October 5, 1964 . The activists handed the collected signatures over to Federal President Heinrich Lübke , who was delighted that for the first time the people themselves were protesting against dirty work.

Little by little, the Clean Canvas campaign was started in numerous other cities in Germany, with a focus on southern Germany. Associated with this were calls for stricter FSK standards, stricter state laws, demands to raise the age of protection of minors from 18 to 21, boycott threats against cinema owners and protests against magazines.

The effort to change the Basic Law

The main initiator was the lawyer and CDU member of the Bundestag Adolf Süsterhenn , who was committed to the "general moral order" and the "healthy public sentiment " and wanted to protect young people from the dangers of "filth and trash " and, above all, to ban immoral things from the cinema . Because of contemporary films with some revealing scenes, he saw the moral order in danger.

In May 1965, together with Maria Probst, member of the CSU Bundestag, he initiated an application to change the Basic Law. The constitutional provision “Art and science, research and teaching are free” should be supplemented by the passage: “The freedom of art does not release from observing the moral law”. About two thirds of the CDU / CSU MPs in the Bundestag supported this request. However, the leading party members lacked support, while the FDP and SPD resolutely opposed an amendment to the Basic Law.

With his efforts, however, Süsterhenn mainly attracted ridicule and criticism from artists and cultural workers, Heinrich Böll is said to have dubbed him "Professor Lüsterhahn".

Failure of the action

According to the press release, the “Clean screen” campaign collected 1,294,000 signatures in Germany and West Berlin, including 19 members of the Bundestag and 42 members of the state parliament. It turned out to be problematic that various small groups and individual activists adopted radical tones and fundamentally attacked the film. In the course of 1965, the leaders of the Catholic and Protestant Churches distanced themselves from the action.

The Clean Canvas campaign has been repeatedly ridiculed in liberal media. The majority of West German journalists also rejected their positions in more conservative papers. So wrote Karl Korn in his contribution Action? in the FAZ on May 6, 1965, despite basic support, one should not overlook the fact that "we are in a state of unprecedented change in our views on custom and morality."

In addition, there was no support from influential people or organizations. The film industry provided the media with background material and paid for 300,000 leaflets with a “Public Warning of the Clean Screen”, which were distributed by the Student Humanist Union in June and July 1965. The SPIO itself also praised the good work of the FSK on large posters under the motto “ There is a threat of paternalism!”.

literature

proof

  1. ↑ See Stefan Volk: Scandal Films. Cinematic excitement yesterday and today. , P. 128ff.
  2. ↑ Jürgen Kniep: No youth approval! , P. 136
  3. ↑ Stefan Volk: Scandal Films. Cinematic excitement yesterday and today. , P. 129
  4. ↑ Stefan Volk: Scandal Films. Cinematic excitement yesterday and today. , P. 129
  5. ↑ Chronicle of Rapploltsein (PDF file; 261 kB)
  6. ↑ Jürgen Kniep: No youth approval! , P. 139