Anachronistic move

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Anachronistische Zug is a political street theater based on the poem of the same name by Bertolt Brecht from 1947 . This in turn is based on the poem The Masque of Anarchy , composed in 1819/20 . Written on the Occasion of the Massacre in Manchester by Percy Bysshe Shelley .

The anachronistic procession was formed in 1980 on the initiative of Thomas Schmitz-Bender and the workers' union for the reconstruction of the KPD as a protest movement against the then CDU / CSU candidate for chancellor , Franz Josef Strauss . The authors accused Strauss of a kindred spirit with National Socialism . The first attempt was made in 1979 during a demonstration against the election of Federal President Karl Carstens , who was accused of being a member of the NSDAP in 1940-45.

The Anachronistic Train traveled through Germany again in 1990 , this time from Bonn to Berlin within 14 days . The political thrust in 1990 was the warning of nationalist tendencies in Germany after reunification. To this day there are still sporadic appearances with updated carriages to the traditional signage.

The 1980 train

According to the director's instructions, the street theater was originally called A Train to Save the Fatherland or Freedom and Democracy. It went down in history under the name “Anachronistic Train” because it borrowed the idea and parts of its staging from another work, the poem Der Anachronistische Zug or Freedom and Democracy, written by Bertolt Brecht in 1947 , a satirical depiction of the blooming clergy in post-war Germany old NS party members and followers. The later relevant judgment of the Federal Constitutional Court also became known under the title "Anachronistic move".

According to Brecht's model, the organizers of the street theater, declared opponents of the policy of the CDU / CSU candidate for chancellor at the time, Franz Josef Strauss, formed a street of pedestrians and vehicles. Among other things, a Kübelwagen with a "General", a military truck with a rocket and a military band, three black limousines (with license plates SIE-MENS, FLI-CK, THYS-SEN), a car with "Members of the People's Court" and a Cars with members of a private security service in black uniform follow. Parodying the election campaign slogan “Freedom instead of Socialism” at the time, the wagons carried signs such as “Freedom instead of butter”, “Freedom instead of politics” and the like. The last wagon of the train was based on the “plague wagon” from the Brechtian model: it housed mechanically movable dolls that symbolized oppression, leprosy, fraud, stupidity, murder and robbery. They all wore masks from former Nazi greats. In the same car drove a performer wearing a white face mask with the features of Franz Josef Strauss . During the performances, the Brecht daughter Hanne Hiob recited the Brecht poem, including the seven stanzas belonging to the plague wagon:

Bone hand on the pommel of the whip / starts the oppression. / She drives in an armored car / The gift of industry.
Big greetings, in rusty tank / the leprosy drives. He seems sick. / Ashamed he plucks the brown bandage in the wind / Up to his chin.
Behind him the deceiver drives a large mug / free beer. Just have to drink from it / sell your children to him.
Old as the mountains, but / Still entrepreneurial / Stupidity drives along on the train / Keeps an eye out for fraud.
Hanging over the side of the car / With his arm, drives in front of the murder. / The cattle are lolling comfortably / Sings: Sweet dream of liberty.
Still trembling from yesterday's shock / The robbery then starts in the skirt / A Junkers field marshal / A globe on the lap.
But all of the six great / indigenous, merciless / all now demand it / freedom and democracy.

The director's book stipulated that the respective plagues should arise when they were named and should be pushed back into their place by the person who portrayed Strauss, until shortly before the end of the poem all six figures should stand up and block their view of the chancellor candidate, so that only the sign that he held up with the words "Freedom and Democracy" remains visible.

On the morning of September 15, 1980, the train drove to the place in Sonthofen assigned to it by the District Office, where it took up its position following the stage directions. By October 4, 1980, the train reached several other German cities, including the city of Kassel on September 25, 1980. In Sonthofen and Kassel, the top of the last car was removed so that the six dolls could be seen. The actor was wearing the ostrich mask. At the request of representatives of the press and police officers, he turned his face to the dolls several times and held up a sign that read “Hitler must be dead”. Because of these facts, Franz Josef Strauss filed a criminal complaint against the actor and the organizers of the train for insult and joined the criminal proceedings as a joint plaintiff .

Legal dispute

The Kempten District Court sentenced the organizers of the street theater and the actor of Franz Josef Strauss for insulting and justified this with the fact that in at least two cases when the train was set up the roof of the plague wagon had been opened to the public, without this in the context of the actual Theater performance. Outside of this context and without the poem, an impartial observer would get the impression that the candidate for chancellor and the leaders of the Third Reich were very close to one another , because they could be seen "in the same boat". The appeal of the convicts, with which in particular a violation of the artistic freedom of Article 5 (3) sentence 1 of the Basic Law was criticized, was rejected by the Bavarian Supreme Regional Court as obviously unfounded.

The constitutional complaint lodged against these decisions was successful.

In its decision of July 17, 1984, the Federal Constitutional Court first referred to the concept of art that it first developed with the Mephisto decision and repeatedly emphasized that “free creative design” is essential for artistic activity, “in the impressions, experiences "The artist's experiences are brought to a direct view through the medium of a certain formal language". For the Federal Constitutional Court there is no question that the anachronistic trait falls under this. It also states that even if one used a formalistic concept of art as a basis, then it is also art. Because the poem on which the performance is based, as well as the performance in the form of a theater with actors, puppets, props, are classic forms of artistic expression. The fact that this is "street theater" is irrelevant, because permanently installed stages do not deserve priority over touring theaters, which are ultimately a form of theater with a long tradition. Even the fact that it is about political theater does not stand in the way of the application of Article 5, Paragraph 3 of the Basic Law, because the area of ​​“committed art”, which deals with current or explosive topics, is also protected.

However, artistic freedom also has limits. It cannot be restricted by a simple law and is therefore not subject to the legal reservation of Article 5 (2) GG. However, referring to its case law on the “Mephisto decision”, the Federal Constitutional Court declares that barriers to artistic freedom can arise from other basic rights . Personal honor is part of the general personal right of Article 2, Paragraph 1 of the Basic Law and is thus protected by this basic right. However, artistic freedom for its part draws limits to personal rights. It is not possible, without taking artistic freedom into account, to ascertain an impairment of personal rights and to condemn them for insulting. Rather, it needs to be clarified whether the impairment of personal rights is so serious that the freedom of art has to recede (weighing of the conflicting legal interests of art versus personal rights). A minor impairment or the mere possibility of a serious impairment is not sufficient in view of the great importance of artistic freedom.

In particular, the Federal Constitutional Court objected to the fact that the district court tore apart the street theater event and separated the preparation of the event (setting up the train) from the actual event. In the opinion of the Federal Constitutional Court, artistic expressions are capable of and in need of interpretation; in this context, an overview of the work is essential. Detaching individual parts of a work of art from its context and examining them separately to determine whether they are to be considered a criminal offense is therefore not permitted, especially since preparation and performance are often inextricably linked, because one determines the other. It should also be taken into account that in modern theater, the preparation of a performance in front of the audience can be part of the overall artistic concept.

The proceedings were referred back to the Kempten District Court for a new hearing. With a judgment of December 4, 1984, the latter overturned the conviction for insult and acquitted the accused.

literature

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Bertolt Brecht: The anachronistic train or FREEDOM and DEMOCRACY 1947
  2. ↑ Where is the anachronistic train going? In: young world. December 30, 2000.
  3. ^ AG Kempten, judgment of October 30, 1981 - Ls 20 Js 12777/80.
  4. ↑ BayObLG, decision of April 30, 1982 - RReg. 5 St 91/82.
  5. ^ Federal Constitutional Court, decision of the First Senate of July 17, 1984 - 1 BvR 816/82 = BVerfGE 67, 213 - Anachronistic move.
  6. ^ Judgment of the AG Kempten from December 4, 1984 - Ls 20 Js 12777/80. Access for a fee at juris.de.