Od bralstva in bralcev k sociologiji bralnih okolij Norbert Bachleitner Univerza na Dunaju, Inštitut za evropsko in primerjalno jezikoslovje in literarno vedo, Avstrija norbert.bachleitner@univie.ac.at Kljub študijam o zunanji zgodovini branja in posameznih bralcih vemo o bralnih navadah skupin zelo malo. Model soodvisnosti med družbenim razredom in okusom je izdelal Bourdieu, vendarje ta precej primitiven v primerjavi s sodobnimi študijami, ki temeljijo na »okoljih Sinus«. Jost Schneider, denimo, je rekonstruiral okus nižjega srednjega razreda, za katerega je značilna stagnacija, liberalno tehnokratskega okolja, kije usmerjeno k oblikovnim eksperimentom»klasične«avantgarde, in hedonističnega okolja, ki išče nove sloge in trende. Schneiderjevi rezultati še vedno čakajo, da jih bodo potrdili empirični podatki. Ključne besede: zgodovina branja / sociologija branja / bralci / družbeni razred / bralna kultura / bralne navade / okolja Sinus UDK 028:316.7 Zgodovina književnosti, ki izključuje bralce, se ukvarja zgolj s ponudbo sporočanja, ne pa s književnim sporočanjem samim po sebi. Če literarno zgodovino pojmujemo kot parado avtorjev in besedil, pokriva zgolj virtu-alne pomene — z interpretacijami, v katerih sintetiziramo branja maloštevilnih uglednih kritikov. Če pa vzamemo sporočilni vidik resno, je vpliv književnosti, način, kako bralci »uporabljajo« knjige, enako pomemben kot besedilna razčlemba. Le z upoštevanjem bralskega odziva se lahko nadejamo odgovorov na vprašanja o zgodovinski vlogi književnosti, o porazdelitvi idej, o oblikovanju mnenj in miselnosti ob književnih besedilih in o izgradnji skupinskih identitet. Če se osredotočimo na »potrošnjo« književnosti, bo nastali izbor del popolnoma drugačen od kanona v kon-vencionalnih literarnih zgodovinah. Raziskovanje branja se je začelo s preučevanjem zunanje bralne zgodovine. Knjižni zgodovinarji so zbrali obsežne količinske podatke, ki jih lahko razdelimo v dva tipa: v makro- in mikrogradivo (prim. Darnton, »First Steps« 158). Na makroravni kažejo statistike, osnovane na nacionalnih bibliografijah (na primer katalogih Leipziškega knjižnega sejma, Bibliographie de la France, dokumentih ceha Stationers' company), kako sta vzniknila sodobni knjižni trg in njemu ustrezno bralstvo. Okvirno predstavo o vplivu književnosti in o njenem bralstvu v danem trenutku nam omogočajo podatki o stopnji pismenosti, številu knjigarn, knjižnih cenah, nakladah in prodaji. Književno sporočanje nam pomaga rekonstruirati zgodovina tiskovne zakonodaje in cenzure, ker nam pokaže omejitve pri književni distribuciji. Rudolf Schenda je prišel do sklepa, da je velika večina nižjega in nižjega srednjega razreda vse do 20. stoletja ostala nepismena in praktično izločena iz književnega sporočanja. Branje je bilo (in je do neke mere še vedno) privilegij izobražene manjšine. Na mikroravni nam nudijo vpogled v individualne knjižne zaloge katalogi iz zasebnih knjižnic plemičev, duhovnikov in drugih vidnih osebnosti. Pripombe v pismih, dnevnikih in drugih avtobiografskih virih pogosto prinašajo nadrobne podatke o bralnih praksah posameznikov. S stališča književnih študij, še zlasti primerjalne književnosti, pa so posebno zanimive bralne navade samih avtorjev, njihova književna izobrazba in znanje. Podobe bralcev iz tistega časa nam nudijo podatke o načinu branja, denimo o tem, kako se je razvilo iz družabne izkušnje v zasebno ali prešlo od glasnega branja k tihemu. Podobno lahko uporabimo prikaze branja v delih leposlovnih piscev, zlasti romanih, kot vir za bralne manire in navade. Od 18. stoletja naprej pa dodajajo katalogi bralnih klubov in izposojnih knjižnic tudi podatke o najpriljubljenejšem čtivu. Drugi viri, primerni za rekonstrukcijo branja, so pedagoški spisi iz 18. in 19. stoletja, ki obsojajo velikopotezno branje romanov (nemško »Lesesucht«), še posebno romanov, kakršna sta Werther in La nouvelle Héloïse. Robert Darnton (»Bralci«) je analiziral pisma Rousseauju, v katerih se razkrivajo ti novi načini sentimentalnega branja in istovetenja z domišljijskimi liki. Podatke o kakovosti branja včasih prinašajo tudi avtobiografske pripovedi, kot so memoari in dnevniki, medtem ko robni zapisi v knjigah lahko pričajo o dejstvu, da branje pogosto vodi k neposrednemu virtualnemu dvogovoru. Nedavno tega je psiholog Norbert Groeben (prim. Christmann in Groeben) predlagal, da bi psihologijo bralnega procesa empirično preučili s pomočjo eksperimentov in vprašalnikov. Prav zdaj pripravlja Maria Handler na Dunajski univerzi disertacijo, v kateri s pomočjo tovrstne študije »preverja«, kakšen vtis napravijo angleški prevodi Rilkejevih pesmi in njihovi nemški izvirniki na vzorec bralcev. Skratka, zgodnje raziskave branja so se osredotočale na očrt količinskega razvoja bralstva in na mikroanalitične študije, ki so zbirale podatke o posameznih bralcih. Še vedno pa vemo zelo malo o bralnih navadah nekaterih bralskih skupin. V poznem 18. stoletju je začelo bralstvo občutno naraščati in se ločevati v skupine s svojskimi okusi. Medtem se je bila že dokaj jasno izrisala hierarhija kulturnih dobrin, ki je ustrezala družbeni hi- erarhiji. Kot prvi je sistematično raziskoval različne življenjske sloge Pierre Bourdieu v knjigi La distinction.1 Po njegovih besedah nima zgolj vsaka družbena skupina lastnega okusa, ampak — kar je še pomembneje — deluje umetnost celo kot sredstvo družbenega razlikovanja. Nagnjenje do intelektualne umetnosti in književnosti (Bourdieu govori o »legitimni umetnosti«) ni naravni dar, temveč predpostavlja izobrazbo, kulturno kompetenco in seveda dovolj prostega časa, da se na umetnino lahko ustrezno odzovemo. Če hočemo razumeti legitimno umetnost, moramo poznati njeno »kodo« in njeno zgodovino, razvoj slogov in tehnik, saj dobi posamično delo smisel le v razmerju do drugih del. (Mimogrede, s trošenjem umetnin, ki so s praktičnega gledišča po definiciji »neuporabne«, potrošnik dokazuje, da ni v ekonomski stiski in da si lahko privošči takšno »luksuzno« dejavnost.) Legitimna umetnost je avtonomna in neodvisna od vsakdanjika, kot tudi od slehernega konkretnega namena. Velja za čisto obliko in od bralca terja poleg »čistega« pogleda še odmaknjenost in ravnodušnost — na primer odmaknjenost od romanesknih likov in rav-nodušnost do lastnosti, kakršne so srečen konec, napetost, zabavnost in podobno. Nasprotno pa si popularna umetnost in okus ne lastita nikakršne neodvisne estetske vrednosti. Če nakazuje legitimna umetnost nekakšno agnostično držo, je popularna umetnost heteronomna in bo z večjo verjetnostjo prikazovala etične ali politične probleme. Zanjo so umetnine uporabni predmeti, komaj kaj drugačni od vsakdanjih. Medtem ko legitimna umetnost ne nudi nikakršnih »naravnih« užitkov, temveč od nas zahteva, naj zavrnemo vse »človeško« (ki je po definiciji banalno in prostaško), računa popularna na čutno dražljivost in vabi naslovnika, naj se udeleži igre, namreč drame ali romana. Bourdieu razlikuje med tremi področji okusa: — le gout legitime (legitimni okus), tj. nagnjenje do legitimnih del; — /e gout»moyen« (sredinski okus), ki obsega manj pomembna dela glavnih umetnosti, in — le gout »populaire« (popularni okus) (La distinction 14—16). Bourdieujev model razmerja med razredom in okusom je zelo prepričljiv, vendar je njegova metoda klasifikacije še vedno precej primitivna. V nedavni študiji So%ialgeschichte des Lesens (Družbena zgodovina branja) pa je Jost Schneider namesto sistema treh razredov uporabil deset »okolij Sinus«. Družba je postala kompleksnejša in bolj raznolika kot pred 35 leti, ko se je lotil raziskave Bourdieu. Dandanes imajo, vsaj teoretično, vsi razredi dostop do kulturne produkcije s književnostjo vred. Zato moramo pojem »razreda« nadomestiti s prožnejšim pojmom »okolja«, ki omogoča mnogo bolj pretanjen sistem razvrščanja. S sistemom »okolij Sinus«, prvot- no izdelanim za tržne raziskave, se po vsem videzu da priročno ločevati med skupinami potrošnikov. Ideja okolij Sinus temelji na soodvisnosti dveh parametrov: na eni strani družbenega položaja (glavnega parametra za razlikovanje med družbenimi razredi; po njem ločimo višji, srednji in nižji razred), na drugi strani pa vrednostne orientacije v spektru, ki se razteza od konservativnih do naprednih nazorov. . i .*::> r J :■ M li. T .IS 1 .. ri i il|il j M H)diffi ri^Htiir " i t .... -. 1 CJ 1 b.'K B o S. «s ■■ B 1 wf.' 'JLh B ■ i !■■ in ■■ i M«:'- ■ -j oN [ p h lls-±: -IIM n ^ C TJ "itir- S l!JT" i j Tul Lkril i n^in Vcca^i trjR| ■ ■ 1 1 ■ 1 j d ■ | ll.l.l ■■!•>. ii Hu?' ■ n m.ri V . 1 ; ■ - r . . 1 1 I-.;.- 1 i ■ : 'i i i i k rj'.-. _.Iai i i j 'j.'.»: ri Vir: http://www.google.at/images?hl=de&biw=1020&bih=614&rlz=1 R2GGLL_de&q=sinu s+milieus+2009&revid=1890806054&um=1&ie=UTF-8&source=univ&ei=hd8oTefeNYSl 8QO_sbSFAw&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ct=title&resnum=3&ved=0CDQQsAQwAg Sistem »okolij Sinus« se pojavlja v več različicah. V tisti, ki jo uporabi Schneider, se področje med skupino uveljavljencev (Etablierte) in skupino postmaterialistov Postmateriellee) imenuje »liberalno tehnokratsko okolje« (Technokratisch-liberales Milieu), meščanski srednji razred je označen kot »razred, usmerjen k družbenemu napredovanju« (aufstiegsorientiertes Milieu), moderni performerji (moderne Petformer) pa nosijo ime »alternativno okolje« Norbert Bachleitner: Od bralstva in bralcev k sociologiji bralnih okolij Die Miliejhndschaft dev EDer Dahre U ttm VCPP^-iT. L .-.-. Uh-bOcV! lin-iwrvm^ jahobLFK^ nie. roihnahralnrhttirjjcj HIILU KJ I Ich.. r.v rTnihrtv hViitidirid ■ iwa mi bij ; Vir: http://www.google.at/images?hl=de&biw=1020&bih=614&rlz=1R2GGLL_de&q=sinu s+milieus+2009&revid=1890806054&um=1&ie=UTF-8&source=univ&ei=hd8oTefeNYSl 8QO_sbSFAw&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ct=title&resnum=3&ved=0CDQQsAQwAg V nadaljevanju si bomo podrobneje ogledali bralne navade treh okolij. 1. Pripadniki tradicionalnih okolij sestavljajo nižji srednji razred; njihov splošni cilj je ohranjati svoj razmeroma skromni življenjski standard, ker bi jih sleherna sprememba statusa quo lahko pahnila v družbeno nazadovanje. V tem okolju so pomembni zakonitost in red, moralni standardi, pozitivno mišljenje, tradicionalni kodeks vedenja in prijetna domačnost (Gemütlichkeit). Med nižjim srednjim razredom so najbolj priljubljeni popularni avtorji, kakršni so Heinz Konsalik, Johannes Mario Simmel in Utta Danella (ti zastopajo »nižji srednji razred« tudi po literarni vrednosti; pomenljivo je, da se njihove knjige distribuirajo predvsem po supermar-ketih in knjižnih klubih, ne po pravih knjigarnah). Mimogrede bi morda veljalo omeniti, da sta Konsalik in Simmel prevedena v ducate jezikov in da žanjeta malone svetovni uspeh. Kot smo že povedali, je pri popularni umetnosti verjetneje, da bo prikazovala moralne probleme. Tako Simmel v svojih pustolovskih in romantičnih zgodbah redno predstavlja sodobne družbene probleme in igra prijatelja malih ljudi, ki brani državljanske pravice. Danella pa je ljubljenka tradicionalnih ženskih okolij; samo po sebi se razume, da v svojem modelu partnerstva med spoloma odobrava poroko in družinsko življenje. Njena kritika »bogatih« in njihove nemorale se do pičice ujema z držo in vrednotami nižjega srednjega razreda. Isto velja za rabo narečij in stereotipnih motivov, sentimente in izražanje (Kitsch) v besedilih sodobnih popularnih pesmi, ki se zvečine navezujejo na umišljeno podeželsko okolje. V popularni komediji pa so izpostavljeni posmehu razredni sovražniki — pripadniki »neciviliziranega« delavskega razreda in bogate ter intelektualne elite. 2. Liberalno tehnokratsko okolje sestavljata dve skupini: nekdanji Bildungsburgertum (tj. intelektualci, denimo odvetniki, zdravniki in arhitekti) in vodilni krogi v politiki in gospodarstvu (»eksperti« in »menedžerji«). Pripadniki tega okolja imajo najodgovornejše položaje v različnih sektorjih družbe; po njihovem mnenju naj umetnost ne bi bila zgolj formalistična igra brez cilja, temveč cenijo zavzet pristop, na primer moralno angažiranost avtorjev, kakršna sta Thomas Bernhard in Elfriede Jelinek. Kot na dlani je, da razumevanje tovrstne književnosti zahteva solidno podkovanost v zgodovini, filozofiji in številnih drugih vedah, zasebno knjižnico, v kateri lahko bralec preverja imena in vsakovrstne aluzije, ter zmožnost in pripravljenost, da se za nekaj časa osredotoči na besedilo. Najbolj priljubljena v tem okolju je svetovna književnost, vključno z avantgardnimi deli, ki eksperimentirajo z obliko. Liberalni tehnokrati odobravajo individualno gledišče, ki ga ustvarjajo pripovedne tehnike kot notranji monolog in tok zavesti. Z rabo neobičajnih besed in skladnje se sodobna poezija pogosto približa zelo zasebnemu jeziku in izrazu. In naposled je tu še samoironija — tehnika za izražanje relativizma vrednot, ki je osrednja dogma liberalnega okolja. 3. Znaka hedonističnega okolja sta nekonformizem in naklonjenost avantgardi. Vanj sodijo predvsem mladi, ki se še niso uveljavili in imajo veliko prostega časa. Med hedonisti največ pomeni in prinaša največji ugled, da odkrivajo še neznana dela in sloge, ki bi utegnili sprožiti nov trend. Ni čudno, da kažejo tržne raziskave veliko zanimanje za okus in navade tega okolja. Inovacije, ki se primejo v njem, pogosto posname in posvoji tudi kulturni mainstream. Hedonisti ne sprejemajo ločnice med visoko in popularno književnostjo. Podobno kot v življenju tudi v umetnosti in književnosti cenijo močne dražljaje in takojšnji užitek. (Pop) glasba jim je v splošnem pomembnejša od branja. Med književnimi zvrstmi je njihovemu okolju pisana na kožo t. i. pop literatura (eden njenih predstavnikov je Benjamin Stuckrad-Barre), ki obravnava probleme mladih v samopo-pustljivem, a tudi samoironičnem tonu. Format, ki združuje lahko prebavljiva besedila in glasbeni ritem, je pesniški slam. To okolje ima razdvojen odnos do potrošniške družbe, kajti hedonisti nihajo med potrošništvom in kritično odmaknjenostjo. Sklep Kot prvi poskus družboslovne zgodovine branja si Schneiderjeva knjiga zasluži spoštovanje, toda njegov pristop kliče po kritičnem pregledu. 1. Njegova razvrstitev bralcev je mestoma povsem prepričljiva, celo samoumevna, mestoma pa zelo problematična. Z vključitvijo tehnokratov in intelektualcev v isto okolje na primer zanemari tradicionalne napetosti med trgovskim in intelektualnim meščanstvom, med gospodarskim in kulturnim/simbolnim kapitalom (Besitz- in Bildungsburgertum). Po Bourdieujevi analizi se gospodarski in kulturni kapital navadno izključujeta, njuno razmerje je komplementarno in hiastično, se pravi, »les fractions les plus riches en capital économique relèguent les investissements culturels et éducatifs au profit des investissements économiques« (La Distinction 133). Z drugimi besedami, kakor hitro si človek pridobi nekaj gospodarskega kapitala, ga pridobivanje kulturnega ne zanima več. Razlog gre iskati v družbeni hierarhiji višjih razredov, v kateri ekonomski bogataši kotirajo više od intelektualcev. 2. Bralne navade, kot jih odčitava Schneider, predstavljajo le splošne usmeritve; »tipične« so za točno določeno okolje, opisujejo pa kulturne izbire in preference, ki so statistično prenapihnjene. Pri soodvisnosti med bralci iz tega ali onega okolja in posameznimi knjigami zgolj domnevamo, da so vrednote, nakazane v besedilih, istovetne vrednotam, ki jih pripisujemo danemu okolju. V prihodnjih družboslovnih raziskavah med bralci si bo treba prizadevati za empirične podatke o bralnih navadah in okusih. Najnatančneje merimo okus z intervjuji ali vprašalniki, toda to zahteva denarno podporo in raziskovalno ekipo. Druga možnost je, da podatke iz virov, na osnovi katerih preučujemo bralce v zgodovini — iz zapisov posameznikov, katalogov zasebnih knjižnic, omemb branja v avtobiografskih besedilih in pismih —, zbiramo z ozirom na družbeno skupino in okolje. Navsezadnje pa je treba preverjati tudi, kaj izbirajo bralci v javnih knjižnicah, četudi je ta tip raziskovanja včasih otežen zaradi varovanja zasebnosti.2 3. Kljub takim problemom lahko Schneiderjeva zgodovina branja rabi kot model za prihodnjo zgodovino književnosti, ki ne bo strukturi-rana po književnih zvrsteh, ampak po razredih bralcev in njihovih zanimanj. Pravzaprav je zgodovino branja nujno združiti z zgodovino besedil. Sociologijo književnega ustvarjanja in slogov je treba navezati na bralska pričakovanja ter na različne vloge in »načine uporabe«, ki jih imajo književna besedila v različnih bralskih okoljih. Če nam bo po zgoraj začrtanih smernicah uspelo razviti zgodovino branja, utegne iz nje nekoč nastati zgodovina književnega sporočanja, se pravi zgodovina ustvarjanja, distribucije in recepcije književnosti. OPOMBE 1 Pomembnega predhodnika je imel v Levinu L. Schuckingu, ki je v delu Soziologie der literarischen Geschmacksbildung (Sociologija oblikovanja literarnega okusa) poudaril, da je nujno razločevati med bralci v različnih okoljih, v obliki umetnine pa je videl sredstvo družbenega razlikovanja. 2 Oddelek za primerjalno književnost na Dunajski univerzi hrani dokumente poslednje zasebne izposojne knjižnice na Dunaju, Leihbibliothek Last & Co., ki se je zaprla leta 1962; prim. Bachleitnerjevo študijo (1986) na osnovi seznamov knjig, ki so si jih izposojali posamezni bralci. LITERATURA Bachleitner, Norbert. »Das Ende des 'Königs aller deutschen Leihbibliotheken'«. Internationales Archiv für Sozialgeschichte der deutschen Literatur 11 (1986): 115—148. Bourdieu, Pierre. La Distinction: Critique sociale du jugement. Pariz: Minuit, 1979. Christmann, Ursula, in Norbert Groeben. »Psychologie des Lesens«. Handbuch Lesen. Ur. Bodo Franzmann idr. München: Saur, 1999. 145—223. Darnton, Robert. »First Steps Toward a History of Reading«. Darnton, The Kiss of Lamourette: Reflections in CulturalHistory. New York: Norton, 1990. 154—187. ---. »Bralci odgovarjajo Rousseauju: ponaredek romantične rahločutnosti«. Darnton, Veliki pokol mačk in druge epizode francoske kulturne zgodovine. Prev. Polona Poberžnik. Ljubljana: Studia humanitatis, 2005. 251-304. Schenda, Rudolf. Volk ohne Buch: Studien zur Sozialgeschichte der populären Lesestoffe 1770—1910. Frankfurt na Majni: Klostermann, 1970. Schneider, Jost. Sozialgeschichte des Lesens: Zur historischen Entwicklung und sozialen Differenzierung der literarischen Kommunikation in Deutschland. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2004. Schücking, Levin L. Soziologie der literarischen Geschmacksbildung. Bern in München: Francke, 1961 (prva izd. 1923). Slike okolij Sinus. Dostopno na: http://www.google.at/images?hl=de&biw=1020&bih=6 14&rlz=1R2GGLL_de&q=sinus+milieus+2009&revid=1890806054&um=1&ie=U TF-8&source=univ&ei=hd8oTefeNYSl8QO_sbSFAw&sa=X&oi=image_result_gro up&ct=title&resnum=3&ved=0CDQQsAQwAg (7. April 2011). From the Reading Public and Individual Readers Towards a Sociology of Reading Milieus Norbert Bachleitner University of Vienna, Institute of European and Comparative Lingustics and Literary Studies, Austria norbert.bachleitner@univie.ac.at In spite of studies on the external history of reading and on individual readers we know very little about the reading habits of groups ofreaders. Bourdieu has provided a model for the correlation of class and taste but his model is rather crude compared with contemporary studies based on 'sinus milieus'. Jost Schneider reconstructs, for instance, the taste of the lower middle class which is characterized by stasis, of the liberal-technocrat milieu which is oriented toward the formal experiments of the 'classical' avant-garde and the hedonistic milieu which is searching for new styles and trends. Schneider's results still await corroboration by empirical data. Keywords: history of reading / sociology of reading / readers / social class / reading culture / reading habits / Sinus milieus UDK 028:316.7 A history of literature that excludes readers deals only with the offer of communication but not with literary communication itself. If literary history is conceived as a parade of authors and texts it covers only virtual meanings and interpretations established by a synthesis of the readings of a handful of prominent critics. If the communication aspect is taken seriously, the impact of literature, the 'use' that readers make of books, is as important as textual analysis. Only if we take into account the readers' response we can hope to find answers to the questions about the role of literature in history, about the distribution of ideas, the formation of opinions and mentalities by literary texts, and about the construction of group identities. If the focus is directed at the consumption of literature the selection of works will be totally different from the canon constructed in conventional literary histories. Reading research started with studies of the external history of reading. Book historians have compiled substantial quantitative data, which can be divided into two types, namely macro and micro evidence. (cf. Darnton, 'First Steps' 158). On the macro level, statistics based on national bibliographies (e.g., catalogues of the Leipzig book fair, the Bibliographie de la France, the papers of the Stationers' company) show the emergence of the modern book market and the corresponding reading public. Data on the degree of literacy, the number of book shops, book prices, print runs and sales provide a tentative image of the impact of literature and of the literary audience at a certain point of time. The history of press legislation and censorship contributes to the reconstruction of literary communication: it demonstrates the limits of the distribution of literature. Rudolf Schenda came to the conclusion that the vast majority of the lower and lower middle-classes remained illiterate and virtually excluded from literary communication until the 20th century. Reading was (and to a certain extent still is) the privilege of an educated minority. On the micro level, the catalogues of private libraries of the nobility, of clergymen and other outstanding personalities provide insights into individuals' book holdings. Remarks in letters, diaries and other autobiographical sources yield often detailed information about individuals' reading practices. From the point of view of literary studies, and especially from a Comparative Literature perspective, authors' own reading habits, their literary education and knowledge, is of particular interest. Contemporary images of readers provide information about the mode of reading, e.g., about the development of reading from a social to a private experience, or the change from reading aloud to silent reading. In a similar vein, the representations of reading in the works of imaginative writers, mainly in novels, may be used as a source for reading manners and habits. From the 18th century on, the catalogues of reading clubs and circulating libraries add information about the favourite reading matter. Other sources apt for the reconstruction of reading are the pedagogical writings of the 18th and 19th centuries which condemn the extensive reading of novels (called 'Lesesucht' in German) and in particular of novels like Werther and La nouvelle Heloise. Robert Darnton ('Readers') has analysed letters sent to Rousseau revealing the new modes of sentimental reading and identification with fictional characters. Autobiographical accounts such as memoirs and diaries sometimes provide data about the quality of reading and marginal notes in books may testify to the fact that reading often leads to immediate virtual dialogue. Recently, psychologist Norbert Groeben (cf. Christmann and Groeben) has proposed empirical studies of the psychology of the reading process by way of certain experiments and questionnaires. Currently at Vienna university, in a dissertation prepared by Maria Handler, this type of study is applied in order to 'test' the impression of English translations of Rilke's poems and the original German texts on a sample of readers. To sum up, in early reading research the focus was on the outlines of the quantitative development of the reading public and microanalyti-cal studies compiling data on individual readers. But we still know very little about the reading habits of certain groups of readers. In the late 18th century the reading public started to grow considerably and to differentiate into groups with tastes of their own. By then, a hierarchy of cultural goods, corresponding to social hierarchy, had to a large extent already emerged. Pierre Bourdieu in La distinction was the first to research systematically different life styles.1 According to Bourdieu not only do social groups have a taste of their own but, more important still, art serves as a means of social distinction. The taste for high brow art and literature (Bourdieu speaks of legitimate art) is not a natural gift; it presupposes education, cultural competence and of course enough spare-time for an adequate reception of a work of art. The understanding of legitimate art requires the knowledge of its 'code' and of its history, of the development of styles and techniques, since a single work makes only sense if it is set in relation to other works. By the way, the consumption of works of art, which are by definition 'useless' from a practical point of view, demonstrates that the consumer is free from economic necessity and can afford such a 'luxury' activity. Legitimate art is autonomous and independent from everyday life as well as from any particular purpose. It is considered a pure form and requires a 'pure' gaze from the reader as well as distance and disinterestedness, e.g., distance from the characters in a novel and disinterestedness in features like a happy ending, suspense, amusement and the like. On the other hand, popular art and taste do not lay claim to any independent aesthetic value. Whereas legitimate art implies a sort of agnostic attitude, popular art is heteronomous, and more likely to present ethical or political issues. Works of art are regarded as useful and scarcely distinguished from objects of everyday life. Whereas legitimate art provides no 'natural' pleasures and requires a refusal of everything 'human' (which is by definition common and vulgar), popular art relies on the stimulation of the senses and invites the recipient to participate in the game, e.g., in a drama or a novel. Bourdieu distinguishes between three zones of taste: — le gout légitime (legitimate taste), i.e., the taste for legitimate works; — le gout 'moyen' (middle brow taste), which comprises the minor works of the major arts; and — le gout 'populaire' (popular taste) (Distinction 14—16). Bourdieu's model of the relation between class and taste is very convincing but the method of classification is still rather crude. A recent study by Jost Schneider entitled Social History of Reading uses the ten 'sinus milieus instead of the system of three classes. Society has become more complex and diverse than it was 35 years ago when Bourdieu started his research. Today all classes have at least theoretically access to cultural production, including literature. The concept of class should therefore be replaced by the more flexible concept of milieu which provides a much more subtle system of categorisation. The system of 'sinus milieus, originally developed for marketing research, seems an appropriate means of distinguishing between consumer groups. The idea of the sinus milieus is based on the correlation of two parameters: on the one hand, social position (which divides upper, middle and lower classes and which was the main parameter for the distinction between social classes), on the other hand, value orientation on a spectrum spanning conservative and progressive views. z> r J3 Mil rjs fcrra Pi :-rn w I = 3ljrl! . Hf." Xa I I ..p. T-hd Lk-r»I i n^iv 5- .11--J.,.,,. 'fvir 'iti-- 2 ■ tf-jri %- sl--» -".n -k ■ I ■ r|i i'j .-- Hi. m qi.ri '.'■I ■ ■ V ri . I l" ..Uli i i 'j "j.r :i Source: http://www.google.at/images?hl=de&biw=1020&bih=614&rlz=1R2GGLL_de&q=s inus+milieus+2009&revid=1890806054&um=1&ie=UTF-8&source=univ&ei=hd8oTefeNYS l8QO_sbSFAw&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ct=title&resnum=3&ved=0CDQQsAQwAg The system of 'sinus milieus appears in different variations. In the version used by Schneider the region between the group of the well-established (Etablierte) and the post-materialists (Postmaterielle) is called liberal-technocrat milieu (Technokratisch-liberales Milieu), the bourgeois middle class is labelled as a class that is heading towards social advancement (aufstiegsorientiertes Milieu), the modern performers (moderne Performer) are called alternative milieu (alternatives Milieu). Die Miliejlnndschaft der EDer ]ahre "Ikic YfclbEl-ZT L-lw YUtttlcM ^^■■»rvmkfm pUmilAi TrchnahralnrhNhrijr-i rntcu K3 liehxi Ml uu JWlJIirt TiBJiLuiiiihu ArtlLlKTTlJßü Trnifrt>cipr-iMn /irtiHilrtrmifc^i." UA rrFir p n.n i. u bp n ir v -i iffi hifi 'r.-pjll lud J Gj jtki Mi vw; hlMlM ■ IM Ml ELI J Source: http://www.google.at/images?hl=de&biw=1020&bih=614&rlz=1R2GGLL_de&q=s ¡nus+milieus+2009&revid=1890806054&um=1&ie=UTF-8&source=univ&ei=hd8oTefeNYS l8QO_sbSFAw&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ct=title&resnum=3&ved=0CDQQsAQwAg In what follows, we shall take a closer look at the reading habits of three milieus. 1) The members of the traditional milieus comprise the lower middle class; their overall goal is to maintain their relatively modest standard of living, since any change of the status quo is liable to lead to social decline. Law and order, moral standards, positive thinking, a traditional codex of behaviour and homeliness (Gemütlichkeit) are important in this milieu. The lower middle class prefer popular authors like Heinz Konsalik, Johannes Mario Simmel and Utta Danella (who represent the 'lower middle class' also in terms of literary value; it is significant that their books are distributed mainly in supermarkets and book-clubs, not in regular book shops). It is perhaps worth mentioning en passant that Konsalik and Simmel have been translated into dozens of languages and that their success is almost worldwide. We have already stated that popular art is more likely to present moral issues. Thus, in his adventurous and romantic plots Simmel regularly introduces contemporary social problems and plays the role of a friend of the common people who defends civil rights. On the other hand, Danella is a favourite of traditional female milieus; it goes without saying that her model of partnership of the sexes approves marriage and family-life. Her critique of 'the rich' and their lack of morals coincides perfectly with lower middle-class attitudes and values. The same applies to the use of dialect and stereotypical motifs, sentiments and wording (Kitsch) in the lyrics of modern popular songs, most of them related to a pseudo-rural setting. In popular comedy the class opponents, the members of the 'uncivilized' working class and the rich and intellectual elite, are exposed to ridicule. 2) The liberal-technocrat milieu is composed of two groups, the former Bildungsburgertum (i.e., the intellectuals, comprising e.g., lawyers, medical doctors and architects) and the leading circles in politics and economy (the 'experts' and 'managers'). The members of this milieu hold the most responsible positions in various sectors of society; in their opinion art should not only be a formalist play without purpose, they appreciate an earnestness of approach, e.g., the moral commitment of authors like Thomas Bernhard or Elfriede Jelinek. It is quite clear that the understanding of this kind of literature requires a solid education in history, philosophy and many other disciplines, a private library that enables the reader to check names and allusions of any sort, and the ability and the will to concentrate on a text for a certain time-span. Furthermore, this milieu prefers world literature, including avant-garde works employing formal experiments. Liberal technocrats approve of the individual point of view produced by narrative techniques like inner monologue and stream-of-consciousness. Through the use of unusual words and syntax, modern poetry often comes close to very private language and expression. Finally, self-irony is a technique for expressing the relativism of values which is the central dogma in the liberal milieu. 3) Non-conformism and sympathy for the avant-garde are the hallmarks of the hedonistic milieu. It comprises mainly young people who are not yet established and have abundant leisure time. What counts most and provides the highest prestige among hedonists is the discovery of still unknown works and styles that are liable to set a trend. It is no surprise that marketing research is very interested in the taste and habits of this milieu. Innovations produced here are often copied and adopted in the cultural mainstream. Hedonists do not accept the boundary between high and popular literature. In art and literature — as in life — they appreciate strong stimuli and instant pleasure. On the whole, (pop-)music plays a more important role than reading for them. A literary genre that suits this milieu well is so-called pop literature (represented, among others, by Benjamin Stuckrad-Barre), it discusses the problems of young people in a highly self-indulgent but also self-ironic tone. Slamming poetry is a format that combines easy-to-consume text and musical rhythm. The relation of this milieu to consumer society is ambivalent, hedonists waver between consumerism and critical distance. Conclusion Schneider's book deserves respect as a first attempt at a sociological history of reading but his approach requires a critical review. 1) The classification of readers he employs is sometimes quite convincing and even self-evident, but sometimes very problematic. For instance, the inclusion of technocrats and intellectuals in one milieu neglects the traditional tensions between commercial and intellectual bourgeoisie, between economic and cultural/symbolic capital (Besitz- and Bildungsbürgertum). According to Bourdieu's analysis, economic and cultural capital tend to exclude each other, their relation is complementary and chiastic, i.e., 'les fractions les plus riches en capital économique relèguent les investissements culturels et éducatifs au profit des investissements économiques' (Distinction 133). In other words, those who have already accumulated a certain amount of economic capital lose interest in accumulating cultural capital. The reason for this is the social hierarchy within the upper classes: those rich in economic capital prevail over the intellectuals. 2) Schneider's indications of reading habits represent only a tendency, they are 'typical' of a certain milieu, describe cultural choices and preferences that are statistically over-represented. The correlations between readers of a certain milieu and individual books are only assumptions about the identity of the values inherent in texts and the values ascribed to a certain milieu. Future sociological reader research should try to establish empirical data on reading habits and tastes. Interviews or question-forms are the most exact instruments for measuring taste but they require funding and a research team. As an alternative, the data from sources used for historical reader research — records of individuals, catalogues of private libraries, indications about reading in autobiographical texts and letters — must be accumulated with respect to social groups and milieus. Finally, the readers' choice in public libraries must be screened, even if the protection of privacy may sometimes render this type of research difficult.2 3) But, in spite of such problems, Schneider's history of reading may serve as a model for a future history of literature structured not by literary genres but by classes of readers and their interests. In fact it seems necessary that the history of reading be combined with a history of the texts. The sociology of literary production and literary styles should be linked with readers' expectations and different functions and 'uses' of literary texts by different milieus of readers. If we succeed in developing the history of reading along the lines sketched above, it may one day become a history of literary communication, that is, a history of the production, distribution and reception of literature. NOTES 1 An important forerunner was Levin L. Schucking who in his Soziologie der literarischen Geschmacksbildung had underlined the necessity to differentiate the reading public in various milieus and regarded the form of a work of art as a means of social distinction. 2 The Department of Comparative literature at Vienna University holds the papers of Vienna's last private circulating library, the Leihbibliothek Last & Co. which was closed in 1962; cf. the study of Bachleitner (1986) based on the lists of books taken out by individual readers. WORKS CITED Bachleitner, Norbert. 'Das Ende des "Königs aller deutschen Leihbibliotheken"'. Internationales Archiv für Sozialgeschichte der deutschen Literatur 11 (1986): 115—148. Bourdieu, Pierre. La Distinction. Critique sociale du jugement. Paris: Minuit, 1979. Christmann, Ursula, and Norbert Groeben. 'Psychologie des Lesens'. Handbuch Lesen. Ed. Bodo Franzmann et al. Munich: Saur, 1999. 145-223. Darnton, Robert. 'First Steps Toward a History of Reading'. Darnton, The Kiss of Lamourette. Reflections in Cultural History. New York: Norton 1990. 154-187. ---. 'Readers Respond to Rousseau. The Fabrication of Romantic Sensitivity'. Darnton, The Great Cat Massacre and Other Episodes in French Cultural History. New York: Basic Books 1884. 215-256. Schenda, Rudolf. Volk ohne Buch. Studien zur Sozialgeschichte der populären Lesestoffe 1770—1910. Frankfurt: Klostermann, 1970. Schneider, Jost. Sozialgeschichte des Lesens. Zur historischen Entwicklung und sozialen Differenzierung der literarischen Kommunikation in Deutschland. Berlin: de Gruyter 2004. Schücking, Levin L. Soziologie der literarischen Geschmacksbildung. Bern: Francke 1961 (first edition 1923). Sinus-Milieu-Bilder. Available at: http://www.google.at/images?hl=de&biw=1020&bih = 614&rlz=1R2GGLL_de&q=sinus+milieus+2009&revid=1890806054&um=1&ie =UTF-8&source=univ&ei=hd8oTefeNYSl8QO_sbSFAw&sa=X&oi=image_result_ group&ct=title&resnum=3&ved=0CDQQsAQwAg (7 April 2011).