Sachlichkeit is deadly for the essence of art. Functions of the debate about Nieuwe Zakelijkheid in the Dutch literary field of the 1920s and 1930s from a field theoretical perspective

1925年在曼海姆举办展览后，Neue Sachlichkeit迅速从绘画传播到其他艺术形式，如文学，建筑，音乐和摄影，以及其他国家。荷兰在这些动态中表现突出，正如字面翻译Nieuwe Zakelijkheid所表明的那样。然而，文学史学家对这一文体概念（穆勒-塞德尔：如果它是一个的话）的理解在德国和荷兰都还不清楚，原因之一是与之相关的作者和文本在意识形态和诗歌方面的异质性，以及许多学者被其同时代对手的规范所偏见。在此背景下，通过分析Nieuwe Zakelijheid作为定位战略的概念（Bourdieu意义），提出了一种创新的方法。这种方法在不同的试点研究中得到测试后（见Grüttemeier，Beekman和Rebel 2013），将系统地应用于本项目中描述良好的荷兰案例。更具体地说，它将集中在概念和概念Nieuwe Zakelijkheid在20世纪20年代和30年代在荷兰文学领域的地位斗争的功能。特别是Delpher工具（KB Den Haag）将用于分析，因为该工具旨在提供大量且仍在增加的荷兰报纸，供全文在线搜索。在新闻文学和艺术辩论中，这个术语和概念Nieuwe Zakelijkheid的使用和功能将被分析，并与据称最有影响力的批评家（其中包括ter Braak，Marsman和货车Vriesland）和Nieuwe Zakelijkheid的作者（其中包括Last，Revis，Stroman和Wagener，但也包括Bordewijk和Kuyle）的众所周知的观点相关。其核心假设是，对新扎克利克海德的否定判断，很快就在文学领域（但也在其他艺术领域）占据了主导地位，可以用文学领域在不久之前才变得相对自主的事实来解释（参见《新扎克利克海德》）。Dorleijn/货车Rees 2006）。上述试点研究（Grüttemeier，Beekman & Rebel 2013）为这一假设提供了证据：据文学领域的主要演员说，新扎克利凯海德似乎反对日益增长的非主流化趋势，除其他外，它与新闻业、纪录片写作的关系密切，因此，Nieuwe Zakelijkheid可能已经成为文学领域文学化倡导者的主要目标。在拟议项目中取得的系统性成果将在第三年的一次国际会议上与来自Germanistik的同事进行讨论，以反映这些成果在国际视野中的相关性。

After its launch with an exhibition in Mannheim in 1925, Neue Sachlichkeit spread quickly from painting to other art forms such as literature, architecture, music and photography, but also to other countries. The Netherlands were prominent in these dynamics, as the literal translation Nieuwe Zakelijkheid indicates. However, what literary historians mean with this stylistic notion (Müller-Seidel: if it is one) is still not clear in both Germany and the Netherlands, due among other things to the ideological and poetic heterogeneity of the authors and texts that were generally related to it and the fact that many scholars turned out to be biased by the norms of its contemporary opponents. Against this background, an innovative approach is suggested here by analysing the notion of Nieuwe Zakelijheid as a positioning strategy (sensu Bourdieu). This approach, after having been tested in different pilot-studies (see Grüttemeier, Beekman & Rebel 2013), shall be systematically applied to the well delineated Dutch case in this project. More specifically, it will focus on the functions of the notion and the concept Nieuwe Zakelijkheid in the fight for positions in the 1920s and 30s in the literary field of the Netherlands. Especially the Delpher-tool (KB Den Haag) will be used for the analysis, since it aims at offering a significant and still growing number of Dutch newspapers for a full-text-online search. The uses and functions of the term and the concept Nieuwe Zakelijkheid in journalistic literature- and arts-debates shall be analysed and related to the well-known views of the supposedly most influential critics (among others ter Braak, Marsman and van Vriesland) and authors of the Nieuwe Zakelijkheid (among others Last, Revis, Stroman and Wagener, but also Bordewijk and Kuyle). The central assumption is that the negative judgement on the Nieuwe Zakelijkheid, which quickly became dominant in the realm of literature (but also in other arts), can be explained by the fact that the literary field had grown relatively autonomous only shortly before (cf. Dorleijn/van Rees 2006). The pilot-studies mentioned above (Grüttemeier, Beekman & Rebel 2013) gave evidence for this assumption: according to central actors in the literary field, the Nieuwe Zakelijkheid seemed to oppose tendencies towards growing autonomization, among other things by its closeness to journalism, to documentary writing, to fashion etc. Therefore Nieuwe Zakelijkheid might have become the prime target for the advocates of the autonomization of the literary field. The systematic results gained in the proposed project will be discussed in its third year in an international conference with colleagues from Germanistik, in order to reflect the relevance of the results in international perspective.