Jrgen Habermas: "The Public Sphere" (1964) Author(s): Peter Hohendahl and Patricia Russian Source: New German

Critique, No. 3 (Autumn, 1974), pp. 45-48 Published by: New German Critique Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/487736 . Accessed: 26/11/2013 14:34
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

New German Critique and Duke University Press are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to New German Critique.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 14.139.246.27 on Tue, 26 Nov 2013 14:34:01 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Habermas: Jilrgen "The Public Sphere"(1964)

by Peter Hohendahl
The followingshort discussionof the concept of the public sphere It is (Oeffentlichkeit) appeared in 1964 as an articlein the Fischer-Lexikon. der Oeffentlichkeit based on the book Strukturwandel (Structural Transforfour mation of the Public Sphere), first publishedin 1962 and reprinted and social theoretician, timessince. Withthiswork,the youngphilosopher written hisreputation. as a HabiliHabermas,established Originally Jiirgen for a of small circle Strukturwandel der scholars, Oeffentlichtationsschrift keitsoon became a standardworkwhichwas to help shape the political New Leftin the 1960s. The book remainedin of theemerging consciousness even after1968 when many leftist the centerof discussion studentsbroke withthe Frankfurt It is School, withwhichHabermas was also identified. Habermas dedicated work that this first not to Horkheimer significant great or Adornobut to the Marburgpoliticalscientist and legal expertWolfgang in a figure unknown the States. Abendroth United had Abendroth, largely in more the much debates of the Federal intensively participated political or Adorno. Habermas, therefore, Republic (FRG) than eitherHorkheimer had more than personalreasonsforthisdedication; his studyof the public of the sphere would not conformeasily to the methodologicalthinking Frankfurt School. Like Abendroth, Habermas aimed much more directly at of politicaland social conditions, the transformation whichwere conditions a stateof crisis.The politicalsimilarity of seenby bothmen as approaching Habermas' book to Dialectic of the Enlightenment by Horkheimerand in those portionswhich deal with Adorno is unmistakable,specifically culturalphenomena(cultureindustry). to However,it is equally important in the methodof investigation. Habermas is not emphasizethe difference contentwithmere speculation.He buttresses his socio-political argumentation with extensivereferences to other sources. Cultural history, legal massmedia theory, history, empiricalsocial science: Habermasdrawsupon a varietyof disciplinesin coming to grips with the phenomenonof the in thefootnotes references pointonce again to public sphere.The numerous of Germanscholarship. the tradition within theframeHabermascould in factno longerrealizehis intentions workof a singlediscipline.His studydemonstrates that the public sphere of the modern constitutes one of the categories centralto an understanding i.e. to 1974. With the aid of this 1700 from bourgeoissociety period,

This content downloaded from 14.139.246.27 on Tue, 26 Nov 2013 14:34:01 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

46

NEW GERMAN CRITIQUE

social as well as politicaland culturalchangescan be explained-category, perceived onlyin theiroutward changeswhichthe olderculturalpessimism of decline. As is commonly as symptoms manifestations known,the oppofromantiquity. sitionof public and privatederives At thattimethe private sphere encompassedthe home, the familyand its activities; the public sphere in the ancient city state, on the other hand, included common the concernforpublic welfare. Yet thisdistinction as it is politicalactivity, maintained continental stilltraditionally of constitutional theories law no by to the relationship of societyand state in the modern longercorresponds Habermas' contributions is his abilityto delineate major period. Among inconsistencies and then to the category historicize of conceptual logically thepublicsphere.What we customarily characterize as "public opinion,"as "the public body"or "the public sphere"emergedforthe first timein early as a between state and This capitalism specificsphere society. bourgeois from the representative public sphere arose genetically public sphere of medievalfeudalism.Its structure and function were originally determined a in constellation the confrontation between the absolutist by particular state and an economic bourgeois individualism in the process of emancipatingitself.This public sphere has evolved into an institution betweenthe privatesphere and the state and is therefore in no way an as integral part of statepower(and of its public sphere). On the contrary, Habermas demonstrates, its function was to overseethe absolutist state. In orderto securethisposition, rationallegal principles were instituted which were binding for all. One of the primary goals of this bourgeoispublic decisionstransparent. The spherewas to make politicaland administrative of thisliberalmodel remainedunquestioned in the Anglo-Saxon legitimacy at an earlier period. As a countries,having been establishedeffectively result, in these societies both the historicalconditionsleading to the to capitalistformsof emergenceof the liberal model and its connections have become obscured. Having himself lived and workedin a production witha weakerpublic tradition, Habermas is able to perceivemore country the of thepublic sphere.In short, at theend of the clearly historicity writing FRG's "restoration phase," Habermas was forcedto reconstruct historically of a liberal public sphere,precisely because in Germanythe the functions and thenonlyto a limiteddegree. publicspherehad been realizedbelatedly of late bourgeoisformsof the public sphere simultaneously His criticism theNew Leftwithan instrument to confront the crisisin the FRG, provided on in visible the horizon the The 1960s. extent to whichit can already early be shownthatthe liberalmodel of the public sphere,stillespousedin West such as Ralf Dahrendorf, is linkedto specific social Germany bysociologists

This content downloaded from 14.139.246.27 on Tue, 26 Nov 2013 14:34:01 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

INTRODUCTION

TO HABERMAS

47

is the extentto whichit can also be shownthat and economicconditions, feasible.This theliberalconceptof thepublicsphereis no longerpolitically as an instrument of politicaldiscussion-institution has lostitssignificance not because the criticaljudgment of the citizen is less important,but undermined is constantly because theliberalmodel itself by the intertwining of the state and social sectors.According the diffusion of stateand society, situation. to Habermas, this is the key aspect of the contemporary If one accepts Habermas' analysisof the end of the bourgeois public spherein a late capitalistsociety,thereremainsthe questionof what will appear in itsplace. Habermas, at least, seems to be of the opinion that its of public welfare rationaldiscussion of problems function-i.e. the citizens' in an atmosphere freeof restrictions-is Yet he declines to indispensible. offer a draft of a future, a post-bourgeois publicsphere.At mosthe suggests very roughoutlineof thispost-bourgeois public spherein the sectionof the book which describesMarx's solution to the bourgeois impasse (section of Habermas). Here the new public sphere is portrayedin the fourteen of terms:"The publicsphereno longermediatesbetweena society following private property owners and the state. Instead, by systematically a state which merges into the society as a whole, an constructing autonomouspublic body, as privateindividuals,assuresitselfa sphere of of movement" freetimeand freedom freedom, (2nd edition,1965, p. 143). into public opinion (the social question), The incursion of privateinterests of the late bourgeois so characteristic public sphere,can onlybe eliminated when the cause--the unequal distributionof property produced by the capitalism--isremoved.There remainsthenthe questionof identifying under late to the within a necessary capitalistsociety preserve, strategies of the but not its the conditions, principle bourgeois public sphere, present forOskarNegt,a studentof Habermas, form.This is thepointof departure und Erfahrung: and AlexanderKluge severalyearslater in Oeffentlichkeit von bi*rgerlicher und proletarischerOeffentZur Organisationsanalyse lichkeit Analysis of (The Public Sphereand Experience: An Organizational the Bourgeoisand ProletarianPublic Spheres, 1972). As is known, the of the had once maintainedthat it would make the institution bourgeoisie never been realized. claim has This to accessible everyone. public sphere been modified to prevent has often Instead,in thelaterphasesthegoal itself the incursionof the masses. Yet in oppositionto this trend,as Negt and in structure has a proletarianpublic sphere different Kluge demonstrate, begunto appear, a publicspherewhichwillassertitsclaims to leadershipin the future.

This content downloaded from 14.139.246.27 on Tue, 26 Nov 2013 14:34:01 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

48

NEW GERMAN CRITIQUE

Habermas, as mentioned above, alludes at best cautiously to such an eventuality.This might be partially attributable to his skepticismthat under the conditions of state-organized capitalism the proletariat has the same chance as the bourgeoisie three hundred years before. If one assumes with Habermas in Kultur und Kritik(Culture and Critique, 1973, p. 76) that the "possibility of a politically organizable class struggle is no longer immediately realizable" and that the mission of the proletariat was therefore bound to the stage of high capitalism, then one cannot indeed hope for a renaissance of the public sphere under the aegis of the proletariat. No group in contemporary society could then be cited as the catalyst of progressive impulses. Therefore the way in which Negt and Kluge tentativelyconfront the form of the bourgeois public sphere with the model of a proletarian one indicates among other things the way in which the Left has advanced beyond the position of Habermas. Nevertheless Habermas' study has not become superfluous. The profoundly stimulting influence of this work is just becoming apparent in related disciplines. Media research, sociology, but also humanistic disciplines such as art histbryand literaryhistory,owe a decisive impetus to Habermas. The concept of the literarypublic sphere, which Habermas was the firstto delineate as a significantaspect of the public sphere, has proven itself exceedingly fruitfulfor sociological investigations of literature and criticism. With the aid of this category, one can comprehend the historical as well as the contemporary value of literature and its function within the total social framework.For the transitionfrom a method of literarycriticism based on internal exegesis, which despite many misgivingsstill prevails here in the United States, to a method rooted in social historyand sociology, we will have to turn to Habermas.

Translated byPatriciaRussian

This content downloaded from 14.139.246.27 on Tue, 26 Nov 2013 14:34:01 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions