Wettlesen um den Ingeborg-Bachmann-Preis: Korpusanalyse der Anthologie Klagenfurter Texte (1977–2011) by Karin Röhricht

Abstract

Reviewed by: Wettlesen um den Ingeborg-Bachmann-Preis: Korpusanalyse der Anthologie Klagenfurter Texte (1977–2011) by Karin Röhricht Paul Buchholz Karin Röhricht, Wettlesen um den Ingeborg-Bachmann-Preis: Korpusanalyse der Anthologie Klagenfurter Texte (1977–2011). Innsbruck: Studenverlag, 2016. 352 pp. The awarding of literary prizes offers an exceptional, though temporary, visibility of literature within the mass media: for one day, an author’s name makes headlines alongside the names of politicians and celebrities! In spite of this visibility, the internal workings and long-term impact of prize-granting institutions often remain unanalyzed, or they at least tend to be relegated to the peripheral vision of literary scholars. In her innovative and highly meticulous study Wettlesen um den Ingeborg-Bachmann-Preis: Korpusanalyse der Anthologie Klagenfurter Texte (1977–2011), Karin Röhricht aims to shed light on the internal functioning of what is widely considered to be the most prestigious literary prize competition in the German-speaking world. The Festival of German-Language Literature, held each spring in Klagenfurt, Austria, is exceptional both for its supreme media visibility (authors in the competition read their texts on live television, and the ensuing discussion by prize jurists is likewise broadcast) and its significant impact on the landscape of contemporary literature (authors who win generally, and relatively quickly, attain greater attention among publishers, critics, and readers). What Röhricht’s study [End Page 141] aims to discover is the extent to which this prize competition privileges a certain kind of writing, and if so, of what sort: is there a “typical Klagenfurt text”? Following Pierre Bourdieu’s field theory, Röhricht distances herself from a purely meritocratic view of the Bachmann prize and seeks to define the “biases of an important literary institution” (303). As such, Röhricht works to make visible the mechanisms of selection that tend to make texts worthy of selection for this competition, inclusion in the annual printed anthology, and finally, the awarding of the prestigious Bachmann Prize. The set of methods that Röhricht uses to answer this question is, without a doubt, one of the most original aspects of this study (and also one that, as the author is well aware, may tend to elicit skepticism from traditional literary scholars). Röhricht employs the sociological method of content analysis (Inhaltsanalyse) to categorize and quantify typical and atypical aesthetic features and thematic content of texts presented in Klagenfurt; this allows Röhricht to demonstrate that certain features are or are not consistently present in these texts. Röhricht pairs this innovative use of content analysis, with its thought-provoking statistical results, with a more traditional, hermeneutic consideration of individual texts, where she shows how certain authors implement such common or uncommon features. These dual methods yield fascinating insight into how the definition of “prize-worthy” texts has developed (and largely stabilized) since 1977. Röhricht’s book is a slightly revised dissertation, and as such it begins with three introductory chapters that provide the history of the Ingeborg Bachmann Prize and outline the general social-institutional context of literary prize competitions before explaining and rationalizing the book’s method of content analysis. Röhricht’s original research is presented in the fifth and sixth chapters, and it is these chapters that will be of the greatest interest to scholars of contemporary literature. Röhricht shows, concretely and convincingly, how a certain set of themes and aesthetic tendencies came to predominate within the corpus texts considered for the Bachmann Prize. In short, since the Bachmann Prize’s inception, there has been a tendency of “homogenization” and “privatisation,” by which Röhricht means that texts selected for the competition increasingly evinced a realist framework, an internal focalization of a main character whose private thoughts are illuminated, and a thematic focus on private life and family relations (as opposed to, for instance, the thematization of work), as well as a less pronounced tendency to thematize historical experience (albeit through the lens of private [End Page 142] life). Röhricht is careful to acknowledge, and count, the recurrent presence of outliers, and she also makes sure to attend to the aesthetic particularities of individual texts (there are many ways that authors have...