Given the relatively stable political situation and the limited support for British fascists, Britain’s political elites and society in the 1930s were considered largely impervious to the various overtures made by the Nazi regime to the Germans, toward developing tolerance, approval, or even enthusiasm for its policies and goals. It was believed that only a few misguided individuals had succumbed to Hitler’s persuasive power, Germany’s rise on the international stage, or other factors such as the perfectly organized 1936 Olympics. In reality, however, there was a significantly broader spectrum of reactions to the Nazi regime on the British side, with a surprisingly high level of support for the measures taken by the new rulers since 1933 in a wide range of areas: in economic reconstruction, in social policy initiatives, in the organization of youth, in the staging of the “Führer,” and even in large-scale propaganda spectacles such as the Reich Party Congress or the persecution of political dissidents. Hardly any group illustrates this as impressively as the British men and women who traveled to Germany between 1933 and 1939. The spectrum ranged from members of the diplomatic service to representatives from politics, business, the churches, associations, and the press, all the way to those who were simply vacationing in the country. As an analysis of their travel reports shows, alongside certainly existing critical interpretations, there was a surprising degree of approval for what they had seen and experienced in the country. This approval was often based on drawing a distinction between Germany and National Socialism. Thus, phenomena such as the construction of the autobahn or the comparatively easy recovery from the Great Depression could be praised as apolitical or even ideology-free achievements.

To base its rule on far more than just terror and propaganda, National Socialism made use of a wide range of elements, such as greater economic security, more opportunities for social advancement, and recreational activities and entertainment. Different groups in society had access to different opportunities for integration, allowing them to participate in and benefit from the Nazi regime, to welcome it in many ways, or simply to accept it. In many cases, ideology took a back seat to these various elements in order to create the appearance of continuity and to garner greater approval among the population as a whole. The fact that, after 1933, the brief chapter of German colonialism continued to be addressed in speeches—and above all in popular culture—is one of these seemingly traditional German elements, rather than specifically National Socialist ones. The theme of German overseas colonialism persisted after the loss of the colonies in 1918–19 in already established media and formats such as youth magazines, penny-paper series, and collectible advertising pictures, and even gained greater prominence in popular culture during the 1930s and early 1940s with a considerable number of documentaries and feature films. This project examines the tropes conveyed through various media to mobilize people in support of the regime, highlighting the potential of the colonial as the epitome of the exotic.

This research project focuses on hearing and the (auditory) experience of sounds in the three industrial cities of Erfurt, Essen, and Birmingham. It examines discourses, practices, and bodies of knowledge concerning sensory perception and their transformation between 1880 and 1960. Making noise is understood here as a practice that signifies power and domination. It can take on economic, legal, medical, social, cultural, technological, or political dimensions. Its content stems from experiences, memories, and encounters with sound. These created diverse bodies of (auditory) knowledge that have shaped the human understanding of noise and sound right up to the present day. They arise in phonotopes, travel along auditory pathways, and contain acoustic elements that are imbued with specific values through social negotiations. Therefore, they are not simply numerical values of sound energy moving within a space for action, work, or leisure, or between people. Nevertheless, the social dimension of hearing, the desire for silence, and the experience of noise were consistently ignored in decision-making for a long time. Among other things, this promoted the standardization of limit values based solely on (minimum) criteria that hardly restricted—or only did so with a time lag—economic exploitation and profit maximization. For a long time, the protection of noisy machinery was considered more important, both socially and economically, than the protection of citizens’ health. Against this backdrop of tension, the project investigates how conflict-ridden negotiation processes surrounding the various acoustic spaces in a city developed.

This research project examines the practices and networks of government public relations in the Federal Republic of Germany during the 1950s and 1960s. It adopts a perspective that combines cultural and media-historical approaches with a history of the mentalities underlying government public relations. The focus of the analysis is on the Federal Chancellery and the Federal Government’s Press and Information Office. The men who served as the “architects” of these announcements—as the title suggests—were able to draw on a wide range of experience in government press and information work dating back to the era of the German Empire—from the German Empire through the Weimar Republic to the end of the Nazi regime. In particular, the experiences gained during the twelve years of dictatorship and its state control of the media were incorporated as a body of knowledge and proven practices into the post-war reconstruction efforts beginning in 1949. Thus, in the young Federal Republic, there was by no means an immediate establishment of relations with the press and the public that would have taken into account the conventions of a liberal and democratic constitutional state as well as the information needs of an open and critical media society. Rather, existing structures and actors continued to exert their influence. They encountered journalists with diverse backgrounds, some of whom were very similar to their predecessors, while others were much more influenced by the Anglo-American system of public relations. The resulting processes of renegotiation and redefinition of press relations and communication between those in power, the media, and the public form the core of this research, which aims to uncover and contextualize the continuities and discontinuities in the transition from dictatorship to a democratic state.

People who were sick or disabled were among those persecuted by the Nazis. During the era of the “Third Reich,” they were stigmatized as a burden on the German “national community” that had to be eliminated. As a result, as early as 1934, up to 400,000 people were sterilized against their will, and during the war years, more than 200,000 people were murdered in hospitals and nursing homes. This took place within German society itself, carried out by professionals in psychiatry, neurology, pediatrics, and other disciplines, with the involvement of administrative staff and nursing personnel. An exhibition held in the buildings of the University of Siegen was dedicated to this topic, taking the question of the value of life as its guiding principle. It told the story of exclusion, forced sterilizations, and mass murder; examined the victims, perpetrators, those complicit in the crimes, and opponents; and ultimately explored how these events have been addressed from 1945 to the present. The traveling exhibition, prepared by the German Society for Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Psychosomatics, and Neurology with exemplary biographies from Germany, was supplemented for its presentation in Siegen by students from the university’s Department of History with life stories of victims from the South Westphalia region. All of these accounts document a shocking disregard for life on the part of members of professions that had actually made the unconditional protection of life their mission.

During the Nazi regime, the acoustic control of public space had a technological dimension, a propagandistic dimension, and a dimension aimed at warning the population in the event of a disaster. Radio masts and loudspeaker systems created public “auditory spaces.” Although temporary, these spaces could be repeatedly recreated; residents were turned into listeners and brought together, with coercion and consent equally shaping these formations. From the distracted, disinterested “mass” of people emerged a “people” who listened and heeded speeches. The underlying motives and interests of local politics, companies in the broadcasting industry, and various Reich ministries form the core of this research. The project highlights which (sonic) aesthetic concepts guided the sound design, mood-setting, and auditory control of citizens during the Nazi regime—and what effects this had on their experiences, expectations, and memories of listening. Alongside propaganda as a significant factor, the economic exploitation of these acoustic spaces also plays a role. On the other hand, the offerings were well-received by the public, who were willing to make use of them. The resulting scope for action available to the various groups of actors is understood as part of a complex interplay between the regime and other active individuals, organizations, and companies. Thus, the project contributes to an understanding of Nazi rule and its acceptance among the German population.