Rezensionen AAA Band 39 (2014) Heft 2 203 Webliographie [1] „Worte, Worte, Worte! “ (2013). boersenblatt.net. [online]. http: / / www.boersenblatt.net/ 659047/ (11. September 2014). [2] „Englisch-deutsche Studienausgabe der Dramen Shakespeares“ (n.d.) [online] http: / / www.stauffenburg.de/ asp/ reihe.asp? id=26 (11. September 2014). [3] http: / / www.arsvivendi.com/ media/ shakespeare-ga/ _html/ 001/ (11. September 2014). Christa Jansohn Lehrstuhl für Britische Kultur Universität Bamberg Journal for the Study of British Cultures, 19, no. 2 (2012): Jürgen Kamm & Bernd Lenz (Eds.), Representing Terrorism. Jürgen Kamm, Jürgen Kramer & Bernd Lenz (Eds.), Deconstructing Terrorism. 9/ 11, 7/ 7 and Contemporary Culture, Passauer Arbeiten zur Literatur- und Kulturwissenschaft 11, Passau: Karl Stutz, 2013. Merle Tönnies These two collections derive from the same 2011 conference and complement each other thematically: they are linked by the parallel focus on textual (in the widest semiotic sense) responses to acts of terrorism. In addition, the editors took the useful decision not to allocate articles to one or the other volume on superficial grounds like the concrete event that is addressed or the medium used in the examples. Instead, they distinguish between the 'representation' and the 'deconstruction' of terrorism, as the volume titles announce. To start with the second case, 'deconstruction' can refer to the choice of material that deliberately opposes the standard 'meta-narrative' of terrorism and brings in new perspectives. At the same time, contributions can also themselves offer a critical view of established discourses on terrorism. In this instance, there can be a close connection to the more neutral concept of 'representation' used in the first volume. Its articles often also address the selected textual responses to terrorism critically and thereby to some extent contain a 'deconstructive' potential in the sense of the second collection. In this way, a productive continuum is created between the two publications. This is strengthened by two fundamental parallels between the volumes. Firstly, both books share the consensus of understanding the complex and controversial term 'terrorism' according to the definition advanced by Richard English (2009: 24). This theoretical basis is frequently quoted in individual articles as well and allows fruitful comparisons between the contributions of the two collections. Secondly, the two publications are held together by their Rezensionen AAA Band 39 (2014) Heft 2 204 close attention to the concrete strategies through which the representations achieve their effects - the constructive side of 'deconstruction'. Visual elements play a very important role here. In this way, both books eschew the generalisations that can often be found with regard to ideologically charged topics like the present one and yield highly convincing results. Within the individual volumes, the contributions are ordered according to the different genres and media of the examples. As the editors' introduction states (121), Representing Terrorism focuses on "modern and postmodern" manifestations of terrorism, starting from the late nineteenth century onwards and leading up to the post-9/ 11 period in a total of four stages. Thus, a developmental perspective plays an additional role here. Each article focuses on a different kind of (written or visual) 'text'. Andrew Glazzard explores the connections between science and terrorism in the so-called 'dynamite fiction' of 1880s Britain. He sets the genre in the context of both actual security challenges of the time and of anxieties connected with scientific and technological advances. In another take on fiction, Michael Frank combines more 'literary' and more 'popular' approaches (Ian McEwan's Saturday, City of Tiny Lights by Patrick Neate and Chris Cleave's Incendiary) and examines in how far they try to counteract and/ or themselves contribute to the "politics of fear" after 9/ 11 (150). The fact that Frank defines 'fear' following Aristotle (cf. 144) introduces what will become one of the dominant leitmotifs of the two collections, namely the question in how far terrorist attacks and their impact are read and represented according to the model of classical tragedy. Birgit Neumann then moves on to film and offers a close reading of Neil Jordan's The Crying Game. The main focus is on the film's destabilisation of binary oppositions on a number of levels, particularly with regard to gender and identity. However, Neumann also includes a critical reading of these techniques, seeing them as a "decontextualising strategy" (173) which maginalises political issues. The following article by Hein Versteegen also analyses a visual medium, though one with very different genre rules - terrorism cartoons from the last forty years. Versteegen explains how they can both perpetuate and also undermine the standard political rhetoric. In comparing representations of Muslim and Irish terrorists and the strategies of othering involved, he uncovers attempts to de-historicise terrorism and depoliticise its representatives (cf. 190) which shows striking parallels to the apparently rather different example studied by Neumann. The final contribution moves towards representation through and in space(s) and addresses permanent memorials in two places (Manchester and London) that became the site of terrorist attacks. Frauke Hofmeister looks particularly at the tendency to represent the attacks as "natural disasters" (204), as the perpetrators and their motivations are ignored (cf. 210). In this way, binary oppositions between 'them' and 'us' are underscored - a direct connection to Versteegen's cartoons. Moreover, from the victims' point of view, these representations also imply a reading of the events as (fate) tragedy (although Hofmeister does not explicitly mention the term). In Deconstructing Terrorism the editors start out with a comparison between the responses to 9/ 11 in the US and 7/ 7 in Britain (cf. 12-18), thus Rezensionen AAA Band 39 (2014) Heft 2 205 making clear straightaway that this collection sets out to cover a broader cultural spectrum than the first British-focused one. The temporal scope is narrowed down to the second half of the 20 th and especially the 21 st century (after the two terrorist acts singled out in the introduction). As the editors state, the volume is informed by a sense that the established conventions for narrating violence have become exhausted in this period (24) - hence the concentration on 'deconstruction'. Historical contexts are included in the analyses when necessary, and this is already the case in the very first contribution. Jürgen Kamm compares two Parliamentary documents dealing with 'terrorist' violence in Britain - 7/ 7 and the Gunpowder Plot of November 1605 - and the ways in which they represent the events concerned. He juxtaposes the secure conviction in the first document about what took place and how the state triumphed over its opponents to the pervasive expressions of uncertainty in the second response. In this way, the representation of 7/ 7 is shown to have "a noticeable affinity to the genre of tragedy" (41). Vanessa Borsky's article moves to a very different cultural context - colonial Rhodesia in the 1960s and 1970s - but also attached great importance to political discourse. She studies how both sides in the conflict tried to delegitimise their opponents by constructing them as the 'Other' against which the identity of the self was defined and how the term 'terrorist' was employed in these processes (71). Despite the pronounced differences in context, period and medium, the parallels especially with Versteegen's analysis in the first volume are striking. Borsky also crosses genre boundaries herself as she compares political constructions with other forms of texts, especially autobiographical narratives, revealing that the new Zimbabwean master narrative of the events is marked by exactly the same kind of binary oppositions as the old colonial discourse. Petra Grond then examines the interaction between political discourse and media language, prominently including the use to which images are put. She examines the criteria that turn some pictures (rather than others) into media "icons" (75) as well as the US government's instrumentalisation of images in the 'battle' against 'terrorism'. The use of the inclusive 'we' in a statement by Barack Obama is brought in to show how different discourses can be employed to achieve similar effects, which are again related to the construction of opposing groups. The next set of articles focuses on literary works, with the first three contributions dealing primarily with Britain and the next two with the American context. Joanna Rostek makes contemporary British drama her focal point and juxtaposes close readings of two examples to see in how far the established discursive othering of the 'terrorist' is subverted in them. Simon Stephens's Pornography is shown to go further in this respect than Robin Soane's apparently more empathetic Talking To Terrorists, while a coda at the end of the article (cf. 111-114) discovers possible ambiguities in the latter play as well. Benjamin Steinrücken then examines two novels, framing the study of how binary oppositions are (de)constructed by means of 'individualism' versus 'fundamentalism' and paying special attention to the use of narrative techniques. In this case, the overall focus is more on similarities (despite the obvious differences between the texts), as both Salman Rushdie's Shalimar the Rezensionen AAA Band 39 (2014) Heft 2 206 Clown and Mohsin Hamid's The Reluctant Fundamentalist blur the seemingly clear-cut boundary between the two concepts and thereby try to reveal the ethnocentric thinking involved in many representations of 'terrorists'. Jürgen Kramer also compares two novels, Sebastian Faulks's A Week in December and the thriller The Fear Index by Robert Harris. He starts out with the thesis that the established view of novels on terrorism legitimating the existing social system (with the terrorist as the 'Other') “may no longer be true for tales of terrorism after 2001” (135). Indeed, despite their genre differences, both works are shown to mark out bankers as the "New Terrorists" (147) who threaten society and may themselves want to label anyone who opposes them a 'terrorist'. With Karsten Fitz, the focus shifts to America. There is also a close connection here to Petra Grond's reflection on media images, as the novels under consideration are shown to be preoccupied with reclaiming iconic photographs of 9/ 11 from their mediatised repetition. In this way, these texts can offer counter-narratives of the traumatic events and may achieve “a catharsis through narrativised remembrances” for their readers (166). The aspect of tragedy which resonates here is placed centre-stage again by Cyprian Piskurek. He refers the term back to Norman Mailer's distinction between absurdity and tragedy with regard to the Kennedy assassination (cf. 169) and demonstrates how novelistic representations frequently reconceive terrorism's inherent absurdity according to "the equally sad but more bearable logic of tragedy" (185). This can have a reassuring effect in the face of unsettling media images which seem too close and impossible to decode. In this way, novelistic and visual representations of 9/ 11 are linked once more. The last three articles then focus directly on visual narratives. Kathleen Starck analyses and contextualises Neil Biswas' feature film Bradford Riots, which wants to give a voice to the Asian perspective marginalised in discussions about the causes of the riots. Starck studies the techniques which the film uses to convey to its (presumably) British or at least Western audience that the responsibility for the perceived 'failure of multiculturalism' in Britain does not lie with the Asian community but with the British state itself (cf. 202). The strategies of visual narration which are uncovered offer interesting interconnections with the narratives devices examined for instance by Frank (in the other volume), Steinrücken and Pisurek. Elahe Haschemi Yekani stays with the same genre, comparing Rachid Bouchareb's London River and Christopher Morris' Four Lions with regard to their ways of representing British terrorism's apparent eruption from within British society itself. As with Starck, the narrative approach plays a central role, and Bouchareb's 'humanist' strategy ("emphasising shared humanity as a 'solution' to conflicts with" the constructed 'Other' [212]) are juxtaposed to Morris' reliance on humour. In its close relationship with the traditionally dark British humour the latter is shown to be the more effective technique in tackling "the absurdities of terrorism" (224). Lisa Peter then rounds off the volume (and to some extent brings all contributions full circle, when one recalls Glazzard's equally 'popular' topic) by dealing with TV spy thrillers after 2000. She compares an episode from the Spooks series with Britz, revealing how they work against the Rezensionen AAA Band 39 (2014) Heft 2 207 espionage thriller's traditional interest in national stability and represent 'security' as a not necessarily positive concept (cf. 242). Again, the audience's relationship with the characters is centrally important in this effect, and the article demonstrates how both thrillers disrupts 'them' and 'us' dichotomies to make it difficult for the spectators to take sides. All in all, as the overview of the individual contributions has shown, there is a high degree of coherence both within and between the two collections. They are held together by dominant leitmotifs like the notion of tragedy as well as questions of othering and how it can be disrupted. Moreover, what distinguishes all articles is the meticulous close reading of the chosen primary material, which makes it possible to observe numerous connections and parallels across genre and media boundaries. In this way, the two collections can prove inspiring and thought-provoking for readers from a wide range of disciplines - in the best cultural studies tradition. References English, Richard (2009). Terrorism. How to Respond. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Merle Tönnies Institut für Anglistik und Amerikanistik Universität Paderborn