the organization’sgoal as follows:“The proletariat must arrive at its own culture.
The life of the proletariat,their suffering,theirstruggle, and their victory must
find expression in cultural work. [...]Proletarian culturalwork moves toward
community,which is the true meaning of all socialist cultural activities.”⁷Only
a“socialist emotional education,”SPD politician PaulFranken (1894–1944) in-
sisted, could provide the proper foundation forasocialist“mental education.”⁸
Considering the practical implications, GustavRadbruch (18 78 – 1949), another
SPD member of the Reichstag,addedamorecautious perspective when he re-
minded his colleagues that economic forces determined all culturalworks and
practices,includinginbourgeois culture.Among other things, his comment im-
plied that the new socialistGemeinschaftskultur(cultureofcommunity) hadto
movebeyond the fixation on the individual work shared by bourgeois high cul-
ture and commercial mass culture and foreground the collective,communicative
processofcultural production.“Proletarian culture,”Radbruch concluded,“so-
cialist cultureinthe making,can onlybeaculture of the masses. But we call
theserefined masses community.”⁹Of course,the mysterious element capable
of transformingthe infamous modern masses into the ideal socialist community
was the feeling of community (Gemeinschaftsbefühl)that, through the perform-
ative qualities of“we,”promised the imaginary reconciliation of the competing
discourses of mass, folk, and class.
In aiding this process, theFrankfurt production ofWe!presented the per-
formers in matchinguniforms, surroundedbydramatic lighting,and onamin-
imalist stageset reminiscent ofasteppyramid. Popular songs, dance numbers,
and film clips added to the celebratory mood of this enormous massspectacle.
Responsible for the choreography, OttoZimmermann (1894–1956) described his
primary objective in ways that could be applied to theSprechchoras awhole:“At
the end of the event,performers andaudiences were to become one big‘we,’
thinking,feeling, and acting asaunit.”¹⁰Contemporaryreviewers wereeffusive
in their praise for the production’smixtureofdramatic, visual, and musicalel-
ements. In the words of one reviewer,deMan realized the full potential of the
Quoted by Rainer Stübling,Kultur undMassen. Das Kulturkartell der modernen Arbeiterbewe-
gung in Frankfurt amMain von 1925 bis 1933(Offenbach am Main: Saalbau-Verlag,1983),27.
PaulFranken,VomWerden einer neuen Kultur.Aufgaben der Arbeiter-Kultur- und -Sportorga-
nisationen(Berlin: Laube, 1930), 39.
GustavRadbruch,Kulturlehredes Sozialismus.Ideologische Betrachtungen(Berlin: Dietz, 1927),
22.For an influential critique of the discourse of community fromthe Weimar period, see Hel-
muth Plessner,Grenzen der Gemeinschaft. Eine Kritik des sozialen Radikalismus(Bonn:Friedrich
Cohen, 1924);the book was republished bySuhrkamp in2002.
OttoZimmermann,“Inszenierungdes FestspielsWir!,”Archief Hendrik de Man,170.
SocialDemocracy and the PerformanceofCommunity 227