Karl Kraus called Austria the “testing facility for the apocalypse”, but also noted that “the streets of Vienna are paved with culture; the streets of other cities with asphalt”. Hugo von Hofmannsthal dismissed the idea that there was an Austrian form of literature as fiction. In his opinion, there was only German literature, into which the works of Austrian writers were subsumed. In this respect, Austria is therefore not a completely straightforward subject. What remains indisputable, however, is that Austria became one of the trendsetters in German-speaking literature and culture from the 19th century onwards. The book ‘Topos Österreich’ (Topos Austria) thus contains studies from the field of literary and cultural studies which focus on modern Austrian literature.

Von Gefahren ist täglich die Rede. Doch die Kulturwissenschaften und Sozialwissenschaften beschäftigen sich hauptsächlich mit Form und Logik des Risikos. Das will dieser Band ändern, indem er eine kultur- und medienhistorische Genealogie der Gefahr und ihrer Vorstellungsräume im Verhältnis zum Risiko liefert. Die Entstehung des Risikos und die Geschichte seiner kalkulativen Minimierung im frühneuzeitlichen Versicherungswesen sind gut erforscht. Aber wie steht es um die scheinbar existenzielle „Gefahr“? Sie gerät erst viel später, mit einem verhältnismäßig winzigen Kapitel in Clausewitzʼ posthumen Riesenwerk Vom Kriege (1832–1834), in den Fokus. Clausewitz erkennt, dass die Gefahr immer auch ein Wahrnehmungsproblem ist, ein ästhetisches Konstrukt, das angewiesen ist auf ein Bewusstsein für die technische Vermittlung der Eindrücke.

The article provides a comparative analysis of the similarities of arguments put forward by discourses on mass imagery in the Renaissance and modernity. In particular, emblem theories are quite striking in the way they advanced similar arguments to theories about television. In both cases we find iconoclast and iconodule arguments, and in both cases we find an implicit, holy or unholy theological connection being made between mass medium, the image, and technology. The article will argue that the condemnation of or fascination with images in mass media is a form of discursive, i.e. textual, self-protection.

Throughout history, the concepts of phantasia (Greek) or imaginatio (Latin) have been linked to the concept of the human body and in particular to our sensory perceptions. But phantasia/imaginatio have also always been linked to the mind and how the operations of the mind are connected with bodily sensations. Functioning as interface between the senses and the mind, phantasia has predominantly been exemplified with the notion of the visual image, rather than a tactile or oral depiction. But as emphatic as discussion of the image has been, in particular throughout the Renaissance period and again in modernity, it has hardly been linked to the contemporaneous technology of imagery that accompanied the theoretical discourses on imagination. The article will flesh out central historical and systematic aspects of the concept of imagination (I), but instead of submitting them to a history of ideas it will turn to a comparative study of the first monograph on imagination by the Renaissance philosopher Gianfrancesco Pico della Mirandola from 1501 and Sigmund Freud's Interpretation of Dreams from 1900 (II) to investigate their respective understandings of imagination and inner images in the light of the technology of imagery (III).