The charm of the recent past
Monte Verità, or the "Mountain of Truth", was recently the setting for an international gathering of historians, aimed at finding new patterns of interpretation for the period between 1980 and 2010. David Gugerli, a Professor of History of Technology at ETH and conference co-organiser, discusses the bold conference format and key findings from the meeting.
Looking back from a historical point of view, 1979 turned out to be a watershed year. Margaret Thatcher became Prime Minister, while the Iranian Revolution occurred and led to far-reaching consequences. Soviet troops invaded Afghanistan, and NATO embarked on disarmament talks at the same time as it positioned mid-range missiles in Europe. While Michel Foucault was preoccupied with neoliberalism, the "market" became a magic word, reverberating far beyond Ronald Reagan's economic policies. During the same year – 1979 – consumer electronics (the Walkman) and computers (PC) became household objects.
The decades following this milestone year between 1980 and 2010 were an elusive time of change. Sociologists, political scientists and historians have attempted to describe it in different ways. Their interpretations include the "End of History" (Fukuyama), "Clash of Civilizations" (Huntington) and "Age of Fracture" (Rodgers). More than 50 historians travelled to Monte Verità in Ascona, at the end of June. It was here that they tried to make it easier to explore the recent past from a historical-scientific point of view. David Gugerli, a Professor of History of Technology and co-organiser of the conference, explains why those three decades are so important for the present day.
Professor Gugerli, the title for the conference was "The Good Years! An International Conference on Recent History 1980-2010". What exactly was good about those years in which so much fell apart and became fragile?
The names of eras have a programmatic character in terms of research and results. One could interpret the recent past as a requiem for the economic prosperity prior to 1973/1974. In other words, it is the period following the boom and can be viewed as the rapid beginning of the end, brought about by isolation, economisation, and hedonism. However, we believe this concept is far too narrow for a comprehensive understanding of social change. It is only an expression of cultural pessimism, which long ago became habit, or an overemphasis on the remote impact of a time when Bretton Woods and Keynesian economic policy still appeared to work. We therefore wanted to conduct a thought experiment and, for once, we did not want to gaze spellbound at everything that has gone down the drain since 1980, which can be summed up by the English Punks' phrase "No Future".
Nevertheless, the title The Good Years sounds somewhat cynical. What exactly are the positive impacts of this time period for those who seek to defend this description?
A new world order had come into existence by 1985, bringing with it many new and surprising methods of communication, new public spheres and different spheres of privacy in numerous channels. The 1980s and 1990s were also a time of hope, justifiable promises, successful emancipation and additional gains in freedom. Emerging markets shifted the imbalances in the world economy. Productivity also increased in many production areas. We therefore believe that talking about the "Good Years" is both a productive and provocative line of questioning.
How did you introduce this viewpoint of the years between 1980 and 2010 at the conference?
We asked prominent historians to carry out a thought experiment as it pertains to their area of research, for example the history of economics, media or technology. What happens when one takes a question dealing with the destruction of the world and replaces it with one that focuses on hopes and expectations? At the same time, we asked two young colleagues to provide a short, critical commentary on every presentation given by the "big shots". Following a coffee break packed with exciting discussions, we reserved a further hour at the conference for precise discussions, additions, corrections, and fine-tuning of the statement. This format led to a very lively debate.
You hold the Professorship for the History of Technology. What are the most notable changes that occurred between 1980 and 2010 in your view?
There are many. Clearly, the most important change is that an ever increasing proportion of our work, transactions, trade and understanding occur with and via computers, both privately and in the public sphere. Of note here is the emergence of a scenario-analysis culture in the 1980s and 1990s. The future was increasingly reflected in computer simulation models, provided with a range of options and therefore planned to a lesser extent and certainly not programmed any more. This phenomena can be found in climate research, demographics, and economic forecasting. The prerequisite for this approach to designing the future is largely a return to the minimal, along with highly flexible, combinable elements. At the extreme, a bit or a pixel. Add to this the combination of playful creativity and mechanistic social physics. Since the 1980s, for example, the field of agent-based modelling has brought together game theory questions with reductionist models of social interactions.
What is the importance of the exponential growth of computer power?
I don't believe that technology makes an impact in a deterministic way. However, I believe that computers offer opportunities to configure machines, resources, people, securities, and product lines to operate according to highly individualized preferences and to make suitable decisions. This is true not only for supercomputing and large data bases, but for simple spreadsheets such as Visicalc in 1979, Excel in 1985, and Quatro Pro in 1987. The impressions that we have of our world and according to which we act must already exist in order for the increasing computing power, visualisation on the desktop, or office work on smart phones to be used at all.
What kind of consequences does this have for society?
Some say it has led to the end of society. Others believe that society has become more dynamic. Both views focus on computer-assisted monitoring of situations. When they find the monitoring suspicious, they call it big brother, bean counting or morally destructive. When it suits them, however, they describe it as creating transparency, increasing flexibility, quality assurance or improved compliance. This culture of control no longer relates just to more technical or business processes, but rather to the evaluation of school programmes, the physical development of children, the monitoring of public spaces, threshold values, and melting glaciers.
Did the conference take a look into the future based on this historical analysis?
We of course discussed the Eurozone problem. What happened? What is going on? What are the stakes? What is to be expected? The first three questions were answered with a high level of competence. But the last one proved difficult. Change brought about by crisis is characterised by the fact that the rules of the game and stability in terms of expectations are lost. The time when one needs forecasts the most is precisely when they cannot be made. We are specialists in social change. We possess the ability to observe this change through analytical skills where possible, namely in the past. As far as future change is concerned, we will leave it to others to speculate.
About David Gugerli
David Gugerli has been a professor for history of technology at ETH Zurich since 1997. He is a founding member of the Centre for the History of Knowledge, which is supported by ETH as well as the University of Zurich.
"The Good Years! An International Conference on Recent History 1980-2010" is the title of the conference, which took place at the Stefano Franscini conference centre on the Monte Verità from 29 June to 3 July 2015. David Gugerli, Jakob Tanner, Monika Dommann, Gisela Hürlimann, Magaly Tornay and Roman Wild prepared and organised the conference.