The image often portrayed of the Netherlands, from just before World War II until about a decade after, is that of a country out of step with the times, in part due to its persistent adherence to a strongly pillarized society. That sacred institution was never completely dismantled. In 1956, the broadcasting system had the chance to bring it to an end, but chose not to: instead, they allowed the radio broadcasters—who had divvied up airtime among themselves—to take to the television stage likewise. Now, fifty years later, that sacred institution, ‘heilige huisje’ in Dutch, still seems to exist, even though the current media minister, in his reform efforts, does not speak of maintaining pillarization. Still, he points to the stubs that remain from the old pillars. For example, when he suggests that the confessional broadcasters in the new broadcasting organizations he wants to set up will be happy to seek each other out – under their own name and while retaining their own identity. It won’t be like a couple in love, I think, but rather like the day-to-day chaos of a student house in all its diversity.
Things are more complicated for broadcasters less inclined to show their colors, who the minister now directs toward a conservative grouping. Even more precarious is the situation for BNNVARA and VPRO, who are expected to coexist—like David and Goliath—in a third house. Still, the minister’s plan is not entirely reactionary: ‘modern’ is the perspective that identity is no longer tied to a professed ideology, a name, or the ‘blood group’ of members, but rather to what the programs themselves express—in form and content—and how they can be contextualized.
In the period my forthcoming book discusses, there was initially only one TV channel, with a second following in 1964. For the arts, that ‘poverty’ was actually a blessing. On Sunday evenings, two arts programs were scheduled: Signalement from VARA and Kunstgrepen from AVRO. The first was a monthly, multidisciplinary program covering music, theater, literature, and visual arts, compiled by Henk de By and Alfred Kossmann. Kunstgrepen was directed by Leen Trimp (husband of tv personality Mies Bouwman), but its success was largely due to its presenter, Pierre Janssen. A third, also popular, arts program aired on the radio. It was created by art historians under the auspices of Openbaar Kunstbezit (Public Art Property) and offered course materials to accompany the broadcasts. These last two programs lasted until the late 1970s. In terms of identity, they couldn’t have been more different—but did that have anything to do with pillarization? Not really.
While Openbaar Kunstbezit aimed to educate listeners, and Janssen sought to emotionally move and enthuse his audience about art, Wim T. Schippers and Willem de Ridder presented facts about contemporary art in their episode of Signalement as the daily news—businesslike, yet also expressing it with an all too serious sense of great importance, worthy of a news broadcast. Signalement, from the socialist VARA, captured the spirit of the times, but that zeitgeist was arguably better sensed by the confessional broadcaster VPRO, led by a pastor. This was evident, for example, when VARA didn’t dare air Jasperina de Jong’s song about a prostitute, titled Call-girl, while VPRO picked it up—although VARA did broadcast the consistently controversial show Zo is het toevallig ook eens een keer (It just so happens to be the case) from 1963 to 1966. Because of her participation in this show Mies Bouwman became the scapegoat (Dutch: de kop van Jut).
What remains in people’s memories about VPRO from that era is not its Protestant label, but its liberal spirit—the first adjective in its name. That’s why the minister suggested that the most forward-thinking programs from the public broadcaster NTR today could potentially be transferred to little David, the VPRO. But the question is whether that aligns with the motivations of current program makers, who, it seems, more often switch to another broadcaster for money or better viewing figures. It’s unlikely that this played a role for Wim T. Schippers and Gied Jaspers in the 1960s when they chose VPRO. The image I present in my forthcoming book, the fourth essay “Queer Television Practices and the Spirit of Fluxus”, is one of a quest for the broadest possible creative freedom to experiment and to be contemporary —a freedom Schippers and De Ridder initially found in VARA’s Signalement (see the fragment of Willem de Ridder’s Paper Constallation ride under police escort above). This is even more evident from the brief clips of well-known Fluxus events that open their episode (December 1963); it demonstrates that television can be not only informative, but also an artistic and meta-critical medium. More about Fluxus in ‘Dutch Fluxus’, the third essay of the book.