Maria Fritsche's study, a new volume in the Berghahn series “Film Europa”: German Cinema in an International Context, is an ambitious undertaking. The author's stated purpose is to “show how popular cinema tackled the pressing issues of masculinity and national identity, in order to establish how cinema intervened in and shaped popular discourses and thus helped to stabilise and modernise Austrian society” between 1946 and 1955 (2). Austria's complex and fragile circumstances during this decade of Wiederaufbau would have posed serious challenges to the influence that any cultural form could have had on society—whether literature, popular or classical music, theater, or other arts.

The thesis that Austrian popular films could serve the purpose Fritsche asserts is an intriguing one. She challenges us thereby to rethink the relationship between popular cultural forms and the (re-)establishment of identities capable of fostering stability in the aftermath of upheaval. The work raises several important questions. Did political or religious authorities actually seize upon themes advanced in mass-appeal films to promote stability and modernization? If so, how? Were the agendas of the two dominant political parties–the Catholic-conservative Volkspartei and the social democratic SPÖ–sufficiently similar that we can productively discuss common notions of stability and modernity? How can we discern that audiences understood films in ways consistent with their ostensible influence? The challenge Fritsche sets for herself requires compelling synthesis of a vast corpus of film with other primary sources, as well as with theoretical literature and historiography.

Readers would be hard-pressed to identify another scholar whose knowledge of postwar Austrian film is as profound as Fritsche's. She draws on close analysis of 140 feature-length productions out of 212 produced during the first postwar decade; these productions are cataloged in the book's impressive filmography. She categorizes these films according to several distinct genres: historical costume films, Heimatfilme, tourist films, and comedies. Each of these genres frames narratives and characterizes relationships in ways that, the author argues, played a significant role in promoting a distinctly Austrian (as opposed to German) identity; in reasserting male dominance (with the exception of some comedies and tourist films); and/or as a kind of entertainment escapism that made it possible for Austrians to repress involvement with the Third Reich.

Fritsche demonstrates her strengths through analysis of plot encryption and imagery (clothing, tools and implements, elements of nature, etc.). These elements are central to her excavation of identity and, she notes, the reestablishment of traditional gender relations. She also demonstrates a keen appreciation for the economic and technical difficulties Austrian artists and businesspeople faced when shooting and distributing films during this period. Moreover, she is acutely aware of developments in film production more broadly (e.g., how international competition, primarily from West Germany and Hollywood, challenged indigenous projects for a significant share of Austrian box office receipts).

The book's central assertions concerning nationhood, gender, and identity are fascinating. But Fritsche's approach never quite establishes a methodological foundation or a firm basis in primary sources upon which to construct a study of text-in-context. Historians who focus on women and gender should find her engagement with the work of scholars such as Joan Scott and Judith Butler promising; furthermore, her acknowledgement of important Austrian social historians (e.g., Ernst Hanisch and Ernst Bruckmüller) indicates her appreciation for how the historiography of the last thirty years has treated significant developments in postwar Austrian society. Her bibliography is impressive, which makes it all the more curious that she does not integrate these sources into a close, sustained discussion of the very themes that she asserts filmic texts addressed. Instead, she is content to make general assertions about gender relations or other aspects of Austria's social fabric, briefly note important research, and then describe how individual films in each genre embody the insights of various scholars. Because context is never developed, even those who are familiar with the theoretical and historiographical references and who know Austrian circumstances well must assume that they understand the author's linkages. She appears to trust they will.

A closely related, no less problematic assumption is Fritsche's treatment of the relationship among filmmakers' intentions, opinion shapers' statements, and popular reception of film. Were directors' purposes consistent with her reading? Does that matter? It may not if compelling evidence exists that cinema visitors received the films as she does. She offers no approach to assessing audience reception, however. Curiously, Fritsche does not avail herself of other sources that could have provided valuable support for her argument—or might have challenged her to recalibrate her approach. For example, filmmakers' Nachlässe or other relevant sources—e.g., interviews with directors and screenwriters (even if later in their careers) and memoirs—might have corroborated her assertions, revealing intentions to encode entertainment in particular ways.

She notes that Church dignitaries and major political figures attended film openings, and cites film reviews that addressed matters of social order and identity in major Austrian daily newspapers. Yet, Fritsche does not make the case that reports on who was present at gala premieres, film reviews, or newspaper editorials influenced the public's perception of films in ways consistent with her thesis. Indeed, her project depends upon establishing this connection. It would have been an important buttress if she could have demonstrated that politicians, clergy, or other significant public figures made reference to film and other cultural forms when shaping public discourses on Austrian identity, social stability, and modernity. The content of parish newsletters, political officials' preoccupations with challenges facing society (revealed, for example, in Parteitagsprotokolle, debates in the Nationalrat, Landesräte, or Gemeinderäte—especially on budgetary decisions for social welfare, arts subsidies, and education), and exchanges in leading Catholic conservative and social democratic journals, could have been useful. Even if these sources supported her argument, Fritsche would still have had to make a compelling case that domestic popular film played a central role in the average Austrian's participation in those discourses. Additionally, she appears to suggest that people who identified with either the Catholic-conservative or social democratic camp at the time would have had a common repository of affective notions of Austrianness. This problematic assumption is not explored.

The absence of sources that would have helped to contextualize filmic narratives raises questions that would require resolution if this bold study were to become the definitive work. Regrettably Fritsche hints at correlation, but does not establish convincing causal linkages. Her thesis is nevertheless fascinating and may be directly on the mark. For these merits, social and cultural historians who work on postwar Austria should be thankful for the exciting possibilities her work suggests.