ON THE HORNS OF A DILEMMA Clarity and Ambivalence in Oppositional Writing in the Wake of the Uprising of 17 June 1953 in the German Democratic Republic Patrick P Harkin PhD University of Edinburgh 2010 Abstract of Thesis A civil Uprising on 17 June 1953 in the German Democratic Republic created a dilemma for a number of writers there. On one hand, they were deeply committed to the principles of socialism, upon which their state was based and which they saw as being put in grave danger by events such as those they experienced on 17 June. On the other hand, they were fiercely critical of the practice of socialism as pursued by the governing party, whose Stalinist methods of governance they believed to be in large part responsible for the civil unrest. My thesis explores the nature of this dilemma in the case of four writers, Bertolt Brecht, Heiner Müller, Stefan Heym and Erich Loest, and their efforts to resolve it within a repressive state, whose regime vigorously suppressed all signs of criticism or dissent. These writers created major works of fiction, a cycle of poems, a drama and two novels, in which the Uprising of 17 June is the central theme. In addition, each has provided a substantial body of non-fictional texts, largely journalistic and autobiographical, in which the Uprising is extensively contextualised. In bringing together and interrelating the fictional and non-fictional work of each author into my analysis, I have been able to demonstrate that all four held and publicly expressed views that set them in opposition to the regime in the GDR. i Contents List of Abbreviations vii 1. INTRODUCTION 1 2. THE LITERATURE OF 17 JUNE: TEXTS AND CONTEXTS 8 A Clash of Interpretations 8 ‗Der 17. Juni ist kein einzelner Tag‘ 8 Sources of Interpretation 9 The Eastern View 11 The Western View 13 Writers and Writing in the GDR 18 The Antifascist Narrative 19 Party Control 21 The Writers’ Tasks 22 Rewards and Privileges 24 Censorship 25 Opposition 28 Problems of Interpretation 35 The Literature of 17 June and Its Reception 39 ii 3. BERTOLT BRECHT 50 Introduction 50 Brecht: As Others Saw Him 52 Brecht in Private 52 The Berliner Ensemble and Cultural Freedom 54 17 June 57 A Changed Landscape 60 Public Reactions 62 Brecht in his Own Words 65 Problems in Interpretation 70 Analysis of the Texts 73 Initial Reactions 73 A Sociopolitical Analysis 75 Need for Cultural Reform 79 Mature Reflection 84 Buckower Elegien 86 A Unitary Cycle of Poems 87 Themes and Textual Strategies 89 The Threat of Fascism 90 Dialogue with the People 92 Nature 94 Building 96 Movement and Stasis 97 ‗Böser Morgen‘ 99 iii Optimism or Pessimism? 101 Publication of the Elegien 101 Conclusion 102 4. HEINER MÜLLER 106 Introduction 106 Müller‘s Prose 108 17 June in Müller‘s Prose 115 Germania Tod in Berlin 121 Germania Tod in Berlin within Müller’s Dramatic Oeuvre 122 German Past and GDR Present 124 Realism and Surrealism 137 Montage and Fragmentation 140 Text and Intertextuality 143 Destruction and Renewal 147 Discordance and Harmony 149 Germania Tod in Berlin as Oppositional Writing 153 Conclusion 156 5. STEFAN HEYM 158 Introduction 158 Journalistic Influences in Heym‘s Work 159 Heym‘s Non-Fictional Responses to 17 June 169 Heym’s 17 June 170 iv The 17 June Newspaper Articles 172 5 Tage im Juni 178 From Der Tag X to 5 Tage im Juni 179 Documentary Fiction and the Illusion of Reality 181 Characterisation 188 Martin Witte and August Kallmann 188 The Party 192 The Workers 193 The Westerners 196 The Soviets 197 Narrative Style 199 A Convincing Account? 203 Conclusion 205 6. ERICH LOEST 208 Introduction 208 Loest According to Himself 210 Loest and 17 June 219 The Portents 219 In East Berlin on 17 June 222 The Aftermath 227 Sommergewitter 232 Plot and Characterisation 233 An Accurate Account? 237 v Personal Experiences 241 Narrative Style 246 Realism or Socialist Realism? 250 A Response to Socialist Realist Depictions of 17 June? 253 Conclusion 255 7. CONCLUSION 258 United in Opposition 259 Contrasting Receptions 264 Appendix 1 Works of Fiction Featuring 17 June 1953 as a Theme 270 Bibliography 273 vi List of Abbreviations 5T 5 Tage im Juni BBA Bertolt-Brecht-Archiv BFA Groβe kommentierte Berliner und Frankfurter Ausgabe BPRS Bund Proletarisch-Revolutionärer Schriftsteller BStU Bundesbeauftragte für die Unterlagen des Staatssicherheitsdienstes der ehemaligen Deutschen Demokratischen Republik D Durch die Erde ein Riβ: Ein Lebenslauf DDR Deutsche Demokratische Republik FDGB Freier Deutscher Gewerkschaftsbund G Germania Tod in Berlin GDR German Democratic Republic HO Handelsorganisation K Krieg ohne Schlacht: Leben in zwei Diktaturen KgU Kampfgruppe gegen Unmenschlichkeit KPD Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands LPG Landwirtschaftliche Produktionsgenossenschaft MfS Ministerium für Staatssicherheit N Nachruf vii NSDAP Nationalsozialistische Arbeiterpartei Deutschlands OdF Opfer des Faschismus RIAS Radio im amerikanischen Sektor S Sommergewitter SA Sturmabteilung (der NSDAP) SBZ Sowjetische Besatzungszone SED Sozialistische Einheitspartei Deutschlands SPD Sozialistische Partei Deutschlands SS Schutzstaffel (der NSDAP) Stasi Staatssicherheitsdienst USPD Unabhängige Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands VEB Volkseigener Betrieb viii 1 INTRODUCTION On 17 June 1953, a civil uprising took place in cities and towns throughout the German Democratic Republic (GDR), the culmination of months of growing anger and unhappiness among the population. It ended almost as soon as it had begun, petering out in the afternoon rain on 17 June, but the day became emblematic of the ideological, political and cultural division of Germany and enjoyed an almost mythical status that was to endure up to and beyond the demise of the GDR itself. What made it especially complex was that it provoked an impassioned debate, in which a single set of events and circumstances was invoked in support of ideological views which often stood in diametric opposition to each other. For some, 17 June 1953 exposed the illegitimacy of the GDR regime, revealing not only the courage of a people determined to throw off the yoke of communism, but also the treachery of those who would stand in the people‘s way. For others, it confirmed their fears that fascist ambition was still very much alive and could only be kept at bay by adherence to the socialism they believed had brought down the Third Reich. Writers were inevitably drawn into this war of words. Those in the GDR were socialist and generally supported their government‘s efforts to build and maintain a socialist state, so much so that Walter Ulbricht, General Secretary and leader of the ruling Sozialistische Einheitspartei Deutschlands (SED), could declare at a Party meeting in July 1953: ‗Die Angehörigen der Intelligenz haben in den Tagen der faschistischen Provokation loyal gearbeitet.‘1 For many, Ulbricht‘s words confirmed the fact of GDR writers‘ unanimous and unconditional support for their government‘s harsh suppression of the workers‘ revolt on 17 June. As a result, GDR writers were often regarded in the West as apologists for a repressive and illegitimate regime, and 1 Walter Ulbricht‘s speech at the Fifteenth Plenum of the Central Committee of the SED, 24-26 July 1953 is reprinted in Elimar Schubbe (ed.), Dokumente zur Kunst-, Literatur- und Kulturpolitik der DDR (Stuttgart: Seewald, 1972), p. 296. 1 consequently there has been a tendency to dismiss GDR texts relating to 17 June.2 The situation, however, was more complex. Many GDR writers, particularly among those who had experienced at first hand the undeniable alienation between the people and their state, were deeply dismayed and filled with conflicting emotions which they endeavoured to express in writing immediately after 17 June and in the months and years to come. Among these texts are to be found not only works of considerable literary merit, but also evidence of a consistency and honesty of view, which ran counter to official GDR narratives and which I believe animated a number of GDR writers in the early decades of their state's existence. It is important here to define what is included within this generic term, ‗texts‘. The relationship between many GDR writers and 17 June is a very complex one indeed: to gain an understanding of this relationship in the case of any particular writer, it is essential to consider everything he (or she) has written or said on the subject. This means we must take into account all texts, not only literary- fictional work, such as novels, poetry and drama, but also diaries and autobiographies, letters, essays, press articles and interview scripts. Only by analysing the totality of a writer‘s output can we fully appreciate the significance of each individual text. It is my contention that the variety of and in texts relating to 17 June has not been sufficiently acknowledged and, as a result, the complexity of individual writers‘ views on this topic has tended to be less than fully understood. In short, judgement of the concerns and motivations which 17 June engendered in writers, or at least some writers, has been hampered by an overly narrow critical reception of their work. We must, of course, treat all texts with caution. Novels, plays and poetry may or may not be intended to represent the author‘s own opinions. Newspaper articles are usually written with the objective of presenting a point of view, based on facts: whether this is always the journalist‘s intention, or indeed whether the underlying ‗facts‘ are reliable is often debatable. Letters have addressees, but the writer may have intended a wider readership. Life narratives require similar circumspection. Diaries may be personal and private, or may have been written with a view to later publication. 2 See, for example, Hubertus Knabe, 17. Juni: Ein deutscher Aufstand (Berlin: Ullstein, 2004), p.