Notes Introduction: Remembering East Germany: Contested heritage 1. It should be noted, however, that archival evidence reveals these occupations to have been more negotiated and ambivalent in their aims and methods than is commonly recognised (see Rudnick, 2011). 2. Cited in Beattie, 2011, p. 26; Bruce, 2009, p. 25; Cooke, 2005, p. 33; Kritz, 1995, xxiv; McAdams, 2001a, p. 7; 2001b, p. 240; Müller, 2001, p. 262. 3. Hubertus Knabe used this term in his introduction to a seminar focusing on the effects of political imprisonment on the second generation, held at the Foundation for the Reappraisal of the SED Dictatorship in Berlin on 14 February 2012. 4. See Sabrow, 2007, p. 8 for a list of members. 5. I take the term ‘state-mandated’ in reference to memory from Beattie, 2011, who attributes the concept to Sabine Moller. 6. Nicht, 2011, investigates both fictional and non-fictional representations. 1 The Media of Testimony 1. For example: van Dijck, 2007; Esposito, 2002; Erll, 2011a, 2011b; Erll and Rigney, 2009; Garde-Hansen, 2011; Hoskins, 2009b; van House and Churchill, 2008; Huyssen, 2003; Landsberg, 2004; Neiger, Meyers and Zandberg, 2011; Olick, 2007; Radstone, 2010; Sick and Ochsner, 2004; Sturken, 2008; Zierold, 2006. 2. Van Dijck (2007, p. 24) herself points towards this research avenue when she notes that ‘beyond immediate family circles, material inscriptions may become part of a more public project – for instance a documentary – and thus add to a shared collective remembrance’ and that there is a ‘a current accen- tuation of personal memories in official “memory institutions”, such as the museum’ (2004, p. 268). 3. As will be discussed, two exceptions are Otto, 2011 (Chapter 3), and Bachelier, 2010 (Chapter 6). 2 Literary Autobiography and the Stories That Can’t Be Told 1. There have been a number of analyses of the relationship between intellec- tuals and political power in the GDR since unification. By way of example: Bathrick, 1995; Bialas, 1996; Borgwardt, 2002; Emmerich, 2000; Jones, 2011b; Mittenzwei, 2003; J. Walther, 1996. 196 Notes 197 2. For an overview, see Niggl, 1998b. 3. For a selection of some of the key contributions to these debates see Niggl, 1998b. 4. For a closer analysis of a wide range of forms of life-writing in the German context, see Dahlke, Tate and Woods, 2010. 5. Rachel Halverson (2008, pp. 213–14) argues along similar lines that ‘although there are differing innuendoes in the response to Kant’s Abspann critics and literary scholars across the board read it as an autobiography and as a result expect Kant’s full disclosure of his complicity with the corrupt SED regime’. 6. For example: Tungler (1991) asks if Kant did not notice that ‘justification often spills over into vain linguistic acrobatics’; Grambow (1991) describes the text as, at least in part, an ‘overlong speech for the defence’; Lewin (1991) considers that ‘Kant is justifying himself’; de Bruyn (1991) describes the text as one of the ‘quickly produced books designed to justify behaviour’; Emmerich (2000) considers that Kant is attempting, ‘to justify himself’; Cosentino (2001) describes the work as ‘Hermann Kant’s self-justifying, striving book of memoirs’. 7. Wolf Biermann (1991) notoriously described Anderson as ‘Sascha Arsehole’ (Sascha Arschloch) in his speech at the presentation of the Georg Büchner Prize. Fuchs (1991a, 1991b, 1991c) published details from the Stasi files in a series of articles in Spiegel, some of which offered evidence for Anderson’s involvement with the MfS. For a detailed discussion of the debate surround- ing Anderson’s involvement with the Stasi, see also Szabo, 2002, pp. 65–97. For an analysis of Anderson’s Stasi files and his activities for the MfS see Lewis, 2003a. 8. Indeed, a customer review posted to Amazon.de perceptively notes that other reviewers expected a ‘classical confession of guilt’ and asks why ‘life histories still always have to be written as nineteenth-century novels of development’. See ‘bebequin’ (2002). 9. Several reviewers point towards Anderson’s apparent lack of ‘Reue’ (regret). See Geissler, 2002; Halter, 2002; Wittstock, 2002. 10. The Free German Union of Authors emerged in 1973 as an alternative to the Union of German Writers (Verband Deutscher Schriftsteller) and was consid- ered particularly reactionary by the authorities in the GDR. For an account of the ‘Legende’ used in the attempts to recruit de Bruyn, see J. Walther, 1996, pp. 392–96. 11. The anthology Berliner Geschichten was an experimental anthology edited by Klaus Schlesinger, Ulrich Plenzdorf and Martin Stade, which they intended to produce as a self-publication and thereby bypass the censor. 12. See BStU MfS AIM 822/84; de Bruyn, 1993; 1996, pp. 190–202; Jones, 2010. An ‘Operative Personenkontrolle’ was opened to observe and record infor- mation on an individual who was suspected of activities against the state or had contact with individuals already considered hostile by the Stasi. An OPK was generally concluded either with an attempt to recruit the individual as IM and/or conversion to an ‘Operativen Vorgang’ (Operative Procedure), and the ensuing higher level of harassment and observation. See J. Walther, 1996, pp. 383–84. 198 Notes 13. See, for example: Braun, 1996; Franke, 1996; Hoyer, 1996; Michaelis, 1996; Saab, 1996; Schaber, 1996; Schorn, 1997; Soldat, 1996; Steinfeld, 1996; K. Walther, 1996. Evans (2006, p. 138) also notes that ‘the majority of reviews welcomed de Bruyn’s text enthusiastically praising its self-critical candour’. 14. For example: Braun, 1996; Hinck, 1996; Liersch, 1996; Saab, 1996; Schäuble, 1996; Schorn, 1997; Soldat, 1996; Steinfeld, 1996; Wendland, 1996; Wiedemann, 1996. 15. For example: Hinck, 1996; Krause, 1996; Michaelis, 1996; Saab, 1996; Schaber, 1996; Soldat, 1996; Steinfeld, 1996. 16. Wiedemann’s (1996) account of de Bruyn’s contact with the Stasi is closer to that given in Vierzig Jahre; however, she begins with the statement: ‘again: nothing objectively serious’. Liersch (1996) similarly asserts that de Bruyn’s shame at his actions is unnecessary: ‘what is not understandable is his level of dismay at having been led to provide information as a result of a disgrace- ful intrigue on the part of the Stasi’. Michaelis (1996) describes de Bruyn’s involvement with the Stasi as ‘(harmless, quickly broken off) conversations with the snoopers from the Mielke-Ministry’. 17. Nußbaumer (1999), for example, states that the ‘ “life report” offers little more than the self-justifying prose of a quasi-Party scribe’. Kant (1996, p. 52) describes the text as the ‘self portrait of a hypocrite’ (p. 52). Hirdina (1999, p. 199) argues that in the chapter in which de Bruyn discusses the Stasi revelations, ‘one [ ...] can also find an attempt at self-justification’. 18. In the statement by Oehlen given above, for example, de Bruyn is described as being ‘elected’ as IM without his knowledge and interrogated under false pretences. Wiedemann (1996) states that the Stasi officers, ‘had visited him [de Bruyn] more often, and learned more than his memory had retained’, again implying a lack of active decision-making on de Bruyn’s part. 19. The only detailed accounts of de Bruyn’s file that I am aware of are in Mix, 1998, pp. 191–94; J. Walther, 1996, pp. 392–95. 3 Fragmented Auto/biographies: Testifying with Many Voices 1. This was the term most frequently used by the Stasi for civilian collaborators in the 1950s and early 1960s. The term ‘Inoffizieller Mitarbeiter’ (IM) became more widely used after the implementation of ‘Richtlinie 1/68’ in 1968. See J. Walther, 1996, p. 470. 2. See also Evans’s (2006) discussion of this criticism of Kunert’s text. 3. Although we cannot, of course, know to what extent Otto edited the origi- nal interview material. She states in her introduction: ‘I did not always write down word-for-word what was said. I reworked repetitions, expressions pecu- liar to spoken language and too excessive leaps in topic and thereby fitted the content of the conversations to the written form (Otto, 2011, p. 11).’ 4. Bickelhaupt (2011) notes that the author leaves the question of Kerstin’s guilt open, ‘as well as other contradictions’. In a customer review under the title ‘Ein Grenzfall’, ‘Falk Müller’ (2011) states that ‘it becomes clear in the book that the truth is considerably more complex, that private decisions are overlaid with political circumstances’. Notes 199 5. John (2011), for example, notes that the Stasi files do not reveal the methods used by the Stasi to pressurise Kerstin. Schreiber (2011) and Bickelhaupt (2011) also note that Kerstin was threatened with the loss of her son. ‘Hermann Burkhardt’ (2011) states that the reader is inclined ‘to forgive Kerstin for her “betrayal” ’. ‘Falk Müller’ (2011) points towards the violence in Kerstin and Jürgen’s marriage as an explanation. 4 The Importance of ‘Being There’: Memorial Museums and Living the Past in the Present 1. For a detailed overview of the development of the memorial, includ- ing the political controversies which accompanied it, see Rudnick, 2011, pp. 227–331. The above description of the history of the memorial also draws on: Deutscher Bundestag, 2013a, pp. 142–50; Kaminsky, 2007, pp. 61–64; König, 2007, pp. 254–78; Stiftung Gedenkstätte Berlin-Hohenschönhausen, 2000–02, pp. 8–9; Verheyen, 2008, pp. 163–73. 2. The analysis is based on fieldwork conducted in Berlin in March 2009, August 2009 and during a longer period of research from June–December 2010. Return visits were made in February 2012 and October 2013. I followed a total of 12 tours at Hohenschönhausen in these periods, with ten different guides, including four with non-eyewitnesses. I also spent several days in December 2010 researching in the Zeitzeugenarchiv, viewing a selection of the eyewitness interviews collected and stored there.