THE JOURNAL OF UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH University of Kansas | Summer 2008
Beyond Mortar and Bricks !e Symbolic Function of the Berlin Wall
Fig. 1. Fig. 2. Standing Berlin Wall 1 Fall of the Berlin Wall 2
!roughout history, civilizations Berlin Wall, followed by a discussion of have built walls to create boundaries the audience reactions and symbolism and to protect against attackers. How- of the wall. !en, evidence will dem- ever, the unique purpose of the Berlin onstrate that, while the Berlin Wall was Wall — to prevent the German citi- symbolic of oppression as it stood, its zens from traveling freely within their destruction also served as a visual ar- own country — sets the wall apart gument. In conclusion, this article will from other similar structures. Clearly, compare the Berlin Wall and a pres- the Berlin Wall was never simply an ent-day wall — the Israeli West-Bank object or mere piece of history, but barrier — in order to exemplify how rather functioned as a symbol of op- the analysis of the Berlin Wall provides pression. !is essay proves this asser- important insight into the function, tion by o$ering a brief history of the nature, and symbolism of walls.
ANNE KRETSINGER is a 2008 graduate from Communication Studies Department at the University of Kansas.
15 Fig. 3. !e Construction of the Berlin Wall 7
THE HISTORY OF THE BERLIN barricaded or bricked up so as not to WALL serve for escape purposes.”9 Clearly, To begin, one must consider the the presence of the Berlin wall altered history behind the Berlin Wall. Be- life for German citizens, depriving tween 1949 and 1961, 2.6 million East people of their ability to move freely in Germans attempted to evade the “re- their own nation. pressions of the Communist system” by escaping from Soviet-controlled East Germany to West Berlin.3 !is AUDIENCE INTERPRETATION population rearrangement posed a se- OF THE BERLIN WALL rious threat of economic collapse in Although the Soviets constructed East Germany. As a result of this threat the Berlin Wall in an attempt to pre- and mounting Cold War tensions, the vent the impending economic col- East German government decided to lapse in East Germany, the e$ects of prevent migration to West Berlin by the structure caused the wall’s audi- constructing the Berlin Wall, “a Wall ences, including East and West Berlin- that divided Berlin for nearly three de- ers and Americans, to view the Berlin cades.”4 !e Communist regime in the Wall as a symbol for a number of dif- German Democratic Republic autho- ferent ideas. !ese viewpoints are re- rized construction of the Berlin Wall, %ections of the di$erent “terministic and the process of assembly, which screens,” held by each audience mem- one can see in Fig.1, began on August ber, that "ltered or shaped the way that 13, 1961.5 Stretching along the border people viewed the Berlin Wall. Ken- between East and West Berlin, the wall neth Burke describes the role of termi- was twenty-six miles in length and nistic screens when he states, “Even if ranged from 7 to 13 feet high.6 any given terminology is a re%ection !e wall was created with “up- of reality, by its very nature as a termi- rooted trees and barbed wire entangle- nology it must be a selection of reality; ments; wire fencing was erected, road and to this extent it must function also surfaces torn up, ditches dug and so as a de%ection of reality.”10 Each Berlin on.”8 Railroads between the East and Wall audience held terministic screens West were destroyed during the con- formed by past experiences surround- struction of the Berlin Wall, and “win- ing Berlin’s political state, mounted dows facing towards the border were Cold War tensions, and the creation
16 of the wall. !ese terministic screens terests,” while demonstrating the fact greatly shaped the way that each audi- that, like the citizens of Berlin, America ence viewed the Berlin Wall. also saw the necessity of tearing down Two main audiences of the Ber- the wall.15 In his speech, “by embrac- lin Wall included citizens of East and ing both principled ideological and West Germany. Although the Commu- moral opposition to the Soviets and in nist regime in the German Democratic other contexts a pragmatic viewpoint, Republic instigated the erection of the Reagan was able to take a strong moral Berlin Wall, the structure a$ected the position in opposition to tyranny, but lives of the citizens of both sides of also to lessen the risk of con%ict and the wall.11 !e Soviets forcibly evicted set the stage for successful negotiation many people living near the wall, and between the two nations.”16 In contrast a large number of citizens from both to Berliners, Americans did not expe- East and West Berlin had family mem- rience the direct e$ects of living in a bers located on opposing sides of the city divided by the Berlin Wall; how- wall.12 Aside from abolishing travel ever, it is apparent that much of the and dividing families, however, one of world viewed the standing Berlin Wall the most dramatic e$ects of the wall as a symbol of the Cold War and of the was the “lost opportunity of exchang- oppression of Berliners. Because the ing life in the GDR [German Demo- Cold War was largely a post-World cratic Republic] for life in the Federal War II economic political struggle be- Republic. !e denial of this opportu- tween the United States and the Soviet nity, it has been observed, depresses Union, America supported and en- morale... resulting in resignation and couraged removal of the Berlin Wall. desperation.”13 !us, the Berlin Wall Reagan’s speech clearly re%ects these acted as a symbol of oppression for post-World War II American goals and both East Germans and West Berlin- ideas, while providing insight into the ers for twenty-eight years until the fall reaction and mindset of the American of the Berlin Wall occurred on Novem- audience, regarding the Berlin Wall. ber 9, 1989. A second audience of the Berlin Wall includes Americans. Ronald Rea- THE SYMBOLISM gan’s speech, “Tear Down !is Wall,” OF THE BERLIN WALL demonstrates how the views of this After examining the history be- American audience greatly contrast hind the Berlin Wall, as well as the re- with the German audience feelings actions of the wall’s audiences, it is toward the Berlin Wall. Delivered in necessary to determine exactly what West Berlin on June 12, 1987, Reagan’s signi"cance the structure holds. To speech re%ects the symbolic mean- begin, in order to understand why civ- ing of the Berlin Wall, as depicted by ilizations create walls, such as the one the American audience. !e line ‘tear in Berlin, one must examine the fun- down this wall’ in Reagan’s speech damental nature of humans. In places “has been treated as a wonderful ap- where there are no natural boundar- plause line, which it certainly was, ies, humans often have the tendency but it was more than that.”14 !e line to “impose boundaries — marking o$ is a symbolic expression of the need to territory so that it has an inside and a end the oppression of Berliners. Rea- bounding surface — whether a wall, gan’s speech depicts “the courage and a fence, or an abstract line or plane. determination of the citizens of Ber- !ere are few human instincts more lin, people with whom America and basic than territoriality. And such de- the rest of the world share common in- "ning of a territory, putting a boundary
17 around it, is an act of quanti"cation.”16 how “the feeling of ‘being locked up,’ It is clear that the East German gov- in addition to wall-induced separa- ernment’s creation of the Berlin Wall tion and social isolation from friends is a re%ection of this basic human in- and family, could produce various stinct to create boundaries. !e imple- psychological disorders such as psy- mentation of the Berlin Wall created a chosis, schizophrenia, and behavioral barrier that contained the German cit- problems including alcoholism, de- izens within either the East or West by pression, anger, despondency, dejec- physically constraining travel. tion, and suicide.”22 Even after the wall However, just as Lako$ and John- fell, “psychologists and psychoana- son claim it is human nature to create lysts maintained that the wall reap- walls, it is also the nature of humans to peared as ‘die Mauer in den Köpfen’ or resist the constraints such boundaries ‘the wall in the heads’ of the German impose. !is is likely because people people.”23 !ese assertions re%ect the see these boundaries not just as struc- idea that, aside from its physical im- tures, but rather as symbols for larger position, the Berlin Wall also a$ected ideas. For example, after the construc- the psychological make-up of many tion of the Berlin Wall, it became ap- Germans who lived with the wall. Evi- parent that the symbolism of the struc- dently, the Berlin Wall is not merely a ture made the wall “a state of mind as physical structure, but rather is sym- much as… a physical structure.”1 Sup- bolic of a number of ideas and emo- porting this argument is the fact that tions that caused con%ict in the minds while the Berlin Wall stood, “East Ger- of the German people. mans were prohibited from mention- Analysis of the Berlin Wall as a vi- ing the term ‘wall’… !e preferred sual argument furthers the idea that term was the ‘anti-fascist protection the structure is not just a cement ob- bulwark’.”19 !e East German govern- struction, but a symbol of the control ment knew that the citizens would be and oppression of the German people. hostile to the idea of the Berlin Wall; According to Sonja Foss, “to qualify as as a result, the government restricted visual rhetoric, an image must go be- the language that citizens could use to yond serving as a sign, however, and refer to the structure in an attempt to be symbolic, with that image only in- prevent backlash of angry Berliners. directly connected to its referent.”24 By creating a new label for the struc- !e function of the Berlin Wall exem- ture, the East German government pli"es this idea, extending beyond was attempting to change the sym- serving as a sign. Despite the fact that bolic meaning of the Berlin Wall for the East German government erected the German people. !e term ‘anti- the Berlin Wall in an attempt to sal- fascist protection bulwark’ is a euphe- vage the economic and political situ- mism for ‘wall,’ intended to lessen the ation in Germany, the German citi- sense that the government was using zens interpreted the structure as the the structure to oppress the German government’s attempt to symbolically citizens. However, “the presence of the demonstrate its power. In support of wall was, nevertheless, a dominating this German mindset, it is interesting feature.”20 to recognize that “the great walls of Furthermore, studies have shown the past were erected to repel invad- that there are many “deleterious social ers and barbarians. !e Wall in Berlin and psychological consequences of a is unique because its object is to pre- society encircled by a wall” including vent the men and women behind it “a novel psychological disease: ‘the from reaching freedom.”25 While the wall disorder’.”21 !is disorder refers to Great Wall of China protected Chinese
18 Fig. 4. Berliners celebrate the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989.27
dynasties from the attacks of nomadic pute,” signed a declaration on August tribes and Hadrian’s Wall prevented 29, 1961, that stated, “It is one thing for the Roman Empire from raids by tribes a social order to force its citizens, by the in current-day Scotland, the East Ger- millions, to seek asylum elsewhere. It is man Government established the Ber- still more reprehensible to cut o$ their lin Wall to prevent travel of citizens escape by means of walls and barbed within their own nation. Armed East wire across city streets, to threaten German border guards lined the Ber- them at the point of bayonets, to shoot lin Wall to prevent people from cross- at them in %ight as if they were run- ing from one side of the wall to the away slaves.”28 !e Congress for Cul- other. During the twenty-eight years tural Freedom continued their asser- that the wall stood, “over 40, 000 peo- tion by describing how the Berlin Wall ple tried to cross illegally, and 95 died de"es “the most elementary respect while attempting to do so.”26 !e large for a human right — and one which all number of killings — both provoked the nations of the civilized world are and unprovoked — over the twenty- on record as having recognized.”29 Ac- eight years that the wall stood empir- cording to the Universal Declaration of ically demonstrate the atmosphere of Human Rights, created by the General fear the wall created. Assembly of the United Nations, “Ev- eryone has the right to leave any coun- try, including his own.”30 !e Berlin DEFIANCE OF HUMAN RIGHTS Wall violates this basic human right in Aside from creating an ambiance two ways: by physically acting as a bar- of fear, the imposition of the Berlin rier preventing travel and by impos- Wall actually de"ed human rights. !e ing psychological barriers upon the Congress for Cultural Freedom, con- minds of the German citizens. It is ap- sisting of “thirty authors of world re- parent that “the Wall that prevent[ed] the citizens of the GDR [German Dem-
19 ocratic Republic] and East Berlin from Reagan emphasizes this symbolic choosing freedom [could] not conceal nature of the Berlin Wall when he as- the injustice perpetrated behind it. Its serts: construction through the heart of the city [had] neither legal nor moral justi- “As I looked out a moment ago from the "cation.”31 !us, the Berlin Wall stood Reichstag, that embodiment of German unity, I noticed words crudely spray-painted as a symbol of oppression by depriving upon the wall, perhaps by a young Berliner: German citizens of their basic human ‘!is wall will fall. Beliefs become reality.’ rights. Yes, across Europe, this wall will fall. For it cannot withstand faith; it cannot withstand freedom.” 34 THE FALL OF THE WALL AND THE OVERTHROW OF A SYMBOL Clearly, Reagan understands the While the Berlin Wall was sym- symbolic nature of the Berlin Wall, bolic of oppression as it stood, its de- and calls to overthrow the symbol of molition also served as a visual ar- oppression in his speech, challenging, gument. !e “fall of the Berlin Wall” “General Secretary Gorbachev, if you occurred on November 9, 1989. From seek prosperity for the Soviet Union this day forth, Berliners could travel and Eastern Europe, if you seek libera- across the border created by the wall. tion: Come here to this gate! Mr. Gor- bachev, open this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, At this time, the wall was not physi- 35 cally torn down, but “a new law to lift tear down this wall!” Two years after the travel restrictions for East Ger- Reagan’s speech, the wall fell and the man citizens” was established.32 !e symbol of oppression and of the Cold true power of the Berlin Wall as a vi- War was overthrown. sual argument became evident when the government announced the fall of the wall and crowds screamed and CONCLUSIONS cheered loudly, celebrating the end of Clearly, the Berlin Wall acted as the oppression embodied by the Ber- a symbol of oppression as it stood lin Wall (as seen in Fig. 2). and portrayed a message of freedom On the day that the destruction when dismantled. Analysis of the Ber- of the wall’s physical form began, the lin Wall provides valuable insight into structure lost its ability to impose the nature and e$ects of walls, which movement restrictions on the German one can apply to similar present-day people; consequently, the message of structures. For instance, consider the the Berlin Wall as a symbol of oppres- role of a controversial wall in the sta- sion ended. Ronald Reagan demon- tus quo: !e Israeli West-Bank bar- strates this symbolic function of the fall rier. In 2005, an Israeli court ruled that of the Berlin Wall in his speech, “Tear the country should have the “authority Down !is Wall,” when he states: to build a separation wall in the West Bank, beyond Israel’s internationally “…as long as the gate is closed, as long as this recognized 1967 borders, for security scar of a wall is permitted to stand, it is not reasons, signaling that Israel would the German question alone that remains continue to build the barrier despite open, but the question of freedom for all Palestinian and international objec- mankind. Yet I do not come here to lament. 36 For I #nd in Berlin a message of hope, even tions.” However, in order to gain in the shadow of this wall, a message of more access to major West Bank cit- triumph.” 33 ies, Palestinian villages appealed this decision, and as a result, Israeli jus- tices decided to rethink the proposed
20 plan for the wall.37 !e fact that the Is- to be a violation of the human rights raeli government took into consider- of German citizens. While the Ber- ation the lives of the people that the lin Wall functioned as a symbol of op- wall would a$ect before erecting the pression, the Israeli West-Bank wall structure contrasts with the unilateral stands as a symbol or reminder of the decision of the East German govern- need to resolve the political unrest in ment to construct a wall dividing Ber- the Israel/West Bank area. !us, when lin. !e goals of the Israeli West-Bank the Israeli West-Bank barrier is torn wall — to prevent attacks, solve polit- down, the dismantling will symbolize ical unrest, and salvage the economy the recti"cation of political problems in the area — are similar to some ex- and the achievement of newfound tent to the functions of the Berlin Wall, freedom and peace. In the case of each which served to prevent possible eco- of the two walls in Berlin and Israel/ nomic collapse and salvage the politi- West Bank it is clear that the building cal situation at the time. Although gov- of walls serves as a visual way to assert ernments created both the Berlin Wall larger issues of politics, economics, and the Israeli West-Bank wall to rec- safety, and control. tify political and economic problems, In conclusion, the history, audi- the two walls became symbols of con- ence reaction, and role in creating an trol and oppression for certain audi- atmosphere of fear o$er important in- ences. In Berlin, the wall restricted sight into the symbolic nature of the travel, split families, and in%icted fear Berlin Wall. By relating the analysis of upon those who lived near the struc- the Wall in Berlin to the Israeli West- ture. Similarly, people who oppose the Bank wall, it is clear that the Berlin Israeli West-Bank barrier feel that the Wall rede"nes the signi"cance of walls. wall will restrict travel for Palestinians !us, what purpose does a wall hold? who live in the West Bank and work in Before examining the Berlin Wall, one Israel. However, although the inten- might have asserted that walls func- tions for both walls might be similar, it tion to contain, block, or guard. While is clear that the creation of the Israeli these things are true, the analysis of West-Bank wall is more justi"ed be- the Berlin Wall points to a higher pur- cause it is necessary for security pur- pose of walls: to visually symbolize poses, whereas the implementation larger ideas of political control, loss of of the Berlin Wall is widely accepted rights, and oppression.
END NOTES 1. “!e Art of War, Part 1.” Sirlin.net. Retrieved on June 15, 2008, from
21 6. Munro, 31. 7. “Berlin.” (1994). Weblo.com. Retrieved on Oct. 21, 2006, from
22 32. Berlin Wall Online. 33. Reagan, R. (12 June 1987). “Tear Down !is Wall.” Ronald Reagan Speeches. Retrieved on Oct. 15, 2006, from
23 24