Keeping up with the State: From Involvement to
Involvement, Eastern German Narratives on State and
Citizenship
Universiteit van Amsterdam
Salma I. Moustafa Khalil
Social and Cultural Anthropology MSc.
Student Number: 11181370
MSc. Supervisor: Dr. Kristine Krause
Second Reader: Dr. Milena Veenis
Third Reader: Dr. Oskar Verkaaik
June 26, 2017
Declaration:
I have read and understood the University of Amsterdam plagiarism policy [http://student.uva.nl/mcsa/az/item/plagiarism-and-fraud.html?f=plagiarism]. I declare that this assignment is entirely my own work, all sources have been properly acknowledged, and that I have not previously submitted this work, or any version of it, for assessment in any other paper
Acknowledgement
This thesis and my presence in Europe at all would not have been possible without the encouragement of my parents and sisters, and my Uncle, Ashraf Moustafa, who has supported me financially and believed in me. I would also like to acknowledge Wiebe and Erik Ruijtenberg who opened their homes to me and became my Dutch family. I would really like to thank all my participants in Leipzig, Dresden, Halle and Berlin, who were open to my incessant inquiries. There are many people I would like to thank but I especially want to mention my colleagues in the program. I would particularly like to thank Lluís Ibáñez Juncosa, Beatrice Malaguti and Olfat Sakr for taking the time to read my thesis and discus it with me. Finally, I want to whole heartedly thank my supervisor, Kristine Krause who always pushed me to do my best and was always present and patient, and encouraged me to be bold and honest.
Table of Contents Acknowledgement ... 3 Abstract ... 5 1. Introduction ... 6 Storytelling ... 9 The State ... 11 Citizenship ... 12
Privilege and Involvement ... 13
2. The Researcher’s State – The Researched State ... 15
2.1. Motivation ... 15
2.2. Positionality during Fieldwork ... 17
Conjuncture ... 20
2.3. Methodology ... 21
3. Finding the Individual’s “state” ... 25
3.1. Tracing Personal Memories – Hunting for the GDR ... 25
The Former-GDR Citizens – Firsthand Memory ... 25
The Almost-GDR Citizens – Midway Memory ... 26
The Could-Have-Been GDR Citizens – Secondhand Memory ... 27
A Family Remembering – 360 Memory ... 28
3.2. The State of Things ... 30
3.2.1. The Remembered state: what participants brought from their past into their present ... 32
3.2.2. The Visible State: what people “see” as a representation of state effect in their surroundings ... 34
3.2.3. The Encountered/experienced state: incidents of direct interaction with the state.. ... 35
3.2.4. The significant state: what people particularly care about in state “performance” in relation to their lives ... 38
3.2.5. The Believed state: Party Politics and how they analyze it and their expected contribution to it ... 39
4. Privileged Citizenship and Democratic involvement ... 42
4.1. A perspective on Citizenship: The comparison effect ... 43
4.2. From A Sense of Privilege to a Critical outlook ... 48
4.3. Democracy and an urgent need for Involvement ... 50
5. Conclusion ... 54 Bibliography ... 60
Abstract
In this research, I investigate how people speak about the State in the former GDR area and position themselves within it. I used storytelling as a methodology in order to understand how they narrate the State and how they understand their citizenship and practice it. I argue that the state has different manifestations, influenced by memory, as well as by what individual find significant for them personally. In that sense, the state is remembered, seen, experienced and given importance, in ways that differ from one person to the next as well as over the course of a lifetime. The state is also experienced through citizenship. My participants seemed to be most concerned with their social citizenship and perceive practicing their political rights as means of protecting the freedoms they believe the state provides. In this thesis, the state is addressed as the authority guiding and guarding life opportunities and choices. And the way citizenship is practiced is informed by what people believe democracy offers.
Keywords: State, Citizenship, Welfare, Privilege, Involvement, Democracy
1. Introduction
In his book, The File: A Personal History, Timothy Garton Ash tells his personal story of conducting research in East Germany (GDR) during the 1980s1. Throughout the book, he tells stories upon stories of individuals who were involved with the Socialist State, through being in the Party, working with the Stasi or as part of the resistance. Through these stories, involvement with the State, and the different ways it was manifested, features as one of the main symbols of the GDR times. Even so, the sense of relief at the end of this coerced involvement is strikingly evident. It is also evident through many of his stories that people saw the benefit of being part of the State, being involved with it; or perhaps not benefit, but security – a security that seems to have been replaced with freedom. This is how he shares the thoughts of one of his informants:
“In fact, she thinks it was easier to be a single mother in the East than in the West. She also feels the political transformation of 1989 came just at the right moment for her son and daughter. They had that safe, sheltered childhood – and now they have freedom” (1997: 156)
Maxim Leo, in Red Love: The Story of an East German Family2, expresses this relief elaborately. He
vividly describes the relief of not having to be involved with the Sate anymore and of finally having full control over his life. In this book, he shares the stories of different members of his family and offers a very close account of the different extents and types of involvement they had with the GDR State, and how each of them experienced the end- the Wendezeit. For him, his sense of relief is most exemplified in the following quote:
“Politics can be a topic of conversation if you can’t think of anything else. Society isn’t the main subject of my life, I am” (2013: 17)
The two Germanys were reunified after the demonstrations which led to the fall of the Berlin wall in 1989. Or at least this is the commonly known narrative. This moment is a part of the complex history of the GDR as a State struggling with many political and economic issues and caught in the crosshairs of the Cold War, among many other issues. This “revolution” is still
1 It is a personal memoir where Garton Ash rediscovers his years in the GDR through his Stasi file and confronts
those who had informed on him.
2 In this book, Leo traces changes in the lives of his family members, personal and professional. He then links these
seen as a rare successful transition from one “State form” to another3. During my fieldwork, participants, especially those over fifty years of age, insisted that it is their main pride that 1989 was a “peaceful revolution”, where the officials decided not to use violence; and I was even corrected a few times when I referred to it as the Wende. It has now been 27 years since the reunification between the Socialist German Democratic Republic (GDR) and the Federal Republic of Germany (BRD), a liberal capitalist State4. In that time, former East Germans had to adjust to new economic, social and political system, as well as raise a new generation during that transition. In certain ways, this transition was considerably smooth, particularly when it came to the consumer culture. East Germans had long aspired for western products and welcomed the new market with open arms (McFalls, 2002). In other ways, however, there seem to still be challenges. These challenges are manifested firstly in certain stereotypes that each “side” of Germany retains of the other. More importantly, they are manifested in the way the eastern side appears to identify as distinct from the western side through media discourses and research (Grix, 2002; Von Salzen, 2015). All this is an outcome of a complicated German history, and consequences of the reunification process. Other consequences include, but are not limited to lower income, higher rates of unemployment, and many other critical challenges that are more pertinent to the east5.
This transformation from one State to another has had an undeniable effect on how the new German citizens viewed their own involvement. As expressed in Leo’s statement, the situation changed from definite involvement, from having day to day exchanges with the State, pleasant or otherwise, to people having varying extents and forms of involvement. This raised many questions for me, about individuals in both stories above, about their understanding of their relationship with the State, about their different navigation choices, between joining the Party, or the protests, or the Stasi, or following instructions to the word. I wondered what happens when this way of life, this form of dependency disappears? How does one adjust? Once you have the freedoms, Garton Ash’s informant talks about, what do you do with it? And where could it take you? And how likely are you to choose to be involved again in politics? And how far apart do
3 The history of the end of the GDR and the German reunification is a complex one, and unfortunately, I do not
have sufficient room to present it here
4 For a thorough analysis of the reunification, refer to Borneman, J. 1992. Belonging in the Two Berlins: Kin, State,
Nation. Cambridge University Press.
5 A more recent analysis of the eastern German situation is also available through this book: Grix, J., & Cooke, P. (Eds.). (2002). East German distinctiveness in a unified Germany. A&C Black.
you position yourself from politics and from the State?
This is a case of individuals who had to relearn to live their lives under a new State, after years of hindered agency, where you get what you want only if it is in line with what the State wants for you. It is also a case of young individuals who inherited a past that does not resemble their present in many ways, and, therefore, were the first to experience the State without much guidance as to how to navigate it. Hence, I am investigating how people currently speak about this State and how they describe their positions within it. I am curious about how former East Germans live today, now that their lives are not assigned to them. I am curious to find out how they go about making life decisions with how they understand their liberties and choices. More importantly, I wonder how they understand the State and narrate it? Is it still an opportunity, 27 years into its existence in that particular way? Or has it evolved into being seen differently? I want to know how people practice life and how have their daily practices have developed.
I arrived in the field after a long thinking and bureaucratic process. I knew I wanted to study political ruptures. I knew I wanted to go to Germany. I had read enough about the GDR, the Berlin Wall, and the infamous 1989 “revolution” to feel a certain connection with it after experiencing what happened in Egypt in 2011. I can, for instance, think of at least three common reasons why people in both scenarios took to the streets: absence of freedom of speech, police (authoritarian) violence and oppressive living conditions (albeit for different reasons and with different outcomes). However, things developed in opposite directions in each situation; for them a revolutionary moment was the end of something and the beginning of another. For me, as an Egyptian, it was the intensification of the already existing authoritarianism, so that it can no longer be ignored or avoided. Still, like eastern Germans, it was only when the political situation started changing with the State that I, and people around me, actually started to consciously and intentionally develop a perception of its effect on our lives and bring it up in our daily conversations.
This experience has been my motivation to work on an ethnography of how people encounter their State and narrate it. It is also an ethnography about how this experience has changed over time, among the different generations and with exposure to and contact with the unique history of that State, and its different faces today (with refugees, migrants and for different social groups – the middle/labor classes). I aim to understand how the resulting understanding of the State, through shared experiences and stories, would translate into a perception of citizenship, of rights
forms and layers of involvement with the State during the GDR, I assume it would have a space in people’s minds and I wonder how they act on it. Does it stop at the earlier mentioned relief; does it become a case of good riddance, or do people still feel this inclination to be part of how the State develops? They might have had to be involved during the GDR, but now that they do not have to, do they want to?
Following in Garton Ash’s and Maxim Leo’s steps, I aimed to collect even more stories. And the questions I plan to answer through this thesis are these: how do former East Germans narrate the State? How do they understand their citizenship?
Storytelling
Storytelling, aside from being a central part of doing ethnographic research, is a way of organizing understanding of the world (Di Maggio,2014); it is both a social and a performative process. Jackson (2002: 15) describes storytelling as actively reworking events, negotiating them and giving them meaning. It is an active process of reproducing organizations, communities and culture. This is what this thesis aims to do. Re-narrate the way in which individuals actively reproduced their understanding of the State, as an organization, as something with an effect on their daily lives (Cortazzi, 2014). Additionally, memory has an essential role in this process of developing meaning, and is a founding element of storytelling, on which I heavily rely. Processing memories, into meaning, gives out different results over the life-course of individuals and more relevantly here, after historical-political changes. Monika Palmberger discusses how memory, as part of personal narrative connects past with present and contributes to the imagining of the future. She also addresses different kinds of memory, whether through direct experiences of secondhand memories and the influence each kind can have on the way people think and perceive their reality (Palmberger, 2013: 14-19).
In this research, I use storytelling as my main method. And during my fieldwork I worked on gathering life-histories of individuals of different ages and different exposure to the GDR past. I focus on storytelling as a form of building a narrative on how individuals rework their past, and reflect on its effect on their present; and through this narrative, point out what their concerns are for their future. Firstly, I started by putting together all the different narratives of what people remember from the GDR, and then used it to create a familiar ground from which everyone starts thinking about and narrating the State. These narratives were then taken forward to create a picture of where people are likely to place the State throughout their life progress. A story
would start form how things were in the GDR, go into how they remember the adjustment period of the Wendezeit, proceed into what life looks like today and end with what people anticipate for their future. Together, my participants and I worked on linking the development and changes of the State, to how their lives have unraveled. The purpose of addressing memory in this research and asking people about their memories of the GDR was to understand how they link it to their everyday decisions, or justify their lifestyles, and acquire their sense of security, primarily, in comparison with other generations. It is addressed with the aim of getting a grasp on the role history and personal memories of the GDR, whether direct or transmitted through family and media, play in one’s reflection on the State.
Furthermore, I do not only look at narrative, or stories, through those telling it. I also consider perspectives of those with second-hand narrative, those who are familiar with GDR stories through parents, grandparents, school or otherwise. Finally, I have also become a participant in that narrative, as yet another listener, and an additional layer to it through re-narrating and analyzing it. This is where my own positionality comes in as a non-European, as a Middle Easterner, an Egyptian with a recent history of political rupture and as a Muslim. The background from which I analyze the stories they tell me is different than theirs. This provided for interesting discussions and revelations. I discuss this more elaborately in the first chapter.
One of the main questions I asked was what came to mind when I mention the State. The initial answers almost always varied between two options, the first being “I am a citizen of Germany”, and the second, was whether I was asking them for their political opinions. And these two responses reflect how people perceive the State as essentially the provider of rights, and as we will see later on, especially welfare. They also reflect how people feel about involvement, and what they identified as “politics”. It was indeed intriguing to hear all the different accounts of welfare, how it works and what it means, when they described their citizenship. In one case, it is a source of living and maintaining a life style, in another it is a source of security or safety net. For some it is one’s ability to change their minds about what to do with their lives. As for political involvement, people seemed to have different perceptions of what is political and what “being involved” means. This varied from volunteering for political parties to demonstration. Most significantly, many of the people I met always had something to say about the neo-Nazis and the importance that the left-wing keep themselves visible against an overwhelming Pegida6
6 Pegida: Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamisation of the West (occident) (German: Patriotische Europäer gegen
presence. They considered it a success that the Monday demonstrations are not needed anymore in Leipzig; they’ve won over Legida7. Quite a few are deeply involved in the refugee scene, as
professionals, through their research and day jobs, and as activists, demonstrating and giving direct help whenever able. Alternatively, some are involved in other kinds of politics, such a food politics, and advocate passionately for veganism. Finally, for some, being political means staying far away from politics and the State.
“I make enough to neither need support nor have to pay taxes. I want nothing to do with this government,” Andi
The way I see it, my fieldwork felt like an exploration of the evolution of how eastern German citizens make use of their new freedom under the current State. It was an investigation into how they attempted to understand the State and position themselves within it. It was an attempt at understanding how they view their “liberal”, or sometimes referred to as “neo-liberal” democratic State. The main themes included in the fieldwork and this thesis are the State, citizenship, welfare, privilege, democracy and sense of security. They were all addressed at length during my fieldwork, and it is my objective to make the best sense out of the interesting discussions I had with my different participants.
The State
In this thesis, the State was defined through the work of Timothy Mitchell (1991) and Michel-Rolph Trouillot (2001). According to them, the State includes, but is not limited to, the structures that define the prohibitions and constraints shaping the encounters individuals have with it. It is manifested in the power, care and control they experience in their daily lives. More importantly, it is critical to view the State, neither as an abstract concept, nor as exclusively existing through its institutions. A lot of work and development has taken place in the study of the State in Anthropology. Michel Bouchard discusses these developments and argues that anthropologists should indeed study the State historically and culturally and allow for an analysis of how the structures of the State are maintained in the daily “practices” of citizens (2011: 184). Anthropologists are encouraged to inquire into the everyday consequences of the State structures from the perspective of the people. In light of that, I attempted to have individuals identify what the State is for them, through narrating their image of it and contact with it.
7 Legida The Leipzig branch of Pegida, which no longer holds demonstrations: http://www.dw.com/en/thousands-demonstrate-in-leipzig-against-right-wing-legida-rally/a-18972594
The State change was analyzed by Katharina Schramm, an Ethnography professor at the Free University of Berlin, during one of our interviews. She described the political rupture in eastern Germany as a shift from a concrete cell, the GDR, to a rubber one, the re-unified Germany. In the concrete cell, “one was definitely bound to bang their heads quite quickly”. While in the rubber cell, the new system, “there is freedom, but still the boundaries are very clear and you move strictly within them, despite their seemingly flexible nature”. This shift from the concrete to the rubber cell has changed the state of things in the eastern German society, a distinction made a few times by my participants. They were not sure whether certain aspects of their lives where a direct result of the State, as a political entity, or just an unintentional evolution of how people live. It was not always clear to them whether something was “from the State”, or it was simply the current state of things, which is bound to change tomorrow, regardless of the State. I will, however, from hereon use the state with a small s, since the distinction was not always a conscious or intentional one, and to avoid confusion and attempt at maintaining a sense of fluidity to how participants used the terms and defined it.
Citizenship
Tracing the state through participants’ narratives, citizenship, and the way it is practiced, emerged as highly pertinent to fully understanding the role the state plays today- or where it is to be found. Participants were quick to assert being citizens of Germany, which in Marshall’s (1977) words would translate to being full members of German society with all the rights and obligations attached to that. His three theoretical attributes of citizenship are: social (welfare), civil (legal rights) and political (participation). This definition of citizenship, however, has been highly contested over the last two decades, where once and again scholars have insisted on the importance of problematizing its all-inclusive aspect, investigating it as a problem of otherness (Isin, 2005: 374). Participants, in this research, reflected on their citizenship with a focus on their social rights. This reflection process took the shape of personal positioning and comparison to other potential positions. Participants positioned themselves in relation to other people who have a different type of citizenship and a different set of rights; like their parents during the GDR or citizens of other countries. They also positioned themselves in relation to those with the same set of rights yet practice them differently. Finally, they positioned themselves in relation to the state, as the provider and controller of these rights, and focused on how they navigate the state as a system. They displayed high consciousness of the excluding effect of citizenship, and
Privilege and Involvement
Privilege was originally defined as unearned benefits, which dominant groups enjoy as a direct result of ongoing oppression of dominated groups (Monahan, 2014). This definition is one that focuses on a direct case of oppressors and oppressed, which is misleading. Monahan (2014: 76) contests this definition and argues for one which recognizes that these rights enjoyed by the privileged are not ones they enjoy unjustly, but are, in fact, fair rights that others are deprived from. Moreover, the sense of privilege presented here, is exacerbated by the acknowledgement of an imbalance between the rights received and the contribution – or duties fulfilled towards the state. Most of my participants are either students, living partly on welfare and still exempt from taxes, or having an income below what requires them to pay taxes. This put in perspective their positions as highly dependent on the state. When they bring the GDR history into the picture and reflect on it, they grow conscious of how lucky they are to be able to have such security, without the obligation to follow a pre-set life track, and instead be able to pursue their dreams and liberties. Finally, they attribute this “privileged” position they are in to a functioning liberal democracy, that they now feel they need to protect when looking, firstly, at Pegida then the global situation- particularly Trump and Brexit.
It is important to note that a big portion of my participants are highly self-critical, as anthropologists and activists working on political issues, where they actually are in contact with crucial matters and diverse communities. Others developed their critical mindset through the media or by noticing changes in their environment, specifically growing numbers of migrants and refugees. Nonetheless, their reflexivity played a major role in how they presented their stories and justified their positions and beliefs; making them, in my opinion a special group. However, that is the group I had easiest access to, as someone with my own background. They themselves acknowledge their difference from “the rest” and advised me to not try and get in touch with someone who is on the right side of the political spectrum. The concern was not that they would most likely refuse to talk to me, but hostility was something they felt I needed to be worried about.
In my first chapter, I will be presenting my motivation to do this research, particularly as an Egyptian, as someone who has had intense exposure to state changes in the last six years. I
reflect on how I arrived at the decision to do this particular research, an ethnography of the state, and why I chose to do it in Leipzig. I then, take a step forward and address my positionality in this context. I use Edward Said’s notion of positionality and reflexivity to flip over the east-west equation and to try to reflect on how my presence in the field has affected my access and findings. Finally, I give a summary of my methods, and the way in which interviews acted as storytelling events and what planning and considerations went into the analysis of accessed stories.
In my second chapter I start talking about the state, as part of personal narratives and reflections on the world today. I start by building a sample of the different backgrounds my three main age groups have of the GDR. My participants are divided into “former GDR citizens”, “almost GDR citizens” and “could-have-been GDR citizens”. I try to give an idea of the different exposure each group has had to that history and how they have brought this background into their new lives after the Wende. Moving on from these varying mindsets, I share how my participants and I have ventured on placing the state in today’s eastern Germany. I use different angles of placing the state- or rather five modes of reflection. The first mode is how the state is remembered, building on from the GDR, while the second is what is seen in the urban environment as a sign of the state-led-change or development. Thirdly, I pin down stories of interaction with the state as institutions, and fourth is what people see as a significant role the state has in supporting them at the different stages of their lives. The final angle, or mode of reflection is politics, particularly party politics and how people feel about the German political scene today.
In my third and final chapter I trace how my participants’ reflection on the state has resulted in them analyzing their own citizenship. To my participants, social citizenship was the most significant one. They then reflected on their citizenship in three distinct ways. They first compared their citizenship to other forms of citizenship, like citizenship in the GDR, or in other countries today. They then compared how they practice their citizenship to how others in their same position did so. The third and final way was by positioning themselves in relation to the state and what it offered. Their citizenship, this privileged citizenship, is seen as a direct result of Democracy, a democracy that is now challenged by a strong rightist political wave that seems to be taking over eastern Germany and the world. I share how my participants discussed the different ways they try to become involved in reacting to this rightist wave as a way of protecting their positions and preserving the state of things.
2. The Researcher’s State – The Researched State
2.1. Motivation
“One has to acknowledge that the choices social scientists make about what to study in the first place, and the way they define clear objects of study out of the ever-shifting reality of social life, are always driven by the values they hold to be most important. Most of the time, Weber says, we are unaware that values play this role in directing our attention and defining what we see as available for study” (Robbins, 2013: 448)
As I reflect on the above statement, I feel it is important for me to acknowledge that as an aspiring social scientist, my interests are not far from my personal life and experiences. I am interested in doing an Anthropology of the State because of how challenging it was for me to wrap my head around what a state is and should be – given the overwhelmingly blurry ways the Egyptian state has appeared – or failed to - throughout my lifetime. I chose eastern Germany as a form of acting on wishful thinking, as chasing down what could have been, had things gone right, had Egyptians been so lucky. I have always wondered if a perfectly “happy” scenario was real, although, I know it is never possible. Still, I wanted to hear different types of stories about adjustment to state changes, in a naïve attempt to believe in the possibility of positive political change. But, I do understand the uniqueness of every situation, and especially the East German one, where they “just fell into the western pot” as one of my participants put it. I also understand the entirely different nature of the Egyptian state- a post-colonial, autocratic, authoritarian state, drowning in national debt and overpopulation.
Understanding the long-term developments of political ruptures, experiencing a case of a successful revolution where people now enjoy what we still lack in Egypt, to me is an attempt at restoring faith, in that things do work out for the better sometimes. I wanted to understand how people approach this “better”, how and whether they try to make the best of it and whether they take it for granted. And if not, how do they try to protect it? My experience, and the Egyptian experience has so far been a heartbreaking one. And I could see considerable parallels between the GDR and the Egyptian state, like surveillance, nationalist socialization through citizenship classes in school and media, and mandatory military service. I also related so much to how Maxim Leo grew up and that made me really want to explore the new lives of those who, at least in the books I have read, seem to have had childhood experiences similar to mine. I also wanted to learn about how they raised their children within the new state of things. Consequently, I was
on constant watch over how I was reacting to the stories being shared with me, how selective I was about the stories I shared back, and how far I was willing to talk about the Egyptian situation.
In using Robbins, and Weber’s, terms, I focused on how the values most important to me came out in the form of feelings, questions, reactions and analysis of what I was being faced with. As a young Egyptian, the values most important to me are the ones I feel I have been deprived of and when fighting for them, I was on the losing side. These values are my freedom of speech, of mobility, of opportunity, of being part of something bigger than myself, something that I believe in. Therefore, I made my inquiries about the state, anticipating their political responses. I questioned, repeatedly, their negative feelings towards their state whenever they surfaced, demanding them to justify this pessimism, to point out what they believed was wrong with the state of things. I walked through streets covered in graffiti and envied them for their ability to express themselves, to have these spaces where they do not have to consider authority. I could hear my own skepticism and criticism when reacting to someone complaining about their financial situation or that they wished they knew more about something. I constantly had to censor my thoughts and reactions, and remind myself that this was why I came here, to develop a realistic look on what on the outside seems like an overwhelmingly good scenario.
I also had to remind myself that I have managed to find my way into a better situation. I am lucky enough to currently be at a place where I am free to say what I want, to go where I please and to a certain extent create my own reality. But this is particularly why I care so much about understanding the state, this authority whose existence is still contested and confusing. I mostly care about understanding how people see the state, and how much stake they feel they have in it, and how much of the authority of the state they think is in fact their own authority. I care as an act of hope, if not for myself, then for all those I have left behind, those who have not yet been fortunate as myself (by leaving) or eastern Germans (whose state has changed for the better).
This research for me, is about understanding how eastern Germans took up this opportunity of self-actualization, and of recreating their own reality in the recent conditions they found themselves in. I was curious about how much they value this opportunity, and whether the current generation, which has never experienced an alternative, takes their situation for granted.
2.2. Positionality during Fieldwork
“For it is true that no production of knowledge in the human sciences can ever ignore or disclaim its author’s involvement as a human subject in his own circumstances, then it must also be true that for a European or American studying the Orient there can be no disclaiming the main circumstances of his actuality: that he comes up against the orient as a European or American first, as an individual second” – Edward Said, Orientalism (1978: 11)
Like Garton Ash, I was the outsider who constantly felt observed, fortunately, with less intensity and with different motives. But unlike him, I am a non-European who does not speak the language – I am even further outside than he was. During my fieldwork, I was very conscious of that, and as someone who strongly relates to Said’s Orientalism, I kept the above quote close to mind. I realized that the reverse of what he is talking about is also very true. I came up against my field as an Egyptian first and an individual second. And I was anxious to find out what that meant for my field experience. Prior to arriving, I had to consider the effects of being a Muslim in an area with a growingly negative rhetoric on Islam, and a seemingly violent Pegida. I also wondered how being a woman anthropologist of color inquiring into a western community will be seen by my participants8. Surprisingly, these elements provided for a very good entry and helped me develop a nuanced understanding of what I was being exposed to. These particular elements of my background, in addition to the political conditions of my country were my entry ticket to the field as a whole.
When I first met Bernadette, who is 24, and Andi, 26, the three of us reflected on our different positions, and the thoughts that were triggered when I presented my project to them. After meeting Bernadette at a café, we went back to her house and settled into the kitchen as her roommate and old friend, Andi, gave us instructions on lunch. The three of us sat around the table chopping vegetables, making jokes about world events and contemplating what to add to the meal. Bernadette had already introduced me as a friend of a friend, who is in Leipzig doing research. She then told me that Andi comes from a village and has big problems with his parents’ politics. Andi is a DJ and two days a week Wurst Kiosk waiter (sausage kiosk). He was quick to announce that he thinks his parents are “idiots”.
8 Unfortunately, I do not have space in this thesis to expand on how gender worked in the field and the special
access (and challenges) I had as a woman. I can, however, say that it did work mostly to my benefit, since being a woman was seen as unthreatening. In fact, because I am a woman alone abroad, people were often concerned for my safety, traveling and living alone in eastern Germany as a person of color in the time when the rightist wave was growing increasingly violent.
Bernadette, who has a bachelor degree in Anthropology, lifted the plate up to a standing Andi, to see if it was enough. He nodded casually as she expressed that “it’s so strange to be subjects of research, to be studied”. For the following hour, a discussion about what that means sprang in the kitchen. We explained to Andi that anthropology has the history of the opposite happening. For Bernadette, among other students that I talked to later, this was a curious case where their study experience was being reversed. Instead of being in Amman or Cairo, for Arabic courses and cultural experiences, someone from Cairo was in their living rooms, studying their language and questioning their culture. This was additionally exciting for most of them, since they are not allowed to go to Cairo anymore given the safety conditions. Andi, however, felt this entire discussion was confusing, he could not see any reason why my presence was anything special. I looked like a normal person, if not for my hair, I spoke better English than him (in his opinion) and seemed to be genuinely interested. If anything, I was making his life feel interesting for a change. For him, this was a brilliant opportunity to ask if all the things he watched on television or in documentaries about the Middle East were true. Bernadette ended with the note that perhaps it is nice to realize that there is something about Europe that is worth studying as well.
Later on, during my time in Leipzig, especially with Bernadette and Andi, I had trouble asking to talk about my research or to have interviews, although, they were incredibly helpful and forthcoming about it. This was a result of the recurring thought that I had so much in common with my participants. Most of them were my age or close to it, we all shared an interest in Middle Eastern issues (if to different extents and for very disparate reason – theirs was a choice) and I am as well-educated, and apparently “western” as they are. Spending time with them, discussing our personal lives and daily dramas, resulted in me occasionally having a hard time switching mode from friend to researcher. It also often complicated my reflection process and had me questioning my position and ability to be forthcoming with my requests for help. For instance, I did not ask again to interview Andi, he was the one to contact me one day and announce that he is now prepared to tell me his story. This was also the case with many students at the university who approached me. Still, sometimes, on requesting meetings with people I had met casually, there was slight disappointment when I revealed that I just wanted an interview.
Being an Egyptian anthropologist in Germany was thought to be a very attractive thing for students of the Arabic Department in the Oriental Institute at the University of Leipzig according to a professor I visited there, Professor Eckehart Schulz. And he was right. Not only
did I not have trouble talking to as many people as I had energy for, I did not have to worry about reciprocity, given they had just as many inquiries about my life in Egypt and Europe as I had for them. I was guided to Professor Schulz through a friend. Our choice was based on him being from GDR and that he had been in the university, first as a student and now as a professor since 1973. During our first meeting, Professor Schulz had a lot to share about his experiences in the Middle East. He asked about my intentions and whether I put all the “ethics of research” into consideration; that is, if I would keep the identities of my participants safe and not get too personal. I promised I would respect their wishes. On that day, I drafted an email for the students of the university and he forwarded it. This is how I met almost all my participants during the first half of my fieldwork.
My interviews with the students, naturally, had a highly performative character, where both parties had to strictly wear the role of a German and an Egyptian – these were the terms of exchange; that is unless I developed friendships with them, as was the case with Bernadette an Andi. They would answer all my questions about eastern Germany and the GDR, discuss their knowledge of the recent history and offer to introduce me to their parents and other friends, as well as translate for me whenever I needed it9. I, on the other hand, would have to time and again answer questions about the Egyptian protests in 201110, and the changes in the political situation since then. I would be asked whether I took part in the protests? How many waves were there? What is the situation like now? How did I feel about everything? What are my political beliefs? Who did I vote for, or if I voted at all? How do I think the Syrian war affects Egyptian politics? Is there terrorism in Egypt? And many more. But at least, reciprocity was not something I had to be too concerned about with this group. I often helped them read Arabic text or practice their speaking skills.
Halfway through my fieldwork time, I moved into an old building in the area of Plagwitz in Leipzig. This building is over a 100 years old and has not been maintained properly. On the outside, it looks abandoned with broken windows and graffiti, and on the inside, it is humid,
9 Contrastingly, Andi and Bernadette refused to introduce me to their parents, at least not for interviews. They felt
there need to be clear lines between my work and my friendship with them. On the other hand, there were some cases where I became friends with my participants after I had already interviewed them and met their parents; partly, because I had already found out so much about their lives that we grew closer.
10 Very rarely did someone ask about the demonstrations of 2013 which ousted Mohamed Morsi, the elected
president at the time. Most people’s knowledge of the political situation seems to end with 2011. I had mixed feelings about the fact that the demonstrations and resulting violence of 2013 were complete news to them, although the most oppressive laws that have been enacted in Egypt in the last three years are a direct outcome of these few months, in 2013 and not 2011.
with toilets in the staircase and coal ovens for heating. This attracted a special kind of tenants, who are young (average age: 30) and of certain economic circumstances and artistic inclinations. Everyone in the building practices some form of art, graffiti, music, graphic design, acting… etc., and only about half of them have a Bachelor’s degree. What they all mostly have in common are irregular incomes and a strong desire to keep living in this building. I was the first and only non-German to live in there and this earned me a unique kind of welcome. I had regular visits from my neighbors, sometimes almost intrusive ones. However, they had a very different exposure to knowledge about where I come from, and this meant they had a considerably different set of questions, very random and rather revealing questions. I was of course asked about the revolution, but I was also asked about what streets and traffic were like in Cairo. And often, I would be shown Arabic (and sometimes Persian) text and asked to translate it. There was an instance or two where they were confused that I cannot understand much Persian, since it looks “just like Arabic”. I once responded by showing an email in Dutch and asked for translation.
All my interviews and even introductions started with why someone like me would be interested in such research and it always ended with how I dealt with looking “the way I do” in eastern Germany, especially with all that is happening with the refugee situation and the increasingly violent presence of the right wing11. Perceptions of what being Muslim means played a part in the kinds of personal questions people asked me about my upbringing, beliefs and ideas about the world.
Conjuncture
During my time in Leipzig, four main events took place that had direct influence on how my participants saw themselves and how my thoughts about my research progressed. The first was the last Legida demonstration, in which right-wing demonstrators were far outnumbered by left-wing anti-Legida ones. Afterwards, everyone was very outspoken about how special and open-minded Leipzig is, it had stopped the right-wing infestation. The second, was Marin Schulz, from the Social Democratic Party, announcing his candidacy for the next round of Chancellorship
11 I would have also liked to explore my participants inquiries about how racism functions in their own society.
Often, I was asked if I thought Germans were racists and how I dealt with being stared at in public spaces. One of my participants has a half-African daughter and she asked me for advice about how she can support her daughter through her identity crisis, now that people around her are telling her that “she is not really German”. I feel this research has equally revealed how my participants see themselves in these politically charged times, as much as how they see the state.
elections against Angela Merkel12. This also came up quite often during my interviews, where everyone was trying to anticipate how he would deal with the refugee crisis and Pegida. The third event was International Women’s Day and the Women’s March in Leipzig. This brought up a lot of discussions on issues of feminism and what the movement was like in Egypt. Even more interestingly it led to discussions about the police as a “protector of society”. I struggled with what I felt was excessive police presence in the march which confused my neighbors, and which led to a discussion on police profiling and institutional violence - something most of them seemed to know very little about. The last event was a right-wing protest in a left-wing area in Leipzig, called Connewitz, which was expected to be violent, and hence, there were rumors that it would have the highest police presence since 1989. There was a lot of anxiety about this protest, and incredible relief – and even more pride- when not enough people showed up and all the police preparations was found to have been unnecessary.
My fieldwork also happened to coincide with the first few months of Donald Trump’s term as president of the USA and his infamous Travel Ban on Muslims. It also coincided with the growingly worrisome Brexit discussions. World politics were always present in daily discussions, but they were even more relevant since my participants, most of which became friends, and I exchanged how we thought these events affected our countries. For them, it was increasingly alarming, yet they have the comfort of a fairly awkward relationship between Donald Trump and Angela Merkel. While I felt entitled to my seemingly apathetic reactions – which are only a result of having exhausted my ability to be angry - given the good relationship between the Egyptian President, Abdel Fattah El-Sisi and Trump.
2.3. Methodology
I depended on a variety of verbal interactions with the aim of gathering stories, where memories expressed through storytelling were shared. Initially, I believed interviews would be my main form of access given my language limitation. Therefore, I attempted to make the best out of them. I treated interviews as not simply an exchange of questions and answers, but a representation of a particular interaction that is shaped by the context and the event of the interview (Briggs, 2007)13. Seeing that interviews in this research were aimed at collecting life
12 More here: http://www.zeit.de/thema/martin-schulz
13 It is also important to consider Briggs’ notions on interview societies, which add to the performative element of
histories in order to inform a narrative, they were not to be addressed as mere interviews but as what Jackson (2002) calls “storytelling events”. These fed into a narrative, a manner of making sense of past experiences as well as mediating and managing reality. Places chosen to conduct interviews were based on the participants’ comfort, or what I thought they would find stimulating. Most of the time, interviews were held at their homes or cafes they frequent. However, by the end, when I was staying in the old house which reminded my older participants of their GDR childhood, I tried to make the best use of that.
I attempted to talk to people of different age groups, and who also live in different cities. In total, I interviewed, and had interactions regarding my research with, 33 participants. Eight are over the age of 50, and identified as former GDR citizens. Thirteen are between 35 and 50, identifying as Almost-GDR-citizens and twelve are between 20 and 35, identifying as Could-have-been
GDR citizens. Out of the original number, 16 are male and 17 are female. Cities where storytelling
took place (discussed in the introduction) included Leipzig, Halle, Dresden and Berlin. Participants came from these cities, as well as, from Stralsund, Magdeburg, Görlitz and surrounding villages. I also went on road trips with participants, and visited them in their hometowns where they showed me around and recalled events from their past – or from their parents’ and grandparents’ stories14. Often, I was invited to visit participants’ favorite spots or have walks around Leipzig or Berlin. Sometimes, discussions sparked without my contribution or even presence from the beginning, where participants would switch between languages to clarify something or share something with each other they did not want to share with me. Even while not necessarily understanding content, I could read into levels of comfort between those in dialogue, whether those sharing or those receiving, which would later be elaborated to apologize for excluding me.
I felt I needed an organizing method to filter through my findings, especially with the diverse groups and the overwhelming input I was receiving. I found Milena Veenis’15 four sources of inquiry, that she developed in her book about material fantasies after the reunification to be incredibly insightful. The first source is reaction to my presence (2012: 32) where my positionality and reflexivity played a big role. I kept track of the different questions I received and how people
14 Monika Palmberger referred to this as memory guided tours
15 In this book, Veenis argues that consumption and material culture has overwhelmingly influenced identification
and relationship between state and citizens in East and West Germany. The promises of consumption acted as a way of concealing the negative aspects of both societies’ histories and lives.
interpreted my behavior, especially my neighbors with whom I shared space and spent a lot of time. I also took note of recurring themes that would come up without my asking, such as the German foreign policy in regard to the Middle East and the refugee crisis16. Very often, when I asked questions about welfare and pensions, people returned the questions to me. On a few occasions, when it was someone I was comfortable with, it put me in a venting mood where I complained about the fact that in Egypt, we do have welfare, yet, pensions are worthless, especially with the current economic crisis in Egypt. People with jobs and no access to welfare are struggling to put food on the table, so those in need of welfare are in a desperate state17.
The second source is conspicuous silence (Veenis, 2012: 32), which mostly appeared with issues related to bureaucracy, such as taxes or Healthcare. Participants preferred to dismiss them by saying “healthcare just works”, while the tax system was too frustratingly complicated to try and explain. In fact, when explicitly asked about taxes, all parents refused to speak about it altogether, and settled for “we pay them”. The third is material culture (Veenis, 2012: 37) which had an overwhelming presence. People would often relate to our surrounding, whether items or location, to GDR relevant stories, memories or anecdotes. They were quick to tell stories about their first visits to Berlin after the Wende and how fascinated they were with about the malls and the varieties – some even remember the first store they walked into or the first item they bought. The final source is haunting trivial utterances (Veenis, 2012: 32). Security was a haunting utterance that everyone brought up, and it was hardly trivial. Older participants were forthcoming with their declining sense of security. This, they attributed to having gone through such a powerful and overwhelming change. It might have been for the better, but it has definitely shaken their sense of security, where they now understand that things could change overnight; if not State-wise then for them as people. Some of the younger participants derived their sense of security from a lifetime of support, while others derived it from a self-perception of independence.
Using these four sources of inquiry helped me assess, value and organize the data I was receiving. It enabled me to point out what was significant. Since I was interested, firstly, in how
16 Not many people were aware that some refugees are Egyptian, or that Egypt hosts refugees from all over Africa,
as well as other Middle Eastern countries. This put me in a spot where I often had to explain the refugee situation in the region, the economic and sociopolitical conditions in Egypt and why I should not be seen as a typical example when someone would react that I do not seem like I come from such a troubled place.
17 This, in turn, opened a discussion about my personal decision to come to Europe, and whether I intended to stay.
I would then explain what privileges I have that enabled me to make it to Europe and that staying is not as simple as making a decision. Mobility, for Egyptians, is not a thing to do; it is an aspiration that demands hard work and a whole lot of luck.
people spoke about the state, having a process of placing what they all talked about, or referred to – or would not talk about in a common manner, allowed me to develop categories and identify how I needed to move forward. For instance, I quickly understood that taxes and healthcare were not going to be a significant part of my research. I, just as quickly, realized the sense of security and social welfare, and what people did to protect them, or rationalize the way they thought of them, were very much going to be central for my research. I also realized that the refugee crisis would likely feature strongly in my results, since being Arab, like the refugees, meant that no story or conversation, would be free from the topic. Everyone started with the GDR history and ended with the refugee crisis.
Finally, after identifying the main themes that have emerged during my fieldwork, I went back to key people in my research and re-described my inquiries to them, and asked about their opinions on my findings. This proved incredibly fruitful, since it reasserted the categories I had defined and allowed me to see areas where certain opinions about the state or practices of citizenship were common among people, of the same age group for instance, and areas where I might have stumbled upon something too unique to be considered. This was also helpful for validation. It was my first time in Germany and I often wanted to confirm I understood certain facts or regulations correctly, or inquire about things I still felt were unclear to me.
3. Finding the Individual’s “state”
As I gathered one story after another and explored one family or person after another, I started thinking about how to make sense of these stories. I want to bring out, first, where my different participants come from, as people and as perceivers of the state, and then to create a bigger picture of the collection of their different stories. I believe, from my own experience, as well as from theories on memory, that history and personal and national pasts affect how one sees their world today. I want to now present what this looks like to me. I will discuss how this past was spoken about by my different, essentially age-sorted, groups. I aim to bring out what people kept from their individual histories, what they still remember, whether these memories are from what they experienced or what they have been told (in Palmberger’s terms, whether they were first or second-hand memories). I also want to uncover where they see these memories as having an effect on their life decisions and feelings about the state of things today.
3.1. Tracing Personal Memories – Hunting for the GDR
I divide my population into three age groups, depending on their exposure to the GDR and how and what they learned about it. The first group is that of, mostly parents (between ages 50 and 60) who presented their memories of the GDR and the Wendezeit as Former GDR citizens. Those who have childhood memories of the GDR, now between 35 and 50 years of age, are thought of as Almost GDR citizens. Finally, those between 20 and 35 held a Could-have-been GDR citizens perspectives. Whenever possible, Families where both generations had the chance to share their stories about how the Wende affected their lives were part of collective storytelling events. Parents and children shared their different memories of the Wendezeit and their knowledge about the GDR. For parents they were experienced memories, while for the children they were transferred, or second-hand memories.
The Former-GDR Citizens – Firsthand Memory
Detlev, a physicist, is 57. He invited me to his house in a village located twenty minutes out of Dresden. During the ride to their home, he said “The Wendezeit for me was an interesting time, it was full of life”. Later on, he said that he could not truly distinguish between the time before and after the Wendezeit. I found this interesting because he then proceeded to tell me how he had experienced problems during his studies in Leipzig and had to move away. He was even
almost rejected from a job he was perfectly qualified for, because he was part of the student community of the Protestant church. “It was difficult for you if you were religious in the GDR”. But at one point, the church had hospitals and provided care for disabled people; and he believes the socialist state was happy to be sharing these tasks. He did not feel very limited, especially when comparing his situation to other people who were more active than him.
When we started discussing the state of things today, Detlev was grateful that they did not have much trouble putting their children through school; especially since things are visibly deteriorating nowadays. Investment in education as well as the availability of schools has decreased. This would not have been something to worry about during the GDR. Finally, he is rather stressed about his pension. He would like to retire soon but is concerned he would lose too much on his pension if he does.
The Almost-GDR Citizens – Midway Memory
“I always feel so honored to have been in this place at this time. Every time I watch it on television I get tears in my eyes remembering… It’s something that has to do with my life but not with the younger people’s life – not as far as they can tell” – Astrid
Astrid, quoted above, is 51. She is from Leipzig and visited me in my house. She was incredibly excited to see my heating oven. After she reminisced over childhood memories of buckets of coal and her family cramming up in one room for warmth, she insisted this was a rare positive aspect of that time. She remembered growing up around a lot of people who were not allowed to do what they wanted, and were not necessarily able to do it after the GDR ended. She recalled hearing stories about the Stasi. She remembered hearing about people who were imprisoned and tortured during the GDR. It always haunted her how some of her parents’ friends were no longer able to pursue their dreams, or really live their lives, even after the Wende. Astrid realized that, for some people, it did not make a difference that the Wall came down. Specifically, she recalled a pianist who could no longer play after being arrested by the Stasi.
As a teenager, particularly after the Wende, she was exposed to people losing jobs or not getting the ones they had studied so hard for. In Astrid’s eyes “the Neoliberal world isn’t any different or better than the socialist one”. She aspired to be a journalist, but panicked when she realized how many people were in her class. She quickly understood that the state does not guarantee
self-reliance she simply did not think she possessed. As a consequence, she stopped studying journalism and moved to Physiotherapy, where, “They tell you exactly what to do and you have a clear track”. For Astrid, security was her utmost priority and this came from being told exactly what is expected of her.
The Could-Have-Been GDR Citizens – Secondhand Memory
Franziska, 27, is from Leipzig but was interviewed in her home in Berlin. She is a fellow anthropologist who felt this was a form of paying forward the lost reciprocity on her most recent fieldwork. She only knows what her parents told her about the GDR, hers is purely a case of secondhand memory. Franziska’s father was in the Party and had a good professional position before “the change, die Wende or the unification era. He had this typical biography of old and new after the reunification”. Whereas it was the other way around for her mother, things became better for her after 1990. Her father started to teach the accordion in the 1990s, and it was quite hard for him. In the 2000s he began learning IT and now lives in Westfallen in western Germany. Franziska, who sees herself as socialist as a result of her father’s influence, still does not see how the GDR could have lived on given what she has read and seen in movies. She is grateful for her situation, being able to live comfortably and pursue her studies, all of which is only possible with the state’s support, yet is not defined by it. The GDR history does not concern her much. However, having a Muslim sister and a socialist background still makes her highly skeptical about the state of things today, even if she is happy with her personal situation.
Robert, 25, anthropologist, is originally from Görlitz, but we met in Leipzig where he studies. He remembers his father saying all the expected things about the GDR18, that life was simple, that things were decided for you, and that this was not a bad thing. His father believes that all these choices young people have now take away from their security and calmness. Robert went on for quite a while about how his parents “feel sorry for him” for having to make all these decisions and being constantly faced with so many choices that guarantee him no security for his future. When asked about how his parents could feel so sure about the security of the GDR despite the conditions at the time, he recalled a story about his father becoming banned from attending university after a bad incident during his army service. His parents’ connections, Robert’s grandparents’ connections, enabled them to deal with that problem. “That’s how it was in the
18 This brings to mind what Milena Veenis refers to as the Standard story. All people of older generations had a lot
to share about how in the GDR times everyone was helpful and society was much more tightly knit. Ostalgie still resonated to a level during my fieldwork
GDR, people always found a way”, through each other. Still, Rober feels quite confident about his future despite his parents’ skepticism. He feels he will not have any problems making a living whatsoever.
For this generation, it was clear that while some of them inherited their parents’ memories and ideologies in ways that may influence their outlook today, others approach the GDR as something to compare their situation today with, but that is essentially history. While the GDR for Franziska was something that concerns her parents and stops with them, except for its theoretical element (the socialist ideology), for Robert it was a consistent topic of conversation between him and his parents. They always discussed how better or worse each of their situations were and this seems to affect how he sees things. He prefers to have choices and little security than his parents’ version of security, but not much choice. In fact, he criticized his father on not seeing that his ability to study what he wanted in the GDR was probably luck more than a matter of “how things went back then”.
A Family Remembering – 360 Memory
Frank is from Halle, Saxon Anhalt. He moved to Munich two years ago to pursue a better career and, in his words, make use of his high potential in Software Engineering. During my first interview with him over Skype, he could recall the GDR being brought up by his parents very rarely during his childhood. His grandmother, however, he called “quite GDR-ish”. He explained his parents’ lack of interest in the GDR by them not having had any of the troubles he remembered people talking about at school. They were both able to study what they wanted and never got in trouble. Granted, their degrees were useless after the Wende but as for their GDR memories, hardly anything was that bad.
I was, later, invited to Halle to spend Andrea, Frank’s father’s birthday with the family and do my interview. They welcomed me at the station and we went to the restaurant where they were having the birthday lunch. The interview was incredibly intriguing, luckily for everyone around – especially Frank who helped greatly with the translation. Andrea surprised everyone with the fact that during the last two years of the GDR he was in the socialist party. This was received by a moment of disbelief as they all looked at him. He was surprised at their surprise. “In order to manage your studies, you had to be in the party. Otherwise, they wouldn’t let you go through” – he explained and this was the end of it.
Heidi, Frank’s mother, told us how chaotic it had been when Frank was born, with them as a family and with the political situation. Frank was born in 1989 and Andrea could not get a job until 1996 and for Heidi 1999. During this time, they lived with his grandparents and depended heavily on their help. , they have their own business and worry mostly about political decision that might affect their work and their pensions.
Frank, however, presented the dilemma he had been struggling with to them. He wondered if they knew whether they had Stasi files and how they as “smart people” perceived the situation:
“I mean what I don’t understand is – did you agree with what happened? Or did you just agree because there was me? Were you going to stay silent or were you going to say something? Or were you going to spend the rest of your life knowing that some people who wanted to speak their minds cannot? What would you do if the Wall was still here today. I would be in Munich and you would be here and not allowed to see me and they would spy on our communication”
Heidi and Andrea found this too hard to imagine and tried to explain to Frank that it was harder than it sounds, to just take such a risk, especially that Heidi was pregnant with him at the time. I, on the other hand, was surprised that it had not crossed anyone’s mind that if the Wall still existed, Frank would very likely not be in Munich at all - the what-if was completely absent from their calculations. Still, a lot of people’s calculations seem to be rooted in their memories about the GDR. We can see from the above vignettes that, a lot of the time, what people feel is important is guided by what they remember or what they were told. These memories also informed how they deal with their situations. Detlev having been exposed to how other people were worse off than him in the GDR, seems to have developed an understanding that things could always be worse. Hence, he is grateful for whatever comes his way. Even looking back at certain things that were better in the GDR, like access to education, he still feels lucky his children were fine. At the end of the day, he and his family are all that matters, regardless of the bigger picture. Astrid, on the other hand, used her memories of the GDR as a sign that safe choices are always better. Seeing how worse off people were, kept her in line and not just grateful like Detlev.
However, when we look at Franziska and Robert whose entire exposure to the GDR are through secondhand stories and memories, the concerns start looking rather different- they become more conceptual in a sense. Neither Franziska nor Robert – nor Frank, are really worried about
