(Hi)Story Telling

08.11.2014, ,

Today we used two slightly different, alternative ways of approaching the historical period we are dealing with.

The first way was object-centered, a kind of historical show-and-tell. This way we got very different presentations on remembrance of the cold war era in Romania, Lithuania, Italy, and Germany (and Finland, but unfortunately I did not get to hear these). For me, the approach though objects is very useful as an opener: it makes the person who brought the object reflect their own relation to the topic in question, and encourages the others to do the same. Furthermore, objects, being material and tangible, are able to draw more attention and interest than texts in books, powerpoint-presentations, or documentaries. They might also “embody” different layers of history, larger historical developments as well as personal stories, which is why the right objects can be great starting points for getting people interested in historical contexts.

Which relates to the next part of the day, the story-telling-cafe: A kind of oral history, and an interview-method at the same time, here people are encouraged to tell their personal stories in a safe space. The safety of the context is guaranteed by rules for the audience, which is not allowed to interrupt or ask questions. Obviously, this also means that there can be no questioning while the narrator is talking and presenting her very own version of history: her-story.
The method needs good moderation, to ensure that there will be adequate reflection of the presented stories, and also that the narrating person is confident to open up and present personal experiences, perceptions and ideas. Preparation is needed to make sure the audience is ready to accept everything they hear at first, with questions, replies and discussions being held back.  I also think solid background knowledge is useful for the listeners to be able to put the subjective accounts into broader context.

When these things are given, I think it is a very valid method (perhaps even in connection with objects), which can add important, thought perhaps not always comfortable, aspects to historical research and advanced education. Otherwise, it might quickly turn into a debate different generations of a family might have at the kitchen table – and from my experience, these are rarely enlightening or satisfying.

In Prison

07.11.2014, Allgemein, , ,

I had heard mainly negative things about the way the Gedenkstätte Stasi-Gefängnis Hohenschönhausen dealt with history and actors opposing their strictly anti-communist way of remembrance. Still, I was interested in seeing the place myself when we went, thought I am not sure what I expected, really. After all, a prison without inmates is not much different from any other abandonded concrete building – unless it contains some “special” rooms as well, which, to be honest, I’d rather not see.

Hohenschönhausen turned out to be just that. A bleak, intimidating wall of concrete, a big gate and some buildings without any special traits. From the tour, which was not given by a former inmate but by an energetic young historian, many details could be learned: what type of food was served, how prisoners had to behave day and night,  privileges and punishments… Historical background was not touched upon too much, and when the conversation with the guide turned to comparisons of this particular prisons with other ones in different times and places it became tangible that there is really not that much to learn in Hohenschönhausen, except that the GDR wasn’t exactly nice to the people they incarcerated (but then again, where have prisons ever been nice), and that arrests were often made at random and prisoners rarely had the chance to get a proper trial and legal advice (again, not exactly unique in history and in the world).

What bothered me about the presentation was not so much the perceived waste of time (I would never recommend a visit to the place to anyone), because in our context it still made some sense to see the prison, but the lack of questioning in the presentation. We, like all the other groups who go to this place, got a complete story presented, without grey areas, open questions, or space for controversy. Not a very good way to deal with historical places and events, in my opinion. Especially because in connection to the space around the prison Hohenschönhausen has the potential to open up new perspectives on the organization and functioning of the Stasi, without demonization and ideological prejudice.

workshops

10.11.2014

Today was the day when we heard a theoretical part of different kind of workshops. Firstly, we had a presentation about perspectives of former East Berlin migrants at the GDR and post GDR discourses. This lecture I found valuable, because I couldn’t imagine how it felt to be “free” when the wall fell. There still were many boarders for the minoritys. And the lecture helped me to know more about the social statuses and migrants posinions in the early united Germany. Secondly, we have presented the places we have visited on the event day ( the fall of the Berlin wall aniversary).We showed pictures, videos and told our impresions and what does this event mean to us. It was a bit hard, because it was very emocional sometimes. Finally, we had and Anti Bias worshop. It tought us about negative side of stereotypes. I liked that workshop alot, because it helped me to realise in what kind of stereotypical world I’m living.

To remember or not to remember

09.11.2014

The variety of memorial sites that we visited shows the fact that people are willing to remember and to preserve in the collective memory the historical events. Usually, the negative events are more impressive and persistant than positive ones, so the focus of the cultural events organized on the 9th was to raise awareness about the tragic history. This approach was opposite to the attitude expressed by the large crowd of tourists, that seemed to enjoy the entertainment and the shallow, ‘fun’ concerts and balloons, in the spirit of blissful ignorance.

Different layers of rememberance

09.11.2014

When the same day stands for different things in history, such as November 9 (1938 – Kristallnacht) and 1989 (not even “fall”, but the opening of the Berlin Wall), each memory needs its (mental and physical) space for rememberance. During the past years, the touristic significance of November 9 marginalizes the 1938 events within collective memory. We have participated in a demonstration for “not forgetting” and “not forgiving” Cristal night, the pogrom against the Jewish population, their homes, shops and synagogs.

Protests prove to be effective means of bringing a topic back into attention because of the their emotional and engaged character. Bringing a past event back into memory takes exactly what the organizers of the march did: bringing together various communities (such as initiatives for housing rights or migrants’ rights) and emphasizing the historical trauma’s links to the present.

Update: While the majority of representations related to rememberance refere to the wall and dismiss comemoration of Kristallnacht, extremist right groups respectfully  commemorate the murders and devastations

“Meanwhile, nationalist activists gathered for a demonstration to commemorate the attacks of the Kristallnacht – or the “Night of Broken Glass” – when in 1938 the Nazi authorities launched a series of coordinated attacks against Jews throughout Nazi Germany and Austria.”

Source: http://rt.com/news/203739-germany-clashes-berlin-wall/

on rememberance: the enigmatic narratives of history

Allgemein

 

image

This is part of a larger story. But firstly, this is a foreward of an evolving story of (my)self.

I want to say that maybe I will not write a post everyday (obviously, this is my first lines in 4 days). Not because I don’t  like the idea, but basically because all we consider, learn, discuss,  here, on the seminar about “Rememberance of The European East West Conflict: Pedagocical Approaches for dealing with history and its current consequences” are very intense topics. I just felt during these first 3 days that I need more time of reflection than I was thinking at the beggining and that “the historical/ cultural iceberg” it’s showing me more and more its hights and also its depths.

The process of discovering that non-linear, anti-hegemonic discourses are vital for our understanding of the past and the complex socio-political reality around us,  had started and shall be continued…

Is the past obscuring the present?

08.11.2014

Participants at the seminar are from various European countries, so each has a different perspective on the East-West conflict. Each brought a picture which he/she relates to the conflict, in a personal way and has to talk about it. The list of topics touched upon is big and colourful: Ceausescu’s huge celebrations in the 80s, Radio Free Europe, the Finlandization process, the rebranded Romanian chocolate with rum and so on. It’s all about the past and how the conflict mirrored in various events and details.

But then Sarah, a German participant, introduces a whole new pespective. She presents the Political Beauty project, belonging to a group of artists who pointed out that the even though the Berlin Wall fell 25 years ago, many walls still exist today, which are being ignored: the Spanish-Moroccan fences, Us-Mexico border etc.

The discourse focusing on the celebration of the past is problematic because it leaves aside the dimension of the present. And because it tricks us into believing that history=past.

 

How close should you get: visiting the Hohenschönhausen prison

07.11.2014

Visiting the Berlin Hohenschönhausen memorial, the main political prison of the former East German Communist Ministry of State Security, the Stasi, cannot be done on your own, but only part of a guided tour.

And on this early November day, our guide is a German historian in her early thirties, with a Club Mate in her hand, friendly and straightforward, and very engaging. We are taken on a tour through this prison which seems to have functioned as a huge mechanism of isolation. The guide has a way of making you aware and curious about the stories, and somehow allowing you to cope with the emotions by not adding extra drama to a context that is dramatic enough.

PB070900

However, the interesting part comes afterwards, as we gather to talk about our visit at the Hohenschönhausen prison. There is a comment made about the guide having been  a bit disrespectful about those who suffered there, particulary in reference to a comment she made, but also by generally employing a certain distance in her presentation. Thus, a point is made that there is no place for distance when talking about traumatic events.

I disagree with it in the beginning. I’ve appreciated the guide’s abbility to stir your curiosity and envolve you in the story without recurring to emotions. In this case I feel that leaving the real emotions to those who actually suffered is more decent and honest, than actually feeling that you can share a bit of that trauma. Because truly speaking, you can’t. But what I can do is learn more about it, through a good documentation. And that’s what the guide did; in a vividly way, she helped me understand a bit of this big story.

But that was only my perspective. And I’ve slowly understood that just because the guide’s presentation style was right for me and my understanding framework, it didn’t mean that there was no place for dilemmas and debate.

PB070901

As the discussion went on about the right way/ways to transmit such knowledge about past events , valuable questions arose. Why do we go to these memorial places in the first place?  Is it better to keep a distance when talking about emotion-ridden events, or is it actually ok to involve emotion? What if the guide was an eyewitness, as it’s the case of some tour guides at the Hohenschönhausen prison, that  were actually prisoners there. Is his/her input more valuable? What do we search for in these memorial places?

And then a great point was made. Are we going to these places to feel that the Ugly and the Bad of our history belongs to the past, and we can breathe relieved after the tour ends and we go back to our lives? Or do we want to live these stories the way we experience Hollywood movies, in search of thrill, may it be a negative on?

 

 

Trouble making dilemmas: taking part at the East-West seminar

Allgemein

Like many human beings, I like confort: that of a warm pillow, of good food and of familiar ideas, which I can easily handle. That’s why on a winter day, I choose to stay inside, at warmth, instead of going out in the cold, and that’s also why I rarely get out of my intellectual confort zone, preferring to keep my world view as it is.

But sometimes you need to get out in the cold and to confront ideas which seem rather trouble making, and learn something, if possible. Taking part at the Training “Remembrance of the European East-West conflict” in Berlin can be a good opportunity of shaking some old ideas and making place for a few dilemmas about how we remember the history, what do we remember and how this relates to the present.

So just like the picture says, Achtung, Sie verlassen jetzt Ihre Komfortzone. Hopefully.

 

The 4.day

10.11.2014

Mostly today was a theoreticalal day.I got a lots of useful,interesting and new information and I think I’ll use those knownoledges during my life.As for me the most interesting part was at the evening,when were talking about “anti-bias” it was all new to me,so I was really fond of it and also making a research about stereotypes in  small groups was interesting