1989—Eine Epochenzäsur ? ed. by Martin Sabrow, Tilmann Siebeneichner, and Peter Ulrich Weiß (review)

Abstract

Reviewed by: 1989—Eine Epochenzäsur? ed. by Martin Sabrow, Tilmann Siebeneichner, and Peter Ulrich Weiß Alexander Vazansky 1989—Eine Epochenzäsur? ed. By Martin Sabrow, Tilmann Siebeneichner, and Peter Ulrich Weiß. Göttingen: Wallstein Verlag, 2021. Pp. 307. Paper €29.90. ISBN 9783835350212. Questioning the validity of era-defining turning point years such as 1492, 1789, 1945, or 1989 is a common and often quite productive practice among historians. The central question often becomes whether the focus on the radical change does not mask or even mischaracterize the considerable continuities experienced by historical protagonists after such turning points. While the title 1989: Eine Epochenzäsur? suggests a similar trajectory, the editors of this collected edition, Martin Sabrow, Tilmann Siebeneichner, and Peter Ulrich Weiß, do not question that the downfall [End Page 515] of the communist regimes in central and eastern Europe represented a moment of radical political, economic, and social change. Instead, they question the overly positive characterization of 1989 in popular and official memory as a major step towards freedom and democracy in Europe and the world at large. Under the impression of the rise of rightwing populism and authoritarianism in Europe in the 2010s, they ask whether 1989 does not carry a far more ambiguous legacy. The essays in the collection are the result of a lecture series at Humboldt University in Berlin during the winter term 2019/20. A majority of the contributors look at 1989 in the context of the collapse of the German Democratic Republic and the unification of its people and territories with the Federal Republic focusing on a variety of areas such as German space exploration, sports, environmentalism, the political left, newspapers, TV and radio, divorce, or the GDR in public memory. The five other contributors look at 1989 in either one particular central or eastern European country, Russia and Yugoslavia in particular, or analyze developments across multiple countries of the former Eastern Bloc. All of the contributions are of high quality. However, the analyses outside of Germany are generally broader in scope and more directly focused on the persistence or recurrence of authoritarianism, rightwing populism, and ethnonationalism. If there is one major critique, it is that the editors do too little in their preface and introduction to put European essays in conversation with the more narrowly focused essays on Germany. The introduction by Sabrow is primarily concerned with defining the mythical qualities of 1989 in Germany and the varying, often competing stakeholders laying claim to its legacy. The officially sanctioned and popular accounts of 1989 often elide the fact that most of the prominent opposition groups that helped bring about the collapse were not looking to end socialism or unite the two Germanys but were looking for a Third Way, a new democratically rooted socialism. This theme is picked up in multiple essays. There are two essays exploring this question for East German media, with Mandy Tröger looking at newspapers and Peter Ulrich Weiß analyzing broadcast media. In both cases, the collapse of the old regime allowed for the emergence of new alternative media. The development of these alternative media was cut short by the decision toward quick reunification resulting from the first free elections in the GDR on March 18, 1990. West German decision makers then forced a realignment of media along the West German model. Ironically, this restructuring led to a high degree of continuity regarding personnel and programming in regional media networks and newspapers. Similar patterns of dramatic structural changes paired with significant continuity can be seen in other areas as well. Environmental concerns became a major topic among GDR opposition groups in the 1980s. While West German environmental organizations absorbed most of these activist groups, Astrid Mignon Kirchhof shows that some initiatives started during the interim period did survive unification. Tilman Siebeneichner provides an example of an East German figure, Sigmund Jähn, the [End Page 516] first German in space, who has become a cultural icon for Germans on both sides of the old divide despite the highly charged political rhetoric that surrounded the two German space programs. An area where West German functionaries fully expected to adopt at least portions of the East German...