记忆力我能和你谈谈吗

IF 0.2 4区 社会学 Q4 AREA STUDIES German Studies Review Pub Date : 2023-10-01 DOI:10.1353/gsr.2023.a910197
{"title":"记忆力我能和你谈谈吗","authors":"","doi":"10.1353/gsr.2023.a910197","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"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...","PeriodicalId":43954,"journal":{"name":"German Studies Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"1989—Eine Epochenzäsur ? ed. by Martin Sabrow, Tilmann Siebeneichner, and Peter Ulrich Weiß (review)\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/gsr.2023.a910197\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"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...\",\"PeriodicalId\":43954,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"German Studies Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"German Studies Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/gsr.2023.a910197\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"AREA STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"German Studies Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/gsr.2023.a910197","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

审查人:1989-Eine Epochenzäsur?由Martin Sabrow, Tilmann Siebeneichner和Peter Ulrich Weiß Alexander Vazansky 1989-Eine Epochenzäsur?编辑:马丁·萨布罗,蒂尔曼·希贝尼希纳和彼得·乌尔里希·韦斯。Göttingen: Wallstein出版社,2021年。307页。纸€29.90。ISBN 9783835350212。质疑1492年、1789年、1945年或1989年等具有时代意义的转折点年份的有效性,在历史学家中是一种常见的、而且往往相当有成效的做法。核心问题往往是,对激进变革的关注是否掩盖了甚至错误地描述了历史主角在这些转折点之后所经历的相当大的连续性。而标题1989:Eine Epochenzäsur?该书合集的编辑马丁·萨布罗、蒂尔曼·西贝尼希纳和彼得·乌尔里希·韦斯认为,中欧和东欧共产主义政权的垮台代表了一个激进的政治、经济和社会变革的时刻,但他们并不质疑这一点。相反,他们质疑在大众和官方的记忆中,对1989年的描述过于积极,认为这是欧洲乃至全世界走向自由和民主的重要一步。在2010年代欧洲右翼民粹主义和威权主义崛起的印象下,他们问道,1989年是否留下了更加模糊的遗产。该文集中的文章是2019/20冬季学期柏林洪堡大学系列讲座的结果。大多数撰稿人将1989年放在德意志民主共和国崩溃及其人民和领土与联邦共和国统一的背景下,重点关注德国太空探索、体育、环保主义、政治左翼、报纸、电视和广播、离婚或公众记忆中的德意志民主共和国等各个领域。其他五位作者考察了1989年中欧或东欧国家(特别是俄罗斯和南斯拉夫)的情况,或者分析了前东欧集团多个国家的发展情况。所有的贡献都是高质量的。然而,德国以外的分析通常范围更广,更直接地关注威权主义、右翼民粹主义和民族主义的持续或复发。如果有一个主要的批评,那就是编辑们在前言和引言中做得太少,以至于无法将欧洲的文章与更狭隘地关注德国的文章进行对话。Sabrow的引言主要关注1989年德国神话般的特质,以及各种各样的、经常是相互竞争的利益相关者对其遗产的主张。官方认可和流行的对1989年的描述往往忽略了这样一个事实,即大多数促成1989年崩溃的著名反对派团体并没有寻求结束社会主义或统一两个德国,而是在寻求第三条道路,一种新的民主社会主义。这个主题在多篇文章中被提及。有两篇文章探讨了东德媒体的这个问题,Mandy Tröger着眼于报纸,Peter Ulrich Weiß分析广播媒体。在这两种情况下,旧政权的崩溃为新的另类媒体的出现提供了机会。1990年3月18日德意志民主共和国第一次自由选举导致的快速统一决定,打断了这些另类媒体的发展。然后,西德决策者迫使媒体按照西德模式进行重组。具有讽刺意味的是,这种改组导致了区域媒体网络和报纸的人事和节目编制的高度连续性。在其他地区也可以看到类似的戏剧性结构变化模式与显著的连续性相结合。环境问题在20世纪80年代成为民主德国反对派团体的主要话题。虽然西德的环保组织吸收了这些激进组织的大部分,但阿斯特丽德·米尼翁·基尔霍夫(Astrid Mignon Kirchhof)表明,在过渡时期开始的一些倡议确实在统一后幸存下来。蒂尔曼·西贝尼希纳提供了一个东德人物的例子,西格蒙德Jähn,第一个进入太空的德国人,他已经成为德国人的文化偶像,尽管围绕着德国的两个太空计划的政治言论非常激烈。在这个地区,西德官员完全希望至少能接纳东德的一部分……
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
1989—Eine Epochenzäsur ? ed. by Martin Sabrow, Tilmann Siebeneichner, and Peter Ulrich Weiß (review)
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...
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
71
期刊最新文献
Cultural Narratives of Charles V and Spanish Imaginaries in West Germany during the Franco Dictatorship Energy and Power: Germany in the Age of Oil, Atoms, and Climate Change by Stephen G. Gross (review) Günter Grass und die Berliner Republik. Eine biografische Fallstudie über die kommunikative Macht von Intellektuellen by Friederike Stausberg (review) Writing at a Distance: Notes on Authorship and Artificial Intelligence Ethiken der Essenz. Eine Emotions- und Körpergeschichte der Rasse in inneren Kolonien (1890–1933) by Anna Danilina (review)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1