Based on the historical nature of social and cultural coexistence in human societies one can understand collective practices of remembering and handing on also as negotiations on belonging, the imagination of nations or building citizenship. These practices and discourses are not only generally complex and multi-layered but also potentially instrumentalized as objects of history politics in current debates. As a whole we are confronted with mutual and reciprocal relationships between various perspectives including complex relations of medial documentation, (re-)presentations and reception (e.g. Wagoner 2018).

Against this backdrop the paper considers medial (re-)presentations of East German experiences in the context of the Peaceful Revolution 1989 and the following process of transformation. The recent and broader research addressing various forms of memorizing the GDR itself describes a fluctuation discourse between the poles of the dictatorial character of the political system and ordinary life experiences which follows specific dynamics and cycles over the course of time (e.g. Clarke/Wölfel 2011; Rechtin/Tate 2011; Saunders/Pinfold 2013). Most likely due to the temporal distance the revolution and the following transformation process came into focus just recently (e.g. Ganzemüller 2021). Given that memory narratives tend to retrospective linearization of initially contingent developments and unexpectedly emerging events the current medial discourse on the historic events in East Germany 1989/90 is mainly dominated by a perspective telling a story about reunification and the following transformation process. Thus, in these narratives experiences of disappointment during the transformation phase and the sensation of a ‘colonialization’ overlap the experiences of empowerment during the previous revolution (e.g. Bertram/Kollmorgen 2001; Brähler/Wagner 2014; Lux/Leistner 2021). In consequence, these narratives build reference points within or evokes debates on identity building processes and concern societal negotiations of origin and belonging in current debates (e.g. Flack 2013; Brückweh et al. 2020; Ganzemüller 2021).

With the intention to discuss the possibilities of deconstruction of such dominant interpretations – without denying their reasons – by contrasting and pluralizing distinct perspectives and narrative patterns as well as by variations and decentrations of timeframes (e. g. Ganzemüller 2021; Denschlag 2017) the paper introduces contemporary video material from contemporary documentaries, specifically a series of documentaries from Leipzig from 1987 until 2015 (Voigt 2015). Based on a second pre-selection among this documentary series, the paper will focus on an analysis how these films present their protagonists’ experiences in the context of the revolutionary events and the early transformation. Doing so, it presents documentations of early experiences of (dis-)empowerment in its multi-layeredness without retrospective linearization. However, it illustrates first lines of development in these medial constructions which indicate diverse experiences of uncertainty and feelings of disempowerment while motives of empowerment fade from the spotlight. On that basis the paper intends to discuss the documentaries as a constitutive part of the ongoing medial discourse by a concluding consideration of further research perspectives like contrastive case studies including retrospective documentaries and other source materials (e.g. interviews with filmmakers and protagonists).

Scholars within the German traditional historical sciences approached documentaries as sources with skepticism for a long time. This skepticism addressed specifically the ambiguous relation between social reality as a matter of facts and medial (re-)presentations. Only since the 1990s, influenced by the Anglo-American visual culture studies, documentaries came gradually into focus precisely because of their character as medial constructions of social reality which contribute to collective sense-making discourses (Schlegelmilch 2019). Given “the two-fold nature of film as a resource in historical research” (Warmington et al. 2011: 459) the documentaries “might be utilised as a source (of information)” (ibid.). As such they are objects of interest as in any way consciously shaped (re-)presentations of events in which also various protagonists (re-)present their perspectives on the event. On the other hand, the analysis might address them as “objects of research, to be studied for their representational and technical features” (ibid.). That includes reflections on spatial-temporal “genres, visual grammar and technological devices” (ibid.) as well. Referring to criteria of the classical documentary analysis (Nichols 2011) one can differentiate between the use of original footage or reenactments, between exclusively observing perspectives or interactions with protagonists, and examine the organizational logic within the sequential order or the use of respectively the refrainment from explicit off-voice-comments. Moreover, one should take the aesthetic elements and features of (re-)presentation into account, specifically visual elements of expression which might articulate statements beyond the established verbal language (e.g. Cabeleira et al. 2011). On the basis of integrating these aspects into the analysis one can interpret the documentaries as parts of a specific “medial milieu” (Weber 2019). Thus, the analysis of multi-layered constructions of narratives and the differentiating classification of representative modes (Nichols 2011) allows the reconstruction of implicit perspectives and discussions on their possibly intentionally (re-)presentation within the documentary. Finally, these reconstructions build the basis for further research in form of contrastive case studies integrating contemporary and retrospective perspectives in order to enlighten mutual processes of generating meaningful reference points within complex memory discourses.

The paper discusses the contribution of medial constructions through documentaries to memory discourses as a constitutive part of both collective and individual identity building processes. By the use of documentaries, it offers, methodologically, a way to reconstruct distinct manners of documentation and how they influence the imparted image and interpretation of the historic event. Doing so, it intends to bring forward the methodological discussion concerning the use of hitherto neglected sources like these contemporary documentaries presented in the paper in order to shed light on the mutual processes betwixt and between medial representations and memory discourses. Starting from the case study with regard to the East German revolution and following transformation it means also to initiate an international discussion on remembering the historic turning point of 1989/90 which does not only concern the end of the GDR and the German division but also of the Cold War as such with the collapse of the whole Soviet Union. Thus, finally it intends a more general discussion on sources and methodologies as possibilities of the deconstruction of dominant narratives, the examination of their reasons as well as a critique of political instrumentalizations.

Bertram, Hans/Kollmorgen, Raj (Eds.) (2001): Die Transformation Ostdeutschlands. Berichte zum sozialen und politischen Wandel in den neuen Bundesländern. Opladen. Brähler, Elmar/Wagner, Wolf (Eds.): Kein Ende mit der Wende? Perspektiven aus Ost und West. Gießen. Brückweh, Kerstin/Villinger, Clemens/Zöller, Kathrin (Eds.) (2020): Die lange Geschichte der „Wende“. Geschichtswissenschaft im Dialog. Berlin. Cabeleira, Helena/Martins, Catarina/Lawn, Martin (2011): Indisciplines of inquiry: the Scottish Children’s Story, documentary film and the construction of the viewer. In Paedagogica Historica, (47)4: 473-490. Clarke, David/Wölfel, Ute (Eds.) (2011): Remembering the German Democratic Republic. Divided Memory in a United Germany. Basingstoke et al. Denschlag, Felix (2017): Vergangenheitsverhältnisse. Ein Korrektiv zum Paradigma des ‚kollektiven Gedächtnisses‘ mittels Walter Benjamins Erfahrungstheorie. Bielefeld. Flack, Jaqueline (2013): Cultural Distinction and the Example of the “Third East German Generation”. In: Lechevalier, Arnaud/Wieglohs, J. (Eds.): Borders and Border Regions in Europe. Changes, Challenges and Chances. Bielefeld: 145-156. Lux, Anna/Leistner, Alexander (2021): „Letztes Jahr Titanic“. Untergegangene Zukünfte in der ostdeutschen Zusammenbruchsgesellschaft seit 1989/90. In: Historische Anthropologie. Kultur – Gesellschaft – Alltag, (29)1. DOI: 10.7788/hian.2021.29.1.98. Nichols, Bill (2010): Introduction to documentary. Bloomington. Rechtien, Renate/Tate, Dennis (Eds.) (2011): Twenty Years On. Competing Memories of the GDR in Postunification German Culture. Rochester. Saunders, Anna/Pinfolg, Debbie (Eds.) (2013): Remembering and Rethinking the GDR. Multiple Perspectives and Plural Authenticities. Basingsstoke et al. Schlegelmilch, Arthur (2019): Die Historie und der Dokumentarfilm. Vergangenheit und Zukunft eines schwierigen Verhältnisses. In: Heinze, Carsten/Schlegelmilch, Arthur (Eds.): Der dokumentarische Film und die Wissenschaften. Interdisziplinäre Betrachtungen und Ansätze. Wiesbaden: 77-93. Voigt, Andreas (2015): Leipzig-Filme 1986-97. Eine Filmreihe. (Alfred, 1986; Leipzig im Herbst, 1989, zus. M. Gerd Kroske; Letztes Jahr Titanic, 1990; Glaube, Liebe, Hoffnung, 1993; Große weite Welt, 1997). [film]. Filmuniversität Babelsberg, DEFA-Stiftung, á jour Film & dok Film Babelsberg, absolut Medien GmbH. Wagoner, Brady (Ed.) (2018): Handbook of culture and memory. New York. Warmington, Paul/Gorp, Angelo van/Grosvenor, Ian (2011): Education in motion: uses of documentary film in educational research. In: Paedagogica Historica, (47) 4: 457-472. Weber, Thomas (2019): Neue medienwissenschaftliche Perspektiven auf den dokumentarischen Film. In: Heinze, Carsten/Schlegelmilch, Arthur (Hg.): Der dokumentarische Film und die Wissenschaften. In-terdisziplinäre Betrachtungen und Ansätze. Wiesbaden: 77-93.