Curating the history of socialist reuse: how two east German castles address their multi-layered heritage

ABSTRACT

Across Eastern Germany, many castles and stately homes were used as shops, schools or community buildings during the GDR. Since the 1990s, many of them have been turned into museums. This paper discusses the challenges of dealing with the history of socialist reuse in East-German heritage buildings comparing the former Prussian castles of Schönhausen (Berlin) and Rheinsberg (Northern Brandenburg). The comparison is based on five in-depth semi-structured interviews providing insights into the considerations of curatorial decision makers. It shows that there is still a high sense of uncertainty in how to address the GDR past, in particular when the role of the building was not clearly political. Personal recollections of the recent past lead to uneasiness in addressing this part of history. At the same time, the paper shows how attitudes have changed over time. Today, the GDR past is increasingly seen as an opportunity to connect to a wider audience and foster a more participatory and democratic memory culture.

KEYWORDS:

• Multi-layered cultural heritage
• memory culture
• reuse
• Eastern Germany
• GDR
• curation

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Statement on ethical approval for non-interventional studies

This is a non-interventional study using source analysis and data from five semi-structured interviews. This study was conducted in compliance with ethical principles, EU regulations, IMT research policies and procedures, and GDPR procedures and did not use any experimental elements. The five semi-structured interviews were conducted on 17 January 2022 (Fuchs 1 and Klöppel), 16 October 2022 (Kresse 1), 1 September 2023 (Fuchs 2) and 2 September 2023 (Kresse 2). All interviewees were contacted via phone and email in the week before the interviews to ask if they’d be interested in participating. In this preliminary contact, the PI also explained the details of the interviews, how long they would take, what questions would be covered and that the interviewees could withdraw their participation at any point without the need to give reasons. The interview questions were sent to the participants in advance. For the interview with Eberhard Klöppel and the first interview with Dr. Detlef Fuchs (phone interview), the consent was given verbally prior to the start of the interview. The interviews were conducted in German and recorded through field notes. For the remaining three interviews consent was given through a signed consent form. The interviews were conducted in German, recorded with an audio device and transcribed.

The interviews lasted for a total of 5 hours. The interview guides were designed following a thorough literature review. The interviews included no sensitive questions and the interviewees faced neither physical nor medical risks by participating in the study.

The three interviewees were informed in advance about the use of their data and were provided with a copy of the final paper. The interview protocols are kept confidential and will not be added to the publication, only single quotes are used directly in the text. In preparation for the publication, consent was given in written form for this specific use of the paper. All participants have agreed to the use of their real names in the publication.

Notes

1. See for example the castles of Leitzkau (school), Paretz (agricultural college and administration of VVB Tierzucht), Spyker on Rügen (FDGB holiday resort) or Schlitz Manor (refugee housing, school and old age home) to name just a few.

2. The term participatory memory building or memory culture (also participatory memory practices or memory work. See POEM n.d.) refers to the idea that democratic societies need to provide opportunities for diverse people groups to take part in the process of memory building since this is one of the preconditions for growing inclusive societies and ensuring cultural and political participation (Council of Europe 2017; POEM, n.d.). This may happen through a variety of participative formats in museums, heritage sites or popular culture, for example, through interactive installations and events (see Kambunga, Winschiers-Theophilus, and Smith 2020 or Kouhia and Rönkkö 2020), the use of technologies to collect and portray more diverse narratives (see Haskins 2015), or even the involvement in management decisions (see for example Dormaels 2016).

3. See Ira and Janáč (2017) for a number of case studies on the post-soviet nationalisation movements of the Eastern Bloc.

4. See for example Bach (2017), Ladd ([1997] 2018), Pugh (2014), Urban (2007), and many others.

5. The historical overview is based on Fischer and Schmidt (1992), Fuchs (2005), Fuchs and Sommer (1996) and Preußische Schlösser and Berlin-Brandenburg (2009).

6. Soviet Military Administration in Germany (1945–1949)

7. All quotes from German-language publications and all interview quotes were translated by the author.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Gesine Schuster

Gesine Schuster is PhD student in the track Analysis and Management of Cultural Heritage at the Center for the Interdisciplinary Analysis of Images, Contexts and Cultural Heritage at the IMT School for Advanced Studies Lucca. Her research focuses mainly on the role of culture and heritage in periods of substantial societal transformation, such as the post-socialist transformation processes of the 1990s. She is interested in individual and communal forms of identity building and perception as well as the practical application of scientific research in public history, museums and education work.