Stasiland: What does choice look like, under oppression?

Caitlin Leishman: Interpretation of original cover art

In Orwell’s fictional state of Oceania, paranoia breeds fear, and the human reaction to fear is to seek protection. This combination led the citizens of Oceania into the Party’s arms. Published 70 years ago, Orwell’s 1984 discusses the impact that a claustrophobic oppression and effective propaganda has on the psyche, and an individual’s moral decision-making capacity - when choice appears scarce. In this sense oppression and its symptoms were crucial to the attitudes and actions of the German populous under Nazism in the 1940s and again under the communist German Democratic Republic (GDR) in the 1980s. 

Anna Funder, during her research for her novel Stasiland, found herself in awe of the remnants of a real life Big Brother. The final chapter features 40 determined individuals who sit piecing together the puzzle of shredded Stasi files, surrounded by tall library-like hallways of sacks, filled with more thin ribbons awaiting their reconstruction. With only 40 people it is estimated that it will take 375 years to reconstruct the files. They continue the seemingly impossible task in a bid to use the Stasi’s own records to resolve the many still unanswered questions held by those who lived in East Germany under the GDR-questions, for many, concerning the fate of disappeared loved ones. 

Stasiland is a narrative about humans and the decisions they make when under a dictatorship. Rather than teaching historical facts, Funder allows the descriptions and experiences of her subjects to more powerfully reveal how it felt to live under the GDR.  Paranoia seethes through the conversations as they relay their stories. Some interviewees are resolute about the righteousness of their actions, while others wrestle with the shame of having acted in a chameleon-like way. In the past they participated with the Stasi, camouflaging themselves despite their morals, only to regret the decisions they made. 

Funder gained the trust of former GDR members Von Schnitzler, a television presenter and Herr Koch the cartographer who designed the Berlin Wall. Von Schnitzler put a voice and face to the regime, and is proud to have done so. Conversely, Herr Koch represents a Stasi member psychologically trapped into participating. He tells the story of his father who, as a teacher acting under duress, taught regime values to children. Herr Koch, bearing witness to this, fell into the party line. He and his father both contracted their values to comply with the GDR agenda. Frau Paul acted in resistance to the GDR with associates despite the risk. She was left with her own ‘Sophie’s Choice’, one that exhibits the undeniable moral strength of the teary woman Funder interviews, as recalls choosing between being separated from her son and informing on resisters who had placed their trust in her.    

In 2013, Iranian psychologist and Georgetown professor, Fathali Moghaddam, wrote The Psychology of Dictatorshipas a critique of the way dictatorships have been traditionally thought to come into and maintain their power. He argues that rather than using ideology to ‘fool’ the masses, the people know what’s going on and its brute force that keeps them in line. He discusses that people resign to it and adapt their values just enough to survive. Similarly, as Auschwitz survivor, Primo Levi, discusses in If this is a man, under extreme oppression a strategy to maintain sanity is to relinquish hope and desire. If a human loses the capacity to hope, they are more able to adapt their morality and make choices for survival accordingly.  

This rationale, as well as the contrasts between the willingness of the two former GDR members and the inner battle Frau Paul discusses as a resister, gives shape to the burden of the decisions people make, when forced to choose within the confines of an oppressive climate. It explains how they condition themselves psychologically to survive and challenges readers to consider empathy. 

As a journalist, Funder has considered not only the form of psychological behaviours or decisions, but also the pathological.  Her piece for The Monthly, ‘Not My Type’, discusses ‘whistleblowers’ and ‘leakers’ and the differences between the two as a matter of conscience. Whistleblowers being morally influenced and leakers (seeking power) acting pathologically.  Considering this, Stasiland is a raw investigation of the psychology of oppression. Funder’s interviews are unique as they take place in the present, in freer times, but discuss decisions made in the past during oppression. Reflecting on past actions, the conversations reveal the struggle individuals, from on either side of the communist line, have in reconciling the decisions they made then so that they can live with themselves now. 

Anna Funder’s Stasiland: Stories from behind the Berlin Wall is an unsettling report that makes use of her skills as an international lawyer, a documentary filmmaker and a multi-lingual government negotiator. Eighteen years after its publication Stasiland continues to teach that the decisions we make, even under extreme circumstances, define us in the eyes of others and ourselves. When an oppressed individual sacrifices a desire to survive above all else, enough to risk their life for their values, they steal back a sense of choice and retain an ounce of their moral identity to build upon, should they outlive their oppression.