De-politicised childhood idylls

As part of a research case study on childhood memories (→ memory), contemporary witness interviews between children of today and older people from the former GDR were analysed. The questions asked in these interviews were developed by the children themselves; the focus of the analysis was on the stories told by the witnesses. Overall, the results of the study show that the witnesses approached the interviews with different intentions and seemed to deliberately share specific accounts. In their stories about their own childhood, they repeatedly differentiate them from today's childhoods – for example with regard to living, leisure, travel, and school. In recounted memories they focus on their individual everyday lives as children. They describe childhood as a beautiful, free niche unobserved by adults. Within the framework of institutionalised care, political influence also took place in the GDR, but this hardly appears in the memories recounted. Instead, politically influenced organisations such as the GDR school or the youth organisation Young Pioneers (Junge Pioniere) (see also Sources in focus: Pioneer narratives) are depoliticised. In the following, the key take-away of the study, a remembrance of GDR childhoods as a depoliticised idyll, is expanded upon using transcript excerpts from the conversations.

In the stories told by contemporary witnesses, their own childhood mainly took place outside and in groups. In most cases, the children were not supervised by adults, but instead spent their free time with their peers. Experiences with their parents were only occasionally discussed in the interviews. The unsupervised, free outdoor play is described by the contemporary witnesses as a carefree childhood idyll, for example by Mrs Beech¹ (born 1958):

The "we" signifying the group of children in the episode narrated here illustrates a sense of community. Mrs Beech also concludes with a comparison to the present: everything used to be a bit simpler. Playing took place at playgrounds, in backyards and in nature. In other interviews, vacant spaces are also repeatedly mentioned as spaces designated for play.

Mrs Maple (born 1965) also draws a comparison to the present. She discusses playing outdoors in the context of technical developments that have accelerated since her childhood.

Like Mrs Beech, Mrs Maple ends in a concluding classification that can be interpreted as a comparison with the present: she didn't miss anything. This type of double negation appears again and again in the interviews. It can be interpreted to mean that the contemporary witnesses – without clearly stating it – are referencing a deficient image of life under dictatorship in their narratives. They describe their childhoods using various leisure activities and both Mrs Beech and Mrs Maple rely on describing and listing rather than re-telling concrete situations. In their interviews, the contemporary witnesses gave two reasons for playing outside: firstly, their parents worked and therefore had less time for their children. Secondly, the children played outside so much because living was confined and there simply was too little space to play indoors.

Due to the special interview situation, the personal ideals of the contemporary witnesses for their individual childhoods become particularly clear. When evaluating current childhood, it is typically perceived and evaluated by adults against the background of their own childhood memories (e.g. Alexi, 2014; → memory). From a narrative perspective, one's own childhood is often described as particularly happy, while current childhoods tend to be perceived negatively. This can be seen, for example, in discourse on the so-called changed childhood in which changing conditions of growing up due to social change is problematised (ibid.). In contrast, there are large-scale studies such as the World Vision Children's Study (World Vision e.V., 2018) or the KIM Study (mpfs, 2023) ), which survey today's children about their childhood. In them, a much more differentiated picture emerges, for example, meeting friends and playing outside are still among the favourite leisure activities of children of primary school age.

In the interviews, the contemporary witnesses insinuate that childhood today is shaped by media and affluence. In contrast with their own experiences, the contemporary witnesses find parents today to be more controlling. Examples include Mrs Hornbeam (born 1968) and Mrs Datepalm (born 1965):

Mrs Hornbeam recounts that she only watched very little television. In this context, the subject of childhood taking place outside is raised again. Mrs Datepalm talks about the absence of her parents during her own childhood and contrasts this with the situation today. In both quotes, the older people differentiate themselves from today's children – their impressions of present-day childhoods become clear. They specifically bring these up in conversation and describe the different nature of their own childhoods according to them.

In the way schooling experiences are narrated, contemporary witnesses refer to school subjects, the premises and their teachers. A political influence, that could show up, for example, in particular lesson content in the subjects of local history or civics, is hardly ever mentioned in the interviews. Instead, the narrative focus is more on order and discipline, as can be seen in the following description by Mrs Hornbeam (born 1968):

In this excerpt, Mrs Hornbeam again compares memories of her own childhood and schooling experience with the present. She vividly describes organisational procedures before the start of lessons; the teacher is portrayed as an authority. It is striking that no reference is made to any political influence according to the GDR education ideal of the development of a socialist personality (→ comprehensively developed socialist personality).

Various images of childhood can be reconstructed from these accounts of contemporary witnesses. In one of the interviews conducted, contemporary witness Mrs Alder sums up that her childhood was very carefree. This positive view of her own childhood, the image of an idyllic childhood, can be found in almost all the childhood memories recounted. These can thus be clearly assigned to arrangement memory (cf. Sabrow, 2009), i. e. the everyday historical dimension of memories (→ memory). References to political topics and politicisation can only be found in rare cases. By contrast, childhoods today tend to be viewed in a culturally pessimistic (kulturpessimistisch) way. Based on these findings, the question arises as to what extent the recounted childhood memories are specific to the GDR? Are the memories of a free childhood, which mainly took place outside, perhaps more due to generational differences? These questions will be addressed by examining childhood narratives from a West German perspective in the second phase of the project.