The name of Erich Loest is equally well-known both in Eastern and Western Germany. His life vacillates between the two halves of a single nation. The Eastern part is where he gained his civil experience, served a seven year strict regime prison term for “forming counter-revolutionary groups,” had to earn a living under a pseudonym, and where he, a mature 53 year-old, protested censorship, quitting the GDR Writers Union. The Western part means temporary refuge from 1981 on and publication of his novel, A Crack in the Earth, followed by another five novels and work in the conditions of a de facto democracy. After German reunification, Mr. Loest returned to his native Leipzig, where he had first worked as a journalist and where he continues to actively communicate with his readers, now members of one nation rather than Wessies and Ossies on the pages of Leipziger Volkszeitung. It is with this slogan, “We are one people,” that the characters of his novel St. Nicholas Church take to the streets. What the former dissident now cares most about is the united nation currently undergoing a tough test of strength within the borders of its ten year-old united state. This care also comes through in the exclusive interview Mr. Loest granted to The Dayduring his recent visit to Kyiv at the invitation of the Embassy of the Federal Republic of Germany.
The Day: “Mr. Loest, you have the experience of living in different ideological and economic epochs in Germany. What are the greatest disappointments in this experience?”
“The greatest disappointment for me was failure to build in the GDR the kind of socialism we wanted to build. I was disappointed that this kind of socialism was called into question on June 17, 1953 (day on which Soviet troops put down an uprising in the GDR — Ed.). I was disappointed that no lessons were learned from those events. I was also disappointed that no conclusions were made from what Nikita Khrushchev said about Stalin, and nothing was done to prevent the construction of the Berlin Wall in 1961. Finally, I was disappointed that the GDR ceased to exist.”
Erich Loest: “Do you think socialism would have had a future if the relevant conclusions had been made? Do you think socialism is a viable system? Or perhaps capitalism and socialism should converge, as Professor Sakharov believed?”
“No, socialism is not a viable system. I think wrong theoretical conclusions about the path of socialist development were made at the very outset. I do not believe that a state-run economy could achieve any success. I think an economy like this cannot possibly teach or bring up a human being, for a person is a creation that needs no outside initiatives but must develop his own initiative. It was also a failure (and I think it was always doomed to failure) to mix socialism and capitalism or to set up an economic system that mixes these two forms of existence.”
“In this case, what do you think should be the path of development for a society in transition from totalitarianism, either fascist or communist?”
“I think conditions in Russia, as well as in Poland and Ukraine, are far more complicated than they were in Germany. In the early nineties East Germany found itself under the conditions of the stable democracy and stable economy of West Germany. In my opinion, East Germany had practically no transition period, and I only wish some processes had not unfolded too fast; they should have developed more slowly. For it is due to such a fast growth rate that the economy of East Germany collapsed. East Germans got the opportunity to buy Western things (not always of good quality), thus scorning local Eastern German products. Large enterprises could not develop, which greatly boosted unemployment. And this process lasted three to four years before local production could begin.”
“EAST GERMANS STILL DON’T UNDERSTAND THEY RECEIVED THE CHANCE TO TAKE CARE OF THEIR OWN LIVES”
“The situation with Eastern Europe’s transformation to Western democracy resembles to a large extent the situation in Ukraine, which is also striving to enter the European community. Moreover, eastern Germany has received large funds over the past decade and the Germans living in both sides are equally interested in becoming a great united nation. Ukraine does not have such favorable conditions. What do you think is in store for Ukraine in this case, and what kind of efforts should we make to enter the European community?”
“The trouble with eastern Germans is that they still don’t understand even after eleven years later that they had received the chance to live their lives the way they want to, rather than rely on the state. Young people still manage to show initiative, but those over forty find it hard to do. So it is now necessary and useful that as many young Germans as possible go not only to western Germany but also to Britain and the United States. I don’t think there will be any further progress without this kind of exchange. It is also important that young Ukrainians go abroad as much as possible, only to return and thus bring new experience, enriching and developing society and the economy in this country. One should develop partnership ties between cities, for example, between Kyiv, Leipzig, and Munich. I know the mayors sometimes visit each other. But I think this would be useful not only for mayors but also for school and college students, doctors, engineers, and writers. I know everyone wants this, but the problem is the lack of money and personal initiative.”
“We have not yet formed a civil society, and unfortunately very much still depends on the authorities, not on the individual. And the authorities are still far from perfect. What do you think is the degree to which the authorities are responsible for the democratization of society? How can this country overcome the contradictions between the authoritarian-minded regime and an incomplete and immature civil society so far incapable of defending its own interests?”
“In Leipzig, too, a considerable part of the middle class (30,000) was wiped out in 1933. This category was also greatly reduced in the 45 years of socialism, and only now can we say it is being restored. So we can assert there also are rather few representatives of civil society in eastern Germany, and a full- fledged civil society will only be established after a long period. In Ukraine, this process could be just as long, if not longer.”
“THE INTELLIGENTSIA MUST BE CRITICAL OF POLITICIANS”
“To what extent do you find interesting your meetings with Ukrainian colleagues during this visit to Kyiv?”
“This communication is very important. All kinds of experts should have the chance to communicate on the international level. I would advise intellectuals not to leave this entirely to politicians. The unification process in Germany became a reality thanks not only to politicians but also to representatives of the economy, business, and culture. Now we think it our duty to be more critical in dealing with politicians.”
“In other words, you share the viewpoint that the role of the intelligentsia is, among other things, to defend human rights and protect society from government pressure?”
“The authorities and politicians carry out their own plans. Our task is to see to it that they do not become too strong to the detriment of societal interests. This is why there should be both independent institutions and those who express independent ideas. For this reason, we have to support one another.”
“What do you think is the role of the writer in this transition period? Who is he, a conductor of ideas or the mirror of society?”
“I believe the writer should reflect both tendencies, that is, to be both a chronicler and a journalist. Earlier, under Helmut Kohl, the government was conservative, so writers were of little account in political life. What exacerbated the situation was the fact that most writers represented Left, Green, or Liberal forces. Now that the government is headed by Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder of the Social Democratic Party, and the latter maintains close ties with culture figures. When I was head of the Writers Union, I never had a chance to have even a word with Mr. Kohl. Now I am no longer chairman, but I have a chance to speak to Mr. Schroeder every week. I consider that German writers, now part of the union, should speak out loud about the ongoing social process and thus try to influence society itself.”
“The role of a writer you have just mentioned is closer to the Slavic interpretation of the role of a poet and a writer, that of a messiah, conductor of ideas. There is also another view: art should not replace ideology but should stay within the notion of public good, that art is primarily play that arouses the emotions and liberates thought. Which do you prefer?”
“I think belles-lettres should represent both directions. Very much depends on the writer’s temperament: one can be more open and another more reserved. As to my position, it is common knowledge I write for the Social Democratic Party without being member of it. I can criticize it.”
“LITTLE THINGS SHOULD BE DONE BY THE PEOPLE THEMSELVES”
“How are the media of former East Germany adjusting to democratic norms? In what way are they shedding the function of propagandist and assuming the normal function of democratic media to inform and exercise public oversight over the state?”
“Eastern newspapers, radio and television were immediately taken over by western media owners. So now there are only two newspapers in eastern Germany, which existed under the Communists: Neues Deutschland, a publication of the Socialist Unity Party of Germany and Freitag, its weekly supplement popular mainly among intellectuals. These two publications, like any other German newspapers, can write what they please. Still, these newspapers have too few readers and too little money. At the same time, television often shows, for example, leader of the Party of Democratic Socialism, Gregor Gysi, still popular among the like- minded circles of the eastern German population, and former Stasi intelligence service chief Markus Wolf.”
“You suffered from censorship under socialism, but it is an open secret that Western democratic countries also practice what might be called the censorship of the market, rankings, and private interests. What kind of problems do you think the Western media are facing now?”
“There is no censorship of any kind in Germany. Everybody can publish what he writes by finding a newspaper to print his ideas. If a journalist or a writer represents the interests of CDU, his articles can be printed in the newspapers Die Welt or Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung; if he expresses the interests of the Social Democratic Party, he can contribute to Frankfurter Rundschau or Der Spiegel. Some vaguely liberal newspapers, such as Suddeutsche Zeitung or Die Zeit, also print such articles.”
“And is pluralism possible in the same publication?”
“Yes, it is. The best newspapers demonstrate this kind of journalism. It is difficult to understand at first glance whether these are Left or Right-wing newspapers. They write quite without bias and their comments are always on a high level.”
“And what is your attitude toward the press that takes a certain position? It is no accident that I am asking this question, for some Ukrainian journalists think that only truly democratic press cannot have its own preferences.”
“There are no state-run publications in Germany. Nor are there any opposition newspapers as such. Every newspaper can be in opposition to or represent the interests of the government. Let me give an example: Federal Rail (Bundesbahn) employees thought they would profit if they went to the stock exchange. As a result of miscalculations, the railroad suffered huge losses. Every newspaper considered it its duty to level criticism at the Bundesbahn. In other words, if there is something to criticize, every newspaper will do it. Criticism is part of democracy, no matter who - Conservatives, Social Democrats, or Liberals — levels it. Let me note that newspaper criticism is very clear and professional. I think newspapers are an organ of vigilance uncovering the shortcomings connected with fraud, humiliation, and suppression of democracy, and the more the detailed their reporting, the better for society. There are very few journalists in Germany, who belong one political party or another. Most journalists are free of political commitments. Those who do belong to a party are, of course, guided by the interests their party pursues.”
“The current situation in Ukraine is like this: there is what many consider to be a government committed to reform, and there are private newspapers owned by oligarchs. These oligarchic papers criticize the government scathingly. Some public figures believe they have no right to do so because they supposedly express the not always righteous interests of their proprietors. What, in your opinion, should be a truly democratic and honest position for journalists working in such newspapers?”
“Here is my opinion: a journalist should be independent of newspaper owners as well as of the government and the various economic associations you mentioned. If he still depends on them, he is not free. There should be more free newspapermen who can cover economic and political events from an independent point of view. This is quite a difficult and complicated job in Ukraine, for a journalist like this will be hardly able to earn money, but this is the correct position. On the other hand, a journalist’s views can coincide with those of the newspaper boss: this is the most common situation in Germany, where journalists can choose the publication they contribute to. Otherwise, in criticizing the government the journalist should also say why the owner is interested in this criticism.”
“Do you think the West is making a mistake paying too little attention to helping the independent media of post-totalitarian countries? For such media are in fact the prime mover of democratization.”
“I think this could also be done as part of the intercity partnership you mentioned. For instance, Leipziger Volkszeitung could invite The Day, and we could cooperate more closely. As to the state, it can’t do everything. In essence, the state should deal with other state and newspapers with other newspapers. The little things should be done by the people themselves.”
The editors thank Ms. Sabine Stoer, first secretary and press and protocol chief of the Embassy of the Federal Republic of Germany, for assistance in organizing the interview with Mr. Erich Loest.
