De-Stalinsation: Successes and Failures

If you haven’t already, before reading this section I would recommend looking at Khrushchev’s motives for de-Stalinisation, which you can find here

Now we’re going to evaluate the success or failure of Khrushchev’s de-Stalinist policies:

1. Did they successfully de-Stalinise the USSR?

2. Were they economically successful?

There was once a 2-in-1 question that asked candidates to answer both of these questions in the same essay, which was very nasty to tackle, but should it come up again then this section is essentially an essay plan for it.

De-Stalinisation took the following forms:

-          Within a year, labour camps were opened and millions of prisoners were set free

-          Five years later, Stalin’s name was removed from the Russian map

·         Stalingrad was renamed Volgograd

-          The 22^nd Congress decided to remove Stalin’s body from the Lenin mausoleum

-          De-Stalinisation resulted in a failed attempt to remove Khrushchev from power in 1957.

·         The party voted 7:4 for his dismissal from the role of Party Secretary.

·         Khrushchev was able to overcome this through using his position to consolidate a power base

A Time of New Freedom?

“The Thaw” was the name given to the relaxation in artistic and cultural life under Khrushchev.

-          For example, in 1959 a new history of the Party was approved, criticising the excesses of the 1930s

-          The composer Shostakovitch’s work was allowed to be performed

-          Books by Western authors like Ernest Hemingway appeared in Russian bookshops

-          Cultural and sporting exchanges were arranged with capitalist countries

·         E.g. football teams like Dinamo Moscow became popular in Europe

HOWEVER, there were limits to this freedom

-          Boris Pasternak was heavily criticised for his novel “Doctor Zhivago” and had to refuse his Nobel Prize for Literature

·         Khrushchev thought it was too critical of the Bolsheviks in the Revolution and the Civil War

·         Other writers met a similar fate, e.g. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

-          Khrushchev didn’t ease pressure on religious groups

·         Orthodox Churches were destroyed in large numbers -> only 7500/20,000 remained as places of worship.

·         Muslim and Jewish places of worship met the same fate

Relations with the Satellite States

The Hungarian Crisis 1956 ­- the most important example!

When anti-Soviet demonstrations broke out in Budapest and the leader Imre Nagy announced his intention to leave the Warsaw Pact, Khrushchev sent in Soviet and Warsaw Pact tanks into Hungary.

-          Why??? -> The Warsaw Pact was an agreement signed in 1955, in which all the Iron Curtain countries committed themselves to the collective defence of Soviet Europe against “Western Imperialism”

·         Therefore, Khrushchev feared if Hungary withdrew, the other satellite states would follow suit

-          Over 20,000 Hungarians were killed, and Khrushchev’s reputation was badly damaged

Yugoslavia

Khrushchev visited their leader Tito in 1955 and 1956, and the bestowal of Soviet favour strengthened the idea that, with Stalin gone, the Kremlin had accepted Yugoslavia’s right to develop its own Communism.

Poland

As strong demands were being made for Poland to be left free to develop its own socialism, Khrushchev compromised and allowed popular Polish patriot Gomulka to return to political prominence, as long as he renewed his commitment to the Warsaw Pact.

East Germany

In November 1958, Khrushchev publicly challenged the rights of the Western Powers to remain in Berlin, and demanded that within six months, West Berlin should become a demilitarised, free city.

-          In June 1961, he threatened Kennedy by saying the West must be ready to leave Berlin within six months

·         This increased the flight of people from East to West Berlin and led to the construction of the Berlin Wall

·         The 28-mile long Berlin Wall symbolised Communist tyranny

·         But in some ways it was a success. It restored greater stability, stopped the loss of essential manpower, and meant the economic collapse of East Germany could be avoided.

International attention was distracted by the Suez Crisis caused by the Anglo-French decision to intervene in Egypt when President Nasser nationalised the Suez Canal Company.

Agriculture

The issues with agriculture following Stalin were:

-          There were fewer animals in the USSR before the Revolution

-          Farmer’s income was too low from state procurement prices

-          Productivity was very low and farmers were taxed too highly

-          The Party had been misled by the idea of “biological yields”

Khrushchev’s remedies to these were the following:

-          A rise of 25% in the price of grain procurements 1953-1956

-          Costs to collective farms were cut

·         E.g. the cost of transport and the hire of equipment

·         This pricing system did little to encourage farmers to grow what was necessary – the state offered prices often less than the cost of production

-          Peasant taxation was reorganised so it was paid on the size of the plot rather than fruit trees and livestock

-          Peasants without livestock weren’t expected to provide meat

·         Shortages caused the government to raise the prices of meat and dairy -> in Novocherkassk there were protests, when troops fired on rioters and killed 24.

-          Collective farms were allowed to set their own targets and were given more freedom to decide how to use their land

-          The MTS were abolished and repair stations were set up instead, for whose services collective farms had to pay

·         This meant there were no barns on farms to store equipment or the expertise to maintain them.

·         Mechanics from former MTS tended to return to industry

·         Farm machinery rotted in the fields for want of small parts

The Virgin Land Scheme

-          This was introduced to cultivate the 90 million acres of unfarmed land in western Siberia and northern Kazakhstan

-          It showed early signs of success in 1954 and 1956  (1955 was a drought year)

·         The 1956 grain harvest totalled 50% of total USSR grain production

·         By 1956 an extra 35.9 million hectares were cultivated = total cultivated area of Canada

·         Around 500,000 volunteers were recruited

·         In the first year of the scheme, 6 million acres were freshly ploughed

·         12,000 tractors were provided

-          However, despite initial success, after 1956 the scheme became a total failure

·         Erosion by wind proved to be a difficult problem – 13,000 square miles had their topsoil removed by 1960 alone

·         After the poor harvest of 1963, Khrushchev suffered the humiliation of having to import grain from the capitalist West

·         Khrushchev advised farmers to grow more maize -> 85 million acres were planted, only 1/6 was harvest ripe, a colossal waste of manpower and land because it wasn’t suited to the climate

Therefore, it is safe to say that Khrushchev’s agricultural policy, although de-Stalinist in that it actually prioritised agriculture, was largely a failure. The Virgin Lands Scheme became an example of Khrushchev’s “hare-brained scheming”, which was only accentuated by the fact Khrushchev had referred to himself as an “agricultural expert”, which obviously turned out not to be the case!

Industry

In 1959 the Party launched a Seven Year Plan with more realistic targets than the Five Year Plans of the 1930s

-          This had a heavy emphasis on power stations and consumer goods.

-          Statistics suggest it was a great success:

·         Coal increased from 391million tons in 1955 to 578 million tons in 1965

·         Tractor production increased from 314,000 in 1955 to 804,000 in 1965

·         TV set production increased from 495,000 in 1955 to 3,655,000 n 1965

In industry, Khrushchev differed very little from Stalin, focusing on meeting targets as opposed to ensuring quality.

He made some reforms in the organisation of industry:

-          105 regional councils (sovnarkozy) took the place of national ministries in decentralisation

·         This moved away from central planning of the Stalinist system

·         Was resented by some within the Party

·         It added another layer of bureaucracy: Filtzer called it “bureaucratic anarchy”

·         Furthermore a Supreme Economic Council was set up in Moscow

-          To prove the USSR could equal the West, Khrushchev invested a huge amount of resources into the Space Race, resulting in the USSR landing a Red Flag on the moon in 1959

·         Oct 1957 – launch of the first artificial satellite (Sputnik)

·         1959 – Luna I’s exploratory mission to the moon

·         1961 – Venera I explored Venus

·         April 1961 – Yuri Gagarin became the first man in space in Vostok I

-          New emphasis was placed on technology and science

·         German technicians were forcible recruited

·         By 1965 – the USSR possessed over 4700 scientific establishments and employed more scientists than in any other country

The standard of living did improve:

-          A minimum wage was introduced in 1956, although most workers earned more

-          The average household income rose by 3% per year between 1960-65

-          The diet of the Russian people improved and became less dependent on bread and potatoes

-          Books and public transport became cheaper in the West, although items like clothes and footwear were expensive

-          By 1964 - only 5 in 1000 Soviets had a car, only 82 in 1000 had a television and only 40 in 1000 owned a refridgerator

-          The substantial increase in housing meant young married couples could find a place of their own

-          Diesel trains were added to Russian railways, but few families had cars

And that’s de-Stalinisation covered! Next we’ll be looking at the reasons for Khrushchev’s fall from power, but that’s another section. For now, try to reach your own judgements based on each section, and then we’ll link them to his ousting.

Why De-Stalinisation?

De-stalinisation was a criticism of the Stalinist system that already existed when Khrushchev came into power, and the dismantlement of aspects of his regime. Thatcher referred to it as “the elimination of Stalinist excesses and policies as well as his cult of personality from Soviet politics, post 1953.” It is vital to understand why Khrushchev decided to attempt de-Stalinisation in order to evaluate whether or not he achieved his motives.

The Relaxation of the Political Atmosphere

Novels critical of Stalin were beginning to appear, notably “The Thaw” by Ehrenburg.

-          Khrushchev took advantage of this -> on the 24^th Feb. 1956 he delivered his “Secret Speech” to the 20^th Party Congress on the subject of “The Cult of the Individual and its Consequences”

·         This described the negative comments made by Lenin by Stalin and pointed the finger directly at Stalin for not preparing the USSR for war in 1941

·         It also listed Stalin’s crimes: mass arrests, deportations of thousands of people, execution without trial

·         This speech was met with disbelief, applause and shouts. Molotov, Kaganovitch and Malenkov tried to remove Khrushchev as First Secretary but this was overturned by the Central Committee

Defensive Motives

If he did not strike a blow against Stalin, Khrushchev believed someone else would show him as one of Stalin’s henchmen

-          He was in charge of the Ukrainian Party between 1938-1949

-          He had worked to eliminate nationalist movements in Ukraine and Poland

Sense of Security

Khrushchev calculated that since none of the current Soviet leaders had a clean record, their shared guilt would prevent any serious challenge.

Genuine Feeling

Alternatively to cunningness, Khrushchev was an idealist who was personally shocked by the extent of Stalin’s terror.

-          This is VERY difficult to argue; Khrushchev was very much aware of the atrocities in the Ukraine, even if he did claim that he was too afraid to speak out about them at the time.

Economic Reasons

By attacking Stalin’s record, Khrushchev believed he would be more likely to gain support for his economic reforms in industry and agriculture.

-          His main focus was agriculture, notably his “Virgin Lands Scheme”, but also placing emphasis on consumer goods, which greatly contrasted with Stalin

Social Reasons

Khrushchev wanted to introduce a policy of Reform Communism;

-          This intended to make the Soviet system more humane by improving living standards

·         By attacking the full terror of Stalin’s system with its labour camps and torture, he hoped to gain support for this policy

Foreign Policy

De-Stalinisation made co-existence with the West easier

The conclusion  to be made here is that if there was ever a time that the Soviet system would be able to change from the rigidity of Stalinism, it would be following Stalin’s death when public opinion was starting to turn more critical. Like any politician, Khrushchev also had his own political motives in that criticising Stalin secured his own position. And without condemning the Stalinist system, Khrushchev would not have been able to drum up support for his policy of Reform Communism. However, as we will go on to look at, the success of de-stalinisation and Reform Communism was very limited.

Themes and Motives of AMND

This section serves as a summary of the key themes of the play that could come up as essay questions. I haven't included thematic quotes just yet, they will be separate posts so that they are organised more clearly.

Love’s Difficulty

The motif of love out of balance – an asymmetrical love among the four Athenians.

The play has strong potential for a traditional outcome, and the plot is based on a quest for internal balance.

Imbalance arises out of Oberon’s coveting of Titania’s Indian boy outweighing his love for her.

Later Titania & Bottom represent an imbalance of appearance and nature: Titania = beautiful and graceful, Bottom = clumsy and grotesque.

Magic

Shakespeare uses magic both to embody the almost supernatural power of love and to create a surreal world.

Magic despite causing chaos ultimately resolves the play’s conflicts.

The ease of Puck’s magic contrasts the labouriousness of the craftsmen’s attempt to stage a play.

Dreams

Dreams are linked to the bizarre, magical mishaps in the forest. The theme is introduced in Hippolyta’s first lines evidencing the prevalence of dreams. Shakespeare is also interested in the actual workings of dreams, he seeks to recreate a timeless and impossible environment in the play through the intervention of the fairies.

The sense of illusion and gauzy frailty is crucial to Midsummer, it renders the play as a fantastical experience rather than a heavy drama.

By calling their experiences "dreams", the lovers and Bottom allow these experiences to exist as they are without explanation or understanding. Near the end of the play, Theseus brushes off the lovers' tale of their mishaps in the forest, condemning the imagination of all lovers, madmen and poets as untruths and full of illusion. But he overlooks the fact that it was reason set down in Athenian law that caused these problems, and the "dream" within the forest resolved them. The play suggests that imagination and dreams are as useful as imagination, and can create truths that transcend reason's limits.

Contrast

The idea of contrast is a building block of the play. E.g. Helena is tall, Hermia is short, Titania is beautiful, Bottom is grotesque.

The three main groups of characters contrast powerfully with one another: fairies = graceful and magical, craftsmen = clumsy and earthly, craftsmen = merry, lovers = overly serious.

The juxtaposition of extraordinary differences (Titania weaving flowers into Bottom’s hair) is the most important characteristic of the surreal atmosphere.

Love
Love is a theme typical of Shakespeare's comedies; he explores the process of falling in love with those who appear beautiful to them. But as time passes, these people seem unattractive, or even repellent. For a short period, this attraction seems to be love at its most intense, but in AMND, love is much more than simply physical attraction.
Despite "The course of true love never did run smooth", the ending is one of harmony. But at the same time, the audience is forced to consider the irrationality of whimsical love, at least among youngsters.
AMND is not a romance, in which the audience get caught up in a romantic affair. Rather, it is a comedy; it is clear from the outset that the play is comedic and will have a happy ending, as opposed to overcoming the audience with the passion of love. It invites the audience to laugh at how love makes people blind, foolish, fickle and desperate. Passion threatens to ruin friendships, turn men against men and women against women, or throw the natural order in turmoil.
Love is a force that characters cannot control, in the case of the love potion that makes people slaves to love. But AMND ends happily, three marriages are blessed by the reconciled fairy king and queen. While AMND makes fun of the effects of love, it still reinforces the importance of love, its beauty and timeless relevance.

David Bevington: The play represents the dark side of love. The fairies make light of love by mistaking the lovers and applying love potion to Titania's eyes, forcing her to fall in love with an ass. In the forest, the couples are beset by problems. Hermia and Lysander are met by Puck, who provides comic relief confounding the lovers. But serious themes are alluded to. Hippolyta and Theseus watch the play about the tragic lovers, Pyramus and Thisbe, and are able to enjoy it and laugh at it. Helena and Demetrius are oblivious to the dark side of their love, totally unaware of what may have come of the events in the forest.

Marriage
The institution of marriage is viewed as the true fulfillment of love. By the end of Act IV, the damaged relationships are resolved, and the following act celebrates marriage in festive spirit.
The mature and stable love of Theseus and Hippolyta contrasts with the volatile and unstable coupling of Titania and Oberon, whose squabbling has a negative impact on the balance of nature in the fairy world. Through the marriage of the fairy king and queen, things can be put right and peace runs throughout their kingdom and the world beyond it.

Appearance and Reality
The idea that things are not necessarily as they seem is a key feature of the play itself, as well as its title.
A dream is not real, despite it seeming real as we experience it. Shakespeare consciously creates a dreamlike quality to the play to highlight this.
This theme is also conveyed through the adoption of a play-within-a-play structure, and this is with comic effect. The mechanicals neglect the magic of the theater in that they need to convince the audience that what is being acted out in front of them is real.

Order & Disorder
The theme of order and disorder is explored in AMND: Egeus' family order is disrupted as Hermia wishes to marry against his will; against the social order of the state that demands her father's will be upheld. The forest is distanced from their ordered city life and hierarchical society, there is a breakdown of order as relationships are fragmented.
But due to the comedic genre of the play, these relationships are rebuilt in the free atmosphere of the forest, before returning to a reformed, but remaining ordered society.
Natural order is also disrupted because of the quarrel between the fairy king and queen. It is only after their reconciliation that this can be put right. Without the restoration of natural order, the play's happy ending could not be completed.

The Moon
In case you didn't notice, there are LOTS of references to the moon throughout AMND, it is referred to three times within the first nine lines of the play! This serves many purposes:
- To create the atmosphere of night. Shakespeare's plays were typically performed in daylight, and so the sense of darkness had to come from his audience's imagination, due to there being no means of "dimming" the light
- To create a dreamlike atmosphere. Familiar things look different in the moonlight; quite literally in a different light.
- The moon is a reminder of the passage of time, and that things, like all phases, must change. 
- The more educated of Shakespeare's audiences would have understood the mythological importance of the moon. The moon-goddesses Luna and Diana were associated with chastity and fertility, these qualities were united in marriage, which the play celebrates.

Sight
There are also many references to seeing, eyes, and sight. They serve a double purpose; the repetition reminds the audience of the difference between how things look and what they are (theme of appearance vs reality); and that love is blind and in the eye of the beholder.

Play within a Play
This structure is reflected through the play of Pyramus and Thisbe, which serves three important functions in the larger scale of the actual play.
1. The mechanicals' mistakes and misunderstandings introduce a strand of farce.
2. It allows Shakespeare to comment on the nature of contemporary theater, primarily within the mechanicals' wrong expectations that the audience won't be able to distinguish between fiction and reality.
3. Pyramus and Thisbe parodies AMND; they're lovers who, facing opposition from their parents, seek to elope, just like Hermia and Lysander. So even as the lovers watch the play and ridicule it, the audience knows that they have been just as absurd.

But this is not the only play within a play, there is a subtler one. Oberon is a playwright who seeks to "write" a comedy in which Helena gets her love, Lysander and Hermia stay together, Titania learns her lesson in wifely obedience, and all conflicts are reconciled through marriage and resolution. Like how the mechanicals' play is transformed from earnest drama to comical farce, so does Oberon's when Puck puts the love potion on the wrong Athenian man's eyes. While the mechanicals' farcical performance suggests the limits of the theater, Oberon's play, which rewrote the same lives of the mortals who mock the mechanicals, suggests that theater really has a magic that defies reality.

Men and Women
The relationship between men and women echoes in the mortal and supernatural worlds, both deal with attempts by male authority figures to control women. Theseus and Hippolyta's relationship is based on a man asserting power over a woman. Oberon uses the love potion to control his disobedient wife. Egeus seeks to control his daughter's marriage. Although the play ends happily, the love on display is one in which the women have accepted the role subservient to men. An Elizabethan society would have generally accepted that men are head of the household and the king is the head of society.
The play also suggests that love can take a nasty toll on same-sex friendships, Helena betrays Hermia for love even before they've reached the forest. Once they're in the forest, the men challenge each other to duels while the women almost come to blows with each other.

Loss of Individual Identity
Maurice Hunt: the blurring of the identities of fantasy of reality in the play make possible "that pleasing, narcotic dreaminess associated with the fairies of the play." Shakespeare prepares the audiences' minds to accept the fantastic reality of the fairy world and its happenings, which also seems to be the axis around which the conflicts of the play occur.
Hunt suggests that it's the breaking down of individual identities that leads to central conflict. The brawl between Titania and Oberon is based on a lack of recognition for each other, and drives the rest of the drama and makes it dangerous for the lovers to come together amidst the disturbance of Nature caused by their dispute. The failure to distinct and identify leads Puck to mistake one set of lovers for the other, placing the love potion on Lysander rather than Demetrius.

Victor Kiernan: the Marxist scholar and historian writes that it is for the greater sake of love that this loss of identity takes place and that individual characters suffer accordingly. "It was the more extravagant cult of love that struck sensible people as irrational, and likely to have dubious effects on its acolytes." Identities are not so much lost as they are blended together to create a haze through which distinction becomes nearly impossible. It is driven by a desire for new and practical ties between characters as a means of coping within the strange world of the forest, even in relationships as diverse and unrealistic as the brief relationship between Titania and Bottom. "It was a tidal force of this social need that lent energy to relationships."

David Marshall: points that the loss of identity is played out in the description of the mechanicals and their assumption of other identities. "Two construct or put together. two mend and repair, one weaves and one sews. All join together what is apart or mend what has been rent. broken or sundered."
This loss of individual identity not only blurs specificities, it creates new identities found in community, which may lead to some understanding of Shakespeare's opinion on love and marriage. Furthermore, the mechanicals understand this theme as they take on roles in Pyramus and Thisbe. 
"To be an actor is to double and divide oneself, to discover oneself in two parts: both oneself and not oneself, both the part and not the part." Each character, particularly among the lovers, has a sense of laying down individual identity for the greater group or pairing. A desire to lose one's individuality and find identity in the love of another is what quietly moves the events of the play, the primary source of motivation and reflected in the mood and scenery.

Ambiguous Sexuality
Douglas E. Green: (In his essay "Preposterous Pleasures: Queer Theories and A Midsummer Night's Dream) explores possible alternative sexuality that he finds within the text of the play, in juxtaposition to contemporary proscribed social mores of culture. His essay "does not seek to rewrite AMND as a gay play but rather explores some of its 'homoerotic significations'...moments of 'queer' disruption and eruption in this Shakespeare comedy."
He does not consider Shakespeare to have been a "sexual radical", but that the play represents a "topsy-turvy world" or "temporary holiday" that mediates or negotiates the "the discontents of civilisation", which while resolved in the ending do not resolve so neatly in life. "Sodomitical elements...homoeroticism...lesbianism...and even compulsory heterosexuality" in the story must be considered in the context of the "culture of early modern England" as a commentary on "aesthetic rigidities of comic form and political ideologies of the prevailing order."
These ideas of ambiguous sexuality and gender conflict are also explored by Shirley Garner and William W. E. Sights, albeit all the characters would have been played by males.

Feminism
Male dominance is a thematic element of AMND. Lysander and Hermia escape to the woods for a night where they don't fall under the laws of Theseus and Egeus. Upon their arrival in Athens, the couples are married. Marriage is seen as a social achievement for women whereas men can go on and do great things and gain societal recognition.

Louis Montrose: (in his article "The Imperial Votaress") draws attention to male and female gender roles and norms present in comedy in connection to Elizabethan culture. "[on the triple wedding] The festive conclusion in AMND depends on the success of a process by which the feminine pride and power manifested in Amazon warriors, possessive mothers, unruly wives, and wilful daughters are brought under the control of lords and husbands." The consummation of marriage is how power over a woman changes hands from father to husband. 
A connection between flowers and sexuality is drawn; the love potion can be seen as symbolising menstrual blood as well as the sexual blood shed by virgins. While blood as a symbol of menstruation is representative of a woman's power, blood as a symbol of the first sexual encounter represents a man's power over a woman.

Leonard Tennenhouse: the problem in AMND is a problem of "authority gone archaic." The Athenian law requiring the daughter to die if she doesn't submit to her father's will is outdated. There is a patriarchal rule of Theseus in Athens and of Oberon in the carnivalistic fairy world. The disorder of the Green World completely opposes the City World of Athens. The events of the four lovers and Bottom's dream represent the chaos that contrasts with Theseus' political order, but he does not punish the lovers for their disobedience. By forgiving the lovers, Theseus makes a distinction between patriarchal law (Egeus) and that of the monarch (Theseus), creating two different voices of authority.
This reflects Elizabeth I, when monarchs were seen as having two bodies: the body natural and the body politic.  Elizabeth I's succession itself represented the voice of the patriarch as well as the voice of a monarch: her father's will that stated the crown should pass on to her and that she was the daughter of a king. The challenge to patriarchal rule in AMND mirrors what was occuring in Elizabethan times.

And that is the themes and motives of A Midsummer Night's Dream finally covered! I'll be posting thematic quotes for each section at a later date, otherwise this post would have gone on forever. But for now I would suggest creating mind maps of the ideas explored in each theme, and add quotes to each idea when I get around to uploading them.

Positive und Negative Aspekte des Alltags in der DDR Aufsatz

Diese Aufsatz hat 38/40 Punkte bekommen, und man muss zumindest 100/110 in dem Examen bekommen, um ein A* zu verdienen, deshalb ist das Aufsatz ein ganz wichtiger Teil des Examens!

                In den Augen der Geschichte wird der Alltag meines gewählten Zeitraums zwischen 1961 und 1989 in der Deutsche Demokratische Republik als sowohl zurückgeblieben als auch als deprimiert betrachtet. Tatsächlich, wenn ich einen solchen Zeitraum nicht studiert hätte, wäre ich geneigt gewesen, dieser Ansicht zu zustimmen, dass das Leben der in der DDR lebenden Leute schlechter als heute gewesen wäre. Dennoch denn ich untersuchte tiefer diese Lage, ist es mir jetzt bekannt, es gab nicht nur Nachteile des DDR-Lebens, sondern auch eine verbreitete Auswahl von Vorteilen. Aber trotz dieser Vorteile ist es nicht zu leugnen, dass das Leben in der DDR total begrenzt war.

                Wenn es von einem wirtschaftlichen Standpunkt gesehen wird, wäre die Arbeit in der DDR eine gemischte Erfahrung gewesen. Es gab selten Arbeitslosigkeit, denn zwei oder drei Bürger waren angestellt für den gleichen Job eines Bürgers in der Bundesrepublik. Wegen der hohen Arbeitsplätze litten weniger Leute von Stress, also waren auch die Arbeitsbedingungen besser, besonders da man mit anderen Mitarbeitern sprechen konnte. Das halte ich sogar für erfreulich! Obgleich es selten Arbeitslosigkeit gab, gab es auch ökonomische Probleme. Erstens gab es einen Mangel an Verbrauchsgütern, oder wurden Verbrauchsgüter wie „Coca Cola“ durch alternative Produkte mit schlechterer Qualität ersetzt. Nicht nur für Luxusprodukte, wegen der langen Wartezeit mussten DDR-Bürger in einer langen Schlange stehen, sondern auch um seine lebensnotwendigen Bedarfsgüter zu kaufen. Alles zusammengerechnet muss ich zugeben, wenn ich nur den Teil der Wirtschaft ziehe, hätte ich nicht gern in der DDR gelebt.

                Jedoch gibt es immer noch mehrere Vorteile gesellschaftlicheweise von Ostdeutschland. Der Staat kümmerte sich um seine Bevölkerung durch kostenlose Kinderbetreuung für alle Eltern mit der Absicht, sie zum Arbeiten zu ermutigen. Wenn ich Kinder gehabt hätte, wäre das unbedingt nützlich gewesen. Aber als jemand, der zurzeit keine Pläne hat, Kinder zu haben, vielleicht wäre das von mir nicht bemerkt gewesen. Wenn es um Lebensbedingungen geht, angesichts der Tatsache, dass der gesellige Zustand in der DDR schon der höchste unter den Ostblockstaaten war, war es Ihnen schwerer gelungen, es noch weiter zu verbessern. Die SED hat gewährleistet, genügend Wohnungen für die in der DDR wohnenden Büer anzubieten. Als Ergebnis davon gab es fast keine Obdachlosigkeit, ähnlich wie bei Arbeitslosigkeit. Wegen der Vorteile hätte ich mich wahrscheinlich sicher gefühlt, aber diese Aussage zieht nicht die Tatsache in Betracht, dass auch wenn ich einfach einen Job bekommen hätte, wäre mein Lebenstil schlimmer gewesen, als wenn ich in der BRD, oder in einem anderen westlichen Land gelebt hätte. Ebenfalls war die ostdeutsche Wirtschaft nicht völlig erfolgreich. Die Schuld dafür liegt bei der UdSSR, indem wirtschaftliche Politik zentral in Moskau geplänt wurde. Deswegen als das sowjetische Wirtschaftssystem an der Bürokratie, und als Folge davon Leistungsschwäche, litt, ging das zu der DDR über.

                Es gehr nicht nur um die Wirtschaft, sondern auch die Kultur. Wenn ich in der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik gelebt hätte, hätte ich ohne Rede-, Kunst-, Informations- und Reisefreiheit gelebt. Egal ob ich das möchte oder nicht, hätte ich nicht fliehen können, und ich bin fest davon überzeugt, dass wenn ich in der DDR gewohnt hätte, wäre ich geflohen. Während die Sozialistische Einheitspartei Deutschlands die Kontrolle hatte, hat es die Stasi zusammen mit einem Überwachungsprogramm umgesetzt. Deswegen konnte man nichts gegen die Reigerung sagen, sonst war man als ein Landesverräter gebrandmarkt. Ausserdem konnte man niemandem trauen, besonders als die DDR gegründet wurde, nachdem Ulbricht sagte, niemand habe die Absicht, ein Mauer zu errichten! Ich unterstütze eine Volksdemokratie, deshalb wäre ein freiheitsloser Staat ein totaler Albtraum. Ich behaupte, dass wenn ich ein DDR-Bürger gewesen wäre, hoffe ich, dass ich etwas ähnlich wie Bärbel Bohley gemacht hätte, indem sie für Freiheit gekämpft hatte, und meine Tapferkeit demonstriert hätte. Westernhagen sang, Freiheir sei das Einzige, was zählt, und ich bin komplett damit einverstanden. Ich stimme überhaupt nicht mit dem Glauben zu, dass die Ostdeutschen ihre eigene Freiheit opfern musste, um ihre Staatsicherheit zu gewährleisten. Manche Leute sagen, der Zweck heilte die Mittel oder es sei lohnenswert gewesen, wenn der Staat sich um die Bevölkerung kümmerte. Im Gegensatz würde ich sagen: Dasist immer noch kein Leben für mich. Wenn ich hätte reisen wollen, wäre es mir noch nicht gelungen, während es ein Reiseverbot gab. Das halte ich für eine wichtige Gelegenheit. Deswegen hab es fast nur kulturelle Nachteile.

                Vielleicht war es schlimm für Erwachsene, aber was wenn es auf Kinder ankommt? Es gab viele Entwicklungsmöglichkeiten in der Schule. Beispielsweise konnte man an den Jungen Pionieren teilnehmen, wo Mitglieder unterrichtet worden sind, etwas zu der Gesellschaft durch Projekte oder freiwillige Arbeit beizutragen. Danach konnte man der Freien Deutschen Jugend (FDJ) beitreten, und als Folge davon fühlte man sich wirklich als ein Kamerad siner Klasse. Die 88%, die ein Mitglied der FDJ waren, hatten die Gelegenheit sich in der Schule zu beteiligen. Die nicht in dem FDJ beitretenden Leute war wegen der Diskriminierung benachteiligt, und musste mit Nachteilen rechnen. Ein andere Nachteil des Ausbildungssystems war die verringernde Auswahl von Schulfächer, weil die Reigerung Gewicht auf die Wissenschaften legen wollte, im Vergleich zu den Sprachen. Ich hätte das total ungerecht gefunden, wenn ich meine Liebe für Sprache opfern musste, um Wehrunterrichtstunden zu haben.

                Als Schlussfolgerung muss ich zugebem, dass im Groβen und Ganzen ich während meiner Studie der DDR zwischen 1961 und 1989 viele Aspekte des Alltags entdeckt habe. Ich kann mir vorstellen, das das Zusammenheitsgefühl, das um der FDJ und anderen Vereinen geteilt wurde, mir sehr gut gepassen hatte. Dennoch ist es meines Erachtens, dass ich mit der häufigen Überwachung, der schlechteren Qualität von Konsumgüter und der Kontrolle der Reigerung über meinem Leben nicht zurecht gekommen wäre, es wäre mir nich gelungen, solche Programme zu überleben, da ich immer meine Meinung äuβern will. Die mehreren Arbeitsmöglichkeiten sind mir total egal. Wenn es keine Debatte gäbe, hätte ich kein Interesse dafür gehabt. Es gibt sowohl Vorteile, als auch Nachteile, aber ich bin persönlich der Meinung, dass die Nachteile das fast zum Überlaufen bringen.

Der Besuch der alten Dame Fragen & Antworten

Ich habe ein paar Fragen und Antworten vorbereitet, damit ich zu einem gewissen Grad üben kann, obwohl ich nicht zu abhängig von diesen Antworten werden will! Ich gehe vielleicht ein Biβchen zu tief in diesen Themen, deshalb machen Sie sich keine Sorgen, wenn Sie nicht verständlich sind! Aber Sie müssen versuchen, ein Vielfalt von Sprachestrukturen und Zeitformen in Ihrer Sprachprüfung zu benutzen.

1) Erzähl mir ein Biβchen von deinem ersten Eindrück des Theaterstücks

Wenn ich nicht durch das Stück gelesen hätte, hätte ich immer noch gedacht, dass der Alfred der Hauptfeind des Theaterstücks wird, während die Klara eine Jungfrau wird. Ich wuβte nicht, dass die Klara machtig wäre, oder dass der Alfred die Rolles des griechischen tragischen Held spielen wird, deshalb war ich baff zu finden, dass die Klara bösartige Absichten hatte. Als jemand, dessen Interessen von der Theater geweckt wird, wuβte ich sofort durch die Verfremdungseffekt, dass Dürrenmatt die Theorie und Praxis von Brecht anwenden würde, aber ich hatte Zweifel, was für einen Zweck es lohnte sich um.

2) Was sind die Hauptthemen?

In diesem Stück geht es um eine Auswahl von verschiedenen gesellschaftlichen und moralischen Hauptthemen. Angesichts des Wirtschaftwunders, dessen Folge war die Meinung, Geld sei das Wichtigste und alles sei damit machbar, wurde das Thema von Geldgier als Schwerpunkt geschrieben. Die im Güllen lebenden Bürger entscheiden sich für die Möglichkeit, durch ein kollektives Verbrechen reich zu werden. Schlimmer noch ist, dass sie dies mit gutem Gewissen tun.

Andere Hauptthemen sind sowohl die Problematik der Gerechtigkeit, als auch der griechische Sinn für Schicksal; der zur Tode verurteilte Alfred fühlte, als ob er seine Hinrichtung verdient hat, wegen seiner ehemaligen Handlungen. Es ist sein Schicksal, die Rolle des Opfers zu spielen.

3) Ist der Schriftsteller erfolgreich, diese Themen darzustellen?

Die Themen von Geldgier und das Problem der Gerechtigkeit sind ausdrücklich untereinander verbinden als die Klara sagt, man könne alles kaufen in Beantwortung von dem Bürgermeister, als er sagte, man könne nicht die Gerechtigkeit kaufen. Im Sinne von Schicksal repliziert die Tragödie des Alfreds die Tragödie, dass wir selbst es sind, die die Welt so hoffnungslos und sinnlos machen, sowie Dürrenmatt beabsichtigt hatte. Das soziale Thema der menschlichen Natur wird vor dem Hintergrund des Güllens mit Klarheit und Überzeugung erforscht. Dürrenmatt hoffte, dass man von ihm sagen wird, er sei ein unbequemer Schriftsteller gewesen. Durch „episches Theater“ und die Verfremdungseffekt war es ihm gelungen, die Zuschauer zu beunruhigen. Sie müssen durch das auf der Bühne gezeigte Geschehen herausgefordert werden, über ihr eigenes Verhalten nachzudenken. Als ich das Stück gelesen habe, fragte ich mich, wenn ich eine Menge Geld wie die Klara hätte, würde ich versuchen, mich zu rächen? Es ist Dürrenmatt gelungen, diese Frage aufzubringen.

4) Kannst du etwas über die Hauptcharakter des Stücks erzählen?

Am Anfang des Stücks dachte ich schon, dass der Alfred eine frauenfeindliche Haltung trägt, besonders weil er „Ich habe sie im Sack“ sagte, als ob sie nur ein Sparschwein wäre. Dies war nur konkretisiert, wenn wir von seiner Vergangenheit lernen. Ich lasse mich nicht davon abbringen, dass der Alfred ein Mann ohne Moralvorstellungen ist, obwohl es keine Gründe gibt, ihn zu töten. Sein Charakter wirkt wie ein Mikrokosmos fürs Patriarchat, denn seine Handlungen hatten ausbeuterische Auswirkungen für die Klara, die zur Hurerei demzufolge gezwungen wurde.

Ich nehme ein sympathisches Blick für Klara an, da sie Opfer eines Fehlurteils war. Aber ein Merkmal, die die beiden Hauptcharakter teilen ist ihre völlige Missachtung fürs Gesetz. Klara ist genau so böse als Alfred, wenn sie glaubt, dass sie die Gerechtigkeit kaufen kann, selbst wenn dies aus von der Handlung des Alfreds geboren war. Hätte Alfred nur nicht diese Justizirrtum begangen. Ich betrachte die beiden Hauptcharakter als eine harte, aber echte Darstellung der Gesellschaft, in Bezug auf ihre Verdorbenheit.

5) Gibt es ein Unterschied in dem Stück zwischen „Gerechtigkeit“ und „Rache“?

Die philosophischen Auswirkungen der Frage „Was sind die Gerechtigkeit und Rache?“ sind abwechslungsreich und unendlich. Wiederherstellung, Ausgleich, Vergeltung, Neuerrichtung? Zu einem gewissen Grad, vieles oder alles davon, aber auch zugleich immer auch das Gegenteil. Manche sagen, Rache sei ein vor-rechtliches Instrument; andere, auch mich selbst, betrachten Rache als einen Begriff von Unrecht. Das Strafrecht des modernen Staates ist das Gegenteil von Rache, aber es ist nicht denkbar ohne die Elemente von Rache. In diesem Stück wird Rache ein persönliches und ungerechtes Mittel, indem die Klara nicht nur ihre eigene Vergeltung bekommt, sondern auch ihre Machtgier erweitern kann. Im Gegensatz zur Rache benutzt Klara den Begriff von der Gerechtigkeit als Vorwand und fordert einen Mord aus Rache. Indem Klara für ihre Rache den Begriff Gerechtigkeit wählt, ermöglicht dadurch den Güllenern, ihr unrechtes Verhalten gegenüber Ill ebenfalls für gerecht zu halten.

6) Was hättest du getan, wenn du ein Güllener gewesen wäre?

Ich würde hoffen, dass wenn ich ein Güllener gewesen wäre, hätte ich mich etwas ähnlich wie der Lehrer verhalten, indem er die Rolle des Humanistes spielt. Aber ich stimme ziemlich nicht mit dem Lehrer überein, da ich aktiver versucht hätte, den Mord des Alfreds zu vermeiden. Als jemand mit starken Prinzipen der Gerechtigkeit bin ich persönlich der Meinung, es sollten alle Menschen Ungerechtigkeit bekämpfen. Deswegen wenn ich in Güllen gelebt hätte, wäre es total Heuchlerei gewesen, wenn ich zurückgetreten wäre, und der Tod des Alfreds gelassen hätte. Aber wie Dürrenmatt es beabsichtigt hatte, habe ich jetzt Zweifel, wegen des wirtschaftlichen Zustandes der Stadt, ob ich wirklich die Verdorbenheit aushalten könnte.

My Pretty Rose Tree, Ah! Sunflower & The Lilly

This section is a rather long analysis of a small collection of three Songs of Experience, each thriving off flower symbolism to convey certain messages and themes. Each of these poems explore the two contrary states of Innocence and Experience from differing perspectives, with each flower symbolising different themes in relation to the overarching contrary states.

My Pretty Rose Tree

A flower was offerd to me:

Such a flower as May never bore.

But I said I’ve a Pretty Rose-tree,

And I passed the sweet flower o’er.

Then I went to my Pretty Rose-tree:

To tend her by day and by night.

But my Rose turnd away with jealousy

And her thorns were my only delight.

Form & Structure

The poem is formed of two heroic quatrains following an uncomplicated verse. The regular rigid rhyme scheme follows the theme of the poem of resisting change from innocence into experience. The metre is anapaestic, giving the poem a jaunty rhythm.

Stanza One

In being “offerd” to the speaker, this verb connotes unsolicited giving, implying the choice of accepting or rejection. The flower is personified as a rare temptress in being a flower “as May never bore”, the superlative language highlighting the feature of rarity, in contrast to the mundaneness of the “Pretty Rose-tree”.

But when the speaker has “passed” the flower, it has been interpreted that the speaker rejects his own personal growth, in that the flower represents experience. The speaker rejects change from innocence, and in doing so grounds themselves in naivety. It could also reflect how society is conditioned by organised religion to reject the ideas of free love, and remain shackled to the institutions of marriage and monogamy. Remember, Blake was a polygamist and believed in free love!

Stanza Two

The “Pretty Rose-tree” is given female personification by being referred to as “her”, suggesting that she is the speaker’s true love, or wife, whom he “tends” to.

The anapaestic metre is disrupted by the stresses on “jealousy”, thereby highlighting the word, which serves the purpose of demonstrating the strength of the negative emotion. This may also relate to the state of fallen humankind: its selfish selfhood. A main pleasure of this is exerting control over others under the disguise of protective love, jealousy therefore characterises this distortion of love.

But despite this “jealousy”, the speaker still takes delight from her “thorns”, which represent her jealousy, suggesting that they are the price he is willing to pay so that he can remain in an unchanging state of innocence, and because of his innocence, he is ignorantly unaware that their love is distorted by jealousy and possessiveness.

Like The Blossom, this poem is great for exploring the theme of love in Blake’s collection, so long as you link it back to the states of Innocence and Experience in doing so!


Next we move on to Ah! Sunflower, a poem evocative of death and the afterlife.

Ah! Sunflower

Ah Sun-flower! weary of time,

Who countest the steps of the Sun:

Seeking after that sweet golden clime,

Where the travellers journey is done.

Where the Youth pined away with desire,

And the pale Virgin shrouded in snow:

Arise from their graves and aspire,

Where my Sun-flower wishes to go.

Form & Structure

The poem consists of two quatrains each composed of an ABCB rhyme scheme, while the metre is anapaestic, creating a lively jaunty rhythm. The ABCB rhyme scheme in the first stanza creates a cyclical monotony of the sunflower’s boredom on Earth.

  

Stanza One

This stanza has a positive tone concerning the sunflower’s desire. The symbol of the sunflower is significant. In legend, it was said to turn continually towards the sun. In mythology, the nymph Clytie dies from unrequited love for Hyperion, the sun god, and is transformed into a flower which tracks the sun. The sunflower is also traditionally seen as a source of life, and can therefore be used as life-affirming imagery.

The opening spondee slows the rhythm down to highlight the sunflower as a central symbol.

In Christianity the sun’s rising in the East is seen as a sign of resurrection, thereby eternal life. Therefore the flower turning to the sun denotes a desire for eternal life. This want of eternity is shown when the flower is described as being “weary of time”. Furthermore, reference to a “sweet golden clime” is evocative of death and the afterlife, and its positive description suggests it is superior to Earth, and therefore mortality. The switch to trochaic foot in this line creates a sense of urgency in the sunflower’s quest.

But Blake may perhaps be criticising this, given that the flower already has a sense of present fulfilment; Blake believed that the desire for eternal life belonged to those who didn’t have the courage to face other desires.

Stanza Two

The “Youth” and the “Virgin” connote innocence and naivety as they either “Arise from their grave” and aspire to reach this “golden clime” to regain their desires, or they are already in the “golden clime”, but it is a place of lifelessness, shown in the semantic field of almost waning language like “pined away”, “shrouded in snow” and “pale”. Blake is attacking conventional Christian beliefs of the true nature of the afterlife, which taught people to accept present suffering with the promise of a self-fulfilling afterlife. This encouraged the oppression of sexuality and other powers. Blake condemned this as the perspective of “fallen” humankind, the “mind-forg’d manacles” of oppression.

Critic Harold Bloom goes as far to describe this poem as:

“The lyric’s tone can be characterised as a kind of apocalyptic sardonicism.”

By this he means, it transcends pity in its preciseness and economic use of language, so much so that it invokes longings and nostalgias that nearly slip the censure past the reader.

Therefore, the poem serves to be a criticism of the conventional Christian teachings on the afterlife. Like in The Chimney Sweeper poems, Blake warns the reader not to passively acquiesce to the struggles of everyday life for the promise of heaven, rather to enjoy the pleasures of everyday life that the Church shamed and condemned.

And finally, we turn to the final poem of this collection, which, once again (and luckily) is very short.

The Lilly

The modest Rose puts forth a thorn:

The humble Sheep, a threatning horn:

While the Lilly white, shall in Love delight,

Nor a thorn nor a threat stain her beauty bright.

Form and Structure

This poem is only one quatrain with two closed rhyming couplets, suggesting axioms, which allows no question or argument. They also suggest harmony, but separate the “Lilly” from typical symbols of love. The first couplet follows a regular iambic rhythm, but is freed up by an alternation between anapaests and iambs in the third line.

Stanza One

The “Rose” represents sexual love, but also explores mortality by linking love and death together. The “thorn” is the rose’s physical reality, thus the love represented by the rose has a means of defence and the capacity to cause harm and pain.

The “Sheep” suggests innocence and simplicity from its biblical implications, but its “horn” once again reinforces the reality of something typically meek and mild having the capacity to cause harm and pain.

By describing these two symbols as “modest” and “humble”, which are both moral qualities, Blake invites the reader to contrast these symbols with the lilly, the descriptor of which follows the noun as opposed to preceding it. This distinction is also reinforced by the rhyme scheme, linking “thorn” and “horn” to “delight” and “bright”.

The “Lilly” in traditional Christian iconography represents virginity, while also associated with funerals, speaking of death not simply as an end but as a passing into eternal life.

Jacob Boehme wrote of the lily as symbol of the new world to come, and with that, a state of perfection.

But Blake rejects this, instead using the lily as a symbol of love that neither defends itself nor causes harm or destruction.

And that’s the flower poems finished with! (phew!) Each of them explore the nature of love in different ways and illustrate the mental state of fallen humankind. There’s another poem that can accompany this collection called “The Garden of Love”, but I will be analysing that in its own section. For now, focus on revising this collection, and I will be discussing similarities and direct contrasts later.

The Dominant Ideology of AMND

This is a short section on a reading of the play that is concerned with Elizabethan and neo-Platonist beliefs. There’s a dominant ideology in the play, and Shakespeare’s other works, concerning a shared cultural and cosmological view of order. 

Others believe while Shakespeare deployed a dominant ideology, it was not, as Tillyard notes, as “an ideological legitimation of an existing social order.”

Tillyard also claims that “The Elizabethans pictured the universal order under three main forms: a chain, a series of corresponding planes, and a dance.”

Thomas Browne wrote, “Thus Man that great and true Amphibian whose nature is disposed to live, not only like other creatures in divers elements, but in divided and distinguished worlds.”

This concerns the great chain of being, in that humans reside on top of the material chain in God’s changeless order because of their understanding of the world.

Another expression of this was the Ptolemaic Universe: Earth, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Sun, Mars, Jupiter, Stellatim, Primum Mobile. The stars dictate change in sublunary things, all things above the moon were immutable, all below were imperfect and subject to mutability/change.

John Donne: “The New Philosophy calls all in doubt; the element of fire is quite put out.”

W. R. Elton: “Shakespeare’s drama provided an appropriate conflict structure: a dialectic of ironies and ambivalences, avoiding in its complex movement and multi-voiced dialogue the simplification of direct statement and reductive resolution.”

John Barton: “[Shakespeare] likes verbal complexity but is often simple and direct. His thoughts naturally shape themselves antithetically…He loves ambiguity and paradox. He delights in the sheer act of expressing himself and in handling seemingly impossible situations.”

If you can fit these quotes in your essay then this will help boost your marks in the AO3 section!