Memories essay Stasiland PDF

Preview

Summary

vce comparative essay stasiland and never let me go...

Description

“The present already belongs to your past.” Compare how the two texts explore this idea. Exploring the consuming and pervasive nature of memory, Anna Funders literary journalistic work, Stasiland and Kazuro Ishiguro’s dystopian novel, Never Let Me Go, reveal the extent to which reminiscence can dictate and control individuals’ lives. As characters struggle to make sense of their “universe in a vacuum”, Funder and Ishiguro highlight the malleable nature of memory. Additionally, individuals are revealed to be consumed in their pasts, as they seek to escape their difficult present realities. Ultimately, Funder and Ishiguro provide a mediation on the ability of individual to overcome the past that informs their present. The desire to reshape the past is explored as Funder and Ishiguro illustrate memories unreliable nature. Many former East Germans are struck with “ostalgie” believing it was “so much better” before The Wall fell. Still clinging to the “spy games” that kept him safe decades before, Herr Winz arranges to meet Funder in “neutral territory”, identifiable by the rolled-up newspaper under his arm. As Winz remains “undercover” awaiting the “second coming of socialism”, it is clear from his behaviour that he still entrusts his faith within the Stasi, as he maintains his absolute belief in the “romance” of the ideology. Funder reveals how these men remember the “easier” version of the past, as Winz recalls “you could leave your apartment door open”, all while ignoring the darker truth, that the Stasi “could see inside anyway”. This same conviction is held by Von Schnitzler, who proclaims he would “do it all again”, asserting The Wall as a “historical necessity”. As Funder further highlights the Stasi are quick to colour a “cheap and nasty world golden” as they prefer to remember the time they had “small deep human satisfaction of having one up on someone else” instead of the horrors they inflicted upon their fellow countrymen. This sentiment is reflected by Ishiguro, as individuals seek to reshape the memories that define them. Ishiguro reveals that to Ruth Hailsham is a safe environment and a “special place”, but yet she still pretends to forget her time there. Ruth’s memories contrast to Kathy’s own as she forgets the “rhubarb patch” and diminishes the “secret guard” down to only a few months although Kathy is sure it was “much longer than that”. Ruth’s forgetfulness incenses Kathy, but it is only upon Kathy’s past reflection that she can understand Ruth’s desire to “move on, grow up and leave Hailsham behind”. Ruth does not want to embark upon the meaning of her life, as Ishiguro illustrates it is a painful process in the face of her brutal future. As Ruth sheds reminders of her past, forgoing her “collection box”, it is evident to both Tommy and Kathy that Ruth was “always different to [them]”, desiring to “believe in something”, rather than being “curious”. Funder and Ishiguro highlight the ability of individuals to manipulate their memory in the face of difficult realities, as individuals seek to reshape their past. As characters become consumed by the past, Funder and Ishiguro highlight the ability of individuals to escape the oppression that surrounds their lives. Hagen Koch is bought up a “poster boy for the regime”, unable to escape Stasi dominion throughout his life. Fearing another “sleight of history”, Koch becomes a “lone crusader against forgetting”, working to “preserve historical monuments” at any cost, even going so far as to “install a homeless man” inside an old watchtower so it could not be demolished. As Koch screws “little white and blue… enamel plates” onto “things precious to him”, he holds onto the past that shaped him. Additionally, as Funder observes him to be “obsessed”, it is clear that “The Wall is the thing that defined him”, as Koch is unable to “let it go” despite the time that has elapsed. Koch recalls form “the eastern side” what it was really like in the GDR, as Funder highlights his insistence that “people must not see things from just one side”, as he protests “history being remade”. This is reflected by Ishiguro, as he illustrates how memory can comfort individuals as they face impossible circumstances. Living a life controlled by “fences”, Kathy’s obsessive recollection of her memories is revealed by Ishiguro to facilitate her assembly of her own identity. As she is faced with a brutal future her “most precious memories” sustain her, as she recalls her formative years at Hailsham and her abiding friendships with Ruth and Tommy. It is evident to Kathy and in turn the reader that she is human, as she desires to “stop, think and remember” and can’t fathom why someone would believe she “didn’t have a soul”. None of the inhumanity belongs to the clones themselves, but instead to a society that deems them “shadowy figures in a test tube”. Existing “safely within her head”, Kathy survives almost impossible restriction, as her memories bring her comfort nobody can “take away”. Funder and Ishiguro unequivocally illustrate the ability of memory to consume an individual, as they seek to escape the circumstances that surround them. The ability of characters to overcome their past is demonstrated throughout both texts, although Funder and Ishiguro provide differing perspectives on the agency available to individuals. Miriam, a woman who “at the age of sixteen…had already become an enemy of the state”, remains hopeful in her pursuit of justice for Charlie. Refusing to succumb to the torture and trauma she has experienced, Miriam is revealed to have made something new for herself, evident in the bookending of Stasiland where she is dressed “all in white” as opposed to her previous, polluted layers of black. Although Miriam finds it “difficult” to remember, she is understanding that “everything takes time”, as she seeks to give herself a second chance. Allowing herself to “remain in existence” within her old photographs, Miriam is revealed to be able to make peace with a past “not yet over”. Whilst

individuals within Stasiland have the ability to become free of their pasts, it is evident within Never Let Me Go, that individuals are not necessarily able to let go of what shaped them. Ishiguro makes it clear that Kathy and Tommy cannot escape the “lives set out for them”, as they each are understanding of the “expiry date” their time together has. Faced with the brutality of his future, “the fight goes out” of Tommy, as he accepts the fact that “the current is too strong”, and the reality of their lives causes them to “drift apart”. Kathy, however, is unable to let go of her memories as her narrative has “caught and held” all of the things she has lost within her life. Maintaining her “fantasy” of seeing Tommy again in Norfolk among “everything she has ever lost”, Kathy’s memory allows her to escape the emptiness a future of loss would otherwise entail, giving a sense of meaning to her existence. Like the immovable “boat standing in the marshes”, Kathy knows she cannot escape the life planned out for her, yet she cannot move forward, as Ishiguro illustrates that for her to forget would be for her life loose meaning. Funder and Ishiguro illustrate the differing agency available to individuals to escape their past memories, as individuals struggle in limbo between the past and present. As the power that memory holds over the lives of individuals is revealed, Funder and Ishiguro highlight the ability of reminiscence to control individuals. As memory is demonstrated to warp and become unreliable, Funder and Ishiguro simultaneously illustrate the comfort and solace that memories can bring, as individuals become consumed in the past. As Ishiguro obliterates all hope of escaping ones “determined future”, Funder alternatively portrays a “city of heroes”, as they each provide a reflection in the ability of the human soul to overcome its past.

PLAN: 1) The desire to reshape the past  malleable nature of memory.  The Stasi- Herr Bock, Herr Winz second coming of communism  Ostalgie- “colour a cheap and nasty world golden”  “sleight of history”  “make themselves innocent of Nazism overnight”  The ability to make themselves innocent is a skill they have developed ”the small deep satisfaction of having one up on someone else”  Try as it might, Germany is unable to leave their debilitating past behind. As long as the aged ex-Stasi men survive, there will always be secrets, tension and lies. Funder is shocked to find there are still men who, in this day and age, stoutly defined their heinous actions during the wall’s ruling. Amongst these men is Herr Winz – the first and perhaps most alarming ex-Stasi man of all. Still clinging onto the “spy games” that kept him safe decades before, Herr Winz arranged to meet Funder at a hotel “neutral territory” and will be identified by the rolled up magazine under his left arm. Through his behaviour it is clear to see Herr Winz has faith in, and feels it necessary to carry out such measures, which seem almost comical in the light of the modern day. Yet his unswerving devotion and almost violent behaviour leave no hint of amusement. Belonging to an “Insider Kommittee” of ex-Stasi men it is evident that there is a hidden, yet strong devotion to the ways of such an unflinching government that Herr Winz genuinely believes in, This same conviction is held by Von Schnitzler, another ex-Stasi man Funder meets. Nicknamed ‘Filthy Ed” his actions were dominated by blackmail and backstabbing, yet he says to Funder “I would do it all again”. This chilling devotion illustrates that despite lacking a physical body the “antifascist protective measure” lives on, distinctly in the minds and lives of men who remain loyal to the Stasi. 

Funder discovers that in the GDR, “people were required to acknowledge an assortment of fictions as fact”, including the suggestion that no East Germans played a part in the Holocaust or the Nazi regime, that the GDR was a “multi-party democracy”, and that “socialism was peace-loving”.

Buildings painted “only halfway up”, in order to impress low-looking foreign officials, added to the illusion of Eastern prosperity that served to hide its economic struggles and food shortages. As “true believers” in the GDR, the concept of its “fiction” is exemplified by the certainty of ex-Stasi perpetrators, such as Karl-Eduard von Schnitzler and Herr Winz, that the Berlin Wall was “the most useful creation in all of German history”. Even insisting that the GDR’s border killings were “[acts] of peace”, these “ossified” men can not see past not only their “ostalgie” for their former security state, but also their absolute belief in the “romance” of communist ideology, which would build a world “from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.” Anna Funder points out how these men are fixated on the advantages of communism, like the fact that “you could leave your apartment door open”, all the while ignoring the darker truth of the GDR; that “[the Stasi] could see inside anyway.” The horrors inflicted on East Germans in the name of a “walled-in” socialist haven made up much of the chilling reality of the Stasi regime. The state that made “enemies of its own children” was dominated by men of the “house of a thousand eyes”, and even the most private aspects of East German lives were peered into and examined by the Stasi. Having previously believed in the GDR and thought that “communism was not such a bad system”, Julia Behrend learned the power of the Stasi the hard way. In her teen years, her Italian boyfriend made her subject to Stasi surveillance, due to her connection to the West, leading her, “through no fault of her own”, to fall “into the gap between the GDR’s fiction and its reality”. After being interrogated by Major N, who pored over letters between her and the Italian, containing their “private lover’s language”, Julia was asked to inform for the Stasi and immediately felt “on the other side”. Able to see the GDR for the oppressive system it was, Julia was could no longer “accept ‘GDR-logic’”, and became depressed and without a job in a nation that claimed to have “no unemployment”. Her treatment speaks to the Stasi’s paranoia and willingness consider everyone an enemy, making “ordinary people” its primary victims in its “universe in a vacuum”. Stasiland highlights the stark contrast that existed between the image of a prosperous socialist nation that the GDR projected to the outside world, and the reality of a “land gone wrong”.



Ruth: Hailsham was “special”  but she still pretends to forget



Ruth does not want to embark upon the meaning of her life as it is a painful – Tommy and Kathy were always trying to find things out; “curious”



process- forgetting the rhubarb patch, getting rid of her collection box. – this forgetfulness makes Kathy angry, but it is only upon her past reflection she can understand to “move on, grow up and leave Hailsham behind” and she and Tommy come to understand that “what you have got to remember about Ruth was that she was always different to us”



“maybe they want to dump it”

2) Becoming consumed by one’s past  Hagen Koch- “poster boy for the new regime”  “collection of strange talismans from a bygone world”  “only one who can remember from the eastern side, what it was like”  “even more obsessed with it than I remember”

      

“the wall is the thing that defined him and he will not let him go” “preservation of historical monuments” “lone crusader against forgetting” “people must not see things from just one side” Kathy- refuses to forget as it is all she has left- its her attempt at assembling her identity when faced with a future that breaks her down. “most precious memories” Living a life controlled by “fences”, Kathy’s recollection of her memories is revealed by Ishiguro to facilitate her assembly of her own identity. As she is faced with a brutal future her “most precious memories” sustain her, as she recalls her formative years at Hailsham and her abiding friendships with Ruth and Tommy. It is evident to Kathy and in turn the reader that she is human, as she desires to “stop, think and remember” and can’t fathom why someone would believe she “didn’t have a soul”. None of the inhumanity belongs to the clones themselves, but instead to a society that deems them “shadowy figures in a test tube”. Existing “safely within her head”, Kathy survives almost impossible restriction, as her memories bring her comfort nobody can “take away”

3) The ability to overcome the past and move forward, whereas others can’t let it go as it is all they have.  Miriam- CAN accept her past and MOVE FOWARD  Miriam, a woman who “at the age of sixteen…had already become an enemy of the state”, remains hopeful in her pursuit of justice for Charlie. Refusing to succumb to the torture and trauma she has experienced, Miriam is revealed to have made something new for herself, evident in the bookending of Stasiland where she is dressed “all in white” as opposed to her previous, polluted layers of black. Although Miriam finds it “difficult” to remember, she is understanding that “everything takes time”, as she seeks to give herself a second chance. Allowing herself to “remain in existence” within her old photographs, Miriam is revealed to be able to make peace with a past “not yet over”.  Kathy and Tommy-can’t overcome their “lives set out for them”  Tommy accepts- Metaphor of the river : “the fight goes out of him” – sees his life as a “big strong river”, where the “current” becomes “too strong” causing them to “drift apart”- tommy ACCEPTS and understands  Kathy cannot- vision of Norfolk; “everything she had ever lost”- refuses to lose the memories as well- Maintains her “fantasy” of seeing him again ; kathys narrative has “caught and held” all of the things she has lost; Kathy’s memory allows her to escape emptiness that a future of loss would otherwise entail and gives a sense to their existence  it is in this way that she CANNOT move forward, because to move forward is to have her life loose meaning...