Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
And my luck.
The well, wherein my precious treasure does lie.
Houoh - youoh.
It is one hundred thousand fathoms deep.
Houoh - youoh.
Pull the rope upwards! Pull the rope upwards!
This precious treasure of mine is my day and my happiness.
The tears are rolling out of my heartthrobs eyes.
Houoh - youoh.
The well is almost half full.
Houoh - youoh.
Pull the rope upwards! Pull the rope upwards!
This precious treasure of mine is my day and my luck.
And if she can´t be rescued.
Houoh - youoh.
I am going to jump downwards to her, right into the well.
Houoh - youoh.
Pull the rope upwards! Pull the rope upwards!
This precious treasure of mine is my day and my luck.
And if you´re going to rescue my precious treasure.
Houoh - youoh.
She shall become your heartthrob, too.
Houoh - youoh.
Pull the rope upwards! Pull the rope upwards!
The precious treasure of mine is my day and my luck.
Thus, some things have fallen downwards into the well.
Other things, apart from these daughters of Trygaios, as well.
Uhm. 1961. Uhm. The premiere took place. We´ve just listened to a new musical adaptation done by Tschirpke. And, uhm. Marcus (Correctly: Marco) Tschirpke. Thus, ahem, yes. It´s quite interesting, that, actually, in these days. In these years, Hacks, actually. One can follow new approaches towards Hacks, these kind of approaches one couldn´t have thought of forty years before this present day. One is not without hope in recognizing those new approaches. Thus, insofar. This version, not being the "Beautyful-Azriel-version". Instead it´s a different kind of version. Uhm. Klaus Höpcke. Did you see the play back in 1961? No, in 1961, i haven´t seen it. You were in Leipzig, during that time. Yes, yes. Leipzig. Klaus Höpcke was born in 1933. Thus, i do have the obligation to do a little bit of an introduction of your person. Dr. Oehme, asked me to do this. Thank you very much. Born 1933 in Cuxhaven. But actually an Berliner. He was in Mecklenburg, being together with his mother. Their apartment having been bombed (bombed out), You told me. And then the first steps towards writing were taken. There were publications in newspapers. Poems, as well. Obviously, there was an inclination towards literature. Quite early on. As i do perceive it. Heh. Mh, definetely so. And, uhm. Then, studying journalism in Leipzig. Uhm. You, were the first secretary of the free-german-youth-county-directory. Or, even district-directory. District-Directory of Leipzig. And, uhm. During this period, right about `61 were. During this time, approximately. Uhm, 1963, approximately. Uhm, the change to Berlin took place. Uhm, on to the "New Germany". And there, uhm, you stayed in the cultural section of this newspaper until 1973. In 1973 you did change into the Ministry of Culture. Deputy Minister of Culture, being responsible for, this, this, great Title i am not able to pronounce correctly. Publishers and, Dr. Oehme had already pronounced it correctly, Book Trade and Publishers. Well, not only concerning literature, that being everyones conception. The Minister of Books. Instead the Minister of Books apparently has been the Minister of all Books. He. Well, Technical Publications. Yes, yes. Everything. Hph, uhm. And 1989, there does, uhm, you are being, well, your work in this apparatus did end, as well as for others, too. And. But you are being an active member of the PDS. And. Later on you are a member of the Legislative Assembly of Thuringia and as of today, you are being an activist in the LEFT. Uhm, I have read, that you are, for the, uh, Deputy, uhm, Deputy Member of the Board of Trustees of the SAPMO-Foundation. Right? Mhm. That´s an interesting question, that´s the, uhmh, Archive of the, uhm, Massorganizations of the State, the Massorganizations of the GDR. And, uhm, that´s an interesting question. How one is actually able to access all things contained in this archive? No. Can one actually gain access to it? Does one have to pay for it? Hph, well the, uh, PDS did seperate itself from this whole archive and gave it to the, uhm, Federal Archive. And there does exist a Board of Trustees, which you are being a member of? Yes. Uhm. If any members of the legal profession are present, i am going to explain these matters in two sentences. Go ahead, right now. He, he. Well, it, it, at first it seemed to be logical to reflect to oneself, uh, if there does exist an SPD and an PDS. Two Parties of the working-class-movement. Then, those two could combine their archives and libraries. And this goal was being pursued by the Friedrich-Ebert-Foundation and ourselves, uh, for a long time. But the situation appeared to be like this, regarding the balance of power in the Federal Assembly. But finally, one couldn´t get approval for this plan by the Konrad-Adenauer-Foundation, Hans-Seidel-Foundation and the Naumann-Foundation of the FDP. For this reason, another kind of construction, one, that didn´t allow for such a close connection of both parties in this area. And we reached this arrangement with the assistance of the staff of the Federal Ministry of the Interior. Sieghardt von Köckritz did play an influential, positive, part in this matter. So, that, actually an integration into the Federal Archive was possible. But integration into as follows. That´s the reason, why i spoke up. Yes. Uh. It´s called, the abbreviation SAPMO, yes. Uh, uh. Archive of the Party- and Massorganizations of the GDR at the Federal Archive. The S in front of it stands for: Foundation. Foundation Archive of the Party- and Massorganizations of the GDR at the Federal Archive. It´s very rare, that in official designations, the GDR isn´t being referred to as the "so called" or the "former" or the "onetime". Instead it´s called: the GDR! And that´s how the things actually were. And there it´s kept in an orderly fashion. That´s located in the Finckensteinalley, uh, in, Lichterfelde. Lichterfelde. You get off at Lichterfelde-West. And, then you have to walk for a short distance. Then, uh, it´s a former barracks-building. Come again, please? There´s a bus, too. Laughter. Yes, one is able to go the last distance by bus, if you are not keen on walking. That´s an interesting historical city-tour walking through this quarter. And, and, for those, who are interested in history? These are the buildings, uh, in which Hitler did kill a large amount of the Röhm-lot. 1934. Actually Röhm, himself, was actually killed in Munich by him. But several ones have been killed in this building. Uhm. It has got a waste (wild), contradictory history, this complex (compound) but, eh, after ´45 the Andrew-barracks have been located there. But now, uh, now it´s going to be possible, by using additional buildings, uh, to store even more there. Well, it´s a quite decent archive site. And the foundation does have got a level of, uh, influence on this site. It just like that. The foundation was founded because of, that its contributors. And,the PDS being an, uh, representative of a large percentage of the contributors. Precisely, representing the part of the PDS and, earlier on, of the Socialist Unified Party of Germany (SED). And, those which did belong to other parties. Did contribute and, uh, therefore, they do have got certain grant of say. Like, for instance, uh, the Cultural Association of the GDR and the trade unions and so forth. Well, everyone that did contribute GDR-archival documents, which weren´t state-related ones. The state-related ones are normally being stored in the Federal Archive. And the Federal Archive is located there, too. And in which manner has the question of ownership been resolved? The ownership stays with those, who did contribute it. Aha, Uhm. Yes, yes. That´s evident. Even in the event, uh, up to, uh, uh. If some machinations were to be set in to gear, which we wouldn´t approve of. In those instances we could say. In this case, we decide to withdraw everything and leave it altogether. No. That´s an option built into the fabric of this foundation. Yes.
Uhm. Well. The has got to, uh, deal with Hacks, too. That´s not bad at all. Uh, heh, if we´re, uh, if we´re talking about politics of culture. And in talking with Klaus Höpcke about Hacks. I think. And, uhm, the. Mhm. The immediate relatedness. Well, where Hacks is referring explicitly to Höpcke, uhm, that´s, well, turned out to be the title of our event. "Opportunistic". And, uh, maybe you could to give a recitation of this anecdote? Yes, well. Eh, there has been published at OWl´s a volume, a small volume containig anecdotes. 130 anecdotes concerning Peter Hacks and 13 alternative ones. One of them is called "Travelling by car with the Minister". "The Weimarian Goethe-Society had turned the celebration of the Goethe-year 1982 into an very international affair. They presented a frechman, an american, a west-german and even a japanese. Hacks had been honored to represent the GDR with an contr..., uh, with a lecture. And Klaus Höpcke, as it goes on to be told in here, the Minister of Books, had topped off the outcome with a highly intelligent abstract of all contributions. Höpcke and Hacks were congenially to each other, as a result of mutual understanding. Höpcke offered Hacks a free ride in his car and they drove back together the six hours from Weimar to Berlin, after a good days work, and they used the long timespan to confabulate. These six hours, uh, are poetic licence, like, uh, mhm, uh, in the Goethe Archives, yes, and in the Goethe Museum where this note is on display, how many hours Goethe claims to have needed in order to arrive at Kochberg. At Charlotte´s place. He did shorten the timespan, eh, in this paper drastically. This here, what Hacks does, is a little degree of an expansion. Well, it certainly weren´t todays traffic conditions and we had an Lada, and I had one, an somewhat higher modernized one at my disposal. But, it didn´t took us six hours to travel this distance. Despite the break. So, eh, eh. We did drive. We, eh, did use these six hours from Weimar to Berlin. And did use the long timespan to confabulate. "Our Book-imports-politics", Hacks dropped, "is a thoroughly opportunistic one." "Opportunistic?", the minister asked back in a slightly sharp voice. "What would you consider to be part of this accusation?" "Just about everything.", said Hacks, who wasn´t trying to start an argument." Laughter. Thank you very much. Uhm, yes. Who, uh, wasn´t trying to pick a fight. Heh, uhm. What, what do you think, what did Hacks mean with "everything"? Yes. We had been talking occasionally about certain aspects of the politics of culture. Including the politics of literature. Uhm. I had been irritated, uh, by. Hence the pungency of my reaction. That he did apply it specifically to Book-imports-politics. I did consider, that the Book-imports-politics of the GDR in the years since ´82, in many aspects, yes, uh, what had been bad before, that we had made up for it and did catch up. That, well, a lot of, what hadn´t bee allowed to be let in, had been already made part of the Book imports. As well as in the imports by licensing, as, eh, eh, because of the use of the same language, eh, and by importing printed books. Eh, eh, well, i was a little bit astonished. And concerning the fact, that we did talk on many occasions. Uh, The opportunistic strain, he did regard, that, eh, certain authors, that he, yes, let´s put it this way, did consider to belong to the artistically inferior ones, eh, that we, so to speak, did let those one pass through and we if we did, eh, intervene to restrict occasionally, Why not in this case? And vice versa. That, eh, that there were aspects, that he, were he did regard us being ideologically to open hearted. Eh, that, we didn´t want to accept as an accusation. Well, regarding this, uh, broad-mindedness, maybe in adding to this, uh. In 1990 there´s this essay written by him. "The international opportunism in the german ranks." And in this, he does research this concept quite rigorously. And, uh, he concludes. One the one hand. That opportunism in case, uh, of writers, well, uhm. He did mention for instance the case of Gerhart Hauptmann. Uh, it´s quite feasible, because writers are humans, still. Mhm. And man, well, wants to eat and so on. And, uhm, but in regarding politics, uhm, he does point to Lenin, naturally. And, uhm, he does arrive at the conclusion, uhm. Where is it? Yes. Opportunism, says Lenin, is the Idea of the collaboration of the classes. From the collapse of the Second Internationale Lenin derives as early as 1915 the necessity. A third one, to establish a Marxist Internationale. Such an inception, would only be possible, he did stress, by passing over the heads of the old leaders. Only to be feasible to put this into the works by passing over the head of the old party. Well, uh, before that. Uhm, the accurate term, well, eh. The labour parties weren´t forced by the governments to collaborate. They willingly did, what they were supposed to do and did follow their class enemies freely. The scientific name for this wonderful self-dissolution of the organized proletariat is called opportunism. Well, uhm, the, uh, the accusation, uh. If he raises it against the politics. Mhm. Is being a very, very, uh, grave one. Mhm. Uhm, M...Maybe we are going to arrive at this detail later on during the interview? Maybe you do want to add to this right now, uh, to immediately respond to this? Ahum. We almost already arrived at this topic, that, well now, we do graze it at this moment. Uhm, that the Hacks-Conference. To which i do want to point towards, uh, i´m able to touch upon it, at this moment. The last one, concerning the romanticism. Uhm, at the core of it, this has been mentioned, too. Uhm. It was concerned with, uhm, how, uhm, the conception of Hacks, well, uh, in regard to the romanticism, if it´s even possible to grasp it from today´s point of view? Mhm. Well, the practical. Mhm. A very serious and important scientist. Uh, Kai Köhler did formulate very precisely then, or. Very poignant, in regard to these facts and circumstances, as he does perceive it. Uhm, Napoleon wasn´t defeated just as little by Kleist, like the GDR has been defeated by Christa Wolf. Laughter. Well, hm. This, uhm, question. At one point, opportunism in the politics. And, but then again, the reflexiveness. Which effect does literature have got on politics? Well, uh, does. Do, uh, the literati of the GDR have got any stake in taking the blame for its downfall? That was the copped thesis, that one could verifiy relying on Hacks to such or such a degree. Or one can´t prove it. Well, uh, how he actually meant this to be understood? But, its, uhm, actually how he did come to this conclusion, uh, the, the Hacks-Conference. Or, that´s been one point of the discussion. Hn, uhm. Well, for us ba...back then, the debate about the romanticism, uh, was being complicated by, that there did exist two distinct tendencies toward it. We had, uh, for a long period of time an, expressed in a rather coarser fashion, sectarian isolation against certain tendencies of the romanticism and regarding her being accepted into the current literary life. And we did try, to reduce this. We tried to say. This way to reflect the reality does belong to literature. Uh, One can´t say, only the classics, the good and so forth. Instead, that´s being one major element, too. Mhm. While we were trying to surmount this narrowness. Eh, there does have to be taken into consideration, and rightly so, the observation, that some, huhm, in inheriting the romanticism, huhm, tried to, eh, consider this, and exclusively this, uh, perspective as being the only legitimate one. Mhm. And to introduce, uh, it into the current literature. And, to these, uh, Hacks is...Hacks did react forcefully to immediately, naturally. And this resulted in, uh, an dual conflict in the regard. In this regard. Heh. Maybe, to consider it, chronologically, to, uh, discuss this matter. And, then, uhm, sometime all attending experts are invited to join in, into this discussion. Uhm. When did you get to know Hacks? Or. When did you at first did encounter him?
´64, ´65. Mhm. When exactly? I just can´t recall it, right now. But, uh, there´s this one thing, that, uh, that´s been documented by newspaper coverage. Yes, uh, yes. In february 1965 during a series, that, uh, was being organized by GDR-writers in the student´s quarter of Sigmundshof. He did feature in this evening. But, uh, that was called "Socialist Novelist, uh, do readings" and there, uh, different ones were invited as guests. And, uh, inter alia Peter Hacks. And, eh, i went to take part in these events, too. I still was working for the "New Germany" at this time. And i did report, uh, shortly afterwords on this. Mhm. These. Mhm. This article was, uh, being published by the "New Germany", to be precise. After that you were contributing to the arts section. Uhm. Maybe, uh, you could try to characterize this period? Well, uh, these times, actually. That´s ´65. Mhm. When you did write this article. That was before the 11th plenary assembly. Mhm. Uhm, well, the period, uh, actually, after the 6th party congress in 1963. Mhm. Uhm, that one featuring the Hüppen-Plenum. Maybe, uh, that might be quite interesting to know more about? You have, uh, You did, uh, in 1963 in Leipzig, uhm, encounter Ulbricht. At a Youth-Conference. Mhm. May turn out to be an interesting aspect? Mhm. Well, uh, these, because that. Because, we might, uh, raise the question concerning this Youth-committee. Uh, yes. Eh. The more mature ones among you, may do remember, that in ´62 - ´63 this Youth-Communiqué had been issued. That, which has just been mentioned. That did have the title "Trust and Responsibility entrusted to the youth". And, eh, that, eh, did result in, eh, to develop more faith in the capabilities of the youth. To not only, uh, in the general sense, from the higher tier downward, instead, uh, to develop more trust in their ability to rely upon themselves. And Ulbricht did express himself in this aspect, eh, very clearly, even in his critical remarks, too. Well, for example. Uh, You mustn´t have to be content with one, uh, with that, what´s written in some chrestomathies or anthologies and so on. Instead, you must read these works yourself. The sources. Eh, You must, if you´ve got, uh, a different perception than the superintendent of your respective areas of labour. Eh, that you have got to advocate this conception of yours. And don´t let yourself get knuckled by someone, only because he´s a little bit higher up than you are, or something along these lines. Well, these were very explicit matters, in the text as well. Not being expressed quite so clearly. Eh, but these matters have been mentioned in this text. And. Where you are trying to get at. That was a manifestation in the Leipzig Zoo. Well, that we did hold in the congress hall of the zoo. Uh, and in other adjoining venues as well. Well, all the venues in this huge compound were, eh, occupied by the young ones. And, eh, that. This, eh, one can already describe it as an manifestation, that did serve, uh, the discussion of the Youth-communiqué. And before the event had begun, we already did convince Ulbricht, i do proclaim. We, being Kurt Turba, the director of the Youth Department of the Central Committee, and myself. Eh, We did persuade him into. Let the youth begin by presenting their contributions to the discussion. And following them, you are going to lecture. And, not you speaking first and then that has to come next. And in addition to that, that´s one aspect, i haven´t mentioned yet. But, i can reveal this to you, now. I did reveal this elsewhere already. I did invite the young ones, uh, in the early afternoon. Or even on noon. That were chosen to give their lectures there, i did invite to come to me and i did say to them. So, boys and girls. I know. Now you´ve got your texts and the party secretary and the Free-German-Youth-secretary did discuss every single detail with you. I am going to take away those papers from you. I am going to give to you white papersheets and pencils or biros. And a room, too. You´re allowed to take the texts with you, for now. But, you do have to take notes. And afterwards we´re going to talk based on your notes. Your writings, uh, all the prefabricated ones, are going to be given back to you after the end of this manifestation. And the benefit it had, was, that they did speak there freely, naturally, and that was, so to speak, much more interesting for Ulbricht to respond to this than to these prefabricated texts. So. How did we arrive at this point? I see, now, uh. Well, that was in, right, uh, at the beginning of the sixties. And in the year of ´64 - ´65, uh, the situation surrounding this type of politics, already got more complicated. In October ´64 Nikita Sergeyvitch Khrustchev had already been deposed of. Khrustchev did support such a way of thinking and politics, uh, such a style of politics, like Ulbricht, with his Youth-communiqué and other analogous measures undertaken in the areas of the law and the press and so forth, and did favour these efforts. Those, who deposed of Khrustchev, did not subscribe to this kind of forthrightness. And thus, the harrassments did set in. Even to affect Ulbricht personally, eh, to keep away from these politics. Didn´t they? And, uhm, in a direct reference to the 11th plenary assembly. That did take place during the december of ´65. This reading there, did take place during the february of ´65. Eh. That does mean. That had been an aspect. The. That of the rollback of this more broadminded politics, that we did experience during ´64 - ´65. But only barely so. Well, in. Uh. Well, in that, uh, article he is being praised, Hacks, how he did succeed there in actually confronting his antagonists. Uh, mhm. West-Berlin. And that for the people in West. That, uh, that, quite interesting, it´s cited, that Hacks actually has got the opinion, that one is actually in the position to conceive a hero and write about heroes. And that one, uh, only is able to conceive of one in socialism. Uh, mhm. He did advocate this. For a long time, a hero hasn´t been written about. We are able to conceive of an hero, for the first time in a long period. Mhm. And, uh. Maybe, let´s take a step back. 1961, uh, in, hm, september. After the closing of the border in Berlin. One has to point this out more clearly. Well, the wall had been built. Closing of the border in Berlin. Uhm, uhm. There does happen. An. Uh. A Conference in the Academy of Arts. A big manifestation. That´s quite interesting. There does exist an recording of this. Uhm. What Hacks does say, there. One does see, naturally, the historical, uhm, the historical situation before ones very eyes. Uhm. But, uhm, the thoughts being. They are transcending these confines. Uh. Maybe, we are able to listen to it, right now? Well, uh, there´s music. It´s going to be very agitative. Ha, ha. Music. "To recognize and to create - problems of the Socialist Culture" Music. "During the last weeks and month, there have been many reports about neofascist acts of terror in West-Germany and West-Berlin. Aimed at progressive novelists, artists and scientists, that advocated the cooperation of all peoples and spoke out in favour of the peaceful coexistence. In full rsponsibility in regard to the german national culture on september, the 4th, of 1961 the leading bodies of all Artists Associations and Culture Organizations of the GDR did meet at the German Academy of Arts in Berlin to express themselves in an intense demonstration of their conviction. You are able to listen to some explanations given by the writer Peter Hacks.
"Ladies and Gentlemen. The dictatorship of the west-german bourgeousie has entered a new level. Behind the golden curtain of the boom economy the financial capital, only to be observed by few people, has calmly taken control by occupying all the central levers of power. All the assets of the state, of the army, of the polics,of the law have been seized by it. All the publicication mechanisms have been seized by it. The process of the societal counterrevolution has come to an end. Now the golden curtain is being hoisted. And across the whole scene an enactment is taking place, as an atrocious satyr play, the ideological counterrevolution. The ability to freely express ones opinion, this precious luxury, has finally come to an end. Had it already been allowed to commit crimes, from now on it´s prohibited to call a crime a crime. The detection is not adequate anymore, that it´s being possible to say some thing and it´s being impossible to say everything. The socialist literature isn´t any arbitrary, quantitavely comprehensible, part of the literature. The socialist literature is the veritable literature. Suppression of the socialist literature, that does mean. Everything can be said, but only the truth, can´t be told.
That´s obviously as if mathematics were to be prohibited. This by itself is total slavery. And, notwithstanding, that´s only the beginning. The suppression of truth is followed by the suppression of half truth. Followed by the fight against the literature of the democracy of the petit-bourgeoisie. Many westgerman writers do condemn our way. But our goal. A peaceful and rational communal life of all people. A free, rich and dignified organization of each individual mind. That´s being our goal, too. Because of this goal, they are being persecuted. In the rhine state the condition has been reached, as it has been described by L. Ricieux. "One only is able to find truth in forbidden books. In the other ones lies are being told. I did already say. And i did say, with a lesser amount of satisfaction, that the westgerman authors, in their inglorious majority, don´t consider the GDR to be their alley. Before their wide-opened eyes the brown blustering waves are rising up and they don´t reach for the life buoy. Who is to blame? The Nazi-Capitalism did leave shredded bodies, smashed up bridges, spoiled brains. The humans have been born posthumously. The bridges have been reconstructed. But the brains. Can we ascertain, that all brains have been cleaned. Inside the heads of the westgerman writers the worst Nazi-poison is being active. The inability to think in political terms. The intellectual opposition has again formed itself up. But they have unlearned how to use their best weapons. In the last few months. Having been forced into the corner by terror of opinion, the ones on the other side did start to fight again. But they do fight with bare hands. They are commenting on societal questions. But they are doing it from the perspective of their private point of view. We haven´t got any reason to doubt the subjective sincerity of our leftelbian colleagues. But indeed to doubt their objective proficiency. Their courage is being very often of an high degree. Their knowledge is always on a very low level. It´s not their conscience, that´s being the problem here. The problem is their knowledge. If we are trying to find out about who has got to take the blame for this tragic Not-Getting-together, then we have enough reason to look at our own actions in a questioning approach. Did we try as best as we could to do everything to reveal to the westgerman writers the picture of socialist realism in all its tremendous magnitude, valour and fullness of life in front of their very eyes? Didn´t we speak with them beneath their intellectual standard and above their political standard? Didn´t we dig the water level deeper at times, too? The fate of homelessness is a harsh one. But the one, who is being affected the most by this fate is the writer, if i am not mistaken. With great pleasure i am able to speak here for myself, and not only for myself. Writers of german language you have got a home. There is a country, which does speak your language, which does approve of your goals und which does understand your suffering. There are still people left, which consider themselves to be part of the homeless left. But this word is nothing more than one of the trappings laid out by the trappers for you. It´s devoid of any meaning. One who is a left progressive, is not without a native country. The left has a home in germany. We offer a home to all german writers, which didn´t betray humanity already. What´s the meaning of this, if it´s meant to signify anything? It means, that we do offer to give a resonance to what they´re doing. That we´re going to print and read them. It does mean, that we do give them access to information. That we´re talking with them. Always and anyplace. It does mean, that we´re supporting their struggle. With mental and political weapons. Needless to say, that they are going to find protection and security if it has gotten to the point, that one isn´t only killing their reputations, but instead their vital bodies. That one isn´t just preventing them to write, but preventing their very existence. I suggest we should offer this assistance unconditionally to them. Thus, not meant as an gratification for any remorsefullness or change of mind that did take place before already. The westgerman writers are invited by us. They and we are but one literature. Even, if they and we are writing two distinct literatures at this moment. We are not going to seperate us from them, even at the risk that our company is regarded by them as being an inconveniant one. We honor those among them, which are still do disrepute us. Go and ask a lover who has been cheated for his reason to persistently cling to a faithless woman, says Diderot, and you´re going to learn why one writer so persistently clings to another writer of superior distinct talent." Well, as mentioned here, the socialist literature is the true literature. No. Well. That´s, uh, the period. Hm. Well, hm, as i´ve already said. Certainly, before it. Well, there had been this writers meeting in, uhm, Hamburg. Well, in the year of 1961. And, aqcuaintances, actually, with...with writers. Hm, uhm. Practically, westgerman writers, uhm, which he is inviting to come. Uhm. In 1961 this probably was quite unrealistic, already? Hm. Well, this invitation? Myes, well, hm. Yes, only a minority. One could almost count the number by using one hand only. But, at the same time, he did speak about this reading in Sigmundshof with a degree of high adulation. About Hochhuth and his work, uh, "The Deputy". And, eh, he did...,eh, and Peter Weiss, the Marat-play. Eh, did raise some objections as well. But he was full of praise and, and support. Yes, hm, hm. Uhm. And what about the situation after that? Uhm. Could you go into further detail? Well, eh, ´65? Eh, the, the 11th plenary assembly. Well. You did write the article against Biermann. Or, you did write a piece about Biermann. Let´s not describe it as an article against Biermann. Nh, that was intended to be against Biermann. Laughter. Applause. Uhm. And one is actually able to, uh, detect remarks and descriptions. Uhm, for example. Craving for attention. Uh. so, well, that´s one aspect. Well, Herostratus. Mhm. That´s being part of the article. That´s interesting, uh, that´s something used being used by Hacks later, uh, for Müller. In the one piece "On the processing of...", uh, "On the reversion of classics". Well, Herostratus, being used. Uh, well, as someone who is constantly craving for attention he is describing him, uhm, in a very elaborate manner in his "World Scene"-article. Uhm, but story does go like this, that this, yes, article got published in the "New Germany" on the 5th of december, no, on the 5th of december. Yes, yes. I do think it got published. Mhm. Nineteenhundred, uh, sixtyfive. And on the 4th, uh, the obituary of Erich, uh, Apel, uh, got published in the "New Germany", uhm, is being flanked by the news, uh, about the signed, uh, economical agreement with the soviet union. Well, that on the left side , this on the right side. Halfway through. Mhm. You did work on this article. Allegedly, in november a delegation by. Well, a secret visit by Brezhnev. A secret visit by Brezhnev took place. In november. Uhm, ´65. And, eh, how do you assess your article in view of these circumstances? Eh, I do have to discerne between, in how i do regard it nowadays, considering these circumstances. No, or? I didn´t mean to talk about the article itself, but rather, about how you, what relevance would you attribute to it in regard of these circumstances? You are concerned about it in relation to all these circumstances? Yes, exactly. I am going to explain something regarding the article later on. Yes. Uh, only as a reminder. I did mention earlier on. Brezhnev did, eh, pressure us after Khrustchev had been overthrown. And the most intense act of pressuring did actually date and take place in november of ´65. Eh, photos do exist, where he does come to close him. Yes. During this talk, because Ulbricht did represent certain, eh, positions, that did divert from the ones, what Brezhnev did force upon us. And, eh, part of this act of forcing upon us something, uhm, concerning the dealing with, our parastatal companies and so forth, eh, trying to change something in this area. Well, to do certain foolish acts, that finally did happen later on in the seventies. But they did try to push into this direction earlier on. Ah, the fact that Apel did committ suicide, uh, is a result of him having been visited by Patolichev. And, eh, having been confronted, with, eh, demands regarding the, uh, trade relations, that he couldn´t accept. Because, he was being afraid, that the interests of the GDR would be getting lost on the wayside. And, eh, so to speak, resulting in nervousness because of this pressure, he finally did, eh, shoot himself. Eh, regarding my article. That had been, to tell it accurately, published before the 11th plenary assembly did happen. Yes, before that. And, eh, for now. I do stress this point because of. I couldn´t have anticipated, that an 11th plenary assembly was scheduled. I was aware, that i had been scheduled to happen, obviously. But, ah, ich couldn´t foresee what it´s main concern would be. 32 00:40:00,01 --> 00:49:56,59 For it had been announced, that it would concern the plan, on the national-economic-plan, both for that year, as well as the five-Year-plan. Uh, uh. Agenda and everything as planned. And the speech, uh, report of the politbureau, in which the escalation intellectual and cultural issues was put forth. This Honecker already had, who was the rapporteur of this text, er, contrary to usual practice in the politbureau, that these texts are to be known in advance by all members of the politbureau, he had, er, fumbled in these texts. Well, Uh, it had been one. He did read out a text, that had not been confirmed as such by the politbureau. But he has made several insertions, which were of this kind, that we have experienced. Isn´t it?. and this provoked the corresponding contributions in the discussion. Um, yes. Regarding my article, I must say the following. Uh. I had a polemic against Biermann. Due to various texts. But. Uh, it seemed to me, uh, uh. Before the article appeared, as far, I have called it "frothing at the mouth", had been redacted into it. To a degree, that I've said. If this does remain as it is. I can not publish it under my name. Uh, Uh. If it is to be published, er, under my name. And now I will not shy away from it out of cowardice here, but then it has to be, uh, that I can restore it in some aspects, to it´s originally intended form. And subsequently reading this article, does indicate clearly to me, er, that in the end, despite all the fierceness of the criticism, of this confrontation. I did imply. Firstly: That poems by Biermann do exist, which I still do appreciate. And secondly: That I would hope that, uh, his talent may enable him, er, to be able to find other ways. That's (implication, hope), as of now, where I must add, after he has made propaganda for the Iraq war in the Springer-newspaper "The World", uh, has not been validated. But the opposite instead. Yes. The, the Honecker, uh, hmph, so. I do not know. They were in the ND (NG: New Germany) at the time. Hermann Axen was the chief editor. Editor in chief. Um. Yes. So, do you have got an insight into who ultimately has to been responsible for these text passages, ehm. Honecker himself? Or did he have, for this, any contributors? Contributors, we all do have, that's clear. Yeah. I mean, which faction do we have to assume, in respect to Honecker? I can´t see any particular faction, instead, just he and his staff did. These are not long novels that have been inserted, there. A few paragraphs do suffice to result in an intensification against the arts scene and artists scene. And cultural and political scene ... Well, it was very strongly concerned about this, uh, straightforward about youth policy. Right. uh. So it seems to me that the, that the cultural policy. Now, that may be also a question, too. Mhm. 19 hundred ... Between 1963 and 65, actually, so, hmph, did not feature a distinct ... no clear agenda. But, uh, it was actually the Bitterfeld-Way, which was being continued. And there was this youth plenum and ... there were some aspects. And there was the aspect of, effectively, this question, of, of, uh, autonomy and discussion. Mainly from discussions that were very strong at this time. Mhm. It is being reported on the books that have been published in that time. In NG those were also being discussed about, in a very intense manner. Mhm. Well, there were controversies. And that, uh, the, uh,. The 11th plenum, when one takes a look at it, well, the report of ... of Honecker, then, he draws a connection between the, yes, Culture politics, between arts, well, between the responsibility of artists and the youth. So it is effectively like this. Certain excesses of the youth, uh, as, uh, are presented as being the effect of the arts. And the reasons for these would have got to eliminated. So. That is clear. And in this context, therefore Biermann, and others are, too, then, virtually the triggers,the ones who are responsible for these things. And, uh, if you are saying. Well, that in the pages of the NG, prior to this. Yes. It does mean, that certain, certain, um. If one assumes that this happened to be aimed against Ulbricht, practically. Mhm. Uh, then, then it surely does indicate, that there must have existed a kind of faction. Well, yes, in that sense. Yes. Just, i don´t know of it as being a faction. Yes. I would say there. Group, coterie. Yes. Uh. Yes. That's for sure. If, uh, uh. If immediately after 11 Plenum there was, for example, the one already mentioned by me here. Kurt Turba. Was being deposed and getting the boot. Literally being convoyed out. Being escorted out. Yes. This is obviously a nasty act of dealing with him. Isn´t it?.And this is a testimonial that a group was collaborating there. That's right. Mhm. Isn´t it? Come again? Who was, Who in this group. Who was it? They are demanding names. Haha. Please, do be so kind to give us at least a hint which departments those people occupied? How that. And how the mechanism worked? That´s what we would like to be told about. How did this happen? We would like it to be told to us. Yes, well, I can only say that Honecker was also supported by Paul Verner, for example, still supported by another Paul, Paul Froehlich, Yeah. And Brezhnev. Laughter. Yes, God knows. Of course, being a strong person, at that time. Mhm. Yes. But, but, because they have not stood out in particular. I do find it so hard, to continue to name certain persons. Ah, because they didn´t cause any large degree of aggravation, it´s being difficult for me to continue to name certain persons. Because, I do not know how they staggered, kept silent or came to the forefront with great verve during certain disputes. Mhm. The, uh. Well, another chapter. Because we´ve already progressed in time, perhaps it will be possible to ask further questions regarding this topic in the discussion after this interview. Uh, the, uh, "New Cultural Policy" 19hundred , with the 8th Party Congress, 1971, Or, uh, more precisely, with the 6th plenum of 1972. 6th of July. And, uh, you get, you get into, in 1973, into a capacity. In the Ministry of Culture. Um, but you have already held, uhm, a certain responsibility for the famous expression "taboo". Yes, that's true. That´s, ehehehe. At that stage, I was an assisstant for the same Honecker, yes, yes, about whom we have just talked very critically. On the 4th Plenary session of the Central Committee, uh, he had to deliver a concluding word. And there was also a chapter on culture. And that displeased him. And he asked his Politbureau fellow, uh, Jochim Herrmann. Uh, that I should come up with a replacement paragraph or passage. There were several paragraphs, Uh-uh, to write. And that i did do as an NG-staff-member, and uh, I myself relied upon the fact that during the meetings of the Chair of Writers' Association, Comrade Kurt Stern, uh, has once commented very critically about. If on does take into account, for now. Cultural policy since the 11th ..., since the 6th party congress. Actually it had become much more relaxed. But, it´s teeming of taboos everywhere. Issues, that one isn´t allowed to take up, matters, that should not be dealt with. And so on. And keeping this in mind, I thought to myself, let´s put some paragraph into it, where it is being expressed. There shall not be any kind of taboos. Neither regarding the matters, nor regarding the issues, nor the modes of composition. And that has survived, fortunately. So, then it has been enriched, uh, by the remark: If one starts from socialist positions, there must be no taboos. That´s a given (Forget it!). Yes. Laughter. And another two embedded particles of this kind. However, the main sentence: There should be no taboos. That remained. Which went on to prove itself to be so effective, that in three other huge artists events of the coming years, even over a decade, if one is accurate, it was repeatedly referred to. Because, uh, writers and other artists, uh, did not stop criticizing. Although this was said. Uh, one does not really abide by this rule. And sometimes locally, sometimes even central authorities. And that´s why, oh, this has been a quite useful element in the development. �