‘Stasiland shows that fact is often stranger than fiction.’ Discuss.
Introduction
The quotes chosen by Anna Funder to preface Stasiland provide the reader with
immediate clues that her story will test their definitions of fact and fiction, of fantasy and
reality. What will Funder discover as she ‘falls down the rabbit-hole’ during her
‘Adventures in Stasiland’? Will it be ‘a silent crazy jungle under glass’ or ‘Sentence first –
verdict afterwards’ as suggested by Funder’s chosen quotes? As the readers immerse
themselves in Stasiland, it becomes very difficult at times to remember that this is a nonfiction text. We know the facts behind the division of Germany into East and West. We
know the date the Berlin Wall went up and the day it came down. However, what is harder
to determine are the personal truths of both the victims and perpetrators of a regime that
at times seemed incapable of distinguishing between fact and fiction itself. Funder’s
description of Erik Mielke’s four hour speech at a lavish meal in October 1989 whilst
growing crowds of demonstrators gathered outside, a speech that failed to even
acknowledge the impending collapse of the regime, highlights that fact can be stranger
than fiction, especially in the GDR.
Paragraph 1
Funder’s mission to discover stories of victims and perpetrators: of men who worked for
the Stasi and those who suffered under one of the most efficient surveillance states in
human history, is spurred by a letter she receives. ‘History is made of personal stories’
argues the letter writer when Funder’s TV station bosses reject his suggestion that the
stories of ordinary people who lived in the GDR are told. They believe no one will be
interested, that people have moved on. But Funder, curious like Alice, pursues her
investigation, creating a non-fiction text with a novel-like feeling. Her style of writing
positions the reader to wonder at the facts she uncovers. Funder’s first person narration,
intrusions and reflections, as well as her ironic, tongue in cheek caricatures of some of
the Stasi men and their practices, are sometimes hard to believe. She juxtaposes the
strange antics of the Stasi against the reality of how their victims were treated. Shredders
are bought in the West as the Wall falls, men wear wigs and fake moustaches, hide
cameras and microphones in strange places, a plate is pursued for many years and the
sixteen year old Miriam’s absurd story told in order to get some sleep is believed.
However, there is no denying the dreadful facts Funder also reveals in Stasiland; facts
that are almost beyond belief for those of us, like the author, brought up in a democratic
society. Startling for the reader is that some of the Stasi men are unrepentant about what
happened and even more startling are the ordinary people who tell Funder that they miss
the safety and security of life in the GDR. One person’s fact can be another person’s
fiction.
Paragraph 2
The very landscape of the former GDR is a physical legacy to the idea that fact can be
stranger than fiction. Anna‘s journey of discovery and confrontation where the “hidden
short cuts” and “unmarked lanes” of Leipzig, the “tumbledown houses and bewildered
people” reveal the “horror -romance” of this untold history. The physical and emotional
intensity of the characters whom Anna meets, interviews and forms relationships with,
are the primary sources of evidence that narrate a brutality and inhumanity where lipservice was paid to a false democracy, where fact is stranger than fiction. Miriam
discovers the harsh reality of his in her search for the truth over Charlie’s death. She
desperately searches for the evidence that is camouflaged in the GDR system where the
Party and “its instruments”, the Stasi, created a secrecy and “knowledge” control around
reality. Miriam angrily rebukes Major Trost as she realises the false “forensics” that
“made a mockery” of individualism, privacy and relationships in her quest to find the truth
about Charlie’s reported suicide, “The least you people could do is get your story
straight.” The power and control of the Stasi challenges Miriam’s very existence as the
Communist regime fabricate the details around Charlie’s death and even his funeral; the
Stasi “play[ing] with [her] like a mouse”. However, the post -Wall political era offers
Miriam little comfort too, as the current authorities “just want to stop thinking about the
past…pretend it all didn’t happen.” The continuing legacy of this broken past freezes
Miriam to a “living epitaph to a life that was”, her “past stopped when Charlie died”. The
“revolution” of democracy continues the blur of fact and fiction in its ambiguity, confusion
and apathy towards the past.
Paragraph 3
Funder’s continuing quest to uncover the past stories of “resistance” to the “dictatorship”
that reveal the reality of human tragedy that have been covered up, is symbolised by the
drunks in the park. Funder’s fascination at their prominence as they ironically “shuffle
together” around the “statue of Heine” and “share knowledge of a world where each of
them once had a place” forces her to face the reality of the new Germany where all is
exposed. Julia’s recognises the falsity of her own statement “There were no drunks
before the Wall came down…as she “corrects herself” to admit that they were the hidden
part of the secrets and fiction in the lying world of “no unemployment” and “no news” .