In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

THE PRESSURE OF DUALITY The identity of an individual is shaped in the course of confrontation. We have seen how the children of the 1956 convicts became aware of their stigmatisation and how they experienced the fact that the political authorities and certain people in their immediate environment labelled them as socially undesirable. The father figure and the relationship of the child to his or her father play an important role in the formation of the child’s identity. In the case of the children of the convicts their experience of stigmatisation and the way in which they related to, and coped with, the blemish on their social identity that they wished to hide from the outside world were a decisive factor in the emergence of their personal identities. The way in which they dealt with their situation depended partly on the father and what he had done, and on the way in which they related to his conviction, and partly on the wider social context and its positive or negative reactions. Abrupt separation from the father meant a huge shock to the children, and later on the absence of an imprisoned or executed father often resulted in inner conflict. Later on, their need to create their own identity as teenagers highlighted the extremely patchy nature of their information about their fathers. In finding answers to the fundamental question of whether their fathers had been heroes, and whether they were innocent or guilty, it was the family who could provide the children with most help. According to the child’s, as well as the adult’s, logic and sense of justice, it is those who do wrong who must be punished. Thus these children were forced to ask themselves again and again whether the fact that their fathers had been punished implied that they were indeed guilty. And if they were not guilty, why had they been sentenced and executed? Such was their insoluble dilemma, and the younger they were the fewer points of orientation they had to help them to the right conclusion. The shaping of a child’s identity is also influenced by the outside world and the signals coming from the child’s immediate and wider environment. The lives of those growing up in the Kádár era were characterised predominantly by a double socialisation and a double system of values. There was often an irreconcilable contradiction between the values represented by society and those represented by the family. When it came to assessing the revolution there was usually a clash between the private and the official worlds. This contradiction The pressure of duality between personal experience and the official viewpoint gave rise to tension in most families, regardless of the extent to which they identified with the ideals of the revolution. Children surrounded by contradictions were forced to make a choice. It is hard for anyone to have to choose between the often contradictory values transmitted by various contexts and to decide which is right and which is worth following. In the lives of the interviewees the significance of such decisions was heightened by the fact that it was not only general and philosophical questions that were at stake. Their fathers, and therefore their own selfesteem , were involved. “IN MY CASE IT WAS PRIDE” Those whose families accepted and approved of the father’s activities and who spoke of them to the children as values to be preserved and examples to be followed, found it easiest to make their choice. These children grew up with a stable system of values in an open, sincere atmosphere, that is, in the security of a family in which they were always given an answer to their questions. They accepted the path chosen by their fathers, and the ensuing consequences. “In my case it was rather pride. Not only in the early years, when many people showed open solidarity and sympathy, but also later, when things were judged much less favourably. I was never embarrassed about it. I was rather always proud that my father had been in prison. I regarded it as being in some way normal.” (KATALIN LITVÁN) “It was natural that my father was in prison. Today one would talk about it differently; one would have a different attitude. But then it was natural. It had to be like that. Perhaps also because where we lived in Budakeszi, on the outskirts of Budapest, quite a lot of the men had spent a shorter or longer...

Share