Envisioning Socialism: Television and the Cold War in the German Democratic Republic by Heather Gumbert (review)

Anglo-American scholars have rarely troubled to look closely at the history of German television. West German television archives are notoriously difficult to navigate, and historians have long considered the East German system a simple receptacle of the propaganda of the Sozialistische Einheitspartei Deutschlands (SED) and hence unworthy of serious attention. As a result, there are few English-language monographs that spare more than a passing thought for such an important and vibrant topic. With these lacunae in mind, Heather Gumbert’s Envisioning Socialism is a welcome addition. Admirably brief, it employs a tight, flowing narrative to illuminate the contours of East German television during the 1950s and 1960s. Gumbert’s central thesis is that television in the German Democratic Republic (GDR) gradually became an ideal venue for negotiating and mediating the formation of a socialist identity. During the early 1950s, SED authorities fundamentally misunderstood television as a Cold War battleground that could be conquered or occupied. Only after a period of trial and error did station and political authorities come to define and execute a more specifically socialist vision of the GDR.

The book is organized in a roughly chronological fashion, with each chapter explaining a new step or landmark on television’s path to “envisioning socialism.” Gumbert begins by looking closely at the way technicians sought to create a viable system of television distribution and operational capacity. From erecting transmitters along the border to working with VHF broadcasting standards—used in Western but not Eastern Europe—the technical “invention” of television in the GDR centered on winning the Cold War through broadcasting volume. Indeed, authorities took many of their decisions with West German viewers in mind. In terms of early programming, Gumbert looks at how overworked producers experimented with genre, lighting, camera angles, “live” broadcasts, and entertainment. She argues that they created a vibrant nightly program in the face of indifference from the SED, which thought of television as a simple vehicle for communist agitation efforts.

Two pivotal events forced authorities to rethink television’s mission: the Hungarian Uprising of 1956 and the building of the Berlin Wall in 1961. East German television barely covered the events in Hungary, whereas the revolt received heavy airtime in the FRG. The failure to cover such a “dramatic and visual” (71) event, Gumbert argues, convinced the SED to place more reliable officials in the station administration and mandate that the medium participate in constructing socialism. The tensions leading up to the Berlin Wall simultaneously deepened the urgency of Cold War, pan-German messages and—particularly after August 1961—marked the beginning of efforts to construct an East German identity, most notably by pointing out the dangers of the West. In the wake of these crises, television became a tool for nation-building and consensus. Sweeping historical epics centered on socialist conversion stories, viewers pushed back against avant-garde programs such as Fetzers Flucht, and censors exercised tighter control over programming decisions. Gumbert thus demonstrates that television “normalized” East Germany (104). It provided entertainment to appease viewers and keep them away from the Western channels, but it also carefully cultivated socialist identities and depicted the GDR as a distinct state in its own right.

Envisioning Socialism relies heavily on political and production documents from the Bundesarchiv in Lichterfelde. In particular, Gumbert makes excellent use of original documents from the collections of the Stiftung Archiv der Parteien und Massenorganisationen der DDR (SAPMO). She also draws extensively on other types of sources, however, including the private collection of well-known GDR composer Kurt Schwaen and a few carefully chosen viewer letters. The programs themselves are only analyzed as they support or substantiate observations gleaned from written documentation.

The book does have its deficiencies. Gumbert’s extensive endnotes, for example, are too heavily laden with important observations that should have been included in the text. For example, note 86...