Who Is Killed In Anna Funder's Stasiland

In the text Stasiland, Anna Funder recounts the horrors that the East German citizens faced under the control of the German Secret Police, known as the “Stasi”. In order to gain a full understanding of the personal damage suffered by everyday people on a daily basis, Funder interviews a range of East German citizens. These include ordinary people, unwilling informers and those Stasi officers that were obsessed with the power and control they held. The focus on personal stories means that the characters share personal memories, and the text becomes almost like a collective biography that testifies to a lost past.

Miriam’s own story, a story of courage and strength, shows her very own struggle to move on from her past due to the effects that …show more content…
The difficulty of Frau Paul’s story, and harsh nature of the decision she was forced to make, represent her as a very honourable person with high moral values, as she could not have her “soul bought” by the Stasi. In the end though, her decision of leaving her son, brought about her undoing. Frau Paul was never truly able to move on and forget her haunting past. Torsten, Paul’s son states that “I’m happy [the wall’s] gone, that there’s so little of it left… it would remind me of the past” this comment demonstrates that the fear that he and his mother still feel of the Stasi. Funder goes on to say that “the wall persists in Stasi men’s minds as hope it can one day come again, whilst in its victims mind’s as a terrifying possibility”. This comment depicts that no matter how much time goes on, as long as the memories of their past remain somewhat in their minds, “they are not over yet”. There will always be that fear of a reoccurrence, leaving behind emotional scarring, and it shows the huge difficulty felt in moving on and accepting their past. This is ultimately the doing of the secret police, that they had succeeded in the attempts of total surveillance and control of the citizens. They continue to have a intense impact on their victims and somehow remain a constant threat, not truly …show more content…
Bohnsack is a man that is full of regret and despair, “what do they want from [him]..? [He] can’t stand [there] and take it all back, undo it all.” The drowning of his sorrows in alcohol show that he is truly hurt and affected by what went on in his past and his own struggle to be accepted by the people around him. Bohnsack is “a man who has fallen between two stools” showing how he doesn’t want to be associated with the Stasi, however he is not accepted by the present society, giving him no sense of belonging. Whilst he covers this up with his jokes and “smiles, like an uncle with a secret”, Funder sees through this and essentially feels sorrow for him because of his inability to move on from the past. Bohnsack, shows the importance of being able to belong somewhere in order to move on instead of trying to ignore the past as if it had not happened. Compared to Herr Christian, who shows that whilst one may feel as though they are free, their actions tend to show another story. Christian’s ability to smile and joke while recounting his story shows that he doesn’t really have a lot to feel remorseful of in his past. He was “never ideological” towards the Stasi regime but states that he only ever caught those in the wrong which shows the contradicting nature of his discussion with Funder. His belief that