1JZGauQ
1JZGauQ
1JZGauQ
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
2: A PHYSICAL METAPHOR<br />
The changing rhetoric around a wall<br />
The Berlin Wall was a frequent actor in rhetoric between the two blocs but<br />
how it was used changed somewhat over its existence. Maybe not too<br />
surprisingly the media in East Germany blamed the construction of the<br />
Berlin Wall on the actions of the West but during the early period after the<br />
wall had been constructed there was also debate in the Western press about<br />
whether the wall was a result of a western failure as not enough had been<br />
done to stop the construction (Bruner 1989:321). This attitude changed,<br />
however, and in his 1963 speech Kennedy claims “… we have never had to<br />
put a wall up to keep our people in, to prevent them from leaving us” (cited<br />
in Bruner 1989:324) suggesting that the wall was in fact proof of eastern<br />
failures. Also during Reagan’s speech in Berlin in 1987 the wall is used as<br />
evidence of failure of the Soviet Union and victory of the West (Bruner<br />
1989:325). During its later years the way the wall was instead portrayed<br />
more as an anachronism, emphasising the absurdity in its existence (Bruner<br />
1989:325). In contrast in East Germany the fortified border with the<br />
capitalist West became the focal point during celebration ceremonies<br />
(Figure 2). Following its fall it instead became a symbol of freedom and the<br />
victory of the people on both sides. This meaning of freedom has also come<br />
to extend outside the Cold War context and images of the fall of the Berlin<br />
Wall has found its way into other settings such as for example during the<br />
2003 invasion of Iraq where images of the fall of the Berlin Wall was used in<br />
news coverage to illustrate images of liberation (Manghani 2008:59).<br />
The picture of the Berlin Wall has become a recurring image in the<br />
media and was constantly used to represent the ideological divisions in<br />
Berlin and in Europe. Critical theorist Sunil Manghani (2008) makes the<br />
point that the media images of the fall of the Berlin Wall were not used to<br />
critically investigate the exact goings on but rather they were used to<br />
maintain an already popular and dominant interpretation of the events<br />
(Manghani 2008:59). Although Manghani has studied images of the events<br />
of 1989 in Berlin rather than the erection of the wall in 1961 his discussions<br />
can also be extended to how previous images of the Berlin Wall were used.<br />
It demonstrates how powerful images can be and how prevailing the story<br />
they convey can become. Manghani also uses other examples to show how<br />
this type of reporting, and in effect also history writing, is constantly occurring<br />
in other places, such as the toppling of the Saddam Hussein statue in<br />
Baghdad’s Firdos Square in the summer of 2003. This event was immediately<br />
broadcasted across the globe and even if the toppling of this statue<br />
35