Introduction

Das vereinte Berlin ist unbekannter als das geteilte Berlin.

When discussing the role of the general public in the Berlin of the 1990s it has to be remembered that events leading up to reunification were set in motion by ordinary people. Media soundbites such as “Ein Volk sprengt seine Mauern” serve to remind us that the memory of reunification does not just cast back to the political processes at work; it also entails a reflection on individual perceptions and experiences. A sense of having participated in the making of history thus shapes memory. The feeling of having played a part in events was bolstered by the media's documentation of each and every development. Some of these images have by now been used so frequently that, taken together, they overwhelm individual memories.

In the early twentieth century, the critic Karl Scheffler observed that Berlin's tragedy lay in the fact that it was condemned “immer zu werden und niemals zu sein.” In recent years this formulation has frequently been used in attempts to explain and define the phenomenon of the city and its most recent fate: the merging of the two halves. Berlin's turbulent history during the twentieth century — from rapid development and European pre-eminence to apocalyptic destruction and Cold War division — has denied it a “normal” development. Yet today this very lack of continuity would seem to add to its appeal.