10 FRANK BÖSCH
theory, contemporaries detected a stronger rapprochement between the
two systems in the postindustrial age. Alternatively, adopting a magnet
theory approach, they observed how East Germany adjusted to follow
the lead of the economically stronger West, at least in the early postwar
years. They point out that this competition led to a permanent surveil-
lance of the “other “on both sides of the Wall that extended to many
diff erent aspects of society. Yet the primary task of future scholarship
should not be to determine whether these contemporary studies, which
tended to overestimate the GDR, were accurate; rather, the more inter-
esting question is what kind of impact these studies had. Did they lead to
the approval or rejection of reforms, or did they foster appropriation in a
modifi ed way using diff erent terminology?
A German-German history must become more than just a narrative
that places existing interpretations of the Federal Republic and the GDR
next to each other. Rather, it needs to take a lead from transnational his-
tory and examine reactions to general problems, cross-border relation-
ships, and reciprocal perceptions. These three levels of interaction were
often, but not always, mutually dependent. The cognizance of the other
Germany at times culminated in action, at times in ignorance. Cross-
border challenges, such as the oil crises in the 1970s, may have led to dif-
ferent reactions, but they nonetheless demonstrated the interdependence
of the two states.
Of course, there are a number of potential pitfalls inherent in such a
German-German perspective. The greatest danger surely lies in the risk
of portraying East Germany as the “fi ve new federal states” even prior to
1989, thereby neglecting the dictatorial power of the SED or fundamen-
tal diff erences between East and West. Careful refl ections must also be
made when choosing specifi c topics in order to determine whether they
come from a more Western standpoint (such as environmental protection
or migration) or rather an Eastern one (social equality).
Moreover, it must be taken into account that the diff erences between
the German states were understandably large in some areas. This applies
in particular to political history in a narrow sense, which can hardly be
approached jointly. To an extent, however, such a classic political history
has been pushed to the sidelines by a history of politics that relies more
heavily on social perceptions and actions. Likewise, the economic diff er-
ences between a statist planned economy and a more dynamic market
economy were no less signifi cant. That said, however, the economic ex-
changes between East and West grew over time, and a concealed struc-
tural change began to peek through in the GDR.^54 At the same, the limited
ability of the social market economy to adapt fl exibly to new problems
also became clear as time went on. Furthermore, there were also quite