This article was downloaded by: [University of Liverpool]

On: 07 October 2014, At: 14:16

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

The International Journal of the

History of Sport
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/fhsp20

The Decline of Mass Sport Provision in

the German Democratic Republic
Jonathan Grix
Published online: 19 Feb 2008.

To cite this article: Jonathan Grix (2008) The Decline of Mass Sport Provision in the German
Democratic Republic, The International Journal of the History of Sport, 25:4, 406-420, DOI:
10.1080/09523360701814755

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09523360701814755

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
 The International Journal of the History of Sport
Vol. 25, No. 4, March 2008, 406 – 420

The Decline of Mass Sport Provision in

the German Democratic Republic
Jonathan Grix
Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 14:16 07 October 2014

The German Democratic Republic’s sports system, often termed a ‘sports miracle’,
produced outstanding results in international sport. Drug abuse aside, this system
appeared to be based on a robust and symbiotic relationship with mass sport, which was
amply provided for by the state. Using unpublished letters sent by GDR citizens to the
state authorities drawn from the Federal Archive in Berlin, this article sheds light on the
miserable state of mass sport, particularly in the last decade of the state’s existence.
Although great numbers of East Germans took part in some form of sport or the other,
elite sport – and the privileged facilities and equipment that went with it – was effectively
hermetically sealed off from wider society. The impressive upward trajectory of GDR
sport – in terms of international titles and Olympic medals won – went hand in hand
with the decline in standards of facilities and availability of equipment for the masses.

Introduction
Modern sport has always been inextricably bound up with the politics of its day, but
rarely so much so as in the case of the German Democratic Republic (GDR). As early
as 1948, Erich Honecker, a future leader of the East German Communist Party,
declared that ‘Sport is not an end in itself, but the means to an end’, effectively
signalling the political use of sport by the GDR. [1] Government involvement in
sport is usually motivated by an attempt to seek prestige on behalf of a state, in many
cases by showing that a nation’s sporting success is rooted in a specific political
system. East German sport was instrumentalized to achieve both international
recognition for an independent state with weak legitimacy through world-class
performances and to promote, and provide facilities for, mass sport and well-being
among the general population. From the outside, the general impression of GDR
sport was that of a well-oiled and harmonious system that thrived on the mutually

Jonathan Grix, European Research Institute, University of Birmingham.

Correspondence to: j.grix@bham.ac.uk

ISSN 0952-3367 (print)/ISSN 1743-9035 (online) Ó 2008 Taylor & Francis

DOI: 10.1080/09523360701814755
 The Decline of Mass Sport in the GDR 407

supportive relationship between elite and mass sports, providing ample provision for
both. While the GDR’s first aim of international recognition via sporting excellence
was clearly achieved, it prospered not in tandem with, but at the expense of, mass
sport, its provision and the participation levels of GDR citizens. [2] Mass sport
suffered greatly because of the disproportionate distribution of resources needed to
prop up the so-called ‘sports miracle’. Although almost all citizens were touched by
sport, with many becoming involved in it in some form or other, the SED (Socialist
Unity Party) shaped mass sport as it saw fit either by not supporting it (if there were
few chances of Olympic success) or by its inability to maintain the existing provision
and develop new facilities needed to satisfy the demand for sport – ironically, stoked
up by official propaganda – among the masses.
If one probes beneath the surface of the ‘sports miracle’, a story of intense internal
Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 14:16 07 October 2014

disputes and rivalries between several of its key party organs, actors, associations and
clubs is revealed. Behind the harmonious veneer a struggle for resources (including
athletes), status and power took place, often with detrimental results for sport (for
example, football). [3] The focus of this article is on the state’s inability to provide its
citizens with equipment and facilities for mass sport – especially in the 1980s, as the
GDR economy ground to a halt.
In order to provide empirical evidence for the claims made in this article, in
particular that mass sport did not enjoy a symbiotic relationship with elite sport, the
author draws on all existing ‘citizens’ communications’ (Eingaben) on the subject of
sport with the GDR authorities held at the German Federal Archive in Berlin. [4] The
emphasis on people’s voices seeks to explore social history under the rubric of the so-
called Alltag, the history of everyday life (Alltagsgeschichte) of the GDR. Such an
approach, in the rather underdeveloped theoretical landscape of East German studies,
can be seen as a challenge to traditional ‘totalitarian’ perspectives, which usually focus
on social control, that is, on ‘propaganda and terror’ and which are shaped by
variants on the totalitarian syndrome pioneered by Friedrich and Brzezinski (in
1956). Everyday history, on the other hand, seeks to move beyond binary opposites
and looks at how life was actually experienced by the people living under the
conditions of dictatorship. [5]
The article begins by setting the wider context in which the case study takes place.
An overview of sport in East Germany is followed by a short section on the role of
‘citizens’ communications’ in the dictatorship. The case study draws on primary
documents from the 1980s – a time when GDR success in sport had reached its peak,
while the country’s economic deterioration was well under way.

Sport in the GDR

Mass sport in the GDR, in later years generally termed ‘physical culture and sport’
(Körperkultur und Sport), [6] was very widely spread throughout society. The state
viewed regular sport as being ‘inextricably linked to the development of a socialist
way of life’, [7] and as a direct means through which to develop the socialist
 408 J. Grix
personalities of its citizens. This understanding and promotion of sport in society was
even anchored in article 18 of the GDR constitution. [8] Most organized sport was
under state control, with the DTSB, the Deutsche Turn- und Sport Bund (‘The
German Gymnastics and Sport Federation’, founded in 1957), formally responsible
for the organization of all ‘mass’ sports. The system of elite sport, as we shall see
below, was, contrary to common belief, completely cut off and separate from
everyday sport. A wide array of sport associations came under the umbrella of the
DTSB, for example, the athletics association, rowing association and so on. Under the
broad term of ‘physical culture and sport’ there are a number of often overlapping
areas where citizens were involved in sport. The key mass organizations, the FDJ
(Free German Youth) and the FDGB (Confederation of Free German Trade Unions)
were very active in promoting sport, often in partnership with the DTSB. A majority
Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 14:16 07 October 2014

of citizens of working age could use the opportunities afforded by their firm’s sports
teams and facilities (BSG –Betriebssportgemeinschaft – ‘works sports team’), which
brought together those interested in sport at one’s place of work, be it a factory,
chemical plant or hospital. At this level team sports were particularly supported, as
they promoted team spirit among co-workers, in particular, handball, football and
tug-of-war. [9]
Citizens were further encouraged to engage in sporting activities through gaining
sports ‘badges’ or ‘insignia’, government-sponsored schemes that came to be based
on comprehensive performance norms which ought to be achieved by the wider
public (in athletics, gymnastics, basic exercises and swimming). [10] In 1983 alone
some four million people reached the standard of one or other of these ‘Sport
badges’, the slogan for which ‘Ready for work and defending the homeland’, echoed
the Nazis’ policy of making people fit to defend the Fatherland. [11] The paramilitary
organization, ‘Society for Sport and Technology’ (Gesellschaft für Sport und Technik),
which taught sports linked to active military service – for example, flying, sailing and
shooting – was closely related to this notion of sport. Add to this compulsory sport at
school and university and one can see why East Germany had a reputation as a
sporting nation. [12]
There is little doubt that sport was important to the GDR’s leading party, the SED.
Elite-level sport was misused for political purposes: sports policy equated to a
political decision and was dealt with at the highest levels in the SED hierarchy, the
Politburo and the Central Committee. GDR elite sport can be understood as a sub-
system within the state itself, and consisted of around 1800 training centres, 25
‘children and youth sport schools’ (Kinder- und Jugendsportschulen, or KJS), specialist
sports clubs and sports associations. Talented children, ultimately some 65,000, were
selected for the training centres via the so-called ‘ESA’ (Einheitliche Sichtung und
Auswahl – ‘uniform inspection and selection’ system). Children were regularly
subjected to a range of tests to assess their motor skills and had their bodies measured
(height, limbs, weight etc.) by DTSB employees in order to identify sporting talent at
an early stage. Successful completion at a training centre led to a ‘delegation’
(Deligierung) to one of the KJS throughout the country (around 10,000 children).
 The Decline of Mass Sport in the GDR 409

From here they would be streamlined further with only 3,000 athletes attending the
30 specialist sports clubs. Training centres, specialist sports schools and sports clubs
were in effect hermetically sealed off from wider society and mass sport, with some 60
to 70 per cent of children boarding at a KJS in the 1980s. [13]
The roots of such a concentrated system are to be found in the 1969 ‘resolution on
elite sport’ (Leistungssportbeschluss), which was passed by the SED Politburo and the
Secretariat of the Central Committee (Zentralkommitee or ZK), calling for a political
and economic investment in elite sport on an unprecedented scale. The resolution
effectively divided up sport disciplines into those, such as athletics, that were to be
promoted for Olympic glory (so-called ‘Sport I’) and those designated as not worth
pursuing for the Olympics, as the chances of medals were slim (so-called ‘Sport II’).
[14] The resolution followed the pragmatic approach of Manfred Ewald, the longest-
Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 14:16 07 October 2014

serving head of the DTSB, towards sport: put the money where the medals could be
won, a seismic structural change in GDR sport he had prepared since 1967. This shift
had an impact on funding for both mass sport and other ‘non-Olympic’ sports, for
example, karate, which was henceforth no longer supported, with only army or Stasi
(Staatssicherheit – State Security) employees encouraged to practise it. [15]

The Neglect of Mass Sport Provision

The 1970s were, as most GDR scholars concur, the ‘golden years’ in East Germany. By
the mid-1970s, the massive social policy programme launched by Erich Honecker in
1971 was beginning to have an impact; the renewal of housing stock and
improvements in consumer goods were accompanied by liberalization in the arts
(namely, film, literature and music) and a general sense that life would continue to
improve. [16] Around this time the elite sports system was beginning to produce
more and more outstanding international results (66 medals at the Munich Olympics
in 1972; 90 at Montreal, 1976 and 126 in Moscow, 1980). From the late 1970s
onwards a decline in both citizens’ acceptance of the lavishly funded elite sports
programme and the provision of services for mass sport can be detected. The core
reasons behind these changes appear to be the division of sports disciplines into
‘Olympic’ and ‘non-Olympic’ sports (discussed above) and the stagnation, followed
by rapid deterioration, of the economy.
On 7 April 1977, a 15-page document drawn up by the ‘Committee for Physical
Culture and Sport’ discussed the provision of mass sport and outlined what was
needed to meet citizens’ demands for sport-related articles, effectively an early
harbinger of shortages to come. In the document, the committee stressed the need for
all government ministries to pull out the stops and assist by providing the resources
necessary to cover these demands. The document even goes as far as to instruct the
Ministry for Commerce and Consumption (Handel und Versorgung) that they ought
to actively influence production in order to increase the quantity and quality of the
supply of sports goods. In this way, they would be able to meet the changing and
growing needs of the public. [17] The reality was, however, that elite sport came
 410 J. Grix
before mass sport in investment in facilities and infrastructure, as well as equipment
and sports-related goods.
By the 1980s, attempting to undertake sport outside elite sports clubs was
increasingly difficult, as there was a chronic shortage of equipment, ranging from
tennis and table tennis balls to racing bikes and all kinds of sports footwear. One
citizen complained bitterly about the state of swimming pools in the Dresden area,
where in 1981–2 they had three pools with a total of 44 hours per week for public
swimming; by 1985, the date of the letter, two baths had been closed, resulting in a
reduction in public swimming time to just 24 hours (all other times were given over
to elite athletes). [18] This dire situation was confirmed by an internal study in 1986
which reported that over 50 per cent of swimming pools throughout the republic
could only be used ‘partially’, due to a lack of maintenance. [19] A stock-take of
Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 14:16 07 October 2014

sports facilities in former East Germany after its collapse (in 1992) came to the
conclusion that only 10 to 20 per cent were actually in a fit state to be used. [20] In
the mid to late 1980s, over 500,000 workers annually had taken part in district-level
sports competitions using such run-down facilities. [21]

Voicing Concerns
The early 1980s provide the backdrop for the empirical case study on the decline in
provision of sport equipment, in particular sports training shoes. The early 1980s
heralded a worldwide running boom, which the GDR welcomed, promoting, through
the DTSB, the cheap art of jogging with their so-called Meilenbewegung (‘Mile
campaign’ – aptly named ‘Eile mit Meile’ or ‘hasten with miles’), organizing state-
sanctioned runs over a variety of distances. According to GDR figures, some 2.3
million people took part in this campaign in 1980 alone. The timing of the running
boom is pertinent, as the economy began to splutter to a halt around 1979–80,
struggling to meet demand for spare parts, housing repairs and consumption. [22]
It is around this time that people started complaining on a large scale about
decaying sporting facilities and a lack of sport-related articles of clothing, in
particular, running and other specialist footwear, such as walking, ski and mountain
boots, handball and basketball training shoes. [23] The medium of these complaints,
legal in the dictatorship, was the so-called ‘citizens’ communications’ (Eingaben).
[24] This means of communication was taken extremely seriously in the GDR by
both citizens and the state. Without the mechanisms available for interest articulation
in democratic states – for example, lobbying groups, interest groups, political parties
and so on – the Eingabe was one of the few communication methods through which
citizens could and did enter into a dialogue with the authorities, often in the hope of
having particular grievances addressed. Eingaben were either individual or collective
communications, alerting the authorities to the shortcomings of dictatorship and
thus acted as a type of recuperative mechanism for the leadership, a form of
barometer to measure the mood of the populace. The official purpose of Eingaben to
the press, for example, was to deal with the suggestions and complaints, questions
 The Decline of Mass Sport in the GDR 411

and wishes of the working class on a regular basis. The party valued this public input
as ‘an expression of the active participation of our people in the planning, guiding
and control of the political and social tasks and in the overcoming of the shortages
and weaknesses that still exist’. [25] A ‘petition law’ (Eingabenrecht) was included in
the constitution of 1974, with the result that individual letters had to be processed
within just four weeks. Eingaben were answered promptly, usually courteously, and,
interestingly, sometimes with different degrees of support or rudeness, depending
very much on who wrote the letter, what they wrote, who received it and which
department it was sent to.
Eingaben were sent to every conceivable government department, organization,
club and the media and at every level from local, regional to national, even including
a department for Eingaben in the Council of State (Staatsrat der DDR), totalling
Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 14:16 07 October 2014

around one million annually. [26] The volume of letters on sport was particularly
high, because of its fundamental importance to the GDR, involving as it did, a wide
range of actors and ministries.
Citizens’ communications to the DTSB, to the office of Egon Krenz (the then SED
Central Committee Secretary for Security, Youth and Sport) and to the sport section
of the Central Committee of the SED held at the Federal Archive in Berlin, indicate a
number of interesting points. These primary sources offer an insight into the realities
of everyday sport; a glimpse behind the official propaganda of the GDR as a sporting
paradise for the masses. The people who wrote these letters did so under dictatorial
conditions; they show courage to speak out, more often than not peppering their
texts with humour. Eingaben cover a wide range of topics – from letters complaining
of children not being accepted into a KJS (children and youth sport school –
effectively schools in which the future generations of Olympic athletes were honed
and trained) [27] via complaints about coaches’ wages to questions about a lack of
adequate footwear. Equally, they indicate the sheer range of people and overlapping
departments involved in sport, the human and material resources used and the
variety of replies sent to citizens from the authorities.

Running out of Running Shoes

Given that complaining in a dictatorship is a tricky matter, especially one guarded by
the omnipresent ‘Stasi’, citizens had to develop strategies with which to make their
point and, ultimately, obtain what it was they were after. One strategy in particular was
widely used in Eingaben in general: set up the argument by first citing the SED’s own
words, slogans or paragraphs from official documents, the constitution or speeches,
make clear you agree with them and then ask how you are to fulfil X, Y and Z under
the present circumstances – in our example, without appropriate shoes. Given such a
strategy it is no surprise that one of the main arguments running through the existing
Eingaben is the contradiction between the SED’s propaganda, telling people to be
more active, take up sport and go for a jog, and the fact that it is almost impossible to
come by a pair of training shoes in which to take up the state’s offer.
 412 J. Grix
On a number of occasions an official speech from Manfred Ewald serves as the
starting point of an Eingabe. As early as 1980 Bert S from Halle wrote, in his letter to
Ewald, the long-standing and powerful head of the DTSB, setting out the problems he
is facing as a long-distance runner. He points out – quite rightly – that the gear
needed as a runner is modest, yet impossible to come by. Furthermore, he complains
that the winding up of the only magazine that deals with road running, aptly named
Strassenlauf (‘Road Running’) by the DTSB contradicts the authority’s sport and
health propaganda designed to get more people involved in sport. [28]
Guenter Z, for example, writing in 1982, points to a ‘crass contradiction’ between
Ewald’s call in his New Year’s Speech for a widening participation in sport among the
masses on the one hand and the inadequate provision of sports shoes on the other.
[29] Wilfried L, in his Eingabe of mid-August 1982, highlights the growth of the
Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 14:16 07 October 2014

running boom, as witnessed in the swelling numbers taking part in mass organized
events, and compares this with the corresponding decline in the supply of sport
shoes. He goes on, in a rather agitated tone, to urge the DTSB to support the ‘people’s
sport movement’ (Volkssportbewegung) by thinking about the situation and rectifying
it. [30] The reply Wilfried L receives is a little sharper than the ‘standard’ one issued
in the majority of cases, probably because of the tone of his Eingabe. The head of the
economics department at the DTSB responds to Wilfried L’s reflections making full
use of the German conjunctive II and a dash of humour to boot: ‘If we’d have waited
for your letter before doing anything to rectify the situation, it would have been a lot
worse than it already is.’ [31]
A second strategy used by citizens in the DTSB Eingaben is to compare the lot of
the Volkssportler (one who participates in ‘people’s sports’, e.g. swimming, walking
etc.) with that of the Leistungssportler (elite athlete), prompting one citizen to lament,
in a letter to Manfred Ewald, ‘what is our sports shoe industry doing for mass sport?’.
[32] The SED attempted, throughout the GDR’s life, the impossible task of lavishly
over-funding elite sport while providing widespread resources for mass sport. Once
the economy was unable to keep pace with demand, sports goods, in this case
training shoes, became a rare commodity and made the provision of top athletes look
more lucrative than before. Norbert H of Rathenow echoes the sentiments of many of
his fellow citizens when, in January 1983, he writes:

While I fully understand the promotion, and privaleged position, of elite sport, I
can’t understand why equipment is safeguarded for this area only. . . . Seriously, I’d
like to pose the question, what alternative is available to me as a BSG [work’s
sports, i.e. non-elite] sports person to get hold of a pair of marathon shoes? Maybe
one day I’ll have some luck constantly knocking on the doors of sports shops up
and down the country. No, that’s not how I understand support for athletes who
are not members of a sports club. [33]

The shortage of sport-related goods must have been particularly hard for GDR
citizens to swallow, especially as their national football team was sponsored by none
other than the West German company Adidas. The reasons behind this ideologically
 The Decline of Mass Sport in the GDR 413

suspect decision were given in one reply to a citizen’s letter as simply ‘economic’
(volkswirtschaftliche), [34] with no further explanation offered.
One month after Norbert H’s letter, Klausdieter H comes straight to the point in
his letter on the derisory provision of footwear, suggesting: ‘How can you reconcile
the fact that in a country with unprecedented success at international championships
and Olympics, the essential prerequisites for mass sport have been neglected for
years?’ [35] Dr Wolfgang J from Mühlhausen continues on the same theme of a
discrepancy between elite and mass sport in a letter to Manfred Ewald:

I’m aware that sport in the GDR has a great reputation. The support, however,
must be extended to allow citizens the possibility to practise a chosen sport
discipline as well. The great achievements of our elite athletes are indeed the result
of a wider approach to sport, for which a decent pair of shoes are a prerequisite.
Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 14:16 07 October 2014

Dr J receives a standard reply from the DTSB economics department written on

11 December 1981. He is told that despite the state’s massive increase in shoe
production there remains a shortage, attributable to ‘the latest fad of wearing running
shoes (if possible with jeans) on all occasions and opportunities – at school, at work,
in the woods, in the garden, on stage, to name but a few – which has had such an
effect that the increased production in trade is not noticeble’. [36]
The list of places where one can see people wearing valuable training shoes is
repeatedly cited in replies to Eingaben from 1981 to 1983 and becomes longer as the
years go by. By 1983, presumably after the official responsible has got fed up with
typing this long list, the standard remark about fashion leading to a shortage of sports
shoes is reduced to simply ‘leisure wear’ or ‘casual clothes’ (Freizeitbekleidung). [37]
By late 1983, the word ‘running shoes’ (Laufschuhe) is written by hand on the top of
the official reply letters, a sort of short-hand to sum up the letter’s contents,
indicating that this subject matter had become very frequent indeed. [38]
In the sample of Eingaben used in this small study, one can distinguish between
several different types of official reply to citizens’ communications. The first is the
most obvious and could be termed the ‘stock’ or ‘standard’ reply. This usually entails
detailing the reasons behind the current shortage, including the list cited above; a
section detailing the state’s commitment to producing more goods; an apology for
not being able to provide the shoes and a plea for the writer to be patient, as things
will improve, eventually. In the economic department of the DTSB, to which most of
these Eingaben are subsequently passed on to (they are usually addressed to
‘Sportsfreund Ewald’ – ‘friend of sport, Ewald’ or ‘Genosse Ewald’ – ‘comrade Ewald’,
head of the DTSB), one has the sense that the officials themselves are unhappy with
the shortage situation in sport-related articles. One of their replies suggested: ‘Your
problem is our problem as well and it is regrettable that we cannot give you a
satisfying answer. We would like to thank you for your letter, as we nevertheless see
in it an expression of trust.’ [39]
In a frank response to yet another request for running shoes, the head of the
economics division deviates from his standard reply again by writing: ‘We are well
 414 J. Grix
aware of the supply situation with regards to running shoes. You are not the only one
who has a right to be disgruntled. We are unlikely to get out of this misery for a
while.’ [40] Occasionally, negative replies finish with the line ‘We are not a trade
organization ourselves and cannot, therefore, send you any shoes’. [41] It is true that
the economics department at the DTSB did not produce the shoes, but it did
nonetheless have the ability to have shoes sent to people.
If a writer is rude or sarcastic in their Eingabe, this rarely leads to success, but rather
seems to elicit a rude or sarcastic reply. [42] Johannes H, for example, in a letter from
5 May 1982, vents his anger at not being able to get hold of a pair of running shoes by
suggesting that it is about time the state put mass sport first, and not just elite sport, as
the former is linked inextricably with economic productivity. There is a delicious
irony here in the fact that for the economy to function you need fit workers; but for the
Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 14:16 07 October 2014

workers to take part in sport and get fit, you need the economy to produce the sports
articles necessary in the first place. Johannes H goes on, rather cheekily, to ask the
DTSB: ‘Do you lot in Berlin know how difficult it is to get hold of a pair of decent
shoes in the republic, without any ‘‘contacts’’?’ He then goes on to rant about the state
of mass sport facilities in general (as we have seen, a widespread problem throughout
the GDR by this time) and the local swimming pool in particular, culminating in the
startling observation that ‘70–80 per cent of citizens in the GDR suffer from bad backs’
(and hence, need to be able to swim to relieve the pain). He views the closure of the
local swimming pool as an outrage, especially given the amount of back trouble
suffered by citizens. The official reply (on 24 May 1982) is sharp, but comical. Bräuer,
head of the DTSB economics department, begins by saying:

I have been handed your letter to reply to . . . in which you ‘let off a bit of steam.’ I
can’t take your observations on the state of swimming pools seriously . . . and you
can keep your 80 per cent of bad backs to yourself, because not even the Health
Ministry reports a figure like that. [43]

Although obviously exaggerating, Johannes H puts his finger on a widespread

problem during the 1980s. The GDR simply did not have the resources to maintain
the sports centres and sports facilities they had already built, let alone build any new
ones. This situation led to citizens becoming increasingly frustrated, including one
who wrote back on receipt of his official reply, stating ‘should I pin your letter to my
feet and continue training, because the only pair of shoes I still own are in the
meantime so worn out that they are likely to damage my feet’. [44] Such letters
should not be misunderstood as outright ‘dissent’, but taken collectively they do
represent a massive critique of the regime and its inability to provide for mass sport.
The second type of official reply contains much of the above, giving the context to
the present shortage, but goes on to offer a glimmer of hope by providing the writer
with a further address to which they ought to write/visit (this is usually a regional
retail organization) in order to procure some running shoes. A variation on this
theme is provided by a third type of answer, which is exactly the same as the second
type above, but instead of just asking the writer to contact the retailer in the hope of
 The Decline of Mass Sport in the GDR 415

procuring something, officials go one step further by asking the writer ‘to contact the
socialist wholesalers for sport equipment in Leipzig (called Sporthouse Am Bruehl;
colleague Salzwedel) with your precise wish. They have been informed by us of your
order’. [45] Here the writer is given the name of a contact person, who has been
informed about their needs and is expecting them.
The fourth and final type of answer is again very similar to the above, but with one
important qualification. The shoes are ordered by the DTSB on the writer’s behalf
and sent directly to his or her home address. [46] Obviously the majority of replies
are of the first type described above, with type four making up the minority. On
closer scrutiny of the decisions made in all the existing Eingaben to the DTSB in the
Federal Archive in Berlin, it is not easy to distinguish a logical pattern between
writers, their requests and their chances of success. However, it is clear that all the
Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 14:16 07 October 2014

successful people could be categorized broadly as contributing something to GDR

society (i.e. voluntary coaches; long-term supporters of sport; local sports clubs – i.e.
non-elite clubs etc.). Of those people who had running shoes sent directly to them, a
few general characteristics can be discerned. First, it helps if you are a good socialist
citizen, very astute and know the ins and outs of the ‘petition law’ (Eingabengesetz), as
one 17-year-old female did; if you have an illness that neither medication nor an
operation can cure and the only route to good health is running (this gentlemen was
also the sports organizer for his firm’s trade union group); if your son is running
some 50km (30 miles) a week on average, is a promising athlete but is in danger of
injury; or, finally, if you could convince the DTSB that you were a long-standing
member of the running movement, as Gerwin G from Halle was able to do. [47]
The generosity of comrade Basel, the official who gives away most running shoes
from the economics department of the DTSB, could be explained by fluctuations in
the command economy: the earliest direct delivery of shoes found was late 1982,
possibly as shoe production was starting to pick up, although the shortage with sports
shoes never appears to go away. As late as March 1989, in a yearly analysis of all
Eingaben sent to Manfred Ewald for 1988, sport shoes are listed as one of the
recurring themes, but there is a note after it indicating that letters on this topic are
gradually decreasing, [48] the first sign that the centralized command economy was
finally catching up with demand – nine months before the Berlin Wall fell.

Conclusion
This article has attempted to look beyond the East German ‘sports miracle’ to mass
sport and its provision. Often elite and mass sport are understood as two sides of the
same coin, mutually reinforcing one another, with mass sport acting as a throughput
for elite sport. In reality, the East German elite sport system was separate from the
rest of society and did not suffer from fluctuations in the economy; access to top-class
facilities, medical care and sports equipment was strictly for elite athletes. Facilities
and provision of mass sport, on the other hand, were neglected and deteriorated as
the economy slowed from the late 1970s until the GDR’s collapse in 1989.
 416 J. Grix
Paradoxically, perhaps, the economic crises of the 1980s and the worsening of
provision for mass sports ran parallel with the greatest international sporting success
the GDR ever achieved. By this time, however, ordinary citizens were no longer
proud of their athletes’ achievements, but resentful of the resources poured into elite
sport at the expense of everything else.
The dire situation in mass sport provision and facilities must have contributed to
the fact that today former East Germans exhibit lower rates of participation in sport
and sports clubs, way behind those of their cousins in the West. [49]

Notes
[1] The GDR existed from 7 October 1949 until 3 October 1990. The quote is from Holzweissig,
Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 14:16 07 October 2014

‘Sport – Gesellschaftliche Rolle und politische Funktion’, 1; on politics and sport see
Cashmore, Making Sense of Sport, 194. All translations undertaken by the author. The original
German can be found in the endnotes.
[2] On mass-elite sport relations see Teichler and Reinartz, Das Leistungssystem der DDR, 215; on
participation levels see Dennis, ‘Sport Participation in the GDR’; Priller, ‘‘‘Jedermann an
jedem Ort’, 309.
[3] See Spitzer, Schlüsseldokumente zum DDR-Sport, 205 and Teichler and Reinartz, Das
Leistungssystem der DDR, 123, for discussions on power struggles within GDR sport.
[4] The majority of Eingaben could be translated into English simply as ‘complaints’, but this only
captures part of their complexity; people also asked the various departments of state to
adjudicate in cases of dispute; particular personalities were praised (for example, Walter
Ulbricht, Eric Honecker), and others still simply sought specific information.
[5] For discussions on, and examples of, ‘everyday history’ see Fulbrook, The People’s State; Kott,
‘Everyday Communism’; Grix, The Role of the Masses in the Collapse of the GDR; Kaelbe,
Sozialgeschichte der DDR; Lindenberger, Herrschaft und Eigensinn in der Diktatur; for examples
of researchers using variations of Friedrich and Brzezinski’s 1956 model (Friedrich and
Brzezinski, Totalitarian Dictatorship and Autocracy) see Staab, National Identity in Eastern
Germany; Schroeder and Staadt, ‘Der diskrete Charme des Status-quo’; for a wider overview
of perspectives on the GDR see Ross, The East German Dictatorship, and Ross and Grix,
‘Approaches to the German Democratic Republic’.
[6] Technically, the term ‘mass’ sport or Breitensport was not used, but the rather wider term
Freizeit- und Erholungssport: Beuker, ‘Breitensport in der DDR’, 1317. Later years saw a
change to the term Körperkultur und Sport.
[7] Kulturpolitisches Wörterbuch, 362: ‘Regelmässige sportliche Betätigung ist mit der Ausprägung
der sozialistichen Lebenweise untrennbar verbunden’.
[8] The constitution stated: ‘Physical culture, sport and outdoor pursuits promote, as elements of
socialist culture, the all-round physical and mental development of the individual’: Witt,
‘Mass Participation and Top Performance’, 171.
[9] See Seifert, Sport 80, 193–7, for examples of works teams.
[10] For badges, see http://www.ddr-geschichte.de/Sport/Abzeichen/abzeichen.html, accessed 15
June 2007.
[11] ‘Bereit zur Arbeit und zur Verteidigung der Heimat’, Deutscher Bundestag, ‘Rolle des Sports
in der DDR’, 640; see Witt, ‘Mass Participation and Top Performance’, 163, on ‘Sport Badges’
and see Fulbrook, The People’s State, 81, on comparison with Nazi sport policy.
[12] On school and university sport in the GDR, see Hoffmann, ‘Der Ausbau der Kinder- und
Jugendsportschulen’, 19.
 The Decline of Mass Sport in the GDR 417

[13] On the ‘ESA’ see Deutscher Bundestag, ‘Rolle des Sports in der DDR’, 708; for figures of
sports clubs and athletes see Teichler and Reinartz, Das Leistungssystem der DDR, 163; for
information on KJS see Hoffmann, ‘Der Ausbau der Kinder- und Jugendsportschulen’ and
Beuker, ‘Breitensport in der DDR’, 1317.
[14] Reinartz, ‘Die Zweiteilung des DDR-Sports’, 59–60; Becker and Buss, ‘Das ‘‘Wunder von
Bern’’, 398. Football was, of course, an exceptional case and was generously supported despite
limited success at international level.
[15] On Ewald, see Leske, Erich Mielke, 76; on Ewald’s thinking prior to the 1969 document,
see Ritter, ‘Wandlungen in der Steuerung’. A very interesting example, explaining the fate of
karate in the late 1980s can be found in Krenz Büro, Eingaben, SAPMO-BArch, DY 30/IV
2/2.039/163. All archival examples are taken from files stored at the Federal Archive, Berlin and
were collected in May and June 2006 by the author. ‘SAPMO-BArch’ is the abbreviation used to
denote ‘The Foundation for the Archives of the Parties and Mass Organizations of the GDR’
kept at the Berlin branch of the Federal Archives of Germany. The standard archival signature is
Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 14:16 07 October 2014

used throughout and, where available, I also cite the archive’s pagination.
[16] See Grix, The Role of the Masses in the Collapse of the GDR, 24 and Maier, Dissolution, 60.
[17] DY/34/10801 Buero Zahn, ‘Schriftverkehr, Protokolle, Berichte, Vorlagen, Sorfortinforma-
tionen vom DTSB, Komitee für KK u. Sport, Staatssekretariat für KK u. Sport’. An indication
of the seriousness of sport in the GDR and the cross-cutting nature of the institutions that had
something to do with it can be read off the distribution list of the above document, which
reads like a who’s who of GDR institutions: the boards of the DTSB, GST, FDGB, FDJ, the
Stasi (Sportclub Dynamo), Ministry for National Security (Nationale Verteidigung, Sportclub
Vorwaerts), Ministry of Internal Affairs (Ministerium des Innern), Ministry of Education
(Volksbildung), Office of Youth Affairs (Amt für Jugendfragen), Ministries of Finance,
Culture, Built Environment (Bauwesen), Health, and the specialist University for physical
culture (in Leipzig). These represent most of the key institutions involved in elite and mass
sport in the GDR.
[18] DY 30/4979 – Eingaben an Abteilung Sport, ZK SED, 3 May 1985.
[19] Teichler, ‘Sport in der DDR’, 416.
[20] Fetzer, ‘Die gesellschaftliche Akzeptanz des Leistungssportsystems’, 337.
[21] See DY/34 25576, ‘Einschätzung der Ergebnisse der Sportfeste der Werktätigen in den
Betrieben und Kreisen’, by the Federal Managing Committee of the FDGB, 4 Dec. 1985.
[22] On participation levels, see Witt, ‘Mass Participation and Top Performance’, 162; Maier,
Dissolution, 105; for further information (including ‘citizens’ communications’) relating to
deteriorating economic conditions, scarcity of goods, spare parts and crumbling infrastructure
see Grix, The Role of the Masses, 45–6.
[23] I was first made aware of Eingaben on a lack of sport provision through Hans-Joachim Teichler’s
chapter ‘Konfliktlinien des Sportalltags. Eingaben zum Thema Sport’ in H.J. Teichler, Sport in the
DDR. By his own admission, Teichler has ‘cherry picked’ a few Eingaben from the years 1982–3.
The conclusions I draw in my analysis are based on all existing Eingaben to the DTSB held at the
Bundesarchiv from 1981 to 1983; in addition I have drawn on Eingaben to Krenz’s office.
[24] Eingabenanalyse by the SED (Socialist Unity Party, Central Committee, Propaganda
Department), SAPMO-BArch, DY 30/IVA 2/903/11.
[25] ‘[E]inen Ausdruck der aktiven Teilnahme unserer Menschen an der Planung, Leitung und
Lenkung der politischen und gesellschaftlichen Aufgaben und an der Überwindung der
Mängel und Schwächen, die es noch gibt’: Central Committee Report, 1971, cited in Bos,
Leserbriefe in Tageszeitungen der DDR, 65.
[26] Mühlberg, ‘Eingaben als Instrument informeller Konfliktbewältigung’.
[27] For a comprehensive account of the KJS see Hoffmann, ‘Der Ausbau der Kinder- und
Jugendsportschulen’.
 418 J. Grix
[28] SAPMO-BArch, DY 12 3337, 3 Dec. 1980, 186.
[29] SAPMO-BArch, DY 12 3336, 20 Jan. 1982.
[30] SAPMO-BArch, DY 12 3341, 16 Aug. 1982, 183.
[31] SAPMO-BArch, DY 12 3341, 16 Aug. 1982, 183, Wilfred L.; SAPMO-BArch, DY 12 3341, 23
Aug. 1982, reply to Wilfred L: ‘Wenn wir erst auf Ihren Brief gewartet hätten und nun erst
beginnen würden, etwas zu unternehmen, um die Situation zu verbessern, wäre es bedeutend
schlimmer gekommen’.
[32] SAPMO-BArch, DY 12 3358 from Lutz R., 7 March 1983: ‘wo bleibt unsere Sports-
chuhindustrie für den Volkssport?’ See Teichler, ‘Konfliktlinien des Sportalltags’, 537–8 for
further examples.
[33] Sport clubs (for football, rowing, athletics etc.,) were organized under umbrella sports
organizations and were for elite athletes only. SAPMO-BArch, DY 12 3357: ‘Bei allem
Verständnis für die Förderung und den Vorrang des Leistungssports kann ich nicht einsehen,
dass lediglich die materielle Sicherung für diesen Bereich vorgenommen wird. Ich möchte die
Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 14:16 07 October 2014

Frage stellen, welche Alternative für mich als BSG-Sportler bleibt, um ein Paar
Marathonlaufschuhe zu bekommen? Vielleicht habe ich beim ständigen Geschäfteabklappern
landauf und landab eines Tages Glück. Nein, so kann ich die Unterstützung nicht verstehen,
die den Sportlern ausserhalb der Sportclubs gewährt wird’.
[34] SAPMO-BArch, DY 12 3341, 13 Oct. 1982, 300.
[35] SAPMO-BArch, DY 12 3358, Klausdieter H, 18 Feb. 1983: ,Wie ist es eigentlich zu
vereinbaren, dass in einem Land mit beispielloser Erfolgsbilanz bei internationalen
Titelkämpfen und olympischen Spielen, jährelang wesentliche Voraussetzungen fuer den
Breitensport vernachlässigt werden?’.
[36] SAPMO-BArch, DY 12 3339, Dr Wolgang J., 24 Nov. 1981, 234: ,Es ist mir bekannt, dass der
Sport in der DDR ein grosses Ansehen geniesst. Die Förderung muss jedoch soweit gehen, der
Bevölkerung auch materiell die Möglichkeit zu geben, die gewählte Sportart ausüben zu
können. Die grossen Erfolge unseres Leistungssportes resultieren ja aus einer breiten
Sportarbeit, zu deren Voraussetzung geeignetes Schuhwerk gehört’. SAPMO-BArch, DY 12
3339, 11 Dec. 1981, 235, reply from DTSB economics department written on 11 Dec. 81:
‘[D]ie Modewelle, dass man zu allen Anlässen und Gelegenheiten – in der Schule, im Beruf,
im Wald, im Garten, auf der Bühne u. a. m. – Laufschuhe, möglichst mit Jeans, trägt, solche
Auswirkungen angenommen, dass die gesteigerte Produktion im Handel nicht spürbar wird’.
[37] SAPMO-BArch, DY 12 3358, 20 April 1983.
[38] For example, SAPMO-BArch, DY 12 3354, 24 Aug. 1983.
[39] SAPMO-BArch, DY 12 3339, 11 Dec. 1981: ‘Ihr Problem ist ebenfalls unseres und so
bedauerlich es ist, dass wir Ihnen keine voll befriedigende Antwort geben können, wir
bedanken Ihnen für Ihr Schreiben, weil wir darin doch einen Ausdruck des Vertrauens sehen’.
[40] SAPMO-BArch, DY 12 3336, 4 Aug. 1982: ‘Uns ist die vollkommen unbefriedigende
Situation in der Versorgungslage mit Einlaufschuhen bekannt. Nicht nur Sie sind berechtigt
verärgert. Wir kommen aber auch über kurz oder lang nicht restlos raus aus dieser
Misere’.
[41] SAPMO-BArch, DY 12 3336, 22 March 1982: ‘Wir selbst sind kein Handelorganisation und
können Ihnen deshalb keine Schuhe zusenden.’
[42] I found one exception to this rule in SAPMO-BArch, DY 12 3338, 3–4, in which Genosse Basel
replies to a sharply worded Eingabe by giving a contact person and address at a sports retailers.
The original Eingabe, however, was not an individual, but written on behalf of a group of
young athletes, who without sports clothes and shoes, would not have been able to compete in
the up-coming Leipzig sports festival.
[43] For Johannes H’s letter, see DY 12 3336, 5 May 1982: ‘Weiss man überhaupt in Berlin wie
erschwerlich es ist, in der Republik einpaar anständige Einlaufschuhe, ohne irgendwelche
 The Decline of Mass Sport in the GDR 419

‘‘Beziehungen’’, zu erstehen?’; for the reply, see SAPMO-BArch, DY 12 3336: ‘70–80% der
Bevölkerung der DDR an Wirbelsäulenschäden leiden’; ‘Ihr Schreiben . . . in dem Sie sich
‘‘etwas Luft verschaffen’’, wurde mir zur Beantwortung übergeben . . . . Mit den Bermerkungen
zur Situation bei Schwimmhallen kann ich Sie nicht ernst nehmen . . . . Ihre 80%
Wirbelsäulenschäden können Sie für sich halten, weil nicht einmal das Ministerium für
Gesundheitswesen eine derartige Zahl von der Gesamtbevölkerung ausweist’.
[44] SAPMO-BArch, DY 12 3359, 26 Oct. 1983 – also, reprinted in the original German in full in
Teichler, ‘Konfliktlinien des Sportalltags’, p. 539.
[45] SAPMO-BArch, DY 12 3358, 14 March 1983, 3–4: ‘[S]ich mit Ihrer konkreten Bitte an den
Sozialistischen Grosshandelsbetrieb für Sportartikel Leipzig, Sporthaus ‘‘Am Bruehl’’ (Koll.
Salzwedel) zu wenden, welcher unsererseits über Ihren Wunsch informiert wird.’
[46] For example, Günter H in SAPMO-BArch, DY 12 3358, 14 June 1983.
[47] Examples as follows: for the young socialist, see SAPMO-BArch, DY 12 3341, 15 Nov. 1982,
409; for the sports organizer who needs to run, see SAPMO-BArch, DY 12 3359, 18 July 83;
Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 14:16 07 October 2014

for the promising athlete, no exact date, but July 1983, see SAPMO-BArch, DY 12 3354; DTSB
reply to Gerwin G from 14 June 83, SAPMO-BArch, DY 12 3354.
[48] ‘Analyse der Eingaben an den Präsidenten des DTSB, 1988’, SAPMO-BArch, DY 12 718,
2 March 1989, 329.
[49] Teichler, ‘Sport in der DDR. Systemmerkmale’, 414.

References
Becker, C. and W. Buss. ‘Das ‘‘Wunder von Bern’’ und die DDR’. Deutschland Archiv 37, no. 3
(2004): 389–99.
Beuker, F. ‘Breitensport in der DDR’. Deutschland Archiv 17, no. 12 (1984): 1316–23.
Bos, E. Leserbriefe in Tageszeitungen der DDR. Zur ‘Massenverbundenheit’ der Presse 1949–1989.
Opladen: Westdeutscher Press, 1993.
Cashmore, E. Making Sense of Sport. London: Routledge, 1996.
Dennis, M. ‘Sport Participation in the GDR’. GDR Monitor 7 (1982): 10–22.
Deutscher Bundestag, ed. ‘Rolle des Sports in der DDR’, Materialien der Enquete-Kommission
‘Aufarbeitung von Geschichte und Folgen der SED-Diktatur in Deutschland’, vol. III/I. Baden-
Baden: Nomos Verlag, and Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp Verlag, 1995: 637–706.
Fetzer, T. ‘Die gesellschaftliche Akzeptanz des Leistungssportsystems’. In Das Leistungssystem der
DDR in den 80er Jahren und im Prozess der Wende, edited by H.-J. Teichler and K. Reinartz.
Schorndorf: Verlag Karl Hofmann, 1999.
Friedrich, C. and Z. Brzezinski. Totalitarian Dictatorship and Autocracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press, 1956/1975.
Fulbrook, M. ‘Approaches to German Contemporary History Since 1945: Politics and Paradigms’.
Zeithistorische Forschungen,/Studies in Contemporary History, online Edition 1 (2004),
available at http://www.zeithistorische-forschungen.de/16126041-Fulbrook-1-2004, accessed
15 June 2007.
Fulbrook, M. The People’s State. East German Society from Hitler to Honecker. New Haven and
London: Yale University Press, 2006.
Grix, J. The Role of the Masses in the Collapse of the GDR. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2000.
Hoffmann, N. ‘Der Ausbau der Kinder- und Jugendsportschulen (KJS) der DDR unter besonderer
Betrachtung des Konflikts um einen ‘humaneren Kinderhochleistungssport’ zwischen dem
Ministerium für Volksbildung und dem DTSB’. Wissenschaftliche Hausarbeit zur Ersten
Staatsprüfung für das Lehramt an Gymnasien, University of Mainz, 2003.
Holzweissig, Gunter. ‘Sport – Gesellschaftliche Rolle und politische Funktion’. Horch und Guck 51
(2005): 1–9.
 420 J. Grix
Kaelble, H., J. Kocka and Hartmut Zwahr, eds. Sozialgeschichte der DDR. Stuttgart: Klett Cota Press,
1994.
Kott, S. ‘Everyday Communism: New Social History of the German Democratic Republic’.
Contemporary European History 13 (2004): 233–47.
Kulturpolitisches Wörterbuch. Berlin: Dietz Press, 1978.
Leske, H. Erich Mielke, die Stasi und dss runde Leder. Der Einfluß der SED und des Ministeriums für
Staatssicherheit auf den Fußballsport in der DDR. Göttingen: Verlag Die Werkstatt, 2004.
Lindenberger, T. Herrschaft und Eigensinn in der Diktatur. Cologne, Weimar and Vienna: Boehlau
Press, 1999.
Maier, C. Dissolution, The Crisis of Communism and the End of East Germany. Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press, 1997.
Mühlberg, F. ‘Eingaben als Instrument informeller Konfliktbewältigung’. 2000, 233. Cited in
H.J. Teichler, ‘Konfliktlinien des Sportalltags. Eingaben zum Thema Sport’. In Sport in the
DDR. Eigensinn, Konflikte, Trends, edited by H.J. Teichler. Cologne: Bundesinstitut für
Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 14:16 07 October 2014

Sportwissenschaft, 2003.
Priller, E. ‘‘‘Jedermann an jedem Ort – jede Woche mehrmals Sport’’. Sport im Zeitbudget von
Erwachsenen in der DDR’. In Alltagssport in der DDR, edited by J. Hinsching. Aachen: Meyer
and Meyer, 1998: 295–312.
Reinartz, K. ‘Die Zweiteilung des DDR-Sports auf Beschluss der SED’. In Das Leistungssystem der
DDR in den 80er Jahren und im Prozess der Wende, edited by H.-J. Teichler and K. Reinartz.
Schorndorf: Verlag Karl Hofmann, 1999: 55–85.
Ritter, A. Wandlungen in der Steuerung des DDR-Hochleistungssports in den 1960er und 1970er
Jahren (Potsdam Studies on the History of Sport and Health, vol. 1). Potsdam: University of
Potsdam Press, 2003.
Ross, C. The East German Dictatorship: Problems and Perspectives in the Interpretation of the GDR.
London: Arnold, 2002.
Ross, C. and J. Grix. ‘Approaches to the German Democratic Republic’. In Approaches to the Study
of Contemporary Germany: Research Methodologies in German Studies, edited by J. Grix.
Birmingham: University of Birmingham Press, 2002.
Schroeder, K. and J. Staadt. ‘Der diskrete Charme des Status-quo: DDR-Forschung in der Ära der
Entspannungspolitik’. Geschichte der Transformation des SED-Staates. Beiträge und Analysen.
Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1994.
Seifert, M., ed. Sport 80. Berlin: Sportverlag, 1981.
Spitzer, G., H.-J. Teichler and K. Reinartz, eds. Schlüsseldokumente zum DDR-Sport. Ein
sporthistorischer Überblick in Originalquellen. Aachen: Meyer and Meyer, 1998.
Staab, A. National Identity in Eastern Germany. Inner Unification or Continued Separation?
Westport, CT: Praeger Press, 1998.
Teichler, H.-J. ‘Sport in der DDR. Systemmerkmale, Folgen und offene Forschungsfragen’. In Das
Leistungssystem der DDR in den 80er Jahren und im Prozess der Wende, edited by H.-J.
Teichler and K. Reinartz. Schorndorf: Verlag Karl Hofmann, 1999.
——. ‘Konfliktlinien des Sportalltags. Eingaben zum Thema Sport’. In Sport in the DDR. Eigensinn,
Konflikte, Trends, edited by H.J. Teichler. Cologne: Bundesinstitut für Sportwissenschaft,
2003.
——. ‘Sport in der DDR. Systemmerkmale, Folgen und offene Forschungsfragen’. Deutschland
Archiv 37, no. 3 (2004): 414–21.
Teichler, H.-J. and K. Reinartz, eds. Das Leistungssystem der DDR in den 80er Jahren und im Prozess
der Wende. Schorndorf: Verlag Karl Hofmann, 1999.
Witt, G. ‘Mass Participation and Top Performance in One: Physical Culture and Sport in the
German Democractic Republic’. Journal of Popular Culture 18, no. 3 (1984): 159–74.