Source: YouTube / Channel of Kilian Kerner
Berlin Fashion Week is not typically seen as a place for historical reflection – especially not for a chapter like the systematic removal of children from their families in the GDR. Yet Berlin-based fashion designer Kilian Kerner dedicated his latest collection to precisely this largely unaddressed topic. Under the title “GDR – The Stolen Children,” he presented a show dealing with the so-called forced adoptions. Between quotes like “You are now leaving West Berlin,” aesthetic references to East German border iconography, and a runway filled with denim, glitter, and slogans, an installation emerged that aimed to evoke memory – but did it leave room for reflection?
Between Emotion and Representation
There is no doubt that fashion can engage with social and political issues. The question is how it does so. Kerner’s show relied heavily on emotionality: a dramatic soundtrack with music and baby cries, handwritten appeals on signs, and a model carrying a baby doll all pointed toward an aesthetic of emotional impact. The focus was on affect rather than an analytical exploration of the historical context. The question remains: how much depth can fashion provide when it walks the line between remembrance and aestheticization?
Stylistic Intention versus Substantive Depth
The show drew on numerous fashion references – 1980s nostalgia, streetwear, and glittering elements – creating a visual tension. But this stylistic intention at times overshadowed the political significance of the topic. The state-orchestrated intrusion into family life that defined these forced adoptions receded into the background. The GDR appeared less as an ideological system and more as a visual cipher. The boundary between fashion and moral appeal remained blurred.
Only the Topic Was Brave
The fashion world praised the show – predictably – as “brave.” But it is precisely this term that shifts the perspective. It was not the designer who was brave, but those who are still fighting for justice – for access to their records, for DNA databases, and for the recognition of systemic injustice. The history of forced adoptions is not a backdrop, but an open wound. Those who give this history a stage bear responsibility – not just aesthetic, but also moral and political. In this respect, the show remained vague. The topic was big. The staging was too. The engagement, however, was too small.