Reinhard Kreckel (1940–2026): A friend
Biao Xiang – Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology
Professor Reinhard Kreckel passed away on 3 July 2026 in Halle at the age of 85. A distinguished sociologist of education, inequality and social transformation, and a former rector of Martin Luther University Halle (1996-2000), Reinhard was a close friend of the Max Planck Institute of Social Anthropology, and a friend and mentor to me personally. It is perhaps unusual in the German-speaking world to use the first name in a memorial essay such as this, but this was how we addressed each other, and Reinhard’s personal friendship across the wide gap of age and status is what I cherish.
In December 2025, six months before his death, Reinhard sent me the English translation of a draft essay that was dated 18 September 2025—it seems he marked all versions of his writings by unique file names and precise dates. Titled “Self as Method?”, the essay is a contribution to the book East German Fractures: An Interdisciplinary Conversation with Wolfgang Engler (originally in German)(1). In the essay, Reinhard recalled:
“In 1992, when my wife and I came to Halle, having worked in several places in Germany and abroad, it was quickly understood that we had come to stay. The locals realized that we had not arrived as bargain-hunting careerists, but were ready to roll up our sleeves and do our best. People in the University started to trust me. I was quickly elected to leadership positions. Thus, almost by accident, I found myself thrown into higher education politics. From the very beginning, I tried to oppose the obvious downsides of the German unification process as best as I could.”
The Kreckels’ arrival in Halle later turned out to be significant for the Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology. When the Max Planck Society decided to establish an institute devoted to social anthropology in 1999, Reinhard was the university rector in Halle. He played a key role in persuading the founding directors, Chris Hann and Günther Schlee, as well as the Max Planck Society, that Halle was the right place for the new MPI. He then turned around to convince other decision-makers in the university, the City Administration of Halle, and the relevant ministries of Saxony-Anhalt of the importance of having a Max Planck Institute. Even more importantly, he was instrumental in setting up the Department of Anthropology at the University (named today Institute of Social and Cultural Anthropology) with three professorships. This has been indispensable for the MPI’s functioning because the MPI relies on universities for the recognition and awarding of degrees, and also relies on universities for PhD training. Purposely located right across a narrow street from MPI, the establishment of the new department aimed at creating a cluster of anthropologists across institutions who would share lectures, co-organize seminars, and go to each other’s parties. The anthropologists’ corner in this northern Halle neighbourhood has flourished ever since and is possibly the largest of this sort in the world.
When I arrived in Halle, almost exactly 30 years after Reinhard, I soon learned about him from my senior colleagues, who all deeply appreciated his support. Stefan Schwendtner, a former assistant to Reinhard and now the public relations officer at MPI, set up a meeting for us. Despite the difference in age and background between us, we quickly developed an intellectual affinity. We talked about a wide range of topics over afternoon tea in my office. Reinhard told me about the complex social consequences of the German unification, especially for the East. Professors appointed during the GDR were removed from their positions, and the management of banks and other important institutions was taken over by individuals parachuted in from the West. This created a deep rupture in the former East, which had far-reaching consequences. His sense of justice and concern for the local society impressed me even more when I learned that he himself came from a wealthy family in southern Germany. I think I understand what he meant when he said “I tried to oppose the obvious downsides of the German unification process as best as I could”. He well deserved the trust that he earned from his local colleagues. It is safe to assume, though I never asked, that his enthusiasm for the MPI lay in his hope that the institute would be good for Halle. “How much have I done for this place?” is a question that we should continue to ask ourselves.
On another occasion, we talked about the public fascination with archaeological and genetic discoveries, as compared to the discussion of contemporary issues. Discoveries about what happened 40,000 years ago are “science”, while analyses about what happened in the last 40 years are mere “opinions”. “It is all very well to have the longue durée perspective”, he remarked in his soft voice, large eyes glittering as usual, “but what about the responsibility? If you talk about a hundred thousand years ago, then the matter has little to do with you. What is your role in it?” He felt that social responsibility has to be an integral part of research, and responsibility means confronting difficult ongoing questions that researchers cannot easily distance themselves from.
In our last conversation, he raised the question of elite formation in Europe and Asia. He compared a French-British model of elite making to a Chinese-Japanese one. The French and the British groom their elites from very early on, and they are well-schooled, very sophisticated and professional. In China and Japan, in contrast, members of the elite rise from the masses who have got their hands dirty. In China, this is because of socialism, while the Japanese pattern may have to do with its history of modernization. Germany, he said, sits in the middle, but is now moving towards the French-British style. I agreed entirely, but I was more pessimistic about the trend. The entire world seems to be adopting the French-British model, but only in form. Members of today’s elite have not got their hands dirty, but they have not touched many books either. The political elite’s disconnection from the masses is particularly evident. Class politics has been replaced by identity politics. The question of how to organize 30 workers in a factory to fight for better working conditions has been replaced by the task of writing 30 pages to make an impressive presentation.
In the same essay, “Self as Method?”, Reinhard said something about me that surprised me:
“Biao Xiang sees his own role and task as a social researcher faced with the realities of today in a similar light [as the Confucian gentry in traditional China]: Only by adopting a peripheral, centre-critical perspective as his own research perspective, will he be able to fully understand social contexts that escape the official view of today's Chinese one-party state. … his ‘gentry disposition’ has by no means made him an outcast dissident in China, but rather someone who can provide valuable mediation services for enlightened but aloof party mandarins. The fate of his own grandfather taught him to always maintain a certain distance from the powerful and to seek out exchanges with educated young people with alert minds.”
No one had said something like this before. I assume Reinhard developed his impression based on the book Self as Method (2), in which I describe the influence of my background on my intellectual development, and on his conversations with me. I recognized that I do “maintain a certain distance from the powerful and seek out exchanges with educated young people with alert minds”, but I wonder how he had discerned this as I don’t remember ever telling him (and I do not agree with his point about my grandfather’s influence). More remarkably, the characterization that I “can provide mediation services for enlightened but aloof party mandarins” is something that never occurred to me. However, on reflection, it does appear to be an acute observation of what I may be actually doing, regardless of whether I intended it and regardless of whether I like it or not. The phrase “enlightened but aloof” is amusing and may be pertinent. Such a vivid image came from a mind that sees the world vividly. It feels uncanny to have someone reveal to me what I am doing but that I have not been conscious of, especially in such a matter-of-fact manner. But it is also validating and gratifying to realise that someone hears and sees the echoes and ripples of what I am doing, probably more sharply than I do.
In our conversations, he often mentioned his time at the University of Aberdeen in the UK and in Paris, conversing with Pierre Bourdieu. He worked in Aberdeen for four years (1973-1977). Before that, he did his PhD and then worked as a research assistant at the University of Munich. After Aberdeen, he taught at the University of Erlangen-Nuremberg (1977-1992), and then came to Halle. He was certainly a man who was at home in world, as much as at home in Halle. His global historical vision and his care for the local region enhanced each other.
When I got to know him, Reinhard’s health problems were already visible. By early 2026 walking had become taxing, and his speech significantly slowed down. But his mind was as alert as ever. He insisted on driving himself in a car that looked too small to be comfortable for him. He told me that he had been sporty since he was young and had been an avid skier. He spoke with deep affection for his late wife Marga Kreckel (they were married for exactly sixty years until her death in 2024), her psychotherapy practice, the years that they spent together in the UK, and how they dealt with the flooding of the Saale river that runs past their house. He also told me joyfully about the long-distance friendship he developed during his widowerhood.
This man, full of life and energy, was also a man of remarkable discipline. All his email messages were impeccably composed and with stylish. (I wonder what he would think of the spotless but lifeless emails written by AI.) When coming for tea, he always carried with him a folder containing printouts. He handed to me the documents one by one, in an order that was obviously thought through: this is an article by a sociologist on comparing the education systems in Europe and China that he thought would be interesting to me, that is a piece by himself on inequality which he mentioned in the previous meeting, and yet another is an excerpt of what he and Marga wrote about Xinjiang that represented a balanced perspective that he thought is urgently needed…
In our conversations Reinhard more than once mentioned Fei Xiaotong (1910-2005), who is widely regarded as a founding father of anthropology and sociology in China. In his final years, Fei was rethinking the role of the intellectual through the analogy of jade (3). Stone turns to jade after long grinding and polishing against harsh material. Jade elevates and represents stones without denying their value. Reinhart was a jade such as Fei described. Disciplined, committed, meticulous, yet soft, warm, and caring. The glow of jade remains even when the jade itself is gone.
1) Veit Friemert, ed. Ostdeutsche Brüche. Im interdisziplinären Gespräch mit Wolfgang Engler (Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2026)
2) Biao Xiang, Qi Wu. 2023. [Translated by David Ownby] Self as Method: Thinking Through China and the World. Palgrave Macmillan. Free download at https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-981-19-4953-1
3) Fei Xiaotong and Zhu Xueqin. 2005. “Interviews with Fei Xiaotong” [in Chinese] Southern Weekend, 28 April 2005; https://chinesepen.org/old/ftwc/02wx/zhuxueqin.htm