APOLOGY:
I'm sorry if anyone came to see me in my office from 12:00-1:15... I forgot about my weekly HumCore staff meeting... hopefully you saw the note on the door
SURVEY:
Most of you didn't take it yet... here's the link. Please try to come up with suggestions for my/our improvement. One person took the survey and basically chose "suck" for everything in the numerical part, which is totally fine, but then wrote something to the effect of "everything seems OK, no suggestions" in the written comment part. I found that rather confusing. If you have a grievance, elaborate. If you like something, tell me how to do more of it. Etc.
HOMEWORK:
-ask Goebbels a question about Nazi aesthetics in reply to this post... no more communist nonsense, today the teacher/fuhrer answers all the questions... you are free to choose from Moeller's own study questions if this is really what you want to know
-Reader 92-101 (Soviet Aesthetics)
-read Moeller's handout on primary vs. secondary sources (a simple demonstration is pg. 97 vs. pg. 100-01)
-read Guide ch. 15 & 16 if you haven't already
TIMETABLE FOR PAPER #5:
Thursday 2/12 @ 9pm = ideas draft (to submission dropbox... see below)
Tuesday 2/17 @ 5pm = working draft (to shared dropbox)
Wednesday 2/18 @ various = group conferences
Sunday 2/22 @ 9pm = final draft (to turnitin.com)
THIS MIGHT BE MORE HELPFUL THAN THE ACTUAL PROMPT:
Grading rubric the instructors were given (or in .pdf format if you prefer)
ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATIVES TO ARTSTOR, CALVIN, AND U.S.H.M.M. :
-Rifkind German Expressionist collection... some of this is online, but you could go to the Los Angeles County Museum of Art, like I did this past weekend, and see all this stuff and more... sometimes it's easier to analyze a painting/poster/photograph if you're actually looking at it than a web image
-University of Minnesota World War poster collection (careful with dates)
-German Federal Archives
IDEAS DRAFT #5 (NOT AS LONG AS THE LAST ONE, BUT LONG):
You need to find six images. Five should come from approved databases [Artstor, Calvin, U.S.H.M.M., Rifkind, U. Minnesota]. Use at least two of the databases... you can repeat images from your Discovery Task, but be sure that they fit the theme you choose, and be sure that you have something interesting to say about them. The sixth image should be a contemporary one (from any source) that somehow fits your theme, even though it's not directly about Weimar.
Winter's 2 S's
Source: who publishes/curates the database this image came from? what is its focus? what are its motives? [do this once for each database you use]
Selection: what category or theme have you chosen to organize your exhibition/article [do this once]... note: one potential category we didn't discuss in class today was the work of a single artist... though it would be better if there was some variety therein
Moeller's 6 C's [repeat six times, one for each image]
Content: what do you see? (in detail... more work now is less work later)
Citation: who made it? how did s(he) display or publish it?
Context: what was going on at this particular place and time? (be specific... not every year in the Weimar period is quite the same, and not every city in Germany is quite the same)
Connections: does this remind you of anything else you've studied in Core this year? (hint: yes)? does it remind you of any other images/ideas (hint: yes)? copy out at least one short quotation from a pertinent primary or secondary source (like from the Reader)
Communication: what's the message, or rhetorical appeal, or propaganda angle? if there's none on the part of the artist/photographer, how might someone else interpret it as such? (example: Grosz calling Primavera bourgeois propaganda)
Conclusions: why is this image historically interesting/valuable? how does it relate to your theme? use it or lose it? (since you will be cutting down from six to three)
Were Dadaist ideas of art ever used in Nazi propognada, even though dadaism has its roots in communist ideals?
ReplyDeleteWhat distinguishes artsy nudity and inappropriate nudity to the Nazi party?
ReplyDeleteChris:
ReplyDeletesome of the techniques were used, such as photomontage, but only in service of the racial & intellectual rehabilitation of the great German people... dada is nonsense, the product of a degenerate mind, probably jewish or influenced by decadent jewish ideas... the dadaists are often communists, foreign interlopers trying to poison the German mind, also a jewish conspiracy... nonsense is only destructive, given that the Reich is perfectly sensible, true, beautiful, orderly, and right... dada that, you assholes
Martha:
First, I suggest you consult George Mosse's article on the Entarte Kunst exhibition (Reader pgs. 78-89), though I fear it may be infected by jewish and communist ideas. But your question is a good one. See, we Nazis have a couple of dilemmas when it comes to nudity in art. First, like all Europeans we like to pretend we are descended culturally and biologically from the ancient Greeks because everyone agrees they were awesome. (Hmmm, but why do they have olive skin and curly hair? Must ask Hitler to clarify.) The trouble is that their art was really hot sometimes. You just can't have Greek art without hotness. Now fortunately we have the benefit of centuries of misinterpretation of Greek art by German and other European academics. For instance we think the sculptures were originally white/colorless (whereas they were brightly painted) and that they lacked pubic hair as a gesture toward sexless abstraction (whereas it was actually because a lot of ancient Greek men and women waxed because they thought it was hot... hey wait, stop listening to your sexually degenerate jewish TA... dammit, but it's true). So anyway, the point being, we are trying to cultivate a kind of platonic idea of beauty, where the body and its urges and its hotness are only symbolic of an Idea or Concept, which is German racial purity/beauty. Second, to get a bit more practical, we want all racially pure Germans to f*** each other to propagate our master race, but we also want to appeal to respectability so people think we are good and proper social conservatives and not crazy radicals. (Don't forget, most Nazis are just regular people like you... they just go along because it seems normal.) So we have to keep the hotness in a certain boundary. Otherwise the wrong people would f*** each other at the wrong times and in the wrong ways, and we can't have that. So we want sexuality that is healthy rather than, you know, jewish.
Hope this was helpful.
-Goebbels
Which artist was included in both the "degenerate art" exhibit and the "healthy art" exhibit? and why was he included in both?
ReplyDeleteWhy was degenerate art still displayed for the public? Why didnt they just ... burn it or something?
ReplyDeleteMarko:
ReplyDeleteOur idea for the two exhibitions was basically that most Germans were biased against avant garde intellectuals/artists and would scapegoat them for some of the things going wrong in Weimar (see bottom of pg. 60). We had some theoretical disagreements within the Nazi leadership (see bottom of pg. 57), but even when we agreed on the guidelines for healthy vs. degenerate we weren't always that consistent... and we had thousands of pieces of art in dozens of galleries to categorize. The artist used in both was Rudolf Belling... his abstract works were considered degenerate, while his more realistic sculpture of the boxer Max Schmeling was considered healthy (Belling Schmeling... hee hee). I don't think that's entirely inconsistent from an aesthetic standpoint, as the two works use a different style, but from a psychological standpoint, how is an artist sometimes a sick degenerate and sometimes not? Must be the influence of evil foreign ideas and the poison of jewish thought.
http://images.artnet.com/artwork_images_171573_250356_rudolf-belling.jpg
vs.
http://www.namos.iupui.edu/Images/ArtistWork/Belling_Schmeling.jpg
Good paper topic maybe.
Sarah:
Another good question. We did burn some books, but there is a very good answer to this in Stephanie Barron's article, specifically the bottom paragraph on pg. 73 of the Reader. Basically we realized that this displaying tactic would work better. It is your duty as a good German to read this article, of course, though it is suspiciously jewish at times. The real question is what the motives were of the people who went to the degenerate art exhibit, which was far more popular than the 'good' art exhibit.
Springtime for Hitler!
-Joe Goebbels
During Professor Moeller's lecture today, I remember him talking about a song that had "dangerously phallic symbols" and sensual inferences to a girl's legs. Despite its sensuality, Hitler had approved it. I'm confused now. Were his decisions to accept or reject a work solely dependent on race/religion or other?
ReplyDeleteIs there a specific piece or style of art that is "beautiful" for the Nazis? (besides the ones that glorify the Nazis)
ReplyDeleteI'm still kind of confused about the whole "beauty without sensuality", so i guess my question is:
ReplyDeleteIn terms of 'healthy/German' art, what would classify as "beauty without sensuality"?
(or anything that is related to this would be fine also)
Thao:
ReplyDeleteYes, race is the main category that trumps _everything_ for the Nazis. The Nazi state is a racial state... that's why Nazis have "solved" class conflict, by substituting racial conflict. The trouble is that race, as a category, isn't a particularly concrete or transparent one. The jews had been living in Europe for over 500 years, and there was some degree of intermarriage, etc. The point is that it is actually harder to pick the jews out than the Nazis say it is, particularly when jewish becomes a category for every possible form of degeneracy rather than some specific atttribute. And again, what are jewish attributes in art or jewish attributes in music? The whole idea is somewhat nonsensical (sorry, I'm breaking character). The other thing you see here is that healthy is basically anything Hitler says it is, even if it entails some degree of contradiction. But I guess Goebbels/Hitler would say that certain kinds of sensuality/sexuality are OK as long as they stay within a certain boundary of decorum and promote the healthiness of the master race. As long as they're not, you know, communist or foreign or jewish.
Scarlett:
That's another question you can maybe pursue in your paper (if the dates fit). Reading Hitler's speech on 90-91 would be a good start. We seem to be better at saying what we don't like than what we do like. I think "glorify the Nazis" isn't quite how we, the Nazis, would put it. We would say anything that glorifies the German race in its once and future purity. As far as that goes we really seem to like scenes with healthy rural families, proper gender roles, etc.
I'm kind of feeling this one:
http://www.artstor.org/artstor/ViewImages?id=8CJGczI9NzldLS1WEDhzTnkrX3kidl1%2Bey0%3D&userId=gDZEcDIl
-Joey G
What, for Hitler, is the relationship of the artist to the larger society?
ReplyDeleteIs this supposed to be some sort of metaphor?
What kind of art do Nazis consider good? Since they don't like expressionism, do they like impressionism? Or do they simply like art that conveys their ideology?
ReplyDeleteIs there any foreign art that is acceptable to the Nazis or is it all degenerate by virtue of its being foreign? If yes (there is some acceptable art from outside of Germany), how would the Nazis justify their approval of such art? If not, what would the Nazis most likely do with the pieces that they have in their possession(put them in the Entarte Kunst exhibition, sell them, burn them, etc.)?
ReplyDeleteWere there people that were against Hitler, and what did they say about him before they knew he would become a tyrant?
ReplyDeleteSo, was art really censored for the sake of maintaining German racial purity, or was Hitler just really pissy about not being able to become a painter?
ReplyDeleteLorena:
ReplyDeleteBeauty without sensuality could obviously include pictures of landscape or nice German families with their clothes on. Or anything heroic or inspiring to Germans. But as I said earlier, there is a long tradition of the use of nude figures in European painting and sculpture that the Nazis are trying to tap into. So the question is can there be nudity without sensuality, or at least without dangerous or uncontrollable sensuality? Apparently they think so... and I think this helps use understand their attitude toward culture and art more generally... they understand that art, like sexuality, is a force that motivates people in powerful ways, but they think they can purify it & regulate it. (Think of the Nazi jazz that Moeller mentioned for instance. Weird. I mean even in the U.S. jazz at this time is associated with sexual depravity, jews, and black people. That's a lot to regulate.)
Amanda:
I'm not sure what metaphor you're referring to. Anyway, according to the Nazis, the spirit of the German people is most important above all. (Though those people need to follow a strong leader...) Artists should be like public servants... they should inspire the people and provide a model for what the people can become once they are purified of foreign, modern, jewish, communist, etc. influences. Artists should not be coming up with their own ideas, because that would mislead the people, especially if those ideas are unhealthy and degenerate. Hitler also says the people should be the judge of art, so if something is too weird or intellectual, the people will surely reject it. (Being a dictator, his use of "the people" means basically, "my government," since they are directly regulating art/culture rather than actually leaving it to popular regulation. But dictatorships don't really work unless they're popular.)
Ankita:
It's not enough to convey the content of their ideology (Germans are the best, etc.). The form is important too, since they believe that forms of art have racial and/or political character. So they probably wouldn't even like impressionism because it so clearly connects to the French and their lax morals... Hitler is very specific that art should be polished/finished in the Renaissance style... otherwise it's just an exercise in deviant psychology. So no modern art whatsoever. Modern art might be a diagnosis of the ills of modernity, but it isn't the cure. It's actually part of the sickness. Modern art is bad. Traditional art is good. Traditional art by Germans is best.
Teresa:
The worst is modern foreign art. I guess older foreign art is OK, but only as a kind of model for the awesomeness of German art past, present, and future (as with their reverence for ancient Greek art as a model). I think the overall goal is to encourage the people to reject degenerate foreign & jewish art, so once that's accomplished why not sell it to the stupid degenerate foreigners/jews and use the money for something more worthwhile, like bombs or tanks or something.
Nicholas:
Sure there were people who were against him, especially in the early years. Think back to Moeller's lecture last week (and the article on pg. 42-51 of the Reader). The Nazis really had to convince people that they were normal and respectable, that they didn't have any crazy ideas. Even when Hitler became Chancellor, there was some thought that he could be offset by having people from other parties, especially Hindenburg's traditional right-wing, to balance him. We have this idea that one day, just all of a sudden, Germany turned Nazi. It was a gradual thing. A lot of people went along with it, not only in the 1930s but into the 1940s, who probably weren't that enthusiastic. The Nazis were able to redefine what "normal" was, which any successful political movement has to do. Their use of modern art as a scapegoat was part of their attempt to redefine "normal."
Based on what evidence to Hitler makes art “degenerate”?
ReplyDeleteWhat is "bourgeois morality" and how was it used to define what was 'degenerate'?
ReplyDeleteHow did Hilter get the masses to agree to his ideology of government and what was bad and good? Weren't the masses Jews, homosexuals, handicaps and the many other groups Hitler had singled out? Did anyone try to shed light onto any of Hitler's many contradictions? (I'm sure they were killed if they tried but it all seems too insane that he has so much influence in everything related to Germany as a nation.)
Can you explain once again why and how German history is related to art and aesthetics please? Was Hitler just mad that he failed at being an artist and decided to go berserk about it? Why the big emphasis on which art is good or bad?
Rante:
ReplyDeleteI think the theory of Hitler as a failed artist has really limited explanatory power, just as theories of him as a frustrated loser have limited explanatory power. To focus on Hitler's personal psychology is to discount the political and ideological effects of Nazism on millions of Germans, which is far more important. There's always crazy... why follow this one into crazyworld at this particular time?
Amanda:
Strictly speaking, none. Because degenerate refers to bad birth, meaning race. And speaking as Aaron rather than Goebbels, it's hard for me to see how you can reliably intuit race from artistic style. But the style is the outward evidence of inward degeneracy (racial, but also psychological and ideological). So any of the modern styles of art are evidence of degeneracy, particularly those that distort or fragment reality & the human body. Hitler says either you're making art that's weird like that because you're weird and can't think any other way, or because you're trying to trick people into believing in a lie. Either way, you're being subversive and shouldn't be allowed to make art.
Lover 90129 (you might want to identify yourself in class so you can get credit for doing your homework):
For "bourgeois morality," think "normal and respectable"... in particular the appeal to strict regulation of sexual behavior. The groups that you refer to were minorities, so Hitler was able to convince "the masses" that they were subhuman... and this was the key to the larger Nazi ideology, because it offered a way of explaining the confusion of modernity, the pain of German's military defeat, the economic crisis, etc. It was a very compelling explanation, that everything wrong with Germany was someone else's fault. So even though most people weren't totally excited about being Nazis, there was something appealing about that idea. German history is related to art insofar as the Germans are really proud at having created great works of art... Goethe in theater/literature, Wagner in music/opera, Durer & Holbein in painting/drawing. But more in that German history, according to Hitler, has been interrupted by getting sidetracked by jews/communists/foreigners into modern corruption, so art is going to be one of the forces that help bring it back to its glorious past, which is also its glorious future. This is an acknowledgement of the motivational value of art and its way of encoding a whole set of cultural values.
How do you not portray nudity as sensual?
ReplyDeleteWhat distinction does Mosse say the Nazis made between the private and public representation of women?
ReplyDeleteThis second one is Grant actually. It was done on my computer, so it automatically posted under my name.
ReplyDeleteConnie:
ReplyDeleteInstead of beauty without sensuality, perhaps it would be a more fitting explanation of Nazi aesthetics to say the right kind of sensuality, in the right ways, at the right time, by and for the right people.
Amanda:
This is off the top of my head, but I think it had something to do with the fact that women represented in Nazi art as being in "public" are demure and clothed and so on, whereas the Nazi depictions of female nudes are somehow in private, such that sensuality can be kept within a certain boundary so long as it occurs in private, and that this is what you're seeing in the art. Which ties to her argument that the Nazis are trying to appeal to a bourgeois sense of morality, decorum, etc.