A) Alfred North Whitehead once said, “Art is the imposing of a pattern on experience, and our aesthetic enjoyment is recognition of the pattern." There is little question as to whether or not Leni Riefenstahl’s work is artistically and aesthetically beautiful. Regardless of content, Riefenstahl displays a connection to her filmed subjects that I feel even rivals many current photographers. In the instance of her most famous work, Triumph of the Will, she produces a rousing film that is not only significant because of its innovations in the medium, but also because it is simply moving to watch. The various shot compositions often look so ahead of their time that you almost forget this film was made in the thirties. From the initial tilt shot of the title, the various aerial views of Nuremburg and the marching soldiers, it is easy to get caught up in the almost whimsical documentation of the event. When Hitler finally appears on screen, you can practically feel the pride that swells in all of the Germans who see him, and the train shots of him traveling to the center of the event almost makes it feel like all of Germany is there to greet him. As the music swells in the background, and the cheers continue to grow louder and louder, you almost start to swell with an odd sense of pride over the moment. It is unsettling how easily you can get lost in the film. Riefenstahl clearly shows an extraordinary talent for choosing shots that captivate the viewer. But she not only demonstrates that ability in her film work. I personally felt that her photographs of the Nuba people were some of the most compelling images I have ever seen. The members of the tribe display an immense beauty and strength not often captured and shown by mainstream media. What is even more surprising to me about these photos is that they are like nothing I've ever scene from that time period. The overall lighting and film quality of the photos look more like something out of today's National Geographic than a 1970s photo book. The emphasis on the natural beauty of the Nuba was also very intriguing to me.The images are easily something that I could view and attempt to absorb for hours on end.
B) In an ideal world, art would never have to apologize. It would also never be critiqued, but instead only viewed, acknowledged, and thought on. However, we do not live in an ideal world, and art often has the ability to evoke strong emotional responses in individuals that can move them in numerous ways. Because of this I do feel that artists hold a moral responsibility to their works. Art always carries the imprint of its artist, therefore I think that if art fails to uphold a sense of morality (which I acknowledge can be very different for different people) then the artist should have to apologize for their work. Even if Riefenstahl’s claims to having no political intention in making Triumph of the Will are true, the fact of the matter is that she still created a film of questionable moral value. Based on Susan Sontag’s searing critique on Riefenstahl’s work, I do believe that she would feel art should be upheld to a certain moral standard. Mary Devereaux’s essay on Riefenstahl’s work is a little less clear on the matter however. While she acknowledges the battle between the beautiful and the evil in some artwork, she never implicitly states whether or not an artist should apologize for “evil” works.
I think each essayist takes a distinct approach to analyzing Riefenstahl’s work, and one is clearly more affective than the other. Many of Sontag’s arguments against Riefenstahl’s work are largely ineffective because of the manner in which they are presented. Her essay never appears to be purely objective, and one must question if Sontag’s Jewish-American upbringing during World War II might have in any way influenced her criticism of Riefenstahl’s work. While her critique of Riefenstahl’s actual life in comparison to the one she has tried to portray is likely true, Sontag’s critique’s of The Last of the Nuba makes her appear as more of a conspiracy theorist than a rational writer. Sontag’s article becomes difficult to read when she begins to compare the members of the Nuba tribe to the ideal of the Nazi fantasy. What startles and upsets me the most is that at one point, Sontag appears to turn the critique from Riefenstahl to the Nuba themselves when she states, “Lastly, Riefenstahl is right on target with her choice as a photographic subject of a people who "look upon death as simply a matter of fate—which they do not resist or struggle against," of a society whose most enthusiastic and lavish ceremonial is the funeral. Viva la muerte.” It is the “viva la muerte” that I feel is the most cutting and disrespectful of the statement and the overall passage passes unfair judgement on the tribe’s way of life. Moreover, Sontag’s continued derision to nearly all parties involved seems to further alienate the reader from the potentially valid points she is making. In response to the German public’s appreciation of “Nazi art” she refers to them as “unsophisticated”, as if they were too simple to appreciate the other art movements of the time, or that they only liked the art because it was 'dumbed down'. This statement in no way moves forward her argument against Riefenstahl’s work and takes away from the value of her criticism. In the case of Devereaux, her analysis of the work feels objective and relevant to the overall idea of how one should approach Riefenstahl’s work and others like it. She however, fails to give an obvious answer to the question of “beauty versus evil”. In retrospect however, this seems positive because it gives each individual reader the ability to draw his or her on conclusion.
In response to a film of similar content and contention, Birth of a Nation, film historian Jonathan Lapper posed the question, “Can one separate content from technique and praise one but not the other?” He then went on to say, “Most critics have developed a pattern of response to the film that continues to this day: Praise the film's techniques, deplore the film's content, let technique trump content, declare the film a masterpiece.” To attempt to renounce or defend Riefenstahl’s most famous work, Triumph of the Will, is an argument I must admit I am not prepared to fully make. Throughout Wednesday’s class, I found myself constantly trying to separate my knowledge of the Holocaust and the actual film itself. To deny that the film is visually moving and charismatic would not only be a lie, but a disservice to cinematic history. When considering the various shot compositions, the various aerial views, and the movement of the people on screen, it is easy to become enamored with what you’re watching. But to praise and laud the film feels like a disservice to human history, and there lies the greatest problem with creating any effective argument for or against the film, and any other artistic works like it. It is near impossible for any knowledgeable viewer to separate the content from the technique.
Additional resources:
1 comment:
I completely agree with your statement that in an ideal world art would not be criticized for its moral or political values. Like you, I see how far from an ideal world the one we live in is, though I tend to disagree with you after that. Just as a runner strives to win first place, the people of the world should strive to make it an ideal one.
It is my opinion that neither art nor its artists should have to apologize for anything, as long as no one was injured during the art-making process. While Riefenstahl’s role during World War II is unclear it is almost certain that while she was filming Triumph of the Will no one was harmed. I understand that the film essentially fueled support for the Nazi Regime and eventually the Holocaust, though I do not think that warrants an apology from Leni. Every person who viewed the film had the choice to make their own opinions about it, whether in favor or against. I am not saying that all artwork is appropriate for everyone, surely some art should be banned and some reserved for a mature audience, I am simply saying that while one may argue Triumph of the Will to be propagandistic, it is not Leni Riefenstahl’s responsibility to apologize for the whole Communist party.
Post a Comment