Jenn Post 4

Jenn Shea

1) The basic idea that an artist has the power to manipulate the medium that he or she uses to deliver a message or portray a certain idea threatens a totalitarian leader because it may lead to disorder and discordance within the state. In Book X of Plato’s Republic, Plato asserts that art can only be appreciated if it can coexist with a well ordered state: “…let us assure our sweet friend and the sister arts of imitation that if she will only prove her title to exist in a well-ordered State we shall be delighted to receive her…” Further, artist’s have the ability to use their creations as a means of speaking out against an authoritarian state in possibly a more and subtle manner. Art allows a freedom and a release of expression that may not be favored by the particular regime or leader. For example, in reference to Hitler’s Nazi regime, what he considered degenerate art was particularly harmful to his power because it lacked respectability in its deception of reality and portrayal of human flaw. As stated in the “Beauty without Sensuality” reading, “Respectability ensured security, order, and the maintenance of values, taming the chaos that seemed always to threaten society, it reflected people’s attitudes toward themselves and toward all that was ‘different’” (Mosse 25). Because art forms of Impressionism, Expressionism, Cubism, etc were considered degenerate, they posed a threat to the security of the state because they expressed ideas that went against the principles defined by Hitler and the Nazi party. Hitler and his party any distortion of reality or of beauty, also expressed by Mosse: “Society expressed its morality in terms of generally accepted ideals of beauty while projecting its fears and ideas of ugliness onto the very groups the National Socialists were eventually determined to exterminate: Jews, homosexuals, habitual criminals, and the mentally disturbed” (29).

2) Karl Hofer was a German expressionist painter. Many of his paintings, although few survived from the period, involve nude depictions of young men and women in relaxed settings and positions. For example, in his drawing titled “Bathers,” while showing what could well be a close representation of the actual form of a human body, deviate from what Hitler would consider beauty because they are not the ideal representation of masculinity; they are skinny bodies with no sign of male power or strength. Another example is his work titled “Dancers,” which depicts two female bodies in dance but shows the lines of transition between their bodily movements in the rhythm of their dance. The entanglement of multiple legs, the lack of definition in the body to reflect a realistic human quality, and the lack of realistic human facial aspect including the use of simple lines for eyes, mouth, and nose (which are also used in the “Bathers” work) show a clear detachment from reality. In addition, Mosse might argue that these women do not depict beauty because the position of their heads and bodies in the dance makes the drawing seem sensual rather than simply showing the female body in a more raw and non-sensationalized manner.

a) Degeneracy in medical terms, according to Mosse, identified those who had “departed from the ‘normal’ because of shattered nerves, inherited abnormalities, or behavioral or sexual excess” (26). It was basically used to describe not only artwork that portrayed atypical representations of the human physique, but also individuals themselves who deviated from the societal norm established by Hitler and the Nazi party. Such deviation can be defined by homosexuality, mental “feebleness,” physical deformities, and basically anything else that did not match the ideal human composition that Hitler envisioned.

b) In the artwork I looked up by Hofer, I think Hitler would have rejected most of it because it portrayed the human body solely through rough lines and did not show the ideal human body. In addition, with specific reference to the “Bathers” painting, Hitler probably would have identified the grouping of three men who did not bear the S.A. physique as homosexual, especially because the drawing’s title infers that the men were bathing together. To refer to a course text, in Mosse’s “Beauty without Sexuality,” he states that, “In this context it is not without significance that nudism was banned immediately after the Nazis came to power…On much the same level was a warning issued by the Reichsministerium des Innern…in 1945 to the effect that nude bathing by people of the same sex could be seen as the first step toward the violation of Paragraph 175, which punished homosexual acts” (28). He also would have criticized their lack of brawn. Finally, Hitler would have seen a majority of Hofer’s work as degenerate because of its indefinite lines and overall abstractness. His need for straightforward artwork can be seen in his speech for the inauguration of the “Great Exhibition of German Art”: “‘Works of art’ which cannot be understood in themselves but, for the justification of their existence, need those bombastic instructions for their use, finally reaching that intimidated soul, who is patiently willing to accept such stupid or impertinent nonsense-these works of art from now on will no longer find their way to the German people” (440). These images thus posed the threat of introducing homosexuality or sexuality in general into Germany, and also, according to Hitler and Plato in more basic terms, would have led to a disordered state because they did not support or uphold the progress of the state by going against its principles.

c) I believe that the body in art was criticized for degeneracy because Hitler was most focused on the physical flaws within the human race. Although landscapes, animals, and abstract figures may have also been seen as deviants from the norm, Hitler at the time was more concerned about his plans for euthanasia and perfecting the human race, beginning in Germany. By pointing out the physical flaws in artistic portrayals of the human body, Hitler quite possibly could have been gathering support for this plan by drawing others’ attention to social deviants. He also seems to be making personal attacks on the artists as degenerates themselves when, in reference to the visual deception in such “degenerate” art in his speech, he says, “Either these so-called ‘artists’ really see things this way and therefore believe in what they depict; then we would have to examine their eyesight-deformation to see if it is the product of a mechanical failure or of inheritance” (441).

d) I think that George Mosse’s argument that beauty with sensuality is dangerous to the social norm, although clearly a prevalent belief in Germany at the time, is not suited to art of today according to modern cultural standards. I believe that the establishment of this idea is in itself dangerous because it places limitations on the artistic expression of individuals, which again at the time in Germany was acceptable. In addition, in the “Fascinating Fascism” reading assigned for last week by Sontag, I found it quite interesting when she refers to SS uniforms as sex symbols, which quite contradicts the idea of avoiding sensuality: “But uniforms are not the same thing as photographs of uniforms-which are erotic materials and photographs of SS uniforms are the units of a particularly powerful and widespread sexual fantasy” (Sontag Part II). In addition, although we have not read about this but have rather discussed it in class, the Justin Timberlake-Janet Jackson “wardrobe malfunction” during the Super Bowl is another good example of beauty and sensuality coming into conflict. Whether or not the shirt was meant to be ripped is unknown, but either way, the general public for the most part saw how such exposure can almost ruin a piece of art or a performance. In that sense, sensuality is not so much dangerous as it is unnecessary and distracting from the main purpose of what is being displayed.

3) By some people’s standards, including Hitler’s and his party, this image would be seen as “degenerate” in its blatant depiction of male homosexuality, which Nazi Germany saw as straying from the sexual norm. Clearly, this is a very anti-republic/ anti-bush ad, but it represents the very pressing and prominent issue in the United States of gay rights and legalizing same-sex marriage. It addresses the value of equality despite sexual orientation and this issue’s presence in the political arena. It also makes an attack on President Bush about how he is hindering love and increasing violence and dishonesty in the United States. Plato would have seen this ad as hindering the progress of the state, but I disagree and believe that it instead encourages social progress within the country despite the idea that Hitler and even some individuals today may consider “degenerate.”

http://www.amyl.org.uk/img/mandate.gif