Kim post 4

Kim Hambright

Authoritarianism, by definition, is essentially complete governmental control. In an authoritarian society, the goal for the government is to tunnel the vision of its populous, allowing only the things deemed “appropriate” to be seen or heard. An authoritarian social structure, therefore, has no place for insightful art. The act of an individual assessing a piece of art with their own thoughts and opinions can indeed be very detrimental to an authoritarian society. In cases such as anti-governmental propaganda, art can achieve exactly what an authoritarian government is trying to prevent. Instead of unifying the State, which Plato and Hitler agree to be a positive thing, art can act as propaganda to stir new and anti-Nazi ideas into the mind of the German population.

Even without propagandistic tendencies, art can be dangerous to an authoritarian society. Hitler, for instance, believed in the purification and beauty of Germans, to what he called the Aryan race. A work of art exhibiting a beautiful dark-haired woman with perfect, god-like qualities would counter-act Hitler’s claim of blonde-haired beauty. The viewers of such an artwork would be exposed to ideas opposite of Hitler’s and possibly spark a rebellion in said viewers. Hitler’s credibility and beliefs, as well as those of the Nazi Regime, would be in question, and the very idea of questioning the government is foreign to an authoritarian society.

As stated in the George Mosse article, “Degeneration was… a term used… to identify the condition of those who had departed from the “normal” because of shattered nerves, inherited abnormalities, or behavioral or sexual excess.” Degenerate art, as explained by Hitler, was any work made by or in the image of any person with physical or mental illness, any person with a criminal record, and anyone who was either Jewish, Bolshevik, or homosexual. In short, degenerate art was any work made in the Cubist, Expressionist, or Surrealist style, or made without the incorporation of Nazi ideology.

One of the artists criticized for his so-called “degenerate art” was Expressionist artist Ernst Ludwig Kirchner. Kirchner had been a soldier for the German army during World War I, but discharged from the military for his nervous breakdowns. He spent two years recovering in a sanatorium after the war before going on to found the Die Brücke group, “bridging the gap between past and present,” and painting his controversial pieces. Perhaps his most famous painting is “Selbstbildnes als Soldat” or “Self-Portrait as a Soldier.” The painting depicts the bust of a man in a German military uniform grimacing at the viewer with a cigarette drooping from his mouth. A nude model in the background awkwardly stands waiting to be painted, surrounded by a sea of bold colors and an abstract artist’s workplace. Both arms of the soldier are held up, and his right hand appears freshly amputated. The painting represents his mental scars from the war, expressed through both the facial expression of the German soldier and his amputated hand. Looking behind the soldier’s eyes, the viewer is able to discern a sense of dehumanization and anger that war has brought on. The amputated hand is meant to show the artist’s inability to work as he once used to, unable to find inspiration in everyday life and unable to concentrate after witnessing the tragedies of war. This negative depiction of the war has the possibility of swaying the viewer’s eye in the direction of anti-war, and thus anti-Nazi, posing a threat to the political structure of Hitler’s empire.

Hitler would determine Kirchner’s art to be degenerate for several reasons. First off, Kirchner was “mentally ill”, or “unstable”. He had spent time in a sanatorium on several occasions and was a founder of the Die Brücke movement, a sect of Expressionism. For Hitler, inclusion in the Expression, Cubist, or Surrealism movement was enough for a piece to be considered “degenerate,” but for the sake of being thorough, I’ll continue. The vibrancy of the colors and “unrealistic” depiction of the piece was unacceptable because they depicted a world as seen through the eyes of someone who’s vision was skewed, and the negative connotations of war alluded to in the painting were intolerable as well because they were seen as going against the stability of the State. In addition to this painting, Kirchner created over 600 other works of art that were confiscated by the Nazi’s, including a collection of prints. The art of printmaking itself was probably seen as degenerate simply because it was not used to create idealistic and realistic forms of the human body, as expected by Hitler.

In Ernst Ludwig Kirchner’s “Self-Portrait as a Soldier,” the nude model in the background is a prime example of beauty without sensuality. The contrasting curvature and angularity of the form heightens the beauty of the feminine figure, while preserving her innocence. She is not seen as an object of lust or sensuality, but instead an Expressionistic figure of the beauty of the female form. The soldier is unable to capture her beauty for the sake of his amputated hand. The depiction of the savageness of war, seen as a threat to the State, is linked to the idea of beauty without sensuality through the soldier and his desire to paint all that is beautiful about the woman.

The separation between Church and State has been an issue since the beginning of the Catholic Church. A few years ago, and still recently, a debate concerning the placement of religious paintings has stirred up controversy. Some people feel that the placement of Christian artworks in City Hall and other governmental buildings is a violation of our Constitutional right to the freedom of religion, while other believe that Christianity is simply a part of American history, and though not all Americans agree with it, no one should deny the works from their places in government offices. Throughout this controversy, the artworks are seen as both politically charged and politically neutral pieces, depending on who is judging them. Some say the presence of the paintings acts as a propagandistic tool to convert all Americans to Christianity, an idea that our Constitution strongly opposes. Others feel that the presence of the paintings is just a test of our right to the freedom of religion; religious articles should be both allowed and accepted everywhere, no matter what religion they represent.