laura post 4

1) Individuality of thought is far more capable than any nuclear warhead or biological weapon can ever be of enacting change or resolutions within a society. The National Socialists Party saw the threatening nature of such difference in mind and realized the only means for Germany being a world power would be to extinguish any existing flames of intellect. All forms of art are sound examples of how all brands of people construct their personalized ideas and sentiments into the tangible. Thus, the German autocracy utilized their power by ridding their society of any art that provoked thought or sensuality. In regards to the artistic movement of Expressionism in the early German 20th century, Goebbels, in probable agreement with all other National Socialist elites, saw the “spirit and chaos” of this particular movement “as analogous to the spirit of Nazi youth.” (Barron, 12) The art considered to be avant-garde work was not pure German and therefore should cease to exist in the eyes of those who adhered strictly to Nazism ideals. For any art associated with intellect, individuality, or sexual appeal was far too detrimental to any cultural “advancement” sought by the National Socialists. What was rather desired in this state was art “that could easily be understood and whose depictions of men and women exemplified the Germanic race”, which included the Neoromantic and Neoclassical art. (Mosse, 25) Thus, art that excited was eradicated, leaving repeated styles of art that did nothing but prohibit the advancement Hitler said he desired for Germany.
2) Lyonel Feininger was an American Expressionist and Cubist painter who taught at the Bauhaus during the reign of Hitler in Germany. His early works included comic strips that appeared in early German newspapers and Expressionist style art, but his later works involved the analytical forms of Cubism. “Lady in Mauve” depicts a woman, obviously in mauve, parading the streets of what can be interpreted as a city. She is painted with very few curves and rather contains long sharp lines and angles. This allows the object of criticism to possess an heir about her that signifies her own personal empowerment. “I am woman hear me roar” comes to mind while engaged in her cubic beauty. I imagine her strutting down the now darkening city sidewalks displaying her lack of a man’s shoulder to rest upon proudly. Her beauty can be found in her individuality. The Lady in Mauve is not like the rest of the European women of her day. Deviation from reality is most readily in place as her squared chest and blocked hands do nothing to depict what an actual woman may look like. Yet, I admire her tall and broad physique and her ability to stand as tall as the buildings that she rather surrounds.
“Uprising” displays a group of citizens in a town racing down the streets in various colors and figure forms. Feininger attempts to create a different bodily shape for almost every character in this painting. There is obviously an uprising in amidst, yet we cannot be certain as to its origins. The most prominent figure in the painting stands boldly in red and yellow coloring, marching with what can be interpreted as a pitchfork that has a red cloth clinging to its sharp ends. This particular figure’s face appears to have more monster or skeleton like qualities than an actual human. His flesh appears to be white with dark circles and lines for his mouth and eyes. Many of the other characters in the painting have very undistinguishable facial features, but all appear to be in a state of chaos and haste.
a) “And what do you create?” Hitler questions, “Misshapen cripples and cretins, women who can arouse only revulsion…as the expression of all that molds and sets its stamp on the present age.” (Mosse, 25) Degeneracy was all that involved the “immoral” behavior and “abnormal” sexuality and thus, those “who refused to conform to the moral dictates of society were labeled degenerate.” (Mosse, 25) The views that were uncomfortable to society were most likely those under this particular label. We can conclude that the universal questioning of “Is this really art?” that applies both now and in the time of the Nazi reign, is important in regarding the actions of the Nazi party with the artwork of that day. The art that was placed in Entartete Kunst exhibit was that of the sort that caused people to tilt their heads and ponder on what was being portrayed in the canvas or various mediums. Hitler used this succecptable nature of the masses to his advantage by solidifying the silent notions of the German public of whether the modern art was actual art and positive for the state.
b) The “body politic” is transformed in both of Feininger’s artworks shown above. In the “Lady in Mauve” a woman is depicted in a very “manly” like manner, according to the early 20th century standards. She consists of radical lines, angles, and shapes that aren’t of the norm in demonstrating a woman figure. This gives way to an unwanted deeper interpretation of the painting in the eyes of Hitler and his regime. Both the man and human form in the “Lady in Mauve” is threatened. “Uprising” demonstrates just that very well as the characters in the painting act very chaotic and exhibit lunacy. These would be the very reasons Hitler would label this work degenerate. He sees it as providing ideas of rebellion through both its title and even more so in its visual nature. Also, the characters in the painting do not really resemble actual human figures, but rather monsters or disfigured beings. Hitler wanted art to show what society should desire to have and in many cases, the approved art demonstrated bodies with perfect physiques that left nothing in question. By ridding of these types of modern art, there were no “crazy” ideas for the long-standing “good” German public to refute. Yet, by not adding anything innovative to Germany’s culture, Hitler would provide regression.
c) Hitler associated the entire state of Germany as being a single body and therefore each inhabitant of Germany a contributor to the health of that body. He sought to rid of all of the “degenerates” in order to attain the utmost health. Hitler was very persuasive in using this technique, because the body is a very relatable subject in which anyone can imagine an illness of the body and its effect on the production in the “giant human” named Germany.
d) Adolf Hitler claimed, “What good fortune for those in power that the people do not think”. He indeed decided to rid Germany of all “degenerate” art, a large part including art that provoked or displayed sensuality. The absence of emotion is what Hitler longed for in his “perfect” society and he decided to eliminate the threat of this from the constituency by not allowing art that motivated feelings.
3) The modern artwork, “Art and Sex”, by Karl Zipser, exemplifies authoritarian worries to the very extreme. The man and woman are engaging in mutual masturbation, where the woman is arousing the man and his genitals. Sex is most definitely not left to question in this painting and also the emotions that ride alongside. I see that this piece of art demonstrates the evolving nature of our society, as sex is becoming less taboo, as it should. Ignorance is not present, due to the fact that you are fully aware of what is going on in the painting. “Art and Sex” is both informative and creative in the way that the sexual act is being displayed.