Tawny N post 4

Tawny Najjar

1. Art has always been a means for people to express their emotions, to convey their views, and to put forth a message to the general public. Art can be used as a powerful tool or a weapon, depending on who uses it, and for what purposes. In Nazi Germany, there was much controversy over what role art works would play. Many art pieces were deemed “degenerate,” viewed to be detrimental to the National Socialist movement. The Nazis felt threatened by some of the more controversial and “modern” artworks. In his speech during the inauguration of the “Great Exhibition of German Art,” Hitler stated, “National-Socialism has made it its primary task to rid the German Reich, and thus, the German people and it life of all those influences which are fatal and ruinous to its existence” (Adolf 441). The Nazis despised any hint of abnormality, preying upon the homosexuals, cripples, Jews, and other “less superior” races. Their ideal society was one of uniformity and strict obedience to the social norms. Certain art movements, such as Cubism, Surrealism, Impressionism, and Dadaism, were said to be “only the artifactitious stammerings of men to whom God has denied the grace of a truly artistic talent, and in its place has awarded them the gift of jabbering or deception” (Adolf 440). Such art forms went against the social norms of respectability, a concept that was highly valued and sternly controlled by the Nazis. In Beauty without Sensuality, the author talked about how respectability ensured security, order, and the maintenance of values, taming the chaos that seemed always to threaten society (Beauty 25). The author later stated, “Works by modern artists were treated not as evidence of individual creativity but as representative of something undesirable…it was a reaction of a society that felt itself to be under a constant threat, a society, moreover, that was bonded together by respectability and the security that it radiated” (Beauty 30). The Nazis depended on the idea of respectability to form a cohesiveness for their society, a way to keep everyone in line, and block out all of the thoughts and ideas that would go against what the National Socialist party said and believed. The “modern art” gave people a voice, a way to express their views and beliefs that were outside the realms of that “respectable” bubble. For example, jazz was highly disliked by the Nazis, mostly because that genre of music is based on improvisation, on what the musician feels at the moment. This genre, along with modern artwork, took away the firm control that the Nazis had over how to influence the German people. The Nazis had a specific message to send to the people, and they could not allow individualists to take away that power and influence. By allowing that art to become popular, the Nazis would be relinquishing some of their power.

2. One of the impressionist artists during that time was Otto Mueller (1874-1930). He was a German painter and printmaker, whose mother was rumored to have been a gypsy. On an interesting note, Hitler despised gypsies as well, and had many of them killed during the Holocaust. Mueller’s most common theme was models painted in nature.

In one of his works, “Boy in front of two girls, one standing, one seated” (1918-1919), Mueller uses a natural color scheme to bring forth the essence of nature. The subjects are all in the nude, and as the title says, two are standing and one is sitting down. No one is turned toward the artist, or the viewer; they are either turned to the side or facing away – not in shame or embarrassment, but as if they do not even know anyone else exists outside of their own little world. There are no distinct faces; they are blurred and nondescript. However, the title is confusing and seems slightly contradicting, because it states that there are three subjects in the painting, but it appears that there are four. On the left, there seems to be two people, standing side-by-side, on being a woman, and the other unidentifiable. Mueller was said to paint his subjects in nature, removing all the realistic descriptions, so that the focus was more on being one with nature. The beauty in this painting is very simplistic – natural, innocent, peaceful. There is no bold pretense of sexuality, even though the subjects are naked. Mueller deviates from reality by giving the subjects no identity, no purpose. They seem to be basking in nature, enjoying their freedom and openness.

2a. The Nazis used the term “degenerate” to label the artworks that “stray all too easily into the realm of folly” (Beauty 25). They believed these “abnormal” pieces of art to be destructive to the German society, because the artworks put unwanted ideas into the minds of the German people. The Nazis wanted regularity and strict principles for the people to follow. The term degenerate was first used as a medical term to describe the “condition of those who had departed from the ‘normal’ because of shattered nerves, inherited abnormalities, or behavioral or sexual excess…such conditions signaled the start of a process that would inevitably lead to destruction” (Beauty 26).

2b. The artwork composed by Mueller was deemed degenerate because it strayed from the ideal beauty and reality that the Nazis worked so hard to maintain. Mueller’s painting idealized being one with nature, giving in to those primitive desires, and developing a more simplistic way of life. The Nazis were all in favor of progression and improving society, while Mueller seemed to be saying that people should just enjoy how life is and embrace who and what they are. The nude subjects present the idea that humans are controlled by nature; they are vulnerable. Hitler wanted to be viewed as being all-powerful and all-knowing. He would not want to be thought of as being susceptible to the forces of nature.

2c. The body was the main site of accusations about degeneracy because it had to do specifically with people. For example, when a figure is painted in the nude, it usually makes them seem more vulnerable, more capable of being hurt, controlled, and most of all, of being interpreted. The subject cannot hide themselves as well when they are naked. In his speech, Hitler used the body as a metaphor, by saying, “an already thoroughly diseased body” (handout p1), when he talked about Germany being bombarded with modern art, after just losing the war. Hitler viewed Germany as a body, a body that he would not allow to be vulnerable.

2d. In Beauty without Sensuality, George Mosse argued that beauty with sensuality was a threat to the social order, a rejection of social and sexual norms. On page twenty-six, he stated, “The ideal of beauty played a dominant role as a symbol of morality, extending far beyond the realm of art. Beauty helped to maintain control over the passions.” This ideal beauty depicted how the German society wanted to have itself viewed. It wanted to be viewed as strong, powerful, devoid of any vulnerability and abnormalities. The paintings and statues that depicted naked males were perceived as sexless, beyond the personal and the sensual, and regarded as “dynamic, promising to bring about a timeless order and a cure to an ailing world” (Beauty 27). However, women were usually clothed, or the pictures were of mothers, in an attempt to take out any sexuality.

3. This picture represents one of the most heated culture wars of our time. The debate concerning abortion has been highly controversial, and very sensitive, because it involves everyday people. This image depicts a lifeless fetus, held in a person’s hand. It was on a website that was against abortion. It shows death at its harshest, merciless and cold. From everything that I have read about the Nazis trying to censor artwork that was contradictory to their ideals, this image would have been highly detrimental to their regime. Hitler sought power and control, and one of the ultimate forms of control is power over death, being able to choose life or death. During the Nazi’s rule, Hitler had the power to choose whether people lived or died. However, the consequences of these actions were not highly publicized. With abortion, some one has the power to choose whether a human lives or dies. This image shows the consequences of the decision to take a life away. The picture is ugly and painful to look at. It makes the viewer’s stomach churn, and brings forth a feeling of distaste. From looking at the image, some questions that come to mind are, what happens when people are given too much power? What happens when that power goes to their heads? This image shows the negative affects of having a lot of power.