By (Katie) Nashatan Tangpiroonthum - Thailand
Even before the dawn of human civilization, man and art went hand in hand. It was a tool to express, a tool to create, and as humanity progressed, so did art. Under the hands of the Nazi Party, art became a weapon of propaganda. Hitler and his advisors recognised the potential art had and used it to champion his ideology (Barron, 1991).
“Such complete monopolisation of the entire creative potential of a people…to the purpose of the leaders of collective society did not exist before the present century.” (New York Oxford University Press, 1954). By controlling art, the Nazis aimed to shape public opinion, normalise their hateful ideology, and rally support for their regime.
Flourishing Art in the Weimar Republic
Following the abdication of Kaiser Wilheim II and the collapse of the Second Reich at the end of the First World War, Germany transitioned from a monarchy to a democracy for the very first time - this period was arguably an era of relative prosperity, known as the Weimar Republic. During this period, progressive politics and unprecedented levels of freedom emerged in Germany, particularly evident in the flourishing of modern art at an extraordinary pace. The 1920s experienced an increase in art movements that deviated from traditional and comprehensible realism. But all of this came to an end in 1933 when the National Socialists, commonly referred to as the Nazis, seized power in Germany. This period was known as the Third Reich, which was infamous for its brutal regime - its authoritarian nature under the National Socialist Party meant that Nazism penetrated every corner of German culture. From government policies down to school curriculums, the Nazis reshaped every element of German society to fit their ideology of a perfect German Empire. To propagate Nazism, the ideology needed to become ingrained within German culture, and where else to start, if not through the Throughout the annals of history, art has stood as an ever-present force, wielding its power as a medium of communication.The Nazi Party not only imposed its beliefs onto existing artworks but also employed art as a propaganda tool, helping advance their racial agendas (Barron, 1991). The brief flourishing of modern art in the Weimar Republic was brutally cut short by the Nazi regime's rise to power, leading to the suppression and demonization of these artistic movements.
The Nazi Assault on Modern Art
The Nazi Party's disdain for modern art during the Third Reich stemmed not only from its racist ideology and its pursuit of a culturally "pure" Germany, but also manifested in active efforts to suppress and demonise it. This alignment with neoclassical aesthetics, which the regime deemed to epitomise their vision, extended beyond mere aesthetic preference (Barron, 1991). The infamous “Entartete Kunst” (which translates to “Degenerate Art Exhibition”) served as an example of this calculated manipulation. Over 650 works by artists like Picasso, Van Gogh, and Kandinsky were confiscated from museums and displayed in a chaotic, poorly lit manner, accompanied by derogatory labels (The Victoria and Albert Museum, 2023). This exhibition aimed to publicly ridicule and condemn modern art, portraying it as a symptom of cultural decline and linking it to mental illness and Jewish influence, further cementing the regime's narrative and solidifying their control over German culture (The Victoria and Albert Museum, 2023). The persecution of artists deemed "degenerate" further underscored this agenda. Stripped of their teaching positions, forbidden from exhibiting their work, and even facing arrest and imprisonment, many talented artists were forced into exile, internal exile, or driven to create artwork in secret (Barron, 1991). This systematic suppression of artistic expression aimed to silence dissent and ensure complete control over the cultural and social landscape of Germany.
Understanding the changes instigated by the Nazis requires grasping the context preceding their rise. The years 1918 to 1933 marked a distinct period, notably the prosperous Golden Age of Weimar spanning 1923 to 1929. During this period of economic boom, cultural life prospered. Museums that exhibited modern art could be found all over Germany, from Berlin to Frankfurt, and public and private enthusiasm for contemporary art bloomed. The lack of censorship meant new art movements such as New Objectivity came to be: New Objectivity was an art movement that focused on the objective world's unsentimental reality as opposed to the more widely known romantic arts (Barron, 1991). Works by artists such as Otto Dix were estranged from the conservative Germans; his drypoint painting, Kriegskrüppel (War Cripples), painted veterans in a light never seen before (Barron, 1991). Unlike the heroic representations that were later displayed in the Große Deutsche Kunstausstellung (The Great German Art Exhibition), Dix’s work depicted the war-torn men with amputations and unappealing deformities - there was a clear, anti-war sentiment (Barron, 1991). These unfiltered and honest viewpoints were commonly found in the artworks produced during the Weimar era. Most avant-garde (experimental type of art) artists identified with socialism and such political views were seen in their art. The end of the war also assisted a new wave of Modernists - people who sought new meaning and value in life after the destruction of their old values by the war.
Architect Walter Gropius claimed, “A world has been destroyed; we must seek a radical solution,” thus, he established the Bauhaus School of Design in 1919. The Bauhaus Movement explored aesthetics, unlike any past traditional movements. Most Bauhaus pieces were abstract and geometric, void of the extravagant designs found in 19th-century ornaments (Barron, 1991). As their creators were generally progressives, more and more abstract art was identified with internationalism and progressive politics (Barron, 1991). This, unfortunately, caught the attention of traditional, conservative nationalists who detested these new ‘alien’ changes, in particular, Adolf Hitler. The rejection of avant-garde art was not only an aesthetic preference but a reflection of the Nazi Party’s deep-rooted racist principles. Nationalists like Adolf Hitler did not particularly welcome these new changes with open arms. Undoubtedly, shaping the culture of the envisioned German Empire they wished to create was a matter of utmost importance, requiring meticulous scrutiny. Nazi ideologies seeped into the way they defined art and, consequently, their perception of beauty in art (Sauquet, 2014). Thus, as soon as the Nazis came into power, they immediately launched their attacks on the art they deemed ‘degenerate’; the Nazis detested this new wave of avant-garde art and sought to devalue it (Sauquet, 2014). Modern art was abstract and promoted varied interpretations and individualism, which was a complete antithesis to the nationalistic realism that was more comprehensible to the average German (Sauquet, 2014). Hitler himself was disgusted by “the outlandish use of colour and a distorted perspective.” The German word for degenerate, entarte, is a biological term defining a plant or animal that has changed so much that it no longer belongs to its original species (Sauquet, 2014). More often than not, avant-garde art was regarded as not German and, instead, alien. Many thought of it as “overrun by degenerates, Jews, and other insidious influences (Sauquet, 2014).” It was a well-known fact that the Nazi Party was obsessed with the idea of racial hygiene, the act of maintaining a pure Aryan race. The Nazi Party used this racist principle as the fundamental basis for defining art.
The connection between art and German nationalism emerged years before Hitler assumed control. In 1920, Bettina Feistal-Rohmeder, a passionate member of the Nazi Party, established the German Art Society. It was part of the völkisch movement (directly translated into the term “folkish”) and aimed to combat “cultural modernism” while promoting “racially pure German art” (Sauquet, 2014). The notion of racial purity in Germany stemmed largely from pseudoscientific ideas of eugenics popularized in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, coupled with nationalist ideologies that sought to define a "pure" Germanic race as superior. This alliance between art groups and the party persisted and even strengthened after Hitler took control of Germany in 1933. During the Third Reich, the Nazi Party and affiliated art groups promoted idealistic art movements like neoclassicism, which had long been revered as perfection (Sauquet, 2014). Neoclassicism especially suited the Nazi Party’s aims as Greek and Roman models were the ideal imagery the party wanted to appeal to its people (Sauquet, 2014). Greek sculptors like Phidias, known for creating majestic statues like the Zeus at Olympia. These sculptures portrayed gods and heroes with perfect proportions, reflecting an idealised view of the human form. While the Nazis adopted this focus on physical perfection, they applied it to their own concept of the "Aryan race," often exaggerating and distorting anatomical features to fit their ideology (Kasher, 1992). These ‘racially pure’ art were an easy-to-understand depiction that exemplified the German race. Consequently, they were also the official art that dominated the Great German Art Exhibition, an exhibition that displayed Nazi-approved art (Sauquet, 2014). Additionally, the party also promoted the idea of ‘beauty without sensuality’; thus, Nazi paintings and sculptures embodied proper morality and sexual behaviour (Sauquet, 2014).
The Degenerate Art exhibition, whose sole existence was to propagandise, avant-garde art was used as a foil to the neoclassical (Sauquet, 2014). The Nazi Party spread the idea that the destruction of respectability leads to the destruction of society and, consequently, the destruction of a nation (Sauquet, 2014). The Degenerate Art exhibit was their proof that they “rescued” the nation from that path of destruction by the Jewish people. The enemies of respectability, it was said, could not control themselves (Sauquet, 2014). They were creatures of instinct with unbridled passions that threatened society. This idea of respectability exists in a continuum; the same values are perpetuated even in the 21st century (Sauquet, 2014). If present-day educated men are susceptible to this rhetoric, one could imagine what the war-torn, radicalised German nationalists in the 20th century thought. The growing antisemitic sentiments were further spread by the Nazi Party’s use of art as a weapon of propaganda (Sauquet, 2014). The manipulation of art by the Nazi regime exposes the timeless danger of weaponizing cultural expression for hateful ends.
Racist principles were not the only foundation on which the Nazi Party based their attitude toward modern art, and consequently, the juxtaposition between avant-garde art and neoclassical art was not the only comparison the Nazi Party utilised to forward their goals (Sauquet, 2014). The Nazi’s scheme against modernism also included the comparison between avant-garde art and the art of the insane (Sauquet, 2014). This methodology was used as a way to prove the degeneracy of modern art (Sauquet, 2014). Works by contemporary artists were placed alongside those made by the “mentally ill”; this was seen on several pages of the illustrated brochure handed out to accompany the Degenerate Art Exhibition (Sauquet, 2014). Not only did this impact the views on Modern art, but it also strengthened the idea that the regime “saved” Germans from the rule of “inferior people” (Sauquet, 2014). Utilising the technique of contrasting denigration and condemnation became a fundamental tool in the Nazi campaign against anything they deemed as inferior and undeserving of a place in their racially pure Germany (Sauquet, 2014).
Conclusion
To conclude, the Nazi Party’s values were virtually the main reason for their attitude towards Modern art. Non-conforming artists encountered persecution, censorship, and imprisonment, which not only shaped Nazi Germany's artistic environment but also contributed to a societal trend of promoting the suppression of diverse ideas or oppositions to any idea promoted by the Nazis. The racist theories on which they based their values fueled their vicious attitude towards the art they deemed as inferior. The authoritarian nature of the regime meant censorship and propaganda were needed to propagate these ideas to civilians. The Nazis employed artwork both as a tool to advance their agenda and as a cautionary example, using the suppression of progressive art to warn individuals of the repercussions of deviating from Nazi ideology.
Bibliography
Barron, Stephanie. "Degenerate Art: The Fate of the Avant-Garde in Nazi Germany." Los Angeles County Museum of Art, 17 Feb. 1991, www.lacma.org/sites/default/files/reading_room/New%20PDF%20from%20Images%20Output-10compressed5.pdf. Accessed 21 Feb. 2024.
Sauquet, Mathilde. "Propaganda Art in Nazi Germany: The Revival of Classicism." Trinity College, 1 Jan. 2014, digitalrepository.trincoll.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1050&context=fypapers. Accessed 21 Feb. 2024.
(2023, May 7). "Entartete Kunst: The Nazis' inventory of 'degenerate art. The Victoria and Albert Museum. Retrieved February 29, 2024, from https://www.vam.ac.uk/articles/explore-entartete-kunst-the-nazis-inventory-of-degenerate-art#?xywh=-58%2C2962%2C730%2C491
Kasher, Steven. “The Art of Hitler.” October, vol. 59, 1992, pp. 49–85. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/778831. Accessed 29 Feb. 2024.
Comments