"Decent"vs.

"Degenerate"Art
The National Socialist Case
MARY-MARGARET GOGGIN
W hen
artistic
censorship
is
discussed,
the case of
National Socialist
(Nazi) Germany frequently
comes to mind. Nazi
Germany's
art
policies
of
the 1930s and
early
1940s and their
consequences provide
a
historical
perspective
onwhat
may happen
when
government
determines what art is decent or
indecent, uplifting
or"de-
generate."
Precedents forartistic
censorship
inNazi
Germany
can
be found
during
the W eimar
Republic,
as the
following
incidents indicate. InBerlinin
1928,
alocal court filed
charges
of
blasphemy against George
Grosz forseveral draw-
ings published
inanalbum titled
Hintergrund (backdrop).
Although originally
found
guilty,
Grosz was
ultimately
ac-
quitted
on
appeal.
The most
provocative
of these
drawings
was one of Christ
wearing
a
gas
mask and
boots, captioned,
"Keep your
mouth shut and do
yourduty"(fig. 1).1
Grosz's
drawing
is echoed inarecent
photographic image
with a
female nude
(fig. 2) by
the Americanartist Barbara
Kruger,
one of
many
U.S. artists who risk
censorship
because of their
engagement
insimilarmoral confrontations. Inotherattacks
onmodernart
during
the W eimar
period,
the Munich
chapter
of the Reichsverband bildenderKiinstler
(federal
association
of
artists) protested
the Berlin
Nationalgalerie's purchase
of
-'p
diI
-:X.
iiiii...............
FIG.
1 GeorgeGrosz, Christ with Gas Mask, 1928, crayon
on
paper,
17?8 x
221/4
inches.
?
Estateof
GeorgeGrosz/VAGA, New York, 1991.
several van
Gogh paintings
in
1929,
and in1930 the director
of the Stadtischesmuseum inZwickau was dismissed be-
cause of his
support
formodernart.2
Evenbefore Hitlerbecame chancellorof the German
Reich on
January 30, 1933,
local National Socialist leaders
were
censoring
modernart. In1930 W ilhelm
Frick,
National
Socialist ministerof the interiorand ministerof
popular
educationinthe
province
of
Thuringia,
ordered the removal
of the works of Ernst
Barlach,
Paul
Klee,
and
Lyonel
Feininger
from the collectionof the Schlossmuseum in
W eimar,
as well as the destructionof OskarSchlemmer's
murals and reliefs inthe formerBauhaus.3
Although
these attacks onmodernart were not new in
Germany,
underHitler
they
became more
systematic
and
continuous. One of Hitler's
priorities
was to
organize
and
centralize the institutions
necessary
to
carry
out Nazi art
policies.
Inorderto do
anything
connected with the
creation,
buying,
or
selling
of
art,
one had to
belong
to the Kunstkam-
mer
(chamber
of
art). By
the late 1930s there were around
forty-two
thousand
members, excludingJews, Communists,
orother"enemies"of the state.4
"Acceptable"
artists did not
suddenly appear
afterthe National Socialists assumed
power,
norwere
they necessarily
schooled inNational Socialist art
theories.
Rather, they
were
already creating
art that corre-
sponded
incontent and
style
to-orat least did not conflict
with-the National Socialists' ideals and
goals.
Provisions
were evenmade to educate the
public
inmatters of
art,
under
the
auspices
of the Deutsche Arbeitsfront
(German
labor
front)
and an
organization
called Kraft durch Freude
(strength through joy).5
Firmly believing
that culture is the cornerstone of
any
enduringsociety,
Hitler
recognized
that art must
play
a
major
role inthe
building
of his ideal Germannation. He
articulated the
goals
of what he considered true Germanart:
it must
develop
from the collective soul of the
people
and
express its
identity;
it must be national, not
international;
it
must be
comprehensible
to the
people;
it must not be a
passingfad,
but strive to be
eternal;
it must be
positive,
not
critical of
society;
it must be
elevating,
and
represent
the
good,
the
beautiful,
and the
healthy.6
Art that was
encouraged
and
supported
had to reflect
W INTER 1991
84
Forget
moralit
Forget
heroes"
FIG
. 2 Barbara
Kruger,
Untitled
(It's
our
pleasure
to
disgust you), 1990, photographic screenprint
on
paper,
192 x 276 inches.
Courtesy Mary
Boone
Gallery,
New York.
the
spirit
and ideals of the German
people
as the National
Socialists envisioned them. Peasants and artisans
engaged
in
theirlabors were
popularsubjects.
W omenas mothers
(fig.
3)
were
especially important
because
they represented
the
future of the
"Aryan
race."
Landscapes symbolized
the "fa-
therland."Female nudes oftenillustrated the
beauty
of
healthy
bodies
(fig. 4).
Not to be
forgotten
were the "heroic"
subjects,
which included not
only soldiers,
but also workers
(fig. 5)
and
images
of Hitler. In
sculpture,
the works of Arno
Brekerand Josef Thorak
conveyed
heroism onamonumental
scale.
Many
works that were endowed with
significant
or
profound titles, however,
were
simple subjects
with no ulte-
rior
meaning
intended
by
theircreators.7
The names of most of the artists who
produced
these
works are
forgotten.
At the
time,
evenHitlerseemed to
acknowledge
the lack of
greatness
inthe art exhibited at the
first "Grosse Deutsche
Kunstausstellung"(great
Germanart
exhibition)
in
1937,
whenhe
said,
"I HAVE NO
DOUBT,
THE ALMIGHTY W ILL ELEVATE AFEW FROM THIS
MULTITUDE OF DECENT CREATORS OF ART INTO
THE STARRY REALM OF THE
IMMORTAL,
DIVINELY
INSPIREDARTISTS OF THE GREAT PAST."8 The Na-
tional Socialists
promoted
art that was
"beautiful,""decent,"
and
"good,"
but theirenforcement of these standards and
their
silencing
of
nonconforming
artists had a
devastating
effect onmodernart and artists in
Germany.
Inthe National Socialists' anti-modern-art
campaign,
artists who are now
recognized
as the
great
names inmodern
Germanart were characterized as enemies of the German
people;
theirwork was labeled
"degenerate"
because
they
did
not meet the artistic criteriaoutlined
by
Hitlerand other
National Socialist leaders. At the end of the nineteenth
century,
inhis book
Degeneration,
Max Nordau had
applied
the term
"degeneration"
to art.9
Later,
inKunst und Rasse
(art
and
race), 1928,
Paul
Schultze-Naumburgdeveloped
his
theories of the aesthetic connectionbetweenartistic
styles
and the
supposed
racial characteristics of the artists.
10o
Such
works
provided
Hitlerwith the theoretical
precedents
on
which he formulated his ownideas about the role of race inart
and the role of art in
society;
more
importantly,
he
pursued
programs
to
implement
those ideas.
Hitlerand the National Socialists
recognized
that there
was analmost
unbridgeable
chasm of
incomprehension
be-
tweenthe
public
and modern
art,
which
they exploited early
oninorderto consolidate their
power
overthe
people.11 They
manipulated
the
public by focusing
its accumulated
political
and economic dissatisfactions and frustrations on
scape-
goats, includingartists,
as well as the
dealers, critics,
and
ART JOURNAL
FIG. 3 Adolf W issel, Kalenberg
Farm
Family, 1939, oil.
Courtesy
theArchiv
fOr
Kunst und Geschichte, Berlin.
Frc.
4 Johannes Beutner, Timeof
Ripeness. Photograph reproduced
from Art
intheThird Reich (New York: Pantheon, 1979,
134),
with
permission.
museum directors who
supported
them. The National Social-
ists made modernart a
symbol
of
corruption
and
degeneracy.
Supposedly
of "Semitic
inspiration,"
modernart was also
portrayed
as
representing
Kulturbolschewismus or"cultural
Bolshevism."2 The
purge
of modernart was
not, however,
limited to the art
produced by Jewish, foreign,
orCommunist
artists. W hateverthe Nazis claimed undermined "desirable"
aesthetic, social, cultural,
or
political values,
or
physical
or
racial
ideals,
was to be eliminated from German
society;
this
included all the modern
movements,
such as
Expressionism,
Cubism, Futurism, Constructivism,
and Dada.13
The National Socialists claimed
that,
because modern
artists considered
everything
suitable as a
subject
for
art,
"the
beautiful,
the heroic and the
pure"
were
relegated
to the
same level as "the
ugly,
the base and the
erotic,"resulting
in
anamoral art.14 Modernart was thus
perceived
as athreat to
German
morality.
The Nazis characterized
many
modern
images, Expressionist
ones in
particular,
as
"pornographic,"
appealing
to the basest instincts of
humanity.15
This moraliz-
ing
was not
only misleading,
but also
hypocritical,
since
many
of the countless
images
of nude womenwith
perfect
bodies that were
officially
sanctioned and exhibited
during
those
years depict
them in
passive
orsubmissive
roles,
implicitly,
if not
explicitly,
as sex
objects
available forthe
pleasure
of men
(fig. 6).16
The National Socialist ideas onart were based on
abstract theories whose catchwords were
"soul,""genius,"
"tragedy,"
"race."17
They
considered "race and homeland"or
Blut und Boden
(blood
and
soil)
the basis of aGermanic art
that would
express
the true
spiritual
values of the
Aryanrace,
purified
of all Bolshevist and Semitic influences. The
practi-
cal
application
of these
vague
notions to acoherent art
policy
was
difficult, however,
and led to
many
contradictions and
inconsistencies.
Although
the National Socialists claimed to
encourage
anart that was a
product
of the Germanic
spirit,
they rejected
the art of Germanartists such as Emil Nolde
(fig. 7)
and
Barlach,
who were at the centerof adebate within
the
party
overthe Germanic and Nordic characterof German
Expressionism.
In
fact,
this debate overart
policy
reflected a
broader
struggle
for
power
withinthe
party.18
Alfred Rosen-
berg, party "philosopher"
and
competitor
with theministerof
propaganda, Joseph Goebbels,
forcontrol of art
policy,
noted
that evenNational Socialists could havedifferences of
opin-
ioninmatters of
art, citing
thedebateoverNoldeand Bar-
lach.
Rosenbergacknowledged
that both artists weretal-
ented,
but asserted that
they
did not seek theNordicideal of
physical beauty necessary
to the
development
of aNational
Socialist
aesthetic.'9
This Nordicideal was based not
only
on
presumed Aryanfeatures,
but also ontheGreek ideal of the
perfect, healthy,
athletic
body,
to which neitherNolde's nor
Barlach's
figures corresponded.
In
contrast,
someintellectuals and
younger
members of
the
party
defended
Expressionist
art as a
spiritual
forcethat
expressed
theGermanic
character,
whileothers believed that
W INTER 1991
86
FIG. 5 Arthur
Kampf, RollingMill, 1939, oil.
Courtesy
theArchiv
fuir
Kunst und Geschichte, Berlin.
FIG. 6 JohannSchult, Expectation. Photograph reproduced
from Art inthe
Third Reich (New York: Pantheon, 1979,134), with
permission.
.,Off nbarusngen. deutMcher
Rel
gieolit"
hadiedeRvn
jidischen
reunseindlern. ile
Presseccinmal| solhe:hn
Die
Titel lauten:
,,Christus and
die
Sitnderin", ,,TodW
der
Mariaaus
Agypten".
,,Kremzbahnahme" and
,Christus".
Die' ,K0instler"
heiIten: Nolde,
Morgner
and
Kurt Ih.
FIG. 7
Page
9 of Entartete"Kunst"
Ausstellungsfiuhrer, guide
to theexhibition
"DegenerateArt,"showing, top
and middle, Emil Nolde, Christ and theSinner
and Death of
Mary
of
Egypt,
and bottom, works
by
W ilhelm
Morgner
and Fritz
Kurth.
Courtesy
theArchivfurKunst und Geschichte, Berlin.
the
revolutionary
characterof
Expressionism
could be linked
to the National Socialist revolution.20 EvenGoebbels
appre-
ciated the works of some
Expressionists, particularly
Barlach
and Nolde.
However,
whenHitler
expressed
his
disapproval
of some Nolde watercolors that the architect Albert
Speer
had
installed inhis
remodeling
of Goebbels's
residence,
Goeb-
bels ordered them removed.21 Inthe
end,
the
Expressionists,
includingNolde,
who was himself amemberof the Nazi
party,
lost the battle to have theirart
accepted
as
"Germanic."
The Germanauthorities
recognized
the
propaganda
value of
art,
both as atool intheir
negative campaign
to
denigrate
modernart and intheir
promotion
of a"new and
true Germanart."Inhis
speech
of
July 18, 1937, dedicating
the Haus derDeutschenKunst and the Grosse Deutsche
Kunstausstellung
in
Munich,
Hitlercontrasted the
"degener-
ate"modern-art movements
(see fig. 7)
with the art that "will
impress you
as
beingbeautiful, and,
above
all,
as
decent,
and which
you
will sense to be
good"(seefigs. 3-6).22
The
propagandacampaignagainst
modernart was
dramatized with the infamous exhibition"Entartete Kunst"
(degenerate art),
which
opened
inMunich on
July 19, 1937,
and was showninthe
larger
cities inall
regions
of
Germany.
Inhis
speech
the
previous day
Hitlerhad called onthe
German
people
to be the
judges
of German
art,
and issued a
warning
to the
"pitiful misfortunates,""incompetents,"
and
"art criminals"whose works were
hunghaphazardly
onthe
walls of the
"Degenerate
Art"show
(fig. 8)
that he was
going
to "cleanhouse": "National-Socialism has made it its
primary
task to rid the German
Reich,
and
thus,
the German
people
and its life of all those influences which are fatal and ruinous
to its existence."23 Those influences included the dealers and
critics,
as well as the
artists,
whom Hitlerreferred to as
"cliques
of
babblers,
dilettantes and art
crooks,"
and
"pre-
historic
stone-age
culture-vultures and art stammerers."24
Onorders from
Hitler,
the
"Degenerate
Art"exhibition
had been
organized by
Adolf
Ziegler, president
of the Reichs-
kammerderbildendenKiinste
(reich
chamberof visual
arts),
although
this was not the first exhibitionof its kind.25 The
purposes
of this exhibitionwere to show the
public
what
constituted
"degenerate"art,
to indoctrinate the
public
about
its
dangers,
and to demonstrate that this
"corruption"
of art
was not
just
anaberrationor
experiment,
but an
organized
F I G. 8
Joseph
Goebbels
visiting
the
"Degenerate
Art"exhibitioninBerlin,
February 27,1938. Courtesy
theArchivfurKunst und Geschichte, Berlin.
88
attempt by
Bolshevists and Jews to create cultural and
politi-
cal
anarchy by undermining
traditional values.26 Visitors to
the exhibitionwere also reminded how much
public money-
ininflated Deutschmarks-had been
paid
forthis
"degener-
ate"art.
W orks inthe exhibitionof
"degenerate"
art had been
confiscated from German
public
collections.27
They
were
described ina
guide
and onwall labels ina
derogatory
and
inflammatory
manner. The exhibitionwas divided into nine
categories,
each
representing
some
"negative"aspect
of
modernart.28 W orks inone
group supposedly encouraged
political anarchy through
artistic
anarchy by depicting
the
strugglingworking
class and
capitalists
who
"mockingly
make
light
of the
misery
of the workers."Another
group
was
characterized as Bolshevist
propagandaagainst military
con-
scription
for
portraying
soldiers as murderers or
victims,
for
example, contrary
to the National Socialist ideal of aheroic
art;
one such "undesirable"work was Otto Dix's W ar
Cripples
(1920, destroyed),
which
depicts
a
grotesque procession
of
mutilated soldiers.
The exhibitionalso
denigrated
the
religious
works of
such artists as Nolde
(see fig. 7), referring
to them inthe
guide
as akind of
"hocus-pocus"
that makes an"insolent
mockery"
of
religion.
The works inanother
group
were
sup-
posed
to
represent
the immoral side of "Bolshevist"
art,
in
which the "whole world is one
big
whorehouse"
(fig. 9).
Some
of the works were called
"nigger
art"
(fig. 10),
with the
Africanand South Seaislander
supposedly exemplifying
the
undesirable racial ideals of modernart.29
Finally,
there was
a
group
of works characterized as "total
insanity"
that in-
cluded
examples
of abstract art.
The Nazis
suppressed
art whose content
they perceived
as athreat to traditional values and institutions.
Images
of
prostitutes by
Ernst
Ludwig
Kirchner
(seefig. 9)
or
Grosz,
for
example,
were criticized for
glorifying
their
subjects, thereby
contributing
to
society's
moral
decay
and
eroding
traditional
family
values. The Germans also considered
style
adetermi-
nant of the
"degenerate"
characterof art. The
figural
distor-
tions of
Expressionism
were
directly
linked to the inferior
racial traits of the artists orto a
"gruesome malfunctioning
of
the
eyes"
caused
by
theirinferior
geneticbackground;
orthe
distortions werecharacterized as ahoax
perpetrated
onthe
unsuspectingpublic.30
National Socialist art doctrineand theresultant art
policies
werecarried to extremes. Not
only
did theNazis
denigrate
modernart and denounce
artists, they
also confis-
cated modernart from museums and othercollections. In
addition, they expelled
artists from their
teachingposts;
Klee
was oneof thoseto losehis
position
in1933.
Many
artists
zuI il ttliehen
Ideal
erl.obeii?
ll'as dile bol~scjhvwis6ische Jiidist
lsaiixunniorg all t
ruiss
ii
nLiteratiur b esoder' liebte
4n rua.i heLtratur.ade ude
Pstituteder, ver chalt IlrH e-
el 1erhwviten de~rCfvs?wII-
,- n.hafi erhubt isi cns aem
Ft.-e.iwr
der U Horrupfio umd
II h i LbIiuanimts die
IBh Liteher ei heIt nd
weni~
nese.
nessiemems.
ne
ouseiianwo
as snow
nei..
FIG. 9
Page
17 of Entartete"Kunst"
Ausstellungsfuhrer, guide
to the
exhibition
DegenerateArt,"showing,
lowerright, a
paintingby
Ernst
Ludwig
Kirchner and works
by
Karl Schmidt-Rottluff and Paul Kleinschmidt.
Courtesy
theArchiv
fir
Kunst und Geschichte, Berlin.
were also forbiddento exhibit and sometimes evento work in
theirownstudios. Artists whose work was labeled
"degener-
ate"had to turnto other
ways
to earna
living, preferably
anonymously;
W illi Baumeisterworked as a
typographic
designer
and
Schlemmer, among
other
things,
decorated
ceilings
and
camouflaged
barracks.31
Many,
like
Klee,
Grosz, W assily Kandinsky,
Josef Albers, Feininger,
Max
Beckmann,
and Kurt
Schwitters,
left the
country.
Others
continued to work and sometimes evento sell in
secret,
but
they
lived infearof
being
discovered
by
the authorities. Karl
Schmidt-Rottluff,
Kathe
Kollwitz,
Gerhard
Marcks, Barlach,
Nolde, Baumeister,
and Schlemmerwere
among
those who
stayed
in
Germany, despite pressures, threats,
and ostra-
cism.
They
had to endure
seeing
theirwork not
only
deni-
grated,
but sometimes
destroyed.32
Barlach was one of the
artists who endured an"innerexile."He
wrote,
"A
pimp
or
murdererhas it much
better;
he
enjoys
the benefit of an
orderly
trial and evenhas achance to clearhimself. W e were
simply repudiated
and if
possible destroyed.
Inthis
respect,
my
conditionis more disastrous thanthat of anactual ex-
ile."33 Artists
throughout Germany
received the
message
loud and clear:
"degenerate"
art would not be
tolerated,
even
inthe artist's ownatelier.
Although
there are
profound
differences inthe histori-
ART JOURNAL
89
Einsehr uf hu rei he
ras
%Ci (lictt
Man btachhte esouders auh die
iunten
stehendendrei Malerbild-
nisse, Essind vo ulinks nach rerhis.-
Der Iater
Morgner, geshein
von
sie selst b I . 'Mlr Rad~iwiIl
gesebe
n Otto DixD erMater
Schlemmer, gesebn
von E. 'L.
Kirchner
FIG
. 10
Page
7 of Entartete"Kunst"
AusstellungsfiJhrer, guide
to the
exhibition
"Degenerate
Art."Theworks
pictued
are(clockwise, from
top left)
by
Emil Nolde, Karl Schmidt-Rottluff
(painting
and
sculpture),
Ernst
Ludwig
Kirchner, Otto Dix, and W ilhelm
Morgner. Courtesy
theArchivfOrKunst und
Geschichte, Berlin.
cal circumstances and the
respective political
institutions of
Nazi
Germany
and the United States
today,
leaders inboth
societies have utilized rhetoric to
politicize
art and to
exploit
deep-rooted
concerns shared
by large segments
of their
popu-
lations, namely,
that anerosionof traditional values threatens
afamiliar
way
of life. This rhetoric
appeals
to the
passions
and
prejudices
of a
significant
numberof
people
who view
offensive or
"degenerate"
art as afactor
contributing
to soci-
ety's
moral decline. In1989 SenatorSlade Gorton
(R-W ash.),
for
example,
referred to "'art'-I
put
that word in
quotation
marks-which attacks the
faith, morals,
or
firmly
held be-
liefs of
large
numbers."34
Like
many examples
of modernGermanart that
hung
inthe Nazis'
"Degenerate
Art"
exhibit,
Scott
Tyler's
W hat Is
the
ProperW ay
to
Display
aU.S.
Flag(1989),
inwhich an
American
flag
was
displayed
onthe
floor,
was attacked as
unpatriotic;
Andres Serrano's 1987 Piss
Christ,
a
photograph
of a
plastic
crucifix immersed inacontainerof the artist's
urine
(fig. 11),
has beendescribed as
blasphemous;35
and
some of Robert
Mapplethorpe's
homoerotic and sado-
masochistic
photographs
have beenlabeled obscene and
indecent. W henthe
Mapplethorpe
and Serrano
photographs
were called
"garbage"
and "trash"
by
United States senators
onthe floorof the Senate in
1989,36 they
were no less
denigrated
thanworks inthe Nazis'
"Degenerate
Art"exhibi-
tion;
inthe wake of the recent warinthe Persian
Gulf,
one can
imagine
that the
Tyler
work would now arouse even
greater
"patriotic"passions
thanit did in1989.
The
political right
inthe United States
today employs
rhetoric not
only
to
denigrate
art it
disapproves of,
but also to
discredit artists and othermembers of the arts
community.37
Onthe Senate
floor,
SenatorHelms
disparagingly
referred to
"so-called art
experts,"
and said of
Serrano,
"He is not an
artist,
heis a
jerk."38
W hensuch
derogatory
rhetoricis
employed,
it escalates
controversy
and inflames
prejudice.
It
legitimizes personal
attacks and
opens up
avenues for
per-
secutionof
individuals,
as well as
groups.
The National Socialist case
exemplifies
the extremes to
which a
government
can
go
to control the arts orto
exploit
art
for
propagandapurposes,
and
puts
in
sharp
relief the
perils
forthe United States of
adoptingpolicies by
which
politicians
havethe
power
to enforcecultural standards and determine
whetherart is decent or
indecent, uplifting
or
"degenerate."
It reminds us that wemust remain
vigilant
and not assume
that ourdemocratic
processes
and institutions will neces-
sarily
check excesses in
government
control of thearts. It
also reminds us of the
power
of art to inflame
prejudice
or
touch our
deepest
concerns.
Notes
This articleis arevised versionof a
paperpresented
at the
College
Art Association
annual conferenceinNew
York, February
1990. It also draws
upon
a
paper,
"Art and
Politics: JesseHelms and theNational Endowment fortheArts,"that I
presented
at the
SouthwesternSocial ScienceAssociation
meeting
inFort W orth, March 1990, as well
as
my
doctoral dissertation, "Picasso and His Art
during
theGerman
Occupation
of
Paris, 1940-1944"
(Stanford University, 1985).
I would liketo thank Robert Storr,
LenoreMalen, and BarbaraHoffmanfortheircomments onearlierversions of this
W INTER 1991
90
INS
INNER
0i:!i
'MW OW T.
US
Im
3i;
.... . . ..... ....
........ ..
sk';K
.. .............
MEMO;
lit
XX
oi,
INN
INN
mom
ISM
=
'.
won
My
Are X
.
... .....
W N:
f1 w:
.
. . . . . . . . . . .
O.Z.
X..
Opp,
Fill
. ... ....
BREHM.
NOW 44
%xM
KANN
tin
W X
W xX Ii
...............
W &
yvagm
"z"", 'mZl'
,
"'no
ANNE
I I M X ''
", ?.
FIG. 11 Andres Serrano, Piss Christ, 1987, Cibachrome, 60 x 40 inches.
Courtesy
Stux
Gallery,
New York.
paper.
This research was
supported
in
part by
aLimited Grant-in-Aid from the
University
of Houston.
1. Grosz's
drawings
wereissued inconnectionwith ErwinPiscator's
stageproduction
of TheGood Soldier
Schweik, from which theGerman
caption,
"Maul haltenund weiter
dienen,"was taken. Inhis first trial, thelocal court inMoabit
rejected
Grosz's claim
that hehad not "intended to defamethechurch orto be
blasphemous
inthese
drawings."
Inhis first
appeal
Grosz was
acquitted;
theSecond Criminal Chamberof
Regional
Court
III, Berlin-Moabit, interpreted
Grosz's
drawing
of thecrucified Christ
as a
legitimateprotest "against
theideaof war. . . and
any
actions onthe
part
of the
church that lend
support
to theideaof war."Thecase
subsequently
went
through
more
trials and
appeals,
into 1932, whenthe
Reichsgericht (national court) decided that the
printingplates
and all
copies
of the
drawing
"inthe
possession
of the
author, the
printer,
theeditor, the
publisher,
or
any
booksellers"wereto be
destroyed.
The
publisher, however, had
already destroyed
the
plates
and sold
impounded copies
of the
portfolio
of
drawings.
Anironicfootnote: aftertheNazis cameto
power
in
1933,
Goebbels's
ministry requested
a
copy
of Grosz's
drawing
Christ with Gas Mask from
the
prosecutor
of theGeneralstaatsanwaltschaft
(superiorregional court) forabro-
chureoncultural Bolshevism. UweM.
Schneede, George
Grosz: TheArtist inHis
Society,
trans. Robert and RitaKimber
(W oodbury,
N.Y.:
Barron's, 1985), 170-75.
2. Hellmut
Lehmann-Haupt,
Art undera
Dictatorship (New York: Oxford
University
Press, 1954), 66-67.
3.
Hildegard Brenner, "Art inthePolitical Power
Struggle, 1933-34,"in
Republic
to
Reich: The
Makingof
theNazi Revolution, ed.
Hajo Holborn, trans.
Ralph
Manheim
(New York: Pantheon, 1972), 396; Lehmann-Haupt,
Art undera
Dictatorship,
67.
Frick acted ontheadviceof ProfessorPaul
Schultze-Naumburg,
anarchitect whose
theories onart were
racially
motivated. Seealso OskarSchlemmer, TheLetters and
Diaries
ofOskarSchlemmer, ed. Tut Schlemmer
(Evanston,
Ill.: NorthwesternUniver-
sity Press, 1990), 272-75.
4.
Lehmann-Haupt,
Art undera
Dictatorship,
68.
5. Ibid., 69, 181.
6. Adolf Hitler, speech inaugurating
theHaus derDeutschenKunst and the"Grosse
Deutsche
Kunstausstellung,"
inHerschel B.
Chipp, ed., Theories
of
ModernArt,
trans. IlseFalk
(Berkeley: University
of CaliforniaPress, 1968), 476-82. Forthe
Germantext seeHitler: Redenund
Proklamationen, 1932-1945, ed. Max Domarus
(W Orzburg: Verlagsdruckerei Schmidt, Neustadt a.d. Aisch, 1962),
I:705-10.
See
also Hitler's
speech
of November11, 1935, in
Nuremberg,
inThe
Speeches of Adolf
Hitler:
April 1922-August 1939, ed. and trans. NormanH.
Baynes (New York:
Howard
Fertig, 1969), 1:569-84.
7. Berthold Hinz, Art intheThird Reich, trans. Robert and RitaKimber(New York:
Pantheon, 1979), 77-83, 102-3.
8. Hitler, in
Chipp, ed., Theories, 482; and Hitler: Redenund Proklamationen, I:
709.
9.
Hinz, Art intheThirdReich, 46. Max Nordau, Degeneration,
with introduction
by
George
L. Mosse(New York: Howard
Fertig, 1968). ForNordau (bornSfidfeld), oneof
thecharacteristics of
degeneracy
is reliance
upon
the
imagination,
ratherthannature.
Therefore, any
art that does not
reproduce
natureis
degenerate.
Nordau excuses the
Impressionists, however, for
sincerely recordingoptical perceptions,
whether
they
be
aresult of thevisual sensationof "amass of colour
composed
of
spots
of different
greens,
onwhich thesunflashes hereand there
points
and
rays
of
light,"
ortheresult
of
"nystagmus,
or
trembling
of the
eyeball."
Ineithercase, however, theartist will
have
produced
an
aesthetically
and
intellectually
inferior
product. Nordau, Degenera-
tion, 483, 27. It is ironicthat Nordau was aJew and aZionist, given
theanti-Semitic
context inwhich the
concept
of
degeneration
was used
by
theNazis.
10.
Lehmann-Haput,
Art undera
Dictatorship,
39-41.
11.
Jacques Sabile, "Introduction,"inLe
Pillagepar
les Allemands des oeuvres d'art
et des
bibliothdques appartenant t
des
Juifs
enFrance: Receuil des documents, ed. Jean
Cassou (Paris: Editions du Centre, 1947), 33; Hinz, Art intheThird Reich, 45-46.
12. Becausemodern, "degenerate"
artists oftencreated withinaninternational
context, they
wereaccused of
being
Bolshevist.
Hinz,
Art intheThird
Reich, 11.
13. Carl Einstein's DieKunst des 20.
Jahrhunderts, vol. 16 (Berlin: Propylaien-
Kunstgeschichte, 1931), which deals
exclusively
with art and artists considered
"modern"
by
its author, was used
by
theNational Socialists as areferenceto
identify
their
opponents
inthevisual arts. Hinz, Art intheThird Reich, 24-25, 228, n. 22.
14. SeeSabile, "Introduction,"inLe
Pillagepar
les Allemands, 25.
15. SeeEntartete"Kunst"
Ausstellungsfiihrer, published by
Fritz Kaiser(Berlin:
Verlag
furKultur- und
W irtschaftswerbung, 1937), 14. This was not a
catalogueper
se, but rathera
guide
to the
traveling
exhibitionthat
presented
theNational Socialist
propagandaabout "degenerate"art, includingexcerpts
from Hitler's
speech
inau-
gurating
theHaus derDeutschenKunst, illustrated with
examples
of
"degenerate"
art
that
may
havebeenintheexhibition. Notetheuseof
quotation
marks around theword
Kunst (art) inthetitle. The
guide
is
reproduced inFranz Roh, "Entartete"Kunst:
Kunstbarberei im DrittenReich (Hanover: Fackeltriger-Verlag,
1962) and in
Stephanie
Barron, ed., "Degenerate
Art": TheFate
of
theAvant-GardeinNazi
Germany,
exh.
cat. (Los Angeles:
Los
Angeles County
Museum of Art, 1991), 356-90, with
translation
by
David Britt.
16. The
iconography of womaninNational Socialist
painting
is discussed inHinz,
Art intheThird Reich, 149-55, and ChristianGross and UweGrossman, "Die
Darstellung
derFrau,"inKunst im 3. Reich: Documenteder
Unterwerfung,
exh. cat.
(Frankfurt am Main: Frankfurter
Kunstverein, 1975),
182-92.
17. SeeSabile, "Introduction,"inLe
Pillagepar
les
Allemands, 20-22.
18. Brenner, "Art inthePolitical Power
Struggle,"
398.
19. Alfred
Rosenberg,
"RevolutionintheFineArts?"Selected
W ritings, ed., with
introduction, by
Robert Pois
(London: JonathonCape, 1970), 159-60.
Originally
published
inBlut und Ehre, ein
Kampffiir
deutsche
W iedergeburt,
Reden
undAufsitze
von1919-1933 (Munich: Thilo von
Trotha, 1935).
20.
Lehmann-Haupt,
Art undera
Dictatorship, 72-73; Brenner, "Art inthePolitical
Power
Struggle,"400-401, 407.
21. Albert
Speer,
InsidetheThird Reich, trans. Richard and ClaraW inston
(New
York:
Macmillan, 1970), 32-33.
22. Hitler, in
Chipp, ed., Theories, 482.
23. Ibid., 480. For
personal
accounts of theexhibitionseePaul
O.
Rave, Kunstdik-
taturim DrittenReich
(Hamburg: Verlag
Gebr. Mann, 1949), 56-57; and Peter
Guenther, "Three
Days
inMunich, July 1937,"inBarron, ed., Fate
of
theAvant-
Garde, 33-43. Seealso Mario-Andreas von
Liittichau,
"EntarteteKunst, Munich
1937: AReconstruction,"inBarron, ed., Fate
of
theAvant-Garde, 45-81.
24. This and the
previous quotation
arefrom Hitler, in
Chipp, ed., Theories, 482.
25. W ilhelm Treue, Art Plunder, trans. Basil
Creighton(New York: JohnDay, 1961),
233.
Ziegler
was also a
painter
of realisticnudes, who was dubbed "masterof German
pubic
hair."Hinz, Art intheThird Reich, 38. Thefirst exhibitions inHitler's
Germany
to
denigrate
modemrn
art wereinstalled in1933. Onein
Nuremberg
was
called "Chamberof Horrors."Seealist of theseexhibitions in
Christoph Zuschlag,
"An'Educational Exhibition': ThePrecursors of EntarteteKunst and Its Individual
Venues,"inBarron, ed., Fate
of
theAvant-Garde, 98-101.
26. SeeEntartete"Kunst"
Ausstellungsfiihrer, 2, 4.
27. Forworks inthe
"Degenerate
Art"exhibitionseeRave, Kunstdiktatur, 79-81,
and Mario-Andreas von
Littichau,
"EntarteteKunst, Munich 1937: AReconstruc-
tion,"inBarron, ed., Fate
of
theAvant-Garde, 49-80. Forworks confiscated from
Germanmuseums seeRoh, "Entartete"Kunst, 123-248, and several
reproductions
following.
28. SeeEntartete"Kunst"
Ausstellungsfiihrer,
6-22.
29. InDer
Mythus
des 20. Jahrhunderts (Munich, 1933), Alfred
Rosenberg
wrote
that Paul
Gauguin
was
"inwardly
rottenand confused,"seeking
ideal
beauty
inthe
South Seas, until this search resulted inchaos. Cited in
Joseph W ulf, Diebildenden
Kiinsteim DrittenReich
(Guitersloh:
S. Mohn, 1963), 269, my
translation.
30. Hitler, in
Chipp, ed., Theories, 480; and Hitler: Redenund Proklamationen, I:
709; cf. n. 9 (Nordau, Degeneration, 483, 27). Seealso Entartete"Kunst"Aus-
stellungsfiihrer,
18.
31. See
Lehmann-Haupt,
Art undera
Dictatorship, 84-87, including
Baumeister's
personal account; Schlemmer, Letters and Diaries, 371-78; and Roh,
"Entartete"
Kunst, 61-65 and 115-19.
32. Schlemmer, Letters and Diaries, 272-75; Carl Dietrich Carls, Ernst Barlach
(New York:
Praeger, 1969), 172, 197-98, 201-2; and W ernerHaftmann, Emil Nolde:
Unpainted
Pictures (New York:
Praeger, 1971), 12-13, 17.
33. Barlach, quoted
inRoh, "Entartete"Kunst, 65, my
translation.
34. SenatorSladeGorton, Congressional Record, October7, 1989, S 12970.
35. Serrano has said that his
photograph
was
"absolutely
not calculated to offend."It
represents
"first and foremost . . .
my
Catholic
upbringing,
and
my
ambivalenceto
that
upbringing, being
drawnto Christ
yet resistingorganized religion."
He
explained
that heused urinebecauseit is oneof "life's vital fluids,"likeblood and milk, which
hehas also used inhis work, and that it
produced
"a
quite
vivid and vibrant color."
Quoted
inW illiam H. Honan, "Andres Serrano: Contradictions inLifeand W ork,"
New York Times
(national edition), August 16, 1989, 22.
36. SenatorJesseHelms, Congressional Record, October7, 1989, S 12969, S 12973;
SenatorTrent Lott, Congressional Record, October7, 1989, S 12975.
37. IntheUnited States theconservatives, especially
thoseontheChristian
right,
also
campaignagainst
offensivecontent inthe
print media, television, movies, and
musicvideos. See, for
example,
Richard Bolton, "TheCultural Contradictions of
Conservatism,"NewArt Examiner17 (June1990), 24-29, 72. Foradiscussionof the
broaderaims of the
political right
and how art issues fit in, see
Goggin,
"Art and
Politics: Jesse Helms and theNational Endowment fortheArts."Theanti-
"degenerate"
cultural
campaign
inNazi
Germany
was aimed at books, music, and
film as well as art. SeeMichael
Meyer,
"AMusical FacadefortheThird Reich,"and
W illiam Moritz, "Film
Censorship During
theNazi Era,"inBarron, ed., Fateof the
Avant-Garde.
38. Helms, Congressional Record, October7, 1989,
S
12968; and Helms, Congres-
sional Record, May 18, 1989, S 5595, cited inCaroleS. Vance, "TheW aron
Culture,"
Art inAmerica77
(September1989): 39.
MARY-MARGARET GOGGIN is assistant
professor
at the
University of
Houston. Sheis
currently completing
abook-
length study of
Picasso and his art
during
theGerman
occupationof
Paris.
W INTER 1991
92