What Constitutes "Degenerate" Art?

 

 http://klio.uoregon.edu/city/berlin/berlin-images11&12.htm

 

The Degenerate Art Show was exhibited in Munich in 1937 by the Nazis. One might think that the majority of the art displayed in the Degenerate Art show was done by Jewish artists, but "only 6 of the 112 artists in [the Degenerate Art show] were Jewish." (Entartete Kunst) So then what constituted "degenerate" art in the eyes of Nazis? For the most part, Modern Art and German Expressionism. "Artists were attacked for working in avant-garde styles and for exhibiting foreign influences in their work. "Degenerate" artists painted landscapes and city scenes using colors that did not replicate nature: yellow skies, red horses, blue faces. They employed forms that were angular, contorted, or geometric...Anything that did not express the Aryan ideal was condemned." (Entartete Kunst) Works by Kirchner, Kandinsky, Chagall, Matisse, Picasso, and many others were displayed.

(John Heartfield, Hurrah, the Butter is All Gone! 1935)

http://germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/sub_image.cfm?image_id=1929

 

It should be interesting to note that John Heartfield, who made satirical photomontages of the Nazi regime, was not one of the artists whose work was featured in this exhibit; actually, "...the most heavily represented artist in Degenerate Art was Emil Nolde, who had been a Nazi party member since 1920." ("Judge for Yourselves!"-- the Degenerate Art exhibition as a political spectacle, Neil Livi) Why was his work represented in this exhibit? Well his works were an example of German Expressionism. To exclude a Nazi critic from this exhibit but to include a Nazi himself is quite baffling, but goes to show exactly what the Nazis found distasteful in art, to consider "degenerate."

In the exhibit, the art was displayed crammed together, grouped with different art periods mixing together, and with inaccurate quotes by artists. This arrangement, these inaccuracies, may be seen as "displays by the National Socialist state of its power to exercise its will with impunity." ("Judge for Yourselves!")

 

By: Chelsea Reintjes

Neue Sachlichkeit: New Objectivity

Neue Sachlichkeit or “new objectivity” concentrates on a return to reality in German art. The director of the Mannheim Art Gallery, G.F. Hartlaub, created the term in 1923 as a title for his idea of a post expressionistic art exhibit. Hartlaub wanted artists in his show that were “neither impressionistically relaxed nor expressionistically abstract” (Schmalenbach). The art of Neue Sachlichkeit was not particularly revolutionary and it lacked overall cohesiveness. Furthermore, it was not singularly focused and didn’t have a particular guiding principle. It instead grew out of the need for stability after the turbulence and uneasiness of World War I. When the socialist government subdued the Nazis and Communists in 1924 the radical stylistic experiments such as Expressionism and Dadaism were replaced by the “subdued rationalism” of New Objectivity that was “grounded resolutely in the material world” (Galerie St. Etienne, New Objectivity). Hartlaub separated Neue Sachlichkeit into two categories: Left and Right. The Left side held on to some Dada influence and was more radical in style. It has been described as “contemporary and shrill” (Hartley, Romantic Spirit). The Right side was conservative and classical. It was more closely tied to romanticism and was the even more realistic side of the two branches. The two sides were both embraced by Neue Sachlichkeit because artists who fell into these categories focused on their then current situation, and the ‘here and now’. Neue Sachlichkeit was ignored in Berlin, which was Germany’s greatest metropolis at the time as it was too cool and harsh for the Nazis approval. Painters in the Neue Sachlichkeit group focused their attention again on contemporary problems, social problems, nature, and objects. It was supposed to capture the mental attitude of the post wartime and the general new thought and feeling of the German people. Neue Sachlichkeit artists rejected expressionistic utopianism and wanted to show things as they really were.

The two paintings shown below were created by artists on opposite sides of the Neue Sachlichkeit spectrum. The leftist sachlichkeit painter, Otto Dix, did the painting of the young girl in pink titled Nelly with Toys 1925. Georg Schrimpf, who is associated with the right side, is the artist of the other work, Three Children 1926. It is interesting that these two men were considered as far apart as they could be amongst the Neue Sachlichkeit group, and yet they both chose to paint and focus on the same objects: children and toys. The difference in directions of the right and left side cannot therefore be considered drastic. It is also interested to note that the young girl in the painting by Otto Dix is actually his daughter. This goes against the idea that the Neue Sachlichkeit artists refrained from painting objects they were personally attached to. This painting does hold true to the neue sachlichkeit concept of creating a claustrophobic and airless environment for the subject to be in. Otto Dix took part in the first international Dada fair in Berlin and was very revolutionary and radical politically. Earlier work done by him depicts scenes of brothels and sexual murders. These led to charges and a trial in Berlin. It is interesting how the subject of his paintings shifted in quite a dramatic way once he was married and had a child. Georg Schrimpf is quoted as saying “I do not paint before nature at all… all the experiences are to be found only within myself”. This statement can definitely be linked with the neo-romanticism that was present on the right side of neue sachlichkeit. Romanticism emphasizes individual inspiration and subjectivity. George Schrimpf can be connected to romanticism because of his belief in the primacy of the individual. 

Neue Sachlichkeit was all about depicting people and objects in a real way. Subjects were typically anonymous and impersonal and the style was usually cool while the tone was dispassionate. Artists were interested in the variations of human personality, which resulted in many portraits. In sticking with their realistic approach artists were not afraid to highlight the bleakness and ugliness of the people they were painting. For example, Rudolf Wacker’ s portrait of Rosalie Haller, an old lady with glasses that was done in 1929 is unflattering but indeed realistic. The old lady’s wrinkles are very pronounced and her right eye droops much more than her right. She has a crooked nose and because only one ear is shown at the angle she is painted, her head appears to be very unbalanced. Another example is a painting by Fritz Silberbauer of his son that was done in 1926. The painting is of a young boy who seems quite healthy but at the same time as disproportionately large ears. Neue sachlichkeit artists did not feel the need to eradicate imperfections when painting both youth and old age. In reality people are not perfect and so they felt they shouldn’t be painted as such.
By: Renny Niebuhr

Galerie St. Etienne. The New Objectivity: Realism in Weimar-Era Germany. New York: 1997.

Hartley, Keith. Hughes, Henry. Schuster, Peter. Vaughan, William. The Romantic

Spirit in German Art 1790 – 1990, Great Britain: Thames and Hudsen, 1994.

Schroder, Klaus. Neue Sachlichkeit: Osterreich 1918-1938. Wien, Kunstforum Bank Austria: 1995.

Scmalenbach, Fritz. The Term Neue Sachlichkeit. The Art Bulletin, Vol. 22, No. 3 (Sep., 1940), pp. 161-165. Published by: College Art Association. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3046704

Weimar Republic and Art of the Left

The Weimar Republic

(SPD Poster, 1920)

            The Weimar Republic is the term applied to the period from 1918-1933 in Germany. The parliamentary system of Weimar, similar to that of Britain, was the first true democracy in Germany and the ruling party — the Social Democratic Party, a center-left party — sought to unite the masses for democratic means. Despite their goals of unity, loyalty, and duty, the Social Democratic Party inherited complex and dire circumstances, which, along with their unpopular actions and efforts to mend the broken country, made the SPD an easy target for both the more Leftist (Socialism, Communism) and the Right (Nationalism, Authoritarianism) parties. These issues include:

            • Extreme terms of the Versailles Treaty (Occupation of Rhineland,                   limitations on German armed and naval forces, prohibition of                           weapons, loss of colonies and European territories, reparation of 226               billion Marks)

            • German Revolution (November 1918-January 1919)

            • Industrialization/modernization

            • Economic crisis (hyperinflation, severe drop in living standard,                         Great Depression)

            • Frequent political changes (splitting parties uprising and challenging                the SPD)

            • Social-cultural changes (national healthcare, mobilization of                           workers, veteran disability program, etc.)

            • Public disappointment with Capitalism

By the time the SPD controlled the government in 1918, there were multiple individual parties on both the Right and Left. While every party recognized the crises facing the Weimar Republic and the German people, each one had its own solution incongruous with the others.

The Right

            The political right (including the DVNP) propagated the Stab-in-the-Back Myth to fight against the center-left Weimar Republic and SPD. The Right parties argued that Germany’s first military defeat (WWI) came at the hands of the socialists and their 1918 revolution, thus, the crippled status of Germany was directly caused by the ideology of the left. Because of this, the Right groups cited, all leftist politics, economics, and even art, was unacceptable and abominable.

See Socialism and Dystopia: Nazi Art

The Left

(USPD Poster 1919)

              Though the SPD was a leftist party, groups unhappy with the SPD’s class collaboration and support of WWI split from the party in 1917 to for new and more extreme left groups (primarily, the USPD and KPD). These groups, though varying in liberalism from democracy to Marxism, all opposed the government's handling of WWI (counter groups began to form within the SPD prior to 1917 for this reason), supported the working class (proletariat) and felt further alienated by their parent party when the SPD used the right-wing paramilitary forces to suppress any revolutionary uprisings.

The Left: Art

            Artists from various schools (Dada, Expressionism, Neue Sachlichkeit) sided with the left groups and used their art as public outcry and commentary against the state of German society and government. Though many artists within the Bauhaus were left-leaning, its founder Walter Gropius declared it apolitical. It is not included here because its pieces were not created as social/political commentary or criticism.

            

Cut with the Kitchen Knife...
Dada

            • Dada: A group protesting the bourgeois, nationalism, rationality, and all other institutions and beliefs developed from the Enlightenment as the cause for the horror and depravity of modern humanity. Because of this rejection of the traditional and rational, the Dadaists were opposed to the figuration of its contemporary — Expressionism

           

            • Expressionism: With the reprehensible results of WWI, both economically and in lives lost, Expressionists moved from a search for an inward, spiritual enlightenment to an anational socialism, criticizing the bourgeoisie, capitalism and democratic means while lauding the resurgence of a “spiritual attitude […] which has existed for millennia in the history of humanity.” This spiritual attitude is the Expressionists response and solution to the Dadaists view of the Enlightenment and also explains why, unlike the Dadaists, the Expressionists did not reject traditional forms such as the figure.

• Neue Sachlichkeit (New Objectivity): see Socialism and Dystopia: Neue Sachlichkeit

Images Used
(I was having formatting issues when adding captions)

1. SPD political poster

2. USPD political poster

3. Dawn From in the Shadows, George Grosz, 1920-21

4. Prague Street, Otto Dix, 1920

5. The Orator, Magnus Zeller, c1920

6. Cut With the Kitchen Knife..., Hannah Höch, 1919-20

7. The Widow II, Kathe Kollwitz, 1922

Works Cited

Berger, Stephen. "Germany." The International Encyclopedia of Revolution and Protest: 1500 to the Present. Guntram H. Herb and David H. Kaplan ed. Vol. 2: 1880-1945. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-Clio, 2008. 609-22. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Web. 22 Nov. 2012.

Lewer, Debbie. "Revolution and the Weimar Avant-Garde: Contesting the Politics of Art, 1919-1924."Weimar Culture Revisited. New Yok: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011. 1-21. Print.

Peters, Olaf. "Aesthetic Solipsism: The Artist and Politics in Max Beckmann 1927-1938." Totalitarian Art and Modernity. Aarhus: Aarhus UP, 2010. 325-45. Print.

Schmidt, Ingo. "Communist Party, Germany." The International Encyclopedia of Revolution and Protest: 1500 to the Present. Immanuel Ness ed. Vol. 2. Malden, MA: Wiley Blackwell, 2009. 826-29.Gale Virtual Reference Library. Web. 27 Nov. 2012.

Williams, John A. Foreword. Weimar Culture Revisited. New Yok: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011. N. pag. Print.

Article by Catherine Estrada

Nazi Art

Nazi endorsed art was characterized by a romantic realism based upon early classical models. They rebelled against degenerate art, and promoted paintings about militarism, blood and soil, and obedience. Popular themes included ideas of love for ones homeland, the virtues of the national Socialist struggle, and the depiction of women raising children, in the kitchen, and going to church. The Great German Art exhibition heavily featured landscape paintings, and was completely devoid of degenerate art. Nazi art rejected materialism and strived to depict the ideal. Unlike Degenerate art, explicitly political paintings were very rare, but rather heroic subjects dominated the scene. Once the war began, romanticized depictions of war were popular, still maintaining the depiction of heroic imagery.

The art of the Third Reich approved of art that was of the taste of Adolf Hitler. His background in the visual arts had cultivated a preference for a particular type of art. He believed that art was a symptom of a healthy and strong society, and that it showed the strength of the race that produced it. Many of the works on view in the German pavilion were by Franz Radziwill. His scenes were primarily landscape images focusing on the modern state of Germany. His images encompassed all of the ideas that Nazi Art embodied and supported.

This Nazi Art was in direct contrast to the Degenerate, or modern art of the time. It could be said that the Art of the Third Reich was a direct reaction against this movement and every idea and concept it supported. Because it contrasted so greatly from the art the Nazis supported, it was often banned on the grounds that it was Un-German. The idea of questioning preconceived idea and redefining objects and concepts directly rebelled against the Nazi art and was therefore banned and sometimes destroyed.

The images below display this stark contrast. The image below is “Floodgate Near Petershorn” by Franz Radziwill, and is an example of Nazi supported art. It not only is a depiction of a landscape, but it is clear and simple in organization and depiction of objects. It maintains a rationality about it that Hitler was fond of in every element of his rule. The colors are natural and simple and show a contemporary scene, but in a more classicizing way.

Franz Radziwill, Floodgate near Petershorn, Germany 1927.

 On the other hand, a work of art by Hannah Hoch, “Cut with the Dada Kitchen Knife through the Last Weimar Beer-Belly Cultural Epoch in Germany” contrasts in every way with these ideals. The image is not orderly or rational and is an attempt to question authority, most often with regard to advertising and the acceptance of same sex couples. It is not surprising then, that with the great difference between her art and the Art of the Nazis, that they did not support her art, or the works of her contemporaries. 

Hannah Hoch, Cut with the Kitchen Knife through the Beer-Belly of the Weimar republic, 1919

Article by Kristen Barrett