`Decent` vs. `degenerate` art.

"Decent"vs.
"Degenerat
TheNational Socialist Case
MARY-MARGARET GOGGIN
artistic censorshipis discussed, the case of
National Socialist (Nazi) Germanyfrequently
comes to mind. Nazi Germany'sart policies of
the 1930s and early 1940s and their consequencesprovidea
historicalperspectiveon whatmayhappenwhengovernment
determineswhat art is decent or indecent, uplifting or "de-
When
84
generate."
Precedentsforartisticcensorshipin Nazi Germanycan
be found during the Weimar Republic, as the following
incidents indicate. In Berlin in 1928, a local court filed
chargesof blasphemyagainst GeorgeGroszforseveraldrawings published in an album titled Hintergrund(backdrop).
Although originally found guilty, Grosz was ultimatelyacquitted on appeal. The most provocativeof these drawings
was one of Christwearinga gas mask and boots, captioned,
"Keepyourmouthshut and do yourduty"(fig. 1).1 Grosz's
drawingis echoed in a recent photographicimage with a
femalenude (fig. 2) by the Americanartist BarbaraKruger,
one of manyU.S. artists whorisk censorshipbecause of their
engagementin similar moralconfrontations.In otherattacks
on modernart duringthe Weimarperiod, the Munichchapter
of the ReichsverbandbildenderKiinstler(federalassociation
of artists) protestedthe Berlin Nationalgalerie'spurchaseof
-'p
diI
-:X.
iiiii...............
FIG. 1 GeorgeGrosz,Christwith GasMask,1928, crayonon paper,
17?8x 221/4inches.? Estateof GeorgeGrosz/VAGA,
NewYork,1991.
WINTER1991
severalvan Goghpaintingsin 1929, and in 1930 the director
of the Stadtischesmuseumin Zwickau was dismissed because of his supportfor modernart.2
Even before Hitler became chancellorof the German
Reich on January30, 1933, local NationalSocialist leaders
werecensoringmodernart. In 1930 WilhelmFrick, National
Socialist minister of the interior and minister of popular
educationin the provinceof Thuringia,orderedthe removal
of the works of Ernst Barlach, Paul Klee, and Lyonel
Feininger from the collection of the Schlossmuseum in
Weimar,as well as the destructionof Oskar Schlemmer's
muralsand reliefs in the formerBauhaus.3
Althoughthese attackson modernart were not new in
Germany,under Hitler they became more systematic and
continuous. One of Hitler's prioritieswas to organize and
centralize the institutions necessary to carry out Nazi art
policies. In orderto do anythingconnectedwiththe creation,
buying, or selling of art, one had to belongto the Kunstkammer (chamberof art). By the late 1930s there were around
forty-twothousandmembers,excluding Jews, Communists,
or other"enemies"of the state.4 "Acceptable"artists did not
suddenlyappearafterthe NationalSocialists assumedpower,
nor were they necessarily schooled in NationalSocialist art
theories. Rather,they were already creating art that corresponded in contentand style to-or at least did not conflict
with-the NationalSocialists' ideals and goals. Provisions
wereeven madeto educatethe public in mattersof art, under
the auspices of the Deutsche Arbeitsfront(Germanlabor
front) and an organization called Kraft durch Freude
(strengththroughjoy).5
Firmly believing that culture is the cornerstoneof any
enduring society, Hitler recognized that art must play a
majorrole in the building of his ideal Germannation. He
articulatedthe goals of whathe consideredtrue Germanart:
it must develop from the collective soul of the people and
express its identity;it must be national, not international;it
must be comprehensibleto the people; it must not be a
passing fad, but strive to be eternal;it must be positive, not
critical of society; it must be elevating, and representthe
good, the beautiful, and the healthy.6
Art that was encouragedand supportedhad to reflect
moralit
Forget
Forget
heroes"
2 BarbaraKruger,
Untitled(It'sourpleasureto disgustyou), 1990, photographic
screenprinton paper,192 x 276 inches.CourtesyMaryBooneGallery,
NewYork.
FIG.
the spirit and ideals of the Germanpeople as the National
Socialists envisionedthem. Peasantsandartisansengagedin
their labors were popularsubjects. Womenas mothers(fig.
3) were especially importantbecause they representedthe
future of the "Aryanrace."Landscapessymbolizedthe "fatherland." Female nudes often illustrated the beauty of
healthybodies (fig. 4). Not to be forgottenwere the "heroic"
subjects, which included not only soldiers, but also workers
(fig. 5) and images of Hitler.In sculpture, the worksof Arno
Brekerand Josef Thorakconveyedheroismon a monumental
scale. Many works that were endowedwith significant or
profoundtitles, however,were simple subjects with no ulteriormeaning intendedby their creators.7
The names of most of the artists who producedthese
works are forgotten. At the time, even Hitler seemed to
acknowledgethe lack of greatnessin the art exhibitedat the
first "GrosseDeutsche Kunstausstellung"(greatGermanart
exhibition)in 1937, when he said, "I HAVE NO DOUBT,
THE ALMIGHTYWILL ELEVATEA FEW FROMTHIS
MULTITUDEOF DECENT CREATORSOF ART INTO
THE STARRYREALMOF THE IMMORTAL,DIVINELY
INSPIRED ARTISTSOF THE GREATPAST."8The NationalSocialists promotedartthatwas "beautiful,""decent,"
and "good," but their enforcementof these standardsand
their silencing of nonconformingartists had a devastating
effect on modernart and artists in Germany.
In the NationalSocialists' anti-modern-artcampaign,
artistswho are nowrecognizedas the greatnames in modern
Germanart were characterizedas enemies of the German
because theydid
people;theirworkwas labeled "degenerate"
not meet the artistic criteria outlined by Hitler and other
National Socialist leaders. At the end of the nineteenth
century, in his bookDegeneration,MaxNordauhad applied
the term"degeneration"
to art.9Later,in KunstundRasse (art
and race), 1928, Paul Schultze-Naumburgdeveloped his
theories of the aesthetic connectionbetween artistic styles
and the supposed racial characteristicsof the artists.10oSuch
works provided Hitler with the theoretical precedents on
whichhe formulatedhis ownideas aboutthe roleof race in art
and the role of art in society; moreimportantly,he pursued
programsto implementthose ideas.
Hitlerandthe NationalSocialists recognizedthatthere
was an almost unbridgeablechasm of incomprehensionbetween the public and modernart, which they exploitedearly
on in orderto consolidatetheir poweroverthe people.11They
manipulatedthe public by focusing its accumulatedpolitical
and economic dissatisfactions and frustrationson scapegoats, including artists, as well as the dealers, critics, and
ARTJOURNAL
86
FIG. 3 AdolfWissel,Kalenberg
FarmFamily,1939, oil. Courtesythe ArchivfOr
KunstundGeschichte,Berlin.
fromArt
Frc. 4 JohannesBeutner,Timeof Ripeness.Photographreproduced
in the ThirdReich(NewYork:Pantheon,1979, 134),with permission.
WINTER1991
museumdirectorswho supportedthem.The NationalSocialists mademodernart a symbolof corruptionand degeneracy.
Supposedly of "Semitic inspiration,"modernart was also
or "cultural
portrayedas representingKulturbolschewismus
Bolshevism."2 The purge of modernart was not, however,
limited to the art producedby Jewish,foreign, orCommunist
artists. Whateverthe Nazis claimed undermined"desirable"
aesthetic, social, cultural, or political values, or physicalor
racial ideals, was to be eliminatedfromGermansociety; this
included all the modernmovements,such as Expressionism,
Cubism, Futurism, Constructivism,and Dada.13
The NationalSocialists claimed that, because modern
artists considered everythingsuitable as a subject for art,
"thebeautiful, the heroicand the pure"wererelegatedto the
same level as "theugly, the base and the erotic,"resultingin
an amoralart.14Modernartwas thus perceivedas a threatto
German morality. The Nazis characterizedmany modern
images, Expressionistones in particular,as "pornographic,"
appealingto the basest instinctsof humanity.15 This moralizing was not only misleading, but also hypocritical, since
many of the countless images of nude womenwith perfect
bodies that were officially sanctionedand exhibited during
those years depict them in passive or submissive roles,
implicitly, if not explicitly, as sex objects availablefor the
pleasure of men (fig. 6).16
The National Socialist ideas on art were based on
abstract theories whose catchwordswere "soul," "genius,"
"tragedy,""race."17
Theyconsidered"raceandhomeland"or
Blut und Boden (bloodand soil) the basis of a Germanicart
thatwouldexpressthe truespiritualvalues of the Aryanrace,
purifiedof all Bolshevistand Semiticinfluences. The practical applicationof these vague notionsto a coherentartpolicy
was difficult, however,and led to many contradictionsand
inconsistencies. Althoughthe NationalSocialists claimed to
encouragean art that was a productof the Germanicspirit,
they rejected the art of Germanartists such as Emil Nolde
(fig. 7) and Barlach,whowereat the centerof a debatewithin
the partyoverthe Germanicand Nordiccharacterof German
Expressionism.In fact, this debateoverartpolicy reflecteda
broaderstruggleforpowerwithin the party.18 Alfred Rosenberg, party "philosopher" and competitor with the minister of
propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, for control of art policy, noted
that even National Socialists could have differences of opinion in matters of art, citing the debate over Nolde and Barlach. Rosenberg acknowledged that both artists were talented, but asserted that they did not seek the Nordic ideal of
physical beauty necessary to the development of a National
Socialist aesthetic.'9 This Nordic ideal was based not only on
presumed Aryan features, but also on the Greek ideal of the
perfect, healthy, athletic body, to which neither Nolde's nor
Barlach's figures corresponded.
In contrast, some intellectuals and younger members of
the party defended Expressionist art as a spiritual force that
expressed the Germanic character, while others believed that
FIG. 5 ArthurKampf,RollingMill,1939, oil. Courtesythe ArchivfuirKunstundGeschichte,Berlin.
deutMcher
.,Off nbarusngen.
Rel gieolit"
ha die deRvn
jidischen
reunseindlern. ile
Presseccinmal| solhe:hn
Die
Titel
lauten:
,,Christus and die
Sitnderin", ,,TodWder
Maria aus Agypten".
and
,,Kre•mzbahnahme"
,Christus".
Die' ,K0instler"
heiIten:
Nolde,
and
Morgner
Kurt Ih.
fromArtin the
FIG. 6 JohannSchult,Expectation.
Photographreproduced
ThirdReich(NewYork:Pantheon,1979,134),with permission.
FIG. 7 Page9 of Entartete"Kunst"
Ausstellungsfiuhrer,
guideto the exhibition
"DegenerateArt,"showing,top and middle,EmilNolde,Christand the Sinner
and Deathof Maryof Egypt,and bottom,worksby WilhelmMorgnerand Fritz
Kurth.Courtesythe ArchivfurKunstundGeschichte,Berlin.
88
the revolutionarycharacterof Expressionismcouldbe linked
to the NationalSocialist revolution.20 Even Goebbelsappreciated the worksof someExpressionists,particularlyBarlach
and Nolde. However,when Hitler expressed his disapproval
of some Noldewatercolorsthatthe architectAlbertSpeerhad
installed in his remodelingof Goebbels'sresidence, Goebbels orderedthemremoved.21In the end, the Expressionists,
including Nolde, who was himself a member of the Nazi
party, lost the battle to have their art accepted as
"Germanic."
The German authorities recognized the propaganda
value of art, both as a tool in their negative campaign to
denigrate modernart and in their promotionof a "new and
true Germanart."In his speech of July18, 1937, dedicating
the Haus der Deutschen Kunst and the Grosse Deutsche
Kunstausstellungin Munich,Hitlercontrastedthe "degenerate"modern-artmovements(seefig. 7) with the artthat "will
impress you as being beautiful, and, above all, as decent,
and which you will sense to be good"(seefigs. 3-6).22
The propagandacampaign against modern art was
dramatizedwith the infamousexhibition"EntarteteKunst"
(degenerateart), which opened in Munichon July 19, 1937,
and was shownin the largercities in all regionsof Germany.
In his speech the previous day Hitler had called on the
Germanpeople to be the judges of Germanart, and issued a
warningto the "pitifulmisfortunates,""incompetents,"and
"artcriminals"whose workswere hung haphazardlyon the
walls of the "DegenerateArt"show(fig. 8) that he was going
to "cleanhouse":"National-Socialismhas madeit its primary
task to rid the GermanReich, and thus, the Germanpeople
and its life of all those influenceswhich are fataland ruinous
to its existence."23Those influencesincludedthe dealersand
critics, as well as the artists, whom Hitler referredto as
"cliques of babblers, dilettantes and art crooks,"and "prehistoric stone-age culture-vultures and art stammerers."24
On ordersfromHitler, the "DegenerateArt"exhibition
had been organizedby AdolfZiegler,presidentof the Reichskammerder bildendenKiinste(reichchamberof visual arts),
although this was not the first exhibitionof its kind.25 The
purposes of this exhibition were to show the public what
constituted"degenerate"art, to indoctrinatethe public about
of art
its dangers, and to demonstratethat this "corruption"
was not just an aberrationor experiment,but an organized
8 JosephGoebbelsvisitingthe "DegenerateArt"exhibitionin Berlin,
27,1938. Courtesythe Archivfur KunstundGeschichte,Berlin.
February
F I G.
zuIil
Ideal
attemptby Bolshevistsand Jewsto create culturaland political anarchyby underminingtraditionalvalues.26Visitorsto
the exhibitionwerealso remindedhowmuchpublic moneyin inflatedDeutschmarks-had been paid forthis "degenerate"art.
Worksin the exhibitionof "degenerate"art had been
confiscated from German public collections.27 They were
described in a guide and on wall labels in a derogatoryand
inflammatorymanner.The exhibitionwas divided into nine
categories, each representing some "negative" aspect of
modernart.28 Worksin one group supposedly encouraged
political anarchythroughartistic anarchyby depicting the
struggling working class and capitalists who "mockingly
make light of the misery of the workers."Anothergroupwas
characterizedas Bolshevistpropagandaagainstmilitaryconscriptionfor portrayingsoldiers as murderersor victims, for
example, contraryto the NationalSocialist ideal of a heroic
art;one such "undesirable"workwas OttoDix's WarCripples
(1920, destroyed),which depicts a grotesqueprocessionof
mutilatedsoldiers.
The exhibition also denigratedthe religious worksof
such artists as Nolde (see fig. 7), referringto them in the
guide as a kind of "hocus-pocus"that makes an "insolent
mockery"of religion. The worksin anothergroupwere supposed to representthe immoralside of "Bolshevist"art, in
whichthe "wholeworldis one big whorehouse"(fig. 9). Some
of the works were called "nigger art" (fig. 10), with the
African and SouthSea islandersupposedlyexemplifyingthe
undesirableracial ideals of modernart.29 Finally, therewas
a group of works characterizedas "total insanity"that included examplesof abstractart.
The Nazis suppressedartwhose contenttheyperceived
as a threat to traditionalvalues and institutions. Images of
prostitutesby ErnstLudwigKirchner(seefig. 9) or Grosz,for
example,werecriticizedforglorifyingtheirsubjects, thereby
contributingto society'smoraldecay and erodingtraditional
familyvalues. The Germansalso consideredstyle a determinant of the "degenerate"characterof art. The figural distortions of Expressionismwere directly linked to the inferior
racial traitsof the artistsor to a "gruesomemalfunctioningof
the eyes" caused by their inferior genetic background; or the
distortions were characterized as a hoax perpetrated on the
unsuspecting public.30
National Socialist art doctrine and the resultant art
policies were carried to extremes. Not only did the Nazis
denigrate modern art and denounce artists, they also confiscated modern art from museums and other collections. In
addition, they expelled artists from their teaching posts; Klee
was one of those to lose his position in 1933. Many artists
ttliehen
erl.obeii?
Jiidist
ll'as
bol~scjhvwis6ische
dile
lsa iixunniorg
all t
ruiss
liebte
besoder'
ii nLiteratiur
4n
rua.i
Pstituteder,
el
he Ltratur.ade
ver chalt Ilr H
1erhwviten
de~r
nese. erhubt isicns
,- n.hafi
weni~
nessiemems.
ne
as snow
U
der
Horrupfio
ouseiianwo
h i LbIiuanimts
Ft.-e.iwr
nei.. II
IBh
Liteher
e i heIt
ude
e-
Cfvs?wIIaem
umd
die
nd
9 Page17 of Entartete"Kunst"Ausstellungsfuhrer,
guideto the
exhibition DegenerateArt,"showing,lowerright,a paintingby ErnstLudwig
Kirchner
andworksby KarlSchmidt-Rottluff
and PaulKleinschmidt.
Courtesy
the Archivfir KunstundGeschichte,Berlin.
FIG.
werealso forbiddento exhibit and sometimeseven to workin
their own studios. Artists whose workwas labeled "degenerate" had to turn to other ways to earn a living, preferably
anonymously;Willi Baumeisterworked as a typographic
designer and Schlemmer, among other things, decorated
ceilings and camouflaged barracks.31Many, like Klee,
Grosz, Wassily Kandinsky, Josef Albers, Feininger, Max
Beckmann, and Kurt Schwitters, left the country. Others
continuedto workand sometimeseven to sell in secret, but
they lived in fearof being discoveredby the authorities.Karl
Schmidt-Rottluff,KatheKollwitz,GerhardMarcks,Barlach,
Nolde, Baumeister,and Schlemmerwere among those who
stayed in Germany,despite pressures, threats, and ostracism. They had to endure seeing their worknot only denigrated, but sometimes destroyed.32Barlachwas one of the
artists who enduredan "innerexile." He wrote, "Apimp or
murdererhas it much better; he enjoys the benefit of an
orderlytrial and even has a chance to clear himself. Wewere
simply repudiatedand if possible destroyed.In this respect,
my conditionis more disastrous than that of an actual exile."33 Artists throughoutGermanyreceived the message
loud and clear: "degenerate"art wouldnotbe tolerated,even
in the artist'sown atelier.
Althoughthere are profounddifferencesin the historiARTJOURNAL
89
90
Ein sehr
uf
ras
%Ci
Man btachhte
rei
hu
he
(lictt
esouders
auh
die
iuntenstehendendrei Malerbild-
nisse, Essind vo ulinks nach rerhis.Der Iater Morgner, geshein von
I . b
'Mlr
sie selst
Rad~iwiIl
n Otto DixD e r Mater
gesebe
Schlemmer, gesebn
Kirchner
von
'L.
E.
cal circumstancesand the respective politicalinstitutionsof
Nazi Germanyand the United States today, leaders in both
societies have utilized rhetoricto politicizeart and to exploit
deep-rootedconcernssharedby large segmentsof theirpopulations, namely,thatan erosionof traditionalvaluesthreatens
a familiar way of life. This rhetoricappeals to the passions
and prejudices of a significant numberof people who view
offensiveor "degenerate"art as a factorcontributingto society's moraldecline. In 1989 SenatorSlade Gorton(R-Wash.),
for example, referredto "'art'-I put that wordin quotation
marks-which attacks the faith, morals, or firmly held beliefs of large numbers."34
Like many examples of modernGermanart that hung
in the Nazis' "DegenerateArt"exhibit, Scott Tyler'sWhatIs
the ProperWayto Display a U.S. Flag (1989), in which an
American flag was displayed on the floor, was attackedas
unpatriotic;AndresSerrano's1987 Piss Christ,a photograph
of a plastic crucifix immersedin a containerof the artist's
urine (fig. 11), has been described as blasphemous;35and
some of Robert Mapplethorpe's homoerotic and sadomasochistic photographshave been labeled obscene and
indecent. When the Mapplethorpeand Serranophotographs
were called "garbage"and "trash"by UnitedStates senators
on the floor of the Senate in 1989,36 they were no less
denigratedthanworksin the Nazis'"DegenerateArt"exhibition;in the wakeofthe recentwarin the PersianGulf, onecan
imagine that the Tylerworkwould now arouse even greater
"patriotic"passions than it did in 1989.
The political right in the United States todayemploys
rhetoricnotonly to denigrateart it disapprovesof, but also to
discredit artists and othermembersof the arts community.37
On the Senatefloor,SenatorHelms disparaginglyreferredto
"so-called art experts," and said of Serrano,"He is not an
artist, he is a jerk."38 When such derogatory rhetoric is
guideto the
FIG. 10 Page7 of Entartete"Kunst"
AusstellungsfiJhrer,
exhibition"DegenerateArt."Theworkspictuedare(clockwise,fromtop left)
by EmilNolde,KarlSchmidt-Rottluff
(paintingand sculpture),ErnstLudwig
Otto Dix,andWilhelmMorgner.Courtesythe ArchivfOrKunstund
Kirchner,
Geschichte,Berlin.
employed,it escalates controversyand inflamesprejudice.It
legitimizes personal attacks and opens up avenuesfor persecution of individuals, as well as groups.
The NationalSocialistcase exemplifiesthe extremesto
which a governmentcan go to controlthe arts or to exploitart
for propagandapurposes, and puts in sharprelief the perils
forthe UnitedStatesof adoptingpolicies by whichpoliticians
have the power to enforce cultural standards and determine
whether art is decent or indecent, uplifting or "degenerate."
It reminds us that we must remain vigilant and not assume
that our democratic processes and institutions will necessarily check excesses in government control of the arts. It
also reminds us of the power of art to inflame prejudice or
touch our deepest concerns.
Notes
This article is a revised version of a paper presented at the College Art Association
annual conferencein New York,February1990. It also drawsupon a paper,"Artand
Politics:Jesse Helms and the NationalEndowmentforthe Arts,"thatI presentedat the
SouthwesternSocial Science Association meeting in FortWorth,March1990, as well
as my doctoraldissertation, "Picasso and His Art during the GermanOccupationof
Paris, 1940-1944" (StanfordUniversity, 1985). I would like to thank RobertStorr,
Lenore Malen, and BarbaraHoffmanfor their comments on earlier versionsof this
WINTER1991
INS
INNER
0i:!i
'MWOWT.
US
Im
3i;
........
..
......
....
....
.
sk';K
MEMO;
lit
XX
oi,
INN
INN
My
Are
mom
ISM
'.
=won
X
.........
f1
O.Z
X..
w:
Opp,
Fil
. ... ....
BREHM.
NOW
%xM
44
KANN
tin
WX
WxX
Ii
...............
W&
yvagm
"z"",
'mZl'
,"'no
M
X''II",
ANNE
?.
FIG. 11 AndresSerrano,Piss Christ,1987, Cibachrome,
60 x 40 inches.CourtesyStuxGallery,NewYork.
..
WN:
92
paper. This research was supported in part by a Limited Grant-in-Aid from the
Universityof Houston.
1. Grosz'sdrawingswere issued in connectionwith ErwinPiscator'sstage production
of TheGoodSoldierSchweik,fromwhich the Germancaption, "Maulhaltenundweiter
dienen," was taken. In his first trial, the local court in Moabitrejected Grosz'sclaim
that he had not "intended to defame the church or to be blasphemous in these
drawings."In his first appeal Groszwas acquitted; the Second CriminalChamberof
RegionalCourtIII, Berlin-Moabit,interpretedGrosz'sdrawingof the crucified Christ
as a legitimate protest"againstthe idea of war. . . and any actions on the part of the
churchthatlend supportto the idea of war."The case subsequentlywentthroughmore
trials and appeals, into 1932, whenthe Reichsgericht(nationalcourt)decided thatthe
printing plates and all copies of the drawing"in the possession of the author, the
printer, the editor, the publisher, or any booksellers"were to be destroyed. The
publisher,however,had alreadydestroyedthe plates and sold impoundedcopies of the
portfolioof drawings. An ironic footnote:after the Nazis came to power in 1933,
Goebbels'sministry requested a copy of Grosz'sdrawingChristwith Gas Maskfrom
the prosecutorof the Generalstaatsanwaltschaft(superior regional court) for a brochure on cultural Bolshevism. Uwe M. Schneede, GeorgeGrosz:The Artist in His
Society, trans. Robertand Rita Kimber(Woodbury,N.Y.: Barron's,1985), 170-75.
2. Hellmut Lehmann-Haupt,Art undera Dictatorship(New York:OxfordUniversity
Press, 1954), 66-67.
3. HildegardBrenner,"Artin the PoliticalPowerStruggle, 1933-34," in Republicto
Reich: The Making of the Nazi Revolution,ed. Hajo Holborn,trans. Ralph Manheim
(New York:Pantheon, 1972), 396; Lehmann-Haupt,Art undera Dictatorship,67.
Frick acted on the advice of ProfessorPaul Schultze-Naumburg,an architect whose
theories on art were racially motivated. See also OskarSchlemmer,TheLettersand
Diaries ofOskarSchlemmer,ed. TutSchlemmer(Evanston,Ill.: NorthwesternUniversity Press, 1990), 272-75.
4. Lehmann-Haupt,Art undera Dictatorship,68.
5. Ibid., 69, 181.
6. AdolfHitler,speech inauguratingthe Haus der Deutschen Kunstand the "Grosse
Deutsche Kunstausstellung," in Herschel B. Chipp, ed., Theoriesof ModernArt,
trans. Ilse Falk (Berkeley: University of CaliforniaPress, 1968), 476-82. For the
Germantext see Hitler:Reden und Proklamationen,1932-1945, ed. MaxDomarus
(WOrzburg:VerlagsdruckereiSchmidt, Neustadt a.d. Aisch, 1962), I:705-10. See
also Hitler's speech of November11, 1935, in Nuremberg,in The Speechesof Adolf
Hitler: April 1922-August 1939, ed. and trans. Norman H. Baynes (New York:
HowardFertig, 1969), 1:569-84.
7. BertholdHinz, Art in the ThirdReich, trans. Robertand Rita Kimber(New York:
Pantheon, 1979), 77-83, 102-3.
8. Hitler, in Chipp, ed., Theories, 482; and Hitler:Reden und Proklamationen,I:
709.
9. Hinz, Art in the ThirdReich,46. MaxNordau,Degeneration,with introductionby
GeorgeL. Mosse (New York:HowardFertig, 1968). ForNordau(bornSfidfeld),one of
the characteristicsof degeneracyis reliance uponthe imagination,ratherthan nature.
Therefore,any art that does not reproducenature is degenerate.Nordauexcuses the
Impressionists, however,forsincerely recordingoptical perceptions,whetherthey be
a result of the visual sensation of "a mass of colour composed of spots of different
greens, on which the sun flashes here and therepoints and raysof light," or the result
of "nystagmus,or tremblingof the eyeball." In either case, however,the artist will
haveproducedan aesthetically and intellectuallyinferiorproduct.Nordau,Degeneration, 483, 27. It is ironic that Nordauwas a Jew and a Zionist, given the anti-Semitic
context in which the concept of degenerationwas used by the Nazis.
10. Lehmann-Haput,Art undera Dictatorship,39-41.
11. Jacques Sabile, "Introduction,"in Le Pillage par les Allemandsdes oeuvresd'art
et des bibliothdques
appartenant t des Juifs en France:Receuildes documents,ed. Jean
Cassou (Paris: Editions du Centre, 1947), 33; Hinz, Art in the ThirdReich, 45-46.
12. Because modern, "degenerate"artists often created within an international
context, they were accused of being Bolshevist. Hinz, Art in the ThirdReich, 11.
13. Carl Einstein's Die Kunst des 20. Jahrhunderts, vol. 16 (Berlin: PropylaienKunstgeschichte, 1931), which deals exclusively with art and artists considered
"modern"by its author,was used by the NationalSocialists as a referenceto identify
their opponentsin the visual arts. Hinz, Art in the ThirdReich, 24-25, 228, n. 22.
14. See Sabile, "Introduction,"in Le Pillage par les Allemands, 25.
15. See Entartete "Kunst"Ausstellungsfiihrer,published by Fritz Kaiser (Berlin:
Verlagfur Kultur-und Wirtschaftswerbung,1937), 14. This was not a catalogueper
se, but rathera guide to the travelingexhibitionthat presented the NationalSocialist
propagandaabout "degenerate"art, including excerpts from Hitler's speech inauguratingthe Haus der Deutschen Kunst, illustratedwith examplesof "degenerate"art
thatmay have been in the exhibition. Note the use of quotationmarksaroundthe word
Kunst (art) in the title. The guide is reproducedin Franz Roh, "Entartete"Kunst:
Kunstbarbereiim DrittenReich(Hanover:Fackeltriger-Verlag,1962) and in Stephanie
Barron, ed., "DegenerateArt":The Fate of the Avant-Gardein Nazi Germany,exh.
cat. (Los Angeles: Los Angeles County Museum of Art, 1991), 356-90, with
translationby David Britt.
16. The iconographyof womanin NationalSocialist painting is discussed in Hinz,
Art in the Third Reich, 149-55, and Christian Gross and Uwe Grossman, "Die
WINTER 1991
Darstellungder Frau,"in Kunstim 3. Reich:Documenteder Unterwerfung,exh. cat.
(Frankfurtam Main: FrankfurterKunstverein,1975), 182-92.
17. See Sabile, "Introduction,"in Le Pillage par les Allemands, 20-22.
18. Brenner,"Artin the Political PowerStruggle,"398.
19. Alfred Rosenberg, "Revolutionin the Fine Arts?"Selected Writings,ed., with
introduction, by Robert Pois (London:JonathonCape, 1970), 159-60. Originally
RedenundAufsitze
publishedin Blut undEhre, ein KampffiirdeutscheWiedergeburt,
von 1919-1933 (Munich:Thilo von Trotha,1935).
20. Lehmann-Haupt,Art undera Dictatorship,72-73; Brenner,"Artin the Political
PowerStruggle,"400-401, 407.
21. Albert Speer, Inside the Third Reich, trans. Richard and Clara Winston (New
York:Macmillan, 1970), 32-33.
22. Hitler, in Chipp, ed., Theories,482.
23. Ibid., 480. Forpersonal accounts of the exhibitionsee Paul O. Rave, Kunstdiktatur im Dritten Reich (Hamburg: Verlag Gebr. Mann, 1949), 56-57; and Peter
Guenther,"Three Days in Munich, July 1937," in Barron, ed., Fate of the AvantGarde, 33-43. See also Mario-Andreasvon Liittichau, "EntarteteKunst, Munich
1937: A Reconstruction,"in Barron,ed., Fate of the Avant-Garde,45-81.
24. This and the previousquotationare from Hitler, in Chipp, ed., Theories,482.
25. WilhelmTreue,ArtPlunder, trans. Basil Creighton(New York:JohnDay, 1961),
233. Ziegler was also a painterof realistic nudes, who was dubbed"masterof German
pubic hair." Hinz, Art in the Third Reich, 38. The first exhibitions in Hitler's
art were installed in 1933. One in Nurembergwas
Germanyto denigrate modemrn
called "Chamberof Horrors."See a list of these exhibitions in ChristophZuschlag,
"An 'EducationalExhibition':The Precursorsof EntarteteKunst and Its Individual
Venues,"in Barron, ed., Fate of the Avant-Garde,98-101.
26. See Entartete "Kunst"Ausstellungsfiihrer,2, 4.
27. Forworksin the "DegenerateArt"exhibition see Rave, Kunstdiktatur,79-81,
and Mario-Andreasvon Littichau, "EntarteteKunst, Munich 1937: A Reconstruction," in Barron, ed., Fate of the Avant-Garde,49-80. Forworksconfiscated from
Germanmuseums see Roh, "Entartete"
Kunst, 123-248, and several reproductions
following.
28. See Entartete "Kunst"Ausstellungsfiihrer,6-22.
29. In Der Mythus des 20. Jahrhunderts(Munich, 1933), Alfred Rosenbergwrote
that Paul Gauguin was "inwardlyrottenand confused," seeking ideal beauty in the
South Seas, until this search resulted in chaos. Cited in JosephWulf, Die bildenden
Kiinsteim Dritten Reich (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). See also Entartete "Kunst"Ausstellungsfiihrer,18.
31. See Lehmann-Haupt,Art undera Dictatorship,84-87, including Baumeister's
personal account; Schlemmer,Lettersand Diaries, 371-78; and Roh, "Entartete"
Kunst, 61-65 and 115-19.
32. Schlemmer,Lettersand Diaries, 272-75; Carl Dietrich Carls, Ernst Barlach
(NewYork:Praeger,1969), 172, 197-98, 201-2; and WernerHaftmann,Emil Nolde:
UnpaintedPictures (New York:Praeger,1971), 12-13, 17.
33. Barlach, quoted in Roh, "Entartete"
Kunst, 65, my translation.
34. SenatorSlade Gorton,CongressionalRecord, October7, 1989, S 12970.
35. Serranohas said that his photographwas "absolutelynotcalculated to offend."It
represents"first and foremost. . . my Catholic upbringing, and my ambivalenceto
that upbringing,being drawnto Christyet resisting organizedreligion."He explained
that he used urine because it is one of "life'svital fluids," like bloodand milk, which
he has also used in his work, and that it produced"a quite vivid and vibrant color."
Quoted in William H. Honan, "AndresSerrano:Contradictionsin Life and Work,"
New YorkTimes (national edition), August 16, 1989, 22.
36. SenatorJesse Helms, CongressionalRecord,October7, 1989, S 12969, S 12973;
SenatorTrentLott, CongressionalRecord, October7, 1989, S 12975.
37. In the United States the conservatives, especially those on the Christianright,
also campaign against offensive content in the print media, television, movies, and
music videos. See, for example, Richard Bolton, "The Cultural Contradictionsof
Conservatism,"NewArtExaminer17 (June1990), 24-29, 72. Fora discussion of the
broaderaims of the political right and how art issues fit in, see Goggin, "Artand
Politics: Jesse Helms and the National Endowment for the Arts." The anti"degenerate"cultural campaign in Nazi Germanywas aimed at books, music, and
film as well as art. See Michael Meyer,"AMusical Facadefor the Third Reich," and
William Moritz,"Film CensorshipDuring the Nazi Era," in Barron,ed., Fate of the
Avant-Garde.
38. Helms, CongressionalRecord, October7, 1989, S 12968; and Helms, Congressional Record,May18, 1989, S 5595, cited in CaroleS. Vance,"TheWaron Culture,"
Art in America77 (September1989): 39.
MARY-MARGARET
GOGGIN
is assistant professor at the
Universityof Houston. She is currently completing a booklength study of Picasso and his art during the German
occupation of Paris.