Shantanu Tilak Research Methods in LCS

Prof. Hyesu Park

THE SUPERIMPOSITION OF NAZI PROPAGANDA ONTO ART, CULTURE AND

POLITICS

The definitions of art and the distinctions between good

and bad art are extremely blurred, but art can be

contextualised in an aesthetic sense to belong to a certain

category. These categories are based on the socio-cultural

scenario of a particular Art, culture and politics run

parallel to one another, as if they were trains running along

the tracks of time that explain the fluctuation of social and

cultural patterns. I wish to analyse this relationship between

the three aforementioned entities by conducting research about

the art within the World War II era, with a specific focus on

propagandist Nazi Art. Taking the illustrated books, newspaper

illustrations, and other artistic media from the Nazi era into

consideration as primary texts, and supporting it with

secondary theoretical discourse, I aim to create a validated

research analogy. In this research paper, I will also look at

the significance of propaganda in today’s cultural scenario,

in order to provide a holistic understanding of the

relationship between art, culture and political phenomena.

(Berman 65-66)

IDEOLOGY IS CONFIGURED BY ART, CULTURE AND POLITICS

Ideology is something that we are involved in

subconsciously, without knowing it. The way the political

authority transforms information that is fed to us in the

social world greatly influences the way culture evolves. Art

is a by-product of the societal constructs of economic

redistribution and the type of authority presiding over a

geographical area. It can distort ideology based on the

message it portrays. Propaganda is something that art can

spread like wildfire. It can break ideology, and form a new

breed of ideology depending on the type of reaction it

receives. Williams and Hoggart say that

“Art is a benefit of redistributive government conferred upon

the masses; art works to undermine traditional social beliefs;

art is a way of articulating belief in a new social order

founded upon a new kind of human personality.” (Berman 65)

Art is an extremely powerful form of expression. It can be

used by the general public, and the authorities to express

views and ideologies. In the free space of democratic artistic

license, the meaning of art is often muddled. There is

propaganda from both sides because of the allowance for

freedom of expression, and the meaning is lost. The notion of

political art in democracy is still quite misconstrued,

because democracy has its way of deceiving its partakers into

thinking they have much more freedom than they really do! If

we put on the ‘iedology glasses’ that Jijek tells us to in ‘A

Pervert’s Guide to Ideology’, we will be able to see the lies

fed to us, but that would not make for a happy existence.

Democracy does, indeed grant greater mobility to masses, but

the way it gives an ‘illusory feeling’ of an acquisition of

some form of excess through the facilities it grants us. In

the autocratic society, the lines are strictly drawn. It is

clear to the public that the authority is not to be messed

with. The manipulation of ideology is inevitable, since people

are socialized to think in one particular way that conforms to

the ruling power’s views. There do exist contrasting

perspectives in an autocracy, but these are often considered

disagreeable and vanquished. Thus, the way a ruling power

handles the ideology fed to its public i.e. its political

activity, the art produced in this time frame, and the

cultural beliefs and traditions that develop as a by-product

of political activity, all run parallel to one another.

(Jijek) Propaganda may have mainly been directed at the public

in the World War II era, but today, propaganda is everywhere.

It omnisciently looms over all our mental ideologies whether

we know it or not, and is a by-product of the relation between

art, culture and politics. Configuring the above postulated

relation in a cultural context is extremely important in order

to totally understand it. In this research paper, I will be

looking at the World War II era, with detailed reference to

Nazi propaganda related to World War II and anti-Semitism, in

order to establish the parallel between art, culture and

politics. This research paper is divided into several

different sections, that encompass the various aspects of Nazi

propaganda, which was aimed at fostering a spirit of general

anti-Semitism and promoting false views of a peaceful German

subcontinent.

HITLER’S PROPAGANDA

When a government is over-authoritative, it tends to

excessively filter the information that is granted to members

of society. The suffocation of ideas that are granted to

society is often a result of the fear for conflict with ideas

of policy that are set in stone. Looking at it from the

reverse perspective, from the view of the government rather

than as a part of society, I feel that it is but natural to

think of ‘freedom of thought’ as an obstacle. (McMasters

22)Censorship is not only a restriction, it is a sort of

distortion of the truth that filters what is ‘permitted’. Art

is not only a way of communication. It tends to express the

cultural context of the period in which it was created. In

Nazi Germany, art was tailor-made in order to manipulate the

public in the favour of the Nazi regime. On the other side of

the spectrum was the public, who expressed their concern about

the ongoing oppressive governmental policy. (Goggin 7)

The Nazi regime was known for its dictatorial stance, and its

deep seated hatred for the Jewish sub-population in Germany.

The Jewish population faced ill-treatment and abuse in

concentration camps because they were considered to be a

‘stain’ on the image of a ‘pure Germany’.

“the belief that Jews were the root of all evil and that

Germany could be saved from collapse only by total removal of

Jews and the

Jewish influence.” (Bergen viii)

This ideology of a ‘pure Germany’ and the hatred for Jews

caused the word ‘Jew’ to become associated with a string of

stereotypes. According to the Nazi ideology, the Aryan race

must overpower and exterminate the Jewish community in order

to maintain racial purity. The time of the Weimar Republic was

the time when more Modern types of Art came into the picture.

But the Weimar Republic failed miserably at its political

agenda. Hitler constantly brought up the failings of the

Weimar Republic and the Jews in relation to Modern art, jazz

music etc., saying that they distort reality and lure one away

from the attainment of absolute racial purity. Hitler was

clearly a very persuasive man, because he somehow managed to

garner public support.

In the Mein Kampf, Hitler says that “This cleansing of

our culture must be extended to all fields. Theatre, art,

literature, cinema, posters, and window displays must be

cleansed of all manifestations of our rotting world and placed

in the service of a moral, political, and cultural idea.”

(Hitler 130)The idea of cleansing culture itself it extremely

‘dictatorial’ in a sense. It aims to show the existence of a

view that the prevalent culture needs to be sanitized, and is

not currently satisfactory. The real underlying reason behind

it is to persuade the crowds and the public to pander to Nazi

ideology. The artistic output of the Nazi era is so highly

influenced by ideas of leadership and domination, and is

obsessed with the portrayal of the Nazi regime in a positive

light. It is important to note that certain forms of art were

perpetuated within society as ‘appropriate’, while certain

forms were suppressed heavily. Modern art was labelled as

‘degenerate’, for example, and its end was marked by and

exhibition, which was ironical in the purest sense.

THE END OF MODERN ART- THE DEGENERATE ART EXHIBITION

Modern art was considered by the Nazis to be instrumental

in distorting our reality

and swaying us from the

path to absolute racial

purity. Modern art was

often associated with the

Jewish population and

basically, anything

considered inferior to the Nazi regime. All forms of Modern

Art was considered to be outlawed, and the Modernist movement

was curtailed in Nazi Germany through an extremely ironic

device: an art exhibition.

“Never before or since has a government made such an elaborate

public effort to

defame an art movement” (Baker 1)

The propaganda was almost forced down the throats of the

public, who were instructed about the ‘dangers’ and

‘disillusionments’ associated with Modern Art. The exhibition

aimed to manipulate the minds of the public by defining for

them what ‘degenerate’ and ‘unacceptable’ is. It only took

around two weeks of planning to hold the Degenerate Art

Figure 1: Hitler and his associates stand before the Dadaism section of the Entartete Kunst Exhibition. The walls are scribbled on with anti-Dada comments and demeaning statements (Galerie)

Exhibition (1937), and it was deliberately made to look like a

haphazard set up. Since all forms of Modern art were

considered to be ‘non-art’, the Nazis decided to make their

views about the value of Modern art quite clear. The pieces on

display were laid around the exhibition space in a haphazard,

cluttered manner to symbolize the ‘chaos’ that Modernism had

managed to instil into the cultural fabric of Germany.

(Grosshans 107) Around six hundred and fifty sculptures,

paintings, prints and books considered to be an exercise in

Modernism were lifted from German public museums as well as

privately owned art collections and hung around the decrepit

exhibition space, accompanied by derisive and demeaning text.

In order to deride Modern art, the pieces on display were

presented in a haphazard manner (often hung with cords),

incorrectly labelled, and also, wrongly classified. They were

displayed without even giving any regard to their original

context. Thus, the exhibition was meant to defame and

represent Modern art as something that was ‘not appropriate’

for the achievement of racial purity. (Levi 41-43)

The initial exhibit was orchestrated on the second floor of a

building that formerly housed the national Institute of

Archaeology. The viewers were made to climb a narrow, dingy

staircase in order to enter. The first sculpture on display,

at the entrance, was a large, theatrical (skeletal) portrait

of Jesus, which was meant to intimidate viewers as they

entered, literally bumping into it. The ‘rooms’ within the

exhibition space were made with partitions of temporary cloth,

and the atmosphere seemed to be scattered, and out of place.

There were three main classifiable

sections to the

exhibition; based on

religion, German

rural life and

femininity and

Semitic art. The rest

of the exhibition

was not classified on

any basis. Works by Wassily Kandinsky,

Erick Heckel,, Ernst Ludwig Kirchner, Max Beckmann and Paul

Klee, among several others, were displayed and defamed at the

Figure 3: Crucifix (Gies)

Figure 2: A Street Scene by Ernst Ludwig Kirschner (Kirchner)

exhibition. (Degenerate Art: The Attack on Modern Art in Nazi

Germany, 1937)

Speeches that were delivered often contrasted the

manifestos of Dadaism, Surrealism, and other Modernist

movements. There were also

notes attached to several works displayed indicating the

amount of money that was required to acquire the paintings

from museums. The Weimar post war inflation in the 1920’s led

to a great exaggeration of prices for art. The exhibition was

orchestrated as propaganda to deride Modern art as something

that defies or alienates the concept of German decency

(financial modesty during the periods of inflation) and racial

purity. The aforementioned criteria can be classified as

‘Jewish-Bolshevist’, but it is interesting to see that only 6

Figure 4: A Public Auction to sell off the Modernist paintings (Galerie)

of the 112 artists condemned through the exhibition were

Jewish. It is important to see that there was hardly any heed

paid to this fact, and that the ‘Jewish sensibility’ was

proved to be only a minute characteristic in the filtering of

visual culture provided to the masses. The ideology was

skewed, yet again. The destruction of Jewish art was used as a

sort of pretext to vanquish anything that was Modern. After

the exhibition, public auctions were held to sell off the

pieces of art, and some were also burned. (Hawley)

The exhibition aimed to sanitize and filter the public’s

perspective about art, as well as the Nazi regime. It moved

from city to city in Germany, even through Berlin. By

expanding the duration of the exhibition, the Nazis were able

to expand its influence to a much larger group of German

locals. (Dinsmore, 20) The goal was not to enlighten the

public and pique their curiosity, but to crudely display the

peculiarities of Modern art to the general public as a

terrifying spectacle and reaffirm the Nazi ideology. The

concept of Modernity was filtered out of the German social

stream of consciousness as favourable. Just as there were

forms of art that were prohibited from being considered as

‘favourable’, there was also art in the Nazi era that was

forced down the throats of the society of that period.

ART CONSIDERED ‘APPROPRIATE’ BY THE NAZI REICH

Nazi Political Art was the art that was considered to be

appropriate for viewing by German society. Hitler was a keen

manipulator of propaganda, and the newspaper illustrations

that were featured in texts read every morning by the German

public contained strong anti-semitic messages. The news and

other popular culture were strongly directed against the

Jewish population. An anti-Semitic newspaper called ‘Der

Sturmer’ was published during the World War II era, by Julius

Streicher. ‘Der Sturmer’ contained illustrations that were

meant to be instrumental in swaying the opinion of the German

public against the Jews. In this section of the research

paper, I will be looking at illustrations from anti-Semitic

newspapers and paintings from the Nazi era as primary texts of

reference to establish the analogy between culture, art and

politics. This art is said to have been one of the key forms

of propaganda through popular media at the time. It served to

distort the ideology perpetuating within German society to

pander to the Nazi autocratic rule.

NEWSPAPER ILLUSTRATIONS IN ‘DER STURMER’:

The picture shown in the newspaper

excerpt shows a ritual murder or

sacrifice from an anti-Semitic

myth. Such rampant and shameless

depiction of anti-Semitic visual

culture in newspaper among other

popular

media

was

like a tool, used to morph the

ideology of the general public in

Germany into one that had an anti-

Semitic tinge to it. Such

propaganda was widely published in

newspapers like ‘Der Sturmer’

Figure 5: Der Sturmer depicts an anti-Semitic ritualmurder (Streicher, Der Sturmer)

Figure 6: Jewish symbolism was widely prevalent in the Nazi era (Streicher, Der Sturmer)

which were blatantly anti-Semitic in nature. Another

illustration from the newspaper is depicted below. It shows

the concept of German femininity being killed and destroyed by

a snake covered in patterns made of Jewish stars. This is a

use of symbolism and icons of Jewish power as propaganda

against the Jews themselves.

The controversial images displayed in the news of the era were

a clear indication of the political scenario of the time. The

art used was meant to change the cultural context and ideology

that pervaded among the general public in Germany. This sudden

desire for a change in ideology, expressed through popular

media, is a direct consequence of political activity and

societal constructs (anti-Semitism, dictatorship) at the time.

The Nazi rule aimed to establish an absolute autocratic rule

over society. The Nazi ideology was almost unreasonable; they

sought to eradicate all opposition, regard Germany as

‘Fatherland’, and spread anti-Semitic notions and constructs

as the standard ideological thought pattern. All of this

evidence was used against the Nazi regime in the proceedings

of the Nuremberg trials.

The Nuremberg trials sought to bring all the Nazi war crimes

to justice after the Second World War. A military tribunal was

elected, and trials were conducted in Germany as well as

several other countries. Twelve prominent Nazis were sentenced

to death, and others were given prison terms, or no penalty at

all. The evidence used included several of the articles and

images in anti-Semitic media such as ‘Der Sturmer’.

Some artistic and illustrative

depictions seemed to take on an

extremely sarcastic but dark tone. The

image shown depicts a giant Octopus

engulfing the Earth with its tentacles

that ooze a dark ink. The most evident

form of Symbolism in this image is the

Star of David that hovers over the

Octopus’ head. A strong correlation

that I made with this image is the fact that Octopuses have

multiple brains, and hence can be considered to have some form

of ‘diabolical’ intelligence. The purpose of this image used

as anti-Semitic propaganda may be to sway public opinion into

Figure 7: The Star of David was to be synonymous with sin (Streicher, Der Sturmer)

thinking that the Jews were ‘diabolical’ and presented an

obstacle in achieving the ultimate racial purity. (A Teacher's

Guide to Nazi Propaganda)

DER GIFTPILZ

‘Der Giftpilz’ (The Poisonous

Mushroom) is a children’s picture

book that was published by Julius

Streicher’s publishing house in 1938.

It seems like a harmless picture book

aimed at mentally and visually

stimulating children, but the

captions underneath each picture seem

to tell a totally different tale. They are seen to be quite

blatantly anti-Semitic in nature. Even the cover of the book,

depicts an almost demonic looking poisonous mushroom with a

Star of David etched into its flesh. The Anti-Semitic tinge to

this eerie illustration is quite

evident, and the contents of the book also contain such

deriding content. This shows how autocratic Nazi ideology was

meant to permeate the society longitudinally, across all ages,

Figure 8: Der Giftpilz was chalk full of anti-Semitic propaganda (Hiemer)

whether it was children or mature adults. The ideology aimed

at modifying the socialization

into something that almost

resembled a mould, adhering to

fixed constructs and notions. The

pictorial representations of the

Jew shown in ‘Der Giftpilz’ was

aimed at morphing the ideology of

children to believe that Jews were

indeed, a bane to society. Jews

are associated with being criminals and sinners throughout the

contents of the seemingly harmless picture book. They are

looked at as being conniving and shrewd, and as fostering a

greed for financial resource. In the image shown, a small

(probably Jewish) boy hands a poisonous mushroom to a lady.

The caption underneath says

“Just as it is often hard to tell a toadstool from an edible

mushroom, so too it is often very hard to recognize the Jew as

a swindler and criminal...” (Hiemer)

Jews have always been depicted as greedy and lecherous in

anti-Semitic propaganda. The illustration shown depicts a

well-fed Jewish man sitting on a giant bag of gold. The

caption reads,

“The God of the Jews is money. To

earn money, he commits the

greatest crimes. He will not rest until he can sit on a huge

money sack, until he has become the king of money.” (Hiemer)

It is true that Jews held some of the most prestigious

occupational positions before the Nazi regime because of the

resilience they showed in the economic sector. A marked

characteristic of the Jewish community was their financial

prosperity. The Nazi government’s main goal was to convince

the German public that the Jews brought them to poverty by

taking up their occupational

opportunities. This is an example of

blatant usage of stereotypes to

condition the minds of readers. Since

this book in particular is aimed at

children, the permeation of these

stereotypes into the mental framework of

young minds would lead to a quicker perpetuation of these

stereotypes and notions. Thus, such propagandistic material is

Figure 9: The Jews were associated with villainy and sin quite blatantly (Hiemer)

Figure 10: Greed (Hiemer)

like a mental manipulation tool used by the Nazi regime in

order to condition its followers. (German Propaganda Archive)

DIE BRENNESSEL

Brennessel was a German humour

magazine, which was published for 7

years, from 1931 to 1938. The magazine

contained a lot of smug and dry

humour, and was not really appreciated

by general public for what it was

worth. The humour was too dark and

smug to be laughed at. The anti-

Semitic references were extremely blatant. The eerie jokes

about the oppression of the Jews were extremely obvious forms

of propaganda. The circulation of the magazine declined slowly

through the Nazi era, and stopped in 1938. Illustrations and

humour strips from the magazine include one captioned ‘Then

Figure 11: Then and Now (Die Brennessel)

and Now’. This illustration depicts a Jew stealing from the

farm in the past, whereas the

present scenario shows him

being stopped by the law i.e.

the Nazi regime. As mentioned

before, the Jews were depicted

as conniving thieves who will

even perform crimes to attain

financial self-sufficiency.

This depiction of the

Jewscould be correlated to how they most often occupied the

highest paying occupations within German society.

The Jews were said to be in control of the Press before the

onset of the Nazi regime, since a lot of Jews occupied

positions within publishing houses. This was considered by the

Nazis to be an enslavement of the press by the Jewish

community. These sentiments were expressed in Brennessel

through illustrations such as “ A Scene from the Good Old

Days” which depicts the enslavement of the press by the Jews.

This is an extremely ironical sentiment, because the press was

heavily manipulated by the Figure 12: "A Scene From the Good Old Days" (Die Brennessel)

Nazis themselves in order to harbour anti-Semitic sentiments

within society. (German Popaganda Archive)

POLITICAL ILLUSTRATIONS ABOUT WORLD WAR II

Germany was at the heart of World War

II, with Hitler’s autocratic power

playing quite a pivotal role in how the

nations participating in the war aligned

themselves. Italy, Germany and Japan

were the Axis Powers, and Britain,

France and The United States formed the

Allies. The two warring sections were

at constant loggerheads over ideology, and formed a series of

military pacts in their battle against one another. In

relation to the ideology of the nations participating of the

war, the thought patterns of German society were morphed by

propagandistic material. Some German cartoons from various

sources illustrate how the Nazis presented Germany as

‘innocent, being forced into battle’ in general. This meant to

morph the way people thought about the autocracy of the Nazi

rule. The prints and illlustrations were spread across several

magazines such as Die Brennessel and Simplicissimus.

Figure 11: "The Campaign Of Lies" (Grimmelshausen)

The illustration shown is from the 1939 edition of the German

magazine, Simplicissimus. The print is known as ‘The Campaign

of Lies’. It depicts several demonic reptilian creatures

emerging from a portal of sorts. These creatures are said to

represent the ‘loyal troops’ of the democratic nations, sent

to encircle and usurp Germany from its position of power. It

aims to depict democracy as a fundamental lie, and say that it

leads to demonic notions and patterns of thought. ‘The troops

of democracy’ are shown to be demonic and scaly, just like the

ideology they perpetuate. The main idea was to present Germany

in a positive light, to say that it was being interfered with

by the Allied Powers.

The depiction of Germany as innocent

was also carried out through propaganda

regarding the constantly ongoing arms

race between the Axis and Allied

powers. The illustration shown depicts

the bad dream that a French Armaments

manufacturer has. He is contemplating

about the ongoing arms race between France and Germany, and is

presumably bothered about how France does not seem to want to

Figure 12: The French Armaments maker suffers a predicament (Die Brennessel)

come to an agreement with Germany. This depiction of the

French standpoint was put out to masses in Die Brennessel in

the 1930’s, and aimed to manipulate the stance of German

society about Nazi political activity (which was strongly

rooted in dictatorship, oppressive activity and anti-

Semitism). It also aimed at morphing the notion that German

society had about other nations to one that was less

favourable. Thus, propaganda was always omnisciently pervading

like a thick fog through Nazi Germany, unsuspectingly

suffocating its consumers, much like any ideological

manipulation does. The artistic output, when situated in the

cultural context of the Nazi era,

gives rise to discourse about the

political scenario of the time,

thus helping us reach the

parallel between art, culture and

politics.

SCULPTURES

Sculpture was used as a form of propaganda by the Nazis as

well. Hitler’s favourite forms of artistic output were

sculpture and architecture. Sculptures made during the Nazi

era often depicted human figures with robust and muscular

bodies to define the concept of German supremacy, physical

vitality and genetic racial purity. Arno Breker was Hitler’s

favorite sculptor. His work, which comprised of muscular and

toned figures of German warriors and

athletes dominated public spaces within

Germany, such as the Olympic Stadium.

The sculptures, which seemed to be full

of physical vitality, sought to

represent the mighty momentum and

willpower of the Reich. The main aim

was to penetrate the minds of the German public to make them

trust and believe in the Reich as the supreme power, in order

to extend the life of the Nazi regime, and surpass all other

ruling bodies. Breker was ‘De-Nazified’ by 1948, after being

tried, since he feigned ignorance regarding the atrocities

committed by the Reich. (Fitscher)

PROPAGANDA IN GERMAN SOCIETY

Societal ideology was morphed by Nazi propaganda, and it

is clear to see that the Nazis were hell-bent on depicting the

Jews as sinners, and creating a deluded illusion of a peaceful

Germany. There were some groups within German society that

were growing concerned about this propaganda, and decided to

fight back with propaganda that reversed the roles, portraying

the Nazi Reich in a negative light. John Heartfield, a member

of the German Dada group, can be considered as one of the most

prominent artists belonging to this wave of anti-Nazi

propaganda. George Grosz is well known for his contribution in

propagandistic art during World War I, and also collaborated

with Heartfiled. However, he was exiled in 1939. He went off

to the United States , but Heartfield continued on with his

comical and scattered photomontages that were quite blatantly

anti-Nazi. In 1932, an anti-Nazi poster, called ‘Hitler the

Superman Swallows Gold and Spouts Junk’ was printed. This

image is a clear symbolism of the hypocritical and deceiving

nature of the Nazi Reich, which portrayed Germany as peaceful.

The image is very fragmented, and combines dark elements with

pop art, resulting in an eerie but comical visual perception.

the Nazis used propaganda in order to say the general public

into following the dictatorship of Hitler, almost like a

religion. Heartfield spent much of his time running from Nazi

army officials sent out to capture him and vanquish him, and

hence his art did not receive the recognition it truly

deserved. He was exiled from Germany to London, but returned

to Germany after the War. He died in Berlin, in 1968. (J. J.

Heartfield)

It is clear to see from the artistic output of the Nazi era

that there was propaganda from both sides. It is important to

look at ideologies from both sides instead of coming up with

binary oppositions about a phenomenon like propaganda, in

order to avoid veering into

the terrain of a biased

thesis. A holistic view of

propaganda is only obtained

when it is looked at

sequentially as well. When

past propaganda is looked at

from the present, it acquires

a different context altogether. This explanation of the rear-

Figure 17: The Cross (J. Heartfield)

view perspective would be necessary to complete my thesis

about art, culture and politics in a spatio-temporal

continuum, parallel to one another.

HOW CAN WE USE THE POSTULATED RELATION BETWEEN ART, CULTURE

AND POLITICS TODAY?

Propaganda still exists, looming over us constantly. It is an

instrument for use by the government as well as by the general

public. Propaganda is what morphs our thinking patterns to

suit the creator, but the results of this effect depend on the

type of law-making policies and governing techniques used. It

is clear that the propaganda of the Nazi era was blatant in

its anti-Semitism and its lies about Germany being innocent,

and forced into war. The main purpose was to deride the Jews,

Modern art, and everything that went against ‘German decency’

and ‘racial purity’.

Today, however, the issues that lead to propaganda are quite

different. Gender issues plague the modern world, with

feminists asserting the need for gender equality, some even

misconstruing the concept of feminism itself. Art today is a

manifestation of abstract thoughts, of ideology as well as of

the political and cultural scenario of the times. It is a

highly subjective entity. From Williams’ scholarly discourse

about good and bad art in ‘The Long Revolution’, it is clear

that there is a blurred distinction between good and bad art

because of its subjectivity. It is more important as to ‘how’

a work of art puts forth its message than how it looks. The

medium is inseparable from the message, and the message here

seeks to sway ideology through propaganda. (Berman 67)

As time passes, the view of a particular piece of art

made in a particular era changes. The purpose shifts from

directly absorbing the propagandistic messages to merely

observing them. Marshall McLuhan said that ‘we look at our

past with a rear view mirror’ (Pressman), which means that as

the present moves on with the ticking of the clock, we have

the constant liberty to simultaneously interpret the past and

understand cultural contexts. The propaganda is viewed from

the standpoint of the era in which it was created, by us.

Thus, temporal volatility and the passage of time itself

dictate how propaganda from a particular era is viewed. For

example, Arno Breker’s sculptures were put up for display in

2006 at a massive retrospective exhibition. Here, the key word

is ‘retrospective’. Breker’s work may have contributed to

Germany’s political goals in the Nazi era, but today we only

look at it in retrospect, for the effect it had in its time.

The exhibit in , called ‘Museum Arno Breker’. It means to look

at the ideology spread by the Nazis in relation to art, and

falsify it. The removal of Modern Art from the cultural

context of Nazi Germany, deeming it as ‘degenerate’, is

something that would be viewed today as ridiculous, or

inhibiting the freedom of expression. The exhibition serves to

show what ideology not to follow when it comes to artistic

expression. It serves to show that Breker is as good as any

other sculptor, and not extraordinary just because of the

meaning and intention of his art. The configurations of time

are extremely important when it comes to analysing

propagandistic artistic output. Thus, today’s propaganda will

be viewed from a rear view mirror 50 years from now.

(Fitscher)

CONCLUSION

Thus, from the analysis of artistic output from the World

War II era as well as the 21st century, it is clear that

propaganda still pervades within society, however in a very

different way. The relation between art, culture and politics

boils down to the basic notion of developing an ideology

within the minds of the masses. Ideology is shaped by art, and

the other forms of propaganda that is fed to a society.

Depending on the freedom of movement given to the masses by a

government, the type of ideology developed definitely differs.

The way in which the nature of propaganda has changed from

being blatantly obvious to being subtle and humorous by simply

changing the cultural context shows us how art, culture and

politics run parallel to one another. The relationship is

inevitable, and universal. The three entities perpetuate in

sync with one another in a specific spatio-temporal setting.

Works CitedA Teacher's Guide to Nazi Propaganda. 2010. 11 September 2015.

<http://fcit.usf.edu/holocaust/arts/artprop.htm>.

Baker, Kenneth. ""A Nightmare of an Exhibition That Really Happened."." Smithsonian Articles (1991): 1. Digital. <<http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-5472083_ITM>>.

Bergen, Doris. War and Genocide: A Concise History of the Holocaust. London: Rowman and Littlefield, 2009. Print.

Berman, Ronald. Art, Culture, Education and Politics. Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 1984. PDF. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/3332500>.

Breker, Arno. Prometheus. Sculpture. 1937.

Degenerate Art: The Attack on Modern Art in Nazi Germany, 1937. 2014. 11 September2015. <http://www.neuegalerie.org/content/degenerate-art-attack-modern-art-nazi-germany-1937>.

Die Brennessel. Munich: Eher Nachf, 1934. Print.

Fitscher, Caroline. Why Mention Arno Breker Today? The work of the Nazi sculptor ison exhibit. 2006. 11 September 2015. <http://www.atlantic-times.com/archive_detail.php?recordID=602>.

Galerie, Neue. "Degenerate Art." 2015. Antiques and The Arts Weekly. 11 September 2015. <https://antiquesandthearts.smugmug.com/Covers/Degenerate-Art-April-14/>.

German Popaganda Archive. n.d. Web. 11 September 2015. <http://research.calvin.edu/german-propaganda-archive/brenn1.htm>.

German Propaganda Archive. 2013. Web. 11 September 2015. <http://research.calvin.edu/german-propaganda-archive/thumb.htm>.

Gies, Ludwig. Crucifix. Lubeck. Sculpture. 1921.

Goggin, M. ""Decent vs. Degenerate Art"." Art Journal 50.4 (1991): 7. Digital. <<http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.lib.calpoly.edu/ehost/detail?hid=7&sid>.

Grimmelshausen, Hans J. C, and Mike Mitchell. Simplicissimus. Dedalus, 1999. Print.

Grosshans, Henry. Hitler and the Artists. New York: Holmes and Meier, 1983.Print.

Hawley, Charles. ""Nazi Degenerate Art Rediscovered in Berlin"." Der Spiegel 2010. Print.

Heartfield, John. Hitler the Superman. Photo Montage. 1932.

Heartfield, John. The Cross. Photo Montage.1939.

Heartfield, John. J. John Heartfield Archives. 2013. Web. 11 September 2015. <http://www.johnheartfield.com/John-Heartfield-Exhibition/john-heartfield-art>.

Hiemer, Ernst. Der Giftpilz. Nuremberg: Sturmverlag, 1938. Print.

Hitler, Adolf. Mein Kampf. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1971. Print.

Kirchner, Ersnt. A Street Scene. Berlin, 1913. Painting.

Levi, Neil. "Judge for Yourselves!"-The "Degenerate Art" Exhibition as Political Spectacle. Vol. October. MIT Press, 1998. Digital. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/779182>.

McMasters, Paul. ""Silencing Ourselves by Censoring Others: Inside the." DLA History - About the Scholarly Communications (2011): 22. <<http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/VALib/v51_n1/mcmasters.html>>.

Pervert's Guide to Ideology. Dir. Slavoj Jijek. Perf. Slavoj Jijek. 2012. Film.

Streicher, Julius. Der Sturmer. May 1939. Print.

Streicher, Julius. Der Sturmer. June 1939. Print.

Streicher, Julius. Der Sturmer. 1938. Print.