Caitlin's post

“Degenerate Art”: The Fate of the Avant-Garde in Nazi Germany-Stephanie Barron

In her discussion of the Nazi regime’s treatment of so-called “degenerate art”, author Stephanie Barron discusses the techniques used by the Reich to defame contemporary art in the eyes of the public, and to idealize simple and non-threatening artwork that promoted an idealized representation of Germany and its endeavors. Barron uses credible visual and textual evidence to enumerate the methods that the German high command used to turn public opinion against artistic movements such as Modernism, Expressionism, Dadaism, and others. Her main argument is that the Nazi regime chose to exhibit and publicly slander art they deemed inappropriate, rather than simply destroy it, because doing so “would have been the cultural equivalent of a martyr. By staging Entarte Kunst they were able to appeal to the majority of the German people who must have considered most modern art incomprehensible and elitist.” (Barron 22) In this way, Germany was able to successfully quash any artistic movements they deemed threatening, while strongly fomenting public opinion against such art, and creating a nation of artistic viewers who were happy to consume art with a highly controlled and propagandistic subject matter.
Barron begins her discussion of the subject matter by first describing the rise of Modernism in post-WW1 Germany. She argues that this movement was a response to the tolling effect the war had on the nation of Germany, with German artists trying to distance themselves from the dismal situation in their own country by studying exotic and avant-garde subject matter and methods of expression. Avant-Garde artists allied themselves with internationalist and progressive political movements, creating anger within the ranks of the fiercely nationalist Nazi party, who viewed 19th century German genre paintings as the pinnacle of perfect Aryan art, and new Modernist art to be elitist. To undermine and quash the Modernist movement, the Nazis appealed to the racist sentiments of most middle-class Germans at the time, associating Avant-Garde art with Jews, and other non-Aryan races, who in turn were associated with insanity. According to Barron, “German psychiatry felt that the Jew was inherently degenerate and more susceptible than then non-Jew to insanity” (Barron 11)
In creating the Entarte Kunst, the organizers of the event used specific techniques to sway public opinion against the exhibited artwork. Organizers grouped artwork according to subject matter, and displayed them in crowded, chaotic arrangements in the galleries. Underneath each painting, the organizers of the exhibition added quotes from art critics, political figures, and even Hitler himself condemning the works. Other art was juxtaposed next to pictures painted by the mentally ill, and quotes such as “Which of these three drawings is the work of an inmate in a lunatic asylum?”. The chaotic, wild, and unorganized look of the gallery itself, as well as the captions and juxtaposition of the works displayed, conveyed the message that the Nazis sought to impart on the general public: that Avant-Garde art was not only crude and worthless, but loaded with dangerous messages, the work of insane and unstable people.
In stark contrast to the Entarte Kunst, Barron discusses the Grosse Deutsche Kunstausstallung, which promoted the artwork that was deemed acceptable by the Reich. The majority of artwork displayed was, in Barron’s own words, “mediocre genre painting” (Barron 18), as well as sculptures with nationalistic subject matter. Before the exhibition began, there was an elaborate parade displaying well-known works, as well as hundreds of costumed participants and thousands of uniformed soldiers. Barron uses these facts to emphasize how the Germans so rigidly controlled public opinion of artwork. Art with simple, easily understood subject matter was elevated because its message was clear, and it didn’t require its viewers to think deeply, or consider radical new ideas, while Avant-Garde art was maligned, and associated with undesirable or insane people.
Barron ends the article by stating that, although Germany put forth a massive effort to undermine the spread of Avant-Garde art, their efforts were not completely successful, and fragments of German Modernist art still survive to this day, and act as testaments to the immense power and influence of visual art. Barron ends the article with a point I found to be particularly interesting, that such issues of artistic freedom are still debated to this day, most prominently in regards to the National Endowment for the Arts. Questions to consider in regards to this subject are:
How do we define art? And do we have the right to censor art if it is deemed inappropriate? What type of arts should be given funding by the government? Should the government have the right to condemn certain types of art or artists? Is there art/artists that you would deem inappropriate or “degenerate” today?