# Moral Dillema



## KRoad (Jun 1, 2012)

Hello everyone. This is my first post and I must start with something that is, for me at least, a moral dilemma.

Having recently re-discovered my love of classical music after many years as a jazz fan and player, it, (naturally) re-ignited my interest for Wagner. As a seminal figure of the mid romantic period he is, well, unavoidable to say the least. So anyway, I discovered recently in my “best” record/CD shop here in Berlin, a Richard Wagner “complete opera collection” (membran 233106). The price was unbeatable – so I thought yes, why not!

Taking the collection home I noticed that “Der fliegende Holländer” was recorded in 1944(!) A quick listen revealed a truly gifted tenor: Hans Hotter, and conductor: Clemens Krauss, whose best period according to independent sources was indeed when he conducted the Bayrischen Staatsoper, from whence this recording comes. The magic of the performance overcomes the technical limitations of the day without question. 

And yet wonderful though this recording is, I feel uncomfortable in a moral kind of way. As this undeniably wonderful performance of the opera was being recorded, thousands Jews were being gassed in concentration camps in and around Nazi Germany.

I should mention at this juncture that I live and have worked in Berlin for the past twenty-five years, and have a rather comfortable life-style as a consequence. And yet, I am disturbed by this recording because of what was going on in this country at the time it was recorded.

That Wagner was anti-semetic is clear, I and hopefully most listeners know this. But to listen to a recording made at the time this country was commited to genocide – well I don’t know, but it kind of brings the moral ugliness home to me at a personal level; this colours my appreciation of the music and performance.

I guess I wish they had not included this version of the recording in the collection– even as I acknowledge the excellence of the recording itself. BTW: I am not Jewish.

So the question is: should one allow historical circumstance to colour one’s appeciation of music?


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

According to sources, Hotter - one of the most famous singers in history - was a passionate, satirical anti-nazi:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Hotter

Krauss on the other hand seems to have been opportunistic:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clemens_Krauss

It´s a problem though that a very large group of famous musicians from the 20th century has been more or less involved with nazi events or even politics at a time in their career, being it as an accept of the Realpolitik, political naivité or personal opportunism - Karajan, Böhm, Mengelberg, Cortot, Tubin, Jon Leifs, Schwarzkopf, Geir Tveitt, Paul von Klenau, Gieseking, Furtwängler etc., just to mention some. Even Beecham conducted at a concert for the nazi dignitaries in 1934 ... (this of course doesn´t make him a nazi, though).

Likewise, musicians even of today or those associated with other regimes sometimes have dubious views, acts or statements to account for - Stockhausen on 9/11 is an infamous example. On the other hand - how many have stood up against Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which were mainly civilian targets ?

My personal definite limit is that if someone informed me that a musician or a composer was directly involved in committing crimes, I´d back out. The conductor Oswald Kabasta is an example. Likewise if the music propagates an obviously detestable message.

The question of remaining passively informed about crimes is more difficult - or allowing absurd orders to be implemented. But if one is to choose musicians on behalf of their morality, one will have to skip a _lot_. This of course also applies to composers.

The best idea IMO is not to idolize those whose human character don´t deserve it, but acknowledge their musical talent. Toscanini said of Richard Strauss, whom he continued to record also after WWII: "_I take off my hat for Strauss the musician; I put it back on my head speaking of Strauss as a human being_".


----------



## ovk (May 5, 2012)

1. Did Wagner live in the 30's - 40's of XXth century?

1. Could Wagner himself in any way be responsible for the performances of his opera in any country after his death (and even before)?

2. Did Wagner, even being anti-Semite, ever call for mass extermination of Jews? Did he declare any ideas about establishing of concentration camps? Did he in any way play a role in establishing them in Hitler Germany?

If you answer all the questions 'no' then how can the facts that you mention 'colour' your appreciation of his music?

Sorry for my English.


----------



## Tero (Jun 2, 2012)

On a broader perspective, many creative persons were very difficult for those around them. Though not nazis, you probably would not like them as people.


----------



## KRoad (Jun 1, 2012)

ovk said:


> If you answer all the questions 'no' then how can the facts that you mention 'colour' your appreciation of his music?
> 
> Sorry for my English.[/QUOTE
> 
> Because, in the case of the recording in question in my mind's ear and eyes there are members of the S.S. and other "insiders" of the Nazi elite who knew of the reality of what was going on and subscribed knowingly to the outcomes. I, in listening to that which they enjoyed, both musically and ideologically, gives me a feeling of being in some way connected with them. Hence the moral dilemma.


----------



## bigshot (Nov 22, 2011)

If I required all creators of noble music to be noble individuals, there wouldn't be a lot of music to listen to. I don't require history to conform to my own beliefs. It is what it is.


----------



## Petwhac (Jun 9, 2010)

"Should one allow historical circumstance to colour one's appeciation of music?"

In my opinion, it may colour one's appreciation of the _musician_ as a person but the _music _ itself? No.
Wagner may have had odious views on many subjects and may have been a thoroughly repellent person. But I believe people's prejudices are a product of various influences as is their character. In life we are all flawed and that is why it is dangerous to idolise the _person_. However, what the person creates may be pure, beautiful and humane in spite of their ignorance, prejudice or moral ugliness. 
The love duet from Act 2 of Tristan would be as beautiful if it was composed by a saint or a psychopath. It is notes on a page turned into sound.
People are a product of their times and I'm sure Wagner is not alone in holding views that nowadays are felt to be unacceptable.


----------



## Petwhac (Jun 9, 2010)

KRoad said:


> ovk said:
> 
> 
> > Because, in the case of the recording in question in my mind's ear and eyes there are members of the S.S. and other "insiders" of the Nazi elite who knew of the reality of what was going on and subscribed knowingly to the outcomes. I, in listening to that which they enjoyed, both musically and ideologically, gives me a feeling of being in some way connected with them. Hence the moral dilemma.
> ...


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

KRoad said:


> ovk said:
> 
> 
> > If you answer all the questions 'no' then how can the facts that you mention 'colour' your appreciation of his music?
> ...


----------



## Roberto (Jul 17, 2010)

K's point has nothing to do with Wagner but with the circumstances of the recording, which were under the control of the Nazis. Therefore there is something very wrong with it, even if it is technically good. 

There is a similar question which arises if you watch a film by Leni Riefenstahl such as the 'Triumph of the Will'. The film is fascinating and worth watching - it is of course horrible and sinister as well. Would I buy it? No


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

KRoad said:


> Hello everyone. This is my first post and I must start with something that is, for me at least, a moral dilemma.
> 
> Having recently re-discovered my love of classical music after many years as a jazz fan and player, it, (naturally) re-ignited my interest for Wagner. As a seminal figure of the mid romantic period he is, well, unavoidable to say the least. So anyway, I discovered recently in my "best" record/CD shop here in Berlin, a Richard Wagner "complete opera collection" (membran 233106). The price was unbeatable - so I thought yes, why not!
> 
> ...


They're ALL dead. This is obviously the best parts of any of them left us.

I think the following generations had nothing to do with it. may as well feel guilty that your great-grandfather ______ (name the crime against person or persons.


----------



## GoneBaroque (Jun 16, 2011)

@kRoad - You are certainly in calling Hans Hotter a truly gifted singer. He was in fact one of the most gifted in the Twentieth Century and many of his performance are legendary. Where you erred was in calling him a gifted tenor, he was a gifted Bass-Baritone just to kep the record straight.


----------



## KRoad (Jun 1, 2012)

Roberto said:


> K's point has nothing to do with Wagner but with the circumstances of the recording, which were under the control of the Nazis. Therefore there is something very wrong with it, even if it is technically good.
> 
> There is a similar question which arises if you watch a film by Leni Riefenstahl such as the 'Triumph of the Will'. The film is fascinating and worth watching - it is of course horrible and sinister as well. Would I buy it? No


Yep, I've seen her stuff - I mean how could you miss it living in Berlin, right? The situation is not too dissimilar. She visually glorified Nazi Germany and in so doing subscribed and supported its "values". The recording of the opera referred to in the OP was made by Nazi's for the Nazi elite. In listening to this recording I am hearing the very same music as that enjoyed by insiders of this appalling regime - hell, it is entirely conceivable that Hitler and his top cronies listened to this very recording seeing as they were all unabashed fans of the anti-semitic Wagner. Yes, it makes me feel uncomfortable - to the point I'm not certain I will listen to it again. A recording of the same opera made post 1945, yes. This one probably not for the reasons stated. Frankly, I surprised that has membran re-released this recording in the first place.


----------



## KRoad (Jun 1, 2012)

GoneBaroque said:


> @kRoad - You are certainly in calling Hans Hotter a truly gifted singer. He was in fact one of the most gifted in the Twentieth Century and many of his performance are legendary. Where you erred was in calling him a gifted tenor, he was a gifted Bass-Baritone just to kep the record straight.


Thank you. My bad!


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

KRoad said:


> Yep, I've seen her stuff - I mean how could you miss it living in Berlin, right? The situation is not too dissimilar. She visually glorified Nazi Germany and in so doing subscribed and supported its "values". The recording of the opera referred to in the OP was made by Nazi's for the Nazi elite. In listening to this recording I am hearing the very same music as that enjoyed by insiders of this appalling regime - hell, it is entirely conceivable that Hitler and his top cronies listened to this very recording seeing as they were all unabashed fans of the anti-semitic Wagner. Yes, it makes me feel uncomfortable - to the point I'm not certain I will listen to it again. A recording of the same opera made post 1945, yes. This one probably not for the reasons stated. Frankly, I surprised that has membran re-released this recording in the first place.


Wagner was actually falling out of favour with the Nazis. Parsifal had been banned in 1939. Hitler was a fan but many of the "Nazi elite" found him decadent and harmful to Nazi values (similar to Nietzsche's view that Wagner's music would corrupt society).


----------



## Moira (Apr 1, 2012)

In the roll call of who believes what I come down on the side of those who don't care about the nature of the person, only the nature of the music. Thus the music of 'good' people, even saints, is not necessarily better than the music of 'bad', even truly evil people. But that is the music, not the people. 

We all have a duty to speak out against social evils going on around us. Sometimes, even to do what we can to mitigate those evils. I am South African. During the apartheid years there was a cultural ban on South Africa and very, very few great (or even mediocre) artists broke it. But it would be patently ridiculous for these same artists (or other artists) to refuse to appear in democratic South Africa today because of the evils of apartheid.


----------



## Roberto (Jul 17, 2010)

Couchie said:


> Wagner was actually falling out of favour with the Nazis. Parsifal had been banned in 1939. Hitler was a fan but many of the "Nazi elite" found him decadent and harmful to Nazi values (similar to Nietzsche's view that Wagner's music would corrupt society).


Interesting. Can you give any refs (other than for Parsifal, which is quite obviously alien to the Nazis' values)?


----------



## Roberto (Jul 17, 2010)

Moira said:


> Thus the music of 'good' people, even saints, is not necessarily better than the music of 'bad', even truly evil people.


Do you think that evil people can produce good music? I don't think they can


----------



## Petwhac (Jun 9, 2010)

Roberto said:


> Do you think that evil people can produce good music? I don't think they can


First define 'evil person' then define 'good' music.
On second thoughts, this would turn into a very long thread indeed!


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Petwhac said:


> First define 'evil person' then define 'good' music.
> On second thoughts, this would turn into a very long thread indeed!


You didn't go 'first' enough; we first must agree on a definition for 'evil'. The 'good music' part probably has to remain a subjective judgement.


----------



## Roberto (Jul 17, 2010)

Hilltroll72 said:


> You didn't go 'first' enough; we first must agree on a definition for 'evil'. The 'good music' part probably has to remain a subjective judgement.


I am one of those who thinks you can define good music, as long as you don't expect a clear majority to agree with your definition.

Evil: someone whose mind is full of malice and ill-feeling; someone who is ready to harm the innocent when it is not necessary (as it may be in certain situations); someone who cannot empathise; a psychopath


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Roberto said:


> I am one of those who thinks you can define good music, as long as you don't expect a clear majority to agree with your definition.
> 
> Evil: someone whose mind is full of malice and ill-feeling; someone who is ready to harm the innocent when it is not necessary (as it may be in certain situations); someone who cannot empathise; a psychopath


For the present purpose, your 'good music' concept is workable. Does your definition of 'evil person' require all of those conditions to be present? (I don't agree with the lack of empathy condition; such a person can avoid doing evil. Also, 'sociopath' may be a necessary refinement of 'psychopath' )


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

Carlo Gesualdo´s music is not looked down upon,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_Gesualdo

it´s been too long probably since the "events".


----------



## Petwhac (Jun 9, 2010)

joen_cph said:


> Carlo Gesualdo´s music is not looked down upon,
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_Gesualdo
> 
> it´s been too long probably since the "events".


His was a crime of passion wasn't it?

@Roberto
Surely a psychopath is ill not evil. 
And when it comes to harming innocents.What one person sees as 'necessary' another might see as a war crime, no?
Bombing Iraq might be an example.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Petwhac said:


> @Roberto
> Surely a psychopath is ill not evil.
> And when it comes to harming innocents.What one person sees as 'necessary' another might see as a war crime, no?
> Bombing Iraq might be an example.


Evil is as evil does.

Bombing in Iraq was not a personal thing (on the doing end).


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Hilltroll72 said:


> Evil is as evil does.
> 
> Bombing in Iraq was not a personal thing (on the doing end).


Neither was the Holocaust, or any other genocide. Or most robberies.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

Roberto said:


> Interesting. Can you give any refs (other than for Parsifal, which is quite obviously alien to the Nazis' values)?


Frankly, no. I read far too many articles on Wagner to remember where I read that.


----------



## crmoorhead (Apr 6, 2011)

Don't complicate things. Just listen to the music. There is much that is a great deal more morally wrong with current and everyday life to worry about the implications you suggest.


----------



## cwarchc (Apr 28, 2012)

As has already been noted earlier
You dont need to "embrace" the person or their actions/beliefs to "embrace" their music
Just enjoy the sound


----------



## Roberto (Jul 17, 2010)

Petwhac said:


> His was a crime of passion wasn't it?
> 
> @Roberto
> Surely a psychopath is ill not evil.
> ...


Re Gesualdo - agreed.

A psychopath is both ill and evil - an evil person is certainly 'sick' in some sense or other
Re harming innocents and crimes: yes of course. But equally, there are (obviously) cases of the 'necessary evil' - the sacrifice for the greater good


----------



## Jeremy Marchant (Mar 11, 2010)

KRoad said:


> ...So the question is: should one allow historical circumstance to colour one's appeciation of music?


It's always interesting and useful to allow our understanding of historical circumstances to enrich our *appreciation *of music. But appreciation is not the same as judgement.

And appreciating the music is a long way from judging the composer or the performers or the audience.

Rereading your post several times, I am not actually sure what your problem is. You feel uncomfortable because of the simultaneity of the particular recording and the operation of the gas chambers. Is it that you feel that no recordings or performances of music should have been made at this time? Or just those of Wagner? [ovk's post has dealt with that]

Suppose there had been a misprint in the booklet and 1944 had been printed 1949, say. Would you feel better? Because of one digit? What if the date was misprinted anyway, and it wasn't 1944?

It feels to me that you're uncomfortable because you have been 'caught out' enjoying a recording you believe you 'shouldn't'. I am intrigued how the situation would have been improved if the recording hadn't been included in the set - is it OK to have made the recording provided you don't know about it? In which case, how do you feel about all the other recordings which were undoubtedly made at this time - perhaps by people far more sympathetic to the Nazis than were Hotter and Krauss - but which haven't come your way, yet?


----------



## KRoad (Jun 1, 2012)

Jeremy Marchant said:


> It's always interesting and useful to allow our understanding of historical circumstances to enrich our *appreciation *of music. But appreciation is not the same as judgement.
> 
> And appreciating the music is a long way from judging the composer or the performers or the audience.
> 
> ...


Valid questions...

My discomfort stems essentially from enjoying a Nazi ideologically approved opera, by a Nazi ideologically approved composer recorded (and it is the date of the recording that bothers me most) by musicians (who by virtue of the fact that they were performing at all) would have been at the very least, compliant with the regime and what it stood for. By 1944 it was very widely known (but not openly admitted) what was being done to the jews. The audience, presuming there was in fact an audience and this was not a studio production, would have been predominetly middle class, well-educated and well placed in the regime in order to be in attendance.

I am listening to a production that was made by and for Nazis to enjoy at the time the concentrations camps were in full swing. A local suburban train station not two kilometers from where I am typing this has many, many plaques on the platform telling the dates of the transports that left with jews and other "undesirables" for Auschwitz. In 1944 that was one busy station! As I mentioned, this makes me feel in some way connected to them more than would normally be the case with Wagner recorded after 1945.

I do have a slight problem with Wagner and his anti-semitism in general, though as has been pointed out there many other composers who shared similar views. In the case of the recording in question it is the contextualisation aspect that rather amplifies the issue in my ears and minds eye. I do not for example have an issue with Bruckner one of whose symphonies accompanied the announcement of Hitler's death on the radio here in Berlin 1945 - so its not simply a case of ignorance is bliss as you seem to hint at.


----------



## Roberto (Jul 17, 2010)

It seems to me that you have identified the original audience accurately. And I think we are right to consider any work in relation to its audiences - it's actually quite difficult not to. I think you have to feel that you are comfortable in being part of that audience or those audiences. Clearly, you would not have felt comfortable at the time, in 1944! The feeling would be stronger if it were a live performance (which I presume it isn't?) - if you could actually hear some Nazis cough (somewhat creepy even).

I wonder what other Berliners think on this issue - presumably their opinions are divided?


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

I think it is most likely that it is a live performance, but this could be easily checked. 

However, in 1944 I don´t think a lot of the German public were satisfied with or uncritical towards the regime; only very few didn´t realize by then, that the end was near, and likewise only few believed much in the official propaganda. It was a terror regime also as regards the internal affairs.


----------



## Roberto (Jul 17, 2010)

joen_cph said:


> However, in 1944 I don´t think a lot of the German public were satisfied with or uncritical towards the regime; only very few didn´t realize by then, that the end was near, and likewise only few believed much in the official propaganda. It was a terror regime also as regards the internal affairs.


Good point - so it might actually be possible to see this as in some sense _anti-Nazi_?? I hadn't thought of that


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Roberto said:


> Good point - so it might actually be possible to see this as in some sense _anti-Nazi_?? I hadn't thought of that


That's a highly dubious conclusion. The Nazis still had firm control of stuff like music concerts.


----------



## KRoad (Jun 1, 2012)

Roberto said:


> Good point - so it might actually be possible to see this as in some sense _anti-Nazi_?? I hadn't thought of that


You jest... I hope.


----------



## Roberto (Jul 17, 2010)

KRoad said:


> You jest... I hope.


It was a somewhat ironical proposition based on developing joen's point to a possible - but unlikely - conclusion, i.e. that whoever was in charge of Bayreuth, and whatever their views, the performers themselves might be united in hoping for a swift end to the regime. Although I didn't think of this at first, it is a possible way of looking at it, and might alter one's view of the recording (in a way that, for example, would not be possible in relation to the von Riefenstahl film). It would be guesswork though wouldn't it, unless you found out more about the individuals concerned?


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

As regards my post, I was responding to the apparent opinion that all those present at the concert would necessarily be ardent nazis; by then, the number of nazis was probably diminishing too, unless invitations and tickets were based on comraderie only.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

To KRoad. I'd recommend you watch *Stephen Fry's documentary* called _*Wagner and Me*_. Out on dvd now. Mr. Fry lost relatives in the Holocaust and as an avid Wagnerite, he kind of goes into issues related to what you spoke about in your opening post. I think controversy around Wagner cannot be denied, it turns many people off his music. But if you like it, good for you, good for Mr. Fry as well. Here is a link to some info about the doco -
http://www.wagnerandme.com/Wagner_&_Me/Home.html


----------



## KRoad (Jun 1, 2012)

Thank you. This looks very interesting. Should I have the opportunity I will certainly watch it.


----------



## Roberto (Jul 17, 2010)

KRoad

You didn't answer my question about the Berliners - what do people you know there think about your dilemma?
(I'd like to watch the Fry prog as well incidentally)


----------



## KRoad (Jun 1, 2012)

Roberto said:


> KRoad
> 
> You didn't answer my question about the Berliners - what do people you know there think about your dilemma?
> (I'd like to watch the Fry prog as well incidentally)


I haven't really asked them - anything to do with the National Socialist years is generally a touchy/sensitive topic. Many would argue that had it not been for his anti-semitism, Hitler would be revered as the greatest German to have lived. The grandparents of my daughter had Hitler's birthday as their safe combination, years ago a director of a well-known German concern related to me that the proudest day of his life was when he became old enough to join the Hitler Youth.

I imagine opinion would be as divided among the locals as it is in this thread. A couple of weeks ago I was getting into the elevator at work carrying Wagners Ring Cycle on DVD. The woman in the elevator noticed what I was carrying and remarked she hated Wagner and would never listen to him. She was a German Jew.

There was a controversial Museum exhibition in Berlin last year called "Hitler and the Germans". I went to the exhibition and noted many of the visitors were elderly Germans who, more than anything else, appeared to be taking a nostalgic stroll down memory lane.

Go figure...


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

I think that any ambivalence is merely present among people of the elder generation, not among the younger Germans, who are often very ashamed and anti-militaristic. 

A couple of days ago, the German soccer team paid a visit to a concentration camp in Poland due to heir Euro 2012 participance, 67 years after the war ended.


----------



## Roberto (Jul 17, 2010)

joen_cph said:


> I think that any ambivalence is merely present among people of the elder generation, not among the younger Germans, who are often very ashamed and anti-militaristic.


I would certainly like to think that this was so


----------



## Roberto (Jul 17, 2010)

KRoad said:


> I haven't really asked them - anything to do with the National Socialist years is generally a touchy/sensitive topic. Many would argue that had it not been for his anti-semitism, Hitler would be revered as the greatest German to have lived.


So have you noticed a difference between the generations? I can see that for the elderly, their own self-esteem might still be somewhat entangled with a view of Hitler which attempted to mitigate his wrongs


----------



## KRoad (Jun 1, 2012)

Roberto said:


> So have you noticed a difference between the generations? I can see that for the elderly, their own self-esteem might still be somewhat entangled with a view of Hitler which attempted to mitigate his wrongs


Although I have a lot of opportunities to ask young Germans, I personally avoid the topic as it leads to discomfort , more so perhaps because I am an English speaking non-German(IMO). According to my daughter, who attends a German Grammar school, History teachers appear to avoid discussing the subject over and above what they are required to do, although she says there is a keen interest among the younger generation to learn more about the N.S. times. Of course this could be brought on by a lurid interest in the activities of the far-right, which does have a following among the youth.

I would hazard to say that, in general, young people feel sufficiently distanced in time from Nazi Germany to perhaps have a more open mind about the events that transpired - but as I say it is a sensitive topic of discussion and should be approached with caution.

Enough said.


----------



## KRoad (Jun 1, 2012)

Look, lest I or the thread get side tracked, the issue is the date of this particular recording. Maybe its just me, but the performers and audience, together with the year of the recording, 1944, create a context out of which rather unsavoury visual imagery is generated in my minds eye. Juxtaposed with well-dressed, cultured and educated middle-class Nazis enjoying a performance of their preferred composer in an elegant opera house is that of kids, babies, attractive women and the elderly choking, defecating, vomiting and clawing at each other in a gas chamber. Both images are accompanied by the music of Wagner. Like I say, maybe its just me and I need to get real and see Wagner for the intrinsic beauty of his music itself.


----------



## regressivetransphobe (May 16, 2011)

Nazis aren't around anymore. Just some pretend ones who shave their heads. You won't resurrect Hitler by listening to nazi music, I promise.

I'd say abstaining from it as an ethical gesture is cheap moral pageantry.

If you dislike the images it evokes for you, fine.


----------



## KRoad (Jun 1, 2012)

regressivetransphobe said:


> If you dislike the images it evokes for you, fine.


Finally, someone who understands!


----------



## Roberto (Jul 17, 2010)

KRoad said:


> . Juxtaposed with well-dressed, cultured and educated middle-class Nazis enjoying a performance of their preferred composer in an elegant opera house ..


Indeed. That is one of the most appalling things about Nazism - that it did have many followers amongst the educated middle and upper classes. There is a good little American book on this subject - written in 1938 - called _Address Unknown_ if you are interested - it's very short, but effective.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

regressivetransphobe said:


> Nazis aren't around anymore. Just some pretend ones who shave their heads...


There are the skinheads, yes, but also far right parliamentarians and politicians. Eg. Haider of Austria, Berlusconi of Italy, Fortuyn of Netherlands (all now out of office, Haider and Forteyn actually not alive anymore, but they were in power within the last decade or so). It's a worrying trend in Europe, it seems they have largely forgotten the past, or have a distorted view of it. I doubt it's just the elderly electing these kinds of governments, I really do doubt it.

Fact is, Wagner had same types of views on 'race' and 'blood' as pseudo scientific theorists De Gobineau and H.S. Chamberlain (who where his contemporaries). Both these guys where Wagnerites of sorts, Chamberlain even converted to German citizenship - he was a Brit - and was still around as the Nazis where organising after World War I. This was a distortion of Enlightenment thinking. That was supposed to give people more freedom, democracy and get rid of superstition, but what these distortions of it gave us was using technology to kill people, simple as that. That ain't no liberation, sorry. & it ain't no real science or real religion either.


----------



## Arsakes (Feb 20, 2012)

The only good thing about the Natzis is that they support good music of Germany. It was sad that foreign works weren't conducted there.
To perform well under heavy pressure is the specialty of great men, like Karajan and Richard Strauss.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Arsakes said:


> The only good thing about the Natzis is that they support good music of Germany. It was sad that foreign works weren't conducted there...


It wasn't necessarily German music versus everything else. Hitler's favourite living composer of _serious_ music was Sibelius. His favourite composer of operetta was Lehar, another one was Kalman (both of Hungarian origin, the latter actually Jewish). The Nazis didn't ban the music of Johann Strauss II and the rest of that waltz dynasty, yet they were of Jewish origin (but non practicing Jews, as I understand it). Yet they banned Mendelssohn and destroyed his monument in Liepzig. Mahler's music was also banned. They also banned Hindemith's music, and he was not Jewish (yet he was against the Nazis). They confiscated the royalties of many composers, many Austrian or German, both Jews and non-Jews.

So in other words, they did not support German music, really. If they did, they were highly selective and kind of inconsistent at the same time. All boiled down to who they did and didn't like, and who they put up with. Same as Stalinist Russia, _formalism _- same as _degenerate art _- being a code word for_ people who we don't like_.

The backlash against Wagner and other Austrian & German composers after the war was understandable, esp. in countries that had been occupied by the Germans and also Israel. It had the positive effect of these countries avoiding Germanic repertoire and putting their own composers in the spotlight. The late Sir Charles Mackerras said this of Czechoslovakia, there after the war they even avoided Beethoven as much as they could, but instead programmed lots of their own - eg. Dvorak, Smetana, Janacek - on radio and live in concert.


----------



## Arsakes (Feb 20, 2012)

Sid James said:


> It wasn't necessarily German music versus everything else. Hitler's favourite living composer of _serious_ music was Sibelius. His favourite composer of operetta was Lehar, another one was Kalman (both of Hungarian origin, the latter actually Jewish). The Nazis didn't ban the music of Johann Strauss II and the rest of that waltz dynasty, yet they were of Jewish origin (but non practicing Jews, as I understand it). Yet they banned Mendelssohn and destroyed his monument in Liepzig. Mahler's music was also banned. They also banned Hindemith's music, and he was not Jewish (yet he was against the Nazis). They confiscated the royalties of many composers, many Austrian or German, both Jews and non-Jews.
> 
> So in other words, they did not support German music, really. If they did, they were highly selective and kind of inconsistent at the same time. All boiled down to who they did and didn't like, and who they put up with. Same as Stalinist Russia, _formalism _- same as _degenerate art _- being a code word for_ people who we don't like_.
> 
> The backlash against Wagner and other Austrian & German composers after the war was understandable, esp. in countries that had been occupied by the Germans and also Israel. It had the positive effect of these countries avoiding Germanic repertoire and putting their own composers in the spotlight. The late Sir Charles Mackerras said this of Czechoslovakia, there after the war they even avoided Beethoven as much as they could, but instead programmed lots of their own - eg. Dvorak, Smetana, Janacek - on radio and live in concert.


I didn't know them, I just know the act of degenerated art and banning of Jazz and Mendelssohn and that Hitler likes Wagner and Bruckner. Thanks for the info


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

You're welcome.

This thread might be of further interest to you, *Arsakes* -
http://www.talkclassical.com/1934-adolf-hitler-used-listen.html

More stuff about this at Alex Ross' website -
http://www.therestisnoise.com/2007/08/hitlers-record-.html

& this old thread I created might be of relevance here as well, generally -
http://www.talkclassical.com/17881-music-banned.html


----------



## Xaltotun (Sep 3, 2010)

The real nazis of today don't have shaved heads, true; instead of swastikas, they wave dollar and €uro signs. Instead of the "aryan race", they talk about "free market", "economic growth", "healthy competition", "liberty to consume" etc. Instead of making concentration camps in their own country, they make them at poor and starving foreign countries.

And it's _us_ who have put them in power; we have no one else to blame. We are indeed no better than the "average Germans" who elected Hitler.


----------



## Roberto (Jul 17, 2010)

Xaltotun said:


> The real nazis of today don't have shaved heads, true; instead of swastikas, they wave dollar and €uro signs. Instead of the "aryan race", they talk about "free market", "economic growth", "healthy competition", "liberty to consume" etc. Instead of making concentration camps in their own country, they make them at poor and starving foreign countries.
> 
> And it's _us_ who have put them in power; we have no one else to blame. We are indeed no better than the "average Germans" who elected Hitler.


Possibly a little OTT? One should draw distinctions........


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Xaltotun said:


> ...
> 
> And it's _us_ who have put them in power; we have no one else to blame. We are indeed no better than the "average Germans" who elected Hitler.


Well to be fair, I think guys like Jorg Haider of Austria could not govern in their own right, they had to 'share' government with other small parties.

But what I said stands. These people were not elected by elderly people with golden memories of 'order' under Hitler or whoever. Most of them would now be dead, or getting very old, if they were adults back then with firm memories of events from day to day and week to week. Unfortunately, as I said, it seems people in Continental Europe have very short memories when it comes to history of the 20th century. To them, it's ancient history, it seems - despite all the documentaries, books, movies based on these issues. Seems it's all been a waste.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Sid James said:


> Well to be fair, I think guys like Jorg Haider of Austria could not govern in their own right, they had to 'share' government with other small parties.
> 
> But what I said stands. These people were not elected by elderly people with golden memories of 'order' under Hitler or whoever. Most of them would now be dead, or getting very old, if they were adults back then with firm memories of events from day to day and week to week. Unfortunately, as I said, it seems people in Continental Europe have very short memories when it comes to history of the 20th century. To them, it's ancient history, it seems - despite all the documentaries, books, movies based on these issues. Seems it's all been a waste.


Before this thread is locked, I'll put in my two cents and say we have the same problem in the USA.

Things are probably going to get very, very bad - I am going to hold on to music.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

science said:


> Before this thread is locked, I'll put in my two cents and say we have the same problem in the USA.
> 
> Things are probably going to get very, very bad - I am going to hold on to music.


I think I will 'hold on to' my pea shooter. Maybe suggest to the 'occupy' folks that they all try the ballot box instead; can't hurt.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Hilltroll72 said:


> I think I will 'hold on to' my pea shooter. Maybe suggest to the 'occupy' folks that they all try the ballot box instead; can't hurt.


Occupy is doomed. They'll be lucky if none of them are classified as terrorists and incarcerated indefinitely without trial.

For you know as well as I do that about half of the country would vehemently support a politician that proposed to do so.

Heck, I'll be lucky if it doesn't happen to me just for typing stuff like this.


----------

