Political Music Censorship: Some Remarks on Nazi Music Regula- Tions 1933-1945
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
URSULA GEISLER Political Music Censorship: Some Remarks on Nazi Music Regula- tions 1933-1945 How music is treated in a society is a relevant marker of how the space of individual freedom is defi ned. Texts dealing with what has been seen as the dangerous potential of music for society can be traced back a long time, with prominent examples since as early as Plato’s Republic.1 The imagination of the existence of “good” and “right” music in contrast to “bad” and “false” music has been used to construct a dichotomy between the Self and the Other in different historical periods.2 This is particularly evident within the framework of dictatorships like National Socialism. In order to secure and affi rm “the moral, spiritual and cultural superiority of the German nation”, music and musicians were extensively exposed to control and censorship measures in the years 1933-1945.3 The present article focuses on political music censorship, which, historically, has of- ten been linked to the institutionalisation of ideological, social, religious and aesthet- i cal principles.4 More specifi cally, the present article deals with the Reich Department for Music Arrangements (Reichsstelle für Musikbearbeitungen; RfM), the music censor- ship institution established by the National Socialists after the beginning of World War II in 1940. The aim is to shed light on how political music censorship was discursively constructed and by which means music censorship was envisioned to support the Pan- German vision of the after-war future. Political music censorship Political music censorship is intertwined with various aspects of a systematized asser- tion of governmental or majority interests. The focus and reasons for censorship change 1 Plato (428-348 BC). The Republic, cf.: http://www.gutenberg.org/fi les/1497/1497-h/1497-h.htm 2 Theories of Otherness and Constructiveness provide relevant perspectives when dealing with ques- tions of music and censorship. Cf. Annette Kreutziger-Herr (ed.), Das Andere. Eine Spurensuche in der Musikgeschichte des 19. und 20. Jahrhunderts (Frankfurt am Main et al.: Peter Lang, 1998). 3 Erik Levi, “Music and National Socialism: The politicisation of criticism, composition and perform- ance,” in Brandon Taylor, and Wilfried van der Will (ed.), The Nazifi cation of Art (Winchester, Hamp- shire: The Winchester Press, 1990), 159. 4 When taking a closer look at which songs, labels or concerts that have been censored, and the rea- sons for this censorship, since the 1960s, this linkage could even apply to contemporary music cen- sorship, cf.:www.zensur-archiv.de/index.php?title=Musik. DANISH MUSICOLOGY ONLINE SPECIAL EDITION, 2015 • ISSN 1904-237X SPECIAL EDITION · 2015 RESEARCHING MUSIC CENSORSHIP 78 Ursula Geisler over time and space, as does the music it is opposed to. However, as Korpe, Reitov and Cloonan point out, “censorship is a form of cultural protection and intended mass be- havioral [sic] control”.5 Such attempts to control the masses by regulatory music mea- sures have been made throughout history in many countries worldwide. If music is cen- sored by means of institutionalisation within a legal framework, the censorship imple- mentation is suitable for describing the cultural construction of the society’s legitimacy. It can therefore be relevant to focus on specifi c historical periods known for totalitarian structures that affected individuals’ possibilities of choice in everyday life to an extreme degree. As a politically extremist government that built on mythological and racial discourses of culturally superiority, the Nazi regime, which held power from 1933 to 1945, put specifi c focus on establishing ways to control artists and the arts in general. Nazi music censorship As Friedrich Geiger has shown in his comparative work on the persecution of com- posers, both the Nazi and the Stalinist regime were rooted in an aesthetic concept of dominion. The different art forms – music, poetry, literature, architecture and fi lm – were referred to by Geiger as “assistant arts” in the construction of a political Gesamt- kunstwerk. Music, with its potential to organise people into a collective mass, was seen as especially suitable for achieving this target,6 making this art form an especially im- portant element in the political discourse and preservation of power. To support their attempt to establish an aestheticized political order, the National Socialists sought to build on historic references and to continue the 19th century’s functionalization of music. The intense debates on the political and societal tasks of music from the 1920s onwards also laid the groundwork for an expanded positioning of music at all levels for the period 1933–1945.7 On the one hand, music life – of a highly controlled and specifi c type – fl ourished under direct support from the Nazi regime, and expanded into many areas. Examples include the Hitler Youth music ceremonies, classical and choral music education and the Wagnerfestivals in Bayreuth. On the other hand, certain music and musicians were banned and discriminated against on ideological grounds. The construction of racial dichotomies was combined with aesthetic and cul- tural values, as well as stereotypes regarding artistic potential. The political propagan- da constructed Jews and Jewishness as the utmost Other to be defeated. The examples presented in the present article of the implementation of political music censorship 5 Marie Korpe, Ole Reitov, and Martin Cloonan, “Music Censorship from Plato to the Present,” in Steven Brown, and Ulrik Volgsten (ed.), Music and Manipulation. On the Social Uses and Social Control of Music (New York: Berghahn Books, 2006), 240. 6 Friedrich Geiger, Musik in zwei Diktaturen. Verfolgung von Komponisten unter Hitler und Stalin (Kassel: Bärenreiter-Verlag, 2004), 199. 7 Cf. Erik Levi, “The Censorship of Musical Modernism in Germany, 1918–1945,” in Beate Müller (ed.), Censorship and Cultural Regulation in the Modern Age (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2004), 63–86; Ursula Geisler, “Med sången in i framtiden. Den tyska ungdomsmusikrörelsen och kris på 1920–1930-talen,” in Mats Arvidson, Ursula Geisler, and Kristofer Hansson (eds.), Kris och kultur. Kulturvetenskapliga perspektiv på kunskap, estetik och historia (Lund: Sekel, 2013), 69–86. SPECIAL EDITION – RESEARCHING MUSIC CENSORSHIP · 2015 Political Music Censorship: Some Remarks on Nazi Music Regulations 1933-1945 79 measures, which were undertaken in the context of Gleichschaltung (“enforced confor- mity”) illuminate the dual strategies of cultural concessions and prohibitions. Special attention will be given to the elements of institutionalisation and language. Institutionalisation Although much has been written about the overall function of music in the racist ideology and propaganda of the National Socialists, little has been written about the concrete execution of the music censorship laws and principles that were enforced by specialized institutions under the leadership of the Reich Propaganda Ministry (Reichsministerium für Volksaufklärung und Propaganda; RMVP).8 Nazi music censorship laws and orders were implemented both by the culture di- vision (Kulturabteilung) and the music division (Musikabteilung) of the RMVP, as well as by the Reich Music Chamber (Reichsmusikkammer; RMK).9 Established in 1933, the RMK was conceptualized as a superior organisational structure for professional music life in Germany. From a structural standpoint, the RMK established specifi c offi ces for composers, musicians, concert life, music education, choir and folk music, music pub- lishing, instrument makers and so on. These offi ces were placed at the centre of music control, and were connected as partners to working commissions, ministries, music organisations, and other associations within the Reich. However, although ambitious, the RMK could not keep up with this ambition in practice. The overall importance of the RMK as a tool for the control of musical life in Germany after 1933 was thus in- 8 To mention just a small number of infl uential references: Joseph Wulf, Musik im Dritten Reich: Eine Dokumentation (Gütersloh, 1963); Fred K. Prieberg, Musik im NS-Staat (Frankfurt a.M., 1982); Hanns-Werner Heister, and Hans-Günther Klein, Musik und Musikpolitik im faschistischen Deutschland (Frankfurt am Main: Fischer), 1984; Pamela M. Potter, Trends in German musicology 1918–1945: The effects of methodological, ideological, and institutional change on the writing of music history (Yale Univer- sity, 1991); Pamela M. Potter, Most German of the arts: Musicology and society from the Weimar Republic to the end of Hitler’s Reich (New Haven, 1998); Brunhilde Sonntag, Hans-Werner Boresch, and Detlef Gojowy (eds.), Die dunkle Last. Musik und Nationalsozialismus (Schriften zur Musikwissenschaft und Musiktheorie; 3) (Köln, 1999); Hans Grüss, Kolja Lessing, Marion Demuth, Frank Geissler, and Eckhard John (eds.), Musik–Macht–Missbrauch (Altenburg, 1999); Isolde von Foerster, Christoph Hust, and Christoph-Hellmut Mahling (eds.), Musikforschung–Faschismus–Nationalsozialismus – Refer- ate der Tagung Schloss Engers vom 8. bis 11. März 2000 (Mainz, 2001). 9 There are several scientifi c publications on National Socialism and the music of recent decades that focus on the RMK and other organisations that worked to institutionalise music: Günter Berghaus (ed.), Fascism and theatre: Comparative studies on the aesthetics and politics of performance in Europe, 1925-1945 (Oxford: Berghahn, 1996). Hinrich Bergmeier, and Günter Katzenberger (ed.), Kulturaus-