BERLIN METROPOLIS

BERLIN METROPOLIS 1918–1933

Edited by Olaf Peters Preface by Ronald S. Lauder, foreword by Renée Price

With contributions by:

Leonhard Helten Jürgen Müller Olaf Peters and Sharon Jordan Janina Nentwig Dorothy Price Adelheid Rasche

PRESTEL MUNICH • LONDON • NEW YORK This catalogue has been published in conjunction with the exhibition

BERLIN METROPOLIS: 1918–1933

Neue Galerie New York October 1, 2015 – January 4, 2016

Berlin Metropolis: 1918–1933 is supported by a generous grant from A. Lange & Söhne

With additional support from

This exhibition is made possible in part by the Neue Galerie President’s Circle.

Curator © 2015 Neue Galerie New York; Library of Congress Control Number: 2015946434 Olaf Peters Prestel Verlag, Munich • London • New York; British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data: Exhibition design and authors a catalogue record for this book is available Richard Pandiscio, from the British Library; Deutsche Nationalbibliothek William Loccisano / Pandiscio Co. Prestel Verlag, Munich holds a record of this publication in the Deutsche A member of Verlagsgruppe Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographical data Director of publications Random House GmbH can be found under: http://www.dnb.de Scott Gutterman Prestel Verlag ISBN 978-3-7913-5490-3 Managing editor Neumarkter Strasse 28 Janis Staggs 81673 Munich Tel. +49 (0)89 4136-0 Editorial assistance Fax +49 (0)89 4136-2335 Liesbet van Leemput www.prestel.de

Book design Prestel Publishing Ltd. Richard Pandiscio, 14-17 Wells Street Verlagsgruppe Random House FSC® N001967 William Loccisano / Pandiscio Co. London W1T 3PD The FSC®-certified paper Magnomatt Tel. +44 (0)20 7323-5004 was supplied by Igepa Translation Fax. +44 (0)20 7323-0271 Steven Lindberg FRONTISPIECE: Hannah Höch (1889–1978), Prestel Publishing World Revolution, 1920, gelatin silver print. Project coordination 900 Broadway, Suite 603 The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Ford Motor Anja Besserer New York, NY 10003 Company Collection, Gift of Ford Motor Company Tel. +1 (212) 995-2720 and John C. Waddell Production Fax +1 (212) 995-2733 Andrea Cobré www.prestel.com PAGE 6: , Memory of New York, 1915–16, Plate I of the First George Grosz Portfolio, Origination Prestel books are available published by Malik-Verlag, Berlin, 1916–17, Royal Media, Munich worldwide. Please contact your lithograph. The Museum of Modern Art, New York nearest bookseller or one of the Printing and binding above addresses for information PAGE 9: Raoul Hausmann (1886–1971), Dada Passavia, Passau concerning your local distributor. Triumphs (The Exacting Brain of a Bourgeois Calls Forth a World Movement), 1920, watercolor and collage on wove paper mounted on board. Private Collection ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Heinrich Schulze Altcappenberg, Berlin Carey Jung, New York Cora Rosevear, New York Catherine Amé, Berlin Julie Jung, New York Jeff Rosenheim, New York Art Installation Design, New York Katrin Käding, Berlin Rainer Rother, Berlin Jamie Aydt, St. Louis Katy Kane, New Hope Anett Sawall, Berlin Thomas Bauer-Friedrich, Halle/Saale Cheryl Karim, New York Andreas Schalhorn, Berlin Jennifer Belt, New York Randy Kaufman, Berlin Uwe Schaper, Berlin Brent Benjamin, St. Louis Harold Koda, New York Hans-Jörg Schirmbeck, Berlin Stephan Berg, Bonn Gerald Köhler, Cologne Peter Cachola Schmal, Berlin Merrill C. Berman, New York Thomas Köhler, Berlin Dieter Scholz, Berlin Anja Besserer, Munich Hulya Kolabas, New York Sandy Schreier, Southfield Tobia Bezzola, Essen Chris Korner, Marbach Robert Schreiner, New York Nina Bingel, Stuttgart Sriba Kwadjovie, San Francisco Antje Seeger, Halle/Saale Franziska Bohr, Leipzig Rainer Laabs, Berlin Luise Seppeler, Berlin Susanne Brüning, Essen Heather Lammers, San Antonio Annemarie Seyda, Berlin Antonia Bryan, New York Liesbet van Leemput, New York Julie Simpson, Washington, DC Thomas Campbell, New York Michael Lesh, New York Michael Slade, New York William Chiego, San Antonio Rebecca Lewis, New York Ute Smeteck, Berlin Andrea Cobré, Munich Steven Lindberg, Molkom Maggie Spicer, New York Brenna Cothran, New York William Loccisano, New York Janis Staggs, New York Crozier Fine Arts, New York Susan Logan-Ferry, Detroit Judy and Michael Steinhardt, New York Corey D’Augustine, New York Glenn Lowry, New York Henrik Strehmel, Berlin Markus Dennig, New York LP Art, Hana Streicher, Berlin Margit Diefenthal, Berlin Norbert Ludwig, Berlin Elizabeth Szancer, New York Fernando Eguchi, New York Peter Marx, Berlin Christian Tagger, Berlin Johannes Evers, Berlin Masterpiece International Elisa Tamaschke, Halle/Saale Conrad Feininger, Westport Maria Fernanda Meza, New York Guy Tosatto, Grenoble Matthias Finke, Berlin Hedwig Müller, Cologne Monika Tritschler, Berlin René Finke, Berlin Jürgen Müller, Dresden Isabelle Varloteaux, Grenoble Emily Foss, New York Hans-Dieter Nägelke, Berlin Hannah Vietoris, Essen Melissa Front, New York Allison Needle, New York Wolfgang Voigt, Frankfurt am Main Joyce Fung, New York Janina Nentwig, Berlin Michael Voss, New York Kristina Georgi, Bonn Vlasta Odell, New York Barbara Weber, Bonn Wendy Griffiths, Fort Worth Richard Pandiscio, New York Wolfgang Welker, Frankfurt Scott Gutterman, New York Wolfgang Pauser, Vienna Nara Wood, Middleton Jeffrey Haber, New York Klaus-Dieter Pett, Berlin Moritz Wullen, Berlin Hasenkamp, Andreas Piel, Berlin Claudia Zachariae, Berlin Stefanie Heckmann, Berlin Carina Plath, Hanover Tom Zoufaly, New York Leonhard Helten, Halle/Saale Dorothy Price, Bristol Lutz Herrmann, Berlin Ellen Price, New York We also acknowledge those individuals Sibylle Hoiman, Berlin Sami Rama, New Haven who prefer to remain anonymous. Ara Howrani, Detroit Adelheid Rasche, Berlin Cynthia Iavarone, New York Juliane Reckow, Halle/Saale Annemarie Jaeggi, Berlin Phyllis La Riccia, New York Joachim Jäger, Berlin Mary Winston Richardson, New York Joelle Jensen, New York Ingrid Rieck, Berlin Ryan Jensen, New York Julia Riedel, Berlin Sharon Jordan, New York Jerry Rivera, New York

CONTENTS

8 RonaldS.Lauder Preface

10 Renée Price Foreword

DADA AND STREET LIFE

14 BERLIN METROPOLIS Art,Culture,andPoliticsBetweentheWars Olaf Peters 36 ART AND ANTI-ART IN BERLIN AROUND 1920 Dada and the Novembergruppe Janina Nentwig 58 PLATES I

ARCHITECTURE, THEATER, AND FILM

114 MODERN ARCHITECTURE IN Leonhard Helten 136 BABELSBERG/BABYLON ’s “Metropolis” Reinterpreted Jürgen Müller 162 PLATES II

THENEWWOMAN,FASHION,ANDPOLITICS

246 “THE RHYTHM OF OUR TIME IS JAZZ” Popular Entertainment during the Sharon Jordan 274 THE NEW WOMAN IN 1920s BERLIN Dorothy Price 294 BERLIN AS A CITY OF FASHION Adelheid Rasche 311 PLATES III

370 Checklist 388 Selected Bibliography 394 Index 400 Photograph and Copyright Credits PREFACE

Withthisexhibition,wecelebrateamagicaltimeinthehistoryofBerlin.Theperiodfrom1918to1933sawtremendous advances in art, film, literature, even social relations in the German capital. One thinks of Alfred Döblin and his epic novel, Berlin ; groundbreaking films such as Metropolis by Fritz Lang, and great stars like ; brilliant painterssuchasOttoDix,GeorgGrosz,andChristianSchad;thefantasticmusicaltheaterofBertoltBrechtandKurtWeill; andthedesigninnovationsofthelateBauhaus—allhappeninginthesameplaceandtime.Berlinwas,inasense,theonly trulyinternationalGermancity,theoneinwhichthemodernerawasborn.Tragically,theriseoftheNazisbroughtanendto this miracle of civic enlightenment.

MyowninvolvementinBerlinbeganinmystudentdaysofthe1960s.Ireturnednumeroustimesovertheintervening decades.IamproudtohavedevelopedtheformerCheckpointCharliesite,contributingtothisoncebarrenarea’srevital- ization, and to have worked on the preservation and development of the historic Tegel airport. It is gratifying to have played a small part in reestablishing Berlin as a major world capital. At the same time, I have always been drawn to the art of this incrediblecity,andIamproudthattheNeueGalerieservesasahometosomanymasterpiecesofearlytwentieth-century German art.

I am delighted to have Olaf Peters as the curator of this exhibition, because he shows the period in all its richness and diver- sity. The results are truly stunning.

IwishtothanktheConsulGeneralfortheGermanConsulateGeneralinNewYork,BritaWagener,aswellasourpartners inVisitBerlin.Theyarehelpingwelcomenewgenerationsofvisitorstothisimportantculturalcenter,fromitsworld-class museums and opera to its concert halls to its lovely .

OurownexhibitionremindsusofthekeyroleBerlinhasplayedinEuropeanculture.Insodoing,italsoinvitesnewvisitors tolearnmoreaboutthisonceandfuturegreatcity.

Ronald S. Lauder President, Neue Galerie New York Raoul Hausmann, A Bourgeois Precision Brain Incites a World Movement (later known as Dada Triumphs),1920,watercolorandcollage onwovepapermountedonboard.PrivateCollection.©2015ArtistsRightsSociety(ARS),NewYork/ADAGP,Paris FOREWORD

FormanyAmericans,thephrase“Berlininthe1920s”conjuresasingleimage:thatofmadcapnightlife,ofdecadenceset against a deteriorating social landscape. In short, it is the Weimar world of , as indelibly depicted on film and on stage.

But the truth of this time was far more complex. Agonizing political realities set the stage, from the ruinous economy that developed in the wake of Germany’s defeat in to the rise of toward the decade’s end. The culture that developedinthisuniquetimeandplacehaditsshareofspectacularmoments.YetBerlinwas,andis,morethanthesumof these disparate parts.

Inpresenting“BerlinMetropolis:1918–1933,”theNeueGalerieNewYorkseekstomovebeyondtheclichés.Ourgoalisto examinetheculturalandsocialrealms,andtowitnessthebirthofmanyaspectsofmodernculture:thesocietyofthespec- tacle, the prevalence of advertising, the rise of the Neue Frau (NewWoman),theintersectionofartandpower.Byexploring these important trends, in particular as they are evidenced by the paintings and drawings of the period, we hope to illuminate thetruenatureofthesocialtransformationthattookplaceinBerlininjustoveradecade.

My thanks extend first to our esteemed curator, Dr. Olaf Peters. Dr. Peters has organized several major exhibitions for the Neue Galerie,including“DegenerateArt:TheAttackonModernArtinNaziGermany,1937”and“OttoDix.”Heisaremarkable scholar, superb colleague, and great friend, and he has created an exhibition and catalogue of impressive scope and depth.

We are deeply indebted to the many lenders to this exhibition, who have parted with major works in order to allow us to tell this important story in full. Some institutions and individuals have contributed to the exhibition in an extremly generous mannerandweareverygratefulforhavingreceivedanenormousamountofhelpandadvice.Inparticular,Iwishtothank the Berlinische Galerie and Dr. Stefanie Heckmann, the Archive of the Akademie der Künste in Berlin and Dr. Hans-Jörg Schirmbeck, the -Archiv in Berlin and Dr. Sibylle Hoiman, the Stiftung Deutsche Kinemathek in Berlin and Julia Riedel, the Kunstbibliothek of the Staatliche Museen zu Berlin and Dr. Adelheid Rasche, the Architekturmuseum der TU Berlin and Dr. Hans-Dieter Nägelke, the Theaterwissenschaftliche Sammlung of the University of Cologne and Dr. Hedwig Müller and Dr. Gerald Köhler, the Institut für Auslandsbeziehungen in Stuttgart and Dr. Nina Bingel, the Metropolitan Museum of Art and Thomas Cambell, and The Museum of Modern Art and Glenn Lowry for their important support of our exhibition.

Iwouldliketogivespecialthankstotwoindividualswhohavecontributedsomuchtothefashioncomponentofourcatalogue and exhibition. Sandy Schreier, couture collector extraordinaire, has generously lent several important pieces from the period, whichshowherkeeneyeandboundlessdevotiontothisfield.HaroldKoda,esteemedCuratorinChargeoftheCostume InstituteattheMetropolitanMuseumofArt,hasbeenacrucialinfluenceintheworldsofartandfashionfordecades.Heis also a trusted friend and advisor. We also owe a debt of gratitude to Merrill C. Berman and to Michael and Judy Steinhardt for making superb loans available from their extraordinary and extensive private collections.

Our catalogue authors have provided new insights and original research, which are invaluable to our efforts. A special mention and my sincere thanks to Adelheid Rasche, Weimar fashion expert, who, in addition to writing a fascinating essay forthiscatalogue,hasbeeninvaluableinlocatingvintagefashionaccessoriesfrom1920sBerlin.RichardPandiscioand BillLoccisanohavebroughtgreatingenuitytothedesignoftheboththeexhibitionandthiscatalogue.AttheNeueGalerie, IwouldliketogivespecialthankstoScottGutterman,DeputyDirectorandChiefOperatingOfficer;JanisStaggs,Asso- ciate Director, Curatorial and Publications; Melissa Front, Chief Registrar and Director of Exhibitions; Michael Voss, Head Preparator;andLiesbetvanLeemput,GraphicsManager,fortheireffortsonbehalfofthisgreatexhibition.

Finally, my greatest thanks are to our President, and Co-Founder, Ronald S. Lauder, whose passion and curiosity for Berlin andtheartofthistimeknownobounds.

Renée Price Director, Neue Galerie New York Christian Schad, Sonja,1928,oiloncanvas.StaatlicheMuseenzuBerlin,Nationalgalerie.bpk,Berlin/Nationalgalerie/Photo: Joerg P. Anders / Art Resource, NY. © 2015 Christian Schad Stiftung Aschaffenburg / ARS, New York / V6 Bild-Kunst, Bonn Hannah Höch, Cut with a Kitchen Knife through the Last Weimar Beer-Belly Cultural Epoch in Germany, 1919–20, photomontage and collage with watercolor. Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, Nationalgalerie. © 2015 Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York / VG Bild-Kunst, Bonn DADA AND STREET LIFE

ø BERLIN METROPOLIS

ø ART AND ANTI-ART IN BERLIN AROUND 1920

ø PLATES I BERLIN METROPOLIS

ART, CULTURE, AND POLITICS BETWEEN THE WARS

Olaf Peters

MYTHOS BERLIN “Weimar was Berlin, Berlin Weimar.”1 That was Weimar in 1919 and moved in the mid-1920s 1. The clock at the Bahnhof howthehistorianEricWeitzintroducedthe to Dessau. An icon of modern architecture Zoo, Berlin, a popular chapteronBerlininhislaudablestudyofthe (Neues Bauen) wasrealizedintheensembleof meeting point, 1935. Photo: 2 Friedrich Seidenstücker. Weimar Republic. The statement is both accu- Bauhaus building and master houses. Not until From: Die Metropole. rate and inaccurate. It is accurate because Ber- 1932 did the institution move, briefly, to Berlin, Industriekultur in Berlin im lin,asthecapitalofPrussiaandGermany,as owing to political developments, but it had no in- 20. Jahrhundert (Munich, the industrial and cultural center, and by its size fluence there.4 The outstanding painters of the 1986), p. 191 alone, stood out among Germany’s other cities WeimarRepublicdidnotliveinBerlin,oratmost [Fig.1].Inthe1920s,GreaterBerlin,including did so only briefly: the Bauhaus masters Josef its numerous recently incorporated areas (and Albers, Lyonel Feininger, Vasily Kandinsky, and twotothreehundredthousandexiledRussians) Paul Klee were tied to the institution in Weimar had a population of over four million residents. In andtheninDessau.MaxBeckmann—proba- terms of area, Berlin was the second largest city bly the most important figurative painter of the intheworld,afterLosAngeles.3 Forthatrea- time, along with Klee—lived in Frankfurt am son,comparingBerlintothecoreoftheRuhr Main from 1915 onward and, after he was dis- region is more appropriate than comparing it to missed from his teaching position in Frankfurt otherGermanmetropolises.Butthestatement in 1933 by the National Socialists, only came to is also inaccurate with regard to art, because themetropolisthatpromisedanonymityforfour numerouscrucialachievementsoftheWeimar years before going into exile in Amsterdam.5 era were produced and worked out in other cit- iesandregionsinGermanyandradiatedfrom Bycontrast,itshouldberememberedthatthe thereacrosstheentireGermanReich.Several most prominent painters in Berlin during this examples will underscore that, since the myth of period were probably Lovis Corinth and Max Berlin,whichhasoftentakenonalifeofitsown Liebermann. Both of them had successful andbeenconfusedwithreality,shouldnotbe careers in imperial Germany before the First reproduced uncritically here, even against the World War and could be regarded as represen- backdropofthecurrententhusiasmforthecity. tativesofanearlierera.ThetributeintheBerlin Secession, the burial of Lovis Corinth in 1925, The Bauhaus—the all-but-unparalleled sym- andthegreatposthumousexhibitionsinthe bolofthemodernist1920s—wasfoundedin Nationalgalerie and the Akademie der Künste

14 BERLIN METROPOLIS in Berlin in 1926 were official events and tes- Max Horkheimer, and Siegfried Kracauer were tifiedtotherankofthepainter,whowasespe- partofthiscircle.Moreover,itshouldbenoted cially brilliant in his late work.6 Karl Hofer, who that the important German philosophers of the wasalsoresidentinBerlinandafamousrep- period—Ernst Cassirer, Martin Heidegger, and resentative of a younger generation, did indeed MaxScheler—taughtinHamburg,Freiburgim produce an important oeuvre, but today he has Breisgau, and Cologne, respectively. Neues been largely forgotten.7 In retrospect, George Bauen also demonstrated new possibilities in Groszseemsmorelikeapoliticaldraftsman themetropolisontheMainRiver,withmunici- and graphic artist than a significant painter,8 palarchitectErnstMay,theconceptfortheso- and Christian Schad, who did not arrive in Ber- called Frankfurt kitchen [Figs. 2 and 3] by Mar- lin until the spring of 1928, was an outstanding garete Schütte-Lihotzky, and the journal Das portraitistwholackedarelevantapproachto Neue Frankfurt.11 Other centers of modern ar- painting beyond that.9 chitecture included the central German cities

MaxBeckmann’snewhome,Frankfurtam of Dessau and Magdeburg and such regional Main,was,moreover,anintellectualcenter centers as Celle, Duisburg, Kassel, Karlsruhe, oftheWeimarRepublic,withtheheadquar- Cologne, Nuremberg, and Stuttgart (the Weis- ters of the Frankfurter Zeitung and the Institut senhof housing development) [Fig. 4].12 für Sozialforschung (Institute for Social Re- search)10—andafter1945itseamlesslycon- , whose aggressive art sometimes tinued this tradition with its university and the made him the scandalous painter star of the Suhrkamp publishing house. Theodor Adorno, young republic, began his career as an artist

OLAF PETERS 15 2. Margarete Schütte-Lihotzky, the Frankfurt Kitchen, 3. Ernst May, Herbert Boehm, Wolfgang Bangert, and Eugen Kaufmann, Praunheim 1926. From: Vittorio Magnago Lampugnani, Vol. 1 housing complex, Frankfurt am Main 1926-30, axonometric projection showing (Berlin,2011),p.348 thecolorconcept.From:VittorioMagnagoLampugnani,Vol.1(Berlin,2011),p.351

in Dresden and then in the Rhineland (Düssel- ciated with Berlin. It is, however, conceptually dorf).13 He did live briefly in Berlin in the 1920s connectedtothatcity,ifnotintermsofsubject butthentaughtinDresdenasaprofessorat matter,since,interestingly,inhisfirstsketch- the Kunstakademie from 1927. His famous esforthetriptychDixreferredtothefamous triptych Metropolis [Fig.5]waspaintedthere, street scenes of Ernst Ludwig Kirchner, which

4. Weissenhof housing andreferredtoDresden,thoughasasymbol were produced in Berlin in 1913–14. In this development of the 1920s it has mistakenly become asso- specificcase,itcanbesaidthattheexperi- enceofBerlinandtheknowledgeofKirch- ner’s work based on it prodded Dix’s ambition tocreateamagnumopusofthepaintingof Neue Sachlichkeit (New Objectivity) that fo- cusedtheageanditstwistsandturns.Inthat sense, Berlin pulses through the painting, even though it is not depicted in it. 14

ABOUT OUR EXHIBITION The exhibition should not once again wrongly makeBerlinouttohavebeenthecenterofthe modern developments of the Weimar Republic. Nevertheless,itshouldhelpustobegintoex- perience visually the Berlin of the 1920s, the capital of the first German democracy, in all

16 BERLIN METROPOLIS 5. Otto Dix, Metropolis, 1927–28, oil on panel. Kunstmuseum Stuttgart. Archiv of IKARE of the Martin-Luther-University, Halle-Wittenberg.©2015ArtistsRightsSociety(ARS),NewYork/VGBild-Kunst,Bonn

itscomplex,multifacetedheterogeneity.That edintheexampleofitscapital,Berlin,since can only succeed in segments and fragments, the cultural development cannot be separated especially because our exhibition cannot be a from the political and social development.16 survey of the history of culture or even of the Artists reacted to this phase of dramatic po- historyofthecitybutisratheranartexhibition liticalupheavalwiththefalloftheGermanRe- 6. Dancing the Black Bottom, 1926. From: Die Metropole. that sets out from important individual works ich and the revolutionary birth of the Weimar IndustriekulturinBerlinim20. and expands on them by adding essential as- Republicwithdecidedlypoliticalart—aimedat Jahrhundert (Munich,1986),p.197 pects of the cultural ’s moder- nity. 15 Forthatreason,thefieldsofarchitecture (public housing), film and photography, fashion and advertising, and the role of the modern woman are prominently represented, and there areseparateessaystoprovidemoredetailon these topics [Fig. 6]. In these areas especial- ly,Berlin’smodernityisevidentinsometimes striking ways, though of course it could also be experienced in Cologne or Hamburg as a phase of modernization specific to the era.

At the same time, the exhibition concept has been shaped by our intention to allow the polit- ical history of the Weimar Republic be reflect-

OLAF PETERS 17 theconsolidationoftherepublicinthereturn Based on the developments roughly sketched to old elites—and with utopian blueprints for here, the exhibition is organized chronological- thefuture.Therelativeeconomicprosperity lyandthematicallyinthreeparts:1)thebegin- oftheWeimarRepublicfrom1924onward ningsoftherepublicinBerlininthecontextof brought with it the comprehensive triumph of defeat in the First World War, revolution, and Neue Sachlichkeit as the representative art political and economic crisis; 2) the political movement,asbecamemanifestby1925with easingofthesituationandtheriseofconsum- theexhibitioninMannheimofthatname.17 At er industries in the capital as part of relative the same time, there were social and political economic stabilization; and 3) the decline of changes—reduced working hours, the contin- the republic in the face of economic catastro- ued development of a culture of salaried em- phe and sometimes violent political confronta- tions. These three main phases of the Weimar Republicarealsothethreecentralmoments in the history of Berlin, which structure the extensive visual materials that our exhibition brings together.

7. Ludwig Meidner, Iand THE CALL FOR CONTEMPORANEITY the City,1913,oilon Our exhibition has an ideal programmatic pre- canvas. Private Collection lude: IandtheCity, the famous self-portrait by Ludwig Meidner from 1913 [Fig. 7]. In addition to Ernst Ludwig Kirchner, already mentioned, it was the Expressionist painter, graphic art- ist, and poet Meidner who early on called for addressing the modernity of the metropo- lis, which in his case meant Berlin.19 In 1914 he published his important text “Anleitung zum Malen von Großstadtbildern” (translated as “Instructions for Painting Pictures of the Metropolis”), which made the programmatic ployees and associated new consumer and demand: “We must at last begin to paint the leisure behaviors—that were perhaps espe- home where we live, the metropolis that we cially evident in Berlin because of the quan- lovewithoutreserve.Withfeverishscrawling titative larger scale. In the final phase of the handswemustcovercanvaseswithoutnum- republic, Berlin and its streets become a polit- ber,andlargeasfrescoes,witheverything ically contested space. The National Socialists that is strange and splendid, everything that tried to conquer “Red Berlin,” which was char- is monstrous and striking, about our great acterized largely by industry and its associated avenues and railway stations, our towers and workers. This political confrontation was once factories.”20 InMeidnerwefeeltheinfluence againreflectedinart,whilemassunemploy- of Italian Futurism, prominently exhibited by ment and existential uncertainty put an end to Herwarth Walden in 1913, when he writes of thebrief,shamvitalityofthemetropolis,which “tumultuous streets” and the “roaring colors of had primarily been an illusion constructed by the buses.” He also makes a pointed settling the media. of accounts and breaks with a traditional ca-

18 BERLIN METROPOLIS nonicalaestheticofearliercenturiesthatno longer satisfied the needs of the present: “And wouldnotthedramaofawell-paintedfactory chimney then move us more deeply than any Fire in the Borgo or Battle of Constantine,more than any number of Raphaels?”21 This is pre- cisely where the Berlin Dadaists would pick up after the First World War was lost in 1918, albeit with an anti-Expressionist, fundamental critique of bourgeois culture, which had been de-legitimizedbytheFirstWorldWar.

In Meidner’s self-portrait, the artist’s head appears cut off, his hand is raised anxious- ly to his chin, and his eyes are turned to the viewer in shock. Above his head, a vedute of the metropolis thunders like garish sheet light- ing; buildings slide; church spires and factory cles were circulating the fable that the unde- 8. Reichswehr troops behind a tank in Berlin smokestacksloom;peopleteemlikeants;and feated German army had been stabbed in the during the post-war period, ayellowhot-airballoonstraysthroughthetow- back, and the Mehrheitssozialdemokratische 1919-20. From: Der ers of clouds. The programmatic call to address Partei Deutschlands (MSPD; Majority Social Gefährliche Augenblick. thethemesofthemetropoliswasrealizedby DemocraticPartyofGermany)failedtocom- Eine Sammlung von Bildern und Berichten,editedby the painter in a phantasmagoric vision that was pel the military elite to accept responsibility for Ferdinand Bucholtz with able to capture the oppressive impressions of the desolate situation [Fig. 8]. This would prove an introduction by Ernst thebigcity.InadditiontoKirchner’sfamous to be a heavy burden for the democracy pro- Jünger (Berlin: Junker und Dünnhaupt 1931), p. 160 streetscenes,thisself-portraitandMeidner’s claimed in November 1918, although initially it apocalyptic landscapes met the challenge of appearedtorestonastablefoundation.The grappling with the reality of the city prior to leader of the MSPD, Friedrich Ebert [Plate 37], theFirstWorldWar.Withhisapocalypticland- was elected chancellor of the Reich, and the scapes, Meidner recorded the crisis of the age electionsfortheNationalAssemblyonJanu- like a seismograph, before the German Reich ary 19, 1919, represented an overwhelmingly engendered its own fall with its flagrant miscal- clear vote for the new democracy, with nearly culations in the First World War.22 75 percent of the votes going to democratic parties. Ebert became the president of the Re- A BIRTH AMID CRISIS ich and Phillip Scheidemann succeeded him Germany’sdefeatintheFirstWorldWarcame as chancellor. as a shock to its people. Although they had to deal with enormous losses and deprivations In art, the radical, distinctly anti-bourgeois and during the war, the military supreme command anti-artistic expressions of the Dadaists sym- had left politicians and the general public bolized a rigorous turn away from established largely in the dark about the true extent of the forces. Expressionism had been the avant-gar- military catastrophe. Beginning on November de of Germany since 1905, and was increas- 4, 1918, there were signs of revolution: work- ingly gaining recognition, which was manifest- ersandsoldiersseizedpower;right-wingcir- ed not least in Expressionist works entering

OLAF PETERS 19 9. Poster for the “First soon characterized the culture of the Weimar International Dada Fair,” Republic.24 Initially,however,joyfuldestruction heldattheOttoBurchard gallery, Berlin 1920 and a utopian will to rebuild clashed.

As early as May 1919, the important Berlin art dealer Jsrael Ber Neumann presented a Dada exhibition that showcased above all the tech- nique of assemblage. In Berlin in 1920 the now famous “Erste Internationale Dada-Messe” (“First International Dada Fair”) was held in thegalleryofOttoBurchard,whousually soldAsianartbutalsofundedthisexhibition [Fig. 9].25 The participants included the Ber- lin Dadaists Johannes Baader, George Grosz, Raoul Hausmann, John Heartfield, Wieland Herzfelde, and Hannah Höch. But other Da- daists and associated artists from other cities were represented as well—for example, Hans Arp from Zurich, Otto Dix from Dresden, Max ErnstfromCologne,andRudolfSchlichterand GeorgScholzfromKarlsruhe.Thefewsurviv- ing photographs of the event show the artists themselvesposingreverentlyinfrontoftheir works[Fig.10],asifabourgeoisaudience hadappearedattheopening.Thepublicwas confronted with a seemingly arbitrary assem- bly of posters, collages, and drawings, a few paintings—including the now lost major works War Cripples (45% Fit for Work) by Otto Dix and Germany: A Winter’s Tale by George Gro- sz—andseveralsculptures,allofwhicharealso 10. Opening of the “First International Dada Fair,” in Otto Burchard’s gallery, Berlin, June lost, replicas of which we are able to include in 1920. Left to right: Raoul Hausmann, Hannah Höch (seated), Otto Burchard, Johannes our exhibition [Plates 31–33]. Baader, Wieland Herzfelde, Margarete Herzfelde, Dr. Oz (Otto Schmalhausen), George Grosz, and John Heartfield. Archiv of IKARE of the Martin-Luther-University, Halle-Wittenberg It is not possible to identify a common denom- German museum collections.23 Nevertheless, inator or origin among the many different art- from 1920 at the latest, Expressionism was istscollectedhere,butingeneralthepolitical, regarded by many as outmoded or even dead. inflammatoryaspectoftheBerlinDadaists Representationalism, naturalism, realism, and reflecting on the situation of revolutionary up- Sachlichkeit were the slogans of the new de- heaval in Germany came through clearly. So did cade, which could be called the decade of the anti-bourgeois attack on art—one poster New Objectivity. Neues Bauen in architecture, announced:“DieKunstisttot.Eslebedieneue Neues Sehen (New Vision) in photography, Maschinenkunst Tatlins” (Art is dead. Long live andNeueSachlichkeitinpaintinganddesign Tatlin’snewmachineart;Fig.11)—thatwas

20 BERLIN METROPOLIS presented in the form of collage, which de- stroyed the traditional concept of the organic work of art,26 and offered ironic “improvements on ancient masterpieces.” The bourgeois Ger- manconformistconcernedwithsecurityand stabilitywasthusmadethecentraltargetand attacked in two ways.27

By contrast, but also in part connected with Dadaism,organizationsinBerlinsuchasthe Novembergruppe (November Group) and the Arbeitsrat für Kunst (Work Council for Art) usedthesituationofsocialupheavalasan opportunity for constructive artistic design.28 These approaches alternated between utopian ideas beyond any realistic dimension and very concrete, practical questions. For example, the members of the utopian-tending architecture group Die gläserne Kette (The Glass Chain) correspondedwithoneanotherin1919–20, and individual members philosophized about 11.GeorgeGrosz(left)andJohnHeartfieldatthe“First thecrystalasafuturisticsymbolofcoming International Dada Fair,” standing in front of a sculpture by Vladimir architecture29 or about the architectural rede- Tatlin, Otto Burchard’s gallery, Berlin, June 1920. Archiv of IKARE sign of the massif of the Alps. The members of the Martin-Luther-University, Halle-Wittenberg included renowned architects such as Walter Gropius, Hans Scharoun, and , who overthecourseoftheWeimarRepublicwould indeed build, putting their modernist stamp ontherepublicincitiessuchasBerlin,Des- sau, and Magdeburg [Fig. 12].30 Gropius and Taut also signed the program of the Arbeits- rat für Kunst, whose catalogue of questions concerned information about urgently neces- sary construction of public housing or about the connections between modern art and the people. If their utopian projects may have been a certain compensation for the inevitable lack of architectural activity after defeat in the First World War, the Novembergruppe and the Ar- beitsrat were concretely involved in rebuilding a postwar order of a democratic and socialist 12. Walter Gropius (design) and Stefan Sebök (drawing), sketch character. One necessary prerequisite for that, showing the perspective of the foyer for the Berufsdoppelschule Berlin-Köpenick, wash and sprayed ink on paper, 1930. however, was a reasonably stable economic Bauhaus-ArchivBerlin.©2015ArtistsRightsSociety(ARS), situation in the young republic. New York / VG Bild-Kunst, Bonn, for Walter Gropius

OLAF PETERS 21 13. The correspondence PRECARIOUS STABILIZATION In terms of foreign policy, the German Reich, department of the Berliner “From1914to1924,Berlinwasstagnating— under the leadership of Gustav Stresemann, Handelsgesellschaft, Charlottenstrasse, Berlin indeed, the cityscape [was] declining increas- wasabletointroduceapolicyofbetterunder- 1920. From: Die Metropole. ingly.”31 Andmuchofwhatfollowedshouldbe standing with France; with respect to Poland, Industriekultur in Berlin im seenas,amongotherthings,anattemptat however, the peace settlement, which entailed 20. Jahrhundert (Munich, self-stylizationandcompensationas“symbol- awarding of considerable territory, was not 1986), p. 34 ic overcoming of the past.”32 Theyear1924 accepted.LoansfromtheUnitedStatesin 14. Salaried employees in marked the beginning of a phase of relative particular ensured that Germany was able to Berlin during the 1920s. stabilization in the Weimar Republic, which pay its reparations to the United Kingdom and From: Die Metropole. Industriekultur in Berlin im from 1920 to 1923 had been standing on the France,ontheonehand,andinvestinGerma- 20. Jahrhundert (Munich, abyss,withattemptedpoliticalcoupsfrom nytoproduceaneconomicupswing,onthe 1986), p. 169. Archiv of both the left and right, political assassinations other. Germany’s industrial production grew IKARE of the Martin- 33 Luther-University, Halle- (Karl Liebknecht, Rosa Luxemburg, and nearlyeightpercentannuallyfrom1924on; Wittenberg Walther Rathenau34), the occupation of the coal and steel production soon exceeded pre- Ruhrregionandthe“BattleoftheRuhr,”the warlevels;exportswereincreasing,andreal humiliating Treaty of Versailles and enormous wages grew. By comparison to other countries, payments of reparations (Article 231 attribut- it was not necessarily always in front but—de- ed sole responsibility for the war to Germany spite the biggest problem, agriculture—it pro- andin1922theAlliedforcesdemandedrep- vided some peace concerning domestic policy. arations totaling 132 billion gold marks), and inflation that devalued financial assets.35 The Berlin,asacentrallocationforlargeindus- inflation had, however, liberated Germany from try (Siemens, Borsig, and others) and as the its debt, and it became possible to initiate inno- capital of and of the German Reich, vativesocialpolicieswithsuchachievements focused several developments like a magnify- as unemployment insurance, regulations on ingglass.Inparticular,thenewcultureofsal- working hours with an eight-hour day, and the ariedemployeeswasofcentralimportanceto construction of public housing. modernity and fashion, consumer and leisure

22 BERLIN METROPOLIS activities, and the history of attitudes.36 Sieg- Sunday) [Fig. 15] is about the weekend culture fried Kracauer’s study Die Angestellten (trans- of salaried employees in Berlin, who travel to lated as The Salaried Masses) was published in the for amusement. Amateur actors 1930andwasbasedonempiricalstudiesits performinthefilm.Ithasfeaturesofthere- author had done in Berlin between April and portageordocumentaryfilmandisamajor July1929[Figs.13and14].37 Kracauer had work of cinematic Neue Sachlichkeit. gone to those concerned and spoken to them and looked closely at their workplaces. The and Edgar Ulmer directed book became a journalistic sensation and trig- Menschen am Sonntag;EugenSchüfftanwas gered vehement discussion, because Kracau- the cameraman, and wrote the er had scrupulously depicted both the milieu script—all these names can illustrate in a flash of the salaried employees and their habitus. how the destruction of by the Kracauer found himself the target of intense National Socialists from 1933 onward drove anti-Semitic attacks—from Ernst Niekisch, for Germany’s creative potential into exile, not least example,whoeventhreatenedhimwithexpul- totheUnitedStates.41 Thatwasalsotrueofthe sion,persecution,andextermination.38 makers of the film Kuhle Wampe; oder, Wem gehört die Welt? (Kuhle Wampe; or, Who Owns From 1920 onward, Kracauer made a name for the World?),whichcameoutin1932.Itwas himself nationally, first as a freelancer and then made by in collaboration with asthefilmcriticfortheFrankfurter Zeitung. BertoltBrechtandErnstOttwalt,aswellas From 1930 onward, Kracauer was reporting Günther Krampf (camera), Karl Ehrlich (produc- from Berlin, where he had been sent because tion management), and Hanns Eisler (music). 15. Film still from Menschen ofincreasingconflictswiththemanagement The problems of unemployment, resignation, am Sonntag (People on of the newspaper, and he headed the editorial suicide, petit-bourgeois and proletarian life in a Sunday), directed by Robert Siodmak and Edgar G. staffofthelocalfeuilleton.Hisfilmreviewsof masshousingcomplexintheearly1920sand Ulmer, 1930. Stiftung the 1920s and early 1930s—which later pro- the communist orientation of the film—symbol- Deutsche Kinemathek videdthefoundationforthebookonfilmhe wroteafterhisexileinAmerica,From Caligari to Hitler: A Psychological History of the Ger- man Film (1947)—offer a fascinating overview ofthefilmproductionoftheWeimaryears.39 Again and again, Berlin played a central role in outstanding productions.40 For example, in Menschen untereinander (PeopletoEachOth- er) of 1926, described the situation in a Berlin apartment building and sketched the social coexistence there, which oscillated between poverty and modest pros- perity, exploitation and empathy. Lamprecht’s Unter der Laterne (Under the Lantern)of1928, bycontrast,showedthefateofagirlwho,after a fight with her father, becomes a high-class prostitute then heads for social decline. Robert Siodmak’s Menschen am Sonntag (People on

OLAF PETERS 23 ized by optimistic, athletic, working-class youth to position oneself within metropolitan moder- looking toward the future—immediately caused nity. In their work, the comparison of Paris, the problems with the censors and resulted in this capitalofthenineteenthcentury,andBerlin, political film being banned.42 which managed to become the most attrac-

16. The Tietz department store on the Alexanderplatz, designed by Cremer and Wolffenstein 1904–11. From: Die Metropole. Industriekultur in Berlin im 20. Jahrhundert (Munich, 1986), p. 39

SMALL FORM tive metropolis in Europe (alongside Moscow, How could one grapple appropriately with the which was rising rapidly but culturally sterilized manifold metropolis and its heterogeneous byStalin’spolicies),playedanobviousrole. phenomena? Since the lucid essays of the Ber- Berlin’snewmodernity,whichwasinpartinflu- linsociologistGeorgSimmel,therelationship enced by America, was measured against the oftheindividualandthecityhasbeenacentral classic modernism of the late nineteenth cen- theme. His famous essay “Die Grossstädte und tury as manifested in Paris. dasGeistesleben”(“TheMetropolisandMental Life”) attempted, already in 1903, to describe The historian Felix Gilbert, who later became specific means of perception and habitual at- famousaftergoingintoexileandwasafellow titudes (world-weariness) that city dwellers attherenownedInstituteforAdvancedStudyin necessarily developed in order to exist in ac- Princeton, New Jersey, mentioned the compar- celerated modernity.43 Intellectuals of Weimar ison of Paris and Berlin in his memoirs and un- modernism continued these approaches in dif- derscored the exciting intellectual atmosphere ferent ways. Today, the names ofthemetropolisontheSpree:“Myenthusiasm and Siegfried Kracauer stand for the attempt forParisdidnot,however,diminishmylovefor

24 BERLIN METROPOLIS Berlin. I knew instinctively—and I believe most 17. The Universum movie peopleofmygenerationsharedthisbelief— palaceattheKurfürsten- damm at night, Architect: that one was very fortunate to live in Berlin in Erich Mendelsohn 1928. the1920s.Berlinwascertainlynotaparticular- From: Die Metropole. lybeautifulcity.[…]Aboveall,however,Berlin Industriekultur in Berlin im 20. Jahrhundert, (Munich, wasanintellectuallystimulatingcity.”44 1986), p. 162

StrikingaspectsoftheFrenchcapital—forex- ample, its display windows, department stores, and arcades, its illumination at night, and the specific figure of the metropolitan flaneur— became topics for Berlin [Fig. 16].45 In 1929 a book by Franz Hessel was published with the title Spazieren in Berlin: Ein Lehrbuch der Kunst in Berlin Spazieren zu gehen ganz nah dem Zau- ber der Stadt von dem sie selbst kaum weiss; EinBilderbuchinWorten(Walking in Berlin: A things about this are remarkable: First, the TextbookontheArtofWalkinginBerlin,Very planning for Berlin provided for the traffic of ClosetotheMagicoftheCityofWhichItIsItself acosmopolitancitythatborenorelationship HardlyAware;ABookIllustratedwithWords).46 to the actual number of existing automobiles. Hessel, a good friend of Walter Benjamin, Attwoorthreetrafficjunctions,atmost,was chose for his guide to experiencing the metrop- thereanappreciablevolumeofmotorvehicles. olis the concept of Spazierengehen (walking), Second, traveling through Berlin by car had an which should not be confused with Flanieren effect that did not conform to the metropolis’s (strolling). It seems that Berlin’s distinct urban self-image: “Traveling by car slowly through structureprovidedwaysofperceivingandim- Berlin,onecomesfromonesmallcitytoan- pressions different from those Paris offered.47 other.”48 Itwasonlytravelingrapidlythatcould Inanycase,thebooksketchesonlyapartial produce the illusion of a world-class city, since image of the accelerated metropolis, instead GreaterBerlinwasgivenitsphysicalstature breaking it repeatedly with side glimpses in the due to an immense number of incorporations. form of topographically structured descriptions of specific parts of the city: Tiergarten, Kreuz- In that sense, the desire and the reality, the berg,Tempelhof,andalsoHasenheide. yearningtobeacosmopolitancityandthepro-

18. Advertisements for the At the same time, however, the walker Hessel competition “Berlin and its also explored the city, somewhat paradoxical- Trade Mark,” 1930. From: ly, on lengthy auto journeys. Traveling by car Gebrauchsgraphik International, Vol. 5 (Berlin, 1930) seemed necessary to get an overview of a dispersed and rambling Berlin, something that was by no means guaranteed by its urban form. Thatwasnottheleastofthereasonsbehindthe image of Berlin as ugly, as the city had grown rampantly in an uncoordinated way during the industrialization of the nineteenth century. Two

OLAF PETERS 25 19.DustjacketforWalter vincialityofasmalltown,createdatension.The Benjamin’s Einbahnstrasse, modelspursuedcouldnotbeachieved,and designed by Sasha Stone, 1930.ArchivofIKAREof that was clearly recognized, for example, when the Martin-Luther-University, the architect Bruno Taut described Berlin’s Halle-Wittenberg neon signs as “small-town” [Fig. 17] compared to those of New York, or when the writer Jo- seph Roth denounced the imitation of interna- tional flair as “failed [Berlin] originals.”49 Berlin’s long-serving mayor, Gustav Böss, had to con- cede realistically at the end of 1928: “I know: Paris, London, and New York are still above us. Soon we have to and will catch up to them.”50 Einbahnstrasse,whosecoverwasimpressively The wish expressed here was satisfied first by decorated by a montage evoking the metrop- propaganda and advertisement, although the olis by the photographer Sasha Stone, and cosmopolitan character of the city being mar- which perhaps had an inherent perspective on keted for tourism was intended not least to per- the history of philosophy determined by the te- suade its former wartime enemies that national leological irreversibility of the one-way street, chauvinism had been overcome [Fig. 18]. wasfragmentaryandconfusing[Fig.19].Itos- cillated between Franz Kafka’s mysteriousness WalterBenjaminwaswellawarethathisBerlin and Ernst Jünger’s heroism, between journal- book Einbahnstrasse, (translated as One-Way ism and philosophy. Benjamin’s view of Wei- Street) owed a great deal to his image of Par- mar culture was considerably blurred not least is.51 That is already evident from the fact that 20. Siegfried Kracauer, he foisted on his essay the aesthetic maxim 1930, official photograph for the Reichshandbuch Charles Baudelaire formulated in the mid-nine- der deutschen Gesellschaft teenth century when he remarked to Hugo von (Imperial Handbook of Hofmannsthal: “Precisely in its eccentric ele- German Society). Archiv of IKARE of the Martin-Luther- ments,thebookisifnotatrophythenindeeda University, Halle-Wittenberg document of an inner struggle out of which the object can be expressed in the words: to grasp actualityasthereverseoftheeternalinhistory and to take the impression from this covered sideofthecoin.Fortherest,thebookisgreatly indebted to Paris.”52

Benjamin’s surreal montage technique, on the onehand,andhisparticularperspective,which he had learned from Siegfried Kracauer, on the other hand, are still fascinating today. But the actual absence of the flaneur—which existed as a specific social type in nineteenth-century ParisbutnotinBerlinofthe1920s—andthe political objectives of his approach limited the scope of his ambitious experiment. The book

26 BERLIN METROPOLIS because he made the historically distinct par- ALEXANDERPLATZ adigm of Paris his contemporary guiding prin- Kracauer’s and Hessel’s brief descriptions ciple, and because of his overly affected cham- contrastwithanothermajorliteraryworkofthe pioningofapoliticizedliteraryintelligentsiato era.AlfredDöblin,mostofwhosenovelsad- which he himself was at pains to belong.53 Ben- dressexoticandfantasticaswellashistorical jamin was thus unable to come up with a lively andmythologicalsubjects,publishedhisnovel and immediate view of Berlin. aboutthemetropolisBerlinwithS.FischerVer- laginthefallof1929:.59 For deep insights into the Berlin of the Weimar ThesubjectofBerlinhadbeenontheagenda era,weareindebtedlesstoFranzHesseland forDöblinforsometime,butthepublicpres- Walter Benjamin than to Siegfried Kracauer, sure was steadily increasing, and it was as if wholivedinFrankfurtamMain[Fig.20].His such a book had been expected of him. The au- talent for precise observation, sensitized to thorfinallyprovidedit,andwith45,000copies urban contexts by his study of architecture, sold by 1932 and a predominantly positive re- and his humanist cultural criticism, influenced sponse from the press, it was quite successful. byhisteacherGeorgSimmel,resultedintexts The book is a magnum opus of literary modern- that dovetail aesthetics and sociology in ways ism and Neue Sachlichkeit. that are still intellectually impressive and also quite moving.54 Kracauer’s figures of thought Döblin imbued the novel with his intense preoc- constituted a fascinating synthesis and sought cupation with the city, making use of his person- to avoid a predetermined, ideological, system- al impressions from long walks, newspaper arti- atic analysis. They were based on philosophical cles, billboards, statistical yearbooks, telephone and theoretical concepts, but they brought with books, popular songs, reference works on Ber- them miniature descriptions of phenomena and liner expressions and histories of the city, but surfaces.Theyfollowaprincipleofsurface also from Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, Frie- phenomena that shed light on one another drich Schiller, and Heinrich von Kleist. His de- by analogy, on the one hand, and a basic ten- scriptionofthemetropolisassembledallofthis dency of the era, on the other, as Inka Mülder- like a montage. It relates the story of Franz Bib- Bach worked out in her pioneering study of erkopf, who wants to become a better man af- the early Kracauer.55 The whole ambivalence ter being released from prison having served a of his position is revealed, among other ways, sentence for manslaughter [Fig. 22], and whose in his famous description of the Tiller Girls, a personal inability and guilt will prevent him from contemporary revue troupe, along with others living up to this simple resolution: “One doesn’t of this ilk, that caused a sensation in Berlin [Fig. 21].56 ThecrucialthingisthatKracauer 21. The Scala-Girls in front of the Scala-Revue-palace, no longer wished to damn the newly emerging 1929. Photo: Herbert mass society from the perspective of cultural Hoffmann. From: Die criticism,butatthesametimerecognizedin Metropole. Industriekultur in Berlin im 20. Jahrhundert the entertainment industry the signs of instru- (Munich,1986),p.203 mental reason,57 which were breaking free of the emancipatory claim of the Enlightenment andthemselvesturningintoamyth,asMax Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno would soon point out while in exile in America.58

OLAF PETERS 27 22. Film still from Berlin cinematicallythefilmdidnotrealizethepos- Alexanderplatz, directed by sibilities of the medium that the novel itself Phil Jutzi, 1931, showing Heinrich George as Franz had demonstrated in the competing medium Biberkopf. Stiftung Deutsche of literature. had originally been Kinemathek, Berlin plannedastheleadingman,buthewasun- availableashewasplayingProfessorUnrat, alongside Marlene Dietrich, in the film version of Heinrich Mann’s novel Der blaue Engel (The Blue Angel). George had read Döblin’s nov- el while in the United States and immediately became enthusiastic about the character of begin one’s life with good words and intentions; Biberkopf. He wrote Döblin, initially with the one starts it by recognizing and understanding, idea of a theater adaptation. But when Döblin andwiththerightpersonnexttoyou,”readthe himself brought the new media of radio and film collagedandmontaged“textoftexts”onthe into play, the actor was initially surprised by this original dust jacket, designed by Georg Salter.60 progressiverequest.DirectedbyPhilJutzi,the filmwasproducedinthespringof1931,but It is perhaps idle to speculate whether Walther criticsfounditdisappointing,despiteGeorge’s Ruttmann’s film Berlin: Sinfonie der Großstadt performance, because it did not live up to its (English title Berlin: Symphony of a Metropolis), masterly literary model. whichpremieredinBerlinonSeptember23, 1927,61 and was in turn influenced by László InhisreviewofthefilmonOctober13,1931, Moholy-Nagy’s early film sketch,62 inspired SiegfriedKracauerevenspokeofafailureand Döblin’s novel. The cinematic technique of offeredacrucialargumentthatwasexpanded montageofthisperiodcertainlymadeanim- withaneyetotheincreasinglyeeriepolitical pression on Döblin. At the same time, by means atmosphere:“Thefilm’sinadequacyderivesnot of the story told and the cinematic montage leastfromthatfactthatitisdecidedlyastar’s structure, he failed to meet certain expecta- film. Its title is revealing: ‘Heinrich George in tions, such as the desire expressed from the Berlin-Alexanderplatz.’ Indeed, all its content is politicalleftthatblamebeplacedsquarelyon related to George and is held together by him. capitalist society. Johannes R. Becher polem- But that is doubly nonsensical with a hero who icizedagainstthebookforthatreasoninthe does not rule over his milieu but is crucially in- Communist Party journal Die Linkskurve,argu- fluenced by his milieu. […] Whereas elsewhere ingthatthemaincharacter,FranzBiberkopf, theactorsphysicallyembodyexistingtimes, hadbeensketchedaspoliticallyignorant,with in Germany many people are, at best, formed no class consciousness. But conservative according to actors. The habitat in which we readerswerealsoputoffbytheauthorsid- arelivingisunreal;theairpregnantwithideolo- ing with his stumbling protagonist and by the gies; the ground gives way under our feet.”63 In sometimes harsh light shed on the milieu of thistypicalstyle,Kracauer’sreviewfrom1931 Berlin’s semi-criminals. connected the specific production and acting of Berlin Alexanderplatz with the critical state With Döblin’s collaboration, Berlin Alexander- oftherepublicandtheriseofHitler’smove- platz was quickly turned into a film, with Hein- ment,whichhesketchedingrandstyleinhis richGeorgeintheroleofFranzBiberkopf.But Caligari book.

28 BERLIN METROPOLIS INTO THE ABYSS 23. George Grosz, Sketch Berlin owed its prominent position in the intel- of Police Headquarters, for theplay“Nebeneinander” lectualandculturallifeoftheWeimarrepublic by Hans Kaiser, 1923, above all to music—Wilhelm Furtwängler, Bru- watercolor and ink on paper. no Walter, and Otto Klemperer were conduct- Theaterwissenschaftliche Sammlung, Universität zu ingthere—literature,theater,andfilm,andless Köln. © 2015 Estate of so to art [Fig. 23]. The historian Felix Gilbert George Grosz / Licensed stated categorically: “But the best thing Berlin by VAGA, New York hadtoofferinthoseyearswasandremained thetheater;thenewplaysandtherevolution- ary directors were the main topics of conver- sation in many discussions. […] The theater in ber (The Robbers) on September 11, 1926. The Berlinwasthefocusofinterestnotonlybe- critics responded accordingly: “But Herr Pisca- cause it was often artistically stimulating but tor would be better off arranging marches for also because it was highly political: The theater the Roter Frontkämpferbund (Alliance of Red scorned traditions and was a place for critique Front Fighters) than slaughtering the classics of society; every limitation on freedom was de- in the state theater.”67 nounced there.”64 Max Reinhardt outshone the scene;hedirectedplaysinViennaandBerlin. The domestic political situation of the German BertoltBrechtandErwinPiscator,whodirect- Reich from 1929–30 onward was characterized ed the Volksbühne am Bülowplatz, brought pol- by increasing violence and an economic and itics to the stage in a new way. Piscator acted political crisis [Fig. 24]. In Berlin, the National- like a second author when he adapted plays for sozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (NSDAP; thetheaterandtransformedthemintomass National Socialist German Workers’ Party) and 24. Reichswehr troops during productions that recalled the political events the (SA; Storm Troopers tried a street fight in the north of Berlin. From: Der Gefährliche of Communists, as was the case with his pro- to achieve a political breakthrough that did not Augenblick. Eine Sammlung ductionsofRudolfLeonhard’sSegel am Hori- ever truly work out in the metropolis, which von Bildern und Berichten, zont (SailontheHorizon)andAlfonsPaquet’s was industrial and tended to be politically edited by Ferdinand Bucholtz withanintroductionbyErnst 65 Sturmflut (Storm Tide), for example. leftist. Nevertheless, , the Jünger (Berlin: Junker und (Regional Party Leader) of Berlin, Dünnhaupt 1931), p. 154 The so-called Russian films, which were well received in Berlin, played their own role. Ser- geiEisenstein’spioneeringBattleship Potem- kin premiered at the Schauspielhaus Berlin on January18,1926,andwasshownattheApol- lo-Theater from late April onward; Eisenstein’s October:TenDaysThatShooktheWorldwas released in early April 1928 at the Tauentz- ien-PalastinBerlin.EdmundMeiselcomposed theoriginalmusicforbothfilmsandEgonErwin Kisch,nicknamedthe“RacingReporter,”pre- pared the intertitles for October [Plate 167].66 Piscatorcontinuedhispoliticalpolarizationon stage with his production of Schiller’s Die Räu-

OLAF PETERS 29 25. John Heartfield, the entourage around Hitler, which was char- Goering – Henchman of acterizedbyparvenusandoftenfailuresfrom the Third Reich,Coverof 68 AIZ, September 14,1933. a bourgeois perspective. But the aggressive Archiv of IKARE of the visual language on the covers of the Arbeiter- Martin-Luther-University, Illustrierte-Zeitung provide clearly enough infor- Halle-Wittenberg. © 2015 mation about the pointed situation, which had Artists Rights Society (ARS),NewYork/VG become caught up in and gave vent to an un- Bild-Kunst, Bonn compromising thinking in terms of friends and enemies. When Hitler came to power, Heart- fieldonlybarelyescapedtheSchutzstaffel(SS; ProtectionSquadron)andfledtoPrague.69 There he continued to make his powerful pho- tomontages: Hermann Goering was shown, for example,asPrussianMinisterPresidentwith an executioner’s ax and blood-smeared apron in front of a burning Reichstag (published Sep- tember14,1933;Fig.25)andavictimofthe Third Reich was broken on a swastika, in an image reminiscent of the medieval depictions ofthesufferingsofmartyrs(publishedMay 31,1934).ItspeaksvolumesthattheNational who in 1933 was promoted to propaganda Socialists had previously protested a new film minister of the Third Reich, did succeed with project by Fritz Lang titled M: Eine Stadt sucht his coldly calculating strategy of confrontation. einen Mörder (English title: M), which alluded to He was not timid about using the Communists their brutal approach.70 for propaganda purposes and he carried a 26. Film still from Der Fürst von Pappenheim, sometimes hard-fought political battle into the directed by Richard ranks of his opponents. By means of provocative Eichberg, 1927, showing marches and disturbances with political events, Curt Bois (left) and Mona the NSDAP tried to occupy the streets and the Maris. Stiftung Deutsche Kinemathek, Berlin public political space, attacking the Communists in their own hangouts. From the perspective of contemporaries, it was soon reaching a state of civil war, even though the monopoly on power of the state—which, admittedly, sympathized rather openly with the right-wing political camp—was never really called into question.

John Heartfield’s brilliant political graphic work of these years conveys impressively the themes and debates that dominated at the time or were imposed from the left, such as the alleged fi- nancing of the NSDAP by large industry and theunholyalliancebetweentheoldelitesand

30 BERLIN METROPOLIS In the end the National Socialists were able an impressive summary of Bois’s career and his to take power in Berlin as well, and during the personality. Bois—a lonely, small, elderly man— twelve years of their destructive and murderous iswalkinginacageofhismemories,spokenas rule, they reconceived the capital on a megalo- an off-camera monologue, of a Berlin scarred maniacal scale as a new center of a subjugated by war and division. He saw it all: Berlin during and culturally sterilized world.71 At first, the Ber- the late imperial era and the Weimar Republic; liners were forced to take refuge in their dreaded he escaped the Third Reich by fleeing into ex- wit.72 But over the years the situation changed ile. He returned to a war-scarred and divided dramatically and they watched the emerging Berlin in the early 1950s, and had an oppor- tragedy of German , who had so enduringly tunity to experience German reunification just influenced modern German culture, especially before he died. Perhaps he celebrated that in Berlin. The proposition of a German-Jewish event, which provided the original dynamic to symbiosis may be problematic, in part because the current cosmopolitan Berlin, with one of his it separates what belongs together, but by look- successes of the early 1930s. Then perhaps ing at the cultural wealth of Berlin between the a smiling Bois would have stood up and pro- wars, many sections of our exhibition remind us posed,“Come,let’sdancealittlerumba.” of the specific contribution of German Jews. Translated from the German by Steven Lindberg In conclusion, Curt Bois can be mentioned as a representative of the cultural flourishing of Acknowledgement: BerlinaftertheFirstWorldWar.Onthestagein This is the third exhibition I was able to realize at 1923 he played a bloodthirsty Roman wearing the Neue Galerie New York—”Otto Dix” (2010) a swastika on his thin chest. He appeared in and“DegenerateArt”(2014).Iwouldliketoex- revueswithKurtGerronandsangsongssuch press my deep gratitude to Renée Price, Scott as“IchmacheallesmitdenBeinen”(Idoev- Gutterman,JanisStaggs,andtheentirestaff erything with my legs) and “Ich hab’, ich bin, ich ofthemuseumandfortheirtrustandgenerous wär’” (I have, I am, I would be), and in the film Der supportoverthepastyears:Thankyou!Ialso Fürst von Pappenheim (ThePrinceofPappen- extend thanks to Elisa Tamaschke for her sup- heim)of1927,heputonwomen’sclothing[Fig. port in Halle (Saale). 26]. In his film DerHimmelüberBerlin(Wings of Desire, 1987), Wim Wenders managed to give For Alice, Undine, and Carina

1 Eric D. Weitz, Weimar Germany: Propyläen, 1989); Heinrich August notdetailedfurtherinthenotes. Promise and Tragedy (Princeton, NJ: Winkler, Weimar, 1918–1933: Die 3 On the economic and historical PrincetonUniv.Press,2007),p.41. Geschichte der ersten deutschen development of Berlin, see Otto 2 Themostimportantsurveysofthe Demokratie (Munich:C.H.Beck Büsch, Geschichte der Berliner history of the Weimar Republic are 1993); and Hans-Ulrich Wehler, Kommunalwirtschaft in der Weimarer DetlevJ.K.Peukert,Die Weimarer Deutsche Gesellschaftsgeschichte, Epoche,withaforewordbyHans Republik: Krisenjahre der klassischen vol. 4, Vom Beginn des Ersten Herzfeld (Berlin: de Gruyter 1960), Moderne (Frankfurt am Main: Weltkriegs bis zur Gründung der Die Metropole: Industriekultur in Suhrkamp, 1987); Hans Mommsen, beiden deutschen Staaten, 1914– Berlin im 20. Jahrhundert, ed. Jochen Die verspielte Freiheit: Der Weg 1945 (Munich:C.H.Beck,2008). Boberg, Tilman Fichter, and Eckhart der Republik von Weimar in den My historical remarks are essential Gillen(Munich:C.H.Beck1986), Untergang 1918 bis 1933 (Berlin: based on these overviews and are and,forasummaryfromageneral

OLAF PETERS 31 and comparative perspective, Neues Bauen, Neues Gestalten: Das Johann Hinrich Claussen (Frankfurt Friedrich Lenger, Metropolen Neue Frankfurt/die neue stadt; Eine am Main: Eichborn, 1994). der Moderne: Eine europäische Zeitschrift zwischen 1926 und 1933, 17 See Neue Sachlichkeit,exh.cat. Stadtgeschichte seit 1850 (Munich: ed. Heinz Hirdina (Berlin [West]: (Mannheim: Städtische Kunsthalle, C. H. Beck, 2013), 275–399. Elefanten, 1984). 1925), and, most recently, New Ontheeraasawhole,seealso 12 See the survey by Wolfgang Pehnt, Objectivity: Modern German Art in Jahrhundertwende: Der Aufbruch in Deutsche Architektur seit 1900 the Weimar Republic 1919-1933, die Moderne, 1880–1930,ed.August (Ludwigsburg: Wüstenrot Stiftung; ed. Stephanie Barron and Sabine Nitschke et al., 2 vols. (Reinbek bei Munich: Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, Eckmann, exh. cat., Los Angeles Hamburg: Rowohlt, 1990), including 2005), 128–56. On Berlin, see Karl- County Museum of Art (Munich: the essay by Klaus Strohmeyer: Heinz Hüter, Architektur in Berlin, Prestel; New York: Delmonico, 2015). “Der Kumpel liebt Berlin nicht …”: 1900–1933 (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 18 See Helmut Plessner, “Die Metropole und Industrielandschaft,” 1988;orig.pub.Dresden:Verlagder Legende von den zwanziger Jahren,” ibid., 1:25–55. Kunst, 1987). in idem, Gesammelte Schriften,vol. 4 See Magdalena Droste, The 13 SeeOlafPeters,Otto Dix: Der 6(FrankfurtamMain:Suhrkamp, Bauhaus, 1919–1933: Reform and unerschrockene Blick (Stuttgart: 1982), 261–79. Plessner paints a Avant-Garde (Cologne: Taschen, Reclam, 2013). brief but eloquent image of Berlin and 2013). 14 Birgit Schwarz, Otto Dix, Großstadt emphasizes its position in the light of 5 For overviews, see Reinhard Spieler, (Frankfurt am Main: Insel, 1993), thelossofpoweroftheformerroyal Max Beckmann (Cologne: Taschen, and James A. van Dyke, “Otto seats of Germany after the fall of the 1994), and Uwe M. Schneede, Max Dix’s Philosophical Metropolis,” in Kaiserreich.Seeibid.,273–77. Beckmann: Der Maler seiner Zeit Otto Dix,ed.OlafPeters,exh.cat., 19 See especially Ludwig Meidner: (Munich: C. H. Beck, 2009). Neue Galerie, New York (Munich: Zeichner, Maler, Literat, 1884– 6 See Horst Uhr, Lovis Corinth Prestel,2010),179–197,and,onthe 1966,ed.GerdaBreuerandInes (Berkeley: Univ. of California Press, connection to Kirchner, Peters, Otto Wagemann,,2vols.,exh.cat., 1990), and Lovis Corinth,ed.Peter- Dix (see note 13), 163–65. Mathildenhöhe Darmstadt (Stuttgart: Klaus Schuster and Christoph Vitali, 15 On Berlin in general, see Hatje, 1991). exh. cat., Nationalgalerie, Staatliche Berlin, Berlin: Die Ausstellung zur 20 Ludwig Meidner, “Instructions for MuseenzuBerlin;HausderKunst, Geschichte der Stadt,ed.Gottfried Painting Pictures of the Metropolis,” Munich (Munich: Prestel, 1996). KorffandReinhardRürup,exh.cat., trans. Nicholas Walker, in Charles 7 See Karl Hofer, exh. cat., Staatliche Martin-Gropius-Bau (Berlin: Nicolai, Harrison and Paul J. Wood, Art in Museen zu Berlin (Berlin: Frölich & 1987), and David Clay Large, Berlin Theory, 1900–2000 (Malden, MA: Kaufmann, 1983). (New York: Basic Books, 2000). Blackwell, 2003), 167–71, esp. 168; 8 See especially George Grosz: Onthecityasculturalmetropolis, orig. pub. as “Anleitung zum Malen Berlin—New York,ed.Peter- see also Berlin, 1910–1933: Die von Großstadtbildern,” Kunst und Klaus Schuster, exh. cat., Neue visuellen Künste,ed.Eberhard Künstler 12,no.6(1914):312–14. Nationalgalerie Berlin et al. (Berlin: Roters (Berlin: Berlin Kunstbuch 21 Meidner, “Instructions for Painting Nicolai, 1994). Verlagsgesellschaft, 1983); Bärbel Pictures of the Metropolis” (see note 9 See Christian Schad, 1894–1982, Schrader and Jürgen Schebera, ed., 20), 171. exh. cat., Kunsthaus Zürich et al. Kunstmetropole Berlin, 1918–1933: 22 On this development, see the most (Rottach-Egern : G.A. Richter, Dokumente und Selbstzeugnisse recent, impressive survey by Jörn 1997) and Christian Schad and the (Berlin: Aufbau, 1987); Der Traum Leonhard, Die Büchse der Pandora: Neue Sachlichkeit, ed. Jill Lloyd and von einer neuen Welt: Berlin, Geschichte des Ersten Weltkriegs Michael Peppiatt, exh. cat., Neue 1910–1933, exh. cat., Internationale (Munich:C.H.Beck,2014). Galerie, New York (New York: W. W. Tage Ingelheim (Mainz: Phillip von 23 See Kurt Winkler, Museum und Norton, 2003). Zabern, 1989), and Berlin: Culture Avantgarde: Ludwig Justis Zeitschrift 10 See Richard Faber and Eva-Maria and Metropolis, ed. Charles W. “Museum der Gegenwart” und die Ziege, eds., DasFeldderFrankfurter Haxthausen and Heidrun Suhr Musealisierung des Expressionismus Kultur- und Sozialwissenschaften vor (Minneapolis: Univ. of Minnesota (Opladen:Leske+Budrich,2002). 1945 (Würzburg: Königshausen & Press, 1990). 24 Despitethecountlessdetail Neumann, 2007). 16 The so-called spectator letters by studies, the following remain 11 See Gerd Kuhn, Wohnkultur und the theologian and philosopher Ernst informativeoverviews:PeterGay, kommunale Wohnungspolitik in Troeltsch bear impressive witness Weimar Culture: The Outsiders Frankfurt am Main 1880 bis 1930: to the early years of the Weimar as Insiders (New York: Harper Auf dem Wege zu einer pluralen Republic. See Ernst Troeltsch, Die &Row,1968);JohnWillet,The Gesellschaft der Individuen (Bonn: J. Fehlgeburt einer Republik: Spektator New Sobriety: Art and Politics in H. W. Dietz Nachfolger, 1998), and in Berlin, 1918 bis 1922,comp. the Weimar Period, 1917–1933

32 BERLIN METROPOLIS (London: Thames and Hudson, more broadly, Freiheit, Gleichheit, 35 Seethegeneralaccounts 1978),andJostHermandandFrank Brüderlichkeit: Künstlergruppen indicated in note 2 and the pointed Trommler, Die Kultur der Weimarer in Deutschland, 1918–1923 summary in Ulrich Herbert, Republik (Munich: Nymphenburger (Recklinghausen: Städtische Geschichte Deutschlands im 20. Verlagshandlung, 1978). The Kunsthalle, 1989). Jahrhundert (Munich: C.H. Beck, Weimar Republic Sourcebook, 29 See Regine Prange, Das Kristalline 2014), 199-213. ed. Anton Kaes, Martin Jay and als Kunstsymbol: Bruno Taut und Paul 36 Iwouldliketotakethisopportunity Edward Dimendberg (Berkeley: Klee; Zur Reflexion des Abstrakten in to express my sincere gratitude once Univ.ofCaliforniaPress,1994), Kunst und Kunsttheorie der Moderne againtotheauthorsoftheessaysin is an indispensable collection of (Hildesheim: Olms, 1991). thepresentvolume;theirdifferent sources is. A methodologically up- 30 See the collections of sources focuses present precisely these to-date account of a wide variety of Die gläserne Kette: Eine expres- modern—though sometimes also thematic areas, which nevertheless sionistische Korrespondenz über regressively interrupted—trends in doesnotmaketheearlysynoptic die Architektur der Zukunft,ed.Iain architecture, film, fashion, and leisure approaches absolute, is found in Boyd Whyte and Romana Schneider culture. Politische Kulturgeschichte der (Ostfildern-Ruit: Hatje, 1996), and 37 Siegfried Kracauer, Die Zwischenkriegszeit, 1918–1939, Bruno Taut, Frühlicht, 1920–1922: Angestellten (Frankfurt am Main: ed. Wolfgang Hardtwig (Göttingen: Eine Folge für die Verwirklichung des Frankfurter Societäts-Druckerei, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2005), neuen Baugedankens (Berlin: Ull- 1930), reprinted and annotated and in Weimar Culture Revisited,ed. stein, 1963). On Taut, see Iain Boyd as idem, Werke, ed. Inka Mülder- John Alexander Williams (New York: Whyte, BrunoTautandtheArchi- BachandIngridBelke,vol.1,Die Palgrave Macmillan, 2011). tecture of Activism (Cambridge, UK: Angestellten, ed. Inka Mülder-Bach 25 On the exhibition, see Helen Cambridge Univ. Press, 1982); Bruno (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, Adkins,“ErsteInternationaleDada- Taut, 1880–1938: Architekt zwischen 2006), 211–310; translated by Messe,” Stationen der Moderne: Die Tradition und Avantgarde,ed.Win- Quintin Hoare as The Salaried bedeutenden Kunstausstellungen fried Nerdinger et al. (Stuttgart: Masses: Duty and Distraction in des 20. Jahrhunderts in Deutschland, Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, 2001), Weimar Germany (London: Verso, exh. cat., Berlinische Galerie (1988), and,placingTautincontext,Timothy 1988). 156–83, and Hanne Bergius, O. Benson, ed., Expressionist Uto- 38 SeeInkaMülder-Bach, Montage und Metamechanik: Berlin pias: Paradise, Metropolis, Architec- “Nachbemerkung und editorische Dada; Artistik von Polaritäten (Berlin: tural Fantasy,exh.cat.,LosAngeles Notiz,” in Kracauer, Werke,vol.1(see Gebr. Mann, 2000), 233–97. County Museum of Art (1993/94), note 37), 375–92, esp. 388. 26 On this, see especially Peter and Roger Fornhoff, Die Sehnsucht 39 See Siegfried Kracauer, Werke,ed. Bürger, Theorie der Avantgarde nach dem Gesamtkunstwerk: Stud- Inka Mülder-Bach and Ingrid Belke, (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, ien zur ästhetischen Konzeption der vols. 6.1–3, Kleine Schriften zum Film, 1974); translated by Michael Shaw Moderne (Hildesheim: Olms, 2004), ed. Inka Mülder-Bach with Mirjam as Theory of the Avant-Garde 369–475. Wenzel and Sabine Biebl (Frankfurt (Minneapolis: Univ. of Minnesota 31 Michael Bienert, Die eingebildete am Main: Suhrkamp, 2004), and Press, 1984); and Hanno Möbius, Metropole: Berlin im Feuilleton der Siegfried Kracauer, From Caligari Montage und Collage: Literatur, Weimarer Republik (Stuttgart: J. B. to Hitler: A Psychological History bildende Künste, Film, Fotografie, Metzler 1992), 99. Bienert offers an of the German Film (Princeton, NJ: Musik, Theater bis 1933 (Munich: excellent critical account that steels Princeton Univ. Press, 1947). Fink, 2000). oneagainstsubjectivenostalgia. 40 Richly illustrated surveys of 27 See Hanno Ehrlicher, Die Kunst der 32 Ibid., 100. Weimar cinema are found in Zerstörung: Gewaltphantasien und 33 Alfred Döblin impressively Laurence Kardish, ed., Weimar Manifestationspraktiken europäischer described the murder of Rosa Cinema, 1919–1933: Daydreams Avantgarden (Berlin: Akademie Luxemburg in all its shocking and Nightmares,exh.cat.(NewYork: 2001), 219–33. brutality. See Alfred Döblin, Museum of Modern Art, 2010), and 28 See the essay by Janina Nentwig November 1918: Eine deutsche Hans Helmut Prinzler, Licht und in the present volume as well as Revolution,vol.4,Karl und Rosa Schatten:DiegrossenStumm-und Arbeitsrat für Kunst Berlin, 1918– (Munich: Deutscher Taschenbuch Tonfilme der Weimarer Republik,exh. 1921,exh.cat.(Berlin:Akademieder Verlag,1978),585–93. cat., Versicherungskammer Bayern, Künste,1980);EberhardSteneberg, 34 SeeMartinSabrow,Der Rathenau- Munich (Munich: Schirmer und Mosel, Arbeitsrat für Kunst Berlin, 1918– mord: Rekonstruktion einer Ver- 2012); translated by David H. Wilson 1921 (Düsseldorf: Marzona, 1987); schwörung gegen die Republik von as Sirens and Sinners: A Visual Novembergruppe,exh.cat.(Berlin: Weimar (Munich: R. Oldenbourg, History of Weimar film, 1918–1933 Galerie Bodo Niemann, 1993); and, 1994). (London: Thames & Hudson, 2013).

OLAF PETERS 33 41 See Jean-Michel Palmier, Weimar Spazieren zu gehen ganz nah remarks in Jean-Michel Palmier, in Exile: The Antifascist Emigration dem Zauber der Stadt von dem sie Walter Benjamin: Le chiffonnier, in Europe and America (London: selbst kaum weiss; Ein Bilderbuch l’ange et le petit bossu; esthétique Verso, 2006; orig. pub. in French in Worten,withanintroductionby et politique chez Walter Benjamin in 1987); Exiles + Emigrés: The StéphaneHesselandanafterword (Paris: Klincksieck, 2006), 957–91. Flight of European Artists from Hitler, by Berndt Witte (Berlin: Berlin 54 On Kracauer, see especially ed. Stephanie Barron with Sabine Taschenbuch Verlag, 2013; orig. pub. Inka Mülder, Siegfried Kracauer: Eckmann, exh. cat., Los Angeles 1929). In 1927 Hessel published Grenzgänger zwischen Theorie und County Museum of Art (New York: the novel Heimliches Berlin, with Literatur; Seine frühen Schriften, Harry N. Abrams, 1997), and Das anafterwordbyWalterBenjamin 1913–1933 (Stuttgart: J. B. Metzler, Internationale Jahrbuch Exilforschung (Berlin: Berlin Taschenbuch Verlag, 1985). 21 (2003), which addresses the 2013). 55 See ibid., 103–15, which also themes of film and photography. 47 Distinct perspectives on the emphasizes the proximity and 42 SeeHelmutKorte,Der Spielfilm perception of the metropolis are distance of the approaches of und das Ende der Weimarer developed in Manfred Smuda, ed., Kracauer and Benjamin. Republik: Ein rezeptionshistorischer Die Großstadt als “Text” (Munich: 56 See Siegfried Kracauer, “Das Versuch (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Fink,1992),andBurcuDogramaci, Ornament der Masse, in idem: Werke, Ruprecht, 1998). ed., Großstadt:MotorderKünstein ed. Inka Mülder-Bach and Ingrid 43 Georg Simmel, “Die Grossstädte der Moderne (Berlin: Gebr. Mann, Belke, vol. 5.2, Essays, Feuilletons, und das Geistesleben,” in idem, 2010). For a comparative perspective Rezensionen, 1924–1927, ed. Inka Gesamtausgabe,vol.7,Aufsätze on the relevant time frame, see also Mülder-Bach with Sabine Biebl et al. und Abhandlungen, 1901–1908,2 Metropolis, 1890–1940,ed.Anthony (Berlin: Suhrkamp, 2011), 612–24; vols. (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, Sutcliffe (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago translated by Thomas Y. Levin as 1995),1:116–31;translatedbyKurt Press, 1984). “The Mass Ornament,” in Siegfried Wolffas“TheMetropolisandMental 48 Bernard von Brentano, “Berlin, Kracauer, The Mass Ornament: Life,” in Kurt Wolff, ed., The Sociology von Süddeutschland aus gesehen” Weimar Essays (Cambridge, MA: of Georg Simmel (Glencoe, IL: Free (1926–27),quotedinBienert,Die Harvard Univ. Press, 1995), 75–86. Press, 1950), 409–24. See also eingebildete Metropole (see note 57 For a critical discussion of Helmut Heinz-Jürgen Dahme and Otthein 31), 108. Lethen’s simplifying but influential Rammstedt, eds., Georg Simmel und 49 See ibid., 122–23. theses, see Mülder, Siegfried dieModerne:NeueInterpretationen 50 Berliner Tageblatt,no.487, Kracauer (see note 54), 68–72. und Materialien (Frankfurt am October 14, 1928, quoted in Bienert, 58 See the chapter on the culture Main:Suhrkamp1984),andKlaus Die eingebildete Metropole (see note industryinMaxHorkheimerand Lichtblau, Kulturkrise und Soziologie 31), 96. Theodor W. Adorno, Die Dialektik umd die Jahrhundertwende: Zur 51 Walter Benjamin, Kritische der Aufklärung, Gunzelin Schmid Genealogie der Kultursoziologie Gesamtausgabe,vol.8, Noerr (Frankfurt am Main: S. (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, Einbahnstrasse, ed. Detlev Schöttker Fischer, 1987), 144–96; translated 1996), 203–32. with Steffen Haug (Frankfurt by Edmund Jephcott as Dialectic 44 Felix Gilbert, Lehrjahre im alten am Main: Suhrkamp, 2009; orig. of Enlightenment: Philosophical Europa: Erinnerungen, 1905–1945 pub. Berlin: Ernst Rowohlt, 1928); Fragments, ed. Gunzelin Schmid (Berlin: Siedler 1989), 95. translated by Edmund Jephcott as Noerr (Stanford, CA: Stanford Univ. 45 On flaneur,seetheexemplary One-Way Street,inWalterBenjamin, Press, 2002), 94–136. Anke Gleber, The Art of Taking a Selected Writings,ed.MichaelW. 59 Alfred Döblin, Berlin Walk: Flanerie, Literature, and Film Jennings, vol. 1, 1913–1926, ed. Alexanderplatz: Die Geschichte von in Weimar Culture (Princeton, NJ: MarcusBullockandMichaelW. Franz Biberkopf (Berlin: S. Fischer Princeton Univ. Press, 1999), and Jennings (Cambridge, MA: Belknap 1929); translated by Eugène Jolas Ester Leslie, “Flâneurs in Paris and PressofHarvardUniv.Press,1996), as Alexanderplatz, Berlin: The Story Berlin,” in Histories of Leisure,ed. 444–88. of Franz Biberkopf (New York: Viking, Rudy Koshar (Oxford: Berg, 2002), 52 Walter Benjamin to Hugo von 1931). On the book and its historical 61–77. For an overview, that also Hofmannsthal,February8,1928, context,seeGabrieleSander, addresses the display window, see in The Correspondence of Walter “Tatsachenphantasie”: Alfred Döblins Janet Ward, Weimar Surfaces: Urban Benjamin, 1910–1940,ed.Gershom Roman “Berlin Alexanderplatz: Die Visual Culture in 1920s Germany Scholem and Theodor W. Adorno, Geschichte von Franz Biberkopf” (Berkeley:Univ.ofCaliforniaPress, trans.ManfredR.Jacobsonand (Marbach am Neckar: Deutsche 2001). EvelynM.Jacobson(Chicago:Univ. Schillergesellschaft, 2007) and 46 Franz Hessel, SpaziereninBerlin: of Chicago Press, 1994), 325. Wilfried F. Schoeller, Döblin: Eine Ein Lehrbuch der Kunst in Berlin 53 On this, see the rather critical Biographie (Munich: Hanser, 2011),

34 BERLIN METROPOLIS 338–52. On issues of the novel’s 1967; facsimile reprint of 2nd ed., Deutschland (see note 65), 503. adaptations for radio and film and 1927; orig. pub. 1925), 122–35; Forhispoliticalviewofthetheater, issues of censorship, see Peter translated by Janet Seligman as see Erwin Piscator, Das Politische Jelavich, Berlin Alexanderplatz: “Dynamic of the Metropolis,” in Theater, rev. by Felix Gasbarra, with Radio, Film, and the Death of Weimar László Moholy-Nagy, Painting, a foreword by Wolfgang Drews Culture (Berkeley: Univ. of California Photography, Film (Cambridge, MA: (ReinbekbeiHamburg:Rowohlt, Press, 2006). MIT Press, 1973), 122–37. On this, 1963; orig. pub. Berlin: Adalbert 60 See Sander, “Tatsachenphantasie” see especially the dissertation of Jan Schultz Verlag 1929). (see note 59), 49–63. Sahli, Filmische Sinneserweiterung: 68 See John Heartfield,exh.cat., 61 On Ruttmann’s status as an avant- László Moholy-Nagys Filmwerk und Akademie der Künste zu Berlin, garde filmmaker, see Christine N. Theorie (Marburg: Schüren, 2006), Altes Museum (Cologne: DuMont Brinckmann, “‘Abstraktion’ und 113–21. 1991), and, most recently, Andrés ‘Einfühlung’ im frühen deutschen 63 Siegfried Kracauer, ““Berlin- Mario Zervigón, John Heartfield and Avantgardefilm,” in Harro Segeberg, Alexanderplatz’ als Film,” in idem, the Agitated Image: Photography, ed., Die Perfektionierung des Werke,vol.6.2,Kleine Schriften Persuasion,andtheRiseofAvant- Scheins: Das Kino der Weimarer zum Film, 1928–1932 (see note Garde Photomontage (Chicago: Republik im Kontext der Künste, 39), 546–50, esp. 548–49. The Univ. of Chicago Press, 2012), and Mediengeschichte des Films 3 review was originally published in Anthony Coles, John Heartfield: Ein (Munich: Fink, 2000), 111–40; the Frankfurter Zeitung, October 13, politisches Leben (Cologne: Böhlau, translated by Brian Currid as 1931. 2014). “Abstraction and Empathy in the 64 Gilbert, Lehrjahre im alten Europa 69 On this, see also Keith Holz, Early German Avant-Garde,” in (see note 44), 96–97. Modern German Art for Thirties Paris, Christine N. Brinckmann, Color and 65 For a summary, see Theater in Prague,andLondon:Resistanceand Empathy: Essays on Two Aspects der Weimarer Republik,exh.cat., Acquiescence in a Democratic Public of Film (Amsterdam: Amsterdam Rheinisches Landesmuseum Sphere (Ann Arbor: Univ. of Michigan Univ. Press, 2015), 145–71; and Bonn (Berlin: Kunstamt Press, 2004). Karl Prümm, “Symphonie contra ; Cologne: Institut für 70 Lang’s masterpiece, made Rhythmus: Widersprüche und Theaterwissenschaft der Universität immortalbyPeterLorre,whowas AmbivalenzeninWaltherRuttmanns Köln,1977);LotharSchöne, laterforcedintoexile,intheroleof Berlin-Film,” in Geschichte des Neuigkeiten vom Mittelpunkt der the child murderer, hit cinemas in dokumentarischen Films in Welt:DerKampfumsTheaterin 1931. On the film, see Christoph Deutschland,vol.2,Weimarer der Weimarer Republik (Darmstadt: Bareither and Urs Büttner, eds., Republik, 1918–1933,ed.Klaus Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Fritz Lang: “M: Ein Stadt sucht Kreimeier, Antje Ehmann, and 1995), and Günther Rühle, Theater einen Mörder”; Texte und Kontexte Jeanpaul Goergen (Stuttgart: in Deutschland, 1887–1945: Seine (Würzburg: Königshausen & Reclam, 2005), 411–34. On the Ereignisse—seine Menschen Neumann, 2010). continuity of the most modern (Frankfurt am Main: S. Fischer, 71 See, crucially, Hans J. Reichhardt montage techniques during the 2007), esp. 493–98 on Piscator. See and Wolfgang Schäche, Von “ThirdReich,”usingtheexampleof alsothecollectionofcontemporary Berlin nach : Über die Ruttmann, who collaborated with reviews in Günther Rühle, Theater für Zerstörungen der Reichshauptstadt Leni Riefenstahl, see Kay Hoffmann, die Republik: Im Spiegel der Kritik, durch Albert Speers “Rhythmus, Rhythmus, Rhythmus! 2nded.,2vols.(FrankfurtamMain: Neugestaltungsplanungen,exh.cat., Avantgarde und Moderne,” in Ursula S. Fischer, 1988; orig. pub. 1967). Berliner Landesarchiv 5th ed. (Berlin: vonKeitzandKayHoffmann,eds., 66 On Eisenstein, see David Transit, 1990; orig. pub. 1984), and Die Einübung des dokumentarischen Bordwell, The Cinema of Eisenstein Paul Jaskot, The Architecture of Blicks. Fiction Film und Non Fiction (Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Oppression: The SS, Forced Labour Film zwischen Wahrheitsanspruch Press, 1993); Felix Lenz, Sergej and the Nazi Monumental Building und expressiver Sachlichkeit, 1895– Eisenstein: Montagezeit; Rhythmus, Economy (London: Routledge, 1945 (Marburg: Schüren 2001), Formdramaturgie, Pathos (Munich: 2000), 80–113. 169–91. WilhelmFink,2008),and,withan 72 “Who is to blame for everything?” 62 SeeLászlóMoholy-Nagy, eye to his reception in Germany, wasanexpressionusedtosendup “Dynamik der Gross-Stadt” (Skizze zu Eisenstein und Deutschland: Texte, HitlerinthemetropolisoftheWeimar einem Filmmanuskript, geschrieben Dokumente, Briefe,ed.Akademie Republic. And the ironic answer of im Jahre 1921/22), in idem Malerei derKünste,conceivedandcompiled the Berliners was: “The Jews and Fotografie Film, ed. Hans M. Wingler by Oksana Bulgakowa (Berlin: the bicyclists.” Schöne, Neuigkeiten withapostscriptbyOttoStelzer, Henschel, 1998). vom Mittelpunkt der Welt (see note Bauhaus-Buch 8, (Mainz: Kupferberg, 67 Quoted in Rühle, Theater in 65), 41.

OLAF PETERS 35 ART AND ANTI-ART IN BERLIN AROUND 1920

DADA AND THE NOVEMBERGRUPPE

Janina Nentwig

Berlin around 1920 still clearly bore the traces oftheFirstWorldWar,evenifthefrontshad been far from the Spree River. The writer Carl Zuckmayer later recalled the atmosphere at the time:

Peoplewerenervousandill-humored. The streets were dirty and thronged with beggars, war-blinded and legless men; in passing them those shod in Oxfords and spats quickened their pace; George Grosz and Otto Dix have depicted such scenes. […] Berlin in the early 1920s was half-silk; it smelled of Chypre [a heavy perfume], makeup remover, and cheap gasoline; it had lost its imperial and upper-middle-class splendor, and only later did it explode into a garish, hectic flower.1

It was not just those injured in the war who kept alive the memory of the lost war and the revolutionary chaos that followed in November 1918: the walls of buildings and the advertising columns were plastered with countless post- ersandappealsfromawidevarietyofparties competing for the favor of voters in the young Weimar Republic. Demonstrations and strikes were just as much part of daily normalcy as po- litical assassinations and street fighting were. Forsome,theTreatyofVersailles,inwhich

36 ART AND ANTI-ART IN BERLIN AROUND 1920 Germany accepted sole responsibility for the intimate circle of Berlin Dadaists, and yet they war, was a shameful defeat and wounding of exhibited jointly with the Novembergruppe as national pride. For others, the abdication of wellaswithOttoDix,RudolfSchlichter,and KaiserWilhelmIIheldoutaone-timeoppor- Georg Scholz, who were loosely associated tunity to introduce political, social, and cultur- withBerlinDada.InpresentationsbyDadaand al changes. More than ever before, artists felt the Novembergruppe, some of which were held called upon to help shape the new society. atthesametime,theyshowedworksthatoften During the early years of the Weimar Repub- differedtotallyinstyle.Hausmann,oneofthe lic, the strategies for such artistic participation, leading Dadaist thinkers in Berlin and a mas- ranging from destructive provocation to opti- ter of the scathing manifesto, was even active mistic affirmation of democracy, were focused in Novembergruppe publications. In the end, asifbyamagnifyingglass. however, their contrary views did collide, and in 1921 there was an open clash. That clash Twoavant-gardegroupsthatinfluencedthe has already been discussed in existing schol- artistic events in Berlin at the time represent- arship, but by enlisting sources that have been ed these two antithetical poles: the Dadaists little known and by putting things in the con- 1. Hannah Höch, and the Novembergruppe (November Group). text of the time, it is possible to reevaluate it. High Finance,1923, photocollage. Galerie The present essay will be about both organiza- In this specific conflict, the relationship of art- Berinson, Berlin. © 2015 tions,especiallyintheyearsfrom1919to1921 ists and the state in the so-called crisis years Artists Rights Society when they were in close contact with each oth- oftheWeimarRepublicisparticularlyevident. (ARS), New York / VG Bild-Kunst, Bonn er.2 Thesometimescloseconnectionsbetween We begin, however, by shedding more light on Dada and the Novembergruppe seem surpris- thefoundingsoftheClubDadainBerlinand ingatfirstglance,sincetheself-concept,work- theNovembergruppe.Whenandwheredid ingmethods,intentions,andartisticproduction thetwogroupscomeintocontact,andhowdid ofthoseinvolvedcouldnothavebeenmore they react to the political upheavals in Novem- different. Whereas the Berlin Dadaists created ber1918?Acomparisonofthemanifestosand ahighlypoliticized,ironicanti-artanddeclared exhibitions of 1919 and 1920 brings surpris- warwithbourgeoissocietyonalllevels,theNo- ingthingstolight,sinceseveralofthestate- vembrists did not question the traditional con- mentsfromDadaistscanbeinterpretedinthe cept of art and the associated ideals, such as chronology of events as a satirizing appropria- aesthetic edification. Their declared goals were tionofthestrategiesoftheNovembergruppe. “the closest possible relationship between the people and art”3 and the perfection of a new “HEY,HEY,YOU,YOUNGMAN. humanbeingbymeansofmodernart.TheDa- DADA IS NOT AN ART MOVEMENT”4 daists, too, wanted to change the relationship Dadawaslaunchedin1916,inthemiddleof of art and life fundamentally, not through the thewar,onneutralSwissground.Inaworld constant, patient work of education pursued thathadgottenoutofjoint,inwhichnations bytheNovembergruppe,butratherbymeans werebattlingoneanotherintechnological- of provocation and the destruction of all tra- ly advanced trench warfare, a small group of ditional forms and concepts. Clearly, however, exiled artists were protesting at the Cabaret these antithetical approaches were not re- Voltaire in Zurich. They wanted to express their garded as unbridgeable opposites by artists revulsiontowardasocietythatnotonlyallowed such as Hannah Höch, Raoul Hausmann, and allthisbuteveninpartexpresslyapprovedit, JefimGolyscheff.Theywerepartofthemore and they sought new forms to do so. The group

JANINA NENTWIG 37 around Hugo Ball, Tristan Tzara, and Hans Arp us today, with their grotesque hybrids, daring selected the meaningless name “Dada” to mir- combinations of set pieces from “real life,” and ror their experience of an absurd reality. Ball biting humor. Nationalism and militarism, stan- called Dada a “farce of nothingness in which dards and values emptied of meaning such as allhigherquestionsareinvolved;agladiator’s unconditionalobediencetostateandchurch— gesture,aplaywithshabbyleftovers,thedeath all these things provoked the artists to make warrant of posturing morality and abundance.”5 “Dadaist products” that they emphatically did The parody and destruction of “conventional” not wish to be art. [Figs. 1 and 2] This attack on art was usually marked by subtle humor. Sound society,ascreativeasitwasaggressive,was poemswithoutsemanticmeaningandgro- also intended to destroy the idea of noble art tesque, satirical performances were offered to and beauty, and to avoid an aesthetic alterna- thedistraughtpublic.Evenso,“Dada’slaugh- 2. Raoul Hausmann, ter”6 was a desperate sort, and it echoed large- A Bourgeois Precision Brain Incites a World ly unheard amid the roar of gunfire. Movement (later known as Dada Triumphs), 1920, In early 1917 Richard Huelsenbeck brought watercolor and collage on DadafromZurichtoBerlin.Inthat“cityoftight- wove paper mounted on board. Private Collection. enedstomachs,ofmounting,thunderinghun- Exhibited at the 1920 ger, where hidden rage was transformed into a “Dada-Messe.” © 2015 boundlessmoneylust,andmen’smindswere Artists Rights Society (ARS),NewYork/ concentrating more and more on questions of ADAGP, Paris naked existence,”7 as Huelsenbeck wrote in 1920, he found Dada was already prefigured in thecircleofthepoliticallyleft-wingjournalsDie Aktion and Neue Jugend.Amongthoseactive there were Hausmann, George Grosz, Wieland Herzfelde, and John Heartfield, as well as Sa- lomo Friedlaender, Franz Jung, and Otto Gross. Their publications had an anarchist, opposi- tional thrust, and Dada in Berlin subsequently became clearly more political and aggressive than in Switzerland.8 Irony became once and for all the central stylistic means that charac- tiveworldtothebloodyreality.Dadawasthus terized Dadaist photomontages as well. This not just an anti-art aimed against the petty techniqueisregardedasagenuineinvention bourgeois and the Weimar Republic, which in of the Berlin Club Dada. Inspired by Cubist and theviewoftheDadaistswishedtorestorethe Futurist collages, artists in Zurich started glu- oldorder,butalsoan“anti-artart”inthestricter ing together everyday materials such as news- and best sense.9 The “Dadaistisches Manifest” paper clippings, slips of paper, and fabric rem- (translated as “Dadaist Manifesto”), read at the nants.TheBerlinDadaistsextendedthistech- firstDadasoiréeinBerlininApril1918,stated: nique to photographic reproductions that the “ForthefirsttimeDadaismhasmadeabreak illustrated press made available daily and mas- withtheaestheticapproachtolifebyrending sively, not least of all political and cultural ce- all the slogans of ethics, culture and inward- lebrities. Dadaist photomontages still surprise ness, which are mere cloaks for weak muscles,

38 ART AND ANTI-ART IN BERLIN AROUND 1920 into their component parts.” This appeal closed theExpressionistsreacttotheharshcriticism in the typically ironic manner: “If you are against of their art that was expressed several times this manifesto you are a Dadaist!” 10 that evening? In the above-cited “Dadais- tisches Manifest,” Huelsenbeck vehemently This Dada evening, at which not only lectures rejected “the anemic abstraction of Expres- but also poetry and dances were presented, sionism”: “Have the Expressionists fulfilled our noonecametoblows—asthepressseemed expectations of an art that brands the essence disappointed to report—but there was a racket. of life into our flesh? No! No! No!!”16 Likewise in The audience appears to have understood the his lecture “Das neue Material in der Malerei” messageof“experienced”Dadaismverywell (New Materials in Painting), Hausmann made andimmediatelymadeitreality.Ifonecanbe- asimilarjudgment:thatExpressionismwasfo- lieve the description of the art critic Willy Wol- cusing“moreandmoreontheaestheticover- fradt,therewerewildfitsoflaughter: coming of the world.”17 It is very likely that the artists around Tappert would even have agreed Everyonewasstandingonchairs,laughers with the critique of the “L’art pour l’art” Expres- whocouldnolongercontinuefellaround sionism of the prewar period in the final, sense- one another’s necks; those with calmer less months of the war, which Germany had natures were smoking casually, as if in a quite clearly already lost. During the November variety theater. Here and there someone Revolution that followed Germany’s capitula- in the crowd betrayed himself as a Dadaist tion on November 9, 1918, this group founded, by emphatically waving his arms, while the together with other politically left-wing art- boorishness at the lectern unswervingly ists, the Novembergruppe in order to engage flungitsgrotesquecynicismstowardthe sociallyandpoliticallyusingthemeansofart. heads of audience members.11 This interdisciplinary union of painters, sculp- tors,andarchitectsimmediatelysettowork, Weretherealsoartistspresentwho,justa enlisting members and establishing contacts fewmonthslater,wouldfoundtheNovember- to artists’ groups in other places with a similarly gruppe? After all, the event took place in the progressive élan that wanted to participate in premises of the Berlin Secession, an important thepoliticalandsocialrevolution.18 meeting place for progressively minded art- ists in Berlin.12 The Expressionist painters and THE NOVEMBERGRUPPE: later initiators of the Novembergruppe Georg “REVOLUTIONARIES OF THE MIND” Tappert, Moriz Melzer, and Cesar Klein were FOUND AN ASSOCIATION known for their work in Herwarth Walden’s The first documented meeting of the Novem- journal Der Sturm, along with Raoul Hausmann bergruppewasonDecember3,1918,inBer- andotherauthorsassociatedwithDadasuch lin,19 and it sounds like it was quite convention- as Friedlaender and Carl Einstein.13 Hausmann, al,incontrasttotheDadaistfuror.Minutesof who had been a convinced Expressionist be- the meeting were published, perhaps in revised fore coming into contact with Dada, also pub- form, in the publication that the November- lished regularly in Die Aktion during the war, as gruppe put out for its tenth anniversary in 1928. did Tappert.14 It is thus reasonable to assume The names of all present were accurately list- thatseveraloftheartistsfromthecirclesof ed and the unsatisfactory result of the evening thesejournalsweresittingintheaudience,if recorded: “It was expressed in the discussion they were not fighting on the front.15 How did thatallofthosepresentprobablyagreethat

JANINA NENTWIG 39 3. Georg Tappert, academic painting up to Impressionism, and Composition I,1919,oil followed the avant-garde movements that had on canvas. Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Nuremberg. been formed prior to 1914—Expressionism, Exhibited at the 1919 Cubism, and Futurism—from which many mem- “Kunstausstellung Berlin” bers produced a very original synthesis. This in the Novembergruppe “Cubo-Futuro-Expressionim”23 determined the section. © 2015 Artists Rights Society (ARS), New face of the Novembergruppe exhibitions, which York / VG Bild-Kunst, Bonn were held annually from 1919 onward.24 The oftenmetaphysicalortranscendentalorienta- tion of the works—for example, by Tappert [Fig. 3],HansBrass,HansSiebert,Heister,andMax Dungert[Fig.4]—followeddirectlyonthepa- thos of the prewar period and offered few con- nectionsintermsofsubjectmattertotheso- cialupheavalsoftheperiod.Anundateddraft manifesto of the Novembergruppe, presumably writteninDecember1918orJanuary1919,is still very much in the tradition of literary Expres- sionism and enthusiastically takes up the motto of the French Revolution: the formation seems necessary but opinions are divided on the purpose and goals of the as- Wearestandingonthefertilesoilofthe sociation.”20 Just ten days later, however, this revolution. Our slogan is: Freedom, Equal- circularwassentout: ity, Fraternity! […]Ourbattleisdirectedat all destructive forces, and our love at all Dear Sirs: rebuilding ones. We feel young, free, and pure. Our spotless love belongs to a young, The future of art and the gravity of the pres- free Germany and we shall fight against all ent moment force all of us revolutionaries backwardness and reaction, bravely, with- of the mind (expressionists, cubists, futur- out reserve, and with all the power at our ists) into mutual agreement and close as- command.25 sociation. The gulf between Dada and the November- Thereforewearedirectinganurgentsum- gruppe seems unbridgeable: destruction ver- monstoallartistswhohavebrokenwith sus building up, radical critique of the “Weimar old forms in art that they declare their view of life”26 versus passionate profession membership in the November Group.21 ofloyaltytothenewstate,27 an almost elitist, closed club, membership in which was not least Theletter,whichtypicallyforitstimewasad- basedonlongstandingfriendshipsandfamily dressedonlytomaleavant-gardists,22 is a connections versus an open forum for all pro- strange mix of formality and revolutionary im- gressively inclined artists.28 It has yet to be clar- petus. At the same time, it identifies the stylistic ified whether the manifesto of the November- coordinates that represented the common de- gruppe was ever published in any form. If the nominator of the Novembrists. They opposed Dadaists had read the text, however, they would

40 ART AND ANTI-ART IN BERLIN AROUND 1920 certainlyhavestumbledovertheExpressionist DADA AND THE NOVEMBERGRUPPE pathos they so hated.29 The naive faith in the IN 1919: APPEALS AND FIRST future and the trust in politics heard in the No- EXHIBITIONS vembergruppe manifesto could not be shared Also in January 1919, the Novembergruppe by the Dadaists. In their eyes, the “young, free sentaletterwithits“guidelines”and“statutes” Germany” was perpetuating the old values and thatlaidoutthetermsofmembershipandof politicaltraditionsoftheprewarera.TheSo- the organization, in fulfillment of a bureaucratic cialDemocraticgovernmentactedrepressively requirementtoregisterasanofficialsociety. toward the radical left, as demonstrated not Registered society and revolutionary attitude— least by the bloody suppression by government wasthatnotself-contradictory?Theguidelines troopsoftheuprisingoftheSpartakusbund definedthemeaningandpurposeoftheas- (Spartacus League) in January 1919. sociation—tidily numbered consecutively and signed by the “Central Working Committee of

the November group.” Under point IV the group 4. Max Dungert, The demanded“avoiceandanactiverolein”: Tower,1922,oiloncanvas. Berlinische Galerie, Landesmuseum für Moderne 1. All architectural projects as a matter of Kunst, Fotografie und public concern, […] Architektur. Exhibited at the 1922 “Grosse Berliner Kunstausstellung”inthe 2. The reorganization of art schools and Novembergruppe section their curricula, […]

3. The transformation of museums, […]

4. The allotment of exhibition halls, […]

5. Legislation on artistic matters […].30

It is highly probable that the Novembergruppe’s letter also reached the Dadaists. In any case, the manifesto “Was ist der Dadaismus und waswillerinDeutschland?”(WhatisDadaism andwhatdoesitwantinGermany?),written by Hausmann, Huelsenbeck, and Golyscheff, andstapledtothefirstissueofthejournalDer Dada, reads like a satirizing appropriation of thedemandsformulatedinit.Itwas,howev- er, not just the statements of the November- gruppebutalsoaleafletfromtheArbeitsratfür Kunst(Workers’CouncilforArt)ofApril1919 of similar presentation and nearly identical contentthatmayhavebeenthebackdropfor the Dadaist declaration:31 The Dadaists chose thesamenumberedoutlinebutfilledthisform

JANINA NENTWIG 41