The Use of Exhibitions As Agents of Propaganda During the Inter-War Period
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ABSTRACT More Than Meets the Eye: The Use of Exhibitions as Agents of Propaganda during the Inter-War Period Amber N. Schneider, M.A. Mentor: Kenneth C. Hafertepe, Ph.D. Exhibitions can be powerful forms of persuasion because audiences tend to have an innate trust in them to be factual and objective. However, this trust has often been manipulated by those who recognize the influence exhibitions can have on the viewers. Certain exhibitions that were influenced by various social and political movements during the inter-war period (1918-1939) were meant to serve propaganda purposes. The British Empire Exhibition of 1924-1925, the French International Colonial Exposition of 1931, the exhibitions created by the American Eugenics Movement, and the Nazi Degenerate Art Exhibit are all examples of propaganda exhibitions. By examining the motives of the organizers, as well as exhibition posters, brochures, advertisements and the displays themselves, the true message of these exhibitions becomes apparent. Not only were events forms of visual manipulation, they each had devastating effects that would last for years. More Than Meets the Eye: The Use of Exhibitions as Agents of Propaganda during the Inter-War Period by Amber N. Schneider, B.A. A Thesis Enter Approved by the Department of Museum Studies ___________________________________ Kenneth C. Hafertepe, Ph.D, Chairperson Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Baylor University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts Approved by the Thesis Committee ___________________________________ Kenneth C. Hafertepe, Ph.D, Chairperson ___________________________________ Ellie B. Caston, Ph.D ___________________________________ T. Michael Parrish, Ph.D. ___________________________________ Julie L. Holcomb, M.A. Accepted by the Graduate School May 2009 ___________________________________ J. Larry Lyon, Ph.D., Dean Page bearing signatures is kept on file in the Graduate School. Copyright © 2009 by Amber Schneider All rights reserved TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS vi CHAPTER 1. Exhibiting Ideology 1 2. Exhibiting the Savage 7 3. Exhibiting the Unfit 42 4. Exhibiting the Degenerate 78 5. Exhibiting Reconciliation 110 BIBLIOGRAPHY 116 iii LIST OF FIGURES 1. East African Pavilion 16 2. New Zealand Pavilion 16 3. Exhibition posters 18 4. An Ashanti weaver 19 5. Advertisement 20 6. Advertisement 21 7. Cover of the Malaya Pavilion brochure 22 8. Ethnographic displays 24 9. Exhibition poster 30 10. Section Métropolitaine 34 11. Oceania Pavilion 34 12. A weaver from Madagascar 37 13. West African natives 38 14. View of the exhibition 49 15. Growth of the U.S. Population chart 51 16. Marriage and birthrate chart 51 17. Differences between fetuses chart 52 18. Sterilization in the U. S. chart 52 19. Kansas State Free Fair 57 20. Flashing Light Exhibits 58 21. View of exhibit 61 iv 22. Race Descent: American Statesmen 65 23. “Inventiveness by Racial Stock” chart 66 24. “Man Among Primates” chart 67 25. “Our Face From Fish To Man” chart 68 26. “Eugenics in New Germany” chart 72 27. “Eugenics in New Germany” chart 73 28. Claude Monet, The Seine at Lavacourt 81 29. Henri Matisse, Femme au chapeau 81 30. Emile Nolde, Masks 82 31. Schultze-Naumburg’s comparison of art 85 32. Georg Günther Rest During the Harvest 90 33. “Degenerate Art” exhibit guide 95 34. View of the Dada wall 99 35. View of Room 4 99 36. View of abstract works in Room 5 101 37. View of Room 6 101 38. View of ground floor 102 39. View of the “Great German Art” exhibit 105 40. The Galerie Fischer auction 108 v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank my family for the love and support that they have given me throughout my academic career at Baylor University. I would also like to thank both Dr. Kenneth Hafertepe, my thesis advisor, and Mrs. Julie Holcomb for their guidance and assistance during the thesis process. I am also grateful to Dr. Ellie Caston and Dr. Michael Parrish for serving as members of my thesis committee. Additionally, I am grateful for the encouragement my friends in the Department of Museum Studies have shown me during my graduate years. I will be forever appreciative of the blessings and opportunities that my years at Baylor have granted me. vi CHAPTER ONE Exhibiting Ideology In Lhasa City, not far from Beijing and the massive National Stadium built for the 2008 Olympic Games, another construction project also finished that same year caused an international outcry. China’s new Tibet Museum, scheduled to be completed by the Olympic Games in time for the influx of foreign visitors to China, led many to protest China’s portrayal of Tibetan history. The controversy over China’s takeover of Tibet in 1950 has been the source of contested debates internationally, with China defending its actions and other countries demanding that China extricate itself from Tibet. The exhibits of the new museum contrast the history of Tibet before and after the 1950 invasion, with grotesque photographs and punishment devices that were used on disobedient Tibetan serfs before the Chinese invasion. A panel at the entrance of the museum states, “This exhibition displays the backwardness and the darkness of the old Tibet as well as the development and progress of the new Tibet.”1 The museum also tries to show that Tibet has been subject to Chinese rule as far back as the 1270s, in an effort to legitimize territorial and political claims.2 The Dalai Lama is also targeted, and although he “was 15 years old when the Chinese invaded in 1950 …the exhibit blames him for the ills of pre-Communist Tibet.”3 According to one source, as a woman led a young boy through the museum she turned to him and exclaimed, “See how evil the Dalai 1 Barbara Demick, “This Tibet exhibit toes the party line,” Los Angeles Times, July 8, 2008. 2 Jim Yardley, “New Museum Offers the Official Line on Tibet,” New York Times, April 17, 2008. 3 Demick, Los Angeles Times, July 8, 2008. 1 Lama is!”4 Another visitor, when questioned whether or not he believed the story that the exhibits were telling stated, “Of course it’s true…it is history.”5 Although China has an official stance on the history of Tibet, and any dissenters from this position potentially face persecution, they still chose to create a museum to legitimize Chinese claims. Perhaps the creators of the museum and its exhibits recognized the innate trust people seem to have in museums to tell truth, to present history objectively rather than subjectively. Although the museum could easily be called Chinese pro-communist propaganda, it certainly would not be the first time that the trust between museums and their audiences has been manipulated. Museum exhibitions are powerful sources of persuasion. In his book Museum Politics: Power Plays at the Exhibition, Timothy W. Luke claims that museum exhibitions “possess power to shape collective values and social understandings in a decisively important fashion.”6 Furthermore, Luke argues that, “Museum displays may quickly change, but their cultural effects can linger indefinitely.”7 The Politics of Display: Museum, Science, Culture “explores the political nature, uses and consequences of representations of science and technology for the public in exhibitions.”8 Although both books present interesting arguments, they are limited because they explore more controversial exhibitions, exhibits that were criticized and protested while still on display. 4 Demick, Los Angeles Times, July 8, 2008. 5 Ibid. 6 TimothyW. Luke, Museum Politics: Power Plays at the Exhibition (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2002), xiii. 7 Ibid., xiv. 8 Sharon Macdonald, ed., The Politics of Display: Museum, Science, Culture (New York: Routledge, 1998), 1. 2 However, if the influence of exhibitions over viewers to shape social thought is recognized, is it possible that this power has been used in a manipulative fashion without the viewers being aware? By reexamining certain exhibitions it becomes clear that some exhibits have been used as agents of propaganda to sway public opinion. This becomes evident by looking at displays created by different social and political movements during the period between World War I and World War II (1918-1939). Propaganda exhibits are different from controversial exhibits because these exhibits were not protested and their negative effects were not realized by many until years later.9 Propaganda is essentially presenting information in such a way that it influences the opinions and behaviors of others. The use of propaganda exhibits was not limited to any country, or any political or social movement. By examining official exhibition posters, advertisements, brochures, speeches, as well as the displays themselves, the propaganda aims of these exhibits becomes apparent. After World War I both Britain and France were struggling financially and a renewed interest in colonialism emerged in hopes that the colonies could bring about economical stability. However, the populations of both countries were not convinced of the need for colonies and believed that the money and resources spent on them should be kept in Britain and France. In order to persuade the masses of the usefulness of the colonies both the British and French governments began heavy pro-colonial propaganda efforts that culminated in the British Empire Exhibition of 1924-1925 and the French Exposition Colonial International of 1931. The British exhibition stressed the economic resources of the colonies and 9 For more on the topic of controversial exhibits, see