As we have just watched Max, I decided that it would be useful to structure my post around similar subject material. As such, I'll be writing about a play which debuted in 1987 and the potential implications of its existence.
In 2018 a production of the satirical play "Mein Kampf" was performed in Constance, Germany. Before the play could debut, however, it became involved in controversy, as its host theatre offered anyone willing to wear a swastika free admission to the play (which I originally learned about here: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-43821564). Most of the controversy around this showing of the play seems more concerned with this method of gaining free entry into the play than the play's actual contents. While the play's director claims that way of gaining free entry is meant to make a statement about human corruptibility, some found the gimmick insensitive or even dangerous. Although I know little about German law, the BBC article I referenced earlier explained the legality of the "Mein Kampf" play when it stated that" German law bans the use of symbols of unconstitutional organisations. But that does not apply where art is concerned and because the spectators are considered part of an artistic production they are not breaking German law either." Please keep that definition in mind.
From what I could tell, Nazi imagery can be used in art as long as its use isn't anti-constitutional (which we might interpret as pro-Nazi or Holocaust denying). However, anti-constitutional expression is illegal in Germany when separate from art. Even if one considers the banning of all non-artistic Nazi imagery to be a reasonable and effective measure, I've noticed an issue with enacting such a policy: that people have different standards for art. I'm curious to see what others think about Germany's laws around art, as I find it difficult to imagine that officials can consistently distinguish art from anti-constitutional behavior.
I find discussions about Nazi imagery and freedom of speech so difficult because there is so much to unpack within them (as I've touched on in a previous blog post about banning books). I do agree with you that the definition given by the German government is really...not specific at all, and that it can lead to a blurring of what is art vs what is hate speech/anti-constitutional behavior. I also know, personally, that on the topic of Nazism and art I am biased because I will almost always side with the law that makes it harder for anything to be "pro-Nazi" or even interpreted as such. I would much rather our freedom of speech be limited if it meant that hate speech/pro-nazism/anything of this type was also limited because to me it is much more important that the people affected by events such as the Holocaust are kept in mind.
ReplyDeleteThis all being said, I do acknowledge that once we make allowances like this, it could be hard to know where to draw the line (which we have discussed exhaustively throughout this course). So I guess this is all to say that while I see that this definition/policy can make it difficult to distinguish between art and anti-constitutional behavior, I don't actually have any qualms against it and would rather have the aforementioned difficulty than I would the allowance of pro-nazi sentiments. Hopefully this long comment has made any shred of sense, great post!
I think it would be important to know the constitution of Germany more in-depth, maybe even a direct quote from the constitution so that we could directly see what it is that is being violated or deemed anti-constitutional. Art is meant to be rebellious, it is meant to question politics often so it may just be that Germany doesn't want the holocaust being questioned. I had a german exchange student and she told me that Germany is very ashamed of the holocaust and that it isn't something that the government likes to talk about at all. It may just be that Germany doesn't want pro-Nazi art even though its a part of its history because there is still a lot of shame and regret concerning the holocaust in German politics.
ReplyDeleteI found this topic really interesting, as I didn't know the German law had these criteria concerning art. But this article did remind me of the German film titled "Er ist Wieder Da," which translates to "He is Here Again." This is a movie about what would happen if Hitler were somehow able to come back to life in the modern day. This is a very popular movie in Germany, and though I don't remeber if it had actual Nazi symbolism in the film, it wouldn't surprise me if it did. I find it interesting that although there are many German laws against depicting these symbols, art seems to tru to push these boundaries as much as possible.
ReplyDelete