Leni Riefenstahl dies at 101 (or 100, depending on source). (1 Viewer)

[andrew markworthy]

After all, the operas of Ricahrd Wagner are some of my favorite works of art, but I acknowledge that he was a reprehensible human being.

I think the difference is that Wagner didn't blatantly extol his anti-Semitism in his operas, whereas Triumph of the Will is nothing but Nazi images, no matter how technically brilliant they are.

I think the issue boils down to this:

(a) nobody denies Riefenstahl's technical genius nor the influence of her *technique*.

(b) everyone acknowledges that the Nazis were a bad idea, and that Triumph of the Will can be seen as part of their propaganda machine.

(c) whether you can cut out the Nazi associations and stand watching TOTW is a matter for individuals. There is no right or wrong response.

 

[SteveGon]

I would imagine that her relative obscurity insofar as the general public is concerned will allow the Academy to give it amiss.

That's probably what they're betting on. While Riefenstahl certainly wouldn't be the first influential filmmaker to have had questionable associations, the tenets of Nazism are so repugnant to us that any mention of her would probably stop the show cold.

 

[Seth--L]

So for all those against recognizing Riefenstahl's contribution to film, where do you stand on The Birth of a Nation, a film often labeled as one of America's best, is frequently featured in those clip montages at the Academy Awards, and YOUR tax dollars have even been spent for its preservation? (just curious)

 

[Lew Crippen]

Seth there is some discussion of this topic in the AFI Challenge and/or the S & S Club.

 

[Chris]

So for all those against recognizing Riefenstahl's contribution to film, where do you stand on The Birth of a Nation, a film often labeled as one of America's best, is frequently featured in those clip montages at the Academy Awards, and YOUR tax dollars have even been spent for its preservation? (just curious)

I think you're mixing up what this is about. I'd be in favor of using tax dollars to support the preservation of "Triumph of Will" too.. because it's an important piece of history. Just as I'm in favor of keeping books, writings, and thoughts of slaves and slavemasters available.
They are important segments of history. You cannot pretend the past is different then it is, you have to evaluate it as it is without revision.
But there is a great difference at work here. On one end, you preserve for the sake of history and note it's importance; on the other hand, you celebrate those that did the work.
You have to put it in the right historical lens.. "preserving the work" and "honoring the person" are two very different things in my book.

 

[Daniel J.S.]

In my view, Wagner DID extol his anti-semitism in his operas. He once said that the Niebelungs were a representation of Jews. If you read his "Judaism in Music" essay, you'll find that the character of Beckmesser in "Die Meistersinger" fits his description of Jewish musicians to a tee. Theodor Adorno once theorized that "all unsavory characters are chariacatures of Jews."

 

[Lew Crippen]

In my view, Wagner DID extol his anti-semitism in his operas. He once said that the Niebelungs were a representation of Jews.

I’ve read this also, but I do think that there is a big difference in decoding what Wagner was implying (and especially in the midst of all that is going on the Ring) and the very direct message in Triumph of the Will.

After all this film was designed to be shown all over Germany to demonstrate the achievements of the party for all of those who could not attend and to help persuade non-party members to either become party members of, at the least, to look favorably upon the party.

Put another way, I consider myself a serious lover of opera, though not by any means an expert and I needed the help of experts to understand the Jewish references in his music. I never needed any help in understating what Triumph of the Will was all about.

In a bit of a defense (or at least an expanded view) of Riefenstahl, she does show Jesse Owens winning in Olyimpia. I have always been surprised at his inclusion.

 

[george kaplan]

Frankly, I think there are numerous filmmakers who can be recognized for their skill (and influence) but whose personal lives and sometimes their work are repugnant. For me this would include Riefenstahl, Griffith and Kazan.

 

[Lew Crippen]

So for all those against recognizing Riefenstahl's contribution to film, where do you stand on The Birth of a Nation, a film often labeled as one of America's best, is frequently featured in those clip montages at the Academy Awards, and YOUR tax dollars have even been spent for its preservation? (just curious

There is a reasonable discussion on Birth of a Nation in the S&S Club thread, beginning at post #689. I goes on for a while and some of the posts are a bit long. The focus was a bit more on Griffith’s place in film history, but there was a reasonable discussion as to the incipient racism in the film as well.

You are welcome to join in Seth, or perhaps begin a thread devoted to the topic.

 

[Lew Crippen]

One more thing to directly address your question: first, I agree with Chris as to the distinction between ‘honoring’ and ‘preserving’. Well-written, Chris.

You are of course correct that you do see clips of this film from time-to-time. But Griffith (and this film, regardless of its racism) was far more important to the Academy than anything Riefenstahl filmed—note that I’m not comparing the artistic merits of the films. Secondly these clips are not presented (as far as I know) to honor Griffith or Birth of a Nation, but (again, from my memory of what I’ve seen) to show the growth of film.

It would be reasonable to include clips of Leni’s work in that context and I would support that kind of an approach.

However this is far different, for me, than to present her and her work immediately after her death (and as the focus of a segment of the show). For consistency, I would be opposed to honoring BoaN on some important anniversary, as well.

I would seem not altogether inappropriate to include a mention of Riefenstahl (and perhaps a clip or two) when the list of those who passed away during the year is presented.

 

[Mark Zimmer]

If they do mention her, presumably it will be to a clip from Olympia (which is pretty apolitical, even though Hitler shows up in it, but he did open the ceremonies) rather than Triumph of the Will. But considering she never made any films in the USA I expect it will be pretty easy for them to just skip right over any mention of her at all.

One can certainly understand why she was defensive about everyone wanting to talk about Triumph, even 65 years after the fact, though. Who wouldn't be embarrassed to have such a thing on their resume, and try to put the best face on it possible.

 

[Garrett Lundy]

I think you're mixing up what this is about. I'd be in favor of using tax dollars to support the preservation of "Triumph of Will" too.. because it's an important piece of history. Just as I'm in favor of keeping books, writings, and thoughts of slaves and slavemasters available.

They are important segments of history. You cannot pretend the past is different then it is, you have to evaluate it as it is without revision.

I second this statement.

 

[SteveGon]

They are important segments of history. You cannot pretend the past is different then it is, you have to evaluate it as it is without revision.

That's our view. Will the Academy feel the same and at least acknowledge Riefenstahl's contributions to the language of cinema? Or will they play it safe and ignore her passing? I guess we'll have to wait and see...

 

[Seth--L]

I don't see how showing clip from a film at the Oscars does not bestow honor onto the filmmakers (maybe if you have some kind of disclaimer).

 

[Seth--L]

I'm merely pointing out that is has been possible to honor a film and a director for their contributions to cinema without endorsing their politics.

 

[andrew markworthy]

In my view, Wagner DID extol his anti-semitism in his operas. He once said that the Niebelungs were a representation of Jews. If you read his "Judaism in Music" essay, you'll find that the character of Beckmesser in "Die Meistersinger" fits his description of Jewish musicians to a tee. Theodor Adorno once theorized that "all unsavory characters are chariacatures of Jews."

Actually, I have read an assortment of Wagner's writings and I'm aware that he thought he was using anti-Semitic images in his operas (the Ring Cycle in particular). However, I stick by what I said in my earlier post - it isn't 'in your face', and as numerous productions since his death have shown, the anti-Semitic aspect is so hidden that it can be ignored completely. On the other hand, Triumph of the Will et al are absolutely up-front about what is being portrayed.

Incidentally, FWIW I think that TOTW, along with Birth of the Nation and other politically incorrect but important movies should be preserved and studied. However, people who admire these movies should understand that for some of us, the subject matter is sufficiently distasteful to overwhelm any appreciation of technical brilliance.

 

[Ben JH]

In my view, Wagner DID extol his anti-semitism in his operas. He once said that the Niebelungs were a representation of Jews. If you read his "Judaism in Music" essay, you'll find that the character of Beckmesser in "Die Meistersinger" fits his description of Jewish musicians to a tee. Theodor Adorno once theorized that "all unsavory characters are chariacatures of Jews."

I have a book of paintings of the Ring cycle that were done by a famous artist called Arthur Rackham around 1910. In it, the pictures of the Nibelung and some other characters are unmistakable anti-Semitic stereotypes (hooked noses, long black hair, etc). Wagner himself was extremely anti-Semitic, not to mention being anti-democracy/capitalism, and Hitler even went so far to say that "To understand Nazism, you must first understand Wagner."

 

[Seth--L]

As for Wagner, the reason his music has survived so long and why most people appreciate it is because of it's purely musical aspects, specifically his brilliant orchestration (proof of this is the popularity of his operas in orchestral arrangement form). I think it's a shame that the majority of people know that Wagner was an anti-semite (and are always quick to point that out) but have never actually listened to a note of his music (with the exception of Walkurenritt from Die Walkure).

 

[Dome Vongvises]

Some time a while back in Polls, we ran a draft in which we picked worst (or most overrated film, I can't remember which). I picked Birth of a Nation as being worst.
To be honest, it's not the worst, but I just ran out of ideas of picking films for the draft. I picked it because its politics riled me, and I chose to blind myself to its technical merits. :p)
But if this thread illustrates anything, it shows the difficulties with the cinematic artform. Can we seperate art and artist? Can we appreciate the art and either accept or reject an underlying message?
If I may pose a challenge to those who've seen Triumph of the Will (a friendly one of course ) or Birth of a Nation; what exactly about these two films is technically astounding? What do these two films have that were innovative or what technical aspects were refined? So the short question is: if these films do have redeeming qualities, what were they?
I could only think of one for Birth of a Nation, and that's its use of quick editing to create suspense in the final sequence. I can see it there, but it didn't work for me because I hate the KKK, but that's another story for another day.
A point-by-point analysis would be good. I'll listen. I hope I have that kind of reputation on this board.

 

[Holadem]

Birth of a Nation Thread. I have had the movie sitting here for more than a month now (Netflix). Three hours of silent is a little daunting.
--
Holadem