Leni Riefenstahl ; Jesse Owens Portrait.

Plot Foiled

H
Plot Foiled

  • 1
  • 0
  • 17
FedEx Bread

H
FedEx Bread

  • 1
  • 0
  • 19
Unusual House Design

D
Unusual House Design

  • 4
  • 2
  • 65
Leaves.jpg

A
Leaves.jpg

  • 3
  • 0
  • 73
Walking Away

Walking Away

  • 2
  • 0
  • 116

Forum statistics

Threads
197,963
Messages
2,767,356
Members
99,515
Latest member
Omeroor
Recent bookmarks
0

copake_ham

Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2006
Messages
4,091
Location
NYC or Copak
Format
35mm
Roger Hicks said:
She was perfectly suited to the task of glorifying ANYTHING. Look also at the Nuba or her underwater photography.This is not a common talent. Its misapplication does not mean she wasn't good at it, and to compare her with Hitler as a painter is frankly risible.

If she'd been on the right side politically, she'd be lionised beyond belief. Because she did a lot of Nazi propaganda, her genius is understandably attacked. Few decry National Socialism more than I but to issue blanket condemnations is to abdicate from rational thought or artistic regard.

Cheers,

R.

But Roger,

While there may be degrees of moral relativism - at some point there is an absolute. That point is different for each of us. For some of us, it is impossible to neutrally separate the artist from her soul. Using her talent, as she did, to advance a malevolence, is derisive of that talent and leaves me with no interest in her work.

The entire Nazi death machine was designed by very talented people and worked extremely efficiently. I don't celebrate their talent any more than Leni's

Finally, going back "on topic" to the OP original posit. Is this one of the best sports portraits ever made?

Frankly, I don't think it is - even if I didn't know who the photog was. It's no more "great" than many pre-race closeups of runners in the blocks that you see on television! And, in fact, I think it was included on the web site page as a means of distracting viewers from the true nature of her work assignment at the 1936 Berlin Olympics. It certainly seems to have done so for you and a number of others here.
 

blansky

Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2002
Messages
5,952
Location
Wine country, N. Cal.
Format
Medium Format
Since probably very few of us have lived in totalitarian regimes we probably have knee jerk reactions to certain things.

Her initial glorification of the National Socialism ideal, which was a political party that eventually took over the country, was originally pretty early on in the history of the regime. Whether she ever really knew the scope of the later madness of the regime, who knows.

Lindberg was a Nazi lover as were a number of prominent Americans, but does that mean he was a terrible pilot.

The people in Iraq that joined the Baath Party to get work, and I believe if you wanted govt work, you had to join, are they as bad as Saddam. There were many artists there worked at glorifying Saddam, are they criminals now.

I think we should be able to look at artistic works and determine if they are good, bad or indifferent by what they are, not by political or moral references to the artist or the time in which they operated.

Nobody here is saying that Hitler, National Socialism, or any of his policies were anything but abhorent, but does that mean that an artist that worked within that system should be negated because of it.

Michael
 

copake_ham

Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2006
Messages
4,091
Location
NYC or Copak
Format
35mm
blansky said:
Since probably very few of us have lived in totalitarian regimes we probably have knee jerk reactions to certain things.

Her initial glorification of the National Socialism ideal, which was a political party that eventually took over the country, was originally pretty early on in the history of the regime. Whether she ever really knew the scope of the later madness of the regime, who knows.

Lindberg was a Nazi lover as were a number of prominent Americans, but does that mean he was a terrible pilot.

The people in Iraq that joined the Baath Party to get work, and I believe if you wanted govt work, you had to join, are they as bad as Saddam. There were many artists there worked at glorifying Saddam, are they criminals now.

I think we should be able to look at artistic works and determine if they are good, bad or indifferent by what they are, not by political or moral references to the artist or the time in which they operated.

Nobody here is saying that Hitler, National Socialism, or any of his policies were anything but abhorent, but does that mean that an artist that worked within that system should be negated because of it.

Michael

Very well put, Michael.

Clearly your range of moral relativism is simply broader than mine. :wink:
 

Bill Hahn

Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2004
Messages
351
Location
North centra
Format
35mm
If you google (er, excuse me, search the internet) for:

"Leni Riefenstahl" + "George Rodger" + Nuba

you will find many other discussions about her, and specifically how
George Rodger didn't trust her with respect to photographing the Nuba people.
(Or, if you have a copy of Russell Miller's book on Magnum on hand, you can
look for her name in the index.)

I first became aware of her in 1967 when I was watched "Triumph of the Will" as a college freshman. (Those long loving shots of the soup kitchens were just the thing for a hungry 1930's audience.) There is no doubt the film was very effective, and
that she was good at what she did. Only much later did I become aware of her still photography.

I like the Jesse Owens portrait, but...but...but...I can't dismiss the other baggage that comes with her name.
 

Roger Hicks

Member
Joined
May 17, 2006
Messages
4,895
Location
Northern Aqu
Format
35mm RF
copake_ham said:
Finally, going back "on topic" to the OP original posit. Is this one of the best sports portraits ever made?

Frankly, I don't think it is - even if I didn't know who the photog was. It's no more "great" than many pre-race closeups of runners in the blocks that you see on television! And, in fact, I think it was included on the web site page as a means of distracting viewers from the true nature of her work assignment at the 1936 Berlin Olympics. It certainly seems to have done so for you and a number of others here.

Dear Frank,

I'd certainly agree that she did a lot of better pictures. But equally, I think your point about 'distraction' is a red herring. As I said, I have seen a lot of her work, and my view is that she was a very great photographer, even if that isn't one of her best pictures (and as I've said, I don't think it was).

My real objection is to the idea that she was a Nazi and therefore can't have been a great photographer. This is exactly the same as saying that Alexandr Rodchenko can't have been a great photographer because he was a communist or that Mapplethorpe can't have been a great photographer because he was gay.

Cheers,

Roger
 

blansky

Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2002
Messages
5,952
Location
Wine country, N. Cal.
Format
Medium Format
Will S said:
I really didn't want to get into this, but here are just a couple of quick (hopefully) accurate factoids:

All Germans had to be evaluated after the war so that they could be "de-Nazified" and they were categorized from 1 (Nazi) to 5 (totally innocent). Reifenstahl was found to be a 4. I can't remember where I read that, but wikipedia says it as well.

The Great Depression was already over by 1939, though job levels didn't return to 1929 levels until 1941 (before Pearl Harbor). (I just confirmed this on wikipedia too.)


Will

Using Wikopedia as a reference on anything is like using Osama bin Laden as a reference on religion.


Michael
 

Roger Hicks

Member
Joined
May 17, 2006
Messages
4,895
Location
Northern Aqu
Format
35mm RF
blansky said:
Using Wikopedia as a reference on anything is like using Osama bin Laden as a reference on religion.
Michael

Now, does this earn you a fatwa, or 72 virgins?

I suppose it depends on how much of a sense of humour Osama bin L. has, and whether he's familiar with Wikipedia.

Cheers,

Roger
 

Will S

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2004
Messages
716
Location
Madison, Wis
Format
8x10 Format
I just don't have access to those "things" that have all of the information in them here at work so I have to use wikipedia. What are those "things" called anyway? You know, rectangular, large, heavy? Use 'em to flatten prints? It will come to me...
 

copake_ham

Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2006
Messages
4,091
Location
NYC or Copak
Format
35mm
Roger Hicks said:
Dear Frank,

I'd certainly agree that she did a lot of better pictures. But equally, I think your point about 'distraction' is a red herring. As I said, I have seen a lot of her work, and my view is that she was a very great photographer, even if that isn't one of her best pictures (and as I've said, I don't think it was).

My real objection is to the idea that she was a Nazi and therefore can't have been a great photographer. This is exactly the same as saying that Alexandr Rodchenko can't have been a great photographer because he was a communist or that Mapplethorpe can't have been a great photographer because he was gay.

Cheers,

Roger

Roger,

My name is George.

You still haven't answered the OP's query?

Forget the photog, forget her background, forget her other work....

Is the particular photo one of the best sports portraits ever made?
 

mark

Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2003
Messages
5,698
Here is a perfect case for thinking of the photograph, not the baggage of the photographer. This is a fantastic image, but i am not sure I would rank it as the greatest.

To me, for a sports photograph to be great it would have to scream emotion, elation, defeat, exhaustian something that defined the sport. More than just intense concentration.
 

c6h6o3

Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2002
Messages
3,215
Format
Large Format
copake_ham said:
Is the particular photo one of the best sports portraits ever made?

Doesn't do much for me.

BTW, just what is a "sports portrait"?
 

Roger Hicks

Member
Joined
May 17, 2006
Messages
4,895
Location
Northern Aqu
Format
35mm RF
All right, it's her own words (Leni Riefenshahl, A Memoir), but presumably the facts can be checked: 10,000 DM ($2500) as an out-of-court from Revue magazine c. 1953. They had suggested she was an active Nazi with knowledge of atrocities. If they'd had a hope in hell of proving it they'd not have settled like this, they'd not have settled.

She was born in August 1902 and was therefore in her early 30s when Hitler came to power. Looking back on my own conscience in my early 30s it was probably more flexible than it is today, 25 years later, and I think Leni was better than I at not seeing what she didn't want to see. She was also a lot better at what she did -- cinematography -- and allowed herself to be blinded by her ambition.

My own view is on the 'soft' end. I don't think that what she did was honourable or even necessarily explicable, but equally, I can't accept the view of her as drinking the blood of Jews. Of course I'd like to think I'd have had higher principles, and I sincerely believe that I'd probably have been kicked out of Hitler's Germany, but I cannot put my hand in my heart and swear with absolute confidence that I'd have behaved a lot better than Leni if I'd been allowed to stay.

Perhaps her most damning film is Tiefland (which I have not seen, only read about), and even with that, no-one was ever able to hang serious Nazi charges on her, despite the best attempts of the French (who appealed unsuccessfully against each denazification verdict)

As Michael says, totalitarian regimes are outside the experience of most of us. I've known a few ex-Nazis, but what sticks in my mind is a comment by a friend who joined the Young Communists in Britain in the 1930s: "The Nazis were glamorous: all the uniforms, the parades, the whole bit. If I'd been a German, I can't say I wouldn't have joined. And this is a communist speaking."

Cheers,

Roger
 

Roger Hicks

Member
Joined
May 17, 2006
Messages
4,895
Location
Northern Aqu
Format
35mm RF
copake_ham said:
Roger,

My name is George.

Dear George (and not Frank at all),

I apologize unreservedly; I can't see how I made such a stupid mistake.

But I think I have answered the original query. I said she had taken many better pictures, thereby implying fairly clearly, I think, that I don't think it's one of the greatest sporting portraits ever.

This does not detract from the point I make to other posters that I think she was a very great photographer, regardless of her politics (which were immediately brought into the arena).

Cheers,

Roger
 

Lukas Werth

Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2005
Messages
285
Location
Pakistan
Format
Multi Format
Being German and trying to accept this aspect of German identity as a responsibility, it is not easy for me to contribute to this string. However, here are my thoughts: Riefenstahl was, for all I can see, able to create great pictures. Being an Anthropologist by education, I have admired for a long time her pictures of the Nuba. I am aware of the critique that she re-created the same aesthetics, a celebration of physical strength and alertness, thought to be also a Nazi ideal, which she did in her Olympics pictures, but personally i don't think this critique really holds water (though my own efforts to engage with another cultural context are very different, see my website below, the gallery "mystical Islam"). For me, the Nuba pictures show an effort of a real engagement and a respect for another people, and I respect that.

In the Third Reich, Leni Riefenstahl uncritically allowed herself to be made use of her talent, and to thrive on her political connections. Later she admitted she was misled, but she also played her enthusiasm down. It is difficult to throw the first stone here, and difficult, also for me, even though I have been told much by my parents and grand parents, and read on the subject, to really imagine what the feeling of life is when one lives through such a time. Easy to say one should resist, leave the country - where, for most people? Knowledge of foreign languages was not common then, people had families, children, employment. You have only one life to live... But on the other hand, there were people who resisted, who either left when they were famous or rich enough, or tried to make secret or half-open stances against official views, very dangerous at the time, even really lived through the daily hell of being humiliated, bullied, maybe incarcerated, tortured and killed.

For me, this is an open question, maybe not at all resolvable once and for all, really a question about the nature of evil, and human fallibility.
For a comparative note: since long time, I think that the idea of the uniqueness of the German disaster is misconceived (not because I would want to diminish it), and that there were two great catastrophes in the middle of the 20th century alone, instigated by Hitler and Stalin. Now, I admire Sergej Eisenstein's films which were certainly politically correct, but still more I like Michail Bulgakow's novel "The Master and Margerita", not politically correct at all, and published only posthumously.

In Germany, it was the luck and the chance of people like Guenter Grass to wake up when they were young, to look around and perceive the disaster, and to go on and lead a free life, and it is his lasting merit to have shown to Germany, and the world, the power of temptation, the subtle seduction of ordinary people. In Russia, people had no such chance. Solshenizyn tried the same for his country, perhaps not with quite the same talent, but he was bullied a lifetime, had to go into exile - and he is lucky to have got out!
 

Roger Hicks

Member
Joined
May 17, 2006
Messages
4,895
Location
Northern Aqu
Format
35mm RF
Lukas Werth said:
there were two great catastrophes in the middle of the 20th century alone, instigated by Hitler and Stalin.

Dear Lukas,

Three. Don't forget Mao. Very roughly, Hitler was reponsible for the deaths of 16,000,000 people; Stalin, for 32,000,000; and Mao for 64,000,000.

Only Mao's regime is still in power -- and doing a roaring trade with the west.

Cheers,

R.
 

Helen B

Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2004
Messages
1,590
Location
Hell's Kitch
Format
Multi Format
I’m not suggesting that someone’s talent should be ignored because of the way they used it. On the contrary, I think that it is important to recognise and never forget that talent may be associated with repugnant ideals, and that repugnant ideals may be promoted by people with talent. I just find it impossible to dissociate talent from the way that it is used or to ignore context. To me, it is no coincidence of time and place that Riefenstahl produced perfect Nazi propaganda. Her pictures show an idealised, pure surface that does not invite you to look beneath. I asked those of you who think that we should ignore her involvement with the Nazis whether or not you had seen Triumph of the Will, and I’m still interested in the answer. She sold Hitler very well – I suspect that few would argue with that. Did she do it because she had no principles other than to advance her career, or did she do it because she believed in it?

While researching a movie I heard many Nazi songs that I would not have heard otherwise. They were powerfully evocative, stirring masterpieces that obscured the underlying toxicity with the fog of personal valour and heroism. Forget the murder of eight million people and look at how well the talented creatives sold the stench? No. Let’s remember them both together.

Best,
Helen
 

Charles Webb

Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2004
Messages
1,723
Location
Colorfull, C
Format
Multi Format
Roger Hicks said:
Dear Ben,

It's disputable how committed a nazi she was. Also, it is disputable how far she was a friend of Hitler, and how far they used each other for their own ends.

There are those who will hear only ill of her, and those who refuse to believe any ill of her. Having read a good deal about her, including two major biographies, I suspect that the truth lies somewhere between.

And regardless of which camp you fall in, she was a brilliant photographer. There's no law saying that great artists have to be nice people.

Cheers,

Roger


Roger,
I coulden't agree with you more! She was extremely talented in my mind.

Charlie.....................
 

Claire Senft

Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2004
Messages
3,239
Location
Milwaukee, W
Format
35mm
No I do not think that is a great portrait of any kind.

I think she made Goebbel's job much easier.
 

blansky

Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2002
Messages
5,952
Location
Wine country, N. Cal.
Format
Medium Format
Helen B said:
I’m not suggesting that someone’s talent should be ignored because of the way they used it. On the contrary, I think that it is important to recognise and never forget that talent may be associated with repugnant ideals, and that repugnant ideals may be promoted by people with talent. I just find it impossible to dissociate talent from the way that it is used or to ignore context. To me, it is no coincidence of time and place that Riefenstahl produced perfect Nazi propaganda. Her pictures show an idealised, pure surface that does not invite you to look beneath. I asked those of you who think that we should ignore her involvement with the Nazis whether or not you had seen Triumph of the Will, and I’m still interested in the answer. She sold Hitler very well – I suspect that few would argue with that. Did she do it because she had no principles other than to advance her career, or did she do it because she believed in it?

Helen

I have no problem with your opinion, and it's probably the prevalent one. However I disagree, to some extent as I've stated.

I believe you are in some aspect of the movie business and I'm not sure if you've ever made industrial films or not but in that genre the moviemakers job is to display and romanticise the company that they are representing.

I don't see too much difference here. The ideal being represented was at the time very popular to a people who were "down on their luck" so to speak, and were seduced by a mythological Teutonic, Aryan ideal.

I don't believe there is a definitive answer to the question on how much she knew early on or later on but I do think she did a masterful job of glamorizing her employer just as a corporate moviemaker/photographer does today, for companies that may or may not be great citizens.

You talk of her willingness to do this but perhaps she was apolitical and only interested in the "art" part of it. I don't know. If early on in my life I was asked to romanticize Exxon or Union Carbide or Monsanto I would pull out all the stops to make them appear as what they wanted to see. For the art.

Some of the atrocities that the Nazi's later did, would have been miles above what normal people could ever imagine.


Michael
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Helen B

Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2004
Messages
1,590
Location
Hell's Kitch
Format
Multi Format
Michael,

I don't disagree with you about the art of prostitution and prostitution for art's sake. And maybe for money. Perhaps it is just a matter of degree, but perhaps it is an important degree in the case of selling Hitler.

"You talk of her willingness to do this but perhaps she was apolitical and only interested in the "art" part of it. I don't know."
I can't know why she did it. All I can say is that seeing Triumph of the Will gave me the strong impression that she believed in what she was doing. At the very least she must have understood Hitler's beliefs very well to have made it the way it was made.

"Some of the atrocities that the Nazi's later did, would have been miles above what normal people could ever imagine."

Well I certainly hope so. However, Triumph of the Will was made in 1934, after Hitler had made his beliefs quite clear in Mein Kampf. Riefenstahl can't have been ignorant of them.

Best,
Helen
 

Ole

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Sep 9, 2002
Messages
9,244
Location
Bergen, Norway
Format
Large Format
Helen B said:
... All I can say is that seeing Triumph of the Will gave me the strong impression that she believed in what she was doing. At the very least she must have understood Hitler's beliefs very well to have made it the way it was made...

That does not necessarily follow one from the other. There's no need for agreement or acceptance in order to portray the "true believers", as any half-decent actor will know.
 

Lukas Werth

Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2005
Messages
285
Location
Pakistan
Format
Multi Format
Helen B said:
I asked those of you who think that we should ignore her involvement with the Nazis whether or not you had seen Triumph of the Will, and I’m still interested in the answer. She sold Hitler very well – I suspect that few would argue with that. Did she do it because she had no principles other than to advance her career, or did she do it because she believed in it?

While researching a movie I heard many Nazi songs that I would not have heard otherwise. They were powerfully evocative, stirring masterpieces that obscured the underlying toxicity with the fog of personal valour and heroism. Forget the murder of eight million people and look at how well the talented creatives sold the stench? No. Let’s remember them both together.

Best,
Helen

I don't remember having seen this film ever in its entirety, and it is a long time since I have seen any excerpts, so I cannot claim real xpertise here. However, while you are certainly right to point out the film's seductive qualities, remember that it was made well before the start of the second world war and the deportation of citizens of Jewish origin, even before, if memory serves, the "Reichskristallnacht". At that time, the full terror had not yet been revealed, though many signs were certainly in the air for those with eyes to see.
But I don't really want to argue against you, and neither, funny as this may sound, against Michael. No, art is not divisible from its message, I certainly don't believe there is a "pure aesthetics" - I rather think the aesthetical dimension is inherently linked to the ethical one. And yes, humans fail, and not only in such times, and if they establish something, it is more often than not through many errors and shortcomings - or so I understand you, Michael.

And Roger, I can only agree. The reason I forgot to mention Mao was that Hitler and Stalin were linked together, and started the 2nd world war (through their "sharing" of Polland).
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom