Swastika

"If Hitler is dehumanized and shown only as a devil, any future Hitler may not be recognized, simply because he is a human being.''

Thus state the opening credits of the 1973 film Swastika, newly released onto DVD this week.  The film consists of a montage of home videos of Hitler and his friends at his Bavarian mountain retreat shot predominantly by Eva Braun in 16mm color.  Nazi propaganda films and violent newsreel footage of the Nazi rise to power are interspersed throughout the film to highlight the gross irony of the substance of the home videos. For example, "one notably noxious moment in which a fawning Hitler sits an adorable little girl on his lap is juxtaposed with a Nazi soldier kicking a pregnant woman," writes the Wall Street Journal's Joe Morgenstern in his review of the film.

When Swastika, produced by David Puttnam (of Chariots of Fire, Midnight Express, and Killing Fields renown) and directed by Philippe Mora, premiered at the 1973 Cannes film festival, "all hell broke loose" according to Mora. Fights erupted, and one audience member even threw a chair at the screen.  The portrayal of Hitler and his cronies as human beings was found extremely offensive and intolerable. Subsequently, the film was banned in Germany for 37 years.

Joe Morgenstern explains the heart of the controversy:

That appearance of humanity—not just on the part of the Führer, but of Goebbels, Martin Bormann, Hermann Göring, Heinrich Himmler and lesser monsters appearing briefly—is at the root of the controversy. And it's a fascinating question. Is our understanding of history served well or ill by the spectacle of Hitler playing with dogs, making nice with bright-faced children, chatting up his secretaries, posing stiffly in various uniforms, deploring Göring's shooting of a boar ("What kind of courage is that? He should go into the forest with a spear"), admiring a visitor's Bolex movie camera ("Ah, color film," he says, "the future belongs to color film"), or talking amiably with guests about "Gone With the Wind"?

It seems as though Hollywood's fascination with Hitler and Nazi Germany is here for the long haul, and so long as it is, the world is not in peril of forgetting Hitler's legacy of evil.  But as time goes on, are we not increasingly in danger of forgetting that Adolf Hitler and all of history's wicked men were human beings with human faces and their own unique set of human charms?  The question that remains for me, I think, is whether this amnesia would necessarily be such a bad thing.

(h/t Emily Esfahani Smith at Acculturated)

  • Comment Filters
Contributor Comments
Member Comments
Comment Popularity

Comments :

flownover
Joined
Aug '10
flownover

How do we square that with Hollywood's apparent sympathy and support of the enemies of Israel and the Jewish people ? 

There were decorative ornaments with Mao's face on them hung on a Christmas tree recently. Che's visage adorns endless tchotchkes. 

It's all up to the media, whether we will know them by their works or their publicity. 

Henry Scanlon
Joined
Nov '11
Henry Scanlon

I'm with Baudelaire: 

"The greatest trick the devil ever played was convincing the world that he did not exist."

Diane Ellis, Ed.
flownover: How do we square that with Hollywood's apparent sympathy and support of the enemies of Israel and the Jewish people ?

That's a very interesting question. How do we square Hollywood's perpetual hatred of Hitler with its sympathy of Jihadists? Maybe the distinguishing factor is political correctness?

Then again, there aren't really that many mainstream movies that portray modern Israel and the Jewish people negatively and their enemies positively, are there? The only one I can think of is Paradise Now, and it didn't come out of Hollywood, but out of Palestine.

Mendel
Joined
Mar '11
Mendel

Diane Ellis, Ed.

flownover: How do we square that with Hollywood's apparent sympathy and support of the enemies of Israel and the Jewish people ?

That's a very interesting question. How do we square Hollywood's perpetual hatred of Hitler with its sympathy of Jihadists? Maybe the distinguishing factor is political correctness?

An alternative explanation: it's what sells.

People are fascinated by evil. We are absolutely disgusted by the actions of the Nazis, but we still want to know more.  One of my first memories as a child were the constant TV ads for the Time-Life books on the Third Reich: 20 volumes of Nazi history porn in gory detail.  Hollywood, and the media as a whole, caters to our wishes.

etoiledunord
Joined
Jun '10
etoiledunord

Yes, Hitler was a human being. But he didn't see himself as merely human. He saw himself as God, "new and improved." Every time God, the real one, is locked out, something evil fills the vacuum. The culture of death rushes in to fill the space.


Joined
Jan '11
Anon

As my friend Willy said: Mark you this, [Ms. Ellis], the devil can cite Scripture for his purpose. An evil soul producing holy witness is like a villain with a smiling cheek, a goodly apple rotten at the heart: Oh, what a goodly outside falsehood hath!

Politics, anyone?

Edited on Jan 6 at 3:22pm
Stuart Creque
Joined
Dec '10
Stuart Creque

flownover: How do we square that with Hollywood's apparent sympathy and support of the enemies of Israel and the Jewish people ? 

There were decorative ornaments with Mao's face on them hung on a Christmas tree recently. Che's visage adorns endless tchotchkes. 

It's all up to the media, whether we will know them by their works or their publicity.  · Jan 6 at 2:54pm

You answer your own question.

Israel went from being a heroic underdog state to being a respected power in 1967 -- but by that time, the Arab world was well within the Soviet orbit.  Thus the first mark against Israel was that it (using Western arms) humiliated the Soviet-equipped forces of the Arab world, punching a hole in Soviet claims of superior strength.

Then, in the 1970s, Israel shifted to a conservative Likud government.  That government steered Israel off the path of state socialism and onto the path of market-based capitalism.  That was the the final insult to world Socialism, and the Left became strong supporters of the Marxist Palestinian terror organizations (remember Vanessa Redgrave dancing with the PFLP, Kalashnikov in hand?).

Aaron Miller
Joined
May '10
Aaron Miller
"If Hitler is dehumanized and shown only as a devil, any future Hitler may not be recognized, simply because he is a human being.''

Agreed. It's very common for people to say an evil person is "crazy" because they can't or don't want to understand. It's also very common for histories to pretend massacres can be chalked up to evil leaders.

It's unfortunate that actions like murder and rape have become the minimum standard for acknowledging evil in anyone. If you can't face it, you can't fight it.

Evil is corruption. Like a shadow, it cannot exist without the light. And it begins much more innocently than it ends.

Aaron Miller
Joined
May '10
Aaron Miller

Diane Ellis, Ed.

How do we square Hollywood's perpetual hatred of Hitler with its sympathy of Jihadists?

It's easier to face bad memories than living threats.

Also, it's harder to face a problem when there's no clear solution. Sure, we can stop people from trying to kill us. But how do we stop people from wanting to kill us?

And, of course, there are a lot of fragile egos that can't withstand being accused of racism or bigotry, no matter how groundless the claims.

flownover
Joined
Aug '10
flownover

Diane, I ,and probably you, have been subjected to those Hollywood comments about Israel. But before I go searching for examples of their bias , where is the PC factory located ? Is it academia or media ? Of course its both.

Stuart Creque
Joined
Dec '10
Stuart Creque

Diane Ellis, Ed.

It seems as though Hollywood's fascination with Hitler and Nazi Germany is here for the long haul, and so long as it is, the world is not in peril of forgetting Hitler's legacy of evil.  But as time goes on, are we not increasingly in danger of forgetting that Adolf Hitler and all of history's wicked men were human beings with human faces and their own unique set of human charms?  The question that remains for me, I think, is whether this amnesia would necessarily be such a bad thing.

How could that amnesia be in any way a good thing?

The next Hitler (like the panoply of current lesser and greater Hitler wanna-bes) will be a human being with a human face and his own unique set of human charms.  If we forget that, we can fall prey to the fallacy the filmmakers warned about: we may dismiss the possibility that some person could be a monster because he seems like an ordinary human being, maybe even a nice one.  See Bashar al-Assad for a stark example.

M1919A4
Joined
Nov '10
M1919A4

The problem is that Hitler, but not Mao or Stalin, was a human being, although a thoroughly corrupted and unprincipled one.  He could and did display personal loyalty on more than one occasion, something that, in my reading of their lives, seems utterly foreign to either of the Russian or Chinese tyrants.

I have pondered this difference for some time and have come to the tentative conclusion that it has to do with his experience in having to deal with the German people as a solicitor of their votes.  I am relying upon the estimable history by Richard J Evans (http://www.amazon.com/Coming-Third-Reich-Richard-Evans/dp/0143034693/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1325893436&sr=1-4) as my chief source.  Neither of the other two, so far as I can ascertain, ever had to appeal to the people in general for power.  And, until after he had come to power, Hitler never was able to inspire or force the acceptance of himself or his program upon the German people.  

Moreover, as Evans points out, the shocking antisemitism of the German people and state was evident and promoted from the 1880's.

Stuart Creque
Joined
Dec '10
Stuart Creque

Diane Ellis, Ed.

Then again, there aren't really that many mainstream movies that portray modern Israel and the Jewish people negatively and their enemies positively, are there? The only one I can think of is Paradise Now, and it didn't come out of Hollywood, but out of Palestine.

Not even Paradise Now.  In it (spoiler alert), the dedicated suicide bomber changes his mind as he sees hope for the future, whereas his aimless friend who was initially only along for the ride becomes the dedicated suicide bomber because he decides this act will give meaning to his meaningless existence.  It isn't really a paean to the suicide bomber, but rather portrays him as a pawn of evil men.

I understand The Valley of Wolves, made in Turkey, is a real example of anti-Jewish hate propaganda.


Joined
Apr '11
James Of England

Diane Ellis, Ed.

flownover: How do we square that with Hollywood's apparent sympathy and support of the enemies of Israel and the Jewish people ?

That's a very interesting question. How do we square Hollywood's perpetual hatred of Hitler with its sympathy of Jihadists? Maybe the distinguishing factor is political correctness?

Then again, there aren't really that many mainstream movies that portray modern Israel and the Jewish people negatively and their enemies positively, are there? The only one I can think of is Paradise Now, and it didn't come out of Hollywood, but out of Palestine. · Jan 6 at 3:06pm

How do we square Hollywood siding with communists then and now? Then, and now, radical leftists held sway over much of the relevant society and provided the important labels (in this case, "right wing" to describe the moderate wing of hard leftism).

Diane Ellis, Ed.

Stuart Creque

Diane Ellis, Ed.

It seems as though Hollywood's fascination with Hitler and Nazi Germany is here for the long haul, and so long as it is, the world is not in peril of forgetting Hitler's legacy of evil.  But as time goes on, are we not increasingly in danger of forgetting that Adolf Hitler and all of history's wicked men were human beings with human faces and their own unique set of human charms?  The question that remains for me, I think, is whether this amnesia would necessarily be such a bad thing.

How could that amnesia be in any way a good thing?

I think that the impulse behind the ban of a film like Swastika in Germany for 37 years stemmed from the fear that it would provide fuel for the revisionists who would swoop in to defend the man as a poor, misunderstood soul who was driven to do the things he did by society.

And I think that yet may happen, perhaps a few decades or a century hence, when there's nobody on this earth left with any personal connection to the holocaust.

Stuart Creque
Joined
Dec '10
Stuart Creque

Here is an example of evil with a benign face: Why Anti-Semitism Is Moving Toward The Mainstream.

For the first time since the end of World War II, classic anti-Semitic tropes – “the Jews” control the world and are to blame for everything that goes wrong, including the financial crisis; “The Jews killed Christian children in order to use the blood to bake matza; the Holocaust never happened – are becoming acceptable and legitimate subjects for academic and political discussion.
To understand why these absurd and reprehensible views, once reserved for the racist fringes of academia and politics, are moving closer to the mainstream, consider the attitudes of two men, one an academic, the other a politician, toward those who express or endorse such bigotry. The academic is Prof. Brian Leiter. The politician is Ron Paul.

Diane Ellis, Ed.

James Of England

Diane Ellis, Ed.

flownover: How do we square that with Hollywood's apparent sympathy and support of the enemies of Israel and the Jewish people ?

That's a very interesting question. How do we square Hollywood's perpetual hatred of Hitler with its sympathy of Jihadists? Maybe the distinguishing factor is political correctness?

Then again, there aren't really that many mainstream movies that portray modern Israel and the Jewish people negatively and their enemies positively, are there? The only one I can think of is Paradise Now, and it didn't come out of Hollywood, but out of Palestine. · Jan 6 at 3:06pm

How do we square Hollywood siding with communists then and now? Then, and now, radical leftists held sway over much of the relevant society and provided the important labels (in this case, "right wing" to describe the moderate wing of hard leftism). · Jan 6 at 3:57pm

That's an easier one for me to square. If you ignore all the facts, it's easy to see the poetry and beauty in the Communist struggle. 

Stuart Creque
Joined
Dec '10
Stuart Creque

Diane Ellis, Ed.

I think that the impulse behind the ban of a film like Swastika in Germany for 37 years stemmed from the fear that it would provide fuel for the revisionists who would swoop in to defend the man as a poor, misunderstood soul who was driven to do the things he did by society.

And I think that yet may happen, perhaps a few decades or a century hence, when there's nobody on this earth left with any personal connection to the holocaust. · Jan 6 at 3:58pm

Exactly my point.  If we forget that ordinary human beings are capable of great, almost inconceivable evil, we can be taken in by the argument that "he can't have been a monster, because he was kind to children and animals."

Let us then take our cue from Wednesday Addams (in the movie version) who, when asked what she was supposed to be for Halloween while wearing her habitual outfit, replied, "A serial killer: they look like everybody else."

Nick Stuart
Joined
May '10
Nick Stuart

What's horrifying is not that some of the Nazis who committed terrible atrocities were sociopaths, but that the rest of the people who committed and abetted atrocities were "normal" people who were, in various ways, co-0pted and brought along.

Ponder what would you do in similar circumstances? If you're honest with yourself the answer will be at least disquieting.

I admit it is for me because I don't really know, I can only hope I would do the right things. But if my family were held hostage ...

Stuart Creque
Joined
Dec '10
Stuart Creque

Diane Ellis, Ed.

James Of England

Diane Ellis, Ed.

flownover: How do we square that with Hollywood's apparent sympathy and support of the enemies of Israel and the Jewish people ?

That's a very interesting question. How do we square Hollywood's perpetual hatred of Hitler with its sympathy of Jihadists? Maybe the distinguishing factor is political correctness?

How do we square Hollywood siding with communists then and now? Then, and now, radical leftists held sway over much of the relevant society and provided the important labels (in this case, "right wing" to describe the moderate wing of hard leftism).

That's an easier one for me to square. If you ignore all the facts, it's easy to see the poetry and beauty in the Communist struggle.

Indeed.  In theory, Communism is fairness and equality.  (But in practice...)


Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading
Welcome Visitor

Already a Member?
Please Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Join Ricochet today!

Already a Member? Sign In