Registered: Jan 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 13002

Back at the beginning of the month (9th Septemebr I think) the legendary Nazi film-maker Leni Riefenstahl died. She was the woman reponsible for the Nuremburg Rally film and other propaganda pieces for the Nazi which some argue are cinemtaic masterpieces in terms fo technique and progressiveuse of technology. Apparently she was the first person to ever cameras that could be rolled on tracks.

The day after she died there was, on BBC Radio 4, a "tribute" to her. The use of the word "tribute" was not used in the title of the show and was only actually used once in an "off the cuff" remark by a presenter promoting the forthcoming show. It did however cause a storm of criticism from listeners, as did the show.

Many believed that it was bad form on the part of the BBC to produce an arts show which lauded praise on Leni Riefenstahl for her aesthetic ability in producing images that literally everyone knows (if you have seen film footage of the Nazis it was hers). Riefenstahl herself was actually aquitted at the Nuremburg Trails of involvemnet in the ar crimes of the Nazi regime, but obviously there are many who still her as the epitome of evil, or more the "promoter of evil". This is most often the feeling of those that can actually remember the war, whilst those that cannot have a more dispassionate view of it.

So I am curious what people here think about Leni Riefenstahl. Should she be portrayed in a black and white reality or are there shades of grey in relation to "Riefenstahl the woman" and "Riefenstahl the work"? Should we celebrate her work or cast it into the dustbin of history because of the ideology it represented? If it is to go in the dustbin will it always remain there or will we ever be able to look at it with a different view?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Aug 2001
Location: Hilbert Space
Posts: 35561

Don't see that there is any problem with celebrating her 'art', assuming one wanted to do something as dubious as be interested in 'art'.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 13002

quote:

---

assuming one wanted to do something as dubious as be interested in 'art'

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2001
Location: ........
Posts: 14954

For all the bad things you can say about the Nazies you can't take away the fact that they had immaculate appearance; fantastic uniforms, cool looking weapons and excellent propaganda movies.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Location Location
Posts: 26384

There is an absolutely fantastic documentary about this woman that for the fucking life of me I can't remember the name of. Fuck.

Anyway, go rent it.

As far as your question goes:

1. There is no such thing as black and white in terms of human beings, their actions, and their value. I'd be remiss not to say that.

2. Along those lines, I don't really think she was evil or even a bad person, neccessarily, so much as a person who's views and perspectives should be at least seen in light of their context. Take that how you like.

3. As far as her work is concerned, we still celebrate Birth of a Nation. But, we do so appreciating the artistry and craftsmanship of it, while also noting the ideology behind it as well as the historical context within which it was presented. I don't see any reason why we should treat much of anything any differently, art, people, ideas, what have you.


p.s. Elia Kazan was still a scumbag.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2001
Location: ........
Posts: 14954

Here's one of Hitler's paintings, evil or simply a bunch of flowers?

Attachment: flower7.jpg
This has been downloaded 47 time(s).

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Aug 2001
Location: Hilbert Space
Posts: 35561

quote:

---

Originally posted by skalie
Here's one of Hitler's paintings, evil or simply a bunch of flowers?

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged