Happy Birthday, Leni Reifenstahl

[SteveW]

One amazing film maker.

[hgc]

I think the occassion of Leni's birthday is a good time to open up a discussion the controversy of her films as art vs her films (some) as vile propoganda for the Nazi regime and Hitler.

Does this make anyone reject her as a laudable filmmaker and artist?

Discuss...

[SteveW]

I find it hard to reject her as an artist. She has to be the best documentarian ever regardless of her subject matter. Triumph of the Will and Olympia are absolute stunning works of art in addition to probably being the most effective propaganda films ever. She still denies that she was a propoganda instrument and only made films.

[hgc]

Originally posted by SteveW
I find it hard to reject her as an artist. She has to be the best documentarian ever regardless of her subject matter. Triumph of the Will and Olympia are absolute stunning works of art in addition to probably being the most effective propaganda films ever. She still denies that she was a propoganda instrument and only made films. I agree that she was a great documentarian -- she could stir the emotions of her audience like no one else.

This is really about the age-old debate about what is art, and specifically about how quality of art is not at all about content (my opinion), but about making a mark on the viewer.

But, then there is more to this than art, there are real consequences to what she participated in, and perhaps direct unpleasant consequences to these films being so effective in their intent. Ah, but what intent? She says she wasn't a propogandist? Do you believe that? I think the only alternative is that she was so disconnected from reality as to be irresponsible in the extreme. If she wasn't a tool of propoganda, then how in the hell was her product such effective propoganda? Personally I find it hard to believe that she didn't know the intent of her films, even if it wasn't her own intent. And if it wasn't her own intent, than what kind of artist are we talking about here? Just a tool, as far as I'm concerned.

[Skeptic]

She denies it was propaganda? Ah well. Then again, she keeps denying she was Hitler's lover--and she probably was.

[Brian]

I'm reminded of Kurt Vonnegut in the introduction of Slaughterhouse Five (I think). A friend was telling him that his daughter has a successful career working for a company that made missiles. Vonnegut writes, "I didn't tell him that I don't consider people in that line of work "successful".

[hgc]

Originally posted by Skeptic
She denies it was propaganda? Ah well. Then again, she keeps denying she was Hitler's lover--and she probably was. Subtle distinction here. I can only rely on SteveW's assertion that "She still denies she was a propoganda instrument and only made films." Let's assume this is a direct quote: I take it to be an ambiguous statement as to whether the films are propoganda, but that she is not an instrument of propoganda nonetheless, meaning that she doesn't take responsibility for the content of her films. I find that to be foolish in the extreme. I can't think of a better example of being a tool.

[kittynh]

I read an autobiography she wrote.

I expected something more than what I read.

I'm an artist. That entitles me to sleep around, drink a lot, abuse my spouse, have a HUGE ego, but I still can't sell my soul to the devil. She didn't just become a Nazi supporter because that was where the bucks were for filmmaking. After reading her book, I concluded that for her to have done such an amazing job, she really had to believe heart and soul in all that crap. She had to believe every nasty aspect of it. You don't produce work that good if you are just going through the moves. She never did anything as good before or after. Your best work is the work that reflects yourself. Evil has good writers, good painters, even good musicians. She was their good filmmaker.