[jon boy]

Originally Posted by gmku

God, we should have let you Brits go to the Nazis. What did you ever give us back except the Beatles and the Stones. Sheesh.

peter sellers.

[ni'k]

there were quite a lot of people in positions of power sympathetic to the nazi cause, joe kennedy for example, but hitler alienated them. the argument i've used about their self destructive urge is taken right out of ian svenonius' the psychic soviet which i'm reading at the moment. he also talks about how soviet realism was in a way feted to win over nazism, highlighting how hitler made the 'suicidal' decision to invade russia despite the historical warnings of napolean and charles xii. it was this move that ultimately was the nazis undoing, as they were defeated and pushed back by the russians all the way to hitlers munich bunker. interestingly svenonius cites eisenstein's film nevsky as prophetic, it being shot in 1938, funded by the soviets and showed the defeat of the german teutonic knights by russian prince nevsky in the middle ages. The invading germans are lured onto an ice lake and drown, similar to how the invading nazi germans heavy machinery broke down in the russian winter, leading to their defeat. when the film was commisioned russia's showdown the the nazis was seen as inevitable, so the idea that soviet realism triumphed over the nazi romantic wagnerian urge for self immolation seems quite plausible. i think nazism's very nature provokes such an easy nationalist reaction to having to bow down to the german fuhrer that it mobilises strong feelings of pride and solidarity against it in people, so resistance is strong and the target is easy to recognise. whereas capitalism creeps in stealthily, it doesn't care about flags, it buys out people and then funds already existing sympathetic elements in the country who can give the appearance to their own people of being nationalist and strong all the while shaking hands with the investors behind closed doors. Also in wars capitalism doesn't require a full military defeat of the country it is invaded, it's troops are ultimately expendable, all it needs is to open up the markets and create conditions favourable enough for business to be done. the anti facist spirit isn't too hard to invoke in people. there is a figurehead that represents a massive weakness because assasinating him does massive psychological and structural damage, and it's always easy to turn such a symbol into a figure of hate. and also yes, what so frightened and awed other countries about nazism was the films it made of its rallies and the seemingly astounding discipline and coordination of masses of people on such a large scale. Apparently tho, the real scene was quite chaotic and less organised than it appeared, but for your only knowledge of another nation to be photos in newspapers of hitler addressing the crowds and perhaps radio clips of their chanting heil in unison... disturbing. what was going on across the world back then must have seemed potentially so alien.

[demonrail666]

Eisenstein's Alexander Nevsky was prophetic but only because, in this case, history was likely to repeat itself. I don't think it demonstrated any kind of superiority within Soviet Socialist Realism which was just as bound up with ideas of 'self immolation' as the Nazi's Wagnerian romanticism. Socialist Realism was a genre which promoted 'reality' only insofar as it corresponded with and ultimately promoted official Soviet policy and, as such, was just as likely to pervert a reality to suit the demands of the party as Nazi art was designed to portray a 'reality' laid out by the Nazis. Both were ultimately conservative reactions against earlier avant-garde tendencies within their respective countries (Expressionism in Germany and Constructivism in the SU). Although both genres now enjoy a certain kitsch status, neither produced any really credible art and are generally seen as betrayals of the once vital and progressive art being produced within Germany and the SU. Eisenstein was basically forced to make Alexander Nevsky after Stalin made him officially apologise for the 'mistakes' of his earlier films like Battleship Potemkin, October and Strike.

I'd be really interested to read Svenonius' account of Soviet Socialist Realism, especially if he's trying to give it some credit.

[gmku]

Originally Posted by jon boy

peter sellers.

Comic genius.

[phoenix]

no.. They all seem fun and ridiculous. I like that in a person.