Month: September 2019

Dear Musical Politicians,
Thank you for your great work last week! I gather that some of you are having a very stressful semester. In the interest of continuing to have substantive and penetrating discussions of our materials without overburdening you, I’ve made some adjustments to the reading and listening assignments for the rest of Unit II. Here is what you need to cover over the next two weeks:
Tues, Oct. 1
Kurt Weill, Three-Penny Opera (full film)
Do not read: Michael Kater, Different Drummers

Thurs, Oct. 3
Albrecht Dümling, “The Target of Racial Purity: The ‘Degenerate Music’ Exhibition in Dusseldorf, 1938”
Pamela Potter, “What Is ‘Nazi Music’?,” The Musical Quarterly, 88:3 (Fall 2005), pp. 428-455 [*Please Note! This was originally assigned for Oct. 8. We will read it on Oct 3 instead of Potter’s article “Attempts to Define ‘Germanness’ in Music”] 
“Letter from Furtwängler to Goebbels,” Ten Principles” and “From Hitler’s Speech” in The Arts In Nazi Germany

Tues, Oct. 8
Michael Kater, Composers of the Nazi Era
Note: This is the only reading assignment for this day!

Thurs, Oct. 10
Same as before. For Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony, you only need to listen to the 4th movement.

I will go over this with you in class on Tuesday. Thanks again for your hard work, and please let me know if you have any questions.

Marissa Whitby

HIS 315

September 25, 2019

The movie stars two main characters Professor Immanuel Rath (Emil Jannings) who is a high well respected educator, and Lola Lola (Marlene Dietrich) a dancer at the local club named The Blue Angel.  It is mainly set in two significant places, one being the professor’s classroom, and the other The Blue Angel. The movie’s plot intensified when the Professor Immanuel Rath (Emil Jannings) finds that his students, specifically Angst, has photos of a cabaret performer named Lola Lola (Marlene Dietrich). The Professor ends up going to this club to find his students and punish them, but instead he found the love of his life, Lola Lola. They both seem to have an interest in each other, which leads to them getting married. The Professor was fired from his job because he was associated with Lola Lola. This leads to a life of selling photos of Lola and and the Professor becoming part of the act. 

1. Through the film, a specific clock is shown that sounds at these points during the film: 7:30, 32:28, 58:08, and 1hr 41 mins. What does this clock symbolize in this film?

2. In Tuesday’s class we read chapters five and six from Jelavich Peters scholarly book Berlin Cabaret. What elements from the book are depicted in the film?

3. In the film it shows two different clowns one in the beginning and one near the end, what do these clowns symbolize? 

4. Throughout the film we see Lola performing in shows singing various songs. Specifically she sings two love songs about finding love, one in the beginning, and the other at the end. What do these songs show about Lola and her relationship with men? 

5. In German culture in the time period of the film, blue did not have the connotation of “sad,” as we know it, instead it meant “dirty”. In the context of the film being called The Blue Angel, with Blue being dirty and Angel signifying Lola, what qualities of Lola does this describe?

Cabernet music in Germany under the Weimar Republic was so vehemently defined by the censorship of the government that it, as a genre, didn’t ever have a fair chance of recovery (Jelavich, Peter. “Berlin Cabaret”). Much like we saw in the Soviet Union, cabernet music became limited in view and was a tool used to serve the government’s ideological views and goals. I found it interesting that the music seemed to be just as controversial in the Weimar Republic as it was during the Soviet Union, but for differing reasons. In Germany music was controversial because some people thought that upbeat music during the war was not appropriate because of the severity of the times. However, others thought that music proved a good distraction because people needed something that took their mind off of the horrible happenings around them (Jelavich, Peter. “Berlin Cabaret”). The shows were also controversial because they were primarily focused on what was going on at the time, reflecting the travesties of war, but they still had very blatant nationalist undertones. I think that these nationalist views cause music to lose its true purpose, which it to be a truly expressive piece of work. Although I haven’t yet heard any of the cabernets from this time I assume they will be similar to the lackluster musical pieces from the Soviet Union. While these two regimes were different in many ways they both impeded on freedom of expression in music. Artist who were dubbed anti-nationalist weren’t well received. “When the Old Motor Beats in Time Again,” is a perfect example of a non nationalistic piece (Jelavich, Peter. “Berlin Cabaret”). In class I think we should discuss this piece further, and try to talk about why a musical piece like this is so important and what impact it had on society and the artist who created it.

Jelavich, Peter. 1993. Berlin Cabaret. Studies in Cultural History. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=282596&site=ehost- live.

Sydney Kightlinger

HIS 315

September 23, 2019

Emerging out of extreme political turmoil, the Weimar Republic (1919-1933) was a great experiment. With the nation in fractions, most notably from the reading, a decision to pull towards communism like Russia or counteract with a plethora of other ideologies, a great movement of expression appeared. Although there had been cabarets (or nightclubs) in Germany prior to the turn of the century, the use of the stage, during and into the 1920s varied in numerous ways.

To focus on Jelavich ‘s chapter five “Political Satire in the Early Weimar Republic,” the years immediately following the war leading to 1925 lead to a temporary resurgence of the cabaret. Satire infested the acts of the stage due to what as Jelavich attributes to as, “the discrepancies between ideals and realities, that contradiction offered a field that humorists cultivated with ease” (130). However, eventually the satire inclination towards satirical humor began to wan as the living conditions ceased to improve.

For the remainder of the Weimer Republic audiences wanted a spectacle. Revues, or variety shows (which could be salacious), came into fashion because they provided just that. The discussion of whether dancing women, nude or not, lead to a discussion over whether these performers where being hyper sexualized or expressive artists. With all of this commotion, this decade leaves an impact. Let’s discuss how with these questions:

1. What are the complications for artistic society of the politically divided Weimar Republic?

2. Arguably, the artistic enveloped is pushed further after WWI. How did the lack of censorship change the cultural scene?

3. The book briefly mentions a rise of anti-Semitic behavior, how was creative expression used by some to make anti-Semitic statements (Bonus question: Do artists have a responsibility to society to insure they are producing non-bigoted work?)

4. How does authority (or lack of it) shape the Weimar Republic?

5. What role does economics following the war play in the republic’s entertainment consumption?

6. In regard to the law code, what do we think of the regulation of naked women’s bodies in respect to 19^th century art?

7. What are the most prominent aspect of American culture that penetrated German art, and how do they effect German sensibilities?

8. In what ways did the cinema and revues work against each other? Is this always the case, or is it the result of a specific market?

9. How is the art of the Weimar Republic a glaring example of modernity? (Is it? The book seems to believe so.)

10. What does marketing kicklines as “purer” than a one-woman show say about the era?

Stalin’s Music Prize was more than just 100,000 roubles awards to the best compositions of that year. Frolova-Walker makes the point that “an elite was already in place” for the musicians and composers because they already could afford basic necessities and luxury goods which is a step over the masses (Frolova-Walker, 12). The most important aspect in historical terms of Stalin’s Music Prize is that the Stalin Prize Committee (KSP) by awarding these prizes clearly illustrated what fit the national agenda of the arts. Stalin’s saying, “national in form, but socialist in content” and the concept of socialist realism were the spoken instructions for what Stalin wanted, but the pieces awarded Stalin’s Music Prize were clear examples of what the KSP thought Stalin wanted.

            Yet, the KSP struggled with deciding between praising ideology and aesthetic. On the one hand, ideology was so easy to laud, but those compositions could easily lack aesthetic. On the other hand, aesthetic pieces were masterfully composed and beautiful to listen to, but those pieces if ideology was not shown through words or tone could easily be construed as “formalist” and “Western” and not Soviet enough. Initially the KSP emphasized aesthetic over ideology because they had more autonomy over their choices and most members were traditionalists (17). As the higher members of Soviet bureaucracy became involved including members of the Politburo, the KSP’s sovereignty was usurped because Stalin’s Music Prize could conveniently be used to send messages to artists and as a propaganda tool. When the KSP’s choices were widened to include music as far back as 1935 for their first awardees, they knew that “it would set in stone the canon of Soviet art, and thereby codify Socialist Realism” (48). It was a momentous task that could not be left up to the autonomy of conservative composers and artists.

1. What criteria encouraged the KSP (and members of the Soviet bureaucracy) to pick certain pieces over others?
2. How did the differences of Shostakovich’s pieces and the changing politics of each year affect his ability to be granted an award?
3. Why did the national republics go from winning barely any awards to becoming a “reliable choice” in 1948? (Frolova-Walker, 180)

Sydney Kightlinger

HIS-315 Blog Post

September 17, 2019

Much like our discussions previously in this unit, the music scandals of the Late Stalin period deal with the issue of what music is good socialist realism? The definition given by the party lacks direction. Arguably, the definition was left intentionally vague so that musician could figure out what soviet music ought to be, and though RAPM had lost their power by the time period we read about today, many of the issues that floated around after the civil war were still very relevant in this post-World War II moment.

In chapter four of Creative Union, however, we get the feeling that for the first time, there starts to be a real push to decide what could be considered “good” art, “Rather, they established the broad contours of a campaign, identified what were considered unacceptable examples of Soviet art, and instructed disciplined and unscathed artists alike to direct their efforts towards fixing newly identified problems,” (Tomoff, 98). As expected, this resulted in what Tomoff refers to “professional politics.” Orgkom used this new urge to align a musical excellence to purse a “purge” in the Composers’ Union, but the attempted works did not work out as intended. Moreover, the Alesksei Ogolevets’ Affair highlighted the lingering issues between party musicians and ambiguous Left musicians.

• In reference to Tomoff’s assessment of Ogolevets on page 110 and the piece we listened to today, do you think that there is still an emphasis on Western Musical traditional? Granted that the piece we listened to comes after Ogolevets, how do you think these can be weighed against each other?

Moreover, in chapter five, we get this very interesting debate on “formalism.” This is further enhanced with the supplementation of one primary source that Tomoff used in his argument. In “Against Formalistic Tendencies in Soviet Music,” we are presented with a scathing review of the opera, Great Friendship, that the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party calls “feeble and inexpressive” (Sovetskaia muzyka, No. 1 (1948), pp. 3-8) which led to the resolution of four tenets that music and it’s keepers need to adhere to:

1. To condemn the formalistic tendency in Soviet music as against the people and as actually to the liquidation of music.

2. To propose to the Administration of Propaganda and Agitation of the Central Committee and the Committee on the Arts that they endeavor to correct the situation in Soviet music, liquidate the shortcomings set forth in the present resolution of the Central Committee, and ensure the development of Soviet music in the direction of realism.

3. To call upon Soviet composers to become aware of the lofty demands made on musical art by the Soviet people, to clear away everything that weakens our music and hampers its development, to ensure that upsurge of creative work which will advance Soviet musical culture rapidly and lead to the creation of finished works of high quality, worthy of the Soviet people, in every branch of music.

4. To approve organizational measures of the appropriate Party and Soviet organs directed toward the improvement of musical affairs

(Sovetskaia muzyka, No. 1 (1948), pp. 3-8).

• With these new resolves in mind, how do you think Shostakovich’s Song of the Forests is responding to it? What elements are playing to these new rules? Are there elements that are not in accordance with them?

The one idea that I found interesting in both readings for Thursdays class was how nations can be manipulated and molded into exactly what the leader, Stalin in this case, wants. In the article “National in Form, Socialist in Content” the author comments on Stalin’s influence on music by saying “Had he remained in obscurity, his interpretation would have been of no consequence, but he had every intention of seeing his definition reflected in the republics of the Soviet Union. And Stalin, unlike other men, had the power to adjust the world to match his words,” (Frolova-Walker, Marina. “”National in Form, Socialist in Content”: Musical Nation-Building in the Soviet Republics.”). I found this quote interesting, and very telling of Stalin’s power because if he could control the music in this way then he could easily control the nation as well. Especially because as we had already discussed in class music is a powerful tool for human control. We see this idea of using culture as a way to control and amass nations again in the article “Soviet Music and Society Under Lenin and Stalin”. This article discusses the creation and perpetuation of socialist nation states, but the key point that I found related to my earlier point, and the bulk of the class, was why culture and music were the ways Stalin’s government choose to control its nation. In the paragraph entitled “Why Culture, Why Music” the author tells us that culture and music were the preferred way to spread ideology because they allowed a message to be widespread, but it also then became inherent to society and a part of one’s identity (Edmunds, Neil. “Soviet Music and Society Under Lenin and Stalin.”). For class we should discuss if others found this interesting as well. We also prepared for class by watching the “Dance of the Kurds and Sabre Dance”. I found that this was one of the more interesting pieces that we have been assigned so far. The music wasn’t too repetitive, like “Life is Better Now”, but it was also simple enough that the average everyday person could enjoy it. I think this piece shows the balance of nationalism versus socialism that was discussed in the articles we read. I felt that is was a happy medium compared to other things we watched and listened to. One question I have is does everyone else think that this is a balanced musical and performance piece? 

Mason Secreti

HIS315 Blog Post

September 9, 2019

These readings for the 12th of September were concerned with the formation and the spread of socialist content of Asian and Soviet-influenced satellite states throughout Europe. Music nationalism and soviet realism, perpetrated by the Soviet government, infiltrated Kazakhstan. They wished to spread their influence and the Soviet culture. “Moreover, pro-worker, pop-opera, and mass dance themes presented socialist realism as a legitimate aesthetic that reached deep into the collective consciousness of the Kazaks (Rouland, 200).” This is interesting because previously soviet realism rejected anything remotely relevant to the West. But now, as the Soviet reputation engulfs eastern Europe, Western ideologies and culture are now seen as acceptable and part of Soviet repertoire. The fall of the radical RAPP and RAPM groups allowed for a breath of fresh air in Soviet creativity, however, music and art must still be “Socialist in content,” which proved to be difficult to execute as an artist. It was also notable, to me, that Azerbaijan was formed because borders were drawn around it – and great composers, who acted as musical crusaders throughout these Soviet satellites, marched in and forced a change in culture. For instance, Soviet composer Gajibekov spent time studying Azerbaijani folk music, in an attempt to more completely understand their culture to further assimilate them into the Soviet sphere. Lots of cultural shifting – such as the kobiz, an instrument reserved for shamans, was “therefore transformed into an instrument of mass choir (Rouland, 193).” This man was heavily anti-orientalist, saying that  “Augmented seconds in music, images of the nightingale and rose in po- etry, flower-bud ornaments in the visual arts, multicolored costumes and ceremonious bows in the theater: all this pseudo-Eastern style can only jar on an Eastern people and violate their spirit and tastes (Frolova-Walker, 353).”

1. What do you think was the greatest obstacle for the Soviets to spread their influence?
2. What do you personally believe Stalin meant, “Socialist in Content?” 
3. Why do you think Lenin said, “A culture designed to educate the masses was an essential foundation of socialism?” Do you think he succeeded in this?
4. Andrey Olkhovsky said, “The musical creative life of other Soviet republics is extremely weakly developed. These republics have neither national composer of their own nor a sufficient basis for their development, since their artistic consciousness has not yet been developed.” What do you take from this? Do you think this is true, or is he belittling the other Soviet states?
5. Ultimately, was the spread of Soviet culture successful? Are the effects still seen today?
6. A nation’s position in the hierarchy determined the rate at which they became “soviet-alized.” Do you think this hindered certain nations development? 
7. Do you think the dakada, international displays of Soviet art at the Bolshoi Theater, was genuinely a display or art, or rather, power?
8. Shirin Akiner argued that the spread of Soviet Kazak art is to “fulfil an ideological role that replaced ‘primitive traditional art,’ to create strong linkages with other Soviet cultures, while maintaining diversity, and to shape a local understanding of their historical past (Rouland, 185).” Would you agree with this? Is it right to call other native cultures “primitive?”