The Great Dictator

Charlie Chaplin’s film The Great Dictator is a satire on Adolf Hitler and the Nazis. Charlie Chaplin plays a Jewish barber who lives in the slums, but is mistaken for Adenoid Hynkel, the dictator of Tomania which is also the mirror representation of Hitler. The humor in the film, I believe, is appropriate because it was a way for the world to almost release some laughter towards the turmoil and pain Germany caused during World War II. These were times of great sadness and depression, and films like these seemed to make things easier  for people to cope with their emotions.

Charlie Chaplin had me dying of laughter just in the first five minutes of the film when he was circling the rocket that kept following him and spontaneously ignited out of nowhere causing him and his mates to run for their lives. Scenes like this with Charlie Chaplin’s understanding of depicting humor on screen made Hitler’s reign look so sad and pathetic by how easily it was to manipulate and control the masses. The film exposes how susceptible Germany was to Nazism and anti-Semitism which was composed of concepts and ideologies that were so ridiculous for anyone to buy into. Charlie Chaplin knew how to make Germans look silly.

However, my reaction to the final scene was quite different from the rest of the movie. I loved the message of unity and the end to violence in his final speech. It was meant to comfort those who have been harmed by World War II to give them hope and remind them that things will get better. It honestly made me a bit emotional because of how powerful his words were. You assume he’s going to agree and reaffirm the last man’s speech, but instead delivers an opposing message, one of peace and freedom from violence and hatred. Charlie Chaplin finished the film with boldness that was needed in this kind of film to send a lesson of what we should all learn from humanity's mistakes stemming from greed, hate, intolerance, and what people in power can accomplish. The speech ends with the crowd praising their supposed leader with applause and cheering, and this represents the bright future of the world Post World War II despite the horrors that have occurred.

This film was meant to shed light on the ironic aspects of Germany and its people under the rule of Hitler. It was a parody with a twist at the end. We all expected it to finish comically since it seemed to be developing that way throughout the film, but the gravity of its seriousness at the end, I thought, was perfect for a film with a subject as fragile as this. It emphasized that war is no joke, nor is hatred, racism, violence etc. Chaplin's deliverance of humor with its twist of seriousness sent a worldly message that was more than appropriate in The Great Dictator to give everyone a sense of vigor after what has happened.

Lynching of Laura and Lawrence Nelson

Lynching of Laura and Lawrence Nelson, Oklahoma, 1911

The photograph titled Lynching of Laura and Lawrence Nelson has strong cult and exhibition values to it because of the ritual or magic (cult value) and information (exhibition value) contained in it. These two values are considered the two poles of the quantitative shift and qualitative transformation an art piece experiences. Both values coexist in all pieces of art, but one dominates the other. In this particular image, the exhibition value is the more demanding of the two poles mentioned. Benjamin analyzes artwork by the exhibition value over the cult value because of the emphasis of horrific, haunting, and mystical quality found in photography.

This photograph confers the exhibition value because of the ghostly imagery of death it possesses. The people spread out along the whole width of the bridge are proud of the murder that has taken place and glorify it by taking a picture for the world to see.  It seems as if they’re having a great time together with two dead bodies hanging beneath them. This is the sick culture of those times, and this best expresses the exhibition value or the information that’s given to us. How could a society find this acceptable and righteous? Death is a sensitive subject, but to these (white) people on the bridge, they appreciate and are happy about the death of these two African Americans. This is also relative to the times of the Holocaust in that these kinds of people shared the same accepted views on supremacy and racism. The innocent dying for people’s pleasure is the main focus in this photograph. Benjamin states photographs like these are like scenes of a crime. However, in this particular photograph, this is more than true because this is a crime that looks dark and dreary that contradicts economic and social progression. 

The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction

Passage:

Even the most perfect reproduction of a work of art is lacking in one element: its presence in time and space, its unique existence at the place where it happens to be. This unique existence of the work of art determined the history to which it was subject throughout the time of its existence (p.220). 

Interpretation:

Walter Benjamin is speaking of the mechanical reproduction of art in how it creates a new perspective of experiences and language. What this means is that instead of what’s actually shown in a painting, a film, or even literature lacks the sense of time and space it was derived from. For example, the painting from Michelangelo, The Last Judgement, shows religious rituals and figures, but what’s not being shown is the atmosphere in which it was painted, where it was made, how, and when it was made. Not necessarily when as in the date, but the time in history that made it significant. Furthermore, Benjamin declares that art isn’t just what’s being displayed in its content. It’s more than that, which is the story of its development and how it came to be along with the aura that surrounds it.

I thought this was a very interesting point of view from Benjamin that makes art more unique and mysterious. The history in which art is made and the influences that helped developed it like social changes or even the changing techniques in art are interesting aspects to pay attention to when analyzing it. Like Benjamin states, this adds an extra element or aura that makes art more compelling and expressive. It’s a new outlook on how to view art that adds another sense of novelty to the grand scheme of things.

The Triumph of Death

Pieter Bruegel the Elder, The Triumph of Death, 1562

Pieter Bruegel the Elder's above painting The Triumph of Death displays the aftermath of a battle in a burning open field which seems have taken place on farmland. As far back as you can see in the distance, it looks barren and lifeless. The pile of dead bodies in the very front looks like they’re trying to be disposed of. This imagery of death depicts the result of war and the price a nation must pay to protect their freedom, justice, and progress. The pain and death revealed portray the dangers of modern life that people have become tolerant of. As an example, Germany’s people became desensitized to images of death and violence like this, not just through paintings, but other forms of art as well like film and literature. This kind of desensitization allows nations like Germany to deal with pain much better than others. They know the price of power is pain. Therefore, as mentioned by Junger, the state that endures the most pain, both inflicting and receiving, becomes the strongest one. This painting shows the dark truth of triumph and what it costs to be supreme. It glorifies death and shows how it's becoming more and more common with society which in turn makes it more tolerable for people to cope with.

Junger: On Pain

Passage:

In war, when shells fly past our bodies at high speeds, we sense clearly that no level of intelligence, virtue, or fortitude is strong enough to deflect them, not even by a hair. To the extent this threat increases, doubt concerning the validity of our values forces itself upon us. The mind tends toward a catastrophic interpretation of things wherever it sees everything called into question (pp. 5-6).

Interpretation:

This passage by Junger suggests that morals, beliefs, and values that humans inherently possess are useless traits that help us none in events of war and politics. He also states how the threat of war makes us doubt the meaning of our values. This is a contradiction of pain that liberal society holds in which good will always triumph over evil. Junger is saying that good is actually weak and can’t be a powerful entity. Evil is what really triumphs because violence is the main factor in conquering one’s enemies and expanding. He suggests that liberalism denies progress, and that pain overcomes any intangible trait that we have which is why he mentions that virtue and fortitude cannot deflect bullets that are fired at us. Progress has to be done with weaponry instead of harmony.

I chose this passage because as we look back into history, civilization could have never started without pain or violence. The progress of any kingdom or state stemmed from war and oppression. For example, the U.S. couldn’t have expanded into the huge nation it has become today if not for violence. I agree that liberalism denies or conceals the relationship to pain, thus, making it a passive means of power. Pain is the forceful impassive way of dominating one another. Being moral and good natured will no longer protect us in our world today with the terrorism and war we are all faced with. Ultimately, Junger describes the amount of pain we can endure the determining factor in how strong a state can be.

Documentaries vs. Fictional Narratives

The difference between the films we have watched thus far is that the fictional ones touched base on the societal changes that Germany went through leading up to Nazism, and the non-fictional documentaries to display the propaganda of Nazism, and the horrors it caused to innocent people who were treated like animals who were herded and killed in concentration camps.

The film M portrayed the horrible crimes of pedophilia and the murders of children that highlighted mental disabilities that were apparent in society. The film The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari brought up themes of how society was in a state of chaos and anarchy. This was a metaphor for needed change in government and politics. The Blue Angel symbolized the wild nature of the younger generations, and how they are transitioning into a life of dance, libations, and fornication. This represented the uprising of society’s new tendencies and beliefs in politics which emplaced new values and morals of the young minds in Germany. This was the cultural change that led to Nazism.

The film Triumph of the Will referenced the notion of the will to power. It was a very effective piece of propaganda that influenced Germany’s people to feel a strong sense of patriotism and the new power under Germany’s new set of government. This was a film to make Germans feel the need of retribution from an embarrassing loss in World War I to becoming the biggest superpower in the world. Germans felt invincible and were fearless through imagery like this. This gave people hope of empowerment again.

The film Night and Fog, which was actually made by a Frenchman, depicted the reality of the Holocaust. It showed the unhealthy living conditions, the torture chambers, the treatment of Jews, etc. It showed how inhumane the Nazis were and how they contained people in camps for mass genocide. This film shows the truth of the Nazi campaign against the Jews whom they blamed for the fall of their economy and loss of the war. This was unjust and considered a hate crime to humanity.

Ultimately, the previous films we watched spoke of the cultural, societal, and governmental change leading up to Hitler’s reign and his Nazis. They were fictitious reenactments of social and political issues in Germany. The Triumph of the Will and Night and Fog were documentaries that showed actual footage of events that were happening in Germany. These films instilled fear into the harsh reality of Nazism. They were used as propaganda to manipulate the masses which later led to World War II and the Holocaust. 

Hitler's Final Speech at his Trial for Treason, March 27, 1924

Passage:

The army that we are building grows from day to day, from hour to hour. Right at this moment I have the proud hope that once the hour strikes these wild troops will merge into battalions, battalions into regiments, regiments into divisions. I have hopes that the old cockade will be lifted from the dirt, that the old colors will be unfurled to flutter again, that expiation will come before the tribunal of God. Then from our bones and from our graves will speak the voice of the only tribunal which has the right to sit in justice over us.

Interpretation:

Hitler is stating in his defense that he’s building an armed force so strong that it will be the return of prospering vitality in Germany again. He claims to turn Germany around from a weak dying state run by a Republic into a sovereign state run by a new more effective form of government which later became Nazism. Hitler suggests that the army he will create will be one of the strongest ever, and they will fight to make what Germany should have been if they hadn’t lost the First World War. The Republic was a failure, but he believes he can be the difference for Germany and its future.