John Heartfield, Adolf, the Superman, swallows gold and speaks junk/rubbish/nonsenseThis was a cover in 1932 of the Arbeiter Illustrierte Zeitung. The KPD sought to make use of a mass media--the illustrated newspaper--that had a very large following among the working class.
Please post your 6 C's for "The Art Scab" here.
24 comments:
John Heartfield, Adolf, the Superman, swallows gold and speaks junk/rubbish/nonsense
* CONTENT: The main idea is to show that Adolf Hitler isn't a good leader. This painting shows that he is useless, and wastes money. Details are important, since we see gold coins stacked up his throat, which shows that he "eats up" money, and doesn't put it to good use.
* CITATION: John Heartfield is the author. This painting was created in 1932, and was the cover of the Arbeiter Illustrierte Zeitung
* CONTEXT: This painting was created right before Hitler took charge, and Germany became Nazi Germany. So in the context, this painting is trying to show how Hitler is a bad leader, and won't help Germany's future.
* CONNECTIONS: I would link this source and painting to World War II, as well as the holocaust. Both prove that Hitler was a very bad leader, and initiated the mass extermination of innocent people.
* COMMUNICATION: The point of view for this painting is against Hitler. It is directed towards the working class, in hope of eliminating the Nazi Party rule. However, the Nazi Party did win and Hitler became the leader of Germany. The source is reliable even though it is a biased painting.
* CONCLUSIONS: This primary source shows that people did try to stop Hitler's power and control over Germany. This painting contributes to our understanding of history we know that World War II and the holocaust occurred under Hitler's control over Germany.
Content: The main idea of the image is to show that Adolf Hitler believes that is he giving good ideas, but they are really bad and harmful.
Citation: Its creator is John Heartfield. It was created in 1932.
Context: When this image was being created, the republic of Germany was ending and the Nazis party was gaining power as was Adolf Hitler. The country was politically in turmoil as the the German people wanted to improve their economic situations.
Connections: I can connect this source to other things I know because this time period influenced how the rest of the world right before and during WWII because it was one of the causes of the war.
Communication: The point of view of this image is from those who are negatively affected by Hitler or from those who saw what kind of monster he was. So in a way, this painting is bias.
Conclusions: This primary source contributes to our understanding of history because it provides a valuable evidence of the feelings towards Adolf Hitler by certain groups of people. Hitler was opposed in the media, though we know now that at that time opposition was futile by the people as Hitler killed millions and started WWII.
CONTENT: THe main idea in this is that Hitler didnt lead very well and wasted all the money, as he has all the coins stacked up in the picture.
CITATION: The authour is John Heartfiled an it was created in 1932
CONTEXT: THe time of this was when the Nazi's were uprising in Germany, and HItler was trying to take over.
CONNECTIONS:I can link this source to toher things that i KNOw because this time not only affected Germany, but affected the rest of the world as well and to the war
COMMUNICATION: THe point of this is to show that Hitler would not be a good leader.It has a negative view towards him and it makes it bias because of that
CONCLUSIONS: This souce contributes to our understanding of history in that people were against HItler and his ways. Everyone was against Hitler because of the mass murders he committed
Shannan's Post-
Content: The main idea is that Hitler is not a valuable leader because his words are ridiculous junk. I see coins going down his throat, and I also see them in his belly. I see Hitler with a very aggressive look on his face. Hitler is depicted as hateful with his facial expression and the swastika on his chest. The artist uses the symbol to label him as a member of the Nazi Party. I see it written in German at the bottom of the picture that Hitler “swallows gold and speaks junk.” The picture is in black and white to represent the time period of Nazi Germany. This picture shows irony in that it(without the coins and X-ray like portion of the image) could be used to rally supporters, but the X-ray portion reveals Hitler’s inner evil (and possibly his plan to end capitalism or take the country’s money?)I am not sure.)
Citation: The author is John Heartfield. The picture was created in 1932and it was used as a cover spread for the German newspaper Arbeiter Illustrierte Zeitung. (right?)
Context: Hitler had gained an increasing authority in Germany during the 1930s. In 1932 the number of his supporters sky rocketed from 170,000 to 1,378,000. During the time that this picture was used to illustrate the newspaper, Germans had turned to Hitler for political and economic stability. Despite all of Hitler’s appeal and popularity, Heartfield shows his negative view of the Nazi leader. The picture was meant to go against the popular belief that Hitler was a successful leader.
Connections: The aggressive portrayal of Hitler in this picture connects to his radical belief that the Jews were responsible for the political instability leading to the countries humiliation. The picture ties to Hitler’s enthusiasm and powerful appeal but shows an alternate view. The angry face that Hitler has might coincide with his hate for Jews or his disappointment of being neglected twice by Hindenburg to be the new chancellor of the Weimar Republic.
Communication: Heartfield shows his discontentment with Hitler as he reveals the Nazi with a hidden agenda (seen with the x-ray like image) for Germany. The artist’s “istoria” is that many people put faith in Hitler based on his outward appearance as a young, passionate, and enthusiastic leader. In his illustration, Heartfield shows that he had an opinion of Hitler that was not main stream. Heartfield shows his audience a negative glimpse of Hitler through his eyes.
Conclusions: The picture gives his audience a chance to see Hitler as having an alterior motive from a historical standpoint. I am not quite sure about which motive he focuses on, but the artist definitely lets others see Hitler as a scheming leader. My question is what kind of motive does Heartfield portray with the use of gold in his picture? I wonder what kind of illustrated magazine the picture was used for. Also, what political party ties does Heartfield have?
~Content~
This picture criticizes Hitler, obviously, in a negative manner. IT shows that he is greedy, and literally eats money, and all that loot stacks up in his stomach. He also has a swastika in place of his heart.
~Citation~
Author is John Heartfield, created in 1923
~Context~
Suppose this is a probable attack on Hitler, and is used as propaganda AGAINST hitler, trying to persuade the public that he is not fit at all to be a modest, trustworthy leader.
~Connections~
This could be an ironic connection to the stereotype of Jewish people love money, and Hitler in the photo literally ingesting and being made of money. Could Hitler be "eating" the Jews of their money?
~Communication~
This image is against Hitler, and tries to thwart Nazi power.
~Conclusion~
This image shows that there were previous attempts, and opposition against Hitler.
I believe that the most important C here is "connection." An image could just be a collage of colors and shapes. It is how we "connect" these colors and forms into something that we can relate to, sympathize to, or understand. Understanding what the image is suppose to do, and in this case, portray Hitler negatively, is essential to "connect" the person of Hitler, to the imagery of the money shown.
Content:The main idea in this picture is to show that Hitler is not the man to lead Germany. Multiple elements in the picture show this, the money he has eaten, the fact that his weapon belt is not transparent and that his mouth is open. The gold he swallowed could represent the fact that he will take the people's money and not put it to good use. His suit is x-rayed to show the money he has eaten but, not the entire suit has been cleared, the painter left the belt at an angle to mimic a slash or cancelling symbol. The slash shows that what hitler will do as a leader is bad. Finally the open mouth and full throat shows that he cannot talk sense, the money from the people is clogging his passage way so he can only talk nonsense. The picture is also intimidating because he looks mad.
-Citation: The author is Heartfield and it was made in 1932 for the Arbeiter Illustrierte Zeitung.
-Context: 1932 in Germany was the time when Hitler was running to lead the country. This was propaganda against Hitler to sway the German people away from his vote.
-Connections: This is best linked to WWII and Hitler's evil reign over many parts of Europe. All he destroyed and left behind for his people make this poster make sense, he was a horrible person to lead a country and the world paid for it.
-Communication: This is obviously propaganda against Adolf Hitler and it is biased against him. The illustration is speaking to the Germans able to vote, in hopes to prevent Hitler and his Nazi party from gaining power in Germany. I think the source is quite reliable at getting its point across even though its message failed and Hitler gained power anyway.
-Conclusions:The image shows that there was resistance to Hitler gaining power in Germany. This contributed to our understanding of history because we know Hitler was the driving force in WWII and he started the Holocaust.
content: Hitler is not exactly poor because during his campaign,he is probably being paid a lot to represent the Nazis. He is also using up people's money that support him to say things that do not make sense and are ridiculous. It hits the working class who are probably suffering economically right now, and they realize they don't want to waste their money on someone who cannot help their country.
Citation: John Heartfield in 1922. This was done during Hitler's campaign for Fuhrer.
Context: Right now in the world, the Great Depression has left the economy in ruins and people are unemployed. They are looking for a new leader to help Germany and John does not agree with Hitler's perspective.
Connections: This is linked to how propaganda targets certain people to get a reaction out of them. This portrays pathos well as it definitely focuses on those suffering from the economic situation in Germany right now. Also focuses on history as it represents money, and the Great Depression has definitely got people looking for financial aid.
Communication: This is biased against Hitler. It is to vote against him and chose someone else, and probably supports Hindneberg's government. It is only reliable depending on what you believe in and whether or not you believe Hitler. It might be more reliable to the working class who has money struggles and they might trust it more. However, because it is targeting a certain group, it is hard to trust.
Conclusions: It shows us again how art is used as rhetoric to get a point across. It also comments on the turmoil of the time, and questions who you can trust.
Content: The main idea is to show that Hitler is full of it. He takes much and offers little.
Citation: Author John Heatfield, 1932.
Context: This was a social commentary on Hitler who was rapidly gaining power in Germany.
Connections: These things would link nicely to the second world war and all its ramifications. Or politics at the time.
Communication: It seems to be communicating that Hitler is not so good. Judging by the title and how evil Hitler and the painting looks, I would say Heartfield is not a fan.
Conclusions: Although Hitler was a smooth talker some people saw him as a jerk. Just like any political leader ever, everyone can't be a fan. It is interesting that this painting keys in on what made Hitler so effective so early in his career.
I personally feel that this is one of the best pieces of political art I've seen. I really really like this one.
Content: the obvious idea behind this is that this is portraying Hitler as having a heart of a swastika. The money in his throat suggests that he is money hungry and thats how he feeds.
Citation: John Heartfield is the author. This painting was created in 1932, and was the cover of the Arbeiter Illustrierte Zeitung
Context: This was propaganda against Hitler coming into power. It suggests that hitler is obviously a bad leader and that he shouldnt come to power.
Connections: This links perfectly to the time of Hitlers reign. The various props in the paintin link directly to Hitler. The swastika, etc
Communication: This comminucates to all classes or society, but specifically the lower class. The way that Hitler will apparantly horde money appeals to the lower class.
Conclusions: Now we all know that the people didnt try and stop Hitler but this painting is beautiful... I really enjoy it.
Content: The idea of the picture is to show that Hilter is connected with the bourgeoise even though he claims to speak for the proliterariat. In swallowing the gold of the bougeouise, he speaks junk/rubbish/ and nonsense addressed to the proliteriat.
Citation: The creator of this picture is John Heartfield and was created in 1932.
Context: This art piece was created before Hitler's rise to power as a warning against his dangerousness.
Connections: In pre-WWII Germany, the struggles between the workers and the owners in Marxist terms led to Hitler's rise to power because of the terrible condition Germany was left in post-WWI.
Communication: The message being sent is one which is against Hitler 's rise to power.
Conclusions: The painting depicts Hitler's undesirableness as a leader because he is lying to the workers by staying connected to the owners.
Content: The message of this painting is that Adolf Hitler was a heartless, selfish, corrupt leader who focused on personal gain. Details such as the stack of gold in his empty chest, the absence of a heart, and its gloomy aspects relate this message. The painting also tries to communicate his cold, uncaring nature and selfishness because he is wearing a belt across this chest which protects the savings inside him in a sense. His face also sends a message to the viewer because it’s distorted in such a way that suggests he is insane.
Citation: This painting is by author John Heartfield. It was made in 1932 for the Arbeiter Illustrierte Zeitung
-Context: This painting is a form of propaganda that aims at dissuading the public from voting for Hitler during the reelection. This was during the era in which Germany was experiencing the Great Depression, so tremendous economic and political turmoil. Hitler was arising in power as was the Nazi Party. Although by this time in 1932 Hitler would have captured the support of the people with promises of reform, the few such as Heartfield saw past his charm.
Connections: Hitler’s true self is reflected in this painting in various ways. The absence of his heart reflects his cruelty, his ordering of the extermination of Jews during the Holocaust. He was famous for giving passionate speeches that moved his audience and this painting reveals the insanity of his words. Lastly, the gold coins inside him connect to the way he ran the Nazi Party during the Holocaust, the policy he had where he ordered Nazis to take the valuables of Jews, even when they were being sent to concentration camps
Communication: Heartfield is communicating his perception of Hitler as a cruel man with evil intentions. This painting portrays his views of the Natzi’s greed, as he seems to believe they “hide” their profits from others. It communicates his opinion that the public seems to be deceived by the real image of Hitler, as this painting is contradictory of the passionate, hopeful, young Hitler the public sees. Not so much a warning, this painting is more mocking the public for the vision they have of Hitler compared to the more realistic one in which he is trying to portray.
Conclusions: This image gives the public an opportunity to see through another perspective of Hitler from an alternative view, because Hitler was glorified in such a way at the time that such a painting as this one would have been shocking to the people. It contributes to the history of WWII, during which Hitler was responsible for the deaths of millions and the Holocaust. This painting reflects the catastrophes he caused and the way he is now perceived in history. I think this image portrays really well the person Hitler was, and the absence of his heart was the most dramatic, truthful aspect of the painting.
Content: The content of this picture characterizes Hitler as a hateful and greedy fellow. His facial expression alone gives off an eery and spiteful look, as if he loathed everything and everyone around him. He has his mouth open, yet only rubbish comes out (from the title). The coins he's ingested represent the money he's taken for his own personal gain. He says he's doing it for the good of the working class, yet this picture speaks otherwise. The swastika in replace of the heart is a key symbol of his support of the Nazi Party and the havok that follows his/their reign.
Citation: It was created by John Heartfield and was the cover of Arbeiter Illustrierte Zeitung in 1932.
Context: This painting was shown during the period of Germany right before the Hitler and Nazi take over. This painting is/was probably being used as propaganda to rally against electing Hitler as the leader of Germany and why he shouldn't come to power.
Connections: This painting is referring to the events that occurred during the period of Nazi Germany and Hitler. It connects with the idea of Hitler's hate for Jews and others of non-Aryan race, which may be the reason of the hateful look on his face. The picture demonstrates Hitler's enthusiasm and at the same time illustrates his insanity.
Communication: The painting provides a negative point of view of Hitler. Though many supported him at first because of his enthusiasm and charisma, they began to see how he truly was. Heartfield's painting shows the negative and disgusting side of Hitler; this is his opinion so it is biaseed, but his opinion is shared by many.
Conclusion: This source identifies that Hitler was a scheming man with an evil agenda. It generalizes what Hitler was and what he represented and how his actions led to WWII and the Holocaust. This painting depicts the true nature of Hitler, though many people at the time didn't recognize it; nor did they know what was to come under his rule. I think this painting adequately represents who Hitler was. I agree with Sacha's conclusion, that it questions who you can trust.
content: the idea that is attempted to be depicted through this painting is Hitler's good leadership and bad leadership at the same time. Though he is despised, he did a good job at leading people to do what he wants. He used his leadership for bad things; however, at the same time he was a wasteful leader in that sense that he is swallowing gold, he takes all the money in and doesn't use it well. He also speaks things that are useless and petty.
citation: John Heartfield is the author in 1932.
context: This time period was when the Nazi reign as well as Hitler's was growing. However, it's also showing his ineffectivity as a leader.
connections: This painting is linked to World War II and the beginning of the reign of the Nazis/holocaust.
communication: this painting is directed against Hitler, and biased against him. It places more emphasis on the bad hes done, but not in the sense that he initiated a mass extermination occurance but the fact that he "ate" the Jews's (and everyones) money since they stil weren't fully aware of the damage he would do. Though ineffective in its attempt to end Hitler's escalating power, this painting reflected the damage he could cause.
conclusion: since Hitler was so adored when this image came out, it brought out a contrasting view to what was commonly believed of him. The lack of his heart and replacement of it with money reflects his heartlessness and greedy nature.
Content: In general, the publication “The Art Scab” essentially demoralizes the true meaning of art. The lower class, in this case the proletariat, are arguing that art no longer had meaning and value because the rich folk, in this case the bourgeoisie, choose to display their “art” in a manner which makes the art more valuable than the work and labor put into the creation of it. The proletariat and their artistic vision cannot help but feel suppressed by the mighty overruling power of the bourgeoisie who choose to put words in their mouths and drain the true meaning of art away from the art itself. In relation to this picture, as a means to mock the bourgeoisie, they defiled the image of a then-considered hero and called it art – which according to the rich upper class, would oppose this decision. The transformation of Hitler into an X-ray figure symbolizes the shallowness and one-sidedness of his character, therefore mirroring the emotions of the proletariat.
Citation: The author is John Heartfield and his subject is Adolf Hitler with an X-ray image superimposed onto his chest. It was created in 1932 and is titled “Adolf, the Superman, swallows gold and speaks junk/rubbish/nonsense”
Context: Essentially, suppression of the lower working class and tyranny of the Socialist/Communist movement. Art is detached from the artist; value is detached from the art. There is an open struggle between capital and labor which takes place in the domain of this disgraceful culture and art. There is a workers’ struggle to oppose culture and art.
Connections: This picture epitomized the World War II, symbolizing hatred, mistrust, and illusions. Hitler, who was seen as a hero to some, is “uncovered” in this portrait, exposing his true self to the community. World War II and the Holocaust was brought about by radical thinkers who chose to fight the governmental power in hopes of change. Change was bought about, but not without its consequences.
Communication: The artist chose to depict Hitler in the negative light, which is in a sense biased against Hitler. The artist’s views towards Hitler are those of negativity, hatred, and disgust, as apparent in this defiled work he considers art.
Conclusions: In a sense, this source represents everything that is brought about through war – the idea that during times of war, hatred becomes affluent, one’s true colors show, and the scheming agenda of one’s political leaders surfaces.
amtbwong = alex wong
amtbwong = alex wong
CONTENT: The main idea is that Hitler is wasteful with the money he uses for his benefit and speaks worthless things to his followers.
CITATION: Authored by John Heartfield in 1932.
CONTEXT: This was made in the early days of Hitler's reign. Possibly in this time, Hitler's influence was still growing and there were still skeptics and non-supporters toward him whose political views against him still had some influence.
CONNECTIONS: Can be linked to pre-World War II, the rise of Hitler/Communism and the Nazis.
COMMUNICATION: The painting is very anti-Hitler, anti-Communism. The audience includes readers of the Arbeiter Illustrierte Zeitung who share anti-Hitler ideas or are interested in the events at the time.
CONCLUSIONS: Hitler looks like he has lung cancer.. Which can be tied to how a lot of WWII people suffered from it with all of the free cigarettes that were handed out during the war. This source is a good depiction of how things were in the 1930s, politically and artistically. It only focuses on Hitler, though, which is a clearly biased representation of the author's views about him. It doesn't show anything about society in general.
Alex Wong:
This is in response to dana's comment.
1) Does this image really attack Communism? I think that the Hitler and his leadership.
2) The conclusion is a bit of a stretch. I don't see the lung cancer in Hitler. I think that the point of showing Hitler's lungs in the image is to show that he swallows gold from the bougeoise.
Alex says:
opps
1) "I think that the Hitler and his leadership." = I think that the image only attacks Hitler and his leadership.
Content: The art depicted in this painting is to demonstrate a corrupt and tyrannical leader. The painting is showing Adolf's bad control on money.
Citation: This piece is done by John Hartfield in 1932. It was used as the cover of Arbeiter Illustrierte Zeitung.
Context: At this time in history, Germany's political regime was at stake, and Hitler was unfortunately rising to power.
Connections: I would connect this piece of art to articles of Hitler's abuse of power and money.
Communication: Heartfield is trying to convey the message of how Hitler's corrupt power will destroy Germany if he comes into power.
Conclusions:This piece of art gives us an insight into German history at the time of Hitler's uprising. It shows the creative expressionism that was demonstrated back then.
They want to show that Adolf Hitler is not a man of his word. They are trying to slander against him, by showing him as a split personality almost.
John Heartfield, 1932, on the cover of Arbeiter Illustrierte Zeitung.
The inspiration for this panting is WWII and the fall out the came from Hitlers actions.
He is trying to convey that Hitler's Nazi Germany was a harmful thing rather than a helper. He was trying to tell the people that empowering Hitler would lead to their downfall.
The painter fells stongly about Hitler being in power, but also it shows an over all idea of Hitler's ideas.
Content: The main idea is to show that Hitler is not suitable to lead Germany. He is portrayed as a corrupted leader, who willingly takes the riches of the people but does not give back.
Citation: It was created in 1932 by John Heartfield and was on the cover of Arbeiter Illustrierte Zeitung.
Context: During the time this was created, there was the 1932 election in Germany. This piece was used to rally support against Hitler and the Nazi party, which was becoming increasingly powerful and influential.
Connections: The reason that Hitler was put into power was because he offered solutions to Germany’s social and economic problems caused by the humiliations and reparations of WWI. It is ironic because Hitler did more harm than good for the German people with his abuse of power and money.
Communications: The point of view is against Hitler because it portrays him in a negative light. It is reliable because it shows another perspective on Hitler’s leadership.
Conclusion: It shows that not everyone was supportive of Hitler. There were individuals who were against him. It also leads people to question, if there was more resistance and propaganda against Hitler, would things have turned out differently?
CONTENT: Heartfield and Grosz believe that mankind places a "surplus value" on art. When workers are the ones who provide the necessities of standard living such as food, shelter, etc., the artists are valued more so even though they create unnecessary luxuries. The article states it perfectly when it says "The bourgcoisie places a culture and its art higher than the life of the working class." And ultimately the writers believe that "Egocentric individualism went hand-in-hand with the development of capital and must fall with it."
CITATION: "The Art Scab" is written by John Heartfield and George Grosz in 1920.
CONTEXT: At this time we see that Germany had failed as a democratic republic. The economy had fallen and the workers faced troubled times. This system of economic strategy had not worked and so frustration and anger brewed in the hearts of the lower class society.
CONNECTIONS: The article makes a powerful statement: "The deification of the artist is the equivalent to self-deification." Deification from dictionary.com means the act of making into a god. The Socialists have such a radical view of artists that they believe artists are making themselves into gods.
COMMUNICATION: This article may not be the most credible source because it is written by the most radical of socialists who have only a one-sided opinion. They are completely against capitalism and will not look at the positive aspects of it. And if capitalism was as self-destructive as the writers claim it to be, then it could not have survived all the way to the 21st century.
CONCLUSION: This primary source helps us understand exactly the animosity the socialists contain against the capitalistic community. We understand their radical point of views on the uselessness of capitalism and democracy. And we understand to what extent they are willing to bring the world into a communistic arena.
CONTENT: This painting shows that Hitler is not a good leader because he is useless and has no concept of money. Because Hitler does not understand the concept of money, he wastes it and misuses it, and because of his mistreatment of money, he has ultimately mismanaged funds leaving his followers in ruins. Thus the painting shows that Hitler is a poor leader because he cannot even manage his own money.
CITATION: John Heartfield, 1932, cover of Arbeiter Illustriete Zeitung
CONTEXT: This painting was created prior to Hitler's takeover of Germany, and is meant to show that Hitler is not Germany's solution for its fiscal problems.
CONNECTIONS: This painting has connections to World War II, German history, the Holocaust, and dictatorships of the 20th century. Connections to this painting show the negative impact that Hitler had on the world.
COMMUNICATION: This painting is anti-Hitler and is directed towards the entire German populace.
CONCLUSIONS: Overall, this painting functions to show that Hitler is a bad leader and is not the right solution for Germany's problems.
Post a Comment