Rogue 9 wrote:Hitler was enthralled with his propaganda tools. Wagner was an all-German composer who wrote inspiring martial music, and was therefore useful to the militaristic and nationalistic Nazi regime, Christian or no.
I realize that, but I find strange the fact that Hitler himself loved Wagner and yet Wagner wasn't even a Christian. That's what I find so odd.
He was also an anti-Semite as I recall, though that could have been a Hitlerian projection onto him as part of the propaganda. I'll have to check that this evening when I get back to my room where I have my reference books for this sort of thing.
Nope. He was definitely an anti-Semite.
(Note that the Nazi party's fascination with Wagner isn't mentioned in the article, even though said fascination is ongoing; the boards of the American National Socialist Party have three entire forums dedicated to aspects of his music. )
Also, when I was reading the article, I found it odd that the author used Wagner and Schubert since Wagner was an anti-Semite and Schubert was a child molestor. Perhaps she really was counting on the readers' ignorance of history and classical music to make her point. (shrugs)
Who's the more foolish, the fool or the fool who follows him? -Obi-Wan Kenobi
"In the unlikely event that someone comes here, hates everything we stand for, and then donates a big chunk of money anyway, I will thank him for his stupidity." -Darth Wong, Lord of the Sith
Rogue 9 wrote:Hitler was enthralled with his propaganda tools. Wagner was an all-German composer who wrote inspiring martial music, and was therefore useful to the militaristic and nationalistic Nazi regime, Christian or no.
I realize that, but I find strange the fact that Hitler himself loved Wagner and yet Wagner wasn't even a Christian. That's what I find so odd.
I love Tchaikovsky's work despite his position on the Atheist Composer's Hall of Fame here and I'm Christian. Religion or lack thereof doesn't affect musical taste much unless you're so deeply into it that religion (or devotion to a secular cause, as the case may be) is controlling you absolutely. To Hitler, religion was a tool to motivate the masses just like everything else. (Note: I'm not claiming that he himself didn't really believe in religion; I don't know one way or the other. All I'm saying is that whether he believed it or not, he still used it to his own ends.)
He was also an anti-Semite as I recall, though that could have been a Hitlerian projection onto him as part of the propaganda. I'll have to check that this evening when I get back to my room where I have my reference books for this sort of thing.
Nope. He was definitely an anti-Semite.
So I confirmed a short while ago.
(Note that the Nazi party's fascination with Wagner isn't mentioned in the article, even though said fascination is ongoing; the boards of the American National Socialist Party have three entire forums dedicated to aspects of his music. )
Also, when I was reading the article, I found it odd that the author used Wagner and Schubert since Wagner was an anti-Semite and Schubert was a child molestor. Perhaps she really was counting on the readers' ignorance of history and classical music to make her point. (shrugs)
That's what I've been getting at. The article reads like a well-done propaganda piece. It presents the point of view that the author is advocating, avoids information that might be harmful to the image of the thing being advocated, and (the most important alarm bell) words it all in such a way as to lead to a particular conclusion while leaving the inattentive reader with the impression that he formed the conclusion himself. It's very cleverly done; if my brother hadn't done his term paper on propaganda methods and asked me to proofread it, I might have missed it.
)
