Friday, October 28, 2011

Coulter- Good, Bent, and Homosexual oppression in Nazi Germany

Like much of the policies that found a foothold in Nazi Germany the oppression of homosexuals, though started earlier, is broadcast under the guise of the betterment of the society and the national body. The articles we read for this week detailed the original ideologies during the Weimar Republic that were established for under moral obligations and social acceptability clauses. When the Nazi party took control these established laws under Summery 175 were expanded to a much greater degree that maintained the established objections to homosexual life but expanded it's reasoning with a more scientific rational. This same method was used by the Nazi party in their persecution of the disabled, Romani, and mentally handicapped peoples leading to the euthanizing of several thousands. The rational for these policies is clearly flawed by our understanding of homosexual life today; however, the rational presented to the public during the time "sounds" like a well thought out rational meant to preserve the status quo. This rational was relayed in the article by Stefan Micheler as, "'Homosexuality must be regarded as a threat to the Volk community, since homosexuals exhibit a tendency to form cliques, seduce the young, and, above all, undermine the natural will to life by propagating an aversion to marriage and the family.'" To an uneducated person during the 1930s being relayed this sentiment about a society that they knew nothing about, and coming from a christian background, the argument must have been quite compelling.
This type of compulsion is showcased in the play by C. P. Taylor, "Good," where the well meaning professor gets swept away by the Nazi propaganda as it slowly builds momentum. To John Halder his intent is to push the Nazi party towards humanity; however, as he dons his uniform and progress's down the path of the holocaust he feels himself no different from any normal man. As Halder himself says, "I do everything other people do-but I don't feel it's real." This type of lapse from reality is exactly what the Nazi party wanted him to feel, what the wanted the whole country to feel. The idea's that they fostered sounded logical while they hung in the air as little more than words, just so long as you don't pull back the curtain and see the reality of what is really being done.
This reality was well shown in the film version of "Bent." I thought this movie did a great job of pulling back the curtain on the life and world that the homosexual of Nazi Germany went through. Plus it had Mick Jagger singing in drag which was a laugh all on its own. While the roles of victim and the victimized were clear within the film, I couldn't help but feel that Halder from "Good" comprised both of these roles. Much as the common people of Germany who were dragged along with a nationalist pride were the victims of one of histories greatest propaganda machines, but at the same time were the victimizers of the social classes being destroyed.

1 comment:

  1. Otto: Comment on Coulter Blog Good, Bent, and Homosexual Oppression in Nazi Germany

    Although I agree that, to some extent, Halder from C.P. Taylor’s Good could be considered a victim of his time, I also think that Max from Bent(1997) played for both teams as well. Max lied to the SS about his sexuality, played a part in killing his partner, as well as wore a yellow star instead of a triangle. He partially submitted to the SS officers. Although he did not outrightly say that he was a “good” person, not a jew or homosexual or other, but he did not play who he really was, and this caused both emotional tears for him, his new friend, and was a beginning of what the SS and Nazi people wanted. A world with no homosexuals. Obviously what happened to Max was wrong, but he wronged others as well; no one is perfect. Victims are also easily victimizers when it comes to saving someone else, like Max in the case of his lover, and victimizers can become victims when they are forced by a higher power, even though they consciously and morally know they are doing wrong.

    ReplyDelete