Download - German Historical Institute London

nouncements were put into practice, and to what extent the high
expectations were fulfilled.
In his introductory chapter London presents popular misconceptions
about theatre under the Nazis and stresses that we should neither
condemn all plays performed nor assert ‘that the theatre
remained untainted by Nazi propaganda’ (p. 3). Nationalistic and
reactionary attitudes within the theatre world had a long tradition in
Germany, going back to the turn of the century. Nationalist drama,
for example, did not suddenly emerge in 1933. The year of the Nazi
take-over, however, marks the starting point of an unprecedented
repressive policy which concerned every aspect of theatrical life.
Nazi policy, however, was far from consistent and rivalries between
the Rosenberg circle and Goebbels, for example, are ample proof of
the relative diversity. This also holds true for the question of censorship.
Reichsdramaturg Schlösser relied heavily on self-censorship in
acts of ‘vorauseilendem Gehorsam’ (pre-emptive obedience), and
improvization was extensive. Concerning the immediate effects of
censorship, however, London’s claim that by 1934 ‘one of the richest
periods of modern German drama had virtually disappeared’ (p. 12)
is not entirely correct. Although the number of plays in the repertoire
was considerably reduced by comparison with the Weimar period,
not all of these plays had been outstanding pieces. Throughout the
Weimar years most provincial theatres presented a highly conservative
programme, and many of these stages did not put on their first
Brecht play until the 1960s. Plays affected by the cuts were mainly the
highly successful comedies by Arnold/Bach, Blumenthal/Kadelburg,
and Bernauer/Österreicher and the operettas by Kálman,
Abraham, and �all. Apart from a few obvious cases, however, there
were many inconsistencies regarding authors and works favoured or
condemned. ‘Weimar’ was the common enemy but Nazi ideologists
never reached agreement about the works with which they wanted to
replace the pieces of this ‘degenerate’ era. It is interesting to note,
however, that the introduction of new forms, like the ‘Thing’ plays or
modern dance, had been stopped by 1935–6, and gave way to a
restoration of established styles. Apart from the first season after the
take-over, in which overtly propagandistic plays had an important
share in the programmes, light entertainment dominated German
stages throughout the period. Stressing continuing effects, London
correctly points out that many characteristic features of theatre
87
Theatre under the Nazis