Leni Riefenstahl died at the age of 101

Remove all ads!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/986528.stm

We all are acquainted with her work, particulary the notorious references in Star Wars and Indiana Jones. I think she's an interesting figure. Surely she's one of the most influentual directors of the 20th century, at would be named and acclaimed for it everywhere. If she would have used her brain and left Germany. But she stayed and made films with Gypsies as statists, which later vanished in camps after the film was finished.

Then, after the war, she went on and made reportages about Africans.

The fascinating thing about here, she was truly a genius, but worked for the devil. Yet her work lives on, inspiring film-makers around the world. A work tainted by the devil, yet indespensable from music-videos and tv-commercials. Can the work be separated from the person ? Shouldn't she be known for her influence, instead of just silently being used ?

 

Well, I at least will forever respect her genius, and respect her for it... not for anything she might have unwittingly done.

Or words to that effect.

 

Her photographic skills were outstanding. Perhaps as interesting as her films are her photographs about an african tribe and her late underwater photography. She went SCUBA diving for that at the age of 80.

A highly remarkable person who lived for photography. And indeed, when you see some sport or deodorant commercials and you wonder why they are so appealing, that's quite probably because they make use of techniques developed by her and used in the olympia film.

Whatever is said about Riefenstahl and the nazis, she certainly made aestethially outstanding films for them, but on the other hand, it was pretty hard after a while to refuse an invitation to work for them.
It is certainly easier to judge about that in hindsight, especially when growing up free of fear in a today's democracy.

 

Her genius will live forever, but unfortunately so will the fruits of how that genius was used. Whether or not she wanted to become known as a propagandist, that's a big part of what she was. She accepted that price when she chose to stay in Hitler's Germany.

 

I think it is very dangerous to be overly judgemental about people who worked in Germany during the reign of the Nazis. Making films of events is not a crime, no matter how distasteful the event may be (I'm talkiung rallies, sports here.) She did what she was told to do, and what she did required no conscious (that is to say, she made films, she didn't shove people into furnaces). We have NO IDEA what was going on in her head.
Now, no one here, as yet, has been judgemental of her, but I know that there are people out there who believe she was evil. I just figure that since none of her actions were directly evil (like killing or raping) we should not judge her morality.
Another sad thing to mention is that out of horrible things good things can come -- her film techniqes were mentioned, but what about some medical advances that have been made? Some of them were the direct result of heinous experiments performed on Jews, Gypsies, POWs and others by both the Germans and the Japanese. The one I remember seeing on a show was some blood preservation techniques that were developed by the Japanese -- they got some data by placing 2 POWs in sub zero water and recording data while the men died. We benefit from their work, hard as it is to admit it.

 

My God. A "let's look on the bright side of the Holocaust!" post.

Speechless.

 

Sprite you misunderstood me -- I'm not anywhere near saying that what was done is in any way excusable. I'm saying that a lot of our modern technologies spring from what was done. That's distasteful as hell, but it's a fact. Nor am I saying we should be thankful to the psychos who did these heinous things.

I'm also saying that there is no evidence that Leni did anything heinous or violent. She shot films of non-violent events (ie -- to my knowledge, she did not take footage of people being killed and tortured)

 

I've seen an interview with her, and some shots from the stuff she made of various sort.
She was genious, a glorious actor and a charming woman. One thing is who you work for, another is what you do. As far as she said (be it true or false), she had read mein kampf and written small notes in the margin of the book of what she labeled good and bad in hitler's politics. He is said to have been amused by it when he saw, although no changes were really made on anything from it.

I find it far more wise to judge a person from his/her actions than from his/her friends.

 

I think more of a problem is that she never made (at least to my knowledge) a clear and unambiguous statement condemming the crimes perpetrated by the Nazis. In most of her statements she does not distance herself morally from Hitler's regime but rather claims ignorance and irrelevence of politics in moviemaking.

That said her films are technically superb. Perhaps even more importantly the films ( especially the triuph of will) remain priceless historical documents. If nothing else, they can help us understand some of the allure of Nazism, which at least partially accounts for its spread and relative popularity, especially while keeping in mind the situation of Germany at the time.

 

She never made this statement because she had nothing to do with the decisions about these subject. She may did not like it but she had a goal to continue producing films and there was where her involvement with Nazis started and ended.
She was a great filmmaker i would say an impressive one since her work was aiming at big first impression. She gave a lot to film making and photography. And she must be remembered for that

 

I'm not suggesting that she should apologise for nazi politics - she had little influence on them (although the influence of propaganda can easily be overlooked). However, i cannot believe that an artist can claim no moral responsability for the impact of their art (god knows scientists are not allowed to get away with that, so why should artists?)

A clear statement on her attitudes towards her subject matter might make the viewing of her films a less ambiguous experience.

I do not deny, however that, regardless of subject, the two films of Leni Riefensthal that I have seen (triumph of will and the one about the olympics) are very good, technically superb and very effective. This is a part of the problem.

 

now there's a thing I'm missing, please elaborate.

 

Sorry that's probably just my personal bitterness - slightly tired of the various restrictions posed on scientists, based on moral and ethical grounds. Now, in some cases I quite agree (demonstartion dissections used in education, testing of comsetics on animals). However, the other extreme being more prevalent - genetically modified crops constantly on the verge of being banned for no clear reasons, stem cell research severly hampered by histerical campaigning etc.

Basically the point being that if scientists try and hide behind 'science for science's sake' excuse they would get crucified.