John Heartfield Essay, Research Paper

As the photographic medium flourished in early 20th Century Europe, artistic expression was the main concern. But, with the advent of the Dadaist movement, new forms of the photographic medium emerged. It was these innovative forms of photography that allowed not only the artistic merits, but also an alternate agenda of the artist to shine through. One of the most explicit examples of this form of photography was done by John Heartfield. Through his photomontages, which were merely a combination images on film in the darkroom, Heartfield was able to create great works of art and disperse not only his political agenda, but also the political agenda of many working class citizens of Central Europe, to a mass audience. Three of his politically motivated photomontages will be analyzed: How One Wages War With a Scissors, The Tiger Montage, and Adolf the Superman. First, in order to understand the basis of his political agenda and his artwork, it will be necessary to look at his life before getting involved in art and politics.

Born Helmut Herzfeld on June 19, 1891 in Berlin. His father was a writer and his mother was a laborer. His parents had met at meeting of strikers, at which his mother spoke. In 1895, his father published a poem denouncing the German government. Due to this poem, his father was sentenced to one-year imprisonment on charges of blasphemy. In order to avoid his imprisonment, the Herzfelds first fled to Switzerland, but were rejected. Finally, the family settled in the Austrian Alps. It was here that Herzfeld’s parents abandoned him and his brother, Wieland, without a trace. Helmut and his brother were then taken in and raised by the mayor of their Alpine village (Brecht, 10).

In Austria, Herzfeld apprenticed as a bookseller, but ultimately decided to become a painter. Attempting to follow his dream of becoming a painter, Herzfeld went to study at the Munich School of Design. It was during these years that he learned about the identity of his father. His father’s name was Franz Herzfeld, but published his works under the pseudonym “Franz Held.” He was a socialist playwright, author, and poet during the reign of Otto Von Bismarck. Throughout the rest of his career, Herzfeld would maintain the socialist convictions of his parents. In 1912, in memory of Franz Herzfeld’s 50th birthday, a publishing company printed a book that contained selected works by “Franz Held,” to which Helmut designed the book cover; one of his first commissioned works (Brecht, 10).

Thus began Herzfeld’s work in art and politics. He was revolutionary in both and therefore was fascinated by politically and artistically radical German publications, such as Sturm and Die Aktion. In the midst of his involvement in art and politics, WWI began. Herzfeld did not go war, although his brother served in the medical corps (Brecht, 11). In protest of the anti-British hate campaign of the German government, Helmut Herzfeld anglicized his name to John Heartfield. He attempted to have this name legitimized, but the German government refused (Danto, 918).

In 1915, Heartfield met another artist named George Grosz. Soon, Grosz became the only artist that mattered to Heartfield. His revolutionary artwork inspired Heartfield, and he destroyed all of the art that he had created up to that point. It was around this time that Heartfield’s brother, Wieland, purchased the copyright of an old school magazine in order to publish the anti-war drawings of Grosz. This purchase also gave Heartfield the opportunity to begin designing book-covers of revolutionary books.

It was also at this time that Heartfield got involved in the Dada movement along with Grosz. The movement was very appealing to people like Heartfield and Grosz, who wanted to express what they thought about the world. They wanted to stop the production of false sentiments and ideas that were being created by governmental institutions. But Heartfield and Grosz believed that the Dadaists discovered, but did not explore the potential of art as a revolutionary tool in the class struggle. Thus, they set out to achieve one of the greatest tasks of art- to make the invisible visible. Heartfield and Grosz did so by understanding the class struggle in society (Brecht, 11).

On December 31, 1918, Heartfield made the biggest political decision of his life, which would ultimately be reflected in his artwork. He joined the New Communist Party. His works became an embodiment of Communist policy. He became a master of Vladimir Lenin’s conception of art. He believed that art should provide revelations of the hidden truths in society. This is exactly what Heartfield did. His works began to foretell that which was going to happen. They served as a warning to prevent that, which, if not prevented, would occur. Through the juxtaposition of two known images, often-antithetical images, Heartfield gave rise to a new meaning, a revelation of an unseen truth.

In a sense, art creates a series of secondary realities. They are not actual reality but instead a representation of reality. In Heartfield’s photomontages, these constructed secondary realities reveal the true realities to which they are secondary (Brecht, 12). Institutions such as the government often jade these true realities. But, it is here that the power of Heartfield’s images shines through. His montages clearly showed the truth in a way that everyone could understand. It was a cynical satire of the times and Heartfield wanted everyone to know something that has begun to lose its place in today’s media, the truth. Thus, began the politically motivated photomontage career of John Heartfield.

In 1929, Heartfield’s brother, Wieland, published the photomontage, How One Wages War with a Hammer, in his school journal turned Socialist publication. The photomontage shows Heartfield cutting the head off of German Police Commissioner, Joseph Zorgiebel. Heartfield gives the viewer a terrifying stare, which almost turns comedic due to the bloodless beheading of Zorgiebel. One interesting aspect of this photomontage is that Heartfield includes himself in it. He holds a large pair of scissors and is pasted next to the overweight, balding Commissioner, whose head is attached by a mere thread. Zorgiebel face is reminiscent of the stoics of ancient Greece, as if he had been sedated for this procedure. Heartfield holds Zorgiebel’s in his fingers as if it were a piece of paper, which is actually what he is doing (Danto, 918).

Not only is there a juxtaposition of images in Heartfield’s photomontage, but there is also a juxtaposition of text with the finished image. The juxtaposition of the images is a very powerful tool to artists. With the addition of the text, the images become so much more powerful, because it allows the artist to tell the viewers the way that the artist had intended the work to be interpreted. The text that appeared with this work was: How One Wages War with a Scissors. This text has multiple meanings in relation to this photomontage. It shows the power of art as a tool of revolutionary politics. Also, it is a direct attack on the established German government. Another meaning may be a possibly a personal war that Heartfield wants to wage with Zorgiebel. But, most likely, Zorgiebel is only a representation of the government as a whole. It is the system on which Heartfield is waging war. He shows that learning that which is going on around you is the first step to waging war instead of rushing into the violent aspect of war.

How One Wages War with a Scissors is not only powerful because it exploits a member of the ruling class, but also because this image would have been impossible to create without the invention of the photomontage medium, which consequently, Heartfield said that he and Grosz created in 1919 (Danto, 918). A painting could have been done with a man cutting off the head of another man, but the focal point of such a work would be the violence and gore present. This photomontage is actually referential to the process of creation. It refers to process of cutting, arranging, and pasting specific photographic images in an extremely powerful juxtaposition. In the manifesto of the First International Dada Exhibition, Heartfield actually wrote: “Why paint anything, when photographs of things lie ready to hand and in great abundance? The task of art is no longer to represent the world but to rearrange it (Danto, 918).” Heartfield is only cutting up a photograph of Zorgiebel, not actually decapitating him. But, Heartfield is trying to convey the fact that these cut and rearranged photographs can become a tool for the rearrangement of the political order.

Let us now examine this photomontage in terms of the secondary realities, which it creates. The term secondary reality has foundations in philosophy. Coined by the philosopher, Nelson Goodman, images of objects contain secondary realities. For example, the primary reality of the word, cat, refers to a specific cat or all cats in general. The secondary reality of the word cat refers to all images of cats. Thus, it becomes difficult to determine, which reality is being referred to when one mentions a word like cat. Is it an actual cat or a just a picture of one? Humans have therefore created some kind of relationship between an image of an object and an actual object. It is this relationship between the primary and secondary realities of certain utilizes better photographic artist in history (Danto, 919). The photomontage contains a man having his head cut off by another man. This is not an image of violence, but a photomontage of certain photographic images pasted together. The photomontage refers to the primary reality, which it depicts, juxtaposing images and exploiting their secondary realities; create a relationship between the two images, which is often satirical and comedic. It seems that photomontages are the only way to exploit these secondary realities in such a manner. Thus, the photomontage becomes a visual allegory, holding all the power and truth of a literary allegory. In terms of the photomontage containing the cruel Commissioner Zorgiebel, he becomes equated to nothing more that a piece of paper. He does not have any more substance than that of his picture, which is easily being decapitated (Danto, 920). This idea of secondary realities bringing out a much more lucid vision of the primary reality will become much clearer with the analysis of the following two examples: The Tiger Montage and Adolf the Superman.

Initially named Crisis Party Congress of SPD, what came to be known as The Tiger Montage, was published on June 15, 1931. This photomontage was an attack on the Social Democratic Party of the Weimar Republic, the political order that ruled Germany before the rise of Adolf Hitler in January of 1933 (Kahn, 74). First, in order to understand the implications of this photomontage, one must be aware of the political situation in Germany at this time.

Just like the United States at this time, Germany was suffering from a horrible depression. The Social Democratic Party relinquished control of the government and Heinrich Borning of the Center Party issued the “emergency decree,” which gave him a constitutional dictatorship over the country. Choosing the lesser of two evils, German officials allowed the dictatorship to go on for some time as opposed to a Nazi takeover (Kahn, 78). Fritz Tarnow, the chairman of the Woodworkers Foundation, gave a speech in front of the SPD Crisis Congress. He spoke the two choices that Germany had: healing capitalism or helping it die. He went on to say that they were currently involved in a quandary- the German people wanted to try to cure, but if it were inevitable that it was going to die, they would rather inherit the benefits sooner than later. It was this speech by Tarnow that Heartfield used for the basis of his Tiger Montage (Kahn, 79).

The imagery used in this photomontage contains a man’s body dressed in somewhat formal garb (suit, collared shirt, and bowtie). Instead of human head, that of a growling tiger is seen. Also, on the tie of the tiger, if one looks close enough, a small swastika pin is seen. The text used in this photomontage is essential for understanding the piece. It contains two quotes. The first reads as follows: “Social Democracy does not want the collapse of capitalism. Like a doctor it wants to heal and improve it (Fritz Tarnow, Chairman of the Woodworkers Foundation).” Along with this quote a second quote is also printed as follows: The Veterinarians of Leipzig: “It goes without saying that we shall knock out the teeth of the tiger, but first of all, we must feed him and nurse him back to health (Kahn, 73).”

By paraphrasing Tarnow’s speech in the first quote, Heartfield puts the photomontage in a historical context. The veterinarians of Leipzig are a reference to the Social Democrats of Germany. Tarnow’s quote about a doctor wanting to heal and improve capitalism is in direct relation to how a veterinarian heals animals, in this case the tiger, which is a representation of capitalism. In the first quote Tarnow speaks on behalf of the SPD. In the second quote, the SPD speaks for themselves (Kahn, 81). Through the formal attire of the tiger, there is a direct connection to extreme wealth gained by few due to capitalism. Although the power of this photomontage comes from the text, the image goes hand-in-hand in the interpretation of the total montage. Tarnow’s character is represented within the tiger because of the singularity of the image. The implications of the SPD are conveyed through the title and also connections between Tarnow and the SPD. Other than that, there are no explicit references to the SPD. In actuality, the malady, which is afflicting capitalism, is in fact the SPD. Therefore, it is essential for the “veterinarians” to nurse the system back to health. By nursing capitalism back to health, the SPD ensures it’s own survival in the world of German politics.

In this photomontage, Heartfield drastically decreases the role of Tarnow. He does this in several ways. First of all, the first quote, which is attributed to Tarnow, is in much smaller print than the rest of the text contained in the montage. Also, his name is in parentheses after his quote, whereas the veterinarian of Leipzig’s quote has their name in front of the quote with a colon. The quote that was attributed to the SPD (veterinarians) was in fact another quote in Tarnow’s speech (Kahn, 82). Finally, the use of the tiger’s head eliminates any reference to Tarnow’s face. This final thing decreases the effectiveness of that which was mentioned earlier, secondary realities. For example, if Heartfield had used Tarnow’s head with a wounded tiger’s body, the memory of this montage may have more easily been rehashed when a person saw a picture of Tarnow (Kahn, 83). But, this photomontage may still effectively produce memories or critiques of the capitalist system, when a person sees a picture of a tiger. This type of secondary reality becomes more difficult though because of the grounding of secondary reality in images. In this case, the secondary reality needs the aid of the text in order to get the message across. As one can clearly see, the text allows Heartfield to do so much more in terms of the political agenda of his montages.

In reference to the swastika pin on the tie of the tiger, it is not completely autonomous Nazism. However, it is anchored in the themes of the capitalism. By placing it on the throat of the tiger instead of the somewhere else, it is as if the roar of the wounded tiger passes through the propeller-like structure of the swastika. Thus, the roars of the wounded tiger (capitalism), powers the rise of the Nazism in Germany (Kahn, 87).

The final photomontage that will be analyzed is entitled, Adolf the Superman. This photomontage appeared in the Arbeiter Illustrierte Zeitung (AIZ) in 1932. The photomontage contains a very familiar picture of Adolf Hitler, with a picture of a ribcage and backbone with gold coins in the abdominal cavity and stacked up into the throat (Herzfeld, 8). These negatives of these images were combined in the darkroom prior to development. The montage contains just one line of text, which reads as follows: “He eats gold and spews idiocies.”

An interesting part of this photomontage is that it is almost prophetical. Hitler did not come to power in Germany until 1933, but this was printed in 1932. It has direct references to the high taxes (gold) that Hitler would ultimately issue upon his rise to power in Germany. Also, it contains direct references to the Nazi propaganda (idiocies) that would litter Germany throughout the years of the Third Reich. Also, it is obvious that Heartfield purposely left out the internal organs of Hitler. He does not have a stomach or intestines, which could possibly be a reference to him having “no guts.” He does not have a heart either, which is also an attack on the character of Hitler, who represents Nazism as a whole.

The juxtaposition of these two images is extremely powerful in the sense of creating secondary realities. This montage creates a relationship between Hitler, skeletons, gold, and the Nazi institution. Any reference to any of these things may spark the memory of this very powerful photomontage, and the truth that it reveals, Nazism is a bad thing that does not help anybody, it promotes idiocies (Herzfeld, 6).

As one can clearly see, Heartfield was dedicated to unveiling the truth in a time and place when the control of it was something that the government tried to have a hand in. Perhaps, he was somewhat of a subjective observer. He found flaws and evils in the Weimar Republic and also in the Fascist years of the Third Reich. It seems as though he would not have been happy until the Socialist principles that his parents had held so close to them had been instituted in Germany. After the fall of the Third Reich, his dream did come true, and at that time he must have felt as if he held some hand in its doing. He took sides with the poor and exploited against the social injustice created by these governmental institutions. He did so by creating some of the most powerful and immortal artwork of this century.

Bibliography

Danto, Arthur C., The Nation; John Heartfield. June 28, 1993. v256, #25, p. 918-921.

Brecht, Bertold. Joanna Drew, ed. John Heartfield:1891-1968 Photomontages. Great Britain, 1973.

Herzfeld, Wieland. Joanna Drew, ed. John Heartfield: 1891-1968 Photomontages. Great Britain, 1973.

Kahn, Douglas. John Heartfield: Art and Mass Media. New York, 1985