Rubble, Ruins and Romanticism - Visual Style, Narration and

Martina Moeller
Rubble, Ruins and Romanticism
Film
Martina Moeller (PhD) works as a DAAD lecturer at the German Department at
the Université Mohammed V in Rabat, Morocco. Her research interests include
German cinema, film theory and intercultural literature.
Martina Moeller
Rubble, Ruins and Romanticism
Visual Style, Narration and Identity
in German Post-War Cinema
Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek
The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available in the Internet at
http://dnb.d-nb.de
© 2013 transcript Verlag, Bielefeld
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known
or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the
publisher.
Cover layout: Kordula Röckenhaus, Bielefeld
Cover illustration: Still from »Die Mörder sind unter uns« (1946) by
Wolfgang Staudte, © DEFA-Stiftung/Eberhard Klagemann
Proofread and typeset by Martina Moeller
Printed by Majuskel Medienproduktion GmbH, Wetzlar
ISBN 978-3-8376-2183-9
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements | 7
Table of Figures | 9
Introduction | 13
1. The Neoformalist Approach: Questions of Form and
Style | 33
Film as an Aesthetic System | 33
The Result of Construction: Meaning | 49
2. German Romanticism: The Stylistic Origin of Rubble
Films | 55
Leading Stylistic and Narrative Romantic Devices | 58
Ruins and Fragment: A Romantic Discourse on Crisis | 87
3. The Romantic Discourse in a Selection of Rubble Films | 93
Rubble Films: Common Features and Main Differences | 105
The Romantic Discourse | 113
The Murderers Are Among Us (1946): A Break with Nazi Cinema? | 119
Film Without a Name (1947/48): Irony Shall Help Us! | 159
The Blum Affair (1948): Engel’s Critical View on the Past | 195
The ‘Last’ Illusion (1948/49): Double Views and Mistaken
Perception | 225
Second Hand Destiny (1949): The Demonic Bourgeois | 255
The Lost (1950/51): No Escape? | 275
Conclusion | 293
Literature | 307
Acknowledgements
For many years I have been fascinated by how visual style and narration affect
our perception of cinema. Therefore, it seems only natural to write a study on
visual style and narration in cinema. My choice to explore post-war German
rubble films relates to the fact that individuals and families in Germany and beyond are still deeply impacted by the consequences of Nazism and the Second
World War.
I am profoundly indebted to many people over the course of my journey towards the completion of this project. I would especially like to thank my supervisors Guido Rings and Karina von Lindeiner-Strásk, who helped and supported me in many ways. Without their engagement, I would not have completed
this project. I also want to thank Thomas Keller and Marion Picker, who also
provided much support and important ideas. I am grateful for the support of the
Stiftung Deutsche Kinemathek, in particular from Ms. Anke Hahn, as well as the
Bundesarchiv in Berlin. They allowed me access to archive materials of great
importance for my work. I also received support through a research post and scientific exchange at the Université de Provence (Aix-Marseille I). I would like to
thank the entire German department of this university and in particular two excolleagues: Cécile Bonnet and Lidwine Portes. I am grateful to Peter Carrier for
his advisement and help concerning this project. Many thanks also to Martin
Lampprecht for his general support and his help in creating the cover of this publication. Finally, thank you to Gael Mooney, Catherine Griffith and especially to
Stephan Schmuck, Suzanne Royal and Sonia Li, who corrected my GermanEnglish with great care and effort.
Table of Figures
Figure 1: The Murderers Are Among Us (1946), Wolfgang Staudte. Stiftung
Deutsche Kinemathek Berlin.
13
Figure 2: The double motif in Staudte’s film. Stiftung Deutsche Kinemathek
Berlin.
15
Figure 3: Moonlit Night near Ruegen (1819) by Carl Gustav Carus. Staatliche
Kunstsammlung, Dresden.
69
Figure 4: Shade and Darkness—the Evening of the Deluge (1843) by William
Turner. Tate Gallery, London.
70
Figure 5: Caspar David Friedrich, Monk by the Sea (1809). Alte Nationalgalerie,
Berlin.
72
Figure 6: Caspar David Friedrich, Winter (1808/1810). Destroyed by fire in the
Glaspalast (1931), Munich.
77
Figure 7: Wolfgang Staudte, The Murderers Are Among Us (1946). Stiftung
Deutsche Kinemathek Berlin.
78
Figure 8: Caspar David Friedrich, The Cathedral (1818). Collection Georg
Schäfer, Schweinfurt.
81
Figure 9: Ernst Ferdinand Oehme, Cathedral in Winter (1819). Galerie Neue
Meister, Dresden.
82
Figure 10: Caspar David Friedrich, Cemetery in the Snow (1817/19). Destroyed
(1945), formerly in the National Gallery, Berlin.
85
Figure 11: Hildegard Knef as Susanne and Borchert as Mertens. Stiftung Deutsche
Kinemathek Berlin.
129
Figure 12: In Brückner’s home with Mertens as a guest. Stiftung Deutsche
Kinemathek Berlin.
129
Figure 13: Stylised setting and lighting indicate Mertens’ trauma. Stiftung
Deutsche Kinemathek Berlin.
130
Figure 14: Robert Forch as Mondschein with Borchert as Mertens. Stiftung
Deutsche Kinemathek Berlin.
134
Figure 15: Film poster The Murderers Are Among Us (1946). Stiftung Deutsche
Kinemathek Berlin.
151
Figure 16: Martin (Söhnker), Christine (Knef), the scriptwriter (Odemar), the actor
(Fritsch) and the director (Hamel). Stiftung Deutsche Kinemathek Berlin.
169
Figure 17: Irene von Meyendorff, Hans Söhnker, Annemarie Holtz. Stiftung
Deutsche Kinemathek Berlin.
173
Figure 18: The refugee couple (Carsta Löck and Erich Ponto). Stiftung Deutsche
Kinemathek Berlin.
184
Figure 19: Kurt Ehrhardt (Dr Blum) in The Blum Affair. Stiftung Deutsche
Kinemathek Berlin.
209
10 | R UBBLE , R UINS AND R OMANTICISM
Figure 20: Paul Bildt (councillor) and Hans Christian Blech (Gabler). Stiftung
Deutsche Kinemathek Berlin.
210
Figure 21: Gisela Trowe (Christine) and Hans C. Blech (Gabler). Stiftung
Deutsche Kinemathek Berlin.
211
Figure 22: Oak in the Snow (1820) by Caspar David Friedrich. Wallraf-Richartz Museum, Cologne.
212
Figure 23: Arno Paulsen (Platzer) and Hans Christian Blech (Gabler). Stiftung
Deutsche Kinemathek Berlin.
213
Figure 24: Carl Wery in Via Mala by Josef von Baky (1943/1945). Stiftung
Deutsche Kinemathek Berlin.
225
Figure 25: Fritz Kortner as Professor Mauthner (1949). Stiftung Deutsche
Kinemathek Berlin.
235
Figure 26: Two Men by the Sea at Moonrise (1817) by Caspar David Friedrich.
Alte Nationalgalerie, Berlin.
241
Figure 27: Peter Lorre as the Hans Beckert in Fritz Lang’s M (1931). Stiftung
Deutsche Kinemathek Berlin.
243
Figure 28: Fritz Kortner as the returning Mauthner. Stiftung Deutsche
Kinemathek Berlin.
244
Figure 29: Fechner welcomes Mauthner. Stiftung Deutsche Kinemathek
Berlin.
247
Figure 30: Scholz/Sylvestro (W. Borchert) and the teacher. Stiftung Deutsche
Kinemathek Berlin.
263
Figure 31: Rudolf Klein-Rogge, Bernhard Goetzke in Dr Mabuse (part two).
Stiftung Deutsche Kinemathek Berlin.
268
Figure 32: In the right corner Ernst Waldow (Gärtner) in the arena before
Sylvestro reveals his past. Stiftung Deutsche Kinemathek Berlin.
269
Figure 33: Eric Ponto (Sapies) manipulates W. Borchert (Scholz). Stiftung
Deutsche Kinemathek Berlin.
270
Figure 34: Karl John, Peter Lorre, Josef Dahmen in The Lost. Stiftung Deutsche
Kinemathek Berlin.
279
Figure 35: Lotte Rausch, Peter Lorre, Alexander Hunzinger in The Lost. Stiftung
Deutsche Kinemathek Berlin.
280
Figure 36: Helmut Rudolph as Oberst Winckler and Lorre as Rothe. Stiftung
Deutsche Kinemathek Berlin.
281
Figure 37: Claustrophobic interiors. Nowack (Karl John) from behind and
Neumeister (Lorre), in the canteen. Stiftung Deutsche Kinemathek Berlin.
282
Figure 38: Richard Münch kills the resistance fighter in The Lost. Stiftung
Deutsche Kinemathek Berlin.
283
Figure 39: Lorre as Rothe in The Lost. Stiftung Deutsche Kinemathek Berlin. 284
Figure 40: Two Men Looking at the Moon (1819) by Caspar David Friedrich.
Alte Nationalgalerie, Berlin.
285
Figure 41: Despair (1893/94) by Edvard Munch. Munch Museum, Oslo.
287
T ABLE OF F IGURES
| 11
Figure 42: Renate Mannhardt as Inge and Lorre as Rothe. Stiftung Deutsche
Kinemathek Berlin.
290
Figure 43: Eva Ingeborg Scholz as Ursula with Lorre as Rothe. Stiftung Deutsche
Kinemathek Berlin.
290
Figure 44: The Sea of Ice (1823/1824) by Caspar David Friedrich. Kunsthalle,
Hamburg.
303
Introduction
Ruins and rubble in German rubble films (Trümmerfilme)1 set in the aftermath of
World War II represent a collective symbol2 of defeat. The landscape of destroyed cities, still recalling the recent battles, renders this defeat an inescapable
aspect of everyday life for the German population. This image of destruction
provoked feelings of shame, sorrow, guilt, anger, and opposition against the
prior regime of National Socialism and the victorious occupation forces of USA,
England, France and the Soviet Union. Yet these ruins do not call to mind the
concept of Romantic ruins: their detachment from reality and their dreamy nostalgia for past times. The post-war ruins represent a reality of painful, traumatic,
and catastrophic contextual events and the necessity to reconstruct a new life
upon these experiences of crisis (see figure 1).
Figure 1: The Murderers Are Among Us (1946).
Photo: Courtesy of the Stiftung Deutsche Kinemathek Berlin.
German audiences and critics did not appreciate most rubble films and their allegoric images of defeat and crisis. Thus it is not astonishing that the term ‘rubble
1
Rubble films are a subcategory of German post-war cinema dealing with the aftermath
of World War II. Most of these films were produced between 1946 and 1951. In general, they were negatively perceived by German critics and audience.
2
According to Link (1988), collective symbols represent a nation in a given historical
moment.
14 | R UBBLE , R UINS AND R OMANTICISM
films’ initially evolved as a negatively connoted nickname3 for films that dealt
with past events of the National Socialist regime and the shadow it cast over the
post-war period. The traditional, negative view of post-war German cinema
tends to define rubble films as simplistic film texts of low artistic quality that
lack a serious impact towards the past and present times.4 Rubble films are considered to reaffirm the spectator’s image of him or herself as ‘good Germans’
during ‘bad times.’5
These prejudices are quite justified for those rubble films that refer to the
problems of the recent past and present period in a reconciliatory manner without any critical discussion about German national identity and society in the
aftermath of war and Nazism. Most of these films were produced in a ‘pseudo’
neorealist film style. This style seems to represent reality through principles
earlier established by French magic realism and Italian neorealism.6 Nevertheless, these films also largely depend on principles of classical cinema style,
which show a strong resemblance to patterns of Hollywood cinema; that is why I
propose to call this kind of style a pseudo neorealist style.
In opposition to these reaffirming and reassuring classical patterns, there is
also a category of rubble films that refers to contextual reality quite differently.
Style depends here on a stylised realism that creates signification by transcending a representation of external reality. This transcendence works to embody the
inner subjective world and feelings of the protagonists in these films. The inner
vision of outer reality forms the representation of reality in these films, and a
particular use of film techniques shapes its visual form.
These films are made of a stylised realism. As a formalist style,7 it relates to
and partly originates from, according to Irving Singer, German idealist philo-
3
Compare: Schweinitz (2002), p. 629.
4
See: Brandlmeier (1989); Shandley (2001); Schweinitz (2002); Bergfelder (2007);
5
Shandley (2001), p. 62.
6
See: Kiefer / Ruckriegl in Koebner (2002), p. 493-499.
7
This distinction also marks the two dominant traditions in cinema during the 20th cen-
Fuchs in Fischer (2007); Arnold-De-Simine / Schrey in Böhm / Mielke (2007).
tury, which are realism and formalism. Theoreticians of realism demand that film
should copy external reality very precisely. This tradition is often linked to a Marxist
point of view on contextual reality. The most well known representatives of this tradition are Siegfried Kracauer and André Bazin. The formalist film theory such as proposed by Sergei Eisenstein, Rudolf Arnheim, Béla Balázs, and others underscores the
effects of film techniques for creating a representation of reality that transcends a simple copy of the external world. For more information see: Singer (1998), p. 1.