K. Duewell Jewish Cultural Centres in Nazi Germany Source: K. Duewell, "Jewish Cultural Centres in Nazi Germany, Expectations and Accomplishments," in: J. Reinharz & W. Schatzberg (eds.) , The Jewish Response to German Culture, From the Enlightenment to the Second World War (Hanover & London, 1985), pp. 294 - 316. We want to give bread to Jewish artists and performers, thereby enabling them by physical and spiritual support to work as artists again, we want to give to the masters of the word the opportunity to speak to us. Jewish artists should show their work. For ourselves, however, we are preparing a path that we need now more than ever before: to elevate ourselves by enjoying artistic creations in a time that depresses us so deeply . . . We have no wish to restrict our activities to Jewish art, but the authorities require that all the practising artists be Jewish. No one who becomes a member of our Kulturbund should believe himself to be making a charitable gesture. All of us should know that the good we are doing is for ourselves!' Dr. Paul Moses, chairman of the Juedischer Kulturbund Rhein-Ruhr , Mitteilungsblaetter, November 1933. In view of the brutal monstrosities of National Socialist policies toward Jews, it could seem almost a diversion from the main problems to consider the cultural life of the Jews in Germany after 1933. The danger in looking at organised Jewish cultural life in Nazi Germany is that it might seem to confirm the Nazis' assertion that Jews were granted, at least for a while, both a freedom of action and the status of a protected minority. This potential misunderstanding must be cleared up first, and then I shall examine how it was possible for contemporaries to have this impression, at least for a time. After a short period of complete emancipation under the Weimar Republic 1 , the Jews in Germany faced - seemingly without preparation - the National Socialist take-over in 1933. With their relatively small numbers, their loose community organisation, and soon also as a consequence of their shrinking social contacts with the non-Jewish population, Jews were more deeply affected by the Nazis' extraordinary restrictions than were other social groups. Support from non-Jews was not the rule but the exception. The psychological oppression of this increasingly isolated minority led, however, to a new consciousness of the religious and moral roots of Jewish existence and awakened spiritual counter forces that, operating in this time of injustice and terror, emerged in one of the most impressive of all cultural movements. When on April I, 1933, the Nazi policy of boycott against the Jewish minority was officially sanctioned, the work of Jewish writers and artists was naturally affected. They were no longer allowed to be members of public orchestras or opera or theatre companies, to have concert agents, or to join artists' clubs or similar organisations. The great age of Elisabeth Bergner, Leo Blech, Ernst Deutsch, Alexander Granach, Leopold Jessner, Otto Klemperer, Fritz Kortner, Fritz Lang, Max Liebermann, Peter Lorre, Ernst Lubitsch, Lucie Mannheim, Grete Mosheim, Max Pallenberg, Max Reinhardt, Joseph Schmidt, Richard Tauber, Ignaz Waghalter, Bruno Walter, Jakob Wassermann, Franz Werfel, and many other fine writers, artists, and performers of Jewish origin seemed to have come to an end. On the other hand, one of the most remarkable effects of the Nazis' policies of boycott and terror was the founding, that very same year, of the Kulturbund Deutscher Juden . In a way this organisation was a response to the Reichskulturkammer , which had excluded all Jews. Public activity by Jewish artists - though there were still some exceptions - no longer seemed possible. The option of emigration, even for the sake of intellectual opposition to National Socialism alone, was open only to a few, on account of the cost and the difficulties of obtaining a visa from the country of destination. For those Jewish artists, writers, and performers who remained in Nazi Germany, the only option seemed to be to work within the framework of a cultural self-help organisation. The Kulturbund Deutscher Juden was founded in Berlin by Dr. Kurt Singer, an intendant of the opera in Berlin-Charlottenburg until he was expelled from this position by Nazi boycott legislation. Very prudently did he plan the new organisation. A few months later he recalled: During those days at the beginning of April when we Jews feared the severe loss of the freedom of movement we were used to, the young director Kurt Baumann came to me with a plan for establishing a theatre and a membership organisation. I had worked out a similar plan and submitted both of them to Rabbi Dr. [Leo] Baeck as a competent judge. After getting his recommendation, I consulted the leading men from Jewish organisations. . . . One committee formulated the constitution; another committee made arrangements for publicity evenings; a third prepared them from the artistic point of view. I submitted the official applications for a license for a Kulturbund Deutscher Juden to various governmental authorities. The decision about the license was delegated by the minister president of Prussia to the Ministry of Education, within which the president of the Prussian Theatre Commission, Staatskommissar [Hans] Hinkel, or his deputy, was to lead the negotiations. Simultaneously I gave reports to the chief of police and to the ministry of Propaganda (here the president of the theatre commission, Ministerialrat [Otto] Laubinger)' 2 . Plans for the cultural centre were supported by the leading representatives of Jewish cultural life, and the board of honorary chairmen included Leo Baeck, Martin Buber, Arthur Eloesser, Leonid Kreutzer, Max Liebermann, Max Osborn, Franz Oppenheimer, and Jakob Wassermann. This new organisation to aid Jewish artists in Berlin soon served as a model for similar cultural centres in other parts of the Reich. In autumn 1933 the Juedischer Kulturbund Rhein-Ruhr ( Freunde des Theaters und der Musik e.V .), was founded in the great industrial Rhenish-Westfalian area, where fifty thousand Jews still lived in the administrative districts of Cologne , Duesseldorf , and Arnsberg. Its first chairman was Dr. Paul Moses, and next to the Berlin Kulturbund , it was the most important cultural centre in Germany 3 . In addition the Kulturbund Rhein-Main in Frankfurt maintained its own philharmonic orchestra of about fifty members, and the Hamburg Kulturbund had its own theatre and travelling company 4 . By 1935 Jewish cultural centres had been founded in Breslau and other towns. In this time of increasing economic and social troubles, they became important economic factors. Together they maintained three theatre ensembles (Berlin, Hamburg, Cologne), one opera (Berlin), two philharmonic orchestras (Berlin, Frankfurt), one cabaret stage, one school theatre, and a few choirs and ensembles in which a total of twenty-five hundred artists made a modest living. Until 1938 nearly six hundred artists and almost the same number of support staff, plus three hundred artisans, mechanics, and additional assistants, were permanently engaged by the Jewish cultural centres in Germany, and they were the greatest single factor in the provision of work for Jewish people in Germany under Nazi rule.' 5 Almost seventy thousand Jewish people in about a hundred towns attended Kulturbund performances 6 . Along with the Jewish communities and the sixty Jewish weekly newspapers, journals, and other periodicals still published in 1935, which had a total circulation of 350,000, the cultural centres were among the greatest intellectual and economic forces in Jewish life in Germany. The Berlin Kulturbund was the largest, employing, up to 1938, more than two hundred people-soloists and supernumeraries as well as technical and supplementary personnel and an administrative staff of ten. In 1933-34 its annual expenses reached six hundred thousand Reichmark. 7 The Juedischer Kulturbund Rhein-Ruhr, which grew out of efforts of the Koelner Zentralstelle fuer juedische Wirts to include support for artists among its activities 8 , had five thousand members by the summer of 1935. Monthly dues were only Reichsmark 2.50. During the first six months of its performances, 1934-35, it employed more than three hundred people, a great number of whom had regular appointments, reported the center's Mitteilungsblaetter 9 . In the 1935-36 season, thirty-five artists were engaged for appointments of six months or a year, and forty-six others had appointments for less than six months, mostly in connection with the travelling theatre. Seventeen clerical workers and five manual workers had regular appointments, and ninety additional assistants were hired for shorter periods in the towns the Theatre Company toured. Altogether 191 people were employed. At the centre of the Kulturbund's activities were the theatre performances in Cologne and in ten other towns in the Rheinish-Westfalian area where it had local affiliations: Aachen, Bochum, Bonn, Duisburg, Essen, (Gelsenkirchen, Krefeld, Wuppertal, and, from 194-35 onwards, also Dortmund and Dueren. The emphasis of the Kulturbund Rhein-Ruhr's activities lay in the theatre, the director of which was Willibald Fraenkel-Froon. In November 1933, he opened the Kulturbund stage with a performance of the tragicomedy Sonkin and her Haupttreffer by Semen Juschkewitsch, a play that had already had great success in Max Reinhardt's staging. In the November/December 1933 issue of the Mitteilungsblaetter, Fraenkel-Froon described the aims of his efforts: The goal of our stage is to bring joy and the courage to face life to all by letting them participate in the eternal values of poetry or by discussing the problems of our time, but also by showing light hearted pieces and not rejecting them. We intend to keep up the connection with the German Heimat and to form, at the same time, a connecting link with our great Jewish past and with a future that is worth living' 10 . After Sonkin, the plays performed in 1933 and 1934 included Johann Wolfgang von Goethe's Stell a and Carlo Goldoni's Mirandolina, Henry Bernstein's Der Dieb, James Briedie's comedy Tobaias und der Erzengel, Hugo von Hofmannsthal's Dance Kobold, Raoul Auernheimer's Die grove Leidenschaft, Arthur Schnitzler's Die einsame Weg, and a drama by a young writer from Cologne, Julius Wolffsohn, entitled Joseph Ben Matthias 11 . Besides the plays, there were poetry evenings with Ludwig Hardt, Otto Bernstein, and other distinguished masters of recitation, and lectures by Leo Baeck, Kurt Blumenfeld, and Martin Buber. David Carlebach, Joseph Carlebach, Adolf Kober, Benedikt Wolf, and other rabbis also gave talks, mostly through co-operative arrangements with the Vereinigung juedisches Lehrhaus in Cologne 12 . In addition there were concerts of chamber music and piano and vocal recitals by soloist of the first rank. In 1935 the so-called Kleinkunst performances included the star performance of the famous diseuse Dela Lipinskaja. But the theatre dominated the activities of the Kulturbund Rhein-Ruhr up to its dissolution in 1958. On the principles that should guide a Jewish theatre program, the Kulturbund Rhein-Ruhr largely supported the position of Julius Bab, the highly esteemed dramaturgy in Berlin, who expressed his opinion in the Israelitisches Familienblatt that a repertory exclusively Jewish as a matter of principle (grundsaetzlich nur j ue disches) would be neither desirable nor possible. We do not want to set up a new ghetto. Through our work we want to keep the German Jews in vital contact with the great life of Western culture in which they have become so deeply rooted over one and a half centuries! And therefore: Lessing, Mozart, and Shakespeare! But there is another side that is just as right and proper: because we exist within this Western sphere of culture as a community in which the performances are given only by Jews and for Jews, there are also duties of a special kind, and we have to pay special regard to the work of Jewish writers who today have no place elsewhere (even if their works have no special Jewish content). We have to pay regard to them as much as to all creative works of intellectual worth that deal with subjects of special Jewish interest . . . Therefore it will not cease to be a German theatre, a stage within the Western cultural tradition' 13 . Some months previous, despite the oppression of Nazi censorship) under the direction of Staatskommissar Hinkel, there had been a sharp discussion within the Jewish community about the work of the Berlin Kulturbund - some even called it an internal Jewish Kulturkampf. The Kulturkampf was fought much more vigorously over the repertory of the theatre than over the program of operas and concerts 14 . The preliminary result of the discussion was the acceptance of the line of reasoning Bab later formulated. But this line of reasoning was only a compromise, and it was questioned, from time to time, by the Juedische Rundschau and other Zionist publications 15 . Moreover, the Nazis in 1934 prohibited the Jewish cultural centres from performing the works of Friedrich von Schiller and the German romantics, and in 1936 they also banned performances of Goethe's works and those of other classical German writers. These restrictions were next extended to the performance of music; in 1937 Beethoven was forbidden, and immediately after the Anschluss with Austria, Mozart, too, was no longer allowed to be played in the cultural centres. It had long been clear, however, that the Nazi policy of restriction would render performances of "German music" increasingly difficult 16 . In May 1934 the head cantor of Wuppertal, Hermann Zivi, had tried to come to terms with the question of whether there was such a thing as "Jewish music." In the Mitteilungsblaetter of the Kulturbund Rhein-Ruhr he pointed to the amalgamation of the musical tradition of the synagogue with the traditions of music in the different host countries in which Jewish communities had emerged: In the East they sing in a melancholy manner, as do the Slavic and oriental people; in the West they sing in another way, and this is also true in the synagogue. The question as to whether there is such a thing as "Jewish music" must be answered in the negative. If the Jews one day become permanently established, and live in compact communities unmolested by oppression and compulsion, then, with spiritual peace, they might also gain the strength to develop in this native country a music of their own that has grown up in the soil of Jewry' 17 . But in the following number of the Mitteilungsblaetter Joachim Stutschewsky, a Viennese cellist and collector of music, contradicted Zivi's claims. Stutschewsky asserted that twenty-five years before no one would have talked of "Jewish music," but an important change had taken place. He mentioned the names of Joseph Achron, Ernest Bloch, Alexander Krein, Levin Milner, Brandmann, Michail Gnessin, and Lazare Ssaminsky, and included his own name, too. For a long time we had many Jewish musicians, concert artists, composers of operas and symphonies, but no Jewish music. Today we have Jewish musicians who also compose music of their own kind out of their deepest personal being and who, striving for a new inner centre, are creating a Jewish art of music.' 18 Here again there are two diametrically opposed opinions, and a new Kulturkampf seemed to be getting under way. The editors of the Mitteilungsblaetter, therefore, in August 1934 asked Oskar Guttmann, a connoisseur and academic teacher of music, for a final opinion. Guttmann altered the basic question a little: did there or does there exist a Jewish music? He gave an affirmative reply to the first part of this question, but to the second he asserted Today there no longer exists a Jewish music. Stutschewsky has totally confused the music Jews have composed with Jewish music. Certainly we have great Jewish composers, and indeed many of them have broken through the "latent Orientalism" [Heinrich] Berl described in his suggestive book Das Judentum in der Musik. Here the Jewish sentiment is strong and genuine. Bit will not develop so quickly. Perhaps a new Jewish music will come from a new permanent culture. Let us hope and wish so. And, for the time being, above all let us hear what Jewish musicians play and compose, though they may not yet create things as "Jewish" as we might dream of' 19 . To the editors of the Mitteilungsblaetter it seemed obvious that with this answer the discussion was not yet over. But it was also clear that they did not want to prolong controversial debate on this problem because the daily, basic difficulties of the Kulturbund's cultural work were so urgent as to require all their effort. Therefore, the editors restricted themselves to a short concluding remark: The answers of the three commentators are widely divergent and differ so much that one can see how difficult it is to comply with the request for concerts of Jewish music. Without defining our attitude regarding this subject, we share Dr. Guttmann's opinion in demanding that for the time being Jewish composers, especially, should be given a hearing. But beyond this we believe that with concerts by orchestras which consist of Jewish musicians we are serving in the best way the interests, if not of Jewish music, at least of Jewish performance of music' 20 . This was the principle according to which in 1934 the Juedischer Kulturbund Rhein-Main in Frankfurt founded its orchestra, which had great success in the Rheinish-Westfalian towns as well. The theatre, however, remained the chief work of the Kulturbund Rhein-Ruhr . In regard to the future shaping of its program, the artistic director Gerhard Walter-Rosenbaum wrote in the summer of 1934: The process of assimilation during the last decade destroyed the old community of German Jews. The only acknowledged tie remained the religious faith, and in view of a general turning away from religion, it was no longer strong enough to mould Jewish community life. But the pressure of recent events has forced a new common cause into being. To transform this cause into a real community by creating a mental bond is a vital task for German Jewry. The principle task of the Kulturbund theatre is to participate in the renewal of the cultural life of German Jews by depicting Jewish destinies and Jewish people and by disseminating the works of Jewish poets and writers. The new Jewish community in Germany cannot and must not tear itself away from the German culture to which all are tied by language and education and most of us also by history and Heimatliebe. Another and equally important task of the Kulturbund theatre is to maintain and strengthen links with German culture. By putting on the stage artistically important dramatic entertainment, the theatre of the Kulturbund should free its audiences from their everyday sorrows and thereby fulfil its third task' 21 . Quite rightly Walter-Rosenbaum pointed again and again to the psychological difficulties of the Jewish theatre work: the everyday life of the German Jews was oppressed by such a heavy psychological burden and by such severe troubles which "for many reasons could not be represented on the stage" that a return to "the individualistic dramas of the last years" would be unthinkable: Nothing would be more senseless than to show problems that, by reason of the personal oppression of the spectators, have become inconsequential. It may be remarked, moreover, that in the new Germany there is no longer room for the problematic plays of yesterday. The new task of creating works for the cultural centres, which fortunately has already started, will not be in full operation for some time' 22 . From this it is clear that the Kulturbund Rhein-Ruhr sought suitable Jewish plays but did not renounce links with general German theatrical tradition. The same is clear also from Walter-Rosenbaum's final appeal: The Kulturbund theater has set high aims for the coming months. It will reach these goals if every Jew stands by the Kulturbund , showing thereby that he is willing to work with heart and soul for the cultural support and strengthening of German Jewry.' (23) But it was precisely this intention of retaining contact with the German theatrical tradition that was opposed by Nazi authorities. The performances were under the permanent control of Gestapo officials - the Herren mit der Aktentasche as Herbert Freeden has called them. The Mitteilungsblaetter could not report on this matter explicitly, lest it run the risk of itself being prohibited. In the fall of 1934 Dr. Heinrich Levinger, a man experienced in theatrical profession, took over the management of the Kulturbund Rhein-Ruhr in Cologne. In October he wrote in the Mitteilungsblaetter about his plans and hopes: We want to deal with our task deliberately as Jews to whom their Jewishness is not only an innate fact but also the means of cultivating a proud tradition. But we want to deal with it also as Jewish citizens of Germany and the world, Jews who do not want to lose touch with the cultural heritage that has become a vital possession for them.' 24 Practical and social aims had to be combined with cultural and artistic objectives. So the theatre performed during the summer as well as the regular season, and the management turned directly to the audience of the Kulturbund with urgent appeals: Remain members of the Kulturbund !! It's your work created by yourselves at a time of greatest crisis. Help to safeguard its existence, to complete its structure, because our artistic performances must be enhanced, more and more unemployed artists must earn a living in it; the youth shall be drawn in. It is necessary to achieve these objectives! Bear in mind that it was always a most dignified Jewish duty to help creative people and to support the arts' 25 . The mostly assimilated Jews in the Rhineland and Westfalia found it very difficult, however, to follow Hans Hinkel's insistent demands that the Kulturbund stick to Jewish themes and authors. As early as June 1934 the Kulturbund Rhein-Ruhr had to organise a competition in order to find new plays with specifically Jewish contents. Within three months fifty plays were submitted for the judges to examine. This was no doubt a sign of the Kulturbund Rhein-Ruhr's vitality, but it was also a sure sign that Jews well understood how necessary it was for them to shed light on the central question of their cultural task at this time. On this matter the Mitteilungsblaetter in the fall of 1934 published a series of essays on "Das juedische Element in der Kulturbundarbeit." Rabbi Hugo Hahn from Essen stated his opinion that as long as, for cultural or technical reasons, Jews had not yet succeeded in articulating the Jewish existence as an expression of the general human situation, they could make this an objective of their artistic work: It could also be a legitimate task of a Jewish Kulturbund to defend the Jews' own cause by pleading the general one: to let the cultural creations of the world flow through a Jewish heart, through a Jewish temperament. By this the Jewish cause would be rendered a good service in these times.' 26 This critical analysis of the Jewish point of view was continued in the successive numbers of the Mitteilungsblaetter. Kurt Alexander of Krefeld, a member of the managing committee of the Centralverein deutscher Staatsbuerger juedischen Glaubens (CV) and of the board of the Kulturbund Rhein-Ruhr , expressed his opinion in the November issue: At the founding of the Kulturbund it was clear to me that without establishing a theatre it would not be of long duration. Concerts and lectures capture the attention of only a small circle of people. But the theatre exists for all . . . The theatre must under no circumstances fail to take an active part in the cultural work of our German Heimat; next to this it has to cultivate the sublime and imperishable heritage of the Jewish cultural community. We are on the right road. Let us proceed onward' 27 . So here again was mention of the double task: to intensify the consciousness of the Jewish existence as well as to pay regard to the historical fact that Jewish culture had struck roots in German language and civilisation. In spite of Nazi policies, this approach continued to be characteristic of the Jews in the West of Germany. In December 1934 Dr. Auerbach, rabbi of the district of Recklinghausen, pointed to the special service the Kulturbund would render to the small communities: The National Revolution 28 resulted in the exclusion of Jews from almost all non-Jewish associations and forced them, especially the Jews in the countryside and in the small communities, into total mental, social, and psychological isolation. At that point the Kulturbund re-established ties. Of course we would not fail to recognise that its founding originated to a great extent in philanthropic motives, since Jewish artists, expelled and therefore suffering, could earn a living only through this organisation. But more important than the ridiculously small amount of money that we pay to the Kulturbund as our monthly dues, are the great ideals and values that the Kulturbund presents to us, and this especially again to the small communities . . . By the Kulturbund's not restricting its performances to the large communities but coming also to the medium-sized and small communities, there serving in addition the surrounding tiny communities, we all are united by a great bond . . . It is precisely the individual Jew in the small communities who feels in a double way the heavy economic and psychological struggle for existence and who is dependent on the work of the Kulturbund and owes to it a debt of gratitude for its efforts' 29 . The Kulturbund Rhein-Ruhr , unlike the Kulturbund in Berlin, made a specific effort to reach out into the rural communities and play a role in the cultural consolidation of Jews in small towns. Of course there were also risks in this-the risks incurred by Jews staying too long in these communities - but they were only realised later . In 1934-35 the work of the Kulturbund was primarily seen as helpful. Nevertheless it was precisely in these small and medium-sized communities that as early as 1935 it became increasingly difficult for the Kulturbund even to find halls for performances. In spite of all external hardships, the discussion about Jewish values continued, and it also determined the decision of the jury in March 1935 on the fifty plays on Jewish themes that had been submitted. What had been called for was "the best play, but particularly with a Jewish content." But the jury could not agree on the awarding of a first prize, which might seem surprising in view of the large number of works submitted. The judges gave their reasons as follows: The Kulturbund had hoped that the competition would provide it with mature dramatic works which, when performed on the stage, would transmit Jewish values and a Jewish consciousness to a broad section of the public. But in addition it was also hoped that the competition would advance and foster the work of Jewish dramatists. Unfortunately these hopes have been realised to only a small extent. Almost all the plays submitted were imitative of other styles, and there was no work suitable for performance that satisfied the particular demands of the Kulturbund theatre' 30 . So only a second prize was awarded, to the play Channa, by Martha Wertheimer of Frankfurt am Main, which was performed the following fall. Seven more plays received commendations. Among them was Benjamin o'er die Ueberwindung by Heinrich Infeld from Tel Aviv, which in the opinion of the jury was the only play in the competition to achieve a form appropriate to the outlook of our times.' It depicted the career of a chaluz 31 . The Kulturbund Rhein-Ruhr's intensive efforts on behalf of the Jewish theatre redounded to its own benefit when on April 27-28, 1935 (no doubt also as a result of Nazi pressure), thirty-six regional and local Jewish cultural centres joined together in Berlin to form the Reichsverband der juedischen Kulturbuende in Deutschland . Later a few additional groups joined them. Singer of Berlin was elected chairman of a small steering committee, and Levinger, the head of the Kulturbund Rhein-Ruhr , was elected senior deputy chairman. Since the purpose of this umbrella organisation was to facilitate the exchange of events among the various cultural centres, the Mitteilungsblaetter of the Kulturbund Rhein-Ruhr thought it had good potential: Within this framework, our Kulturbund theatre, as the only Jewish travelling theatre company, should find a larger sphere of activity opened up to it.' It concluded its report about the confederation of Jewish cultural centres by asserting: Every individual must be fully aware what an important brick his membership represents in the overall structure of Jewish cultural work in Germany! Then no one will lightly neglect something that is among the most important obligations of Jews in Germany: to extend on a cultural level the Jewish Lebensraum in Germany and to help provide work for Jewish artists!' 32 Through the confederation of Jewish cultural centres in the Reichsverband der juedischen Kulturbuende in Deutschland , every member of an individual Kulturbund was automatically a member of the Reichsverband . In return for a small addition to their monthly dues, individual members thereby had the right to attend the events of other local and regional centres. In addition all the centres had improved opportunities for co-operation. But these advantages were offset by the possibility of tighter controls by Staatskommissar Hinkel and the Gestapo. This opportunity was not fully exploited by the Nazi regime during 1935-36, since the Hitler government temporarily held back from anti-Semitic measures in view of the approaching Olympic Games, but the Reichsverband was an avenue for facilitating more restrictive policies at a later time. Meanwhile the cultural and social work of the Jewish cultural centres continued undismayed. Friedrich Brodnitz, the former chairman of the CV and now a committee member of the Reichsvertretung der deutschen Juden , encouraged the centres' activities in a lecture in Cologne in November 1935: Your recent confederation has formed the basis for united, effective work. Now it is a matter of giving life to the organisational framework. From being individual audience groups, you must become real centres of strength in the cultural life of the German Jews.' Brodnitz thought that, just as new paths were being developed in all areas of German-Jewish community life, artistic work must also be built anew "right down to the smallest details." Each of the many questions that arose in this regard would have to be examined afresh: The meaning of artistic creation and enjoyment for a new age and a new generation, the relationship of specifically Jewish art to the art of Germany and to the art of the whole world, the tasks of the new individual areas in the overall plan for a new cultural life, all these problems must be thought out and shaped anew from the ground up. It must be our leading principle that there cannot be a place in our Jewish cultural centres for art that no longer has anything essential to say to the people of our time . . . The particular cultural needs of German Jews of today, recognised and formulated in an un-dogmatic way independent of party views, must give our work its stamp.' In Brodnitz's opinion the Jewish cultural centres would have to "draw all sectors of German Jewry around themselves" and prove that they were determined to be the cradle of an art that would "stand up to the serious situation of our days" and to demonstrate that they were not just "emergency shelters" but valid forms of cultural life 33 . The difficulty lay in turning theory into practice, and that could be done only by the centres themselves. In January 1936 Singer spoke in Cologne, Dortmund, Essen, and Krefeld on "The Foundation and Extension of Jewish Cultural Work in Germany." 34 But already the future of programs for extending cultural work was uncertain. In March 1936 Dr. Paul Moses, senior chairman of the Jewish Kulturbund Rhein-Ruhr , left Germany; the second wave of emigrations sinc1933 was on its way. Although the membership of the Kulturbund Rhein-Ruhr had now declined from its high of five thousand, its work continued. But major theatrical performances gradually gave way to poetry evenings and Kleinkunst , while art exhibitions and solo musical recitals increased in number. At the exhibition of the Jewish cultural centres in Berlin in May 1936, at which Jewish artists from all over the country were represented, Rheinish painters such as Flora Joehlinger, Lisel Wetzlar, Lotte Prechner, Hans Eltzbacher, and Otto Schloss had considerable success. The Kulturbund Rhein-Ruhr found it increasingly difficult to stick to the original performance schedules of its theatre 35 , as it had serious problems maintaining a large staff. Nevertheless the company managed to perform Somerset Maugham's Sacred Flame in May 1936 and Rudolf Kurtz's comedy Hut ab vor Onkel Eddie in June. For November 1936 Marcel Pagnol's comedy Zum goldenen Asker was scheduled, and for 1937 two premieres - Gerhard Hirschfeld's Der Pojaz and Willi Buschhoff's Hachscharah - and three additional plays - George Bernard Shaw's Candied or Ferenc Molnar's Die grosse Liebe, (Borg Dueren's Der Staerkere, and The Importance of Being Earnest by Oscar Wilde. It proved impossible to perform the plays by Buschhoff and Dueren. Other performances included the Hungarian comedy Jean by Ladislaus Bus-Fekete and The Man Who Changed His Name by Edgar Wallace. From 1937 onwards, light plays and comedies came to dominate the Kulturbund Rhein-Ruhr's theatre program. Among these were Bob macht sich gesund by Axel Ivers, Achtung, frisch gestrichen! by Rend Fauchois, Molnar's comedy Delila, evenings of light entertainment with the irrepressible Max Ehrlich, Offenbach evenings, and the like. The audience needed diversion and temporary respite from cares in a time of increasing psychological oppression, and the management no doubt conceded to the wishes of the public on whom the continued existence of the theatre so heavily depended. In view of this, the premiere in Cologne of Franz Werfel's most recent play, In einer Nacht, as late as January 1938 must be regarded as a considerable achievement. References: 1. For discrimination existing in the time of the Weimar Republic, see, as standard literature: Fritz Marburg, Der Antisemitismus in der Deutschen Republik (Vienna, 1931); Werner E. Mosse and Arnold Paucker, eds., Entscheidungsjahr 1932: Zur Judenfrage in der Endphase der Weimarer Republik , 2d ed. (Tuebingen, 1966); Arnold Paucker, Der juedische Abwehrkampf gegen Antisemitismus und Nationalsozialismus in den letzten Jahren der Weimarer Republik , Hamburger Beitraege zur Zeitgeschichte, vol. 4 (Hamburg, 1968); George L. Mosse, Germans and Jews: The Right, the Left, and the Search for a 'Third Force' in Pre-Nazi Germany (New York, 1970); Hans-Helmut Knuetter, Die Juden und die deutsche Linke in der Weimarer Republik, 1918¯1933 (Duesseldorf, 1971); Werner E. Mosse, ed., Deutsches Judentum in Krieg und Revolution, 1916¯1923 , Schriftenreihe wissenschaftlicher Abhandlungen des Leo Baeck Instituts, vol. 25 (Tuebingen, 1971); Hans-Joachim Bieber, 'Anti-Semitism as a Reflection of Social, Economic and Political Tension in Germany, 1880¯1933,' in Jews and German Jews from 1860 to 1933 , ed. David Bronson (Heidelberg, 1979), pp. 33¯77. For the increasing importance of Zionism at the end of the Weimar Republic, see also Jehuda Reinharz, ed., Dokument zur Geschichte des deutschen Zionismus, 1882¯1933 , Schriftenreihe wissenschaftlicher Abhandlungen des Leo Baeck Instituts, vol. 37 (Tuebingen, 1981). 2. Kurt Singer, 'Vor der Premiere des Kulturbundes,' Central-Verein Zeitung , September 28, 1933, no. 37, Beilage 2. See also the recollections of Kurt Baumann in Juedisches Leben in Deutschland , ed. Monika Richarz, vol. 3, Selbstzeugnisse zur Sozialgeschichte, 1918¯1945 (Stuttgart, 1982), pp. 313¯22. 3. Herbert Freeden, Juedisches Theater in Nazideutschland , Schriftenreihe wissenschaftlicher Abhandlungen des Leo Baeck Instituts, vol. 12 (Tuebingen, 1964), pp. 53ff. For the Juedischer Kulturbund Rhein-Ruhr, see also Kurt Duewell, Die Rheingebiete in der Judenpolitik des Nationalsozialismus vor 1942: Beitrag zu einer vergleichenden zeitgeschichtlichen Landeskunde (Bonn, 1968), pp. 132¯40. Another regional example was treated by Erwin Lichtenstein, 'Der Kulturbund der Juden in Danzig, 1933¯1938,' Zeitschrift fuer die Geschichte der Juden 10 (Tel Aviv, 1973): 181¯90. For figures about the whole Kulturbund organisation in Germany, see Herbert Freeden, 'A Jewish Theatre under the Swastika,' in Leo Baeck Institute Year Book I (1956): 159¯60. I am grateful to Dr. Ernst Lustig, Wolfenbuettel, for a large number of references to the work of the Jewish cultural centres. 4. Freeden, Juedisches Theater , p. 25. 5. Ibid., pp. 25¯26. 6. Ibid., p. 4. 7. Ibid., pp. 22¯23. 8. Juedische Rundschau , October 17, 1933, cited in ibid., p. 53. 9. 'Zusammenschluss der juedischen Kulturbuende Deutschlands,' Mitteilungsblaetter des juedischen Kulturbundes Rhein-Ruhr (hereafter Mitteilungsblaetter ), June 1935, p. 4, and October 1936, p. 4. See also materials in the Archives of the Leo Baeck Institute, New York, esp. the Julius Bab Collections. 10.Willibald Fraenkel-Froon, 'Das Theater entsteht,' Mitteilungsblaetter , November/December 1933, un-paginated. 11.The program for the following years contained: Franz Grillparzer's Esther , Heinrich Heine's Almansor , Pedro CaldÉron's Absalons Locken , Jean Baptist Molière's Streiche des Scapin , George Bernard Shaw's Der Arzt am Scheidewege, The Importance of Being Earnest by Oscar Wilde, Johann Nestroy's Titus Feuerfuchs , and two lighter entertainment numbers¯Adler's Drei Herren im Frack and Garais's Der Fall Jadin Grandais . For later, Miss Selby by Ervine, Johann Wolfgang von Goethe's Clavigo , William Shakespeare's Twelfth Night , Gerhart Hauptmann's Michael Kramer , Georg Hirschfeld's Hosea , and Israel Zangwill's comedy Der Koenig der Schnorrer were planned. Some were not performed, however, for reasons that cannot be precisely determined. 12.See also Ernst Simon, Aufbau im Untergang: Juedische Erwachsenenbildung im nationalsozialistischen Deutschland als geistiger Widerstand , Schriftenreihe wissenschaftlicher Abhandlungen des Leo Baeck Instituts, vol. 2 (Tuebingen, 1959). 13.Julius Bab, 'Warum Nathan der Weise?' Israelitisches Familienblatt 36, no. 2 (1934): 12, as quoted in Mitteilungsblaetter , February 1934, p. 3. 14.Freeden, Juedisches Theater , p. 4. 15.For Bab's considerations and for the opening performance of Nathan the Wise by the Berliner Kulturbund theatre, 150 years after Gotthold Ephraim Lessing wrote the play, see Juedische Rundschau , July 25, 1933, no. 59; and October 4, 1933, nos. 79/80. 16.Freeden, Juedisches Theater , p. 46, quotes a letter of November 19, 1934, from the NSDAP-Gauleitung Berlin, in which performances of Beethoven's music by the local Jewish Kulturbund were sharply criticised: to see our magnificent Beethoven in such dubious company' was intolerable and even more tactless' if the Jewish Kulturbund performed Fideolio' with an all-Jewish cast'¯whereas there was no alternative open to the Kulturbund according to the regulations. 17.Hermann Zivi, 'Gibt es eine juedische Musik?' pt. I, Mitteilungsblaetter , May 1934, p. 4. 18.Joachim Stutschewsky, 'Gibt es eine juedische Musik?' pt. 2, ibid., June 1934, p. 4. 19.Oskar Guttmann, 'Gibt es eine juedische Musik?' pt. 3, ibid., August 1934, p. 7. 20.Editors' comments, ibid. 21.Gerhard Walter-Rosenbaum, 'Aufgaben der Kulturbuende Rhein-Ruhr, ein Wort zur kuenftigen Spielplangestaltung,' ibid., p. 3. 22.Ibid., p. 4. 23.Ibid. 24.Heinrich Levinger, 'Unser zweites Arbeitsjahr beginnt! Plaene und Hoffnungen,' ibid., October 1934, p. 3. 25.'Bleibe Mitglied des Kulturbundes!' ibid., June 1934, p. 4. 26.Hugo Hahn, 'Dajuedische Element in der Kulturbundarbeit,' ibid., October 1934, p. 6. 27.Kurt Alexander, 'Kulturbund-Theater¯warum und wie,' ibid., November 1934, p. 6. 28.The term nationale Revolution was like Machtergreifung , a catch phrase of Nazi propaganda and had been first used by the conservative Right. Its use at this time in the Mitteilungsblaetter must be seen in part as a tactical concession to Nazi censorship. 29.Dr. Auerbach, 'Was bedeutet der Kulturbund fuer die kleinen Gemeinden?' Mitteilungsblaetter , December 1934, p. 6. 30.Walter-Rosenbaum, 'Unser Preisausschreiben! Die Entscheidung des Preisgerichts,' ibid., March 1935, p. 7. 31.Ibid. In addition, the area from which this competition attracted entries shows the considerable circulation of the Mitteilungsblaetter of the Juedischer Kulturbund Rhein-Ruhr, for none of the other six authors who received recommendations lived in the Rhineland or Westphalia either. They were Fritz Rosenthal of Munich ( Das Messiasspiel ); Maurice Ruebner ( Pax eterna ) and Oswald Pander ( Man tuermt ), both of Hamburg; Herbert Schoenlank of Amsterdam ( Kalenner faehrt Auto ); Martin Mansbacher of Luebeck ( Chanukkafestspiel ); and Sylvia Cohn-Oberbrunner of Offenburg/Baden ( Esther ). 32.'Zusammenschluss der juedischen Kulturbuende Deutschlands,' Mitteilungsblaetter , June 1935, p. 4. The term Lebensraum , so overused by the Nazis, turns up here most likely, again, as a tactical concession to Nazi censorship. 33.Friedrich Bodnitz, 'Kultubuende und juedische OEffentlichkeit,' ibid., November 1935, p. 3. 34.Kurt Singer, 'Die Grundlage und Erweiterung juedischer Kulturarbeit in Deutschland,' ibid., January 1936, p. 9. 35.For the original performance schedule, see n. 11, above. Back to the top