According to Moeller, policy makers after the war also located women in "normal families" with
male "providers" (164), for example by providing government child support payments as a
supplement to the male wage, instead of being paid directly to mothers (145), so that single
mothers were in danger of not receiving the supplement. Similarly, until 1977 the marriage law
included a provision that "women's wage work outside the home must not impede fulfilment of
'marital and family obligations'" (168). "Biology had defined women's status under the Nazis; it
remained women's destiny in a democratic republic" (164). Moeller also writes,
In the case of post-World War II West Germany, laws aimed at protecting the
family ultimately protected and preserved much else-- patriarchal authority;
women's economic dependence on men; the ideological elevation of motherhood;
pronatalist sentiments; and the normative conception of the 'family' as an ahistorical
social unit transcending class divisions" (139).
These concepts remain close to the ideals of National Socialism despite the policy makers desire to
create new policies for post-war Germany.
Maria's relationship with Bill, a Black American army officer, can be seen as evidence of
her desire to break with the ideologies of Nazi Germany. She becomes fond of a man who would
have been seen as "the enemy" by a Nazi. Far from being undesirable to her, she believes Bill is
"Better black than brown," with reference to the Nazi brownshirts (Kaes 285). However, the
relationship and her attempt to embrace what the Nazis disregarded ultimately fails when her
brownshirt husband Hermann returns home and she kills Bill: better Braun than black.
After the war, Maria embraces capitalism and focuses on making money, just as Germany
embarked on the Wirtschaftswunder in the 1950s. The economic miracle is customarily seen as a
testament to Germany's democratic transformation from the country that marched under the banner
of Nazism (Rheuban 8). However, as Mary Beth Haralovich notes, "Economic "independence"
does not free women--or men--from the oppression of sexual politics" (13), and much of
Germany's old ideologies remained unchanged before and after Stunde null. Fassbinder
observed, "The opportunities that Germany had in 1945, when the war and the Third Reich came
to an end, were not taken advantage of. Instead...the structures and the values on which this
country, now as a democracy, ultimately rests have remained essentially the same" (quoted in
Rheuban 8).
Maria Braun discovers herself in a situation similar to Germany's. Although Maria "rises
above the rubble," she has built her world according to the rules of men. As Beth Haralovich
writes,
While Maria thinks that she is in control of these relations of work and
sexuality, she is actually governed by the exchange in two ways: through the
contract between Oswald and Hermann (whereby Hermann agrees not to return
until Oswald is dead, and Oswald agrees to leave the bulk of his estate to Maria and
Hermann) and through her increasing separation from everything but work. (8)
Maria sees herself as temporarily taking Hermann's place as provider, less from a desire for
emancipation than out of necessity; she is "making a home for us like you would have done" (97).
The boundaries between gender roles are blurred in the post-war chaos; for example, Betti asks,
"What difference does it make if you're a man or a woman if you're freezing?" (49) Maria does
not question the structures from which she comes. Seidel writes, "By her own definition, she is
fulfilling the function of a stand-in" (217). Hermann defines her as "somebody you let work for
you...[a] man's foot" (97). Hermann does not relinquish the position as protector and provider to
Maria:
Hermann's image of himself as women's protector requires him to take the blame
and punishment for his wife's deed. Similarly, his long separation from Maria after
prison is a consequence of his belief in an ideal of male self-sufficiency. Hermann
can accept money from Oswald, but not from Maria...he cannot allow himself to be
dependent on a woman. (Rheuban 15)
In his eyes, she has merely had more success in accumulating wealth than he has until Oswald's
death. He would rather go into voluntary exile than accept his wife's support. "For Hermann, in
the sexual politics of exchange, it is the man who gives his economic life to the woman"
(Haralovich 12). Maria, on the other hand, has created a role for herself and has built her life
around the myth of her marriage and the preparation for the day when Hermann will return. She
has enjoyed the monetary fruits of her labour and the respect and privileges that come with
economic power, which are usually reserved for men. However, upon discovering the deal
between Oswald and Hermann, she discovers that her role is not absolute. Instead of being in
control, in the role of provider, "Maria has been playing a role [as an object of exchange] in
someone else's scenario--one composed by men" (Rheuban 19).
The soundtrack particularly demonstrates how traditional German culture and ideology has
continued across the divide of Stunde null . For example, Beethoven still plays on the radio and
the Deutschlandlied is heard on the street, although a break from tradition can be heard at the bar,
where Glenn Miller's "In the Mood" is played (67). In a speech, Konrad Adenauer declared that
Germany should not rearm itself after the war, which would ensure the nation's role would
change, yet a few years later his position has reverted back to rearmament. Similarly, Hitler's
portrait is thrown down from the wall, suggesting his fall in the German people's estimation.
However, the portraits of chancellors combined with the explosion at the end of the film echo the
shot of Hitler at the film's opening, suggest the similarities between the leaders before and after
1945. Maria and other Germans in the film desire to break from their traditional German and
National Socialist past, yet ultimately things remain remarkably the same under democracy and
capitalism.
Bibliography
Adam, Peter. Art of the Third Reich. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1992.
Haralovich, Mary Beth. "The Sexual Politics of The Marriage of Maria Braun" Wide Angle 12.1 (Jan. 1990): 6-16.
Kaes, Anton. "History, Fiction, Memory: Fassbinder's The Marriage of Maria Braun (1979)" German Film and Literature: Adaptations and Transformations Eric Rentschler ed. New York and London: Methuen, 1986: 276-88.
Moeller, Robert G. "Reconstructing the Family in Reconstruction Germany: Women and Social Policy in the Federal Republic, 1949-55" Feminist Studies 15.1 (Spring 1989): 137-69.
Rheuban, Joyce. "The Marriage of Maria Braun: History, Melodrama, Ideology" The
Marriage of Maria Braun. Ed. Joyce Rheuban. New Brunswick, New Jersey:
Rutgers University Press, 1986: 3-20.
Rheuban, Joyce, ed. The Marriage of Maria Braun. Dir. Rainer Werner Fassbinder.
New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press, 1986: 35-162.
Seidel, Hans-Dieter. "Stuttgarter Zeitung" The Marriage of Maria Braun. Ed. Joyce
Rheuban. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press, 1986: 217-8.
This essay focused itself well. The topic question (the desire and failure to break with tradition) was answered clearly and concisely with many examples from the film as well as the secondary sources. However, the paper only discusses Maria as wanting to make a total break from the past. In the last sentence of the essay, (adding information in the conclusion) it refers to "Maria and other Germans in the film desire to break...." etc. Who were the other characters that felt this way?? This is not explained.
Five secondary materials were used quite extensively throughout the essay. The secondary sources support the paper's argument well, and even sum up the on-going Nazi tradition. An example is the source "Adam" about Goebbels role for women. The footnotes, however, are confusing. It is unclear which author is being referred to, and the parentheses mid-paragraph detract from the flow of the paper. Example: On page one the paper refers to an idea by "Beth Haralovich" which is followed by a page number mid-sentence....why not put the number at the end of the sentence? I think this (english) style of footnoting takes the reader's focus away from the paper's content.
Yes, the argument was very consistent and convincing. Several points need to be elaborated and explained more. The essay uses very general statements,such as:"West Germans sought to reconstitute the social order after the shock and trauma of National Socialism..." Which West Germans?? All of them? There must have been many traditionalist males who wanted to preserve women they way they'd always been. Also, "These concepts remain close to the ideals of National Socialism despite the policy makers desire to create new policies for post-war Germany" Which policy makers? What new policies?
No obvious stylistic or grammatical flaws. There are, however, a few terms that could be explained or defined for clarification: Wirtschaftswunderin, and Stunde null.
Relevant, important scenes were well chosen for the discussion. The essay analysed the film critically, using particular aspects of the film, rather than a plot summary re-cap.
Outstanding area: "Better black than brown" contrasted with "better Braun than black" Great!!
Nice clear thesis statement.
Grade: A- (80%)