mh2000
Well-known
Hey, if we don't paint things as so starkly b&w and idealize everything we won't be able to paint over all the terrible things we do other people in the name of God, freedom and untimate good! So back off!
"And you’ll be sorry that you messed with
The U.S. of A.
`Cause we`ll put a boot in your ass
It`s the American way..."
-Toby Keith
>>Geez, you americans have got to get over this sh!t.
"And you’ll be sorry that you messed with
The U.S. of A.
`Cause we`ll put a boot in your ass
It`s the American way..."
-Toby Keith
>>Geez, you americans have got to get over this sh!t.
mh2000
Well-known
Personally, I don't collect Nazi memerabilia, but I can see the fascination that many have for it and don't comdemn it at all. Owning historical Nazi stuff is certainly not an endorsement of Hitler's horrendous legacy at all, but it is fascinating (to me) in the recognition of the universality of the human failings that it took to come to pass... every people has historically had a similar failing and it is better to recognize the humanness of this tendancy so we can better protect ourselves from allowing our own country/people from committing its own attrocities. The failing is not limited to only Nazis, but is a potential failing in us all.
As to the camera, *I* would want to get it working at least so I could shoot some photos with it. I guess I would have it appraised first (I don't have a clue what those are worth... only I'm sure more than what I would be willing to pay) before doing anything...
As to the camera, *I* would want to get it working at least so I could shoot some photos with it. I guess I would have it appraised first (I don't have a clue what those are worth... only I'm sure more than what I would be willing to pay) before doing anything...
murrayb53
Established
I found an article on Photo.net last night that had a couple pictures of a Leica with an engraving on the back of the top plate "SS - Reich".
The engraving looked fake to me. The font used for the word "Reich" didn't look like anything I've seen before.
Is this the model you were speaking of?
Steve
The engraving looked fake to me. The font used for the word "Reich" didn't look like anything I've seen before.
Is this the model you were speaking of?
Steve
flessas
Member
Steve,
I would try to establish the functionality of the camera, but I would keep the appearance as it is.
I believe that old products and special ones with a historical background should show their age and history.
Restoring so old products is like rebuilding the Acropolis or the Colosseum….
What a thread!!!!
It is weird sometimes…
People are fascinated by a German product, admire it, dreaming of possessing it and spending thousands of Euros or dollars to obtain it.
But still do not realise that in the last 60 years the world has grown closer together leaving no room of resentments and prejudices.!!!
For gods shake, here is a photography range finder forum and not a “come to turns with the past” forum.
I would try to establish the functionality of the camera, but I would keep the appearance as it is.
I believe that old products and special ones with a historical background should show their age and history.
Restoring so old products is like rebuilding the Acropolis or the Colosseum….
What a thread!!!!
It is weird sometimes…
People are fascinated by a German product, admire it, dreaming of possessing it and spending thousands of Euros or dollars to obtain it.
But still do not realise that in the last 60 years the world has grown closer together leaving no room of resentments and prejudices.!!!
For gods shake, here is a photography range finder forum and not a “come to turns with the past” forum.
Last edited:
bcostin
Well-known
Indeed. I was wondering if someone was going to mention Soviet cameras. The Soviets were Allies of convenience during WWII, and then successfully hid much of their evil behind the Iron Curtain for decades after that. I think those things still color our historical perceptions of Communism even today. But there's do denying that during their long history the Eastern Bloc and China killed, starved, ruined, imprisoned, and enslaved more people in pursuit of Communist ideology than the Nazis ever managed.
Many Soviet cameras were made with slave labor and many were used by the military. Like a FED NKVD, inscribed to commemorate one of the most brutal secret police agencies the world's ever seen. But ultimately it's just a camera.
That said, I have to admit that I've had these same sorts of qualms sometimes myself. I'm fascinated by Soviet technology and space exploration. Cosmonauts were just doing their jobs, and very bravely. But I still can't bring myself to buy or display patches or other items that prominently feature Soviet symbols. Too many people died living under and fighting against those symbols. I'm glad that other people do collect them, though. They're an important part of history, and forgetting history is usually far more dangerous than remembering it.
Dunk
Established
I also have these two books and authenticated my "Luftwaffen - Eigentum" Leica IIIb and "Luftwaffen - Eigentum" 50/3.5 Elmar by cross referencing the S/N's to the matrices in the books. I bought the camera and lens together from a reputable source but have had some "Hmmm really?? ... are you sure its genuine??" comments about their authenticity from those who assume that because there are so many fakes about then any WW2 "Luftwaffen" camera/lens should be treated with suspicion. But when I told them where I bought it they chenged their opinion especially after seeing the documentation in the two books. The books cannot authenticate all genuine WW2 Luftwaffe Leica cameras and lenses. But they can authenticate all those for which documentary evidence exists in Leitz Wetzlar's shipping records .. assuming the cameras' and lenses' serial No.'s are genuine and original.
You might be interested to know Steve I just had my Luftwaffe IIIb CLA-d because the shutter was obviously inaccurate. The camera did not require any cosmetic restoration; the vulcanite is in good condition. If the vulcanite on mine had been in a worn/distressed state it would have been left in its original state because to restore it would destroy its authenticity. A nice bit of WABI on a well used camera or watch adds to their character and charm.
Regarding the aesthetics of collecting WW2 Luftwaffe memorabilia there will always be those who frown on the practice. However, fact is that Leica cameras were used by both German and British armed forces during WW2 in fact the British Govt put out an SOS requesting its citizens to donate their Leica cameras for the war effort. If an authentic British forces' WW2 Leica became available I would have no hesitation in considering buying it and few people would raise a "Tut Tut" eyebrow if I did. It would be another part of Leica History. Furthermore, some of the "Tut Tutters" may not be aware that Leica (Leitz) helped Jews to escape from Germany during WW2 by arranging exit documents for them to emigrate to New York on the pretence that they had jobs waiting for them at Leitz New York.
There is a fascination for collectors with WW2 memorabilia and it will never "go away". I can understand why some people regard war memorabilia as being in "bad taste" because of all the attrocities committed by madmen. But Leitz had no option but to supply cameras for the Luftwaffe during WW2 just as many thousands of Germans had no option but to join the German forces. Technology advanced at an unprecedented rate during WW2 because of both the allies' and enemies' hunger for victory ... but Leica cameras probably played a very minor part in that battle. The "Tutt Tutters" should realize every time they look at their computer screens that they would not be doing so now if it was not for the space race ie NASAs manned moon trip and the necessary advances in microchip technologies. And how did the conquest of space come about? It was via German WW2 V1 and V2 rocket technology.
But do the "Tutt Tutters" refuse to use a personal computer because of its technological origins?
And do they refuse to use modern "miniature" cameras because of their common Leitz/Leica/Oscar Barnack German origins?
Of course not.
Here are the pictures of the books and my camera:
Cheers
dunk
Last edited:
Roger Hicks
Veteran
There's an interesting attitude to history here. Someone -- I forget who -- would 'blow his nose' on a Nazi or Confederate flag.
Ok... would he blow his nose on a Royalist (or Roundhead) pennant from the Civil War? On a flag of the Knights Hospitallers or a flag of Soleiman's Janissaries from the Great Siege of 1565? On a Crusader or Saracen flag? On a Roman or Essene standard?
It is all very well to take sides in long-past wars, but destroying symbols (from either side) smacks of book-burning.
Both my grandfathers were killed in the war, one on the Russian convoys, one off Crete. The one who was killed off Crete was a keen amateur photographer and a holder of the George Medal. I have no doubt that they were fighting on the side of right. But somewhere I have a pfennig with the Reichsadler and swastika on it. Should I throw it away? Why?
To return to the original question, if you're not going to use it, why 'restore' it? It's a piece of history; if you don't want to use it, why does it need to work? I once had a grey-paint Luftwaffen Leica with all the good stuff, including an engraved lens and field-gray case blind-stamped Luftwaffe Eigentum. It was in good working order -- it was in the late 70s or early 80s -- but I bought it (and sold it) as a usable curio. To me it was an interesting and unusual Leica like my Model A or my 9cm fat-barrel with the serial number ending a*. I certainly didn't (and still don't) associate it with the death of my grandfathers.
If you want to boycott hideous, murderous regimes, don't buy anything Chinese. Very roughly, Hitler killed 16,000,000 people; Stalin doubled that at 32,000,000 (and I've had an NKVD Fed, too); and Mao doubled it again, at 64,000,000. Both German fascism and Russian communism have fallen from power; Mao's regime is still in power.
Cheers,
Roger
Ok... would he blow his nose on a Royalist (or Roundhead) pennant from the Civil War? On a flag of the Knights Hospitallers or a flag of Soleiman's Janissaries from the Great Siege of 1565? On a Crusader or Saracen flag? On a Roman or Essene standard?
It is all very well to take sides in long-past wars, but destroying symbols (from either side) smacks of book-burning.
Both my grandfathers were killed in the war, one on the Russian convoys, one off Crete. The one who was killed off Crete was a keen amateur photographer and a holder of the George Medal. I have no doubt that they were fighting on the side of right. But somewhere I have a pfennig with the Reichsadler and swastika on it. Should I throw it away? Why?
To return to the original question, if you're not going to use it, why 'restore' it? It's a piece of history; if you don't want to use it, why does it need to work? I once had a grey-paint Luftwaffen Leica with all the good stuff, including an engraved lens and field-gray case blind-stamped Luftwaffe Eigentum. It was in good working order -- it was in the late 70s or early 80s -- but I bought it (and sold it) as a usable curio. To me it was an interesting and unusual Leica like my Model A or my 9cm fat-barrel with the serial number ending a*. I certainly didn't (and still don't) associate it with the death of my grandfathers.
If you want to boycott hideous, murderous regimes, don't buy anything Chinese. Very roughly, Hitler killed 16,000,000 people; Stalin doubled that at 32,000,000 (and I've had an NKVD Fed, too); and Mao doubled it again, at 64,000,000. Both German fascism and Russian communism have fallen from power; Mao's regime is still in power.
Cheers,
Roger
LeicaTom
Watch that step!
Cheers
dunk
Very nice example of an Luftwaffen IIIB, good photos.
But I think what Steve was asking was to see what`s the evidence of this so called Waffen SS "SSKB" Leica IIIC that`s supposed to be real?
(someone here said that there`s photos of one in that book, but then they said said that they did`nt even own the book?)
Does the 30 Jahre book have photos of a SSKB IIIC in it or not?
I would really like to know, I don`t have access to this book now.
Tom
PS: Ohh and the US Army also used Leica`s during WW2 that`s also included in the research for my planned book.......Leica`s up to model IIIA & IIIB were susposed to have been issued,
IIIC`s were very rare and only a handful of them fell into Allied hands before May 1945, either captured on the ground, from crashed aircraft or in barter trading with Neutral countries, that`s how the American`s and British forces got their first look at the Leica IIIC.
Last edited:
iamzip
Ambitious, but rubbish
Without having read any of the other responses, I will paraphrase this mantra that is popular with car collectors: A camera can be restored as many times as you like, but it is only original once.
That being said I think it is perfectly acceptable to put it into good working order, CLA and all.
That being said I think it is perfectly acceptable to put it into good working order, CLA and all.
murrayb53
Established
Tom, no, I have not seen the camera that was discussed.
Did you have the time to Google photo.net SS REICH ? There are a couple of interesting shots of an authentic wartime IIIc, but with what appears to be an
engraving which most likely was engraved at a later date.
Take a look and tell me what you think.
Steve
Did you have the time to Google photo.net SS REICH ? There are a couple of interesting shots of an authentic wartime IIIc, but with what appears to be an
engraving which most likely was engraved at a later date.
Take a look and tell me what you think.
Steve
LeicaTom
Watch that step!
Steve,
Ohh yes, I do know that camera (an uncommon series in the #380xxx group *late 1941/early 1942*
But, I`m pretty sure the engraving is a fake, purely fantasy......a real Leica with a fake engraving, most certainly not an engraving used by any official German military capacity of the Waffen SS.
The oddest and rarest of all the WW2 German military engravings are the Kriegsmarine and Heer cameras, especially the Artillery ones for the Army (Heer or W.H. - Grey painted K shuttered cameras with military engravings are the rarest of all the WW2 cameras) - one has to be very careful with all the WW2 engravings, if it doesn`t match to the numbers in the Leitz records, then leave it alone, that`s the best advice.
Tom
PS: There was another case of a real camera and a fake engraving about 5 months ago (we disscused the camera here somewhere on RFF) A REAL Leica IIIC "Red Curtain" that was delivered to Bulgaria in late 1941 to a Leitz distributor there ~ it had a Kriegsmarine reichsadler and M. engraved prefectly in the upper left side of the top plate, a perfect engraving, but fake, this one was called out by Jim`s research and the numbers were nowhere close to any Navy shipment - it always pays to check numbers first before buying anything "wartime" Leica.
Last edited:
Roger Hicks
Veteran
It appears, though, that the Nazis themselves sometimes 'faked' Nazi Leicas. Of course I've seen fake Afrika Korps Leicas in desert sand colour -- in fact, the last one I saw was a IIId as well -- but several collector friends as far back as the 70s (when there were far fewer fakes around) thought it possible that at least some were actually painted during WW2...
Cheers,
R.
Cheers,
R.
LeicaTom
Watch that step!
Yes, I`m sure that`s another factor, I`ve seen fake IIID`s and IIIC K`s (Grey painted and Chrome) as well and this was back in the late 1980`s/early 90`s.
Tom
bmattock
Veteran
Roger,
I've really said all I want to on this subject, but in exiting this thread, I do want to correct a perception that I feel is quite unwarranted.
That would be me. I have no respect for such symbols as they have come to be regarded.
No, I would not. First, the chances are fairly high that I would not even recognize them if I saw them, without doing some research first. Second, and more importantly, neither would the general public. The Nazi flag and the Confederate flag (and yes, I am quite aware that the so-called 'Confederate' flag wasn't actually what it is now purported to be) have identity with the general public. They are symbols that are well-understood. More on that later.
My lack of respect is not for historical artifacts but rather for the value people place upon them. I would not, for example, set fire to a historical document written by Adolf Hitler or Jefferson Davis. They are truly part of history and the record should indeed be preserved - in a museum, library, or other public repository.
I have never said or intimated that you should. Again, more on that later.
And I don't suppose I would, either.
I've said nothing about hideous regimes and boycotting them. No one that I am aware of collects Chinese-made televisions in commemoration of their use by the Chinese People's Army. Do you begin to see my direction?
It is not the evil done by the Nazis that I object to (well, actually, I do, but there's not much anyone can do about that now, since it's over and done with). Nor do I deny the place in history that WWII, winners and losers, occupy. Things which are of that era and have historical significance are rightfully museum pieces.
And if people placed the same value on formerly-military-owned Nazi items that had been converted from civilian use as they do the non-Nazi items, I'd have no objections at all. A camera, after all, is a camera.
But I do object to the fact that people *do* place special value on Nazi historical artifacts that they can own, such as cameras, flags, letter openers, and etc.
There probably is a legitimate market for such things, since they exceed the requirements of museums in terms of sheer numbers of surviving artifacts. But if they were merely historically-valued items, they would command similar prices as a Swedish-military-owned Leica or a US WWII Graflex, wouldn't they? But they do not. The others are collectible too, but not in the same league as the Nazi Leicas.
The same is true of the value people place on collectible Confederate memorabilia. Note that people do not display 'real' confederate flags, other than the stars and bars (which is actually fairly inauthentic and/or historically obscure). They display the stars and bars - and why? Because of the symbolic value.
I do not object to cameras. I do not hate Leica or hold them responsible for what they had to do during WWII. I have a Krups coffee grinder and a Mitsubishi car, for God's sake. My skin does not burn if I touch a Leica that was once owned by the German military during WWII. This is not about the 'right side' and the 'wrong side' or even about the good or evil of the Nazis.
It is about symbols, and the value people place on them. Collecting Nazi symbols is not something I feel comfortable with. I would not, had I the power, stop others from doing so - have at it. But I have no use and no interest in such things. I do suspect the motives of those who are fascinated with Nazi memorabilia, yes.
This is why I get such angry responses by collectors who (intentionally?) mistake my motives or my reasoning. It is not the camera, nor the regime, I find objectionable. It is their fascination with a symbol of - what? Nothing but hatred. The Nazi regime now 'stands' for something as a symbol, like it or not. It stands for hatred, in the same manner that the Confederate flag 'stands' for slavery. No, that is not what they originally were for - it is what they symbolize now.
You, Roger, understand this. You know Roland Barthes, you know semiotics. When an item becomes a symbol, it is no longer signaling what it is, but what it represents. One can argue all day long from logic about the history of Leica, or how a camera is just a camera, and blah blah blah and it means absolutely squat - because the camera that was once owned by the Nazi war machine is now a symbol.
The proof is undeniable - it is in the value people place on it - both monetarily and by asking such questions as 'restore or leave as-is'? That's not camera talk, that's symbol talk. When pointed out, it brings about an quick and very angry response. No one likes to be told that their camera (flag, belt buckle, etc) is a symbol of evil and that others hold it in low esteem therefore.
Semiotics says that the image of Hitler is no longer that of a man, or a historical figure, or a leader, or whatever else Hitler was when alive. Hitler is a symbol of evil - universally understood, as is the Nazi flag. Semiotics says that Pol Pot is not, even though he killed as many or more, neither is Stalin, or Mao, etc. Those figures do not have the semiotic power the symbol of Hitler does. And there is no accounting for why - it just is. This is the value humanity has placed on the image of Hitler.
The same is true for the Confederate flag. It was not the only, or even the predominate, battle flag, and it was not the official flag of the CSA. None of that matters in the slightest. The CSA historically fought for state's rights, not to (specifically) preserve slavery, and that's of no consequence either. The fact is that the stars and bars represent (symbolically) slavery, and that's that. Sure, some argue. But logic does not change the value that a symbol has in how it is seen by others.
And again, I hold this only for myself. Sure, I look askance at collectors of Nazi memorabilia, including cameras (and cigarette lighters, table napkins, whatever). I don't 'get it' because I see the symbols as symbols and not as the items themselves. If I tried to see them as they are - historically-significant items from a particular period in time, then I am forced to confront the fact that Nazi items are worth more money and are more assiduously colllected than, say, Finnish items of a similar vintage and background. When I confront that, I'm back to symbols again.
I have no use for symbols of evil. No one can argue that a Nazi-owned Leica is not a symbol of evil because that is precisely why they collect it, QED. They just choose not to confront the symbology of their own psychology. It does not make them evil, nor do I dislike them. I have lots of friends who do things I don't like or that I don't approve of. Life goes on.
I've really said all I want to on this subject, but in exiting this thread, I do want to correct a perception that I feel is quite unwarranted.
That would be me. I have no respect for such symbols as they have come to be regarded.
No, I would not. First, the chances are fairly high that I would not even recognize them if I saw them, without doing some research first. Second, and more importantly, neither would the general public. The Nazi flag and the Confederate flag (and yes, I am quite aware that the so-called 'Confederate' flag wasn't actually what it is now purported to be) have identity with the general public. They are symbols that are well-understood. More on that later.
My lack of respect is not for historical artifacts but rather for the value people place upon them. I would not, for example, set fire to a historical document written by Adolf Hitler or Jefferson Davis. They are truly part of history and the record should indeed be preserved - in a museum, library, or other public repository.
I have never said or intimated that you should. Again, more on that later.
And I don't suppose I would, either.
I've said nothing about hideous regimes and boycotting them. No one that I am aware of collects Chinese-made televisions in commemoration of their use by the Chinese People's Army. Do you begin to see my direction?
It is not the evil done by the Nazis that I object to (well, actually, I do, but there's not much anyone can do about that now, since it's over and done with). Nor do I deny the place in history that WWII, winners and losers, occupy. Things which are of that era and have historical significance are rightfully museum pieces.
And if people placed the same value on formerly-military-owned Nazi items that had been converted from civilian use as they do the non-Nazi items, I'd have no objections at all. A camera, after all, is a camera.
But I do object to the fact that people *do* place special value on Nazi historical artifacts that they can own, such as cameras, flags, letter openers, and etc.
There probably is a legitimate market for such things, since they exceed the requirements of museums in terms of sheer numbers of surviving artifacts. But if they were merely historically-valued items, they would command similar prices as a Swedish-military-owned Leica or a US WWII Graflex, wouldn't they? But they do not. The others are collectible too, but not in the same league as the Nazi Leicas.
The same is true of the value people place on collectible Confederate memorabilia. Note that people do not display 'real' confederate flags, other than the stars and bars (which is actually fairly inauthentic and/or historically obscure). They display the stars and bars - and why? Because of the symbolic value.
I do not object to cameras. I do not hate Leica or hold them responsible for what they had to do during WWII. I have a Krups coffee grinder and a Mitsubishi car, for God's sake. My skin does not burn if I touch a Leica that was once owned by the German military during WWII. This is not about the 'right side' and the 'wrong side' or even about the good or evil of the Nazis.
It is about symbols, and the value people place on them. Collecting Nazi symbols is not something I feel comfortable with. I would not, had I the power, stop others from doing so - have at it. But I have no use and no interest in such things. I do suspect the motives of those who are fascinated with Nazi memorabilia, yes.
This is why I get such angry responses by collectors who (intentionally?) mistake my motives or my reasoning. It is not the camera, nor the regime, I find objectionable. It is their fascination with a symbol of - what? Nothing but hatred. The Nazi regime now 'stands' for something as a symbol, like it or not. It stands for hatred, in the same manner that the Confederate flag 'stands' for slavery. No, that is not what they originally were for - it is what they symbolize now.
You, Roger, understand this. You know Roland Barthes, you know semiotics. When an item becomes a symbol, it is no longer signaling what it is, but what it represents. One can argue all day long from logic about the history of Leica, or how a camera is just a camera, and blah blah blah and it means absolutely squat - because the camera that was once owned by the Nazi war machine is now a symbol.
The proof is undeniable - it is in the value people place on it - both monetarily and by asking such questions as 'restore or leave as-is'? That's not camera talk, that's symbol talk. When pointed out, it brings about an quick and very angry response. No one likes to be told that their camera (flag, belt buckle, etc) is a symbol of evil and that others hold it in low esteem therefore.
Semiotics says that the image of Hitler is no longer that of a man, or a historical figure, or a leader, or whatever else Hitler was when alive. Hitler is a symbol of evil - universally understood, as is the Nazi flag. Semiotics says that Pol Pot is not, even though he killed as many or more, neither is Stalin, or Mao, etc. Those figures do not have the semiotic power the symbol of Hitler does. And there is no accounting for why - it just is. This is the value humanity has placed on the image of Hitler.
The same is true for the Confederate flag. It was not the only, or even the predominate, battle flag, and it was not the official flag of the CSA. None of that matters in the slightest. The CSA historically fought for state's rights, not to (specifically) preserve slavery, and that's of no consequence either. The fact is that the stars and bars represent (symbolically) slavery, and that's that. Sure, some argue. But logic does not change the value that a symbol has in how it is seen by others.
And again, I hold this only for myself. Sure, I look askance at collectors of Nazi memorabilia, including cameras (and cigarette lighters, table napkins, whatever). I don't 'get it' because I see the symbols as symbols and not as the items themselves. If I tried to see them as they are - historically-significant items from a particular period in time, then I am forced to confront the fact that Nazi items are worth more money and are more assiduously colllected than, say, Finnish items of a similar vintage and background. When I confront that, I'm back to symbols again.
I have no use for symbols of evil. No one can argue that a Nazi-owned Leica is not a symbol of evil because that is precisely why they collect it, QED. They just choose not to confront the symbology of their own psychology. It does not make them evil, nor do I dislike them. I have lots of friends who do things I don't like or that I don't approve of. Life goes on.
murrayb53
Established
Tom,
What Military Book?
I haven't heard about this one.
Where did you order it from.
Thanks,
Steve
What Military Book?
I haven't heard about this one.
Where did you order it from.
Thanks,
Steve
murrayb53
Established
The earlier idea of sitting around and having a beer sounds great.
Steve
Steve
murrayb53
Established
Yeah, my luck......all the way in Oz !!
ENJOY !!
Steve
ENJOY !!
Steve
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Bill,
Ummm... Yes I can, actually.
It's something that happened a long time ago. Like you, I may question the psychology of people who collect the residue of National Socialism -- I am even more puzzled by those re-enactors who choose Waffen-SS regiments -- but I'd counter with 'everything has got to be somewhere', unless, of course, it is destroyed.
There's a big difference in my book between a curio, and a symbol of evil. I was once shown the Magickal wand, sceptre, call it what you will, that had once belonged to Aleister Crowley. I found it banal.
Which, ultimately, is what any minor collectible can easily be, whether it's the model pigs I used to collect, non-Nazi Leicas, or Nazi Leicas. Collecting may be a route to history -- Paul-Henry van Hasbroeck's camera collection is a wonderful place to learn about camera design, engineering, the cost of labour, the substitution of capital for labour, and more -- or it may be essentially thoughtless and accidental, which I believe is generally the case.
You may think that someone who thought hard about National Socialism would not collect Leicas, but hell, Napoleon's Moscow campaign arguably showed him to be as big a monster as Hitler (read Adam Zamoyski's book if you haven't already). Should people spit upon Napoleonic memorabilia? An old girlfriend had a gold bee from Napoleon's coffin: there is, I think, a natural human inclination to be interested in things that have been 'touched by history' in a clearer way than usual.
Semiotics is, in its nature, transactional; the symbol has to mean something to someone, as does the signal. To make a 70-year-old camera a symbol of evil is reification, made doubly dangerous by the fact that there is a concrete thing to invest with symbolism. My own feeling is that unless something is being used as a rallying point for a barbaric philosophy, it is not anything like as symbolic as you maintain. Indeed, it can be a reminder of a past from which we can, with any luck, learn.
Cheers,
Roger
Vince Lupo
Whatever
Don't know if I should wade into this or not, and sorry for asking a potentially stupid question, but isn't there a difference between the Nazis, which was a political party, and the Luftwaffe, which was the Air Force? If you're part of the Luftwaffe, does it necessarily follow that you would've been a member of the Nazi Party?
I have three Luftwaffe Leicas, and I don't really look at them as representatives of anything evil (though I do find them very interesting and collectible). If that were the case, then maybe we shouldn't be using Leicas at all, because the company made them for these military organizations. Should I then not drive my Volkswagen because of things that company may have done during WWII?
I have three Luftwaffe Leicas, and I don't really look at them as representatives of anything evil (though I do find them very interesting and collectible). If that were the case, then maybe we shouldn't be using Leicas at all, because the company made them for these military organizations. Should I then not drive my Volkswagen because of things that company may have done during WWII?
Last edited:
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Vince,
An excellent point. Among her family heirlooms, a friend of mine has the standard silver-framed portrait of a handsome young fighter pilot who never came back: her great-uncle, I think.
She is a moderate socialist, and one of the people who helped hammer out the first joint history book to be used in both German and French schools. Should I shun her because her great-uncle was in the Luftwaffe? Should she throw away his picture?
I fully take Bill's point that this isn't what he's saying, but my argument is that one can invest too much symbolism in something that can't really carry it, and that Luftwaffe Leicas are in this category.
Edit: Just out of curiosity, how would you put into words the reasons why you find them 'interesting and collectable'? I'm not saying you're wrong, or a secret Nazi or anything, but I'd find it hard to put into words why I possess quite a number of things that are not necessary to life, such as my 1602 edition of Euripides's comedies.
Cheers,
Roger
Last edited: