Aaron Oppenheim writes:

Sunday evening, on returning home from the most inspiring M.A.N.A. Numismatic Convention in Washington, I found the October 26th edition of COIN WORLD awaiting me.

My attention was arrested by the Gunter W. Kienast article entitled, "NAZI PARTY TIES SPURNED BY GOETZ AS REVEALED BY MEDALS, WRITINGS." May I say that my reaction toits contents was decidedly unfavorable. As this is Mr. Kienast's first article, I shall defer my commentary until the completion of the series. I am, however, impelled to makethe following immediate remarks as my reaction to what Mr. Kienast has said in his capacity of author of a book on Karl Goetz.

As to the Lusitania catastrophe and the medal designed by Goetz, to which Kienast plans to devote "generous space" ... with "many unpublished statements ofofficials and Goetz himself, "the sinking of this ocean liner on May 7, 1915 was a barbaric act committed by Germany during World War I. There was no justification forcommemorating this atrocity as if it were a heroic triumph. And yet that is the spirit in which Goetz conceived and executed the medal. How Mr. Kienast condone itscreation, when "everyone in the civilized world, be it an enemy citizen or a neutral, was shocked" when this diabolical "art" object appeared?

Your article has a sub-heading, "Artist Refused to Agree with Policies of Hitler." Kienast maintains that Goetz was compelled to work for the government, that he hadto do it even to survive. In the actual record, however, there is no hint of such a conflict either in his conduct or his work. Even if he was not a member of the party, he servedas one of its skilled propagandists, using his art to glorify first the German and then the Nazi atrocities. He translated the most heinous crimes and the most evil doctrines intoan aesthetic, and therefore pleasing, motif.

I can readily back up the above with materials in my collection. A short analysis of Karl Goetz that I wrote years ago touches upon the Lusitania medal, his ready service tothe Kaiser and the Fuhrer, and a work of his that involved me closely -- his design for a medal that, with bitter and cruel irony, depicted as an everlasting triumph the bombingand invasion of Holland by the Germans in May 1940. I have cause to disagree with Mr. Kienast when he writes, "The satire and sarcasm which is so dominant in his World War Imedals is absent [in the Hitler period]. His style changed noticeably."

Mr. Kienast endorses Goetz's contention that he was contaminated by Nazism, even though the latter proudly confesses his ties with Gebert who pandered the favorof Julius Streicher in order to promote Goetz's designs, notably his medal "Hitlerputsch." If ever there was an admission of guilt, it is contained in Goetz'sboast that he "hit the nail right on the head" when Streicher showed pleasure with his work. This occurred in 1923, before Hitler took power, and when people were stillfree to exercise their right to dissent, But Goetz was evidently aiming to please the Nazis even then.

The beast he was trying to please was none other than the arch-racist publisher of "DER STUERMER, who steamed up the German people to hate the Jews with his luridfabrications of "ritual murders," first published in a special edition in May 1934, together with the infamous caricatures. This issue aroused a world-wide outcry. TheArchbishop of Canterbury wrote in the London Times (May 16, 1934): "It seems almost incredible that such a publication recalling the worst excesses of medieval fanaticismshould have been permitted in any civilized country."

I leave it to your discretion about advising Mr. Kienast, at this time, concerning my findings as indicated in this letter.

To read the earlier E-Sylum article, see:
GUNTER W. KIENAST (1923-2017) (https://www.coinbooks.org/v22/esylum_v22n03a09.html)