This excerpt is from a Dali interview which
I included in a video I posted in June: Dali’s Mustache. It’s a simple and quick allusion to Hitler’s
mustache, calling it tragic, but while doing the research for that video, I also remember
hearing Dali say this: Hitler, to Dali, was a sublime and a great
character. Trust me, this is just the tip of the iceberg. You better get ready because, after this video,
your perception of Salvador Dali will completely change. Was Dali, the quirky, the crazy, the surrealist
painter, a fascist? Let us first define, very quickly what fascism
is. One of the simplest and most accessible definitions
would have to come from Umberto Eco’s Ur-Fascism where he defines Fascism as: “[Fascism was] a fuzzy totalitarianism,
a collage of different philosophical and political ideas, a beehive of contradictions.” “There was only one Nazism. We cannot label Franco’s hyper-Catholic
Falangism as Nazism, since Nazism is fundamentally pagan, polytheistic, and anti-Christian. But the fascist game can be played in many
forms, and the name of the game does not change.” Basically, fascism is notoriously hard to
define because it’s not a consistent ideology. There are many fascisms, encompassed in the
very broad and umbrella term, Ur-Fascism: “But in spite of this fuzziness, I think
it is possible to outline a list of features that are typical of what I would like to call
Ur-Fascism, or Eternal Fascism.” So here are some of the 14 features typical
of Ur-Fascism which Eco identifies: 1. Cult of Tradition
2. The Rejection of Modernism
5. Fear of Difference or (of the Intruder)
10. Elitism or Contempt for the Weak
11. Cult of Heroism and the Cult of Death Eco makes sure to clarify that, to be a fascist,
one doesn’t need to adhere to all these features. Only one of those features could be enough
for fascism to slowly grow in an individual or in a collectivity. As Ernest Hemingway put it in For Whom the
Bell Tolls: “But are there not many fascists in your
country?" "There are many who do not know they are fascists
but will find it out when the time comes.” If you’re interested in knowing more about
these features, I recommend reading Eco’s essay which is relatively short and free to
read online. I’ll link it in the description. But trying to apply any of these features
to Dali would be an extremely hard and perhaps impossible task. Dali, just like fascism, was very hard to
understand. He was purposefully confusing and contradictory. So my case for Dali’s Fascism will unfold
in three parts. Part I: Dali’s 1934 trial for his obsession
over Hitlerian fascism. The trial wasn’t a legal one. Dali was being tried by the surrealist group
for his obsession over Hitler, and, if he was convicted of such crime, he’d be expelled
from the group. Keep in mind, the surrealists were communists
and were strongly opposed to fascism and Hitler. Hitler didn’t only oppose communists and
socialists, he also opposed modern art. I made a video about that if you want to check
it out. The leader of the surrealist group was André
Breton and he lead the charges against Dali. In a letter, Breton wrote, on January 23rd
1934, that Dali’s anti-humanitarianism revolted him and was completely incompatible with surrealism. For example, “Dali preferred train accidents
in which the third-class passengers suffered most”. On top of that, Dali defended academic painting
while deploring modern art, an opinion which, in a context where Hitler was trying to eradicate
modern art, was quite disappointing. Lastly comes the charges of having too much
of an obsession over Adolph Hitler. Breton heard Dali “praise the Nazi government
for its “worst exactions””. At the end of this letter, Breton asked Dali
to write a letter, to be published in a surrealist review, in which he would completely disavow
fascism. Dali’s answer wasn’t very satisfactory. For his anti-humanitarianism, he blamed a
sexual perversion. For his lamentation of modern art, Dali said
he was thinking of all modern art except surrealism and cubism. Finally, as for the accusation of being too
interested in Hitler, Dali said that he was Hitlerian “neither in fact nor intention”,
explaining that his own paintings wouldn’t be accepted in Nazi Germany. Even if this, for now, clears Dali’s position
on fascism, he still refused to disavow fascism and asked Breton to trust him. A little over a week later, the surrealists
boycotted the Salon des Indépendants, but Dali still decided to expose the Enigma of
William Tell, a caricature of Vladimir Lenin. That incident was the straw that broke the
camel’s back. Dali was accused of “several counter-revolutionary
acts tending the glorification of Hitlerian Fascism”. The trial was held on February 5th and Dali,
while being afflicted by a cold, managed to defend himself and stay in the surrealist
group. The very next day, fascists sparked a riot
in Paris resulting in the death of 12 people. Though these two events are unrelated, it
goes to show how dangerous it was to promote fascism at that time. Breton wasn’t the only person worried about
Dali’s obsession over Hitler. Paul Éluard, a prominent poet, wrote that
this obsession worried him and that “It’s absolutely necessary for Dali to find another
subject of delirium.” Later in 1934, Breton and Dali reconciled
and Dali even wrote to Breton saying that he’s making efforts to disavow Hitler. On April 11th, Dali held a lecture in Barcelona
where he tried to convince the audience that he wasn’t a fascist. While Dali said he was successful, the newspaper
La Publicitat wrote: “Dali only just fell short of declaring himself a Nazi”. So far, I’ve showed you the accusations
of Dali’s fascination for Hitler and Nazism, but I haven’t really given you examples
of it. First, and this is more of an interesting
piece of trivia, even the FBI had suspicions that Dali was a Nazi. In 1942, they arrested and searched his car
under the suspicion of him being a Nazi spy. Second, we can look at two of Dali’s paintings
about the subject. The first being The Enigma of Hitler in which
you can see a small portrait of Hitler in a giant plate amidst a barren and colorless
landscape. What does this mean? It’s really hard to tell. Is this supporting or denouncing Hitler? Is it just an apolitical painting as Dali
would often say? In any case, in 1939, the surrealists absolutely
despised it and didn’t think it was a good idea to paint Hitler in their political climate. The second painting is The Weaning of Furniture-Nutrition. In it, you see a cabinet which, we assume,
was taken from a nurse’s back. This woman is Dali’s childhood nurse, Lucia. To wean means to “accustom (someone) to
managing without something on which they have become dependent or of which they have become
excessively fond.” Dali has to learn to live without Lucia, the
same way she taught him to live without his mother. Again, the interpretation of this painting
can prove to be difficult, but where’s the link with Hitler and nazism? Well, this is where this painting gets interesting. Do you see the nurse’s armband, pretty inoffensive,
right? Well… it used to be a nazi armband until
the surrealists made Dali paint over it. Alright well those two paintings and their
iconography are open to interpretation. Can we really accuse Dali of being a fascist
for those paintings? Well Dali was also quoted saying some very
contentious and questionable things about Hitler. “I often dreamed of Hitler as a woman. His flesh, which I had imagined whiter than
white, ravished me... There was no reason for me to stop telling
one and all that to me Hitler embodied the perfect image of the great masochist who would
unleash a world war solely for the pleasure of losing and burying himself beneath the
rubble of an empire; the gratuitous action par excellence that should indeed have warranted
the admiration of the Surrealists.” But let’s leave Hitler for now and look
at perhaps another indicator of Dali’s fascism: The Spanish Civil War. To put you in context, the Spanish Democratic
Republic drafted a new constitution in 1932, applying modern ideas such as Freedom of Speech
and Assembly, the separation of Church and State, the secularization of education and
land redistribution. Though these ideas sound moderate to us, they
were radical to the Church, to nationalists and to fascists. In 1936, the tension turned into a civil war
in which were opposed the Democratic Republic, anarchists and communists and nationalists
and fascists led by Francisco Franco. This civil war opposing democracy and fascism
was a prelude to what was to come in world war II. However, the democratic forces of Spain were
alone, with a little bit of help from the USSR, while Franco’s nationalists had the
help of Hitler and Mussolini. In the art world, the best illustration of
this war was made by Picasso through his mural Guernica. One of my first ever videos was made on that
painting. Anyhow, Picasso made this mural to denounce
the violent bombing of the city of Guernica by the fascist forces. Picasso was in Paris at that time and funded
the anti-fascist forces, hoping to preserve democracy in Spain. Guernica was made for the Spanish Pavilion
at the Paris World Fair to promote the Republican struggle against fascism. Many Spanish artists contributed to the Pavilion,
Picasso and Miro being two of the biggest figures, but one very famous Spanish artist
wasn’t there to promote the Republic. To understand Dali’s involvement in the
Spanish Civil War, we can compare him to Picasso. The relationship between the two artists,
especially after the civil war, was a one-way street. Dali admired Picasso and Picasso ignored Dali.
Dali continuously provoked him, Picasso wouldn’t reply. Speaking of his painting Autumn Cannibalism,
Dali said “These Iberian beings devouring each other in the autumn express the pathos
of civil war considered (by me) as a phenomenon of natural history, as distinct from Picasso,
who considered it a political one.” So let’s compare two paintings denouncing
the civil war: Guernica by Picasso and Autumn Cannibalism by Dali. Guernica is an active painting, in so far
as it takes a position. Its message is saying: “Here are fascists attacking the Spanish
Republic. This is extremely wrong, dangerous and we
need to fight it.” Picasso sees a terrifying situation, identifies
the problematic element of this situation, expresses it and calls for battle. Dali on the other hand is depicting the civil
war passively. He’s not taking sides through this painting,
he’s just saying that both sides are hurting each other and that the civil war is bad for
Spain. The reason why I’m saying that this depiction
is passive is because Dali sees a terrifying situation, but is unable to identify its problematic
element. He sees a situation and says that such a situation
is bad. By not making an active depiction of the situation,
he’s being what many would call an “enlightened centrist” or someone who, by not positioning
themselves to one side or other, technically avoid being wrong, but end up giving legitimacy
to both sides: in this case, giving legitimacy to fascists. Dali’s refusal to take sides during the
Civil War is extremely problematic. Even George Orwell, who fought during the
Spanish Civil War alongside communists and anarchists, despised Dali and wrote: “During the Spanish Civil War he astutely
avoids taking sides, and makes a trip to Italy. He feels himself more and more drawn towards
the aristocracy, frequents smart salons, finds himself wealthy patrons, and is photographed
with the plump Vicomte de Noailles, whom he describes as his ‘Maecenas.’” When Dali’s friend and poet, Federico Garcia
Lorca was assassinated by Spanish fascists, he became a martyr for the republican forces,
a reason to combat fascism. Dali was appalled by this: “His death was exploited for propaganda
purposes. This was ignoble, for they knew as well as
I that Lorca was by essence the most a-political person on earth.” In fact, Lorca, before dying, supported the
republican side of the conflict, signed left-wing manifestos and publicly condemned fascism. Perhaps Dali is attributing to his friend
what he, himself, believed. But the danger of being apolitical during
such a conflict is that you can accept, or you can be indifferent, to whatever political
outcome the conflict has. This is exactly what happened with Dali when
Spain was won over by the fascist dictator Francisco Franco. Franco would rule from 1939 to 1975... with
Dali’s support. This shouldn’t come to a surprise, considering
Dali publicly said in 1975: “As for me, I am against freedom. I am for the blessed Inquisition. Freedom is shit, and that's why all these
countries founder, from an excess of liberty.” In 1939, the year the Civil War ended, Dali
wrote a letter to his friend Luis Brunuel, saying “Spain is serious, destined for “World
Hegemony”. A surrealist “Arriba Espana!”” Spain being destined for world hegemony was
an important idea in Falangism, the Spanish fascist ideology that took over Spain in 1939,
and “Arriba Espana” was its slogan. He was in admiration of a falangist group
he met in Madrid, calling them “one of the most intelligent, inspired and original of
the age!” This was the coup de grace for Dali’s involvement
in the surrealist movement. To Breton, the case for Dali’s fascism was
becoming stronger and stronger. Breton would finally write: “In February 1939 Dali said (I have this
from Dali himself and I’ve taken the trouble to make sure that no humour was involved)
that all the present trouble in the world is racial in origin, and that the best solution,
agreed on by all the white races, is to reduce all the dark races to slavery. Dali’s racism and xenophobia also resurfaced
in the 60s. The businessmen Peter Moore and Reynolds Morse,
both close to Dali, saw that Dali wasn’t very popular with Jewish art dealers. Moore said he was surprised how anti-semitic
Dali and his wife Gala were, while Morse, accused jewish dealers of discriminating Dali
for being catholic. In 1948, coinciding with his return to falangist
Spain, Dali publicly declared his newly important Catholic faith. It’s important to note that falangism accorded
great importance to catholicism, so Dali’s religious beliefs can be doubted, especially
knowing his character. Just to make you understand Dali’s opinions
and his reputation, here’s how Breton described Dali in the 60s: “the ex-apologist of Hitler,
the Fascist, clerical and racist painter and the friend of Franco, who opened Spain as
a drilling field for the worst barbarism ever known.” And this finally brings us to our last case
for Dali’s fascism, his admiration and his friendship with a fascist dictator. Dali met Franco a couple of times, constantly
defended him and even painted a portrait of his grand-daughter: Equestrian Portrait of
Carmen Bordiu-Franco. Like I said, Dali admired Franco and this
admiration would reach its most dangerous point on September 27th 1975. General Franco killed many people, but, less
than two months before his death, he’d carry out his final 5 executions, which was also
the last time Spain used capital punishment. 5 alleged members of the ETA, a left-wing
separatist terrorist group, were sentenced to death. This decision sparked international outrage. On October first, hundreds of thousands of
fascists gathered in support of Franco, chanting his name and making fascist salutes. Italy, Finland and Austria denounced the situation;
Mexico even proposed to exclude Spain from the United Nations. The international community was appalled. What did Dali have to say about the situation? He said that the rally in Madrid, which was
the biggest gathering in Spain, was “the biggest present that could have been made
to our Generalissimo Franco. “The success he’d had today, with a crowd
of more than two million people acclaiming him the greatest hero of Spain (the entire
Spanish people supporting him), could never have happened if there hadn’t been these
incidents. The hostility of the other countries has made
him thirty years younger in a second. He’s a wonderful person. This guarantees that the coming monarchy will
be totally successful. We’ll see then that Spain is a country where,
in a few months, there’ll be no more terrorism because they’re going to be liquidated like
rats. Three times more executions are needed. But there’ve been enough for the moment.” Finally, just to make my case for Dali’s
Fascism stronger, I interviewed professor Vicente Navarro, who teaches at John Hopkins
University. Mr. Navarro has been an advisor for countless
governments, for the United Nations and even for the President of the European Parliament. But Navarro was also an anti-fascist activist
in Franco’s Spain. After qualifying Spain under Franco as “the
nastiest dictatorship ever in Western Europe, he told me how he knew about Dali: Navarro knew about Dali for being a defender
of the fascist regime and, because of this reputation Dali made for himself in Spain,
he was despised by a large part of the population, but why don’t we know about that? Why has Dali’s fascism been buried? Dali is one of the most important figures
in Western art history. Why don’t we know about his fascistic tendencies? To conclude, I will let Mr. Navarro’s closing words to
the interview be the conclusion of this video. It was truly inspirational. Thank you for watching, thank you to my patrons for
supporting the channel and thank you Mr. Navarro for your tremendous help. He gave me his time and recommended me the
book The Shameful Life of Salvador Dali by Ian Gibson, which is the biography I used
for this video. Really, thank you! This was a long video and I really hope you
enjoyed it. As always make sure to subscribe and share
it with your friends if you thought it was interesting. Did I convince you that Dali was a fascist,
or at least had fascist sympathies? I’d like to end the video with a segment
from my interview with Mr. Navarro, which I thought was important to include, but I
didn’t know exactly where. I hope you find it resourceful.
