Bismarck

Hi Silentmodeler,

I think the actual swastika symbol is omitted for one of two reasons.  As you point, there may some sensitivity to putting it on a model (even though this would be the accurate depiction of the subject).  The other reason is likely that in some jurisdictions, namely Germany, the display of the swastika is not allowed.  I know that Revell-Germany does not include the swastika in any of the decals for its models.

Hope this helps.  Rick

Thanks Rick,  that what i thought.  its more likely i will leave the white circle alone w/out the symbol.  again thanks

  I hope I don,t upset anyone here but this requires my input. The markings on a model of an historic vessel , no matter what they are is a fact of history . Face it ,the archives and other books people use accuracy for have undesirable markings in them . It is history . I do believe that the ommission of markings is taking the attitude of sticking ones head in the sand . I am german by birth and the gov,t back then almost destroyed my kin ,but ,we don,t hide from history . If we make it go away in real life , what will prevent something the same or worse from rearing it,s ugly head today. You are building a model . I build models .I do give credit to the audacity of german and japanese engineering for without it we wouldn,t have the great ships or planes of todey .      tankerbuilder

As others have allready pointed out. Whether good or bad, the swastika is an historic mark. Many assume it is the mark of Germany however it was actually the mark of the German National Socialist political party. That it represents the absolute worst in human behavior is undeniable, but it is history. As a side note the very same marking (or similar) figures prominately in many societies far pre-dating the Nazis of Germany. I recall one of my first road convoys in Vietnam where we passed thru a fairly large town and I saw a Budhist temple which had a stone stastika as part of its architechture. The old hand driving the deuce and a half explained that not only did this mark appear in Vietnam but he remembered seeing it in Arizona and Texas as a kid. Its also part of our own native American heritage and religion especially in the Southwest, Alaska and other areas. It also appears prominately in ancient Norse mythology too. If anyone takes exception point out (very politly and respectfully) that it is displayed in its historical context and maybe also point out that it has figured in other societies for hundreds if not thousands of years. Most will understand and those that refuse to probably won't be convinced by what you tell them. Other than that, all I can offer is since its your model do it as you see fit and enjoy the hobby. RickM

Tankbuilder

I do respect your comment.  You might have the point as  its part of the history at the same time i dont know what people or friends will feel if they saw it on the model.  I have no problem with the japanese symbols on the model, my only concern is the nazsi symbol. i know serveral of my friends will destory it if they see it. but you are right that its part of the history and some people might not understand it as well as my friends, if i put it on the Bismarck.  I personally will have no problem showing the sybmol since im showing the acutally history of the Bismarck and at the same time i might be afraid of showing in the public.

 I guess its something that i have to think abt it to see how i feel. 

Rick

Thank for ur kindness comment and clearing up about swastika.

I also have my "two cents" to put in.  I agree that the swastika needs to be depicted as an authentic historical marking for most WWII era German ships.  Although I understand contemporary sensitivities about its meaning, we cannot ignore that Hitlers NAZI Party was but one example of the worst of human behavior.  Nobody questions the placing of the Red Star or the sickle and hammer emblems on Soviet tanks, ships, and aircraft, yet Stalin was responsible for far more inhumane deaths than Hitler ever was.  Similarly, Communist Chinese markings can equally represent the hundreds of millions of innocents murdered by that Party.  Equally, the Rising Sun emblem on Japanese vehicles represents the brutality with which that nation's military treated the peoples which they conquered in WWII.

In other words, the sensitivity over the displaying the swastika emblem on German aircraft or ships seems misplaced to me. If we are modeling for historic accuracy, it needs to be placed on those vehicled on which it was carried.

Bill Morrison

   Silentmodeler, put the swastika on your model ! It is an authentic part of the Bismarck. I for one am tired of "political correctness" where people have to be intimidated just so they won't offend the sensitivities of the thin skinned. Enjoy your modeling experience.

             Montani semper liberi !  Happy modeling to all and every one of you.

                                                 crackers  

I fitted my S-boat build with Kriegsmarine flag with swastika on it. It just doesn't look right without it.

Julian

I say put the symbol on the ship. without it it's like we are remembering to forget what happened.  It's important to remember the past exactly the way it happened becuase justice is denied by repressing the memories of the injustices that were pressed upon the victims and the rest of the world.

I have to admit I have mixed feelings about all this.

When I teach a history course I feel like I'm obligated to relate the facts, insofar as I'm able to figure out what they are.  Sometimes the facts aren't pleasant, but that doesn't mean they aren't part of history.  To pretend the Nazi Part never existed would, in the context of a history course or a history textbook, be almost criminally irresponsible.

When it comes to non-historical subjects, I tend to feel the same way.  Some years back our state art museum took some flak when it did a temporary exhibition by an artist whose theme was spouse abuse.  I don't believe in spouse abuse - but I don't try to pretend it doesn't happen.  The art exhibit in question wasn't intended to glorify wife-beating; it was intended to increase public awareness of the problem.  (And I think it did so.)

I also recall a protest against an exhibit at our university library.  The exhibit consisted of a series of graphics dealing with the American Revolution.  The leader of the protest - a professor in the School of Education, I'm embarrassed to say - claimed that the pictures glorified war.  (She also objected, for the same reason, when one of her own kids was required to read All Quiet on the Western Front in his high school English class.  When she was informed that the book in question is generally recognized as one of the great anti-war novels of the twentieth century she didn't have any response.  I'm pleased to report that this particular professor is no longer at the university.)

I certainly don't see anything wrong, or inappropriate, about building a model of the Bismarck.  I have a model of the Graf Spee in my own small collection; I spent quite a bit of time on the Nazi eagle at the stern, the coats of arms on the bow (and the turrets - though they're too small to decipher), etc.  I think that's all part of history, and recognizing that it existed doesn't imply the modeler's approval or disapproval of it.  (I see it as a minor historical irony that two of the most vicious, totalitarian governments in history, Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, built some of the twentieth century's best-looking warships.)

I've also seen some models that I did think were inappropriate.  One that comes to mind immediately was a "fantasy" diorama depicting an imaginary, stylized pirate raping a woman.  To my eye, at least, the intent of the model pretty clearly was sensationalism and titilation.  That sort of thing has no place in my hobby.  I don't claim any right to ban such stuff from aybody else's hobby, but I have no interest in it.

I guess I can understand why some people - especially those who can remember the actual events in question - find the very sight of the swastika offensive.  And I've seen it used in some contexts that I find pretty offensive myself - contexts in which it's clearly being used as a symbol of anti-semitism, white supremacism, etc.  In my personal opinion, there's a world of difference between building a scale model of a BF-109 with a swastika on its fin and carrying a Nazi flag in a rally.  But I guess there is a question of degree there, and quite a bit of room for personal opinion.

I ran into a vaguely similar issue once in a ship model club.  I was starting a model of the steamboat Virginia, the C&O ferry that for many years carried passengers and freight between Norfolk and Hampton.  (She was a beautiful little ship, and my old employer, the Mariners' Museum, had a fine set of plans for her.  Maybe some day I'll actually finish that model.)  The C&O, in those days, was obligated under Virginia law to provide "separate but equal" accommodations (cabins, restrooms, water fountains, etc.) for white and "colored" passengers.  Several signs saying "Colored Waiting Room," "Colored Men's Restroom," etc. were visible in exterior photos of the ship.  I took several such photos to a club meeting and told one of our black members, "John, I'd like your opinion on something.  If I build this model, should I include those signs or not?"  His reaction was interesting.  First he laughed.  (He was too young to have experienced the Jim Crow South himself.)  Then he said, "Absolutely."  I said, "You wouldn't find those signs offensive?"  He said, "I'd be offended if you left them off.  That stuff is history." 

The more I thought about it, the more firmly I concluded that my friend was right.  But I can also understand why some other African American might have a different opinion.  If I'd finished my model of the Virginia I probably would have either (a) included a label on the base that carefully explained the context of those signs, or (b) been mighty careful where I showed it off. 

My knee-jerk reaction to such controversies tends to be, "Let history speak for itself."  But I also feel obliged to take other people's feelings into consideration, and I don't feel entitled to pronounce their opinions "wrong" just because they differ from mine.  This is, after all, a hobby.  When I teach a history course I figure one of my jobs is to stir up people's brains and make them think about controversial, contentious issues.  But that's not why I build ship models.

One of the best answers I have ever read from you John. You have put the matter into words in a very careful and well thought out manner. My most sincere compliments.

Julian

If someone is "offended on behalf of" a group I'm a little suspect of their motivation.

How about having  a disclaimer on the model, "this model is built to represent history and does not serve of an endorsement of any political beliefs, groups, or movements past or present."

I find it interesting that many people find the presence of a swastika offensive but I've seen many models of WWII Soviet armor that says "Za Stalina" in Russian on the turret as well as Soviet aircraft. The phrase means, "For Stalin" and it is a close debate as to who was the greater monster of history.

I can relate to being offended. I am a Catholic Priest and I am regularly faced with ridicule because many of my brother priests have done some horrible things in recent years with the scandals and I have had to apologize for their behavior on behalf of the Catholic Church and although I abhor what they did, I cannot ignore it. It is precisely because people in authority covered it up and pretended it did not happen that it continued for decades and many were permanently hurt because of it. I have been refused service when I wear my black outfit with the roman collar because the store or restaurant "doesn't serve predators." Obviously someone similarly dressed hurt them or someone close to them and all I do is pray for healing on their part.

I feel for anyone who suffered under tyranny of any kind. My grandmother's dear friend spent three years at Birgen-Belsen and was permanently physically disfigured by it. I showed her a stick and tissue model of an Me-109 with the requisite swastika on the fin and all she had to say was that she admired my workmanship. My grandmother corrected me for showing it to her and told me of her camp days and I apologized to her friend Nancy for upsetting her and she told me she never thought for a second that I was promoting the Nazis but was rather building a model of a piece of history that I thought was cool looking which was the case. She told me that if we forget history we are bound to repeat it and I agree. War is a thing that brings out the worst in humanity and the best in men. We see courage and gallantry, horror and brutality at the same time.

Ironically, the captain of the Bismarck was not a member of the nazi party and never allowed his men to use the nazi salute. Admiral Rader who rode on the Bismarck during Exercise Rhine refused to dismiss the Jewish officers under his command and also only used the traditional salute.

Building a model of any war machine could be construed as glorifying killing or as remembering history or the genius of the one who designed it or the bravery of the one who flew/drove/sailed it.

I cannot control how someone else reacts to what I say with my model. I can only control what I am saying and as long as I am saying what I mean to say and it is good and true, I say it confidently and if someone dislikes it, I tell them I am sorry they feel that way but I know what I say and I say it. Pleasing all of the people all of the time is impossible. I please God and myself and that is all I can do and I am absolutely convinced God has no problem with an accurate depiction of history no matter how unpleasant.

Thank you all for the comments you made.  It actually makes me think twice  if i should put the swaskita symbol on the Bismarck which more likely i will since most of you all mention that it does reprecent the history that actually happened.  I personally hate to see the swasakita symbol in the public since myself im deaf and nazsi does horrible thing to deaf people as well to jewish.  but building the models with the symbol on it might be okay for me since i want to reprecent the actual history.  at the same time I might talk to some of my friends who are jewish and hopefully they might understand why i put it there.  like everyone says  its show the acutal history. 

Again  I want to thank everyone for all of ur comments so that I can be sure about it.  Feel free to type up more comments/feedbacks.  I will show you my Bismarck once its compete.

Pavlvs~  i learned something new about captain of Bismarck which i never knew about. 

First of all, Father, see my PM as I'd like to get to know you and our religion can't be a topic, per se.

Of course it's interesting that many people find the swastika offensive, and well they should. In particular our brethren, the Jews. The old argument that " I know Jews who don't have a problem with it" is hogwash. They all or at least 99% do. However that is not the issue.

They also are the ones who continue to carry and remind us of the history of the Shoa, and would be the last to suggest that suppression of this symbol is a desired thing. The argument that it's not "PC" is uninformed.

The one single reason that swastikas are banned in places, in modeling, is in German Federal Law. Wiki has about as good an article about it as I've ever seen, based on the sources cited, and I've lived in Northern Europe for years at a time and heard it all. Nazism lives on, and the BRD, now unified Germany, has to deal with that for at least the next 50 years. It's like gang graffiti to them.

Thanks, Bill

Bill,
Please email me at pavlvsmax@gmail.com if you would like to contact me directly.

Paul

One issue that I have with the omission of the swastika is that I have seen models include the red band and white circle. I would rather either include the swastika as being historically accurate or leave the deck painted in wood.  The glaring white circle in a field of red is so obviously incorrect that it detracts from the model.

I also appreciate the comments about how Admiral Raeder and Admiral Lutjens allowed Jewish officers and sailors to continue to serve, renderring the naval salute.  Histories often ignore that Germans were not all Nazi!

Bill Morrison

Well, here's something I have not yet seen mentioned, and that is when Bismarck squared off against the Hood and Prince of Wales, she didn't have swastikas painted on her decks at all!  They had been painted out, along with the fancy camoflage job, so if you want to represent Bismarck as she was in battle, you would simply paint a grey band across the deck in the bow, and in the stern.  If you want to give your model an earlier paint job (like just before she was repainted in Norway for her 'big adventure,' then you would have the black swastikas on a white field (I don't see any reason why a Nazi ship shouldn't LOOK like a Nazi ship, cuz that's what it was!  You might as well only show a film with Hitler in it, but only minus the mustache.  If you have a problem with depictions of Nazi gear, or worry that someone might be offended, then you shouldn't build models of them at all.).  And if you want Bismarck's initial deployment paint job in all her glory (when she was working up in the Baltic), then the black swastikas on the white circles also have a red field behind...... Note, Bismarck started off with very prominent swastikas for all to see, and in stages, reduced, and finally eliminated them entirely, so the choice is up to you! 

Would not the remedy to this particular problem be to depict the ship as she was during her commissioning trials in 1940, or on Rheinubung itself? As just pointed out, at neither of these stages of her career did the Bismarck have the German national flag painted on her decks for aerial recognition -  in the Baltic n 1940, a large warship would hardly be anything but German, and in the North Atlantic in 1941, the last thing a German warship would want to do would be to draw attention to herself!

You're probably familiar with this site:

http://www.bismarck-class.dk/bismarck/paint_schemes/paintbism1940.html

but if not, it shows the relevant colour schemes. Because the flags are much smaller than the air recognition markings, it's much easier to replace the swastikas with crosses and not be noticed. That said, Peddinghaus decals, a German firm, seems to have had no legal problems releasing decals for the Bismarck and other German warships, featuring Gernam naval ensigns, complete with swastikas:

http://www.peddinghaus-decals.de/index.php?page=shop.browse&category_id=15&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=1

Their air recognition flags, however, do feature 2-part swastikas. There is a let-out clause in the German legislaton which permits the depiction of NSDAP emblems for reasons of historical accuracy, but understandably, many model show organiizers would prefer not to take the risk.

From a personal point of view, I spent a large part of my youth in Germany, hate the NSDAP and all it stood for, and fully understand and support the general ban on displaying NSDAP symbols there. That said, I don't have any personal problems, here in England, displaying swastikas on models if ,for reasons of historical accuracy, the need arises. I do draw the line on building models of members of the SS, their vehicles and equipment.

Cheers,

Chris.

thank you all for more comments

chris~  which one is the right one just before the Bismarck sunk in may?

The one with NO swastikas, and a fairly simple gray paintjob (a rough 50 & 51 as i recall)

searat12

u telling me that the day when bismarck sunk there was no swastikas on the bow or stern  if so why do i see it on Dr Ballards video when he discovered Bismarck?

Because the very recent gray paint peeled after being immersed in seawater for 60 years..... Please have a look at:  http://www.bismarck-class.dk/bismarck/paint_schemes/paintbism1941rheinubung.html

 

This is the MOST comprehensive source for Bismarck and other Kriegsmarine ships that I have come across.....

searat12

ahhh  gotcha!   thanks for clearing up,  for some reason i always thought the swasakita was already on the bow/stern when it sunk and never knew that it was actually covered up with gray paint.

Yup, Bismarck went through a number of different paint schemes, and each one simpler than the last.  I think she had the big swastikas on a red field when she was in the Baltic as an aerial recognition feature (didn't want to be bombed by the Luftwaffe by mistake!), but once she was ready to head for the open Atlantic from Norway, the fewer identifying features the better......

Really?  I kept on learning something new about the Bismarck.  I am wondering if the swasatika was be able to see thur the gray paint like a "fade" or was it soild gray paint?

As far as I can tell, it was solid gray, but my guess is they didn't prep the surface much, just slopped gray hull paint over the swastika and red field, which may account for it peeling off after years of submersion.  This happens a lot on real ships, especially wood boats!  About three years ago, they had a classic boat race here on Narragansett Bay, and on the final stretch, just off Rose Island light, there was a little Herreshoff 'Fish' class sloop charging for the finish while sailing almost dead downwind.  The wind shifted, the boat gybed, and because the mainsheet was cleated off, the sloop capsized, came up, capsized again, and then went down in about 80' of water!  It was recovered about six weeks later, but by that time all the wood had swelled, and all the white paint and varnish was peeling off all over the boat.  My guess is even if the sailors on the Bismarck had prepped the wood deck painting area well it wouldn't have mattered much, as it was apparently a different kind of paint from what was underneath (paint intended for metal, vs paint intended for wood?)

Ever since I stumbled upon this thread a few weeks ago I've been thinking about a proper contribution to this sensitive topic.

First my personal view about whether or not one should add the swastika to a model of the Bismarck:

For the model to be historically accurate I think the swastikas should be added.

Just be careful when showing it to other people, especially in Europe. Why? Because a lot of people just don't understand why you would even bother to put a lot of time and effort into building this model if you don't have some affiliation with Nazi Germany in the first place. I know, not very reasonable but that's just the way it is. If you however explain to them that your interest is purely technical/historical and that your model has nothing to do with glorifying Nazism, I'm sure most people will try to understand. Still, for most Europeans, especially those living in the countries occupied by Germany or its allies, it's difficult to make that distinction.

While reading the other responses in this thread and the other one titled "I need to apologize" I couldn't help but notice that most of them were from the United States and included statements like Political Correctness, History is History, Sensitivity of thin skinned people etc etc. Apparently the people who made these statements have a hard time understanding why the use of the swastika is prohibited in Germany and other parts of Europe. They probably see it as some kind of censoring or denial of history. That is not true.

Showing the swastika and other Nazi symbolism in film, photographs, books, memorabilia etc in its historical context isn't prohibited at all. On the contrary, the German people are very well aware of their history because of this and they should be admired for not trying to hide from it (unlike the Japanese).

However, it is the manufacturing of new products (including scale models) displaying these symbols which is prohibited (accept for educational purposes). Please remember, these laws are not new but were introduced right after the end of the war as part of the denazification process.

And there is a very good reason for this: contrary to what you might think Nazism or German nationalism is not merely history, it's living history.

After the German troops surrendered in May 1945 the Allies were faced with a huge problem: an enormous country, completely in ruins, economically wrecked, full of disillusioned soldiers and civilians whom had been indoctrinated for so many years. Once again the rise of the Great German Nation had been halted. Once again they were defeated. Once again there rightful place among nations was withheld from them. It's true, not all Germans were Nazi's, but still, many of those felt the same way nonetheless.

You would however be astonished if you knew how many fairly high ranking Nazi's quickly regained their former influential spots in German and Austrian society. This is probably due to the scale of the atrocities committed and the huge amount of people involved. The little fish mostly got away as all attention was directed to the big ones. Furthermore, both sides were tired of war and wanted to move on as quickly as possible.

"Murderers among us" by Simon Wiesenthal is a good read about this subject.

It's primarily this group of people for which the strict anti-Nazi laws were (and are) intended. To prevent them from using the familiar old symbols (which a lot of Germans, Nazi or not, still associated with the prosperous pre war era) to gain political support and thus endangering the future of the new democratic Germany the Allies had in mind.

It's this preoccupation with nationalism which is one of the reasons why the German people became Europe's "problem child" in the first place. Like many events in history its roots can be traced way back. In the case of Germany all the way back to Napoleon. Until its dissolvement in 1806 the German people were all part of the Holy Roman Empire. In 1815 the German Confederation was formed. Although language and culture were roughly similar the federation consisted of approximately forty separate states. Among these Prussia and Austria were the biggest, both trying to increase their influence. The Kingdom of Prussia was however the leading military and industrial power. An early attempt to unify all German States under leadership of Prussia in 1848 failed.

Otto von Bismarck (after whom the battleship was named) became prime-minister of Prussia in 1862. It was he who introduced nationalism as a means to achieve his goals. First Prussia, together with Austria, declared war on Denmark to liberate the German people in the Danish provinces of Schleswig and Holstein. Doing so was a great way to make the German people aware of their common identity and at the same time prepared the Prussian army for things to come.

Then, in 1866 Prussia declared war on Austria as a way of eliminating Austria's influence in the confederation. Austria was defeated and Prussia annexed four Austrian States. The North German Confederation was formed which included all the former states except Austria and a few southern states.

In 1870 Bismarck tricked France in to declaring war on Prussia. As the French army marched to Berlin the southern states were forced to turn to Prussia for help. Together they defeated the French at Sedan ending the Second French Empire. In 1871, while Paris was under siege, the King of Prussia was proclaimed German Emperor (not Emperor of Germany!) and the German Empire was born.

Under the ambitious Emperor Wilhelm I and the even more ambitious Emperor Wilhelm II German nationalism reached its peak. By using propaganda the German people were led to believe they had to conquer their rightful leading role in world politics. However, while other nations had already successfully secured their role, Germany found itself land-locked between well established borders: Holland and Belgium in the west, France in the south-west, Austria-Hungary in the south-east, Russia in the east and Denmark in the north.

Furthermore, none of Germany's states had a seafaring tradition which as a result left them without any overseas colonies. Although they eventually acquired some scraps of territory in Africa they were not able to secure the profit-making colonies to which other nations had access.

They were too late, the world was already divided! Wilhelm II's erratic diplomacy and huge navy program were amongst the reasons which eventually lead to World War I, a war which, as you know, ended disastrous for Germany. "Dreadnought" by Robert K. Massie covers this topic brilliantly!

The economic malaise Germany found itself in, especially after 1929, paved the way for Hitler and the NSDAP. After he came to power he used the same tactics as Bismarck to appeal on the German sense of nationalism to reach his goals. First he convinced the German people Germany wasn't complete until every German was able to live in Germany (Heim Ins Reich), which led to the annexation of Rhineland, Austria, Sudetenland and Memelland. All of this by using diplomacy alone (and a little threatening with war). Then he united the Germans by providing them with a common enemy: Jews and other undesirables, they were the cause of Germany's defeat in 1918! Finally Prussia's former possessions in the east (Poland) were to be brought back under Germany's influence in order to create room to expand (Lebensraum). The rest is history....

A lot of people then stood behind their Fuehrer, as of today some of them still do, I've met one of them, it's shocking!