Last Day

Today was our last day! I feel like we have both done everything and done nothing. Things start to run together when they are all packed within the course of a simple month, churches begin to look the same, and each melange tastes like the last. Yet, I feel as if I could spend a year here - the beauty, majesty, and history of this place has not begun to permeate me. I know I have lived here for a month, but I feel as if I just landed from London. A month is not succinct time to fully absorb and appreciate this beautiful city.

Our last day has been filled with those last minute things we have not had time yet to see - our list included only those things of utmost priority.

First stop, our last visit to Cafe Oberlaa of course! This place has been our home away from home, a pit stop in the middle of the city fueling our ever going engines. Caffeine and sugar have been our best friends this trip.

Historically, we decided to visit the Greek Orthodox Church near Schwedenplatz beyond Stephansdom. Until Joseph II unveiled his plans for reformation, including religious toleration in the 1700's, Vienna and the remaining lands under Habsburg rule were exuberantly Catholic. However, Joseph II lifted the ban on Protestantism and other religions aside from Catholicism were allowed to be practiced; the law, however, required these buildings to have plans facades, in order that they not be recognized as religious houses from the outside and by strangers. In the 19th century this law was lifted, and the Greek church was modernized in 1833 into a more ornate church. In 1856 and 1858 Theophil Hansen, the famous Ringstrasse architect, redesigned the Greek church in a Byzantine style, laying the foundations seen today from both the outside and on the inside (tourmycountry.com).

The outside was truly majestic, with Byzantine colors and motifs featured on every square inch of its facade. Upon entering, there is a small hallway, acting as a foyer, with Greek plaques on the walls. The entrance to the inner church is farther back, allowing for the eyes to adjust to the darkness - as opposed to the Baroque churches throughout the city, this Byzantine jewel was not built to draw in light and invoke the spirit of God. The Greeks followed orthodoxy, taking religion more seriously than their Catholic counterparts. Also, the church itself is quite smaller than any other we have seen. The ceiling was decorated with gold and with the images of Jesus, Mary, and the prophets. In the front of the church was the altar and a gate, leading back to the inner sanctuary. Unfortunately, it was not accessible to the public. The frescos and gold ornamentation was beautiful however, and the Greek inscriptions reminded me of the coming fall and the start of classes - luckily translating on the spot was not required here!

After the church, we wandered through the streets for the last time, passing the historic centers surrounding the Graben and Michaelerplatz. We met our group at the Prater, the large hunting park used by the Habsburgs for recreational purposes. Today, it is used by Viennese families, for various sports, and houses a small theme park with rides. As a group, we went on the infamous ferris wheel from Orson Welles' The Third Man, seeing the city with the advantage of height. For dinner, we trekked across the city to a restaurant where upon arriving we were served dinner on swords - unlimited alcohol and metal swords turned out to be a tempting combination for some!

Our last ride on the subway felt strange - I am heading back to the land of suburbia, dominated by cars and supermarkets. Europe already feels so far away.

Rath Heuriger

29 August 2010

Tonight we had the opportunity to visit a wine garden (heuriger), one of the most traditional and oldest in the area. The Rath Heuriger is 170 years old, and is located about an hour from our apartments in Vienna. When we arrived, the heuriger looked beautiful and quaint.

Located among crabapple trees and long green grass, picnic tables were scattered throughout and people were sitting amongst them drinking their specialty wine from mugs. Here they serve their current year's vintage - a white wine cuvee - and it is so popular that they are only open for a scant four weeks during the summer, when their supply runs out and they are forced to close for the year. They serve no formal food, but offer an array of various German sides - german potato salad, three spreads with brown bread, cheeses, and more. Is it the essence of the Viennese spirit - good company, good wine, and fresh air.

The history of wine in Austria is quite older than Rath itself. In 700 BC, vitis vinifera seeds (the most common wine grape varietal) were found in a Celtic grave, since Austria and Vienna were both inhabited by Celtic peoples before the region was conquered by the Romans. In the first century AD, the land of Pannonia was established, inhabited continuously by both Celtics and Romans. Emperor Marcus Aurelius lifted the prohibition placed on cultivating new vines, temporarily spiking an interest in winemaking. After this however, history was not kind to the wine industry and interest weakened. It wasn't until Charlemagne permitted vintners to serve young wine (that year's vintage) in Heurigen and introduced German varietals that an interest in wine was re-cultivated. The Cisterican order of monks cleared forest land and planted vines, controlling most of the region's wine production. Burgenland, south of Vienna, was granted extensive privileges by Mary the Hungarian queen in producing wine (wein-plus.com/austrian_guide/Burgenland). The Esterhazy family was an important patron of the wine trade, being the largest land owner in the Burgenland region - our visit to Eisenstadt a few weeks ago was full of posters for the local wine festival. After the golden age of wine growing in the region during the 1600's, phylloxera (an insect which attacks vitis vinifera grapes and is a recent problem in the Napa valley) struck Burgenland, leaving the region to adapt and become a region known for its white wines. Interestingly enough, Stift Klosterneuburg - home to our canon friends - is the oldest and largest working winery in Austria, having been established in the 1100's as a source of revenue for the monastery (travel.nytimes.com).

Claim to Fame - In 1756, Riedel Crystal was founded in Austria, and now produces some of the world's most famous and notable stemware. It was founded amidst the seven year's war between Austria and Bohemia and was part of the Art Nouveau (Jugendstil) period, making first glass window panes and later crystal glassware (crystalclassics.com).

Having been schooled in wine from my own dad and having participated in the wine culture before this trip, it was a priceless experience to be able to partake in such an integral aspect of Austrian hospitality and culture.

The wine was truly unbelievable and the conversation was even better - who would have ever thought that I would be sitting in an Austrian wine garden drinking and laughing late into the night with friends I had not known until this trip? How blessed I am.

Feast of St. Augustine

Today we were able to travel back to Stift Klosterneuburg to attend the feast of St. Augustine of Hippo, coinciding with the swearing of vows for many of the canons.

The canons at Klosterneuburg are Augustinian canons, meaning they follow the rule and lifestyle first dictated by St. Augustine of Hippo in his Augustinian Rule. Following this rule, the canons share common prayer and common meals, living together and studying theology for their future clerical work. As opposed to the last time we went for the tour, yesterday we were able to see the entire range of canons since all participated in the special mass.

There were about 50 or 60 men, all decked out in their canon attire, and there was quite a range of ethnicities as well; southeast asians, eastern asians, one african american, americans - all speaking German and Latin. At the end of the procession into the church followed the altar boys, boys and girls in their early teenage years who were in charge of procession, and those novices who were in their trial year at Klosterneuburg. The strangest and most unexpected thing to happen however, was the entering of six teenage boys dressed in pale blue military attire with riding boots and funny looking hats. Each of them had a sword and sheath, both highly ornamented. They came in before the monks and stood at the front in a stance of symbolic protection. Since I am not versed in Augustinian tradition, nor can I read German or the information booklet handed to us, I was not able to figure out what they are.

The mass itself was very long - around two hours - and consisted of much purifying, standing and sitting and standing, communion, offerings, and most importantly the renewal of vows by the canons. The provost was there to bless the new canons and to precede over the affairs - the provost is elected by the canons for either life or 10 year terms. The first set of vows was the simple vows taken by three novitiates. They had already undergone their first year, and were ready to commit to three years within the community, preparing for the priesthood. Dom Kilian, whom I was able to talk to when we all went to the wine garden during our last visit, was one of these three who was taking his simple vows, as was Dom Ambrose who also had dinner with us.

The next set of vows were the solemn vows - those canons who have completed their commitment of three years and are ready to engage in priesthood, binding themselves to the chapter (Stift Klosterneuburg) and their community of lay people. Three other canons took this vow, one of them being Dom Gabriel from the wine garden. This vow is a bit more ritualistic than the simple vow - those taking the vow are required to lay prostrate before the altar and the provost and are stripped of their previous shawls, which are then replaced with a sarozium (sacred rochet) - a white lacy tunic historically worn by the choir and which now symbolizes worship to God. These canons are also given a purple mozzetta (cape) and they are given new sashes - the old fringe being replaced with tassels. All this decorum is given to the canons upon the signing of their solemn vows (they personally write out the vows before the ceremony).

After the vows, there was more chanting and purification and a German sermon - it was hard to follow due to the language barrier. After the service ended, there was a reception for the canons and their family and friends, but it was so crowded that we opted for lunch elsewhere. We ended up meeting the cutest Viennese ladies (around the age of 80) - we were all waiting for the bus, but the bus was extremely late. These two women had come from Vienna as well, but spoke only German so the conversations ensued many hand motions. Luckily Zach was with us and was able to use his German skills to find our bus and talk to these ladies. Talking to Viennese outside of Vienna, they actually tend to be quite nice!

Having the opportunity to witness the vows at Klosterneuburg was truly a neat experience, one not to be had by many. To be the audience of such a time honored tradition, deeply seeped in both religious and political importance, was unbelievable - it was as if we were transported back in time watching canons of days gone by make their vows. Furthermore, to not merely be witnesses, but to actually know a handful of the canons taking their vows - that was priceless.

Jesuitenkirche

It seems that the best advice I have gotten has been from locals, in particular, two men - one a canon at a monastery and the other an intern at the U.N..

The canon told me to try Oberlaa cafe for coffee and cake - it is now our favorite cafe and it does, indeed, have the best melange and apflestrudel around.

The U.N. intern told me to find the Jesuit Church and explore the inside, since it is one of the finest gems of the baroque style in Vienna.

So, today after class and lunch, I decided to get lost. I started walking on Kohlmarkt, but instead of heading to the Hofburg, I walked the opposite direction and then southwest down to the Ringstrasse. However, although I knew the general direction of where I was heading, I hadn't yet explored the small streets and alleys in that part of the innerstadt. As i wandered, I came upon a small square that would almost appear as a dead end if not for a small archway under a building leading through the plaza. There were some restaurants, and the building for the old University of Vienna took up the main center of the square. To the left though, there stood a huge church, tucked in between tall buildings so it was almost unnoticed. This style of churches blending into other buildings harks back to Joseph II's Edict of Toleration, where other religions were allowed under the empire but Protestant and Jewish churches and synagogues could not stand out as buildings - they could not look like churches. It turns out that here, I had unknowingly stumbled upon the baroque gem which I was told to seek out.

The history of the Jesuit Church and the presence of Jesuits in Vienna is interesting. After the liberal and Protestant-leaning emperor Maximilian II died, Archduke Charles invited the Jesuits to Vienna to play a role in the Catholic Counter-Reformation. The Jesuits positioned themselves near the Am Hof, where they initially obtained control over university education, thus using public education as a platform for their doctrine. However, they soon moved to the church's current location near the old University of Vienna so as to have more control and influence over education and in fighting Protestantism and to align themselves with the philosophy and theology departments of the school. The church was built between 1623 and 1627, influenced by early baroque styles and motifs. However, the church was rebuilt and refashioned into an even heavier style of baroque under the architect Andrea Pozzo in 1703 (completed in 1705) who was commissioned by Leopold I. The original church had been dedicated to Saint Ignatius Loyola and his co-founder of the Society of Jesus, Francis Xavier, but the remodeled church was rededicated to the Assumption of the Virgin Mary.

Compared to the relatively plain facade (almost reminiscent of a Renaissance courtyard or the like), the inside is the epitome of baroque. Marble twisted columns rise up on each side of the many chapels extending off of the main aisle of the church. The pews are carved with intricate details, the ceiling is covered with four massive frescos, and the gold work on the pulpit, altar, and the ceiling is quite astounding. Pozzo painted frescos of angels, the trinity, and other biblical scenes in the style of quadratura, where architecture, painting, and sculpture are united under illusionary scenes. This combination of styles allows the viewer to see a fresco as three dimensional; the church's ceiling is a sort of trompe l'oeil, playing with perspective and with illusions - the actual ceiling of the church is flat instead of domed as in the ceiling's fresco.

On another note, I watched The Third Man last night, an Orson Welles movie filmed in the 1950's in postwar Vienna. It was neat to go around today while getting "lost" and recognize certain locations within the film. Also, there was a neat connection between the postwar theme of the movie which emphasizes the east meeting the west, and the NYTimes articles I drew upon yesterday when discussing Vienna as a cultural, espionage, and diplomatic center between the east and west. It is intriguing to see the aspects of postwar Vienna which have evolved and those which have been transformed into something different - such as the notion of Vienna as a literal and figurative meeting place between the east and the west which still rings true today, yet the cultural fear of the police and the suspicion nurtured within the people by the occupation of different zones after 1945 is no longer evident within the city.

Today's German Word:

Fußball - 'soccer'

Recent Headlines

I have compiled articles from the New York Times and other relevant news resources concerning some of the museums we have visited, Vienna as a city, and the UN. Since my other posts tend to be long, I have decided to compile excerpts from these various articles and my responses to them in a concise narrative in one post.

NYTimes July 20, 2010 - "Leopold Museum to Pay $19 million for Painting Seized by Nazis" by Randy Kennedy - In 1938 an Egon Schiele painting ("Portrait of Wally" 1912) was seized by the Nazis from Lea Bondi Jaray, a Jewish gallery owner in Vienna. In 1954, Mr. Leopold acquired the Schiele painting through good faith and a legal transaction, making it part of his personal collection now housed at the Leopold Museum. In 1997 the painting was lent to the MOMA for a temporary exhibition, but was seized by the US government who claimed that Leopold did not have rightful ownership of the painting. The MOMA and the Leopold Museum believed the painting should be returned to the Leopold. However, the US government was stubborn in its insistence that the painting was not legally owned by the Leopold. In the end, the Leopold paid $19 million to the Jaray family for the Schiele painting, the painting spent some last weeks at the MOMA in a temporary exhibit, and the US government dismissed the case upon the Leopold Museum's payment for the painting. This entire situation is an ongoing struggle, with many families coming out and claiming that paintings within the Leopold and within the Belvedere collections were stolen by the Nazis and that they should be returned to the original owners. These legal cases are modern manifestations of the ongoing effects of the Nazi regime into the cultural realm of Vienna and eastern Europe as a whole.

NYTimes June 8, 2010 - "U.S. Presses Its Case Against Iran Ahead of Sanctions Vote" by David E. Sanger - Today at the U.N. we learned about the Non-Proliferation Treaty regarding nuclear weapons. Iran is a member of this treaty, but has been found in violation of many of its articles and in enriching uranium. There is an ongoing battle between the U.N. specialists and Iran, the U.N. asking why there are tests and nuclear materials unaccounted for and articles violated while the latter is stating its right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes. This article states that the U.S. is putting forth new information, revising its previous findings from 2007 that although production of Iran's nuclear fuel had increased, Iran's leadership had suspended work on nuclear weapons designs. However, the U.S. is now pressing for sanctions to be put on Iran by the U.N Security Council as the fourth round of votes for sanctions against Iran comes up. The U.N. and the Obama administration is presenting evidence to the Security Council showing that Iran has revived elements of its design program for nuclear weapons. According to the IAEA, suspicion of Iran's nuclear programs has risen due to its "possible military dimensions to its nuclear program" and that Iran "has not provided the necessary cooperation to permit the agency to confirm that all nuclear material in Iran is in peaceful activities." After today at the U.N., it seems that if Iran was truly using uranium and nuclear technology for peaceful activities, the tests and enrichment of uranium would be easily explained and there would be transparency regarding their tests and their actions. Iran's lack of cooperation seems to point to other uses of nuclear technology for non-peaceful ends. [This article is a follow up on an article from May 2010 which stated that Iran had expanded its work at its nuclear sites and that it has enough nuclear fuel for two nuclear weapons].

NYTimes July 13, 2010 - "U.S. Wary of South Korea's Plan to Rescue Nuclear Fuel" by Choe Sang-Hun - Aside from tensions with North Korea and Iran about their nuclear tests and production of nuclear weapons, tension between South Korea and the U.S. is beginning to emerge due to South Korea's desire to recycle nuclear fuel. The article states that South Korea is quickly running out of room to safely store used nuclear fuel, and has expressed interest in reusing this fuel for nuclear reactors which provide 40% of the nation's electricity and in reducing waste. However, S. Korea is still under an agreement with the U.S. from 1974 that prohibits the nation from recycling nuclear fuel since recycling produces plutonium which can then be used for both nuclear reactors (and thus electricity) and nuclear bombs (in the example of North Korea). S. Korea insists that its only aim is to reduce waste while producing electricity, but the U.S. has not lessened its suspicion on South Korea's attempts from the 1970s in making nuclear weapons and believes that it will set a precedent, thus encourage North Korea's nuclear weapons project since tensions between N. and S. Korea are also not diminishing. This entire situation revolves around politics more than it does science, especially since the U.S. has allowed India (not part of the NPT) to recycle its spent nuclear fuel. Even with alternative options such as pyroprocessing (the plutonium produced would not be pure enough to use in nuclear weapons) and recycling the fuel outside of S. Korea, the United States remains overtly wary of South Korea's attempts at nuclear recycling.

NYTimes July 9, 2010 - "Vienna Still a Spot for Cloak-and-Dagger Work" by Nicholas Kulish - This article discusses Vienna's role as an international city, especially in regards to the recent exchange between agents at the Viennese international airport. Vienna is the home of the United Nations in Vienna, contains the IAEA, the UNODC, and is a key city between the east and the west. During the Cold War, Vienna was at the edge of the Iron Curtain yet remained neutral, encouraging spies to conduct business here; only spying against Austria is a crime - espionage in itself is legal. Even Vienna's high concentration of emigrants contributes to a high number of intelligence officers within the city reporting on political and social dissidence within these communities. However, in contrast to the still high concentration of intelligence officials and espionage activities within Vienna, the Mercer Human Resource Consulting firm listed Vienna as its most livable city in the world. This second NYTimes article ("The Best Place to Live?" by H.D.S. Greenway, May 26, 2010) states that "Vienna used to seem a little sad - all those grand imperial buildings with no empire left, stuck on a dead-end street at Western Europe's Cold War frontier. But with the Iron Curtain gone, Vienna is once again at the center of the Central European crossroads and is enjoying its place in the sun." Having seen both the imperial side of Vienna at the Hofburg and the diplomatic side of Vienna at the U.N., I can agree that Vienna is a meeting place of intelligence officers for good reason, yet I can more than readily agree with the second article stating that the tension between imperial with no empire and an old Cold War center with a war no longer cold is finally being reconciled, producing a city culturally, diplomatically, and historically beautiful.

The U.N.

Today's visit to the United Nations in Vienna was amazing. I wasn't sure what to expect, especially since I study neither modern history nor political and international relations, but the lectures were interesting and engaging nonetheless. We arrived and went through security, officially leaving Austrian territory. We were able to sit in the cafe for a while and soak it all up before our tour guide arrived.

Our tour guide first led us into one of the viewing rooms for the main conference room, telling us about who attends these conferences and the obstacles regarding languages. There are six official languages within the United Nations, those being English, French, Russian, Arabic, Chinese, and Spanish. German is also spoken at the Vienna UN since it is in Austria, but it is not considered an official language. Interpreters must know on average three languages upon being hired, but they are only allowed to translate for 30 minutes before taking a break. Translators are responsible for not only translating a conference from its given language into their mother tongue and perhaps a third language, but they are also responsible for conveying notions, concepts, and subtleties with little to no delay. To work as an interpreter for the UN, interpretation studies is not necessary, but the fluent knowledge of three languages is a must.

After viewing the conference room, we were led into a smaller lecture hall where a representative for the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) was waiting for us. His lecture gave us a brief overview of the UN's role and responsibilities concerning the production and use of nuclear sources.

The IAEA's motto is "Atoms for Peace," conveying their governing principle of promoting the peaceful use of atomic energy. The organization grew out of an idea initiated during the bombing of Hiroshima and the fear of annihilation during the Cold War between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R.. The organization was thus formed in 1957 to promote the responsible use of nuclear resources. The IAEA deals with the dual nature of nuclear technology - its use for nuclear energy and its use for weapons of mass destruction. At the heart of nuclear energy is the nuclear fuel cycle, where uranium is mined, converted to gas, enriched and then either recycled or disposed of. At any point in this cycle, the materials can be diverted from the aim of nuclear energy and used instead for weapons and bombs. The IAEA thus monitors whether these materials are being diverted from this cycle and who is diverting them. It is not their responsibility to regulate the environmental or social impact that nuclear materials may have since states themselves are sovereign, but the IAEA creates guidelines for using nuclear materials peacefully.

The IAEA principally promotes the peaceful application of nuclear applications and technologies. In the 1950's when few countries has the resources (financial and intellectual) to initiate research into nuclear technology, the IAEA saw nuclear technology as information which should be shared. Now, although still maintaining the principle that nuclear information is valuable and useful thus meant to be shared, the IAEA is also intent on setting up guidelines ensuring that nuclear information is used and shared with peaceful ends.

In 1968 the Non-Proliferation [of nuclear weapons] Treaty was signed by the UN, assigning another task to the IAEA. The NPT made the IAEA responsible for the fundamental control of non-proliferation (thus, as there is a dual use of nuclear technology, the IAEA has a dual mandate). Non-proliferation is not a responsibility of the IAEA, but its fundamental foundation influenced by media, international pressure, and set guidelines by the UN is now in the hand of the IAEA. 182 countries signed this treaty. The nuclear weapons states which are legally authorized to build and have nuclear weapons are the U.S., the U.K., Russia, France, and China since all five countries exploded a nuclear device before January 1967 and thus before the formation of the treaty. These states are not to transfer nuclear weapons, they are to facilitate the peaceful use of nuclear energy, and they are to pursue disarmament. The non-nuclear states which are not legally allowed to have nuclear weapons but who have signed the treaty are not to proliferate weapons and they are to accept the safeguards set up by the IAEA to assure peaceful use of nuclear technology. The goal is that someday, no state will possess nuclear weapons, thus they promote non-proliferation (but not necessarily disarmament). Those who fall outside of the NPT are India, Pakistan, and Israel, of which the first two do possess nuclear weapons and the last is suspected to have nuclear weapons. In 2003, North Korea left the NPT, and subsequently ran one unsuccessful and then later a successful test for nuclear weapons.

The three pillars of the IAEA are 1) safety and verification, accounting for nuclear resources and technology; 2) safety and security, promoting safety within nuclear plants and guarding against nuclear terrorist threats; and 3) science and technology, researching effective ways to use nuclear energy.

After the first lecture, we were able to grab lunch with the other UN workers and interns in the cafe, and were lucky enough to sit next to the intern assigned to our first lecture. He is working on his masters in Vienna in European politics and is interning for two months at the UN; he was very gracious is letting us pick his mind for hangouts and neat things to do in Vienna. After lunch, we went back to the lecture hall to hear from the Human Trafficking agency.

I was particularly interested in this lecture, since one of my best friends and my roommate from last year founded the SOLD Project in Davis (fighting child sex slavery in Thailand), has spent the last two summers in Thailand, and is currently involved in passing legislation with the California Against Slavery campaign. I have been able to learn so much from her and to become involved on campus a bit with SOLD, so I was extremely interested to learn about the UN's role in human and sex trafficking.

The lecture began by stating that the victims of human trafficking are often hard to identify since before 2000 there was no international definition for human trafficking and there is so much red tape in catching and prosecuting traffickers. However, in 2000, the UN passed the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress, and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children. This protocol thus provided the first international definition of human trafficking, and identified three aspects to trafficking: the act, the means, and the purpose.

Traffickers often take advantage of national and natural disasters, war, poverty, and unfulfilled dreams. However, the trafficker is not always the recruiter, since recruiters are often those who are more integrated into the smaller communities. Traffickers traffic victims for either labor, organs, or sex, but there is often a blur between the three. All types of transportation of victims is used, making it much harder to stop the crime. Also, there is a blurred line between smuggling and trafficking, since smugglers and traffickers often work together and since recruiting for both is carried out at every stage of transporting the victims. The main difference, however, is that smuggling is a crime committed against the state where the victim has given consent, whereas trafficking is a violation against human rights and often lacks proper consent.

The main problem in human trafficking is that there is often a focus on the victim's illegal passport and such, and thus the trafficker is able to slide under the radar. Officers don't know how to recognize the signs of trafficking and either ignore them altogether or prosecute the trafficker on another crime thus eliminating any chance of charging the perpetrator with human trafficking. It is with this problem that the IAEA attempts at promoting dialogue - to train and raise awareness concerning the signs of trafficking. Another large problem is the issue of consent - often victims give consent to initial recruiters, but are later deceived or have been coerced. Through these improper means, consent is invalidated (consent with children is never an issue since all forms of child trafficking is improper).

The main type of human trafficking is sex slavery and exploitation, accounting for 75% to 80% of all types of trafficking, although trafficking for organs and for forced labor are common as well. The Human Trafficking Agency at the UN focuses mainly on the criminal justice component, as well as rehabilitation and the protective witnesses program. The agency often runs into difficulty with religious rules and traditions as well, which play a large part in psychological imprisonment and which are hard to disconnect victims from. I had a list of questions to ask the lecturer, but unfortunately my questions became irrelevant when I realized that the UN and the Human Trafficking Agency has no legal control over individual sovereign states, but that they are only able to advise, promote, train police, and seek out reforms and guidelines to offer to those states who ask for help. They work closely with NGO's, but they are distinctly separate from localized governments.

My Questions:

1. Does the UN find localized education for high risk victims an effective way of combatting human trafficking?

2. What are the biggest deterrents for traffickers when the majority of the police focus on a victim's legality or lack thereof as in the video shown to us?

3. What are some active steps in localized governments where trafficking is prominent that the UN is taking to implement the Protocol from 2000 in contrast to promoting this protocol?

4. What are the strongest forms of prevention? Localized victim education? National legislation? International legislation? Public education?

5. Which is more effective: punishing the pimps through legislation (top-down policy) or educating the victims and those in high risk situations (bottom-up approach)?

6. How much influence does the UN have when training police to recognize victims of trafficking?

7. How does the UN feel or react to online sex-trafficking such as the current situation on Craiglist?

8. Is this is a "cult issue" or a "trend issue?" What has spurred recent interest in the issue of human trafficking?

9. How does the UN understand and regulate those who claim that they have chosen into prostitution rather than being sold into prostitution (referencing the recent articles in the New York Times and CNN which target Craigslist as a site of illegal soliciting and forced prostitution)?

10. There is a concern that the current financial crisis is causing an increase in sex slavery in Cambodia (according to the UNIAP). Is there fear that this trend has or will develop in the U.S. or other countries?

Although I felt my questions were inapplicable to the lecture today since there was a big focus on the sovereignty of the state and the UN's role in promoting and creating guidelines instead of the UN's role with local NGO's and education for high risk victims, I was able to gather a unique insight into an international crisis which I had not previously been privileged to have.

Debriefing

In class today we debriefed from our visit to the concentration camp, attempting to digest and make sense of what we saw. There was a general consensus that nothing new or significant was learned. Rather, another element, a visual layer, was added to our sense of understanding the Holocaust and concentration camps. These continued thoughts from our visit may seem disconnected from one another - similar to how we will always be disconnected to the camps, no matter how hard we try. There is no logic to these thoughts, just as there is no logic to these camps.

Someone saw the following etched onto a wall within the barracks by a former prisoner:

"If there is a God, He must plead for my forgiveness." A perspective we cannot even imagine or attempt to understand.

We discussed the memorials we saw, and how all memorials are political. They honor the victims in words which further that particular nation's political agenda - this is inevitable. They build the victims into a political or national model, whether consciously or subconsciously. Can there be an apolitical monument?

The 2003 plaques (shown on yesterday's blog) commemorating the American liberating forces almost seemed unnecessary. They seem to be the typical American response, glorifying the heros. This place is not about America and its Allied accomplishments, but it is about the victims. The plaques, although nice and appropriate in the correct context, seem violating here. Is there ever a correct context though?

It was stated that to fully grasp the situation of the camps one must oscillate between commemorating the individual and commemorating the mass. Is this the reason for the monuments outside of the camp?

Deaths in Mauthausen were mostly political, thus may it be appropriate to have or erect political monuments here?

Was there any fluidity in viewing and entering the gas chambers? The chambers were full during the war with the victims. Today, the chambers are filled with tourists and us. Is this an ironic fluidity or is this emotional vandalism?

In Ruth Kluger's biography, she protests against visiting these concentration camps, stating that tourism and visiting them only serves to glorify the crimes committed there. However, is there a middle ground, fluctuating between individual stories and guided tours? Is there a similar middle ground between glorifying or punishing the individuals involved in the Holocaust (war generals, surviving SS members) versus glorifying or punishing the mass victims and soldiers?

Is a compromise possible? May visiting under an educational premise with a tour guide be a compromise? When we were there, there were bikers visiting the barracks, children running and screaming, and laughing, families taking pictures, and pure ignorance by the majority of the viewers. Is less foot-traffic and a lessening of the "family-outing" mentality the answer? Who determines the bounds of regulating human behavior?

In regards to the camps, is time a dimension or rather a diminishing factor, lessening the importance and impact of a past history? When studying something, does a visual response strip away the academic element and force an emotional and physical visceral response? Does it place us in a place beyond and deeper than empathy?

Seeing the camps paralyzes the analytical factor - it is easy to analyze and speculate, but visual processing forces the experience to become more personal. We are disconnected, yet somehow drawn in, kicking and screaming, scared to enter the place of facing the truth. As I said before, I didn't learn any key information regarding concentration camps of the Holocaust which I did not know before. Rather, another element was layered upon my own understanding of the past events. The analyzing is now diminished.

There are layers to this unique, atrocious event, to visiting the camps, to cultivating responses. Questions such as "how do we regulate 'appropriate' visits and responses without actually regulating and making the camps less accessible," or "is joy even allowed amongst the now green grass and flowers and laughing kids?" Are the children we saw laughing and enjoying their visit not allowed to have a childhood of their own within the bounds of the camp since the children imprisoned in the concentration camps did not have childhoods? There are many questions, but somehow these questions seem satisfying in themselves. Answers are often unattainable.

Upon entering and touring the camp, I did have preconceived notions of how I would feel and how I should feel. I had judgments against the monuments. I still do not completely grasp them, nor do I believe that the monuments and the tourists lessen the glorification of the camp. I do not regret visiting, but I also would not go again. I appreciate the visual element which I gathered, but emotionally I remained numb - digestion and understanding are only just beginning.

Often visitors project their moral beliefs onto the victims. Does being the victim purify the person? We assume that yes, being victimized does purify that person, and thus we hold them to a higher moral standard.

What is the correct response?

Mauthausen

Today amidst the rain we visited Mauthausen Concentration Camp outside of Vienna. I want to refrain here from making any sort of conclusion from today in this post, focusing more on my observations, questions, and the paths which those question may lead me down. I feel that more time is needed for me to come to a conclusion (if one can every really come to any conclusion after such a visit) regarding what I saw.

The following are simply my reactions to our visit, our tour, and the images which I saw. Pictures of the camp itself will not be posted as well - they cannot do justice to such an atrocious past.

We arrived and met in front of the main gates leading into the camp - the only gates through which the victims were led. This camp was the mother camp of all Austrian concentration camps, with other satellite camps connected to it. There were about 200,000 prisoners here, most prisoners being political dissenters. The main goal was the elimination of political dissent against the Nazi regime through labor, thus classifying this camp as a type III camp (hard labor) instead of an extermination camp. Of the 200,000 prisoners, 30,000 were Jews, but there was in influx in the number of Jews here just before Auschwitz was liberated when the Jews were transfered from the camps closest to the Allies.

Around 100,000 prisoners did die, with 83,000 being liberated by Allied forces; the remaining 17,000 are unable to be accounted for due to missing records and such. Those who did die died through labor, abuse, malnutrition, disease, and gassing. The camp was built in Mauthausen due to its close proximity to a granite quarry; the first prisoners arrived here in August 1938 to begin building the buildings and walls.

Before entering the camp we saw the many, many monuments erected by different nations. Some commemorated individuals, some armies, some the victims. My first thoughts:

- It seems that the monuments take away from the gravity of the camp and tends toward glorifying its history.

- The monuments remember the soldiers more than they do the victims (in reference to the plaques praising the American liberating forces posted above).

- Are our attempts at "remembering" actually beneficial? Or are they more harmful to the memory of the camp?

- The various nations built these monuments, attempting at some form of closure to the unburied bodies. Is this really closure, or is this glorification? Or could it become a form of both?

- These monuments were built to give closure, but will there ever really be closure? Are these attempts futile?

- Is the best we can do simply remembrance [ through memorials]? Or are testimonies more useful and relevant? Does Ruth Kluger, as a survivor of Auschwitz, have a right to dictate Holocaust memorialism? Surely she has more right than I. Is her preference for testimony over monuments correct? Is there a correct preference?

How were the citizens of the town of Mauthausen supposed to react to the camp? Indifference? Feigned ignorance? Participation? Fear? Emotional self-protection? Our guide mentioned that many of the towns people felt honored since they too were Nazis. The camp gave them jobs in a time of war. However, now, their culture and their own hometown is rejected due to the camp and its history. These people cannot mention their own town without shame. Their sense of honor is now turned to shame. Their identity is now looked down upon due simply to the town's association with Nazism. Thus they are forced to disconnect from something as elemental and essential to a person's own identity as one's hometown.

Nowadays, many want the camp torn down, yet the mayor of Mauthausen himself is a tour guide at the camp. Is there a middle ground? The younger generation sees the camp as a responsibility, to remember; they are able to reject the actions of their grandparents and great-grandparents since they are distanced by several generations from the Holocaust.

During the camp's use, neither the SS nor the victims knew how to quarry stone or granite; thus, stone specialists and townspeople were employed in the quarry among the victims to help. They were forced to sign declarations of silence to keep the truth of the camps suppressed. Is this silence forgivable? Was this silence simply a matter of survival in a world filled with the threat of death and forced labor if one did not comply to the Nazi regime?

We were able to walk down into the quarry. The stones have been evened out to allow tourists to descend into the green plain which used to be the active quarry and labor site. Now it is serene and green. The steps, although smooth, are still stone, and are most steep. I cannot imagine carrying granite up stones rougher than the ones we used, all the while being beaten and abused, malnourished and under-clothed.

This silence and suppression surrounding just the camps and the declarations of silence has contributed to an emotionally backwards culture, family, and nation. It is human nature to remain silent for the safety of one's own family and children, but to attempt at justifying it when challenged remains difficult. Thus a collective guilt emerges from the peoples' silence.

Seeing the camp today, it looks old and run down. However, in the camp's operating days, it was quite modern with its showers and central heating.

We were told that individual creativity in regards to mockery and punishments dolled out by the SS was rewarded. The goals of the Nazis were articulated, but top-down instructions were not given. There was a sense of sadistic, inhuman humor alive here amongst the dead.

There was a gas chamber that was used, where 4,000 out of the 200,000 victims were killed. Gassing was only one method of extermination in this camp. It seems somehow fitting that while the insecticide used to kill the lice upon a victim's entry was also the same insecticide used to kill the victim in the gas chambers. Morbid, but logical according to the SS.

The most moving part to me, was not the gas chambers, not was it the memorials or the bunks in the barracks. Rather, the two remaining cremation ovens were the most disturbing remnants left within the camp. Walking through the gas chamber, one walks into two small rooms, where families have left pictures and stories of the victims' lives before the war and the camps. In this same room as the stories, pictures, and attempts at closure, there are two large cremation ovens. Bodies were burned, and their ashes used to pave and fortify the paths and streets surrounding the camp. It was such a morbid image. the gas chamber was a room, with its gassing tube removed by the Nazis so as to remove evidence. The ovens remain.

Jugendstil and Judaism

"Nothing impractical can ever be beautiful."

- Otto Wagner

Today we had a tour at the Leopold Museum, the personal collection on display of Mr. and Mrs. Leopold. The museum is fairly new, housed in a specially constructed building to highlight the expressionist and Jugendstil art. Leopold began collecting art when he inherited a stamp collection from an uncle, which he then sold, making enough capital to begin purchasing art in the 1950s. Upon graduating college, he turned down an offer for a car from his parents in order to obtain a painting by Egon Schiele from London, thus beginning his long time fascination with and love for Schiele's paintings and sketches which were hardly famous at the time.

Leopold also had a strong affinity for Gustav Klimt's work - the main painting in the gallery being Death and Life (1910).

Before this particular expressionist style of painting, Klimt was associated with the art of the Ringstrasse group, embracing historicism and classical motifs. However, after three of his paintings were rejected by the University (who was responsible for the paintings' commissioning), Klimt left the Ringstrasse culture and became involved with the Secessionists, eventually becoming their president and painting Death and Life. This particular painting refers back to Klimt's unfinished painting in the Belvedere of The Bride, in both its figures and its positioning. In Death and Life, death is depicted as almost playful or sly, creeping on tip toes over to those alive. In 1915 when death was abounding amidst the unfolding drama of World War I, Klimt came back to revise this painting, adding another column of figures to contract the space between the dead and the living. In the group of the living, a mourning couple is positioned in front, while an older woman with the same coloring as death (and thus she has some association with death) is behind them. The top figures look very much alive, yet sleeping peacefully. The figures on the left, tucked in closest to death are the added figures, their open eyes forcing us and allowing us to relate to death; they are acting as the mediators between the dead and the living.

Another Secessionist who had left the culture of the Ringstrasse was the architect Otto Wagner, most famous for his Jugendstil buildings and his green Stadt Bahn stations. He famously stated and promoted the notion that the art of the past should not be copied, but that new art should be made. He championed function over form, thus rejecting the essential nature of the Ringstrasse culture.

Another room displaying furniture and artifacts collected by Leopold highlighted the Vienna workshop, co-founded by Josef Hoffman and Koloman Moser. Their main aim was to bring together artists, architects, and various other talents to provide various items accessible to the public. However, once this style became popular, the public was no longer able to obtain the items, defeating the workshop's original intent. Along with this room, Adolf Loos was also mentioned, being an architect of the mindset that when the best materials are used in a building's design and construction, there is no need for ornamentation. He thus rejected the decoration and ornate brass details embraced by the Secessionists, designing buildings 'without eyebrows'.

After this room, there were several others which highlighted artists such as Oskar Kokoschka, Richard Gerstl, and a special exhibit with many (dark and depressing) paintings and sketches by Egon Schiele.

Our tour ended in the Schiele exhibition, and was followed by a walking tour through the older part of Vienna and the Jewish quarter. The Jews have a long history in Vienna (as already explored in a previous post on the Jewish Museum), and today allowed us to see the physical places where this history was established and created.

The Jews were part of the high medieval economy, playing an integral part in the long distance trading between the Ottoman Empire and Austria after they were expelled from Spain in 1492 and settled among the Turks. In 1238 however, it became legal for Jews to live in Vienna, allowing them to build a synagogue as well. Although the Jews were legally allowed to live in Vienna and German territories, they were confined to certain area, qualifying them unofficially as ghettos. In 1420, a case of host desecration was committed in Enns, near Vienna, reverberating within the Austrian territories and leading to the mob violence against and the expulsion of the Jews from Vienna in 1421 by Duke Albrecht V (their synagogue was also destroyed at this time). There is still a plaque in the Judenplatz today which praises the pogrom of this time.

Also within the Judenplatz stands a modern memorial, taking up a large portion of the square and falling within the old boundaries of they ruined synagogue. It was built in response to the two memorials outside of the Albertina, one commemorating all those who were victims of war and fascism (dedicated to those non-Jews whose apartment was bombed) and and the other showing a Jew bound in barbed wire forced to scrub the streets. It is designed as a square library, but with all its books turned spine in, and with doors lacking knobs. This library has no access. Around the base of the library, all 41 camps where Austrian Jews were killed are listed, and there is an inscription stating

"In commemoration of more than 65,000 Austrian Jews who were killed by the Nazis between 1938 and 1945."

The books symbolize the Jews as a people of The Book, but these books - the life stories and the religion of the Jews - became inaccessible through the death inflicted by the Nazis, thus we as people can see the books, but we cannot see their titles nor their content. The Jew's contribution to the cultural intellectualism of Vienna and to the world at large is lost, and not seen - the lack of titles shows an evident cultural void.

There was a lot of dissent and disagreement among our group, with many feeling that since the inscription specified "Austrian Jews," it should have also specified that they were killed by "Austrian Nazis," their fellow citizens and countrymen. However, I don't feel that this monument aims at making a political statement, nor does it aim at pointing a finger. I believe that this monument was made for Austria, thus specifying the Austrian Jews whose lives were cut short. This monument remains ambiguous in its use of the term 'Nazi,' allowing the blame to fall on all those who declared themselves Nazis and not one specific type of Nazi. I do believe that it is important to distinguish and point out that Austrian Jews were indeed killed by their fellow Austrian Nazis, but this monument was not intended for that purpose. Rather, this monument is an appropriate commemoration of the Jews within the Austrian borders (hence the monument is IN Austria) and avoids making a political statement by refraining from engaging in the conflict between Austrians killing their fellow Austrians.

This monument does, however, fall into the area of discussion brought up by Ruth Kluger, namely, are these sorts of stereotypical images and monuments beneficial to the memory of the Holocaust, or should the images from individual stories be sufficient and be embraced over the physicality of memorials?

Sunday Religion

Today I had to myself since a group of people had gone away for the weekend, so I decided to head to Cafe Central and then to the Kunsthistorisches for my third (and last) time.

Cafe Central has come to be one of my favorite cafes in the central area of Vienna. It is close to the Hofburg rather than the overly crowded Stephansplatz, and is a few blocks back so the amount of foot traffic is significantly less. Although all of the guide books say that this old-school cafe now caters to tourists, I would have to disagree. The small front patio is definitely filled with tourists, but once inside, there is a definite balance between tourists and locals. The inside is very old fashioned with iron chandeliers, high arched ceilings, red velvet booths and chairs, marble columns. The service is spot on, and the Wiener Eiskaffee is amazing (it is this heavenly drink we discovered upon our first visit of chilled coffee, vanilla ice cream, whipped cream, and pirouette cookies on top). If only Starbucks made this sort of iced coffee...

After working on some background information for the artists I was about to study, I headed over to the Kunsthistorisches Museum to visit the Baroque and Renaissance art collections on my own. It being a Sunday, it seemed oddly appropriately to work on a comparison between Catholic and Protestant art since both collections seemed to focus on the theme of religion.

The Protestant Artists:

1. Rembrandt - Rembrandt was a dutch painter who transformed classical iconography to fit his own experiences. He had an extreme empathy for the human population, including the Jews.

Artistically, he employed the technique of chiaroscuro - the theatrical employment of light and shadow (similar to Caravaggio). His Self-Portrait illustrates this technique wonderfully - the dark shadows and background of his smock and his studio stand in stark contrast to his face. His self-portrait also shows the critical influence which the Protestant Reformation had on his artistic creativity - namely, moving away from the glory of man embodied within the Renaissance, Rembrandt saw (and thus painted) himself as a humble man before God and grace. The glory of man thus came to be replaced with the baseness of man, both in his own life and in his paintings.

2. Vermeer - Vermeer was a Dutch baroque artist who painted many pictures of the middle class making popular the genre style of painting. He used light and color in a specified style; in his The Art of Painting differing shades of blue and yellow are used to compose the entire painting; he often layered loose colors onto his canvases in a manner called pointille. His Protestantism was well known in his day (although he married a Catholic), leading him to paint genre scenes of daily life rather than engage in the religious propaganda embraced by Catholic and Protestant artists alike.

3. Bruegel - Pieter Bruegel the Elder was a renaissance painter from the Netherlands who was the first to begin painting landscapes for his own sake rather than for the sake of religion. He painted many genre paintings, and used peasants as his main figures. He was not associated with a religion in particular, viewing the institution of religion as an obstacle to God, but his The Fight Between Carnival and Lent shows the religious paradoxes between the religiously emaciated group "celebrating" lent against the excess and inebriation of the revelers during Carnival. Hence, we see a man struggling to interpret religion against both the backdrop of Catholicism and the challenging notions put forth by the Reformation.

The Catholic Artists:

1. Rubens - Rubens was a Flemish baroque artist who used sensuality, movement, and light to promote the cause of the Counter-Reformation.His Annunciation of Mary made for a Jesuit organization in 1610 shows the careful use of light and shadows to contrast Mary and the angel Gabriel - her royal blue dress and the symbolic red curtain behind her are separated by darkness from the golden hair of Gabriel and his orange robe. The white dove above also shows the contrast between light and dark and shows the fluidity between the heavenly and the earthly.

2. Titian - Titian was a dynamic painter from the Venetian School of art who used broad brushstrokes and vivd color to convey his messages. His Assumption of Mary has been used for religious doctrine within the Catholic church; his Violante (the painting's coloring is drawn from the violet tucked into the woman's dress) also is considered Catholic since it shows the stigma of prostitutes during the Early Modern Period. The woman is dressed in the grand dress which prostitutes were told to wear in order that they would be publicly recognized and the yellow color of her prominent skin and hair was used as a stigma for the outcasts and the prostitutes.

3. Raphael - Raphael was a painter during the High Renaissance and was employed by the Vatican (Pope Julius II) to create frescos within the Vatican rooms. He was the standard to which renaissance artists compared their works - after his death, mannerism and the baroque style were embraced. His Madonna in the Meadow embraces the spiritual thinking of the renaissance, illustrating the eternally valid in the horizon and the appreciation for humanity amongst the triangle of figures.

Amongst all of the artists shown within the Kunsthistorisches Museum, there were a lot that stood out, both for their content and for their beautiful paintings. However, the above artists are some of the more well-known artists and their works have had a profound impact on religion. Most of the artists shown have at least one religious painting - the question of Catholic or Protestant lies, rather, in the interpretation of and the message conveyed within the painting itself.

Spanish Influence

Yesterday after the Jewish Museum, Sidney and I had the chance to tour the stables and the winter riding school of the Spanish Riding School near the Hofburg. After seeing the horses up close, I decided to attend their morning practice today.

The Habsburg court always had a riding school, with horses used both militarily and recreationally. In 1562, Archduke Maximilian bred the Lipizzaner horses systematically to obtain the pure white color for a uniform look. The Lipizzaner horses were the most elite horses in the world, thus the horses were imported for the imperial court from Spain - hence the school's name. In 1572 there is the first mention of a riding school, and in 1580, Emperor Charles II of Austria founded the court stud Lipizza where he brought in horses from Spain. However, it wasn't until 1681 that Emperor Leopold I commissioned the design and construction of an official riding school. Emperor Charles VI rebuilt and restored the riding hall, commissioning Fischer von Erlach as its architect; the building which we see today is Erlach's design.

The morning practices themselves were neat - four sets of five horses and riders warm up and practice for 30 minute intervals, switching out and showing off. The horses, however, don't perform, but only practice techniques and such.

After the morning practices, I headed over to the Belvedere again, to more closely examine the art and follow the timeline of the artistic styles showcased. [Pictures were not allowed so all the following pictures are courtesy of Belvedere images.] The Belvedere was Prince Eugene of Savoy's summer baroque palace, with the upper Belvedere housing his guests and the lower Belvedere housing himself. Since Prince Eugene was honored and revered as the conquor of the Turks, he fashioned his guest house to reflect it. Turks captured as prisoners of war show up as motifs throughout the architecture of the upper Belvedere; they hold up walls and pillars, they are shown holding up the palace's main fountain, and they are shown agonizing under the weight of marble decorations. The upper Belvedere shows Prince Eugene as the warrior; however, the lower Belvedere shows Prince Eugene the art lover. The upper Belvedere as well is heavily baroque, emphasizing the grandeur of Prince Eugene; even the ceiling frescos are meant as optical illusions to create an elongation and dramatization of size and stature. Today, the lower Belvedere houses mainly medieval religious relics. However, the upper Belvedere houses medieval, baroque, and biedermeier art.

The lower level of the Upper Belvedere has an entire wing of medieval religious art work. The Znaim Altarpiece was one of the largest relics on display. It was created sometime between 1440 and 1445, and is one of only a few surviving large-winged retables of this time period. Its style shows early realism; the Sunday side shows high reliefs of the passion and an association with Bavarian art. The weekday side shows scenes from the life of Christ (from baptism to flagellation).

Works by Rueland Frueauf the Elder were also on display; an altar piece made between 1480 and 1491 with Mary's life depicted on the weekday side and Jesus' life and the passion depicted on the Sunday side resided once in a Salzburg church but is now at the Belvedere. His use of rhythm, color, and landscape made him a prominent artist during his time.

My favorite piece was by Johann Georg Platzer, titled Samson's Revenge; painted between 1730 and 1740, it crosses artistic lines by combining the heavy and dense details of the scene with the timelessness and objective lives of the carefree characters.

In another wing on the first floor are the buffs of Xaver Messerschmidt, referred to as the "crazy heads" since he himself never named them. Messerschmidt worked for Maria Theresia as a sculptor (late baroque period), and was trained in Munich by his uncle in the craft of sculpting. Alongside being the court sculptor, he taught at the Academy in Vienna.

His crazy heads were made in Bratislava, however, where he had bought a house. He was rumored to be schizophrenic, and he created these heads to scare away the demons and pain he felt in the night.

The next floors contained works from Vienna in the 19th century - namely works of classicism, romanticism, biedermeier, historicism, and impressionism. Famous works of Monet's such as Garden at Giverny, Van Gogh's Wheat Fields Near Auvers, Renoir's The Red-haired Bather, and Digas' Harlequin and Columbine are shown.Renoir's classical womanly figure was the epitome of beauty for the impressionists, and the landscapes depcted by both Monet and Van Gogh attempted at capturing the true essence of an experience or scene - realism was a top priority in their art. David's Napoleon Bonaparte also dominated one of the rooms, an example of the historicism which many artists desired to portray.

In the next rooms, there was a large collection of works by Gustav Klimt (his work The Kiss among them), Koloman Moser, Oskar Kokoschka, Egon Schiele, and Carl Moll. Klimt's works took up much of the exhibit. In all of his figure paintings, the woman's silhouette is outlined clearly and is positioned in the front; the man is always positioned in the back and he is less concrete and more abstract in form.

The Kiss was the only picture of people by Klimt which I liked - there was a tenderness there that was lacking in his other figures. However, his landscapes were very appealing. Their almost impressionistic style (more similar to pointillism) was beautiful, mixing blues and green into beautiful landscapes. Kokoschka's Prague Harbor was a combination between impressionist technique and the appearance of sketching. Schiele's focus on people with odd profiles and hardly any landscapes was definitely an form of expressionism within the modern boundaries.

Moser's Self-Portrait exhibited a direct use of color and purpose to communicate beauty through function rather that form. Finally, Moll's Twilight and Interior of the Winter Palace of Prince Eugene were created with an intense depth and meant to portray texture.

The final upper rooms were dedicated to the Biedermeier genre, where under Metternich's attempt at restoring the pre-Napoleonic years and implementing a conservative government through censorship and the secret police led to interior 'immigration'. The family unit was thus valued both at home and in art. Domestic scenes of the immediate family were in popular by the middle class during this time of urbanization and conservatism. Friedrich von Ameriling's portrait of a father and his three children remembering their mother is a perfect example of this notion of the closed family unit, as is Ferdinand Georg Waldmuller's Morning of Corpus Christi with the contrast between the peasants and the aristocracy manifested in the playing children. Finally, Josef Danhauser's Game of Chess was the first painting to represent life within the salons and illustrates the domestic nature of the Biedermeier period. The constant notion of the woman over the man is prevalent throughout the painting, with the woman standing and the man sitting; the queen of chess on the board; the woman winning the game; and the sculpture of Hercules enslaved to Omphale.

The entire Belvedere was quite large and overwhelming, but using the Wien Museum as a guide through each culture and artistic period of Vienna's history, the floors and paintings were easier to understand and comprehend.

I turned on the TV for the first time since being here in Vienna and was watching CNN (they don't have many English options over here...). Surprisingly, it wasn't much different from CNN back home - many of the same programs were aired, including interviews with Anderson Cooper and a special on the heros of Hurricane Katrina. The only difference seemed to be that there was a greater ethnic diversity among the channel's news broadcasters and that the commercials seemed to all be promoting or associated with the Arab world. There was not one commercial which did not try and promote a business in Dubai or did not deal with the region of Saudi Arabia. This is not as surprising as it may seem due to Saudi Arabia's wealth and obvious vicinity to Europe since Europe is its closes Western neighbor. It seems that for as conservative culturally and religiously as Saudi Arabia may be, it is definitely making a concerted effort to include itself among Western economies and business markets.

Jewish Museum

Today after class we headed over to the Jewish Museum to try and see what we could learn about such an integral culture within Vienna. The museum's lower level had artifacts concerned with the various holidays throughout the Jewish year, including those relics used during temple services and associated with the Tabernacle. However, the second floor is where the history truly began.

The exhibit began with the expulsion of the Jews from Spain, where they fled to North Africa and into the Ottoman Empire. In 711 Spain was conquered by the Moors, but later the Reconquista pushed the Muslim influence out of the region. In 1492, Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain signed an edict expelling all Jews, participating in a mass ethnic cleansing. Some Jews fled to Portugal and then later to Amsterdam due to persecutions, and some established economic communities in the Balkans (parts of which were under the rule of the Ottoman Empire). These Sephardic Jews ('sepharad' is Hebrew for Spain) became assimilated into the Turkish empire, and were welcomed freely. When the peace treaty was signed between the Habsburgs and the Sublime Porte (referring to the Ottomans), Turkish citizens began to reside in Habsburgs lands, and Austrians began to settle in Turkish lands. Thus, due to these new cultural and economic relations, Sephardic Jews began to settle in Vienna. The Sephardic Jews became mediators between the east and the west, between orient and occidental, and between Asia and Europe.

In 1735 a treaty established the Turkish Sephardic Community in Vienna, but in 1830 the new Israelite law ended the community's autonomy, and they were incorporated into the Israelite community (The Association of Turkish Israelites).

Jews also settled in Bosnia (Sarajevo) after their expulsion from Spain, but with the establishment of the Yugoslavic state in 1918 and the subsequent German invasion , 75% of the Jews were sent to the Jasenovac Concentration Camp. The survivors after the war immigrated to Israel in 1948; only 1000 Jews remain today in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

When the Habsburgs were able to recapture Hungary from the Ottomans, there was a large influx of Ashkenazic Jews in Budapest, making the Sephardic Jews who had fled to Budapest now a minority.

The Ottoman conquest of Belgrade by Suleiman the Magnificent in 1521 led to an influx of Sephardic Jews in the city. Fights between the Habsburgs and the Ottomans over Belgrade continued until 1867 when the Kingdom of Serbia obtained complete independence. The Jews who fled to both Bulgaria and Thessaloniki were deported to concentration camps when the Germans invaded during WWII.

In Italy, the exhibition mentioned that attitudes toward the Jews were ambivalent and oscillating between acceptance and discrimination; the Republic of Venice was the first nation to implement a Jewish ghetto.

The Jewish musicians in Vienna were executed and exiled, and after the war, many refused to return to a land which had denounced and ignored their contributions to culture and history. As the exhibit mentioned, in exile they became a testimony to Vienna's past - while valued abroad they were only distantly remembered at home.

The exhibit itself focused mainly on the regional diaspora of the Jews after their expulsion from Spain, and did not detail the Holocaust. However, the second floor had a temporary exhibit of Ernst Toch, a classical and film score musician, who went into exile during WWII to avoid Hitler's wrath. The exhibit included more history from WWII, but was extremely modern with everything displayed on glass holograms and a mock pool patio as the backdrop.

Apart from the top floor, the Jewish Museum was extremely enlightening and gave a much needed and yet concise context for the Jewish culture in Vienna.