1. Borchert, Wolfgang, “Generation ohne Abschied,”Google Scholar in idem, , Draussen vor der Tür und ausgewählte Erzählungen (Hamburg, 1966), 125Google Scholar; Heuss cited in Peter, Merkl, The Origin of the West German Republic (New York, 1963), 29.Google Scholar

2. Jost, Hermand, Kultur im Wiederaufbau (Munich, 1986), 70–71Google Scholar; Wolfgang, Benz, Potsdam 1945 (Munich, 1986), 183Google Scholar; Reiner, Pommerin, “Some Remarks on the Cultural History of the Federal Republic of Germany,” in Culture in the Federal Republic of Germany, ed. Reiner, Pommerin (Oxford, 1996), 4Google Scholar. As the American music officer in Berlin remarked; “The word festival usually implies gaiety and happy times. The Germans, however, organize a Fest (festival) on an even numbered anniversary of any famous citizen's birth or death and then drench the public in his works until it cries for help. Schubert had his turn recently, and we are now in the middle of Brahms-Fest.” John, Bitter, Weekly Report, 26 March 1947Google Scholar, National Archives (NA), RG 260, Office of the Military Government (U.S.), (OMGUS), Education and Cultural Relations Division, Cultural Affairs Branch, Records Relating to Theater and Music, Box 242. All OMGUS documents cited hereafter are in NA, RG 260.

3. Lutz, Reuter, “Political and Moral Culture in West Germany: Four Decades of Democratic Reorganization and Vergangenheitsauseinandersetzung” in Coping with the Past: Germany and Austria after 1945, eds. Kathy, Harms, Lutz, Reuter and Volker, Duerr (Madison, 1990), 166Google Scholar; Merritt, Richard L., Democracy Imposed: US Occupation Policy and the German Public, 1945–1949 (New Haven, 1995), 346CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Large, David Clay, “Uses of the Past: The Anti-Fascist Resistance Legacy in the Federal Republic of Germany,” in Contending with Hitler: Varieties of German Resistance in the Third Reich, ed. Large, David Clay (Cambridge, 1991), 163.Google Scholar

4. In fact, in their initial planning for occupation governance, the Americans had conceived of directly running every level of government, including cities and towns. The opposition of the British, together with a recognition of the huge manpower resources that would be required for such an undertaking, led to the adoption of an indirect control model. For insight into the debate, see: AFHQ, Appreciation and Outline Plan, 24 March 1943, in Civil Affairs: Soldiers become Governors, ed. Coles, Harry L. and Weinberg, Albert K. (Washington, 1964), 170–71Google Scholar and the subsequent correspondence between Charles Spofford and Lord Rennell and between Roosevelt and Churchill, Coles, ibid., 171–73.

5. Benz, , Potsdam 1945, 119–31Google Scholar; Maier, H., “Die Entwicklung der kommunalen Politik und Organisation in den drei westlichen Besatzungszonen,” in Vorgeschichte der Bundesrepublik Deutschland: Zwischen Kapitulation und Grundgesetz, ed. Josef, Becker, Theo, Stammen, and Peter, Waldmann (Munich, 1979), 341–45Google Scholar; FRUS, 1945, vol. 3, 954–55, 961–64; L. Clay to J. McCloy, 16 September 1945 and L. Clay to D.D. Eisenhower, 26 May 1946, in The Papers of Lucius D. Clay, vol. 1, ed. Smith, Jean E. (Bloomington, 1974), 76, 215.Google Scholar

6. Röpke cited in Alter, Peter, “Nationalism and German Politics after 1945,” in The State of Germany, ed. John, Breuilly (London, 1992), 170Google Scholar; Diefendorf, Jeffry M., In the Wake of War: The Reconstruction of Germany after World War II (New York, 1993), 15, 66–107Google Scholar; for the importance of local identities after 1945: Applegate, Celia, A Nation of Provincials: The German Idea of Heimat (Berkeley, 1990), 228–46Google Scholar, and Fehrenbach, Heide, “Cinema, Spectatorship and the Problem of Postwar German Identity,” in The American Impact on Postwar Germany, ed. Reiner, Pommerin (Providence, 1995), 165–95Google Scholar. For the intricate relationship between preservation and national identity see Koshar, Rudy, Germany's Transient Past: Preservation and National Memory in the Twentieth Century (Chapel Hill, 1998)Google Scholar, chap. 5. Koshar, however, sees postwar urban restoration as involving a more direct dialogue with the immediate past and a less regionalized set of identifications than suggested here.

7. L. Clay to W. Draper, 7 February 1948, in The Papers of Lucius D. Clay, vol. II, 557; the struggle of the bizonal administration to work around regional sensibilities can be traced in Troeger, Heinrich, Interregnum: Tagebuch des Generalsekretärs des Länderrats der Bizone, 1947–49, ed., Wolfgang, Benz and Constantin, Goschler (Munich, 1985)Google Scholar, esp. 33–43.

8. On OWI: Winkler, Alan, The Politics of Propaganda: The Office of War Information (New Haven, 1978), 118–28Google Scholar; Eaton, F.Q., “Music as a Weapon,” Musical America (10 02 1945): 27Google Scholar. On PWD: D. Taylor, memo, 12 January 1945 and D. Taylor to G.I. De Beer, 30 May 1945, NA, GG331, SHAEF, PWD, Box 24, Entry 87; Maritta Hein-Kremer's detailed discussion of the lending libraries provides an excellent introduction to the coordination of OWI/PWD activities, see Die amerikanische Kulturoffensive, 1945–1955: Gründung und Entwicklung des amerikanischen Information Centers in Westdeutschland und West Berlin (Cologne, 1996)Google Scholar, esp. chap. 2.

9. Bausch, Ulrich, Die Kulturpolitik der US-amerikanischen Information Control Division in Württemberg-Baden von 1945 bis 1949 (Stuttgart, 1992)Google Scholar; Frei, Norbert, Amerikanische Lizenzpolitik und deutsche Pressetradition: Die Geschichte der Nachkriegszeitung Südost-Kurier (Munich, 1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; a welcome and rare English-language example is Gienow-Hecht, Jessica C.E., “Art is Democracy and Democracy is Art: Culture, Propaganda and the Neue Zeitung in Germany, 1944–1947,” Diplomatic History 23, no. 1 (1999): 21–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar, though she distinguishes between American-born ICD officers (who she thinks did not understand the local situation) and the German-born ones (who she believes did).

10. Peterson, Edward, The American Occupation of Germany: Retreat to Victory (Detroit, 1977), 349, 351Google Scholar; Schivelbusch, Wolfgang, In a Cold Crater: Cultural and Intellectual Life in Berlin, 1945–48 (Berkeley, 1998), 28Google Scholar; Pells, Richard, Not Like Us: How Europeans Have Loved, Hated and Transformed American Culture Since WWII (New York, 1997), 40–46Google Scholar similarly presents American cultural officials as insensitive to European conditions and determined on Americanizing Germany. The final quote is from Willett, Ralph, The Americanization of Germany, 1945–1949 (London, 1989), 14Google Scholar; Peter K. Breit, also emphasizes the failure of official efforts at “Americanization” in comparison to the success of U.S. popular culture in the 1950s: “Culture as Authority: American and German Transactions,” in The American Impact on Postwar Germany, ed. Pommerin, , 125–48Google Scholar. Deshmukh, Marion, “Recovering Culture: The Berlin National Gallery and the U.S. Occupation, 1945–49,” Central European History 27, no. 4 (1994): 418–19.Google Scholar

11. History: Information Control Division, Office of the Military Government for Germany (U.S.), 8 May 1945–30 June 1946, 68–69, OMGUS, Records of the Executive Office, Information Control Division, Box 454. Bausch also notes the flexibility of ICD directives in Die Kulturpolitik der US, 174–77.

12. John Evarts, Special Report: Music Control in Bavaria, June 1945–July 1946, 27 June 1946, OMGUS, Educational and Cultural Relations Division Records, Theater and Music Section, Box 241; Theater and Music Accomplishments (n.d.), (emphasis in original), OMGUS, Records of the Educational and Cultural Relations Division, Records of the Cultural Affairs Branch, General Records, Box 248; History of Information Control Division, Office of the Military Government for Germany (U.S.), 8 May 1945–30 June 1946, OMGUS, Records of the Executive Office, Information Control Division, Box 454.

13. Directive for Psychological Warfare and Control of German Information Services 18 April 1945, Special Staff — Psychological Warfare Division, Entry 87, Box 19 NA, GG 331 SHAEF; John Evarts, Special Report: Music Control in Bavaria, June 1945–July 1946, 27 June 1946, OMGUS, Educational and Cultural Relations Division Records, Theater and Music Section, Box 241; Reorientation Activities of ODIC in Germany, 15 April 1947, OMGUS, Educational and Cultural Relations Division, Cultural Affairs Branch, General Records, Box 248.

14. Bogner, W. Jr., “Harry Bogner: Biographical Sketch,” n.d.Google Scholar, copy in author's possession; Hagen, H., Personal Observations of Operations in 6870th DISCC, 29 September 1945Google Scholar, OMGUS, Educational and Cultural Relations Division, Theater and Music Section, Box 241; interview with E. Kilenyi, 28 June 1995; memo: Meinzolt, 3 July 1945, Akten des Bayerisches Ministerium für Unterricht und Kultus, Bayerisches Hauptstaatsarchiv (hereafter BHstA), MK50007; the conversation with Schattenhofer concerned Oswald Kabasta: Meyer, Gabriele, “Oswald Kabasta und die Münchner Philharmoniker: Glanzvolle Karriere unter dem Hakenkreuz und bitteres Ende,” in Musik soll nicht bloss tönen, sie muss leben: Die Beiträge zum 2. Internationalen Oswald Kabasta Symposion, ed. Exl, E. (Graz, 1998), 161Google Scholar; D. Taylor memo to Film-Theater-Music Control Branches, 26 May 1945, NA, GG331, SHAEF, Special Staff — Psychological Warfare Division, Entry 87, Box 24.

15. H. Hagen, Report on Mission to Munich and Nurnberg, 29 September 1945, OMGUS, Educational and Cultural Relations Division, Theater and Music Section, Box 241; on his Fragebogen (questionnaire), Kabasta indicated that he had applied for party membership in 1938, but had never received a membership card. The Americans initially accepted this, but by November 1945 they had found not only his 1938 membership number, but also evidence to suggest that he had joined the party in Austria six years before. Kabasta continued to deny his official membership in the party (whether dated 1932 or 1938) and, in despair, committed suicide in February 1946; for more see Meyer, , “Oswald Kabasta und die Münchner Philharmoniker,” 161–65Google Scholar (I am indebted to Joan Evans for this reference). Vogel, A., Daily Reports, 26 June 1945Google Scholar, 25 June 1945, 10 July 1945. Vogel, A., Daily Reports, 26 June 1945Google Scholar, 25 June 1945, 10 July 1945, OMGUS, Educational and Cultural Relations Division, Administrative Records of the Director's Office, Box 20, Music Section.

16. Niethammer, Lutz, Entnazifizierung in Bayern: Säuberung und Rehabilitierung unter amerikanischer Besatzung (Frankfurt am Main, 1972), 149–56.Google Scholar

17. Music Section, Daily Report, 15 July 1945, OMGUS, Educational and Cultural Affairs Division, Educational and Cultural Relations Branch, Administrative Records of the Director's Office, Box 20; Evarts, J., Special Report: Music Control in Bavaria, June 1945 to July 1946Google Scholar, 27 June 1946, OMGUS, Educational and Cultural Relations Division, Theater and Music Section, Box 241; Aktennotiz attn. Staatliches Wohnungsamt, 2 August 1945 BHstA, MK 50187; Die Neue Zeitung, 25 October 1945.

18. Hagen, H., Personal Observations of Operations in 6870th DISCC, 29 September 1945Google Scholar, OMGUS, Educational and Cultural Relations Division, Theater and Music Branch, Box 241; Music Section, Daily Reports, 15 July and 5 August 1945; Music Section, Weekly Report, 3 November 1945, OMGUS, Education and Cultural Relations Division, Administrative Records of the Director's Office, Box 20.

19. ICD History, 8 May 1945–30 June 1946, 62, OMGUS, Records of the Executive Office ICD: Activities, 1945–49, Box 454.

20. Hagen, H., Report on Mission to Munich and Nurnberg, 29 September 1945Google Scholar, OMGUS, Educational and Cultural Relations Division, Theater and Music Section, Box 241; Evarts, John, Yearly Report of Music Control in Bavaria — July 1946 — July 1947Google Scholar, Educational and Cultural Relations Division, Theater and Music Branch, Weekly Reports, Box 239. Claus-Dieter Schwab, in his study of ICD Munich, criticizes the Americans for their preoccupation with denazification and control; see “Kultur zwischen Kontrolle und kleiner Freiheit: Amerikanische Kulturpolitik in München am Beispiel der Information Control Division,” in Trümmerzeit in München, ed. Friedrich, Prinz (Munich, 1984), 67–68Google Scholar. His point is valid for some sections under ICD control, but as Prinz notes, one needs to consider military government activity section by section and group by group; Prinz, “Münchner Kultur — Kultur in München, 1945/49: Nature Morte oder Musica Viva,” in Prinz, , Trümmerzeit, 14.Google Scholar

21. Author's interview with Edward Kilenyi, 8 June 1996; Evarts, J., “Vom Musikleben in Amerika,” Neue Musik 3, no. 1 (02 1947): 80–85Google Scholar; Evarts, J., Weekly Report, 16 November 1946Google Scholar, OMGUS, Educational and Cultural Relations Division, Theatre and Music Branch, Weekly Reports, Box 239; Report to the State Department of the USIE Survey Mission on the OMGUS Reorientation Program in Germany, 21 July 1949, NA, RG 59, Lot 53D311, Box 205. Bausch also notes the European connections of many ICD officers and sees them as having a “double-identification” in Kulturpolitik der US, 159 and conclusion. See also Gienow-Hecht, , “Art is Democracy and Democracy is Art,” 24–29.Google Scholar

22. John, Evarts, Yearly Report of Music Control in Bavaria — July 1946–July 1947Google Scholar and Weekly Report, 11 January 1947, OMGUS, Educational and Cultural Relations Division, Theater and Music Branch, Weekly Reports, Box 239.

23. A similar policy is emphasized by Thomas Steiert in an excellent article on music control in Stuttgart, : “Zur Musik und Theaterpolitik in Stuttgart während der amerikanischen Besatzungszeit,” in Kulturpolitik im besetzten Deutschland, 1945–1949, ed. Gabriele, Clemens (Stuttgart, 1994), 55–68.Google Scholar

24. Evarts, J., “Vom Musikleben in Amerika,” 85Google Scholar; Report to the Department of State of the USIE Survey Mission on the OMGUS Reorientation Program in Germany, 21 July 1949, RG 59, Lot 53D311, Box 205. The text of JCS 1779, which replaced JCS 1067, can be found in U.S. Department of State, Germany, 1947–49: The Story in Documents (Washington, 1950), 33–41.Google Scholar

25. Evarts, J., “Diary: Spring-Summer 1947,” 7–8Google Scholar (copy in author's possession); Evarts, J., Semi-monthly summary, 16 July 1946Google Scholar, OMGUS, Educational and Cultural Affairs Division, Educational and Cultural Relations Branch, Administrative Records of the Director's Office, Box 20.

26. Evarts, J., “Diary: Spring-Summer 1947,” 4 and 6Google Scholar; Vogel, A., Daily Report, 25 June 1945Google Scholar, OMGUS, Educational and Cultural Relations Division, Administrative Records of the Director's Office, Box 20.

27. Evarts Private Archive, Evarts, J., “Diary of second European tour 1929.”Google Scholar A similar pattern of development is described in James Tent's definitive study of U.S. education policy Mission on the Rhine: Reeducation and Denazification in American-Occupied Germany (Chicago, 1982)Google Scholar, esp. chap. 4. Bausch sees a similar struggle against pietistic Protestantism in Württemberg-Baden; Die Kultur-politik der US, 129–35.

28. On Nazi-period Munich see Large, David Clay, Where Ghosts Walked: Munich's Road to the Third Reich (New York, 1997)Google Scholar, esp. 258–67.

29. Süddeutsche Zeitung, 26 October 1945; Vogel, A., Daily Report, 9 July 1945Google Scholar, OMGUS, Educational and Cultural Relations Division, Administrative Records of the Director's Office, Box 20; History of Theater and Music Control Branch: Wuerttemberg-Baden, 5, NA, RG 260, OMG Wuerttemberg-Baden, Educational and Cultural Relations Division, Records of the Cultural Affairs Branch, Records Relating to Music and Theater, Box 242; on Rosbaud's career see: Evans, Joan, Hans Rosbaud: A Bio-Bibliography (New York, 1992), 13–40Google Scholar and for an assessment that undermines the Americans' opinion that Rosbaud was “truly white,” Kater, Michael, The Twisted Muse: Musicians and their Music in the Third Reich (New York, 1997), 65–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar; author's interview with Carlos Moseley, 18 March 1996.

30. Süddeutsche Zeitung, 17 September 1946; Bauckner, A., Spielplan, 1946Google Scholar, 19 December 1945 BHstA, MK 50239; A. Bauckner, monthly reports for December 1945, February-March 1946, and May 1946, BHstA, MK 50239; K. Scharnagl to Staatsminister, 15 February 1947, BHstA, MK 50187.

31. Author's interview with Edward Kilenyi, 8 June 1996; in his Memoirs (New York, 1997)Google Scholar and in an interview with the author, 16 March 1997, Solti maintained that he was only invited to perform in Munich after he had successfully conducted in Stuttgart on 26 April 1946. Bauckner, however, had already engaged him, “at the request of the military government,” to perform in Fidelio by late March: A. Bauckner to Staatsministerium, 25 March 1946, BHstA, MK 50204; Evarts, J., Weekly Report, 29 June 1946Google Scholar; Scharnagl, K. to Staatsminister, 15 February 1947Google Scholar and E. Jochum to A. Hundhammer, 23 July 1947, BHstA, MK 50187.

32. Evarts, J., Special Report — Music Control in Bavaria — June 1945 to July 1946, 27 June 1946Google Scholar, OMGUS, Educational and Cultural Relations Division, Theater and Music Branch, Box 241.

33. Evarts, J., “Diary: September 1946,” 6.Google Scholar

34. Evarts, J., Weekly Report, 12 October 1946Google Scholar, OMGUS, Educational and Cultural Relations Division, Theater and Music Branch, Weekly Reports, Box 239; Evarts, J., “Diary: September 1946,” 6.Google Scholar

35. Evarts, J., Weekly Report, 12 October 1946Google Scholar, OMGUS, Educational and Cultural Relations Division, Theater and Music Branch, Weekly Reports, Box 239.

36. C. Moseley to J. Clark, 10 May 1948, OMGUS, Educational and Cultural Relations Division, Administrative Records of the Director's Office, Box 20; Evarts, J., Yearly Report of Music Control in Bavaria, July 1946–July 1947, 15 July 1947Google Scholar, Educational and Cultural Relations Division, Theater and Music Branch, Weekly Reports, Box 239. In Berlin, Spruchkammer (denazification tribunal) decisions still needed to be approved by the Allied Kommandatura. P. Au Buchon to Theatre and Music Licensees, 19 June 1947, OMGUS, Educational and Cultural Relations Division, Theatre and Music Branch, Box 242.

37. Evarts, J., Weekly Report, 10 April 1947Google Scholar, OMGUS, Educational and Cultural Relations Division, Theater and Music Branch, Weekly Reports, Box 239; Solti, , Memoirs, 88Google Scholar. Munich concert-goers' wild affection for Knappertsbusch extended back to the early 1920s, when he had replaced Bruno Walter as Generalmusikdirektor of the Staatsoper; Kater, , Twisted Muse, 40–41.Google Scholar

38. Appendix 7 to Combined History of the Theatre Control Section and the Music Control Section, 28 April 1947, OMGB, Educational and Cultural Relations Division, Cultural Relations Branch, Box 20; Minutes of General Information Control Meeting, 1 September 1947, OMGB, Intelligence Division, ICD Intelligence Records, Box 114/52A,

39. H. Rosbaud to K. Scharnagl, 16 February 1947, Washington State University Archive, Hans Rosbaud Papers, Box 6 file 89; and John Evarts to H. Rosbaud, 16 February 1947, Box 3 file 40.

40. Süddeutsche Zeitung, 26 June 1948 and 29 June 1948; memo regarding the contract with Hans Rosbaud, 26 February 1948, cited in Krauss, Marita, Nachkriegskultur in München: Münchner stüdtische Kulturpolitik, 1945–54 (Munich, 1985), 60Google Scholar; Evans, , Rosbaud, 44.Google Scholar

41. Sattler, D., “Aussprache mit Carl Orff,” 7 November 1949Google Scholar, Institut für Zeitgeschichte (IfZ), ED 145, Bd 2; and D. Sattler, Vormerkung, 16 July 1947, IfZ, ED 145, Bd 2; Evans, J., “Diary: Spring and Summer 1947,” 9Google Scholar; Müller, H., Aktennotiz, 9 August 1948Google Scholar, BHstA, MK 50187; R. Hartmann to D. Sattler, 28 November 1949, BHstA, MK 14395; Solti, , Memoirs, 91.Google Scholar

42. Dr. Schwink to H. Meinzolt, 14 July 1945, Metzger, L., Aktennotiz, 20 July 1945Google Scholar and F. Fendt to W. Hoegner, 6 May 1946, BHstA, MK 50007; F. Messmer makes this same point in “Münchner Tradition und Klassische Moderne — Der musikalische Neuanfang,” in Trümmerzeit, ed. Prinz, , 174.Google Scholar

43. School reform revealed a similar pattern as the Americans moved from control to “voluntary compulsion,” local resistance mounted; see: Bungenstab, Karl-Ernst, Umerziehung zur Demokratie? Re-education Politik im Bildungswesen der US-Zone, 1945–1949 (Düsseldorf, 1970), 92–98Google Scholar; Tent, , Mission on the Rhine, 200Google Scholar; Winfried, Müller, Schulpolitik in Bayern im Spannungsfeld von Kultusbörokratie und Besatzungstmacht (Munich, 1995).Google Scholar

44. D. Sattler to A. Hundhammer, 7 Mai 1947, BHstA, MK 50136; Sattler, D., Vormerkung, 16 Juli 1947Google Scholar, IfZ, ED 145, Bd 2.

45. Murphy, R. to Secretary of State, 19 February 1947Google Scholar, NA, RG 59, 862.00/2–1947; Evart, J., “Diary: Spring-Summer 1947,” 7Google Scholar; Sattler, D., Aktennotiz of conversation with W Egk, 23 August 1949 IfZ, ED 145, Bd 6Google Scholar; on Abraxas, Süddeutsche Zeitung, 8 June 1948; Glaser, Hermann, The Rubble Years: The Cultural Roots of Postwar Germany (New York, 1986), 206–9Google Scholar, and Hermann, Glaser, Lutz, von Pufendorf and Michael, Schoneich, eds., So viel Anfang war nie: Deutsche Städte, 1945–1949 (Berlin, 1989), 145–47.Google Scholar

46. Sattler, D., Aktennotiz, 17 April 1947Google Scholar, BHstA, MK50129; C. Moseley to Dear and Good Woman of Otis Boulevard, 20 February 1948 (copy in author's possession); Krauss, , Nachkriegskultur in München, 64Google Scholar; Süddeutsche Zeitung, 16 March 1948.

47. Süddeutsche Zeitung, 16 October 1948.

48. R. Hartmann to L. Meinzolt, 15 October and 29 October 1951, BHstA, MK50055; F. Hink to Münchner Philharmoniker, 6 April 1949, Stadtarchiv München, 1563; Süddeutsche Zeitung, 16 October 1948.

49. Sabine Henze-Döhring finds similar irony in U.S. policy regarding the Bayreuth Festspiel. Unable, in the face of heavy local resistence, to remake the Wagner Festival into an event featuring international classics and experimental works, the section watched the Wagner family restored to its traditional authority. But as Henze-Döhring notes, the festival became an international event nonetheless. See “Kulturelle Zentren in der amerikanischen Besatzungszone: Der Fall Bayreuth,” in Kulturpolitik im besetzen Deutschland, ed. Clemens, , 39–54.Google Scholar

50. Author's interview with Carlos Moseley, 18 March 1996.

51. On the centrality of America to German national identity: Andrei Markovits, S., “Anti-Americanism and the Struggle for a West German Identity,” in The Federal Republic of Germany at Forty, ed. Peter, Merkl (New York, 1989), 35–54Google Scholar; Dan Diner has observed that by making the Americans into oppressors and themselves into victims, many Germans were able to transfer the guilt over Nazism to a foreign power: America in the Eyes of the Germans (Princeton, 1996), 111 and 119Google Scholar. Kaspar Maase valuably deepens these views by showing America to have been the battleground over which different groups within German society attempted to legitimize their lifestyles, politics, and their views of the nation and in so doing constitute themselves as social collectivities; “Amerikanisierung von unten: Demonstrative Vulgarität und kulturelle Hegemonie in der Bundesrepublik der 50er Jahre,” in Amerikanisierung: Traum und Alptraum im Deutschland des 20. Jahrhunderts, ed. Alf, Lüdtke, Inge, Marssolek and Adelheid, von Saldern (Stuttgart, 1996), 291–314.Google Scholar

52. C. Moseley to Helen 30 March 1948 (copy in author's possession).