Editing Carl Orff (section)

====Denazification====
In late March 1946, Orff underwent a [[denazification]] process in [[Bad Homburg]] at a psychological screening center of the [[Information Control Division]] (ICD), a department of the [[Office of Military Government, United States]] (OMGUS). Orff was rated "Grey C, acceptable", which his evaluator Bertram Schaffner (1912–2010) defined as for those "compromised by their actions during the Nazi period but not subscribers to Nazi doctrine".{{sfn|Schaffner|1948|p=69}}{{efn|Documents pertaining to Orff's denazification, including the official report by Schaffner, are printed in {{harvnb|Rathkolb|2021|pp=236–254}} and {{harvnb|Kohler|2015|pp=415–435}}. The materials from Orff's evaluation are held in the Oskar Diethelm Library, DeWitt Wallace Institute for the History of Psychiatry, [[Weill Cornell Medical College]], New York City, David M. Levy Papers, Box 35, Folder 2 (Schaffner's report) and Folder 40 (Orff's [[Rorschach test]]).}}

Some sources report that Orff had been blacklisted before the evaluation,{{sfn|Prieberg|2009|p=5376}}{{sfn|Kater|2019|p=324}} which would have prevented him from collecting royalties on his compositions.{{sfn|Monod|2005|p=44}} According to more recent research by Oliver Rathkolb, there is no evidence to support this.{{sfn|Rathkolb|2021|pp=132–139}} In January 1946, American officer Newell Jenkins (1915–1996)&nbsp;– Orff's former student (with whom he used the informal ''[[duzen|du]]''), who went on to have a career as a conductor<ref>{{cite news|last=Kozinn|first=Allan|author-link=Allan Kozinn|date=24 December 1996|title=Newell Jenkins, 81, Conductor Who Found Gems in Archives|work=[[The New York Times]]|page=D 18|department=Obituaries|url=https://www.nytimes.com/1996/12/24/arts/newell-jenkins-81-conductor-who-found-gems-in-archives.html|access-date=17 August 2021}}</ref>&nbsp;– informed him that he did not need a license as a composer if he was not seeking to conduct, teach, or otherwise appear in public.{{sfn|Kohler|2015|pages=416–418|postscript=; here one may find a reprint of the letter from Newell Jenkins, dated 7 January 1946, with English translation. For the original, see National Archives, Records of United States Occupation Headquarters, World War II (Record Group 260), Entry A1 1681: Correspondence and Related Records, 1945–1949, Box 928.}}{{sfn|Rathkolb|2021|p=134}} Jenkins, however, hoped that Orff would take an Intendant position in Stuttgart, which Orff was considering after initially saying no. This would require evaluation, and thus Jenkins encouraged Orff to think of how he could prove that he had actively resisted Nazism, as such persons were most highly valued.{{sfn|Rathkolb|2021|pp=132–138}}{{sfn|Monod|2005|pp=67–68, 110, 113 |postscript=. On pp. 67–68, Monod wrote that Orff was prevented from taking the position by his "'Grey C', acceptable" rating, although Orff's official report states that he was not at that time interested in such a position.}} Orff turned down the Stuttgart position by early March 1946, but Jenkins still insisted Orff undergo an evaluation at the end of that month.{{sfn|Rathkolb|2021|pp=137–138}} Schaffner's report notes: "Orff does not wish a license as 'Intendant' of an opera-house, and states that he has already refused such an offer, because the work would be primarily administrative and not musical. He wishes to have permission to appear as guest-conductor."{{sfn|Rathkolb|2021|p=238}} Orff was granted a license without any restrictions despite his rating of "'Grey C', acceptable", but there is no evidence that he conducted in public after the war.{{sfn|Kohler|2015|pp=207–209}}

Schaffner believed that the root causes of Nazism included an underlying societal rigidity and authoritarianism in Germany, especially as they pertained to fathers in family life and institutions such as the school and the military. His theories informed his and his colleagues' denazification evaluations.{{sfn|Schaffner|1948|pp=41–71}}{{sfn|Kohler|2015|pp=209–217, 228–232}}{{sfn|Rathkolb|2021|pp=139–141}} In his report on Orff, Schaffner wrote:

{{Blockquote |text=O[rff]'s attitudes are not Nazi. One of his best friends, Prof. Carl [sic] Huber, with whom he published "Musik der Landschaft", a collection of folk songs, was killed by the Nazis in Munich in 1943. Nevertheless he was a "Nutzniesser" [i.e., beneficiary] of the Nazis and can at present be classified only as "Grey C", acceptable. In view of his antinazi point of view, his deliberate av[o]idance of positions and honors which he could have had by cooperating with the Nazis, he may at a future date be reclassified higher.{{sfn|Rathkolb|2021|p=237}}}}

There is no evidence that Orff was ever reclassified, but since his license had no restrictions, this was not necessary.{{sfn|Kohler|2015|p=227}} For Orff's psychological evaluation, Schaffner wrote:

{{Blockquote |text=<p>1. A highly gifted, creative individual who scored high on intelligence tests ... Orff is diplomatic, ingratiating and ingenious. Retiring and unob[tr]usive, accustomed to independence and solitude since childhood, he has steadfastly pursued his career as an unattached composer. He has little personal need of "belonging" to a group, public honor or recognition, and prefers to work alone rather than in organizations. He is emotionally well-adjusted, purposeful and egocentric.</p>
<p>2. Orff scored highest in his group on the political attitudes test. Psychiatric studies of his environment and development are consistent with an antinazi att[i]tude. On psychological grounds, [N]azism was distasteful to him; likewise on psychological grounds, he remained a passive antinazi, and tried to avoid official and personal contact bot[h] with the Nazi movement and with the war.{{sfn|Rathkolb|2021|p=238}}</p>}}

Some scholars have maintained that Orff deceived his evaluators to some degree.{{sfn|Monod|2003|p=302 |postscript=. "[Orff] was sharp enough to have taken advantage of the Americans' lack of knowledge and to have utterly bamboozled the psychiatrist."}}{{sfn|Kater|2000|pp=136–137}} The counterpoint is that Orff misrepresented himself in some instances, but the Americans had enough information to assess him fundamentally correctly and rate him accordingly.{{sfn|Rathkolb|2021|pp=142–147}}{{sfn|Kohler|2015|pp=217–237, especially 235–237}} The report notes some of Orff's financial support from the cities of Frankfurt and Vienna, his participation in the [[1936 Summer Olympics]],{{sfn|Rathkolb|2021|pp=51–61}} and the music for ''A Midsummer Night's Dream'' (although the number of its performances was undercounted{{sfn|Prieberg|2009|p=5390}}), which Orff said he wrote "from his own private musical point of view" but "admit[ted] that he chose an unfortunate moment in history to write it."{{sfn|Rathkolb|2021|p=237}}

Orff said "that he never got a favorable review by a Nazi music critic";{{sfn|Rathkolb|2021|p=237}} however, his work had been enthusiastically received by audiences and many critics.{{sfn|Rathkolb|2021|pp=69 and 74–80}}{{sfn|Kohler|2015|pp=147–159, 167–176}}{{sfn|Painter |2007 |pages=262–265}} He also said that "[h]is great success" was in 1942 with a performance of ''Carmina Burana'' in [[La Scala]] in [[Milan]], "not under the auspices of the Propaganda Ministry."{{sfn|Rathkolb|2021|p=237}}{{sfn|Kater|2000|p=136. Kater characterized Orff's statement as an attempt at "moving himself, his oeuvre, and his civic and artistic responsibilities out of the jurisdiction of the Third Reich." It was, however, still under [[Axis powers]] (Kohler 2015, p. 222)}} In fact, Orff later publicly characterized the second staging of ''Carmina Burana'', which took place in Dresden on 4 October 1940, as the beginning of his great success.{{sfn|Orff|1975–1983|p=71, Vol. IV}} The American evaluators disbelieved Orff's account of his reception in the Third Reich: "The fact that he was deferred ... during the war is contradictory to his claim that he was not well thought of at the Propaganda Ministry. ... He does not give a very good [e]xplanation."{{sfn|Rathkolb|2021|p=237}} The report likewise notes Orff's very sharp rise in income in the latter part of the Third Reich.{{sfn|Rathkolb|2021|p=236}}{{sfn|Kohler|2015|p=220}}

Surprisingly absent from the report are several factors that Orff could have used in his favor, notably his associations with Jewish colleagues{{sfn|Rathkolb|2021|p=162}} as well as his own partly Jewish ancestry,{{sfn|Brembeck|1999a}}{{sfn|Busch-Frank|2020}} the latter of which was never publicly known while he was alive.{{sfn|Kater|1995|pp=30–31}} Nor is there any mention of the potentially subversive and anti-authoritarian texts in his works,{{sfn|Rathkolb|2021|pp=110 and 113}}{{sfn|Kohler|2015|p=250}} notably the passages in ''Die Kluge'' (premiere 1943) that have been identified as such, sometimes even during Orff's lifetime (including by [[Carl Dahlhaus]]).<ref>{{cite news|last=Dahlhaus|first=Carl|author-link=Carl Dahlhaus|date=13 February 1982|title=Den Notlügen auf der Spur: Fred K. Priebergs Chronik der Musik im NS-Staat|work=[[Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung]]|page=BuZ5|language=de}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last=Hartung |first=Hugo |date=10 July 1970 |title=Begegnungen mit Carl Orff: Zu seinem 75. Geburtstag |work=[[Saarbrücker Zeitung]]|language=de}}</ref>{{sfn|Orff|1995|p=52}}{{sfn|Rösch|2009|p=125}}{{sfn|DCamp|1995|pp=218–221, 235}}{{sfn|Rockwell|2003}}