The Trials and Tribulations of Richard Grune

Rolf Fischer, a member of the Schleswig Holstein state parliament from 2000 to 2012, titles his edited book of articles, Das Radikale Leben: Der Kieler Maler Richard Grune und seine Zeit 1903-1984. However, a good question might be: what would be considered “radical” in today’s western Europe about an artist who votes for the Social Democratic Party and from time to time has a boyfriend? In the Germany of the Kaiser, Hitler, the Occupation authorities, and Adenauer, what made Richard Grune’s life “radical” was the reaction of the legal and political establishment to his art, ideas, politics and most importantly lifestyle.

Using Fischer’s book as well as documents from the Schleswig Holstein archives, this presentation will highlight the legal biography of the artist, Richard Grune who reached adulthood during the Weimar

Republic. When the Nazis took power, Grune’s fortune changed. Arrested by the Gestapo in 1934, he spent a number of months in Columbia Haus and Lichtenburg concentration camps. Freed in 1935, Richard returned to his family in Flensburg. However, when his sexual relationship with Arthur Dietz was discovered by the authorities, the District Court of Flensburg sentenced Richard Grune on September 4, 1936 to prison for “unnatural relations.” Following completion of the prison sentence, Grune was placed in “protective custody” and spent more than eight horrific years in Sachsenhausen and Flossenbürg concentration camps. One might question whether his fate in the concentration camps was related to his sexual orientation alone, or his orientation combined with membership in the Social Democratic Party, and criticisms of the Hitler regime. In May 1945, Grune returned to his family in Flensburg. Liberated but not totally free, Grune faced prison again, for “unnatural” sexual relations in 1948.

It is interesting to compare two court convictions under Section 175, the first from the Third Reich and the second from post-war Flensburg. However, these were not the only legal hurdles Grune faced. There was the issue of the destruction of his art exhibition in Kiel, that had made public his famous illustrations of concentration camp scenes. The police found no perpetrator(s). When Grune attempted to prove that he was a politically persecuted victim of the Nazi regime, his application was denied. Grune applied for compensation for the works of art that the Gestapo had destroyed. The application was unsuccessful.

After liberation, it is true that Grune lived in a liberal democracy with a rule of law. However, this system did not provide him with the judicial vindication he needed. He never became fully integrated in post-war German society. The little bit of happiness he experienced came by living abroad in Barcelona, Spain. Through Grune’s legal biography and life history, one can gain a better understanding of the troubled path of a generation of Gay citizens, who bore the scars of the Third Reich, and later suffered judicial disappointment and societal rejection during the occupation and Adenauer periods.