To what extent is the statement Speer was a product of his times a correct assessment of the career and life

of Albert Speer The statement that Albert Speer was a product of his times is of limited accuracy when assessing Speers role as the First Architect of the Reich and as a key individual in the Nazi war machine. Speers position of power in the Nazi regime attests to his significant ability to shape the idealogy of the Nazi era to the wishes of the regime He wa not a product of his times to the extent that the historical period shaped his rise to power but he exercised a dominant degree of control over the national era to promulgate his path to eminence. His work as Armaments Minister also supports the view that he was not overwhelmed by the war effort but instead structured the industry making the war effort a product of his organization. Thus this statement fails to address the role of Speer to influence his times more so than him being a mere product of his times. Speers innate ability to shape spectacle into vivid propaganda for the Nazi party serves to emphasize his control over his nations acceptance for the Nazi regime. Speer was appointed the First Architect of the Reich in 1934 and in this capacity, was influential in transforming the appeal of the Nazis into concrete form. The Nazis projected an image of power, dominance and revitalisation. Speer was effective at translating this appeal into visible form. His work with the 1933 Mayday Rally with the Zepplin Field Eagle and the 1934 Nuremburg Rally delivered a visual spectacle to influence public consensus for the party. IN addition, Speers orchestration of the Buckeburg Harvest Festival in 1934 which mirrored the Nazi idealogy of the Volksgemeinshaft. As an united Aryan race was a prominent feature of his times, it is evident that Speer was successful at manipulating its reception to the public, exemplifying his control over his times. Furthermore, Speer captured the imposing dominance of the Nazi era through the design of the Reich Chancellery in 1938-1939 on Wilhelmstrasse. Speers inherent skill at designing this atmospheric pageantry desired of his employers (Fest) was integral to his control over the idealogy of his times. Thus the statement that he was a product of his era is to trivial accuracy when discussing his career as the First Architect of the Reich. Speer can be viewed in history as an individual whose rise to power was heavily influenced by the culture of his times, of power being granted by access to Hitler, suggesting that his position was a product of his times. Speers rise to prominence can be dictated by his enthusiasm for nationalistic ideals which Hitler possessed in the early 1930s. Speer was an individual shaped by the ideals of the time such as the need to revive the German greatness and Herrenvolk or Master race. When he was at the Berline Institute of Technology in 1931, he attended a speech by Hitler. It was here that the speech swept away any reservations (Inside the Third Reich) and encouraged him to join the party, the stepping stone to his entrance into the Nazi inner circle. Speers career path can be seen to be a product of his times by the fact that his escalation to eminence was promulgated by the power structure of the Nazi era. Here, power and influence was determinant by the access to Hitler or moreover,

if an individual could impress Hitler. Speer was evidently able to impress Hitler, who possessed a degree of favouritism to Speer. It is noted that in Speer, Hitler saw an idealised self image, (Kershaw) it was this patronage of Speer as a protg which enabled him to gain prestige in the party. Speers close relationship with Hitler was central to his ability to receive prestigious commission such as the renovation of the Reich Chancellery in 1938 and the Germania project in 1939. Speer and Hitlers mutual idealism for architecture led to a significant force in Speers own career and life. It is clear that Speer was directly affected by the power structures and nationalism of his times, lending credibility to the statement that individuals are products of their times. The assessment that Speer was a product of his times is of secondary importance and lesser accuracy when considering the decisive control he had over his international history through the Nuremburg Trial in the post-WWII era. Here, his ability to craft the Penitent Nazi image challenges the view that he was merely swept up in the fervour of his time and like the rest of the Nazi top members, was unable to break free of the mould of a Nazi who was just following orders. The Nuremburg Trials revealed a career driven individual independent of the callous nature of the regime. Speer admitted guilt through association with the party but also touched on his reproach of Hitlers scorched earth policy in 1945. His detachment from the regime compounds his success at being viewed as unaccountable for the war crimes of the Holocaust. From this, the favourable image (Bradley Smith) which Speer personified at Nuremburg provided an insight into the regimes inner machinations and suggested that Speer was not a individual overwhelmed by his times. Inadvertently, Speers defence reveals that he was not a product of his times to the extent that he did not exhibit the characteristics of a cold Nazi but instead presented an honest figure. The view that Speer was Product of his times is true to the extent that his times, the period of the Nazi regime provided a major impetus for his career. However, it is a fallible assessment as it fails to address the ability of Speer to exert a central control over his times through propaganda and the image formulated out of the Nuremburg Trials in 1945. Thus Speer was not a product of his times.