Kirste Flagstad Biography

Silje Nergaard Kirsten Flagstad-a world-scale star and a goat of the year of the year was the light of a new biography about Kirsten Flagstad, who came out of the pen of the writer Ingeborgi Sulbrekken Ingeborg Solbrekken. For the first time, materials are published in the book, indicating how key figures from among the representatives of the Norwegian authorities were able to effectively use the press, police and the judicial system in the process that is unworthy of the legal state, ”the publishing house press release said.

This article presents excerpts from the new book. June of the year was supposed to be a fateful month in the fate of Kirsten Flagstad. Unaware of the consequences, she gave an interview to the Swedish journalist, telling about the desire to leave Norway and return to the USA, where she still had many friends. She was glad that Norway again gained freedom, despite the fact that this did not make her life in her homeland more pleasant.

The article of the Swedish journalist was published in the Stockholm newspaper Morgentidningen Morgentidningen on June 10. Back in May, American newspapers wrote that the flagStad wanted to return to the United States. One of the journalists stated that he would like to hear her again, after which the newspaper’s editors were overwhelmed by a wave of outraged letters of readers.

One of the authors of indignant responses said that the flag studio allegedly returned to Norway by Hitler’s personal aircraft. Instead of refuting this lie, the Norwegian embassy in Washington made an official statement about the flag studio, which is not just false in content, but became for her a “death sentence”, which was supposed to be publicly read out by the president of Storting.

The telegram from Washington said the following: “On the question of the place and role of Kirsten Flagstad, the former singer-soprano“ Metropolitan ”, the Norwegian embassy revealed the following: it was in this country when an invasion of Norway occurred. Her husband Henry Johansen was in Norway. Soon after the start of the German invasion of Norway, he became a member of the Nazi party.

He is a large Norwegian businessman, trading in the forest, earned 60 million kroons in transactions with the Germans. This is a terrifyingly huge amount-there is hardly at least someone who would be able to make a big profit. She knew that her husband is Nazi. Norwegians in their homeland and abroad believe that she was not at home - she should be in the country where she would be useful to Norway.

She went to Portugal, then to Berlin, and from Berlin to Norway. Immediately after arriving in Norway, she agreed to give an interview for the official printing authority of the Kvisling Government “Free People” Frit Folk. She remained in Norway, where she lived with her Nazi husband. As far as we know, she never gave concerts in Norway. She went to Sweden, where she was boiled during a performance in Stockholm.

There is no evidence of her passive or active participation in Nazi activities. But I can quote Karl Yuakim Hambro, the President of the Norwegian Storting, who allegedly said at a meeting at the New York City Hall that the Kirsten Flagstad for the Norwegians "died". Rumor repeats that art and politics are different things. In times, like the current, we do not believe in it.

We believe that if the Kirste Flagstad is allowed to return to the United States, where it will continue its career, this will cause the corresponding reaction in Norway. The people will not forget this. Associations of farmers, dentists and others adopt decisions according to which anyone who has ever been somehow connected with the Nazis will never be forgiven. Kirsten Flagstad was not arrested.

Perhaps she didn’t want it. Her husband, of course, is in prison. Her desire to leave Norway is obviously a reaction to the feelings of the Norwegian people in relation to her. But the question of the refusal to exit the exit should be so balanced. ” The application can be considered unique. It is easy to imagine how it influenced the formation of an American opinion. It seemed that the official representatives of Norway deliberately made a statement according to which Kirsten Flagstad sympathized with the Nazis and “died” for her fellow citizens.

Almost a year later, on May 5, her lawyer Gullestad Gullestad, a member of the Supreme Court, wrote to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and asked to explain why the embassy considered it necessary to make a public statement that had so many untruths. The answer from the ambassador Morgenstierne Morgenstierne had to wait for nine months until he still wrote at the Foreign Ministry on February 16.

In a response letter, he claims that the embassy did not make this statement; On the day of his publication, he was probably absent. Nevertheless, he was forced to admit that the head of the press service of the Embassy of the Tour Muclaybust Tor Myklebust made a statement. Further, Morgenstyerne writes that the journalist probably interpreted the statement in his own way and that he referred to the information received by the embassy from the government’s information service in London.If it really was a statement by the emigrant government, as Morgenstierna says, then the case is still in a more serious light.

It is very doubtful that Morgenstyerne was not familiar with the content of the official statement that fell into the press from the embassy. It is clear as the day that it would be a refutation. But this was not done solely because he agreed with his content and wanted him to be published in this form. This conclusion easily suggests itself, you just have to get acquainted with the letter that he sent to the Foreign Ministry five days after the appearance of the application in the press.

She could easily confuse people with regard to the difference between the Norwegians and Quisling, traitors, traitors of the Motherland, collaborating with a national enemy named the leader of the Nazis Norway V. Quisling, who supported the seizure of his country by Hitler's Germany to the city of the ambassador strongly recommends that the US departure as possible. ” The fact of conducting the campaign Morgenstierne against the lawyer of the Sundfer, which is easy to pressure, and the supply of the latter with the arguments on the case file became obvious due to the fact that the Sundfer distributed the comments sent by the agricultural court on April 4 of the year.

The inaccurate information presented by Morgenstyerne obviously influenced the decision of the district court, which supported the complete confiscation of the property of the flag engine. The hidden motive of this decision was an attempt to prevent the continuation of her career. She had the opportunity to write letters and send telegrams, so it was absolutely not necessary to refuse the struggle for her country for this reason.

The fact that concerts were planned for her for her season, she will not say anything if this program was put. I have an article from an American music magazine published in the fall of the year, in which the flagStad is subjected to severe attacks for his position in wartime. The article indicates that in the United States she is not at all a welcome guest. ” The biography was released by the publishing house "Transit", and the given passage is published with the permission of the publishing house.

The author of the translation: Shepelev K. The author of the Norwegian text: INGEBORG SOLBREKKEN BNITI expresses the gratitude of Natalia Budur for the assistance and assistance in the selection of this material for publication.