Page 13 - Studio International - September 1974

heated debate about the eventual thrust of the economic and professional security. The board Marxist critics in this country and in Europe,
magazine as well as the ability of the two disdained 'those arty magazines which normally many of whom were induced by him to
organizations to work together. The resolution ignore anything outside the gallery world'.2 contribute articles to the magazine. In the
of these problems, resolved with the assistance Conflicts arose pertaining to the extent art February issue of Art Front, Weinstock
of V. J. Jerome, a Communist functionary with essays, critiques, and reviews would be included. attacked Stuart Davis's favourable review of
responsibility in cultural matters, placed the Although the social realists were in the vast Dali, charging the surrealist with being merely a
magazine under the direct control of the union, majority, the entire range of art styles existed `sophisticated illustrator'. Dali's paintings,
and the split editorial committee was abandoned within the rank and file and the leadership. The according to Weinstock, were in the reactionary
in favour of a single editorial board. The April leaders, highly motivated by their political tradition that was forced to psychological
1935 issue declared that Art Front was the involvement, were generally committed to the portrayal because 'the facts of the world made it
`official publication of the Artists' Union.' The Marxist doctrine of 'art as propaganda'. They ashamed to show its face on any other plane'.3 In
combined logos of the Artists' Committee of believed the official publication of the union had the same issue, Jerome Klein, who regularly
Action and the Artists' Union continued to a responsibility to guide its members in their wrote art criticism for the New York Post, also
appear on the masthead until December 1936, role as revolutionary artists, and there was attacked Dali and the surrealists, who, being
although the magazine had been truly co- always pressure within the editorial board to `neurotically incapable of giving their effort a
sponsored only for the first two issues. interpret that role in the narrowest social- point of leverage in the real world, have dodged
The demise of the Artists' Committee of realist sense. The editors and writers of Art the issue of revolutionary art'.4
Action did not completely remove conflicting Front were committed to social change and The art style that the editors could agree upon
attitudes regarding the proper role for the concerned about the correct role of art and the was the so-called American Scene painting; they
publication. The editorial board was in artist in a changing society; much of the vitality detested it. When Time magazine declared that
agreement on the need to stress the economic of this spunky little magazine derived from the the works of Thomas Benton, Grant Wood,
goals of the union, to publicize grievances, and struggle of a minority of the editors to extend Charles Burchfield, Reginald Marsh, John
to report activities related to the struggle for the range of revolutionary art beyond Stewart Curry, and other American Scene
propaganda. painters were 'destined to turn the tide of
In the Artists' Union section of the first issue artistic taste in the United States',5 Art Front
of Art Front, considerable space was devoted to launched an attack against the movement.
a proposal for a permanent federal art project; it Stuart Davis charged that Benton's 'gross
was to remain a major editorial theme and it was caricature of Negroes' was a 'third-rate
a rare issue that did not have an editorial or an vaudeville character cliché with the humour
article concerning the plan. omitted' and, commenting on the Benton self-
Stuart Davis functioned as editor-in-chief for portrait on Time's cover, Davis cruelly added,
the second through the tenth issue, although the `We must at least give him credit for not making
masthead did not indicate an editorial board any exception in his general underestimation of
until the seventh issue, or an editor-in-chief the human race'.6 As for John Stewart Curry,
until the eighth issue. Davis was able to Davis asks, 'How can a man . . . who willfully or
maintain a close personal relationship with Hugo through ignorance ignores the discoveries of
Gellert and the social realists on the board, Monet, Seurat, Cezanne and Picasso and
while encouraging a more open attitude toward proceeds as though painting were a jolly lark fot
art content in the magazine. He asked John amateurs to be exhibited in county fairs . . . be
Graham to review 'Eight Modes of Modern considered an asset to American art ?'7
Painting' at the Julien Levy Gallery, and Davis In the same issue, Moses Soyer wrote a review
himself reviewed favourably the painting by of his own exhibition at Kleemann's Galleries.
Salvador Dali at the same gallery. Soyer, a member of the Artists' Union, used the
Clarence Weinstock, writer, board member, article to endorse the 'important, ever-growing
and later managing editor, joined Art Front group of artists that has chosen the American
when the second issue was being prepared. scene for its theme'. Soyer had no difficulty
Weinstock, an expatriate art student in Paris, denouncing 'Cubism, Futurism, Surrealism and
gave up his studies for a life of intellectual all the other artificial schools of painting', but he
bohemianism, and became a Marxist literary is apologetic about the 'lack of class
(Left) Cover of the first Art Front and art critic. A gifted writer and a devout consciousness on the part of Moses Soyer',
November 1934 Communist, he became editor of Masses and which he attributes to 'an uncertainty in his own
(Above) Artists' Union demonstration 1936 Mainstream after World War Two, using the powers, an almost unconscious reluctance to
Front page of Art Front for January 1937 name Charles Humbolet. On 27 October, 1934, tackle such serious themes'.8
the day of the artists' large demonstration at Curry's reply in the April issue of Art Front
City Hall, Weinstock returned to the United politely defended his work, inferring that social
States. Strolling the streets of lower Manhattan, realist and American Scene concepts were not so
he wandered into the demonstration, met some far apart, and drawing a parallel between the
of the artists he had known in Europe, and was `viciousness of life' portrayed by Jacob Burck,
swept into the activities of the day. Learning an avowed Communist, and the 'subtle
about Art Front, he immediately volunteered to characterization' of Thomas Benton.9
help and soon became the magazine's most active Benton, on the other hand, bluntly declared
contributor. that Davis's motives were plain — 'no verbiage
Probably no one enjoyed working on Art can disguise the squawks of the defeated and the
Front as much as Weinstock; he was completely impotent'10 He asked the editors to submit
devoted to it. Nothing delighted him more than ten questions to him and give him space in
crossing literary swords with other critics and he which to respond. Benton's reply to the
maintained a voluminous correspondence with questions appeared in the April issue. He made
67