i-xxii Front matter.qxd - Brandeis Institutional Repository

i-xxii Front matter.qxd - Brandeis Institutional Repository i-xxii Front matter.qxd - Brandeis Institutional Repository

bir.brandeis.edu
from bir.brandeis.edu More from this publisher
13.07.2015 Views

Art on the Left in the 1930s / 49trope that happened to have encapsulated Neel’s personal experience. 10 Althoughthe social realist movement in the United States was in„uenced primarilyby the Mexican mural movement, the connections with the Cubanavant-garde were also signiƒcant. 11Social Realism, 1930–1940Thus, when Neel moved to Greenwich Village in 1931, she found herself atanother artistic center committed to social and political change. The Depressionhad precipitated the emergence of social realism, which gathered momentumbetween 1932 and 1935 and was characterized by the use of overtlypolitical subject matter, emphasizing the plight of the destitute worker. 12 Althoughthe product of a speciƒc set of historical conditions during the 1930s,social realism, examined in broad terms, can also be seen as part of a consistentstream of socially concerned art that threads throughout the twentieth century.Although rarely explicitly sectarian, nonetheless American social realism, as atrend rather than a movement, maintained a belief that an oppositional artwhose subject matter addressed sociopolitical problems could serve as a powerfulimpetus to social reform. Neel is thus a social realist in the narrow sensethat her paintings after 1930 are part of that emerging movement, and a socialrealist in the broader sense of a politically concerned, reformist art. Neel andher more prominent social realist colleagues, such as Ben Shahn, WilliamGropper, Phillip Evergood, and Jack Levine, continued throughout their careersto make art that critiqued the varying historical circumstances of a givenera from a left perspective. Although Neel’s contribution to the revolutionarytableaux characteristic of the social realist movement of the 1930s is relativelyminor, her invention of the proletarian portrait gallery is a genuine contribution,important not only for its alternative vision of social realism during theDepression, but also for its contribution to a larger trend of socially concernedart in America. Neel’s work provides one signiƒcant example of the way inwhich politically engaged artists adjusted the expression of their left-wing idealsin the face of changing historical circumstances. However, her continuingassociation with the Communist Party makes charting the political content ofher work a particularly challenging task.The years between the onset of the Depression in 1929 and the end of WorldWar II in 1945 were so tumultuous that terms such as revolutionary art, proletarianart, and social realist art are still buffeted by its winds, as are its loosely relatedcommunist terms: proletcult art, Zhdanovism, socialist realism. If thecommunist system, as exempliƒed by the U.S.S.R., provided the most deƒnitiveeconomic alternative to the collapse of capitalism in 1929, it nonetheless

50 / Neel’s Social Realist Artwas as unstable a model as capitalism itself. After Hitler’s rise to power in 1933,it appeared to be the political alternative to fascism, but its authority was underminedas early as 1934 by Stalin’s purges of dissidents; by the end of thedecade, the Nazi-Soviet Pact in August 1939 and the Russian invasion of Finlandin November 1939 destroyed for many fellow travelers their faith in theSoviet system. Given the course of international politics, it is hardly surprisingthat the Communist Party USA was fraught with internal dissension, and thatMarxist literary and artistic theorists in the United States could not provide atranslation of changing Soviet policies appropriate to the vernacular of theAmerican milieu.The nature of Neel’s contribution to social realism is also difƒcult to chartbecause she did not occupy a leadership position either artistically or organizationally.Neel joined several of the artists’ organizations, such as the ArtistsUnion and its successor, United American Artists, and in addition participatedin Union-sponsored exhibits and protests. However, she left no paper trail ofher activities that can elucidate her stance on any of the issues of the decade.Nor was she singled out by galleries or museums to be shown in national exhibitions,such as the American Artists’ Congress Exhibition at the ACA galleriesin 1935 or the “America Today” exhibit in 1936. Finally, she was uninterestedin the monumentally scaled public mural commissions that might have helpedto establish her reputation, but concentrated instead on the medium of portraiture,a genre considered irrelevant to a collective art.Just as Neel’s presence in the landmark artistic events of the decade isghostly, so the connections between her Marxist-in„uenced aesthetics, her politicalbeliefs, and her art are elusive. A lifelong supporter of the ideals if notthe practice of communism, her participation in communist politics was erratic.13 Nonetheless, she was familiar with the aesthetic ideas of some of themost controversial communist writers in this country, among them MikeGold, journalist and author of Jews Without Money (1930), and V. J. Jerome,author of Culture in a Changing World (1947). In addition, she read many ofthe central texts of communist theory, which she purchased through AlexanderTrachtenberg’s International Publishers in New York. 14 Neither an intellectualdilettante nor a political naif, Neel was conversant with the principlesof Marxism and of International Communism. Although the exact dates andstatus of her Party membership cannot be established, she remained at theleast a fellow traveler when it was dangerous to do so (during the 1940s and1950s), and as Party stalwart even when, with the emergence of the New Left,she formed new alliances. Although Neel never severed her ties with the CommunistParty USA, her continued alliegance to its politics and philosophy mayhave had less to do with a commitment to the goal of establishing a communiststate than with her outrage at the gross inequalities perpetuated by capitalism

50 / Neel’s Social Realist Artwas as unstable a model as capitalism itself. After Hitler’s rise to power in 1933,it appeared to be the political alternative to fascism, but its authority was underminedas early as 1934 by Stalin’s purges of dissidents; by the end of thedecade, the Nazi-Soviet Pact in August 1939 and the Russian invasion of Finlandin November 1939 destroyed for many fellow travelers their faith in theSoviet system. Given the course of international politics, it is hardly surprisingthat the Communist Party USA was fraught with internal dissension, and thatMarxist literary and artistic theorists in the United States could not provide atranslation of changing Soviet policies appropriate to the vernacular of theAmerican milieu.The nature of Neel’s contribution to social realism is also difƒcult to chartbecause she did not occupy a leadership position either artistically or organizationally.Neel joined several of the artists’ organizations, such as the ArtistsUnion and its successor, United American Artists, and in addition participatedin Union-sponsored exhibits and protests. However, she left no paper trail ofher activities that can elucidate her stance on any of the issues of the decade.Nor was she singled out by galleries or museums to be shown in national exhibitions,such as the American Artists’ Congress Exhibition at the ACA galleriesin 1935 or the “America Today” exhibit in 1936. Finally, she was uninterestedin the monumentally scaled public mural commissions that might have helpedto establish her reputation, but concentrated instead on the medium of portraiture,a genre considered irrelevant to a collective art.Just as Neel’s presence in the landmark artistic events of the decade isghostly, so the connections between her Marxist-in„uenced aesthetics, her politicalbeliefs, and her art are elusive. A lifelong supporter of the ideals if notthe practice of communism, her participation in communist politics was erratic.13 Nonetheless, she was familiar with the aesthetic ideas of some of themost controversial communist writers in this country, among them MikeGold, journalist and author of Jews Without Money (1930), and V. J. Jerome,author of Culture in a Changing World (1947). In addition, she read many ofthe central texts of communist theory, which she purchased through AlexanderTrachtenberg’s International Publishers in New York. 14 Neither an intellectualdilettante nor a political naif, Neel was conversant with the principlesof Marxism and of International Communism. Although the exact dates andstatus of her Party membership cannot be established, she remained at theleast a fellow traveler when it was dangerous to do so (during the 1940s and1950s), and as Party stalwart even when, with the emergence of the New Left,she formed new alliances. Although Neel never severed her ties with the CommunistParty USA, her continued alliegance to its politics and philosophy mayhave had less to do with a commitment to the goal of establishing a communiststate than with her outrage at the gross inequalities perpetuated by capitalism

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!