California's Not So Radical New Deal Murals - Revision history

Ccarlsson: upgraded photo

2018-09-07T23:20:57Z

upgraded photo

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:20, 7 September 2018
Line 3:		Line 3:
	''by Steven M. Gelber''		''by Steven M. Gelber''

	[[Image:~~Coit_mural_orange~~-~~harvest9979~~.jpg]]		[[Image:Maxine-Albro Coit-Tower 9980.jpg]]

	'''~~Orange~~ harvesters in Coit Tower mural show the pro-work theme that underlay most New Deal murals'''		'''Apricot harvesters in Maxine Albro's Coit Tower mural show the pro-work theme that underlay most New Deal murals'''

	''Photo: Chris Carlsson''		''Photo: Chris Carlsson''

Ccarlsson: swapped in better photo

2014-05-28T04:47:57Z

swapped in better photo

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:47, 27 May 2014
Line 9:		Line 9:
	''Photo: Chris Carlsson''		''Photo: Chris Carlsson''

	[[Image:~~art1$beach-chalet-wpa-worker~~.jpg]]		[[Image:Waterfront 3667.jpg]]

	'''Panel from the New Deal [[Beach Chalet \|Beach Chalet]] murals, suggesting, in typical WPA fashion, that work was the key to economic prosperity.'''		'''Panel from the New Deal [[Beach Chalet \|Beach Chalet]] murals, suggesting, in typical WPA fashion, that work was the key to economic prosperity.'''

Ccarlsson: Protected "California's Not So Radical New Deal Murals": excerpted essay [edit=sysop:move=sysop]

2009-01-04T09:10:20Z

Protected "California's Not So Radical New Deal Murals": excerpted essay [edit=sysop:move=sysop]

← Older revision	Revision as of 02:10, 4 January 2009
(No difference)

Ccarlsson: PC

2009-01-04T09:09:59Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:09, 4 January 2009
Line 1:		Line 1:
			'''<font face = Papyrus> <font color = maroon> <font size = 4>Historical Essay</font></font> </font>'''

			''by Steven M. Gelber''

	[[Image:Coit_mural_orange-harvest9979.jpg]]		[[Image:Coit_mural_orange-harvest9979.jpg]]

Ccarlsson at 00:20, 11 August 2008

2008-08-11T00:20:21Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:20, 10 August 2008
Line 51:		Line 51:
	article excerpted with permission of [http://www.californiahistoricalsociety.org/ California Historical Society], San Francisco, CA		article excerpted with permission of [http://www.californiahistoricalsociety.org/ California Historical Society], San Francisco, CA

	[[~~Reminisce~~ \| Prev. Document]] [[Indoor Public Murals \| Next Document]]		[[The Apartment \| Prev. Document]] [[Indoor Public Murals \| Next Document]]

	[[category:SOMA]] [[category:1940s]] [[category:1930s]] [[category:Public Art]] [[category:murals]]		[[category:SOMA]] [[category:1940s]] [[category:1930s]] [[category:Public Art]] [[category:murals]]

Ccarlsson at 23:51, 10 August 2008

2008-08-10T23:51:48Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:51, 10 August 2008
Line 1:		Line 1:
			[[Image:Coit_mural_orange-harvest9979.jpg]]

			'''Orange harvesters in Coit Tower mural show the pro-work theme that underlay most New Deal murals'''

			''Photo: Chris Carlsson''

	[[Image:art1$beach-chalet-wpa-worker.jpg]]		[[Image:art1$beach-chalet-wpa-worker.jpg]]

Line 43:		Line 49:
	''--excerpted from ''"Working to Prosperity: California's New Deal Murals" by Steven M. Gelber in'' California History magazine,'' Summer 1979, Vol. LVIII, No. 2'' ''		''--excerpted from ''"Working to Prosperity: California's New Deal Murals" by Steven M. Gelber in'' California History magazine,'' Summer 1979, Vol. LVIII, No. 2'' ''

	article excerpted with permission of California Historical Society, San Francisco, CA		article excerpted with permission of [http://www.californiahistoricalsociety.org/ California Historical Society], San Francisco, CA

	[[Reminisce \| Prev. Document]] [[Indoor Public Murals \| Next Document]]		[[Reminisce \| Prev. Document]] [[Indoor Public Murals \| Next Document]]

	[[category:SOMA]] [[category:1940s]] [[category:1930s]] [[category:Public Art]] [[category:murals]]		[[category:SOMA]] [[category:1940s]] [[category:1930s]] [[category:Public Art]] [[category:murals]]

Ccarlsson at 07:30, 7 August 2008

2008-08-07T07:30:19Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:30, 7 August 2008
Line 42:		Line 42:

	''--excerpted from ''"Working to Prosperity: California's New Deal Murals" by Steven M. Gelber in'' California History magazine,'' Summer 1979, Vol. LVIII, No. 2'' ''		''--excerpted from ''"Working to Prosperity: California's New Deal Murals" by Steven M. Gelber in'' California History magazine,'' Summer 1979, Vol. LVIII, No. 2'' ''

	~~photo by Chris Carlsson~~

	article excerpted with permission of California Historical Society, San Francisco, CA		article excerpted with permission of California Historical Society, San Francisco, CA

Ccarlsson: categories

2008-08-07T07:29:43Z

Ccarlsson at 00:47, 28 December 2007

2007-12-28T00:47:51Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:47, 27 December 2007
Line 33:		Line 33:
	Most Social Realists painted in New York, which was the only state that had more extensive art projects than California. There they joined Regionalists to present a full spectrum of contrasting views of America in the thirties.10 In California, however, the Regionalists' outlook totally eclipsed that of the Social Realists. Social Realism was an expression of disenchantment with the economic system that California artists did not share. Men and women who had found a place on the government payroll and who were far removed from both the cultural and political ferment of New York had little reason to upset the status quo. "On the whole the western projects were more naive," observed Federal Art project (FAP) administrator Joseph Danysh in a recent interview. "You could feel the cultural greenhorn quality. On the whole you found them trying harder, and on the whole you found much less of a politically social consciousness." Danysh attributed the difference to the fact that New York "had a very, very strong Communist element" that was missing in the Far West.11		Most Social Realists painted in New York, which was the only state that had more extensive art projects than California. There they joined Regionalists to present a full spectrum of contrasting views of America in the thirties.10 In California, however, the Regionalists' outlook totally eclipsed that of the Social Realists. Social Realism was an expression of disenchantment with the economic system that California artists did not share. Men and women who had found a place on the government payroll and who were far removed from both the cultural and political ferment of New York had little reason to upset the status quo. "On the whole the western projects were more naive," observed Federal Art project (FAP) administrator Joseph Danysh in a recent interview. "You could feel the cultural greenhorn quality. On the whole you found them trying harder, and on the whole you found much less of a politically social consciousness." Danysh attributed the difference to the fact that New York "had a very, very strong Communist element" that was missing in the Far West.11

	In California, New Deal artists accepted Regionalism, urbanized it where necessary, and applied its uniquely American perspective to the people, places, and history of their state. Theirs was an art of affirmative nationalism that found value in''' '''even the most everyday situations and things. The ability of California artists to find beauty in common objects drew notice from as far away as Boston, where in 1934 the ''Christian Science Monitor ''praised the artists who wove "such prosaic things as post office boxes, crates of vegetables, a ticker tape apparatus, factory buildings, and even an ash can into a poetic, if slightly grim, whole."12 Both artists and critics gloried in the fact that native artists were painting native subjects. Writing in I937 about the work of San Diego sculptor Donal Hord, Stanton ~~Macdoiiald~~-Wright boasted that Hord "has never been abroad, nor has he studied under the influence of foreign masters; his work represents in a marvelous way what the American artist is capable of doing-uninfluenced and untaught by over-seas dictates."13		In California, New Deal artists accepted Regionalism, urbanized it where necessary, and applied its uniquely American perspective to the people, places, and history of their state. Theirs was an art of affirmative nationalism that found value in''' '''even the most everyday situations and things. The ability of California artists to find beauty in common objects drew notice from as far away as Boston, where in 1934 the ''Christian Science Monitor ''praised the artists who wove "such prosaic things as post office boxes, crates of vegetables, a ticker tape apparatus, factory buildings, and even an ash can into a poetic, if slightly grim, whole."12 Both artists and critics gloried in the fact that native artists were painting native subjects. Writing in I937 about the work of San Diego sculptor Donal Hord, Stanton Macdonald-Wright boasted that Hord "has never been abroad, nor has he studied under the influence of foreign masters; his work represents in a marvelous way what the American artist is capable of doing-uninfluenced and untaught by over-seas dictates."13

	The return to figurative art was particularly welcomed by the culturally isolated California artists, few of whom had ever accepted modern art and were pleased to find the pendulum of national taste swinging back in their direction. According to surrealist artist Reuben Kadish, who was also an administrator for the Federal Art project (FAP) in San Francisco, California art was generally "mediocre and insipid." The entire state, argued Kadish, was "saturated with provincialism." The galleries would not show, the museums and patrons would not buy,''' '''and the critics would not praise anything that was not representational.14 Fortunately for California artists, the American Scene made provincialism a virtue.15		The return to figurative art was particularly welcomed by the culturally isolated California artists, few of whom had ever accepted modern art and were pleased to find the pendulum of national taste swinging back in their direction. According to surrealist artist Reuben Kadish, who was also an administrator for the Federal Art project (FAP) in San Francisco, California art was generally "mediocre and insipid." The entire state, argued Kadish, was "saturated with provincialism." The galleries would not show, the museums and patrons would not buy,''' '''and the critics would not praise anything that was not representational.14 Fortunately for California artists, the American Scene made provincialism a virtue.15
Line 41:		Line 41:
	''--excerpted from ''"Working to Prosperity: California's New Deal Murals" by Steven M. Gelber in'' California History magazine,'' Summer 1979, Vol. LVIII, No. 2'' ''		''--excerpted from ''"Working to Prosperity: California's New Deal Murals" by Steven M. Gelber in'' California History magazine,'' Summer 1979, Vol. LVIII, No. 2'' ''

	~~Contributors to this page include:~~		photo by Chris Carlsson

	''California Historical Society,San Francisco,CA ~~- Publisher or Photographer ''~~		article excerpted with permission of California Historical Society, San Francisco, CA

	~~Gelber,Steven - Writer~~

	[[Reminisce \| Prev. Document]] [[Indoor Public Murals \| Next Document]]		[[Reminisce \| Prev. Document]] [[Indoor Public Murals \| Next Document]]

Ccarlsson at 18:51, 12 October 2007

2007-10-12T18:51:14Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:51, 12 October 2007
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[Image:art1$beach-chalet-wpa-worker.jpg]]		[[Image:art1$beach-chalet-wpa-worker.jpg]]

	'''Panel from the New Deal [[Beach Chalet Beach Chalet]] murals, suggesting, in typical WPA fashion, that work was the key to economic prosperity.'''		'''Panel from the New Deal [[Beach Chalet \|Beach Chalet]] murals, suggesting, in typical WPA fashion, that work was the key to economic prosperity.'''

	Announcing in 1933 that artists needed "to eat just like other people," New Deal relief administrator Harry L. Hopkins gave his support to a groundbreaking plan to commission artists to produce public works of art.1 Hopkins argued that "work relief," as it was termed, was necessary because it not only''' '''provided otherwise jobless people with money to buy food, but also preserved their skills and restored their self-confidence.2 In addition, work relief brought the government something in return for its money--unlike the more traditional "dole" or cash handout.		Announcing in 1933 that artists needed "to eat just like other people," New Deal relief administrator Harry L. Hopkins gave his support to a groundbreaking plan to commission artists to produce public works of art.1 Hopkins argued that "work relief," as it was termed, was necessary because it not only''' '''provided otherwise jobless people with money to buy food, but also preserved their skills and restored their self-confidence.2 In addition, work relief brought the government something in return for its money--unlike the more traditional "dole" or cash handout.
Line 47:		Line 47:
	Gelber,Steven - Writer		Gelber,Steven - Writer

	[[Reminisce Prev. Document]] [[Indoor Public Murals Next Document]]		[[Reminisce \| Prev. Document]] [[Indoor Public Murals \| Next Document]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:29, 7 August 2008
Line 2:		Line 2:

	'''Panel from the New Deal [[Beach Chalet \|Beach Chalet]] murals, suggesting, in typical WPA fashion, that work was the key to economic prosperity.'''		'''Panel from the New Deal [[Beach Chalet \|Beach Chalet]] murals, suggesting, in typical WPA fashion, that work was the key to economic prosperity.'''

			''Photo: Chris Carlsson''

	Announcing in 1933 that artists needed "to eat just like other people," New Deal relief administrator Harry L. Hopkins gave his support to a groundbreaking plan to commission artists to produce public works of art.1 Hopkins argued that "work relief," as it was termed, was necessary because it not only''' '''provided otherwise jobless people with money to buy food, but also preserved their skills and restored their self-confidence.2 In addition, work relief brought the government something in return for its money--unlike the more traditional "dole" or cash handout.		Announcing in 1933 that artists needed "to eat just like other people," New Deal relief administrator Harry L. Hopkins gave his support to a groundbreaking plan to commission artists to produce public works of art.1 Hopkins argued that "work relief," as it was termed, was necessary because it not only''' '''provided otherwise jobless people with money to buy food, but also preserved their skills and restored their self-confidence.2 In addition, work relief brought the government something in return for its money--unlike the more traditional "dole" or cash handout.
Line 46:		Line 48:

	[[Reminisce \| Prev. Document]] [[Indoor Public Murals \| Next Document]]		[[Reminisce \| Prev. Document]] [[Indoor Public Murals \| Next Document]]

			[[category:SOMA]] [[category:1940s]] [[category:1930s]] [[category:Public Art]] [[category:murals]]