ben shahn article

8/11/2019 Ben Shahn Article

1/29

The Smithsonian nstitution

The Politics of Media: Painting and Photography in the Art of Ben ShahnAuthor(s): Laura KatzmanSource: American Art, Vol. 7, No. 1 (Winter, 1993), pp. 60-87Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of the Smithsonian American Art MuseumStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3109135 .Accessed: 21/09/2014 19:06

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

The University of Chicago Press , Smithsonian American Art Museum , The Smithsonian Institution arecollaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to American Art.
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucpresshttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=smithhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3109135?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3109135?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=smithhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucpress


2/29

The Politics of Media

Painting and Photography n the Art of Ben Shahn

In 1947 Ben Shahn (1898-1969) was givenhis first retrospective exhibition at theMuseum of Modern Art (MoMA) in NewYork. This exhibition helped to establishhim as one of the most popular figurativepainters of his generation and affirmed acommitment to his work at a time whenthe museum was championing mostlyEuropean abstract modes of painting. JamesThrall Soby, the curator of the exhibit,planned to show a representative selectionof Shahn's work in a variety of media,

including paintings, drawings, posters,and mural studies-but not necessarilyphotographs. In fact, Soby expressedserious concern about having any of

Shahn's photographs in the exhibitionand questioned how to deal with them inthe catalogue. In a letter to Shahn abouthis text, which was, significantly, the first

major essay on Shahn's work, Soby wrote:

I'll try to work out the photography business

carefully and accurately. As a matter offact,I've worried about the latter part all along.There s a tendency o link yourpaintingfartoo closely ophotography, as in the U.S.Camera article and numerous reviews, andI tried to

qualifywhatever said

aboutyourphotography bypointing out how differentthe paintings are in final conception and

spirit. But I'llgo over it again with afinetooth comb. It's important.'

Soby also did not reproduce hahn'sphotographs n a special upplement fthe MoMA Bulletin devoted o hisexhibition. He made a general eferenceto them, but he did not list them sepa-rately or give them individual itles. Heeven took the liberty o halt an article hatthe New York Times magazine ectionwanted o do on Shahn's painting andphotography. Clearing t with Shahn afterthe fact, Soby wrote:

I vetoed he dea on the theory hat thiswould urn nto another U.S. Cameraarticle, whichyou hadn't iked-nor IHope his was he right hing o do, even

though t may mean they won't do thearticle t all. They've ublished lot of badarticles n that section, ncluding manyattacks n modern rt, and Ifelt that weshouldn't ake a chance, articularly n viewofyour reluctance o have any photos n theshow at all.2

Although some photographs were n factincluded n the exhibition, hey wererelegated o the end of the show and notintegrated with the paintings o which

theyrelated.

What was it that so worried Soby andShahn about the photographs? ow canwe understand heir reluctance o exhibitthem? Their concerns would at first seem

61 American Art

Laura Katzman

Photographer'sindow detail),

1939. Tempera on board, 24 x 32 1/4in. Hood Museum of Art,Dartmouth College, Hanover, NewHampshire, Bequest of the Estate ofLawrence Richmond, Class of 1930

This content downloaded from 14 6.95.253.17 on Sun, 21 Sep 20 14 19:06:56 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/29

0

0

0 - S

a *l 0

a__

a *



4/29

linked to the fact that photography wasnot yet fully accepted as an art form, despiteefforts made earlier n the century by Alfred

Stieglitz. By the 1930s a lively communityof art photographers existed in New York,and photography was exhibited and evencollected by a few galleries like Julien Levy

and Delphic Studios. Still, these galleriescould not survive on the sale of photo-graphs alone, nor could photographerssupport themselves outside the commercialworld. In this country, a form of straightor documentary photography prevailedthroughout the Depression and WorldWar II. In fact, some have claimed that theissue of whether photography was art was aremote one during this period, as it servedthe more urgent function of recording theharsh conditions of the day.3 Given this

popular conception of photography, a

painter's use of photographs would havebeen perceived as compromising creative

imagination and-especially for artists who

aspired o realism -succumbing to aform of cheating. Since the invention ofthe medium, photography's indexicalconnection to the material world was seenas being at odds with the transcendentstatus of art.

Soby's concern, then, stemmed fromthe uncomfortably close connectionbetween Shahn's paintings and photographs

and from his belief that public knowledgeof the photographic sources of paintingscould diminish the paintings' aesthetic ormarket value or, worse, both. This was

certainly the attitude of Shahn's dealer,Edith Halpert, who had refused to exhibitCharles Sheeler's paintings and photo-graphs together in her Downtown

Gallery, deliberately stifling publicexposure of his photography. As Diane

Tepfer has suggested, Halpert feared thatSheeler's photographs would eclipse his

paintings and thereby reorient his reputa-tion as a painter that she had helpedconstruct. The close relationship betweenthe two media would allow critics andcollectors to judge his paintings as merely

photographic, an added hindrance to sales

during the Great Depression.4Halpert never showed Shahn's paint-

ings and photographs together and was

probably relieved that he didn't pursuephotography to the same degree thatSheeler did. In later years she expressed

some concern about the relationshipbetween the two media in Shahn's work.She seems to have either possessed little

knowledge of the extensiveness of his useof photographs or downplayed what shedid know, asserting that Shahn alwayspersonalized and altered photographswhen appropriating them for his paint-ings.5 At the time of his first retrospectiveof photographs in 1969, shortly after theartist's death, Bernarda Bryson Shahn, hiswidow, also worried about the relation-

ship between his paintings and photo-graphs. She suggested that knowledge ofsuch connections would, in the public'seye, minimize Shahn's seriousness as botha photographer and painter as well as his

respect for photographs or paintings as

independent art forms.6To protect the autonomy, integrity,

and perceived originality of Shahn's

paintings and photographs, some criticsand biographers have felt compelled tomake distinctions between the two mediaat different points in his career. When

biographers do acknowledge the interrela-tionships, they usually qualify them insome way, often with the claim that the

photographs and the paintings each standon their own.7 Also, critics tend to make

qualitative judgments about the twomedia, claiming that Shahn was a better

painter than photographer or vice versa.This tendency was evident in reviews ofthe 1947 MoMA exhibition. Photohistorian Nancy Newhall, in explainingwhy Shahn was a better painter than

photographer, wrote:

In his photographs Shahn] does not work

for the most expressive moment; he snaps an

interesting but incomplete dea.... His

62 Winter 1993



5/29


6/29

1 Handball, 1939. Tempera on paperover composition board, 22 34 x 31 /4.

Collection, The Museum of ModernArt, New York, Abby AldrichRockefeller und

2 New York City, ca. 1933. Gelatinsilver print, 7 x 9 5/8 in. Fogg ArtMuseum, Harvard University,Cambridge, Massachusetts, ift ofMrs. Bernarda . Shahn

his art. Soby's attitude oward he

photographs s especially urious, giventhat he himself had been an amateur

photographer. He took special nterest nthe documentary work of Walker Evans,under whom he had apprenticed n the1930s. Later, he even wrote about Evansfor the Saturday Review n request byMoMA, the first museum n the United

States to have a bona fide department of

photography.1In 1966 the former director of this very

department, ohn Szarkowski, om-mented on the similarity etween Shahn'spainting Handballand he photographthat inspired t: It s not remarkable hat

[Shahn's] ainting based upon [thephotograph] esembles t so closely, or towhat purpose would he change t?Szarkowski as promoting photographyas a unique entity existing within its owndistinct aesthetic ealm; n his logic, to usea photograph s a study or prop forsomething else would necessarily iminishits authority, ompleteness, nd au-tonomy. But Szarkowski's ttitude mustalso be seen in light of MoMA's largerconstruction f a formalist rt history ofphotography hat has neglected he socialand political uses and contexts of thephotographs n its collections.12

Another possible reason why Shahn'sphotographs were not exhibited n largenumber or in relation o his paintings n1947 is that the type of photography ehad practiced or the New Deal's Resettle-ment Administration/Farm ecurityAdministration RA/FSA) becamepolitically uspect after World War II.Even during he organization's eyday,FSA photographs were attacked s

Communist propaganda y conservativecongressmen who recognized hat imagesof down-and-out Americans ould beused to criticize he capitalist ystem or

highlight he hypocrisy f democraticideals. Shahn's paintings and sometimeseven his photographs were among those

singled out in congressional ecords ortheir hard-hitting messages, rreverentovertones, r allegedly red ssociations.In the mid to late 1940s Shahn was underattack or his radical posters done for the

Congress f Industrial rganizations CIO);his contribution o the experimental tateDepartment xhibition of 1946, whichwas the subject of an anti-Communistassault; nd for his government mural on

64 Winter 1993



7/29


8/29

3 Untitled, New York City, ca.1933-34. Gelatin ilver print, 5 7/8 x8 7/8 in. Fogg Art Museum, Harvard

University, Cambridge, Massachusetts,Gift of Mrs. Bernarda . Shahn

4 Creole Trapper's Children,Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana,1935. Photograph, x 10 in. Libraryof Congress, Prints and PhotographsDivision, Washington, D.C.



9/29

5 Self-Portrait ith AngleViewfinder, ca. 1939. Drawing.Private ollection

6 Fenno Jacobs, photograph famateur minicam user, ca. 1936.Reproduced n The U.S. MinicamBoom, Fortune 4 (October 1936)

evident n his photograph f a GreekAmerican, an Italian American, nd anAfrican American rom circa 1933-34(fig. 3). Here Shahn used the architectureenclosed within the picture rame oestablish physical barriers etween hemen-barriers suggestive f larger ocial

and ethnic divisions.14From 1935 to 1938 Shahn photo-graphed n a more professional apacityfor the RA/FSA, documenting ruralpoverty and small-town ife as part of apropaganda ampaign o bring relief othe nation's armers. His warm, spontane-ous-looking mages, characterized yasymmetrical alance, ompressed pace,and dramatic cropping, alongside WalkerEvans's older, rontal, and more formallyconstructed pictures, have come to shapethe way our culture views Depression-eraAmerica (fig. 4).

Shahn ook his work for the govern-ment very seriously. n later years hespoke about the total involvement he hadfelt on the FSA project and how his eye-opening photographic rips across heUnited States challenged his preconcep-tions about oppressed eoples, enabledhim to put art at the service of socialchange, and helped him build a collectionof visual materials or future use. But atthe same time Shahn kept his distance

from photography, s is evident not onlyin his writings but also in his art. Hewrote relatively ittle about the medium,but when he did, he downplayed heimportance of technique, privilegingcontent over print quality. He claimedthat he never made a photograph or itsown sake but only for documentary rcommunicative purposes, and that he wasuninterested n making an art of photog-raphy. He rejected hierarchies f media,asserting hat images were equal whetherthey were made with the brush or camera.While in later years he was could bedismissive bout his involvement nphotography, sserting hat it was neitherhis livelihood nor his career, he main-

tained strong opinions about the relation-ship between painting and photography.15

The way in which Shahn positionedhimself n relation o photography sapparent n a very revealing ocument of1959 from MoMA's photography epart-ment requesting nformation n his workfor its curatorial iles. Shahn answered ewof the questions about his photographsand even claimed, curiously, hat hisphotographs ad no exhibition history.16Such posturing was expressed more

graphically n a line drawing f twentyyears earlier n which the artist depictedhimself using his Leica camera with aright-angle iewfinder, mirror attachedto the lens at a forty-five-degree ngle thatenabled him to capture his subjects ffguard fig. 5). In this caricature, hahn's

67 American Art



10/29

7 Advertisement for Leica angleviewfinder, ca. 1938

eager, orward-leaning tance, exaggerat-edly large body, tiny feet, and openmouth express his playfulness nd delightin taking photographs n this way. Such

lightheartedness an counter o theseriousness nd intensity with which

thirty-five-millimeter hotography was

practiced uring he miniature ameracraze of the 1930s (fig. 6). According oone social historian f the period,Frederick ewisAllen,

during he early ears of the Depression ne

began o notice, here and there, oung menwith what appeared o be eather-cased

opera lasses lung about heir necks. Theywere hepioneers f the camera raze whohad discovered hat the Leicas nd other tinyGerman ameras, which ookpostage-stamp-sizepictures apable fenlargement,combined speed, depth offocus, and an

ability o do their work n dim light whichopened ll sorts of new opportunities o the

photographer. henumber of candidcamera addicts grew rapidly s the expertsshowed oweasily n executive ommittee ra table-full f night-club atrons might beshot sitting. During he eightyears om1928 to 1936 the importation nto Americaof cameras nd parts hereof-chiefly romGermany-increased verfive-fold despitethe Depression.17

Shahn's drawing unctions much as theLeica dvertisements unctioned n popularphoto journals nd manuals at the time inthe way it displays he camera's pecialfeatures-smallness, compactness,

portability emphasized y Shahn's largehand), and simple design. The drawingplays on the notion of handling Leica,a promotional actic hat suggested hehuman dimension and user's ontrol overthe camera machine. And much as the adspromoted he right-angle iewfinder (fig.

7), Shahn cleverly boasted he effective-ness of this device n capturing peopleunawares: y the time we, the viewers ofthe image, igure out what he is doing, hehas already napped our picture.

In depicting himself playfully with theLeica and angle viewfinder, Shahn seemedto embrace n amateur tatus. Initiallyyet unfairly onsidered y many he toys ofamateurs, inicameras y the ate 1930shad only recently been taken seriously n

professional ircles.) But what did it meanto be an amateur photographer n the1930s? The advent of miniature amerasspawned a new breed of amateurs gener-ally known as serious mateurs, adge-teers, or minicamers, istinguished romearlier snapshooters y their dedication otechnical matters, quipment, andexperimentation. hahn disliked hisobsession with how, as opposed o why,pictures were taken. His antitechnicalstance was evident n his aversion oflashes, ilters, exposure meters, andcamera lubs-he provided at least one

photo journal with misleading echnicalinformation o accompany is publishedphotographs-and the irreverent delighthe took in non- art hotographs, uch as

newspaper ictures.18While Shahn rejected he technical

focus of serious mateurs, e neverthe-less embraced ther aspects of an amateurstatus hat would allow him the freedomto experiment. f his photographs urnedout poorly, he had an excuse; f they urnedout well, he could attribute heir successto his natural alent ather han o technicalknow-how or sophisticated quipment.Colin Westerbeck as argued persuasivelythat Shahn was not restricted y thecompunctions f a professional. hat

68 Winter 1993



11/29

photography was secondary o his paint-ing, in Westerbeck's iew, accounts orthe originality f his photographs, whilehis uninvolved go-his willingness o tryanything and to fail-contributed to hisgreat output and facility n photography.19

Behind Shahn's rreverence bout

technique, however, urked he probabil-ity that he cared more than he let on. Heprinted, dodged, enlarged, ropped,mounted, and titled many of his ownphotographs nd became a good techni-cian in spite of himself. In the early yearsof the RA/FSA, e even nsisted n printinghis own material s models for thegovernment printers. But Shahn's om-mitment to photography hould not beexaggerated ecause he mostly didn t careabout technique, and he lost manypotentially powerful pictures because hedidn't use equipment appropriate orcertain low-light ituations. He even refusedto learn more than he needed o know toget by. What is at issue here s notwhether or how much Shahn cared abouttechnical matters, ut how his attitude-hisdismissals nd his desire not to make anart of photography-has prevented usfrom looking more closely at his work,and how it became or the artist a kind ofself-conscious tance n and of itself.20

The angle viewfinder drawing, or

example, was inspired by staged photo-graphs of Shahn rom circa 1939 (fig. 8),and as one of the few well-known imagesof himself as a photographer, t becameclosely dentified with his photographicpersona. Twenty years after uch photo-graphs were taken (and, significantly, tthe time of his last major photographicactivity), imilar photographs were stagedduring a trip to Japan. Pictured playfullywith camera ases and binoculars slungaround his neck and a souvenir poster nhand that reads tell me about

Japan fig.9), Shahn at once acknowledged ndpoked fun at the tourist's ision-a visionmediated by lenses, preconceived otionsof other cultures, nd desires o take

8 Unknown photographer, BenShahn with Leica and angleviewfinder, ca. 1939. Photograph,8 1/2 11 in. Collection of Mrs.Bernarda . Shahn, Roosevelt, NewJersey

9 Unknown photographer, Ben

Shahn with Leica in Japan, ca.1960. Polaroid photograph, /2 x3 1/4 in. Collection of Mrs. BernardaB. Shahn, Roosevelt, New Jersey

69 American Art



12/29

home views. hahn's ourist dentifica-tion is yet another xample of how in later

years he tended to resist a serious, profes-sional association with photography.21

Shahn's Covert Use of Photographs

Shahn's deep involvement with photogra-phy s further onfirmed y the photograph

files he maintained spart of his visualreference ibrary, iles he would refer owhen he needed a picture of, say, a miner,a child, a building, or a politician. Thatthese files have only recently ome to

light suggests he Shahn estate's oncernover public exposure f the artist's use

of photography.t also underscores

photography's ntrance nto museumsand its greater public acceptance s an aidin the artistic process.22

Shahn's iles indicate he great extentto which he used his own photographs swell as those of others, both known and

anonymous. The majority f the photo-graphs were newspaper nd magazineclippings of the thirties and forties, but

they also came from government bureausand news agencies, which sent them tohim unsolicited or in response o his

request when he needed hem for aparticular roject or specific commission.

Many of the newspaper hotos-oftenwith captions retained-feature politicalfigures r events. Photography nd politicsare hus inextricably inked n this archive.

Shahn's iles reflect he proliferation nthe mid-thirties f big picture magazines,with their predominance f image overtext, and suggest Shahn's awareness fhow one photograph ould be used in

many different ways and how its meaning

was contingent upon its context. Aphotograph f a labor dispute at the Ford

plant n 1937, for example, appears wicein the files under he headings strikesand police and conventions, he latter

suggesting he relevance f labor unionissues o political campaigns t the time.

Shahn used seemingly nnocuous

photographs o make more overt social

commentary n painting, as in Carnival

(fig. 10), inspired by his own photographsof a game operator fig. 11), an amuse-ment ride, and a couple at an Ohiocarnival n 1938. Juxtaposed nd trans-formed n the painting the game operatorbecomes a sadder, more sympathy-evoking person), hese mages helped

70 Winter 1993



13/29

12 Brothers, 1946. Tempera on papermounted on fiberboard, 8 5/8 x 26 in.Hirshhorn Museum and SculptureGarden, Smithsonian nstitution, Giftof Joseph H. Hirshhorn Foundation

13 Unknown photographer, Kloogadeath camp prisoner, ca. 1944.Radiophoto, eproduced n

Information ulletin, Embassy f USSR,in Ben Shahn Papers, Archives fAmerican Art, Smithsonian nstitution

Shahn suggest he disparity etween hehaves and have-nots-that the play ofsome depends on the work of others.Conversely, e also used very politicallycharged photographs, watering downtheir implications o make more general-ized, universal images, as in Brothers (fig.

12), a painting hat borrowed rom anews photograph f a survivor f theKlooga death camp n Eastern Europe(fig. 13).

Art historian Ziva Amishai-Maisels asshown how Shahn used photographs fHolocaust victims as the basis of hiswartime and postwar paintings, hidingtheir original meanings behind moregeneral antiwar messages r responses othe sufferings f the Poles, Danes, Czechs,and French. Linking his covert usage ohis Jewish heritage, he states hat his

complex expression of his ethnic identityreveals struggle between his need forself-identification s a Jew and his fears ofbeing labelled parochial, hich Shahnfelt would impinge upon his identity asan American and as a 'rational umanist.'Thus might be explained his simultaneousattraction nd ambivalence owards hisJewish dentity at a time of rampant nti-Semitism.23

While it is tempting o read Shahn'sso-called overt use of Holocaust photo-

graphs n an ethnic context, t was typicalof the way he used most photographs orhis painting and mural work throughoutthe thirties and forties. An example s hisphotograph f a blind street musician ca.1933-34, Fogg Art Museum) and itsrelated painting, BlindAccordion Player(1945, Neuberger Museum, Purchase,New York). Shahn abstracted rom thephotograph, liminated xtraneous etail,decontextualized nd enlarged he figure,and compressed he space, hereby

creatinga more surreal, universal tate-

ment about the human condition.This universalizing endency was not

particular o Shahn. Other politicalrealists f his generation, uch as William

Gropper and Philip Evergood, movedin the mid-1940s from topical imageryto an allegorical language that addressedbroader, more universal issues and

appealed to a wider audience. This

pictorial change was also a response tocriticisms of art as a propagandistic tool: itwas a way for these artists to affirm thestatus of their work as high art thattranscended mere

propaganda.24If Shahn's use of photographs was notalways obvious during the war years, henever verbally denied his reliance uponthem. From the late 1930s on, he openly

71 American Art



14/29


15/29

requested hotographs rom Roy Stryker,his boss on the FSA project, and fromvarious government gencies o use for hisown work. He admitted hat photographsformed he basis of much of his art fromthe late 1930s through he mid-1940s.Later, n fact, he expressed is annoyance

at the endless debates on the relationshipbetween painting and photography ndhoped they would come to an end. Hewas apparently uite open about showinghis photo files to interested ndividuals,thereby naturalizing n artist's use ofphotographs s common studio parapher-nalia and tools of the trade.25

What is curious, however, s that whenShahn raced he origin of a photo-inspired painting, he rarely mentioned hespecific photograph e used, implyingthat his experiences nd memories as theywere recorded by preparatory rawingswere the seeds of his ideas. Even when hedid acknowledge he photographic ourceof a painting, he did not credit hephotographer r newspaper rom which itcame.26 hese omissions can be explainedpartly by failed memory, partly by hisown awareness f the biases against usingcamera images, but mostly by the ubiqui-tous nature of photographs n our society.So thoroughly do they saturate urculture hat photographs-especially

newspaper hotographs-are consideredto be authorless public property, air gameto be freely used, altered, manipulated,and reproduced.

Photographer's Window

Shahn used photographs n these waysthroughout his career. But at crucialmoments n his life he also reflected uponphotography tself and issues of represen-tation, as demonstrated n several

paint-ings from 1939. This dialectic s exempli-fied by Photographer's indow(fig. 14),which he painted he year after he re-signed from the FSA-a time when

photography was still very much on hismind. Photographer's indow as notreceived much attention n the Shahnliterature, lthough one critic n 1976called t a curious painting: One s nevercertain whether Shahn s portrayingliteral transcription f a real window or an

invented situation. 27 The reviewer'suncertainty might have been clarified hadhe known about the photograph romwhich the painting derives fig. 15), aphotograph hat provides lues to thepainting's arger meanings.

The photograph which has neverbeen reproduced) resents studiophotographer's indow that Shahn sawon a New York City street hree yearsbefore he made the painting. The imagepresents our rows of pictures of weddingcouples, graduates, bar mitzvah tudent,babies, and small children. While most ofthe photographs re matted, some aremore formally displayed n frames,indicating a more expensive ptionavailable t the studio. In the foregroundlightbulbs nd reflections rom thewindow partially lock the face of a childand a bride, and light obliterates wophotographs ntirely, a detail hat will beshown to bear considerable significance.

The photographs resent ormallydressed people posed for momentous

occasions. The couples stand n stockposes, either frontally r at an angle withtheir heads slightly cocked oward eachother. They smile ahead or look wistfullyand lovingly away rom the camera ntothe distance. Some of the couples appearwith flowersagainst ackdrops ith archesthat enclose and bathe hem in a soft haloof light. The windows suggest worldsbeyond the loving shelter of their union;staircases point to the eternal oad of theirjoined lives. The photographs f thechildren,

nterspersed mongthose of the

couples and also adorned with flowersand shown with studio props, suggestmore literally he future products ofmarriage.

73 American Art



16/29

Why would Shahn have been inter-ested n such an ordinary mage? Preciselybecause t was so ordinary. His interest nthe common man had already eendemonstrated y his Sacco nd Vanzettiseries 1931-32), Mooney eries 1932-33), and Prohibition 1933-34) and Rikers

Island mural tudies 1934). Such workwas part of a larger rtistic response o theGreat Depression and exemplified fforts

For Shahn the artist, the window

presented n opportunity o

reflect upon the practice ofpho-tography tself for the very act ofphotographing photographer's

window necessarily stablishedrelationship etween he photog-rapher and the pictures n thewindow.

by the Works Progress Administration/Federal Art Project WPA/FAP) o recordthe lives of rural and small-town olk as away of fostering national pride. In a questto document what was American bout

America and to find a usable past,artists elebrated heir agrarian oots nthe rural Midwest. For Shahn, hiswindow would have represented slice ofAmerican ife-a window on the world.

Yet this is not just any world, and it'scertainly not middle America. Shahn'swindow presents very specific urban andethnic community, one that becomes

apparent when the photograph s consid-ered n the context of the other photo-graphs aken on the same roll of film. Onthis roll Shahn ocused closely on aspectsof New York City street ife in 1936-immigrants, omeless people, and thestorefronts f Jewish-owned usinesses.Read n sequence, hese images not only

evoke the intimate, nsular world of aJewish neighborhood n the Lower EastSide, but also inform us of Jewish ritualsand religious esponsibility. or example,the photographer's indow, with itswedding photographs, s situated betweena photograph f a matzoh advertisement

(suggesting he Passover holiday), picturesof Jewish men and a Hebrew bookstore(connoting earning nd the perpetuationof faith), and kosher markets (signifyingdietary aws).

Shahn ook these photographs lose tothe time when he had broken sharplyfrom his Jewish mmigrant past, recentlyseparated rom his first wife and family,become nvolved n the bohemian circlesof Greenwich Village, and just begun totravel around he country as a graphicartist and photographer or the Resettle-ment Administration. On visits back oNew York rom Washington, he photo-graphed his immigrant world aboutwhich he was so ambivalent, s if attempt-ing to examine ts changes ince hischildhood and the ways t was copingduring he Depression.28

But Shahn had more than personal rsociological easons or being drawn o aphotographer's indow. For Shahn heartist, he window presented n opportu-nity to reflect upon the practice f

photography tself, for the very act ofphotographing photographer's indownecessarily stablished relationshipbetween he photographer nd thepictures n the window-in this case,between tudio photography nd Shahn'sdocumentary treet photography. n fact,the image ells us less about the peopledepicted n the window than it does aboutthe conventions of depiction n portraitphotography.

Studio photography s it was practicedat the time was very different romShahn's kind of photography. irst of all,it took place ndoors, with large viewcameras, ontrolled lighting, props, andbackdrops. t was a commercial nterprise,

74 Winter 1993



17/29


18/29

17 Children ofRehabilitation lient,Arkansas, 1935. Photograph, 8 x10 in. Library of Congress, Printsand Photographs Division,Washington, D.C.

farmers, iving them visibility andexposure ypically denied them, or was he

calling our attention o middle-class

ignorance f poverty and emphasizing heclasses' eparate worlds by the distinct

separation f images n the window? Bypresenting more representative electionof the American population, one that

includes he oft-forgotten dispossessed,Shahn sought to show us how he otherhalf ives.

But Shahn's window does more thandocument blatant lass inequalities: tcomments on the nature of the documen-tary project tself. The image unctions asthe artist's wn advertisement or the FSA

project which he undoubtedly avoredover studio photography) nd displays he

types of photographs hat made foreffective propaganda. t is instructive o

compare Shahn's use of FSA photographsin the window with the way the govern-ment and media used the same images oinform he public about poverty and toconvince Congress f the need for relief

Just as the portraits of smilingcouples were ntended o sell a

particular mage, so too were heFSA photographs, ccording osome contemporary istorians,intended o sell a certain anitized,palatable notion ofpoverty.

programs. Like newspaper or governmenteditors, Shahn cropped the photographshe used for his window, abstracted them,removed them from their larger contexts

(many were originally parts of series), and

presented them without their originalcaptions. By doing so, he transformedthem into iconic images that show

poverty with dignity. Shahn selected thisimage of the children of a rehabilitationclient (fig. 17) instead of the boys' entire

family, for example, presumably because

76 Winter 993



19/29

two children could generate more sympa-thy and less judgment han a picture of a

poor family with many children. In his

painting, he picture of the two boys wasaltered o show only one boy.) Such usageaffirms what historian ames Curtis haswritten about the FSA photographers:that in their working process hey ar-

ranged ubjects, liminated unwantedelements, and selected photographs or

publication hat conformed o thedominant cultural alues of an urban

middle-class udience.30On one level, then, Shahn's

Photographer's indow ould be said toillustrate form of humanist documen-tary hat has in recent years come underattack by cultural and photo historians,who argue hat 1930s documentary idnot so much effect social change asreinforce mainstream otions aboutpoverty. The government xploiteddocumentary hotographs, evisionistscholars ontend, to appease he publicthat

somethingwas

beingdone to amelio-

rate poverty, uppress he potential of aworking-class evolution, and affirmpower relations between he patriarchalstate and its poor citizens. On another

level, however, Shahn may have used hisFSA images n a more subversive manner,for not only do they intrude on a world ofmiddle-class elebration, ut they presentthat world as quite imperfect. He ren-dered his sitters visually unappealing, with

pasty aces, distorted eatures, oothy

smiles,and

stiff,unnatural

oses.Because

such an uneasy uxtaposition f these twoworlds was not a typical propagandastratagem ound in FSA publicity at thetime, Shahn's mployment of it could beseen as supporting what photo historianMaren Stange has argued-that FSA

images were more radical n their implica-tions than the ends to which the govern-ment and media used them in legitimat-ing reform ideology.31 n Photographer'sWindow, owever, Shahn went one stepfurther by using his FSA photographs omake his paintings ven more blatant ntheir social commentary han their

photographic ources. n raising uchissues Shahn ultimately questioned heeffectiveness f the documentary rojectas a whole.

Shahn subjected his FSA photographsto the same conventions of presentation sthe more nnocuous tudio photographs.He stylized and abstracted he FSAphotographs n their painted versions,presenting he child of a rehabilitation

client within the same dramatic hadow asthe wedding pair on the top row, andsetting he miner couple on a platformnot unlike the stage settings before whichthe children near hem are posed. Shahnthus depoliticized he government mages,demonstrating heir imited power oeffect social change. By displaying hemin a window intended o attract business,he underscored he commercial ature ofthe whole FSA enterprise. ust as theportraits f smiling couples were ntendedto sell a

particular mage,so too were the

FSA photographs, ccording o somehistorians, ntended o sell a certainsanitized, palatable otion of poverty.In its contrivance, hen, Shahn's

77 American Art

18 Detail of lens, Self-Portrait ithAngle Viewfinder, a. 1939.Drawing. Private ollection



20/29

19 Self-Portrait among Church Goers,1939. Tempera on masonite, 20 x 2912 in. Formerly n the Edward ndBetty Marcus Foundation, Dallas,Texas; present whereabouts nknown.

Reproduced n Christie's catalogue,December 1985

20 Street Scene, Natchez, Mississippi,1935. Photograph, x 10 in. Libraryof Congress, Prints and PhotographsDivision, Washington, D.C.

painting acknowledges he problemsthen encountered n attempting ohonestly and persuasively epresentmarginalized eoples or purposes fsocial reform.32

The tension between promoting andquestioning documentary s also revealed

in Shahn's self-portrait ith angleviewfinder rom 1939 (see fig. 5). Shahndedicated ne version of the drawing oRoy Stryker: To Roy who made tpossible or us to work uninterruptedlyfor 5 years-a full lifetime. This gesturesuggests he nature of Shahn's workingrelationship with Stryker nd, on a largerlevel, the artist's mbivalent nd complexrelationship o government bureaucracy.Shahn, who shared Stryker's elief n

photography s a tool for communicationand dramatic, ffective propaganda, adbeen valuable o his employer n helpinghim to clarify his goals and promote heFSA project. Shahn was grateful or

Stryker's evotion o his photographersand for his efforts o protect heir jobsfrom government utbacks nd charges f

boondoggling. But at the same time, theartist had problems with Stryker's gno-rance about art and with the bureaucraticauthority he represented.33

In the drawing Shahn cleverly lludesto such issues by inscribing pithy

commentary n the lens of the camera(fig. 18): misery, esolation, rosion,cropping, and dust -the subjects FSA

photographers ere supposed o look foron their trips. To prepare or these trips,the photographers ere given referencebooks recommended y Stryker swell asoutlines (shooting cripts) written by him.Once in the field, they were required osend all their film back o Washington.Even though the photographers eceived

photographs nd contact prints n thefield so

theycould identify, caption, and

make notations, hey still relinquishedmuch of their control over their picturesto the printers, writers, ditors, and layoutmen who would process, ile, crop, and

distribute heir work to newspapers,magazines, nd exhibitions.

The inscribed ens reflects Stryker'sgeneral desire o make his photographersinto sociologists with cameras ndliteralizes running oke he and Shahnshared concerning he latter's request or

super-psychic ilm and a philosophicallens o obtain certain desired pictures.The word cropping s a pun-a referenceto both sharecropping nd to the actualcropping of photographs. The inscribedlens thus refers o what Maren Stange hastermed he management f vision andto the fact that FSA photographers erenot the sole authors of their pictures.34

Alternatively, he lens could be read asan acknowledgment f the teamwork, heunity, and the shared vision that Shahnand others elt on the FSA project.Collaborative ffort was in fact encour-aged by Stryker, who promoted dialogueand an exchange f ideas among his staff.But in this drawing Shahn ultimatelyasserted is own authorship ver hisvision by rendering he Leica an extensionof his eye and linking his hand so closelyto the camera hat the lines of his handactually merge with those of the lens. Theartist, not the machine nor the words of

sociologists r Stryker, s clearly presentedas being responsible or the camera's

picture.35The issue of artistic ontrol s exploredfurther n Shahn's painting Self-Portraitamong Church Goers(fig. 19), in whichhis self-portrait ith angle viewfinder

appears gain, only this time in paintedform. This image, constructed rom a

group of Shahn's FSA photographs f achurch n Kentucky, street cene nNatchez, Mississippi fig. 20), and anunidentified treet cene, was the artist'spictorial esponse o a particular nstanceof public censure. The Reverend gnatiusW. Cox had attacked Shahn's ketch orhis Bronx Post Office mural 1938-39),which incorporated quote from WaltWhitman hat Roman Catholics ound

78 Winter 1993



21/29

- 4 Ii



22/29


23/29

trade, s aid out in contemporary anu-als, such as aying own he flesh onefirst, hen he cheek olor. But ultimatelyhe violated he standards f good photocoloringwith his rough, painterly urface.Ideal hand-colored tudio photographswere made with ransparent aints o that

the color would not mask he photographbeneath. heyemulated rints made romcolor ilm, not necessarily aintings. hatShahn's and oloring sopaque ndtextural allsattention o the fact hat hisimage s not a photograph ut a painting(or, hat his image s not only a display fhand-painted hotographs ut alsoapainting f hand-painted hotographs).Photo coloring must have alsoappealed oShahn ecause, ikepainting, t involvedhandwork, et its simplicity llowed imto put the time and abor back nto theimage aught uickly nd effortlessly ythe camera.

The concept f handwork eldgreatrelevance n New Deal culture, whichpromoted worker imagery n whichhands oomed arge, sseen n Shahn'sown posters or he Office of War nfor-mation OWI) and he CIO. Manyartists, specially hoseon the WPA/FAPprojects, ligned hemselves ith manualworkers ndwere reated s such bygovernment upervisors ho needed o

justify he use of federal unds or artduring n economic risis.Photographerswere also referred o as workers n jour-nals of the period.38

In Photographer's indow hahnfavored ainting verphotography or tsability o show color more effectively hanphotographs, iven he nfant tate ofcolor photography t the time. Thepainting salsoable o demonstrate heartist's many alents, or Shahn s at oncea photographer f FSAphotographs,colorist r hand olorer f

photographs,and he painter f the entire picture.The assertion f painting's epresenta-

tional powers sbeing uperior o those ofphotography sksus to consider he

relationship etween painters nd photog-raphers n Shahn's day. Critic ElizabethMcCausland, who had close contacts nboth worlds, noted that some paintersfeared technological nemployment ndresisted photography. he claimed hatthe conflict was mostly on the side of

painters nd printmakers, ho saw theirpictures eplaced by photographs n thebig picture magazines, ecausephotography

Thepainting is also able todemonstrate he artist's manytalents, or Shahn s at once a

photographer fFSA photo-graphs, colorist or hand colorer

ofphotographs, nd the painterof the entire picture.

better erved advertising nd commercialpurposes.39 hahn was undoubtedlysensitive o the threat photography osed.

After 1939 Shahn rarely eflected withsuch seriousness pon the nature ofphotography n his painting. On a fewoccasions, however, he commented on thecurrent tate of photography r expressed

nostalgia or an older form of photogra-phy. This is seen in My Friend he Photog-rapher, which depicts an itinerant photog-rapher with an old-fashioned iew camera(fig. 21). The painting was inspired byShahn's photograph f a street photogra-pher from Columbus, Ohio, in 1938 (fig.22)-a time when itinerant photographywas a common phenomenon. n thepainting, Shahn underscored he honest,hard-working ualities of the photogra-pher by enlarging his hand and by

relocatingim from the commercialism f

a town environment (apparent n thephotograph) o a simpler, ess congestedrural setting. He then emphasized isperception f the man's piety by cleaning

81 American Art



24/29


25/29

23 Candid Photographer, 1955. Brush

drawing, 9 /2x 7 /2 in. Presentwhereabouts nknown. Reproducedin Kennedy Galleries Ben Shahnexhibition catalogue, 1968, no. 31

24 Self-portrait of WeeGee fromNaked City (New York: EssentialBooks, 1945)

up his white smock (which s soiled in the

photograph) nd setting him against an

Apostolic Gospel church derived rom yetanother FSA photograph by Shahn.

The last significant mage n whichShahn addressed photography s a humor-ous line drawing of 1955 that depicts an

evil-eyed andid photographer ith animposingly arge peed-graphic amera-acomment on the state of photojournalism(fig. 23). Throughout he 1950s photo-journalism ominated he photographyworld through mass-circulation icturemagazines ike Life and Look. Since the1930s the photojournalist ad become a

ubiquitous presence n the popularimagination, nd the speed-graphic asthe archetypal ress camera or the firsthalf of the twentieth century. The popularperception of the photojournalist n thethirties and forties was an intrusive, rude,rough, rowdy, comic figure, as exempli-fied by WeeGee (fig. 24). By the 1950sthe image had become a bit more glamor-ous: freewheeling, dventuresome, ndinvincible. Shahn's aricature, howing a

large, mposing photographer oised withhis camera, ffirms ome aspects of the

long-standing tereotype f photojournal-ists. Shahn mphasized he photojournalist'sintensity with a nervous, autly pulledquality of line. Such stereotypical mages

could still be found in popular photojournals f the day. But because he drawingwas executed at the time when photojour-nalists were adopting maller ormatcameras, t is unclear whether Shahn'scaricature marks he apex of the older

speed-graphic amera r the end of its day.As a documentary hotographer hahn

was certainly ware of the emergence fcommercial photojournalism nd itsconcurrent development with the FSAproject. Roy Stryker tayed abreast factivities f the

picture pressbut made

clear distinctions between what heconsidered hurried nd superficialphotojournalism nd its uninformed,manipulative pproach with the FSA's

more profound ociological nvestigation.Stryker nd his photographers erecritical of the growing se of photogra-phy as a form of entertainment. hahnhimself criticized ertain orms of journal-istic photography, uch as MargaretBourke-White's nd Erskine Caldwell's

You Have Seen Their Faces 1937), whichhe called a commercial ob, derivativeand lacking he dedication of FSA work.FSA photographers, owever, did learnfrom the photojournalists, specially ntheir use of shooting scripts and picturestories, and Stange has even argued hat

Stryker was actually promoting a kind of

professional hotojournalism, ikening hiswork to corporate ublic relations. Thisview, along with Shahn's generallypositive attitude about and extensiveinvolvement n commercial rt, precludesany simple nterpretation f his photo-journalist.40

More specifically, Candid Photographerseems o be a response o the most

significant moment of humanistic photo-journalism f 1955-Edward Steichen's

Family f Man exhibition at MoMA, inwhich Shahn's work was prominentlyfeatured. The exhibit gathered photo-graphs rom all over the world under he

populist, universalizing, nd ultimatelydepoliticizing ubric of family, hich

downplayed he differences etween hecultures represented n the show. Even

though Shahn greatly espected teichenand strongly upported he exhibition, henonetheless declared painting's uperiorityover photography. n a letter o the editorof the New York Times, hahn ookexception o Aline Saarinen's eview ofthe exhibit, n which she referred o

photography s a folk art, more obligatedthan painting o represent he externalworld. After defending photography s a

keenly sophisticatedrt, Shahn affirmed

painting's higher status as an art. At thesame time, however, he rejected heintrospective endencies of contemporarypainting, exemplified or him by Abstract

83 American Art



26/29


27/29


28/29

Notes

I would like to thank Jules Prown, JonathanWeinberg, Frances Pohl, Mary Panzer, andAlan Tansman for reading versions of thisarticle, and Bernarda Shahn, VirginiaMecklenburg, Beverly Brannon, YoshikoWada, and especially Stephen Taller for theirgenerous support of my work.

1 James Thrall Soby to Ben Shahn, 16December 1946, Ben Shahn Papers,Archives of American Art, SmithsonianInstitution, roll D147:1433.

2 Soby to Shahn, 18 September 1947, BenShahn Papers, roll D147:1450.

3 See Merry Foresta, Art and Document:Photography of the WPA's Federal ArtProject, n Official mages: ew DealPhotography Washington, D.C.: Smith-sonian Institution Press, 1987), p. 154.

4 See Diane Tepfer, Edith Gregor Halpertand the Downtown Gallery Downtown:1926-1940: A Study in American ArtPatronage Ph.D. diss., University ofMichigan, 1989), pp. 98-101.

5 See correspondence between Halpert andShahn and Halpert and Van Deren Cokeregarding Coke's inclusion of Shahn in hispioneering exhibition and catalogue ThePainter nd the Photograph 1964).Halpert was actually supportive of Coke'sproject, but she was initially puzzled byhis theme, prompting her request for a

fuller explanation and her encourage-ment of Shahn to select the pairs ofpaintings and photographs to appear nthe book. Letters 10 May 1963; 14September 1963; 11 October 1963; and30 December 1963, Ben Shahn Papers, ca.1924-89.

6 Bernarda Shahn to Davis Pratt, 17 August1969, Photograph Files, Fogg ArtMuseum. This letter responded to a letterfrom Agnes Mongan (acting director ofthe Fogg) proposing an exhibition ofShahn's photographs at the Fogg. Mrs.Shahn was very supportive of the show'seffort to note Shahn's achievements as aphotographer but did not want himpromoted simply as a painter who usedphotography. She stated that he did nottake photographs with the intention of

using them in another medium. In herwritings she has always acknowledged thegreat importance of photography toShahn's art and vision, but with thequalification that he did not use photogra-phy as a sketchpad and that he eventuallyput down his Leica because it began totrap him in a certain point of view. Alongwith Soby and Halpert, believe BernardaShahn did not personally bject o Shahn'suse of photography n painting but feltthat public uxtaposition f his paintingsand photographs ould allow or iteral,

mechanical, nd hence simplisticconnections o be made by those notattuned o the nuances f his workingprocess. Bernarda hahn, nterviews ithauthor, 1989-93.

7 See, for example, elden Rodman, Portraitofan ArtistAs an American: en Shahn, ABiography ith Pictures New York:Harper nd Row, 1951), p. 96.

8 Nancy Newhall, BenShahn, n PhotoNotes November 947): 3; and ClementGreenberg, Art, TheNation 165 (1November 1947): 481.

9 Reviewers' omments nclude RobertCoates, Contemporary mericans, ewYorker 3 (11 October 1947): 62; and

TheArt of Ben Shahn, nidentifiedreview, November 1947, Ben ShahnScrap-book, ol. 1, Museum of ModernArt.

10 Clement Greenberg, uoted n FrancesPohl, Ben Shahn: New DealArtist n aCold War Climate, 947-1954 (Austin:University f Texas Press, 1989), p. 57;Greenberg, . 481.

11 Soby o Shahn, 16 December 1946, BenShahn Papers, ollD146:1433; JamesThrall Soby, Ben Shahn New York:Museum of Modern Art, 1947), pp. 13-14.

12 John Szarkowski, ooking t Photographs:100 Pictures om the Collectionof theMuseum ofModern rt (New York:Museum of Modern Art, 1973), p. 118.See Christopher hillips, TheJudgmentSeat of Photography, n Richard Bolton,ed., The ContestofMeaning: CriticalHistoriesofPhotography, d. RichardBolton Cambridge: MIT Press, 1989),pp. 15-48.

13 The situation was complex, however, oras Pohl notes, Shahn and MoMA wereattacked n the late 1940s for both

aesthetic onservativeness nd politicalradicalism. ohl, p. 76. Neither Soby northe staff at MoMA were conspiring gainstShahn's olitics or his photography. oby,in fact, did not want o soft-pedal hahn'spolitical iewsor activities n his essay orthe MoMA catalogue. He included hahn'spolitical osters n the show and, alongwith Barr nd others, defended he artistagainst eactionary acklash. everal earslater he even wanted o write bout Shahn'suse of photography. eeSoby's ettersfrom he 1947 MoMA exhibit, amesThrall Soby Papers, Museum of ModernArt Archives, iling unit 12; and ettersfrom Soby o Shahn, Ben Shahn Papers,roll D147:1433, 1439-40, 1458-59.

Shahn's hotographs ere n MoMA'scollection searly s 1938 and periodically

exhibited. He was ncluded n photogra-phy symposia nd maintained goodrelations with Edward teichen, hedirector f the photography epartmentfrom 1947 to 1962.

14 SeeJohn Morse, BenShahn: AnInterview, Magazine fArt 37 (April1944): 136-41. Shahn spoke of theinadequacy f drawing rom ife n ainterview with Richard Doud for theArchives f American Art (1964), p. 1.

15 For Shahn's most extensive tatements nphotography, ee Morse, p. 139; Photosfor Art, U.S. Camera (May 1946): 30-32, 57; Ben Shahn, Henri Cartier-Bresson, Magazine fArt 40 (May 1947:189-93; Ben Shahn, What s ModernPainting, merican Photography March1951): 147; Doud interview 1964); andArthur Goldsmith, AnUnfinishedInterview, echnicalPhotography (uly1969): 29, 33.

16 His photographs ad n fact beenexhibited n group hows ince he 1930s.Questionnaire n Ben Shahn Papers, a.1924-89.

17 Frederick ewisAllen, Since Yesterday1929-1939 (New York: Bantam Books,1939), pp. 211-12. See The U.S.Minicam Boom, Fortune 4 (October1936): 124-29, 160-70.

18 A major urning point n minicam historywas 1935-36. Willard Morgan nd HenryLester ublished The LeicaManual(1935), kodachrome ilm becamecommercially vailable n the thirty-five-millimeter ormat, nd Lifemagazine itthe newsstands n 1936. Editors nd

engraversn the FSA project t first

resisted miniature photography mostlybecause f aesthetic easons ut alsobecause f the practical roblems fworking with small negatives. ee SallyStein, FSAColor: The ForgottenDocument, Modern Photography 3(anuary 1979): 163.

Shahn was not alone n his criticalattitude oward he minicam boom'stechnical bsession. ome art photogra-phers ikeAnsel Adams elt that thenumber f gadgets endered minicamwork a nightmare or serious tudents. Aphotographer's ismissal f technique ndfancy equipment ould also be a way tomaintain mystique r power over heartistic rocess. n the early 1930sphotographers ike Edward teichen,Edward Weston, and Cecil Beatonboasted bout heir inexpensive ens andcameras. imilarly, Ralph Steiner efusedto provide echnical nformation or anexhibition f his work, explaining hat twas as silly as asking a painter what kind ofcanvas e used.

86 Winter 1993



29/29

19 Colin Westerbeck, Ben Shahn: Artist asPhotographer, Connoisseur212 (October1982): 100-101. Shahn also enjoyed acertain freedom from not being officiallyunder Stryker's employ for much of histime with the RA/FSA.

20 See Doud, p. 10; and Edwin Rosskam,Los anos de la depresion, in Ben Shahn:

Dibujos y Fotografas de los anos treintaycuarenta Madrid: Salas Pablo RuizPicasso, 1984), p. 23. Rosskam felt thatShahn exaggerated his illiteracy inphotography.

21 Shahn ironically referred o himself at thetime as a tourist photographer; seeBernarda Shahn, Ben Shahn, Fotografiasy Pinturas, n Ben Shahn: DibujosyFotograflas, . 11. Writer Noriya Abenoted, however, the special un-touristlikequality of Shahn's photographs of Kyotothat exposed a face of Japan unknown tomost Japanese. Shimingaka no mitaNippon, Geijutsu Shincho 11 (May1960): 56-67.

22 Many of these files can be found in theArchives of American Art, SmithsonianInstitution, Washington, D.C. Shahn'smodels for his photo files were most likelythe New York Public Library PictureCollection, which he had used extensivelyin the 1930s, and the FSA file, with whichhe had close contact as a photographer, anexhibition organizer, and a graphicdesigner. Alan Trachtenberg has analyzedthe organization of the FSA file on thepremise that the way photographs wereclassified and used can inform us about thevalues of the culture in which they weremade. Shahn's files are by no means assystematic or theoretically conceived asthese examples, but neither are theycompletely arbitrary. See Trachtenberg,

From Image to Story: Reading the File,in Beverly Brannon and Carl Fleischhauer,eds., DocumentingAmerica: 1935-1943(Berkeley: University of California Press,1988), pp. 43-73.

23 Ziva Amishai-Maisels, Ben Shahn andthe Problem of Jewish Identity, Jewish Art12-13 (1986/87): 318, 306.

24 See Cecile Whiting, Antifascism nAmerican Art (New Haven: Yale Univer-sity Press, 1989), p. 165.

25 Doud, p. 13; Goldsmith, p. 29; and VanDeren Coke, telephone interview withauthor, July 1990.

26 See, for example, John Morse, ed., BenShahn (London: Seeker and Warburg,1972), pp. 41-58, 64-87; and This IsBen Shahn, transcript of a CBS televisioninterview (1965), Ben Shahn Papers, ca.1924-89. Drawing was in fact central to

Shahn's rt; his earliest training was ndrawing nd ithography, nd a graphicsensibility ervadesmuch of his work.

27 Ann Sargent Wooster, NewYorkReviews, rt News76 (February 977):124.

28 The number f Eastern European ewssettling n Manhattan's ower East Sidedecreased significantly rom 1931 to 1936,but by 1936 there was some ncrease againpartly due to the rise of Hitler nGermany. hahn herefore ocumentedthe streets f this area at a turning point nimmigration history.

29 If Shahn's tudio resided n the LowerEast Side, the clients n the window weremost ikely rom he working r lower-middle classes. n juxtaposition ith therural poor, however, hey are ransformedinto a more privileged roup of people,hence my use of the term middle lass.

30 See James Curtis, Mind's Eye,Mind'sTruth: SA Photography econsidered(Philadelphia: emple University ress,1989).

31 On criticism f the documentarytradition, eeJohn Tagg, TheBurden ofRepresentation Cambridge: MIT Press,1988), as well as the writings f MarthaRosier, Alan Sekula, Abigail Solomon-Godeau, Sally Stein, and Maren Stange.On the radical implications f FSAideology, ee Stange, Symbols f deal Life:SocialDocumentary hotography nAmerica 890-1950 (New York:Cambridge University ress, 1989),p. xv.

32 I am not claiming hat Shahn ntended hemeanings have suggested orPhotographer's indow, ut rather hat heand other FSA photographers ere awareof the ideological mplications f theirpictures nd their potential or being usedby different ndividuals nd nstitutionsfor different political nds.

33 Shahn was one of the important layers nthe early ears f the RA/FSA project ndcontinued o be consulted by Stryker venafter his resignation n 1938. Althoughthey maintained warm and friendlyrelations ver he years, n retrospectShahn expressed eemingly ontradictoryviews about both Stryker nd thegovernment. ee Doud, pp. 4, 10, 12-13,16-17,26-27.

34 For an excellent, well-balanced ccount ofStryker's ombination f direction ndconcession f control o photographers nthe FSA and Standard Oil projects, eeUlrich Keller, Highway sHabitat: A RoyStryker ocumentation, 943-1955 (Santa

Barbara: University Art Museum, 1986),pp. 33-38. For a more critical assessmentof Stryker's position, see Stange, pp. 89-131.

35 In his interview with Doud, Shahn said, Ifelt I had more control over my ownmedium than I did over photography.Extraneous material entered into it that Icouldn't control in photography except invery few instances where I felt there was atotal picture (p. 24). Apparently Shahnwanted nothing to come between him andhis subject, so he chose to see his camera asan extension of his eye.

36 See Stein, pp. 90-99, 162-64, 166; andSally Stein, The Rhetoric of the Colorfuland the Colorless: American Photographyand Material Culture between the Wars(Ph.D. diss., Yale University, 1991).

37 Sally Stein, discussion with the author,January 1993.

38 Shahn spoke about the biases he heldwhen he first came to do governmentwork for RA/FSA in 1935. He claimed hehad little use for bureaucrats and thosewho didn't produce (meaning with theirhands), attributing much of this attitudeto his family background of woodcarvingand pottery. Doud, p. 12.

39 See Elizabeth McCausland, AmericanPhotography in Representative Show,The Springfield Sunday Union andRepublican, 24 October 1937, p. 6E, RoyStryker Papers, Archives of American Art,Smithsonian Institution, roll NDA9:426.Despite this resistance, there wasnonetheless interaction between the twocommunities, especially in the fine artworld in New York, as seen in thepioneering efforts of Barbara Morgan andothers in organizing a photographyexhibition for the American ArtistsCongress in 1937. Several painters led byPaul Strand fought to secure a specialsection for creative photography in theCongress.

40 Stryker, quoted in Keller, p. 33; Stein,FSA Color, p. 64; Shahn quoted in

Doud, p. 20. See Stange, p. 108. Shahnconsistently objected to the distinctionsmade between fine and commercial art.

41 Shahn wrote, I feel that the status ofpainting as an art is a higher one than thatof photography not because the one isresponsible, the other irresponsible, butsimply because painting is able to callmuch more out of the artist himself and isable to contain a fuller expression of theartist's own capacities than in photogra-phy. Ben Shahn, In the Mail: Art VersusCamera, New York Times, 13 February1955, p. 15.

87 American Art

ben shahn article

Documents