The 1920s was a time of widespread political dissatisfaction in America. Most artists and intellectuals of the period were leftist in their political orientation but restricted their concerns to closed-door meetings and cartoons in journals such as The New Masses and The Liberator. In the early 1930s, a number of factors led social comment out of the discussion groups and onto canvases and lithographic stones. The leading American art schools, particularly New YorkÕs Art Students League, promoted the teachings of Ashcan School artist Robert Henri and his ideas about a new and vital American art. Henri told artists to seek subjects outside of the studio and to explore Òthe human qualityÓ of life on the city streets and in the back alleys. It was only natural that such populist subject matter and a newly developed political sense should converge in socially pointed paintings and prints. When art patronage more or less evaporated during the early years of the depression, American artists further identified with Òthe masses.Ó ArtistsÕ unions, and particularly the journals and exhibitions they generated, provided a forum for evaluating the artistsÕ role in society and the most appropriate form for a socially conscious art.

The funding of public art by RooseveltÕs New Deal Administration was the single most important event in the development of American social commentary art. Federal funding validated the equation of artist and worker and asserted the importance of socially motivated art. Project artist Anton Refregier recalled, ÒI felt a sense of purpose, a closeness to the people with whom we shared our economic plight, a feeling of being needed by them. Recognizing our obligations as citizens, we participated in all major social and economic struggles of the day.Ó Under a variety of acronyms, the government sponsored hundreds of artists on a project basis from 1933 until 1941. The WPA era murals, paintings, sculptures, and prints that continue to adorn many post offices, courthouses, and schools reflect the explosion of new artistic influences. In addition to the highly influential European art movements, the work of Mexican muralists Diego Rivera, David Alfaro Siqueiros, and Jose Clemente Orozco, provided important examples of how socially conscious art could function aesthetically. From within national boundaries, the newly found voice of African-American culture and the heightened participation of women artists brought new subjects and issues to the fore. While not all of the works from these years constitute social commentary art, it was a thread that drew in all of the arts and defined some of the best work created outside of the government projects as well.

Following the war, the unions and institutional structures that had unified the diverse concerns of social commentary artists diminished rapidly. Some artists, such as Ben Shahn and Robert Gwathmey, continued to draw upon social issues as a defining element in their artwork, while others passed on to a different emphasis. In contrast to the open and responsive environment of the New Deal era, postwar America was suspicious of outspoken artists, particularly if their past had included the slightest connection to radical politics. Social comments and criticisms continued to be made in the form of visual art, but the equivalence of artistry and citizenry seemed to be broken. More often than not, social comments took the form of personal reverie or reflections on the human condition.

Today social commentary is again a leading trend in the visual arts, and again the issue over what form that art should take is at the center of our reception of that art. For many artists, Òthe medium is the message,Ó in the sense that the comment is deeply embedded in the means of art production. The landscape reclamation projects of environmental artist Mel Chin, the performances of African-American artist David Hammond, and the body-based projects of feminist artist Kiki Smith are just a few instances of how social commentary presents itself in late-twentieth-century art. Whatever its form, social commentary in the arts is a feature of all civilized cultures. Though the basic issuesÐwar, poverty, prejudice, and injusticeÐmay remain constant from generation to generation, it will always be of value to view these issues through the eye of the artist.

Andrea Swanson HonorŽ
Guest Curator