A 1939 Letter of Protest: Controversy Over
Public Art During the New Deal

Historical Background

In the midst of the Great Depression, the Federal Government gave the visual arts unprecedented support. Artists, like millions of their fellow Americans in the 1930s, found themselves without work and without resources to pursue their vocation. Many were destitute. With the arrival of Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal in 1933, however, the Federal Government launched a number of programs aimed at promoting economic recovery, providing work relief, and conserving the skills of American workers. For artists, programs such as the Works Progress Administration’s Federal Art Project and the Treasury Department’s Section on Fine Arts provided needed employment as well as opportunities for creative work. In addition to giving work to artists, the New Deal administrators who ran these programs hoped they would spread original art across the country, allowing millions of Americans to see it for the first time. Between 1933 and 1943, the art projects employed more than 10,000 artists who produced 100,000 paintings, 18,000 sculptures, 13,000 prints, and more than 4,000 murals for public buildings.

Some of the most familiar and enduring legacies of these New Deal art projects are the hundreds of murals painted in local post offices across the United States. Most post office murals were commissioned by the Section on Fine Arts, which was part of the Treasury Department, and later the Federal Works Administration. Commissions were made on the basis of open competitions announced in the Section’s Bulletin, with winners chosen by juries of expert judges who were themselves artists. In addition to works for post offices, the Section commissioned murals for courthouses, Federal buildings, customhouses, hospitals, and housing projects. It also commissioned some sculpture.

In June 1939 the Section announced its largest nationwide competition-the 48 States Competition. Its goal was to place a mural in the lobby of 48 newly built post office buildings-one for each state of the Union. These murals would all occupy the same standard space-along the lobby’s end wall, above the postmaster’s door. The Section left open possibilities for the murals, but suggested themes such as local history or industry, postal history, local color, landscapes, or recreational pursuits. Because the post offices to be decorated were small, the towns chosen for the contest tended to be rural hamlets. Greybull, WY; Los Banos, CA; Corning, IA; and Westerly, RI; were among the towns to be favored with Government art.

The mural design for one of the chosen towns, Kellogg, ID, briefly became the center of controversy in late 1939. The winning design, "Mine Rescue," by California artist Fletcher Martin, depicted an injured miner being carried from a mining accident on a stretcher by two fellow workers. Its stark use of light and shadow as well as its somber mood won Martin’s design high praise from the 48 States jury. In the eyes of the artist and artist-judges, its subject matter seemed appropriate for a mining town. Edward B. Rowen, assistant chief of the Section, regarded it "as comparable to some of the great religious paintings of the past." Several members of the jury stated that Martin’s design was the strongest of any submitted for the competition.

Click the image to view a larger version

Click the image to view a larger version

Unfortunately, many citizens of Kellogg, ID, did not share that opinion. After the competition winners were announced, a number of angry individuals and organizations wrote to Edward B. Rowen in Washington, DC, protesting the award and the placement of "Mine Rescue" in their community. The writers included presidents of the Idaho Art Association, the Bunker Hill and Sullivan Mining and Concentrating Company, and the Wardner Industrial Union. In addition, a U.S. Senator weighed in against the design. In fact, only one letter supporting the design can be found in the National Archives file on the Kellogg mural.

Among the protests was one from the Kellogg, ID, Chamber of Commerce, which is reproduced here. The letter makes two points. First, the subject of the mural was "unfit" for Kellogg. Depicting a mining disaster on the post office wall did not appeal to a population that was economically dependent on mining. Second, the "ghastly" subject depicted in the mural would offend those in the community who had lost loved ones in mining accidents. These family members should not have to confront a reminder of their loss every time they went into their local post office. Attempting to force this "monstrosity" [sic] upon the citizens of Kellogg would only result in "bitter feelings" toward the Government.

By November 1939 news of Kellogg’s displeasure was already public knowledge. Early that month an Associated Press reporter contacted Fletcher Martin for a comment on the growing protest over the mural. Martin replied that if the townspeople objected to his design, he would be happy to change it. But the Section did not want to lose one of its most distinguished 48 States designs, and Rowen quickly wired Martin, "Do not undertake redesign." By early December, when Life magazine announced the 48 States Contest winners, the essay accompanying photographs of the winning designs noted that "local residents objected to the pessimistic atmosphere of Fletcher Martin’s mining scene."

Rowen attempted to mollify his critics by finding funds for an additional, less controversial mural for the Kellogg Post Office. This way, Martin’s mural could still be completed, and its critics would have a happier scene for balance. (Presumably, visitors to the Kellogg Post Office would look at the design that pleased them and avert their eyes from the "depressing" Martin mural.) But after a few weeks of searching, Rowen admitted that no new funds were available for such a compromise solution. Regretfully, he wrote to Martin asking him to contact his critics in Kellogg and to solicit their suggestions before undertaking a new design. He then wrote to those individuals in Kellogg who had protested the original award, assuring them that they had prevailed but reminding several that their taste in murals flew directly in the face of "a distinguished jury of artists."

Not surprisingly, Fletcher Martin’s new subject, "Discovery," was benign. It pictured two excited pioneer miners and a burro at the moment of discovering what would become the Bunker Hill and Sullivan Mine, one of the town’s major employers (see figure 2). Uncontroversial, it was also undistinguished as art, devoid of the portrayal of human fortitude in the face of adversity displayed in the original submission. In fact, an animal, and not a human, occupies the center of Martin’s second mural. The local postmaster reported, however, that the townspeople of Kellogg were much more positive about the new design. "The Mural has created considerable interest among the patrons of this office," he wrote to Edward Rowen, "and so far the public seems to be well pleased."

The case file concerning the Kellogg Post Office mural is one of several hundred found among the records of the Treasury Section on Fine Arts in the Records of the Public Buildings Service, Record Group 121. These case files allow the researcher to study the interaction among the Federal Government, artists, and the localities where the murals were to be located. They also stand as a testimony to the New Deal efforts to bring art to millions of American hometowns.

Teaching Activities

Document Analysis

1. Share with your students the background information provided on New Deal programs.Distribute copies of the document to your students, and ask them the following questions:

a. Who wrote this letter?
b. What type of letter is this?
c. Who received this letter?
d. What steps were taken to choose the design for the Kellogg Post Office?
e. What unforeseen difficulties were encountered?
f. Why were members of the Kellogg, ID, Chamber of Commerce upset with the original mural design by Fletcher Martin?
g. Why might this organization have an interest in preventing Martin’s design from being completed?

Click the image to view a larger version

Click the image to view a larger version

2. Lead a class discussion about why the Federal Government commissioned works of art such as post office murals in the 1930s and early 1940s. Conclude with a discussion about ways the government supports the arts today.

3. Invite your school art teacher or a community artist to participate in an activity to compare and contrast Fletcher Martin’s two designs for the Kellogg, ID, Post Office. Ask the artist to list the criteria that he or she uses in analyzing a work of art. With the guidance of the artist, help the students examine the two designs for artistic merit. Ask the students how they think the Chamber of Commerce reacted to Martin’s new design.

Related Topics for Research and Reports

4. Direct your students to research and present a brief report on a mural, sculpture, monument, or frieze in your town or a nearby town. The report should address the following questions:

a. When was the artwork created?
b. What does the artwork depict?
c. Who was the artist?
d. Was there any controversy around the presentation of this
artwork such as the controversy in Kellogg, ID?

If possible, students should include a photograph or videotape of the artwork.

5. Assign students to investigate the possibility of painting a mural in your school. Consider with them potential subjects. Ask them:

a. Which members of the school community should be involved?
b. Who would they choose to serve as judges in a design competition?
c. Who will supply the paint and materials?
d. What obstacles can be anticipated?

6. Ask your students to research a recent publicly funded art project, report on any controversies that arose over the project, and explain how the conflicts were resolved or averted. Students might wish to contact the National Endowment for the Arts to request information on their policies regarding project funding. The address is The National Endowment for the Arts, 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20004.

References

Bustard, Bruce I. A New Deal for the Arts. Washington, DC: National Archives and Records Administration, 1997.

Marling, Karal Ann. Wall to Wall America: A Cultural History of Post Office Murals in the Great Depression. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1982.

Park, Marlene and Gerald E. Markowitz. Democratic Vistas: Post Offices and Public Art in the New Deal. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1984.