Description

Description: This small archive consists of five typed letters signed from Granville Hicks to editor/publisher Henry Hart. They adopt a tonal variety, from “obstreperous” to equanimous–all of which are intellectually direct and discerning. In an editorial capacity, he is aghast at Hart’s lack of discernment of Hicks’ stylistic preferences on his John Reed book; he confronts an advertising manager over a rejected letter; is astute about the weak ending of Isisdor’s Schneider’s novel, (From the Kingdom of Necessity 1935), and savvy about the novelist, John Dos Passos reputation. The letters written from Troy and Grafton, NY,  are from the time period when he was allegedly dismissed from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute for his communist activities. Clearly, the two men also shared an intimate friendship; the letters are signed “Yours”  or “As ever, Granville.”

On May 31, 1935 (Troy, NY), he writes a “very obstreperous letter,” aghast that Hart “didn’t like the style of the Reed book” (One of Us: The Story of John Reed, Equinox,1935). He is especially troubled that Hart assumes that Hicks would find “attention to stylistic needs. . . superfluous”; he goes on to add that he “worked very hard on the style of these pieces” to write a “stronger, harder, more distinguished, . .  . more careful, less journalistic” piece, in all a much better style than that of Hart’s. He states, “It doesn’t matter which of [them] is right,” but doesn’t want to lend his name to a book when “[he doesn’t] like the way it’s written.” He adds, “. . . if the Equinox people don’t like the stuff, they don’t have to use it” and asks to be paid $75 and “write the book any way you please. . . . This is final.”

The May 15, 1935 letter (Grafton, NY) includes a transcripted version of the conversation Hicks has with Dwight Marvin who has refused to publish Hart’s letter, for not including the “whole truth,” and has published “the other side[s]” (the Catholic Information Society) piece instead. Hicks gets their Writer’s Association to publish a bulletin instead and plaster the town with it.

Distressed by the unfortunate pollyannaish ending of Isidor Schneider’s novel, he writes an insightful detailed critique (Sept 2, 1935). He lists the novel’s main preoccupations, noting that the “hero’s poverty, his race, his literary career, and his sexual adjustment” “is rooted, as it should be in class.” Hicks strongly asserts that “the book ought to go on to the only possible conclusion; the liberation of the poet in the one way he can be liberated, by the achievement of understanding of his class position. Not only is the sex business a false ending; the amount of attention paid to it in the last few chapters is grossly out of proportion. Isidor suddenly seems to lose his grip and the novel goes haywire.” In a follow up letter (Sept 6, 1935), he states that he suspected that “Isisdor planned to write a sequel,” but he doesn’t think it would help the first novel. He adds that he would prefer the “prize novel” (Marching, Marching) as a Book Union Choice over Isidor’s book. He adds that he has agreed to speak at the JR (John Reed) meeting, suggesting that he should be the first speaker who could “tell about Reed’s life,” thus giving a “clear picture of what Reed really was and did” before other “reminiscential and appreciative speeches.”

In his June 7, 1936 letter, he highly recommends John Dos Passos’ final book of The U.S. A. Trilogy. He anticipates “two possible objections” by the Book Union, one being that it is part of a series and the other Dos Passos’ “anti-CP bias.” However, Hicks considers the latter, “a minor incident,” that “does not demand an anti-CP interpretation.” Regarding the first possible objection, he says “the only real advantage of having read the other two is that one is used to the method.” He points out “the advantages of having the book . . . Dos Passos’ reputation, the [to him] great intrinsic interest of the novel, etc.” He astutely suggests getting out “a monthly . . . bulletin on left-wing books” so as to inform editors and reviewers in advance, but mostly to call attention to the books: “By and large, unfavorable reviews are less damaging to a book than lack of attention.”

All five letters are signed and typed on 8 ½  x 11” ivory paper. Item #AM00317

Granville Hicks (1901-1982) was an American novelist, literary critic, teacher and editor. He was one of the earliest of American Marxist literary critics who became disenchanted with the Communist Party’s uncritical acceptance of Soviet policies after the 1939 Nazi-Soviet pact. He taught at several universities, was the Director and later Executive Director of Yaddo’s Artists Community, served as editor of New Masses, and as a literary advisor to MacMillan Publishers (1930-65).

Henry Hart was an American writer (Dr. Barnes of Merion, 1963) and publisher who worked as Publicity Director for Scribner’s Sons, Editor-in-chief of Putnam’s Sons, an Associate Editor of Time and Fortune, the founding member and first editor of Films in Review and a founding member of Equinox Cooperative Press. He edited the American Writer’s Congress (1935) and was responsible for the English-translation publications of Thomas Mann’s works.

John Reed (1887-1920) was a journalist, poet and war correspondent.  He helped start the Communist Party in the United States. As a close friend of Lenin’s, he witnessed the Bolshevik Revolution. His book Ten Days that Shook the World (1919) was the basis for the Soviet director Sergei Eisenstein’s 1927 silent movie.

John Dos Passos (1896-1970) a lost generation writer, was most known for The U.S. A. Trilogy (1930-36), his non-linear writing style, and his political views which shifted from democratic socialist to conservative by the 1950s.

Condition: Mailing fold lines, light soil, generally good condition.