FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Was Picasso Apolitical?

A political objective of the artistic establishment in the U.S. is to depoliticize art.  Art that explicitly expresses a political commitment to change the power relations in our societies is frowned upon, discouraged, ridiculed or condescendingly dismissed by the art critic whose assumed maturity is reflected in his cynicism and skepticism of anything that transcends his own parochialism.  It has to be expected that when an art collection of Picasso’s politically committed paintings has been organized (“Picasso: Peace and Freedom” — Albertina, Vienna, Sept. 22, 2010 ? January 16, 2011, and Louisiana Museum of Modern Art, Denmark, February 11-May 29, 2011), a voice of that establishment would warn that “political art” was actually non-political.  And this is what John Richardson tries to do in his article in The New York Review of Books (November 25, 2010) entitled “How Political Was Picasso?” concluding that the painter was not really political.  He bases his conclusion on a whole series of erroneous observations and claims about Picasso and his political views during his youth. Richardson displays limited knowledge of the Spanish Civil War.

Richardson tries to diminish Picasso’s commitments to the causes he supported, including the anti-fascist struggles in Spain and Europe.  To that end, he rewrites history and indulges in psychoanalytical explanations, ignoring the political realities and context that, to a large degree, shaped Picasso’s life and art.  For example, Richardson presents Picasso as a very changeable character, his opinions depending on the lover he had at the time.  This is an accusation usually aimed at women ? a woman’s opinion simply reflecting her husband’s opinion.  It might seem to be an improvement to put a man in the same position, and changing wife for lover.  But in either case, for man or woman, this stereotyping is wrong, and especially so in the case of Picasso.

Picasso grew up artistically in Barcelona, when he arrived from Malaga at the early age of 13 years and stayed until he was 22 years of age, when he went to Paris.  The artistic circles in which he moved were clearly progressive. In Barcelona (where I was born), in Picasso’s youth, for example, the artistic community in which he moved was influenced by a political and social context in which anarchism and socialism were extremely important.  To define Picasso as a monarchist at that point, as Richardson does, is frankly ridiculous.  Later, in 1944, he became a member of the Communist Party and remained so to the last day of his life in 1973.  He despised Dali, who changed completely and became a strong supporter of the fascist regime ? to the point of sending congratulatory telegrams to the dictator every time he signed a death warrant for members of the underground who had been detained by the Spanish Gestapo (La Brigada Politico Social).  This is why Dali left Spain when the dictatorship ended, afraid that people might lynch him.  The contrast between Dali and Picasso could not be stronger.  Picasso helped and supported the antifascist underground in Spain, of which I was a member.  He was clearly committed to the antifascist struggle and to the establishment of democracy in Spain.  His integrity and steadfastness in this area completely contradicts the ridiculous, flimsy accusation that his political commitments changed according to his lovers’ whims.

Richardson’s limited knowledge of Picasso’s commitments is accompanied by an ignorance of the Spanish situation during the fascist dictatorship.  For example, he mistakenly describes the famous Spanish bullfighter, Dominguin as close to the dictator’s circles, indicating that Dominguin approached Picasso in response to the Franco regime’s wish to co-opt Picasso.  Dominguin was, in fact, very close to the antifascist Spanish underground and collaborated extensively with the resistance.  He hated Franco and the dictatorship.  Another of Richardson’s completely inaccurate claims is that Mussolini’s planes bombed Palma de Majorca.  Palma de Majorca, however, was on the fascist side and was not bombed by Mussolini, who supported the military fascist coup.  Actually, the Italian fascist planes had their base in Majorca (where even today there’s a monument to this), from which they bombed Barcelona and many other cities in eastern Spain.

Richardson’s Cold War mentality seems to see Picasso’s antifascist commitment as wavering, with that wavering being a sign of the realization that the cause he had supported was not worth his commitment.  Although Richardson’s intention seems to be to “protect” Picasso and clean his past (attributed to having the wrong lover at the right time), this is profoundly offensive not only to Picasso but to the millions who shared that commitment, without which the world would be in worse shape.

VICENTE NAVARRO is professor of Public and Social Policy, Johns Hopkins University and professor of Political Science at Pompeu Fabra University. He can be reached at: vnavarro@jhsph.edu

 

More articles by:

Vicente Navarro is Professor of Public Policy at Johns Hopkins University, and Director of the JHU-UPF Public Policy Center.

Weekend Edition
December 14, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Andrew Levine
A Tale of Two Cities
Peter Linebaugh
The Significance of The Common Wind
Bruce E. Levine
The Ketamine Chorus: NYT Trumpets New Anti-Suicide Drug
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Fathers and Sons, Bushes and Bin Ladens
Kathy Deacon
Coffee, Social Stratification and the Retail Sector in a Small Maritime Village
Nick Pemberton
Praise For America’s Second Leading Intellectual
Robert Hunziker
The Yellow Vest Insurgency – What’s Next?
Patrick Cockburn
The Yemeni Dead: Six Times Higher Than Previously Reported
Nick Alexandrov
George H. W. Bush: Another Eulogy
Brian Cloughley
Principles and Morality Versus Cash and Profit? No Contest
Michael F. Duggan
Climate Change and the Limits of Reason
Victor Grossman
Sighs of Relief in Germany
Ron Jacobs
A Propagandist of Privatization
Robert Fantina
What Does Beto Have Against the Palestinians?
Richard Falk – Daniel Falcone
Sartre, Said, Chomsky and the Meaning of the Public Intellectual
Andrew Glikson
Crimes Against the Earth
Robert Fisk
The Parasitic Relationship Between Power and the American Media
Stephen Cooper
When Will Journalism Grapple With the Ethics of Interviewing Mentally Ill Arrestees?
Jill Richardson
A War on Science, Morals and Law
Ron Jacobs
A Propagandist of Privatization
Evaggelos Vallianatos
It’s Not Easy Being Greek
Nomi Prins 
The Inequality Gap on a Planet Growing More Extreme
John W. Whitehead
Know Your Rights or You Will Lose Them
David Swanson
The Abolition of War Requires New Thoughts, Words, and Actions
J.P. Linstroth
Primates Are Us
Bill Willers
The War Against Cash
Jonah Raskin
Doris Lessing: What’s There to Celebrate?
Ralph Nader
Are the New Congressional Progressives Real? Use These Yardsticks to Find Out
Binoy Kampmark
William Blum: Anti-Imperial Advocate
Medea Benjamin – Alice Slater
Green New Deal Advocates Should Address Militarism
John Feffer
Review: Season 2 of Trump Presidency
Rich Whitney
General Motors’ Factories Should Not Be Closed. They Should Be Turned Over to the Workers
Christopher Brauchli
Deported for Christmas
Kerri Kennedy
This Holiday Season, I’m Standing With Migrants
Mel Gurtov
Weaponizing Humanitarian Aid
Thomas Knapp
Lame Duck Shutdown Theater Time: Pride Goeth Before a Wall?
George Wuerthner
The Thrill Bike Threat to the Elkhorn Mountains
Nyla Ali Khan
A Woman’s Selfhood and Her Ability to Act in the Public Domain: Resilience of Nadia Murad
Kollibri terre Sonnenblume
On the Killing of an Ash Tree
Graham Peebles
Britain’s Homeless Crisis
Louis Proyect
America: a Breeding Ground for Maladjustment
Steve Carlson
A Hell of a Time
Dan Corjescu
America and The Last Ship
Jeffrey St. Clair
Booked Up: the 25 Best Books of 2018
David Yearsley
Bikini by Rita, Voice by Anita
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail