Visit 14

I continued looking through the Good Fight folders and began to browse the names of those with interview transcripts. I was tempted to read Vaughn Love's folder but I instead picked out Milt Wolff's because I figured I might as well go for continuity. And also because I found him a very compelling personality in The Good Fight. And then that Hemingway piece was so beautiful--it actually made me respect him even more and wonder about him more. So I looked at his transcripts.

The interview revealed that, in the beginning, Milt Wolff was a pacifist and an aspiring artist. The part of the interview I was able to read traced his journey from this initial identity to his crossing the Pyrenees in order to fight fascism in Spain. The interviewers were trying to ask Wolff if he could pin down how exactly he came to make such an ideological change. It seems he couldn't exactly explain it until a point in the transcript which reads, "(break) From passism, from out right pacificism, to, uh, anti-fascism, which meant struggle. And that took place about the time of, uh, the Rape of Etheopia. When, uh, Mussolini's son was describing the dropping of bombs on the beer-carrying little Blacks, you know, and a bomb burst opening like flowers, like rosing, unfurling in full bloom. Uh. Which is pretty horrible stuff. And uh, my pacifism became anti-fascism at that time, as did these people who were my friends." I just thought this bit of memory was really interesting. When Wolff was describing the particular memory, about Mussolini's son's description, I thought the "flowery" bombing imagery he repeated, which he obviously found at odds with the reality of the bombs' devastation, kind of paralleled his own contradictory ideology of pacifism with his conviction that struggle was now necessary if there was to be peace.

The interviewers asked Milt Wolff if the stereotype of intellectuals plotting revolution in basements was true of the communist meetings he went to. He responded, "Not--the YCL, that I was exposed to, we didn't plot any revolution. We talked about the Popular Front. And the struggle against fascism. This was the primary goal. To preserve what democracy there was and to defeat fascism." I thought this statement was so important to understanding the motivations of the the Lincoln Brigade--that this testimony must correctly summarize what everyone was thinking and feeling at the time. But then I thought maybe Wolff was only framing it that way. I guess it's impossible to say now since these are only recollections. Still, going to the letters in the archive, you find most of the sentiments expressed are these same as these.

And I thought this was lovely: "Uh, it's the fashion now for some of us who were in that period to describe ourselves as uh, naive... uh, I remember one guy said at my house, he said, he shrugged his should, he said, 'Milt, we were only kids, then little shmucks, you know!' But that's not true at all! That's not true at all. We were, uh, we came into this thing with our eyes open from bitter experience. Uh. It, it, In full... possession of our senses, ready to commit ourselves, you know. To this prospect that was open to us for a better world. It was, it was, I mean, to look back at it now, and call it something about being dupes or something, and trying to, uh, wash your hands of it in that, doesn't make sense to me at all--because I am still committed to that idea. Through whatever avenue. I still think that, that's the wave of the future. For humanity." Milt doesn't identity what "that idea" is but I think that it's not too bad because I don't think he could have actually explained what "that idea" was. I don't think any of us can explain what our ideal vision of the future would look like. It's just a feeling, as it seems to come down to here for Wolff.

Visit 13

So I actually didn't have enough time last time I visited the archive to, I think, satisfactorily go through the Good Fight folder. I looked at some other people's blogs and it seems like they were really excited about the folder, especially the interview transcripts, so when I went back, I reordered the box.

One folder I found had at the head: Department of State Office of Arms and Munitions Control. This folder contained letters concerning resources going to Spain--but not on the Republican's side. In 1937, apparently it was found that the Atlantic Refining Company of Philadelphia sent to "the Spanish Monopoly ... two and a half million gallons of gasoline." The reporter also talks of "the great number of automobiles which continue to pass through Portugal destined for Spain." I think there was only one response included in the folder which basically said, "We know. It's okay." So, great. It was funny because it seemed like the reporter thought the information he was about to disclose would be very surprising and illicit quick action. Nope.

Another thing I found that was very interesting was a folder called "Veterans Lists." It was interesting because it was I guess basically a log of the filmmakers' impressions of all the veterans they interviewed. A heading read, "Vets betwixt the Coast" and listed names under different cities and states. It was kind of funny to read because next to many names were comments like these: "nice but dull;" "not there long, opportunist;" "political, stubborn;" "incomprehensible, unpleasant." It gave a little insight into the process of narrowing down which veterans would be featured in the film and it even suggested that it was actually easier picking out the personalities than one might think.

Reading the Peter Carroll book, I came across the fact that the government demanded that the VALB list with the Attorney General as a foreign organization. Also in Carroll's book was the mention of a piece Hemingway wrote to accompany a bust of Milt Wolff. These two facts came together in this folder that contained a letter from the Subversive Activities Control Board to Milt Wolff listing 20 (labeled a-s) accusations of communist activity for each of which he must write a rebuttal 30 days after receiving it. The letter's purpose was obviously to intimidate and overwhelm. Still, in the same folder I found a copy of the piece Ernest Hemingway wrote about Wolff. I get really happy whenever I come across his words because I've read so much of his stuff and so much criticism of his work. Whenever I read something he wrote for the real world, it resonates with the values I see in his literature. So, I found what he wrote about Milt very compelling and beautiful: "He is a retired major now at twenty-three and still alive and pretty soon he will be coming home as other men his age and rank came home after the peace at Appomattox courthouse long ago. Except the peace was made at Munich now and no good men will be at home for long." These lines round out a comparison Hemingway of Milt Wolff to Lincoln, playing off his leadership of the Lincoln Brigade. The last line is so forcefully sad because of Hemingway's pessimism and the invocation of a loaded proper noun contrasted with that of a lost generalization. I wondered why this tribute was included in the folder. I wondered if maybe someone sent this piece on to the Board as an additional piece of testimony in defense of Milt Wolff.

Visit 12

Earlier in the week, I finally finished off the Lardner folder. The visit before that I had read a great many of his letters when suddenly they stopped and all I had left were letters from others. But before I get to my discovering his death and my reaction, I wanted to write about some things he had said.

This is why the archives are great. You can read passages like this one: "There are still some phases of war that I haven't seen, so that I am not sorry to be returning to the front, but for your comfort it is very unlikely that we shall see action for some time. There is a lot of reorganization and remoralization to be done. One thing that makes me more satisfied with life than ever is that I have a very good idea of what I am going to do with my life."

There are several things I wanted to touch on within this. First, there's the hint that morale was sinking amongst the troops and that structural work had to be undertaken, probably due to loss of lives and dwindling of resources. On a personal note, however, I found that I really identified with Lardner in this passage. I understood that going back to the front meant for him more experiential knowledge and I was glad that that was something for which he was still seeking. I guess I felt similar to him then because I sort of do the same thing--I'll try things just to gain the experience and the knowledge that comes with it. Still, we know Lardner wanted to write. So that might be a reason for his wanting to see more fighting--so that he could accurately render the experience. I was really glad when I read that he thought he'd found a clear direction for his life from then on. I'm always hoping I'll reach a moment like that in my life and it's gratifying to see that it does happen for some people. At the same time, it's infinitely sad. Just as he finds he understands himself and his purpose, his life is cut short. It's very tragic--so tragic that it's literary. There's even a term for it in Greek--anagnorisis--the point of recognition of one's identity; knowledge that comes too late and is often followed by tragedy.

The last letter we have in the folder is dated September 19th, 1938, and its last sentence reads: "This is not a very cheerful letter but I will do better next time." As I scanned the last folders I realized there was no next time. To me, that last letter set an oppressively sad tone. I may have started crying then or it may have been after John Murra's letter. Murra's letter was perfect. It was addressed to Lardner's mother and told all about James' adventures and accomplishments in Spain, how kind and intelligent he was. That part was about three-fourths of the letter. The revelation of James' death was subtle and sort of indirect, followed by a statement that there was nothing more to say of it. After I had gotten over the shock of James' death and went back the second time to finish the folder, I looked at Murra's letter again and tried to imagine a mother receiving that letter. And then I tried to imagine John Murra, lying in a hospital bed in Spain attempting to write a condolence letter to the mother of one of his closest friends now dead. I just think this series of letters is a great microcosm of the suffering experienced by every American volunteer and family wrapped up in the Spanish Civil War. But it doesn't stop there. It points further toward toward the tragedy of the Spanish people, and even further into the future when innocent civilians all over the world were ravaged and devastated by fascism.

Questions have been coming to me now about the relevance of the Spanish Civil War. I envy that generation for their activism and their passion, and in a strange way, for the great evil they witnessed in their time. For at least they could identify that evil and fight it. In our time, there is no clear enemy, no obvious manifestation of the darker side of human nature. How can we carry on the fight? To where has fascism slipped away? And is it growing, ready to emerge in a new twenty-first century form?

Visit 11

As requested, the last time I visited the archive I checked out the Good Fight box hours before actually seeing the film. Another student was using the box when I came in. I asked what folders were interesting since the box was pretty big and I had about an hour and a half to read after walking over from work.

The first interesting thing I looked at was a letter from Clute Wilton's father to the Secretary. His letter began with an impressive opening where he recounts his family's involvement in patriotic wars: a father in the Civil War, a great, great grandfather in the Revolutionary War, two sons in the Great War, and one currently fighting in Spain. The rest of Mr. Wilton's letter serves to connect his son's current fighting in Spain to the values and spirit of those fighting in the other American wars mentioned: "He has asked me to write to you, to ask you in the name of all that is fine and true and great in our American tradition to please give the Spanish government just a fair chance. " He says that his son has informed him that ammunition from America is killing American soldiers in Spain while "we do not permit the real government of Spain to buy ammunition from us." He calls this policy "one of the most inhumane, diabolical, and un-American practices I have ever heard of." I just thought this letter was interesting because it connected Spain's cause with America's in a way that I haven't seen before. And after having seen the movie last night it reminds me of a quote from one of the veterans: "The government wasn't representing the thoughts of the people."

This becomes very disconcerting when studying the American opinion of the Spanish Civil War because, as far I as I can think, this may have been the first time where the government deliberately ignored the will of the people, rendering the premise and the promise of our government to represent the people barren. Vietnam was the first wide-spread instance of this. Was the Spanish Civil War its precursor?

I ask the question because there was a folder that really obscures the answer to the question. The folder was called Franco's Fascism or something like that. I began to read an article called "Life in Nationalist Spain" dated October 1937 from the publication The Commonweal. Reading the first paragraph, I wrote down a quote that I thought was particularly laudatory of the Republican side: "it is not only the courage of his troops that is winning the war but the magnificent organization and cooperation of civilians of all classes." As I continued reading, I realized there was something wrong with my comprehension of the article, for it was turning pro-Franco. I looked at the quote again and picked out "his troops"--Franco's. This shocked me. It was the first of many shocks I would receive reading through the publications in this folder. I remember I was extremely tired when I got into the archive, but my indignation woke me up. I became absorbed in this folder and actually didn't get to look at anything else.

To answer the quote above, we know that Franco's army was not a cooperative coalition of all civilian classes. It was of the upper classes. And the troops weren't even civilian--a good fraction were foreigners. Many outrageous statements followed that were either untrue or scarily close to descriptions of fascism. In fact, there was an entire article with the aim of proving that Franco's Spain was not fascist--but contained several descriptions that fit exactly the fascist model.

This is the worst: "The mission of the new state according to General Franco himself is the establishment of social justice in Spain according to the teachings of the Catholic Church. AS the means necessary to fulfill this mission the state must be organized in the best and most efficient way, it must posses unity and hierarchy, it must be guaranteed stability and independence from party politics ... If there are any rights suppressed it will be the 'rights' of irresponsible agitators to incite mobs to burn and to loot." Two things particularly stand out: 1) "independence from party politics"--this statement effectively categorizes Franco's state exactly in place with the rest of the single-party states of that time and the rest of the twentieth century. 2) The fact that the author feels the need to mention and justify "rights suppressed"--"if there are any"--sends a signal to the discerning reader that this action is much more sinister than the defensive author aims to let on.

These were just a couple of examples of unsettling statements found in these publications. It was extremely interesting to me to find these papers because I now wonder if a large segment of the population believed these articles and helped to cancel out the voice of the pro-Republican activists.

Visit 10

My last visit to the archive just about finished James Lardner's folder. I would have read the rest but Tamiment was closing. I plan to finish it off next time. I did get to find out that James didn't make it, which I could have found out by reading a finding aid, I suppose, but I feel as if you always forget whether the person you're reading from died there or not. You don't remember the fact and it doesn't become real until you read the actual letters of condolences. Because you almost feel like they're still alive, when reading the letters. It's much more heartbreaking, then, to read through a box without knowing the outcome. Sometimes I chide myself for not researching the person more before I start reading, but I think I will stop that because, in not knowing, the series of letters becomes so moving.

This folder, Folder 4 Aug-Sept 1938, opened sort of dramatically with postcards indicating to the recipients that Lardner had been wounded. I would just like to compliment whoever arranged the folder this way because the next piece of correspondence was a letter to Mrs. Lardner explaining the exact details of the event, those details for which I had immediately begun to search after the first brief postcards piqued my anxiety for Lardner. The arrangement, therefore, was actually exciting and satisfying. Weird experience, I guess.

As early as September 2, 1938 Lardner knew that Spain was preparing to release the International Brigades: "This paragraph is confidential and possibly inaccurate. From a number of events and opinions and rumors I gather that a gradual and lengthy process of removing the I.B. from Spain has begun. Herbert Matthews, N.Y. Times correspondent...says he thinks it will take six months or so." This excerpt reveals that at least the war correspondents and journalists had access to this sort of confidential information early. I guess it's just surprising to me reading these letters how much information was available and known by the troops. I mean, contrast this war with WWI, where the soldiers barely knew what they were fighting for. In Spain you'd think that foreigners volunteering there would have no ideas whatsoever about the larger picture, but in this war they do. I guess it speaks for the political commitment and international outlook of the volunteers. Because they were passionate they were knowledgeable.

I was going to write about James Lardner's death and my reaction but I think I will save what I have for next blog post after I've finished the last few documents in the box. I want to sort of close totally on the subject. So I need the totality of the information.

Visit 9

One of the greatest benefits of reading Lardner's letters is coming across lines where he's spot on in his analysis of the world situation. Because he's a writer, he knows how to convey these ideas in an effective way, which he's constantly doing because the main interlocutor out of the folders is his skeptical and reluctant mother.

In one very interesting letter he defends the Soviet Union, but not unconditionally, while taking stabs at the policies of the U.S. Lardner seems to have a more realistic attitude about Russia than we might expect: "there may not be the same kind of freedom of speech as in the United States, but you have to remember that the Russians are carrying through a project which was generally considered impossible when they started." Not only does he present Russia's situation with nuance, he also seems to know enough about the economy and demography of Russia to know that, based on those two subjects, it was one of the least likely of the powerful countries to be able to carry out a Marx-inspired revolution at that time in Europe.

We don't have the letters Mrs. Lardner wrote back but we get an idea of her arguments through reading Lardner's responses. Apparently, Mrs. Lardner tried to make the case that much progress had been made back home. Perhaps this was the view of many in the country. Lardner counters, "As for the progress made in your lifetime in the public attitude toward the exploitation of labor, et al., it seems to me that the simultaneous progress in the number of unemployed makes it look rather empty. Not to mention the number of wars." Here, Larder really cuts into the U.S., making good points about its failures and hypocrisy. Perhaps this disillusionment with their country and its failures to serve them and their loved ones was what drove so many young Americans to become internationalists, concerned not just for their own freedom and well-being, but for that of citizens across the continents.

Again Lardner shows great insight into the international situation as evacuation time draws nearer. He writes to his mother, "Don't pay any attention to the non-intervention committee. There is not chance of Hitler's or Mussolini's withdrawing support from Franco before it is all over..." This was interesting to me because I hasn't thought about whether there actually was a committee for non-intervention and whether they published any of their own news or propaganda. Still, it's clear from this excerpt that whoever spread this news was not to be believed. Maybe there was a lot of false information and false hope circulating at the time.

Towards the very end of one of the correspondence folders, there's this prediction: "It looks as if it would drag on here until some big change in the international situation decides the outcome. Fortunately almost any change would favor us." These lines, to me, are so regrettably sad. One, because they are so true. Two, because they reveal still how much optimism was possessed by the Americans who believed in and fought for this cause. Larder was right. The international situation would decide the outcome. And he was right that almost any change would benefit the Republicans. But there was no change. The war did drag on, and the world watched and said nothing as Franco finally marched into Madrid.

Visit 8

So my new guy has been James Lardner. Last time, I read the second folder in his box and this time I got through at least one more--it may have been two; I forget. I skipped the first one because it pre-dated his enlistment in the war and I wanted to jump into his service in Spain. As of now, I plan to go back to those papers. I think they may be more interesting after I know what happens to him during the war.

I don't know if Lardner ended up writing any literature as a result of his experiences but I'm reading the letters hoping that something shows up. If not, I'm doing the same thing that I would with any other volunteer. And I really like reading Lardner's letters because he's a writer. He's perceptive and intelligent and a lot of the time his analyses match up exactly with what historians have said about the same subjects.

In the letters Lardner says he's become a corporal and commands four men, 3 of whom are Spaniards. This was new for me. Thus far, I haven't come across explicit instances where Americans and Spaniards fight together. I thought the Americans fought with the Americans and the Spaniards with the Spaniards. I know that they fought under command of mixed nationality, but I didn't think the mixing went on below those upper ranks. Lardner did mention the boys were in their teens. Maybe that had to do with it. Maybe they weren't actually soldiers, just boys recruited from the local village?

Something very interesting to read was Lardner's justification of communists and their ideology. Of course the mother's letters are not available but it's clear that much of Lardner's letters are written as a response to arguments his mother puts forth against communism--which is very interesting. Even though her son is risking his life in Spain for a lot of these ideas, the mother doesn't give unconditional support without criticism. Instead, they argue. I've been very interested, since I've started reading these letters, in what the other American opinions were concerning the Spanish Civil War, communism, the Soviet Union, etc. Most of what we've been reading has taken the communist perspective. Therefore, these letters were extremely interesting because, through Lardner's counter-arguments, one can identify the initial objections and learn the opinions of someone holding an opposing view to that which I have been used to reading.

Lardner says: "In the first place"--which is indicative of an argumentative response--"it is not the goal of the Communist Party in any country to establish socialism or communism by violent overthrow of the government" but rather "to win the people over to their way of thinking by peaceful, organizational methods." Lardner recognizes, however, that violence does play a role in the communist struggle and justifies it by pointing out that force is simply the means through which opponents of communism maintain power. Therefore, communists are forced to fight back with force.

I'm unsure whether 1) this is really the official reason for the prominence of violence in communist ideology or at least propaganda or whether 2) this does not match up with official doctrine and is just Lardner's justification to his mother and maybe to himself. It sort of is sophisticated reasoning, however, and I would prefer myself that the first of the two options is the true one.

Lardner quoted negative stereotypes about communists which I thought I should record: "dirty bomb-throwing foreigners etc." Sounds like Bolshevik? What significance does this hold for the history of that time?

Video History

Since I went to stay with a friend for the weekend and was away from the archive, I thought I would bring along with me the complimentary DVD to the Facing Fascism exhibition. I've been wanting to watch it, but I never really sat down to do so until now. Needless to say, I'm very happy now that I've seen it. I guess what struck me about all the testimonies was the degree to which these people were involved in Republican Spain's cause, whether actively, ideologically, or emotionally. It's easy to tell from the interviews that the Spanish Civil War had a great effect on the interviewees' lives, which is really interesting considering these were Americans sympathizing with the problems of one European country.

I admire them for seeing in the Spanish Civil War what no one else at the time did--or at least not the democratic governments--that, complicated though it was, there was something of a dichotomous fight raging in this war between something more desirable for mankind and something that was not. I choose these terms to describe the sides because I don't want to simplify the war down to good vs. evil. No war is ever that simple. But I do mean to say that this war came closest to that description than any I can think of. And that's reflected in the interviewees' testimonies. One of the most poignant segments of the DVD for me was the "When the War Was Over..." segment. There were two interviews placed one after another that were really moving: Irving Schiller's and Amy Swerdlow's. Schiller seemed reach back into his feelings at the time and his words in the video were strong. He pointed to Spain as the place where fascism could have been stemmed. He said Hitler ruined the entire 20th century. It's a grand statement to make, but a quick reflection proved to me that it could be argued. Amy Swerdlow said, "Spain was a pure cause--for me." I think this quote must have summed up what many Republican supporters felt at the time. So Spain had a big effect on those who followed its convulsions. A quote from Abe Asheroff that I particularly loved: "And Spain was the place where I learned that I didn't have to know that I was gonna win in order to fight."

If I may comment on the video in its entirety, something I really liked about it was the tone of the ending, which was set by the interviewees. Vera Schiller said more than once that we're still trying to find a better way to run the world. Ultimately, I thought the video sustained a sense of tragedy that, when it came to the end, lingered. Thinking back on the testimonies, one questions whether we've moved very far since the Spanish Civil War, since that defining moment, where we capitulated.

Visit 7

In the previous visit I had satisfied myself with Archie Brown and was ready to move on. I think I have a good grasp now of the average experience of an American International Brigadier. I guess at this point I should feel lost as to what direction I should take regarding my project, but my natural interests are pointing me towards something to do with art. Because I have experience already with analyzing the art of propaganda, I'm thinking I might want to shy away from that now and focus on either formal visual art or literature. What intrigues me most about the Spanish Civil War is its impact on the people who lived through it. Impact is expressed through art. This is what I'd like to study--how people expressed the myriad of complicated issues and feelings engendered in this war.

Having more or less decided on this general direction, I started looking up names of creative people who were involved in the American volunteer brigades. I ordered a box of Ralph Fasanella's but upon looking through it, I found that the contents were mostly correspondence from later dates, which I was not interested in right then. The finding aid online says there should be more to the collection but I wasn't to figure out whether I had to order a different box number. I ended up just looking at the James Lardner Papers' finding aid and, seeing it contained 1930's correspondence, just ordered that instead.

Lardner was part of a family of writers. I read that he died in Spain. With the confusion over which box to get, I wasn't able to read very much and I plan on picking it up again next time--but I did notice the recurrence of some themes I've been keeping track of in the other letters.

Optimism: [About Valencia] "...and I don't think it will ever be conquered. there are too many people here who are fighting for things they believe in, and too few on the other side."

Scarce resources: "Four days in Barcelona were enough for me to see that there is not much chance of my getting into the artillery just now. There are too many trained men and not enough guns."

The finding aid said that someone (I forget who now) said of Lardner: he was the las to enlist in Spain and he was the last to die. I think this is a very powerful statement about the nature of the war and I hope to come back to it after I've read more from Lardner's papers.

Visit 6

Monday when I went to the archive, I decided to call back the Archie Brown Papers and bring that inquiry to a kind of conclusion. Since I wasn't able to read the full sequence of letters in my last visit, I started at the chronological end of his civil war correspondence and worked backwards. First, I wanted to know when they actually left versus when he knew they would be leaving. Last time the letters that mentioned the Americans' departure were dated in October. This time I found that they actually left sometime after December 22. I don't know whether this has any special significance; whether it indicates anything. I do remember, however, Brown saying that the French government was particularly unhelpful, which he marked as ironic since one would think that the French would want American volunteers out of Spain, since that policy would line up with their policy of non-intervention.

Something that was prominent in Brown's letters was the scarcity of resources--not only military resources but ordinary resources for civilians like food and soap. On October 18th he describes the great new lodging they've been given: "At the present moment I'm living practically in the lap of luxury... [descriptive paragraph]... But you can't get a damn thing to eat." That last line is actually enjambed to a second paragraph for extra stress. These lines reminded me of a paragraph in a previous letter: "Bimbo along with others went out to work the fields. The peasants are elated--there has been such a lack of man power. It's a shame to see the way the countryside is ladened with food and cannot be picked and the cities and the people generally are rationed." This is an issue I hadn't thought about but it makes perfect sense. Men are resources. A country needs them to fight but also to work. When men are trained well but ill-equipped, the casualties are higher than they should be. Thus, the country lost men at too great a rate. The frustrating issue, however, is that this loss was not the Republicans' fault. How could they equip their soldiers without being able to buy weapons?

What continues to surprise me in these letters is the examples of optimism I find. The volunteers can be discouraged, but they cannot be completely disheartened. Brown says, "Well we are finally on our way. We're sorry that we had to leave Spain before the struggle has been settled--but since we can do more good on the outside--it is better to be home working than in the rearguard of Spain waiting." Thus, Brown assumes the fight will continue on and he will continue to fight, if not in Spain, at home.

I think many Americans thought the war would go on longer than it did. That's what I've found in most of the letters I've read, at least. Even in Hemingway's play the main character predicts the war will go on for much longer. I wonder why the Americans felt this way when most Spaniards seemed to know that the end was near.

Visit 5

During my last archive visit, which was last night, I decided to look at the Archie Brown papers. Earlier I had looked through the database online at what photograph collections were available. I saw that Brown had his own photo collection and decided that before I requested it, I should request his personal papers. When I got the box, I started to take out the first folder, but then I changed my mind and looked for a folder full of letters written near the end of the period of American involvement in the International Brigades. I made this decision because the letters I've read from three different men were all written before and during the first months of combat. I couldn't have read their letters towards the end of the involvement because these men did not make it until that time. Therefore, I was curious to look at Brown's later letters.

I wasn't able to finish the folder I choose--I think it was eighteen--but still there were many interesting things in what I did read. The letters I read were written after Archie Brown found out that the American battalions were to be sent home. Throughout the course of those I read, Brown was never able to confirm the official date of departure.

From these letters I wanted to know why the Americans thought they were allowed to go home and whether they were demoralized or hopeful for Spain.

The first bit I came across that addressed this question was a section where Brown was talking about what places he and Ester, his correspondent, would see traveling. He named the U.S., then Mexico, "and perhaps France and the new Spain." This was curious to me. The context made me think that "new Spain" referred to a triumphant Republican Spain. The next line was, "Of course all these things are not in the cards but who can tell." I was unsure whether this referred to a victorious Republican Spain or to the possibility of their traveling. But then he wrote, "Perhaps the democracies will unite against the fascists--perhaps things will get better enough so that we can save enough to travel" and this mostly answered my question.

In the same letter Brown writes: "We were all depressed by the sell-out of Czechoslovakia. But we are becoming madder everyday. We feel that our added influence could lift the Embargo." What was interesting to me about this sentiment was that it was still hopeful. I remember reading in the Helen Graham book that once Britain and France sacrificed Czechoslovakia, the Republicans knew that Non-Intervention would never be lifted; that the cause was just about hopeless then. Therefore it is interesting to me that American Brown still has this persistent optimism: "By now it is pretty evident that the war will go on for another year, unless we end it sooner from our side ... if in the interim (before spring comes) the democracies will raise the embargo, Loyalist victory is assured. I hope Czechoslovakia has been a lesson." Here, Archie Brown's optimism is such that he hopes Czechoslovakia may be a lesson instead of what it was, and what the Spanish knew it was--a sign of doom.

In another later letter Archie Brown says, "The fact is that the Spanish Government and army is militarily strong enough to let us go." When reading, I immediately took this sentence as another example of unrelenting American optimism--until I read the second sentence: "The problem is not lack of men but lack of arms" and realized that Brown was not just uncompromisingly optimistic, but had an accurate analysis of the state of Republican standing in the war. I think these passages are important because they do reveal the American opinion--unless Archie Brown can not be taken as a representative of general opinion, in which case I'll have to read more--but they also show that the Americans had a good idea of the state of the war and understood the factors working against the Republicans.

Visit 4

On my last archive visit, I read a folder of letters Harold Malofsky wrote to Miriam Sigel. I really like reading Malofsky's letters because he covers a lot of subjects in each one. The interesting excerpts I copied down range from reports on the state of the soldiers, to updates on the war in general, to the details of everyday life.

At the front of the folder was a letter written by Harry Fellmen to Mrs. Sigel. I don't know who Harry is in relation to the rest of the cast of this folder but I copied this quote down:

"On a large scale aviation is about the most ineffective of all the death dealing instruments of modern war. It depends more on breaking morale ... But it doesn't break our morale because we have something to look forward to and a strong support based on firm convictions. The broken morale appears on the Fascist side among their soldiers."

I picked this quote out for two reasons. First, I think it calls necessary attention to the unprecedented all-pervasive use of air attacks. Planes compromised a significant bulk of the machine weaponry that Italy and Germany wanted to test out. Second, the writer analyzes the true effect of the planes. To an extent, he's probably correct, for air attacks were used not only against soldiers on the battlefield but against citizens in the cities specifically to break morale. I think this quote is important in the context of WWII where large scale aviation became a major factor in the fighting and the terrorizing. This letter records that it was first seen in Spain.

I finally came across a reference to the anarchist rebellions going on in other parts of the country during the war. Trotsky associates the "God-damn Trotsky menace" with anarchists. He says, "This is the worst type of enemy the people of Spain or anywhere could have. Wherever they are--they are vile poison. Isolate them! They are playing Franco's game. Anybody who tries to break the wonderful unity of the Popular Front here is a member of Franco's fifth column."

One thing I picked up on was Malofsky's diverting to the language of propaganda. I feel like these statements could have been on a Republican poster--although I don't think the Republicans produced propaganda that was negatively aimed at anyone besides the fascists. Not sure, though. Still, Malofsky here is supposed to be writing a letter not a pamphlet.

This excerpt provides a negative view of the revolutionary activities in places such as Aragon, Catalonia, and Barcelona. It would be interesting to read letters from participants in events in those areas to better understand the truth of the situation, but of course there's no information like that at ALBA because the majority of the soldiers were communists and the communist party was at that time aligned with Stalin's politburo and the Social Democratic Republicans. Still, I've focused on this issue because the division between factions on the left was a negative factor on the Republican side that, as far as I've read, was largely absent from the Nationalist side. And here is an example of that same-side aversion.

One thing I noticed was that Harold said the Americans were the best-trained troops in the People's Army. Again, was this true? Were there sources which asserted this? Or is this sentiment just an expression of pride and enthusiasm?

Malofsky's letters are always well-balanced between larger subjects and personal subjects. One letter in particular I found extremely. It was so funny that I didn't even feel guilty or wrong reading such about such personal matters were discussed. Harold talked about the lack of women around and made statements similar to: "In order to touch a girl you have to be married to her." Writing to Miriam, he avoided direct language and therefore was so much more humorous in describing the men's misfortune in Spain. He talked regretfully about the "supplies" that were handed out at the beginning by the doctors and how no one was using them. He said, "Most of the boys, however, are economical , and are using them for tobacco pouches." A new paragraph began with: "The major problem though is how to keep from going 'fruit' altogether. Already the boys are beginning to ogle eyes at each other, and sometimes Ernie frightens me." He ended the subject by saying that, if ever he had to re-sew the buttons onto his underwear, he'd sooner throw them out than have to sit through the ordeal again.

Visit 3

I went to the archive yesterday morning and was able to get through entire box of photographs from the Small Photographic Collections. There were many photos taken after the Spanish Civil War and many of unidentified figures. But still, I was able to see pictures of soldiers on break, soldiers in combat, and portraits of well-known people like Largo Caballergo, Dolores Ibarruri, and Miguel de Unamuno.

A series of photos that I found very interesting and that I would like to find more about each had been named "To Die in Madrid" Publicity Photo. This series showed different well-known people as well as soldiers in action. I took snapshots of them with my webcam on my macbook. These photos were the most interesting in the folder, in my opinion. I wish I knew their purpose.

One thing I noticed in a lot of the pictures is the presence of women. At a time when Italy and Germany were trying to turn back the clock on women and force them back into traditional gender roles separate fro

m men, women in Republican Spain were always present among the men, helping actively in whatever way they could.

Another thing I noticed in the photos was how many shots were taken of veterans going back to Spain. The images convey a mix of wonder and solemnity. They show the great extent to which the Spanish Civil War must have impacted the veterans' lives.

I looked at two photos from a "Veteran's Return" in NYC. I wonder how much Americans knew about the Spanish Civil War and to what extent the veterans were honored upon their return.

Although some of the photos were very interesting I still felt lost most of the time because I didn't know the significance of a lot of what I was looking at. But maybe the significance of everything was mixed.

Visit 2

Last class we talked about our approach to each of our blogs. I think my approach is going to be very honest. I really like the subject that we're studying and I often feel emotionally moved by what I read. I don't think that emotions are inappropriate reactions to record. Therefore, I will record them.

I really have to get into the library for a more substantial amount of time. I realize it takes me about an hour to get through one folder of one collection, as was the case today. I went back to the Miriam Sigel Friedman papers because I hadn't read anything written by Harold Malofsky. I really enjoyed his letters because they were long and he wrote about his personal experiences on and off the front.

There were a couple strands of things I noticed that I wanted to write about. Malofsky personified the fascists as "the muddy, traitorous hands of a dictator, a banker, and a fat priest." I picked this out specifically because the description matches up remarkably with some of the Republican propaganda of the war. Particularly, the "Los Nacionales" and "El Generalísimo" posters come to mind. It made me wonder whether this identification of the enemy was a common one or whether the Spanish propaganda had significant influence in drawing this portrait and impressing it upon its viewers.

One thing I found that I was really happy about was a quote I had read before in one of the course books. Malofsky wrote: "And it's ironic. A communist for years, I now find myself fighting to make the world safe for democracy." It was just really exciting to have read that line before but then held in my hand the letter from which it came. I think it's also a brilliant line. One thing that's interesting about the letters I've read so far are that they are all pretty well written and come from intelligent, thoughtful people.

Something else concerning propaganda--Malofsky said that at one point on the battlefield, "Junker plans" began to drop leaflets from the sky. Comparing the leaflet to those he had handed out on street corners for years, he called it "a very stupid manifesto" quoting it: "'Bilbao finally belongs to Spain. Viva the dead Mola! Viva Franco! Viva Spain! Join our ranks and surrender.' This was supposed to convert us, the jerks." I just thought it was funny the way he seems so disgusted by the fascists' attempt to persuade and propagandize. Probably because, for one, to him it would be unthinkable to cross over, but perhaps he was also laughing at their ignorance of quality political propaganda, something in which the communists were very experienced.

Following up on an issue I addressed last post--the issue of the accuracy of strategic information and Republican standing in the war--Malofsky wrote that the "Daily Worker" published some statistics and that he read it regularly to inform himself of the war's progress. I thought perhaps this was one of the primary ways soldiers received information, which made me wonder whether the published statistics were accurate. I wondered in general how truthful was the information the battalions received and how far off was their conception of their side's standing in the war.

One last thing I noticed in Malofsky's letters that was the same for Sigel and Arion was the undeniable optimism and dedication to the cause of Spain and fighting fascism. As I read more, I think I will find this optimism is pervasive throughout soldiers' letters--which is really actually very sad. Malofsky wrote, "Nothing can stop the Spanish people from their important historic task. I only hope I live to come back and tell the story." He would be disappointed on both counts. As I was reading a letter written on August 29th, 1937, I reached for the finding guide because I knew that Harold did not come back from the war. Turns out, he would be dead a week after he penned the letter I held.

Visit 1

Today I took my first independent visit to the Abraham Lincoln Brigade Archives. Our professor had already provided us with some suggestions of collections to look at. I chose to look at the Miriam Sigel Friedlander Papers. I had about an hour and a half to sift through the material, but I'm embarrassed to say that I only read through one a half folders out of the fifteen in the collection. Part of the drain on the time resulted from filing out paperwork and being new to the Archives. The other part was puzzling out some of the handwriting, which got easier with more practice.

The Miriam Sigel Friedlander collection contained mostly letters written from three Lincoln Brigadiers to one Miriam Sigel (later Miriam Friedlander) but sometimes other correspondents were included, as was the case with Mrs. Sigel, Paul and Miriam Sigel's mother. The three soldiers who wrote to Miriam were her brother Paul and their mutual friends Ernest Arion and Harold Malofsky. All three died serving in Spain.

I read through Folder 1 which consisted entirely of Ernest Arion's postcards and letters to Miriam, whom he addressed as Mim, if I read the handwriting correctly. What I found most interesting in his letters was his confident optimism about the American battalions and the Republic's standing in the war.

Date April 28, 1937, Ernest Arion wrote:

"As you have probably read by now, the fascists are on the run. Our forces are improving in organization and as our army grows the fascist army becomes more and more demoralized."

And April 30:

"Militarily, we are the best-trained battalion in Spain today. And as we progress in our daily training we see the development of a free people's army here in Spain."

I picked out these lines because I assumed they exemplify some of the feelings and beliefs of many Americans serving in Spain at this time. Optimism is evident here, as well as a hint of revolutionary hopefulness. At the same time, I questioned the truth of his statements. Were the fascists really "on the run" at that time? And I thought I had read that the Americans were the least-prepared participants of the the International Brigades. Then if I remembered correctly, the Americans could not be considered the "best-trained battalion in Spain." These discrepancies made me wonder whether these statements could have been true or whether Ernest Arion was just trying to comfort Miriam, and perhaps himself. Or perhaps this is what the soldiers were told by their leaders. It will take further investigation of different sources for me to understand more clearly.

One thing that I found intriguing were some of the closing remarks of Ernest's letters. He would say things similar to: "I miss you Miriam. I'm surprised to find myself thinking of you and missing you more than I expected." I just sort of liked that.

After reading Ernest Arion's folder, I specifically wanted to find Paul Sigel's folder, because I thought that the familial relationship might result in a different type of letter. The letters were very different from Arion's, but it may just have been due to Paul's character and not so much because of their brother-sister relationship. Either way, Paul expressed the same sort of optimism and faith in his political convictions as Ernest. One letter featured a beautiful-written but politically charged account of what seemed to be an equally beautiful night in Paris. One night there was an "Exposition" in the "plaza" where buildings were being lit and people were saying, "Ahhhh." Paul Sigel wrote that when the German building was lit, the crowd reacted with, "Boooooooo etc. However, when the Soviet exhibit was illuminated, the feeling was so strange that there was spontaneous clapping and cheering." As one can tell from this excerpt, both Paul and the Parisians in the plaza felt a sort of reverence for the Soviet Union. I think the strength of that awe is best understood by considering Sigel's language. The moment was important enough for him that the language he uses to describe the scene is actually rather poetic. I noticed he used "lit up" to describe the lighting of the German building while he used "illuminated" to describe that of the Soviets. The consonance of s's and then c's seems to mimic the situation described. I really feel as though Paul Sigel purposely took time to match the quality of his writing to the importance of the experience. Or maybe he just had a flair for writing.

Launch

Just to have a first entry--this blog has been created to record my reflections on visits to the ABLA archive at NYU's Tamiment Library.