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.