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.