Until reading Barbara Kingsolver’s fictional novel La Lacuna, I would never have envisioned Russian revolutionary Leon Trotsky, French surrealist author André Breton, and Mexican muralist and painter Diego Rivera as part of the same squad. Their commitment to Marxism drew these three extraordinary men together and, for a brief period, made them close collaborators. In 1938, they established The International Federation of Independent Revolutionary Art (F.I.A.R.I.). This short-lived organization was intended to push back against what its founders viewed as a growing worldwide trend toward state and bureaucratic control over art and literature.
Kingsolver’s novel touches on the melodramatic aspects of the trilateral friendship but I wanted to learn more about the circumstances and beliefs that brought these men together. While browsing the web, I found an interesting letter that Trotsky sent to Breton shortly after publishing the manifesto that launched the F.I.A.R.I. It contains some ideas that I think are worth reflecting upon.
Pernicious and Prevalent Misconceptions
These days, the term Marxism has been weaponized by right-wing politicians, but few people know much about it. Case in point: a man-on-the-street interview that I saw about a month ago. The person was asked if he supported Marxism. Definitely not, came the reply. He was then asked if he could explain what it is. He said that Marxism is when you point a finger at someone before knowing the person and place a label on him. You’re marking the person before you have any information.
That is a comically extreme example of ignorance but still, Americans in general have little understanding of Marxist philosophy. Like all political ideologies, Marxism has weaknesses but most of us would agree on some of its tenets. Tenets such as: workers are often exploited and have a right to fair compensation; or, the state of the economy greatly affects a society’s well-being; or, extreme wealth disparities provoke social unrest; or, government should provide free and high-quality education to all children; or (Marx’s admission that), free markets drive technological innovation.
While Trotsky, Breton, and Rivera had their differences, their fundamental belief in the importance of art in the face of political oppression is worth pondering. Below, you’ll find Trotsky’s letter to Breton in the original French alongside my translation.
Letter from Leon Trotsky to André Breton
Mon cher Breton,
J’approuve de tout cœur l’initiative que vous avez prise avec Diego Rivera de créer la F.I.A.R.I., fédération internationale d’artistes authentiquement révolutionnaires et indépendants, et pourquoi ne pas ajouter : une fédération d’authentiques artistes. Il est temps, il est grand temps ! Le globe terrestre devient une caserne impérialiste boueuse et fétide. Les héros de la démocratie, avec à leur tête l’incomparable Daladier, mettent toute leur énergie à ressembler aux héros du fascisme (ce qui n’empêche pas les premiers de se retrouver en camp de concentration chez les seconds). Plus un dictateur est ignare et borné, plus il se sent appelé à régenter l’évolution de la science, de la philosophie et de l’art. La servilité moutonnière du monde intellectuel est également très significative de l’état de pourrissement de la société contemporaine. La France ne fait pas exception.
My Dear Breton,
I wholeheartedly agree with the initiative that you and Diego Rivera have undertaken to create the F.I.A.R.I., international federation of artists authentically revolutionary and independent, and why not add: a federation of authentic artists. It is time, it is high time! The globe is turning into a rank and mud-strewn barracks. [Fascism was on the rise in Europe, Stalin’s totalitarian grip on the Soviet Union was unprecedented.] The heroes of democracy, with the unmatched Daladier1 at their head, are putting all of their energy into behaving like heroes of fascism (which doesn’t prevent the former group from winding up in the concentration camps of the latter group). The more a dictator is ignorant and narrow-minded, the more he feels destined to govern the evolution of science, philosophy, and art. The sheep-like servility of the intellectual world is equally very indicative of contemporary society’s state of decay. France is no exception.
[In the second paragraph, Trotsky talks about what he views as the regrettable corruption of men he once respected. He names the Nobel Prize winner, Romain Rolland, who ultimately became a supporter of the Soviet Union, and the prominent author André Malraux, who slowly evolved from staunch leftist to supporter of Charles de Gaulle.]
Pendant la guerre civile, j’ai dû mener un combat acharné contre les rapports d’opérations inexacts ou mensongers, dans lesquels des chefs s’efforçaient de dissimuler leurs erreurs, leurs échecs, et leurs défaites derrière un torrent de phrases générales. La production actuelle de Malraux est, elle aussi, faite de rapports mensongers sur les champs de bataille (Allemagne, Espagne). Le faux est néanmoins bien plus repoussant lorsqu’il se pare d’une forme artistique. Le destin de Malraux est symbolique pour toute une couche d’écrivains, presque pour toute une génération : les gens mentent en raison de leur ” amitié ” fictive envers la Révolution d’Octobre. Comme si la révolution avait besoin de mensonges !
During [Russia’s] civil war, I was forced to lead a relentless battle against inaccurate or false operational reports, in which leaders endeavored to hide their errors, their failures, and their defeats behind a torrent of generalizations. Malraux’s current output is also based on false reports from the battlefields (of Germany and Spain). Nevertheless, falsehood is even more repulsive when draped in artistry. Malraux’s fate is symbolic of an entire stratum of writers, almost of an entire generation: people lie because of their bogus “goodwill” toward the October Revolution. As if the revolution needed lies [to succeed]!
L’infortunée presse soviétique, évidemment sur ordre venu d’en haut, se lamente avec force ces derniers jours sur la ” pauvreté ” de la création scientifique et artistique en U.R.S.S. et reproche aux écrivains soviétiques leur manque de sincérité, d’audace, et d’envergure. On n’en croit pas ses yeux : le boa faisant au lapin un sermon sur l’indépendance et la dignité individuelles. Tableau absurde et ignominieux, et cependant bien digne de notre époque !
The unlucky Soviet press, obviously under orders from above, recently complained loudly about the “inadequacy” of scientific and artistic creation in the U.S.S.R and reproached soviet authors for their lack of sincerity, audacity, and scope. One can’t believe their eyes: the boa giving the rabbit a sermon on individual independence and dignity. It’s an absurd and shameful picture, and yet well worthy of our age!
Le combat pour les idées de la révolution en art doit reprendre, en commençant par le combat pour la vérité artistique, non pas comme l’entend telle ou telle école, mais dans le sens de la fidélité inébranlable de l’artiste à son moi intérieur. Sans cela, il n’y a pas d’art. ” Ne mens pas ! “, c’est la formule du salut. La F.I.A.R.I. n’est pas, bien sûr, une école esthétique ou politique et ne peut le devenir. Mais la F.I.A.R.I. peut ozoniser l’atmosphère dans laquelle les artistes ont à respirer et à créer.
En effet, à notre époque de convulsions et de réaction, de décadence culturelle et de barbarie morale, la création indépendante ne peut qu’être révolutionnaire dans son esprit, car elle ne peut que chercher une issue à l’insupportable étouffement social. Mais il faut que l’art en général, comme chaque artiste en particulier, cherche une issue par ses propres méthodes, sans attendre des ordres de l’extérieur, en refusant les ordres, et qu’il méprise tous ceux qui s’y soumettent. Faire naître cette conviction commune parmi les meilleurs artistes, voilà la tâche de la F.I.A.R.I. Je crois fermement que ce nom passera dans l’Histoire.
The fight for revolutionary ideas in art must be resumed, starting with the fight for artistic truth, not as one school of thought or another sees it, but in the sense of the artist’s unshakable fidelity to his inner self. Without this, art doesn’t exist. “Do not lie!”, is the key to salvation. The F.I.A.R.I. is certainly not an aesthetic or political school and cannot become one. But the F.I.A.R.I. can oxygenate the atmosphere in which artists breathe and create.
Indeed, in our era of upheaval and reaction, of cultural decadence and moral barbarity, independent creation must be revolutionary by nature, because it must search for a way out of unbearable social suffocation. It’s necessary for art as a whole, and each artist in particular, to seek a path using his own methods, without waiting for outside orders, but rejecting such orders and scorning all who submit to them. Bringing about this commonly held conviction among the greatest artists, this is the task of the F.I.A.R.I. I firmly believe its name will go down in history.
Truth be Told
Trotsky’s letter contains several declarations that feel uncomfortably familiar, like “leaders endeavored to hide their errors, their failures, and their defeats behind a torrent of generalizations” or “One can’t believe their eyes: the boa giving the rabbit a sermon on individual independence and dignity.” Today’s news cycle is overflowing with “upheaval and reaction”. But what about the role of art in exposing and disrupting tyranny and injustice? Alas, the F.I.A.R.I. was short-lived. The creative minds that founded it were less skilled when it came to organizing.
Yet, I appreciate their cause and am grateful for the powerful works of creators such as street artist Banksy, contemporary artist Ai Weiwei, authors Ocean Vuong and Yasmina Khadra, and photographer JR. Freedom of expression, artistic or otherwise, is vital to a healthy society. And I agree wholeheartedly with Trotsky’s insistence that the most impactful creations are those that spring from the artist’s “unshakeable fidelity to his inner self”. What do you think?
- Edouard Daladier was a French World War I hero turned politician. He served as Prime Minister of France several times and in 1933 granted asylum to Trotsky who was exiled from Russia and living in fear of Stalin’s assassins. In the lead up to World War II, Daladier helped form the Popular Front which united leftwing parties to counter the rise of fascism. Initially, Daladier hoped to avoid war with Germany through appeasement. But later, again as Prime Minister of France, Daladier declared war on Germany in September 1939—after Trotsky’s letter to Breton. When France was defeated in 1940, Daladier was tried for treason and imprisoned in Germany until the end of the war.
Sadly, and obviously, jerks like Putin and Trump would sneer at the points made in your essay.
Yup, and many of their followers would agree with the sentiments expressed here without realizing that the strongmen they support do not. Thanks for stopping by.
It is indeed pathetic that some people condemn Marxism without knowing anything at all about Groucho’s actual philosophy.
Today’s wingnuts use “Marxist” as a catch-all label for anything they don’t like, much the same way the dregs of the left use “fascist” and “racist”. The literal meaning of the word no longer matters. Some who are dimly aware that Marxism is basically an economic ideology have coined the expression “cultural Marxism” to apply to clearly non-economic phenomena they don’t like, such as tolerance of homosexuality.
As to actual Marxism, I can’t think of a single government explicitly based on Marx’s ideology that did not almost immediately turn into a totalitarian nightmare and stay that way. Socialism has worked as an integral part of democracy in western Europe, but only in pragmatic forms that exclude Marx’s specific ideas such as the dictatorship of the proletariat and the necessity for violent revolution.
Trotsky’s picture of “the sheep-like servility of the intellectual world” and the willingness of “an entire stratum of writers” to lie and prevaricate due to their sympathy for the totalitarian Soviet state, is difficult to judge without knowing more about the cultural landscape of the time. However, my thoughts immediately went to Orwell. If FIARI was founded in 1938 and this letter mentions it, it must have been at least that late, so at least several months after Orwell emerged as a staunch opponent of the Stalin regime.
Trotsky was certainly right that, under conditions of explicit repression, “independent creation must be revolutionary by nature, because it must search for a way out of unbearable social suffocation. It’s necessary for art as a whole, and each artist in particular, to seek a path using his own methods, without waiting for outside orders, but rejecting such orders and scorning all who submit to them.” Art cannot thrive under political control or cultural conformism, but neither can it thrive under the guidance of “leaders” of whatever stripe, including “revolutionary” ones.
One does wonder whether Trotsky would have cleaved to these views if history had turned out differently. There’s an old saying that a Trotskyite is a person who believes that, if Trotsky had been in power, he would have killed slightly fewer people than Stalin did.
Since the French declaration of war on Germany in 1939 is mentioned, some context might be helpful. The previous policy of appeasement consisted of doing nothing about Hitler’s annexation of Austria, and then (in collaboration with Britain) backstabbing Czechoslovakia by forcing it to hand over the Sudetenland to Germany, rendering Czechoslovakia geographically defenseless in exchange for empty promises from Hitler. When Hitler invaded and conquered the rest of Czechoslovakia a few months later, it was obvious that he could not be trusted and appeasement was a failure. Britain and France issued an ultimatum that they would declare war if Hitler invaded Poland, his obvious next target. Hitler ignored the ultimatum and invaded anyway, and Britain and France kept their word and declared war. If Daladier finally did the right thing, it was after missing obvious earlier opportunities to stop Hitler with far less bloodshed than ultimately turned out to be necessary in fact.
I note that your translation excludes the sentence La France ne fait pas exception at the end of the first paragraph? Trotsky seems to have been focusing mainly on France anyway, but the observation seems somewhat significant.
Ha! Those marxists are everywhere one looks!
I could not track down the date when Trotsky wrote his letter but it had to have been right around the time that Daladier joined the United Kingdom and Italy in signing the Munich Agreement with Germany. I assume that this is what caused Trotsky to lose respect for a leader he had once admired. That agreement, as you probably know, ceded the Sudetenland to Germany. Trotsky probably believed that this was a fatal mistake, even though Germany had not yet invaded Belgium and France.
We now know what happened to Daladier once France came under German occupation: an exact enactment of Trotsky’s prediction when he wrote “which doesn’t prevent the former group from winding up in the concentration camps of the latter group.”
Oops! I simply overlooked that ending phrase which is indeed important. I owe you lunch! 🙂
Beautiful mural!
I think so too. It adorns the north wall of a large courtyard that is entirely covered with Rivera’s murals. One of Detroit’s hidden gems.
A timely and illuminating essay, Carol, and a reminder that artistic freedom must be protected and celebrated—along with all other freedoms. I must admit I haven’t heard “Marxist” used much in recent years, and under Trump, et al, we get a jumble of attacks on “isms,” with a targeted individual being labeled a “communist liberal fascist socialist.”
For decades, the Leonard Leo contingent, now ensconced in the federal government, has spoken of the “degradation of American culture” writ large, and Trump’s takeover of the Kennedy Center and his sending some right-wing actors to be his eyes and ears in Hollywood are unsettling. Interesting to note that when Vance visited the Kennedy Center last night, the presumably dignified audience resoundingly booed him.
I’ve only vaguely heard of a “Tramp” takeover of the Kennedy Center? Too much to follow these days… As for booing brown-nose Vance, that’s nice. Maybe they should bring some tomatoes next time?
(Sorry, Carol, for ranting on your blog. Annie’s comment was very welcome. And I am so mad, ultimately…)
Y’all take good care in America… Dark times are upon us.
Those are good observations Annie. Someone should do a comparison between rhetoric in the run up to McCarthy’s Red Scare campaign and the accusations that are being thrown about today.
‘Tis true, but the opposition is mounting. Thank you for your kind words!
Merci, Carol. C’est très pertinent à notre époque.
Malheureusement, tu as raison Kathy.