Viewing page 6 of 13

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

2

I have talked to innumerable people connected with advertising, newspapers, magazines and industrial concerns, all of whom agree that the show would be of great interest and would have possibly the greatest and most widespread publicity campaign back of it that any art show has ever had. On this point alone we can, of course, take their judgment as a competent judgment, since their lives are tied up with publicity and since their businesses in all cases are the life blood of the publishing business in the form of advertising.

However, knowing that your main interest in the show would not be from a publicity standpoint but from a quality standpoint, I have been at a loss to know just how to go about getting you an answer to that problem from the people who could do most to convince you of the quality involved. I did not feel that I had the right to ask the leading art critics to express an opinion in advance on a show that was to be held at a specific gallery. But I found the solution to this problem and sent a newspaper woman to interview Edward Alden Jewell, the critic of the [[underlined]] New York Times [[/underlined]]. I have before me her interview, which contains quotations from what he had to say to her about such a show. He was not told, nor does he know, that it was intended for the Seligmann Gallery.

Interview with Edward Alden Jewell, Critic, [[underlined]] New York Times [[/underlined]]

"To be a good advertising artist a man must be first of all an artist. It is difficult to differentiate between advertising art and fine art. We have passed the point where a hard and fast decision can be made. There is a mid-Victorian aura around the word Fine Art, but I suppose we must make some distinction. Undoubtedly men who have become masters of their craft in the commercial field are capable of producing fine art. From the few opportunities I have had to see their painting, I can say that many of them are better technicians than some easel painters are. I recognize the distinctly individual styles that have been developed by the best of the advertising artists, but I cannot identify the artists because they seldom sign their work.

"The ^[[pencil underlined]] idea has fine possibilities [[/pencil underlined]] and ^[[pencil underlined]] there is no reason why a gallery of the highest standing should not undertake such a show. [[/pencil underlined]] If there is anything I can do to help, any suggestions I can make, don't hesitate to ask me."

This concludes Mr. Jewell's remarks. At the bottom of them there is a note from the newspaper woman which reads: "How about a jury for the show beginning with Jewell?" If I had not been able to get this interview with Jewell I should have gone down the line and tried some of the other critics, but I felt that if the dean of the art critics agreed with the leading advertising men on the advisability and possible artistic merit of such a show, that we need not delve further into the art critics' opinions. Mr. Jewell also suggested the name of Rockwell Kent.