EXPERIMENT: a Manifesto of Young England, 1928-1931 Two Volumes

EXPERIMENT: A Manifesto of Young England, 1928-1931 Two Volumes Vol. 1 of 2 Kirstin L. Donaldson PhD University of York History of Art September 2014 Abstract This thesis examines the little magazine Experiment, published in Cambridge between 1928 and 1931. It represents the first book-length study of Experiment; and therefore offers a deeper level of engagement with the magazine’s social and historical context, its influences, and crucially, its contents. The appearance of Experiment coincided with the tenth anniversary celebrations of Armistice Day; an event which I argue was a catalyst for the formation of a new generation of artists and writers. The First World War created a rupture in society: the myth of the “lost generation” weighed heavily on those who were left behind. The Experiment group had lived through the War; however, their childhood experiences were far-removed from those of frontline soldiers. The Experimenters’ self-identification with the term “postwar” recognised the importance of the War to their sense of identity while simultaneously acknowledging their temporal separation from that moment. This thesis demonstrates how the Experiment group’s conception of themselves as a generation was constructed around their relationship to the First World War. It will be shown that they embraced their temporal distinctiveness while nonetheless attempting to situate themselves within established historical narratives. This is evidenced in the group’s appropriation and subversion of traditional avant-garde methods, for example the production of a magazine and manifesto. However, the Experiment group never explicitly adopted the term “avant-garde”: it will be shown that their preference for the descriptor “experimental” was motivated by their desire to distinguish themselves from the past, by the scientism of Cambridge, and also by the contemporary perception of avant-gardism as “decadent.” The artistic and literary experiments produced by the Cambridge group display an emphasis on “process” over “results.” I argue that this was a result of the contemporary social and political situation in the late Twenties and early Thirties. These years were marked by unprecedented social and political upheaval: the Experiment group were conscious both of the importance of their epoch and its ephemerality, and sought to capture this impression in their art and literature. These dual conditions of permanence and impermanence are inherent in the nature of the little magazine itself. It has been argued that such publications are necessarily incomplete: that they are “only historically legible at the point of their obsolescence.” This thesis argues that in its quest to capture the essence of the period 1928-1931, the Experiment project was doomed: the success of such a venture can only be judged in retrospect. In this regard, Experiment represents the quintessential little magazine. Ultimately, what this thesis provides is a pre-history to the canon of scholarship that addresses the artistic and literary movements of the nineteen-thirties. Previous studies have marked out 1930 as the critical year in the development of the Thirties generation. Members of the Experiment group went on to achieve considerable success beyond Cambridge, influencing the diverse fields of art, criticism, film, literature, and science. This thesis argues that the process of becoming a coherent and active literary and artistic generation was in fact begun in 1928. That process was Experiment. 2 Table of Contents Abstract 2 List of Illustrations 4 Acknowledgements 5 Declaration 6 Introduction 7 Chapter One: Experiment Made Manifest 37 Chapter Two: The Nature of the Experiment 79 Chapter Three: The Cinematic Idiom 124 Chapter Four: ‘Experiment is Changed’ 164 Towards a Conclusion: At The Point of No Return The Ship Sails On 204 Abbreviations 229 Bibliography 230 Published Primary Sources 231 Published Secondary Sources 232 Illustrations 244 3 List of Illustrations Fig. 1.1 Misha Black, ‘Experiment’, cover design, card, 1928. Fig. 1.2 Wyndham Lewis, ‘Blast’, cover design, card, 1914. Fig. 2.1 Max Ernst, Pietà or Revolution by Night, 1923, Oil on Canvas, 1162 x 889 mm, Tate Collection, London. Fig. 2.2 Henri Cartier-Bresson, Portrait, 1929, medium unknown, dimensions unknown, lost. Published in Experiment, No.2, (February 1929). Fig. 2.3 Henri Cartier-Bresson, Composition, 1929, medium unknown, dimensions unknown, lost. Published in Experiment, No.2, (February 1929). Fig. 2.4 Joan Miró, The Birth of the World, 1925, Oil on canvas, 250.8 x 200 cm, MOMA Collection, New York Fig. 2.5 Max Ernst, Men Shall Know Nothing Of This, 1923, Oil on Canvas, 803 x 638mm, Tate Collection, London. Fig. 2.6 Apollinaire, ‘Tour Eiffel’ in Calligrammes: poèmes de la paix et de la guerre 1913-1916, 1918. Fig. 2.7 Man Ray, L’Etoile de mer, 1928, 35mm film, 15mins, black and white, silent. Fig. 2.8 Man Ray, L’Etoile de mer, 1928, 35mm film, 15mins, black and white, silent. Published in Experiment, No.3, May 1929. Fig. 3.1 Advertisement for the Cambridge Film Guild. Published in Experiment, No.4, November 1929. Fig. 3.2 Advertisement for POOL and Close Up. Published in transition, No.4, July 1927. Fig. 3.3 Eugène Deslaw, The March of the Machines, 35mm film, 5mins, black and white, silent. Published in Experiment, No.3, May 1929. Fig. 3.4 Sergei Eisenstein, Battleship Potemkin, 1925, 35mm film, 75mins, black and white, silent. Published in Experiment, No.3, May 1929. Fig. 3.5 Page Layout featuring Eugène Deslaw, The March of the Machines and Sergei Eisenstein, Battleship Potemkin, in Experiment, No.3, May 1929. Fig. 3.6 Page Layout featuring Man Ray, L’Etoile de mer. Published in Experiment, No.3, May 1929. Fig. 3.7 Francis Bruguière, The Way, 1925, 35mm film, black and white, silent, unfinished, lost. Published in Experiment, No.3, May 1929. 4 Acknowledgements Initial thanks must go to the Arts and Humanities Research Council whose funding made this study possible – and to the University of York, for providing an intellectually stimulating research environment in which to carry it out. This project has benefitted enormously from the guidance of my supervisor Michael White. There have been times when I have thought that Michael better understood what I was trying to say than I did myself; and his support and unwavering patience have been essential in bringing this thesis to completion. Thank you! Thanks must also be extended to the members of my thesis advisory panel: Lawrence Rainey and, in the early stages, Sarah Turner. The writing in this thesis has been improved immeasurably owing to Lawrence’s keen eye for grammar and style. And his wealth of knowledge of Modernism has encouraged me to think laterally about the problems posed by the thesis. Although Sarah’s involvement with the project was in its very early stages, I found myself returning to her critical annotations at the very end. I hope that the finished product has answered the questions she posed. This project would not have been possible without the cooperation of various departments and colleges of the University of Cambridge. Particularly, I would like to thank the staff at the Munby Rare Books Room at the University Library for providing me with access to primary sources and permission to reproduce them. The University Archives, Pembroke College, St John’s College, and Trinity College have all provided me with access to their archives which has provided invaluable insight into the background of this study. I would like to thank the PhD cohort at the University of York which has been the most amazing friendship group and support-network over the past four years: Jasmine Allen, Claire Jones, Stephanie Lambert, Eoin Martin, Sam Shaw, Catherine Spencer, Robert Sutton, Sean Willcock, and Gabriel Williams. I am incredibly grateful for the support and encouragement I have received from my Mum and Dad, not just over the past four years, but always. Thanks are also due to my brothers, Alastair and Ross, who have made it their mission to keep me grounded. I would also like to extend my appreciation to my Aunt Maureen who first introduced me to modern art, and who has encouraged me every step of the way. To Barbara and David: you are the best proof-readers in the business, and have improved this work enormously. Finally, thanks to Dan – for everything. I couldn’t have done it without you. 5 Declaration I declare that all of the research presented in this thesis is my own work. I also declare that none of the material in this thesis has previously been published in its current form. This work has not previously been presented for an award at this, or any other, University 6 EXPERIMENT: A Manifesto of Young England, 1928-1931 INTRODUCTION In November 1928 a new student magazine appeared in Cambridge: that magazine was Experiment. It was the product of a coterie of Cambridge undergraduates – a self-appointed “local intelligentsia”1 – that sought to provide a forum for their own literary and artistic endeavours as well as those of “likeminded individuals.”2 The editorial committee of Experiment was comprised of mathematician, poet, and emerging critic William Empson (Magdalene College), mathematician Jacob Bronowski (Jesus College), Labour peer Viscount Ennismore, known simply as William Hare (Magdalene College), classics student Hugh Sykes Davies (St John’s College), and English student and aspiring artist Humphrey Jennings (Pembroke College). The timing of the appearance of Experiment in Cambridge is critical to our understanding of the magazine and its importance in the history of twentieth- century Art and Letters: it marks the precise moment at which a new generation of artists and writers united in a collective endeavour to creatively express their shared experience of contemporary culture. The first proof copies of Experiment were released to Cambridge local presses on 10th November 1928 before formal publication on the 12th.3 The timing of the magazine’s release to coincide with the 10th anniversary of Armistice Day is significant.

Load more