The Writing Artists of the Magazine Kroniek van Kunst en Kultuur (Chronicle of Art and Culture) in the Period 1935-1941

Hestia Bavelaar

Due to its broad approach the Dutch cultural magazine, Kroniek van Hedendaagsche Kunst en Kultuur can be justly called a mirror of the time. The magazine’s repeatedly proclaimed goal to give an objective section of artistic expressions that are seen as valuable for the own time reinforces the appropriateness of this name. Although the KKK-signature was not utopian and also not avantgarde, it gives a more adequate and factual image of the road most Dutch artists travelled in that time than the avant-garde magazines had done. One of the direct incentives for the foundation of the KKK was the authoritarian art policy of Nazi-, where artistic freedom was severely curtailed. Looking for the right attitude, the KKK-artist chose alternately for individualism or social and political engagement, between (cultural)-pessimism and confidence in a better future. Emphasis will be put on articles about the fine arts, because these form the largest part within the magazine. By sketching the artistic face of the KKK in the thirties justice will be done to the complexity of the Dutch art in this period. Long time art of the thirties in Holland is identified with Magical Realism and Neo-Realism and a large number of other artistic trends and views are ignored. An analysis of the KKK sheds light upon the attitude of a large group of Dutch artists toward the avant-garde, retour à l’ordre, the decline of culture and the purpose of the artist in society.

Since the mid-twenties one can speak in the Western countries of a cultural transition. This is characterized by scepticism towards the avant-garde movements of the two preceding decades and the search for a synthesis of traditional and contemporary values. The cultural transition became manifest in the rehabilitation of traditional artistic notions that had been denied by , such as mimesis, the importance of handicraft, the classical genres and academic rules. Especially artists who can be called the pioneers of such revolutionary experiments as , and rediscovered the tradition. These artists include , George Braque, André Dérain, Fernand Léger, and Carlo Carrà.1 In the thirties the young generation overtly preferred figurative art that was based on traditional principles. By then, experimental and abstract art had left 338 Hestia Bavelaar their heydays. Internationally a large range of neo-realist tendencies came to the fore, among which were (Neue Sachlichkeit) (Georg Grosz, Otto Dix, ) in Germany, Magical Realism (Magisch Realisme) (Carel Willink, Pyke Koch, Raoul Hynckes) and Neo-Realism (Charley Toorop, Dick Ket) in Holland and the trompe-l’oeil-approach of (Salvador Dalì, René Magritte, Paul Delvaux) in France. The reorientation on the tradition was seen as a contemporary form of classicism. This tendency did not restrict itself to , for it can also be found in the architecture of the international style, in classicist sculpture and in neo-baroque music. Jean Cocteau’s frequently cited book, Rappel à l’ordre, 1926, greatly influenced the mentalities of a number of Dutch artists in the twenties and especially the thirties. It is important to note that the opposition to the previous period was not as radical in Holland as it was in France, Germany and, to a lesser extent, Belgium. Of course, Holland also had several important modern artists,2 but in the Dutch context it is not possible to identify clearly defined movements, such as Fauvism, Futurism, Cubism, and . An exception lies with the explicit avant-garde mentality of De Stijl. It was mainly due to the active participation of , who combined the Neo-plasticism of Mondrian and later his own Elementarism with futurist and dada features, that the Dutch art world, which was known for its indolence, was given a dynamic and innovative impulse. In June, 1935, the first number of the general cultural magazine, Kroniek van Hedendaagsche Kunst en Kultuur (Chronicle of Contemporary Art and Culture) – from now on called KKK – appeared in Holland. This happened to be precisely the time that both artistic and political life were in an idealistic vacuum. The editors of the KKK consisted of the sculptor and writer, Leo Braat, the painters, Jan Wiegers and Matthieu Wiegman, the writer, Edouard de Nève, the architect, Sybold van Ravesteyn and the journalist, Henri Wiessing (fig. 1). The plastic artists all lived on Amsterdam’s Zomerdijkstraat, in the functionalist studio-building that was completed in 1934, known as the “Amsterdamse Montparnasse”. One of the direct incentives for the foundation of the KKK was the authoritarian art policy of Nazi- Germany, where artistic freedom was severely curtailed. Alarmed by the disquieting reports of the German immigrants who tried to find