Horizon – May 1977


, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

This issue’s cover features a detail of The Virgin by Andrew Wyeth, ‘the star’ of a Wyeth retrospective at the Metropolitan Museum in New York, one of ‘A Quartet of Spectaculars’, along with the travelling ‘Treasures of Tutankhamun’ then at the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago, and retrospectives of Robert Rauschenberg at the Museum of Modern Art and Alexander Calder at the Whitney Museum in New York.

It contains a letter from the Publisher Rhett Austell, announcing that with the September issue, Horizon would now be published monthly and would no longer be in hardcover.

In ‘Those Mean and Dirty Streets’, Richard Eder writes about how the city in film in the 70s has become ‘a place of violence, squalor, degradation, and boredom, leaving many an urban moviegoer bewildered about where he lives’:

The pavement vents clouds of steam, which turn the city scene into a hellish murk. A taxicab moves slowly through, like a yellow fish in a heavy sea. Times Square’s cheerful, tacky neon is blurred and drained of life. And the sallow face of Robert De Niro takes in everything and gets it wrong. The walls of his rented room are shiny, the windows are padlocked, there are candy wrappers on the floor, vitamin bottles and Wonder Bread on the shelf.

This is how the movie Taxi Driver sees the city of New York. In a movie of fifteen years ago the cabs would have been clean, shined up, and slightly out of focus: part of the background against which some quirky romance – Breakfast at Tiffany’s, for instance – was played out. Ten years before that Gene Kelly would have climbed out dancing, as the cabbie and passers-by beamed.

…Today, when cameras focus on the nerve-racked faces in Taxi Driver, on the victims and perpetrators of the bank holdup in Dog Day Afternoon, or on the drifters in Midnight Cowboy, they make city life seem more terrible than it is…

The photography and music of Taxi Driver deliberately make the city ugly, sticky, sinister. Each person is isolated, shut in by fear of others, and the only communication is the temporary exchange of delusions. The isolation is most extreme in the case of Robert De Niro. When he and Cybill Shepherd are together, it is not two people touching but fragile and mismatched fantasies.

Also in this issue:

In ‘Dancing in the Seventies’, Jamake Highwater looks at the burgeoning disco scene:

When the rock era ended in the early seventies, it was a fortunate return to normalcy for some. For others it was the triumph of mediocrity. Critics saw the rise of the discos as the decline of political involvement and alternative lifestyles. And the new music – the music of the discos – records played loudly by jockeys with a mania for manipulating their audience – satisfied nothing but the feet. The beat is a straight, soulless 4/4 without any of the subtle inner rhythms that made rock so sensual and complex. The lyrics are pointless at best, tasteless at worst. In “Disco Duck” by Rick Dees and His Cast of Idiots, the words disco duck are repeated endlessly by Donald Duck voices.   Dancers cavort to such songs with blank faces, untouched by the mindless lyrics.

Disco sound has not always been like that. Labelle, a three-woman group, now defunct, graced the early dance era with “Lady Marmalade,” and singer Gloria Gaynor has had a few appealing tunes. But on the whole the highly overproduced disco sound has lost all energy as well as every trace of freshness and invention…



Whereas rock essentially came from England and California, the disco sound was born in New York out of a combination of black and Latin music. Like rock, it has its admirers and critics. David Todd, the baron disc jockey who reigns at Manhattan’s Jouissance Disco, likes it because ‘it really makes you want to dance’. Pop critic Peter Occhiogrosso disagrees: ‘The disco sound reduces music to an automated beat, packaged string arrangements, cooing girl-choruses, and everything else that the classic FM-radio format of the sixties most loathed about AM-radio music. It’s the pits! It’s the triumph of plastic!’



‘Bringing Bold Splendor to the City’ is a selection of photographs from Henry Moore: Sculpture and Environment by David Finn, which was published that month. Finn tracked down Moore’s pieces around the world in some 495 pictures:

If Moore’s own artistry is taken as evidence, the right sculpture in the right place can be a dramatic focal point for urban space that might otherwise seem stark or bare. And in their vigor Moore’s sculptures in the city testify to the vitality of urban life itself.


In ‘Guernica: An Act of War, a Work of Art’ Charles L. Mee, Jr. describes ‘the most renowned painting by the century’s most protean artist’:

The most astonishing aspect of Picasso’s first day of work on Guernica is surely its savage coolness. He does not show bloody bits and pieces of women and children flying through the air; he does not show smashed buildings; he does not depict massive death by fire; the woman with the lamp who leans out of the window is not horrified but rather curious; and the dead soldier lies at peace.

Whatever violent emotions Picasso may have felt have been thoroughly subdued. He does not try to depict the bombing of Guernica, to illustrate it, or even quite to make it into an allegory. Rather, he brings the event deeply within himself, and he responds to it as a unique witness. His first reaction is transmuted, strangely, into the silent whinnying anguish of the horse – a horse that has been injured by the bombing of Guernica, obviously, but more than that; it is a symbolic horse of some sort, a vexingly obscure, seemingly irrelevant, private symbol of some sort, a peculiar association of the sort that springs unbidden to mind.




Horizon, Spring 1975 – 2


, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

In ‘How Republics Die’, Walter Karp looks at the ‘vanished city-states of medieval Italy’, whose republican institutions were destroyed not by ‘the mob’ but the privileged:

Though they were far from meek and hapless, there is genuine pathos in the populares’ fidelity to law and in their faith in legalistic contrivances. When the internecine warfare among the nobles had all but destroyed the consulate, the people created a new municipal officer, the podestà – a sort of city manager chosen from another city for a fixed term of office in the hope that a paid official from a neutral quarter would administer municipal affairs in a professional manner and thereby overawe the nobility. But the ruling families were too strong and too contemptuous of law for such a feeble constitutional makeshift to have much of an effect.


Is there a lesson in the story?  One political observer thought so. The lesson for him was that it is the men of privilege and influence who are likely to harm, and the people who are surest to defend, republican institutions. ‘The demands of a free people,’ he noted, ‘are rarely pernicious to liberty.’ That is not the maxim of a sentimental American Jeffersonian. It is the somber conclusion of Niccolò Machiavelli as he looked back, in the bitterness of blighted republican hopes, on the ‘wasted world,’ as he called it, of vanquished republican Italy.

In ‘The Cult of the Secret Agent’, Edmond Taylor writes about the spy’s threat to the open society:

In all secret service literature, fiction and nonfiction alike, there is an ambiguous and extremely complex relationship between myth and reality. Such a relationship exists, indeed, within the covert organizations themselves. Somerset Maugham, who served in the British Secret Intelligence Service during World War I, was probably the first modern writer to be struck by the tendency of the secret service to imitate art – the art of the popular thriller. This phenomenon, which might be termed the Ashenden Effect after the eponymous hero of Maugham’s semiautobiographical espionage tales, has since been confirmed by a number of other writers of secret service fiction – most notably Graham Greene and Compton Mackenzie – who have themselves had actual secret service experience. (I noticed the same tendency myself – and at moments in myself – during my five years’ service in General William J. Donovan’s Office of Strategic Services in World War II.)

Illustration for Horizon by Dennis Corrigan.

It was the Second World War that gave the secret agent one of his most significant new traits…the James Bond look, the look of violence. He became not merely a spy but a saboteur, a killer, an organizer of resistance networks, a ruthless guerrilla chief. The savage colonial or semi-colonial wars, declared or undeclared, that have marked the history of the last thirty years – Indochina, Korea, Algeria, the Near East, and Indochina again – have further accentuated the element of violence, both in the secret agent’s real professional activity and in his public image. All these conflicts have been more or less closely linked with the global power struggle between the United States and the Soviet Union (though most of them had autogenous roots), and the direct confrontations between their rival secret services have sometimes been equally savage – especially in the vital Central European sector. Before World War II the professionals occasionally assassinated one another’s human pawns in the Great Game – ‘natives’, foreign agents, low-level sub-agents – but almost never their opposite numbers. At the height of the Cold War, however, such fratricidal attacks became one of the secret service officer’s recognized – if still relatively minor – occupational hazards, something akin to a secret service vendetta developed at times, and casualties among the pawns attained unprecedented levels all over the world.

In ‘”The Perfect Interpreter of the English Countryside”’, Ronald Blythe writes about John Constable’s seeking to paint the light of England, ‘an idea that shocked the art establishment of his time’:

His long and bitter struggle to be accepted as an artist by everyone, from the inhabitants of Suffolk to the members of the Royal Academy, was a wish to be an accepted part of the civilized world he so strongly believed in. His difficulties – and ultimate triumph – stemmed from his refusal to give the public what it wanted as the price for easy entry into that world.

‘Painting’, he said, ‘is a science, and should be pursued as an enquiry into the laws of nature.’ But the public did not want painting to be a science; they wanted painting to be a kind of magic. They did not want straightforward descriptions of the countryside they knew so well; they wanted stories and mystery in paint. They wanted to look into a picture as they could look into Virgil or into one of their favorite poems, The Seasons, and see an idealized existence. Constable bewildered – and annoyed – them by leaving out these literary and emotional references and painting instead the natural realities of a certain place at a certain moment. This now seems a reasonable thing to do, but when Constable, at the very beginning of his career, confessed to his friend John Dunthorne that he intended to be a ‘natural painter,’ one of those rare peaks of total originality in art came into view.



In ‘Henry Mayhew’s Other London’, Christopher Hibbert writes about how the journalist Henry Mayhew came to write London Labour and the London Poor:

Mayhew paid a visit to Jacob’s Island in 1849 when the cholera epidemic was at its height. What he saw, and later described, makes Dickens’ account [in Oliver Twist] seem almost discreet. Mayhew wrote of the disgusting graveyard smell of the place, the heavy bubbles rising in the slimy, green-black water choked with rotting weeds and fish heads, the swollen carcasses of dead animals ready to burst with the gasses of putrefaction, and the red effluent from leather dressers. He described what Dickens, with his concern for the susceptibilities of the public, would never have dared describe: the open, doorless privies, the dark streaks of filth running down the walls where the house drains emptied into the ditch.

Mayhew’s description of the London prostitutes, and of the bawds, pimps, panders, and bullies who lived on their earnings, are contained in the first part of the fourth volume of his book, which is otherwise devoted entirely to those tens of thousands of Londoners who lived wholly or partly by crime or begging.

Here, as elsewhere, Mayhew exposes but he does not preach; he reveals but he never condemns. And this is his great strength as a social enquirer. He shares with Dickens (strangely, there is no record of the two ever meeting) a regard for the existing moral code and a belief that those who transgressed it must surely end in misery. But he was far ahead of his time in insisting that any steps toward social reform must be firmly based on detailed, dispassionate investigation of a sort that had never been done before but would be commonplace later. He was, in fact, one of the great pioneers of social science and criminal ecology. His volumes are the prototype of later surveys, but they are written with such understanding, such fascination, so refreshing a lack of either condescension or humbug, such vivid immediacy that they are unique: the very colors and smells of the East End come rising out of their pages.

The wonderfully evocative effect that Mayhew succeeds in creating is due, not so much to his skill as a journalist, novelist, and playwright, as to the warmth and attractiveness of his coaxing personality, his ability to get his subjects to talk frankly and naturally. The engraver Ebenezer Landells recorded that he once saw Mayhew at work talking to a costermonger, drawing his story out of him, leaving Augustus and his brother-in-law, William Jerrold, to put in a word or comment so that it seemed more like a conversation than an interview, and meanwhile relying on another brother, Horace, to take down everything that was said.








Horizon, Spring 1975 – 1


, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

This issue’s cover features a twelfth century English miniature of Viking ships from a manuscript called The Life and Miracles of St. Edmund (Edmund was a ninth century King of East Anglia killed by Vikings). It illustrates ‘The Lure of the Vikings’ by Lionel Casson


It was not that that the Vikings were invincible in battle. Their favoured weapon, the battle-axe, had long been abandoned by less primitive nations, their swords were inferior to the Frankish swords (which Viking chieftains preferred to the local products), and they never got the hang of besieging a fortification. What made them so formidable were their superb ships and skilled seamanship. These gave them so total a command of the water that no force ever dared engage them there, and as a consequence they had unlimited mobility. They were able at will to make swift and sudden onslaughts and, if pressed, beat hasty and safe retreats.

Horizon caption – ‘Adding injury to insult, Vikings bind King Edmund, flog him, and drag him away. Later they used him as a target for archery practice and finally beheaded him. Ultimately he was raised to sainthood and his cult flourished at Bury St. Edmunds.’


The Danes and Norwegians, though active enough traders, preferred the pleasures of fighting and the quicker profits of plunder. The Swedes, on the other hand, were as much interested in trade as in fighting and found their best customers in the rich caliphate of Baghdad. As a result they were drawn deeper and deeper into Russia.

The Slavic population called the newcomers Rus – whence the name Russia. We think of Igor, Vladimir, Oleg, as typically Russian names. Not at all: Igor is a Slavic version of Ingmar, Vladimir of Valdemar, Oleg of Helge. As a matter of fact, many historians argue that it was Swedish Vikings who founded the first Russian state, although others, particularly Soviet historians, do not agree.


Casson extensively quotes a report of a full-scale Viking funeral by Ahmad Ibn Fadlan, secretary of an embassy from the caliph of Baghdad to the Bulgars on the middle Volga , whose route took him through a community of Rus in 921.

Also in this issue:

In ‘The Rear Guard of the Avant-Garde’, part of the ‘Man of Ideas’ series, Roy McMullen describes French philosopher Roland Barthes:

Does pop culture make you morose? Have you stopped smiling at television commercials? Do you have the suspicion that we are all getting more and more phony? On the positive side, are you trendy enough to be fascinated by linguistics? If so, you qualify as a member of the growing public for the social and literary criticism of Roland Barthes.



…an écriture is for Barthes a manifestation of an ideology and to some extent a form of double talk. To adopt the écriture classique is to commit oneself, intentionally or not, to notions about common reason and the universal nature of man that reflect the bourgeois ideology that began rising to power in the late seventeenth century. To adopt the écriture of the traditional French novel, which is also that of straight historical narrative, is to commit oneself to notions of fate and causality that falsify, at least in the modern existentialist view, the reality of choice in human life. To adopt the Communist écriture is to…but there is no need to belabor the point. No écriture is innocent.

In ‘Waiting for the End’ Francis Russell writes about going to a poetry reading by the Sitwells at the Churchill Club in Dean’s Yard, Westminster during a V-1 attack in October 1944. Edith Sitwell was reciting Still Falls the Rain:

Now the roar had all but drowned out her voice. Air raid wardens on the roof had begun to blow their whistles. This meant a direct hit was imminent. People were getting down on the floor, trying to shield their heads with chairs. Edith kept on reading without the slightest change of voice or expression No one was listening to her. No one could.

The flying bomb must have all but skimmed the roof. Then the roar of its motor began to fade as it headed across the Thames. Some seconds later there was a dullish boom, all the windows rattled and several of them cracked. Edith read on until the end, immutable.

Then sounds the voice of One who like the heart of man

Was once a child who among beasts has lain –

“Still do I love, still shed my innocent light, my Blood for thee.”

Then, barely perceptibly, she winked at us.

In ‘Inflation’, part of his ‘In the Light of the Past’ Series, J.H. Plumb looks at the scourge that was rising again in the 1970s after the long post-war economic boom, and looks for historical parallels. In contrast to examples such as the post-World War I German hyperinflation,

…inflation can also be widespread and long-term – an intermittent fever that crests sharply from time to time but never dies away, lasting, perhaps, for a century.

It was this variety of the disease that afflicted Europe between 1540 and 1620, a variety more like our present circumstances than the dramatic inflationary spiral of Weimar Germany or the temporary, if sharp, inflation in France and England during the Napoleonic Wars.

Plumb notes that governments ‘attempt complex remedial measures that rarely have any effect except to intensify class bitterness on the one hand and distrust of government on the other.’




Horizon, Autumn 1967 – 2


, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

In ‘England’s Second Family; The Cecils’, Lacey Baldwin Smith (author of The Horizon Book of the Elizabethan World) writes about the descendants of David Cecil:

The history of the Cecils is the kind of success story that should warm the cockles of the heart of every bureaucrat who believes that “men of blood shall not live out half their days” and dreams that quiet attention to detail will be rewarded. The first great Cecil – William, Lord Burghley  – was stage manager to Elizabeth’s Regina, and it was said that “of all the men of genius he was the most a drudge; of all men of business the most a genius.” His son, Robert, first Earl of Salisbury, was the indispensable instrument by which James Stuart of Scotland became king of England, and it was early noted that young Sir Robert always had “his hands full of papers and his head full of matter.” In the nineteenth century the Cecilian bloom continued to be “petalled with patience,” and when the third marquis, three times prime minister of England, died in 1903, it was said that he had succeeded in being great “without much pomp or parade.”


Marble Hall at Hatfield House, home of the Salisbury Cecils, with portraits of Mary Queen of Scots ‘whom William Cecil helped put to death’, and Elizabeth I.

…For almost half a millennium they have possessed par excellence those qualities necessary to dynastic success: a tenacious grasp on land, an abundance of fat and healthy babies, and an unparalleled capacity for ferreting out the winning side in politics.

In ‘Reston’, Milton Viorst writes about Robert E. Simon’s ‘fief on the Potomac’:

Lake Anne Village Center is the heart of the first of seven communities that will ultimately make up Reston, a projected town of some seventy-five thousand inhabitants. If it recalls a European piazza, this is because Simon planned it that way…Simon’s goal is not to copy a successful city – which is manifestly impossible – but to make Reston the source of all the pleasant sensations that a successful city invites…

Lake Anne Village, now some two years old, is Simon’s test tube for the new city. Most of Reston’s first two thousand inhabitants live in the village and it is there that Simon has indulged his social theories and his recreational whims, his architectural preferences and his artistic tastes. Though he was warned he would never persuade apartment dwellers to move to Reston, he decided to build the high-rise – and he has had scarcely had a vacancy since it was completed. Though he was told that middle-class Americans would not live in commercial neighbourhoods, he built two floors of apartments above the shops in the village center – and they fill up faster than the garden apartments in the woods. Though he was told that art was a waste of money, he spent thousands on original sculpture – and both the kids who climb over it and the grownups who gaze at it take pleasure in its presence.


In ‘Rasputin Reconsidered’, E.M. Halliday describes the alleged ‘Mad Monk’ as ‘a strong and healthy peasant with strong and healthy appetites’, but:

Once the idea that he was sexually grotesque has been set aside, it is quite possible, as a matter of fact, to see Rasputin in a favorable light: he was really, in modern terms, a good guy. He was undeniably crude, but there is little evidence that he was cruel…

On more important questions, Rasputin comes off surprisingly well. He foresaw what World War I would mean for Russia and tried desperately to make Nicholas  see it, too, sending him telegrams and notes conveying his vision of the impending calamity…It was a very lonely and unpopular view to take at the start of the war, for Russia was caught up in the frenzied, romantic patriotism of 1914 as much as any of the participants…

There was another subject on which Rasputin took an unpopular stand, particularly for a Russian peasant. He was sure that all races and religions were equal in the sight of God, and he spoke out boldly against anti-Semitism whenever he thought it might do some good. Over a long period of time this had some effect on Nicholas and Alexandra, in whom the prejudice was deeply ingrained.


Nevertheless, Halliday argues that Rasputin contributed to the Russian Revolution of 1917 by encouraging Nicholas to go to the front and personally lead his troops in 1915: ‘It was farce that fooled almost nobody but Nicholas himself’. Back in St Petersburg and Tsarskoe Selo, Rasputin and Alexandra presided over ‘a governmental debacle’.

A portfolio of contemporary posters by Contributing Editor Walter Karp notes that once they were not meant to last. ‘Lately, however, posters are enjoying a longer life and certainly a great deal more attention.’ Selections include a long poster for the 46th Annual Art Directors Club Show, ‘personality posters’ of W.C. Fields and Mao Zedong (‘considered by some to stand with Fields as an enemy of respectability’), ‘art posters’ (often for gallery openings) such as Robert Indiana’s ‘Love’, and posters for rock concerts and consumer products. ‘[A] New York store known as The Poster Center now sells these and similar art posters for prices ranging from five to twenty-five dollars.’



Horizon, Autumn 1967 – 1


, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

This issue’s cover features Leonardo da Vinci’s portrait of Ginevra de’ Benci, which had just been purchased by the National Gallery of Art, Washington, for a then-record $5 million. Contributing Editor Walter Karp writes about the painting’s history and its subject:

Also in this issue:

In ‘The Silk Road’ James (now Jan) Morris writes about the overland route from Rome to China:

The fortunes of this road have fluctuated down the centuries. Sometimes it followed this path, sometimes that; now it was blocked by wars, brigands or zealots; now secure beneath the protection of conquering empires – a road of many stages and legends, stretching from the frontiers of China at one end to the Mediterranean coast at the other. The trans-Asian route was the tenuous link between the two supreme civilizations of the earth, and there was a time when it seemed almost ready to unite them, East and West, in the marvellous richness of a common culture.

The powers at each end of the route knew nothing of one another. Each was only a rumor. The Chinese had heard whispers of cultivated nations far beyond the Asian steppes – possibly their first inkling that there existed any civilized people other than themselves. The Romans knew that somewhere far to the east, beyond India, there lived a powerful people to whom the Greeks had given the name “Seres”; but just where the country of the Seres was, and what kind of people they were, nobody knew. Nobody in the West had seen a Chinese. Nobody in the East had seen a European. Eratosthenes’ map of the world, drawn in 220 B.C., begins to peter out at the Tigris and ends altogether at the Ganges Delta, which is shown pouring into the unknown seas of the farthest East. Rome and China were like islands separated by an uncharted ocean.


By the middle of the first century B.C. the gap was closing. The four empires along the route had given it a certain security. The Han emperors had subdued much of the wild country on the western marches of China, south of the Gobi, making the route safe against Huns and Tibetans. The Kushans firmly policed the eastern approaches to the Pamirs, the Parthians controlled the western. The armies of Rome, under the command of the proconsul Crassus, were vigorously at war with Parthia in eastern Syria. Only a single great impulse, of war or of commerce, was needed to pierce the veil that lay between the eastern and western civilizations.

Crassus led the Romans at the Battle of Carrhae in 53 B.C.:

As the Parthians moved in for the kill they suddenly unfurled some majestic battle standards, such as the Romans had never seen before – brilliantly dyed and made of a material unimaginably sumptuous. Tradition says it was the abrupt appearance of these arcane devices that finally broke the morale of the legions; certainly the banners lingered in the Roman memory, and in the and it was the fascination of that astonishing fabric, first glimpsed by the Romans upon the battlefield of Carrhae, that brought the trans-Asia route to life and established a thin and transient connection between Rome and China.


Horizon caption: ‘Afghanistan’s valley of Bamian was one of the most overpowering sights on the caravan road. Here, at the foot of the Hindu Kush mountains, in the fourth century A.D., Buddhist missionaries from India carved a 175-foot-tall statue of their lord, around which they hewed out chapels for themselves in the sheer cliff. From these eyries they could watch the caravans arriving from Samarkand, Palmyra, the Khyber Pass. The huge statue (in the niche to the right of center), once painted in polychrome and gilded, is now weathered and partially defaced.’

Gibbon says it took two hundred and forty-three days to travel from China to the Syrian coast; if modern trade routes are anything to go by, many a bale lay for weeks at a time under a trader’s counter waiting for clearance, or a bill of lading or camel space – or simply forgotten. Still nobody knew the Silk Road from end to end, and no European had set eyes upon the inconceivable settlements of highest Asia beyond the Pamirs: Aqsu and Hotien, Qara Shahr and Kokand, or the remotest of all, Sera Metropolis, the silk capital, somewhere in the heart of China.

Eventually the secret of silk making leaked out of China, which withdrew behind its frontiers, and the route was abandoned and forgotten. Morris describes 1960s plans for the Pan-Asian Highway : ‘But even these Olympian enterprises stop short at the Chinese border, and the dotted lines of the projected routes shy warily south. The contact of the Silk Road has never fired; the void separating China from the West remains a hazard and a tragedy.’

In ‘Anatomy of a Masterpiece: The Burial of Count Orgaz’, Roy McMullen describes El Greco’s painting:

Anyone who doubts the transfiguring power of art should reflect on the genesis of The Burial of Count Orgaz. The central incident in El Greco’s painting…is a rather vulgar and morally pointless miracle. Most of the circumstances preceding and surrounding the execution of the work smell of money – literally to high heaven. Yet the result is a genuinely mystical masterpiece and, for us at least, a vivid image of several crises.

Here, refracted by the neurotic sensibility of a Cretan immigrant, is that discouraging moment in the history of European thought when one part of the Renaissance lost its rationalist nerve and turned back towards the Middle Ages. In terms of art history, here is one of the high points of the sixteenth century mannerist style, with its warping of a classical language into unclassical statements. At the level of national history, here are Spain’s nobly unteachable hidalgos, assembled for a class portrait two years before the Armada revealed their obsolescence.

In ‘E.T. Hall and the Human Space Bubble’, part of Horizon’s ‘Men of Ideas’ series, William Kloman interviews the anthropologist Edward T. Hall, who developed the study of proxemics, the human use of space and the effects that population density has on behaviour, communication, and social interaction. His book The Hidden Dimension had been published the previous year:

“New York City may already be dead. We may not be able to bring it back. And if we lose New York it could be the death of the nation.”

The speaker was an anthropologist named Edward T. Hall; his audience a select gathering of scientists, city planners, architects, and environmental experts at the Smithsonian Institution last spring. A man who has made a career of probing the communications blocks that exist between cultures, Hall has developed ideas about men’s varying needs for space that could have important implications for the future of our urban centers. Recently appointed to a professorship in the study of intersocietal communications at Northwestern University, he is one of a growing number of scientists seeking ways of making our cities fit for human habitation…

Besides food, water, and shelter, Hall says, we need a certain amount of space in which to conduct our lives. Each organism, he has written, “no matter how simple or complex, has around it a sacred bubble of space, a bit of mobile territoriality which only a few other organisms are allowed to penetrate and then only for short periods of time.” The bubble varies in size, depending on such factors as the emotional state, immediate activity, position in a social hierarchy, and cultural background of the individual. What may be a comfortable living space for a Latin American who requires a certain amount of physical contact with his fellows, may be unbearably crowded to an Englishman, who requires a somewhat large bubble of space around him to feel at ease. Similarly, other unspoken needs – for variety, visual beauty, and quiet – differ from one culture to another.

We must begin to study these needs, recognizing that if we do not take them into consideration, life can become intolerable. Given the cosmopolitan nature of our cities, we must design dwellings, office buildings, and transportation systems in accordance with the diverse requirements of the people who must use them. The melting pot, Hall says, is an illusion.

Kloman concludes by sitting in on one of Hall’s classes at the Illinois Institute of Technology in Chicago (where he taught before moving to Northwestern):

Horizon, Spring 1971


, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

This issue’s cover features Lucas Cranach the Elder’s painting of Adam and Eve in the Cortauld Institute, London. It illustrates a section on ‘Liberated Women’, beginning with ‘The Feminine Utopia’ by Contributing Editor Walter Karp:


The family…is not a natural or a biological institution. It…is a human contrivance and it invites the question, which the women’s movement asks, why has the family division of roles been drawn up the way it has? That women bear the children is a biological fact; that those who bear children must carry the chief burden of tending them is not a biological necessity. It is certainly ‘convenient’…but convenience is not necessity. There is even less reason for women to maintain the household simply because they are female. Among the Todas of southern India, where women may have more than one spouse, the men, interestingly enough, consider housekeeping too sacred for women.


…many spokesmen [sic] for the women’s movement conclude that males have deliberately confined females to the domestic sphere in a concerted effort to maintain their dominance. Employing an analogy with racism, many today speak of the present system of human life as ‘sexism’– ‘the definition of and discrimination against half of the human species by the other half’, according to Robin Morgan, editor of a recent collection of women’s movement essays called The Sisterhood is Powerful. The most rigorous exponent of this view is Kate Millett, who has coined the term ‘sexual politics’ (in a well-known book of that title) to designate the ways in which males contrive to keep females subordinate under what she calls ‘patriarchal government.’


Also in this issue:


In ‘Odd Couples’, part of his ‘In the Light of the Past’ series, J.H. Plumb considers how the family has evolved:

Basically, the family has fulfilled three social functions – it has provided a labor force, transmitted property and educated and trained children, not only in accepted social patterns, but also in the work skills upon which their future depended…The unitary family was particularly good at coping with the small peasant holdings that covered most of the world’s fertile regions from China to Peru. In the primitive peasant world a child of five or six could begin to earn his keep in the fields, as he still can in India and Africa.

After the revolution in agriculture, property and its transmission lay at the very heart of social relations and possessed an actuality that we find hard to grasp…


The family as the basic social group first began to fail, except in its property relations, among the aristocracy. The majority of the affluent of western Europe have always created for themselves a double standard, particularly as far as sex in concerned…The family as a unit of social organization was remarkably appropriate for a less complex world of agriculture and craftsmanship, but ever since industry and highly urbanized societies began to replace that world, the social functions of the family have steadily weakened. It is a process not likely to be halted.

In ‘The Ashanti’ James (later Jan) Morris explores the history and culture of the West African people:


…It was during the seventeenth century that the Ashanti entered history. They immediately began to display a talent for organization, both civic and military, altogether exceptional among West African peoples. Gradually they constructed a federation of Akan tribes whose separate customs were respected and whose ruling chiefs preserved their own stools, or thrones, but who were subject to the suzerainty of the king of Ashanti – the Asantahene.


The Ashanti empire was never static or absolute, varying rather in its degree of central control and shading away from the pure Ashanti districts in the center to the less indoctrinated tribal areas on the perimeter. Nevertheless, the Asantahene became the most formidable indigenous ruler of West Africa, whose writ ran in one degree or another from the Black Volta to the sea.

The revelation of the Golden Stool consolidated this power by providing a supernatural focus for loyalty. Through its agency the Ashanti came nearer than any other West African people, except perhaps the people of Dahomey, to a concept of nationalism in the Western sense.

In ‘The Tempesta Puzzle’, Roy McMullen considers the many theories about Giorgione’s mysterious painting:


…And then in 1939, modern science added a fresh note to the discord: beneath the figure of the dreaming young man an X-ray examination revealed a seated woman with her legs in the water. Had she once had a role in the narrative? Was it possible that Giorgione had never had a narrative in mind and had just improvised an inhabited landscape? Or did the hidden bather prove only that he had thriftily made use of an old canvas?


In 1949 Kenneth Clark, meditating on the X ray and reflecting an opinion already widespread in Britain and America, decided that heavyweight Tempestry had demonstrated its futility. ‘The Tempesta,’ he wrote in his Landscape into Art, ‘is one of those works of art before which the scholar had best remain silent. No one knows what it represents…and I think there is little doubt that it is a free fantasy, a sort of Kublai Khan, which grew as Giorgione painted it…’ He added that if we cannot say what it means, still less can we say ‘how it achieves its magical power over our minds.’


Horizon, Summer 1967 – 2


, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

In ‘David: The Napoleon of French Painting’, John Canaday writes about Jacques-Louis David, the painter who was equally admired by Louis XVI, Robespierre and Napoleon: ‘His heroic style, suppressing passion beneath a hard, chilly surface, made him the artistic dictator of France.’

Though tradition has made him the archetype of the classicist who reduced antiquity to a kind of sterile purity, David is really only a pseudoclassicist whose variation of the formula was dominated by a combination of staggering realism and true romanticism. In his most frigid paintings an obsessive sensuality lies just beneath the surface. His nudes are at once adaptations of the idealized bodies of antique sculpture, carefully analysed anatomical studies, and declarations of the allure of human nakedness that on occasion can amount to a revelation of concupiscence. David must have been a lustful man beneath his aesthetic puritanism, but he never thought of his idealized forms as a transmutation of sensual experience, as the original forms were with the Greeks. Only in an occasional portrait of a member of his family or a very close friend does he allow himself even a confession of tenderness. But his portraits are brilliant renderings of surface that become by second nature revelations of the personality of the sitter.

Horizon caption – 'David again returned to Roman history in The Lictors Bringing to Brutus the Bodies of his Sons (above), based on the story of the consul (seen brooding in the shadows, left) who sentenced his own sons to death for conspiring to restore the monarchy. The trio of grieving women in the detail opposite has the granitic quality of a classical bas-relief, with only a discarded sewing basket to give a feeling of home life. The painting was exhibited in 1789, after the fall of the Bastille, and the message that it imparted was not lost on its viewers.'

Horizon caption – ‘David again returned to Roman history in The Lictors Bringing to Brutus the Bodies of his Sons (above), based on the story of the consul (seen brooding in the shadows, left) who sentenced his own sons to death for conspiring to restore the monarchy. The trio of grieving women in the detail opposite has the granitic quality of a classical bas-relief, with only a discarded sewing basket to give a feeling of home life. The painting was exhibited in 1789, after the fall of the Bastille, and the message that it imparted was not lost on its viewers.’

Horizon caption: Marat Assassinated (1793) has become, in the words of one art historian, “The Pieta of the Revolution.” The dead Republican leader, murdered in his bathtub by a young woman named Charlotte Corday, is shown holding a letter from her in one hand and in the other, the quill pen that had been busy sentencing his political enemies to death.

Horizon caption: ‘Marat Assassinated (1793) has become, in the words of one art historian, “The Pieta of the Revolution.” The dead Republican leader, murdered in his bathtub by a young woman named Charlotte Corday, is shown holding a letter from her in one hand and in the other, the quill pen that had been busy sentencing his political enemies to death.’

6703 - 2 - David4

6703 - 2 - David1
6703 - 2 - David5

In ‘The Anarchy of Art’, part of his ‘In the Light of the Past’ series, J.H. Plumb looks at the state of visual arts in 1967 from the point of view of ‘a liberal-minded man of fifty.’ He remembers how in his youth, ‘we had our moment of excitement and protest. We were seized by bitter fury against the Establishment when the police seized D.H. Lawrence’s etiolated nudes. And how we laughed at the glossy horrors of Munnings…And what derision we felt for the heavy, momentous portraits of tycoons that littered the board rooms of London and New York.’ They ‘thronged’ to the Surrealists, ‘Picasso’s distorted females’ and Pollock’s ‘painting without language but decorative, memorable, at times haunting.’

But now, how does one find one’s way through the present anarchy of art, which ranges so widely from the meticulous studies of Wyeth to the cold remains of the postwar surrealism of Moore, to the near-abstractions of Sutherland, to the screaming, bleeding faces of Francis Bacon, to the cartoon horrors of Pop, to Bridget Riley’s literally painful Op, or to the junk and graffiti schools, the hard-edge types, or those anti-art artists who just paint shapeless boards one color and leave them lying on the floor or propped up against a wall? Must one turn one’s back on this, denounce it as infantile, regressive, anarchic, or mad – neither decorative nor meaningful? Has art, after living within one broad context for centuries, shattered into fragments? Is there anywhere to go?

6703 - 2 - Plumb1

…[A]bout most great ages of art there is a harmony between painting, sculpture, music, architecture and the decorative arts that is unmistakeable and clear….try as one might it is impossible to unite the elegance of the Seagram Building with the painted beds of Rauschenberg or the cacophonic horrors of musique concrète.

Looking back at the flowering of art in Renaissance Italy, seventeenth century Holland and Flanders, and nineteenth century France, he asks why it seems harder to find such genius in today’s ‘anarchy’:

One factor is time: each age makes it more difficult for the next. It was much easier to be Aristotle in fourth-century-BC Athens then it is in twentieth-century New York; easier to be Newton in seventeenth-century Cambridge than in twentieth-century Moscow…

And there is a further, more profound difficulty: originality is just as rare in painters and sculptors as in engineers or chess players. Yet the development of the past hundred years of art has been the creation of a cult of the artist as a wayward, misunderstood, yet dedicated genius – the man exiled from society by the originality of his ideas and techniques. Hence the endless pursuit of novelty in modern art. Much of its so-called originality, however, is flat-footed, dull, obvious, jejune…This kind of modern art is just as banal, just as empty of content, as the most tedious forms of salon painting.

…So one wanders, as along a seashore littered with debris; occasionally there are bits and pieces that delight the eye, more rarely a fragment of treasure, but the skies are gray, the wind coming in from the sea, very cold. There is nowhere to go but Coney Island.

6703 - 2 - Plumb2

In ‘Saint Francis and the Ecologic Backlash’ the mediaeval historian Lynn White, Jr writes about how Christian theology led man to exploit nature, and that he needed to listen to the ‘great heretic’ St Francis of Assisi before he destroys his earthly home. After considering the ‘hypothesis that [man’s] fire-drive method of hunting created the world’s great grasslands and helped to exterminate the monster mammals of the Pleistocene from much of the globe’, as well as the banks of the Lower Nile being ‘an artefact’ for the last six milleniums, and the Dutch ‘pushing back the North Sea’, he argues:

People, then, have often been a dynamic element in their own environment, but in the present state of historical scholarship we usually do not know precisely when, where, or with what effects man-induced changes came. As we enter the last third of the twentieth century, however, concern for the problem of ecologic backlash is mounting feverishly. Natural science, conceived as the effort to understand the nature of things, had flourished in several eras and among several peoples. Similarly there had been an age-old accumulation of technical skills, sometimes growing rapidly, sometimes slowly. But…[the] emergence in widespread practice of the Baconian creed that scientific knowledge means technological power over nature can scarcely be dated before about 1850, except in the chemical industries, where it was anticipated in the eighteenth century.

…Our ecologic crisis is the product of an emerging, entirely novel, democratic culture. The issue is whether a democratized world can survive its own implications. Presumably it cannot unless we rethink our axioms.

He traces the beginning of Western technical and scientific world dominance to the Middle Ages: ‘we cannot understand their nature or their present impact upon ecology without examining fundamental mediaeval assumptions and developments.’ The development of ploughs for the wet and sticky soils of northern Europe which required eight oxen and ‘attacked the land with such violence’ led to ‘ruthlessness towards nature’ and an ‘exploitative attitude’. And belief in perpetual progress is ‘rooted in, and is indefensible apart from, Judeo-Christian teleology.’ God had planned all of creation ‘explicitly for man’s benefit and rule: no item in the physical creation had any purpose save to serve man’s purposes…Especially in its Western form, Christianity is the most anthropocentric religion the world has seen…By destroying pagan animism, Christianity made it possible to exploit nature in a mood of indifference to the feelings of natural objects.’

Possibly we should ponder the greatest radical in Christian history since Christ: Saint Francis of Assisi. The prime miracle of Saint Francis is the fact that he did not end at the stake, as many of his left-wing followers did. He was so clearly heretical that a general of the Franciscan order, Saint Bonaventure, a great and perceptive Christian, tried to suppress the early accounts of Franciscanism. The key to an understanding of Francis is his belief in the virtue of humility – not merely for the individual but for man as a species. Francis tried to depose man from his rule over creation and to set up a democracy of all God’s creatures.

…Since the roots of our trouble are so clearly religious, the remedy must also be essentially religious, whether we call it that or not. We must rethink and refeel our nature and destiny. The profoundly religious, but heretical, sense of the primitive Franciscans for the spiritual autonomy of all parts of nature may point a direction. I propose Francis as a patron saint of ecologists.

This happened in 1979.

On the last page, a piece by William K. Zinsser comments on ’25 and Under’ being made Time magazine’s ‘Man of the Year’:

6703 - 2 - Zinsser

Horizon, Summer 1967 – 1


, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Another issue I’ve had to divide into two parts.

This issue’s cover shows a Stone Age pottery vessel in the shape of a double-headed female, found at Hacilar in southwest Turkey:

6703 - Cover

It illustrates a letter from Editor Joseph J. Thorndike, ‘The Smugglers’ Trail’, and the article ‘The Strange Case of James Mellaart, or The Tale of the Missing Dorak Treasure’ by Kenneth Pearson and Patricia Connor of the London Sunday Times, whose book The Dorak Affair was published the same year.

Also in this issue:

6703 - Contents

Thorndike describes Turkey as ‘the scene of the greatest archaeological looting job since Lord Elgin made off with the sculptures of the Parthenon. Because the Turkish government forbids the export of any ancient art objects, whatever comes out of that country must be smuggled out. And the smugglers’ trail, which begins in remote Anatolian villages, leads in the end, as often as not, to some of the world’s most famous museums.’

Mellaart – himself a Horizon contributor– was the archaeologist who discovered the Hacilar site.

At first glance no one seems less likely than Mellaart to be involved in any dishonorable dealings. His colleagues have commented on his imperiousness and lack of tact, but as the British ambassador to Ankara remarked, ‘He has a nose for a site that amounts almost to genius’…Mellaart [in the 1950s] had the knack of walking a site for hours, picking a spot to excavate, and striking it rich almost at once.

It isn’t luck. He reads signs like a Sherlock Holmes.

Controversy came when Mellaart claimed to have found relics of the Yortan culture, belonging to a neighbour state of Troy from the middle of the third millennium BC. He told a story of having met a woman called Anna Papastrati on a train to Izmir in 1958, who was wearing a solid gold bracelet of a type that had only been found at Troy. He came home with her, sketched the collection of antiquities she owned, and realised that what he had stumbled across was ‘real evidence of a large seafaring nation, ruled by a warrior aristocracy, immediately east of Troy.’ His report on the Dorak treasure was published in the Illustrated London News in 1959:

6703 - Mellaart 1

The news shattered the Turkish authorities. Although an introduction to the article made clear its provenance, and special attention was drawn to the treasure’s imaginative reconstruction, there is no doubt that the Department of Antiquities thought a minor ‘Tutankhamen’ had slipped through its hands.

On July 18, 1960, Mellaart went over the details of his trip with the Turkish authorities. Though he included the name of ‘Anna Papastrati’ and her address, investigations in Izmir drew a blank. The Turks could not locate the woman or her house…The Dorak treasure had vanished.

Mellaart’s troubles were just beginning, because unfortunately it was only too logical for the Turkish authorities to assume that the treasure had been taken out of the country, either with the connivance of the archaeologist or without it…An increasing number of Turks are angered by the removal of their heritage by outsiders. This is the crux of the Dorak affair.

6703 - Mellaart 2

Horizon caption: ‘The letter at right, written in the style of ten-cent thriller, is the only proof that Anna – or the treasure – ever existed.’

In ‘The Literary Road to Rome’, Norman Kotker chronicles the writers – Italian, French, German, British and American – who have come to Rome over the centuries ‘to seek inspiration among its ruins…Mourning has always seemed the appropriate attitude for writers to adopt in Rome. “Rome its own sad sepulchre appears,” declaimed Washington Irving as he entered the city for the first time. “…death seems to have been born in Rome,” Chateaubriand mused as he walked along the Appian Way.’ The writers include Petrarch, Dante, Tasso, Gibbon, Henry Adams, Hawthorne, Machiavelli, Goethe, Keats, Shelley, Stendahl, Dickens and the Brownings.

6703 - Rome Keats

Horizon caption: ‘”A thing of beauty is a joy forever.” The first line of “Endymion” is barely visible at upper left in a framed manuscript of the poem that hangs in the Keats memorial in Rome. Buildings of the Piazza di Spagna and a fresh rose are reflected in the glass.’

He concludes that tourists no longer have to come to Rome:

As the film replaces the written word, Rome in all its decadence can come to them. Now, thanks to the work of such latter-day Roman journalists as Federico Fellini and Michelangelo Antonioni, the city is apparently even more fallen than Gibbon’s Rome, more wicked than Stendahl’s, more malignant than Hawthorne’s – all of which may explain why the parade of writers shows not the least sign of slackening.

In ‘Breuer: The Last “Modern” Architect’, Cranston Jones looks at the career of the Hungarian-born and Bauhaus-trained architect who had been practising in the US since the 1930s, and whose Whitney Museum of American Art had just opened in New York:
6703 - Breuer Whitney

The first impression…was discouraging. With its massive, raw cantilevers, the building loomed out of a sunken, moat-like sculpture garden; curious, trapezoidal windows were punched in the façade; concrete blinder-walls went up at either side, cutting off the adjacent apartment houses…

6703 - Breuer - City 1936

Horizon caption: ‘A 1936 project for a “Civic Center of the Future” forecast Breuer’s later designs, with its acoustically formed theatre, trifoil pavilions, Y-shaped office buildings, and its shopping center with set-back ramps.’

What the opening night guests had discovered was that while the building seemed aggressive on the outside, the architectural style of the interior had been carefully planned to accommodate the basic function of the museum – the creation of an ideal display space for art. Spaces are well lighted and inviting. The ceiling is an open grid that allows the movable partitions to be arranged in a variety of ways at the same time that it incorporates air-conditioning and elaborate lighting…His use of surfaces gives the whole museum a hand-crafted feeling which, in an age when architecture increasingly looks as if it could be turned out by the mile, is in itself a source of pleasure.

6703 - Breuer detailsIn ‘The Holy Terrors of Munster’, Edmund Stillman describes the Anabaptists of 16th century Germany:

In the long record of man’s savagery to man, there can be no more brutal episode than the drama of the Anabaptist revolution played out in the small city of Münster in northwest Germany in 1534-35. There, as the medieval world was dying and the modern age dawning, as an ancient social order disintegrated and a new proletariat was born, starving and desperate men conceived a utopian kingdom of eternal goodness and eternal peace – and ended by creating a forerunner of the modern totalitarian state.

Anticipating the French Revolution by more than two hundred and fifty years, and the Nazis and the Communists by nearly four hundred, the Anabaptist revolution in Münster was striking in its modernities of class warfare, thought control, communal farms, an elite military corps, and a proto-Gestapo…

6703 - Munster

Horizon caption: ‘Besieged in their “holy city” of Münster (at right, surrounded by a moat), the Anabaptists fought the mounting forces of much of the old Holy Roman Empire for sixteen months…The sketch at right, and those on the following two pages, were done by Erhard Schoen, an artist of the time.’

Outside the city gathered all the forces of the Holy Roman Empire, Catholic and Protestant alike. Acting to protect privilege and what they conceived to be God’s true order, they buried their doctrinal differences in a counterrevolutionary alliance and pledged to extirpate the Holy City of the Anabaptists by death and fire. In the end they succeeded, but not until they had matched atrocity for atrocity in the sixteen-month siege of Münster.

Horizon, Summer 1971 – 2


, , , , , , , , , , ,

Part 2 of this issue:

In ‘How Not to Win a War’ the eminent British historian Correlli Barnett writes about the book that was a key influence on him, and which he says could help explain what he calls ‘the American defeat in Vietnam‘, though the end of the war was still four years away:

General Karl Maria von Clausewitz was the first man to make conceptual sense of war as a social and political activity and to deduce its governing principles. Clausewitz is the starting point of all later theorizing about war, and often the finishing point as well. He significantly influenced the German and French general staffs before 1914; he is the fountainhead of present-day Communist thinking about war; and he ought to be a part of every Western young man’s education. His great work On War (Vom Kriege), casts more light than any other single book on all the facets of collective human rivalry…

…Clausewitz’s philosophy of war has been garbled into dogma, with regrettable results.

Horizon caption: 'Who would have won the honors if Clausewitz had taught a seminar on war? In Edward Sorel's reunion portrait, the bright students sit up front below their master.' Front row, L-R: Marx, Mao, Frederick the Great, Bismarck. Second row, L-R: Elizabeth I, Lenin. 'Dunces' in the rear, L-R: Napoleon, Eisenhower, F.D. Roosevelt, Churchill, Wilson, Marshall.

Horizon caption: ‘Who would have won the honors if Clausewitz had taught a seminar on war? In Edward Sorel’s reunion portrait, the bright students sit up front below their master.’ Front row, L-R: Marx, Mao, Frederick the Great, Bismarck. Second row, L-R: Elizabeth I, Lenin. ‘Dunces’ in the rear, L-R: Napoleon, Eisenhower, F.D. Roosevelt, Churchill, Wilson, Marshall.

War for Clausewitz was no meaningless episode of violence, nor was it absolutely distinct and separate from peace. War, on the contrary,

‘belongs…to the province of social life. It is a conflict of great interests which is settled by bloodshed, and only in that is it different from others. It would be better…to liken it to business competition, which is also a conflict of human interests and activities; and it is still more like State policy, which again…may be looked upon as a kind of business competition on a grand scale.’

This simple proposition is Clausewitz’s greatest and most illuminating insight. In the words of his most quoted aphorism, “War is only a continuation of policy by other means.” Clausewitz returns again and again to this theme of the continuity of international relations, from peace via war to peace again, speaking of a diplomacy that (in war) employs battles instead of notes. It follows that the conduct of war ought to be constantly governed by political considerations.

In Clausewitz’s view, it is absurd to try to “win” wars by military means alone, because, as he says, no major plan of war can be made without political understanding and insight. The political setting not only determines the aims and decisions of war strategy but also colors the whole character of the war…

It was not the nature of nineteenth-century warfare that made the American Civil War so long and bloody but the irreconcilable political and social issues of secession and union, slavery and emancipation. And it is political, not military, considerations that have prevented the United States from using nuclear weapons in Vietnam – on the contrary, nothing would so economically and efficiently block the Vietcong supply routes.

In his study of Seurat’s A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte, Roy McMullen explores the hostile response to it:

Nervousness and defensiveness are, of course, unprovable, but they become at least a faint, mischievous possibility when we remember that viewers in 1886 were still uncowed by avant-garde art and were without our modern emphasis on the formal and abstract elements in painting, and were therefore more sensitive than we are likely to be to the figurative message – the moral, to use a nineteenth-century term – of La Grande Jatte.

Seurat 1Seurat 2

For there actually is such a message, or moral, in the picture, however much it is ignored by art historians intent on optical effects and spatial organization or by ordinary appreciators engrossed in summertime and bustles. And a similar message can be detected nearly everywhere in Seurat’s mature achievement, rising like a slightly corrosive odor from his characteristic mixture of loveliness, banality, delicacy, and pedantry.

Seurat 3

A whiff could have made a boulevardier at the Maison Dorée feel obscurely menaced. Consider, as an example, the pipe-smoking boater and his two elegant neighbors in the left foreground of La Grande Jatte…At first glance these impressively monumental figures – naked, the boater could be an antique river deity – seem drenched in the sedative bliss of a sunlit holiday; at second glance the bliss drains away. One of today’s veristic film directors could scarcely ask for more eloquent images of urban man’s loneliness in a crowd and his inability to communicate with his fellow men.

The same solitude seems to shroud, with a few doubtful exceptions, everyone in the picture, including the mysteriously motivated hornblower in the tropical helmet and even the “superb cocotte” despite her decorative pet and her evidently affluent protector.

‘The World of Samuel Pepys’ is a lavishly illustrated look at the life of the Restoration diarist:

Pepys 1

Pepys 2Pepys 3

Also included with this issue is a supplement: an eight-page panorama of London in 1647.

Horizon, Summer 1971 – 1


, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

A bumper issue, in two parts.

This issue’s cover shows a detail from Georges Seurat’s  A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte:

7103 - Cover

It illustrates an article on the painting by Roy McMullen.

Also in this issue:

7103 - Contents

In an introductory letter, ‘Arab and Jew’, Contributing Editor Walter Karp writes about the special section on The Middle East:

Writings about Arabs and Jews these days strike a common note. The sound like the claims and counterclaims of litigants in a protracted lawsuit, the suit, of course, being the Arab-Israeli conflict. As in most protracted lawsuits, the rights and wrongs at issue have grown increasingly obscure. This being so, we thought it useful to step back from the contemporary fray and look at matters from a different standpoint. Instead of airing the dispute between the contending parties, we asked two authors to help us identify the contenders. What is an Arab? What is a Jew? What kind of history, what fundamental experiences, have made these two peoples what they are and brought them to their present impasse?

In ‘What is an Arab?’, James (later Jan) Morris gives a brief history of the Arabs and Islam, then sums up the position in 1971, reflecting on moves for Arab unity, before the rise of Islamism both in and beyond Arab countries in the wake of Iran’s 1979 Islamic Revolution:

Oil also gave the Arabs new confidence. They discovered, through no merit of their own, a new importance in themselves. They were not born to be poor after all, but to be immensely rich. They did not inhabit a backwater, but rode the mainstream of world affairs. The possession of oil gave the Arabs a tremendously powerful instrument of persuasion – or blackmail.

Horizon Caption: 'an Arab version of Virgo - the red dots represent the individual stars - adorns a Treatise on the Fixed Stars, written in 1009. By then, Arab universities thrived in Baghdad, Cairo, Cordoba, antedating Europe's by two centuries.'

Horizon Caption: ‘an Arab version of Virgo – the red dots represent the individual stars – adorns a Treatise on the Fixed Stars, written in 1009. By then, Arab universities thrived in Baghdad, Cairo, and Cordoba, antedating Europe’s by two centuries.’

Two more developments gave a new vitality to the Arabs. The first was the emergence, in the 1950s, of a remarkable young leader, the first Arab statesman of world importance since Saladin resisted the Crusades: Gamal Abdel Nasser, who made Egypt the epicentre of Arab progress and gave to all the Arab peoples, not prosperity, nor even serenity, but a new pride. The second was the existence of Israel, an alien body planted on the shores of the Arab world by the intervention of the West, which acted as a catalyst to the energies of the Arabs, spurring them on to a common cause and intermittently reviving their sense of camaraderie.

Horizon caption: 'Palestinian refugee children undergo guerilla training. They are the "lion cubs" of Fatah, the Arab paramilitary force dedicated to the destruction of Israel.'

Horizon caption: ‘Palestinian refugee children undergo guerilla training. They are the “lion cubs” of Fatah, the Arab paramilitary force dedicated to the destruction of Israel.’

All these factors have combined to bring the Arabs nearer to political unity than they have been since the heyday of their empire. The dream of unity is vivid and inescapable: it enters every Arab declaration and is a sine qua non of political respectability…

Somehow, it never works. Arab co-operation, let alone unity, remains fitful and unreliable. The leaders of the Arab world seldom trust each other – and not surprisingly, for each country’s leadership shifts from figure to figure, ideology to ideology, incessantly down the years.

In ‘What is a Jew?’, David Daiches considers ‘the criterion of Jewishness’:

If the Jews are, as is sometimes maintained, a “socio-religious group,” then neither Freud nor Marx could be considered Jews – nor could Spinoza after his expulsion from the Jewish community. One cannot solve the problem by arguing that Jewish identity is cultural rather than biological: there is a far greater cultural difference between an American Jewish businessman living in Westchester County and a Yemenite Jew then between an American Jew and a non-Jewish American. There is today no cultural unity among the Jews of the world, or even among the Jews of America: The Lubavitcher Rebbe and (shall I say?) Leslie Fiedler have no common language. To be Jewish does not necessarily involve membership in a specific race, a specific religion, or a specific culture. Yet a Jew remains a Jew until generations of assimilation have removed the memory of his origins.


Horizon caption: 'before the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem, a youth in ritual shawl takes part in the ancient bar mitzvah ceremony initiating him into manhood. All that remains of the Second Temple, which was destroyed by the Romans, the wall was taken by the Israeli army during the 1967 war with the Arabs: after 1900 years, it belings to the Jews once again.'

Horizon caption: ‘before the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem, a youth in ritual shawl takes part in the ancient bar mitzvah ceremony initiating him into manhood. All that remains of the Second Temple, which was destroyed by the Romans, the wall was taken by the Israeli army during the 1967 war with the Arabs: after 1900 years, it belongs to the Jews once again.’

He looks at the origins of current Jewish identity:

At the time of the rebellion against Rome, there were two main ideological groups in Judea, the Sadducees and the Pharisees. The former were conservative and priestly, concerned with temple worship, and the latter were concerned with the interpretation of the Law and its application to daily life. The Sadducees mostly perished with the destruction of the Temple; in a way this was fortunate for Jewish survival, for it meant that the Pharisaic interpretation of Judaism, which was in any case the more popular, became dominant. More than a mere profession of faith or a pattern of ritual was needed to maintain the identity of the Jewish people. But the Pharisees made the Law adaptable to circumstances widely different from those that had prevailed in earlier periods of Jewish history. It was their insistence on knowledge of the Law and in interpreting it far beyond its literal meaning that enabled Judaism to survive as a way of life in all parts of the world. From now on the rabbi – the scholar and interpreter of the Law – and not the priest, determined the nature of Jewish religious life.


Horizon caption: 'the frontispiece of a thirteenth-century Hebrew Bible is decorated with scenes from the Pentateuch, or first five books. In the center are the opening words of Genesis: "In the beginning..."'

Horizon caption: ‘the frontispiece of a thirteenth-century Hebrew Bible is decorated with scenes from the Pentateuch, or first five books. In the center are the opening words of Genesis: “In the beginning…”‘