: The Little Review March 1916 (Vol. 3 No. 1) by Various Anderson Margaret C Editor - Literature Modern 20th century Periodicals

@FreeBooks

Posted in: #FreeBooks #FreeBooksIndia #FreeBooksApp #gg

Vote Up Vote Down   0 Reactions

Login to give Reaction!

In a strange land; so strangely treated! That prophets might be understood in another land their priests distort them that barbarians may comprehend!

Editorials

THE LITTLE REVIEW is a magazine of Art and Revolution. If you ask me which it believes in most I shall have to say--Art. Because there is no real revolution unless it is born of the same spirit which produces real art.

A man like Bill Haywood doesn't agree with this. "Why do you ask why some one doesn't start the revolution?" he says; "don't you see that we're in the midst of a revolution now?" No, I don't see it. I see evolution at work in labor--not revolution. But I see something more than evolution at work in the arts--music, painting, poetry.

"... to obtain victory over man and circumstance there is no other way but that of feeding one's own exaltation and magnifying one's own dream of beauty or of power." You can argue that D'Annunzio, who said this, is neither a very great man nor a very great artist. Nevertheless it is what Beethoven did; and it is what Jeanne d'Arc did.... It is what Bill Haywood does; but it is not what most labor leaders do, or what most radicals do. It is not what the laborers themselves do. How horrible it is to realize that when a man is slaving for his very life he can not be selective in what he does, that he has no dream left to magnify, and yet that he must have or perish....

This is why I would go to hear John Cowper Powys even if he spoke in such a benighted place as the Hebrew Institute. Boycotts are important, but they will not help a revolution as a dream will. Mr. Powys will help you to find both an exaltation and a dream....

M. B.

Propaganda

Margaret Sanger has been "forgiven" by the government, but the statutes regarding family limitation remain the same. Any unfortunate unknown can be whisked into jail for propagating birth control, just as usual. Mrs. Sanger didn't even demand redress for her husband, who spent a month in prison. Surely he was entitled to a dismissal on the same grounds--more entitled to it, even in the eyes of the law: he had never circulated the pamphlets or in any way agitated for birth control. He is an artist, not a propagandist. But he served his sentence, and nothing was done or is being done about it. Mrs. Sanger means to go on with her work. What does the government mean to do about it?

Emma Goldman is about to stand trial for the same "offense." In her case there will be no "influential" women rushing back and forth to Washington to interview the President in her behalf. I only wish there would be. It would insure her freedom for the next year, and it would be so amusing to figure out on what grounds the Good Presbyterian could effect the release of the Arch Anarchist. But Emma Goldman will fight her case alone, and on its merits. If she does not succeed in effecting a revision of the penal code regarding the whole matter of birth control she will spend the next year in prison, I understand. You can all help by sending your protests to Magistrate Simms and also by giving your support to Dr. Long and Dr. Haiselden or any other person who gets involved in these laws of the dark ages.

Why do you object to Jean Crones' reasoning? I reprint his second letter, transposed into English:

Why did I do it? While in Europe millions of Christians are slaughtering each other in the most bloody massacre, and in this free country thousands of men and women are tramping the streets without food and shelter, and at the same time the church holds dinners that cost a cover, beginning with Beluga caviar and champagne--the money which was beggared from poor working men and women, the money which the blood of poor workers has run for.

Free books android app tbrJar TBR JAR Read Free books online gutenberg

(0)

Login to post a comment!