One of the more interesting lost items of CASiana is a critique of an exhibition of CAS' paintings held at Berkeley's Claremont Hotel in July 1927. This had not been located by Don Fryer for EMPEROR OF DREAMS, and although numerous references occur to it in the letters of both CAS and HPL (see MYSTERIES OF TIME AND SPIRIT, and also LETTERS TO ROBERT BLOCH [I think]), none of them mention where it appeared or who wrote it. I checked all of the SF and Berkeley newspapers for July and August 1927 looking for the
article, and found a brief one-paragraph mention of the exhibit in a longer article in (I think) the Chronicle, but this couldn't have been the effusive panegyric that HPL refers to. Based upon some letters, I concluded that the author was probably Harry Noyes Pratt, a fellow poet who also ran the Claremont's art gallery.
Anyway, I received a phone call this weekend from a friend of Clark's who is helping me in my research. Several years ago he received from the family who founded the AUburn Journal about fifteen years worth of the paper, and was going through some of them when he ran across several articles referring to CAS. One of them identified the article in question and gave its source, which I will cite latter on. In the meanwhile, I thought that I would share some of his comments with you:

"There is a strange world, a realm recognized by scientists, from which spring 'new arts' in painting, music and poetry. It is a realm of the grotesque: it is a world of peculiar beauty. These painting by Clark Ashton Smith which are now on display at the Hotel Claremont's Art Gallery would seem to have had their origin in just that source--the realm of the subconscious, the subjective mind. And why not? Poets habe found oddly beautiful fantasies there, expressions which most certainly were not subject to their own volition: and Clark Ashton Smith is a poet, an exceptionally talented one to whom Edwin Markham paid marked tribute on his recent western visit. Is it not possible that in this painting, an art
which is a new expression to him, Smith is receiving his inspiration directly from the subconscious?
"Evidence of this is found in the fact that where he
consciously endeavors to represent the landscape of the foothill company about Auburn, where he makes his home, his work is mediocre and uninteresting, markedly in contrast to the fantastic loveliness of the group of oils and water color which is on display. Here are tropic jungles with all manner of weirdly beautiful trees and flowers. There are lands of black skies where flowers bloom besdes waters that flow in utter silence. Hillsides life from loneliness to loneliness, a land of faery with grotesque trees spread above crag and cavern. It is not an art expression which will appeal to
the mass, but to the artist, to the poet, to the psychologist this exhibit will prove of exceeding interest."
Comments? I also posted this over at ZN.
Best, Scott

This is very interesting, indeed. I wonder whether the critic was aware of the then-nascent Surrealist movement in France? It's possible, I suppose, although my impression is that Surrealism did not begin to become widely known in the U.S. until the early-to-mid 1930's (coinciding with a few widely publicized art exhibitions here, a trip to New York by Salvadore Dali, etc.). I mention this, of course, because of the repeated references to the notion of CAS's drawing inspiration from the subconscious (sic, an idea that is closely associated with Surrealism (the reference here seems clearly to Freud--oft considered the "patron saint" of Surrealism--though we all know what CAS thought of him!). Judging from CAS's "Sonnet Surrealiste", I gather that he was rather dismissive of Surrealism, as well, although I'd be curious to know whether he ever commented on it elsewhere.

Scott,
I just read the information from the article you quoted in this post on CAS's artwork and found it very interesting indeed....I have not seen all of Smith's artwork and certainly wish that I could allievate that. While I think CAS was a better poet and short story writer than artist...I do admire his artwork that I have seen . Thanks for this very imformative quote from the article you have....
-Loton-

Scott - Your discovery jogged a tiny piece of memory. I recall
Clark mentioning Pratt, but the context of that conversation escapes
me entirely at the moment, other than that it occurred in Pacific
Grove. My guess is that your guess is correct. While Clark took a
dim view of Psychiatry, it was in its early bloom of popularity
among the "artsy" crowd of the day. That, of course, was when there
was still a serious measure of science attached to it and it had
not degenerated into the pretentious silliness that it is today
(see Dr. Tana Dineen's excellent, "Manufacturing Victims). That
art critics of the time would have made psychoanalytical references
was wholly appropriate to that era. Clark's artwork (the good
stuff as also the sculpture) came from the same source as the
tales and poems -- the entrance to that site is a hidden cave
that can be found only by inquisitive shepherd boy's - like Xeethra.
That is, for those who are able to launch out without a lifeline
or even a trail of breadcrumbs to find your way back -- it is a place to visit with no guarantees that you will even have the will to return.
Dr. F

Howdy all,

I haven't put much up of late, but when I saw this about lost articles about CAS and his artwork I had to reply.

In about 1978, I was working with a bunch of SF/Fantasy artists to form a kind of artists union. It was based out of Southern California and it was called Fantasy Artist Network (FAN). They published a magazine, here is where my memories get vague, I think the well done glossy zine was entitled FAN or Fantasy, something like that...
anyway, I had told them about Smith's art side and they asked me to write some articles about his art work which they were surprised he did any.

I wrote a two part article, one on his painting etc another on his scuptures et. al.
These came out in two issues (I think somewhere between 1978-79). They had some nice photos/information thanks to people like his step-son Bill Dorman, Emil Petaja, Donald Sydney-Fryer, Fritz Leiber and the Southern California gang of CAS associates and friends. I also picked up some excellent Smith art pieces myself that were on display/for sale/auction in the artshow at the World Fantsy Convention held in LA that year. I bought some with Donald helping me out and Donald said I got one of the better Smith art work on display at the con (it was done on this somewhat large rectangle piece of silk, framed in this bamboo-like frame...as many already know, Smith painted/drew on all sorts of material he had on hand at the time of a work's creation).

Anyway, I write this because someone out there might be able to help trace these articles down. I will do whatever I can to aid in this effort. They were considered at the time to be one of the few in depth pieces on Smith the artist and led to a renewed interest in CAS work in the SF art field. And, I personally would like to see them again (with all my world traveling over the years, I have packed away, misplaced the magazines...of course, the art itself that was mine was put into safe keeping). Plus, I think might add to material for Smith fans' shared knowledge and for research.

Thanks to any who might use their valuable time and energy on this and I hope this bit of info is of some help! FJM

Hi Fred:
Interesting post. I have some friends who were active fans from that period, I'll check with him. Did you check with Don Fryer to see if he has copies? Thanks--Scott

Howdy Scott,

I don't have a way of contacting Donald. Ron was suppose try to create a way for us contacting each other, but for some reason that hasn't worked yet. Thanks for the help.

I am sure that Donald probably remembers the LA con (I became actual friends with Leiber at that time, I remember how hunourously proud he was to take us, though, I can't remember who "us" were, to a real "greasey spoon" place near by...I do remember how we talked of CAS artwork)and the artwork I speak of, but I can't remember who all I gave copies to, eventually, of the actual magazine articles when they came out:-|

I think Dorman might help (even Hal Rubin) as they both were journalism professors at CSUS at the same time I was there. But, anyone who was into the art scene then, especially, in Southern California, should remember these two women who started FAN, as they really tried to get the SF artists "together" on such issues as not letting someone just walk into an art show, take pictures and then use them. These women I remember well except I can't remember names, I can describe them etc. They worked hard and were going to a lot of the conventions then. So, maybe some of your friends might remember them/the zine.

As a "professional" writer/poet/artist/critic for more years I don't want to recall (or can't haha,) I am compelled to make a comment connected to some of the above thoughts...the use of the term "surreal" has become an all to easy catch phrase to use on some art. Smith was not a surrealist and if anyone is familiar with the creative process, Smith is typical, an artist, like a writer, will think in multi-media ways while using one form as their core for outward expression, using of various other forms to expand on what is inside and it is not unusual for them to dabble into other areas with no thought to a style of art. CAS' art was done in this way :-O

Again, thanks Scott( and any others) for helping out and hopefully we will find some more Smith relatd material. FJM

FMJ:

Quote:

[...]I am compelled to make a comment connected to some of the above thoughts...the use of the term 'surreal' has become an all to easy catch phrase to use on some art. Smith was not a surrealist [...]

It seems to me that you're setting fire to a straw man. I can't speak for anyone else, but nowhere in my post do I suggest that CAS was a Surrealist. Strictly speaking, such a label would apply only to one who was a member of the movement, or who otherwise explicitly appropriated the label. My post merely speculated as to whether the critic in question was familiar with the then-newborn Surrealist movement, and whether that knowledge (or merely an awareness of Freudian concepts alone, as Dr. Farmer has suggested) informed his review of CAS's painting. I also wondered whether, aside from his somewhat snide sonnet, CAS had ever commented publicly or privately on the Surrealist movement. That's it!

I do think, however, that applying the adjective surreal to some of CAS's work is not entirely mal apropos. An early appreciation of CAS by Robert Allerton Parker, for instance, appeared during the 1940's in VVV, a Surrealist publication. CAS may or may not (in the absence of further evidence, I'm assuming the latter) have appreciated the Surrealists' work, but at least some of the Surrealists appear to have appreciated his.

Mr. Mayer -
You may may contact Donald by sending me a personal email
at remraf3@att.net so I can send you his address without posting
it. I would be reluctant to post it without his permission, and
I will obtain his permission to send you his mailing address as well.
Dr. F

So, CASmith was not a "card-carrying" Surrealist, per se. He may even have thought negatively about that which was Surreal, or that which came out of consciously appropriated Surrealism. But, aha, here's the trick, in the casual and unexamined definition of many people, they may feel it justified to call Smith's work surreal when they really mean weird. Weird has a negative connotation, so it might appear safer to some to apply, helplessly, the term surreal when confronted with the clearly weird. Frankly, Surreal art is quite often weird. After all, to portray the real is, on this level, realistic; to portray the unreal is therefore, by extention, something other than realistic, and so the term surreal becomes misappropriated and so, misapplied.

It's a coloquial usage, when it's used here. "What do you think of this?", and the polite reply is to pause, consider that it may be rude to say that it is clearly weird, and so, picking a harmless-sounding and inoffensive word like surreal seems a convenient solution.

But just wait 'till the Surrealists hear, they'll set the record straight!

Smith's art is also charmingly innocent, even lacking basic techniques of draftsmanship, proportion, and depth of field perception. This puts him on a par with instinctive artists like Grandma Moses. But why should he, a dreamer, spend his efforts portraying something we could look around ourselves and observe? Better that he should show us that which only he could see. Of course not all Smith artwork is weird, or non-real. He often gives us landscapes with trees, natural objects, but in all his work there is that element of sharing his vision. If it was a real place he portrayed, it would not be like making a copy of that place, but of that place as he saw it.

The term surreal, it seems to me, is a general purpose adjective that is applied often quite appropriately, and without a trace of muddle-headedness, to forms of art that are not specifcally circumscribed by the historical Surrealist movement. The Surrealists themselves often identified precursors and "fellow-travellers" whom they felt anticipated or embodied certain of their ideas and aesthetics. One additional point worth mentioning is that the Surrealists who mention CAS typically refer to his writings, and not to his artworks. (I have't looked at the Parker article in some time, however, so I could be mistaken). The relatively sparse Surrealist commentary on CAS that I've read tends to focus on his weird tales, in particular. This fact is not surprising, because, although I daresay they would have appreciated some of CAS's poetic imagery, the Surrealists, like most Modernists, foolishly and dogmatically anathematized as "reactionary" any use of fixed verse forms.

As a sidenote, it may interest some to know that CAS's words appear in Franklin Rosemont's 1978 book-length introduction to his notable anthology of Andre Breton's (founder of the Surrealist movement) writings in English translation entitled What Is Surrealism?. Each chapter has a quotation heading it, and one of them is CAS's statement "The only impossible thing is to define and delimit the impossible". Thus, twenty-five years ago, was I introduced to the name and writings of Clark Ashton Smith! If it hadn't been for the Surrealists, I may have discovered his work much later.

Yes, Rosemont's book about Andre Breton does include a quote from CAS, and that is a nice surrealist connection. Another connection is the discussion of CAS's work (and Lovecraft's) in an essay by Robert Parker, published in 1943 or 1944 in the magazine VVV, which was published by the surrealists in exile here in America.