The Little Review, May 1914 (Vol. 1., No. 3)

In Short

Edited by Margaret C. Anderson in Chicago, this May 1914 issue of The Little Review serves as a vibrant platform for radical cultural criticism, modern art, and social commentary. Through a collection of essays, theatrical reviews, book discussions, and published correspondence, the contributors critique the commercialization of American literature, analyze revolutionary ideas like anarchism and feminism, and champion European avant-garde theatre and dance. The periodical has endured as a crucial historical snapshot of American modernism, capturing the intellectual fervor of an era eager to break free from Victorian conventions and build a new cultural identity.

The Story

The issue opens with DeWitt C. Wing's "On Behalf of Literature," a scathing critique of an open letter written by Edwin Björkman to President Woodrow Wilson. Wing rejects Björkman's plea for state-sponsored prizes and subsidies for American writers, arguing that true art thrives on struggle rather than government coddling or commercial prosperity. Editor Margaret C. Anderson follows with a passionate assessment of anarchist Emma Goldman’s Chicago lectures, praising Goldman's blistering attacks on traditional religious and sexual moralities that constrain human passion and individual vitality.

Moving into literary aesthetics, Edith Wyatt’s essay "True to Life" echoes advice from John Galsworthy, urging American writers to abandon off-hand, hasty habits and instead sit long and attentively before their subjects. She warns against copying foreign trends or blindly following fashionable literary figures like H. G. Wells, insisting that authentic art must stem from an artist's unique, closely considered vision. George Burman Foster furthers this philosophical inquiry by reflecting on the tragic separation between serious life and gay art in modern culture, yearning for an earlier, ideal era where everyday work and art were unified.

The journal then shifts its focus to performance and contemporary criticism. Wing reports on his transformative experience watching the Welsh play Change at Chicago’s Fine Arts Theatre, celebrating its unvarnished realism and hard-hitting intellectual force over mere theatrical spectacle. An analytical essay on the modern ballet explores how Russian choreographers like Fokine are reviving pantomime and dance as expressively superior to traditional opera. Meanwhile, reviewer Llewellyn Jones takes a sharp look at G. K. Chesterton's poetry and polemics, poking fun at Chesterton's whimsical hatred of tea, cocoa, and soda water while unpacking his anti-liberal satire.

In its concluding movement, the issue engages with urgent social issues and editorial realities. A discussion of Abraham Flexner’s book on European prostitution sits alongside a reader's letter reflecting on the complexities of modern feminist education. Another correspondent humorously breaks down the humiliation of editorial rejection slips, drawing comfort from the realization that commercial editors often fail to recognize truly original work. The issue rounds out with concise book reviews, lists of current bestsellers, reader correspondence, and publisher advertisements, painting a complete picture of a bustling, uncompromising literary movement at the dawn of the modern era.

How It Unfolds

The rejection of patronage DeWitt C. Wing opens the issue by attacking the notion of state subsidies for authors, claiming that comfort corrupts real literary genius.

The anarchist challenge Margaret C. Anderson summarizes Emma Goldman's provocative Chicago lectures, highlighting Goldman's assault on puritanical morality and property constraints.

The call for artistic focus Edith Wyatt criticizes American writers for being hasty and derivative, urging them to contemplate their own surroundings deeply rather than imitating European models.

The division of art and life George Burman Foster analyzes how modern industrial society tore art away from daily labor, rendering art a luxury for the rich and work a drudgery for the poor.

The power of authentic drama Wing reviews the play Change at Chicago's Fine Arts Theatre, praising its uncompromising realism and the raw, unpretentious performance of its Welsh cast.

The revival of dance and satire Essays explore how modern ballet surpasses opera in pure emotional expression, followed by an analysis of G. K. Chesterton's satirical, anti-modernist verse.

The writer's struggle Contributors tackle feminist educational debates, dissect social studies on European prostitution, and commiserate over the absurdities of receiving editorial rejection slips.

The People

• Margaret C. Anderson: The energetic editor of The Little Review who champions bold, non-conformist ideas. She seeks absolute creative freedom and writes with intense admiration for radical figures who challenge societal norms.
• DeWitt C. Wing: A blunt literary critic who despises commercialism and artistic hand-outs. He wants writers to embrace hard, uphill struggles rather than seeking state honors or easy financial comfort.
• Emma Goldman: The famous anarchist lecturer whose Chicago speeches electrify Anderson. She wants to liberate human beings from state authority, religious dogma, and restrictive moral codes that stifle love and passion.
• Edith Wyatt: A thoughtful essayist who wants American literature to develop its own genuine, patient voice. She opposes the American tendency toward casual off-hand habits and superficial imitation of foreign writers.
• Edwin Björkman: An author whose open letter to President Wilson sparks controversy; he wants official government recognition and financial support to encourage American poets and writers.
• H. G. Wells: The prominent English novelist who serves as a lightning rod for debate in the magazine, viewed by some as a visionary scientist-novelist and by others as a trendy bandwagon for imitators.

In Its Own Voice

"I do not offer the old smooth prizes, but offer rough new prizes"

DeWitt C. Wing quotes Walt Whitman to argue that genuine literary artists are driven by inner passion rather than official awards or comfortable financial security.

"In the consciousness of our nation there appears to exist a mysterious though deep-seated awe for the prestige of the casual and the off-hand."

Edith Wyatt observes the troubling tendency of American readers and writers to value hasty, superficial work over patient, deeply considered artistic observation.

"There was art without life, life without art, and both art and life suffering from ailments which neither understood."

George Burman Foster lamentation captures the tragic cultural rift between serious everyday work and genuine artistic expression in modern industrial society.

What It's Really About

Underneath its literary reviews and theatrical commentary, the issue is fundamentally about the struggle for individual and cultural autonomy in an increasingly commercialized world. It wrestles with the question of how artists can remain authentic when society demands popular conformity or economic efficiency. The contributors consistently interrogate the boundaries of morality, feminism, and social reform, asking whether existing institutions can ever foster genuine human flourishing. By juxtaposing political radicalism with avant-garde aesthetics, the publication argues that true social progress and true artistic innovation are inseparable—both require a complete rejection of stale orthodoxies, comfortable compromises, and borrowed ideas.

Why Read It Today

This issue offers a captivating, front-row seat to the birth of American modernism. Readers interested in cultural history, print culture, or the evolution of radical thought will find it fascinating to see how early 20th-century intellectuals wrestled with issues that still feel remarkably relevant: the commercialization of art, the challenge of staying authentic in a fast-paced culture, and the debate over social reform versus individual liberty.

The prose throughout is fiery, opinionated, and sharp, reflecting the high-stakes passion of an era on the brink of massive cultural shifts. While contemporary readers might occasionally find the specific references to 1914 plays, forgotten bestsellers, or minor published letters somewhat obscure, the journal's bold energy easily carries it through. What stays with you is the unyielding spirit of the contributors—their fierce refusal to compromise, their deep commitment to intellectual debate, and their unshakeable belief that literature and art are matters of life and death.