Pictured above are images of a diverse group of individuals from all over the world that were found in an exhibition featured in the Modern Museum of Art in 1955. This exhibition was titled The Family of Man. This exhibit showcased photographs of men, women, and children submitted by 273 photographers world wide. To the average visitor, the actions of people from all over the world were universal and easily recognizable. In the 1950’s , following the recent World War, this was new way of looking at the world – as one. This brilliance of showing universal actions such as birth and death brought people to explore a new world ideal. Following World War II, which encompassed the horrors of mass murders of the Holocaust and the use of the Atomic bomb, “The Family of Man carried with it undercurrents of protest and of utopian globalism (F Turner 83). To say this curatorial display lacked a political movement is false but to say this was a new wave of popular culture making a statement and dictating public opinion in the evolution of human rights and universalism was completely accurate.
This body of art showcased the political sentiments of some contemporaries of this time.Even the exhibit’s creator, Edward Steichen, claimed, “he came to do the show…because earlier exhibitions that he had organized had failed to spark antiwar activism” (F Turner 59). With this new exhibit , Steichen wanted to show “what a wonderful thing life was, how marvelous people were, and, above all, how alike people were in all parts of the world” (F Turner 59). This inclusive movement was a result of rejection of authoritative government and ideals -for the horrors of the very recent past was owed to these types of regimes. From the public, social scientists, and creative figures, there was a push for a democratic identity that separated them from the countries which allowed rapid discrimination and undermined human rights. This sentiment valued democracy and this separation had to be made paramount by its acceptance of diversity of race, sex,and culture. Although this exhibit did not display the full acceptance of all of these categories, its purpose was to showcase democratic ideals, social progress, and even the flaws of the current time.
Critics argued the origins of this display were showcasing the flaws of the 1950’s but Steichen argued that it, instead, it relayed the struggles of the 1940’s. As the exhibit displayed the people, actions, achievements from of all over the world, their nations’ leaders were finding their place in the world’s hierarchy in terms of alliance and the protection of human rights. The United Nations had just formed and the protection of human rights was a controversial topic. There was a new push for the subject of human rights, not just in a domestic sphere, but for the people suffering abroad as well. The question was whether this interest had always been around and if it was a cause that large super powers now wished to acknowledge or if the actions of the Germans in WWII had forced a new age of concern for humanity that could no longer be overlooked. While drafting the United Nations‘s Declaration of Human Rights , countries like Russia and Great Britain attempted to undermine these issues because the execution of the laws they were helping create would limit their autonomy in their homelands. However, “the British and the Russians had failed to foresee the force of public opinion within the US” ( Mazower 392). The people of the U.S. no longer wished to be bystanders of the violation of human rights internationally. This change in the priority of human rights in U.S. public opinion came to prominence by a new waves of mass media like The Family of Man exhibit.
The creators of this exhibit knew that this universalism was where public opinion was headed. To see the faces of people who were virtually just like them doing things they recognized lead to an interest of protection of human beings all over the world. The purpose of the display was to push for a new democratic identity and allowed these ideals to be massively shown and internally accepted. It was noted that the display did not show all of the flaws of American society or of the world but, the creators knew how much the public would be able to accept. This display set the tone for change.
Pictured above are images of a diverse group of individuals from all over the world that were found in an exhibition featured in the Modern Museum of Art in 1955. This exhibition was titled The Family of Man. This exhibit showcased photographs of men, women, and children submitted by 273 photographers world wide. To the average visitor, the actions of people from all over the world were universal and easily recognizable. In the 1950’s , following the recent World War, this was new way of looking at the world – as one. This brilliance of showing universal actions such as birth and death brought people to explore a new world ideal. Following World War II, which encompassed the horrors of mass murders of the Holocaust and the use of the Atomic bomb, “The Family of Man carried with it undercurrents of protest and of utopian globalism (F Turner 83). To say this curatorial display lacked a political movement is false but to say this was a new wave of popular culture making a statement and dictating public opinion in the evolution of human rights and universalism was completely accurate.
This body of art showcased the political sentiments of some contemporaries of this time.Even the exhibit’s creator, Edward Steichen, claimed, “he came to do the show…because earlier exhibitions that he had organized had failed to spark antiwar activism” (F Turner 59). With this new exhibit , Steichen wanted to show “what a wonderful thing life was, how marvelous people were, and, above all, how alike people were in all parts of the world” (F Turner 59). This inclusive movement was a result of rejection of authoritative government and ideals -for the horrors of the very recent past was owed to these types of regimes. From the public, social scientists, and creative figures, there was a push for a democratic identity that separated them from the countries which allowed rapid discrimination and undermined human rights. This sentiment valued democracy and this separation had to be made paramount by its acceptance of diversity of race, sex,and culture. Although this exhibit did not display the full acceptance of all of these categories, its purpose was to showcase democratic ideals, social progress, and even the flaws of the current time.
Critics argued the origins of this display were showcasing the flaws of the 1950’s but Steichen argued that it, instead, it relayed the struggles of the 1940’s. As the exhibit displayed the people, actions, achievements from of all over the world, their nations’ leaders were finding their place in the world’s hierarchy in terms of alliance and the protection of human rights. The United Nations had just formed and the protection of human rights was a controversial topic. There was a new push for the subject of human rights, not just in a domestic sphere, but for the people suffering abroad as well. The question was whether this interest had always been around and if it was a cause that large super powers now wished to acknowledge or if the actions of the Germans in WWII had forced a new age of concern for humanity that could no longer be overlooked. While drafting the United Nations‘s Declaration of Human Rights , countries like Russia and Great Britain attempted to undermine these issues because the execution of the laws they were helping create would limit their autonomy in their homelands. However, “the British and the Russians had failed to foresee the force of public opinion within the US” ( Mazower 392). The people of the U.S. no longer wished to be bystanders of the violation of human rights internationally. This change in the priority of human rights in U.S. public opinion came to prominence by a new waves of mass media like The Family of Man exhibit.
The creators of this exhibit knew that this universalism was where public opinion was headed. To see the faces of people who were virtually just like them doing things they recognized lead to an interest of protection of human beings all over the world. The purpose of the display was to push for a new democratic identity and allowed these ideals to be massively shown and internally accepted. It was noted that the display did not show all of the flaws of American society or of the world but, the creators knew how much the public would be able to accept. This display set the tone for change.
If this exhibit was intended to bring a greater since of human unity then the impact was small. Some may even say that there was no impact at all. Knowing what you know of history, do you believe that this did any good?
Christopher Jackson
Despite the criticism that the exhibit was politically motivated, I agree with you that it was still significant. I don’t think that it had to significantly change the world to be meaningful and useful during the time. That the exhibit was put together at all and its desire to show the world as unified after WW2 is meaningful in my opinion, and I think it showed the desire of much of the public to come back together and not allow another war like this to happen.
The quote “The people of the U.S. no longer wished to be bystanders of the violation of human rights internationally.” really caught my attention. Would you consider this the turning point of when the United States taking mantle of leading the world in terms of international human right movement? Alternatively was this the period of time when the United States went from being isolationists to move involved internationally? I thought the blog was thought provoking and the idea that people” To see the faces of people who were virtually just like them doing things they recognized lead to an interest of protection of human beings all over the world.” makes me think that humans inherently care for one another.
You did a great job at analyzing the intent of the art piece. I thought the quote “a result of rejection of authoritative government and ideals -for the horrors of the very recent past was owed to these types of regimes,” really encapsulated the attitudes that were prominent in the post-war period. Do you believe that the majority of people felt this sort of skepticism towards their government, or did nationalistic pride and patriotism place a veil on the eyes of the masses.