LETTERS: Blacklist Correspondence with William Shawn.
Janet Flanner and Kay Boyle
Correspondence with William Shawn Regarding Blacklist
Flanner, Janet and Kay Boyle. Blacklist Correspondence with William Shawn, ca. 1952-1953.
A collection of 5 Janet Flanner letters (4 TLS, 1 telegrams, with copies) and 4 Kay Boyle letters (2 TLS, 1 ALS and one carbon copy, signed in type); to editors William Shawn and Katharine White at The New Yorker; ca. 1952-1953. All of these letters, sent during the McCarthy period, regard Boyle’s being denied accreditation at The New Yorker; eventually losing her position as the magazine’s foreign correspondent, a post she had held for six years. This led to her being blacklisted at other American magazines. In her letters, Flanner defends Boyle’s character and tries to convince Shawn and White not to deny her accreditation. Together with 3 of Shawn’s carbons and 1 partial typed draft of a letter; 3 of White’s carbons and 1 interoffice memo addressed to Shawn; and one memo (Leo) Hofeller to Shawn.
Together with:
Typed letter signed Ann Watkins to William Shawn; April 16, 1953; 1p., one leaf of Ann Watkins, Inc. letterhead. Regarding Boyle’s accreditation.
Typed letter signed Willard Allen to Kay Boyle (Franckenstein); May 4, 1953; 1p., one leaf of U.S. Army headquarters letterhead. Informs Boyle that she has lost her accreditation because he has not received her Employer’s Certification.
Seven typed letter carbon copies (2 from Don Cook at the Herald Tribune; 2 from Stuart Rose at the Saturday Evening Post; 2 from Edward Aswell at McGraw Hill and 1 from Jack Raymond at the New York Times); ca. May, 1952; all sending Employer Certifications on Boyle’s behalf.
Newsclippings.
Boyle writes to Katharine White for help in the late spring of 1952, saying that “it became necessary in the past few weeks for us to defend ourselves against unspecified charges” (June 1, 1952), which she came to discover were charges that her husband, Joseph von Franckenstain, was a security risk. Boyle claimed that on her part, “I have belonged to no organizations, and engaged in no activities, other than the organization and activities of the United Nations’ Associates, we are all of the opinion that there are no charges against me that could standup if brought out into the light of day” (ibid.). She goes on to ask if White or Shawn “could make a statement as to my loyalty to the United States” (ibid.).
When this issue of Boyle’s accreditation first came up, it appears that the editors at The New Yorker were on her side; Boyle writes again to White, thanks her for her “sympathy in this vile situation” (June 20, 1952). She goes on to acknowledge a note that Shawn sent on her behalf, for which she says she is grateful.
By February of 1953, it became clear that the New Yorker was in fact not going to support Boyle. In a carbon copy of a letter to Shawn (original letter is apparently missing), Boyle describes her surprise at her accreditation not being renewed, and closes by asking,
But what is the use of “The New Yorker” saying all the truly fine and meaningful things that it has said in “the Talk of the Town” concerning guilt by association, and other evils of our time, if the editors are not prepared to follow up these statements by whole-hearted action? When an old associate is in need of defense, the warm response should be there, even though it be there for only one instant out of a busy, wearing day. (February 1, 1953)
Flanner took it upon herself to write to White in defense of Boyle, explaining that “Kay Boyle needs aid” (March 15, no year but 1953), and that she and her husband were subjected to a trial in Bad Godesberg. Flanner testified on Boyle’s behalf at the trial, explicitly as a friend, not a colleague at the New Yorker, explaining, “I am violently opposed to the horrible, shapeless, irresponsible practice of denunciation. It was a satisfaction, I tell you, to strike against it. I was glad to stand for an Amer
Print Inquire