Alma: The Process
On January 17, 1939, the Section of Fine Arts in Washington, DC, sent Indianapolis artist Joe Cox an official letter inviting him to create a mural in the Alma, Michigan, Post Office based on his submission to the regional East Detroit competition, which Cox was able to enter as an Indiana resident. The Section’s offer was standard: Cox needed to research the location, submit an initial design for approval, and check in with the Section along the way in order to receive the promised $690 in installments. Cox quickly wrote back to accept the offer on January 23 and he followed up only two days later to inform the Section that he would be traveling the three hundred miles from Indianapolis to Alma in the following week to meet with the postmaster and research the town.
Unfortunately, we don’t have any letters from Cox about his visit specifically. But on May 29, 1939, he wrote to the Section with his first preliminary sketch. His description and the subject matter give us a sense of the artist’s impression of the Alma area.
“My subject deals with the many successful oil wells that have recently been drilled in the neighborhood of Alma. The town has three new oil refineries. In the background are suggestions of agriculture and the peach orchards so well known to southern Michigan.” (Image 1) In this first sketch, Cox doesn’t depict the refineries but he does show the metallic base of an oil well and workers loading barrels of oil onto a truck. It appears that the man in a suit is making business arrangements with the farm family. In the distance and middle ground, we can see that agricultural work continues. It is a crowded and busy scene, but also one that is consciously contemporary to New Deal Alma.
Unfortunately for Cox, the Section was not impressed by his design. Edward Rowan, the superintendent, responded on June 5: “The introduction of the well immediately in the back yard of the farmhouse, while it may be authentic, is nevertheless an uninteresting note and it is suggested that you carry this element into the far fields on the left. This will allow you to present a rural pastoral threatened, as it were, by the discovery of oil. The pink of the peach orchards occurs to us as a disturbing note in relation to the other reds used in the composition. This can be overcome in the revisions which I will appreciate your making and returning to this office at your early convenience.”
Sadly, the National Archives only holds black-and-white reproductions of artists’ sketches, so we can’t engage with the Section’s criticisms of Cox’s color scheme. It is interesting to note, however, the criticism around the depiction of oil. Rowan seemed to react to the proximity of the well to the house and the farm—a rare criticism of a muralist sticking too close to reality. The idea of the “threatened” rural pastoral is also interesting because Rowan praised murals that united oil and agriculture in other states, but Cox seems to have leaned too far into reality. There is nothing romantic about oil infrastructure and a business deal in the front yard, unlike murals where oil derricks are kept on the horizon across a sweeping wheatfield. It seems that this composition is exactly what Rowan had in mind since he suggested that Cox “carry this element [oil wells] into the far fields on the left.”
On July 18, 1939, Cox responded, apologizing for the delay which he attributed to a trip to the World’s Fair in New York. With the letter, Cox included two new sketches and an official form outlining his technical details like what type of paint he planned to use (J.M. Paillard Oils) and how he would adhere his canvas to the wall (an adhesive made of white lead and Venice turpentine). He also submitted a sample of his canvas for approval—Weber #2 double-primed linen canvas.
In his revised designs, Cox clearly made an effort to incorporate the Section’s suggestions. Both retain the oil industry but move wells further back in the scene. However, Cox also added a refinery—a feature of the Alma landscape that he mentioned in an earlier letter. Of his first revised design, Cox explained: “In #1 I have used the farm scene including the peach orchards at picking time and a suggestion of dairying and agriculture. In the middle distance is the growing oil industry and the town in the distance.” (Image 2) It is a crowded scene, just like his first attempt, but even more chaotic as Cox attempts to include all of Alma’s industries.
Of his second design, Cox wrote: “In #2 I have chosen a much more simple approach, showing the rural people such as the farmer, business man, workman or laborer and students from Alma college coming home at the end of the day. Alma College, located in Alma is very well known in this section of the country.” (Image 3) The second design is undeniably more straightforward, and we can imagine that many Alma citizens would recognize themselves in the depicted types. The Section, however, was not impressed. Rowan responded on July 28, explaining that the Section was “not inclined” to recommend the approval of either sketch. “Both designs appear to be studies hastily undertaken in the studio rather than serious interpretations based upon authentic observation.” Of the first sketch, the Section felt that Cox should instead focus on one industry rather than creating a “conglomerate exposition” and of the second, they explained that, while the landscapes were intriguing, the figures were uninteresting and the cow poorly drawn.
Following this round of criticism, Cox did not respond until October 18. However, as he explained in the letter, in the intervening months the artist had moved to Iowa City to teach and study at the University of Iowa. (See The Artist) With this letter, Cox submitted six new designs though he did not describe any. However, we know that the fifth design is the design that would ultimately become the final mural because, on November 4, Rowan finally responded with good news. “Your designs have been considered by the members of the Section and the Supervising Architect and of the group the design which you have designated as number five showing the wheat harvest is preferred. This is extremely handsome in composition and general rhythmic qualities and it occurs to us that it will be of great interest to the people of Alma.” Luckily, Cox’s color mockup of his selected design survives in the Smithsonian American Art Museum. (Image 4) With approval, the Section also released Cox’s contract in November, which outlined the title (“Harvest”) and medium (oil on canvas), as well as the fee schedule ($150 for the preliminary design, $150 for the full-size cartoon, and $390 on installation and approval) and a timeline to completion (274 days).
Now with an approved design, Cox pressed ahead on the project at a quick pace. On February 27, 1940, a few months after the initial approval, the Section approved a photograph of Cox’s full-scale mural cartoon, which released the second payment. Only weeks later, on March 15, 1940, Cox wrote to Rowan with a large photograph of the completed mural, ready for installation the weekend of March 23 (the University of Iowa’s Spring Break). To speed things along, Rowan telegraphed Cox on March 20th to grant permission for the mural’s installation. In a letter only dated “April 1940,” Cox wrote Rowan to confirm the mural’s installation and to provide the required photographic evidence. (Image 5)
The photograph of the installed mural is now held in the Section files at the National Archives so we can see the mural as it looked in spring 1940, complete with a lighting fixture obstructing the view. These hanging lamps were a frequent frustration to muralists so, like many other artists, Cox also submitted an official form to have the lamp height adjusted. After hearing from Cox, Rowan wrote to the local postmaster, Joseph Winslow, to solicit a report and to provide information about caring for the mural (a dry soft rag for dusting). Notably, Cox also sent more detailed instructions to Rowan: “Wash with warm water containing small amount of ivory soap. Mural upon completion was varnished with a wax varnish - washing will remove this, so it should be revarnished.” Rowan did not share this information with Winslow, though he indicated that for more involved cleaning, the postmaster should write to the Section. Though there was some confusion with the postmaster's letters being misplaced in the Section offices, on May 23, 1940, Cox’s contract was finally stamped with approval for the payment of his final installment of $390.
Sources
- “Alma.” Box 49, Case Files Concerning Embellishments of Public Buildings, 1934-1943, Entry 133, Records of the Public Buildings Service, Record Group 121, National Archives II, College Park, Maryland.
