Life Magazine

Author: Nadia Garriga

Reflecting on Life Magazine: The Intersection of Consumerism and Modernity

The photo magazine Life captured every facet of American life via weekly publications from 1936 to 1972. While its online publication persists, Life was arguably in its prime with its run of physically printed magazines [1]. The curated images were consumed by a middle-class audience that had arguably never been exposed to the artistic and formal side of photography. Reflections on the magazine’s heyday tend to laud the publication with praise for its innovations and cultural enlightenment it brought to the United States. Most admiration for the magazine was geared towards its ability to seamlessly capture the “now.”  Many Americans craved a return to day-to-day reality after a tumultuous and war-ridden start to the 20th century. As this start became further complicated by the devastation of World War II Life magazine stepped in to provide scenes of ordinary life and, through consumer culture, helped fill the desire for normalcy [2].

Another common rhetoric around Life was that it managed to mythologize American history, taking larger than life celebrities and events, such as JFK and the Great Depression, and eternally framing them through the lens of Life’s vision [3]. Suddenly, American iconography was permanently preserved with these photographs, and a synonymous cultural identity of what it meant to be American through art was created [4]. However, Life owes much of its success and iconic imaging to the influence of European art movements. Europeans, specifically Germans, found their way into Life’s photography, marketing, and developmental departments. This defined Life as a paradox of a distinctly American magazine that succeeded due to the role of foreign influence.

The History of Life

Purchased by Henry Luce of TIME in 1936, Life is widely credited as the first American photography magazine, adopting a new form of journalism known as photojournalism [5]. Prior to Luce’s acquisition, Life served as a middlebrow weekly general publication [6]. After its buyout, Life became a pioneer of photojournalism in the western hemisphere, utilizing the new method to share news, global events, and art across the newly conjoined mediums of photography and text. To the Americans of the early 20th century, this meant that Life’s publications would define what constituted art, which art was worth consuming, and how an understanding of art related to social status [7].

The early days of Life navigated the unstable societal terrain that had been ravaged by war. The magazine’s beginning operated within the cultural context of a desire to return to routine [8]. A boom in consumer culture accompanied the post-war setting to cultivate Life’s market of middle-class citizens eager to replicate normalcy by engaging with consumption [9]. Luce also drew on Life’s predecessor, and in some ways rhetorical muse, Time, for its “on the go” framing of news, reflected in the fast-paced economic boom of the early 1920s onward [10]. The desire for normalcy and rise in consumerism, fueled by industrial innovation, created the historical circumstances for Luce and his colleagues to sculpt Life in their vision of the new post-war world. The times were changing and Life wanted in on the change.

The prior success of Time served as a loose structural model for Life, and convinced Luce that he was capable of shaping the nation’s taste and interests via the content that Life published [11]. Despite having a reference point, Luce would find himself desiring a guideline for Life that exceeded the physical borders of America and the cultural borders of the American art he was familiar with [12]. For Life to succeed, Luce believed that the magazine would greatly benefit from an outside perspective. Beyond the scope of American art movements, Life would continue to draw on European influences to establish the structure, messaging, and branding of the company.

Life’s Beginnings and European Influences

Life’s early creative team was aware that if the magazine were to succeed, it had to be well organized, captivating, and productive all at once [13]. The ambitious goals of a weekly publication of consistently high-quality American photojournalism required the foreign expertise of someone who already had experience in a field unfamiliar to westerners. To achieve these goals, the editor-in-chief of the German magazine Berliner Illustrierte Zeitung (BIZ), Kurt Korff, was recruited as a consultant for the Experimental Department of Life [14]. The Experimental Department was the brainchild of Luce. Unique to Life, it served as a space for Time employees to come together and brainstorm content, marketing strategies, and photographic methods for Life to utilize. Considering that there were no former photography-based magazines to allude to, the Experimental Department was unique yet vital to the planning phase of Life. Drawing on his previous experience at the modernist illustration magazine BIZ (Berliner Illustrirte Zeitung), Korff provided Luce with ample advice on improving Life’s construction [15]. These improvements included recommendations regarding what type of audience Life should target, which photographers should be hired, and how the photos should be laid out in the magazine. Korff advocated for his fellow Germans to be employed by Life, specifically the photographers Alfred Eisenstaedt and Martin Munkacsi [16]. This uptick in Germany's desire to work with American artists and companies coincided with Hitler’s rise to power, as Germans were seeking refuge, meaning an influx of potential employees for Life [17]. Korff and others alike believed that Life would greatly benefit from a European eye, providing a fresh photographic perspective that competitors, such as the budding Newsweek would lack, giving Life a one-up in the magazine industry. [18]

Regarding the physical composition, the magazine’s short title, investment in high quality paper and ink for printing, and appeal to a wide range of topics, were all a result of Korff’s presence in the Experimental Department [19]. Despite Korff’s approach to Life, his contributions were undervalued by the company. Aiming to keep Korff’s presence a secret from competitors, editor Daniel Longweel instructed Korff to keep his partnership with Life hidden. As rifts arose between Korff and Life executives, Korff still had an unbridled devotion to his previous editorial position at BIZ, which led to Korff cutting ties with Life in the summer of 1936 [20]. Regardless of Korff’s departure, Life executives continued to express their fondness for him by implementing virtually every recommendation Korff provided during his time at Life, bringing about what Korff himself called “the long expected great American magazine” [21].

Life Through the Lens of American Consumerism

After its implementation of the modernist techniques provided by Korff, Life’s early days were met with success. Moving forward towards the late 1950s and early 60s, Life continued to define art for the middle class, further clarifying how the post-war rise of modernity would be situated within an American context [22]. However, integration of American economic growth and art would lead contemporary viewers to critique Life for its commodification of art to turn a profit. The common claim among existing literature is that in an attempt to generate revenue, Life watered down modern art for a middlebrow consumer base, which in turn domesticated art to be palatable and advertizable rather than thought-provoking or controversial [23]. While it had a mission of portraying art to the everyday viewer, Life aimed to train said viewer as a consumer of Life’s definition of what avant-garde modern art is [24]. To 21st-century scholarly critics, this means the commercialization of art for financial gain. While Life sought to integrate the European modernism that Korff had brought to their attention, the modernism that Korff presented undermined the free market culture Life thrived in [25]. This led the magazine to present a pre-digested culture that would offend no one and appeal to everyone [26].

Scholars who defend Life’s practices argue that the pretentiousness that was associated with the modernist movement was absent in Life’s interpretation. Life deconstructed the elitism that kept art out of the hands of consumers without a post-secondary education, and delivered a memorialization of the “now” that the Americans were experiencing [27]. Through this, images of mythological American icons, such as the previously mentioned JFK, could be delivered to the masses. This deliverance cemented a synonymous national identity of not just what America was, but who America was [28]. Life’s simplification of art could allow everyone to indulge in the “now,” regardless of status or prior knowledge.

While this counterargument holds some weight, the consensus is that Luce assigned Life the responsibility to deliver modernity to America and educate the masses on what “good” taste is. This self-assigned education meant promoting a bare boned interpretation of complex movements so that audiences would be in the know [29]. During the early '60s to early '70s, Life equated art with a monetary value to resonate with viewers what a piece was worth, therefore diluting art as an investment towards status.

A Brief Analysis of Life’s Commodification of Modernity

A major critique of Life was that it published watered-down versions of modern art and photography, making it unique enough to qualify as avant-garde but safe enough that it wouldn’t cause any controversy that would promote social unrest or threaten magazine sales. “Looking at Life Magazine”, edited by Erika Doss, features multiple contributors who critique this marketing decision. Professor John Gennari of the University of Vermont discusses a 1971 Life issue titled “Saucy Feminist That Even Men Like” that flaunted a cover photo of second-wave Australian feminist and academic Germaine Greer.

With a tousled shag, chunky silver jewelry, and a dusty red paisley coat, Greer embodies the feminist foremother that the women of today would draw inspiration from. Yet, Gennari makes an interesting note that the coverage of Greer was “feminism without gender warfare” [30]. Down to the title, Life’s coverage of Greer was more performative than progressive, more charming than provoking, and more friendly to the status quo than antagonizing. The issue framed her within a pseudo-feminist lens that lacked the nuance to incite any contention with the public. As long as the American norms that justified the political and social turmoil of the 1960s and 70s weren’t sufficiently challenged, Life was eager to cover the latest social trend that steered America in an innovative direction conditional to its pre-existing values [31].

The End of Life Weekly

Life trudged through the remainder of the 1960s until an executive decision was made to seize the weekly publications due to costs. Semi-consistent special issues were released monthly throughout the rest of the millennia, until the early 2000s limited Life’s release to special occasions. Finally, Life was officially shut down in 2007, though the online archive remains active for viewers to reflect on Life’s work [32]. Despite Life no longer releasing a weekly publication, it provides a memorialization of America’s past through a lens designed for the US. It is a distinct entity of the West and is widely praised for its documentation of the events that defined entire generations, cementing the American legacy of the 20th century against the test of time [33]. Rivaling this nostalgic recollection of Life, modern reflections take on a much more critical approach, with claims that Life’s bastardized art through [34]. The implications of Life’s commentary and how it affected 21st century interpretations of art are still largely unaddressed and will require future research. Whether or not  Life’s commercialized approach to artistic expression was for better or worse, it is undeniable that Life played a pivotal role in situating Americans in the history that they were actively experiencing. Life was able to capture the harsh realities of the 20th century and formulate them in a manner that empowered and engaged American consumers with the truths of the tumultuous world handed to them.

Endnotes

[1] Vials, “The Popular Front in the American Century: Life Magazine, Margaret Bourke-White, and Consumer realism”, 74.

[2] Ho, “Comedic Relief in a Culture of Uncertainty: The Contribution of Life Magazine to 1920s America,” 22.

[3] Cunningham, “To Watch the Faces of the Poor": "Life" Magazine and the Mythology of Rural Poverty in the Great Depression,” 280.

[4] Vials, “The Popular Front in the American Century: Life Magazine, Margaret Bourke-White, and Consumer Realism,” 75.

[5] Webb, “The Tale of Advancement: Life Magazine’s Construction of the Modern American Success Story,” 2.

[6]  Ho, 22.

[7] Webb, 2.

[8] Ho, 22.

[9] Ho, 22.

[10] Vials, 79.

[11] Vials, 74.

[12] Smith, “Emigre Contributions to 'Life': German Influence in the Development of America's First Picture Magazine,” 10.

[13] Smith, 4.

[14]  Smith, 4.

[15]  Smith, 10.

[16] Smith, 15.

[17] Smith, 8.

[18]  Smith, 9.

[19] Smith, 13.

[20] Smith, 21.

[21] Smith, 21.

[22] Erika Doss, “Looking at Life Magazine,” 26.

[23] Webb, 116.

[24] Webb, 122.

[25] Ho, 27.

[26] Herzstein, “Henry R. Luce: A Political Portrait of the Man Who Created The American Century,” 43.

[27] Webb, 86.

[28] Webb, 86.

[29] Webb, 119.

[30] Gennari, 272.

[31] Gennari, 273.

[32] Jennifer Abella, “Life (magazine): History, Photography, and Ownership,” 1.

[33]  Ho, 27.

[34] Webb, 92.

Works Cited

Vials, Chris. “The Popular Front in the American Century: Life Magazine, Margaret Bourke-White, and Consumer Realism, 1936-1941.” American Periodicals: A Journal of History, Criticism, and Bibliography 16, no. 1 (2006): 74–102. https://doi.org/10.1353/amp.2006.0009.

Ho, Andy. “‘Comedic Relief in a Culture of Uncertainty: The Contribution of Life Magazine to 1920s America,.’” New Errands: The Undergraduate Journal of American Studies., October 4, 2015.

Cunningham, Charles. “‘To Watch the Faces of the Poor’: Life Magazine and the Mythology of Rural Poverty in the Great Depression.” Journal of Narrative Theory 29, no. 3 (1999): 278–302. https://doi.org/10.1353/jnt.2011.0072.

Vials, Chris. “The Popular Front in the American Century: Life Magazine, Margaret Bourke-White, and Consumer Realism, 1936-1941.” American Periodicals: A Journal of History, Criticism, and Bibliography 16, no. 1 (2006): 74–102. https://doi.org/10.1353/amp.2006.0009.

Webb, Sheila. “Art Commentary for the Middlebrow: Promoting Modernism & Modern Art through Popular Culture--How Life Magazine Brought ‘the New’ into Middle-Class Homes.” American Journalism 27, no. 3 (2010): 115–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/08821127.2010.10678155.