Blitz to America

In the summer O
propagand

rom themoment Winston

ChurchicametopowrinMay
i d Sttes was
Sflv/ngStPau/'s194J-42
by Reginald Mil's-

was to use

oddview.

2012 1 History Toiioy

.^ijpe20K|f""'"

www.historytoday.com

Taking the Blitz to America

The US ambassador John G.

Winantwithi the three
London men chosen to
represent the Auxiliary Fire
Service in the US: Rudoif
Haybrool(, C. Paimer and
District Officer D.D. ivaii.
Aprii 30th 1941.

Things changed in the summer of 1941 when the

British Ministry of Information reorganised and
revitalised its American operations. This enabled
it to oversee a little-known but remarkably
successful propaganda campaign in the US,
conceived and executed by an unlikely agency, the
London Fire Brigade.
On February 1st, 1941 Major F.W. lackson DSO,
Officer Commanding London Fire Services, wrote to
the secretary of the War Artists Advisory Committee

(WAAC), E.M. O'Rourke Dickey, to inform him that

he had recently called for a list of artists serving in his
force, which had revealed 'a large amount of hidden
talent of which we were not previously aware'. He
stated that he had invited all artists in the service to
submit works of art for an exhibition in his headquarters and wondered if the WAAC would assist in
judging them. If the standard was sufficiently high
then perhaps the works might be sent to the US.
Instead of dismissing the idea as fanciful. Dickey
arranged for the works to be seen by J.B. Manson, a
former curator of the Tte Gallery, after getting agreement from the WAAC chairman, Kenneth Clark, that
depending on the quality'it would be quite a good
thing to send it to America'.
Dickey also went to see the pictures for himself He
reported to Clark on February 7th that he thought
they made 'quite a good show' and that on artistic
merits alone the collection might not be 'anything
very great' but 'as a show of work by combatant
firemen I am sure it would be worth sending to the
States for propaganda purposes'. Meanwhile Manson
not only approved of the paintings but wrote to thank
Jackson for the 'thrilling entertainment' of a demonstration put on by his firemen, adding: 'I was deeply
impressed by what I saw and by your wonderful
organisation.' By mid-February Clark was said to be
favourably impressed with the pictures and had
formed the opinion that an exhibition in the US
would be 'valuable propaganda'.
There was soon talk of the project being sponsored
by the Ministry of Information (Mol) who were

The London Fire-Boat

Massey Shaw approaching
Dunkirk at 11 pm on the 2nd
June 1940 by Rudolf
Haybrooi<.

22

HistoryTorfay | June 2012

www.historytoday.com

Taking the Blitz to America

encouraged to hear that Jackson had already built up

good relations with the head of the New York Fire
Brigade (NYFB), Colonel John James McEUigott, after
three of their officers had been shown British firefighting techniques in the Blitz. The NYFB could be
asked to help arrange an exhibition in New York on
the basis of reciprocity. A proposal was submitted to
the Overseas Planning Committee of the Mol, with
the objective stated as 'propaganda for our cause'. A
memorandum listed the 'main ideas to be put over':
J. This must not happen to you. Help Britain to keep
away the Nazi menace.
2. The courage of London firemen - citizen soldiers
manning the new front line.
3. Art in wartime how culture and art can
he kept alive and even stimulated in Blitz
conditions.
Then the Mol proceeded to expand the
project, with Jackson's agreement. As well
as paintings, a three-dimensional Blitz firefighting display would be added to the
exhibition. The London County Council
agreed to pay for picture frames after the
Mol obtained a supply of timber, a
restricted material, by certifying that it was
to be used 'for propaganda purposes'.

LONDON

Action and heroism

By March 10th, 1941 all the pictures were
in frames and ready for what was advertised as the first public 'firemen artist'
exhibition, opening in London at the
Central School of Arts and Crafts in
Holborn with over 100 paintings. In
reality it was a rehearsal for the more
ambitious foray into the US. The exhibition lasted three weeks, attracting a total
of about 30,000 visitors. Journalists were
told of its real destination and their
reviews show that they had been well briefed. The
Daily Telegraph wrote that 'America is about to see
perhaps the most dramatic collection of pictures ever
assembled: impressions of the Siege of London as set
down by 20 auxiliary firemen and women auxiliaries
(sic). Their brushes record, as the camera cannot, the
cruelty and spectacular horror of night bombing'.
According to The Times, the exhibition was 'in all
probability such a record of great public events as has
never before been made by the actual participants'.
All the artists were volunteers in the Auxiliary Fire
Service (AFS).
These features were to be the unique 'selling
points' in America and Jackson shrewdly sent the
newspaper reports to McEUigott at the NYFB. They
would distinguish the exhibition from the large
WAAC Britain at War display that was being
prepared for New York at about the same time and
which also covered the First World War. The
firemen's exhibition had the advantage of a much
clearer focus. In a letter to the director of the British
Press Service in New York in April 1941, regarding a
www.historytoday.com

The cover of the catalogue

accompanying the 1941 US
exhibition, published in
New York for The Story of
the Great Fire of London.

catalogue for the exhibition, Jackson refers to the

subject as 'the great London fire of 29th December
1940'. This had been the most horrific night of the
Blitz. The title of the touring exhibition would be
The Great Fire of London, recalling the 17th-century
precedent but also promising paintings of spectacular action and heroism, elements conspicuously
absent from most exhibits in Britain at War, which
had deliberately avoided anything that could be
described as deliberate 'propaganda'.
Just before the exhibition opened in London the
American Division of the Mol had suggested sending
tlireefiremento the US to accompany the paintings.
Jackson promptly agreed, although Kenneth Clark
expressed doubts about whether they could find men
'who could hold their own with the
I __ _
American public and reporters, and who
I [ 1^ ^
would not be spoiled by all the inevitable
baUy-hoo'. This augmentation of the
original plan would completely transform the whole project and greatly
enhance its propaganda value. A decision
was taken to send one auxiliary fireman
artist, one wounded auxiliary Blitz
veteran and one more senior regular
fireman, who would be capable of
answering technical queries. The regular
was an experienced staff officer called
D.D. Ivall and the unfit man was Auxiliary
Fireman C.E.J. Palmer, a peacetime painter
and decorator, who had just spent six
months in hospital after being badly
burned whuefirefightingin the East End.
The fireman artist was Auxiliary
Fireman Rudolf Haybrook, typical of the
many 'characters' who were attracted to
the AFS. Already over 40 when he joined,
medal ribbons on his uniform showed his
army service in the First World War. He
also came with a leg injury sustained while
on fire fighting duty. He had been a crew
member of the ThamesfireboatMassey
Shaw at Dunkirk and recorded his impressions of the *
event in three ou paintings, one of which had been
'
bought by the WAAC. Jackson had made it clear from
the start that Haybrook was in fact the source of the
original idea for the American project.
With such rapid implementation it would have
been surprising if there were no problems related to
ministerial or departmental rivalries. When the
Ministry of Home Security, which was part of the
Home Office, saw the publicity for the exhibition,
one of its officials wrote to the Mol to complain that
his ministry had not been consulted. He criticised
the Mol for working with the London Fire Brigade,
declaring 'this Ministry alone is in a position to
authorise the policy', adding 'I gather that some of
the details in the exhibition shown to the press are
wrong'. The director of the Mol American Division,
Douglas Williams, called the complaint 'peevish and
unjustified' and 'just another example of someone
sniping at a complete plan they might just as well
have thought of themselves'. The complaint was
June 2012 I History Today

23

Taking the Blitz to America

Southampton Row, London,

April 1941, a watercolour by
E.BoyeUdenoftheAFS,
showing a view following
aerial bombardment.

withdrawn but the Ministry of Home Security

would soon find a different reason to take issue.

Taken on strength
Enthusiasm for the project, rather than petty rivalry, also
brought its own problem. As soon as news of the exhibition reached Canada, there was a great deal of lobbying
and many requests to extend the itinerary. The Eaton
Company of Canada offered their net\vork of department stores as exhibition sites and offered to pay the
transport and exhibition costs if it came to them before
New York. A compromise resulted In a plan for a 'dogleg' itinerary across the US/Canadian border, although
this became subject to change due to German submarine
action in the North Atlantic. The Treasury was inquisitive, but satisfied on hearing that the travel costs would
be met by the Mol and that payment of the firemen's
wages and subsistence would be handled by the NYFB,
whose commander would 'take them on strength' as
Major Jackson had done with their men when visiting
London. Jackson told him 'if any one of them gives the
slightest trouble I know you will not hesitate to send him
back to England'. It was assumed that the whole operation would be completed within a matter of months. As
it turned out, the planned programme was affected by
the decision to send the paintings and thefiremenby
difterent ships as well as by its own success.
The American Division of the Mol issued a press
24

History

|une 2012

release on April 30th, 1941 stating that the American

Ambassador in London, John G. Winant, had met the
three London firemen on the eve of departure to bid
them 'bon voyage' and to deliver the following message:
Anyone who has seen you in action, as I have, can appreciate the help and advice you bring to America. You have
learned to stand up to doublefire.It takes a special kind
of courage tofightfirein a blaze of light while enemy
aircraft are bombing you fiom above.
The firemen arrived in New York in advance of the
pictures and the British Library of Information
reported to the Mol that the hospitality by Mayor La
Guardia and the NYFB was 'extraordinary' and that
they were 'a great success wherever they appeared'. The
Packard Company presented the firemen with a
scarlet car and chauffeur to take them on a whistlestop
lecture tour of New York and neighbouring states. The
Daily Mirror carried an article on May 30th, 1941 by
its resident reporter, John Walters, on the impact of
the firemen in New York City:
When Haybrook and Palmer stroll about the streets in
uniform, crowds rush to shake their hands. One of them
was grasped by a civilian who dragged him into a store,
thrust a beautiful silk tie into his hand, and went on his
way. Ivall, Palmer and Haybrook are doing a splendid

From the Archive

FiresWere started
Jeffrey Richards
rei<indies Humphrey
Jennings' stirring wartime
portrayal of firefighters who
became heroes of the Blitz.
www.historytoday.com/archive

www.historytoday.com

Taking the Blitz to America

job in telling Americans about the work of London's firefighters with a modesty totally devoid of heroic trimmings. Which leads me to implore the British Government to send more men of this type on trips to the
United States. They spread far more good will for Britain
than do our sleek diplomats, dry as dust economists and
sentimental novelists, who are here in swarms.
When The Great Fire of London, 1940 opened at the
National Gallery of Art in Washington on July 18th,
1941 it was widely acclaimed. The Washington Sunday
Star of July 20th called it 'an exceptionally interesting
exhibition', stressing that it should not be confused
with Britain at War because the subject matter was
different: 'the bombing of a great city'. The reviewer
Florence S. Berryman explained that these were 'not
compositions worked out at leisure in a peaceful
studio, but first-hand impressions of experiences,
horrors and trials valiantly met by men and women
whose physical labor in defense of their country was
supplemented by sensitive perception and creative
ability.' Other reviews also emphasised that the artists
were 'civilian fire-fighting volunteers' who painted
while under fire themselves. Many noted the attendance of La Guardia in his role as Director of Civilian
Defense. His presence, combined with the attack on
Pearl Harbor on December 7th, 1941, would lead to
an even greater interest in the London firemen and an
almost overwhelming demand for their services,
which would lead to the expansion and reorientation
of Major Jackson's project.

Washington objects
In Washington the British Embassy reported that the
ambassador found the exhibition of'exceptional
value' and that visitors had shown 'unusual interest
and sympathy'. However there were problems at the
National Gallery. The centrepiece of the exhibition
was a three-dimensional stul life of the Blitz that
perhaps today would be called an 'installation'. Many
of the artefacts it comprised
were predictable: parts of
bombs; an incendiary extinguished by a stirrup pump;
'an improperly ignited incendiary bomb found in
Thames mud'; a hose
coupling melted by heat;
'fabric from a barrage
balloon shot down over
London by enemy action';
fi^agments of'Ack-Ack'
shrapnel. The gallery
director David Einley
refused to allow the firemen
to display this on the
grounds that it was war
material, stating that his
gallery only concerned itself
with 'art exhibits' as
opposed to 'war exhibits'.
Some objects had in fact
already been removed from
www.historytoday.com

the display by censors from the Ministry of Home

Security before it had left London. These came fi-om a
parachute bomb. The prohibited items included light
alloy fragments and the Bakerlite and cardboard tail
unit. The firemen's centrepiece was transformed by
two surprising objects. The first was 'part of the tunic
of a dead auxiliary fireman',
the other a battered steel
helmet, with a note saying
'fifteen perished when a
sub-station was hit'. The
tunic had been confirmed
as belonging to 'the late
Station Officer R.W. Sinstadt
(24 Stn) who was killed by
enemy action on 20th Inst.
It is assumed that Station
Officer Sinstadt was wearing
the tunic at the time'. As well
as introducing an unexpectedly emotive element into
the exhibition, these objects
were displayed with almost
religious reverence. In
correspondence relating to
the exhibition they were
described as 'relics'. The
incorporation of death and

G.V. Biackstone GM, London

Fire Force by Paul Dessau,
1941.

US poster warning against

a Blitz in America, 1942-43.
June 2012 I History7bda>'

25

Taking the Blitz to America

ARTIST-FIREMAN PORTRAYS
RAID HORRORS ON CANVAS

A news item about

Haybrook in the Toronto
Daily Star, August 18th,
1941.

British Pintf. Her

Exhibit. Uuds Work o(
Canleen Girl)

mourning into a propaganda event would have risked

causing oftence but in this exhibition, organised by
SHOW AT EATON'S firemen themselves, it was a way of sharing with
Americans the reality ofthe Blitz.
i hiiti nitiht. bombF
Finley ordered that the words 'Nazi vandals' on one
=ir,d bmliiisi act! tti htack
ns a^ftjr.fci a backc^ound o( ofthe captions should be covered up on the grounds
f iTC-'lfitilC' have )>ccri i that it constituted propaganda. Possibly this was a
g for o-jn ana arc near tx- ; reference to St Bride's, Testament to Nazi Culture [ghi up luicji the ciotcrn car I Damping Down, & paintmg of a bombed church by

iniiorm LesHe Cam Finley also banned distribution of a

y-.irif .cnitr "vhn rtm'liiw
mar-dge to louit (rcnh tnd imarl in pamphlet containing a message from Charles Latham,
Nptlc ot Uic ciiiiifi nu\ t the car
Chief of the London County Council, for the same
?'^i pick tiicir ivay thr^^lCb Ic
rubele to (li:itlit)ulc coMcc
reason. It appeared that the spirit of American
T^i RirU me ;iltahinl 1'j London]
ftux.lur/ tua M^rvicc. ^:i HudolfJ neutrality was being applied with exceptional zeal and
HaybrooX. Pne lit 30.03"* nKmbtn f
<! ilii! A . r s . !>. vtB'M i>( ttiom. He that the 'special relationship' had not yet been
ihlnkJ a counlr) vvhow sirlt Iroll
calmly thruunh Jcrry'^ woisi i- invented. The embassy instructed the firemen to
Ucks, carrying r.-frc$meni* to ihe comply, but said that these restrictions would apply in
men. .s X country Ihi; wiil never b
cor.fjucfd by llitlf r r anybody the. Washington only.
"'They HTC r ght jn *:, jut as much
wo itn. anil A mnpntlcciit )a'u
The obstacles encountered there were not unique,
ihc> Arc doinx ' savs M.*. liaybrook.
"Mary ? t<rcd ma.-i ha^ been however. Shortly before the attack on Pearl Harbor,
C>i<3dc.-icd Ui ii rm.ti[i ej/t hatxiinfi
him run 0/ rp/icr ai. i tire in the the US State Department objected when it heard that
middtt ci h r:wd. '
the firemen's paintings were on sale, with half of the
Notra MtM
Mr. It.^bfonk i.1 a t^.l tn^ri with a money to be donated to the London Fire Brigade
rod hfira ftRtt a \{ru'i "I mwial
Benevolent Fund via the British Library of Information. The department announced that, since the latter
was an agent of a 'belligerent government', it was not a
proper recipient of relief funds under the 1939
Neutrality Act and therefore alternative arrangements
had to be made. Evidently American 'hearts and
minds' could not be taken for granted, indicating the
very real need for propaganda eftorts such as the
firemen's exhibition.

almost overwhelming, due to afi-anticexpansion of

US civil defence preparations. Fear that the US might
be bombed not only made the paintings more relevant, but also put a premium on the experience and
expertise ofthe British men, who were called upon to
deliver lectures and radio broadcasts nationwide on
'lessons learned' from the Blitz. A typical headline
appeared in the Indianapolis Times for June 25th,
1942: ' "Can Indianapolis be Bombed? It's Certainly
Possible" say British firemen', adding that just three
planes with only 10 per cent effectiveness of bombs
dropped could 'give you more fire than you've ever
had before'.
When the Ministry of Home Security heard that
the firemen were being asked to help plan civu defence
for the US another turf war ensued. It complained that
civil defence was its responsibility; in any case the
firemen had been abroad for so long that they were
unaware of'recent developments'. The ministry was
unable to specify what these developments were
however and after lengthy correspondence the matter
was eventually resolved.
Auxiliary Fireman Haybrook was appointed Fire
Consultant by the Regional Office of Civilian
Defense in Seattle, who paid his expenses and $10 a
day in lieu of subsistence, while the LFB still paid his
wages. From January 1942 to April 1943 Haybrook
was on the road, giving hundreds of talks to audiences from chambers of commerce to high schools
and handing out the Mol's booklet. Fifty Facts about
India, to defiect awkward questions about British
imperialism. Haybrook's own opinions seemed to be
in tune with those of most Americans, as when he
praised the AFS as 'the most democratic organisation
in the world' in a newspaper interview. The British
Consul in Seattle described him as a 'romantic,
almost heroic figure', whose great popularity might
have aroused jealousy among regular firemen. In

Britain's missioners

New York mayor Fiorello H.

La Guardia (left) and Fire
Commissioner John James
McEUigott inspect a blaze
on Greenwich Avenue, New
York City. Photograph by
Weegee, February 1940.

26

HistoryTodfl)'! Iune2012

The decision to send firemen who had been injured to

the US produced a notable response in the American
press. A typical headline fi-om the Milwaukee Sentinel
was 'Buried, Seared in Air Raids, London Firemen
Visit Here'. The Dayton Daily News announced that
'Two of Trio Carry Bombing Marks'. Many reports
gave details ofthe men's injuries and described visible
wounds and scars on their faces and bodies, as if they
were stigmata. Continuing the religious theme, a
Seattle press headline called the firemen 'Britain's
Most Successful Missioners', symbolising 'the spirit of
civilian heroism'.
As a result of what the British Library of Information described as the 'extraordinary success' ofthe
exhibition two unexpected decisions were taken. A
second collection of paintings was sent late in 1941,
accompanied by three more firemen, with two simultaneous tours allowing coverage to be extended into
areas associated with isolationist and anti-British
sentiments such as the Midwest. Furthermore, even
though its strategic aim was achieved after events at
Pearl Harbor led to America's entry into the war, the
duration ofthe campaign was extended.
In fact demand for the London firemen became
www.historytoday.com

Taking the Blitz to America

In the East End, November

1940 by Reginald Miiis.

February 1943 he was the victim of an accusation,

possibly anti-British in motivation and discovered
from a mail censorship intercept, of lecturing while
drunk. The strain finally told and he spent ten days
in hospital in San Francisco, suffering from exhaustion. He had been treated for shell-shock during the
First World War. His medical bills were paid by
Malvina Hoffman, the well-known New York-based
sculptor, and he was soon back in action.
A double success
Detailed records were kept of all the firemen's activities and these show the remarkable impact of the
North American tour. For example the official attendance at the Washington Museum was 100,000, with a
total for all exliibitions of over half a mulion by the
end of 1942. The number attending lectures and talks
was over 600,000. Press coverage was extensive and
universally favourable, often effusive. Many
commented on the distinctive quality of the paintings,
typically described as 'a new kind of war art based on
personal experience'. As for the firemen, their bearing
and demeanour fully matched their reputation as
veterans of the Blitz, inspiring admiration and respect
wherever they went. This was recorded in many
reports to the Mol in London and in countless official
lettersfi-omorganisations where they had spoken,
both in the US and in Canada.
In a letter to the Home Office of June 24th, 1942
the firemen artist tour was described by the American
Division of the Mol as 'phenomenally successful'.
The ministry particularly appreciated its reception
by audiences and regions previously beyond their
reach and in forms that did not look like propaganda. Of course it all began with paintings that
www.historytoday.com

were not designed as propaganda, making the

whole episode an intriguing example of the problematic relationship between art and politics. The
campaign was all the more remarkable given the
cost in manpower: six firemen sent abroad for two
years. The only'casualties' were 18 paintings
destroyed by an accidental fire at the Newark Art
Club in New Jersey in February 1944 and these were
covered by insurance.
There can be no doubt that the project achieved its
double aim. Major Jackson succeeded in showing and
selling in America the paintings of his AFS men and
women, helping both the individuals and the firemen's
charity, while the Mol had a propaganda coup. The
'special relationship' may have become a concept
liable to exploitation by politicians, but the London
firemen's paintings undoubtedly helped Britain's
standing in the US at a crucial time and contributed
towards a genuine relationship based on empathy and
solidarity between two peoples.
Anthony Keily is a researcher and iecturer. He is writing a booi<
on the firemen artists.
Further Reading
Nicholas John Cull, Seiiing War: the British Propaganda
Campaign Against American 'Neutrality' in World WarTwo
(Oxford University Press, 1995).
Susan A. Brewer, To Win the Peace: British Propaganda in the
United States During World War II (Cornell, 1997).
David A. Lincove/The British Library of Information in New
York: a Tool of British Foreign Policy, 1919-42'in/./brar/es
and the Cultural World, Vol 46. No.2,2011 pp.156-182.
For more articles on this subject visit
www.historytoday.com

June 2012 I History7(ia)'

27

Copyright of History Today is the property of History Today Ltd. and its content may not be copied or emailed
to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However,
users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.