View allAll Photos Tagged hlmencken
" Love is the triumph of imagination over intelligence. "
.....H. L. Mencken... ( 1880 - 1956 ).
.....American journalist, critic.
Antique and original edition of this literary pulp magazine filled with art deco culture content and racy and romantic pulp fiction. Published from 1900 to 1930 during the heyday of the Jazz Age under the editorship of H. L, Mencken and George Jean Nathan, the "Smart Set” offered many up-and-coming authors their start and gave them access to a relatively large audience – authors such as Ambrose Bierce, Jack London and Theodore Dreiser
Have you ever watched a crab on the shore crawling backward in search of the Atlantic Ocean, and missing? That's the way the mind of man operates.
H. L. Mencken
"On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron." - H. L. Mencken (1880-1956)
The Saturday Night Club coat of arms in the Mencken Room at the Pratt Library. The room is open to the public once a year on Mencken Day (Sept. 10, in 2016) and to researchers by request.
The Mencken Room at the Pratt Library. The room is open to the public once a year on Mencken Day (Sept. 10, in 2016) and to researchers by request.
“Idealist: One who, on noticing that a rose smells better than a cabbage, concludes that it will also make better soup” Henry Louis Mencken. The Eastern Market in Washington is filled with beautiful produce each weekend. This display of cabbages was made up of one of my favorite color combinations. What if we revered cabbages for their beauty as much as roses? Have a great, optimistic week ahead!
A Ludwig Beethoven death mask in the backyard garden wall of the H. L. Mencken house installed by Mencken himself. Mencken, a big fan of Beethoven, was a famous Baltimore citizen regarded as one of the most influential American writers of the first half of the 20th century.
"The feelings that Beethoven put into his music were the feelings of a god. There was something olympian in his snarls and rages, and there was a touch of hellfire in his mirth"
- H.L. Mencken
*October is my favorite month of the year. It's Halloween season, the weather is a bit cooler, and autumn brings beautiful colors to the region. In honor of October's spooky traditions, I'll revisit creepy locations and share photos I never posted.
The Mencken Room at the Pratt Library. The room is open to the public once a year on Mencken Day (Sept. 10, in 2016) and to researchers by request.
The Parisienne. March 1916.
Provenance: The George H. Thompson Collection of Henry Louis Mencken
Location: The George Peabody Library
Bain News Service,, publisher.
Baltimore Convention
[1912] (date created or published later by Bain)
1 negative : glass ; 5 x 7 in. or smaller.
Notes:
Title from unverified data provided by the Bain News Service on the negatives or caption cards.
Photo taken at the 1912 Democratic National Convention held at the Fifth Regiment Armory, Baltimore, Maryland, June 25-July 2. (Source: Flickr Commons project, 2008)
Forms part of: George Grantham Bain Collection (Library of Congress).
Subjects:
Baltimore
Format: Glass negatives.
Rights Info: No known restrictions on publication.
Repository: Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division, Washington, D.C. 20540 USA, hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/pp.print
General information about the Bain Collection is available at hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/pp.ggbain
Higher resolution image is available (Persistent URL): hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/ggbain.10618
Call Number: LC-B2- 2422-10
"No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public" is the common misquote of a famous observation by H.L. Mencken. A recent post on QuoteCounterquote.com discusses what he actually wrote and why, then lists some of my favorite variations on this saying, like Politico columnist Tanya Snyder's quip: "No one ever went broke underestimating the ability of Congress to do its job." Here's a direct link to the post-> www.quotecounterquote.com/2019/05/no-one-ever-went-broke-...
Civilization, in fact, grows more and more maudlin and hysterical; especially under democracy it tends to degenerate into a mere combat of crazes; the whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary.
All government, in its essence, is a conspiracy against the superior man: its one permanent object is to oppress him and cripple him. If it be aristocratic in organization, then it seeks to protect the man who is superior only in law against the man who is superior in fact; if it be democratic, then it seeks to protect the man who is inferior in every way against both. One of its primary functions is to regiment men by force, to make them as much alike as possible and as dependent upon one another as possible, to search out and combat originality among them. All it can see in an original idea is potential change, and hence an invasion of its prerogatives. The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out for himself, without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane and intolerable, and so, if he is romantic, he tries to change it. And even if he is not romantic personally he is very apt to spread discontent among those who are.
In the present case it is a little inaccurate to say I hate everything. I am strongly in favor of common sense, common honesty and common decency. This makes me forever ineligible to any public office of trust or profit in the Republic. But I do not repine, for I am a subject of it only by force of arms.
I believe in only one thing and that thing is human liberty. If ever a man is to achieve anything like dignity, it can happen only if superior men are given absolute freedom to think what they want to think and say what they want to say. I am against any man and any organization which seeks to limit or deny that freedom. . . [and] the superior man can be sure of freedom only if it is given to all men.
Off goes the head of the king, and tyranny gives way to freedom. The change seems abysmal. Then, bit by bit, the face of freedom hardens, and by and by it is the old face of tyranny. Then another cycle, and another. But under the play of all these opposites there is something fundamental and permanent — the basic delusion that men may be governed and yet be free.
Government is a broker in pillage, and every election is a sort of advance auction sale of stolen goods.
The great artists of the world are never Puritans, and seldom even ordinarily respectable. No virtuous man — that is, virtuous in the Y.M.C.A. sense — has ever painted a picture worth looking at, or written a symphony worth hearing, or a book worth reading.
When a candidate for public office faces the voters he does not face men of sense; he faces a mob of men whose chief distinguishing mark is the fact that they are quite incapable of weighing ideas, or even of comprehending any save the most elemental — men whose whole thinking is done in terms of emotion, and whose dominant emotion is dread of what they cannot understand. So confronted, the candidate must either bark with the pack or be lost... All the odds are on the man who is, intrinsically, the most devious and mediocre — the man who can most adeptly disperse the notion that his mind is a virtual vacuum. The Presidency tends, year by year, to go to such men. As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.
The only good bureaucrat is one with a pistol at his head. Put it in his hand and it's good-bye to the Bill of Rights.
The fact is that the average man's love of liberty is nine-tenths imaginary, exactly like his love of sense, justice and truth. He is not actually happy when free; he is uncomfortable, a bit alarmed, and intolerably lonely. Liberty is not a thing for the great masses of men. It is the exclusive possession of a small and disreputable minority, like knowledge, courage and honor. It takes a special sort of man to understand and enjoy liberty — and he is usually an outlaw in democratic societies.
No government is ever really in favor of so-called civil rights. It always tries to whittle them down. They are preserved under all governments, insofar as they survive at all, by special classes of fanatics, often highly dubious.
The main thing that every political campaign in the United States demonstrates is that the politicians of all parties, despite their superficial enmities, are really members of one great brotherhood. Their principal, and indeed their sole, object is to collar public office, with all the privileges and profits that go therewith. They achieve this collaring by buying votes with other people's money. No professional politician is ever actually in favor of public economy. It is his implacable enemy, and he knows it. All professional politicians are dedicated wholeheartedly to waste and corruption. They are the enemies of every decent man.
The highfalutin aims of democracy, whether real or imaginary, are always assumed to be identical with its achievements. This, of course, is sheer hallucination. Not one of those aims, not even the aim of giving every adult a vote, has been realized. It has no more made men wise and free than Christianity has made them good.
The pedant and the priest have always been the most expert of logicians — and the most diligent disseminators of nonsense and worse. The liberation of the human mind has never been furthered by such learned dunderheads; it has been furthered by gay fellows who heaved dead cats into sanctuaries and then went roistering down the highways of the world, proving to all men that doubt, after all, was safe — that the god in the sanctuary was finite in his power, and hence a fraud. One horse-laugh is worth ten thousand syllogisms. It is not only more effective; it is also vastly more intelligent.
The difference between a moral man and a man of honor is that the latter regrets a discreditable act, even when it has worked and he has not been caught.
What is any political campaign save a concerted effort to turn out a set of politicians who are admittedly bad and put in a set who are thought to be better. The former assumption, I believe is always sound; the latter is just as certainly false. For if experience teaches us anything at all it teaches us this: that a good politician, under democracy, is quite as unthinkable as an honest burglar.
Suppose two-thirds of the members of the national House of Representatives were dumped into the Washington garbage incinerator tomorrow, what would we lose to offset our gain of their salaries and the salaries of their parasites?
I propose that it shall be no longer malum in se for a citizen to pummel, cowhide, kick, gouge, cut, wound, bruise, maim, burn, club, bastinado, flay, or even lynch a [government] jobholder, and that it shall be malum prohibitum only to the extent that the punishment exceeds the jobholder’s deserts. The amount of this excess, if any, may be determined very conveniently by a petit jury, as other questions of guilt are now determined. The flogged judge, or Congressman, or other jobholder, on being discharged from hospital — or his chief heir, in case he has perished — goes before a grand jury and makes a complaint, and, if a true bill is found, a petit jury is empaneled and all the evidence is put before it. If it decides that the jobholder deserves the punishment inflicted upon him, the citizen who inflicted it is acquitted with honor. If, on the contrary, it decides that this punishment was excessive, then the citizen is adjudged guilty of assault, mayhem, murder, or whatever it is, in a degree apportioned to the difference between what the jobholder deserved and what he got, and punishment for that excess follows in the usual course.
Do they believe that the aim of teaching English is to increase the exact and beautiful use of the language? Or that it is to inculcate and augment patriotism? Or that it is to diminish sorrow in the home? Or that it has some other end, cultural, economic, or military? ... it was their verdict by a solemn referendum that the principal objective in teaching English was to make good spellers, and that after that came the breeding of good capitalizers. … I have maintained for years, sometimes perhaps with undue heat: that pedagogy in the United States is fast descending to the estate of a childish necromancy, and that the worst idiots, even among pedagogues, are the teachers of English. It is positively dreadful to think that the young of the American species are exposed day in and day out to the contamination of such dark minds. What can be expected of education that is carried on in the very sewers of the intellect? How can morons teach anything that is worth knowing?
Liberty and democracy are eternal enemies, and every one knows it who has ever given any sober reflection to the matter. A democratic state may profess to venerate the name, and even pass laws making it officially sacred, but it simply cannot tolerate the thing. In order to keep any coherence in the governmental process, to prevent the wildest anarchy in thought and act, the government must put limits upon the free play of opinion. In part, it can reach that end by mere propaganda, by the bald force of its authority — that is, by making certain doctrines officially infamous. But in part it must resort to force, i.e., to law. One of the main purposes of laws in a democratic society is to put burdens upon intelligence and reduce it to impotence. Ostensibly, their aim is to penalize anti-social acts; actually their aim is to penalize heretical opinions. At least ninety-five Americans out of every 100 believe that this process is honest and even laudable; it is practically impossible to convince them that there is anything evil in it. In other words, they cannot grasp the concept of liberty. Always they condition it with the doctrine that the state, i.e., the majority, has a sort of right of eminent domain in acts, and even in ideas — that it is perfectly free, whenever it is so disposed, to forbid a man to say what he honestly believes. Whenever his notions show signs of becoming "dangerous," ie, of being heard and attended to, it exercises that prerogative. And the overwhelming majority of citizens believe in supporting it in the outrage. Including especially the Liberals, who pretend — and often quite honestly believe — that they are hot for liberty. They never really are. Deep down in their hearts they know, as good democrats, that liberty would be fatal to democracy — that a government based upon shifting and irrational opinion must keep it within bounds or run a constant risk of disaster. They themselves, as a practical matter, advocate only certain narrow kinds of liberty — liberty, that is, for the persons they happen to favor. The rights of other persons do not seem to interest them. If a law were passed tomorrow taking away the property of a large group of presumably well-to-do persons — say, bondholders of the railroads — without compensation and without even colorable reason, they would not oppose it; they would be in favor of it. The liberty to have and hold property is not one they recognize. They believe only in the liberty to envy, hate and loot the man who has it.
The truth, indeed, is something that mankind, for some mysterious reason, instinctively dislikes. Every man who tries to tell it is unpopular, and even when, by the sheer strength of his case, he prevails, he is put down as a scoundrel.
The basic fact about human existence is not that it is a tragedy, but that it is a bore. It is not so much a war as an endless standing in line. The objection to it is not that it is predominantly painful, but that it is lacking in sense.
Laws are no longer made by a rational process of public discussion; they are made by a process of blackmail and intimidation, and they are executed in the same manner. The typical lawmaker of today is a man wholly devoid of principle — a mere counter in a grotesque and knavish game. If the right pressure could be applied to him, he would be cheerfully in favor of polygamy, astrology or cannibalism.
It is the aim of the Bill of Rights, if it has any remaining aim at all, to curb such prehensile gentry. Its function is to set a limitation upon their power to harry and oppress us to their own private profit. The Fathers, in framing it, did not have powerful minorities in mind; what they sought to hobble was simply the majority. But that is a detail. The important thing is that the Bill of Rights sets forth, in the plainest of plain language, the limits beyond which even legislatures may not go. The Supreme Court, in Marbury v. Madison, decided that it was bound to execute that intent, and for a hundred years that doctrine remained the corner-stone of American constitutional law.
I believe that religion, generally speaking, has been a curse to mankind — that its modest and greatly overestimated services on the ethical side have been more than overcome by the damage it has done to clear and honest thinking.
I believe that no discovery of fact, however trivial, can be wholly useless to the race, and that no trumpeting of falsehood, however virtuous in intent, can be anything but vicious.
I believe that all government is evil, in that all government must necessarily make war upon liberty and the democratic form is as bad as any of the other forms.
I believe that the evidence for immortality is no better than the evidence of witches, and deserves no more respect.
I believe in the complete freedom of thought and speech — alike for the humblest man and the mightiest, and in the utmost freedom of conduct that is consistent with living in organized society.
I believe in the capacity of man to conquer his world, and to find out what it is made of, and how it is run.
I believe in the reality of progress.
I —But the whole thing, after all, may be put very simply. I believe that it is better to tell the truth than to lie. I believe that it is better to be free than to be a slave. And I believe that it is better to know than be ignorant.
If he became convinced tomorrow that coming out for cannibalism would get him the votes he needs so sorely, he would begin fattening a missionary in the White House yard come Wednesday.
•The American Mercury (March 1936) - referring to Franklin Delano Roosevelt
It is [a politician's] business to get and hold his job at all costs. If he can hold it by lying, he will hold it by lying; if lying peters out, he will try to hold it by embracing new truths. His ear is ever close to the ground.
Public opinion, in its raw state, gushes out in the immemorial form of the mob's fear. It is piped into central factories, and there it is flavoured and coloured and put into cans.
No one in this world, so far as I know — and I have searched the record for years, and employed agents to help me — has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people.
The public...demands certainties...But there are no certainties.
Injustice is relatively easy to bear; what stings is justice.
The most costly of all follies is to believe passionately in the palpably not true. It is the chief occupation of mankind.
Notes on Democracy (1926)
•No man, I suppose, ever admits to himself candidly that he gets his living in a dishonourable way.
•Democratic man, dreaming eternally of Utopias, is ever a prey to shibboleths.
•Democratic man can understand the aims and aspirations of capitalism; they are, greatly magnified, simply his own aims and aspirations.
•An aristocratic society may hold that a soldier or a man of learning is superior to a rich manufacturer or banker, but in a democratic society the latter are inevitably put higher, if only because their achievement is more readily comprehended by the inferior man, and he can more easily imagine himself, by some favour of God, duplicating it.
•My business is not prognosis, but diagnosis. I am not engaged in therapeutics, but in pathology.
•Democracy is shot through with this delight in the incredible, this banal mysticism. I have alluded to its touching acceptance of the faith that progress is illimitable and ordained of God - that every human problem, in the very nature of things, may be solved.
•Democracy, in fact, is always inventing class distinctions, despite its theoretical abhorrence of them.
•What is not true, as everyone knows, is always immensely more fascinating and satisfying to the vast majority of men than what is true. Truth has a harshness that alarms them, and an air of finality that collides with their incurable romanticism.
Nature abhors a moron.
Human life is basically a comedy. Even its tragedies often seem comic to the spectator, and not infrequently they actually have comic touches to the victim. Happiness probably consists largely in the capacity to detect and relish them. A man who can laugh, if only at himself, is never really miserable.
The Diary of H.L. Mencken (1989)
...I have given my whole life to newspapers. I am convinced that they have abandoned their functions, and in an abject and ignominious manner, in the present war. Nine-tenths of them, and even more than nine-tenths, print the official blather without any attempt to scrutinize it... It is a disgraceful spectacle, but I do not believe that anything can be done about it. Roosevelt has taken the press into camp as certainly has he has taken the Supreme Court. It has ceased altogether to be independent and has become docilely official. [1944]
I was wise to quit writing for the Sun back in January, 1941, for it was obvious by then that Roosevelt would horn into the war soon or late, and I knew by bitter experience in the last war that I'd be throttled at once. Since then I have thought out many likely articles, but not one of them has been printable. In these days, indeed, my very vocabulary is prohibited. I couldn't so much as mention Roosevelt or Churchill or any of the other frauds without having to face a savage official onslaught, with all blows directed below the belt. The common notion that free speech prevails in the United States always makes me laugh. [1945]
The Sun editorial on Roosevelt this morning begins: "Franklin D. Roosevelt was a great man." ...The argument, in brief, is that all his skullduggeries and imbecilities were wiped out when "he took an inert and profoundly isolationist people and brought them to support a necessary war on a scale never before imagined." In other words, his greatest fraud was his greatest glory, and his sufficient excuse for all his other frauds. It seems to me to be very likely that Roosevelt will take a high place in American popular history -- maybe even alongside Washington and Lincoln... He had every quality that morons esteem in their heros. It will be to the interest of all his heirs and assigns to whoop him up, and they will probably succeed in swamping his critics. [1945]
[Roosevelt] was always... finding new victims to loot and new followers to reward, flouting common sense, and boldly denying its existence, demonstrating by his anti-logic that two and two made five, promising larger and larger slices of the moon. His career will greatly engage historians, if any good ones ever appear in America, but it will be of even more interest to psychologists. He was the first American to penetrate to the real depths of vulgar stupidity. He never made the mistake of overestimating the intelligence of the American mob. He was its unparalleled professor. [1945]
The course of the United States in World War II, I said, was dishonest, dishonorable, and ignominious, and the Sunpapers, by supporting Roosevelt's foreign policy, shared in this disgrace. [1945]
Quote Source -> en.wikiquote.org/wiki/H._L._Mencken
The Works of H. L. Mencken -> www.gutenberg.org/browse/authors/m#a578
The Mencken Society -> www.mencken.org/
This band loves nothing more than to tap their cloven hooves to the hottest speakeasy tunes!
The Smart Set, August 1922. Edited by H.L. Mencken & George Jean Nathan.
Provenance: The George H. Thompson Collection of Henry Louis Mencken
Location: The George Peabody Library
The Smart Set. March 1922.
Provenance: The George H. Thompson Collection of Henry Louis Mencken
Location: The George Peabody Library
Injustice is easy to bear, it is justice that hurts.
— H.L. Mencken
Typeface: Roswell (edited)
Merchandise available: www.redbubble.com/shop/ap/129232257
Menckeniana, the Magazine about all things H.L. Mencken, is now a searchable, portable, website. Subscribers can still download or view issues as a PDF, but the new format allows easier searching and browsing, and it flows nicely into smaller sizes for viewing on tablets or smartphones.
Learn more, subscribe, or download sample PDF issue at www.prattlibrary.org/menckeniana.
Photo device simulations generated by Breezi's PlaceIt (CC BY 3.0)
The Smart Set. October 1921. Edited by H.L. Mencken & George Jean Nathan.
Provenance: The George H. Thompson Collection of Henry Louis Mencken
Location: The George Peabody Library
Saucy Stories. November 1916.
Provenance: The George H. Thompson Collection of Henry Louis Mencken
Location: The George Peabody Library
2048 x 2048 pixel image for the iPad’s 2048 x 1536 pixel retina display.
Designed to complement the iPad iOS 7 lock screen, also works on an iPhone, simply centre the image horizontally after selecting it.
Image via: www.lifeofpix.com/gallery/screen-print/
Typeface: Yaahowu
This is a photo I took in a Roman Catholic church in Bretagne, north France. The cobwebs struck me as a sign of the reduced importance that religion holds in Europe now. However, the idea that religions are sacred and should be exempt from satire is ever more present with the immigration to Europe of communities with different religions, especially Islam.
In the process of losing my Christian faith, on this issue I have now embraced the position as expressed by H.L. Mencken:
" ... even a superstitious man has certain inalienable rights. He has a right to harbor and indulge his imbecilities as long as he pleases, provided only he does not try to inflict them upon other men by force. He has a right to argue for them as eloquently as he can, in season and out of season. He has a right to teach them to his children. But certainly he has no right to be protected against the free criticism of those who do not hold them. He has no right to demand that they be treated as sacred. He has no right to preach them without challenge."
I want to test how many people are open to this idea on Flickr. If you agree with me and you can think of a satirical title for this photo, please post your suggestion below.
The contest is open-ended and therefore I will not choose a winner. For the sake of freedom of speech and creativity your effort is greatly appreciated. Some good suggestions also from the members in this group.
If you think this is wholly inappropriate, please make your argument!
Peace!
The Smart Set. August 1921. Edited by H.L. Mencken & George Jean Nathan.
Provenance: The George H. Thompson Collection of Henry Louis Mencken
Location: The George Peabody Library
2048 x 2048 pixel image for the iPad’s 2048 x 1536 pixel retina display.
Designed to complement the iPad iOS 7 & 8 lock screens, also works on an iPhone, just centre the image horizontally after selecting it.
Typefaces: Everly, Hollyhock
Mencken Day: honoring the memory, career and bequest of Henry Louis Mencken
Central Library, Saturday, Sept. 12, 2009 (10:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.)
The Mencken Room is open to the public from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.
New Exhibits: "Treasures of the Saturday Night Club Music Collection," a display of original compositions by four members of the fabled Saturday Night Club -- On display in the Annex, through September 12; and "Mencken and Prohibition," and "Mencken and F. Scott Fitzgerald,".
The 2009 Mencken Memorial Lecture, 2:30 p.m., Wheeler Auditorium - "Bryan Debates Mencken: The Confrontation We Missed," by Dr. Michael Kazin, professor of history at Georgetown University and author of A Godly Hero: The Life of William Jennings Bryan. A reception and book signing will be held in the Poe Room following Dr. Kazin's lecture.
More info on the Pratt Library website:
Mencken Day 2009 details - The H. L. Mencken Room - H. L. Mencken Collection
from the invitation to Mencken Day 2009 (Saturday, September 12) at the Pratt Library
Mencken's at the far right at the piano.
Serfs Up ! (Mencken quoe photo courtesy of From Sovereign to Serf "Serfs Up" Author Roger Sayles and the Serfs Up Blog.) Roger Sayles' book, "From Sovereign to Serf" is available at www.serfs-up.net.
From Sovereign to Serf - Serfs Up ! - Roger Sayles - (serfs-up.net)
The Smart Set. February 1923. Edited by H.L. Mencken & George Jean Nathan.
Provenance: The George H. Thompson Collection of Henry Louis Mencken
Location: The George Peabody Library
Author H.L. Mencken, as photographed by Carl Van Vechten in 1932.
Image courtesy of Marquette University Archives. Image No.: MUA_KJP_00917front
Related images at
Menckeniana, the Magazine about all things H.L. Mencken, is now a searchable, portable, website. Subscribers can still download or view issues as a PDF, but the new format allows easier searching and browsing, and it flows nicely into smaller sizes for viewing on tablets or smartphones.
Learn more, subscribe, or download sample PDF issue at www.prattlibrary.org/menckeniana.
Photo device simulations generated by Breezi's PlaceIt (CC BY 3.0)
Mencken Day is Saturday, Sep 07, 2013 at the Central Library in Baltimore: www.prattlibrary.org/calendar/atPratt.aspx?id=80544
The Smart Set. December 1920. Edited by H.L. Mencken & George Jean Nathan.
Provenance: The George H. Thompson Collection of Henry Louis Mencken
Location: The George Peabody Library
The Smart Set. March 1923. Edited by H.L. Mencken & George Jean Nathan.
Provenance: The George H. Thompson Collection of Henry Louis Mencken
Location: The George Peabody Library
Cover Design by Paul Rand
Knopf (1958)
“One quickly realizes that simplicity and geometry are the language of timelessness and universality.”
The Smart Set. September 1923. Edited by H.L. Mencken & George Jean Nathan.
Provenance: The George H. Thompson Collection of Henry Louis Mencken
Location: The George Peabody Library
Is it love?
The Smart Set. May 1922. Edited by H.L. Mencken & George Jean Nathan.
Provenance: The George H. Thompson Collection of Henry Louis Mencken
Location: The George Peabody Library