I have today received a promotional leaflet for the new publication on Peter Lanyon which I found offensive and which makes me dread what is contained within the descriptive text of the book about Peter and his personal identity?

Peter Lanyon was known to be passionately Cornish and would have felt insulted by the definition of himself as "...one of the ... ...English artists".   He might have understood the arrogance which said it but he would certainly not have condoned its use in publicising anything about him.   If it is claimed that he is attributed as "...remade English landscape painting..." then it is surely more correct to have stated that he, in fact, replaced that discipline with Cornish landscape painting?

Whilst you may argue that you cannot be responsible for what others have said, I would submit that you have a duty to be sensitive to the man and it seems clear that this has not come through in the authors 'assessment' of Peter Lanyon.

The work would appear to promote - in the absence of anything in the promotional leaflet to the contrary - the objectionable imperial concept that anything or anyone to do with Cornwall may be 'branded' as English.   This is the antithesis of Peter Lanyon's - a Cornish Bard - understanding of himself, his place and his landscapes.   It certainly defies an application of reason and logic to historical accuracy and the hoped for sensitivity from one people to another.

Tyr-Gwyr-Gweryn is a Cornish Rights organisation and we know from a knowledge of Peter Lanyon that he shared our concerns for Cornish Rights and for the future of Cornwall.   As it is another fait accompli we shall have to see, in the fullness of time, whether Chris Stephens has done justice to what was considered as "his strong belief in employing landscape and place to explore questions of personal identity" ?   I hope that you will please convey the above concerns to the author?

Georgia Mazower has sent me a copy of your passionate response to the promotional leaflet for my book on Peter Lanyon.   I am interested to see that the book can be so provocative even before it is read.

While I did not know Peter Lanyon, as you seem to have done, I have, over twelve years, discussed him in depth with many of his friends and family, several of whom have read my text.   I am, of course, well aware of the importance to him of his Cornish identity and of his support for Cornish causes.   The role that cultural identity played in his self-perception and in the formulation of his art is a central theme of my analysis of him and his work.   As I did not write it, I cannot really answer your comments on the reference to Lanyon as an 'English artist'.   I would assure you, however, that he publicly and unequivocally declared his desire to be associated with 'the English landscape tradition' that he is said to have remade.   While at certain times his paintings were almost exclusively based on Cornish places, at others they drew upon a variety of sites, including Dorset, Derbyshire, Clevedon in Somerset, Mexico, Czechoslovakia and Italy, as well as on the human body and mythological figures.

The crucial thing about Lanyon's attitude to a Cornish cultural identity was his perception of it as embedded within a broader view of the world.   While recognising the importance of a distinctive local identity, he was always an internationalist.   His was an open-minded understanding of identity rather than a narrow-minded nationalism, a stance which was, perhaps, inevitable for a man who had fought Nazism and Fascism during the war.

Thank you for your interest.   I look forward to hearing your response to the book itself.

Yours sincerely

It was the promotional leaflet that I had challenged with its use of "English artist" and "English landscape tradition".   I had no way of knowing what the text of your book was other than through interpreting the context of the leaflet and an obvious deduction that Peter Lanyon's Cornish identity had not been discussed in such a way as to influence the promotional aspects of the publication - given that personal identity was given as a theme.   The reason for asking the publisher to pass the email to you was to see if you agreed with, or acquiesced to, the quoted references but secretly hoping that you would affirm that Peter's passionate identification with being Cornish was covered - even if inadequately - within the text.   That is still in doubt!

I did not know Peter personally but was always aware of how Cornish he was, how he always thought in terms of Cornwall and England and that he would have found being described as 'English' as offensive - although I feel sure that in some situations he would have felt obliged to tolerate such ignorance.   The promotion (and publication) would have been the place to put the record straight.

With regard to what passes as a definition for 'English landscape painting' I have no knowledge, for unless it applies specifically to some unique technical form, it should only relate to landscape paintings of the countryside of 'England'.   It is obvious that some of Peter's artistic creations were precisely that and the accolade is well deserved.   Since much [the majority?] of Peter's work was not 'English' landscape then this should have provided the principal focus within the promotion unless the term 'English' is being used in a narrow-minded imperialistic idiom which seeks to extend its borders across the world.

You wrote: The crucial thing about Lanyon's attitude to a Cornish cultural identity was his perception of it as embedded within a broader view of the world.   While recognising the importance of a distinctive local identity, he was always an internationalist.   His was an open-minded understanding of identity rather than a narrow-minded nationalism, a stance which was, perhaps, inevitable for a man who had fought Nazism and Fascism during the war.

Lanyon also said, of his war experience:

"I always had a root in Cornwall.   I could always find a pattern there both for living and for the darker and deeper things which can make a joke of the idea that man is a rational being.   For an artist, these inward things which are labelled 'the spirit', 'the psyche' or the 'subconscious' are one of the sources of energy and even subject matter.   These sources by themselves would be without form or meaning unless there is something or in my case some place where these inner things find reflection and are therefore made sensible. If I am ever at the bottom of a hole deep down and in the dark, I remember I am a Cornishman."
BBC Home Service 10th August 1954

Anyone who understands, and respects, identity is by that very definition an internationalist.   His identity was not simply "a distinctive local identity" it was a national identity, viz. 'Cornish'.   It was the very act of 'being Cornish' which made him aware of 'identity'; the importance of 'identity' and the need to respect the identity of others in a way that was/is, apparently, alien to the English consciousness.   You seem to imply that to focus on, or promote, one's Cornish identity may be defined as "narrow-minded nationalism" which you equate to Nazism and Facism.   That is, sadly, a bizarre understanding of the politics of power and domination and of Cornwall!   The Cornish have never sought to extend their borders or to redefine the territorial identity of their neighbours neither have we deprived our neighbour access to their history nor imposed measures upon them which threaten their very existence.   The Cornish people have no power at all, let alone an absolute power to abuse.   I would respectfully suggest that you review your understanding of Cornish political culture and then compare it with that of an 'English' Establishment towards its neighbours - particularly Cornwall!

Michael Canney observes ( 'Peter Lanyon 1918 -1964' by Andrew Lanyon):

'Some obscure hurt that he had suffered in his life, real or imagined, came through at times, and the only predictable aspects of his talk were when he was attacking the 'foreigners' in Cornwall, and those on the Cornwall art scene.   He would say that these were people who had come from outside, and instead of keeping their heads down, had thrown their weight around, taken over the place, had assumed too much.   "If they behaved", he said, "we don't mind them being here!"   Cornwall now, and the Cornish are so diluted by the foreign invaders, that Peter's Cornwall hardly exists, but he belonged to the generation who felt proud and possessive about Cornwall, about his roots.   It was his property.   As one left him, he often used to shout out: "Up the Rebels!"   The rebels being the Cornish, throwing back the invader.'

Perhaps "narrow-minded nationalism", "nazism" and "facism" are thrown into the debate as a defensive offensive mechanism from imperial minds towards a marginalised people's aspirations?   Perhaps I could persuade you to visit my website which may be found at >http://www.tyr-gwyr-gweryn.kernow.eu.org< ?

Patrick Heron, ( 'Arts' (New York) in 1956), in describing Peter Lanyon includes the following:

'To begin with, the whole of Cornwall feels alien to England proper: it is Celtic, even British, but certainly not English.'

The following observation was given to me during an exhange of correspondence with a fellow Cornishman who is more involved in the arts than myself:

"Lanyon was definitely a man who perceived Cornwall as a British nation, apart from England, and he was a Cornish painter whose eye saw in a way which, although engaging and often brilliant for others who view his work, speaks of passion, anger, persistent rebellion and conviction of place, people, identity and destiny - these are qualities in his work which engage Cornish people, and are mysteries to others."

If there is within your text a genuine portrayal of the man and his deeply felt 'Cornish' Identity [as one may construe from the above quotes] then I shall purchase a copy but I am unable to support any publication which in any way demeans that identity or the status of Cornwall itself.

Lowena dhys

Thank you for your email.   I'm sorry not to have replied, but have been away - not least to Cornwall!

Firstly, I should say that I was surprised at Margaret Garlake's use of the phrase 'English artist'.   As someone of Cornish descent (great-grandparents from Looe and Lostwithiel) and having lived in Scotland for some years, it is not a phrase I would have used.   Your letter was too tempting, however.

'English Landscape Tradition' can be seen as a historical cultural category, rather than simply pictures of the English landscape, though of course the term is problematic.   It is used to describe paintings of landscape by British artists, usually of the 18th and early 19th Century, and has gained such a currency that it seen as Britain's major contribution to art and any artist's use of landscape is generally seen to associate him or her with that tradition. (Turner's views of the Alps, for example, are major works in what I like to call the ELT).

This was certainly in Lanyon's mind when he stated his desire to be compared with Constable and equated his (Lanyon's) identification with West Penwith with Constable's immersion in the countryside around Dedham in Suffolk. My point is that the crucial thing for Lanyon, which the quotes you deploy reinforce, is PLACE - not just a particular location, but the historical, social, cultural implications of that location.   A 'sense of place' is a cliché in discussions of Constable and other landscape artists and it is one that Lanyon applied to his own work.   Of course the place, for him, was Cornwall or West Penwith:   this was where he re-established his identity after the war and with which he continued to identify himself.

I have read, as far as I know, all of Lanyon's published statements and a large amount of his unpublished writings - draft essays, statements of intent and correspondence with friends, but have never seen him associate himself with a Cornish nationalist movement.   He did, indeed, refer to the in-coming artists and, to a lesser extent, the tourists in general as 'foreigners'.   This was, of course, sincere, but must also be understood in the light of his feuding with those artists (in particular with Heron, who you quote).   I also believe there is a strong element of pose-striking for effect (e.g. when he campaigned for the opening of mines along the Zennor coast in opposition to just about everybody else who wished to conserve its natural beauty) and, as I said before, of tongue-in-cheek.   The last notion was actually suggested to me by a relative of Lanyon's, also very active in Cornish cultural affairs: the two had been associated with a Cornish revivalist group, but he was quite certain that Peter viewed it with a certain wry amusement. (In relation to this, you would be amused by something I found sadly too late for inclusion in a book: Lanyon sent a friend a tourist's guide to Cornwall, in which he had glued pictures of their friends on the illustrations - Bryan Wynter, for example, whose art is very much about his knowledge and experience of the landscape around Zennor, is seen emerging from a fogou, while, on the frontispiece, Lanyon is shown with a hammer chipping away at the stone piers of the Tamar Bridge).

Actually, I don't think we are that far from each other's position, and I think you will find much of my book quite palatable.   Lanyon's attitude to Penwith, Cornwall, 'Place' is one of, if not the, major theme of the book.   But, I explore how it changed, or incorporated, both a social history, a personal mythology and a physical experience of the place.   I also try to tackle the paradox of his insistence of that identification with the place as essential to his art and his painting of many other places.   I would say that Penwith/Cornwall is self-evidently the dominant theme during the period 1949-54.   Prior to that his work was more symbolic, referring to Cornwall but elliptically, relating the land to a personal rebirth in a way consistent with much cultural expression in Britain at that time.   From 1954, other places (Italy foremost, Dorset, Somerset, and later Czechoslovakia and America) and themes (sex, myth, gliding) took his attention, though he would return to local places and themes.

I have to say that Lanyon's attitude to Cornwall is one of the things which attracts me to him: his insistence on the importance of place and one's roots in it, and on the value of the periphery as opposed to the metropolitan centre; his anxiety over the decimation of local culture in the face of tourism's demeaning demands.   I also think, however, that this sometimes led him to lapse into narrow mindedness and to romanticise a brutal, exploitative past (specifically the mining industry that destroyed so many minds and bodies for the benefit of a few distant owners).

I think you would find much of interest in the book (I would say that of course), though I dare say there will be something to provoke as well.   As to your wondering if there is 'a genuine portrayal of the man' etc., I can only say that the text has largely been met with approval by his family and friends (including Lanyon's widow and that of Michael Canney, since you cite him).   That said, the book is supposed to be, not a portrayal of a man, but an explanation of his stated intentions and an investigation of their broader significance.

With best wishes

It was good of you to respond to my email and I cannot believe that it has taken me this long to give you the courtesy of a reply.

I apologise most sincerely for this delay.

I have little doubt that you will have done justice to the life of Peter Lanyon and, as I said my original argument was with the way he was promoted in the leaflet and the Imperial concept of an 'English Landscape tradition' which will become increasingly problematic.

Thank you for sharing the adapted tourist guide story with me and it is a great pity that this missed publication because it reflects the inner necessity within Cornwall of making subliminal gestures through humour.   It is a form of symbolism which has been forced upon us because things need to be said yet, somehow, it is against our nature to offend.   How we promote our Cornish aspirations will be dependent largely upon the circles we travel in and our true feelings are rarely known outside of ourself.

There is another concern in that that much of what is written about Cornwall or Cornish personalities is written by people who have little knowledge of Cornwall or the significance of Peter's hammer.   This, in my opinion, removes a valuable component from what is written - from a Cornish point of view - and which invariably leads to a misrepresentation of our Cornish Duchy.

I wish you well with the book but hope that the publisher goes out of business :)

Lowena dhys