Katherine E Flach Dissertation

ELIOT ELISOFON: BRINGING AFRICAN ART TO LIFE
by
KATHERINE E. FLACH
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements
For the degree of Doctor of Philosophy
Dissertation Advisor: Dr. Catherine B. Scallen
Dr. Constantine Petridis, Co-Advisor
Department of Art History and Art
CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY
May 2015
2
CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES
We hereby approve the thesis/dissertation of
Katherine E. Flach
______________________________________________________
Doctor of Philosophy
candidate for the ________________________________degree *.
Catherine B. Scallen
(signed)_______________________________________________
(chair of the committee)
Constantine Petridis
________________________________________________
Henry Adams
________________________________________________
Jonathan Sadowsky
________________________________________________
DATE OF DEFENSE
March 4, 2015
*We also certify that written approval has been obtained for any
proprietary material contained therein.

3
This dissertation is dedicated to my family
John, Linda, Liz and Sam

4
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................... 11
Abstract............................................................................................................................ 12
Eliot Elisofon and African Art: An Introduction ........................................................ 14
Elisofon and LIFE ....................................................................................................... 20
The Legacy of Eliot Elisofon ...................................................................................... 24
State of the Literature ................................................................................................. 27
1974 - Tribute to Africa: The Photography and the Collection of Eliot Elisofon ..... 28
1974 - Robert and Nancy Nooter............................................................................... 28
1990s-early 2000s - Christraud M. Geary ................................................................. 29
1996 - Amanda B. Carlson, M.A. Thesis .................................................................. 32
2000 – “To Help the World to See:” An Eliot Elisofon Retrospective ...................... 34
2007-present - Amy J. Staples ................................................................................... 34
2009-present - Raoul J. Granqvist ............................................................................. 35
Chapter One: Elisofon Biography and Career Overview ........................................... 39
Africa: A Chance to Change Your Life ..................................................................... 39
Career Beginnings ....................................................................................................... 40
Working for LIFE Magazine ..................................................................................... 41
World War II ............................................................................................................. 43
The Prototypical LIFEr.............................................................................................. 45
Aristocracy of Talent ................................................................................................. 49
The Meaning of LIFE ................................................................................................ 51
A Life Lived Through a Lens .................................................................................... 53
The Show-Book of the World ................................................................................... 55
Chapter Two – 1947: Africa or Bust ............................................................................. 57
Museum in Léopoldville (Kinshasa) .......................................................................... 60
Why the Kuba? ............................................................................................................ 63
Kuba: Mushenge, Day One ........................................................................................ 64
Kuba: Mushenge, Day Two ........................................................................................ 66
Photographing the King ............................................................................................. 67
Gift Exchange ............................................................................................................ 69
Songye ........................................................................................................................... 72
Luluwa .......................................................................................................................... 76
The Further History of the Kuba Encounter............................................................ 78
The Kuba Encounter ReViewed ................................................................................. 88
Chapter Three: Eliot Elisofon, Meeting African Art .................................................. 98
Chaim Gross, Isamu Noguchi, and African Art ..................................................... 100
Gypsy Rose Lee and African Art ............................................................................. 101
5
An African Art Expert? ............................................................................................ 103

Elisofon’s Collecting Habits ..................................................................................... 104
1960s-70s, Warren Robbins ...................................................................................... 112
Chapter Four: Elisofon Photographing, Exhibiting, and Writing about African Art
......................................................................................................................................... 118
The Grand Plan ......................................................................................................... 120
1951 Alter Ego, Cooper Union Exhibition ............................................................... 124
1952 Understanding African Negro Sculpture, Exhibition ..................................... 127
Elisofon’s Multiple Exposure Images of African Art ............................................ 132
September 8, 1952, “Mystic Art of Tribal Africa,” LIFE ..................................... 137
African Art in the 1954 U.S. Camera Annual ......................................................... 145
April 1959, “African Sculpture,” The Atlantic Monthly ........................................ 149
October 13, 1961, ‘Literary Africa,’ LIFE photo essay ......................................... 156
January 1962, “African Arts: Primitives to Picasso” Think magazine, IBM ...... 161
Chapter Five: 1958 Was a Very Big Year .................................................................. 166
Masterpieces of Primitive Art, Exhibition ................................................................ 166
Masterpieces of Primitive Art, Reactions and Press Coverage ............................... 174
The Sculpture of Africa, Book ................................................................................... 184
A Visual Catalog of African Art.............................................................................. 189
The Sculpture of Africa: Reactions, Reviews, and Press Coverage......................... 192
Bell, Book and Candle, Film ..................................................................................... 203
The Role of ‘Primitive’ Art in the Film................................................................... 206
Reception ................................................................................................................. 211
Chapter Six: Late 1960s and Early 1970s Television Shows..................................... 213
1967 ABC Africa Special ........................................................................................... 213
1970 Camera III: African Sculpture Productions ................................................... 216
CBS Camera III African Art Content Guide ........................................................... 219
1972 Black African Heritage ..................................................................................... 219
A Researcher’s Assessment ..................................................................................... 223
Art Coverage............................................................................................................ 224
Black African Heritage Reviews and Press Reaction .............................................. 226
Chapter Seven: The Final Years ................................................................................. 251
1973 “Africa’s Ancient Splendor,” Smithsonian magazine ................................... 251
1973 African Art of the Dogon, Exhibition .............................................................. 255
An Adventure Interrupted: The End of Two Lives ............................................... 266
Conclusion: Eliot Elisofon and African Art ............................................................... 271
A Life of Influencing the Language of African Art................................................ 276
Figures............................................................................................................................ 288
6
Introduction and State of the Literature................................................................. 288

Fig. 0.1. Eliot Elisofon. ........................................................................................ 288
Fig. 0.2. Elisofon’s photograph of a Shilluk woman on the cover of LIFE,
November 20, 1950 –The first time a black woman appeared on the cover of LIFE.
.............................................................................................................................. 288
Fig. 0.3. Myrlie Evers and her son on the cover of LIFE, June 28, 1963 – The
second time a black woman appeared on the cover of LIFE. .............................. 289
Figs. 0.4-0.8. LIFE article, “The Nile” (November 20, 1950) with images by
Elisofon. ............................................................................................................... 289
Fig. 0.9. Cover of the Tribute to Africa: The Photography and Collection of Eliot
Elisofon, 1974. ..................................................................................................... 291
Figs. 0.10-0.11. Cover of “To Help the World to See:” An Eliot Elisofon
Retrospective, 2000; and title page. ..................................................................... 291
Chapter One – Elisofon Biography and Career Overview.................................... 292
Fig. 1.1. Elisofon’s Lower East Side, New York City, street photography of
fashion models in industrial settings. ................................................................... 292
Figs. 1.2-1.3. Elisofon’s LIFE articles on tintype photographers and Jewish
holidays, September 20, 1937. ............................................................................. 292
Fig. 1.4. Elisofon’s LIFE cover photograph of Carol Bruce, September 9, 1940; his
first LIFE cover. ................................................................................................... 293
Chapter Two – 1947: Africa or Bust ....................................................................... 293
Figs. 2.1-2.2. LIFE article, “England’s King Visits South Africa,” sample pages,
March 10, 1947, including Elisofon photographs................................................ 293
Figs. 2.3-2.6. Examples of Elisofon’s photographs of objects in the Musée de la
Vie Indigène, 1947. .............................................................................................. 294
Figs. 2.7-2.13. Kuba bridge, sculptural poles, Kuba man with hat and pipe, 1947.
.............................................................................................................................. 294
Figs. 2.14-2.15. Kuba capital of Mushenge, blacksmith forge, and King’s
bedroom, 1947. .................................................................................................... 296
Fig. 2.16. Kuba King’s wives dancing and playing music, 1947. ....................... 296
Fig. 2.17. Making of Kuba velours, 1947. ........................................................... 296
Figs. 2.18-2.19. Kuba men weaving a floor mat and carver with animal-shaped
backrest, 1947. ..................................................................................................... 297
Figs. 2.20-2.22. Kuba King in his coronation costume, 1947. ............................ 297
Fig. 2.23. Elisofon with the King, caption: “Elisofon & Friend: The King adores
ground glass,” 1947. ............................................................................................ 298
Figs. 2.24-2.25. Some of the gifts Elisofon received from the Kuba King, 1947.
.............................................................................................................................. 298
Figs. 2.26-2.27. Kuba King wearing the necklace Elisofon gifted him, 1947. .... 298
Fig. 2.28. Mask Elisofon received from the King, 1947...................................... 299
7
Fig. 2.29. Kuba masks Elisofon acquired on the 1947 trip. ................................. 299
Figs. 2.30-2.31. Kuba man dancing in mask, impromptu performance, 1947..... 299
Fig. 2.32. Songye child with power figure, 1947................................................. 300
Fig. 2.33. Songye man with two power figures, 1947. ........................................ 300
Figs. 2.34-2.35. Songye power figures on their platform, 1947. ......................... 300
Fig. 2.36. Luluwa boys training in the forest with masked instructor, 1947. ...... 301
Figs. 2.37-2.39. LIFE article, “African Big Shot,” pages, March 31, 1947, images
by Elisofon. .......................................................................................................... 301
Fig. 2.40. Arnold Newman photograph of the Kuba King, 1958. ....................... 303
Figs. 2.41-2.42. Arnold Newman with the Kuba King, 1958. ............................. 303
Figs. 2.43-2.46. LIFE article, “Polygamy Passing,” pages, December 12, 1960. 304
Chapter Three – Meeting African Art, Collecting ................................................. 305
Fig. 3.1. Elisofon photograph of David Smith’s studio, 1938. ............................ 305
Figs. 3.2-3.5. Elisofon photographs of African art in his New York City
apartments, throughout his life. ........................................................................... 306
Fig. 3.6. African art in Chaim Gross’s 1957 publication, The Technique of Wood
Sculpture. ............................................................................................................. 307
Figs. 3.7-3.8. LIFE article on Isamu Noguchi stool, which was based on a Kuba
stool in Elisofon’s collection. .............................................................................. 307
Figs. 3.9-3.10. Elisofon’s multiple exposure photograph of a woman teetering on
Noguchi’s stool and Noguchi’s stool next to Elisofon’s Kuba stool. .................. 308
Fig. 3.11. Small Pende ivory sculpture given to Elisofon by Gypsy Rose Lee, his
first African art object in his collection. .............................................................. 308
Fig. 3.12. A four-faced helmet mask, Fang, NMAfA #73-7-290, Elisofon collected
in the field, town of Ibea in Republic of the Congo, 1951................................... 309
Fig. 3.13. Possible Kwele dancer performing this mask...................................... 309
Figs. 3.14-3.15. Cynthia Kellogg article, “Living with Sculpture,” New York Times
Magazine, October 5, 1958; Inexpensive items to collect. .................................. 310
Figs. 3.16-3.17. Kellogg article main pages. ....................................................... 310
Fig. 3.18. “Dr. Elisofon, I Presume,” image with the f.y.i. magazine article about
Elisofon. ............................................................................................................... 311
Chapter Four – Photographing, Exhibiting, and Writing about African Art ..... 312
Fig. 4.1. Cover of The White Witch Doctor, published 1950............................... 312
Fig. 4.2. The White Witch Doctor 1953 film poster. ............................................ 312
Fig. 4.3. Example of 1947 Africa trip photographs, objects clustered on blankets
and shot from above. Often distorted by heavy shadows. ................................... 313
Fig. 4.4. Example of an Elisofon studio photograph of African art made for
publication in a reference source, Suku headdress. ............................................. 313
8
Fig. 4.5. Elisofon’s detail photographs of African art, which were published in
Tribute to Africa (1974), exhibition catalog pages with Dogon and Songye figures.
.............................................................................................................................. 314
Fig. 4.6. Elsy Leuzinger, The Art of Africa (1960), plate 18, Baule mask on top of
Baule cloth. .......................................................................................................... 314
Figs. 4.7-4.9. African art objects shown in the 1951 Alter Ego exhibition at the
Cooper Union, Nos. 90 (the cover of the exhibition catalog) and 93 are Elisofon
collection objects. ................................................................................................ 315
Figs. 4.10-4.44. Elisofon’s Understanding African Negro Sculpture, exhibition,
1952. Installation photographs of Chicago, from photocopies. ........................... 316
Installation photographs of MoMA, photographs by Dick Meek. ....................... 318
Fig. 4.45. Marcel Duchamp’s Nude Descending a Staircase, 1912. ................... 321
Figs. 4.46-4.47. Examples of Elisofon’s multiple exposure photographs of African
art. ........................................................................................................................ 322
Figs. 4.48-4.49. Gjon Mili’s stroboscopic, i.e. multiple exposure, photographs of
Gene Kelly and Pablo Picasso (late 1940s-late 1950s). ....................................... 322
Fig. 4.50. Gjon Mili’s photograph of a “Nude Descending a Staircase” (1942). 323
Fig. 4.51. Elisofon’s photograph of Duchamp descending a staircase (1951). ... 323
Fig. 4.52. Gjon Mili’s photograph of Gene Krupa’s drum-playing (1941). ........ 323
Fig. 4.53. Gjon Mili’s photograph of Willie Hoppe’s billiard trick shot (1941). 324
Figs. 4.54-4.55. More examples of Elisofon’s multiple exposure photographs of
African art. ........................................................................................................... 324
Figs. 4.56-4.58. Elisofon’s “multiples” series on a small Dogon figure. ............ 324
Fig. 4.59. Elisofon’s silhouette picture of Guro heddle pulleys. ......................... 325
Fig. 4.60. Elisofon’s views of a Fang figure. ....................................................... 326
Figs. 4.61-4.65. Elisofon’s “Mystic Art of Tribal Africa,” 10 pages, LIFE,
September 8, 1952. .............................................................................................. 326
Figs. 4.66-4.79. Elisofon’s “Africa,” 25 pages, U.S. Camera Annual 1954........ 328
Fig. 4.80. Table of Contents page of The Atlantic Monthly, April 1959. ............ 332
Figs. 4.81-4.85. Elisofon’s “African Sculpture,” pages with images, The Atlantic
Monthly, April 1959. ............................................................................................ 332
Fig. 4.86. Image of the entrance to the 1936 Museum of Modern Art exhibition
Cubism and Abstract Art, Pablo Picasso’s Dancer (1907) is next to a Kota
reliquary figure, by Beaumont Newhall............................................................... 334
Fig. 4.87. Alfred Barr’s exhibition catalog pages with a Kota reliquary figure
clustered with three works by Picasso, Cubism and Abstract Art, 1936. ............ 334
Figs. 4.88-4.99. Elisofon’s ‘Literary Africa,’ “The Storied World of Africa,” 22
pages and cover, LIFE, October 13, 1961. .......................................................... 335
Fig. 4.100. Elisofon multiple exposure image of a Dogon figure as the cover of
Think magazine, IBM Corporation, January 1962. .............................................. 338
9
Figs. 4.101-4.102. Elisofon’s “African Art: Primitives to Picasso,” 4 pages, Think

magazine, January 1962. ...................................................................................... 339
Chapter Five – 1958 Was a Very Big Year ............................................................. 339
Fig. 5.1. The cover of the exhibition catalog for the Masterpieces of Primitive Art
show at the Boston Museum of Fine Arts, 1958.................................................. 339
Figs. 5.2-5.3. Invitation to the exhibition opening, Masterpieces of Primitive Art,
Boston Museum of Fine Arts, Fall 1958.............................................................. 340
Figs. 5.4-5.5. 1952 film Latuko: We Saw Primitive Man, photographed and
directed by Edgar M. Queeny, poster images. ..................................................... 340
Fig. 5.6. The Sculpture of Africa, showing African art in a modern way—stark,
bold, abstract. ....................................................................................................... 341
Figs. 5.7-5.10. Elisofon photographs of the set of The African Queen, the Belgian
Congo, LIFE issue September 17, 1951, 5-page article, “…Katie and Bogie Hit the
Congo.” ................................................................................................................ 341
Figs. 5.11-5.13. Elisofon’s still photographs of Moulin Rouge film, 1952 in LIFE’s
“Razzle-Dazzle Paris of Toulouse-Lautrec,” January 19, 1953. ......................... 342
Figs. 5.14-5.16. LIFE magazine story on Bell, Book and Candle, November 24,
1958...................................................................................................................... 343
Fig. 5.17. Bell, Book and Candle, 1958; Kim Novak’s name is paired with Kota
reliquary figure in film titles. ............................................................................... 344
Figs. 5.18-5.19. Elisofon’s stills of Kim Novak’s character Gil, shown wandering
among the ‘primitive’ sculptures in her shop at night, talking to her cat,
Pyewacket. ........................................................................................................... 344
Figs. 5.20-5.22. The shop and character transformation after Gil loses her powers.
.............................................................................................................................. 344
Figs. 5.23-5.24. Blue gelatins seen underneath the art objects in Gil’s ‘primitive’
art shop, lit from below through milk glass shelves, as per Elisofon’s
recommendation................................................................................................... 345
Fig. 5.25. The ‘Pende’ mask in her shop, which breaks during Gil’s argument with
Shep...................................................................................................................... 345
Fig. 5.26. Gil’s magical familiar, Pyewacket, hiding amongst the sculptures,
running away from Gil. ........................................................................................ 346
Fig. 5.27. Man Ray’s Noire et Blanche, 1926 ..................................................... 346
Figs. 5.28-5.30. Robert Coburn photographs of Novak as Gil in a gauze gown with
an African mask. .................................................................................................. 346
Figs. 5.31-5.34. Coburn photographs of Novak as Gil with a large Kota reliquary.
.............................................................................................................................. 347
Chapter Six – Film and Television Projects in the 1960s and 1970s .................... 347
10
Figs. 6.1-6.4. Bete/Dan-Ngere mask Elisofon lent to the 1970 National Gallery
exhibition of African sculpture, and TIME magazine article with Elisofon pictures
on this exhibition, Feb. 2, 1970............................................................................ 347
Fig. 6.5. On set the set of Black African Heritage with Lamidi Fakeye, Eliot
Elisofon, and Georges Bracher. ........................................................................... 348
Figs. 6.6-6.8. Examples of African art being created in Black African Heritage, set
photography by Elisofon. ..................................................................................... 349
Fig. 6.9. Group W advertisement for Black African Heritage. ............................ 349
Fig. 6.10. “Filmmaker perplexed by black response,” Ohio U showing of Black
African Heritage. Dave Sekal, “Filmmaker perplexed by black response,” The
Post, Ohio University, Athens, Ohio, October 18, 1972: 1. ................................ 350
Chapter Seven – The Final Years ............................................................................ 350
Figs. 7.1-7.6. Elisofon’s Akan gold article, “Africa’s Ancient Splendor,” for
Smithsonian magazine, January 1973, including cover. ...................................... 350
Figs. 7.7-7.8. 1973, African Art of the Dogon, exhibition installation photographs.
.............................................................................................................................. 352
Fig. 7.9. Dogon kanaga performer mannequin in regalia in Wunderman exhibition.
.............................................................................................................................. 352
Bibliography .................................................................................................................. 353
11
Acknowledgements
The Smithsonian’s National Museum of African Art,

Eliot Elisofon Photographic Archives, and the Warren M. Robbins Library
Amy J. Staples
Bryna Freyer
Janet Stanley
The Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin
Jose E. Banda, Linda Briscoe Myers, and Roy Flukinger
Elin and Jill Elisofon
Catherine Scallen, Constantine Petridis,

Henry Adams, and Jonathan Sadowsky
Debby Tenenbaum
The Olszewski Graduate Travel Fund
The College of Arts and Sciences Dissertation Fellowship
Dr. Edwin Shirley
Christina Larson
Laura Bishop
Roxy and Trixie Flach

12
Eliot Elisofon: Bringing African Art to LIFE
Abstract
By
KATHERINE E. FLACH
As a public figure and a famous LIFE magazine photographer, Eliot Elisofon
participated in the mainstream appreciation and discussion of African art more than many
scholars. He publicized African art in magazine articles, exhibitions, books, lectures,
films, television documentaries, and much more during his career. Elisofon exposed a
wider population to unknown art forms, peoples, and cultures. By putting this content
into the mass media, he was ahead of his time. Through stimulating interest in African art,
he contributed to its transformation from natural history artifact to fine art. The
occasional flaws of his promotion tactics reveal some of the perceptual difficulties
encountered during the formation of the field of African art history.
This examination of Elisofon’s life’s work delineates his unique place in African
art history by assessing his contributions to the study and appreciation of African art. It is
a field of study that defined a large part of his life, and his affiliated activities give us a
window into the history of reception of African art in America from the late 1940s
through the early 1970s. Elisofon was fascinated with Africa and African art, and he
wanted to convey this interest to the widest audience possible. While he never earned a
degree in art history, his photographs of African art and words on this topic influenced
generations. Elisofon brought the public along on his journey for knowledge about
African art and Africa, initiating public consideration of what most people regarded as a
foreign and intimidating topic. His projects embody the varied perceptions of the time.
13
As Elisofon first discovered African art, he appreciated it because of its influence on
modern European art. Later he began to discuss its aesthetic value independent of modern
art, and its meaning for Africans. He participated in the debate over how much
information should be presented to the public about these objects without getting in the
way of appreciation of them as art. Toward the end of his life, he continued to serve as a
proponent of African art and culture in the mass media, forming an interest in how his
work could encourage black pride.

14
Eliot Elisofon and African Art: An Introduction
“…the photographer is not simply the person who records the past,
but the one who invents it.”– Susan Sontag1
This dissertation examines Eliot Elisofon’s life’s work to clearly delineate his
unique place in African art history by assessing his contributions to the study and
appreciation of African art. It is a field of study that defined a large part of his life, and
his affiliated activities give us a window into the history of reception of African art in
post-war America from the late 1940s through the early 1970s. Elisofon was fascinated
with Africa and African art, and he wanted to convey this interest to the widest audience
possible. While he never earned a degree in the art history field, his photographs of
African art and words on this topic influenced generations. Elisofon brought the public
along on his journey for knowledge about African art and Africa, initiating public
consideration of what most people regarded as a foreign and intimidating topic.
As a public figure and a famous LIFE magazine photographer, Elisofon
participated in the mainstream appreciation and discussion of African art more than many
scholars. He was able to put Africa and African art in the public view. He publicized
African art in magazine articles, exhibitions, book projects, lectures, films, television
documentaries, and much more during his career. The outcome was successful, but not
always thoroughly positive. Despite the occasional appearance of stereotypes in his work,
Elisofon was able to expose a wider population to unknown art forms, peoples, and
cultures. By simply putting this content into the mass media, he was ahead of his time.
Through stimulating interest in African art, he helped to contribute to its transformation

1
Susan Sontag, On Photography (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1977): 67.
15
from natural history artifact to fine art. The occasional flaws of his promotion tactics
reveal some of the perceptual difficulties encountered during the formation of the field of
African art history.
His projects embody the varied perceptions of this time period. For example, as
Elisofon first learned about African art he appreciated it because of its influence on
modern European art. Then, with time, he began to discuss its aesthetic value
independent of modern art, and its meaning for Africans. He participated in the debate
over how much information we should be giving the public about these objects without
getting in the way of appreciation of them as art. Toward the end of his life, he continued
to serve as a proponent of African art and culture in the mass media, forming an interest
in how his work could encourage black pride.
‘Driven’ is the word that best describes Eliot Elisofon (fig. 0.1). From his
formative years as a child of European immigrants on New York City’s Lower East Side,
to his career as a professional photojournalist for LIFE magazine, Elisofon was always
pushing himself to be the best of the best. Coming from extreme poverty, and ashamed of
his background, Elisofon was incredibly ambitious and motivated to rise above the world
he was born into, to exist in a different circle, one with money, status, and comfort.
Photojournalist, painter, author, filmmaker and collector, Elisofon lived his life on a
metaphorical bullet train, speeding along from job to job, seeking success and recognition
at every stop. According to the 1972 Current Biography entry on Elisofon, he traveled
16
two million miles “across six continents to meet what he regards as ‘the great challenge’
of his craft: ‘to help the world to see.’”2
For the purposes of this dissertation I particularly recognize Elisofon’s need for
people to “see” African art as fine art. He wanted his photographs to inspire his audience
to learn more about African art, as his duty to society. “Don’t shoot just because it’s a
pretty picture,” Elisofon once told an interviewer, “first know what it means…I have no
time for pictures that don’t say anything: if something doesn’t say anything, don’t
photograph it.”3 Throughout his life Elisofon wrote articles, books, and created films
about Africa in an attempt to share with the larger public the beauty, majesty, and power
he found in Africa and its art.
The casual student of African art may see Elisofon’s photographs of Africa and
African art in a variety of resources: websites, textbooks, exhibition catalogs, magazines,
journals, and postcards, as examples. In the field of African art history we typically
regard him as “Eliot Elisofon, Photographer of Africa.” However, Elisofon, his friends,
family, and the public knew him first and foremost as a LIFE magazine photographer.
This dissertation is meant to bring the words LIFE and Elisofon back together, the way
they were in the American cultural psyche during his lifetime. It will elucidate what
being a LIFE photographer meant, how it affected Elisofon’s personality, work, and day-
to-day existence. He was a LIFE photographer long before he was a photographer of

2
Charles Moritz, ed., “Eliot Elisofon,” in Current Biography, January 1972, vol. 33, no. 1 (New
York: The H.W. Wilson Company, 1973): 19-21.
3
Robert W. Marks, “Elisofon Takes Both Sides of the Tracks,” Minicam (April 1942): 36. (HRC
71.9/66.9, IMG_5994 thru IMG_6010.) The abbreviation HRC stands for the Harry Ransom
Center. The number 71.9/66.9 is the box and folder code for the document. 71.9 is the new
number, 66.9 is the original number of the box and folder when I started my research. The IMG
numbers are the names of the photographs I took of the documents.
17
Africa, so it should be within that context – historically and biographically framed as an
ambitious, commercial magazine photographer – that we should study his work on
African art and culture.
In general, Elisofon did not produce his field photographs for a scholarly
audience; he made them for specific commercial assignments. All of his photographs of
Africa, Africans, and African art were constructed personal visions. He viewed himself as
an artist. “Good artists take what they like from reality and discard the rest,” he told The
New Yorker in 1953.4 When we look at Elisofon’s photographs we are looking at an
imaginary Africa, a part of the African ‘image world’ constructed by Europeans and
Americans. His photographs belong in the same category as “colonial photographic
practices that imaged and imagined Africa for European audiences” and they “do not
reveal ‘authentic’ Africa, but construct a particular vision of Africa as exotic, timeless
and unchanged.”5
A Susan Vogel quote reverberates throughout this dissertation: “An examination
of how we view African objects (both literally and metaphorically) is important because
unless we realize the extent to which our vision is conditioned by our own culture –
unless we realize that the image of African art we have made a place for in our world has
been shaped by us as much as by Africans—we may be misled into believing that we see

4
Lillian Ross and Brendan Gill, “The Talk of the Town: Fictional Color,” The New Yorker
(March 14, 1953): 24.
5
Amy J. Staples, “Visualism and the Authentification of the Object: Reflections on the Eliot
Elisofon Collection at the National Museum of African Art,” Collections: A Journal for Museum
and Archives Professionals, vol. 3, no. 2 (Spring 2007): 181-182.
18
African art for what it is.”6 Elisofon’s photographs are proof of his own cultural agenda.
What that agenda was is another question, one with multi-faceted, evasive, and highly
debatable answers.
The day-to-day reality of a photographer striving to satisfy both himself and his
employer was complex. Elisofon straddled the line between commercial photography, i.e.
a photographer on assignment, taking pictures for a client, and a creative artist, following
his own impulses. He believed that the two were not mutually exclusive, and that indeed,
the line between those two occupations did not exist. According to Elisofon, if a
photographer did not imbue his own creative spirit into his work, he was never going to
take a good — never mind a great — picture. “Any person can take pictures,” he stated in
1970, “but the secret ingredient of a good picture is creativity and imagination.”7 “Great
pictures come from the eyes, heart and brain of the photographer – not the lens, film and
camera. Equipment is the least important. Buying an expensive typewriter won’t make
you a Hemingway. You have to care about your subject,” he explained in an interview.8
The equipment analogy was one Elisofon often used:
The typewriter is not a writer; the camera is not a photographer. These are
only the implements of your craft, they have no soul and they are
meaningless utensils without the human element which you must give to
the subject which you are treating, whether it be an essay or a photograph.
The camera interferes between you and your subject; it is brutal in its
candor, it is a travesty of reality, it can give a completely false image, for
it is only a tool, a means to your end….One of the greatest threats of this
increasing world of conformity is the loss of passion. Don’t be afraid to be

6
Susan Vogel, ART/artifact (New York: Prestel Verlag, 1988): 11. Exhibition catalog for Center
for African Art.
7
Eneid Routte, “Hellzapoppin’ Elisofon,” San Juan Star Magazine (January 4, 1970): 2-3. (HRC
71.11/66.11, IMG_6535.)
8
Maureen D’Honau, “Living in Japan; Feminine Focus: Hellsapoppin Elisofon,” Mainichi Daily
News, February 12, 1973: 6B. (HRC 71.11/66.11, IMG_6556.)
19
passionate, to feel something. Too many people today just don’t care. You
can’t change mankind, but have deep and strong feelings and don’t ever be
ashamed of them.9
Elisofon was never afraid to be passionate about the aesthetic power of African art, and
he viewed his artistic sensibilities as a unique and valuable justification for his
experimental topics and techniques. For this dissertation, one must fully acknowledge
that much of Elisofon’s work is inherently flawed as an African art
historical/anthropological document, and yet, we cannot ‘unsee’ what has been shown to
the public again and again for half a century. Elisofon’s imagery has gained a life of its
own in academic and commercial America; it is used both in scholarly sources and the
mass media, always taking on a new meaning within each context.
Despite being non-anthropological and non-ethnographic, Elisofon strongly
believed his African field photographs were documentary and could be useful to
academics and curators. While his African studio work was created for study purposes, it
was also designed with the intent to publish. Elisofon suffered from an internal conflict
between his artistic impulses and his need to satisfy his client. His daughter, Elin,
interviewed Robert Gardner, the Harvard documentary filmmaker, for her biography
draft:
Bob believes that Eliot was ‘serving two gods.’ One being his impulses,
which were artistically honest and correct for him, and the other being the
client, which in most cases was LIFE. These factors, tugging at each other,
created the conflict in which he worked and it was the need to satisfy the
client, which meant take pictures which sold magazines, that made Eliot

9
Eliot Elisofon, “Dynamism in High School Yearbooks,” lecture transcript, October 11-12, 1963,
Columbia University, New York, 23rd Annual Conference Columbia Scholastic Press
Association and Short Course on Yearbook Production, concluding event at the Waldorf-Astoria,
Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection, Harry Ransom Center, The University of
Texas at Austin. (HRC 53.47, IMG_4006 thru IMG_4012.)
20
more a ‘journeyman,’ in Bob’s eyes, than the great artist he truly wished
to be.
He was famous, he made plenty of money, and he made pictures which
sold a lot of magazines, but ‘he knew that this wasn’t how great art is
judged.’
Though Bob respected Eliot’s awareness of the struggle between his inner
most desires and his professional life, he may not have truly understood
the desperate beginnings from where it came and the impossibility of Eliot
being able to resolve it.10
Elisofon used photography to challenge himself. Like any other photographer, he wanted
to make meaningful pictures but he also saw himself as an artist. In the end, he was
creating commercial products that sometimes pandered to stereotypes and were
exploitative. Elisofon was a product of his age, of his time and yet ahead of time as well.
We must make a deeper examination of what his photographic practices were,
conventions this researcher regards as firmly rooted in the guiding principles of LIFE
magazine.
Elisofon and LIFE
Elisofon contributed to and benefitted from the “iconic presence” and “cultural
prestige” LIFE magazine quickly gained after its introduction in 1936, something that has
persisted even decades after its weekly production ended in 1972.11 How do we measure
the impact of LIFE? From 1936 to 1973 LIFE published 1,864 consecutive issues, many
of which carried Elisofon’s photographs. In 1940 2.8 million copies of LIFE were sold
weekly, and factoring in an estimated pass-along rate, the weekly audience was estimated

10
Bob Gardner, quoted in Elin Elisofon, Elisofon Biography Draft, Eliot Elisofon Paper and
Photographic Collection, Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin. (HRC 79a.1-
4/72.2-5, IMG_1518.)
11
Erika Doss, ed., “Introduction,” Looking at LIFE Magazine (Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian
Institution Press, 2001): 3.
21
at 19.9 million people.12 Despite the growing popularity of television, in 1970 there were
over 8 million subscribers to LIFE, and with an estimated pass-along rate of four to five
people per copy, each issue reached as many as 40 million people.13
LIFE was designed as a spectacle within itself, a weekly World’s Fair crafted of
ink and paper. Laid out flat, an issue measured 13.5 by 21 inches, the largest magazine in
the United States. Writing was confined to captions or small text blocks; an article’s
impact, argument and effect were accomplished through visuals, usually photographs.
Overall, the popular picture magazine served as an exchange of lowbrow and highbrow
culture. Loudon Wainwright, a long-time LIFE employee, explained:
It was clear to everybody that we were assembling each week a very

mixed bag of goods. In LIFE’s glossy pages, trivial and vulgar fragments
about starlets and hairstyles nestled among splendid color portfolios about
the glories of antiquity, titillating items about the weird habits of quirky
socialites followed high-minded entreaties for American greatness,
powerfully moving black-and-white picture essays illuminating the joys of
childhood abutted shocking photographs of starvation victims and of
people leaping to their deaths from burning buildings.14
In Looking at LIFE Magazine, Terry Smith described how the publication’s project was
“…to define typical American life by celebrating the strengths of dynamic but ultimately
fusible internal, local, and regional differences in contrast to the fascinating but
potentially dangerous oddity of external and international differences.”15 Africa and
African art landed squarely in the category of “fascinating but potentially dangerous” to
most twentieth-century Americans.

12
Loudon Wainwright, The Great American Magazine (New York: Knopf, 1986): 114.
13
14
Loudon Wainwright, The Great American Magazine (New York: Knopf, 1986): xv.
15
Terry Smith, “Life-Style Modernity: Making Modern America,” in Erika Doss, ed., Looking at
LIFE Magazine (Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press, 2001): 30.
22
Elisofon was instrumental in bringing African culture into LIFE magazine. For
example, the first black woman to appear on the magazine’s cover was in an Elisofon
photograph, for his 1950 Nile photo essay (fig. 0.2). A black woman would not be seen
on the cover for another 13 years; not until the widow of Civil Rights activist and martyr
Medgar Evers, Myrlie Evers, was shown comforting her son at her husband’s funeral (fig.
0.3, June, 28, 1963). The text that accompanied the 1950 cover, a smiling portrait of a
young Shilluk woman, follows: “The scarified forehead of the broad-shouldered African
girl marks her as a member of the Shilluk tribe on the Nile River. Like most smart
women of her village of Kwon Fashoda, she wears on her chest decorated aluminum
jewelry, fashioned by a local craftsman from the wreckage of a World War II plane.”16
This article also introduced African architecture and ephemeral arts to LIFE
readers, including coiffures, jewelry, and scarification markings of the Madi, Shilluk,
Dinka, and Nuer ethnic groups (figs. 0.4-0.8). These types of ephemeral arts and aesthetic
forms were not studied as African fine art until the end of the twentieth century, but
Elisofon chose to include them in several of his publications and exhibitions.17
Elisofon also created LIFE’s first photo essay on African art, published on
September 8, 1952: “Mystic Art of Tribal Africa.” And he took the first color images of
the Ruwenzori Mountains in Central Africa, featured in LIFE on May 4, 1953. In
addition, he photographed LIFE essays on the Central African Kuba capital and King
(March 30, 1947), Nigerian politics and culture (Sept. 26, 1960), and literary-themed

16
“Table of Contents,” LIFE (November 20, 1950): 29.
17
In addition to several other articles and exhibitions on this topic, Elisofon published a book on
the Nile in 1964. Out of the 292 pages in the book, 79 are dedicated to sub-Saharan Africa,
moving from the headwaters of the Nile in the Ruwenzori mountain range, to the Victoria Nile
region, the Sudd, and northward into Sudan where black Africa meets Arab Africa. Elisofon
included 18 pictures of black Africans from various ethnic groups, which focus on jewelry,
coiffures, dress, architecture, and scarification marks.
23
African vignettes (Oct. 13, 1961). Elisofon’s studio photographs of African art were also
featured in TIME-LIFE publications, such as Great Ages of Man: African Kingdoms
(1966). His African work for LIFE appeared in other publications, such as the 1954 U.S.
Camera Annual and the French-American international magazine Réalités. Elisofon’s
experiences in Africa as a LIFE photographer gave him opportunities later in life to work
on African projects for Smithsonian magazine and National Geographic.
Ultimately, LIFE’s purpose was to generate profit, but it appealed to simple and
basic human needs. Elisofon saw himself as a theatrical director, staging every scene
necessary to tell the story, creating photographs that would elicit empathy and
understanding from his audience. This was how most LIFE photographs were made.
Some were candid, in the moment, with inherent lack of artistic control. But in general,
each LIFE photo shoot was an elaborate cooperation and compromise between image-
maker and imaged.
“Would you please move your army back two steps for a better
composition?”—Gordon Parks to the commander of the Danish military
forces in Copenhagen
“I know you’ve a ruptured hernia, but couldn’t you put some ice on it or
something and get into your riding pants and boots for just one more
picture?”—Margaret Bourke-White to Augustus A. “Gussie” Busch in St.
Louis
“I know it’s expensive to move a whole fleet, but the ships are placed so
we can’t see the new plane maneuvering among them.”—Ralph Morse to
an admiral off Norfolk
“Where is all the traffic?…go to the police and arrange a traffic jam. Go
on, do something. We need an obstruction. Go cause an obstruction.”—
Rudi Crane to his LIFE researcher-writer in London18

18
Dora Jane Hamblin, That was the Life (New York: Norton, 1977): 48-49.
24
What was the point of all of these orders? LIFE photographers believed they had the right
and the obligation to manipulate a situation to get the best pictures for the magazine.
LIFE had an almost-mythic level of potential and influence, and most of these staffers
dedicated their lives to its goals. Wainwright offered an explanation of the philosophy of
the magazine’s staff:
…in its finest efforts (and in many hundreds of less well executed stories,
too), LIFE did a sturdy, dignified, and occasionally highly distinctive job
of reflecting events as no other publication would or could, of presenting
stories that now and then offered readers new possibilities for their own
lives. Much of the staff’s extraordinary loyalty and drive can be traced to
the conviction that great things could happen in those pages, or grow out
of them.19
For the majority of his career, Elisofon was a LIFE man, steeped in the culture of this
exhibitionist, high-flying magazine. He shared the conviction that “great things” could
“grow out” of his work, and so he pursued it with passion and energy. The legacy of
LIFE as “perhaps the single most important general weekly magazine from the late 1930s
until its demise in the early 1970s,” which “influenced ideas about class, ethnicity, gender
and race in America, and throughout the world,” is also part of Elisofon’s legacy.20
The Legacy of Eliot Elisofon
The word ‘legacy’ was specifically used in the title of this section to highlight the
Elisofon enigma: Why, when he was so active and famous as a LIFE magazine
photographer and Hollywood color consultant during his lifetime, has no one heard of
Elisofon outside of the Africanist field today? What is his legacy? What is his reputation?
Where did his fame go? He is not the first man whom history has forgotten. But why has

19
Loudon Wainwright, The Great American Magazine (New York: Knopf, 1986): xvi.
20
Erika Doss, ed., “Acknowledgments,” Looking at LIFE Magazine (Washington, D.C.:
Smithsonian Institution Press, 2001): xiii.
25
this happened? Why isn’t he placed next to Alfred Eisenstaedt, Gjon Mili, David Douglas
Duncan, Margaret Bourke-White, and W. Eugene Smith as fine art photographers in art
history textbooks? They were LIFE magazine photographers, too.
Through a survey of the literature on Elisofon one discovers that while many
articles have been written about him, and several by him, not much comprehensive
analysis of his activities has been published. His obscurity in the history of photography
is perhaps due to his early death, his willful personality, or simply the inaccessibility of
his archives until recent years. In addition, his finest work was done in color film, a
medium for which he was a pioneer. For fine art photographic history, color pictures,
unless they are impressive contemporary digital accomplishments, are often overlooked.
More than a hundred years after his birth, this project is the first dissertation
written on Elisofon’s activities. After his death, his work fell into obscurity. Why? His
African archives and objects were immediately inherited by the Museum of African Art
(MAA) in 1973. In theory, Warren Robbins and his staff became responsible for his
legacy. His other papers and photographs sat in his New York City apartment until his
daughters donated them to the Harry Ransom Center in 1992. Elin Elisofon, his eldest
daughter, worked on his biography in the 1980s, but it was never published. The only
non-Africanist who has written about Elisofon from an academic perspective is Roy
Flukinger, senior curator of the Harry Ransom Center. The public face of Elisofon’s
legacy sat squarely in the hands of the MAA, which became the National Museum of
African Art (NMAfA). But this situation skewed the public perception of Elisofon into
just a photographer of Africa. Even his status as collector and expert fell away.
26
Elisofon belongs in multiple categories of historical analysis, not just that
projected by NMAfA. But what is he? How do we analyze him? Do we treat him as an
American photographer? A LIFE photographer? A pioneer of color photography and
film? An Africanist? Because of this dilemma of muddled identification, Elisofon
belongs simultaneously to multiple fields of art history and none. By studying him as an
Africanist, his other careers are reduced and forgotten. Africanists have claimed him,
particularly as an occasional propaganda tool of the NMAfA, but whom does he really
belong to? This is probably one of the main reasons why scholars have not studied
Elisofon in depth. He eludes definition, presents a constant challenge of study and
analysis.
However, in the end, if his legacy had not immediately fallen into the hands of
Africanists, he might not have fallen into such obscurity. He might be known today
primarily as the famous LIFE photographer he was—his deep fascination for Africa and
African art might only be part of a broader legacy. But even scholars’ knowledge of his
projects on Africa and African art has diminished since his death. Maitland Edey, his
colleague at LIFE, said in his eulogy:
Eliot was also a past master of the art of the parlay. His photo assignments
to Africa for LIFE gave him the chance to start collecting African art.
Later on he reversed the process, using his collection and his knowledge
of the subject as a way of photographing it and publishing books about it.
Some of the most beautiful photographs of African sculpture that I have
ever seen were made in that way by Eliot. By this time he was recognized
as an authority on the subject, and was able to propel himself onto the
lecture platform.21

21
Maitland Edey, quoted in Eliot Elisofon and Warren Robbins, Tribute to Africa: The
Photography and the Collection of Eliot Elisofon: a Memorial Exhibition at the Museum of
African Art, Frederick Douglass House, June Through December 1974 (Washington: Museum of
African Art, 1974): 5.
27
Roy Sieber said of Elisofon:
He extended the range of our knowledge and our consciousness of the rich
variety of sculptural form through books, films, field photographs and
most especially through the sensitive photographic recording of literally
thousands of sculptures in public and private collections. The archives he
donated to a number of study centers will long continue to inform the
scholarship of African art studies and may well serve as the best
monument to a dedicated photographer and an impassioned Africanist.22
Though he was recognized by his contemporaries for his ambitious achievements, over
time Elisofon’s career and specific contributions to the field have mostly been forgotten,
except for photographic credit lines in African art history publications. This dissertation
examines his long-term impact on the field beyond those credit lines.
State of the Literature
Glimpses into Elisofon’s career exist from many angles. Elisofon was interviewed
dozens of times by newspapers, magazines, and television shows, such as The New
Yorker, Toronto Globe and Mail, The Milwaukee Journal and the Today show. In
addition, there are hundreds of newspaper articles that include references to him. A
handful of The Washington Post article titles gives an idea of their intriguing content:
“The Secrets of Eliot Elisofon” (1972), “Capturing a Visual Philosophy” (1974), “Top
Lensman Advises Amateurs How to Click” (1973), “Photographer Would Choose Gorilla
Over Glamour Girl” (1953), and “Elisofon’s Africa” (1974). There are also many
Elisofon obituaries, appearing in newspapers, magazines, and academic journals.

22
Roy Sieber, quoted in Eliot Elisofon and Warren Robbins, Tribute to Africa: The Photography
and the Collection of Eliot Elisofon: a Memorial Exhibition at the Museum of African Art,
Frederick Douglass House, June Through December 1974 (Washington: Museum of African Art,
1974): 7. Study centers that received sets of Elisofon’s photographs: the Peabody Museum at
Harvard University, the Museum of Primitive Art, the Department of Ethnic Studies at the
University of California Los Angeles, the University of Indiana Department of Art History, and
the British Museum (Tribute to Africa, 3).
28
However, scholarly examinations of Elisofon’s work are limited, and are often
superficial or narrowly focused. Six scholars have written about Elisofon: Warren
Robbins, Christraud M. Geary, Amanda B. Carlson, Roy Flukinger, Amy J. Staples, and
Raoul J. Granqvist. But Elisofon was not their primary research interest. There have also
been three exhibitions about Elisofon, two of which had accompanying publications, but
these were short, soft-cover booklets.
1974 - Tribute to Africa: The Photography and the Collection of Eliot Elisofon
After Elisofon died in 1973, from June through December of 1974, museum
founder Warren Robbins held an exhibition at the Museum of African Art, in the
Frederick Douglass House on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. It was titled Tribute to
Africa: The Photography and the Collection of Eliot Elisofon, and had an accompanying
booklet publication, which is a trove of images and text (fig. 0.9). It also included a
truncated bibliography and a chronology of Elisofon’s life. Robbins wrote the foreword
and the “In the Eye of the Storm” section, while Elisofon’s own words were used in
excerpts from his diary and letters, and in “On African Sculpture and Modern Art” and
“On Photographing African Sculpture.” Much like the later Harry Ransom Center
exhibition publication from 2000, Tribute to Africa presented a flattering account of
Elisofon’s life, career, and accomplishments.
1974 - Robert and Nancy Nooter
A little more than a year after Elisofon’s death, in the August 1974 issue of
African Arts, Robert and Nancy Nooter’s article, “Eliot Elisofon: Photographer of Africa,”
29
appeared as a tribute to his life and work in Africa.23 The Nooters were art collectors with
particular interest in African and Native American works. They contributed essays to The
Art of Collecting African Art catalog edited by Susan Vogel, which accompanied The
Center for African Art exhibition in 1988. Nancy Nooter also worked on the African Art
in American Collections book with Warren Robbins. The 1974 African Arts article
included one page of text followed by five pages of Elisofon’s field photographs. It
addressed the highlights of his career and major activities in connection with African art.
The Nooters knew Elisofon and were not unbiased in their account; they refer to him as
“renowned, even legendary.”24
1990s-early 2000s - Christraud M. Geary
The primary Elisofon scholar is Christraud M. Geary, although her work on this
topic represents only a small fraction of her diverse scholarly output. Geary served as the
curator of the Eliot Elisofon Photographic Archives (EEPA) at the National Museum of
African Art from 1990 to 2003. She specializes in the history of photography in Africa
and the study of African art.25 Geary was the Teel Senior Curator of African and Oceanic
Art at the Boston Museum of Fine Arts, but is now retired.
During her tenure as the EEPA curator, Geary was in an opportune position to
study Elisofon’s work. Geary’s first Elisofon-related publication was featured in
Fotografia e storia dell’Africa: Atti del Convegno Internazionale Napoli-Roma 9-11

23
Robert and Nancy Nooter, “Eliot Elisofon: Photographer of Africa,” African Arts, vol. 8, no. 1
(August 1974): 8-13.
24
(August 1974): 8.
25
Geary received her PhD in cultural anthropology and African studies from the University of
Frankfurt in 1973. Her degree fieldwork was conducted in Cameroon.
30
settembre 1992, edited by Alessandro Triulzi, and published by the Istituto Universitario
Orientale of Napoli (1995). Her second publication on Elisofon was a 1993 African Arts
article, “Two Days in Mushenge: Eliot Elisofon’s Images of the Kuba (1947).”26 Logical
speculation would lead one to assume that Geary worked on both of these texts in 1992,
after familiarizing herself with the EEPA holdings and Elisofon’s career. Later she also
included a brief discussion of Elisofon’s 1947 Kuba photographs in her exhibition
publication In and Out of Focus: Images from Central Africa, 1885-1960, which was
printed in 2003.27
Geary’s 1993 African Arts article was too brief to provide deep analysis and
criticism of Elisofon’s work. She gave an overview of Elisofon’s 1947 encounter with the
Kuba and their King, Nyim Mbop Mabiinc maKyen, and included passages from
Elisofon’s reports to LIFE magazine on the assignment and his letters. This topic also
appeared in Geary’s 2003 exhibition catalog In and Out of Focus. But her information on
this 1947 trip to Central Africa was not comprehensive. In comparison to the propitious
and easily accessible 1993 African Arts article, Geary’s 1992 conference paper delivered
direct criticism of Elisofon’s photographic practices. The article presented the
paradoxical observation that cameras simultaneously lie and tell the truth, thus one must
use sensitivity and caution when using photographs to form conclusions. Typically pre-
arranged and staged, photography is deceptive.

26
Christraud M. Geary, “Two Days in Mushenge: Eliot Elisofon’s Images of the Kuba (1947),”
African Arts, vol. 26, no. 2 (April 1993): 72-77.
27
Geary also briefly discussed Elisofon’s role organizing the 1958 Museum of Fine Arts Boston
‘primitive’ art exhibition in her chapter, “On Collectors, Exhibitions, and Photographs of African
Art: The Teel Collection in Historical Perspective,” in Suzanne Preston Blier, ed., Art of the
Senses: African Masterpieces from the Teel Collection (Boston: MFA Publications, 2004): 25-41.
31
In this conference paper Geary explained how Elisofon staged, posed, and re-
enacted several Bamana chi wara performances for his Black African Heritage film
project in 1970 and 1971. He purposefully removed signs of Westernization and
modernization from his photographs, such as wristwatches and Western-style clothing.
Some of these chi wara photo shoots were blatant falsifications, which “jeopardize the
photographs’ value as sources,” and led to discontent among the Bamana groups Elisofon
worked with because they “rightfully felt mis-represented and exploited.”28 The chi wara
film was used in Black African Heritage, the photographs are still used via the EEPA,
and little of the context of their problematic production background accompanies the
images. Geary concluded that “the contextual image is itself an object, whether in an
exhibition or in publications. When used in these new contexts, images should thus be
scrutinized no differently from objects, which are painstakingly analyzed as to their
formal characteristics, their history, function, and meaning.”29
Geary was mainly concerned with the value of Elisofon’s photographs as
contextual evidence for African art, performances, and rituals. How well can an Elisofon
picture fit the needs of a publisher or a curator organizing an exhibition? Geary’s texts
delivered a muffled cry for more attention to Elisofon’s career. Her work did not dismiss
nor discredit Elisofon — that would be counter-productive for the field of African art —
but it did issue a caveat to art historians: Be careful how you use his photographs.

28
Christraud M. Geary, “Photographic Practice in Africa and its Implications for the use of
historical photographs as contextual evidence,” in Alessandro Triulzi, ed., Fotografia e storia
dell’Africa: Atti del Convegno Internazionale Napoli-Roma 9-11 settembre 1992 (Naples: Istituto
Universitario Orientale of Napoli, 1995): 118.
29
Christraud M. Geary, “Photographic Practice in Africa and its Implications for the use of
historical photographs as contextual evidence,” in Alessandro Triulzi, ed., Fotografia e storia
dell’Africa: Atti del Convegno Internazionale Napoli-Roma 9-11 settembre 1992 (Naples: Istituto
Universitario Orientale of Napoli, 1995): 118.
32
She encouraged the researcher to analyze the production background for Elisofon
photographs before using them, but provided little of that background to her reader.
Admittedly, it is a vast topic that even my dissertation cannot fully address. For example,
Elisofon documented his 1947 experience with the Kuba very carefully because it was
the first time he photographed Africans in the field. He wrote about some of his future
photo shoots in Africa with similar attention to detail, but in the end, only a small fraction
of them were given this treatment. If the researcher wanted to know everything that was
happening before, during and after an Elisofon African photo shoot, he/she is mostly out
of luck.
1996 - Amanda B. Carlson, M.A. Thesis
Amanda B. Carlson wrote her Master’s degree thesis, “Object Photography:
African Art in the Photographic Frame,” for Indiana University in 1996. The Smithsonian
Institution supported Carlson’s thesis research for 10 weeks in 1995 in the form of a
Graduate Research Fellowship at the National Museum of African Art. Christraud Geary
was the head of her Smithsonian research committee, and assisted Carlson with the
conceptualization and support of her project. At Indiana University, Patrick McNaughton
and Diane Pelrine supervised the production of Carlson’s thesis.30
An art historical analysis of the object photography of African art could be its
own dissertation, even its own multi-volume book series; hence, Carlson’s thesis project
served as an introduction to the topic and not a complete overview. Her 45-page thesis

30
Amanda B. Carlson, “Object Photography: African Art in the Photographic Frame,” M.A.
Thesis, (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University, 1996): iii. Carlson also received her PhD from
Indiana University, in Art History and African Studies. She currently serves as an Associate
Professor at the University of Hartford and publishes on a variety of topics, such as contemporary
art, photography, indigenous writing systems, masquerades, and women’s ritual performances.
33
discussed the nature of object photography, reviewed the literature on this topic, and
delved into the history of surrogates, i.e. reproductions as substitutes for the actual work
of art, a term introduced in the scholarship of Helene E. Roberts. Carlson then briefly
analyzed the stylistic conventions of six photographers of African art: Charles Sheeler,
Walker Evans, Eliot Elisofon, David Finn, Erik Hesmerg, and Franko Khoury. Two and a
half pages of the thesis were dedicated to Elisofon; not a huge amount of information
given the complexity of his career and photographic approach. She included four
Elisofon photographs in her figures, three multiple exposure shots and one straight
picture of a Dogon mask. The final section of the paper was dedicated to the reception of
African art object photography, its layers of meaning and multiple agendas, both positive
and negative.
Carlson’s thesis treated Elisofon’s African images as products of his time period,
the 1960s and 1970s. She explained that his corpus of images was produced over two
decades; however this is inaccurate – he was taking photographs of African art before the
1960s. She described his black and white images as high-contrast, stating that some
objects have no backgrounds causing them to appear very flat. She regarded his color
photographs of African art as “dramatic” – the bright jewel-toned backgrounds and
lighting sometimes had “a very ‘futuristic’ Star Trek look to them.”31 Carlson did pull
from some of Elisofon’s writings on why he began to photograph African art. The other
scholars did not address this information, but it had appeared in Robbins’ 1974 Tribute
booklet. Carlson wrote that Elisofon’s “continued documentation of African art was
much more than a job. It was a passion.” Elisofon wanted to “visually explain African

31
Thesis, (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University, 1996): 23.
34
art.”32 But her brief comments only hint at the deeper narrative of his involvement with
African art.
2000 – “To Help the World to See:” An Eliot Elisofon Retrospective
From September 14 through December 18, 2000, an Eliot Elisofon retrospective
exhibition titled “To Help the World to See” was held at the Harry Ransom Center’s
Leeds Gallery. A “keepsake booklet” was produced to commemorate the event, with an
introductory essay by Roy Flukinger, Senior Curator at the Harry Ransom Center (figs.
0.10-0.11). The information and photographs contained in the booklet give an idea of
what types of documents are held in the Elisofon papers, and the brief biography and
chronology included are useful. In general, however, the text was flowery and laudatory,
an expected aspect of something labeled “keepsake” and dedicated to Elin and Jill
Elisofon, Eliot’s daughters.
2007-present - Amy J. Staples
The current senior archivist of the EEPA, Amy J. Staples, also wrote an article on
Elisofon, “Visualism and the Authentification of the Object: Reflections on the Eliot
Elisofon Collection at the National Museum of African Art,” which was published in
Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals in 2007.33 In addition she
participated in the creation of Showtime’s Smithsonian Channel 2008 “Spotlight on
Elisofon” special, a 27-minute production. With curator Bryna Freyer, Staples co-curated
the 40th anniversary Elisofon retrospective at the NMAfA in 2013, Eliot Elisofon: Africa

32
33
and Archives Professionals, vol. 3, no. 2 (Spring 2007): 181-188.
35
ReViewed. There was no publication for this exhibition, but Staples did publish a brief
article in Tribal Art to promote it and the EEPA (Spring 2014, XVIII, no. 71).34
Many of her publications analyze films, such as her 2006 article, “Safari
Adventure: Forgotten Cinematic Journeys in Africa.”35 While this piece discussed safari
films as exploitative, Staples did not discuss Elisofon in the same way in her 2007 article.
This publication was one of the most informative ever written on Elisofon and his career,
discussing specific trips, photographs, and projects; but it skirted around real analysis.
Staples argued for a need to study the context of his images in more depth as “a lens to
examine historical relationships between Africa and the West,” such as his approach to
photographing the Mangbetu in the 1970s.36 This set up an approach for future Elisofon
scholarship, but Staples did not address the situation herself in this short four-page article.
2009-present - Raoul J. Granqvist
Raoul J. Granqvist is a Professor Emeritus of English Literature for the Language
Studies Department of Umea University in Sweden and a prolific author. He received a
fellowship from the Harry Ransom Center in 2009-2010 to study “Colonial
Photojournalism and the Western War: Ernest William Smith and Eliot Elisofon in
Africa,” which was funded by the David Douglas Duncan Endowment for

34
Staples received her PhD in the history of consciousness from the University of California,
Santa Cruz in 2002, and a Master’s degree in visual anthropology from Temple University in
1989. Her dissertation focused on independent travel and exploration films produced in Africa,
New Guinea and South America from 1930-1960.
35
Amy J. Staples, “Safari Adventure: Forgotten Cinematic Journeys in Africa,” in Film History:
An International Journal, vol. 18 (2006): 392-411.
36
and Archives Professionals, vol. 3, no. 2 (Spring 2007): 185.
36
Photojournalism and the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation Research Fellowship
Endowment.
Granqvist has written seven articles on Elisofon and his work continues on the
topic. In 2011 he published, “På gränsen till ett krig: Eliot Elisofon och Life i Finland
1939 (On the Threshold of a War: Eliot Elisofon and LIFE in Finland 1939),” in the
Finnish-Swedish cultural magazine Nya Argus.37 This was the first in a series of four
pieces on Elisofon’s activities during World War II when he was stationed in Scandinavia.
It was followed by “Med matkorg och kamera på resa: Eliot Elisofon i krigets Finland
1944 (Traveling with a Sack of Food and a Camera: Eliot Elisofon in Wartime Finland
1944)” and “Eliot Elisofon i Sverige 1944: spion, fotojournalist och livsnjutare (Eliot
Elisofon in Sweden 1944: spy, photo journalist and bon vivant).”38 Granqvist’s most
recent publication in this series is “Elisofon’s möte med Jean Sibelius: nationalism och
jazz (Elisofon’s meeting with Jean Sibelius: nationalism and jazz).”39
Granqvist is a literary and cultural researcher who has done work on English
literature, African studies, post-colonial theory, reception studies with historical
perspectives, popular culture, communication studies and intercultural critique. He has a
diverse background, and when dealing with Elisofon he served as a visual media critic,

37
Raoul J. Granqvist, “På gränsen till ett krig: Eliot Elisofon och Life i Finland 1939 (On the
Threshold of a War: Eliot Elisofon and LIFE in Finland 1939),” Nya Argus, vol. 104, nos. 5-6
(2011): 143-146.
38
Raoul J. Granqvist, “Med matkorg och kamera på resa: Eliot Elisofon i krigets Finland 1944
(Traveling with a Sack of Food and a Camera: Eliot Elisofon in Wartime Finland 1944),” Nya
Argus, vol. 104, no. 9 (2011): 213-220; and Raoul J. Granqvist, “Eliot Elisofon i Sverige 1944:
spion, fotojournalist och livsnjutare (Eliot Elisofon in Sweden 1944: spy, photo journalist and bon
vivant),” Nya Argus, vol. 104, nos. 11-12 (2011): 294-301.
39
Raoul J. Granqvist, “Elisofon’s möte med Jean Sibelius: nationalism och jazz (Elisofon’s
meeting with Jean Sibelius: nationalism and jazz),” Nya Argus, vol. 105, no. 4 (2012): 89-92.
37
analyzing Elisofon’s projects for their “reflexive duplicity and iconographic clarity.”40
While the abstracts for the World War II articles were balanced, the full texts were
harshly critical of Elisofon, as a photojournalist, as an American, and as a man. The
articles framed Elisofon as a cunning, hedonistic spy who mistakenly believed he was a
do-gooder American savior. Since the articles were written in Swedish, something may
have been lost in translation. However, Granqvist’s article on Elisofon and his 1961 LIFE
photo essay “Storied World of Africa: A Writer’s Land of Primitive, Eloquent Beauty”
(October 13 issue) was published in English and followed the same agenda.
Granqvist’s article, “Photojournalism's White Mythologies: Eliot Elisofon
and LIFE in Africa, 1959-1961,” was published in Research in African Literatures in
2012.41 This text falls into several of Granqvist’s research themes on Africa: the Western
conceptualizing of the continent and its cultural expressions, the colonialist or post-
colonialist travelogue, and the visualizing and gendering of the continent.42 His work on
Elisofon looks to “uncover the predetermined templates that both guided and provoked
him to produce … troubled still-life images of Africa.”43 For the “Storied World of Africa”
photo essay, Granqvist argued that the pre-determined template for this assignment was
one of colonialist domination, racism and sexism, paired with American Cold War
politics. He continued to frame Elisofon’s work in connection to colonialism and racism
in his recent articles: “Eliot Elisofon’s Famous Portrait of a Young Chinua Achebe,”

40
Raoul J. Granqvist, http://www.sprak.umu.se/om-institutionen/personal/raoul-granqvist,
accessed June 21, 2013.
41
Raoul J. Granqvist, “Photojournalism's White Mythologies: Eliot Elisofon and LIFE in Africa,
1959-1961,” Research in African Literatures, vol. 43, no. 3 (2012): 84-105.
42
43
38
Africa is a Country (blog), Sept. 18, 2013; and “Eliot Elisofon’s Africa: Old, Updated,
Worse,” Africa is a Country (blog), Feb. 13, 2014.44 Granqvist is currently drafting a
book on Elisofon and Africa titled: An American Mission: Eliot Elisofon in Africa 1942-
1972.
While these scholarly publications have illuminated aspects of Elisofon's career
and legacy in relation to Africa and African art, they are few in number. Their specificity
and — in some cases — underlying agendas deny a holistic view. This has created a
narrow, even warped, perception of Elisofon's legacy. No part of Elisofon's work or life
existed in a vacuum and separating them from each other, from the environments in
which they were created and were lived, blurs the picture. My dissertation takes a broad
view of Elisofon's impact on the reception of African art and offers a timeline of events,
causes and effects, and influences on his work in order to examine the larger scope of
Elisofon's legacy. This dissertation aims to clarify and broaden the scholarship on
Elisofon while paving the way for future research.

44
See Raoul J. Granqvist, “Eliot Elisofon’s Famous Portrait of Chinua Achebe,” September 18,
2013, http://africasacountry.com/eliot-elisofons-famous-portrait-of-chinua-achebe/; and Raoul J.
Granqvist, “Eliot Elisofon’s Africa Old, Updated, Worse,” February 13, 2014,
http://africasacountry.com/eliot-elisofons-africa-old-updated-worse/.
39
Chapter One: Elisofon Biography and Career Overview
Africa: A Chance to Change Your Life
Elisofon’s life-long fascination with Africa was initiated by his father’s attempt to
set down roots in South Africa from 1904-1907. In a 1970 newspaper article Elisofon
stated that his “interest in Africa” was “a mental transference from his father.”45 Overall,
he imagined Africa as a prime location for grand, romantic adventures and starting from
childhood, he read every book he could find on the continent. In the 1910s through the
1930s these sources were the popular Tarzan books by Edgar Rice Burroughs, and Henry
Morton Stanley’s accounts of his escapades in Africa, including the search for the famous
Dr. Livingstone. Elisofon commented in 1962, “always in the back of my mind was
Henry Stanley, the great journalist who went to Africa to find a whole new meaning for
himself.”46
Samuel, Elisofon’s father, arrived in South Africa, prepared to help his brother
Abby, with his business. But Abby died accidentally soon after Samuel arrived, and his
widow did not help him find work in the bottling factory. Eliot would later overstate and
romanticize his father’s experience in Africa, talking about how he had mined for
diamonds and gold while there.47 Eliot’s myth of his father also depicted him as an expert
marksman in the Russian army. In reality, Samuel struggled to survive in Capetown for
five years, selling fruit on the street.

45
Eneid Routte, “Hellzapoppin’ Elisofon,” San Juan Star Magazine (January 4, 1970): 2-3. (HRC
71.11/66.11, IMG_6535.)
46
William F. Woo, “Visual Goals Mark Varied Life,” The Kansas City Times, January 22, 1962:
2C. (HRC 71.11/66.11, IMG_6437.)
47
Elin Elisofon, Elisofon Biography Draft, Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection,
Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin. (HRC 79a.1-4/72.2-5, IMG_1102.)
40
When Elisofon first traveled to sub-Saharan Africa in 1947 to photograph the
British royal family’s visit to South Africa, he began this assignment in Capetown. In the
same town where his father had failed, he arrived as a professional LIFE photographer, a
success. Elisofon imagined himself as a modern-day Stanley or Livingstone, eager to see
everything that he could on the continent, live the exciting life he had read about in
books. In his mind Africa was a land of adventure, opportunities, and countless wonders.
Career Beginnings
Elisofon’s near-obsession with and appreciation of art, aesthetics, beauty and
nature can be attributed to the influence of his mother. He truly wanted to be a painter,
but he realized he needed to eat and put a roof over his head.48 He embraced freelance
photography as a way to earn money while still practicing his watercolor technique.
Photography was his second love and an ideal solution, and so it became his primary
medium. Being self-taught, Elisofon relied heavily on the advice and critiques of his
friends. He sought out other painters, photographers, and artists in his neighborhood to
connect with. Eventually Elisofon met Willard Van Dyke, a founding member of f/64, a
group of modernist photographers in San Francisco, which included Ansel Adams, Paul
Strand, Imogen Cunningham, and Edward Weston.
When Van Dyke needed a studio in which to film in New York, Elisofon offered
him August & Co., the commercial studio he had founded with some of his high school
friends. This was a major turning point in Elisofon’s career. The two men became friends
and Van Dyke suggested Elisofon show his experimental photographs of surreal

48
Candide, “Only Human,” Daily Mirror, April 5, 1939. (HRC 71.9/66.9, IMG_6114.)
41
industrial scenes to Alexy Brodovitch of Harper’s Bazaar. One of Elisofon’s Lower East
Side street photography projects included placing fashion models in urban or industrial
settings to create bizarre visual juxtapositions (fig. 1.1).49
Brodovitch liked some of his work, but his editor thought the photographs were
too radical for the magazine.50 He directed Elisofon to see Julien Levy, of the Julien Levy
Gallery; Beaumont Newhall, Curator of Photography at the Museum of Modern Art; and
T.J. Maloney, editor of U.S. Camera, the first major magazine for photographers. Levy
took twelve of Elisofon’s prints on consignment and showed them, and Elisofon’s
meetings with Newhall and Maloney were the beginnings of life-long connections. 51
Never lacking bravery, Elisofon thought this was the perfect time to show a portfolio at
LIFE magazine.
Working for LIFE Magazine
The first issue of LIFE was released on November 23, 1936. From that point, the
goal of photographers the world over was to get their pictures in the pages of LIFE, the
first high-quality American picture magazine ever produced. The enterprise began with a
photographic staff of four: Margaret Bourke-White, Alfred Eisenstadt, Thomas D.
McAvoy, and Peter Stackpole. In addition, the magazine was contracted with the
Associated Press for a steady flow of news photography, and it eventually had similar
connections with the Black Star and Magnum photo agencies. But in order to fill its

49
Robert W. Marks, “Portrait of Eliot Elisofon: Up from the Tenements He Carries a Camera
with a Social Conscience,” Coronet (August 1940): 32.
50
Robert W. Marks, “Portrait of Eliot Elisofon: Up from the Tenements He Carries a Camera
with a Social Conscience,” Coronet (August 1940): 32.
51
42
nearly 100 pages of images weekly, LIFE solicited images from talented photographers –
not just the official staff members and press corps. This meant that anyone with skill and
enticing photos could be published in LIFE.
Some versions of the story say that Brodovitch told Elisofon to go to LIFE, which
would have been a conflict of interest for Harper’s Bazaar, a Hearst publication, so it
may not have been smart to advertise this. But Brodovitch was an artistic mentor, helping
anyone he thought deserved his aid to get his or her career off the ground.52 Elisofon
called on Willard Morgan, a LIFE contributing editor, who then took Elisofon’s prints to
Alexander King, assistant picture editor. King gave Elisofon one assignment on
speculation, a story on tintype street photographers.53 Elisofon returned with 11
photographs and King bought eight. Elated, Elisofon went home and crafted a mock-up
LIFE cover with one of his pictures and a cutout logo.54
His first photos to appear in LIFE were for the September 20, 1937 issue. Elisofon
had five pages of images: three pages in the “Speaking of Pictures…” section on the
modern tintype street photographers and a two-page feature on the Jewish holidays of
Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur (figs. 1.2-1.3). Throughout the late 1930s he was taking
assignments from King and proposing stories. During this time period, Elisofon
experimented with social documentary work, trying to use his photographs as tools for

52
Elisofon had a small show at the Pennsylvania Museum of Art’s Division of the School of
Industrial Art, where Brodovitch was teaching a course, in the fall of 1937. So Brodovitch may
have helped him get this opportunity.
53
Time-Life Book Editors, “Eliot Elisofon,” in Photography Year 1974 (New York: Time-Life,
1974): 224. (HRC 71.17/66.17, IMG_2767 thru IMG_2772.)
54
Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin. (HRC 79a.1-4/72.2-5, IMG_1123 thru
IMG_1124.)
43
social change, but LIFE rarely published these stories. “It soon became apparent to me,”
he stated in 1953, “that my career was at a standstill and I became a photographer of
wider scope doing a variety of stories from the stars of Hollywood to the Atlantic Coast
of the United States in order to gain recognition….”55 Eventually he decided to abandon
commercial photography altogether and dedicate himself to photojournalism.
LIFE was a security blanket for Elisofon as he became more creative, more
efficient, and more skilled. With every tough and enticing challenge they served him,
they provided all of the resources and equipment he needed to complete the assignment.56
Elisofon no longer had to be starving in a cold, leaky basement, nor toiling away on non-
creative, commercial jobs. LIFE brought him sufficient recognition and money to boost
both his ego and his bank account. Elin Elisofon wrote on her father: “Eliot admired
those photographers whose artistic or humanitarian ideals came first, and many times he
wished he could be like them, but he had been hungry too long and wanted to get to the
top too much to do as they did.”57 Elisofon wanted an audience for his photography, and
LIFE provided that.
World War II
Elisofon had his first LIFE cover photograph in 1940—of actress Carol Bruce
(fig. 1.4)—but he would not become an official contracted LIFE photographer until 1942

55
Eliot Elisofon, “The Ethics and Morals of Creative Expression,” lecture for Conference on
Moral Standards at the Jewish Theological Seminary 50th Anniversary, September 13-15, 1953,
Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection, Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at
Austin: 4. (HRC 53.11, IMG_3844.)
56
Roy Flukinger, “To Help the World to See:” An Eliot Elisofon Retrospective (Austin: Harry
Ransom Humanities Research Center, University of Texas at Austin, 2000): 5.
57
44
when he was drafted to become a war correspondent for LIFE and the press pool.58 He
was initially stationed in North Africa from November of 1942 through May of 1943.
Elisofon teamed up with LIFE writer Will Lang and they followed the action in their own
peep (small Jeep), bouncing along on the muddy ‘roads’ in the wide-open, dangerous
landscape of North Africa. This was Elisofon’s field photography training school,
teaching him how to deal with dust, dirt, weather, humidity, and their effects on the
cameras and film. And it was his first experience of Africa.
Elisofon’s communication to LIFE’s picture editor, Wilson Hicks, was steady and
gives a glimpse into how demanding Elisofon could be with the LIFE staff. His artistic
vision was paramount. He explained to his editor how large his photos should be printed,
which ones were meant to be double spreads, and which were framed for possible covers.
Elisofon had specific thoughts on how his pictures should be printed in the lab and used
in the magazine, outlining them all to Hicks. He was unable to develop his own film on
the frontlines, and would not be able to see his pictures until he returned to New York.
This was a frustrating situation for him, as he had spent years processing his own film. It
was also unpleasant for the LIFE staff, who mostly followed the orders handed down by
the head editors, not from the photographers.59
Elisofon was also stationed on the European and Pacific fronts during the war,
and was injured during a German stuka dive-bomber attack in Finland, which led to his

58
Ransom Humanities Research Center, University of Texas at Austin, 2000): 4. In addition, the
first true color cover of LIFE magazine was Elisofon’s image of General Patton, U.S. Defense
Issue, July 7, 1941.
59
45
removal from combat assignments. With the end of the war came a return to business as
usual for Elisofon and the magazine, which became the hub of his existence until his
death. Now 34 years old, he had lifted himself out of poverty and was a successful
professional photographer. He was well on his way to becoming part of the “aristocracy
of talent” at LIFE with his work being seen by millions of people all over the world.60
Despite his occasional desire to resign from the magazine during the war, he stayed on
for another 19 years, using it as a public stage to communicate his ideas about the world,
including an appreciation for African art.
The Prototypical LIFEr
Elisofon remained an official LIFE staff photographer until 1964. He left to
pursue his own projects but still worked for LIFE on a contract basis and maintained an
office in the Time & Life building in New York until the magazine stopped production in
1972.61 LIFE defined Elisofon’s fame, his career, and his personality. The TIME-LIFE
Books Photography of the Year, 1974 edition text stated:
LIFE, the magazine he had helped shape almost from its beginning. There
was more than a chronological parallel of careers, however, for Elisofon
was in many respects the real-life actuality of the LIFE photographer of
fiction.
Quick-witted, self-assured, friend of celebrities and a celebrity in his own

right, he excelled in many fields of photography…His mastery of the
evocative powers of photography ranged from clear-eyed objectivity…to
feats of studio artifice.62

60
61
Charles Moritz, ed., “Eliot Elisofon,” in Current Biography, January 1972, vol. 33, no. 1 (New
York: The H.W. Wilson Company, 1973): 19. Lists his business address at the Time & Life
Bldg., Rockefeller Center, New York 10020.
62
Time-Life Book Editors, “Eliot Elisofon,” in Photography Year 1974 (New York: Time-Life,
1974): 224. (HRC 71.17/66.17, IMG_2767 thru IMG_2772.) Elisofon died 4 months after the
production of LIFE magazine stopped in 1972.
46
Roy Flukinger echoed these comments, explaining that the lives of Elisofon and the
magazine became enmeshed, and that “he came to embody the prototypical LIFE
photographer —energetic, creative, brash, unstoppable, globetrotting, always in motion,
outspoken, sometimes egotistical, but at all times thoroughly professional.”63
In February of 1973, two months before his death, Elisofon described his feelings
about the end of LIFE: “The one thing no one said was what a wonderful time we had.
LIFE was my magic carpet that let me go anywhere in the world to photograph anything I
wanted.”64 He valued the freedom and opportunities LIFE offered him. In a posthumously
published interview, Elisofon explained, “Senior LIFE photographers had greater
privileges than anyone in any other occupation in the world. You could ask to go
anywhere. Working for LIFE was a romantic period. It can’t ever be equaled by being a
TV director — then you have to take a crew, but a photographer goes alone.”65
While Elisofon painted a picture of a LIFE photographer as being a lone entity, a
large team of people produced the magazine. He often created his own assignment ideas,
but the researcher-writers in the New York LIFE office always created shooting scripts to
go with assignments. Elisofon typically attempted to follow the script as best as possible,
but sometimes he wondered what the people in New York were thinking, much like any
other LIFE photographer. For example, in 1948 Elisofon wrote a letter to LIFE photo
editor Wilson Hicks while he was working on his Pacific Trust Territory story:

63
Ransom Humanities Research Center, University of Texas at Austin, 2000): 4-5.
64
Maureen D’Honau, “Living in Japan; Feminine Focus: Hellsapoppin Elisofon,” Mainichi Daily
News, February 12, 1973: 6B. (HRC 71.11/66.11, IMG_6556.)
65
J.R., “Talent alone is not sufficient,” South China Morning Post, July 24, 1973: 5. (HRC
71.11/66.11, IMG_6563.)
47
I am worried about the Tonga Salote story. Everyone here tells me our
idea is screwy. The queen is dignified, is very distrustful of American
journalists because of the stupid silly stories spread about her (and you can
read Dick Johnston’s suggested script to see how right she is) and the
people are completely under missionary influence and rather dull. I will
give it a try but don’t bank on it….
I am more than a little tired by imaginative scripts. I reread Johnston on
the Nammatol ruins and it is almost frightening to realize how the script
could be written, no mountains, no pillars, no nothing.
As for the Wimberly script. I want you to read it. It calls for at least a
week’s hard work and that was why I declined in the first place. Had I
known it was a short act before your cable arrived something could have
been done. Wooton’s department told me to shoot for at least four pages in
color plus plenty of b. and w….
Read the Herzog script with pictures at dawn at sunset and what not.
Somebody ought to give her a camera. It is raining like hell here
today….66
A LIFE researcher-writer usually accompanied photographers on assignments to help
keep track of needed information and organize photo shoots. Most of the time Elisofon
logged his own reports and caption ideas in addition to those created by the researcher-
writer.67
The undeveloped film was flown to New York on a semi-weekly basis. Dozens of
LIFE staffers were needed to complete one photo essay. The film was received and
cataloged by one group, then handed off to the lab to be developed and printed. A third
group of staffers would number and file the images. Film editors combed through
thousands of frames each day, selecting photographs to execute the most dramatic telling
of the narrative for the magazine. Elisofon, like most LIFE photographers, typically shot

66
Eliot Elisofon, letter to Wilson Hicks, December 15, 1948, Eliot Elisofon Paper and
Photographic Collection, Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin. (HRC 13.7,
also Elin’s biography draft, IMG_1437 thru IMG_1438.)
67
For the 1951 and 1959 African photo shoots, Elisofon’s second wife, Joan, served as his
researcher.
48
more than one roll of film per photo shoot. When in the field, the photographers did not
have the opportunity or the time to go back and shoot things more than once.
Once the selected photographs were printed by the lab, they were handed off to a
researcher-writer in the New York office whose job it was to keep track of the progress of
the story, “sort the photos so they made some consecutive sense, study the captions in
order to identify all persons therein, and then ‘sound-track’ the entire stack of pictures so
they could be shown quickly to the managing editor.”68 “Sound-tracking” involved
reorganizing the images so they would flow as a story, with the most compelling, and
important pictures first, followed by unfolding actions and side characters. Most large
photo essays had hundreds of prints tracked into large stacks by the researcher-writer,
who then laid them around his office in piles, waiting for the managing editor to come by
to look it over. Copy for the photo essay was created by the researcher-writer and then
turned over to typists, who made multiple copies and distributed them to division chiefs,
copy editors, the managing editor, the head researchers, and the fact-checker.69
Then the pages had to be laid out for printing, which involved another group of
staffers. Spreads were created page by page and were often revised, tossed out, reinstated,
tossed out again. Photographs had to mesh with headlines, captions and textblocks. Then
all of the spreads and images were shipped to the printer in Chicago where plates of each
page were created for the press and color correction tests were run.70 Loudon Wainwright,
one of LIFE’s lifers and main writers, revealed:

68
Dora Jane Hamblin, That was the Life (New York: Norton, 1977): 74.
69
70
Dora Jane Hamblin, That was the Life (New York: Norton, 1977): 28, 31.
49
…under the pressure of time narrowing against a deadline, of confining an

event or an idea in pictures to a limited space, a strange transformation
sometimes took place. For those who shaped it, LIFE’s treatment of an
event somehow transcended the event itself.
In a long and curious jump of thinking (or of feeling) whatever had

happened to make the photographs possible took place now and then,
again and even better, in the pages of the magazine. The production in
light and shadow seemed bigger than the reality it came from.71
Elisofon did not create his photo essays on his own. He did not develop the photographs
or choose which pictures would appear in print, he did not write the final header and
caption copy, he did not arrange the photographs and the pages, and he did not oversee
the final product.
Aristocracy of Talent
If Elisofon was the “prototypical LIFE photographer” and “a celebrity in his own
right,” how can we measure this success from a viewpoint 60 years in the future? First
and foremost, Elisofon’s reputation was based upon his status as one of LIFE’s best
photographers. In The Great American Magazine, Loudon Wainwright referred to
Elisofon as part of “a sort of aristocracy of talent” at LIFE, along with W. Eugene Smith,
Gjon Mili and Dmitri Kessel. He also commented that these men were as proficient at
selling themselves as they were at taking photographs.72 For example, Elisofon was a
witty self-promoter in newspaper articles and interviews throughout his lifetime. In 1963
he said, “It is hard to be completely modest about my work, because a man with a camera
must radiate confidence. He must exude it, even if the camera isn’t working, to gain and

71
Loudon Wainwright, The Great American Magazine (New York: Knopf, 1986): xvii.
72
50
keep the confidence of others.”73 Despite his self-promotion, ‘Elisofon’ is not a name that
typically springs to mind when thinking about the great photographers of LIFE magazine.
And yet, he worked for the magazine for most of his life; he was one of their highest
paid, star photographers; and he travelled all over the world on assignments.
Dora Jane Hamblin gave us some insight into why Elisofon’s LIFE escapades are
not well known. She wrote, “Some LIFE photographers — Carl Mydans, David Douglas
Duncan, John Phillips, Alfred Eisenstaedt, Larry Burrows, Margaret Bourke-White —
have either written books about their adventures or have been the subjects of books by
others. Their exploits are well known and will appear in any LIFE narrative. But many
who do not figure in the best-publicized events were pretty memorable themselves….”74
While Elisofon did publish books, he did not publish any comprehensive memoirs before
his early death at the age of 61. His sudden death meant that no one was left to fan the
flames of his fame. Also, after World War II was over, Elisofon covered very few
breaking-news stories for LIFE. While the types of assignments he covered were diverse,
he was rarely on the front lines of gruesome battles, political campaigns, assassinations,
tragedies and catastrophes — the kind of work that seared into the public psyche.
In addition, Elisofon’s personality was not one that lent itself to great appreciation
from fellow LIFE staffers who, generally, were the ones writing about the history,
anecdotes, and meaning of the magazine. Once again, Hamblin shed some light on how
people regarded Elisofon. She explained:
It took patience to work on a story with [Fritz] Goro, tolerance to cope

with [Francis] Miller. But there were other gods on staff who sometimes

73
Margaret J. Brink, “Photographer Eliot Elisofon: His life has been an adventure story,” The
Globe-Democrat, March 7, 1963: 14a. (HRC 71.11/66.11, IMG_6446.)
74
51
had difficulty rounding up attendant harp players [reporters]. There was a

noticeable reluctance on the part of reporters and correspondents to work
with some of the most glittering stars: Eisenstadt, Bourke-White, Elisofon,
among others. They demanded so much mopping-up and ego-
nourishment, that the reporter hardly had any time left to write captions….
Eliot Elisofon, though capable of climbing mountains, penetrating

swamps, paddling about the South Pacific, required at least 50 ccs of
flattery a day and kept on about it until some exhausted reporter agreed,
‘Yes Eliot, you are undoubtedly a genius.’ He customarily referred to
anyone who accompanied him, from editor to reporter, as ‘my assistant,’
and he was fond of writing articles for photography magazines in which he
confessed in effect that ‘I cannot tell a lie, I am the greatest
photographer….’75
What can we conclude from this passage? Elisofon, as Hamblin referred to him, was a
“star,” which to her meant he was “ego-ridden.” Perhaps humility did not come easily to
Elisofon, but from Hamblin’s perspective, and that of many others, he was in good
company on the LIFE staff. Wainwright wrote, “…it was all right at LIFE in the high-
flying years for people to act like children now and then. In fact, a capable man or
woman who had passing seizures of mood or drink often made more money and was
treated with more respect by the management than an equally talented person with a
quiet, even disposition.”76 Why was it tolerable for Elisofon to act the way he did? How
did he get away with it? Why did LIFE encourage brashness and arrogance?
The Meaning of LIFE
The founder of LIFE magazine, Henry Robinson Luce, head of the Time, Inc.
mass media empire, was known for his own brashness and arrogance, so it made sense to
follow in those footsteps. Luce started LIFE in 1936.77 He had an idea for a new kind of

75
Dora Jane Hamblin, That was the Life (New York: Norton, 1977): 60-61.
76
Loudon Wainwright, The Great American Magazine (New York: Knopf, 1986): xiv.
77
Institution Press, 2001): 1. His publications already consisted of TIME (started in 1923, a weekly
52
American picture magazine, which was actually an earlier idea from the German
magazine business. Several American companies had considered copying the Germans
and publishing a large-scale picture magazine, but the American printing technology for
reproducing high-quality images on magazine paper was yet not advanced enough. Luce
pushed his printer to solve this issue, to find a paper that would do justice to high-quality
photographs or risk losing Time Inc.’s business.78 Luce had self-imposed lofty goals to
meet. He wrote, “A hundred years from now the historian should be able to rely largely
on our Picture Magazine instead of having to fumble through dozens of newspapers and
magazines.”79 He exhibited an arrogant confidence in LIFE that Elisofon shared. In
perhaps one of the most famous declarations of purpose for a magazine, Luce outlined
what would be seen in LIFE:
To see life; to see the world; to eyewitness great events; to watch the faces
of the poor and the gestures of the proud; to see strange things—machines,
armies, multitudes, shadows in the jungle and on the moon; to see man’s
work—his paintings, towers, and discoveries; to see things thousands of
miles away, things hidden behind walls and within rooms, things
dangerous to come to; the women that men love and many children; to see
and to take pleasure in seeing; to see and be amazed; to see and be
instructed.
Thus to see, and be shown, is now the will and new expectancy of half
mankind.

news magazine), the business monthly magazine Fortune (started in 1930), and the radio program
and newsreel The March of Time (begun in 1931).
78
79
53
To see, and to show, is the mission now undertaken by a new kind of

publication, The Show-Book of the World, hereinafter described. (1936)80
“The Show-Book of the World” was once a proposed title for the picture magazine, the
phrase eventually transformed into its subheading, reflecting Luce’s ambitions.
Elisofon’s common refrain that his goal as a photographer was “to help the world
to see” was directly related to Luce’s prospectus and he purposefully positioned himself
as a key player in accomplishing Luce’s aspirations for the magazine. He became
especially adept at helping the LIFE audience “see the world…strange things…shadows
in the jungle… man’s work—his paintings, towers, and discoveries…things thousands of
miles away, things hidden behind walls and within rooms, things dangerous to come to;
the women that men love….” Given this rundown of poetic fantasies, there is little
mystery as to why Elisofon took the pictures he did. Luce wanted attention-grabbing
pictures in his magazine; images no one had ever captured. Luce and Elisofon were cut
from the same cloth; romanticism was par for the course.
A Life Lived Through a Lens
LIFE editor Maitland Edey explained that Elisofon “was a learner. Having learned
something, he became an instant expert on the subject. Brash, ambitious, restless,
extremely talkative, he had his nose into almost everything throughout his life….”81 In a
1963 interview, Elisofon commented, “All my life I have been learning. I hope to die

80
Institution Press, 2001): 2. Luce collaborated with the poet Archibald MacLeish to write his 1936
prospectus for LIFE magazine.
81
Maitland Edey and Constance Sullivan, “Fight Trainer, February 12, 1951,” in Great
Photographic Essays from LIFE (Boston: New York Graphic Society, 1978): 80. (HRC
71.17/66.17, IMG _2760.)
54
learning.”82 Thus the LIFE prospectus directives “…to see and to take pleasure in seeing;
to see and be amazed; to see and be instructed” also defined Elisofon’s daily motivations.
He was both the giver and receiver of these orders. Elisofon was never satisfied with
inhibitions, stagnation, or a narrow world-view.
“I’m too diverse a man to be a great photographer,” he explained to an
interviewer in 1972, “I have discipline, motivation. I’m a good photographer. But I’m a
writer, painter, editor, filmmaker too. I’m a complex human, who needs to satisfy human
needs. You can’t be great without giving everything you’ve got to a single art. I haven’t
done that.”83 While the public primarily regarded Elisofon as a LIFE photographer, his
versatility and range of specialties defy categorization. Elisofon also worked for
publishing houses; Hollywood motion picture studios; television broadcasting companies;
a variety of institutions, such as the Harvard Peabody Museum; and other magazines, for
example, U.S. Camera, The Atlantic, Smithsonian and National Geographic. He lectured,
held exhibitions, and collected art around the world; attended conferences and
symposiums; wrote dozens of articles and manuscript drafts on a wide range of topics;
and participated in and/or created several films and television shows. Elisofon used
photography as a stepstool to reach toward everything and anything that fascinated him.
From the level of his activity, one can gauge that he was in demand, and from the
range of his interests we know he was a resourceful photographer. Maitland Edey wrote,
“He was an unusual and remarkably versatile man. During his career at LIFE he was

82
83
Charles Benbow, “Eliot Elisofon- Artist of Expanded Interest,” Tampa Times, May 1972.
(HRC 71.11/66.11, IMG _6573). Elisofon’s choice of 5 great photographers is also mentioned in
this article – Weston, Cartier-Bresson, Strand, Gordon Parks, Ernest Haas.
55
given assignments on almost every conceivable subject.”84 In this manner, Elisofon
helped LIFE satisfy the American public’s “will and new expectancy” to “see, and be
shown,” just as his assignments satisfied these expectancies within himself. As stated in a
1963 article, Elisofon’s career was “a continuing adventure story, romantic and exciting
enough to satisfy the most insatiable wanderlust.”85
The Show-Book of the World
After World War II, Elisofon threw himself into his career and his life took on a
fevered pace, with constant travel and very little downtime.86 His friend and fellow LIFE
photographer, Gjon Mili, said that Elisofon “was from the old school. He could do
everything. Once he accepted a job, you knew he would deliver.”87 LIFE had no shortage
of assignments for him, and he often created his own, which they usually approved. He
knew he had to be proactive or risk obsolescence, so instead of staying in New York,
waiting for LIFE to call him, Elisofon suggested large travel assignments to keep himself
busy and on salary. Having traveled widely during WWII, he positioned himself as one of
a handful of LIFE photographers that were willing to travel to and photograph every
corner of the world. Elisofon wanted to prove to the LIFE editors that he was not afraid
of challenging and dangerous travel assignments. The last 30 years of his life were spent
continent-hopping, often visiting dozens of countries per trip. In addition to his work in

84
Maitland Edey and Constance Sullivan, “Fight Trainer, February 12, 1951,” in Great
Photographic Essays from LIFE (Boston: New York Graphic Society, 1978): 80. (HRC
71.17/66.17, IMG _2760.)
85
86
Both of Elisofon’s marriages ended in divorce, partially because of his globetrotting and hectic
schedule. He had two children from his second marriage, Elin and Jill.
87
N.G. “Eliot Elisofon, 1911-1973,” f.y.i magazine (April 16, 1973): 5. (HRC 71.17/66.17,
IMG_2763 thru IMG_2764.) Mili knew Elisofon since 1938.
56
the United States and Africa, he photographed many other locations: the South Seas
Islands, the West Indies, Europe, Indonesia, Japan, India, Hawaii, Canada, South
America, Israel, Mexico, and more.

57
Chapter Two – 1947: Africa or Bust
In 1947 Elisofon traveled from central Africa to South Africa, to Victoria Falls
and then up to the delta of the Nile River, covering most of the continent. He was there
from January through June and was paid by LIFE. His primary assignment was the visit
of the English royal family to South Africa (“England’s King Visits South Africa,” LIFE,
March 10, 1947, figs. 2.1-2.2). Elisofon also crafted an African art photo essay. He took
photographs in the Léopoldville (Kinshasa) Musée de la Vie Indigène (figs. 2.3-2.6) and
field photographs of the Kuba, Luba, Luluwa, and Songye.88
Elisofon later wrote that there were three kinds of people on his flight to Africa:
businessmen, construction and labor foremen, and missionaries. He had a conversation
with one of the missionaries, which revealed the type of research Elisofon had conducted
prior to this trip, and also that his thoughts were centered on art. “One of the missionaries,
who is also a medical doctor, Rev. Roy G. Hamman of Kyabe, French Equatorial Africa,”
Elisofon wrote, “…was very angry when I read him a passage in one of my leaflets on
African art in which the ethnologist Dr. Himmelheber states that around 1925 priests and
their helpers bound the chiefs of the various tribes, searched for idols and fetishes and
then burned these.”89 The Reverend told Elisofon this was a lie, but there was truth in this
information. Many missionaries had viewed African art as evil and pagan, and did
participate in its destruction.

88
Elisofon wrote four letters to the TIME-LIFE office in New York describing the Congo portion
of his African adventure in 1947. “First Trip Report” 1/12/47 (4 pages), “Letter of Intent” 1/24/47
(9 pages), Jan. 1947 Report #2 (11 Pages), and Report #3 1/31/1947 (6 pages) have allowed the
researcher to construct this chapter’s narrative.
89
Eliot Elisofon, to TIME-LIFE office in New York City, “First Trip Report,” January 12, 1947,
Eliot Elisofon Papers, Eliot Elisofon Photographic Archives, National Museum of African Art,
Smithsonian, Washington, D.C.: 2. (EEPA P-2, 1.)
58
Elisofon interpreted this information to mean that it might be difficult for him to
find traditional African arts, which was why he went to Africa three weeks early.
Elisofon also wrote about how he wanted to go to Nigeria, but he did not “even know if
there is anything left to the Benin metal craft.”90 With only three weeks to make the story,
Elisofon ended up focusing on the central Congo. He was interested in finding authentic
African sculpture still being made and used by the local population. His prior research,
such as the Himmelheber pamphlet, had led him to believe that this was rare, and would
be a challenge to find. As he wrote on January 24, 1947, “The best of African art” was
“not in Africa but in museums and private collections, the British Museum having the
greatest.”91 Though these two generalized statements were/are not exactly true, he
believed them. He had set up a challenging quest for himself, in the style of previous
white explorers and adventurers in Africa: hunt down something exotic that was headed
toward extinction, find lost traditions and cultures. In 1947 his intention was to
photograph what examples he could “find in Africa still in the hands of the natives, and
being used by them as part of their everyday life.”92 For him — and for many scholars
and collectors today — the mark of authenticity was use by Africans.
Elisofon bought into the Western propaganda that African art was dying, which
existed to boost the value of art objects, and he believed that most African art existed

90
91
Eliot Elisofon, letter to TIME-LIFE office in New York City, “Letter of Intent,” January 24,
1947, Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection, Harry Ransom Center, The University of
Texas at Austin: 1. (HRC 11.3.)
92
59
outside the continent. It was a notion he repeated even in his 1950s writings on African
sculpture. This was a Western misconception, an over-simplification. He wrote in his
Report #2: “Up to now I had seen masks only in museums and was beginning to doubt if
they had ever been used for anything but collectors.”93 The “best” African art was judged
to be so by Western aesthetes and scholars, not by Africans themselves. So the system of
categorization of “best” and “great” is inherently distorted and skewed toward a Western
perspective. At this point in time, however, Elisofon did not question this system.
Two weeks into the trip in the Congo, Elisofon had already constructed his
opinions of the authenticity and quality of current African arts. “It was impossible to find
old sculpture anymore,” he wrote, “The new stuff is inferior except in rare occasions.”94
Elisofon even knew, or thought he knew, why there was this difference in quality:
A pipe that I had bought from a native…did not have one fifth the quality
of the old one. The reason for this is that the native now is after money. If
he makes it faster he will sell more and so the quality of the work has gone
down. Even stuff made for themselves has deteriorated with this general
decline. Stuff made for tourists is even worse as the native has discovered
that the white will buy it regardless.95
According to his scenario, the local artist has lost his aesthetic soul in pursuit of financial
gain. This idea falls into the trope of the ‘native’ being greedy and reinforces the Western
view that only older art is good and has real artistic value. The newer objects are made
quickly for tourists. So even though the colonials and Westerners created the market,

93
Eliot Elisofon, letter to TIME-LIFE office in New York City, Report #2, Jan. 1947, Eliot
Austin: 4. (HRC 11.3.)
94
95
60
Elisofon does not fault them for the hastily-made, ‘lesser-quality’ art objects. Like many
other authors on Africa in the twentieth century, he regarded the Westernization of the
local population as negative and destructive, but never acknowledged that his activities
on the trip contributed to the perceived issue. Elisofon purchased objects wherever he
went, traded for them, paid for photo opportunities, and overall helped to bolster the
existence of a tourist art market in the region. In his writings he never comes to this
realization, which speaks to a lack of self-awareness that is prevalent in many of his trip
reports.
The 1947 trip was a learning experience for Elisofon. Despite his initial statement
that the “best of African art is not in Africa,” he regarded some art that he encountered as
fine, great, good, or even “masterpieces.” Elisofon changed his opinion that great African
art no longer existed in Africa. He found that Africans were even still using some of it.
This aspect of African art—fine art objects being used in everyday life—was the most
fascinating for Elisofon. That was his motivation to travel to the Belgian Congo, despite
the great expense and potential risks. And despite the fact that LIFE did not tell him to go
to the Congo. It was his own plan.
Museum in Léopoldville (Kinshasa)
When Elisofon arrived in Léopoldville (Kinshasa), he visited the Museum of
Native Art (Musée de la Vie Indigène), directed by Dr. Adrien Van den Bossche.96 He

96
With the independence of the Belgian Congo, many cities and institutions were renamed.
Léopoldville is now Kinshasa, and the Musée de la Vie Indigène was eventually transformed into
the Institut des Musées Nationaux du Congo. Luluabourg is now Kananga, and Elisabethville is
Lubumbashi. See Sarah Van Beurden, "Forty Years of IMNC," African Arts, vol. 45, no. 4
(November 2012): 90-93, for more information on the Institut des Musées Nationaux du Congo
(IMNC).
61
described his project to him, in his schoolboy French, but Van den Bossche’s response
was that it was impossible to do justice to a story on African art in such a short amount of
time. Elisofon was used to making LIFE stories with short turnaround times, so he
insisted on trying. His goal was to spend the next three weeks in the “bush so as to get
some original material.”97
Van den Bossche explained that there was a “relatively untouched” area near
Coquithaville, i.e. ethnic groups that would be less Westernized.98 One had to reach this
area via canoe, but it would give Elisofon the opportunity to photograph art production
and use in the field. Van den Bossche had collected objects from the area himself, and
showed them to Elisofon, who was also able to examine the museum’s collections. He
praised the items: “I also looked thru all the other collections from each region. They
have a simply incredible museum full of masterpieces the like of which I have never seen
and which I will photograph thoroughly.”99
In true adventurer fashion, Elisofon described the challenges of this encounter in
his Luluabourg report dated 1/24/1947: “I spent two days photographing the best the
museum had to offer after first blowing out all the lights in the museum because of a
difference in voltage between my American lamps and that of the town. Luckily for me
the Belgian Information Service in Léopoldville (Kinshasa) has on its staff a film man
who had some lighting equipment but we first had to go to the town’s light plant and ask

97
98
99
62
for permission to use 1500 watts of light….”100 Elisofon discussed the museum’s
artworks as fine art and his interest in African art was encouraged by the experience. He
continued:
I finally got set and shot quite a bit of stuff, taking examples of each
section of the Congo. I photographed figures made as pure ornament,
drinking cups in the shape of heads and figures, chief’s chairs decorated
with figures, iron weapons, some with beautifully carved hilts, baskets of
intricate design, earthenware of various shapes and colors, and weavings
of grass and raffia. All in all, the set shows that the Congo native is a
person of high art standards who very often loves art for art’s sake
alone.101
The concept of “art for art’s sake” was still a mark of a civilized people in the 1940s. It is
treated in a much more complex manner today, but here Elisofon was recognizing the
advanced nature of Kuba art and culture.
While he regarded many of the artworks in the Musée de la Vie Indigène as
praiseworthy, he commented on the holdings of the Museum Léopold in Elisabethville
(Lubumbashi) as a collection of “junk,” with some “beauties” on January 31st.102 Elisofon
was already being selective with what he wanted to photograph, what he viewed as high
quality works, despite only having been in the Congo for three weeks.

100
101
Texas at Austin: 2-3. (HRC 11.3.)
102
Eliot Elisofon, letter to TIME-LIFE office in New York City, Report #3, January 31, 1947,
63
Why the Kuba?
With some analysis it was decided that traveling up to Coquithaville by canoe was
not a logical option, given that all of Elisofon’s cameras and equipment could easily end
up at the bottom of a river during this journey. Elisofon wrote: “By great luck and some
research previous to my arrival I discovered that one race or rather tribe in the Congo was
outstanding in their reputation as artisans. These were the Bakuba.”103 He mentioned
Torday and Joyce’s Les Bushongo (Brussels 1910) and Kjersmeier’s Centres de style de
la Sculpture Nègre Africaine (1938) as research sources. He also conferred with the
Belgian Bureau of Information and Dr. Van den Bossche about this project, and through
their help confirmed that the Kuba had the highest reputation in the region for their
artistic output. This was a Western opinion put in place by the activities of amateur
ethnographers such as William Sheppard and Emil Torday, who were fascinated with the
technical sophistication and royal nature of many Kuba arts.
A visit to the Kuba, to find art being created and used, seemed ideal to Elisofon.
Elisofon was attracted to any type of sculpture or art he saw along this journey:
When we entered the Bakuba district, the walls of the houses were all
woven material and I even saw one house in transport with several men
carrying a wall a piece.
The first interesting sign of Bakuba country came when we crossed the
bridge (just some planks, it looked like) over the Luembe River. This was
four columns erected as pure ornament at the corners of the bridge. Each
column had a double head at the top and a bas relief of a crocodile around

103
64
the middle. The poles were higher than my head. I made some pictures
since it had stopped raining.104
Elisofon took photographs of the bridge, the sculptural poles, as well as a Kuba man next
to the poles for scale, wearing a similar hat to one figural form, and smoking a Kuba pipe
(figs. 2.7-2.13). This was his first encounter with Kuba art in the “bush.”
Kuba: Mushenge, Day One
The next day Elisofon met the Belgian Government Administrator, Gabriel Hunin,
who had been radioed by the Governor General to give Elisofon “all possible
assistance,”105 meaning Hunin was charged with arranging the cooperation of the Kuba
King. Elisofon’s project was relayed to the King, through Hunin, to Hunin’s translator,
who then retranslated it for the King.106 Elisofon asked for photographs of the
blacksmiths and sculptors, and of women weaving the Kasai velours. In addition, he
wanted to photograph dances, and a mask being performed. Elisofon wrote: “I was told
about the incredible royal costume and I decided that this might make a LIFE VISIT. So I
asked for that as well.”107 This may seem insignificant, but it was Elisofon who asked for
the coronation costume. The King did not suggest it, and it was someone else who had

104
Austin: 1-2. (HRC 11.3.)
105
106
107
65
told Elisofon about it. In later accounts, Elisofon stated that a colonial told him about the
outfit, and more specifically that it was “at the suggestion of the administrator.”108
The photographic opportunities Elisofon had requested needed to be arranged and
it was raining, so the group decided to take interior shots of the blacksmith forge and the
King’s bedroom (figs. 2.14-2.15). Like the coronation outfit, Elisofon had been told
about “interesting carved columns in the outer house of the king’s bedroom” by a
colonial.109 This was not information volunteered by the Kuba people, nor their King.
“We went in,” Elisofon wrote, “and there were two columns carved in the rhythmic
patterns of the Bakuba. I decided to see the inner chamber and went boldly in without
being stopped.”110 Elisofon portrayed himself as adventurous in this text, while also
unwittingly laying bare the off-balance power structure between Westerner and African
in this situation. He saw it as his right to see the inner chamber, and the King, whether he
wanted to or not, did not see it as his place to stop him. The photographs that Elisofon
took of the King in his bedroom, occasionally posed with his two sons, become
uncomfortable once we learn more of their context. Elisofon was overjoyed at what he
found in the inner chamber:
Here were several more columns beautifully carved, a base board for the
bed also carved, and on the wall of the inner house a large collection of
native knives, with two European hunting knives in sheaths. Near by was a
reclining chair beautifully carved in simple patterns and the head of the

108
109
110
66
chair was a carved rams head in simple style. I found an illustration of this
chair later in Torday and Joyce’s ‘Les Bushongo’ Brussels 1910. There the
chair is called ‘Siege Bambala.’111
The day was spent photographing the King in his home, documenting the Kuba woven
mat walls, carved wooden columns, a wooden ram backrest, and a knife collection. These
images helped Elisofon fulfill his mission to find African art being used in everyday life.
He was particularly enamored of the backrest, and promised the LIFE staff that he would
take a rubbing from the patterns on it.
Kuba: Mushenge, Day Two
Upon entering the palace grounds on the second day of his visit, Elisofon
encountered a large group of the King’s wives performing gourd rattle music in a circle
with sporadic dancing (fig. 2.16). After photographing the King’s wives’ performance,
Elisofon shot a series on the making of the Kasai velours, which were “highly prized and
small ones [had] been sold in the US for as much as fifty dollars” ($515 today, fig.
2.17).112 In addition, he photographed four Kuba men weaving a large floor mat, which
takes about three months to create, and a woodcarver blocking out an animal-shaped
backrest like the one Elisofon photographed in the King’s bedroom (figs. 2.18-2.19).
Elisofon also photographed a dancer wearing a mask, but not genuinely performing with
it, which disappointed him.113

111
112
113
Austin: 10. (HRC 11.3.)
67
Photographing the King
Elisofon described photographing the Kuba King in his coronation outfit with a
combination of awe and wisecracks. Throughout the morning Elisofon checked to see if
the King was ready to be photographed. “He wasn’t,” he wrote, “We waited two and a
half hours for him to get dressed. Cases of all kinds arrived and when I by mistake turned
a corner and saw him with a small group of dressers he grunted some thing which was
‘scram’ without any doubt. I did.”114 In this narrative, Elisofon paints himself as
apprehensive of the King and builds up the tension to the revealing of the costume.
The King…was dressing in one corner of the grounds. It took him almost
three hours to get ready and I understood why when I saw him. There he
sat, the King of the Bakuba, a mass of cowrie shells was all I could see at
first. He was literally covered with them. Cowrie shells were the first
currency in Africa so this costume was actually a fortune on his back. I
could also see a large sash of leopard skin.
He wore gloves on which were painted red finger nails and on his feet he
had a similar outfit. Above the feet gloves I could see his copper bands
and then cowrie shells (white monovalve about one inch length). On his
head he wore an open band connected to a chin strap. This again was
covered with shells and the crown was topped by what looked like egret
feathers to me and a white plume. Between his legs dangled a small brass
bell and I discovered another one on the left side below the waist. In his
right hand he held a sword and in his left a lance.115
Elisofon was amazed by the costume, its detail, ornament, and complexity. “His hands
and toes were covered with some cloth and I think toenails were indicated on the
covering,” he wrote in another report, “…On his breast I noticed some medals with

114
115
68
Leopold II on them.”116 When a mirror was brought out next to the camera for the King to
see himself, it became a highlight of his narrative.
As I set up my camera I was told wait a bit and two men came in carrying
a flat wooden case. This was carefully laid upon the ground and opened. It
was a large standing mirror. The glass was adjusted so that the King could
see himself and he ordered a change in the set of his crown. Well, only
two other people had ever ordered a mirror near the camera before, and
they were Gypsy Rose Lee and Ginger Rogers.117
Elisofon seemed to simultaneously regard the King highly and yet not respect him.
Elisofon photographed the King in black and white and in color, taking detail
shots, pictures of the King with members of his court, and using multiple cameras (figs.
2.20-2.22). “I also made bold enough,” he wrote, “to get a shot of myself standing next to
this ensemble. I also shot one on a press plate which I would like to get developed here
for postals.”118 He knew this was a special opportunity and wanted to capitalize on it. But
the image of himself standing by the King highlights the uncomfortable nature of these
pictures (fig. 2.23). The King became a tourist’s exotic photo opportunity, and it
emphasizes the colonialist voyeurism and consumption of the experience.
The costume was so heavy that the King required two men to help him get up and
walk away when the photo session was complete. In a way, this was a stately portrait
session. But the fact that the King did not want to pose for photographs, and he resisted

116
117
118
69
modeling the costume, changes the atmosphere.119 “I told the King the sitting was over,”
Elisofon wrote, “and he waddled off. His face was covered with sweat. So was I.”120
Clearly Elisofon was directing this encounter. If the King was truly in control of his own
image, would he not have decided when the session was done? Would he not have
questioned Elisofon’s approach, making sure that the types of photographs he wanted to
be made were, in fact, made? It seems unlikely the King would have chosen to spend
three hours getting dressed into a 160-pound costume to sit for a portrait session in the
middle of the summer, on a sunny day, sweating profusely, if he had not been pressured
to do so.
Gift Exchange
After the photo session was over and the King had changed, a gift exchange took
place. Elisofon received:
…about a dozen fresh eggs were brought in a small basket. After that two
pieces of earthenware, a small urn and a bowl, and then to my great
pleasure some old Bakuba wood carvings, an old pipe with a man’s head
for the bowl, a head rest of wood carved in the shape of an animal, a cup
in the shape of a head, several boxes covered with intricate designs and
animals in relief (figs. 2.24-2.25).121

119
Leonard Lyons, “The Lyons Den,” New York Post, undated, Eliot Elisofon Paper and
IMG_1313.) “He was reluctant at first to spend any time posing.”
120
121
70
He regarded the “old” carvings as: “A simply wonderful present because it is almost
impossible to find old sculpture anymore.”122 Elisofon did not acknowledge the eggs as
valuable but was very appreciative of the artworks, many of which are now in the
NMAfA collection, and some of which were on display in the 2013-14 Africa ReViewed
exhibition.
Elisofon gave the King 500 francs, in fifty franc notes, which the King counted
out and handed to an assistant ($11.44 in 1947, $117.77 today). Elisofon could not tell if
the King was pleased, so he pulled out more gifts. He wrote:
I had bought some junk jewelry in Woolworths for just such a moment
and I took out a gold-looking heavy neck chain that cost me exactly forty
nine cents. Unfortunately the King’s neck was so thick it would not pass
around it so I took out another and together they made a fine neck piece. I
then attached to the chain a clip set with six red stones. The King was very
pleased.123
Elisofon took several photographs of the King wearing this jewelry (figs. 2.26-2.27). He
then felt he could ask the King for a mask, since the King seemed satisfied with the “junk”
gold jewelry. A messenger was sent for one, and then the King explained his desire to
have an American blonde wife. According to Elisofon’s trip reports, he requested that
Elisofon send him/bring him one. He wrote, “I took this without a blink and answered
that it would be very difficult to bring one to him. I suggested that he might go to New
York. The King said fine. When I told Hunin about it he was disturbed because he was

122
123
71
sure the King would demand a trip to America.”124 Elisofon repeated this story in
multiple contexts for many years. The Kuba King became the punch line of Elisofon’s
joke.
The King then asked for one of Elisofon’s cameras. “I made haste to inform him,”
Elisofon wrote, “that it had taken me ten years to learn how to operate these cameras (no
lie) and that I would ask my office to send him a simpler one. He was satisfied with this
promise and I intend to keep it.”125 Elisofon wired a cable to Wilson Hicks at LIFE to
send the King a Kodak Brownie camera with ground glass. An hour later, Elisofon’s
mask was delivered (fig. 2.28). He described it in one of his reports:
The mask was just the wooden center portion and it was new but still very
fine. It was face in natural size [sic] with a pair of short horns at the top
curving downward over the oval shaped face. The features are simple and
in relief.
But the coloring of the mask is what is interesting. Black horns, white
upper eyelids and black lower ones with open slits for eyes, an earth red
nose and mouth with a connection section in relief of similar color
between the lips and nostrils. The cheeks are alternating thin stripes
(diagonal) of black, ochre, red and white. The forehead and chin are an
overall pattern of diamond shapes in black and white. Between the horns
there are several stripes of red, white and ochre.126
This is an example of Elisofon’s attention to detail and fascination with the formal
qualities of the art he encountered and collected. He wrote about the mask as any other
art object. He did not use “savage,” “wild,” or “primal,” words that often appear in

124
125
126
Austin: 10. (HRC 11.3.)
72
popular literature on Africa and African art. In addition, his changing view on new
artworks was apparent when he wrote that even though the mask was newly carved, it
was still “fine.” Elisofon went on, “Afterward I found two more masks by the same man
each different but decorated in similar colors and patterns but one mask had protruding
cones for eyes and one for the mouth. I bought these two for 80 francs” (figs. 2.29).127
Earlier in the day he had taken photographs of a Kuba man wearing a mask similar to the
one he was given. It had a cloth top and sides, and the man danced in an imitation of boys
playing, with awkward gestures and jumping (figs. 2.30-2.31). This, however, was not a
genuine masquerade performance and Elisofon was not satisfied with the pictures.
When he left the Kuba palace grounds, he was “besieged by salesmen of all
kinds.”128 Men offered him caps, knives, weaving, etc. He bought a long battle sword that
Torday called an “Ilenda” and a short one called “Ikula,” as he described in his report. He
specifically referenced Torday, and seemed more inclined to purchase things that were
related to his publications on the Kuba. He purchased the swords for less than a dollar
each.
Songye
After Elisofon’s visit to the Kuba capital, he based his activities in Luluabourg
(Kananga) and traveled every day for a week to nearby Luba, Songye, and Bena Lulua
(Luluwa) villages. He tried to photograph as many ethnic groups as possible for wide

127
Austin: 10. (HRC 11.3.)
128
Austin: 10. (HRC 11.3.)
73
coverage. Elisofon was always looking for art he could purchase and he was not ashamed
to ask if he could buy any item that caught his eye. He visited the hut of the chief of the
Songye village of Zappo-Zappo to “see how they lived” but “was sidetracked by several
Kasai velours which were tacked to his walls,” that the chief had purchased in Mweka,
when he worked there on the railroad.129 “I offered to buy the most attractive one but at
first he wouldn’t sell,” Elisofon wrote. He continued:
There have been natives who were not all interested in selling to me. One
old man who had a beautiful knife told my driver… ‘not at any price.’
Another, a hunter, who was carrying a beautiful ‘tshisanji,’ also called a
sanza, which is a small board on which are mounted about ten small pieces
of thin iron bent over a strut so that they can be picked to produce a tune,
refused to even discuss price for his. He told me that he had bought it to
play for amusement and so saying played a tune for me and did a little
dance as well.130
Elisofon bought musical instruments, cloth, utensils, weapons, and anything else that
appealed to him. He did not solely buy objects as pure art. For example, he was interested
in sanzas because he wanted to start a sanza band when he returned home, with his
friends Edward Millman, Julio De Diego, William Baird, and Fletcher Martin.131
Eventually Elisofon convinced the chief of Zappo-Zappo to sell him one of the
velours by offering him “the highest price yet on the trip. One hundred francs.”132 Again,

129
130
131
132
74
Elisofon had paid the Kuba King 500 francs for the opportunity to photograph in the
capital, so 100 francs for one object was a high price. “There was a big palaver with the
wife, the first time I have ever seen a native woman consulted on anything, and she
finally gave in and accepted the money,” Elisofon wrote. “He would not accept the
money. I was told that the Basonge do this quite often in great contrast to other tribes.”133
Elisofon’s art collecting interests were not reserved to traditional arts. “To-day I
bought two rather strange paintings by a local native, Kingue Po,” he wrote. “Onewas
[sic] a portrait of a Bakongo chief, the other a Bayumbe [sic] landscape. They are pure
primitive and really charming. I made a portrait of the artist with his work to show this
new development in African art…. The adoption of oil painting on canvas. I bought the
two for $12.”134 Oil painting was not a new development in Africa; there had been
African oil painters in the 1800s. However, in comparison to woodcarving, it appeared to
Elisofon to be a newer development. His use of the word “primitive” here draws parallels
to the American folk art he also collected.
When Elisofon left the chief’s hut, word had spread that there was a white man
paying 2 francs for posing and he was particularly looking to photograph figures and
sculptures. He was invited to another hut where he photographed a power figure with an
elaborate headdress, said to be a protector for a child, who appears in the picture holding
the object (fig. 2.32). Then he was approached by several people with smaller power

133
134
75
figures, less than six inches high, with rectangular arm placement and holes in their
stomachs for medicine (bishimba). One older man had carved two figures himself, one to
protect against lightning, the other against thieves, and Elisofon photographed him
holding up these items (fig. 2.33). Elisofon preferred this approach: “A lot more
interesting than a cold museum shot.”135 Several men showed him Songye swords, which
Elisofon referred to as “nasty looking.”136 “I photoed and bought several,” he wrote,
suggesting that sometimes he paid for the chance to photograph an object by purchasing
it.137 Also in Zappo-Zappo he encountered a man weaving raffia mats and the shuttle on
his loom featured a figural form.
In another Songye village, Zappo Kowiamba, Elisofon photographed a group of
large power figures that protected the whole community and had their own platform,
which had a small grass-covered section on one end, at the back of a hut (figs. 2.34-2.35).
He described his experience:
I learned that this was the home of the spirits of the deceased relations of
the native were supposed to live in so as to stay out of his house. The two
large fetishes were very crudely carved and are called ‘Kadifu.’ The
natives told me they were the protectors of the village. I was taken to still
another one which was girdled with a monkey skin skirt, called ‘Tshilolo.’
Here we were told that the villagers dance around ‘Tshilolo’ every full

135
136
137
76
moon. They also place food before it. I made plenty of pictures of these
fetishes in their natural setting.138
Again, not only did Elisofon want to see African art, he emphasized seeing it in its
normal setting, not just in a museum or in a collector’s apartment in New York City. We
may never know if these items were authentic or were manufactured or enhanced for him.
But Elisofon saw the value of the art in its use and placement, as well as in its aesthetic
qualities.
Luluwa
Elisofon found it more difficult to find artwork in the Bena Lulua (Luluwa)
communities. He wrote:
The Bena Lulua are not well known for their art and I found very little in
the way of material. One of their habits is to decorate their huts. Not in the
traditional sense of the Mangbetu who do intricate symmetrical patterns
over theirs, but every once in awhile, a native will paint some stuff on his
hut. If a figure is depicted he will often raise it in relief. I found one such
hut and made some studies of the paintings. They were done in lampblack,
a white obtained from the soil, a grey result from a mix of the white and
black and a raw red earth color.139
Elisofon found this decorated hut in the village of Bashila Kasanga. Luluwa art did and
does exist — figures, masks, etc. — but it had not been studied much prior to 1947, so
Elisofon would not have encountered much information on it in his readings. While
working with the Luluwa, Elisofon was not shown any of the figures or masks we
associate with this group today. However, he was invited to attend part of a performance
by Luluwa boys in the initiation camp.

138
139
77
The son of the chief of Bashila Kasanga invited Elisofon and his guide, Earl S.
King, a missionary from the American Presbyterian Congo Mission who spoke Swahili,
to view two dances by the trainees and their masked instructor (fig. 2.36). Elisofon
referred to this as “exciting news,” since he had wanted to see a genuine mask
performance.140 The village’s initiated boys had been circumcised and were in training in
the forest, where they stayed for three months. Elisofon explained:
We were guided to the clearing in the forest. There were two small huts at
the far edges of the small space and in the center were about fifteen boys
of varying sizes. They were lined up and about to begin a dance called
‘Tundandi.’
As they began out of one of the huts a wild masked figure jumped into the
air and then into the circle of boys. They all began a rather strenuous
movement of the body with the arms and legs all going at once. The best
description I can think of is trying to hit your chin with your knees as
rapidly as possible and your arms imitating a windmill in a storm. The
masked figure was the teacher and he wore a small mask over a woven
costume which covered him from head to toe to fingertip of black and tan
patches. He wore rattles on his ankles made from seed pods. There were
three drummers who beat out a very strong rhythm. They did two dances
and we left. I now had pictures of a mask being actually used.141
According to Luluwa art specialist Constantine Petridis, these “are the only photographs
that document the use of masks in relation to the mukanda ritual” among the Luluwa.142
Petridis published two of Elisofon’s Luluwa mukanda photographs in his 1999
article on Luluwa masks in African Arts. This was the first time an academic published
and discussed these photographs. Petridis explained that the dance scene probably
“documents the first appearance of the initiated boys during the festivities celebrating the

140
141
142
Constantine Petridis, “Luluwa Masks,” African Arts, vol. 32, no. 3 (Autumn 1999): 43.
78
end of the initiation period and the reintegration of the boys in the village.”143 According
to Elisofon’s description, what he photographed took place in the initiation camp, in a
clearing in the forest, so it was most likely a rehearsal for the actual celebration of the
reintegration of the boys into the village, not the final celebration itself.
The Further History of the Kuba Encounter
Elisofon’s goal for his time in the Belgian Congo was to “track down” a story on
“African Negro Art.”144 Did Elisofon accomplish his goal? Was he able to show African
art being used by Africans in their everyday life? And if so, did LIFE publish any of these
photographs? Yes and no. Elisofon’s Kuba encounter appeared in LIFE as a 4-page
article; 3 pages were shared with advertisements and only the first page had a whole page
to itself (figs. 2.37-2.39, March 31, 1947). The first photograph is Nyim Bope Mabinshe
in his coronation costume; the second, an image of his wives performing music and
dancing; the third, three musicians performing on cowrie-encrusted, waist-high drums;
the fourth, the Nyim in his bedroom with two of his sons; and the fifth, a Kuba woman
balancing a large water gourd on her head. All of the women in the article appear in their
normal topless state, a selling point to LIFE’s editorial staff.
The photographs show the Kuba as an exotic, unusual people. They highlight the
differences between Americans and the Kuba people – skin color, dress, environment,
social practices. If one examines only the photographs in this article and ignores the title
and the text, Elisofon’s fascination with the Kuba is apparent. However the tongue-in-

143
Constantine Petridis, “Luluwa Masks,” African Arts, vol. 32, no. 3 (Autumn 1999): 43.
144
79
cheek LIFE title “African Big Shot” and text meant purely to entertain undermined this
fascination. The article projected an image of Africa as different, wild, and needing
tamed. “African Big Shot” is culturalist – it emphasized African ‘problems’ and
‘differences,’ framing the Kuba culture as less-evolved, a reflection of Western
perceptions of the time.
African art is not mentioned in “African Big Shot.” The King’s coronation outfit,
drums, and architecture are seen, but not discussed as art. The photographs represent
what Elisofon experienced, the day-to-day life of the Kuba and their King. He saw
dancing, music, art creation, the palace: the best of Kuba culture. But the article was not a
lesson in cultural appreciation, even though that was Elisofon’s intention.
The LIFE staff is not entirely to blame for this, as Elisofon prepared all the
caption material for the piece. The tone of his original text is playful, since LIFE was
meant to entertain. However, the LIFE editors added to the work, because Elisofon was
still in Africa when the piece was published. “African Big Shot,” the text began, “A fat,
black monarch of the Congo rules his tribe with a heavy hand. Probably the most
strangely autocratic ruler in the world is a big, frog-faced man named Bope Mabinshe.”145
Within the first paragraph, LIFE has called the King of the Kuba fat and frog-faced.
These words did not appear in Elisofon’s trip report, though he did call the King “quite
ugly” and potbellied.146 Some of the LIFE text was taken from John Latouche’s book,
Congo, written in 1945, with photographs by André Cauvin. The following sections,

145
“African Big Shot,” LIFE (March 31, 1947): 128.
146
80
which described the Nyim’s mode of rule, were not included in Elisofon’s reports, but
appeared on pages 59-61 of the Congo text:
When he sneezes, all people present must burst into spontaneous applause.
If the king, who reigns by divine right, happens to spit on the ground, the
person nearest him carefully gathers the spittle in a cloth and reverently
preserves it. In his court is a minion called the Yumi whose function it is
to rub red pepper into the eyes of the monarch’s 350 wives if they become
disobedient.147
These were not credited to the Congo publication, which demonstrates how LIFE used a
variety of sources to create its articles, but did not always cite them. The sneezing,
applause, spit, and red pepper rubbing ‘facts’ are highlighted as bizarre practices of this
culture. The brief text goes on to explain that the Belgians pay the King a tribute to keep
his ‘once-cannibal subjects’ under control. The final two sentences are: “Bope has one
ambition: to visit America. He thinks American blondes are fascinating.”148
Aside from a “plump Buddha” description of Mabinshe, the image captions are
more respectful and drawn more directly from Elisofon’s trip reports.149 Yet on the whole,
the article is a reflection of how Africa featured in American popular culture, as
someplace purely exotic, to be ogled, and even laughed at. Ultimately, the image of
Mabinshe, resplendent in his 160–pound coronation costume, became an iconic LIFE
image, exhibited and republished repeatedly, including in the Edward Steichen-curated
1951 MoMA show and catalog Memorable LIFE Photographs.
In her 1993 African Arts article, Christraud Geary explained that Elisofon’s 1947
Kuba photographs are some of his most famous of Africans and African art, and that they

147
John Treville Latouche and Andre Cauvin, Congo (New York: Willow, White, and Co., 1945):
59-61.
148
149
81
deserve analysis. Geary gave an overview of Elisofon’s 1947 encounter with the Kuba
and their King, and included passages from Elisofon’s reports to LIFE magazine and his
letters. Her objective was to concisely address the photographer’s motivations and
process for this assignment, as well as the Nyim’s control of how he and his people were
represented in the pictures. This topic was repeated in Geary’s 2003 exhibition catalog In
and Out of Focus. The three pages on Elisofon in this book concluded with these
sentences: “In a complex process, the expectations of both the photographer and the
photographed met and reinforced each other. Photographers and subjects were authors of
the images, which distant consumers imbued with meanings of their own making.”150
Geary explained that she would elucidate “the specific circumstances surrounding
their creation” in her article, however specific information about these photographs was
not as thorough as it could have been.151 Although Geary’s contextual information was
derived from the same resources the current research deals with — Elisofon’s lengthy
letter dated Jan. 24, 1947 and two of his reports — the description of the events seems
imprecise. Her argument was that the Kuba King had as much agency in the photographs
as Elisofon did. But from Elisofon’s writing the King appeared to be more of a pawn than
a co-director. Geary did not address Elisofon’s statement that the Belgian administrator
Hunin asked for the royal coronation costume and insisted that the King be photographed
in it. The situation described in Elisofon’s reports was one of colonial control. The King

150
Christraud M. Geary, and Krzysztof Pluskota, In and Out of Focus: Images from Central
Africa, 1885-1960 (Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian National Museum of African Art in
association with Philip Wilson, London, 2003): 102.
151
African Arts, vol. 26, no. 2 (April 1993): 72. For example, Geary numbered them as 200 black-
and-white images, but did not mention that color images also exist from Elisofon’s two days in
Mushenge, as can be found in the Getty Image archive online. It would have been more accurate
to state that there are 200 black-and-white images from 1947 in Mushenge located in the EEPA.
82
did as Hunin prescribed, despite the heat, the fact that the costume weighed 160 pounds,
it took him three hours to get into it, and that it involved great physical strain.
Geary also did not address publication of these photographs in LIFE in “African
Big Shot.” She explained that “Two Days in Mushenge” was meant to reveal the creation
circumstances for these 1947 Elisofon Kuba pictures, a goal largely accomplished in the
small text space available. She stated that both the photographer and the King had a stake
in the pictures, which is true, and that together they “succeeded in creating a lasting
image of the Kuba,” which is also true.152 However, the initial LIFE publication on the
King and the Kuba showed the magazine’s and American society’s inability to fully
appreciate African culture and to give its inhabitants the respect they deserved.
Overall, Geary’s article did not address the romantic goals that Elisofon had for
this project, connected with his self-identification as a LIFE photographer. Geary
addressed Elisofon as if he were an educated ethnographer, exploring Africa for the sake
of knowledge. While Elisofon was interested in knowledge, he also needed his
photographs and text to fit a photojournalistic format that LIFE would want to publish,
which would both inform and titillate the readership. As the LIFE prospectus stated:
“…to see strange things…to see and to take pleasure in seeing; to see and be
amazed….”153 Ultimately, Geary’s short article gave a truncated account of the creation
of the 1947 Kuba photographs, particularly the most famous image of the King in his
coronation costume. Elisofon is a historical example of how many Westerners have

152
African Arts, vol. 26, no. 2 (April 1993): 72.
153
83
regarded, written about, and photographed Africans. His experiences in Africa and his
naturally Western-oriented perceptions of those experiences add insight to the
circumstances surrounding the photographs taken.
Elisofon repeated his tale of adventure with the Kuba over and over — in
magazines, newspapers, and television and radio interviews — and played to his audience,
just as LIFE had in “African Big Shot.” For example, he often sent Leonard Lyons
information for inclusion in his New York Post daily column, “The Lyons Den.” Elisofon
visited Mushenge on January 19th and 20th. On January 31st, Lyons already had a blurb on
the story in his column. He wrote:
PHOTO DEPT.: Eliot Elisofon, the Life cameraman, is in the Belgian

Congo. He visited the Bakuba tribe near the Kasai River in the heart of the
Congo forest, and met the King, Nymi Bope Mabinshe who, among other
things, has 350 wives…The royal costume is so heavy that the King
cannot rise from a chair without assistance. The costume is covered with
sea shells – Congo currency – several bells, a sword, a lance, etc.
When the King had finished dressing Elisofon set up his camera. The King
asked him to wait—and then a large, flat case arrived, and from it was
removed a large mirror which was set up next to the camera, so that the
King could see how he appears to the camera lens… “Only two other
people ever pulled this mirror stuff on me,” said Elisofon, pointing to the
preening King of subjects who were cannibals only 50 years ago, “and
now it’s three –Nymi Bope Mabinshe, Ginger Rogers and Gypsy Rose
Lee.”154
350 wives. Cannibals. The mirror. And those were not the only jokes that appeared in
Lyons’ column about the Kuba encounter. “MATRIMONIAL DEPT.: Eliot Elisofon, the
cameraman,” Lyons wrote, “covered the arrival of the King and Queen of England, in
Capetown. Elisofon told King George about his visit to the tribes and of the time he spent
with Nymi Bope Mabinshe. ‘He was reluctant at first to spend any time posing,’ said

154
Leonard Lyons, “The Lyons Den,” New York Post, January 31, 1947. (HRC 11.3, IMG_1306.)
84
Elisofon. ‘He has 350 wives.’ …. ‘Well,’ replied King George, ‘it would keep a man
busy, wouldn’t it.’”155
Elisofon maintained a self-congratulatory role as the clever white adventurer. In
the TIME Inc. in-house publication f.y.i. magazine, this becomes apparent in the coverage
of Elisofon’s encounter with the Kuba. F.y.i. was similar to a staff newsletter, meant to
keep everyone informed about how articles were produced for the TIME Inc. magazines.
The article read:
Eliot Elisofon…is a man of tact. After completing his photographic close-

up of King Bope Mabinshe of the Belgian Congo’s Bakuba
tribe…Elisofon allowed His corpulent Majesty to peer into the ground
glass view finder of his Rolleiflex. They exchanged gifts – two dozen
eggs, a decorative mask, odds & ends for Elisofon; some high-class
Woolworth’s jewelry for the King – and then the King expressed a liking
for Elisofon’s $400 Rolleiflex.
The photographer had to think fast. ‘This is a very complicated machine,’

he said. ‘It took me ten years to learn how to operate it. But I’ll try to get
one in America and send it to you.’ Elisofon sent an SOS to LIFE’s
Wilson Hicks, who had a Brownie Reflex, complete with ground glass,
dispatched to the monarch.156
This rendition of the trip painted Elisofon as outwitting a native, thinking “fast” to come
up with a way to save his camera, and gift the King a much less expensive device. The
implication is that the King would not know the difference between a Rolleiflex and a
Kodak Brownie, which cost approximately $40, one-tenth the price of the Rolleiflex. The
Brownie was famous for being an everyman’s, easy-to-use, inexpensive camera. The f.y.i.
magazine article continued:

155
Leonard Lyons, “The Lyons Den,” New York Post, undated, Eliot Elisofon Paper and
IMG_1313.)
156
“With Elisofon in Darkest Africa,” f.y.i. magazine (July 21, 1947): 3. (HRC 11.3, IMG_1307.)
85
King Bope’s second request stopped Elisofon cold. He wanted an

American blonde, just like those in the copies of LIFE Elisofon had shown
him. She would be an interesting addition to his 350-wife harem. Rather
than try to explain about U.S. blondes, Elisofon hedged: “Perhaps you can
come to America yourself and pick one out.” When the Belgian
administrateur of the district heard about this, he fumed: “He’ll be down
here next week for a passport!”157
“King Bope” is portrayed not only as greedy and Western-technology hungry, but also as
a willful lecher. The Belgian Administrator (Hunin) is then added as the beleaguered
colonial ruler, unable to satisfy the demands of his ‘charge.’
To finish off this text: “Bope, a vain, canny tyrant, had a full-length mirror set up
aside the camera while Elisofon was working, so he could be sure his dignity would not
suffer in the resulting pictures.”158 And the human sacrifices of the King’s widows
resurfaced, a story that had appeared in Elisofon’s reports: “One of the anthropological
details [Elisofon] picked up: ‘When a Bushongo king dies, six of his widows are sealed
into his underground death chamber after their arms and legs are broken. When Bope’s
predecessor died, the Belgians sent troops to prevent the celebration of this quaint rite,
but I understand it was done anyway as soon as the troops pulled out.’”159 Multiple
cultural stereotypes and Western misconceptions were reinforced.
The 1947 Kuba encounter was mentioned throughout Elisofon’s career, as those
photographs are some of his most famous. The most noteworthy example of this
persistence occurred in 1958 because Elisofon included a photograph of the King in his
royal coronation outfit in his book, The Sculpture of Africa. It became a trending topic,

157
158
159
86
promoting the collecting of African art as proof of Elisofon’s adventurous life. From the
New York Post’s column, “The Lyons Den:”
Business Dept.: Eliot Elisofon’s new book, ‘The Sculpture of Africa,’ was
a seven year project which has just been published simultaneously in N.Y.,
London, Paris and Cologne. Elisofon is the Life photographer who also is
a foremost collector of African sculpture. His book includes a photo of the
King of the Bushongo who owned some prized sculpture Elisofon coveted.
He knew of the local custom of giving a gift in exchange for a gift.
The photographer marked the pieces he wanted, then gave the King $50 in
Belgian francs. The King signaled and his men brought Elisofon a gift-12
eggs. Elisofon emptied his pockets of $25 more. The King gave him two
worthless jars. Then Elisofon placed around the King’s shoulders $2 worth
of rhinestones on a thin chain. The King gave him the priceless African
sculpture, which now is on exhibition at the Boston Museum.160
“Priceless African sculpture” is an exaggeration. Yet that we may never know the truth
was reinforced by Elisofon’s interview with Robert Taylor of The Boston Herald. He
interviewed Elisofon on the night he was delivering a lecture for the Masterpieces of
Primitive Art exhibition at the Boston Museum of Fine Arts in 1958. The Kuba story took
up most of the article text: “Mr. Elisofon showed us a photograph of the Nyimi in his
latest volume ‘The Sculpture of Africa.’ The Bushongo ruler was a mountainous mass
buried under an avalanche of plumage from which he stared out with heavy-lidded,
saurian eyes.”161 Elisofon explained to Taylor:
I wanted a superb mask in the household of the Nyimi – he’s got a full
court, by the way, with regal trappings – and I knew that if I offered him
something he’d be forced to respond according to native custom. I gave
him 50 dollars. The Nyimi’s chamberlain, in turn, gave me three eggs. So
I raised the price. The chamberlain produced a hen. By this time I was
worried. I recalled reading about explorers who had swapped mirrors,
gimcracks, that sort of things, and as an afterthought I had purchased some
gold chains at the Five and Ten.

160
Leonard Lyons, “The Lyons Den,” New York Post, November 21, 1958. (HRC 11.2,
IMG_1243.)
161
Robert Taylor, “The Roving Eye: The Many Masks of Eliot Elisofon,” The Boston Herald,
November 7, 1958. (HRC 71.10/66.10, IMG _6289.)
87
It couldn’t be, I thought, but apprehensively I took out the chains and
placed them around the Nyimi’s neck. He used to be an absolute ruler, you
know, and the natives aren’t entirely unsophisticated. But when he beamed,
I heaved a sigh of relief, and a rhinestone fountain pen was the final thing
that closed the deal. I felt as if I were back in the era of the explorer,
Stanley. I could have gotten myself killed for that mask.162
Every time the story was told, it was a little different. Just $50. Then $25 more. 3 eggs.
12 eggs. Two-dozen eggs. A hen. No hen. A pen. No pen. The story was in constant flux,
adjusted to suit the moment. The journalists did not question the veracity of Elisofon’s
words, however, the researcher must. In the end, his ideas, opinions, and stories were
being projected publicly, true or not.
Among Elisofon’s quotes in this article was the following: “One mustn’t think of
uncivilized artists as child-like. They are extremely intelligent men, but they have their
artistic conventions just as we do. I’ve lived among primitive cultures all over the world,
and if you’re friendly to them they sense it and generally respond.”163 The first part of this
discussion is valid, and it is commendable that Elisofon was attempting to communicate
these points to a broader audience. The last sentence reads as patronizing and
paternalistic from our modern point of view. However, he was supporting living amongst
the artists and trying to understand them. In one moment, he went from saying ‘natives’
are not child-like, to saying ‘if you are friendly to them they will sense it’ as if they are
the stray dog on the street that you want to pet. These articles serve as examples of how
Elisofon’s words and images took on a life of their own in the American media. Despite
Geary’s argument that the Kuba King had a degree of agency in this encounter, clearly

162
November 7, 1958. (HRC 71.10/66.10, IMG _6289.)
163
November 7, 1958. (HRC 71.10/66.10, IMG _6289.)
88
once the photographs were taken he was no longer controlling anything. This was
Elisofon’s show.
The Kuba Encounter ReViewed
In 2013 the National Museum of African Art held an exhibition, Africa ReViewed,
in honor of the 40th anniversary of the founding of the Eliot Elisofon Photographic
Archives. Curators Amy Staples and Bryna Freyer created the exhibition from the archive
of 60,000 prints and negatives, as well as the art objects, documents, and film footage
that Elisofon gave to the Museum of African Art.
The thesis of the exhibition, that Elisofon presented new ideas about Africa to the
American public, is, in part, also the thesis of this dissertation. However, the argument
that Elisofon shed “new light on what had been viewed as the Dark Continent,” implied
that he showed Africa in a new way, a different way than previous image-makers.164 The
way he approached Africa transitioned throughout his career, and this was not explained
by the exhibition nor the museum’s publicity. At first, Elisofon was firmly entrenched in
the past, occasionally using racist language and constructing the same ‘us vs. them’
dialogue that colonials had used for almost a century. In 1947, the Congolese native was
still the primitive, exotic ‘other’ to Elisofon’s educated, white adventurer. The concept of
being sensitive to racial issues arose in the 1960s, because of the Civil Rights movement
and African independence movements, and a subsequent more dignified approach to the
continent solidified in Elisofon’s work in the 1970s.

164
Susan Stamberg, “‘Life’ Photographer Showed Africa Through A New Lens,” NPR radio
interview, February 10, 2014.
http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=272041622
89
In connection with the anniversary exhibition, Staples stated in a National Public
Radio (NPR) interview: “He redefined Africa in a new and a complex way for American
audiences. And he brought Africa into their living rooms in Life magazine.”165 The
newest, most innovative thing about Elisofon’s approach was not even his own creation.
The bold presentation of images of Africa and African art in a mass-produced, large-
format picture magazine was only possible with the invention of LIFE. Elisofon did
contribute to the popularity of this magazine, but he did not originate the publication
himself. And his pictures were not the only images of Africa in LIFE; there were multiple
participants in the re-defining of Africa for American audiences via this magazine.
So did Elisofon have a new approach? Did he redefine Africa in a new and
complex way? Not at first. And arguably, all of his approaches to Africa were derived
from other sources. Africa as a land of adventure. African art as aesthetically advanced.
African art as proof of advanced African cultures, i.e. a potential source of black pride.
None of these were his ideas. They were more like conceptual trends that he adopted, and
then let fall away when they went out of fashion. In many ways Elisofon was a pioneer,
but it is important to avoid oversimplification. He was a complex man with a long,
complex career.
The NPR interview began with a sound bite of the typical Tarzan yell as he
swings through the trees. Susan Stamberg, the special NPR correspondent, then explained,
“Before World War II, most Americans got their ideas about Africa from movies, filmed

165
Amy J. Staples, interview with Susan Stamberg, “‘Life’ Photographer Showed Africa Through
A New Lens,” NPR radio interview, February 10, 2014.
90
on Hollywood sound stages. ‘Tarzan, the Ape Man,’ in the African jungles.”166 The
interview was set up to present Elisofon as the opposite of this stereotypical Tarzan
example, but the character was even in his mind as he traveled through Africa in 1947. In
one of his trip reports Elisofon casually commented: “The road passed through forests so
dense that you could not see into them and some stretches were covered with heavy vines
Tarzan would have simply loved.”167
“He came in early,” Staples continued in the interview, “He was probably one of
the first photographers to travel extensively in Africa after World War II.”168 This
statement should have been qualified. He was one of the first photojournalists to travel
extensively in Africa after World War II. To think he was doing this work before anyone
else had thought of it would be inaccurate. Ethnographers, anthropologists, colonials, and
missionaries had been photographing Africa since the invention of photography, and they
certainly continued this work after World War II. The difference with Elisofon is that his
photographs were immediately published in a mass-produced, popular magazine in the
United States. They were not shelved in a museum, moved to an archive, and then
cataloged decades later like so many African ethnographic photography collections.
Photojournalism was a new field, almost embryonic, spurred onto an international level
because of World War II coverage.

166
167
168
91
For a photographer to take an image of a traditional ruler of Africa, like Bope
Mabiinshe, and then have it almost immediately published in LIFE, viewable by a large
audience, millions of people, was something that had never happened before. Even if
colonial-era photographs of the Kuba King had been published in journals in the late
1800s, or postcard images sold throughout the world in the 1930s, the scale of readership
with LIFE, in 1947, was completely new. Further, one must acknowledge that Elisofon
created these images with the intent of publishing them in LIFE. He had a specific agenda
to meet with his photographs. He needed high-quality, aesthetically pleasing, well-
composed images that could tell a complete story in LIFE. How can I get this published
in LIFE? How does this work as a LIFE story? These were questions constantly going
through Elisofon’s head, if not directly, suggestively. All of his work needs to be framed
by the LIFE mission.
Later in the NPR interview was a discussion of the Kuba King photograph and
LIFE article: “For readers of Life, this was a new vision of Africa, Staples explains:
‘People hadn’t seen that kind of detail and that kind of costume and that kind of beauty
and dignity before.’”169 Stamberg followed with: “The photo is regal and dignified. But
the caption Life put with it was disparaging: ‘A fat black monarch.’ Elisofon hated that
caption.”170 How could he hate the caption if he helped to write it? How do we know he
hated that caption? It is an off-hand remark from the correspondent without any source.

169
170
92
Elisofon was the one who called the King “quite ugly” and potbellied.171 Stamberg
continued: “He spent much of his career as a photographer and filmmaker providing
evidence of a rich, diverse and modern Africa –evidence for all America, and all the
world, to see.”172
Another concept that the exhibition sidestepped, but which is emphasized
throughout this dissertation, is that the ‘Africa’ Elisofon ‘ReViewed’ was his own view
of Africa, his own construction. Staples wrote about this issue briefly in her 2007
“Visualism and the Authentification of the Object” article on Elisofon and his collection
at the NMAfA. She explained:
These images encapsulate the underlying assumption that “primitive” or

traditional cultures do not change or are isolated from the rest of the world.
Elisofon’s photographs do not reveal “authentic” Africa, but construct a
particular vision of Africa as exotic, timeless and unchanged….
…Elisofon’s photographs are not simply visual evidence of African

cultural or spiritual practices, but must be analyzed for what they reveal
about the photographer’s visual practices, his relationships with Africans
and local cultural brokers, and the romanticized vision of Africa
constructed in his imagery….
While these images contain significant aesthetic and ethnographic detail, it
would be a mistake to accept these images as transparent representations
of African life, rather than carefully constructed scenes or commissioned
events….
…photographs cannot be approached uncritically as visual evidence of
reality. His conflation of the exotic and authentic…illustrates the

171
172
93
intersecting aesthetic, documentary, ethnographic, and ideological

contexts within which archival images are created and interpreted.173
Staples’ sentences were carefully worded. “I think what he did,” she commented in the
NPR interview, “is he created a more intimate view of Africa. There was humanity there.
He was actually trying to educate audiences in the U.S. about how he perceived the real
Africa to be.”174 Overall the NPR coverage projected Elisofon as a hero for Africa –
battling stereotypes of the continent as “a remote, exotic, often fearful place.”175
In reaction to this exhibition publicity, Raoul J. Granqvist wrote an article for the
blog Africa is a Country, titled “Eliot Elisofon’s Africa: Old, Updated, Worse.”176
Granqvist began: “Eliot Elisofon did not cast ‘new light’ or ‘refine [sic] Africa in a new
and complex way for American audiences,’ as claimed by Susan Stamberg’s ‘‘Life’
Photographer Showed Africa through a New Lens’ on NPR (February 10, 2014) about an
exhibit of Elisofon’s work…His subjectivity and artistic talent was of another sort.”177
Much like this dissertation, Granqvist took issue with the oversimplification of
Elisofon’s approach. He commented on the fact that Elisofon took these photographs for
LIFE, and they were “the result of an array of interlaced pulls.”178 He explained that

173
and Archives Professionals 3, no. 2 (Spring 2007): 182, 183, 185.
174
175
176
Raoul J. Granqvist, “Eliot Elisofon’s Africa: Old, Updated, Worse,” Africa is a Country blog,
February 13, 2014. http://africasacountry.com/eliot-elisofons-africa-old-updated-worse/,
Accessed June 10, 2014.
177
February 13, 2014.
178
February 13, 2014.
94
Elisofon’s work “was informed by the contextual material that he culled from various
impromptu sources, by what the LIFE editors supplied him with, and, in particular, by the
normative colonial practices that related to the visualization of the ‘African’ body and the
‘African’ landscape.”179 Given the amount of research Elisofon put into his projects, one
would doubt the label “impromptu” for his sources. But Granqvist’s further observation,
that Elisofon’s “‘choice’ of what to see (and how) was embedded in a visual colonial
archive of long standing,” that “it was never a unique choice,” has some merit.180
However, instead of problematizing the discussion, Granqvist maligned Elisofon,
LIFE, and even the Kuba King. Granqvist continued: “To un-mask the mask or the
‘unfamiliar world’ (Africa), [Elisofon] re-masked it by bringing it home – at costs for
Africa…Elisofon was out for the ‘authentic’ and the ‘untouched,’ but he was always
ready to compromise these ideals, when his camera caught what he thought might attract
an American eye (that was male).”181 Granqvist followed this observation with the
account of Elisofon photographing the King’s topless “harem” of 350 wives. Granqvist
also referred to the Kuba King as a “colonial handyman…a king who knew his price,” in
this section. Next, the gift exchange story was introduced, which Granqvist explained
was a “lopsided mode of bargaining,” “a colonial norm that Elisofon practiced whenever
he had a chance.”182 Granqvist was quick to assign colonialist qualities to every aspect of

179
February 13, 2014.
180
February 13, 2014.
181
February 13, 2014.
182
February 13, 2014.
95
Elisofon’s behavior, again oversimplifying a very complex man. Finally, we come back
to LIFE. How did Granqvist deal with “African Big Shot?” He described how:
The re-invented photographies of the Kuba clan (with the freakish

depiction of him as “African Big Shot. A Fat Black Monarch of the
Congo,” LIFE, March 31, 1947), and the denigrating one-liners that
accompanied them, were returned ‘home,’ and being re-published (with
them also the support from the condescending captions) and robbed of
their content, were/are continuously distancing African cultural and
historical conditions, in fact revisiting mythologies….
As a contrast, see the sober, unsentimental photo by Arnold Newman, a

colleague of Elisofon, “Bope Mabinshe King of the Bakubas Congo
Africa 1958.”183
“African Big Shot” is a racist article, as previously discussed, however, it is inaccurate to
label the photograph of the King as racist. This seems unfounded. The “freakish depiction”
is a challenging description of the King’s photograph, as it is specifically contrasted with
Newman’s “sober, unsentimental” picture (fig. 2.40). What makes one freakish and the
other sober? Newman took his photographs in much the same way as Elisofon – with the
guidance of the Belgian government, with the LIFE mission in his mind. He even took
the same “The King and I” photographs that Elisofon had taken 11 years before, posing
twice next to his majesty like a tourist (figs. 2.41-2.42).
The most obvious statement from Granqvist—that Elisofon’s “photographs are
not about Africa, they are about Africa in America!”—is heavy-handed with its
exclamatory nature.184 Clearly this is a similar thought process as Staples—this is the
Africa that America saw through Elisofon’s eyes—so it is not a new, shocking idea.
However, Staples and Granqvist discussed the images solely as views of Africa—whether

183
February 13, 2014.
184
February 13, 2014.
96
real, imagined, or racist. The photographs’ connection with African art history is being
reduced and reframed within new conceptual goals. We must not forget that in 1947 in
the Belgian Congo Elisofon was not thinking: ‘How can I show Africa to LIFE readers?’
Instead he was thinking: ‘How can I show African art to LIFE readers?’
Staples and Granqvist do stand at opposite ends of the Elisofon spectrum. For
Staples Elisofon’s work had positive repercussions for the image of Africa in the
American collective psyche; in Granqvist’s opinion the results were ultimately negative.
However, while focusing on Elisofon as racist and colonialist, Granqvist missed the most
demeaning article on the Kuba King. On December 12, 1960, LIFE published the feature
“Polygamy Passing: Congo King Loses 750 of His Wives” (figs. 2.43-2.46). The brief
essay juxtaposed Elisofon’s 1947 photographs of the King in his coronation outfit and of
his wives performing music in a circle and dancing against new pictures of the Kuba by
Terence Spencer.
The text explained that the King had lost most of his wives, and the majority of
his children; his court was dissolving, as well as his power. His palace walls and fences
were crumbling because he no longer had the wives to maintain them. The Belgian
Congo had gained independence and the new government decreed it undemocratic to
have 800 wives: “We have our independence now, and so must these women.”185 The
main photograph of the “Morose Monarch,” is the visual opposite of the coronation outfit
picture. He “sits in a darkened room attended by a favorite son, Bope Mbelepe, in tennis
shirt.”186 The “King now has rheumatism so badly two men must hold him up when he

185
“Polygamy Passing,” LIFE (December 12, 1960): 79.
186
97
wears royal robes.”187 Draped in a blanket in his bedroom, the King carried a look of
defeat. LIFE named him as Lukengu Bope Mabinshe, now past 60. He told Spencer, “I
am a very unhappy man. Circumstances have given us independence before we are
ready.”188
“Polygamy Passing” is a different type of intimacy and humanity than Staples had
in mind when she was describing Elisofon’s photographs. It painted an image of the King
as pathetic, sickly, and weak. In contrast, Elisofon’s pictures of the King do indeed make
him look regal and dignified. Overall, the Kuba encounter of 1947 is both useful and
problematic. Elisofon’s two days in Mushenge represent his first experience with African
art in the field, being made and used. However, his image of the King in his coronation
outfit has become so iconic that it has become representative of his whole career. This
narrows our vision of his true impact on the study and appreciation of African art. As
important as Elisofon’s 1947 trip is to this dissertation—it was his first experience of sub-
Saharan Africa—it was far from his first encounter with African art. Instead, his earliest
experiences with African art were as a collector, not as a field photographer of Africa.

187
188
98
Chapter Three: Eliot Elisofon, Meeting African Art
Around the late 1930s, Elisofon brought his photographs of New York’s Lower
East Side to Marion Willard of the East River Gallery. She was not sure what to do with
his work, as she had never exhibited photographs as art. She asked him to photograph
some of modernist sculptor David Smith’s work to accompany his upcoming exhibition
in January 1938. Elisofon photographed Smith at work, his studio, and his artworks for
Willard (fig. 3.1). Elisofon became friends with Smith and his wife Dorothy Dehner,
trading his photographs for Smith’s sculptures. Dehner and Smith had been collecting
African art since the 1920s, and Elisofon was impressed with what they owned.189
This was probably his first encounter with a large private collection of African art,
though it was not Elisofon’s first exposure to African art. Elisofon had gone to the 1935
Museum of Modern art exhibition, African Negro Art, organized by James Johnson
Sweeney. African art was shown as fine art in this show, against white walls, on white
pedestals, and without labels, dioramas or the crowded case displays typical of natural
history museums. Later press releases and the acknowledgements section of The
Sculpture of Africa stated that Elisofon’s interest in Africa began at this point and he
decided then that he wanted to visit the continent.
In a newspaper interview in 1958, Elisofon stated: “I first got excited about
primitive sculpture when I saw a Museum of Modern Art exhibit on African art in 1935.

189
Elin Elisofon, Dorothy Dehner interview (David Smith’s ex-wife), Elisofon Biography Draft,
Texas at Austin. (HRC 79a.1-4/72.2-5, IMG_1125.)
99
That started me as a collector.”190 Indeed, he was so interested in the show and African art
that he even squirreled away the TIME magazine article on the exhibition, “Works of
Fear,” in his papers.191 If this text was one of his earliest readings on African art, it
certainly left a lot to be desired. “Ever since the Portuguese, Dutch and British first
started raiding the jungles of West Africa for slaves to work their new colonies, the
hideous gods and little demons of primitive Africa have been turning up as curios in the
homelands of the traders,” the article stated.192 Racist language and a tongue-in-cheek
attitude overshadowed the core, valid explanation that African art was purposeful, not
made from spontaneous motivations.
The article epitomizes the type of media representation of African art of this
period, running through the gambit of stereotypes, explaining them, and simultaneously
reinforcing and breaking them down in an odd paradox. The author seemed to regard all
African art as violent, wild and dangerous, and promoted the idea that fear alone was the
dominant emotion in generating African art. Also the article argued that African art is the
darling of the cultural elite, and not for the masses: “Today an African mask or two is as
necessary for the apartment of a young-man-about-Paris as lounging pajamas and a bottle
of port.”193 While this joke seems heavy-handed, Elisofon did photograph his African-art
bedecked apartment (figs. 3.2-3.5) and these images certainly speak to this idea of
displaying African art as proof of one’s intellect and elite status. The everyman may be
able to comprehend the lure of African art to the modern artist, the article continued, but

190
November 7, 1958. (HRC 71.10/66.10, IMG _6289.)
191
“Works of Fear,” TIME (April 1, 1935): 49.
192
193
100
“may not be able to comprehend the technical skill, the shrewd relation of form to
material that these savage artists used.”194
In the end, a lack of respect for the continent and its art is evident. While the
author may have been attempting to genuinely describe objects one could see at the
MoMA show, he ended up creating absurd comedy: “From Dahomey came one of the
largest exhibits, the iron war god in the lobby, nearly life-size and wearing a strange
spiked hat and a garment like a pleated nightshirt. His raised left arm looked as if he were
signaling over his shoulder with his thumb, like any hitchhiker.”195 The article endorsed
African art as exotic oddities, fit for those who can successfully pretend to understand
and appreciate it.
Chaim Gross, Isamu Noguchi, and African Art
Also in the late 1930s, probably through his friendship with David Smith,
Elisofon met Chaim Gross and Isamu Noguchi, modernist artists who carved wood
sculptures. Gross also collected African art with his wife Renee.196 They began their
collection around 1937, buying objects from fellow artist John Graham.197 Elisofon
started photographing Gross and Noguchi’s sculptural projects. He documented Gross’s

194
195
196
Elisofon’s relationships with Gross and Noguchi would last his lifetime. According to a 2009
essay, Gross was “very sociable” and is regarded “as one of the central figures of New York’s
artistic scene in the 1920s into the 1940s.” He was “generous with his time in supporting and
educating younger artists and new collectors, he kept his working space as an ‘open studio’ to
welcome friends as well as newcomers.” The Sculptor’s Eye, Sotheby’s Gross Collection Auction
Catalog, (New York: Sotheby’s, 2009): 9.
197
In 2009 Irwin Hersey, a friend of both Gross and Elisofon, wrote that Chaim had turned many
of his friends into African art collectors, including Elisofon. However, Elisofon credited the 1935
MoMA show as the turning point. Irwin Hersey, “A Tribute,” in The Sculptor’s Eye, Sotheby’s
Gross Collection Auction Catalog, (New York: Sotheby’s, May 2009): 7.
101
wood sculpting process — an uncommon medium for modern art — from shopping for
logs to finishing the wood surface. These were included in Gross’s 1957 publication The
Technique of Wood Sculpture. Several African pieces were included in this text in a
photographic section on cross-cultural examples of woodcarving (fig. 3.6).
Elisofon crafted several articles on Noguchi for LIFE, and an Elisofon photograph
of Noguchi lamps was included in the 1956 Color Photography Annual. The February 6,
1956 issue of LIFE included a two-page article with pictures by Elisofon of a stool that
Noguchi had designed, which was inspired by a Kuba stool in Elisofon’s collection (figs.
3.7-3.8). Employing the multiple exposure technique he also used on Marcel Duchamp
and African art in the early 1950s, Elisofon photographed a young woman in three poses
on one negative, teetering back and forth on the interactive stool Noguchi created (figs.
3.9-3.10). The Technique book and the Noguchi stool article serve as examples of how
Elisofon and his friends influenced each other, and how African art often sat in the
middle of these relationships and ideas.
Gypsy Rose Lee and African Art
Elisofon’s interest in African art and his pursuit of an African art collection was
likely a combination of different experiences within a relatively short time period, rather
than a single moment or experience. However, we do know that Gypsy Rose Lee, the
famous burlesque dancer and close acquaintance of Elisofon and Chaim Gross, gave
Elisofon his first piece of African art: a small Pende ivory sculpture (fig. 3.11). Elisofon
probably met Lee at the 1939 World’s Fair in New York City when he photographed her
for LIFE magazine. This was likely their first meeting, despite her acquaintance with the
102
Grosses, and they began dating. So Elisofon received the Pende work after this point,
with an obvious romantic connection.198
Besides Gypsy’s gift, Elisofon’s experience of African art collecting essentially
functioned as a boys’ club. In a 2009 Sotheby’s auction catalog, Mimi Gross (b. 1940)
recalled a typical Friday evening in her parents’ home in her teenage years:
A cluster of perhaps five or six men stands in a little circle, close to a

cabinet with many African sculptures. All are wearing white shirts, with
Chaim standing in the middle in a plaid woolen shirt. I stand around too,
also in the middle or off to the side, listening and looking, while they
focus their conversations. Chaim is holding an African figure in his hands,
perhaps one of the Fang or more recently acquired Dogon, rotating it very
slowly for the others to observe.
They are each looking down at the figure with great attention. As he
rotates the piece, he is explaining its sculptural qualities. They argue with
one another about the special authenticating features, the history, the
fetishes, and the facts, sometimes laughing. There’s Eliot Elisofon &
Harold Rome, & Bill Fagg & Margo Plass, there’s Bill Siegmann and Bill
Brill, Al Arnold & Arnold Newman, there’s Hersey & Segy, & Mert
Simpson & Klejman, & Warren Robbins & Lydia Pulcinelli & Ed
Spiegel.199
Despite the presence of women’s names in Mimi’s list, most of Elisofon’s closest
collector-friends were male.200 They traded objects amongst themselves and shared their
sources.201 Elin Elisofon explained, “When one of them acquired a new piece they all
rushed to see and inspect it. They delighted in each other’s purchases, as if each piece

198
Though they did not end up as a couple, Elisofon and Lee stayed close friends until she died in
1970. He introduced her to her third husband, Julio De Diego, a Spanish artist, and he dedicated
his 1969 book, The Hollywood Style, to her.
199
Mimi Gross, “Common Bonds,” in The Sculptor’s Eye, Sotheby’s Gross Collection Auction
Catalog, (New York: Sotheby’s, May 2009): 6.
200
As examples, Chaim Gross, Harold Rome, Irwin Hersey and Arnold Newman. Their
discussions of African art typically occurred on Friday or Saturday nights around a dinner, often
cooked by Elisofon. Elisofon was also close friends with Donald Deskey, who also collected
African art.
201
103
were an addition to shared holdings. Even so that in no way diminished the sense of
contest and fervor with which each piece was sought and shown with explosive pride.”202
African art was an important part of the camaraderie of Elisofon’s middle-class Jewish
New Yorker lifestyle; it helped him make friends, keep them, and gave them something
to discuss.
Elisofon also took photographs of his friends’ collections of African art. By the
1950s he had constructed a grand plan to create an archive of African art images for
study. Through his images he wanted “to help the world to see” the splendor of African
art. In his eulogy for Elisofon, Harold Rome described what it was like to watch him
photograph African art: “What a joy it was to be with him when he was photographing
pieces from my collection. He would set the sculpture up, dance around it, fiddle with the
lights, in a kind of ecstasy at its special qualities, and marvel as he took the picture —
pointing out its line and form and snapping away to show the world the beauties he
saw.”203
An African Art Expert?
Just as he had taught himself photography through his friendships, Elisofon used
his connections to teach himself about African art. Besides friendly conversations with
friends like Gross and Rome, Elisofon researched it independently, plotting to craft LIFE
articles on African art even though they had never been assigned them to him. He
maintained an African art library throughout his life, gathering articles and books,

202
203
Harold Rome eulogy, quoted in Elin Elisofon, Elisofon Biography Draft, Eliot Elisofon Paper
and Photographic Collection, Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin. (HRC
79a.1-4/72.2-5, IMG_1390.)
104
reading everything he could. As LIFE colleague Maitland Edey put it, “It made no
difference that he was ignorant of a subject. Like a fool he rushed in anyway, leaving
many of us cautious angels standing on the sidelines. But as it turned out, he was a very
wise fool. Wise enough to know he could depend on his taste, boundless energy and
intelligence. He trusted them and they steered him straight.”204 For Elisofon it was a point
of pride to be regarded as an expert or authority on anything — be it the culinary arts,
photography, or African art.
Eventually Elisofon had confidence in his own expertise, knowing which ethnic
groups made which artworks, and being able to tell what was good art from bad,
authentic from fake. He gained this status by sharing his opinion in an authoritative voice,
which he had acquired through years of selling himself in order to get work as a
photographer. He had to project confidence in himself for his work, and that transferred
into his studies and discussions of African art. Whether or not he could really tell what
was fake is not as important as that he thought he could tell, and others believed in him
and his opinions. Elisofon did not make up information. Perhaps he was sometimes
erroneous, but that was not purposeful. He was sensationalistic at times, but there was a
lot of false and /or generalized information around.
Elisofon’s Collecting Habits
Elisofon began to buy art for his apartment and studio in the late 1930s; he
“wanted to live with a certain style,” “he bought contemporary furniture, hired a

204
Maitland Edey eulogy, quoted in Elin Elisofon, Elisofon Biography Draft, Eliot Elisofon Paper
79a.1-4/72.2-5, IMG_1271.)
105
decorator and had his clothes custom made.”205 He filled these spaces with modern art,
his photographs, artwork from his friends, and pieces of wood that he found on his
travels. Once he was on LIFE’s payroll, Elisofon took (or suggested) assignments that
sent him around the world. His goal was to get paid to travel and collect objects, and he
largely succeeded. Robert W. Marks wrote that Elisofon’s apartment was, “loaded down
with modern paintings, modern sculpture, pieces of old tree stumps, which have what
(Elisofon) calls ‘wonderful design.’ Here and there are accents given by old prows of
ships, picked up in odd places; by the hundreds of shelves storing Elisofonana, and by
unique bits of photo equipment.”206
Elisofon collected aggressively. When Elin Elisofon interviewed Chaim Gross for
her biography of her father, he told the story of how one day Elisofon “stormed” into his
studio. He reached for a large figurative wall piece and said, “I have to have this for my
studio.” Gross told him he could not have it, that it was one of his most important pieces.
Elisofon said, piece in hand, “It’s alright, we’ll straighten it out later.” He took it home
and hung it over the fireplace in the living room. Later, Elisofon gave Gross $150 without
asking him what he felt the piece was worth.207

205
206
Robert W. Marks, “Elisofon Takes Both Sides of the Tracks,” Minicam (April 1942): 36.
(HRC 71.9/66.9, IMG_5994 thru IMG_6010.)
207
106
Elin Elisofon wrote that her father “told his friends he was going to get LIFE
magazine to send him around the world so he could collect sculpture and they did just
that.”208 She recalled her memories of her father’s collecting habits:
He never came back from a trip where he was not preceded or followed by
huge crates. Long suffering elevator men strained against hernias trying to
squeeze these things next to our back door. Others ended up at museums,
the homes of fellow collectors or LIFE until Eliot’s faithful friend,
secretary and gal Friday, Dottie, could find some other place to stash
them. The files are stuffed with copies of cables to Eliot, deep in the bush,
from people desperate for instructions.
Eliot bought and picked up everything and size was no object. There were
rocks—one had to be rolled end over end for miles on a beach in Java
before someone could be found to help carry it; bolts of cloth, jewelry,
dishes, Asian, New Guinean, Pacific, Pre-Columbian and Native
American, art, weapons, furniture, household tools; enormous exotic shells
and huge pieces of coral only the brawniest men can lift, vast amounts of
cooking utensils, but more than anything else he collected African
artifacts.209
Like the Grosses, and many of his friends, Elisofon collected art from around the world,
but the dominant cultural element in his collection was African art. Elisofon used all of
his voyages to Africa as collecting trips.
Every time he went to Africa he purchased dozens and dozens of objects, shipping
them back to New York by the crate-full. He collected every kind of African art – not just
sculpture – but utensils, textiles, paintings, musical instruments, and more. Some of the
works he kept for his own collection, others he gave to friends or donated. On some
occasions he was specifically sent as a collecting agent for institutions like the Harvard
Peabody Museum, the Peabody Museum of Salem (South Seas art), and the Museum of

208
209
107
African Art. He also donated and sold African art objects to these institutions, as well as
New York’s Museum of Primitive Art, and the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Not all of
these sales and donations are connected with Elisofon in the institutions’ records,
however the object photographs match those Elisofon took of objects he owned or
collected in the field. He usually did this job in addition to the photography assignment
he was originally sent on. While the LIFE editors did not exactly appreciate him using
their paying assignments as opportunities to collect, they allowed him to do so for three
decades.210
Elisofon’s collection was built over his whole career, from the mid-1930s until his
death in 1973. He was always comprehensive and obsessive in his collecting habits. He
bought or traded items that caught his attention. Elisofon did not employ a contemplative
method of acquisition; most of his purchases were spontaneous, of found objects.
Elisofon began his collection before he even knew what was truly representative of a
culture’s arts. So if he happened to buy such objects it was because he liked them, not
because it was iconic or canonical in some way. He did follow trends, like purchasing
Bamana chi wara, Kongo nkisi, and Dogon granary ladders, but his taste was eclectic and
for every trendy item, there were ten more that were acquired simply because they
fascinated him. In fact, based on various reports, he seemed to have been more interested
in shopping for artworks rather than cataloging or studying them. He would ask to buy
jewelry right off the people he photographed, beg a restaurant owner for a sculpture he

210
108
saw in the window, read about a type of object and then hunt it down on his next trip to
Mali, and even directly request that the Kuba King give him a dance mask.211
For example, Elisofon was able to unexpectedly acquire a mask that he
photographed as part of a nighttime dance in the town of Ibea in the Republic of the
Congo during his 1951 African trip. The performers were identified as Kwele from the
town of Madjingo in Gabon. A four-faced helmet mask was danced, and Elisofon
purchased this object afterward. It is now in the National Museum of African Art,
accession #73-7-290 (fig. 3.12). The institution’s information on this piece follows:
The four faces of this helmet mask are each different but strongly
resemble the ngontang masks of the Fang peoples. The Fang are believed
to have originated this type of mask during the colonial period, blending
existing mask styles.
Once used in ritual performances, when borrowed by other
neighboring peoples, such as the Kwele, these masks were used primarily
for entertainment. This is also true of their use by the Fang today.212
This Elisofon acquisition illustrates the complex history of African objects even before
they leave the continent. The helmet mask was performed by one ethnic group, in a
different area from where they lived, and most likely the mask was not even made by that
ethnic group.
Only one image of this performance has been found at this time, but it reveals the
costume of the dancer, and the setting of the event (fig. 3.13). Given the presence of
chairs and seated guests, the dance seems to have been held for entertainment. This is

211
Bryna Freyer, personal communication, May 16, 2011; Pascal J. Imperato, A Wind in Africa: A
Story of Modern Medicine in Mali (St. Louis: W.H. Green, 1975); and Christraud M. Geary,
“Two Days in Mushenge: Eliot Elisofon’s Images of the Kuba (1947),” African Arts, vol. 26, no.
2 (April 1993): 72-77.
212
“Helmet Mask,” Object Number: 73-7-290, Online Collection Information, National
Museum of African Art, Smithsonian, Washington, D.C.
http://africa.si.edu/collections/view/objects/asitem/items$0040:4600. (Accessed May 15, 2014.)
109
probably why Elisofon was able to buy the mask. At another point during this trip, the
Elisofons attended a Kuba funeral dance near Luluabourg (Kananga). They watched the
dancers, and then asked if they could buy the drum that had just been used. It featured a
head and hand carved into it. They received growls, yells, and sneers as their answer.213
Today’s Africanists have not studied the works Elisofon collected, and scholars
have never addressed the objects’ significance and quality. The pieces have been split up
between private and public collections, but rarely exhibited after Elisofon’s death. The
National Museum of African Art holds the majority of the collection, but almost all of the
objects reside in storage, both on and off-site. Only a curator would have access and the
time needed for assessing the works. Bryna Freyer, curator at the NMAfA, stated that of
the 615 objects, only about one-third is ideal for museum display.214
Elisofon never wrote any summation of why he collected African art or how he
approached this occupation. Because of his early death, he never had a chance to gather
these thoughts, or organize a comprehensive exhibition of his collection. Typically an
exhibition catalog allows for the collector to voice his or her thoughts on why he began
collecting, and what his aesthetic motivations might be. The only publication directed
explicitly toward his collection was an October 5, 1958 New York Times Magazine article
by Cynthia Kellogg that was devoted to the Elisofons’ use of their art collection as
apartment décor. Kellogg explained, “Current interest in primitive African sculpture is
underscored by an exhibition at the Museum of Primitive Art, where many of Mr.

213
Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin. (HRC 79a.1-4/72.2-5, IMG_1359 thru
IMG_1360.)
214
Bryna Freyer, personal communication, May 16, 2011.
110
Elisofon’s pieces are on view through Oct. 19.”215 Elisofon usually lent objects to
exhibitions that had been recently acquired, fit their theme, or had been specifically
requested by the organizer. Unless he organized the exhibition himself, he rarely made a
conscious choice of what to contribute.
Kellogg discussed a variety of cultures in this article, but it was African sculpture
that she specifically pointed out as a trending subject. Kellogg wrote:
During the last decade art collecting by the American public has increased
phenomenally, radically changing the appearance of the home. The bare
white walls of the years immediately following World War II have yielded
gradually to arrangements of oils, water-colors, prints and, more recently,
sculptures….
In the New York apartment of Mr. and Mrs. Eliot Elisofon an enormous
collection of carvings has set the mood of the decorating schemes
throughout. With the sure eye of a professional photographer, Mr.
Elisofon has arranged African primitives, South Seas island carvings and
ancient sculpture from China and Japan against sparsely furnished
backgrounds and muted color schemes….
Throughout the apartment décor is subdued, walls are washed white and
floors left almost bare, so that the superb quality of the collection shines
through….
Today, good sculpture is available at very reasonable prices. For those
who wish to use it in their own homes, these pictures offer many ideas for
dramatic display. A number of typical inexpensive pieces are shown on
Page 51 (figs. 3.14-3.15).216
Thus, the article framed the Elisofons as trendsetters, and several photographs of their
apartment were included in the spreads (figs. 3.16-3.17). African art was given special
attention by Kellogg, showing that it had great potential for interior design. While this

215
Cynthia Kellogg, “Living with Sculpture,” The New York Times Magazine (October 5, 1958):
48. (HRC 71.11/66.11, IMG_6583 thru IMG_6596.)
216
Cynthia Kellogg, “Living with Sculpture,” The New York Times Magazine (October 5, 1958):
48. (HRC 71.11/66.11, IMG_6583 thru IMG_6596.)
111
may seem to be a superficial, even transitory approach to African art, this type of article
also served to boost its public reputation.
Other articles and anecdotes mentioned Elisofon’s collection, but they certainly
did not approach it from an academic mindset. When Elisofon’s 1951 Gabon gorilla hunt
article was published in LIFE, Elisofon’s work was featured in the TIME, Inc. f.y.i. in-
house magazine. The article, titled “Dr. Elisofon, I Assume,” featured an image of
Elisofon in his apartment with his art collection (fig. 3.18). The f.y.i. article presented
Elisofon as he wanted to be seen publicly, as an educated man with fine tastes. This was
the image he had worked for years creating and fostering. At the core of this persona was
an interest in Africa, ‘primitive’ cultures, and art. He was progressive and unique. The
text explained:
LIFE photographer Eliot Elisofon has a passion for Africa…. Fact is that
Africa and photography came into his life the same year — 1936, when he
gave up painting to become a photographer, and saw an exhibition of
African sculpture in New York’s Museum of Modern Art.217
In one sentence, the article tied Elisofon with one of the most famous and influential art
museums in the world while also hinting at a fine art background. It continued:
No man to stifle a worthwhile impulse, he literally took Africa right into

his home. His apartment looks like a corner of the Smithsonian — without
the old aeroplanes. Walls, bookcases, tables and corners are hung, covered
and filled with a multitude of statues, tools, busts, masks and vicious
looking weapons. Most of them have been collected during trips for
LIFE.218
This section subtly encouraged the collecting of African art, comparing the Elisofon
apartment to the Smithsonian. In addition, the included photograph attested to Elisofon’s

217
The Editors, “Dr. Elisofon, I Assume,” f.y.i. magazine (1951): 3. (HRC 71.10/66.10,
IMG_6236.)
218
IMG_6236.)
112
use of art objects as wallpaper for his eclectic and exciting home. Next, Elisofon’s role in
the world of ‘primitive’ art was addressed:
Elisofon’s interest in the primitive goes deeper than a yen for mere
acquisition. He has become an authority on primitive art, has studied and
photographed sculpture from New Guinea, Australia, Peru, and Polynesia
(much of it for LIFE) as well as Africa.
A visiting expert, he has lectured at Yale on aesthetics in primitive art —

as Trowbridge Lecturer, and as guest in a course splendidly titled “Man,
Nature and Society.”
During this summer’s trip he lectured on African art some more — this
time to Katharine Hepburn while he was shooting the story on the movie
African Queen (LIFE, Sept. 17). As a result, Miss Hepburn reportedly has
started collecting primitive art herself.219
Whether or not that last anecdote was true is beside the point. In the end, these passages
helped to build the image of African art as an intellectual experience, and the collecting
of it as an elite, celebrity interest.
1960s-70s, Warren Robbins
Through his photographing and collecting of African art, Elisofon met almost
everyone in the field – dealers, collectors, art critics, and specialists; some he befriended,
others he did not. As in any other type of art history narrative, human networking
affected the history of African art. Perhaps the most important connection Elisofon made
was with Warren Robbins, the founder of the National Museum of African Art. They met
in the early 1960s and remained close friends until Elisofon’s death.
Robbins picked up The Sculpture of Africa in a bookshop in Paris after he had
casually started collecting African art while living in Europe in the early 1960s. In his

219
IMG_6236.)
113
book Speaking of Introductions, Robbins published his April 10, 1973 eulogy for
Elisofon, which discussed The Sculpture of Africa: “It took me six days to do justice to it
and the reading marked the beginning of my own growth in this field. Later, I read an
article by Eliot in The Atlantic which made me aware for the first time of the relationship
of African art to the work of Picasso and others. My own special interest in this
relationship began with Eliot’s article.”220
In 1963 Robbins established the Center for Cross-Cultural Communication as a
“prototype educational institute integrating, popularizing and utilizing the insights and
perspectives of the social sciences and the arts to foster not only international and
particularly interracial understanding, but equally important, communication between the
academic world and a broader public audience.”221 Under the auspices of this Center,
Robbins founded the Museum of African Art (MAA) in 1964. The museum had a two-
fold purpose: “First, to show the best of the art and culture of Africa, and secondly, to
reach the Negro American with an educational program aimed at giving him a sense of
his great cultural heritage.”222 Because of the Civil Rights movement, Robbins was very
concerned with race relations when he founded the museum. He explained: “In order for
‘equal regard’ as well as ‘equal rights’ to be achieved, the widespread misconception that
the Negro’s only past has been that of savagery and slavery must be challenged on both
historical and aesthetic grounds, and supplanted by recognition of a heritage as valid in

220
Warren M. Robbins, Speaking of Introductions: Vignettes of a Cultural Pioneer: a
Journey Through Four Careers and Three Continents (Washington, DC: Robbins Center for
Cross Cultural Communication, 2005): 73.
221
“Robbins Center for Cross Cultural Communication,” http://www.robbinscenter.org/,
Accessed April 28, 2014.
222
Leslie Jud Ahlander, “Negroes’ artistic past,” The Christian Science Monitor, July 1, 1964: 5.
114
its own cultural context as is Western culture relative to its frame of reference.”223
Elisofon would play a key role in supporting Robbins’ goals for his institution.
In the 1974 Tribute to Africa booklet Robbins wrote: “In its brief ten-year history,
the Museum of African Art had no greater and more energetic friend than Eliot Elisofon.
From the very onset he, together with his wife Joan, supported its original concept and its
early organizational steps as a teaching Museum, also lending to it two dozen fine works
of African sculpture for its first tentative exhibition in June 1964.”224 The Elisofons lent
and gave works, introduced Robbins to other collectors, and encouraged them to help the
museum as well. For example, Gaston de Havenon, whom Elisofon introduced to African
art, chose the MAA for the first public display of his 250-piece African art collection in
1971.225 Chaim Gross, Harold Rome, Arnold Newman, and Irwin Hersey, all friends of
Elisofon, also helped the fledgling museum by lending objects to exhibitions, and gifting
works to the permanent collection.
According to Elisofon’s daughter, Joan Elisofon and Robbins created the idea for
the private museum together. Joan wanted the institution to be like the Asia Society’s
museum, once known as Asia House, established by the Rockefeller family in 1956: a
place that fostered good will and mutual understanding while also being a meeting place
for foreign delegates. She also wanted it to be in New York City, like Asia House.

223
Leslie Jud Ahlander, “Negroes’ artistic past,” The Christian Science Monitor, July 1, 1964: 5.
224
Eliot Elisofon and Warren Robbins, Tribute to Africa: The Photography and the Collection of
Eliot Elisofon: a Memorial Exhibition at the Museum of African Art, Frederick Douglass House,
June Through December 1974 (Washington: Museum of African Art, 1974): 3. The Museum of
African Art was renamed the National Museum of African Art when it was absorbed by the
Smithsonian Institution and relocated to the Mall.
225
Roderick Nordell, “African art: museum on the move,” The Christian Science Monitor, June 4,
1971: 4. Discussion of Museum of African Art, its renovation and reopening, and an exhibition of
de Havenon’s collection. Through Elisofon, de Havenon bought his first African artwork, a mask
from the Fang, with “simplifications ‘like a Brancusi head.’”
115
However, in 1963, Robbins bought the Frederick Douglass house in Washington, D.C. as
the home of his museum. Elin also explained that Joan helped design and install the first
exhibition, which took place in June 1964.226
Robbins made the museum a showcase for African art, as well as a central focus
for efforts to promote American interest in, and knowledge of, African art and culture.
Sharon Patton, former director of the NMAfA, stated after his death in 2008: “With little
money, through the largess of friends and collectors and an undeterred dream, Robbins
established what would become one of the world’s pre-eminent museums for exhibiting,
collecting and preserving African art.”227 The Museum was groundbreaking in many
ways, but particularly because it was solely dedicated to African art, and it did not exhibit
it as ‘primitive’ art; it was simply art.
After meeting Robbins and becoming a Founding Trustee and Curatorial
Associate of the Museum of African Art, Elisofon decided to bequeath his entire African
art collection to the museum upon his death. By mid-1972 he had willed his African art
collection and his photographic archive of African images to the museum– this included
photographs, transparencies, and film footage of Africa and its art, both field and studio
work. This kick-started the Eliot Elisofon Photographic Archives (EEPA), which is now
one of the largest repositories of African imagery in the world, collecting not only
photographs of the continent and its art, but also old glass negatives, lantern slides,
postcards, stereographs, engravings, and antique maps.

226
Warren Robbins eulogy and communication with Joan Elisofon on June 28, 1985, in Elin
Elisofon, Elisofon Biography Draft, Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection, Harry
Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin. (HRC 79a.1-4/72.2-5, IMG_1389 thru
IMG_1390.)
227
Dennis Hevesi, “Warren M. Robbins, Collector of African Art, Dies at 85,” The New York
Times, December, 16, 2008: B12.
116
By the early 1970s Elisofon had amassed a large art collection. His goal was to
sell some of the objects for profit. When he died in 1973 he had not yet culled his
collection in this manner. Hence, when his bequest arrived at the NMAfA, they received
615 objects of varying quality.228 While a few of these works have been used in
exhibitions, publications, marketing and even film projects, the bulk of the collection
remains vaguely categorized and largely under-researched. Most of the items are
currently located in storage, but they do travel for exhibitions. Only two sub-Saharan
African art objects from Elisofon appear in the museum’s handbook, Selected Works
from the Collection of the National Museum of African Art.229 For the 2013 Elisofon
exhibition at the NMAfA, only sixteen Elisofon collection objects were displayed and his
daughter Elin owned one of them. In the permanent installation gallery one Elisofon
object was on view in December 2013, a Kota stool from Gabon (accession number 73-7-
475).
Robbins often commented on Elisofon’s contributions to the field of African art
history in the media, and after Elisofon’s death, he worked hard to include his objects in
exhibitions and catalogs, and fiercely promoted the use of the EEPA. However, once the
MAA became the NMAfA, Robbins lost his position as director in 1982, and the
attention to Elisofon objects waned. Robbins organized the 1974 Tribute to Africa
exhibition in honor of Elisofon at the MAA. The institution would not host another
exhibition on Elisofon until the 40th anniversary of his death and the founding of the
EEPA in 2013. While Elisofon had been actively promoting his collection by exhibiting it

228
Bryna Freyer, Personal communication, May 16, 2011.
229
National Museum of African Art, Selected Works from the Collection of the National Museum
of African Art (Washington, DC: Smithsonian, National Museum of African Art, 1999). Chiwara,
Bamana: 21. Ivory head, Lega: 121.
117
throughout the country and publishing objects in articles and books, the NMAfA has not
continued this level of attention. It would be unfair to expect a museum with over 9,000
objects to fawn over only Elisofon items, however, it could be argued that the Elisofon
collection had much more of an impact upon public perceptions of African art when it
was in Elisofon’s hands than it does today. This speaks to the issues and inquiries
surrounding a museum bequest of this nature.

118
Chapter Four: Elisofon Photographing, Exhibiting, and Writing about African Art
“The act of creating a great painting or symphony or novel or any

example of the other arts is perhaps an extension of God’s own creation of
the world and the beauty that exists in it. When man makes a new, original
work of art he is extending the beauty and meaning of life itself. There is
no question but that this ability to produce a work of art is a Divine gift.
The responsibility, therefore, of the artist to his fellowman is great… By
the same token, the public itself is in a key position as regards the honesty
of creative expression. It is the approval or disapproval of the public
which fosters or destroys art.”
- Eliot Elisofon230
After Elisofon was introduced to African art and started collecting it in the 1930s,
he devoted much of his creative energy toward gaining the public’s approval of the field.
While World War II interrupted his efforts, he refocused his work in the late 1940s, and
by the 1950s he was publishing articles and images of African art, and creating
exhibitions. Many of his projects were simple introductions to African art, but provided
the valuable resource of photographs with proper identification information. Elisofon
understood that people need images of art objects to be able to learn about them and
understand them. If African art is not properly labeled and respected, misinformation is
produced. Elisofon was working to combat this issue, which was prevalent because many
African artworks were orphan pieces, i.e. they were collected in the field without any
written documentation.
He witnessed firsthand the mistakes that were made because of the lack of
knowledge about ‘primitive’ art. In 1953 he spoke about the recent film The White Witch

230
Austin: 1. (HRC 53.11, IMG_3841.)
119
Doctor, starring Susan Hayward and Robert Mitchum, and based on the 1950 fictional
book of the same name.
It is unfortunate to find that the maker of a recent film, ‘White Witch

Doctor,’ would be so lax as to use two huge fetishes from the Pacific, one
from new Guinea and the other from New Hebrides, as sacred idols of the
Bakuba, a Belgian Congo People.
In a documentary by Armand Denis called ‘Savage Splendor’ snatches of

dancers in West Africa doing some wonderful dancing were intercut with
shots of the King of Bakuba in Central Africa as if it were taking place at
his court. This same footage was purchased by the studio which made
‘White Witch Doctor’ and cut into the fictional Bakuba sequences as
well.231
The Oceanic items placed in a Central African setting, and the mix-up of film footage is
just a small portion of the ethnographic mistakes in the film. Kuba attire and architecture
is intermixed with Mangbetu hairstyles and aprons, and West African Benin scarification
markings. The black witch doctor’s main costume is an invention and cannot even be
labeled. The book’s 1950 cover was a Chokwe mask, not a Kuba one (fig. 4.1). But even
more odd, the film poster featured an Oceanic sculpture over a Zulu shield (fig. 4.2). The
New York Times review stated, “The Africans, their homeland and the glimpses of their
customs are, after all, the virtues of ‘White Witch Doctor,’” as if the film were
educational and factual.232 Most of the footage was shot on a Hollywood backlot. This
was the type of mis-informational amalgamation that Elisofon was countering with his
work on African art. He wanted his projects to be as honest and didactic as possible.

231
Austin: 3. (HRC 53.11, IMG_3843.)
232
A.W., “Fox Travels to Africa for ‘White Witch Doctor’ at the Roxy – Hayward. Mitchum Star;
At the Roxy,” The New York Times, July 2, 1953.
120
The Grand Plan
As a professional photographer Elisofon dedicated much time and effort to
capturing the beauty of African art with his camera, following in the footsteps of Man
Ray, Walker Evans, and many others. In the early 1950s, Elisofon was asked to illustrate
the Bollingen Foundation’s African Folktales and Sculpture, with text by James Johnson
Sweeney, Paul Radin, and Elinore Marvel. Elisofon began a diligent effort to photograph
his African objects and those of his friends, as well as fellow collectors, galleries, and
museums in the United States, Europe, and Africa. He wanted to create clear, lasting
images of noteworthy African art objects. This book project dictated that his photographs
of African art had to be more detailed and elaborate than those he took during his 1947
trip (fig. 4.3). Instead of quickly arranging groups of objects together for documentation
snapshots, Elisofon took great care to create images worthy of publication in a reference
source (fig. 4.4).
When photographing in the studio, Elisofon usually took more than one shot per
item. He was interested in showing objects from multiple sides and angles, so one could
study a sculpture as though one were walking around it. He typically took pictures of
each side of a figure, and detail shots of delicate designs. Elisofon wrote about how and
why he photographed African sculpture, and this brief text appeared in Warren Robbins’
Tribute to Africa catalog in 1974: “To better explain the plastic quality of works of
African sculpture, I began in 1951 to photograph them in such a manner that only one
aspect of an object would be isolated for critical observation. I did this because few
people are capable of seeing only one part of a piece at a time, and of building from part
121
to part to the whole.”233 He wanted his photographs to show people the beauty and power
of African art.
Elisofon consistently took these shots in a way that he believed would be useful
for specialists, collectors and publishers. However, he did not take them from the
perspective of an art historian who might be looking for damaged areas on the work, adze
marks, signs of wear and use, sweat marks, surface additions, etc. Elisofon showed
details and patterns in many of his photographs, but not the whole story, not necessarily
enough information for stylistic analysis. Tribute to Africa also included Elisofon’s
description of the approach of his detail photographs (fig. 4.5):
…in the case of a large Dogon figure pictured here, four studies were
made in addition to a conventionally lighted full figure: a close-up of the
head and shoulders to reveal the Dogon convention of balancing head and
headdress against shoulder and breast – this involved the technique of
cross-lighting to bring out texture and show the style and vigor in the
carving of facial features; a silhouette to show purity of style and form;
and two studies of the torso, frontal and profile, lopping off head and feet
in order to dramatize the abstract construction of the torso itself.
I also isolated the cubist construction of the back of a BaSonge figure…. I

enlarged a head from its actual size of three inches to twenty inches, in
order to focus upon the facial expression characteristic of its particular
tribal style.234
Elisofon’s dramatic style of photographing African art was not entirely unique. Africanist
Amanda B. Carlson wrote her Master’s thesis on photographing African art and she
discussed Elisofon. She explained, “Elisofon’s style…is similar to much of the black-

233
Eliot Elisofon and Warren Robbins, “On Photographing African Sculpture,” Tribute to Africa:
The Photography and the Collection of Eliot Elisofon: a Memorial Exhibition at the Museum of
African Art, 1974): 16-17.
234
African Art, 1974): 16-17.
122
and-white object photography of African art in the 1960s and 1970s in that the images are
high-contrast (dark shadows and bright highlights), but are perhaps much less
‘mysterious’ than the type of images with dark shadows engulfing the object. Elisofon
mostly played with light on the surface of the object.”235 Elisofon believed his images
were simple and true to the objects. “There are no tricks involved in these photographs,”
he wrote.236 He explained:
No object has been distorted by either false camera viewpoint or the use of
a wide-angle lens to emphasize perspective. The only devices used were
those of selecting the part of the object to be photographed and its position
in relation to the lens, and the use of light either to reveal or hide detail as
needed. There has not been a single dot or line of retouching.237
At a conference on “Traditional African Art,” at the Peabody Museum of Harvard in May
of 1971, Elisofon spoke on his approach to photographing Africa and African art. Many
of his statements echoed his work from throughout his career:
The most basic idea in photographing any subject, including both

environment and still life is simplicity. The more direct and the less
complicated the subject, the better. Think of what you are trying to record
and concentrate on that. Don’t clutter up the picture with extraneous
material…. In photographing sculpture it is essential to eliminate
distractions such as shadows…avoid confusing shadows on the
background.238

235
236
African Art, 1974): 16-17.
237
African Art, 1974): 16-17.
238
Eliot Elisofon, “How to Photograph Primitive Art,” transcript of lecture given on May 7, 1971,
Traditional African Art, Peabody-CAAS Symposium, May 4-7, 1971, Peabody Museum, Harvard
University, Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection, Harry Ransom Center, The
University of Texas at Austin. (HRC 54.6.)
123
He dismissed the publications that used African cloth as backgrounds for objects, such as
in Leuzinger’s The Art of Africa (1960), plate 18, with a Baule mask on top of Baule
cloth (fig. 4.6). Elisofon stated at the conference, “I believe that the function of the
photograph of African sculpture made away from its actual environment should be as
clear and specific as possible.”239
However, most of Elisofon’s work creating study images of African art for
Bollingen would not pay off. Pantheon published African Folktales and Sculpture in
1952, with 357 pages total – 196 pages of text on African art, and 187 plates.240 Even
though Elisofon was contracted to produce images for Sweeney’s book, only 15 of the
photographs are his.241 Instead of relying on Elisofon’s work, Sweeney used photographs
from Walker Evans’ 1935 African art portfolio made to accompany the MoMA
exhibition. Undeterred by this outcome, Elisofon decided to pursue his own publication
of African art. In the 1950s, he used his studio photographs of African art in The
Sculpture of Africa (1958), and in articles on African art for LIFE and The Atlantic.242
While photographing African art objects for his publications, Elisofon decided to
create collections of images for study purposes and to distribute these photographs to
several institutions. Study centers that received sets of Elisofon’s photographs include the
Peabody Museum at Harvard University; the Museum of Primitive Art, New York; the
Department of Ethnic Studies at the University of California Los Angeles; the University

239
240
It was reprinted in 1964 and in 1970 the African sculpture section was extracted and reprinted.
241
Figures 1, 42, 79, 81, 83, 85, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 138, 142, and 143.
242
The Sculpture of Africa will be discussed in Chapter Five.
124
of Indiana Department of Art History; the British Museum; and the National Museum of
African Art.243 By the late 1950s he had created over 2,000 studio images. Elisofon’s
ambitious grand plan was to photograph every African art object in the world, including
those in museums, galleries, and private collections in the United States, Africa and
Europe. If he had lived past 61, perhaps a couple more decades, Elisofon might have
accomplished this goal.
1951 Alter Ego, Cooper Union Exhibition
“Your mask, at the moment, is on my desk facing the entrance to the

museum: if the manner in which it stops visitors cold in their tracks is any
indication of the effect it will have in the exhibition, it should be the star
performer.”
- Everett P. Lesley, Jr. of the Cooper Union Museum
Exhibits Section, letter to Elisofon, February 20, 1951244
In March of 1951 Elisofon possessed a growing art collection, and he was asked
to lend eight masks to the Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science and Art’s
Museum for the Arts of Decoration in New York. Six of the works were African objects:
a ‘Babindji’ helmet mask, Kuba sorcerer’s mask, Poro female mask, Poro horned mask,
and two Bushongo female masks. The show was held from March through June of 1951
and the exhibition was entitled Alter Ego: Masks, Their Art and Use. It included more

243
African Art, 1974): 3. Elin’s Biography Draft (IMG_1390) states the centers were: UCLA Ethnic
Collections; the British Museum, London; the Royal African Museum, Tervuren, Belgium;
Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard; African Studies Center, Indiana
University; Museum of African Art, Washington, DC, and the Museum of Primitive Art, New
York.
244
Everett P. Lesley, Jr., letter to Eliot Elisofon, February 20, 1951, Eliot Elisofon Paper and
Photographic Collection, Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin. (HRC 62.7
and EEPA Z-6, 14.) Elisofon was thanked by the Cooper Union curator for his loan, who also
commented that the show was very successful.
125
than 200 objects and a catalog was published with the ‘Babindji’ mask on the cover.245 A
cross-section of the show’s masks was featured as black-and-white photographic figures,
including seventeen African works (figs. 4.7-4.9).
Thus began Elisofon’s commitment to loaning objects to as many exhibitions as
possible, large and small. Art museums, galleries, natural history museums, colleges, and
conferences all benefited from the presence of Elisofon’s art and/or photographs.
According to the correspondence, if a venue asked for a loan, Elisofon provided
something, often one or more objects worth thousands of dollars. These loans often
required little effort on his part, as the institution and his second wife or secretary
managed most of the exchanges, and the institutions insured the items. That is not to say
that lending objects requires no thought. A collector has to weigh the value of showing a
piece against the risk of its loss or damage, and for many that risk is too high. Elisofon
was in the business of taking risks as a globetrotting photojournalist, so he did not seem
to be affected by a collector’s trademark possessiveness.
Wading through the opaque Alter Ego catalog text, written by the Cooper Union
Exhibits Section curator, Everett P. Lesley, Jr., one can conclude that the show focused
on the cross-cultural human tendency to wear masks in order to transform oneself.
Masks from around the world and across many time periods were displayed, as well as
some paintings, drawings, and lithographs that included or referred to masks. Coming
from a decorative art museum standpoint, the catalog text presented the items as both

245
The ‘Babindji’ mask is actually a Bakwa Luntu mask, as identified in Petridis’s 2005 article on
the topic. Constantine Petridis, “Bwadi Bwa Chikwanga: A Ram Mask of the Bakwa Luntu,”
African Arts, vol. 38, no. 2 (Summer 2005): 50-59, 93, 95.
126
“artistic expressions” and “utilitarian objects.”246 Discussion of the artistic materials, uses
and functions of the masks was included, but was superficial. Given the breadth of the
topic and the number of objects, not much of substance could be said in Lesley’s catalog
text. But overall, the essay would have helped the Cooper Union student think about what
a mask is, and why and how one is created.
When addressing specific cultures, the prose became flowery. African art was
lumped into the ‘primitive’ category. ‘Cult,’ ‘magic,’ and ‘fetish’ were in the introduction
sentences. Five styles of masks were categorized: masks worn on top of the head, masks
worn over the head as a helmet, masks held in front of the face by a handle, masks bound
upon the face, and masks worn as part of a costume. This was Lesley’s most concrete
observance, but then his text devolved into an explanation of African art that
simultaneously insulted and praised it:
For us, so remote from the African Negro’s habit of thought, what is the
extraordinary artistic validity of these objects?
It lies in the effortlessness with which energy has been impressed upon
three-dimensional form, the savage stamina that electrifies and humiliates
our effete traditions, the perverse gallantry that makes of life a
supernatural spectacle even more distressing than reality, and then
proceeds to realize it visually, that it may be mastered.
This art is belligerent, but not degraded by sentiment; lurid but

outspokenly honest, it assaults form with neither timidity nor affectation.
If the new-found enterprise of some modern art is due to these qualities,
we are the healthier.247

246
Cooper Union Museum for the Arts of Decoration. Alter Ego: Masks, Their Art and Use. (New
York: Cooper Union Museum for the Arts of Decoration, 1951): 4.
247
Cooper Union Museum for the Arts of Decoration. Alter Ego: Masks, Their Art and Use. (New
York: Cooper Union Museum for the Arts of Decoration, 1951): 12.
127
With this type of oblique guidance, it is not surprising that Elisofon sought his own route
to understanding African art. His next exhibition project, Understanding African Negro
Sculpture, was designed to showcase his thought process on the matter.
1952 Understanding African Negro Sculpture, Exhibition
“If you think you have seen everything photographic, think again….”
- Association News of Chicago Camera
Clubs Association248
Elisofon was adept at crafting exhibitions of his own photographs: coming up
with a theme or narrative, choosing the photographs, organizing the show, convincing a
venue to host it, and even writing captions, catalog text, and invitations. While traveling
in 1951, he began work on an exhibition combining his studio photographs, field
photographs, and African art objects (figs. 4.10-4.44).249 The show was built upon years
of work he had begun in 1947 for an African art-themed photo essay for LIFE, which was
eventually published in the September 8, 1952 issue as “Mystic Art of Tribal Africa.”250
Taking its cue from 1930s MoMA exhibitions that included African art, Understanding
African Negro Sculpture was designed to guide visitors toward a vision of African art as
fine art, carved with a cultured, artistic eye.
The exhibition was organized with the Museum of Modern Art as a circulating
show, much like James Johnson Sweeney’s 1935 MoMA display. Due to scheduling
conflicts, it was shown first at the Art Institute of Chicago, from January 15 through

248
“Art Institute Photograph Gallery: Eliot Elisofon, Top Magazine Photographer, One Man
Exhibit,” Association News of Chicago Camera Clubs Association, vol. 20, no. 6 (February
1952). (HRC 62.10, IMG_9230 thru IMG_9231.)
249
The technique of combining photographs of art and sculpture was common in MoMA
circulating exhibitions, as seen in the Circulating Exhibitions booklet from 1931-1954.
250
The publication of the photo essay in LIFE coincided with the show’s display at MoMA.
128
March 1, 1952, and then traveled back to MoMA for its debut there. It was shown in New
York from July 2, 1952 through September 14, 1952. Afterward it was booked at sixteen
more venues, mostly colleges, and traveled throughout the country until mid-summer of
1955.251 On display in Chicago were 26 enlarged camera studies, several field
photographs, and 10 pieces of African sculpture. There were seven sculptures at the
MoMA and subsequent shows, along with 32 photographs. Two of the sculptures were
from Elisofon’s own collection and the other five were from Nelson A. Rockefeller’s
collection.
The artworks included figures and masks from the Ivory Coast, French Sudan and
Gabon, and the Belgian Congo. The Elisofon objects were a Fang (Pahouin) male
reliquary figure and a Dogon female figure, both valued at $1,000 each.252 There were
also photographs of African art objects from other collections in the circulating version of
the show: a Luba horned mask and a Luluwa (Bena Lulua) male figure with sword from
the Royal Museum of the Belgian Congo, Tervuren; the Luba Master of Buli Chief’s

251
Porter A. McCray, Director of the MoMA Department of Circulating Exhibitions, letter to
Eliot Elisofon, July 13, 1955, Eliot Elisofon Papers, Eliot Elisofon Photographic Archives,
National Museum of African Art, Smithsonian, Washington, D.C. (EEPA M-5, 9.) Venues:
University of Miami, Coral Gables, Florida; J.B. Speed Art Museum, Louisville, Kentucky; Des
Moines Art Center, Des Moines, Iowa; Mulvane Art Center, Topeka, Kansas; Oak Ridge
Community Art center, Oak Ridge, Tennessee; Colorado State College, Greeley, Colorado;
Carleton College, Northfield, Minnesota; Sanford Museum, Cherokee, Iowa; Western Michigan
College, Kalamazoo, Michigan; Marshall College, Huntington, West Virginia; Iowa State
College, Cedar Falls, Iowa; Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio; The Art Institute of
Zanesville, Zanesville, Ohio; San Antonio Art Institute, San Antonio, Texas; University of
Arkansas, Fayetteville, Arkansas; Phillips Exeter Academy, Exeter, New Hampshire.
252
Receipt of Loan, signed by Dorothy Dudley of MoMA, May 7, 1952, Eliot Elisofon Papers,
Eliot Elisofon Photographic Archives, National Museum of African Art, Smithsonian,
Washington, D.C. (EEPA M-5, 2.)
129
stool from the British Museum, London; and a Senufo male figure from the collection of
Paul Verité, Paris.253
The show was very successful in Chicago and New York. Most of the reactions
and press coverage remarked on Elisofon’s contribution to art education. On March 5,
Peter Pollack, the Public Relations Counsel for the Art Institute of Chicago, wrote a thank
you letter to Elisofon. “It was a great show — popular, respected and highly-praised —
and, further, it looked good,” he explained, “I’m thankful to you for having made it
possible, and may I congratulate you again on the splendid work you are doing.”254
Nelson Rockefeller wrote to Elisofon on October 6, 1952 in regard to the show: “I have
been very much impressed by your handsome photographs…. The exhibition is
convincing proof that a photographer has an important mission in teaching people to see
works of art.”255
At the heart of the show were Elisofon’s close-up, enlarged studio photographs of
African sculpture. In Chicago his multiple exposure images were also featured, which he
had started taking in 1951, inspired by his friend Gjon Mili’s work and his LIFE
assignment with Marcel Duchamp. Elisofon’s high-contrast photographic studies were
meant to record the abstract elements of the African carvings, shedding light on the

253
List of object photographs in the show. Understanding African Negro Sculpture. 1952. Eliot
Elisofon Papers, Eliot Elisofon Photographic Archives, National Museum of African Art,
Smithsonian, Washington, D.C. (EEPA M-5, 3.)
254
Peter Pollack, Public Relations Counsel, AIC, letter to Eliot Elisofon, March 5, 1952, Eliot
Elisofon Papers, Eliot Elisofon Photographic Archives, National Museum of African Art,
255
Nelson A. Rockefeller, letter to Elisofon, October 6, 1952, Eliot Elisofon Papers, Eliot
Elisofon Photographic Archives, National Museum of African Art, Smithsonian, Washington,
D.C. (EEPA M-5, 4.)
130
formal qualities of the works.256 Ralph Pomeroy’s text on Elisofon, probably created for
the Chicago wall panels, concluded with this sentence: “His photographs catch light at
work creating compositions, the intense drama of sculpture in the open air.”257
The photographs were typically paired with the sculpture itself (or a related work
of art), and sometimes accompanied by a field photograph that would further illuminate
the topic. It was a direct, personal approach. Elisofon believed that people were not
putting enough effort into viewing African sculpture and that he could see things in it that
were not readily apparent to others. His photographs were designed to grab a viewer’s
attention, to point out overlooked details. “I discovered that a lot of people, in looking at
a small piece of African sculpture, were not able to see quite a number of things which
were apparent to me,” Elisofon commented. “By using light and enlargement it is
possible to greatly increase the visual impact, and to point out details not ordinarily seen
by the naked eye.”258
While working to teach his audience how to understand African art, Elisofon laid
bare his own process of understanding it. He dissected African sculpture with his camera,
enriching his own experience and appreciation while creating fresh compositions that
intensified the dramatic qualities of the art. In the end, he used African sculpture to create
new photographic art. However, one could argue that he undermined his own goal.

256
Eliot Elisofon, letter to Carlotta, undated, Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection,
Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin. (HRC 62.10/57.10, IMG_4222.)
257
Ralph Pomeroy, Chicago Art Institute wall text draft for Understanding exhibition, undated,
Texas at Austin. (HRC 62.10/57.10, IMG_4223.)
258
Barbara Powell, “Around Chicago…at the Institute,” WHERE magazine (January 26, 1952): 5.
(HRC 62.10/57.10, IMG_4225 thru IMG_4226; and EEPA M-4, 6.)
131
Most of the articles and reviews of the show (in the Chicago and New York press)
focused on Elisofon, his life, and the studio photographs.259 Very little was said about the
sculptures themselves. The field photographs were only mentioned as a part of the show
description. The Chicago Daily Tribune commented: “It is interesting to view the
sculpture and then see what characteristics have been emphasized by the camera.”260
Barbara Powell wrote for Chicago’s WHERE magazine:
Although it would seem that most of the basic possibilities for artistic
techniques ought to be about exhausted by now, occasionally somebody
turns up with a new one.
LIFE photographer Eliot Elisofon, whose interpretations of African

sculpture are currently (through March 1) on display in the Art Institute’s
Gallery of Photography, has done just that, and with most interesting
results, particularly since his photographs were intended primarily to point
up details in the sculpture which might otherwise be overlooked by the
spectator. They succeed in doing that and, in addition, in creating an
artistic effect which in itself is quite satisfactory.261
So while the detail and multiple exposure photographs helped the audience to appreciate
the art on a formal level, the exhibition did not explore what African art means to
Africans, despite Elisofon being interested in this topic himself. However, this was a
Museum of Modern Art exhibition, not a Museum of Primitive Art show. As one effort
toward an ultimate goal of overall appreciation and comprehension of African art,

259
HRC folders 62.9 and 62.10 address the Understanding exhibition. EEPA documents on the
show can be found in M-4, M-5, M-6, and M-7. These include copies of press coverage on the
show, from the Chicago Daily Tribune, Chicago’s WHERE magazine, Chicago Area Camera
Clubs Association News, This Week in Chicago: the Magazine of Chicago, The Art Digest and
The New York Times.
260
“Elisofon Show on Display at Art Institute,” Chicago Daily Tribune, January 18, 1952.
261
Barbara Powell, “Around Chicago…at the Institute,” WHERE magazine (January 26, 1952): 5.
(HRC 62.10/57.10, IMG_4225 thru IMG_4226; and EEPA M-4, 6.)
132
Understanding had value. As the exhibition press release put it, it was one step toward
bringing African art “out of the ethnologist’s cabinet and into the art museum.”262
Elisofon’s Multiple Exposure Images of African Art
As mentioned above, in 1951, lasting inspiration was born out of a LIFE
assignment to photograph artist Marcel Duchamp. One of Elisofon’s ideas was to
photograph him walking down a staircase like his painting Nude Descending a Staircase,
which had caused a stir at the 1913 Armory Show (fig. 4.45). Elisofon exposed the
negative multiple times to capture each movement of the artist. This inspired him to use
the same technique when photographing African art. He produced at least fifteen black-
and-white “multiples” shots using wood figures and masks from throughout sub-Saharan
Africa (figs. 4.46-4.47). Some items were from his personal collection, but not all of
them. Several of these more artistic photographs of African art appeared in Basil
Davidson’s Great Ages of Man: African Kingdoms book, and Warren Robbins’ Tribute to
Africa booklet.263
One of Elisofon’s closest friends, Gjon Mili, introduced him to the stroboscopic
photographic technique that he used for his Duchamp image and his African art
“multiples.” It was invented and perfected by Mili, a fellow LIFE photographer, and MIT
professor Harold Eugene Edgerton. Mili had been producing stroboscopic images since
the early 1940s — and continued creating them through the late 1950s — using the

262
“Exhibition of African Negro Sculpture to Go on View at Museum,” press preview, July 1,
1952 and press release, July 2, 1952, Eliot Elisofon Papers, Eliot Elisofon Photographic Archives,
National Museum of African Art, Smithsonian, Washington, D.C. (EEPA M-6, 1.)
263
Elisofon also employed the multiple exposure technique for a color photo essay on jazz
musicians for LIFE in 1954. He designed his pictures as vibrant visualizations of their music and
performance (“New Life for U.S. Jazz,” LIFE, January 17, 1955; HRC 21.3-4.)
133
images to capture the passage of time and the visual patterns of quick movements. His
most famous stroboscopic photographs are two series on Gene Kelly and Pablo Picasso
(figs. 4.48-4.49).
Elisofon’s multiple exposure captures were most likely a collaboration between
him and Mili, due to their close friendship. In 1942 Mili took the photograph “Nude
Descending a Staircase” (fig. 4.50), and in the early 1950s Elisofon seems to have used a
similar staircase, studio, and set-up for his image of “Duchamp Descending a Staircase”
(fig. 4.51). Visually, Elisofon’s African art “multiples” are most similar to Mili’s
photographs of Gene Krupa’s drum-playing (fig. 4.52) and Willie Hoppe’s billiard trick
shot (fig. 4.53), both taken in 1941. Elisofon’s pictures were designed to give the viewer
the feeling of African art in motion, in use, being performed, and being danced (figs.
4.54-4.55). For example, “The two photographs of the throwing knife…attempt to
capture the essence of the object in flight, without its having been thrown and seen in
flight,” Elisofon wrote.264 In reality, a knife would not spin in one spot when being
thrown, so the depiction is artificial. However, the “multiples” were a fresh, artistic
approach to photographing African art.
Elisofon wanted these photographs to show the relationship between African art
and modern art, so he referred to this style as Cubist.265 The viewer could see multiple

264
African Art, 1974): 16-17.
265
List of Elisofon’s “Multiples” shots: Kota mask, frontal 5 times – multiple prints of this, some
very dark; Dogon figure, female, 5 times; Dogon figure, female (same as above), 29 times
(approx.); Dogon figure, female (same as above), 12 times; Various masks layered over each over
134
views of an object rendered on one plane. Elisofon explained how his experiment
developed: “It occurred to me that I could carry the process one step further and include a
much larger series of such impressions, mostly overlapping, to arrive at a completely
Cubist effect.”266 This technique is evident in his series on a small Dogon figure (figs.
4.56-4.58). These photographs are sometimes more powerful than the objects. For
instance, the rotated Dogon figure appears monumental in Elisofon’s “multiples” shots,
while in reality it is only 6.5 inches tall.
Elisofon wanted to create the broadest impression of an African art object as
possible in the projects he worked on, and in the 1950s the projects were exhibitions or
publications. “Multiple views are important in describing African sculpture reproduced in
two dimensions on a printed page,” Elisofon explained at a conference in 1971.267 He
continued:
Photography may also be used as a tool to analyze and demonstrate

esthetics in African sculpture. A silhouette picture of Guro heddle pulleys
expresses one aspect of the plastic quality of these objects; added light
reveals another (fig. 4.59).

a) Bamana with figure b) Cameroon c) Baule d) Songye e) Dan/Mano f) Upper Volta with
pigments (Mossi?) g) Bamana (?) h) We w/ tusks (Elisofon’s mask)
Fang figure, 3 time (many, many copies of this – some darker than others and one copy has
orange marks on it); Zoomed out version of Dogon figure 19 times (non-cropped)
266
African Art, 1974): 16-17.
267
135
It is possible to photograph a sculpture several times on the same piece of

film. Three different views of a Fang figure were made to express
different aspects in one image (fig. 4.60).268
Overall, Elisofon was interested in using his “multiples” to show the world that African
art is fine art. He stated, “I tried in these pictures to explode the object into recognition as
a work of art.”269
Elisofon explained his purpose behind making these photographic studies of
African art for the press release for the Understanding African Negro Sculpture
exhibition at MoMA in 1952. A truncated version of his original text was included in the
release. His full essay was later published in Robbins’ Tribute to Africa:
As a student of art, I was interested in African sculpture as far back as the

Museum of Modern Art exhibition in 1936 [sic, 1935]. Since then I have
seen many thousands of objects, on numerous African trips and in
museum and private collections the world over. Having begun a small
collection of my own, I found myself trying, when the occasion arose, to
explain the aesthetic value of these objects to both sympathetic and
skeptical persons.
The task was often frustrating, since the ordinary person’s way of seeing
has been determined by conditions of birth, religion, climate and national
philosophy. The European or American, or for that matter his Chinese or
Indian counterpart, has been steeped in certain deep-rooted beliefs or
prejudices. At the very least, his native sensibility has been ‘channeled.’
Thus Westerners find it easier to appreciate a Chartres window than an
Ajanta fresco because Christian themes are familiar, Hindu ones strange.
We may not realize how powerfully the unfamiliar content of an art work
can block our true appreciation of it. In addition there is the fact that
different cultures have developed different conventions used in
representation. Thus Western Art usually renders the human figure with

268
269
136
the head in a one-to-eight proportion to the body. To the artist this

difference of style or representation is of little matter. He is trained to
appreciate an object for its own aesthetic quality.
The same problem confronts the first-time viewer of African sculpture.

Africans made traditional sculpture for a variety of reasons — many never
properly understood by non-Africans — masks made to ward off alien
spirits, mortuary figures to guard baskets of human bones, fetishes to keep
away thieves or lightning.
To Westerners, such objects seem very remote, yet could not the African
argue that the Western custom of placing a representation of an angel or
cross on a tombstone is not so different from the Bakota practice of
placing bronze figures on their reliquary baskets? There are other
surprising parallels: the bronze portrait heads of ancient Nigeria’s Ife
rulers rival the portraits of classical Greece and Renaissance Italy; and the
finely carved and decorated cups, spoons, knives, and other ‘utilitarian’
objects used by many African peoples bear comparison with the finest
examples from our own tradition.
Our major stumbling block to easy public appreciation of African art is the
freedom of the African artist from any compulsion merely to imitate
nature. This does not mean that he is a truly ‘free agent,’ however, for
within the confines of local tradition, individual African artists produced
highly personal work. At the same time, regional styles are so well-
developed and refined that competent students can recognize the origin of
a particular work without hesitation. Such highly evolved art can hardly be
called crude or primitive.270
Thus, Elisofon hoped his photographs would help “explain the aesthetic value” of
these objects to viewers used to seeing European and American art forms. Perhaps
the images could re-channel the public’s sensibilities toward an appreciation of
African art’s “bold structure and expressive force.”271

270
271
“Exhibition of African Negro Sculpture to Go on View at Museum,” press preview, July 1,
1952 and press release, July 2, 1952, Eliot Elisofon Papers, Eliot Elisofon Photographic Archives,
National Museum of African Art, Smithsonian, Washington, D.C. (EEPA M-6, 1.)
137
September 8, 1952, “Mystic Art of Tribal Africa,” LIFE
“African Big Shot,” the 1947 article discussed in Chapter Two, was not the
culmination of Elisofon’s 1947 African art story for LIFE. Instead it functioned as the
“LIFE Visit” he had envisioned it as, but not exactly as a celebration of African art. The
King’s costume, the Kuba drums, and the architecture of the King’s bedchamber were art
coverage, but the essence of “Big Shot” was not about art. In early September of 1952
LIFE published a 10-page photo essay, without advertisements, on African art (figs. 4.61-
4.65). All of the images were by Elisofon. His 1951-52 traveling exhibition,
Understanding African Negro Sculpture, most likely encouraged LIFE to publish this
article. “Mystic Art of Tribal Africa” was the only photo essay in this issue, placing
African art in the limelight. LIFE photo essays were designed to be cohesive artistic
statements. “Mystic” was bold, laid-out carefully and thematically; it was meant to make
a visual proclamation.
What was the main message “Mystic” was structured to convey? The text
explained, “The sculptures on these pages are the products of a culture which for some
1,500 years has flourished among the Negro tribes of Africa.”272 The first declaration was
that African art has a deep history. “Centuries before the first Europeans penetrated West
Africa in the late 1400s,” the article continued, “native craftsmen were creating works of
remarkable skill to serve their mystical rites and beliefs.” In other words, Africans were
capable of creating sophisticated arts without the aid of Europeans, and their culture was
much more advanced and rich than Westerners had typically understood.

272
“Mystic Art of Tribal Africa,” LIFE (September 8, 1952): 117. The uncredited text was most
likely written by a member of the LIFE staff, based on a combination of Elisofon’s notes and staff
research.
138
Another one of the article’s underlying messages was that cultural uniqueness
should be celebrated. Africans and African art may have been portrayed as different,
mysterious, and enticing in this article, but they were not depicted in a negative manner.
After Elisofon’s “Mystic” article was published in LIFE, the black magazine Jet ran a
small article noting positively that African art was finally being discussed in a major
magazine.273 African art was celebrated, hailed for its innovative aesthetics and visual
power in “Mystic.”
Elisofon’s images presented African art as exciting treasures for the reader to be
in awe of and worthy of respect. It is beautiful, exciting, audacious, bizarre,
misunderstood, complex, advanced, and multivalent. The text acknowledged that African
art is confusing to the average Westerner, but understanding could only occur if one
pursued more knowledge on the topic. The photo essay delivered a romantic, but not
sensationalistic, image of ‘authentic Africa,’ with real people, real communities, and real
art. Wildness and sophistication were combined, coexistent in the Africa of “Mystic.”
Difference can be compelling; Africans lead very different lives and have different
motivations than Westerners. Within the field, Africanists continue to wrestle with
whether Westerners can ever truly understand African art. Perhaps not, but that may be
part of its allure.
Overall the goal of “Mystic” was to help the reader appreciate African art, so it
was more representative of Elisofon’s goals for his 1947 trip to Africa than “African Big
Shot.” The article included photographs from this trip, as well as images he had been
working on in the studio. These pictures were taken in connection with the Bollingen

273
“African Art in LIFE,” Jet, vol. 2, no. 21 (September 18, 1952): 22.
139
African Folktales and Sculpture project, but did not appear in that book. However, eleven
of the “Mystic” objects would be published in The Sculpture of Africa in 1958. Also, one
of Elisofon’s experimental, multiple exposure photographs, of a small Dogon figure, was
featured as a double-page spread in “Mystic.”
Though the text did include some stereotypical language, it was much more
sophisticated than “Big Shot.” In comparison to the derogatory “Big Shot” text, “Mystic”
was progressive and tried to educate the LIFE readers about African art. A push toward
cultural conformity was not embedded into the essay, unlike with “Big Shot,” where the
reader was led to question and criticize everything about the Kuba King’s lifestyle. These
two articles show that Elisofon’s photographs, in LIFE’s hands, could be used to create
vastly different products. The agenda of the magazine in that moment, for that article,
dictated the outcome of a piece.
The table of contents page of the September 8, 1952 LIFE issue explained: “On
pages 116 through 125 there is a spectacular photographic essay on African tribal art.
This not only takes you a long way off but a long way back—some of the carvings shown
are 600 years old. Customs now current in Africa grew out of this ancient art, and some
of the treasures in your local museum probably derive from it.”274 In a confusing paradox,
the reader was presented with opposing ideas. This blurb engendered the myth of Africa
as timeless, and by looking at African art you were traveling back in time. It also
explained that Africa has ancient arts, and suggested that modern arts are not an exact
replication of items from 600 years ago. The subtitle of the article was “Images of Early
Negro Culture Influence Native Life of Today.” The sculptures were meant to represent

274
“Table of Contents,” LIFE (September 8, 1952): 27. Issue with “Mystic Art of Tribal Africa.”
140
images of the African past, and the field photographs showed modern African life. While
delineating between a past and a present, the historic timeline was being blurred. ‘Not
much has changed,’ the subtitle and image juxtapositions conveyed to the reader. For
Westerners, perhaps continuity in Africa was more comforting than change.
The subtitle also set up an expectation of a detailed description of “native life
today” in the text, but even LIFE could not supply that kind of information in a 10-page
photo essay. Instead, “Mystic” was a modern, stunning, graphic showcase of African art
objects, designed by Bernard Quint with Elisofon’s photographs. The article included 20
images, each with a caption. Fifteen artworks were pictured in black and white, many of
them as full-page images, with bold interior shadowing and vivid detail. Except for the
multiple-exposure Dogon object, all of the African art pieces were isolated on white
backgrounds, shadow-less over the white page. There were also six smaller field
photographs to illustrate certain points. Quint would repeat his layout design of “Mystic”
within The Sculpture of Africa.
Quint was the primary layout artist for LIFE in the 1950s. His design style was
LIFE’s style, and therefore this style was present in most of Elisofon’s publications on
African art. “Mystic” pages were dedicated to four art objects at most. Many pages
featured only one object, which filled the entire page. Often these objects were shown
larger than life-size. Other objects were spread across two pages. Quint preferred to have
all of the art objects isolated on white backgrounds, so they floated and popped from the
white page. The layout design was dynamic and eye-catching, and gave full attention to
the aesthetic qualities of the art. While Elisofon shot all of the photographs of the
141
sculptures, the final result was a combination of his high-quality photography and Quint’s
eye for design.
“Mystic” featured five spreads, each organized around two themes, one overt and
one implicit. Each layout had a titled, thematic paragraph of text that was meant to relate
to all of the objects on the page. As previously discussed, the first spread held the main
heading: “Images of Early Negro Culture Influence Native Life of Today.” The article
began with a full-page image of a 12th-century Ife bronze head, a small field photograph
of a young, topless Pende woman, and an image of a nude Luba female wood figure.275
Elisofon took the Pende woman’s picture because her torso and face featured elaborate
scarification marks. The Luba figure is also adorned with scarification marks, and the Ife
head is striated, most likely with scarification marks. So the overt theme of the first
spread was scarification, or African corporeal cultural markings. The comparison
between art objects and field photograph told the reader that body modification traditions
have a long history, and are still practiced as “a sign of tribal membership,” as stated in
the field photograph caption.276 The spread’s focus on nudity and physicality suggested a
latent theme of the exotic, sexualized African body.
The second spread’s title was “Masks and Mysteries” and the theme was
animals/animalistic imagery. Objects included were a Bamana chi wara, Senufo
firespitter, and Kuba dog divination sculpture. A field photograph of twelve Pende
minganji initiation guards performing appeared at the top of the left page. The spread was

275
The young woman is simply identified as a “Congo girl” — her ethnic group and name are not
included. While Elisofon would have known which ethnic group she was a member of, it is not
included here. She appears on page 15 of The Sculpture of Africa and is labeled there as Pende.
276
“Mystic Art of Tribal Africa,” LIFE (September 8, 1952): 117.
142
dominated by the fierce-looking firespitter that cut across the two pages at a slight angle,
pushing his plentiful sharp teeth toward the viewer.
In contrast to this wild imagery, the third spread focused on “Household Images.”
Six art objects and one field photograph of a sculptor’s hand holding an adze were
pictured. Three figurative Luba “household” objects were seen: a headrest with two
figures embracing, a double-figure bowl, and a ‘caryatid’ stool. On the far right of the
spread were two Baule heddle pulleys and a Kongo cup. Each is carved in the shape of a
human head. The visual theme of this spread was the technical sophistication of
embedding the human form into everyday objects. Even a seat could be beautiful and
transcend the mundane. The prevalence of humanity in these carvings also conveyed the
importance of personal connections, community, and togetherness.
“The Unchanging Faces” was the heading on the fourth spread. On the left page a
400-year-old bronze head of a Benin Queen Mother stared nonchalantly across to the
right-hand page, meeting the gaze of a Kuba ndop figure carved around 1800. In between
these two art objects were two field photographs. A profile portrait of a young Congo girl
was compared to the Benin head, and the famous image of Kuba King Bope Mabinshe
was paired with the ndop figure who represented one of his ancestors in the line of Kuba
kings. The theme of the spread was timelessness. “The pattern of tribal life in present-day
Africa is little changed from that of the early days before European penetration,” the
explanatory paragraph stated.277 The text continued with a discussion of the system of
divine African kingship, and the rulers’ patronage of the arts, particularly for ancestral
rites. Like much of “Mystic,” the informational content was shallow and misleading. On

277
143
the positive side, the imagery here was not sexual, wild, or abstract. Two realistic
portraits of people who once lived are paired with contemporary portraits of living
Africans. Thus, the theme of this spread was African history and its meaningfulness for
contemporary Africa.
The final spread brought together three of Elisofon’s most fascinating images, and
they served as examples of how much his photography of African art could differ. The
multiple-exposure image of the small Dogon figure dominated the layout, occupying
most of the two pages. On the far left, a field photograph of the Luluwa boys initiation
dance appeared at the top of the page as a visual parallel to this Dogon image. The
caption stated: “Dancing boys of Congo form angular pattern like multiple view of
Dogon statue...Though such a statue was based on actual observation of life, its
geometric forms were arbitrarily arranged to create symmetrical object with a character
of its own.”278 Despite the confusing wording of this text, the point of the juxtaposition
was to show how abstract art could imitate life, as reality is often equally abstract.
“Old Forms Now New,” was the heading for this last spread. The explanatory
paragraph discussed the “discovery” of African art by European artists, how African art
affected Cubism, and how modern art’s acceptance of African art led to its “widespread
appreciation.”279 A horned, human Luba mask was dramatically positioned under this text
as an example of the stylized African art that inspired artists such as Picasso at the
beginning of the twentieth century. The theme of the spread was the transition of ‘old’
African imagery into ‘new’ European art forms. In reality, the timeline is more blurred

278
279
144
and complex, but the idea of African artists being ‘modern’ before Europeans were
‘modern’ was clearly presented. Most of the African art projects Elisofon worked on
referred to European modern art, using it as a gateway to entice the reader, educate him,
and lead him to accept African art as fine art.
Throughout “Mystic” ethnic group names were used to identify art objects and
occasionally people, but the two images of women, and the one image of young boys
were simply referred to as “Congo.” Only the Kuba King was named, given an identity.
Despite the use of ethnic monikers, the article lumped all African peoples and artists
together, indicating that the same tendencies and desires existed throughout the black
groups or “Negro tribes” of Africa. For example, the article stated: “While the African
Negro made sculpture chiefly for ritualistic purposes, his love of decoration prompted
him to ornament the simplest utensil and tool of everyday life.”280
The “Mystic” photographs contained the essence of Elisofon’s fascination with
Africa and African art. They were skillfully executed with technical sophistication and
carefully composed with regard for the sculpture’s form and detail. Yet scale was lost to
the reader, as no measurements were included in the captions, and the images varied
greatly in size. Despite the large size of a LIFE spread, masks and headdresses were not
shown in life size, and heads and small figures were shown oversize. To a reader who had
never seen an African artwork in person, it would have been difficult to accurately
visualize the works shown.

280
145
In the end, the visuals for “Mystic” were so engrossing that one might not have
bothered to read the captions and text, which were a mixture of fact, fiction and
exaggeration. For example, on the current state of African art the essay explained: “They
have lost much of the inspiration which produced their art but they still ornament their
bodies with traditional symbols and surround themselves with ritualistic carvings of their
ancestors.”281 “Mystic” was not based on complex historic facts, deep academic ideas, or
detailed field research. It was structured around semi-educated generalizations,
suppositions, and broad themes. It was a simple introduction to the topic with bold
photographs, meant to engage and entertain the everyman of LIFE’s broad audience of
millions.
African Art in the 1954 U.S. Camera Annual
Elisofon’s photographs of African art were sometimes used in magazines besides
LIFE. With permission from LIFE, editor Tom Maloney used Elisofon’s 1951 African
expedition photographs in the U.S. Camera Annual 1954. Founded in 1935, U.S. Camera
began publication in 1938 as a magazine for professional and amateur photographers. It
emphasized the technical process, discussed camera technology, and presented a variety
of photographs. The magazine was published several times a year, and the annual was a
hardbound book. Together they “reported on the state of photography each year,” and
“helped to develop photojournalism as an important news medium.”282
The 1954 annual included a 25-page photo essay with pictures and words by
Elisofon (figs. 4.66-4.79). With 26 photographs, many of them full spreads, this was the

281
282
“Tom J. Maloney, 83; Published Magazines,” The New York Times, January 28, 1988.
http://www.nytimes.com/1988/01/28/obituaries/tom-j-maloney-83-published-magazines.html.
146
principal feature in the American section. There was a combination of black-and-white
and color photography. The essay focused on the landscapes and game seen in “Lost
Peaks and Big Game,” the May 4, 1953 LIFE article also about Elisofon’s trip to Albert
National Park in the Belgian Congo. The Annual also included several Elisofon
ethnographic images, such as the Tutsi performing a lion dance, which was seen in
“Black Africa: Primitive Society Holds Out South of the Sahara.” This was another
article in the May 4, 1953 LIFE issue, which was dedicated to “Africa: A Continent in
Ferment.” Two pictures of Nuer men, from Elisofon’s Nile coverage, and a night shot of
the gorilla hunt ritual of the Babinga were also in this U.S. Camera Annual article.
The introductory page of the Annual article was a purposefully blurred close-up of
a Kongo power figure shot at an intimidating angle, which was featured in many Elisofon
projects. This emotive photograph of a “fetish” indicated the type of sensationalistic
prose that followed. Elisofon began, “Africa, the continent of impending tragedy, has
been called the ‘Dark Continent,’ ‘Continent in Turmoil,’ ‘Behind God’s Back,’ ‘In
Darkest Africa,’ etc. It is all of that and a place of diverse beauty and richness besides.
Africa today is a mass of black dynamite, waiting for someone or some great event to set
off the explosion.”283 In the article, Elisofon addressed the issues between black and
white, between colonial and native that he encountered throughout Africa. He discussed
political issues in a factual manner, but also mentioned “barbaric customs such as
cannibalism.”284

283
Eliot Elisofon, “Africa,” in Tom Maloney, ed., U.S. Camera Annual 1954 (New York: U.S.
Camera Publishing, 1953): 163.
284
147
Generally, the essay was an account of Elisofon’s expedition in Africa —
difficulties he and his team faced; what kind of cameras and film he used; the dangerous
terrain he encountered; how his wife faired during the Ruwenzori ascent, etc. The first-
person narrative brought the reader right along on the journey, making this “Africa” feel
less superficial and imaginary than “Lost Peaks and Big Game.” Also, unlike “Lost
Peaks,” this article mentioned African art. This was due to the fact that Elisofon wrote it
himself and he controlled the content. He was able to promote his particular interests. He
explained:
For the past few years I have been studying and photographing African
sculpture in Africa, and in Europe and America as well, since many of the
finest examples of this culture were taken away from Africa. The
Government of Nigeria is now trying to buy back some of the great
bronzes taken away from the Beni when the British destroyed their capital
at the end of the last century in retaliation for the killing of nine
courageous Englishmen who tried to stop the human sacrifices that took
place there.
These will be installed in a museum being finished at Jos which will

remind the African of his cultural heritage. This contradiction of some of
the finest sculpture extant being used for human sacrificial altars is one of
the many that face black and white alike in planning the future Africa.285
Elisofon often brought up the British Punitive Expedition in his articles and essays on
African art. It did serve as an explanation for why most Benin art is now in Western
collections. However, even though Elisofon acknowledged the beauty of African art, he
still capitalized on the stereotypes. For example, he presented the stereotype that Africans
were always on the brink of war or revolt, and any white man who ventured to Africa
took his life into his hands. Elisofon discussed how in 1947 he saw the Luluabourg
(Kananga) church where whites barricaded themselves during these “spontaneous

285
Camera Publishing, 1953): 165, 168-169.
148
outbursts.”286 He also perpetuated the misbelief that colonialism was a necessary evil that
would help eradicate the inhuman behaviors of the local cannibals and savages. The
Benin Punitive Expedition was launched in order to stop human sacrifices, he explained,
which is only half of the story.287 These types of myths were not extinct by the early
1950s. Even a man who had traveled to the continent multiple times and met many
Africans still wrote about Africa as if he were writing a nineteenth-century travel journal
in order to entertain the masses.
Two more points stand out in this essay, which he repeated in many of his
publications on African art, including the 1958 Masterpieces exhibition catalog discussed
in Chapter Five. First, he stated that even though traditional arts were still being produced
on the continent, they were only being made in remote areas. Most of the objects readily
available were airport or tourist arts. Modernity had affected many African regions, and
led to a change in the fundamental values that influence art production. This may seem a
premature obituary for traditional African art, but Elisofon believed what he wrote. He
directed the reader to the old collections in Western museums for the best objects. In a
way, this was his attempt to develop his audience’s aesthetic tastes. The second point was
designed to boost the appreciation of African art by advertising its increasing monetary
value on the art market. “The one obvious glory of the African,” he explained, “his masks
and statues, is highly prized by experienced art connoisseurs the world over, and some
objects command a price of thousands of dollars in other parts of the world.”288

286
287
288
Camera Publishing, 1953): 171-172.
149
April 1959, “African Sculpture,” The Atlantic Monthly
Another Elisofon article that appeared outside of LIFE was an examination of
African sculpture for The Atlantic Monthly. In a similar approach to “Mystic,” the
Atlantic article presented African art as fine art - complex and sometimes confusing, but
worthy of those with sophisticated aesthetic tastes and academic interest. Elisofon’s goal
was for the reader to develop an appreciation and admiration of African art. He explained
that understanding why African art is made allows us to better comprehend its
complicated aesthetics. According to Elisofon, the continent has created a variety of art
forms with varied purposes for multifaceted cultural contexts: ancestor figures, fertility
figures, funerary figures, power figures, masks, puberty ritual arts, secret societies’ arts,
masked costumes, and divination arts.
The Atlantic Monthly (now simply called The Atlantic) was founded in 1857 with
a focus on literary and cultural matters. From the early years the magazine was geared
toward an intellectual audience, and thus, it was never going to have very high circulation
numbers. Between 1960 and 1965 the circulation went from 265,243 to 279,000 –– that is
not exactly the millions of readers that LIFE had.289 But as far as being able to get his
message about African art out to people who were more concerned about cultural issues,
The Atlantic was an ideal venue for Elisofon’s article. It was known as a literary
magazine, boosting the career of many American poets and authors, and was certainly
marketed to the nation’s intellectuals and leaders. In the twentieth century most Atlantic

289
“Facts about The Atlantic,” www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/about/atlfaqf.htm#circulation,
2007. Accessed April 9, 2013.
150
issues included editorials on society and politics, as well as short stories, poems, book
reviews, and discussions of cultural trends.
Most of the April 1959 issue of The Atlantic was dedicated to “Africa: South of
the Sahara.” The Benin Queen Mother ivory hip mask was pictured in color on the cover
of the issue, courtesy of the Museum of Primitive Art, New York. The issue included
articles, stories, and poems by a variety of authors representing a Who’s Who of African
Studies in the 1950s (fig. 4.80). It featured articles on African archaeology by Basil
Davidson, the African ‘Revolution’ by Tom Mboya, African songs by Léon G. Damas,
African music and dance by J.H. Kwabena Nketia, a short story “The Sacrificial Egg” by
Chinua Achebe, a poem “We Delighted, My Friend” by Leopold Sédar-Senghor, several
articles on current events, racial and political tensions on the continent, and much more.
A sampling of article titles in this issue included: “The Emerging Africa,” “The Harmless
People,” “Black States or Partnership?,” “The Conflict of Cultures: A Plea for Patience,”
and “Last Chance in Africa: An American View.” Despite the usual ethnocentric ‘What
does Africa’s current situation mean for America?’ type of discussion, the Atlantic issue
is noteworthy for its inclusion of African political, social, and artistic leaders as authors
and participants.
Elisofon’s piece was the one contribution on the plastic arts of Africa in the issue.
The text’s introduction explained why Elisofon was chosen to author the piece:
An internationally respected photographer for LIFE magazine, Eliot

Elisofon had made two extensive expeditions in Africa south of the Sahara,
in the course of which he uncovered many examples of African art, some
of them now part of his own magnificent collection. He is a research
fellow of primitive art at Harvard University and the creator of the
authoritative, handsome volume, The Sculpture of Africa, a collection of
151
his photographs, published by Praeger, with text by William Fagg and

design by Bernard Quint.290
The article worked to promote his book, as well as African art. It served as Elisofon’s
(sometimes erroneous) account of African art – why we like it, why it was made, why it
is not being made anymore, how the West took it all, and the increasing value of it. He
relayed his own experiences with African art, in Africa, seeing an initiation dance,
collecting from the Bushongo, etc. The article represented the type of personal approach
to African art that would have gone into The Sculpture of Africa if the publisher had not
required essays from well-known scholars (Ralph Linton and William Fagg). It offered
Elisofon an opportunity to get his ideas on African art in print.
The 13-page article had 5 pages of Elisofon’s text, 8 pages of his photographs,
and no advertisements (figs. 4.81-4.85). Thirteen art objects were pictured:
1) Kota reliquary figure, Edith Gregor Halpert collection, New York, paired with
Picasso’s Dancer, Walter P. Chrysler, Jr. collection (full page)
2) Fang reliquary head, Jacob Epstein collection, London
3) Fang reliquary figure, Jacob Epstein collection, London (two views)
4) Teke ancestor figure, Elisofon collection
5) Ife bronze head, Ife Museum collection, Nigeria
6) Pende dance mask, Elisofon collection (full page)
7) Songye dance mask, Tervuren Museum collection, Belgium (kifwebe)
8) Chokwe dance mask, Musée de la Vie Indigène collection, Léopoldville,
Belgian Congo (pwo)
9) Luba headrest, Webster Plass collection, British Museum, London (two
views)
10) Luba divination bowl-bearer figure by the Buli Master, Tervuren Museum
collection, Belgium
11) Bamana headdress, Elisofon collection (chi wara, full page detail shot)
12) Two bronze Benin leopards, Jos Museum collection, Nigeria (full page)
The layout was designed by Bernard Quint, and the images were the same ones used in
The Sculpture of Africa. Some of them also appeared in “Mystic,” as well as the later

290
Eliot Elisofon, “African Sculpture,” The Atlantic Monthly, vol. 203, no. 4 (April 1959): 48.
(HRC 53.21.)
152
1962 Think magazine article. Even though the Atlantic essay is more than 5,000 words
and was filled with a variety of information and Elisofon’s educated opinions on African
art, the article was dominated by the images. The eye is drawn to them, and luckily they
were accompanied by brief explanatory captions to help deliver specific information
about the pieces, including material, use, function, style, and history of the works.
Occasionally measurements were mentioned, as well as aesthetic assessments. There
were no field photographs included in “African Sculpture,” closely aligning it with the
overriding approach of The Sculpture of Africa. This publication included only a few
field photographs, but had over 400 studio pictures of African art.
The Atlantic article began with three solid pages of text, followed by a full-page,
bleed-off image of the Kota funerary figure that dominated a much smaller reproduction
of Picasso’s 1907 Dancer painting. Unlike “Mystic,” which foregrounded the ancient Ife
head and the female nude imagery, the layout of “African Sculpture” relayed a
preoccupation with the relationship of African art and modern art. The juxtaposition of
the Dancer and the Kota work was adapted from Alfred Barr’s famous 1936 Museum of
Modern Art exhibition Cubism and Abstract Art, which Elisofon probably saw. In her
1988 Art Journal article on this exhibition, Susan Noyes Platt included a small
installation photograph that showed the Dancer next to a Kota figure at the entryway to
the show (fig. 4.86). Platt referred to the Kota work simply as an “African figure.”
However, Barr’s exhibition catalog included a Kota reliquary figure clustered with three
works by Picasso, including the Dancer (fig. 4.87).291 Elisofon used this comparison

291
Barr also included several other African artworks both in the exhibition and in the
accompanying catalog. Alfred H. Barr, Cubism and Abstract Art (New York: Published for the
Museum of Modern Art by Arno Press, 1966, reprint of 1936 edition).
153
again in his 1962 Think magazine article on African art. In his way, he was perpetuating
Barr’s discussion of African art’s crucial role in the founding of Cubism, although he
never credited Barr or MoMA as his source.
As previously discussed, many of Elisofon’s publications discussed African art’s
influence upon European modern art. While Alfred Barr wrote about African art as a part
of the development of Cubism and modern art, Elisofon addressed this relationship to
engender an appreciation of African art. “The reasons for the ready acceptance of African
art by the modern artist,” Elisofon wrote for the Atlantic, “are perhaps a clue to our own
appreciation.”292 This dialogue represented one way that he presented African art to the
public. He was not the only author to do so—the connection to modern art was often used
as justification for the study of African art—however, it is an example of ethnocentrism.
It suggested that African art was primarily valuable because it was valuable to modern
artists. Yet as a tactic it may have helped people accept the aesthetic value of the African
works.
He continued with a passage from James Johnson Sweeney’s African Folktales
and Sculpture:
European painters, sculptors, and critics in the first two decades of this
century were constantly on the lookout for examples of primitive art that
did not conform to the naturalistic convention which had dominated the art
of their continent for most of two thousand years….
And since their time European artists in each generation have been able to
find in one or another aspect of Negro art something that seemed to justify
their own theories: the expressionists found an emotional use of colour

292
(HRC 53.21.)
154
and distortion of shape, the cubists found ‘structure,’ the surrealists found
fantasy, mystery –even a pathological inspiration.293
Sweeney’s text foreshadowed that of William Rubin for his 1984 Primitivism exhibition
at the Museum of Modern Art. Rubin insisted that the trajectory of modern art would
have occurred as it did even without the artists’ exposure to non-Western arts. Sweeney
argued that the modern artists were already looking for something radical, already had
their own theories, and non-Western arts simply were the key that fit the lock. Emotion.
Distortion. Structure. Fantasy. Mystery. Inspiration.
Despite the fact that Elisofon attempted to discuss African art as part of its own
culture later in this article, he drifted back to Western art historical terms, describing the
“serene naturalism” of a Chokwe mask and the “cubistic” kifwebe mask of the Songye.
These descriptions present a vexing issue—how can we define African art with European
terms? How can we call a Songye mask “cubistic” when it might have been carved before
Cubism was invented, and the African artist had no knowledge of Cubism? Again, this is
a reflection of ethnocentrism, a tendency Elisofon was probably not even aware of.
Elisofon also occasionally used demeaning language in the article. As previously
discussed, the positives and negatives of Africa and African culture were often muddled
together in his texts. “Without the indoctrination of having seen paintings by these
modern artists,” he wrote, “we would probably have considered the objects in the
selection of photographs accompanying this article to be hideous native carvings best left
in the jungle. Art is the great conditioner, and the artist leads the populace, perhaps

293
James Johnson Sweeney, African Folktales and Sculpture (New York: Pantheon Books, 1952)
quoted in Eliot Elisofon, “African Sculpture,” The Atlantic Monthly, vol. 203, no. 4 (April 1959):
48. (HRC 53.21.)
155
unwittingly and perhaps unbidden, into new ways of seeing.”294 Like many other
contemporaneous authors he had mastered the backhanded compliment for the continent
and its peoples. He continued:
Sculpture is only one aspect of a larger body of African culture. Folk tales
numbering into the thousands, oral history, traditional music and dancing,
well-organized governments, and a powerful religion are some of the
Africans’ attainments.
Lack of a written language and thus of recorded history, ignorance of

mathematics and other sciences, and a tendency to accept slavery and to
practice human sacrifice and cannibalism are some of their uncivilized
characteristics.
Many have used the word ‘savage’ not only for the African but also for the
South Sea Islander and the American Indian, who shared some of these
negative attributes.
The fact that the people of Benin committed human sacrifices does not
lessen the artistic quality of their bronzes, nor does the architectural
wonder of Chichen Itza become less extraordinary because the Maya
threw sacrificial humans into a deep well. We have not changed our
opinion of Kant, Beethoven, or Mann because of the horrors of
Buchenwald.295
Slavery. Human sacrifice. Cannibalism. Elisofon never seemed to fail to mention these
lurid words in his articles on African art. As previously discussed, he used them
sensationalistically—not as a critical discussion of history or of history’s image of Africa.
Elisofon continued mentioning these sensationalistic themes, but they did not contribute
to his reader’s understanding of African art. He used them to capture people’s attention.
Then he dismissed them as unimportant to the appreciation of art. Yet he still viewed it as
necessary to include them.

294
(HRC 53.21.)
295
(HRC 53.21.)
156
Ironically, the article ended with the statement, “It might not be a bad idea to
return some African sculpture to the Africans.”296 Elisofon noted that because African art
had become so popular to collect in the West, “the African has to buy his art in order to
show it to his children.”297 In other words, he acknowledged that Africans have had to
buy back their art objects from Westerners to learn about their own heritage. Elisofon
was one of the Westerners collecting African art so voraciously, contributing to this
dilemma. He openly encouraged the collecting of African art, and publicized it repeatedly
in his articles, images, and publications. But he was also promoting the idea that
everyone should have access to African art. Thus we are presented with yet another
Elisofon African art paradox: the private need to possess and control, and the public need
to perform and inform.
October 13, 1961, ‘Literary Africa,’ LIFE photo essay
The LIFE May 4, 1953 issue and The Atlantic April 1959 issue both focused on
the changes happening in Africa, the transition from colonial to non-colonial states. Their
existence reveals the increasing attention paid to the continent. This consciousness
increased in the late 1950s and early 1960s, and is evident in Elisofon’s two final
products on Africa and African art during this time period, his ‘Literary Africa’ photo
essay for LIFE, and his Think magazine article, “African Arts: Primitives to Picasso.”
While Elisofon worked on countless photo stories for LIFE, his most notable
projects were multi-page color photography spectacles, which usually were cover

296
(HRC 53.21.)
297
(HRC 53.21.)
157
stories.298 Beginning in the 1940s, he used large color essays to set himself apart from
other LIFE photographers, many of whom did not have extensive experience with color
film in this early period. At a photojournalism conference in 1961, Elisofon explained
that he tried to originate his own stories at LIFE as if he were a freelance photographer.
He was specifically referring to ‘Literary Africa,’ which he described as “a pageant of
Africa through the literary device of using quotations from many writers about the Dark
Continent.”299 Elisofon had used this approach before with his “Isles of Romance in the
South Seas” project, also known as ‘Literary South Seas.’ These are two examples of his
popular LIFE color spectacles.
Though ‘Literary Africa’ did not include African sculpture, it did include
performance and body arts; and it elucidates how Elisofon photographed and thought
about Africa in the late 1950s. This was a major project that Elisofon promoted widely by
lecturing about it on multiple occasions, including at the 1961 UNESCO Conference in
Boston. Elisofon’s intention for ‘Literary Africa’ was to take photographs that would
“make Africa come alive to the public.”300 He believed, as he explained in a letter to LIFE
Editor Phil Wooton, that if people understood the continent of Africa they would better
understand the art produced there. In Elisofon’s mind, Africa and African art were not

298
Elisofon specialized in color photography, starting in the 1940s –– during a time period when
it was mostly used for advertising. In 1961 Viking Press published Elisofon’s book Color
Photography. The text served as a guide to color control, the effects of time of day and weather
on color photographs, how to create special effects, lighting techniques and set-ups, composition,
and equipment specifically for making color images.
299
Eliot Elisofon, ‘Camera as Magic Carpet,’ lecture for the “Learning the Photo Journalism
Conference in the West,” Asilomar, CA., September, 26-29, 1961, Eliot Elisofon Paper and
Photographic Collection, Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin. (HRC 53.35.)
300
Eliot Elisofon, letter to Phil Wotton, November 22, 1957, Eliot Elisofon Paper and
IMG_1386.) He told Wooton that ‘Literary Africa’ would not depend for its excitement and
quality on animal pictures, dancers, and naked girls. On the other hand he made no promise to
leave them out and he hoped to photograph these “old subjects” in a new way.
158
two separate topics. The current concept of separating African studies and African art
history did not exist for him. He believed that a photo essay like ‘Literary Africa’ could
engender respect for the continent and its art (figs. 4.88-4.99).
‘Literary Africa’ represented aesthetic expressions of the Western perceptions of
African culture as portrayed through the quoted passages. So when LIFE created this
photo essay, it was not surprising to find superficiality. For example, the cover image was
a wild-eyed Lega warrior menacing Elisofon’s camera with a spear as his comrade shouts
in the background. The warriors were covered in white dot body paint, wore headdresses,
and held shields along with their spears. The header, “Africa’s Savage Beauty,” was
paired with the photograph. The last two pages of the ‘Literary Africa’ photo essay
featured this Lega warrior again, paired with the following poem from Vachel Lindsay’s
“The Congo”:
Then along that riverbank

A thousand miles
Tattooed cannibals danced in files;
Then I heard the boom of the blood-lust song
And a thigh-bone beating on a tin-pan gong.
And “BLOOD” screamed the whistles and the fifes of the warriors,
“BLOOD” screamed the skull-faced, lean witch doctors,
“Whirl ye the deadly voo-doo rattle,
Harry the uplands,
Steal all the cattle,
Rattle-rattle, rattle-rattle,
Bing.
Boomlay, boomlay, boomlay, BOOM,”
A roaring, epic, rag-time tune
From the mouth of the Congo
To the Mountains of the Moon.301

301
Vachel Lindsay, “The Congo,” quoted in “Storied World of Africa: A Writer’s Land of
Primitive, Eloquent Beauty,” LIFE (October 13, 1961): 86-87.
159
In addition to war painted ‘cannibals,’ naked girls also appeared throughout ‘Literary
Africa.’ The first layout featured a girl bathing in the Niger River at sunset. Later in the
photo essay was an image of two Liberian girls dancing in celebration. In a traditional
manner, they perform without coverings over their chests, and dance with mirrored,
fringed woven mats in their hands. Another spread included two photographs of young
girls: one shyly looking away from the camera at a market in Monrovia, and the other
smiling widely at the camera, her body covered in ritual chalk makeup from the waist up.
Africans were stock characters in this photo essay, without names, families, homes, or
personalities. They existed only to satisfy the literary passage.
‘Literary Africa’ has received the scholarly attention of Raoul J. Granqvist. His
article “Photojournalism’s White Mythologies: Eliot Elisofon and LIFE in Africa, 1959-
1961,” was published in Research in African Literatures in 2012.302 He placed the “racist
storytelling,” as Granqvist referred to it, of the ‘Literary Africa’ photo essay on
Elisofon’s shoulders. This dismisses the context of creation of the photo essay as a sequel
to ‘Literary South Seas,’ and also assumes that Elisofon had more control over the final
LIFE product than he actually did.303 Very few LIFE photographers controlled every
aspect of their articles. W. Eugene Smith tried to, and eventually resigned because
editorial choices had been made contrary to his clear demands. LIFE was undeniably a

302
Raoul J. Granqvist, “Photojournalism’s White Mythologies: Eliot Elisofon and LIFE in Africa,
1959-1961,” Research in African Literatures, vol. 43, no. 3 (2012): 84-105. Granqvist produced
another article that discussed the ‘Literary Africa’ project and the “Hopeful Launching” project
about Nigeria published in LIFE in 1960. “The story of how the most famous portrait of a young
Chinua Achebe was taken,” Raoul J. Granqvist, Sept. 18, 2013, Africa is a Country blog,
http://africasacountry.com/eliot-elisofons-famous-portrait-of-chinua-achebe/, accessed May 4,
2013. In this article he is still critical of ‘Literary Africa,’ referring to it as “myth mongering,”
and a construction of “the risky sadness of the bygone.”
303
1959-1961,” Research in African Literatures, vol. 43, no. 3 (2012): 84. Granqvist does not
mention ‘Literary South Seas’ in his 2012 article.
160
team effort. Even though Elisofon found the literary passages and took the photographs,
he did not make ‘Literary Africa’ on his own. He did not even select which literary
passages would be included, and he did not choose the cover image.
Despite being shot in 1959, LIFE held onto ‘Literary Africa’ for two years before
publishing it. The October 13, 1961 issue was meant to appear right before the October
22-26 UNESCO conference to be held in Boston, which had the theme “Africa and the
United States: Images and Realities.” At the UNESCO conference, the largest such
meeting ever held in the United States on the topic of Africa, a portion of Elisofon’s
African art collection was on display at Boston University, and some of his photographs
were displayed as large photo panels at the Boston Museum of Science. In addition, he
helped the curators plan these exhibitions, participated in two UNESCO conference
panels, and gave lectures on his ‘Literary Africa’ photo essay.304
The goal of the conference was to increase understanding between the U.S. and
Africa in order to develop “meaningful guidance” for future American action to help new
African nations “strengthen their independence” and “help them in their own efforts
toward social and economic progress” as stated by President John F. Kennedy.305 While
that sounds friendly and encouraging, today we know more about the events surrounding
the Cold War, and that the United States had its own goals. Fearing communism, the
United States did morally questionable things in Africa, such as assisting in the

304
Guide to UNESCO Conference, Eliot Elisofon Papers, Eliot Elisofon Photographic Archives,
National Museum of African Art, Smithsonian, Washington, D.C. (EEPA D-18, 4.)
305
John. F. Kennedy, telegram to conference, delivered October 22, 1961 as opener by Dr.
William S. Dix, Chairman of the U.S. National Commission for UNESCO, quoted in Simon
Ottenberg, Phoebe Ottenberg, and U.S. National Commission for UNESCO, “Africa and the
United States: Images and Realities, 8th National Conference: Final Report,” (Washington, D.C.:
U.S. State Dept., 1961): 2.
161
kidnapping and execution of Patrice Lumumba in February of 1961, which Granqvist
cited as murder in his article on ‘Literary Africa.’306
But according to the archival data, Elisofon never said nor wrote that ‘Literary
Africa,’ nor his work at the UNESCO conference, were meant to be anti-communist, pro-
democratic statements. ‘Literary Africa’ was meant to be a beautiful color feature on
literary images of Africa, a continent that was in the limelight because of this major
conference. Granqvist explained that Elisofon and LIFE exploited Africa and Africans for
their own gain, yet he never talked about money, the underlying motivation behind
everything that Elisofon and LIFE did.
January 1962, “African Arts: Primitives to Picasso” Think magazine, IBM
In a similar approach to the 1959 Atlantic article, Elisofon provided a very brief
discussion of African art for Think magazine in January of 1962. Think was both the
company magazine and motto of IBM, the International Business Machine Corporation.
It debuted in June 1935, with Rodin’s The Thinker on the cover. The magazine was
circulated internally, to IBM customers, and to people IBM viewed as prominent
members of society. Circulation numbers in 1935 were around 60,000 and that rose by
the 1990s to 360,000; by that time it was distributed in 65 countries. Magazine pieces
were contributed by the brightest ‘thinkers’ of the day, with content from leading

306
1959-1961,” Research in African Literatures, vol. 43, no. 3 (2012): 100.
162
academics, politicians, businessmen, and scientists. Most issues included photographs of
art.307
The January 1962 issue of Think was dedicated to Africa and explored “the
restless continent’s innumerable facets.”308 The table of contents page included an
editorial note explaining why the issue focused on Africa. The passage reflects how
Americans thought about the continent:
A few years ago, in this country, the popular image of Africa contained
approximately equal parts of jungle, witch doctor, wild animals, Dr.
Livingstone and Tarzan. In the gentler world of yesteryear, we could
afford to indulge in fantasy. Today, such an image is not only distorted; it
is dangerous.
When 19 new nations start life on the continent of Africa within a span of
two years, when these nations join the U.N. and assume a voice in world
affairs, from atom-testing to Berlin, when a tribal chief wins the Nobel
Peace Prize, it is time for us to know more about Africa.
The facts alone won’t be enough, of course. A country’s gross national

output is a fact we can learn. But whether that country will remain stable
in the next 10 years is a judgment we have to make. Still, the facts will
lead to a better judgment.
This month we publish a special issue on Africa. It contains articles by
native Africans and by other writers who have traveled in Africa and who
know their subject. In addition, we are printing an interview with G.
Mennen Williams, Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs.
There is a saying: ‘It is better to light a single candle than to curse the
darkness.’ We think of this issue as one candle which may shed more light
on the once-dark continent. – The Editors309
In contrast to The Atlantic Africa issue that Elisofon had contributed to in 1959, every
Think article in this issue was written by a white man. Only one of them, author and poet
Anthony Delius, was from Africa. The rest were journalists, businessmen, politicians, and

307
“A Culture of Think,” http://www-
03.ibm.com/ibm/history/ibm100/us/en/icons/think_culture/transform/. Accessed April 9, 2013.
308
“Table of Contents,” Think, vol. 28, no. 1 (January 1962): 1. (HRC 53.24.)
309
“Table of Contents,” Think, vol. 28, no. 1 (January 1962): 1. (HRC 53.24.)
163
religious leaders from America and England: John Gunther, Smith Hempstone, Howard
Simons, The Rt. Rev. Trevor Huddleston, and Clarence B. Randall. Hence, Think was
delivering an incredibly ethnocentric product. This was not an opportunity for Africans to
educate others about Africa.
None of the other authors wrote about traditional African cultural issues.
Elisofon’s article was the only entry on African art. “African Art: Primitives to Picasso;
How tribal sculpture has influenced modern artists,” was four pages long. It was a
truncated, slightly revised, version of his earlier Atlantic article. Most of the short text
discussed what African art has meant in the Western world, to artists, collectors, and the
market. Elisofon explained:
It has become the darling of a fast-growing audience of aesthetes,

collectors and enthusiastic amateurs who have elevated it to a high place
in the art pantheon. The good and the bad are being gobbled up, and fakes
are being manufactured both in Africa and Europe. Very important pieces
of sculpture are almost up to $50,000. What was once the province of
natural history museums and the careful studies of qualified
anthropologists has now been hastily incorporated into the art world.310
African aesthetics and artistic motivations were barely addressed. Most of the contextual
information was reserved to three one-sentence captions.
The cover of the issue was one of Elisofon’s multiple-exposure shots of the small
Dogon figure (fig. 4.100). It wrapped over the front and back of the magazine, with the
word “Africa” repeated underneath it seven times in bold white letters. Like the 1959
Atlantic article, the first illustrations in Elisofon’s Think article were a Kota reliquary
figure (“primitive Bokota funerary fetish”), and Picasso’s Dancer. But in a reversal of the
Atlantic article layout, the Kota illustration took up less than a fourth of the page, while

310
Eliot Elisofon, “Artful Primitives,” Think, vol. 28, no. 1 (January 1962): 32. (HRC 53.24.)
164
the Dancer image was much larger and dominated (figs. 4.101-4.102). However, the next
page was completely dedicated to the Léopoldville (Kinshasa) Chokwe pwo mask. The
third page featured a striking example of a Bamana chi wara, also seen in The Sculpture
of Africa, and the final page was filled with a field photograph of Pende minganji
initiation camp guards. While The Atlantic article was much longer and more in-depth in
its analysis of African art, it lacked field photographs, which did appear in the 1952 LIFE
“Mystic” article and this 1962 Think piece.
Did this article advocate for African art? Somewhat. Elisofon explained that we
can understand why Modernists were inspired by this art — so we should appreciate it as
fine art. But it was too short to really serve as an introduction to African art. In May of
1935, Robert J. Goldwater wrote an article on the occasion of the Sweeney exhibition of
African art at the Museum of Modern Art for Parnassus. His first sentence was: “It is
customary to begin any consideration of African art with a statement in its defense.”311
We saw this practice in “Mystic,” The Atlantic article, and again in this Think text. Not
much had changed in 27 years. Modern art was still being used as the gateway, as it is
still often used today.
In this article, Elisofon encouraged the readers’ interest in the artworks that the
Modernists saw and collected, increasing the market value of any object with a Modernist
provenance. By aligning African art with the accepted and popular modern art of artists
such as Picasso, Elisofon contributed to the established dialogue on African art, justifying
its study and its placement in elite art museums. But by focusing only on formal qualities,

311
Robert J. Goldwater, “An Approach to African Sculpture,” Parnassus, vol. 7, no. 4 (May
1935): 25.
165
the art’s connections to Africa, its place of origin, are severed, and it loses its meaning.
As time passed, Elisofon’s work reconnected the art to Africa, celebrating its culture and
the environment. He went from telling people about why African art is fine art through
the lens of modern art and aesthetics, to celebrating African art and culture, and working
to educate people about the continent. In order to gain its acceptance as fine art, African
art’s ties to the continent were cut; years later the connection was re-established.
166
Chapter Five: 1958 Was a Very Big Year
As Chapter Four established, Elisofon was involved with African art-related
projects throughout the 1950s and early 1960s. These contributions to the field continued
throughout his life, and their success led to more opportunities for Elisofon’s images of,
and ideas about, African art to reach the public. While 1947 marked his first exposure to
African art in the sub-Saharan region, 1958 was also a landmark year for Elisofon and
African art. Elisofon curated the first exhibition of ‘primitive’ art at the Boston Museum
of Fine Arts in 1958. His most famous book, The Sculpture of Africa, was published; and
Bell, Book and Candle, a major Hollywood film famous among Africanists for its
inclusion of African art, was released. These three distinctive projects are connected by
their demonstration of an increasing public awareness of, and even fascination with,
African art, and a growing demand for information about this topic.
Masterpieces of Primitive Art, Exhibition
“The Primitive Exhibition has been a great success. As it was the first
exhibition of primitive art to be in held in Boston, we were especially
proud to be able to show only works of the highest merit.
There is no question that the quality of all the pieces was the factor that
won so many new friends for primitive art and gave the display such
distinction.”
- Perry T. Rathbone, Director of the Boston

Museum of Fine Arts, letter to Elisofon, Dec. 10,
1958312
Elisofon was appointed as a Harvard Research Fellow in Primitive Art in 1958, on
the recommendation of John Otis (J.O.) Brew, the director of the Peabody Museum of

312
Perry T. Rathbone, Director of the Boston Museum of Fine Arts, letter to Eliot Elisofon,
December 10, 1958, Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection, Harry Ransom Center,
The University of Texas at Austin. (HRC 62.28/57.28.)
167
Archaeology and Ethnology at the University. His first task was to help assess Harvard’s
collection of ‘primitive’ art, and combine its top items with pieces from Salem’s Peabody
and the Museum of Modern Art to create the first inclusive exhibition of ‘primitive’ art to
be shown at Boston’s Museum of Fine Arts (MFA). His participation in this project
proves that his connoisseurship of ‘primitive’ art was valued and valuable. Elisofon and
Brew ultimately choose 150 objects for the show, 53 of which were African. It was held
from October 16 through November 23, 1958.313
According to the MFA’s press release, Masterpieces of Primitive Art was the
inaugural show in a new program to display the best of Harvard’s ‘primitive’ art in a
permanent gallery at the Boston MFA. The new gallery space was scheduled to open
after the exhibition closed, and the plan was to have two shows annually.314 Thus,
Masterpieces marked the physical and symbolic transformation of ethnographic artifacts
into fine art objects. The release explained, “Weird and fascinating masks, dynamic and
powerful sculpture, pottery and gold objects used in ceremonies and rituals by primitive
peoples of Africa, the Americas and the South Seas will be displayed.”315 The cultural
differences embodied by these non-Western art objects are advertised as the draw. Here,
the words “weird” and “primitive” are not meant to be insulting. However, the museum
probably would not have used those words to describe a painting by an Old Master.

313
“Return of the Head-Hunter,” f.y.i. magazine (May 29, 1958): 3. (HRC 62.24, IMG_9501.)
314
Division of Education, “Masterpieces of Primitive Art,” Boston Museum of Fine Arts press
release, October 9, 1958, Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection, Harry Ransom
Center, The University of Texas at Austin: 1. (HRC 57.28, IMG_4318 and IMG_4319.)
315
Division of Education, “Masterpieces of Primitive Art,” Boston Museum of Fine Arts press
release, October 9, 1958, Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection, Harry Ransom
Center, The University of Texas at Austin: 1. (HRC 57.28, IMG_4318 and IMG_4319.)
168
Even though Elisofon was the curator of the show, it seems he did not title the
exhibition himself. In fact, he was not confident that the word ‘masterpieces’ should be
used. He wrote to Perry T. Rathbone, the Director of the Boston MFA, on June 25, 1958:
I am a little concerned about the title of the exhibition using the word
Masterpieces. I certainly should have spoken up sooner and I am probably
over-concerned but this field is so new that it is difficult to call many of
the objects ‘Masterpieces.’
There is no doubt that a good part of them have been recognized for their
quality by being shown in other museums and by having been reproduced
in books on the subject. At any rate, I simply had to speak now or forever
hold my peace.316
At the heart of Elisofon’s concern was the persistent issue of whether or not we can call
any African art object a masterpiece. Such labels implied that we had a complete
understanding of the field, thorough enough to create a hierarchy of objects. In addition,
what we in the West call a masterpiece, might not be what the original African culture
called a masterpiece, and vice versa.317
The EEPA holds 69 correspondence documents just for the MFA show, and the
HRC holds many more. We can conclude from the archival data that Elisofon was
dedicated to the project. He designed the catalog for this exhibition and wrote the
introductory essay and the subdivision texts. Rathbone wrote the foreword. The 48-page
catalog was issued in a black art-paper cover with cutouts (fig. 5.1). African, Oceanic,
and American Indian works were included. More than half of the objects featured were
from the Peabody Harvard collection. The exhibition also included some of Elisofon’s
own objects, those of his friends, and pieces gathered from the Peabody Museum in

316
Eliot Elisofon, letter to Perry T. Rathbone, Director of the Boston Museum of Fine Arts, June
25, 1958, Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection, Harry Ransom Center, The
University of Texas at Austin. (HRC 57.28, IMG _4314.)
317
The concerns about labeling art objects as ‘masterpieces’ that Elisofon was pondering in 1958
are still valid for the field today.
169
Salem, American Museum of Natural History, Brooklyn Museum, and Museum of
Primitive Art in New York. In total, loans were organized from 21 public institutions and
private collectors.318 Elisofon also participated in a television program to promote the
show with Brew: the MFA’s weekly show, “Invitation to Art,” on WGBH Channel 2.
Elisofon and his wife attended a black tie, invitation-only reception and preview
of the show as special guests on October 15, 1958. The invitation explicitly presented the
event as a ‘meet and greet’ Eliot Elisofon occasion (figs. 5.2-5.3).319 While this may not
seem remarkable, it does show that ‘primitive’ art was being given the same exclusive
treatment as any other art opening of the MFA and that Elisofon had a celebrity status
that the Museum was eager to capitalize on. Over 1000 people attended the opening
reception.320
Exhibitions of multiple non-Western ‘primitive’ arts grouped together were
common in the United States. In some ways, this approach allowed the viewer to think
about the ‘primitive’ categorization as a whole. Rathbone wrote in his catalog foreword:

318
Lent by Elisofon to the 1958 MFA Boston exhibition: Dogon mask with bird superstructure;
Senufo mask, double firespitter; Teke male figure, 26 inches high; Yaka mask with fiber trim and
commercial pigments, collected at Kasongo Lunda by Elisofon in 1951, 21 inches high; Mask,
Congo Basin, Bushongo, wearing Bushongo cap covered in chicken feathers, a sorcerer’s mask
confiscated by a Belgian officer in the 1930s, 19 inches high; Mask, Congo Basin, Baluba, mask
of the helmet type, collected by a Belgian colonial in the early 1930s, with raffia fringe, 24 inches
high; (Headdress, Guinea Coast, Ibibio, covered with animal skin, collected by Dr. J.S. Harris,
wood, 22 in. high, Lent by The Museum of Primitive Art, New York, Gift of Eliot Elisofon);
(Mask, Congo Basin, Balumbo; painted white, worn by men in a stilt dance commemorating the
spirits of dead women; from along the Ologwe River; wood, paint, 11 3/8 in high; Lent by The
Museum of Primitive Art, New York, Gift of Eliot Elisofon)
319
Boston Museum of Fine Arts, invitation to Masterpieces of Primitive Art, Eliot Elisofon Paper
62.28/57.28, IMG_4311.)
320
“Primitive Art Fascinates Socialites,” Boston Traveler, October 16, 1958: 28. (HRC
62.28/57.28, IMG_4415.)
170
The artistic revolution of the twentieth century has been accompanied by a

revolution in aesthetic appreciation. Our grandfathers could complacently
equate art with ‘beauty’; for us, however, in the words of André Malraux,
‘beauty’ has become only one province of art’s kingdom. The inspired
French author further observes that ‘art has become a field in which all
works that move us are affiliated.’
We may look for no more striking example of this truth than the
widespread appreciation of ‘primitive’ art in our time. That we are
genuinely moved by the artistic expressions of cultures that lie outside the
great Oriental and European civilizations is undebatable.321
“Works that move us,” is a key phrase in this passage. Later on in his foreword Rathbone
credited the discovery of ‘primitive’ art to the modern artists: they “brought them out of
the restricted category of anthropological data and into the light of pure enjoyment.”322
Enjoyment — the appreciation of ‘primitive’ art had become a respectable intellectual
exercise. Rathbone continued:
In the space of fifty years these multifarious works from all over the globe
have taken a firm hold upon our imaginations and established themselves
in our aesthetic consciousness. There they offer a constant and stimulating
challenge to our inherited notions of what art is.
Primitive art occupies today a respected place alongside those classic

expressions of man’s plastic genius which have been revered for
generations. In the United States especially, the art museum that aspires to
reveal every embodiment of the human will-to-form displays with pride
the finest obtainable works of the tribal artist.323
According to Rathbone, this type of presentation had become obligatory for any major
art museum. Questioning the nature of art is part of the modern thought process and
welcomed.

321
Perry T. Rathbone, foreword in Masterpieces of Primitive Art (Boston: Museum of Fine Arts,
1958): 3.
322
1958): 3.
323
1958): 3.
171
Through the combined efforts of the MFA and the Peabody, a collaboration that is
perhaps the most significant part of this exhibition, Boston was able to participate in the
dialogue surrounding ‘primitive’ art. Rathbone explained:
This is the first exhibition in Boston. Across the river at Harvard primitive
art has been shown at the Fogg Museum, but it is Harvard’s Peabody
Museum that is almost synonymous with the term. In that venerable
fortress of anthropological research there is housed one of the world’s
greatest collections of the art of tribal man.
Though much of its vast collections date from the purely ‘specimen
conscious’ age, the directors of the Peabody have long been sensitive to
the artistic treasure over which they preside. Their concern has been how
to share the enjoyment of the Peabody’s riches with a public beyond that
which consists only of the student body, an occasional Cantabrigian and
the visiting specialist.324
Rathbone credited J.O. Brew with first recognizing the artistic significance of the
holdings of his Museum, and then the greater capacity of the Boston Museum to exhibit,
publicize and make them available to a large audience as works of art. The exhibition
literally allowed ‘primitive’ art to move from an ethnology museum to an art museum,
both a physical and theoretical transformation.
Brew’s role highlights the importance of specific personalities in the history of the
appreciation of African art. On this topic, Rathbone acknowledged Elisofon’s key
contribution to the show:
Still the character of the exhibition and this publication are in large part
owing to the inspired labor and unlimited enthusiasm of Mr. Elisofon
alone. Often of necessity working by himself and without benefit of
consultation he conceived the plan of the catalogue, gathered quantities of
data and wrote the introductory essay and the subdivision texts. It is

324
1958): 3.
172
impossible to thank him adequately for the full measure of his contribution
so generously given.325
This passage suggests that the MFA exhibition and catalog would not have been possible
without Elisofon’s work.
The two most important catalog essays for our purposes are on “Primitive Art”
and “African Art.” Elisofon took a practical approach to his language, speaking to the
broad public. The first theme he tackled, which also appeared in Ralph Linton’s essay in
The Sculpture of Africa, was the use of the term ‘primitive’ as a label for these art forms.
Elisofon wrote:
The visitor viewing this exhibition might well ask himself why this art is
called primitive. Through lack of a better term the art of three great
geographic areas have been lumped together under the term Primitive art.
The peoples of these areas were far from primitive but because their
civilization has been considered lower than our own the term primitive has
found some acceptance. Other terms sometimes used are indigenous or
tribal art. No truly satisfactory term has ever been devised.326
Language failed Elisofon in this situation. He recognized that the label of ‘primitive’ was
incorrect and useless as a descriptor. These arts were not ‘less than’ Western art, but had
their own cultural framework. This realization marked a shift in his thinking, which
matched that of scholars, and then eventually museums, collectors, and the general public.
In addition to this commentary, some of the use and function of the objects is explained
in this essay, as well as the general stylistic motivations of art being what these peoples
feel rather than what they see.

325
1958): 4.
326
Eliot Elisofon, “Primitive Art,” in Masterpieces of Primitive Art (Boston: Museum of Fine
Arts, 1958): 5.
173
In the “African Art” essay, Elisofon described how each art-producing ethnic
group in sub-Saharan Africa has a distinct style, presenting an extreme range of
representation of the human body. Elisofon also discussed how Westerners will
inherently view African art differently from Africans — what is meant to be terrifying to
Africans, may be expressionistic to us. “Meaning as well as beauty is in the eyes of the
beholder,” he explained.327
Elisofon used art historical terms to situate African art in a recognizable
comparison for MFA guests. “Simplicity and strength are perhaps the distinguishing
qualities of African sculpture,” he wrote, “In contrast to the highly involved baroque-like
carvings of Oceania, African sculpture is a Gothic statement without frills.”328 Then he
formally described African art, as one would visually analyze any art form:
The sculptures are architectonic, evolving from the original material, the
cylindrical tree trunk. One rarely finds the African carver adding pieces of
wood to this simple shape, a common practice in Oceanic and the Indian
art of the Northwest Coast. Instead the figure is compressed out of the
cylinder by what appears to be a minimum of carving.
The feet are flat and form the base, the legs are bent in what appears to be
a desire to achieve tension in stance, the body trunk is straight up and
down, and the head is firmly mounted and rarely tilted or turned.
Proportion is often ignored, but the head, if anything, is favored.329
In comparison to Elisofon’s 1952 exhibition, Understanding African Negro Sculpture,
this type of catalog allowed him to share more cultural information with his audience.
However, it did not include an object-by-object contextual analysis. In a draft version of
his “Primitive Art” essay, Elisofon wrote, “How much the ordinary person must know

327
Eliot Elisofon, “Primitive Art,” in Masterpieces of Primitive Art (Boston: Museum of Fine
Arts, 1958): 6.
328
Eliot Elisofon, “African Art,” in Masterpieces of Primitive Art (Boston: Museum of Fine Arts,
1958): 9.
329
Eliot Elisofon, “African Art,” in Masterpieces of Primitive Art (Boston: Museum of Fine Arts,
1958): 9.
174
about the use of these objects to appreciate them has been a subject of debate between
anthropologists and art enthusiasts.”330 This was a debate Elisofon participated in, and
throughout his career he experimented with a variety of techniques to illuminate the topic
for the public. But he often returned to an art theory he voiced in this draft: “a true work
of art should need no literal explanation.”331
Masterpieces of Primitive Art, Reactions and Press Coverage
Christraud Geary discussed the 1958 MFA Show in her essay in Art of the Senses
(2004), an exhibition catalog on the Teel Collection of African Art. Having access to the
“African Exhibition Files,” of the Peabody Museum of Harvard University, Geary was
able to examine some pieces of correspondence that are lacking from the HRC and EEPA
archives. This included a January 21, 1958 letter from Elisofon to J.O. Brew concerning
Elisofon’s ideas for future rotating exhibitions at the MFA that he could help the Peabody
organize, for the joint program on ‘primitive’ art between the institutions. “Distortion in
Primitive Art,” “The Influences of Primitive Art on Modern Art,” and “Superstition and
Magic” were Elisofon’s suggested themes, none of which materialized as shows. 332
In the end, Masterpieces was a short five-week display, and despite many positive
reviews in the press, Elisofon was never again a curator for the Peabody nor the MFA.
But his title of Harvard Research Fellow was never retracted. Instead he eventually

330
Eliot Elisofon, “Primitive Art,” essay draft, Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection,
Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin: 1-2. (HRC 62.28/57.28, IMG_4375
thru IMG_4376, also EEPA Items D-4, 3 and 4.)
331
Eliot Elisofon, “Primitive Art,” essay draft, Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection,
Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin: 2. (HRC 62.28/57.28, IMG_4375 thru
IMG_4376, also EEPA Items D-4, 3 and 4.)
332
Christraud M. Geary, “On Collectors, Exhibitions, and Photographs of African Art: The Teel
Collection in Historical Perspective,” in Suzanne Preston Blier, ed., Art of the Senses: African
Masterpieces from the Teel Collection (Boston: Museum of Fine Arts, 2004): 25-42.
175
became a Research Associate in Primitive Art, and then later an Honorary Associate in
Primitive Art.333 But his involvement with the Peabody shifted away from African art and
toward South Seas art and work in New Guinea.
The press coverage of Masterpieces was generally positive, though the precise
reactions of the journalists were varied. Over a dozen newspaper and magazine articles
were published on the topic, including announcements, opening reception coverage,
special interviews with Elisofon, coverage of the television special, and general
exhibition reviews. Most of the articles discussed Elisofon as the main organizer of the
show, specifically mentioning his name, and his background as photographer, expert, and
collector.
T.H. Parker of The Hartford Courant wrote the most analytical article for the
exhibition on October 5, 1958. “Art and Artifacts,” as his piece was titled, recognized
that ‘primitive’ art was changing its position in the world. He discussed four institutions:
the American Museum of Natural History in New York, the brand-new Museum of
Primitive Art (MPA), the Harvard Peabody, and the MFA. The 1957 foundation of the
MPA and the showing of Peabody objects at the MFA both served “to remove primitive
artifacts from ethnology as their frame of reference,” in the words of Nelson
Rockefeller.334 Parker referred to this new type of display as an “emancipation.”335 “While

333
Harvard University, letters of appointment for Eliot Elisofon, February 17, 1958; April 18,
1966; and June 11, 1969, Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection, Harry Ransom
Center, The University of Texas at Austin. (HRC 73.10/68.10, IMG_4718, IMG_4719, and
IMG_4737.)
334
Nelson Rockefeller, quoted in T.H. Parker, “Art and Artifacts,” The Hartford Courant,
October 5, 1958. (HRC 62.28/57.28, IMG_4413 thru IMG_4414.)
335
T.H. Parker, “Art and Artifacts,” The Hartford Courant, October 5, 1958. (HRC 62.28/57.28,
IMG_4413 thru IMG_4414.)
176
indeed the world has not been altogether insensitive to the aesthetic content and quality of
great, primitive art,” Parker explained, “museums have only infrequently given it equal
footing with their collections of the arts of the historic or civilized cultures.”336
The natural history museum can show one side of ‘primitive’ art, but it does not
serve the objects completely. Parker understood the larger implications of showing
‘primitive’ art in a fine art museum. It would effect how an audience appreciated the
objects, both visually and mentally. He wrote:
…anyone who wished to make a study of primitive art or delight his eye
and imagination with its special provocativeness had to turn to the great
natural history repositories. One of the best known in this area obviously
has been the fabulous American Museum in New York.
Even here, however, the approach to primitive cultures has been

ethnological or anthropologic which, under the circumstance, certainly is
mete and right. Here as elsewhere among the natural history museum the
exquisite artifact takes its place side by side with the plain. There is no
hierarchy of beauty, but only of scientific importance.337
Pure scientific examination blocked appreciation of the “special provocativeness” of
‘primitive’ art. And it also meant that only scientists were studying ‘primitive’ art. Thus
the pool of experts in this field was small. Parker continued:
Thus, only those who had surpassing patience, as well as a keen eye, were
able to winnow these great ethnic collections for their sheer art value. And
once the enchanting object had been spotted, it could seldom be viewed to
any special advantage, surrounded as it was by a host of other exhibits
equally loved by the natural historian. The chase after primitive art as art
has therefore been a frustrating one.338

336
337
338
177
For the MFA exhibition, Elisofon served as the one with “surpassing patience” and “a
keen eye,” sorting the Peabody collection to discover objects that could shine in the MFA.
He was the middleman between natural history and art.
Parker grasped the primary issue at hand, pondering the question: What is the best
way to display ‘primitive’ art? He did not dismiss the natural history presentation, but he
also supported this new trend of showing it in art museums. So many objects can qualify
as both art and artifact. But to show it as both simultaneously may lead to a “confusion of
purposes,” according to Parker.339 He explained:
…in a natural history museum such a double standard might have been
distracting to the ethnic scholar to whom beauty is largely a footnote to
anthropological studies.
Moreover, the pure-art addict generally does not think of science museums
as repositories of beauty and does not go looking for it there. This may
well be his own fault, stemming from ignorance or laziness. However that
may be, the art museum seems the native and proper place for beauty of
all times and climes.
Whether it again grew out of ignorance, or some sense of professional

nicety, the fact that art museums have made so little claim to primitive art
is certainly deplorable. Apparently this mistake is about to be rectified on
increasing scale. The alliance of the Peabody and Boston museums is both
pioneering and wonderful. Who’s next?340
It is interesting that he blamed everyone equally for the current situation, but especially
pushed art museums to lay “claim” to ‘primitive’ art. His strong words – ignorance,
laziness, deplorable, mistake – forced the issue. Certainly he viewed the MFA exhibition
positively and encouraged others to follow suit.

339
340
178
Many other reviewers acknowledged the ‘fresh’ concept of showing an
ethnographic collection in an art museum. For example, Edgar J. Driscoll of The Boston
Globe, explained that the exhibition was “a significant step, since it is just recently that
primitive art got into the public domain and out of the rarified atmosphere of ethnologists,
anthropologists and psychologists.”341 TIME magazine commented that the Harvard
Peabody was a place “where few people except students of anthropology ever set foot” –
i.e. only scholars had access to this material.342 Parker was the only journalist to see the
deeper meaning of the exhibition—that not only the display, but also the study of the
‘primitive’ object was changing.
As encouraging as Parker’s analytical thought process was, not everyone was on
the same page. “It was ‘bongo, bongo, bongo’ at the Boston Museum of Fine Arts last
night as Boston got its first full dress showing of primitive art,” Driscoll wrote on
October 16, 1958.343 “And more than 2000 members and guests responding to the beat,
jammed the museum’s upper special exhibition galleries for the big opening Fall show,”
he continued.344 This bizarre opening paragraph referred to the song “Civilization,” which
was written by Bob Hilliard and Carl Sigman for the Copacabana nightclub in New
York.345

341
Edgar J. Driscoll, Jr., “2000 Attend Primitive Art Show Opening,” Boston Globe, October 16,
1958: 1, 22.
342
“Mana from Harvard,” TIME (November 24, 1958): 78.
343
1958: 1, 22.
344
1958: 1, 22.
345
Michael Sigman, “‘Civilization’ and its Disc Contents,” The Huffington Post Blog, July, 23,
2009. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-sigman/civilization-and-its-disc_b_218587.html.
The club did not use the song, so it appeared instead in 1947 in their Broadway musical revue,
179
What exactly was the bongo beat in “Civilization” that Driscoll referred to? He
was probably most familiar with the Danny Kaye version of the song, which began:
Each morning, a missionary advertise with neon sign

He tells the native population that civilization is fine
And three educated savages holler from a bamboo tree
(Eeeee! Ah-loh-kee-hah-tah-sah-nah.)
That civilization is a thing for me to see
So bongo, bongo, bongo I don't want to leave the Congo, oh-no-no-no-no-no

Bingle, bangle, bungle I'm so happy in the jungle, I refuse to go
Don't want no bright lights, false teeth, doorbells, landlords, I make it clear
That no matter how they coax him, I'll stay right here346
The song was a humorous critique of modern society. The Congo ‘natives’ do not want
anything to do with Western civilization. But they are referred to as jungle-dwelling
savages; who holler in strange tongues; and cannot speak in complete, grammatically
correct sentences. These fictional ‘natives’ are simultaneously admired for their simple,
‘laidback’ lifestyle, and mocked for being different, and uncivilized. Driscoll seemed to
suggest that the uncivilized savage world of the Congo jungle had manifested itself in the
MFA galleries with his “bongo, bongo, bongo” evocation. His text continued: “Masks,
ceremonial bowls, rough hewn carvings of dieties [sic], portrait heads of warriors, et al,
lured the swarm from one gallery to another, often arousing shivers in the onlookers so
strange and powerful are these works.”347 This sentence encouraged the reader to think of
the art objects as terrifying.

“Angel in the Wings,” sung by Elaine Stritch. Louis Prima recorded it later and it went on the
charts, but the most famous rendition is by Danny Kaye and the Andrews Sisters.
346
Danny Kaye, Carl Sigman, Bob Hilliard, Allan Roberts, Lester Lee, and Vic Schoen.
Civilization (Bongo, Bongo, Bongo). (Decca, 1947): MP3.
347
1958: 1, 22.
180
Unfortunately, this article reflected a common fascination with exotic, savage
Africa in the press and media. “Civilization” revealed the situation within its lyrics:
I looked through a magazine the missionary's wife conceals

(A magazine? What happens?)
I see how people who are civilized bang you with automobiles
(You know you can get hurt that way Daniel?)
At the movies they have got to pay many coconuts to see
(What do they see Danny?)
Uncivilized pictures that the newsreel takes of me348
As a comic paradox, the ‘uncivilized savage’ regards the images of himself in the
newsreel as ‘uncivilized.’ Thus, the larger question becomes – Who is actually
uncivilized? The exploited or those that exploit? At the time the song was written,
‘documentary’ films on Africa were popular in the cinema—for example, the famous
1952 film Latuko: We Saw Primitive Man, photographed and directed by Edgar M.
Queeny, of the Monsanto corporation, in connection with the American Museum of
Natural History. The poster images and text for this film were designed to titillate the
American audience (figs. 5.4-5.5):
See… for the first time on any screen, this completely different picture
that takes you back thousands of years…back to Primitive Man!
See…the savage pageantry of ceremonial sacrifice—starkly realistic,

completely authentic—entirely unstaged and unrehearsed!
See…native hunters, flaunting death as they track down the most vicious
of African game in the wildest jungle!
See…frenzied natives in spontaneous tribal rites never before
photographed! Shown in candid color photography for the first time—the
Latukos—barbaric, warring heathens, pictured in their remote,

348
Danny Kaye, Carl Sigman, Bob Hilliard, Allan Roberts, Lester Lee, and Vic Schoen.
Civilization (Bongo, Bongo, Bongo). (Decca, 1947): MP3.
181
mountainous redoubt of Africa…barbaric drama as only the camera can

record for you!349
Latuko was meant to be educational. From a modern perspective it is clearly
sensationalistic and exploitative. However, the poster language is a good example of the
way the press discussed Africa in the 1950s, and it is echoed in Driscoll’s articles.
Indeed, Driscoll wrote a second article on the MFA exhibition, dated October 19,
1958. If possible, this text is more condescending than the bongo beat: “This Week in the
Art World: Halloween Updated By Eerie Museum Show; Halloween came early to the
Boston Museum of Fine Arts.”350 Driscoll reviewed the exhibition opening for his
readers:
Occasion was the opening of the “Masterpieces of Primitive Art” show,

which features enough weird masks, strange carvings and fetishes to scare
the living daylights out of the most sophisticated child.
In fact, more than one adult will find it eerie going as he makes his rounds
of this important showing. Had the museum gone in for darkened galleries,
off-beat background music and a little incense burning, they’d do a fast
business in tranquilizers.
For this is a strongly emotional show, made up for the most part, of
ceremonial and ritualistic objects carved by gifted artist tribesmen in so
called “primitive” areas the world over….
There are fantastic cubistic masks worn by members of a powerful secret
society in the Belgian Congo; male and female figure carvings to be
placed on a barrel containing the skulls of family ancestors; a six-foot
snake fetish of a cobra; an ivory tusk from the Guinea coast “the blood
from human sacrifices of 10 formed a thick crust on these tucks” notes the
catalogue; a war headdress with teeth from Hawaii, worn in battle to

349
Redoubt is a fort system. These posters can be seen in Amy J. Staples, “Popular Ethnography
and Public Consumption: Sites of Contestation in Museum-Sponsored Expeditionary Film,” The
Moving Image 5, no. 2 (Fall 2005): 55.
350
Edgar J. Driscoll, Jr., “This Week in the Art World: Halloween Updated By Eerie Museum
Show,” Boston Globe, October 19, 1958: A_30.
182
frighten the enemy (which it undoubtedly did); figures from the Marquesa
[sic] Islands, with inlaid shell eyes that stare menacingly back at you…351
Perhaps Driscoll believed that this exaggerated prose would entertain his audience.
Maybe he even thought it would encourage people to go to the exhibition. Either way,
Driscoll was not the only journalist to focus on the otherworldliness, strangeness, and
even the ‘frightening’ aspects of the show, although he was the only one to mention
bongos, Halloween, and tranquilizers.
The TIME magazine article on the exhibition described it as a “wild little dream
world within the Fine Arts’ staid galleries of European pictures.”352 The visitor could see
“Melanesian tom-toms, Benin bronzes, a footstool in the shape of a kneeling woman, a
dog-shaped bowl, and African, American Indian and South Sea Island idols by the
score.”353 Robert Taylor also constructed an imagined space at the MFA when he
interviewed Elisofon for The Boston Herald. He wrote:
We had veered onto this culinary topic [broiled gorilla] by way of talking
about primitive art. The scene was a comfortably-appointed room at the
Museum of Fine Arts where Eliot Elisofon was scheduled to give a lecture
to a large audience. On the walls were paintings by Renoir and Corot. We
seemed a long way from the jungle.
The jungle, however, was just around the corner. To be precise it was in
the galleries upstairs where many masks and figures from Mr. Elisofon’s
private collection figure prominently in the Museum’s current exhibition
of primitive masterpieces.354
There seemed to be a need to exoticize the show in the press. To bring the jungle into the
museum. To make the show seem wild, violent, and savage. The poster text from the

351
Edgar J. Driscoll, Jr., “This Week in the Art World: Halloween Updated By Eerie Museum
Show,” Boston Globe, October 19, 1958: A_30.
352
353
354
November 7, 1958. (HRC 71.10/66.10, IMG_6289.)
183
Latuko film could have easily been plugged into any of these reviews. These journalists
believed this was the reality of how African art was used in Africa—as strange,
frightening implements of violence—and that the exhibition needed to be described as
exotic and dangerous as marks of its authenticity. For example, Robert Taylor explained:
I must confess that the aesthetic appeal primitive works have for me is not
altogether divorced from their romantic side. No. 43, “a typical Bushongo
cap covered with chicken feathers,” is a wonderfully compelling piece of
carving and design; but I also derived great pleasure from knowing that it
was an actual sorcerer’s mask confiscated by a Belgian officer in
the ’30’s.355
This Bushongo sorcerer’s mask was one of the objects collected by Elisofon in Central
Africa and then given to the Harvard Peabody. Perhaps for Taylor it symbolized the
conquest of the uncivilized by the civilized, the triumph of logic over superstition. Or
maybe it was just the thrill of the illicit, of something scary and powerful that entertained
him. He emphasized that it was “an actual sorcerer’s mask.” The mask’s connection to an
exciting story, whether it was true or not, allowed the journalist to spin a fairy tale in his
head. The romance was alluring. Taylor’s text continued, focusing on the ‘darker’ aspects
of African art:
In general, though, the African sculpture on display expresses the ferment

of nature’s forces, fertility, war, the surge of supernatural influences
constantly affecting man in a thousand ways, but always in changing,
prodigal abundance.
The violence in African sculpture is contained within the framework of
nature, a part of the natural order; but in the Oceanic works violence is
isolated and made to serve as an end in life. The presence of death which
one feels as a yeasty flux in African sculpture becomes in the Oceanic a
hovering, individual shadow.356

355
Robert Taylor, “Events in Art: Primitive Masterpieces on View at Museum Through Nov. 23,”
The Boston Sunday Herald, Oct. 26, 1958. (HRC 62.28/57.28, IMG_4411 and IMG_4412.)
356
The Boston Sunday Herald, October 26, 1958. (HRC 62.28/57.28, IMG_4411 and IMG_4412.)
184
Taylor felt the “presence of death” in African sculpture. Like Driscoll, his words seem
constructed to terrify rather than to educate. Yet, at the end of his article, he called the
exhibition “a dazzling experience.”357
Apart from the dramatic language and jungle images, there was some genuine
appreciation of the show. William Germain Dooley wrote an article for The Boston Globe
on October 5, 1958 titled “Primitive Masterpieces Assembled Here.” He explained to his
readers: “The arts of primitive peoples were far from primitive. Once regarded as crude
and clumsy, the best of their carvings and weavings are now realized to be the work of
great craftsmen working with deep conviction. This will be strikingly demonstrated this
month when the Boston Museum of Fine Arts opens an exhibit ‘Masterpieces of
Primitive Art.’”358 Dorothy Adlow, writing for The Christian Science Monitor, praised
the show: “The total effect is magnificent…. The immediacy, the contained energy, the
raw force…. For those who have not yet encountered the beauty, the mystery, and the
oddities of tribal arts, this exhibition can be a revelation.”359 These varied reactions, from
positive, to negative, from analytical to childish, demonstrate the multiplicity of
approaches that the press, and the public, had toward ‘primitive’ art.
The Sculpture of Africa, Book
“It was so gracious of you to send me the magnificent book on Primitive

Art which is illustrated with your photographs. It is truly a masterpiece for
which you have every reason to be proud. I am happy that my collection

357
The Boston Sunday Herald, October 26, 1958. (HRC 62.28/57.28, IMG_4411 and IMG_4412.)
358
William Germain Dooley, “Primitive Masterpieces Assembled Here,” Boston Globe, October
5, 1958: A19.
359
Dorothy Adlow, “Masterpieces of Primitive Art; 207 Objects on Display at Museum of Fine
Arts,” The Christian Science Monitor, October, 20, 1958. (HRC 62.28/57.28, IMG_4409 and
IMG_4410.)
185
was of help to you in compiling your book. I am sure it will be a great

success.”
- Helena Gourielli (Rubinstein), noted
collector, letter to Elisofon, Dec. 5, 1958360
“Dear Eliot: Many, many thanks for sending me your extraordinary book,
‘The Sculpture of Africa.’ I can assure you that it has been LIFE’s
privilege to have so many like you available to train a lens upon so many
areas of the world. And the extra dividends, such as this book, that come
from the fertile brains – and hearts – of such as you are most gratefully
received.
Please give my warm congratulations to Bernie Quint too, for his
masterful design. And to you both, hearty good wishes for the Holidays.”
- Henry R. Luce, founder of TIME, Inc. and
LIFE magazine, letter to Elisofon, Dec. 8,
1958361
In 1958 the Frederick Praeger publishing house of New York released The
Sculpture of Africa, Elisofon’s most important publication on African art. The Christian
Science Monitor described the book as “the best and most fully illustrated volume among
the numerous publications on African tribal arts…nowhere is there an opportunity to see
so much material, such good examples, and such magnificent photography.”362 It was
seen as the most complete and authoritative photographic anthology of African art
available. African art historian Herbert Cole wrote a review of The Sculpture of Africa in

360
Helena Gourielli (Rubinstein), letter to Elisofon, December, 5 1958, Eliot Elisofon Paper and
IMG_1137.)
361
Henry R. Luce, letter to Elisofon, December, 8, 1958, Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic
Collection, Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin. (HRC 11.1, IMG_1139.)
362
Dorothy Adlow, “Old Masters and New in an Array for the Reader with a Taste for Art:
Beauty in Many Forms From Around the World,” The Christian Science Monitor, November 20,
1958: 14.
186
1979, upon its reprint, for African Arts. “Quickly this book became a classic,” he
explained, “and in some ways a model for future general books on African art.”363
What was groundbreaking about The Sculpture of Africa? There had been African
art publications before. What made it stand out? Essentially it was the scale of the
enterprise that made The Sculpture of Africa unique. The book included 321 Western and
Central African sculptural examples from 46 collections. Art forms from 57 ethnic
groups were represented. The Sculpture of Africa is a large publication, measuring 14.5
inches long by 10.75 inches wide. In comparison to Paul Guillaume and Thomas Munro’s
African Negro Sculpture (1926), one of the earliest publications on African art, The
Sculpture of Africa is almost five times larger. African Negro Sculpture measures 10
inches long by 7.5 inches wide, and includes only 41 images, all from the Barnes
Foundation collection. It has 141 pages; The Sculpture of Africa has 405 illustrations on
297 pages. The size of a typical Sculpture of Africa image measures 11.5 by 7.5 inches,
with multiple images per page. The size of a typical African Negro Sculpture image
measures 4 by 6.5 inches, with only one image per page. With 350 more images, all of
them much larger, The Sculpture of Africa packs a visual punch that African Negro
Sculpture does not have.364
The entire book was laid out by LIFE’s main designer, Bernard Quint. The
aesthetic he used in the LIFE article “Mystic Art of Tribal Africa” was repeated on a
grander scale in The Sculpture of Africa. Cole commented, “Mr. Elisofon’s style was to

363
Herbert Cole, “The Sculpture of Africa by Eliot Elisofon; W. B. Fagg,” African Arts vol. 12,
no. 3 (May 1979): 20.
364
The model for the scale of The Sculpture of Africa was LIFE magazine, which measured 14
inches long by 10.5 inches wide.
187
light pieces rather dramatically and ‘drop out’ backgrounds, and his results are quite
effective.”365 This style was created partially by Elisofon’s pictures, and partially by
Quint’s design. Their goal was to show African art in a modern way—stark, bold,
abstract (fig. 5.6). The Sculpture of Africa showed African art as fine art, not as
ethnographic items. Field photographs were limited to just nine in the book, apparently to
emphasize the fine art over the ethnography.
The contextual information in field photographs was too distracting from pure
aesthetic appreciation. Thus, The Sculpture of Africa presented African art in a much
different format than how it would have appeared in Africa. But Elisofon wanted the
book to appeal to the widest audience possible, and he believed that this was the way to
attain this goal. The message of The Sculpture of Africa is well represented by the quote
by the Roman playwright Terence, aka Publius Terentius Afer, that appears on the second
page: “Homo sum; humani nihil a me alienum puto.”366 Translated: “I am a human being,
I consider nothing that is human alien to me.” In other words, all of humanity stands on
common ground, and in this context, all world arts, including African art, are equally
valuable and important.
The Sculpture of Africa was the published culmination of Elisofon’s ‘grand plan’
to photograph all African art objects the world-over. Elisofon had plans for making a
book out of his African art photographs since the late 1940s, but he was not able to
establish a contract with Praeger until 1954. Elisofon had spent more than a decade
working on this project, taking the photographs, gathering the support, communicating

365
no. 3 (May 1979): 23.
366
Eliot Elisofon, The Sculpture of Africa (New York: Praeger, 1958): 2.
188
with collectors, institutions, and authors, and pushing it into existence. It was printed in
Germany, under the auspices of British publishing house Thames & Hudson, in order to
attain a high-quality print product, which was not available in the United States at that
time.
Praeger ordered a total of 15,000 copies of The Sculpture of Africa for the 1958
first edition. For many African art books today the typical publication count is much less,
between 2,000 and 3,000. The book was distributed internationally: 5,000 copies to the
United States, 2,000 to England, 3,000 to France, and 5,000 to Germany.367 “On the
whole the book has sold well and steadily,” Frederick Praeger wrote to Elisofon, “We
didn’t make any money with it but it has at least added to our reputation. It is such a
beautiful book that we would hate to see you out of print.”368 Despite the fact that Praeger
assured Elisofon that all of the copies had sold out by October 1961, the company did not
deem it a wise business decision to order a reprint. However, The Sculpture of Africa still
proved that an African art book of this scale could be successful, visually striking, and
sell well. A second version of this text was in development when Elisofon died in 1973;
one based more on field photographs and cultural context — African art and its
environment.369

367
Distribution of print run documentation, The Sculpture of Africa, 1958, Eliot Elisofon Paper
11.1, IMG_1185.) United States – 5000 copies // Thames and Hudson – 2000 // Fernand Hazan –
3000 // Dumont Schauberg 2000 // Deutsche Buch-Gemeinschaft – 3000.
368
Frederick A. Praeger Inc., letter to Eliot Elisofon, October 9, 1961, Eliot Elisofon Paper and
IMG_1145.)
369
189
William Fagg, Keeper of Ethnography at the British Museum, wrote the book’s
four main essays; and the preface was by Ralph Linton, Sterling Professor of
Anthropology for Yale University. Fagg embodied the transition of the status of African
art. He specialized in ethnography, but as a pioneering scholar produced many art history
resources. The Africanist Leon Siroto helped Elisofon with the captions, which Cole
referred to as “often quite detailed and informative.”370 But the texts were only a small
part of the publication; the main focus was on Elisofon’s photographs of African art. This
makes it particularly ironic that The Sculpture of Africa is now usually regarded as Fagg’s
book. He is the most famous name attached to the project, so in scholars’ minds it is his
publication. However in 1979, Cole recognized The Sculpture of Africa for what it was:
“Mainly this is a picture book….”371 The contextual depth was lacking. The texts were
relatively shallow. Elisofon had gone to sub-Saharan Africa two times when The
Sculpture of Africa was published in 1958, but the book contained very few field
photographs and did not reflect these activities.
A Visual Catalog of African Art
Even though The Sculpture of Africa is 297 pages long and includes 405
photographs, Elisofon wanted a much larger publication. He was probably aiming more
for an African art visual encyclopedia, rather than the visual dictionary he created. But
the publication cost of such a book countered Elisofon’s obsessive thought-process. The
Sculpture of Africa still functioned as a successful visual catalog for the field. It could be
used as a guide for collecting purchases. ‘Tribal’ styles, specific regional tendencies,

370
no. 3 (May 1979): 23.
371
no. 3 (May 1979): 23.
190
iconic works, and aesthetic markers were delineated by the captions, and prioritized over
use and function data. Figure 122 provides a good example of a typical caption: “Baule,
Dance Mask: Schematic nose, tribal marks and slightly asymmetric coiffure are typical of
the classical Baule style, of which this is one of the purest examples.”372
The Sculpture of Africa was an elite resource. It recognized the best of the best
collections in the world. It was a mark of pride if your artwork was selected for the book
— with Elisofon photographs and texts by a Yale professor and a British Museum curator.
The book boosted the status and reputation of collections and objects. It was a tastemaker.
In The Sculpture of Africa collectors could see their objects, and see those they might
want to possess. Institutions could assess their collections in connection with The
Sculpture of Africa objects. Essentially it looked like an auction catalog — selling the
objects aesthetically as fine art. The only thing missing was prices. African art was not
placed within the African world — it was presented as fine art for the Western world’s
appreciation — to be bought, sold, studied, and photographed as a commodity. On
subsequent trips to Africa, Elisofon even encountered counterfeiters who used The
Sculpture of Africa as a book of blueprints.373
The publication focused on the sculptural forms that were popular with collectors
in the beginning of the twentieth century — figures and masks. The only vessels that
appear in the text are a Barotse wooden food dish (No. 203) and a Mangbetu figurative
ceramic jar (No. 312). As the publication’s title dictated, the textiles, ceramics, and

372
Eliot Elisofon, The Sculpture of Africa (New York: Praeger, 1958): 98.
373
“Eliot Elisofon at Home: Eclectic Collector,” Black African Heritage press release, undated,
Smithsonian, Washington, D.C.: 3. (EEPA X-9, 23.)
191
ephemeral arts of Africa were not included. Even the famous beaded arts of the
Cameroon kingdoms and the Yoruba do not appear in The Sculpture of Africa. Two Kuba
beaded masks are featured (No. 260-261), but no other Kuba beaded art forms are present.
The text was built around the sculptural arts of West and Central Africa, again a
reflection of the field’s concentration at this time. A few objects represent Eastern and
Southern African art, but overall those regions appear to be artless.
The Sculpture of Africa became a useful and educational tool for the blossoming
world of African art collectors in the United States. Jay T. Last, a famous collector of
Central African Lega art, explained:
In 1960 there were few books on African art that were readily available,
but I did manage to acquire The Sculpture of Africa (1958) by Eliot
Elisofon and William Fagg and James Sweeney’s catalog of the 1935
Museum of Modern Art exhibition African Negro Art. These texts exposed
me to the richness and variety of African art….
In pouring over the illustrations in Elisofon and Fagg’s Sculpture of Africa,
I realized that the objects that most intrigued me were the eight Lega busts
and figures from the collections of the British Museum, the Musée Royal
de l’Afrique Centrale in Tervuren, and the collection of Charles Ratton.
I had not seen any comparable material on my visits to the New York
dealers and could only dream of owning objects of this caliber. Years later,
I would be fortunate to acquire one of these pieces, Ratton’s four-headed
ivory figure.374
For Last, The Sculpture of Africa was a visual guide to African art. It encouraged him to
collect Lega art, and it helped to establish his “dream” canon of objects to own. Lester
Wunderman, a famous collector of Western African Dogon art, found himself in a similar
situation as Last. He purchased his first African art object at a Los Angeles gallery in
1957, but the dealer did not know what it was. She had traded it with a Parisian gallery,

374
Jay T. Last, “Preface: The Collector’s Perspective,” in Elisabeth L. Cameron, Art of the Lega,
(Los Angeles: UCLA Fowler Museum of Cultural History; Seattle: Distributed by the University
of Washington Press, 2001): 12, 14.
192
but the papers identifying it had not arrived yet. This is where The Sculpture of Africa
became useful. Wunderman wrote: “When I returned to New York, I tried to identify the
piece. It was a book on African art by Eliot Elisofon and William Fagg that finally helped
me to recognize it as a sculpture from the Dogon people of Mali.”375 When viewed and
purchased from galleries, African art was, and is, perpetually out of its original context.
Resources like The Sculpture of Africa served a much-needed purpose for a nascent field
of collecting and scholarship.
The Sculpture of Africa: Reactions, Reviews, and Press Coverage
“An extraordinary book on all scores….” –Harper’s
“By all odds one of the handsomest books published this year.”—
Washington Post & Times Herald
“A treasure.” – The Nation
“This is the best and most fully illustrated volume on African tribal arts.
Nowhere is there an opportunity to see so much material, such good
examples, and such magnificent photography.”—The Christian Science
Monitor
“The perfect book on African sculpture.” – Richmond Times Dispatch
“This book is a revelation.”- Virginia Kirkus Bulletin

“A surpassingly beautiful and tautly organized presentation.” - St. Louis
Post-Dispatch
“The photographs are large and superb; the text by William Fagg and
Ralph Linton is most enlightening.” –Saturday Review
“Stunning…it should be essential in every library, grade school, high
school and college.”—Library Journal

375
Lester Wunderman, “Preface,” in Kate Ezra, Art of the Dogon (New York: The Metropolitan
Museum of Art and Harry N. Abrams, 1988): 7.
193
“Will perhaps do more than any previous publication in the field to

promote appreciation of African art.” – New York Herald Tribune376
The Sculpture of Africa served as an approachable, comprehensible introduction
to African art for both collectors and casual readers. Press and scholarly reviews of the
book were generally positive. For example, Howard Devree of The New York Times titled
his review, “Study in Primitive Beauty”— the inclusion of the word “beauty” signaled
that this was a positive review. 377 Devree highly regarded Linton’s essay, describing how
it was “a highly discerning and brief but comprehensive introduction on ‘primitive’
art…which should be required reading for anyone interested in art, let alone the special
field under consideration.” He paraphrased Linton’s thesis: ‘Primitive’ art has only been
labeled as such because it is “the product of people whom we superciliously regard as
‘not civilized’ in our sense.” This “photographic anthology” encouraged the reader to
think about how and why African artists created the sculpture within its pages. “Eliot
Elisofon’s admirable photographs of the highly plastic African sculpture urge the
observer to meet this art on its own esthetic terms,” Devree stated. Beauty. Ingenuity.
Quality. Variety. These are the words Devree used to describe African art. “This volume
is a challenging addition to any art library,” he explained.378
Despite Devree’s positivity, there were reviews that offered shrouded insults to
African art. The Chicago Tribune explained that The Sculpture of Africa is “a scholarly

376
Quotes adapted from Frederick A. Praeger company brochure, The Sculpture of Africa in the
Books that Matter series, undated, Eliot Elisofon Papers, Eliot Elisofon Photographic Archives,
National Museum of African Art, Smithsonian, Washington, D.C. (EEPA E-2, 1.)
377
Howard Devree, “Study in Primitive Beauty,” The New York Times Book Review, December 7,
1958: BR56. (HRC 11.2, IMG_1239.) Six object photographs were included with his short
article.
378
Howard Devree, “Study in Primitive Beauty,” The New York Times Book Review, December 7,
1958: BR56. (HRC 11.2, IMG_1239.)
194
study, both important and impressive, of tribal sculpture of Africa, and, while its appeal
will be tremendous to some, it isn’t a book which can be sent to just anyone on your
list.”379 TIME magazine offered this review:
The Sculpture of Africa, by Eliot Elisofon…contains 405 examples, so

brilliantly displayed that the photographs (mostly done on assignment for
LIFE) convey a good deal of the subjects’ three-dimensional excitement
and lasting strangeness. By its influence on Picasso, Modigliani, Brancusi
and others, African sculpture changed the course of modern art; yet it is
hard to imagine that people will ever get used to it.380
“It isn’t a book which can be sent to just anyone on your list.” “Hard to imagine that
people will ever get used to it.” The underlying message was that African art can be
discomfiting. It isn’t for everyone. Dorothy Adlow, of The Christian Science Monitor,
took a more understanding approach to The Sculpture of Africa. She wrote, “Gradually
the strangeness vanishes, the beauty and mystery of these tribal arts become more
exciting. Such artifacts are now called works of art, and collectors regard them as
treasures equal to works of the grand tradition of classical and medieval times. With
photography of this caliber, we come very close indeed to perception of the originals in
shape, color, material, texture.”381
Indeed, the age of the coffee table fine art book had dawned. Better quality
publishing. Better quality images. Add in Elisofon’s trained photographic eye and you
end up with a high-end fine art book. In addition to the off-hand insult above, TIME

379
“Two more are ‘The Thrones and Earth and Heaven’ and ‘The Sculpture of Africa,’ by Eliot
Elisofon, with text by William Fagg…,” Chicago Tribune, November 30, 1958. (HRC 11.2,
IMG_1247.)
380
“Art: Museums Between Covers,” TIME (December 8, 1958). (HRC 11.2, IMG_1244.)
381
Dorothy Adlow, “Old Masters and New in an Array for the Reader With a Taste for Art;
Beauty in Many Forms From Around the World,” The Christian Science Monitor, November 20,
1958: 14.
195
illuminated this interesting aspect of the history of The Sculpture of Africa. The article,
titled, “Art: Museums Between Covers,” explained:
In André Malraux’s “imaginary museum” of art reproductions, many walls

are still blank. But last week U.S. publishers were doing their best to fill in
the empty spaces and, incidentally, investing more dollars than ever before
in the U.S.’s growing interest in art of all nations and ages.
Result: the biggest crop of art books ever. In anticipation of the Christmas
season, more than 100 titles have been published in the fall season alone at
prices ranging from 50 cents to $50.382
Phil Watson, for The San Jose Mercury-News expanded upon this topic:
While one spectacular development in the book business has been the
recent dizzy growth of paperbound, pocket-size, 25-cent reprints, another
at the opposite end of the money scale has been the annual appearance,
usually at this season, of increasing numbers of lavish art volumes that sell
for prices closer to $25.
We had been accustomed for some time to the fine Phaido [sic] and Studio
publications, but houses that find this field profitable and that deserve art
lovers’ warm regards keep growing more numerous. Their issues are
primarily picture books, which are accompanied however by extensive,
authoritative texts.383
Thus, this publication, with its large size, high-quality pictures, and texts by
renown scholars, was part of this growing trend, and perhaps could not have been
produced before this time period. Watson continued, discussing Praeger and The
Sculpture of Africa in particular:
One of the busiest newcomers is Frederick A. Praeger, recently named

printer to the Whitney Museum of American Art, and publisher this fall of
some outstanding and essential works:
The Sculpture of Africa, 405 photos by Eliot Elisofon, text by William
Fagg, preface by Ralph Linton ($15); in effect not just an art book but an

382
“Art: Museums Between Covers,” TIME (December 8, 1958). (HRC 11.2, IMG_1244.)
383
Phil Watson, “The World of Books,” The San Jose Mercury-News, December 21, 1958. (HRC
11.2, IMG_1247.)
196
art exhibition, all the more valuable for being the record of a creative
activity threatened with extinction.384
Watson did not insult African art; he did not make any flippant jokes about its
strangeness. Instead he recognized the publication as “an art exhibition.”
Reviewers acknowledged that African sculpture was given elite treatment
in Elisofon’s book. Martin and Mary Price assessed this fine art book trend for
Harper’s magazine, also in connection with a review of The Sculpture of Africa:
The great range and variety, as well as technical excellence, that art books
have achieved in recent years are an index of affluence, like platinum
ballpoint pens or stereophonic doorbells. But they indicate too the ways in
which the pleasures of collectors—the “proud possessors”—have become
diffused and transformed.
The volumes of Henry Moore and Henri Matisse listed below are works
the artist has designed himself for large-scale reproduction. The other
books, though they give one less of this sense of immediacy, make up for
the pleasures of possession with the pleasures of understanding. They
enable us to “own” a work through a more intense and informed response,
and, if this occasions pride, it also exacts effort and growth.385
Some interesting concepts are at play in this text. The owner of the book was now the
collector, now the possessor. Owning the volume was a sign of affluence, as any book
with a high price tag automatically has such status. The Moore and Matisse texts were art
forms in book format. But even The Sculpture of Africa allowed the owner to possess the
art within its pages on a theoretical level. It brought the “pleasures of understanding,”
encouraging the reader to grow intellectually, which triggered a sense of pride. Thus, in a

384
Phil Watson, “The World of Books,” The San Jose Mercury-News, December 21, 1958. (HRC
11.2, IMG_1247.)
385
Martin and Mary Price, “New Art Books,” Harper’s magazine, undated, Eliot Elisofon Papers,
Washington, D.C. (EEPA E-2, 10.) The Proud Possessors: The lives, times, and tastes of some
adventurous American art collectors, written by Aline B. Saarinen, was also published in 1958. It
discussed high profile art collections, such as those of J. Pierpont Morgan, Thomas Gilcrease,
Peggy Guggenheim, and the Rockefellers. (New York: Random House.)
197
way, the book stood for the art itself in the mind of the possessor, just as Elisofon’s
photographs stand for the sculptures. The Prices praised The Sculpture of Africa: “the
special appeal of the book lies in LIFE-photographer Elisofon’s 400 expert photographs
of carefully selected works (in some cases several views of the same object), beautifully
mounted in Bernard Quint’s book design. These do remarkable justice to texture as well
as mass and line; they are all the more handsome in themselves through their respect for
the works they represent. They are, in short, closer to art than to LIFE.”386
Like the passage above, many reviewers hailed the inclusion of multiple views of
the same object. For example, Frank Getlein wrote an article about Elisofon for the Dec.
28, 1958 Milwaukee Journal, “The World of Art: Photographer of African Sculpture is
Also Painter, Scholar, and Explorer.” Included in his text was a brief review of The
Sculpture of Africa:
The photography is direct and clear, dedicated to showing the pieces as

faithfully as possible. To heighten that fidelity, Elisofon introduces one
device that could well be applied to all sculpture reproduced in
photographs. Many of the pieces are shown in two views and a lot are
shown in as many as six. Spread across a double page, in a slowly rising
and descending arc, these photographs convey exactly the impression of
holding pieces in your hand and turning it gradually all the way around.387
Branching out from the concept of mental possession, the notion of tactile possession and
manipulation is opened up in Getlein’s text. The Sculpture of Africa provided an
enhanced experience for its readers.

386
Martin and Mary Price, “New Art Books,” Harper’s magazine, undated, Eliot Elisofon Papers,
Washington, D.C. (EEPA E-2, 10.)
387
Frank Getlein, “The World of Art: Photographer of African Sculpture is Also Painter, Scholar,
and Explorer,” Milwaukee Journal, December 28, 1958: Part 5, 5. (HRC 66.10, IMG _6300.)
198
While each of the book reviews promoted The Sculpture of Africa, they also
served as advocates of African art. Each newspaper article placed African art in the
public’s vision, moving toward recognition, acceptance, and appreciation. Emily Genauer
wrote for the Herald Tribune Book Review:
The aim of the new book “The Sculpture of Africa” is…to foster
understanding of it on its own terms…. Since we do not yet understand the
symbolic meanings of primitive art, our appreciation must be based on its
sensuous and aesthetic appeal.
Elisofon’s magnificent photographs of objects in wood, ivory, stone and

bronze, grouped according to the area of Africa in which they were made,
along with lucid explanatory text by William Fagg, of the British Museum,
about the anthropology and the art of each region, will perhaps do more
than any previous publication in the field to promote appreciation of
African art and, as a most important by-product, of the aims of modern
artists who also stress idea and essence above a superficial notion of
reality.388
The Western construction of beauty is just one option in the world of aesthetics and The
Sculpture of Africa helped to highlight this fact. Mary Beattie Brady wrote in her review
for the Library Journal: “The reader-viewer is started on an impelling intellectual
exercise of appreciation of this indigenous skilled art that is always logical and
understandable in terms of the culture of the artist and in the universal reach for beauty,
even though in a different evolution than that of the Western world to which we have
been so bound.”389
Several reviews, such as Brady’s, also looked beyond this aesthetic appreciation
for African art, thinking about the publication in a different way. Brady explained:
This book is not simply for the artist, the esthete and the anthropologist. It
should interest all who are trying to know and think in world terms…. It

388
Emily Genauer, “Artists of Africa and the Modern West: In Both Cultures, the Stress is on
Idea and Essence,” Herald Tribune Book Review, January 11, 1959: 4. (EEPA E-2, 9.)
389
Mary Beattie Brady, “The Arts,” Library Journal (February 1, 1959). (EEPA E-2, 11.)
199
can have a happy effect on our race relations at home and abroad. It can be
a useful tool in the development of self respect and pride among our
largest minority group in this country. In the United States where almost
all come from widely differing cultural backgrounds, we all need a sense
of belonging to some cultural inheritance.
After more than three centuries in looking away from Africa, our
Americans of African ancestry can take pride in the creative art
achievement of Africans as set forth in this thorough, dignified and
authoritative presentation. They can enjoy with special cultural
satisfaction, along with everyone else, these art objects that convey so
skillfully and uniquely, desired emotional effects without lessening
esthetic values.390
Associating “the creative achievement” of African art to black pride was not a new
concept, but it is meaningful that publications like The Sculpture of Africa were being
tied to “race relations.” In addition, Brady discussed the broader world: “The book is an
impressive combination of American and British knowledge, presentation skills and
cultural interest in the sculptural achievement of Africa at a time when those indigenous
peoples are joining the modern world with explosive speed and there is vital need for
intercultural understanding.”391 African art is more than just the sum of its objects; it has a
larger role to play and several newspaper articles on The Sculpture of Africa
acknowledged this. They proposed that the book could effect more than just
scholarship—it might affect the public’s worldview. The Jackson, Michigan Citizen
commented: “Eliot Elisofon’s ‘The Sculpture of Africa,’ is interesting for those
concerned with the art world, but also is noted by the politically minded reader who
wishes to understand the rapidly changing areas of the world.”392 For the Chicago Daily
Sun-Times Alma Lach wrote:

390
391
392
“Among the many books…,” Citizen, Jackson, Michigan, March 11, 1962. (HRC 11.2,
IMG_1247.)
200
Over the last few decades the popular American image of Africa has
undergone a swift transformation. At one time the ‘Dark Continent’ was
connected only with backwardness, exploitation and slavery. Today Africa
is seen as a composite of emerging nations and peoples. Statesmen,
scholars, and artists have learned with each passing day that Africa has its
own contribution to make to civilization.
One of those who has helped to reveal the artistic treasures of Africa is
Eliot Elisofon, photographer-collector (Life magazine) and research fellow
of Harvard University’s Peabody Museum…. Not the least of his artistic
triumphs is his new book, ‘The Sculpture of Africa,’ a landmark in the
artistic appreciation of primitive peoples.393
An appreciation of African art and an appreciation of Africa could go hand in hand, the
first often feeding the second.
Margaret Trowell, artist and founder of the oldest art school in East Africa, wrote
a review of the text in Man, the quarterly journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute.
Trowell stated: “This is a superb book, in both the quality of its photography and the
scholarship of its text. It will probably stand as the most important general work on
African sculpture for many years to come.”394 She also commented on the clarity and
scholarly care of the writings. Of course at the time, William Fagg was the editor of Man,
from 1947 to 1965.395 So this may have biased the review.
Was The Sculpture of Africa a lasting publication? Praeger’s marketing prose
stated: “…The Sculpture of Africa, a huge and most impressive book…is more ambitious
than anything yet published in this field and it will be for many years the standard volume
for anyone interested in the subject. Eliot has spent seven years altogether compiling the

393
Alma Lach, “Fine Fare from African Safari,” Chicago Daily Sun-Times, Good Food section,
January 8, 1959: 1. (HRC 66.10, IMG_6327.)
394
Margaret Trowell, “The Sculpture of Africa by Eliot Elisofon; William Fagg,” Man, vol. 59
(May 1959): 88.
395
Frank Willett, “Obituary: William Fagg,” The Independent, July 14, 1992.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/obituary-william-fagg-1533203.html
201
photographs for this book, and the whole thing is really a stunning job.”396 Was it really
“the” standard? Yes and no. It served as a great resource for collectors and libraries, but
the field quickly outgrew such a superficial approach to the subject. This was not
predictable, but Elisofon himself contributed to the push for more information about
African art, thus making his own book obsolete as far as contextual content.
Even at the time, anthropologist G.I. Jones took issue with this suggestion of The
Sculpture of Africa being “the standard,” and most of Praeger’s book jacket prose. He
wrote on the publication for Africa: Journal of the International African Institute in April
of 1959. Referring to the Praeger book jacket text, Jones declared: “This is not ‘the most
important work on the indigenous sculpture of Africa south of the Sahara ever attempted,’
nor is it ‘a synthesis of anthropology and aesthetics’ from which emerges ‘a unique view
of African art, its background and its inspiration.’”397 He criticized some of Elisofon’s
photographs as being distorted or blown out by “overpowerful spot lighting.”398 He stated
that, “Mr. William Fagg would be the first to disclaim the assertion that his essay
‘constitutes a major work in this field and a profound and detailed analysis of the whole
aesthetic philosophy of African sculpture,’” as was proclaimed on the book’s dust
jacket.399 Jones disapproved of the division of the book into three regions, and disliked
the interchangeable use of the words tribe and style, with no inclusion of precise

396
Praeger Publishing, letter to TIME magazine, October 8, 1958, Eliot Elisofon Paper and
IMG_1223 and IMG_1225.)
397
G.I. Jones, “The Sculpture of Africa by Eliot Elisofon,” Africa: Journal of the International
African Institute, vol. 29, no. 2 (April 1959): 198.
398
399
202
definitions of these terms. “It is high time that producers of works on African Negro art
made up their minds about the labels which they attach to their specimens,” he wrote.400
Jones also undermined some of Elisofon’s style classifications, second-guessing several
Nigerian ethnic group attributions. He remarked negatively on the lack of Eastern African
arts, and highlighted the inclusion of some recent products that he referred to as
“junk…designed for the European market.”401
Jones finished his in-depth review with the following statement: “But although
the classification and attribution of the various styles may be defective and Mr. Fagg’s
introduction to them disappointing, there still remains Professor Linton’s essay and Mr.
Elisofon’s 405 photographs. What more can we expect or ask for in these days when
African Negro art has ceased to interest the majority of anthropologists and has become
the accepted domain of the art critic and the connoisseur?”402 He seemed to have little
respect and patience for the non-anthropologist attempting to deal with African art and
publish books on it. He did not expect substance from art critics and connoisseurs. There
was no more tried and true anthropology in this book, and few of his colleagues were
pursuing the topic anymore. Earlier in the text he explained:
The fact that the producers of this book could find no more suitable essay
for their introduction is, however, a sad indication of how little attention
anthropologists have devoted to African art.
Mr. Fagg’s contribution which follows underlines this fact still further:
instead of a serious comparative study he has produced, presumably in
response to pressure from the editors, the kind of introductory essay which

400
401
402
203
has become stereotyped for art books of this kind, in which the writer
expresses his own opinions about the subject while debunking those of
other less informed or more imaginative writers.403
Jones knew enough about the topic to be critical of the publication, pointing out issues
that most other reviewers did not see. In many ways, he wrote a critique from the future,
expecting a much more specific text than was possible in 1958. He delivered an
authoritative, pointed analysis, but in the end, it is clear that he saw The Sculpture of
Africa as an attractive picture book for amateurs. The separation of the fields was starting
to occur. Fagg was an ethnographer, but he decided to specialize in art history as his
career developed. Jones belonged to the pure anthropology camp that disliked this type of
shift in scholarship and audience.
But to whom should African art ‘belong’? The art historians? The
anthropologists? Or the public at large? Who has the right to study it? Discuss it?
Analyze it? Elisofon believed that he had the right to publish this book, despite the fact
that he was neither art historian nor anthropologist. He was confident that it could serve
as a groundbreaking resource, and in many ways it did, helping to transform the
definition of African art as artifact into its new status as fine art.
Bell, Book and Candle, Film
“Who’s to say what magic is?”

- Shepherd Henderson, Bell, Book and Candle404
During his second trip to Africa in 1951, LIFE sent Elisofon on a side-trip to
photograph the production of The African Queen, directed by John Huston, starring

403
404
Bell, Book and Candle, directed by Richard Quine, screenplay by Daniel Taradash, play by
John Van Druten, performers Kim Novak and Jimmy Stewart (Columbia Pictures, 1958): DVD.
204
Katharine Hepburn and Humphrey Bogart.405 The article on The African Queen was
published as “LIFE Goes on Location in Africa: Katie and Bogie Hit the Congo,” in the
September 17, 1951 issue (figs. 5.7-5.10). While on the set he chatted with Huston about
the potential of emotive color in motion pictures. What Elisofon had thought of as a
casual conversation turned about to be an important one; Huston asked him to be his
Special Color Consultant for the 1952 production of Moulin Rouge.406
In a New Yorker magazine interview in 1953, Elisofon declared that Moulin
Rouge was the “first picture to be painted with light.”407 His work on the film combined
many of his passions into one package: photography, color, lighting, and painting. In his
five-page spread on the motion picture, “Razzle-Dazzle of Paris of Toulouse-Lautrec,”
(LIFE, January 19, 1953) he gave the magazine’s readers a glimpse at the settings, scenes,
actors, and innovative color scheme. Elisofon’s still photographs of Moulin Rouge
closely correspond to the look of the film (figs. 5.11-5.13).
Critics applauded the film for starting a revolution in color cinematography and
Elisofon won Modern Photography magazine’s first award for outstanding photography
for his work on Moulin Rouge.408 LIFE continued to lend Elisofon to film studios to work
as a color consultant and set still photographer after Moulin Rouge’s success. From 1963-

405
See Katharine Hepburn, The Making of “The African Queen” (New York: Alfred A. Knopf,
1987).
406
Jacqueline Bolder, “Eliot Elisofon, 61, Dies: Noted Photographer,” Star-News (1973). (HRC
71.17/66.17, IMG_2751.) Moulin Rouge was a fictionalized account of the life of the painter
Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec, based on the novel by Pierre La Mure (1950). It was a United Artists
film.
407
Lillian Ross and Brendan Gill, “The Talk of the Town: Fictional Color,” The New Yorker
(March 14, 1953): 24.
408
See HRC 82.13, Modern Photography magazine proofs for article on Elisofon and Moulin
Rouge; HRC 53.16/48.16, 1956 Color Annual, HRC 53.19/48.19, “Color Control,” Popular
Photography, vol. 43, no. 6 (December, 1958), as examples of critical response to the film.
205
65 he worked on The Greatest Story Ever Told, produced and directed by George Stevens,
and he also created an accompanying photo essay: “The Greatest Story Ever Told,” LIFE,
March 27, 1964.409 Also in the mid-1960s Elisofon worked as a color consultant and still
photographer for the films Cast a Giant Shadow, The Warlord, and Dr. Dolittle. These
opportunities led to a new phase of his career, and eventually, to his directorship of the
Black African Heritage television series. His most important Hollywood project in
connection with African art was Bell, Book and Candle.
In 1957, Hollywood producer Julian Blaustein hired Elisofon as the special color
consultant for Columbia Pictures’ production of Bell, Book and Candle, a successful New
York play written by John Van Druten. Daniel Taradash, a friend of Elisofon’s, wrote the
screenplay and recommended Elisofon to Blaustein. Elisofon also served as a still
photographer for the Bell, Book and Candle set. His pictures were featured in a LIFE
magazine cover story on November 24, 1958, which was designed to promote the film
(figs. 5.14-5.16).410
Bell, Book and Candle starred Kim Novak as Gillian Holroyd (Gil), a modern-day
witch who falls in love with publisher Shepherd Henderson (Shep), played by James
Stewart, and subsequently loses her powers. It is a reverse fairytale in which the ‘villain’
is also the protagonist. She falls in love with the ‘prince’ and has to transform into the
‘princess’ in order to get her man. The movie co-starred Elsa Lancaster, Jack Lemmon,
Ernie Kovacs, and Hermione Gingold.

409
Elisofon appeared in the documentary on this film on the DVD set, both taking still
photographs on set, and making salad in the mess tent for the film’s actors.
410
Ralph Crane took the cover picture of Novak and Elisofon took all of the other photographs on
set.
206
The Role of ‘Primitive’ Art in the Film
Taradash and Elisofon had known each other since the early 1950s, and Taradash
was well aware of Elisofon’s art collection, as he had been to his apartment for dinner.
He had wanted Elisofon to be the color consultant on his film Picnic, but schedule
conflicts prevented it.411 In Taradash’s Bell, Book and Candle script ‘primitive’ art played
an important role and Elisofon collaborated with Julius Carlebach on its appearance in
the film. The $75,000 worth of African and Pacific art was borrowed from Carlebach’s
Gallery of New York to stock the shop, and the title sequence of the film lavishes it with
attention. Taradash’s script commentary for the opening credits follows:
Behind each Credit Title, a grotesque object of Primitive Art from Africa
or Oceania. The impression is that these figures are in a shop or intimate
gallery. They are on small individual projections along a wall, at varying
height from waist level to near the ceiling, As the Credits change, we pass
torsos and skulls, masks and statuettes.
The heads are flattened, the eyes are protruding, the lips are pouting.
Distorted bodies, foreshortened legs, pointed bosoms. The pieces represent,
to some degree, the characteristic of each Credit: frightening (for the
Producer), preposterous (for the Director), endearing (for the Writer) – but
always grotesque.412
Single art pieces are paired with the actor’s names as a direct correlation between the
look of the artwork and the look of the actor. For instance, Kim Novak’s name is paired
with a glamorous Kota reliquary figure (fig. 5.17).
Bell, Book and Candle opened around Christmas in 1958. Elisofon’s The
Sculpture of Africa had just been published, and his Boston Museum of Fine Arts

411
Daniel Taradash, letter to Eliot Elisofon, December 19, 1954, Elisofon Paper and Photographic
Collection, Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin. (HRC 67.1/66.9,
IMG_2236.)
412
Daniel Taradash, ‘First Estimating Draft’ of Bell, Book and Candle, script commentary,
October 12, 1956, Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection, Harry Ransom Center, The
University of Texas at Austin: 1. (HRC 28.8, IMG_2678.)
207
exhibition on ‘primitive’ art had just opened. The Daily Boston Globe featured an article
on Carlebach in connection with the film and the MFA show: “Bell, Book and Masks: A
Dealer in Magic.”413 The text follows:
Bringing a collection of primitive African masks used by natives in ‘magic’

ceremonies, Julius Carlebach arrived in Boston yesterday with several of
the antiques and sculptures shown in ‘Bell, Book and Candle.’ This is a
picture about Manhattan’s modern witches with Kim Novak as the chief
witch … There are also three treasures from Carlebach’s collection at the
Boston Museum of Fine Arts.
Primitives, he says, are the forerunner of modern art, but they have one
value which is not shared by contemporary paintings and sculpture.
‘Primitive art has the appeal of complete honesty,’ he said. ‘The primitive
artists didn’t make their masks and sculptures to impress rich patrons but
for the purposes of magic. When a native wears a mask, he is no longer
himself but the god represented by the mask.’
His one sorrow about the film is that he never did meet beautiful Miss
Novak. ‘But I’ll give her a job in my Madison av. shop any time she likes,’
he promised.414
Just as in this article, the film ties ‘primitive’ art to magic, especially Gil’s magic. The
contents of Gil’s art shop and the way it appears are part of her character. Her apartment
is at the back of the shop, so there is no separation between the art and her identity. Gil is
shown wandering among the sculptures at night, talking to her cat, draped nonchalantly
on her shoulder (figs. 5.18-5.19).
When Shep meets Gil for the first time, the scene takes place in the shop. He is
fascinated and appalled by the ‘grotesque’ art, and comments on several pieces. When
Gil loses her magic to love, she changes and so does her shop. Her wardrobe goes from
bare feet and beatnik clothing in dark colors and animal prints, to yellow heels and a

413
M.L.A., “Bell, Book and Masks: A Dealer in Magic,” Daily Boston Globe, November 22,
1958: 24.
414
M.L.A., “Bell, Book and Masks: A Dealer in Magic,” Daily Boston Globe, November 22,
1958: 24.
208
yellow-and-white gauze shirtwaist dress. The ‘primitive’ art leaves the building (we do
not even see it go), and is replaced by ‘Flowers of the Sea’ — floral arrangements of
shells (figs. 5.20-5.22). The shells are simple, ordinary objects, while the ‘primitive’ art
was spooky, magical, and special. To win over Shep, Gil has to give up magic and
become human. She must set aside ‘primitive’ art, her college training in anthropology,
and embrace blushing, crying, and selling seashells as a ‘proper female.’
Elisofon worked in Hollywood for 10 weeks on Bell, Book and Candle. He was
contracted “to perform services under the supervision of the producer of the picture in
connection with the selection and coordination of the colors contained in the
photographic portion of the picture as related to costumes, sets, set dressings, and other
elements of the picture and to create a basic color pattern or scheme for the picture as a
whole.”415 Blaustein wanted Elisofon to write a color scenario from the movie script,
translating the entire movie, scene by scene, into color terms, using special filters and
gelatins.416 This approach was meant to incorporate color as part of the dramatic action of
the movie, to use it to mark character changes, to further the story, and to heighten
emotion.
One of Elisofon’s suggestions was to place the shop’s ‘primitive’ sculptures on
milk glass shelves lit from below, with light blue gelatins on top of the glass in order to
cast an eerie blue glow onto the art. One can see these blue gelatins in some of the stills
shot by Elisofon (figs. 5.23-5.24). Overall, the original shop had an eccentric, shadowy

415
“Employment Agreement,” between Phoenix Productions and Eliot Elisofon for Bell, Book
and Candle color consultant position, December 23, 1957, Elisofon Paper and Photographic
Collection, Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin: 3. (HRC 28.6, IMG_2441.)
416
“N.Y. to L.A.,” f.y.i. magazine (undated), Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection, Harry
Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin. (HRC 28.7, IMG_2629.)
209
atmosphere that was enhanced by gray walls, unconventional lighting, and ‘primitive’ art.
The reformed shop was shown with white walls, the seashell sculptures lit from above,
and overall pink lighting for a fresh, healthy, soft atmosphere.
The ‘primitive’ art might appear as just set dressing, but it was specifically written
about in Taradash’s script as integral to Gil’s presentation as a witch. While using
‘primitive’ art as a character attribute boosts its status, the overall message of the film is
that magic is negative. Spell casting is treated like drug abuse: It is addicting, used
selfishly, and causes the user to lose touch with normal society. “That’s what happens to
people like us,” Gil says to her brother Nicky, “We forfeit everything and end up in a
little world of separateness from everyone else.”417 In Taradash’s script ‘primitive’ art is
treated as baffling, creepy and unsettling. He uses words such as esoteric, ferocious,
gruesome and forbidding to describe it.
In a symbolic moment, that is as heavy-handed as the rest of the film, Gil breaks a
‘Pende’ mask when she throws a broom at it during a quarrel. Shep has given her the
broom as a cruel joke, as he confronts her about her casting a love spell on him. He is
leaving her and the apartment house where they both live. Gil suspects he will go back to
his ex-fiancée, he says maybe he will, and she loses her cool. The mask breaks right
before she realizes that she has lost her powers and is in love with Shep (figs. 5.25). Her
cat, Pyewacket, is her familiar and method for casting spells. She searches for him to hex
Shep’s ex-fiancee, but he hides from her. In another bit of contrived symbolism,
Pyewacket climbs up high to a shelf containing an African sculpture of a cat to escape

417
Bell, Book and Candle, directed by Richard Quine, screenplay by Daniel Taradash, play by
John Van Druten, performers Kim Novak and Jimmy Stewart (Columbia Pictures, 1958): DVD.
210
from Gil and be among the other magical objects, which Gil can no longer channel (fig.
5.26).
The average American would come away from the film thinking ‘primitive’ art
was dangerous and the domain of weird people who lived abnormal lives. While this may
not seem like the best advertisement for African art, for anyone who wanted to live a hip,
risky, and exciting life, ‘primitive’ art was the hot trend to embrace. Susan Vogel
mentioned Bell, Book and Candle in her 2005 African Arts article “Whither African Art?
Emerging Scholarship at the End of an Age.” A film still of Novak and Stewart in the
‘primitive’ art shop was accompanied by Vogel’s caption:
In the 1950s, African art was primitive, sexy, and exciting — even
magical and dangerous. Here, Kim Novak, playing a seductive witch, runs
a gallery in bohemian Greenwich Village. The movie Bell, Book, and
Candle expressed mid-century pop-culture associations of African art with
sex, magic, bongo drums, and radical avant-gardes. That is gone today. In
the public mind, and in movies, African objects are now usually placed in
a high-toned decor or in a museum. 418
Columbia Pictures’ promotional photographs for Bell, Book and Candle supported the
image of African art as ‘sexy.’ A sensuous homage to Man Ray’s African art photographs
(such as Noire et Blanche, 1926, fig. 5.27), the shots were taken by Columbia Pictures’
studio photographer, famed Hollywood portraitist Robert Coburn. Novak lounges in a
revealing gauze gown while clutching an obscured horned African mask in one series of
shots (figs. 5.28-5.30). In another set she is seen in a slinky black gown posing with the
Kota reliquary she is connected to in the opening credits (figs. 5.31-5.34). The second
series was shot in both black-and-white and color.

418
Susan Vogel, “Whither African Art? Emerging Scholarship at the End of an Age,” African
Arts, vol. 38, no. 4 (Winter 2005): 16-17.
211
Reception
Bell, Book and Candle was nominated for two Academy awards and one Golden
Globe and garnered a tepid reception in the press. ‘Primitive’ art and the film’s unique
sense of color were mentioned in most reviews and announcements. Bosley Crowther of
The New York Times wrote: “The magic in Bell, Book and Candle … is not so much
black as chromatic. It’s the color that’s bewitching in this film.”419 For the Christian
Science Monitor, John Beaufort wrote: “One should mention three contributions which
reflect credit on Mr. Quine (the director) and his employers. The first is the amusing use
of primitive art to characterize various and sundry in the credit titles. The second is the
modish color for which, one assumes, Eliot Elisofon’s consultancy deserves applause.
The third is Pyewacket, a credit to all the cats from Siam….”420
While Elisofon did work on more African art-centric productions during his
lifetime, out of all of them, Bell, Book and Candle has probably had the most impact.421 It
was distributed in movie theaters around the world from 1958 through 1961, and played
in them for weeks, if not months. It has been shown on television for decades,
particularly around Halloween and Christmas, two holidays discussed in the film. It was
released on video and DVD for home viewing. Today anyone can order a copy of the
film, sit down, and watch it at their convenience, even repeatedly. One cannot do that
with any of the other of the African art-centric productions that Elisofon was connected
to.

419
Bosley Crowther, “Screen: A Witch in Love; 'Bell, Book and Candle' at Fine Arts, Odeon,”
The New York Times, December 27, 1958. (HRC 28.7, IMG_2623.)
420
John Beaufort, “James Stewart, Kim Novak Starring in Comic Fantasy,” The Christian Science
Monitor, January 2, 1959: 9.
421
The 1960s American television series Bewitched was partially inspired by the Bell, Book and
Candle film.
212
Though the way that African art was shown in this film may have had negative
repercussions for how people thought about ‘primitive’ art, it still exposed the public to
an unfamiliar topic. Elisofon once said, “In the field of commercial films where almost
all of them are made to entertain people it is not often that we find enlightenment as
well.”422 Bell, Book and Candle allowed its audience to view art objects that they may
never have seen before, and this could qualify as a type of enlightenment. The same
could be said of the MFA exhibition and The Sculpture of Africa, and their potential to
enlighten was noteworthy. Overall, 1958 produced the most influential African art
projects of Elisofon’s career.

422
Austin: 4. (HRC 53.11, IMG_3844.)
213
Chapter Six: Late 1960s and Early 1970s Television Shows
Many of Elisofon’s final years were spent honing his skills as a film director,
writer, and producer on several African film and television projects. He was the set still
photographer and prologue director for Khartoum, a United Artists film released in 1965.
His experience on Khartoum led to a job filming the Ancient Egyptian section of Man
Builds, a film for the American Institute of Architects. It also opened up opportunities to
work on television documentaries on Egypt and Africa, most of which were designed for
television broadcast and educational distribution. He was the creative director and chief
cameraman for Africa (1967), a $2.5 million, four-part documentary for the American
Broadcasting Company. Elisofon also helped create the two-part Camera III: African
Sculpture special (1970) that was filmed for CBS Television. In addition, four one-hour
programs known as Black African Heritage were written and directed by Elisofon for
Group W (Westinghouse Broadcasting Company, 1972). Each of these projects helped
Elisofon make connections with people in the African art field, and contributed to the
changing American perceptions about African art.
1967 ABC Africa Special
In 1966, ABC hired Elisofon as the Director of Creative Production for a unique
project: a 4-hour documentary on Africa that would take up all of one Sunday evening
prime time slot.423 ABC’s intention was to launch a series of long documentaries, each

423
ABC News Chief Elmer Lower declared in the New York Daily News: “With this undertaking
we hope to break entirely new ground in TV journalism and deliver a product to make a lasting
contribution in conveying knowledge and thereby fostering international understanding” (Matt
Messina, “Around the Dials: ABC-TV Sets Africa Study,” Daily News, May 18, 1966, HRC
48.9).
214
dedicated to how people live in different parts of the world.424 At the time it was created,
Africa was the longest, most expensive documentary ever made. ABC’s budget for the
program was $2.5 million. The final product was 3 hours and 24 minutes long, 4 hours
with commercials.425 With the help of Elisofon, the ABC team formed nine camera crews
that were sent to 36 African countries.426
Elisofon traveled to Africa twice for the production, staying approximately six
months in total. He directed one of the units himself, filming animal behavior and natural
landscape sequences. He also contributed to the early planning for the show’s content.
While Elisofon wanted to make a magical and poetic documentary about Africa, ABC’s
goal was to make a hard-hitting news production. Africa included segments on current
affairs, political leaders, disease, corruption, poverty, civil wars, inter-tribal massacres,
refugees, economic problems, and much more. While athletics and folk music in Africa
were also addressed, African art was ignored in ABC’s Africa. Perhaps it was deemed too
‘soft news’ for their hard-hitting news program.
As planned, Africa was shown in a 4-hour block on Sunday, September 10,
1967.427 The press response to Africa was generally laudatory. Louise Sweeney,

424
ABC press release, June 14, 1966, Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection, Harry Ransom
Center, The University of Texas at Austin: 1. (HRC 48.9, IMG_8728.)
425
The shooting schedule ran 367 days and yielded more than 600,000 feet of film for a total of
278 viewing hours. James Fleming, “Africa on U.S. Television: The Making of a Marathon
Show,” Topic USIA magazine, 1967. (HRC 48.9, IMG_8773 thru IMG_8792.)
426
At the beginning of the project, Elisofon held a seminar in New York City for the crews in
order to coordinate the camera techniques so there would be uniform-style footage. The units
were trained in lighting techniques, camera manipulation, and lens usage (Television Age, June 6,
1966, HRC 48.9, IMG_8743 thru IMG_8744).
427
Then the program was cut into 1-hour segments and shown on subsequent Tuesday mornings
for four weeks in order to be shown in schools. In 1967, ABC, Ridge Press and Doubleday
published a book to accompany the documentary. It was called Africa’s Animals and it featured
80 pages on 22 African species, with 45 color photographs by Marvin Newman and Elisofon.
215
reviewing the show in the September 11th Christian Science Monitor, called it “stunning
television, entertaining, informative … Africa knew how to use the medium to put the
message across.”428 Dean Gysel of the Chicago Daily News wrote: “Africa was a
thoroughly interesting and enthralling evening. It was the definitive piece on this still-
dark continent, a document of extraordinary dimension and of lasting educational
value.”429 The Variety magazine review said Africa was “some of the best color footage
ever to run on the smallscreen … Anyone who still doubts that black is beautiful (too)
would have been shaken.”430 John Vorhees of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer wrote: “ABC
turned TV into a magic carpet Sunday night … certainly no one who saw the entire report
will ever be able to think of Africa in the same old simplistic fashion again … As a
beginning study of the complexities of Africa, it was a brilliant effort by ABC, an
outstanding example of what commercial TV can do when it uses its funds wisely by
placing them at the disposal of creative talents with a statement to make.”431
For the Dallas News, Bevo Baker wrote that Africa “must go down as a landmark
in television … The photography, masterfully helmed by Eliot Elisofon, was brilliant. His
work, alone, made the four hours the best travelogue yet offered on the tube.”432 Elisofon
was awarded the Outstanding Achievement in News Documentary Award by the
National Academy of Television and Sciences in 1967 for his work on Africa. He did not

428
Louise Sweeney, “TV: ‘Africa’ and points west,” The Christian Science Monitor, September
11, 1967: 6.
429
Dean Gysel, “Africa a Really Great Show,” Chicago Daily News, September 11, 1967. (EEPA
V-13, 7.)
430
“Television Reviews: Africa,” Variety, September 13, 1967. (EEPA V-13, 9.)
431
John Vorhees, “Absorbing Africa,” Seattle Post-Intelligencer, September 12, 1967. (EEPA V-
13, 6.)
432
Bevo Baker, “Broadcast Beat: More Wins than Losses,” Dallas News, September 11, 1967.
(EEPA V-13, 4.)
216
feel that he deserved the recognition. In his book Java Diary Elisofon described his
feelings about the project: “… I was given kudos for the color … too many kudos since I
didn’t do much more than select the film we all used, a new high-speed Kodak film that
was still unproved, and to help pick some of the camera crews. More credit should have
gone to the men who were in the field… Quibbles aside, I am happy the show was a
success ….”433
After the sensation of ABC’s Africa, Elisofon was able to make television shows
on Africa using his own approach. His next two projects, two CBS Camera III specials
and the Group W series Black African Heritage, were built around his fascination with
African art. Black African Heritage was released in 1972, a year before Elisofon’s death,
and following that project he had several new documentary ideas on African art in the
works. For example, at the time of his death, Elisofon was working on a large educational
filmstrip project for Encyclopedia Britannica titled: “Africa: Its People and Their Art.”
Robert Farris Thompson and Patrick McNaughton contributed to this project, but because
Elisofon died, it was never completed.434
1970 Camera III: African Sculpture Productions
Camera III or Camera Three was a CBS variety show that ran from 1959 to
1979.435 The program was dedicated to the fine arts and often featured presentations of
poetry, ballet, and opera. It aired on Saturday afternoons. Each episode ran for 25 minutes

433
Eliot Elisofon, Java Diary (New York: Macmillan, 1969): 285-6.
434
Weldon Johnson, letter to Warren Robbins, February 20, 1975, Eliot Elisofon Papers, Eliot
Elisofon Photographic Archives, National Museum of African Art, Smithsonian, Washington,
D.C. (EEPA K-1, 6.)
435
In 1966 Camera III won a Primetime Emmy, awarded to the producer, Dan Gallagher, for
Achievements in Daytime Programming. In 1979 it moved over to PBS for one year before
ending.
217
and was presented by James Macandrew. Elisofon wrote, filmed and organized two
shows for CBS’s Camera III program on African art in 1970.436 Elisofon played the role
of host on the two programs, joined by special guests. The first program was title
“African Sculpture: Glorious Past,” and the two special guests were Yale University
professor Robert Farris Thompson and John J. Akar, the Sierra Leone ambassador to the
United States. Akar was instrumental in bringing African culture to the United States: in
1963 he founded the Sierra Leone National Dance Troupe, which performed at the 1964
New York World’s Fair. The goal of “Glorious Past” was to explore the meaning of
African art for specific ethnic groups in West Africa.437 It aired on April 26, 1970. For the
second show, “African Sculpture: Dynamic Expression,” Elisofon was joined by James
Johnson Sweeney and Warren Robbins. “Dynamic Expression” was a discussion of the
aesthetics of African art and how it influenced western art. It aired on May 3, 1970.438
Both programs followed a talk show format in which Elisofon chatted with his
guests. They sat in chairs on top of a map of Africa painted on the studio floor. African
masks and sculptures sat on pedestals around them. Occasionally Elisofon and one of his
guests would stand next to a specific work of art to discuss it. The shows were only 25
minutes long, so comments about the artworks were brief, but they were an effective
introduction to African art.

436
On November 30th of the previous year he had appeared on the program to promote his Java
Diary book and he had a good working relationship with the Camera III team.
437
Merrill Brockway, letter to Ned Cramer, CBS employees, April 3, 1970, Eliot Elisofon Paper
48.11, IMG_8894.)
438
“African Sculpture: Glorious Past” is viewable on DVD at the EEPA. “Dynamic Expression”
is probably there, but is currently missing. The HRC holds videotapes of the two Camera III
programs but they have not been digitized, so the researcher cannot view them at this time.
218
In addition to the talk show-style studio segments, Elisofon’s African field
photographs and film footage, and two mask performance films by Thompson were built
into the Camera III programs. Elisofon also filmed special sequences on the art in two
exhibitions, both organized by the International Exhibitions Foundation: the 1970
National Gallery of Art’s African Sculpture (also shown at the Brooklyn Museum) and
the Tishman collection traveling exhibition Sculpture of Black Africa. These segments
featured African sculptures rotating on a turntable in front of the camera. Elisofon re-used
much of this footage in his next television series, Black African Heritage.439 Elisofon lent
one item to the National Gallery show, a Bete/Dan-Ngere mask, which he had owned
since the 1940s (figs. 6.1-6.4). He also photographed the exhibition objects for TIME
magazine, the exhibition catalog, and a traveling picture exhibition. Elisofon was paid to
come to the National Gallery and lecture as part of a speaker series to introduce the
exhibition. Thus, he was a key participant in the marketing.
The CBS shows were a success and further boosted Elisofon’s standing in the
African art field. Stephan Chodorov, a Camera III staff writer, sent Elisofon a letter on
May 12, 1970: “I think the subject matter and your reputation drew a larger audience to
these shows than to the average C3 show. I heard later from several friends whose
reactions I solicited that they had rather expected a didactic approach and were delighted

439
The two CBS Camera III: African Sculpture productions were shown at the Elisofon memorial
exhibition opening at the Museum of African art, hosted by Warren Robbins on May 30, 1974.
Angela Terrell, “An Elisofon Tribute,” The Washington Post, May 31, 1974: B3.
219
to find so much more going on besides talk … The programs were handsome and very
well received.”440
CBS Camera III African Art Content Guide
African artworks seen in “Glorious Past:”

Benin queen mother bronze head
Tsoede chief bronze
Tada seated bronze statue
Nok terracotta head
Igbo-Ukwu bronze shell
Afro-Portuguese ivory saltcellar
Benin altar, bronze plaques and Odudua head
Yoruba bronze female figure, gelede masks, epa mask
Ejagham headdresses
Ashanti gold objects and stool
Akan head
Baule sculptures
Fon sculpture of god of war
Tishman Cameroonian figure holding severed head
Dan judgment mask, gorilla mask, and figures
Mende trumpet and bundu headresses
African artworks seen in “Dynamic Expression:”

Bamana and Dogon art
Special attention to chi waraw, masks, mother and child figure
Fang and Kota works
1972 Black African Heritage
“We are all aware of the exciting political, economic, and social growth of
today’s African nations. But we can never forget the cultural heritage
which Black Africa has given, not only to its own people, but to the
world… We will show the traditions, history, culture and beauty of the
African people. Some of us, like myself, owe a debt of gratitude to the
Africans who are among our forefathers. But all of us, black and white,
have been made richer by the African contribution to American culture.”

440
Stephan Chodorov, letter to Eliot Elisofon, May 12, 1970, Eliot Elisofon Paper and
IMG_8906.)
220
– Julian Bond’s introduction

narration for Black African
Heritage441
Disappointed by the breadth of the ABC Africa production but encouraged by its
success, Elisofon yearned to do his own large-scale television documentary on Africa.
Eventually he got a sponsor to pay for the project: Group W, The Westinghouse
Broadcasting Company.442 Elisofon convinced the company that he could do four hours
on Africa for much less money ($200,000 instead of $2.5 million) and with a focus on
culture so it would not be a rehash of ABC’s show. For Group W, this was an appropriate
follow-up to their 1971 series Rush Toward Freedom, a presentation of the modern civil
rights struggle in America, narrated by Julian Bond, Georgia legislator and civil rights
leader.
Elisofon’s series, Black African Heritage, was shown over the course of four
weeks, beginning in March 1972.443 It consisted of four one-hour documentaries: “The

441
Eliot Elisofon, Black African Heritage (Group W, The Westinghouse Broadcasting Company,
1972), Eliot Elisofon Photographic Archives, National Museum of African Art, Smithsonian,
Washington, D.C.: DVDs.
442
Elisofon used the two CBS Camera III programs on African art to help get backing for Black
African Heritage. (Eliot Elisofon, letter to John Smith, February 10, 1970, Eliot Elisofon Paper
and Photographic Collection, Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin, HRC
49.5, IMG_9691.) A large part of the studio footage of sculpture seen in Black African Heritage
was filmed for the CBS Camera III specials by Elisofon and then lent to Group W for inclusion
in the series. In addition, most of the Nigerian antiquities were filmed from Elisofon’s
transparencies that he had made on earlier trips to Africa. (Eliot Elisofon, letter to David E.
Henderson, President of Group W Productions Inc., May 31, 1972, Eliot Elisofon Paper and
Photographic Collection, Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin, HRC 49.3,
IMG_9453.)
443
The EEPA holds the original 100,000(+) feet of film and audio of Black African Heritage,
which has been preserved but not digitized. This includes all of the footage shot, but it is not
researcher accessible. Luckily the EEPA also holds four DVDs of the programs in their airing
format, which are viewable. The HRC also holds five reels of the series, but again, they have not
been digitized for the researcher to view.
221
Congo,” “The Bend of the Niger,” “The Slave Coast,” and “Africa’s Gift.”444 The series
was shown on television channels in 41 major markets throughout the country and Group
W estimated that 40 million people watched at least one of the four programs.445 While
ABC’s Africa was shown all at once, on Sunday, September 10, 1967, the Elisofon series
was spread out. This was both detrimental and beneficial to the series. In theory, if a
viewer missed one show, he could still see the next one. However, if the viewer only saw
one of the films, he was not getting the whole message.
Elisofon created this series over several visits to Africa in 1970 and 1971, with
the help of two cameramen, Georges Bracher and John Smith, and one sound technician,
Maya Bracher (fig. 6.5).446 The four films were narrated by Julian Bond (“The Congo”),
actor Ossie Davis (“The Bend of the Niger”), author Maya Angelou (“The Slave Coast”),
and by fellow LIFE photographer and Elisofon’s close friend, Gordon Parks (“Africa’s
Gift”). By using famous black Americans to voice the series, Elisofon differed from the
ABC approach, which had used Gregory Peck as narrator.
Elisofon produced, wrote, and directed Black African Heritage, which was
originally titled Focus on Africa and alternately Black Pride. He had artistic control of

444
In addition, two short films were created by Elisofon using some of the Black African Heritage
footage: African Carving: A Dogon Kanaga Mask and Akan Gold. The Dogon film was shown
with the Lester Wunderman Dogon art traveling exhibition in 1973 (HRC 52.5, 63.27-28). Akan
Gold was commissioned by Paul Tishman to showcase his Akan gold and brass gold weights
collection. It features footage shot in West Africa on a later trip by Elisofon, including the process
of making a gold pendant (HRC 52.6). His work on the film became the foundation for his
January 1973 Smithsonian magazine article, “Africa’s Golden Splendor” (HRC 43.8, 57.11).
445
Eliot Elisofon, letter to Georges Bracher, October 25, 1972, Eliot Elisofon Paper and
IMG_9506.)
446
Georges and Maya Bracher worked as a team and were based out of Dakar. They had done
documentary work for the United States Information Service (USIS). Georges Bracher is famous
for his work as a cinematographer on avant-garde films, such as Touki Bouki (1973).
222
the programs and Group W had final say on their subject matter and treatment. Elisofon’s
main goal for the series was to show what Africa has given to the world. However,
anyone familiar with Elisofon’s life pursuits would recognize it as a visual catalog of his
own interests and experiences in Africa. He returned to the same peoples and villages he
had been visiting and photographing since 1947.
He wrote several treatments for Black African Heritage that described his
motivations for creating the series. “This is not an educational TV series,” he explained,
“but it is informative and will be also exciting entertainment. In 1966 and 1967 I
produced and directed two large parts of the four-hour ABC Africa Show. Our goal then
was too general. We were still unaware of how important the roots of black Americans
were, not only to themselves, but to all of us. We will need to learn and to know our
black heritage.”447 Elisofon wanted to present a new, positive view of Africa that would
give black Americans pride in their heritage. The series focused on the history and
culture of Central and West Africa, the two main areas where black Americans’ ancestors
had originated from during the slave trade. All of the material filmed was designed to
establish the worth of black Africa. 448

447
Eliot Elisofon, “In Search of Soul,” essay draft for Black African Heritage, Eliot Elisofon
Papers, Eliot Elisofon Photographic Archives, National Museum of African Art, Smithsonian,
Washington, D.C.: 1. (EEPA X-8, 2.)
448
The series was automatically booked to appear on the five Group W TV stations: WBZ-TV,
Boston; KYW-TV, Philadelphia; WJZ-TV, Baltimore; KDA-TV, Pittsburgh; and KPIX, San
Francisco. Elisofon conducted a press tour for Black African Heritage to several of these cities,
including Boston and San Francisco. This gave him opportunities to be interviewed by media
outlets and get his own words directly into the press coverage, and to defend his approach to the
series. After the initial television showings, Black African Heritage was handed over to the
Westinghouse Learning Corporation, which cut filmstrips from the material, and served as
distributor of the films to specific institutions, TV channels, overseas markets, etc. The
Westinghouse Broadcasting Company and Learning Corporation were both part of the
223
A Researcher’s Assessment
Black African Heritage had its flaws. It lacked a clear approach to what heritage
is and how to show it. Elisofon needed to explicitly define it in the narration — and he
never did. Uncomfortable superlatives were occasionally used in the script, such as how
the Dogon were “considered to be the greatest sculptors in all of Africa.”449 By whom?
And the wording implied that all Dogon sculpt, which is inaccurate. On the positive side,
the films used specific names of ethnic groups and labeled maps were included to show
viewers where each group lived. But sometimes the narration was about one group while
another group’s objects were being shown, which could mislead the viewer. For instance,
two Ejagham headdresses were shown while the narrator talked about the Yoruba in “The
Slave Coast,” leading the viewer to think that these works were made by the Yoruba.
The films were bright, colorful and full of action and activities. Westinghouse’s
editors deemed the camerawork unimaginative and stagnant, so they tried to make the
final product more exciting by using a lot of cuts.450 Jumping from one thing to another
was an attempt to keep the viewer’s attention, but resulted in disconnected footage that
was often frustrating to watch. It was similar to watching a fast-paced commercial on
Africa, not a clear narrative documentary. The viewer was often left asking: “Why are we
watching this scene?” For example “The Slave Coast” showed the rocky landscape of the

Westinghouse Electric Corporation, which merged with CBS in 1996 and took on the CBS name
and company identity.
449
450
Dotty Scher, telegram to Eliot Elisofon, undated, Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic
Collection, Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin. (HRC 49.7, IMG_9828 and
IMG_9830.)
224
Jos Plateau, then cattle, followed by scenes of porridge making, and then a roof
construction technique — all of within a matter of seconds. This made it impossible for
the narration to keep pace and explain why they are important.
The soundtrack was a mixture of ambient noise and music. Occasionally an
African was heard as part of the narration, but in general the voiceover dominated. The
composed music was often overly dramatic, not appropriate in tone and distracting.
Music or singing was also shown being performed in the films, and then continued on the
soundtrack as the narrative moved forward. Long pieces of varied African music were
broadcast this way, exposing the audience to this aspect of African culture. However,
Africans were rarely allowed to speak for themselves in the films.
Art Coverage
Why was African art featured so prominently in the programs? For Elisofon and
many others, it served as visual proof of great civilizations on a continent with limited
written, documented history. Art is a record of the rich past of Africa. The films
discussed specific ages of the older objects, such as the Nok terracottas and the Igbo-
Ukwu vessels, addressing the depth of African history and civilization. However, the
timeline was sometimes oversimplified in the narration, leading to a blurred distinction
between the Yoruba, Benin, and ancient Ife civilizations, as one example.
Approximately 80% of Black African Heritage included images and discussion of
African art. Hundreds of objects were shown being created, used, and in studio-style
display shots. There were 14 scenes devoted to the artistic process (figs. 6.6-6.8):
Kuba cloth weaving and embroidery

Kuba woodcarving (bope figure)
225
Dogon mask carving (kanaga)

Bamana strip cloth weaving
Bamana headdress carving (chi wara)
Bororo mobile altar creation
Yoruba artist Lamidi Fakeye and his apprentice carving two objects in his
workshop
Bini sculptor demonstrating lost-wax casting process
Fon appliqué cloth banners being created
Asante carvers making stools to order
Asante kente cloth weaving
Akan pottery creation and firing
Yoruba artist Twins Seven Seven working in pen and ink
Senufo carver working on two double firespitter helmet masks
The types of materials used in African art highlighted were: ivory (Kongo staff head),
wood (Cameroon executioner), terracotta (Mossi head), and bronze (Cameroon
equestrian). Varying artistic styles of African art were also addressed: naturalism,
distortion, and simplification.
A major success of the series was the care and attention given to the hundreds of
African art museum pieces shown, which tied directly to Elisofon’s lifetime interest in
giving his audience as much visual information about artworks as possible. The pieces
were usually featured spinning on a table. The camera remained in one position and the
object turned so all sides could be seen. There were also panning shots when dealing with
still images, showing details by moving up and down, side to side over an image.
Unfortunately, the background for most of the studio shots was a graduated burnt orange,
which is not conducive to examining art. Sometimes the orange hue cast onto the objects
themselves, as in the case of the Yoruba door panels. Occasionally the spinning of the
objects was sped up the point of ridiculousness, seemingly for a dramatic effect. But in
general, the rotating works were shown successfully.

226
The art objects were well lit and many details were visible. Occasionally there
were two shots in one frame, with one side occupied by the complete object spinning, and
the other side featuring a detail shot of the piece. Theatrical lighting was used to heighten
appreciation of the sculptural form of certain pieces. For example, some Bamana chi
wara sculptures and a marionette were initially backlit and shown in silhouette before the
light source on the front turned on and revealed the entire work.
Court art, masquerades, and older art pieces were given special attention in the
series. Usually the most famous art form from an ethnic group was shown first, such as
the Bamana chi wara, and additional works followed. The function and meaning of the
art was occasionally discussed, but not in depth. While not all of the African artists
shown in the films were named, many were, including Fakeye, Twins Seven Seven, and
Dolo. In the end, the series covered many key points that would be taught today in an
African art history course. There were generalizations and some inaccurate statements,
but in general they were based on research, facts, and in-the-field experiences. By this
time more information was available to Elisofon than ever before. More books, articles,
and resources were being published on Africa and African art. In addition, he was more
open to advancing his own presentation and understanding of African art.
Black African Heritage Reviews and Press Reaction
The Black African Heritage series was well publicized in many markets
nationwide, with more than 100 notices for the series appearing in the two Elisofon
archives alone. Most of the newspaper articles and blurbs were informational, with some
occasionally critical, and others at times very critical. Many, but not all, of the reviews
were written about the New York United Nations preview or the first program, “The
227
Congo.” While a review of the first program would have theoretically encouraged
viewers to tune in for the next three parts, it now seems unbalanced and incomplete to
judge an entire series from the first quarter of it, particularly when “The Congo” was the
weakest and least organized of the programs. But even after having viewed only a quarter
of the series, it was clear to many writers that African art was the series’ star.
From an art historian’s perspective, Black African Heritage was tremendously
successful at exposing the American television audience to African art – in the museum
and in the field, object and environment. To show four hours of footage — about 80% of
which contained African art — to a total of 40 million viewers in 41 markets was an
accomplishment, and one that was not overlooked by reviewers. “Perhaps the most
significant aspects of the premiere program are the displays of African arts and crafts,
with their beautiful designs; objects of gold, bronze, pottery, ivory, wood, and cloth
materials are displayed in excellent color,” wrote Anthony LaCamera for the Record
American.451
Several of the reviews remarked on how Black African Heritage would encourage
an interest in African art, potentially sparking that interest in their readers. For The
Patriot Ledger, Reed F. Stewart commented:
We are fortunate in the 1970s, to be able to begin to understand the artistic

convention of Africa. In spite of the enthusiasm with which the sculptures
were shown, one could see why it was that Europeans of past centuries,
thinking in the traditions of classical Greece, did not appreciate the
stylized and startling conceptions worked into the wood, clay, bronze,
beads and gold which the Africans used. … the point was strongly made
that the Black African heritage is lengthy, complex, rich and inspiring.
Anyone wishing to pursue the subject further might begin with the

451
Anthony LaCamera, “‘Black African Heritage’ Makes Bow,” Record American, March 17,
1972. (EEPA X-9, 61.)
228
excellent exhibits of African carving and other arts in the Peabody

Museum of Harvard University.452
Harry MacArthur of the Washington Evening Star wrote: “It’s a welcome experience
when television comes along and broadens your horizons and tells you something about
life on the planet today instead of merely lulling you into somnolence… One of the
things this series easily could do is give you a strong yen to become a collector of African
art. Some of this sculpture is realistically representational and some of it is primitive.
Most of it is truly magnificent.”453
But for every positive comment on Black African Heritage, there were three
negative critiques. The series was also discussed and reviewed in the 1982 book, Africa
on Film and Videotape 1960 – 1981: A Compendium of Reviews, published by the
African Studies Center at Michigan State University. Many of the sharpest critiques in
this text were also observed by newspaper reviewers at the time and they bring up some
important points. The 1982 review in the film compendium, simply titled “Black African
Heritage Series,” began:
This magnificently photographed production is flawed primarily by a

distinct lack of analytical and explanatory depth. The films do not fulfill
the promise of their beautiful images. This is due to the overriding
emphasis on artistic creations of African carvers, dancers, and musicians.
While these achievements are unquestionable, little effort is made to
explore the more complex and more fascinating relationships between art,
religion, social organization, and the rituals which link the various strata
of African societies. Beautifully lighted studies of African carvings in
museums seem to take too much time in the series.
The footage would have been more profitably spent explaining the dances
and ceremonies in the films. The vast scope of the production creates a

452
Reed F. Stewart, “Aspects of a Complex Heritage,” The Patriot Ledger, March 23, 1972.
(EEPA X-9, 60.)
453
Harry MacArthur, “A Fascinating Look at Africa,” Washington Evening Star, March 14, 1972.
(HRC 51.9/46.9 and EEPA X-9, 64.)
229
survey presentation which aggregates many African peoples into an

unfortunate and unintended homogeneity. No sense of everyday life is
developed because the focus is on admittedly spectacular material culture
artifacts. This view, however, is a distorted one, equating material culture
with proof of the complexity of the civilization while largely ignoring
specifics of the history, social structure, and economy of the people
portrayed.454
For the art historian, the first point that stands out from this review is the immediate
regard for African artistic achievements as “unquestionable.” In fact, Westerners had
been questioning them for hundreds of years, calling African art ‘primitive,’ ‘craft,’
‘child-like,’ and ‘unsophisticated.’ The comment echoed a March 10, 1972 review of
Black African Heritage by Judy Bachrach for The Baltimore Sun. She wrote:
Monday’s show opens with a group of Eleventh Century Nigerian

sculptures, and Mr. [Julian] Bond sums up their artistic value by saying:
“These bronzes rank with the finest sculptures of any civilization.” Now if
there is one unstated assumption a series on Africa should make, it is that
since each culture is unique, the products of each disparate culture must
also be unique. They do not ‘rank’ with anything from anywhere. And
they certainly do not need the insult of a defense.455
Bachrach’s opinion was mirrored in that of Lou Cedrone, writing for The Baltimore
Evening Sun: “‘The Congo’ was also condescending in manner. African art, it said with
unhappy redundancy, is comparable to that of other civilizations. No real need to say so.
Art speaks for itself, in this case proudly and without protest.”456 Elisofon came from a
generation that not only had to defend African art, but also modern art and avant-garde
photography. Hence, it is not surprising that he repeatedly pointed out African art’s
advancement.

454
“Black African Heritage Series,” in David Wiley, ed., Africa on Film and Videotape 1960 –
1981: A Compendium of Reviews (East Lansing, MI: African Studies Center, Michigan State
University, 1982): 62.
455
Judy Bachrach, “The Dark Continent Comes Up Rather Gloomy,” The Baltimore Sun, March
10, 1972. (EEPA X-9, 62.)
456
Lou Cedrone, untitled document, The Baltimore Evening Sun, March 15, 1972. (HRC
51.9/46.9, IMG_4939.)
230
Bachrach and Cedrone brought up another interesting point: Is it wrong to
compare one culture to another? Is that condescending? Another reviewer took a different
approach to this issue. “I am sure that the Africa of Black African Heritage will be a
revelation to most Americans,” wrote Percy Shain of The Boston Globe.457 “The supposed
‘dark, backward continent’ had exquisite works of art and dazzling gold sculptures a
thousand years before we thought of such things…its tribal ceremonies were elaborate
and picturesque and the costumes of coronation would do credit to a Tudor court,” he
continued.458 Why not compare African culture to our own? Is it inappropriate if it
engenders appreciation and understanding? To break down stereotypes about Africa,
Elisofon employed the universal language of art. In order to do that successfully, he
worked to bring the status of African art to the same level as Western art by lavishing it
with attention in his films. This was a valid approach. Appreciate the art, understand it,
understand the people, appreciate the people.
Returning to the 1982 review, the next noteworthy point was the lack of depth and
breadth in Black African Heritage, resulting in a homogenous portrayal of the continent
and a distortion of what heritage actually is. Again, Bachrach’s review reinforced this
criticism:
It has all the markings of a series created with the best intentions and
that’s a good part of its problem. For African Heritage emerges as a
condescending show, and I suspect it was never meant to be, and it
emerges as a dull-witted travelogue, and I suspect that was inadvertent.
And finally, it emerges as a show entirely bereft of anything but the most
cursory manifestations of a heritage.

457
Percy Shain, “Night Watch: Special on Africa ‘Fascinating, Exciting,’” The Boston Globe,
March 17, 1972. (EEPA X-9, 59.)
458
Percy Shain, “Night Watch: Special on Africa ‘Fascinating, Exciting,’” The Boston Globe,
March 17, 1972. (EEPA X-9, 59.)
231
And I suspect that that, too, was not how things were meant to be…. The
show then moves through what might be considered ‘spot checks’ of
varying aspects of life in the Congo…. And the real problem is that the
actual heritage of the individual Congolese tribes is never explored…. I
think one of the flaws of the series is that most of it is divided into
geographical segments, (“The Congo,” “The Bend of the Niger,” etc.) And
not into coherent thematic entities that would substantiate the word
‘heritage’ in the title.459
Cedrone’s statements revealed a similar opinion:
Before they presented the first of their four-part ‘Black African Heritage,’
Westinghouse arranged a one-hour preview of the series, a sampling so
disjointed, so completely without form it was impossible to fathom the
purpose of the project. Still, a critic is supposed to have an open mind, so
we waited, remembering that you can’t always tell a series by the sampler.
Sadly, in this case, you could….the original materials, footage building on
the title and theme of the series, was in short supply.
What we had most were long visits with hippos, water bucks, storks,
elephants, buffaloes, hyenas, lions and gazelles, mainstays of the familiar
and by now trite documentary on the no longer dark continent….What
‘The Congo’ needed was a more definitive portrait of the natives, where
they learned their crafts and how they made them their own…. ‘The
Congo’ was short on form and substance.460
The programs did suffer from a lack of continuity and a scattered approach that produced
a fragmented image of Africa. From my perspective, this was due to Elisofon’s
personality and approach, and was most evident in “The Congo,” of which Bachrach and
Cedrone were severely critical. Elisofon had too many ideas and images in his head for
just four hours of footage. It would have been enough for four books or a lifetime of
magazine articles. He had wanted to be more focused than the ABC production, and yet
he ended up trying to pursue almost as much breadth in his coverage.

459
Judy Bachrach, “The Dark Continent Comes Up Rather Gloomy,” The Baltimore Sun, March
10, 1972. (EEPA X-9, 62.)
460
51.9/46.9, IMG_4939.)
232
Elisofon was proud and confident of the fact that he could do four hours on a tight
budget of $200,000.461 So proud and confident, in fact, that the entire production suffered.
Each week filming in the field meant money spent, so the first two takes in the Congo
were rushed and resulted in sloppy coverage and technical issues. Large sections of the
footage were fogged, much of it was under- or overexposed due to faulty light meter
readings, and often what was filmed correctly was simply boring. Sometimes what was
exciting and fascinating in the field — such as the environmental changes of the
Ruwenzori mountain range at ascending altitudes — was tedious and meaningless when
seen 7,000 miles away in a New York City film editing studio.462 Elisofon scheduled 14
weeks to film Black African Heritage and had to add more and more time. To cover
several major African countries in a few months was unrealistic.
Reviewers saw these cracks in the foundation of “The Congo.” Elisofon knew
these fractures existed after the footage was reviewed in New York City, and he tried to
fix them in subsequent takes in West Africa. He even returned to the Congo to try and
salvage the first program. But Elisofon’s desire to show all of his favorite things about
Africa persisted, and while the next three programs certainly have more depth per
subject, the footage still randomly jumps from one thing to another. Elisofon was not the
type of man to sit still in one place and his films were a reflection of that. Once the
viewer started to absorb one scene, the film was already moving onto the next thing.

461
Eliot Elisofon, notes and correspondence for Black African Heritage production costs, Eliot
Austin. (HRC 50.7.)
462
Dotty Scher, letter to Eliot Elisofon, December 23, 1970, Eliot Elisofon Paper and
IMG_9906.)
233
Given the flawed delivery of Black African Heritage, how much heritage was
shown? Was it none, as Bachrach and Cedrone said? And how does one show heritage?
Why is material culture not enough proof of the complexity of a civilization? These were
fundamental questions, ones that existed from the start of the project. While one critic
commented that it seemed the concept of heritage had been tacked on after the filming
was completed, this is not true.463 The idea of portraying the cultural heritage of Africa
was in all of the film treatments long before any filming commenced.
The separation happened once filming began. What Elisofon understood as
heritage was not what others perceived as heritage. They wanted more. His production
manager, Bill Browning, wrote Elisofon a letter on January 14, 1971 with commentary on
the first two takes. He explained:
Somehow I have the feeling that we are in danger of winding up with just
another National Geographic lecture that relates to this place, that place
and the other place without much of the true feeling for the culture,
heritage and peoples under discussion. As an example, I was disappointed
in not being able to see more of the woodcarver than just a bland and static
posed collection of shots showing him seated in front of a dwelling and
working on his sculpture. I wanted to see more of how he lived, his
family, his pleasures, etc. What I did see appeared to be somewhat hoaky
[sic] rather than a comprehensive presentation of a heritage that Black
Americans and others will relate to.464
How much heritage was actually shown in the final product is debatable, but to regard the
African art as taking “up too much time in the series,” as the 1982 review stated, seems to

463
Ben Luparello, “What’s On; TV and Radio; Black African Heritage is Scenic but Scattered,”
unmarked newspaper clipping, Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection, Harry Ransom
Center, The University of Texas at Austin. (HRC 51.9/46.9, IMG_5007.)
464
Bill Browning, letter to Eliot Elisofon, January 14, 1971, Eliot Elisofon Paper and
IMG_1566 thru _1570.)
234
miss the point of the programs.465 Heritage can refer to valued objects and physical
artifacts, not just the intangible qualities and traditions of a society. Elisofon was always
visually motivated and fascinated by material culture. Though he saw himself as an
Africanist, he was not an academic. He consistently labeled himself as an artist. Black
African Heritage was his production and it was tailored to his interests. For Elisofon, the
greatest, most profound and most beautiful representation of African culture and heritage
was art.
While some reviewers discussed how the series’ lack of depth and shallow
narration was probably due to the immensity of the subject matter, in general, they seem
to have assumed that the progression of knowledge about African cultures was much
farther along than it actually was. Cedrone commented on “the no longer dark
continent.”466 The level of knowledge required to create a documentary on the “history,
social structure, and economy of the people portrayed” did not yet exist.467 These critics
wanted a presentation on topics that had yet to be thoroughly researched. In the early
1970s Western academics were still forming an outline of basic African history, and
specific African ethnographic studies were not available by the hundreds. To expect an
in-depth account on all aspects of each African culture encountered in Black African
Heritage would have been anachronistic for Elisofon. Such specificity would come with
later decades. While such comments must have been frustrating for the filmmaker to

465
466
51.9/46.9, IMG_4939.)
467
235
read, they reveal the reviewer’s (and the public’s) desire for more information and greater
understanding — an encouraging reaction.
Another critic of the content of Black African Heritage was none other than Maya
Angelou, the narrator for the third program, “The Slave Coast.” In her April 16, 1972
New York Times article, Angelou wrote:
A camera in the hands of an intelligent, inquisitive artist is a tremendous

peep-hole into life. Elisofon succeeds at what he attempts if what he was
aiming at was the recording of tangible Africana. It must be admitted,
however that the culture of Africa is not caught only in masks and dances,
tribal chiefs and musical instruments.
If we believe that, we are trapped again in the cliché which informs us that
all Blacks can sing and dance. And we hear the implication that they can
only sing and dance. It is unfortunate for Elisofon and for the viewers of
this well-done series that the most compelling and little-known facets of
African culture do not lend themselves to the camera lens.468
Angelou wanted more history, oral traditions, and social background than Black African
Heritage provided. She highlighted several things she wished were in the series:
discussion of matrilineal inheritance, a Fulani griot recounting stories, the Egyptian
pyramids, and mention of the ancient Timbuktu university (which was included). She did
not seem as fascinated as Elisofon with the visual arts as proof of a rich cultural heritage,
a source of black pride, and an educational device.
If Elisofon had concentrated on storytelling, social and political hierarchies, and
descriptions of Africa’s great cities, people would have pointed out that he ignored the
visual culture and artistic masterpieces. A 4-hour special on the daily life of Africans –
food preparation, health matters, living arrangements, marriage customs, etc. – would not

468
Maya Angelou, “For Years We Hated Ourselves,” The New York Times, April 16, 1972. (HRC
51.9/46.9, IMG_4990.)
236
have been the type of film Elisofon wanted to make. It is difficult to balance all of the
meanings of “heritage,” and one TV series can never be all things to all people.
Angelou’s article pinpointed one aspect of the programs that the researcher also
viewed critically. Black African Heritage did not feature any interviews. No
conversations were held. Only one African was heard when speaking to the camera, the
Timi of Ede, who introduced and demonstrated the Yoruba talking drum. Of course,
language and translations would have been an issue, so one can understand the
dependence on separate narration. And yet, this muted the Africans’ ability to describe
their heritage. This is the largest and most obvious fault of the series, and one that could
have been addressed. We do hear Africans singing and chanting in the films, so recording
technology was used in the field. Amazingly, not one of the critical reviews of the series
mentioned this lack of African voices talking about African heritage.
Why didn’t Elisofon have Africans talk on camera? How does this lack of African
voices impact our understanding of African art? We have to rely wholly upon the
narration for our information. Lamidi Fakeye, Twins Seven Seven, and the other African
artists could have talked about their work to the camera. This would have remedied the
issue of narration not corresponding to or not being informative about what was being
shown. There were even moments when the Oni of Ife, Fakeye, Twins Seven Seven, and
Dolo, the Dogon sculptor, were talking and addressing the camera. But we could not hear
what they were saying. Instead, the recorded commentary and music played on.
Boiling down all of the criticism discussed so far, we arrive at a basic question:
Could a commercial television broadcasting company offer the type of heritage that black
237
Americans needed to see? Elisofon and Group W thought they could. The company ran
an advertisement featuring two black children (fig. 6.9) that stated:
If there’s one thing future generations of black Americans need, it’s a

past…From the time they first set foot on American soil, black Americans
have been cut off from their roots. To bring their lost cultural heritage to
light, Group W is presenting a four-part documentary, Black African
Heritage….
Each of the four one-hour programs focuses on a different region of the

African continent. But all of them reveal the remarkable culture of the
African people: their music, art, rituals and dance. A culture which much
of white America adopted. Black African Heritage reveals how much of a
past black Americans really have. And helps put them back in touch with
it.469
Could art be evidence of that much-needed past? Some critics thought so. Three
reviewers in particular thought Black African Heritage would have a positive effect on
black Americans.
John Rhodes of the Philadelphia Tribune wrote “upon reviewing the series, I feel
that Black African Heritage will further inform Black Americans of the life and culture of
the African people…the series is chuck-full of detailed information relative to art, music
and traditions of Africans.”470 Barbara Parkins of the San Francisco Chronicle
commented in a March 17, 1972 article that the series “has come at a lucky time for
American blacks who are seeking evidence of their own African Heritage to give them

469
“If there’s one thing future generations of black Americans need, it’s a past,” Group W Black
African Heritage advertisement clipping, Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection,
Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin. (HRC 51.9/46.9, IMG_5025.)
470
John Rhodes, “Writer Finds African TV Series Informative,” Philadelphia Tribune, March 18,
1972. (EEPA X-9, 56.)
238
the same sort of solace and pride that other Americans have found in Irish castles or
Scottish plaids or Greek dances.”471
In addition, Henry Mitchell wrote an article titled “‘African Heritage’ – Seven
Steps to Pride” for The Washington Post on March 14, 1972. His text corresponded
directly with Elisofon and Group W’s goals. He wrote that Black African Heritage
“attempts to get it through our heads that African tribal society is as complex, as serious
and as much worth our attention as human society anywhere. The black tribes of Africa
did not, as the first hour-long show points out, swing through the trees like Tarzan.”472
Mitchell explained:
Some mischief has been done (as the series hints) by treating black Africa
as a kind of joke – as insensitive visitors to a zoo might gawk at the odd
giraffes. But the harm of the joke comes if a child should believe, really
believe, his forebears were mere savages stomping about in the bush.
Viewers of English background would not be upset at the rudeness of the
French, say, who might make cracks about human sacrifice among the
Druids, or painting oneself blue with woad. That joke never hurts, because
for one thing it’s true, as the African jokes are not. And for another thing,
the English have done as well, in terms of power, as any who laugh at
them.
The point here is not frivolous. An ethnic joke is one thing if you’re
running a continent, but it’s something else again if you’re not.
…We shall see, as the hours unfold, the Benin bronzes. Europe, at that
time, had no such plastic art to show. People who give no thought to
anything may imagine that great sculpture just sort of springs out of the
woodwork. But a saner view is that whenever we see great sculpture, we
may assume century after century of trial and error beforehand – centuries
of effort.
The Benin bronzes, while not unique among the splendors of black art, are
a quick refutation of the slur of ‘savages.’ It is shocking, no doubt, that it
should be still be desirable in our late day, to say (as this show implies) to
any child, ‘You are the result of an endless line of princes, and now it’s up

471
Barbara Parkins, “TV Spots,” San Francisco Chronicle, March 17, 1972. (EEPA X-9, 50.)
472
Henry Mitchell, “‘African Heritage’ – Seven Steps to Pride,” The Washington Post, March 14,
1972. (HRC 51.9/46.9, IMG_4997.)
239
to you.’ But such a statement is necessary indeed, since a cruel society has
said to some children, ‘You were born of slobs.’ There ought to be a rage,
there ought to be a defiance and there ought to be an answer to that.473
For Mitchell, African art was substantial proof of the advanced cultures of Africa and his
article served as a rallying cry for black pride.
The title of Angelou’s New York Times article, “‘For Years We Hated
Ourselves,’” was a reference to a speech made by Malcolm X at the Henry and Edsel
Ford Auditorium in Detroit on February 14, 1965. It is known as the “After the
Bombing” speech because it took place the day after Malcolm X’s Queens home was
firebombed. This was one of his final speeches, as he was assassinated on February 21,
1965 in New York City. One section of Malcolm X’s speech was dedicated to the topic
of Africa and black American self-hate. He described how the West’s image of Africa as
uncivilized led black Americans to hate Africa and Africans. “In hating Africa and in
hating the Africans,” he explained, “we ended up hating ourselves, without even realizing
it. Because you can't hate the roots of a tree, and not hate the tree. You can't hate your
origin and not end up hating yourself. You can't hate Africa and not hate yourself.”474 The

473
Henry Mitchell, “‘African Heritage’ – Seven Steps to Pride,” The Washington Post, March 14,
1972. (HRC 51.9/46.9, IMG_4997.)
474
Malcolm X and George Breitman, Malcolm X Speaks: Selected Speeches and Statements (New
York: Grove Weidenfeld, 1990): 168-169. Malcolm X “After the Bombing” speech excerpt:
“Now what effect does [the struggle over Africa] have on us? Why should the black man in
America concern himself since he's been away from the continent for three or four hundred
years? Why should we concern ourselves? What impact does what happens to them have upon
us?
Number one, you have to realize that up until 1959 Africa was dominated by the colonial powers.
Having complete control over Africa, the colonial powers of Europe projected the image of
Africa negatively. They always project Africa in a negative light: jungle savages, cannibals,
nothing civilized. Why then naturally it was so negative to you and me, and you and I began to
hate it. We didn't want anybody telling us anything about Africa, much less calling us Africans.
In hating Africa and in hating the Africans, we ended up hating ourselves, without even realizing
240
Village Voice interviewed Malcolm X around the time of the “After the Bombing”
speech. “The greatest mistake of the movement,” Malcolm X said, “ has been trying to
organize a sleeping people around specific goals. You have to wake the people up first,
then you’ll get action.” “Wake them up to their exploitation?” the reporter asked. “No, to
their humanity, to their own worth, and to their heritage,” he responded.475 For Malcolm
X, an understanding of the historical achievements of black people, as well as the origins

it. Because you can't hate the roots of a tree, and not hate the tree. You can't hate your origin and
not end up hating yourself. You can't hate Africa and not hate yourself.
You show me one of these people over here who has been thoroughly brainwashed and has a
negative attitude toward Africa, and I'll show you one who has a negative attitude toward himself.
You can't have a positive attitude toward yourself and a negative attitude toward Africa at the
same time. To the same degree that your understanding of and attitude toward Africa become
positive, you'll find that your understanding of and your attitude toward yourself will also become
positive. And this is what the white man knows. So they very skillfully make you and me hate our
African identity, our African characteristics.
You know yourself that we have been a people who hated our African characteristics. We hated
our hair, we hated the shape of our nose, we wanted one of those long dog-like noses, you know;
we hated the color of our skin, hated the blood of Africa that was in our veins. And in hating our
features and our skin and our blood, why, we had to end up hating ourselves. And we hated
ourselves. Our color became to us a chain - we felt that it was holding us back; our color became
to us like a prison which we felt was keeping us confined, not letting us go this way or that way.
We felt that all of these restrictions were based solely upon our color, and the psychological
reaction to that would have to be that as long as we felt imprisoned or chained or trapped by black
skin, black features and black blood, that skin and those features and that blood holding us back
automatically became hateful to us. And it became hateful to us.
It made us feel inferior; it made us feel inadequate; made us feel helpless. And when we fell
victims to this feeling of inadequacy or inferiority or helplessness, we turned to somebody else to
show us the way. We didn't have confidence in another black man to show us the way, or black
people to show us the way. In those days we didn't. We didn't think a black man could do
anything except play some horns - you know, make some sound and make you happy with some
songs, and in that way. But in serious things, where our food, clothing, shelter and education were
concerned, we turned to the man. We never thought in terms of bringing these things into
existence for ourselves. Because we felt helpless. What made us feel helpless was our hatred for
ourselves. And our hatred for ourselves stemmed from our hatred for things African...”
475
Malcolm X, Malcolm X on Afro-American History (New York, London, Montreal, Sydney:
Pathfinder, 1992, 4th edition): 7.
241
and evolution of their oppression in recent centuries, was an essential weapon in the
hands of those struggling for their liberation.
Angelou’s New York Times article acknowledged the potential power of black
African heritage and it certainly echoed Malcolm X’s February 14th speech. She
explained:
The act of enslavement does not succeed by force alone. The enslaver and
the slave must be persuaded that the latter is sub-human (whether by
God’s will, the slave physiognomy or just his ill luck doesn’t matter very
much) and deserves his condition. Both actors in this tragedy must also be
convinced that everything about the slave is, was and will be inferior: He
is in his present state because he has no past, or certainly none worth
mentioning, and can have no future, or certainly none worth anticipating.
The African enslavement in the West was carried out along those strict,
unwavering lines. And with painfully obvious success. For years Blacks
were immersed in cocoons of self-revilement. Africa, to Blacks at the
time, was that dreaded dark and pagan land well lost in the past and better
forgotten.
Then in the mid-fifties there was the Sharpeville massacre in South Africa
and the Montgomery, Alabama, bus boycott. Ghana won its independence
and suddenly there were beautifully gowned black men at the United
Nations who spoke English (surprise, real English) and Black Americans
were jolted into observing themselves again and this time in a historically
new way. Then along came Malcolm X and Martin Luther King and the
Freedom Rides…. Black students began to insist on courses in African and
Black American history. Their demands ranged from requests to riots.
They asked, ‘If Black is Beautiful, where has it been all this time?’ With
‘Black African Heritage,’ a Group W television series in four parts, Eliot
Elisofon attempts to provide some answers to that question.476
Did Angelou think the programs provided any answers? Overall, was Angelou satisfied
with the series? It is difficult to tell. She continued:
I do not intend to take Eliot Elisofon to task for what he omitted when
obviously he has approached his subject with seriousness and respect. It is
exactly because the series is as good as it is that I want more. More depth,
more explanation and more soul involvement. And yet the photographer is
not as committed to the subject as a Black American must be. For Africa

476
51.9/46.9, IMG_4990.)
242
to me, to Gordon Parks, to Julian Bond and to Ossie Davis (the narrators
of the series) is more than a glamorous fact. It is a historical truth. No man
can know where he is going unless he knows exactly where he has been
and exactly how he arrived at this present place.477
Can a white man successfully create a TV series on black African heritage in the midst of
the heated civil rights movement? This was a troublesome topic, and one that irked
Elisofon. He felt betrayed by Angelou’s article. Of all people, why should one of the
narrators of his program critique it publicly?
Her article gave him something to fume about during interviews on Black African
Heritage. George Tashman, writing for The Independent, included this Elisofon quote in
his article: “The outspoken photographer disagrees vehemently with that segment of the
black population that says, ‘Whitey shouldn’t write or tell about blacks, because he isn’t
black…. They’re way off base, those blacks who believe that.’”478
While Angelou’s negative comments were mixed with positive ones, Elisofon
was not the type of person to quietly swallow criticism. On the one hand, he liked to
argue, and on the other, he took pride in his work and was ready to defend it at every
turn. He wrote a response letter to The New York Times, “Being White, Do I Love Africa
Less?,” which was published on May 14, 1972. It stated:
We made four films for as wide an audience as possible. We meant to

entertain people and hoped to inspire them to a new appreciation of Africa
in general. How many would watch a professional discussion of
matrilineal inheritance, which Miss Angelou thinks is most important? It
could make a documentary film for a foundation or university, but not a
film for a general television audience.

477
51.9/46.9, IMG_4990.)
478
George Tashman, “Tashman on TV,” The Independent, May 16, 1972: 15. (HRC 46.9,
IMG_4978.)
243
This subject might be ‘much more relevant to today’s need than a perfect
photograph of a much-photographed Benin mask,’ writes Miss Angelou. I
doubt that one per cent [sic] of the audience has ever seen the greatest
Benin art before. Was it not important to show our audience that Africans
were producing these works of art in the Middle Ages? We also showed
Nok terra-cotta heads made 2,000 years ago, an extraordinary
achievement….
Finally, I am very disturbed by Miss Angelou’s statement about me, ‘the

photographer is not as committed to the subject as a black American must
be.’ This is a bad blow and I am surprised that she sounds just as
prejudiced against all whites as are too many of her contemporaries …
Before the black revolution, most black Americans were either ashamed of
Africa – and why not, since the Tarzan image was the only one they were
familiar with – or they just did not care.479
Elisofon regarded himself as a long-time Africanist who had been studying the continent
since his first sub-Saharan trip in 1947. Having black or white skin did not matter to him:
Being white does not mean that I love Africa less than a black American,
or that I do not have the capacity to understand its vast, complex structure
of traditions and culture. Do you have to be Jewish to understand the Old
Testament? Or be of Greek ancestry to understand Plato and appreciate the
Acropolis? The concept of ‘black for blacks only’ is my biggest quarrel
with Maya Angelou, who I believe is one of the most gifted Americans of
our time.480
While Elisofon loved Africa, to black Americans it meant much more – not just love or
hate, but something sensitive and complex. Angelou wrote Elisofon a private letter on
May 25, 1972. She told him:
I am distressed that you were distressed with the New York Times’ article.
I am distressed that you misunderstood the point of the article. In effect, I
was saying that, although in my youth I studied Judaism and have visited
and taught in Tel Aviv; if I were to do an article on Israel, I could never
approach the task with the same emotion as one whose relatives had

479
Eliot Elisofon, “Being White, Do I Love Africa Less?,” The New York Times, May 14, 1972.
(HRC 51.9/46.9, IMG_5029.)
480
Eliot Elisofon, “Being White, Do I Love Africa Less?,” The New York Times, May 14, 1972.
(HRC 51.9/46.9, IMG_5029.)
244
suffered at Dachau and died in that madness. It is no intention of mine to

underestimate your past, present and future contributions to all of us.481
Elisofon had put himself in a sticky situation, but he was never one to shy away from
controversy.
Elisofon was “puzzled by the lack of black student response” to a weeklong series
of Black African Heritage showings at the Ohio University campus in the fall of 1972
(fig. 6.10).482 He voiced his confusion in an article written by Dave Sekal in the campus
newspaper, The Post, on October 18, 1972: “‘So here I am with four films on the roots of
the black experience on a campus with a potential black audience of almost 1200, and
how many do I draw with my presentation? Six out of an audience of three hundred, six
were black. I don’t want to sound like I’m complaining, but I don’t understand why
they’re not showing up. I know some of them have classes—but what about the others?
Haven’t they had any interest in the culture from whence they came?’”483
After essentially ‘calling out’ the black campus population it is not surprising that
Elisofon, and in turn, his films, received some backlash. The Post published response
letters from Allen Knowles and Connie Perdreau. Knowles stated:
There were more than six black students at his first showing, (yes, there
were some light-skinned Afros in the room, but they all were not white)
not to mention the second showing. But then after seeing two of the four
films, six blacks should be considered a huge turnout. “Twas a great flick
for 7:30 pm weekdays on channel X. But please don’t expect me to get my
intellectual jollies off of it. If this is the involvement that the University

481
Maya Angelou, letter to Eliot Elisofon, May 25, 1972, Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic
IMG_4996.)
482
Dave Sekal, “Filmmaker perplexed by black response,” The Post, Ohio University, Athens,
Ohio, October 18, 1972: 1. (HRC 49.3.)
483
Dave Sekal, “Filmmaker perplexed by black response,” The Post, Ohio University, Athens,
Ohio, October 18, 1972: 1. (HRC 49.3.)
245
deems relevant to show to the students-at-large (not to mention the black

segment of that body) I suggest that the next installment of ‘Africa as seen
by…’ might possibly be choice clips from ‘Untamed World’ and ‘Wild
Kingdom.’”484
Perdreau was even more critical of Elisofon:
… the Africa depicted in his presentation on Tuesday reeked of the

undying colonialist spirit: the myth of the happy native, the exoticism of
so-called primitive life and customs on the ‘dark continent’ and the
exploration of the indigenous population for the financial benefit of the
‘bwana,’ in this case Elisofon and Time-Life. Moreover, the fact that
Elisofon admittedly paid these Africans for their services makes one
seriously doubt the verisimilitude of the entire production…. It is apparent
that you took much from the great continent of Africa, Mr. Elisofon. What
in turn, did you give them? More importantly, what have you given us?485
Perdreau saw the series as encouraging African stereotypes: “the myth of the happy
native, the exoticism of so-called primitive life….” What is a stereotype? An
oversimplified idea or image of a particular person or thing. Black African Heritage was
very specific in its content. Maybe it was too vague with explanations, but it referenced
specific peoples, places, and activities. Nothing generic. This was not a Hollywood
production, scripted with sets and costumes. Elisofon wrote the narration scripts after all
the filming was complete.
Yes, every scene that was shot for Black African Heritage was constructed and,
hence, can be seen as superficial. And yet, none of the people seen in the films were
actors and none of those experiences can ever be reproduced. Perhaps it was as genuine
as it could be. For example, the narration acknowledged that firespitter masks are danced
at night with lit charcoal pieces in their mouths. But to film such a scene at night and

484
Allen Knowles, “Postmarked,” letter to the editor, Ohio University Post, vol. 63, no. 19,
undated, Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection, Harry Ransom Center, The University
of Texas at Austin. (HRC 49.3, IMG_9591.)
485
Connie Perdreau, “Postmarked,” letter to the editor, Ohio University Post, vol. 63, no. 19,
undated, Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection, Harry Ransom Center, The University
of Texas at Austin. (HRC 49.3, IMG_9591.)
246
have the camera actually get useable footage was a different matter, so two firespitters
were shown being performed during the daytime. That way the viewer could see the
appearance of the masks and the costumes clearly.
If Elisofon had filmed the entire project without paying any African, critics likely
would have then called him out for exploiting them. Perdreau saw Elisofon as the
‘bwana,’ boss/master, exploiting the natives to make money, yet she complained that the
Africans were paid for appearing in the films? This logic seems flawed. Authenticity may
always be a source of criticism. But in the end, it only seems fair that those Africans who
worked for hours (often in very hot temperatures) in front of a camera crew, whether
dancing, weaving, sculpting, or grinding millet, were paid to appear in the films.
Another critic who saw a sea of stereotypes in Black African Heritage was Rex
Polier of The Philadelphia Evening Bulletin. He wrote an article titled “‘Black African
Heritage’ Takes Museum Approach” on March 20, 1972, a review of “The Congo.” He
described the show:
Artistic creativeness of the peoples who inhabit the Congo was illustrated
by centuries-old bronzes and other sculpture. Bond told of states and
governments that existed 1,000 years before Europeans knew anything at
all about the ‘Dark Continent.’
A number of tribes were filmed doing colorful ritual dances. There were
glimpses of artisans, especially of one ancient woodcarver who fashions
masks from a log. The scenes were accompanied by throbbing drums and
other authentic tribal musical sounds.
But this approach has its limitations, and it was quickly reflected. It
produced the same stereotyped views of Africa that we have been seeing
since the days of Osa and Martin Johnson and their quaint little African
spectaculars.486

486
Rex Polier, “‘Black African Heritage’ Takes Museum Approach,” The Philadelphia Evening
Bulletin, March 20, 1972. (EEPA X-9, 58.)
247
Polier also compared the program to National Geographic, an observation echoed by
Judy Bachrach’s article, and the Bill Browning letter cited above — a comparison meant
to imply triteness and superficiality. Polier argued that “The Congo” stressed “a simpler,
more primitive Africa.” He continued:
Most viewers who have been made aware of modern Africa by the large
number of TV films and documentaries in recent years will invariably
realize they are looking at museum footage.
It leads to a question. Which better serves the new Africa: the showing of
museum objects and token ceremonial tribes, or a contemporary look at
this fascinating, exciting and progressing continent? I think the museum
approach only perpetuates the older trappings of a civilization that has
discarded them except for the theater, museum, and history texts.487
There is some misconception and some truth in Polier’s statements. Africans have not all
“discarded” the “older trappings” of their civilization. Some maintain older traditions
even today. And yet, Elisofon was certainly partial to the idea of the timelessness of
Africa and attempted to engender it in most of his photographs and in the Black African
Heritage series. There is a downside to believing that nothing ever changes in Africa, or
any other ‘exotic’ environment, be it the South Seas or the Australian outback. When
things do change, when acculturation naturally takes place, it is then automatically seen
as negative and a tainting of the pure, perfect form of the culture that had once existed.
A portion of the narration for “The Bend of the Niger” confirms this sense of
nostalgia: “The Dogon have retained a great deal of their traditions, but they are not far
enough away from our ideas to maintain complete independence. There are only a few
tribes left who share with the Dogon the stubborn desire to be themselves. Let us hope

487
Rex Polier, “‘Black African Heritage’ Takes Museum Approach,” The Philadelphia Evening
Bulletin, March 20, 1972. (EEPA X-9, 58.)
248
that this may never change.”488 Change does come naturally, but perhaps not as abruptly
as Polier thought it had in the “new Africa.”
After Polier’s negative review appeared, Kimpianga J. Mahaniah of the African
Studies program of Temple University, and a citizen of Zaire, wrote a letter to the editor
of The Philadelphia Evening Bulletin. “An African Agrees with African Series” was
published on March 31, 1972. Mahaniah defended the program:
…Mr. Rex Polier argues that the Black African Heritage film [“The
Congo”]…did a disservice to the New Africa by showing only the pre-
European African contribution to world civilization and by eliminating the
contemporary look at this fascinating, exciting, and progressive continent.
Does Mr. Polier mean that the only fascinating, exciting, and progressive
aspect of African civilization is that of contemporary Africa? What does
he mean by ‘New Africa’ and ‘contemporary’?
Does he mean that there is no place in his idea of ‘New Africa’ for pre-
colonial civilization? Does he believe that African history and civilization
began only with the 20th century, or that pre-European African culture
ceased operation in the ‘contemporary continent’? The majority of
Africans still live in villages and are still part of the culture which the
producers of the program showed.489
Mahaniah saw the show’s content as myth-breaking, rather than stereotype-enforcing.
The program dealt with more than the dancing, arts and handicrafts of the
African people. The message of the program indeed challenged the idea
that Africa suffered a cultural vacuum before the coming of Europeans…
By showing the weaving methods of the Kuba people, the producer
challenged the argument held in Western nations that pre-colonial Africa
did not have a technology or that its technology was crude and inferior….
African arts and handicrafts show the contribution of Africa in artistic
creativity…art to Africans is never a ‘museum piece,’ as the narrator of
the film pointed out. Art in Africa must also be functional in order to be
artistic….

488
489
Kimpianga J. Mahaniah, “An African Agrees with African Series,” The Philadelphia Evening
Bulletin, March 31, 1972. (HRC 51.8/46.8, original letter to the Editor of The Philadelphia
Evening Bulletin, IMG__4893 thru IMG_4894.)
249
Mr. Polier thinks that the program helped only to perpetuate the negative
and humiliating image of Africa created in the Western World….But the
Black African Heritage film challenges this image….
African history does not begin with colonialism in Africa, nor does pre-
colonial civilization cease operation in colonial and independent
contemporary Africa. Any genuine understanding of African heritage must
begin with the study of the traditional institutions and cultures of African
society.490
Is it possible to completely break down stereotypes and misconceptions about Africa with
a 4-hour made-for-TV series? No, but it was a move in the right direction. Perhaps
Elisofon envisioned his project as something more than the final result. But he was not
the only one who thought that Black African Heritage was a step forward.
While some critics saw the series as condescending in tone, a more apt description
would have been paternalistic: benevolent but sometimes intrusive. Elisofon was
attempting to influence people’s thoughts on and opinions of Africa. “The enslavement of
Africans, and the traffic in humans, is one of the most disgusting episodes of man’s past,”
Elisofon wrote in one of the many Black African Heritage press releases, “but the story of
the African cultures and people is one of his glories.”491 Some people misinterpreted or
were wary of the delivery of his message, while others embraced it. Elisofon told Charles
Benbow of the Tampa Times: “I have been accused of being too slickly commercial with
some of my films. I’m not ashamed of entertaining people or working for people, of
reaching audiences of 20-25 million people as we have with the African films. I like to

490
Kimpianga J. Mahaniah, “An African Agrees with African Series,” The Philadelphia Evening
Bulletin, March 31, 1972. (HRC 51.8/46.8, original letter to the Editor of The Philadelphia
Evening Bulletin, IMG__4893 thru IMG_4894.)
491
Eliot Elisofon, quoted in Black African Heritage press release, December 21, 1971, Eliot
Austin: 3. (HRC 51.8/46.8, IMG_4861.)
250
think people have come away with more information than they realize, have been
inoculated with a whole new appreciation for a culture.”492

492
Charles Benbow, “Eliot Elisofon- Artist of Expanded Interest,” Tampa Times, May 1972.
(HRC 71.11/66.11, IMG _6573.)
251
Chapter Seven: The Final Years
The last three years of Elisofon’s life were filled with African art-related trips and
projects. By 1964 Elisofon was no longer a contracted LIFE photographer. Instead he
worked as a freelance photographer for a variety of outlets. His last two major African
articles appeared in Smithsonian magazine and National Geographic. He traveled to
Africa four times in the early 1970s, working on multiple assignments simultaneously.493
For his final trip to Africa Elisofon stayed on the continent from January through April of
1972. His main objectives were to finalize the article for National Geographic, create an
article for Smithsonian magazine, and shoot a short film on Akan gold art objects for Paul
Tishman. He also took pictures of the Dogon in Mali, most likely for the planned
exhibition of Lester Wunderman’s Dogon art collection.494 This was the first exhibition
that Elisofon worked on that was dedicated to a single African ethnic group. In addition,
for the Smithsonian magazine article he focused on one African ethnic group, the Akan,
something that he had not done since the 1947 LIFE article on the Kuba, “African Big
Shot.” Also, the article primarily discussed Akan gold arts, a level of specificity that had
not yet existed in Elisofon’s work on African art.
1973 “Africa’s Ancient Splendor,” Smithsonian magazine
“I am determined that any African art should be related to the

environment which produced it; even if very little of it is left today.”

493
From March through July of 1970 Elisofon was in Central Africa taking photographs for an
article on Zaire for National Geographic. (John J. Putnam, “Yesterday’s Congo, Today’s Zaire,”
National Geographic 143, March 1973: 398-432.) While he was there he took pictures for
Joseph’s World (Crowell-Collier, 1973). This was a children’s text on one week in the life of a
Zairian boy named Joseph.
494
Elisofon’s daughters, Elin and Jill, accompanied him during a portion of this trip. Of course,
none of them knew this would be his last trip to Africa, and they all expected that this would be
the first of many future adventures.
252
- Elisofon to F. Weston Fenhagen, Public Affairs

Officer, American Embassy, Abidjan, Ivory Coast495
One of Elisofon’s previous LIFE editors and his close friend, Edward K.
Thompson, started up Smithsonian magazine around 1969 under the direction of the
Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, S. Dillon Ripley. The first issue was released in
April 1970 to 160,000 subscribers; 1973 was the first year the magazine turned a profit,
with a circulation of 465,000.496 Thompson and Elisofon shared a deep sense of loyalty to
their LIFE colleagues, and so it is not surprising that Thompson hired Elisofon repeatedly
for the new magazine. Elisofon’s first and last piece on Africa for Smithsonian was on
Akan gold arts, published in the January 1973 issue.497
“Africa’s Ancient Splendor Still Gleams in the Akan People’s Golden Art”
included the cover, ten full pages, and nine full color photographs (figs. 7.1-7.6). The
Smithsonian piece was related to Elisofon’s 1972 project Akan Gold, the film on the Paul
Tishman collection, and he worked on them at the same time. But unlike the film, the
article did not include any images of the Tishman objects, though it did mention the
collection. Both of these assignments were connected to the Tishman traveling exhibition
Sculpture of Black Africa, which included over 100 Asante gold objects. Elisofon

495
Eliot Elisofon, letter to F. Weston Fenhagen, January 3, 1972, Eliot Elisofon Paper and
IMG_4870.)
496
“Smithsonian Magazine History,” www.smithsonianmag.com/about/magazine-history.html.
Accessed April 9, 2013.
497
He worked on other assignments for this magazine in India and Southeast Asia, and both of
these projects were published posthumously: “An Eleventh-Hour Effort to Save Java’s Borobudur
Temple,” June 1973; and “The Last of the Asiatic Lions Hang on in India’s Gir Forest
Sanctuary,” July 1973. (HRC 57.12 and 57.13.) Most likely, if he had lived, Elisofon would have
continued doing pieces for Smithsonian.
253
researched and proposed the article to Thompson, and then created all of the text and
photographs.
Thompson and Elisofon got along especially well because, at heart, Thompson
was a photo editor and of course, Elisofon a photographer. Thompson’s Smithsonian
focused on big, bold photographic spreads and the Akan gold article was no exception. In
a way, Smithsonian became the offspring of defunct LIFE: a mixture of many topics,
anything a curious mind would want to learn about, and with a clear focus on great
photographic material.498
“Ancient Splendor” followed in the footsteps of other Elisofon articles on African
art by focusing on the objects and not on intangible theories. However, it was much more
specific than any of his previous articles, concentrating solely on the gold arts of the
Akan people. It exclusively employed field photographs, unlike “Mystic Art of Tribal
Africa” for example, which was a mixture of field and studio pictures. “Ancient Splendor”
was designed to show how Akan gold arts were still being used in the 1970s, instead of
featuring items in museums and collections in studio photographs. For example, the cover
image was Elisofon’s picture of an Akan woman holding two gold-handled flywhisks.
The article was Elisofon’s first-person account of his experiences in Ghana with
several Akan groups. The text starts in Kumasi during the receiving ceremony of a
paramount chief Ya Na by the current Asantehene, Otumfuo Nana Opoku Ware II, a
London-educated barrister and diplomat, which took place in March of 1971. Elisofon

498
Other articles in the January 1973 issue covered the work of modern sculptor Michael Ayrton,
the philatelic shop of the Weill brothers in New Orleans, the last sea cows (killed off in the mid-
1700s), and the age of Neoclassical art (inspired by a London exhibition on this topic with
photographs by another LIFE alum, Dmitri Kessel).
254
described the feeling of the occasion, the clothing, the umbrellas, and all of the objects
covered in gold: rifles, knives, pouches, hilts of the swords of state, scabbard décor,
linguist staffs, jewelry, pendants (round discs that are known to be the conveyors of
souls), and stools. The history and cultural background of the Asante was discussed as
well. For example, he mentioned the Golden Stool legend – a symbol of the spiritual
unity of the Asante people, for a “remarkable political achievement in West Africa’s
past.”499 Overall, the article and the photographs were fixed on artworks—what Elisofon
saw, how the objects were employed in ceremonies and displays, and how they reflected
Ghanaian history and culture.
The Elisofon layouts are rich and colorful, featuring elite Akan men and women
draped in a medley of gold art objects and detailed fabrics. In addition to the flywhisks on
the cover, the article included:
1) The Asantehene surrounded by his court and chiefs, with gold hilt
ceremonial swords
2) Two Asante chiefs and a linguist wearing gold jewelry
3) A man wearing a gold tablet headpiece
4) An Asante nobleman holding a gold hilt sword with a gold bull
attachment
5) A gold elephant atop a staff next to an Ebrie chief wearing more gold
accoutrements
6) A Baule chief with two linguists and musicians, two gold-topped staffs
held and gold jewelry being worn
7) An Ebrie chief’s daughter wearing a large ram pendant on her forehead
8) A circle of Ebrie chiefs with gold-topped staffs and gold jewelry
Everyone looks very serious, proud, and poised. Despite the fact that modernized,
Westernized Africa is not visible in these images, there is nothing condescending. In
contrast with the ‘Literary Africa’ layouts of 1961, “African Splendor” is dignified and

499
Eliot Elisofon, “Africa’s Ancient Splendor Still Gleams in the Akan People’s Golden Art,”
Smithsonian (January 1973): 22.
255
restrained. There is no nudity, no dancing, no spears pointed at the camera. The
Smithsonian magazine was a government publication, so in those matters it could not take
the same path as LIFE. It had to be apolitical, non-controversial, and appropriate for a
wide audience of all ages. The less sensationalistic style of “African Splendor” was also
due to the fact that attitudes had shifted in the decade between the publication of LIFE
and Smithsonian magazine.
This was the last article Elisofon wrote on African art before his death in late
spring of 1973. The field had changed a lot since he wrote his first article on this topic in
1959 for The Atlantic. In the 1970s there were more scholars and academics writing on
African art. In “Ancient Splendor” Elisofon even mentioned “all of the burgeoning
interest in African culture and art,” however, he also commented how he found “little
scholarly research…focused on Ashanti gold.”500 This work for the Smithsonian proves
that Elisofon was not obsolete. He could gain access to major ceremonies, photograph
important persons, and view rare art forms. He had the ability to travel widely around
Africa, taking bold, high-quality color photographs that were worthy of magazine
publications. Most African art scholars were not traveling the whole continent, nor taking
magazine-quality images in the 1970s.
1973 African Art of the Dogon, Exhibition
Eliot Elisofon and Lester Wunderman were close friends, and comrades in the
study and appreciation of African art. Wunderman primarily collected Dogon art, and
held the largest private collection of this material. The Autumn 1973 issue of African Arts

500
Eliot Elisofon, “Africa’s Ancient Splendor Still Gleams in the Akan People’s Golden Art,”
Smithsonian (January 1973): 23.
256
stated: “This is undoubtedly the finest collection of Dogon art in private hands.”501 The
same year Wunderman commented: “assembling the collection was a process of
continuous discovery and learning, in which I was assisted by many friends, scholars,
collectors, and dealers,” including “Eliot Elisofon, who helped me learn to see.”502 In
1988 Wunderman expounded upon this information:
I…met Eliot Elisofon, the great photographer and Africanist, and we

became fast friends. Eliot loved African art, and he had photographed,
collected, and written about it. He had also made films for television about
African life and art.
Eliot and I installed a photographic studio in my apartment where we

worked together trying to understand African art through photography. He
taught me to see Dogon art as the sculptors meant it to be seen. We re-
created the blazing African sun with harsh, hot photographic lighting in
our studio. Meanwhile I went on quietly collecting.503
In the early 1970s Wunderman started a pet project with Elisofon and Michael Kan, then
curator of Primitive Art and New World Cultures at the Brooklyn Museum: an exhibition
exclusively dedicated to his Dogon collection. This was the last exhibition of African art
that Elisofon worked on.
African Art of the Dogon: The Lester Wunderman Collection was first shown at
the Brooklyn Museum, from April-May of 1973, and then handed over to the
International Exhibitions Foundation as a circulating show.504 It consisted of

501
“African Art of the Dogon: The Lester Wunderman Collection” review, African Arts, vol. 7,
no. 1 (Autumn, 1973): 72.
502
Jean Laude, African Art of the Dogon: The Myths of the Cliff Dwellers (New York: Brooklyn
Museum in association with the Viking Press, 1973): 14.
503
Lester Wunderman, “Preface,” in Kate Ezra, Art of the Dogon (New York: The Metropolitan
Museum of Art and Harry N. Abrams, 1988): 7.
504
See HRC 63.27-28. Also, another exhibition dedicated to Wunderman’s Dogon collection
appeared in 1988, complete with an extensive catalog by Kate Ezra, and shown at the
Metropolitan Museum of Art.
257
approximately 103 pieces and traveled to many cities throughout the United States from
1973 through 1975. Tour locations included:
The Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, Massachusetts

New Orleans Museum of Art, Louisiana
William Rockhill Nelson Gallery of Art, Kansas City, Missouri
The Toledo Museum of Art, Ohio
Museum of Fine Art, Houston, Texas
Dallas Museum of Fine Arts, Texas
Detroit Institute of Arts, Michigan
Dayton Art Institute, Ohio
Munson-Williams-Proctor Institute, Utica, New York
Columbus Gallery of Fine Arts, Ohio
Art Institute of Chicago, Illinois505
Despite the number of venues, the show was difficult to ‘sell’ to institutions because it
was only one ethnic group and from one collector.506 But Elisofon regarded this type of
exhibition as the show of the future and pitched it as such. On May 19, 1971, Elisofon
wrote to Mrs. John Pope of the International Exhibitions Foundation:
I feel that exhibitions which include a few pieces each from many tribes
are often confusing to the public and make almost no statement except as
to the general esthetic value of this art. We need now to go further into the
subject and concentrate on a cohesive area such as the Western Sudan, or
better still, a single tribe such as the Dogon who are justly world-famous
for the quality of their art. This will help the public understand the subject
to a deeper degree.507
Elisofon did not seem concerned whether the art shown was from one collection or from
twenty. The main goal of the show was to place the art of the Dogon into its larger

505
List of Dogon exhibition tour locations, early 1970s, Eliot Elisofon Papers, Eliot Elisofon
Photographic Archives, National Museum of African Art, Smithsonian, Washington, D.C. (EEPA
Z-4, 17.)
506
Mrs. John A. Pope, letter to Eliot Elisofon, October 28, 1971, Eliot Elisofon Paper and
IMG_0418.)
507
Eliot Elisofon, letter to Mrs. John A. Pope, May 19, 1971, Eliot Elisofon Paper and
Photographic Collection, Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin: 1. (HRC
63.27, IMG_0361.)
258
cultural context.508 Given the scale of Wunderman’s collection, he believed that this was
entirely possible to do with just his objects.
Elisofon was not the only one that believed shows like African Art of the Dogon
would have more impact upon an audience by focusing on one ethnic group instead of
many groups. African Arts compared the Dogon exhibition to the 1971 UCLA Yoruba
show Black Gods and Kings:
…the sense of cultural form, the very style of a people, was more apparent
than in the mixed bunch of masks and carvings often shown at exhibitions
that are divided without a coherent context in their presentation, no matter
the caliber of the individual pieces. Such a deliberate single regional focus
provides the viewer with at least a minimal opportunity to immerse
himself in that culture.509
Also, Kan was quoted in the African Arts review as saying, “We are moving away from
the more superficial ‘masterpiece’ show, which emphasizes only fine objects removed
from their African context.”510
The innovative nature of the Dogon exhibition did not elude the press. John
Canaday, of The New York Times, reviewed the Brooklyn installation on April 5, 1973.
He explained, “Brooklyn’s Dogon show gives African art back, not so much to the
anthropologists as to the Africans, enriched, for us, by the estheticism of the last 50 years
but revivified by renewed identification with its sources.”511 The show identified Dogon

508
“‘African Art of the Dogon: The Lester Wunderman Collection;’ Opening at Brooklyn
Museum on April 4, 1973,” press release, Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection,
Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin. (HRC 63.27, IMG_0504.)
509
no. 1 (Autumn, 1973): 72.
510
Michael Kan, quoted in “African Art of the Dogon: The Lester Wunderman Collection”
review, African Arts, vol. 7, no. 1 (Autumn, 1973): 72.
511
John Canaday, “In Brooklyn, the Splendid Art of Africa,” The New York Times, April 5, 1973:
50.
259
art with the Dogon people, answering the questions: Where were these sculptures
created? Who created them? Why were they made? For Canaday the exhibition
represented “a new stage, a kind of rounding out, in our understanding of primitive art,” a
“rescue of African masks and fetishes from museums of natural history….”512 The
presentation answered many questions, but was not entirely ethnographic in its approach.
The art was not lost within the world created by the exhibition. It was still the focus.
According to a separate exhibition description written to promote the show to the
International Exhibitions Foundation, the show was meant to “break new ground in the
understanding and appreciation of African art.”513 It was originally designed as a non-
travelling educational show, with a hundred objects and a multi-media accompaniment,
which the planners believed would expand the audience, widen the horizon, and intensify
the impact of the exhibition.514 The Brooklyn Museum, known for its educational work
for the black community of Brooklyn, intended for the show to have an impression on the
local population. The exhibition description stated, “It is hoped by those organizing this
exhibition that it will become a prototype for a new way to present the art of other
cultures as a total educational, emotional, and esthetic life experience. This should attract

512
John Canaday, “In Brooklyn, the Splendid Art of Africa,” The New York Times, April 5, 1973:
50.
513
Lester Wunderman, description for African Art of the Dogon, proposed exhibition, October,
Texas at Austin: 1. (HRC 63.27, IMG_0422.)
514
260
a wider audience, hopefully including the black community in an art and learning
experience which has hitherto been unavailable.”515
Elisofon was assigned to be Kan’s research consultant and he helped coordinate
the connection with the International Exhibitions Foundation. He had worked with the
Foundation before when they organized the 1970 National Gallery and Brooklyn
Museum exhibition African Sculpture. Elisofon had also collaborated with the Brooklyn
Museum for its 1954-55 exhibition Masterpieces of African Art. He lent them fourteen
objects and contributed photographs to the catalog. For the multi-media portion of the
Dogon show, Elisofon’s cooperation was key. “Eliot Elisofon, whose books, photographs,
motion pictures, scholarship and long involvement in African Art are world renowned, is
creating this part of the exhibition,” the exhibition description stated.516
The show included Elisofon’s Dogon photographs and film footage taken in 1970
and 1972. If Elisofon had lived, he planned on presenting Black African Heritage
showings at the Dogon exhibition venues along with lectures. The exhibition catalog
thanked him for making his “superb visual material on the Dogon” available for use.517
Elisofon also took all of the plates of Wunderman’s objects in the catalog, even though
they are un-credited. Elisofon’s black and white prints were framed and displayed at the
show, as well as blown-up for multiple 4’ x 6’ photo panels. These large murals featured

515
516
517
Jean Laude, African Art of the Dogon: The Myths of the Cliff Dwellers (New York: Brooklyn
Museum in association with the Viking Press, 1973): 6.
261
the Bandiagara Escarpment, and scenes of Dogon daily life and architecture (figs. 7.7-
7.8).
The show was designed to be immersive and encourage participation. Two
displays flanked the entrance to the exhibition for its Brooklyn display: an eight-foot
“Mother of Masks” for the sigui festival, and a mannequin wearing the complete regalia
of a Dogon kanaga performer (fig. 7.9). Dogon music was played in the galleries as
background atmosphere for the show. Separate from the exhibition, but nearby, was a
school project area where students were encouraged to build scale models of the Dogon
cliff villages using clay and paper. This project can be seen as an extension of
Wunderman’s attempt to share the art of the Dogon with others in order to enrich their
lives as his had been affected.
There was also a slideshow of 80 photographs on display, projected onto a false
wall in the exhibition. This was a combination of Elisofon’s and Wunderman’s color
photographs of Dogon villages, architecture, and daily life, as well as the landscapes of
the Bandiagara Escarpment region. In addition, Elisofon’s studio shots of Dogon art were
included in this slideshow. The images were of select details, planes, forms and sculptural
structures that were meant to assist the viewer in his/her understanding and appreciation
of Dogon art. Hence, the show featured some of Elisofon’s photographs with the same
purpose as those shown at his 1952 Understanding African Negro Sculpture exhibition.
“The viewer’s eye will be guided by a master photographer, who is an expert and scholar
in the field, to see, appreciate and understand the work as if he himself were an expert,”
262
declared the exhibition description.518 According to archival documents, the traveling
version of the exhibition maintained much of the original presentation, including the
multi-media experience.519
A nineteen-minute film, African Carving: A Dogon Kanaga Mask, was created
specifically for the exhibition through a splicing of Elisofon’s footage for Black African
Heritage and a dama dance performance film held by the Wunderman Foundation.520 The
final film, like the slideshow, was projected at the exhibition on another false wall.
African Arts commented: “The show had many features in common with other recent
displays of African art—the utilization of multimedia forms so that an exhibition is no
longer merely a display of the artifacts themselves but a part of a presentation that can
stimulate other senses than the eye.”521
Thomas D. Blakely edited African Carving: A Dogon Kanaga Mask, with
ethnographic consultation from Hans Guggenheim, and the collaboration of Robert
Gardner.522 The exhibition description asserted, “the film will enable the audience to
know who the [Dogon] people are, where they live and how, and to observe their life, and

518
519
In an invoice dated July 5, 1973, Eliot Elisofon Productions gave rights to the Boston Museum
of Fine Arts to show 47 black and white photo panels and 80 color slides of Dogon art at their
institution from July 15-September 2, 1973 with the Wunderman exhibition. (HRC 63.27,
IMG_0489.)
520
See HRC 52.5 for information about film, African Carving: A Dogon Kanaga Mask.
521
no. 1 (Autumn, 1973): 72.
522
It was created at the Harvard University Film Study Center and can be purchased today from
them on DVD. Music and narration accompany the film, not all original to Black African
Heritage. Additional sound for the film was acquired from the Musée de l’Homme, Paris.
263
the environment.”523 The film was finalized after Elisofon’s death, hence why Blakely
was the editor. However, it was still structured around Elisofon’s footage of the creation a
Dogon kanaga mask by the master blacksmith-woodcarver Dolo and his fourteen-year-
old son, Samuel, from the village of Ogol. Also seen in Black African Heritage, father
and son choose a tree to make the mask from, cut it down, take it to a secluded cave, and
carve the mask, away from other villagers. Only one man passes by during the creation
process; women are not allowed to see a mask being carved. The conclusion of Elisofon’s
footage included the same kanaga mask being performed with a large group of masked
dancers at the village of Bongo.
This long sequence was a key feature of Elisofon’s Black African Heritage: “The
Bend of the Niger.” The original television script for the series reveals Elisofon’s high
regard for the Dogon and their art, feelings also conveyed by the exhibition. It referred to
the Dogon as the most famous ‘tribe’ in the Western Sudan, considered to be the greatest
sculptors of all Africa. For Dolo’s process it commented that he does not use sketched
lines to prepare his work, he has the whole mask in his mind before he begins carving. It
also mentioned that there are several theories about meaning of the kanaga mask, but that
“research in African art today is difficult since the style and content of the sculptures date
back many generations and no one living knows its origins.”524 A mysterious statement,
which adds to the allure of the art.

523
524
264
Black African Heritage also included studio footage of African sculpture,
including many Dogon works, most from the Wunderman collection. As previously
mentioned in Chapter Six, “The Bend of the Niger” concluded with this statement: “The
Dogon have retained a great deal of their traditions, but they are not far enough away
from our ideas to maintain complete independence. There are only a few tribes left who
share with the Dogon the stubborn desire to be themselves. Let us hope that this may
never change.”525 This reveals the romantic, nostalgic Elisofon mindset. He consistently
lamented the Westernization of cultures he encountered around the world, from New
Guinea to Japan, and even Africa. Change is inevitable however, and Elisofon was either
bending reality to his own desires or willfully ignorant of that fact.
Many of the press reviews acknowledged Elisofon’s contribution to the
atmosphere of the exhibition. David Shirey, writing for The New York Times on April 22,
1973, explained:
The most distinctive feature of this exhibition is, perhaps, the general
consideration to the Dogon culture. Supplementing the many art objects in
the show are utilitarian pieces as well as film and outstanding dramatic
photographs by the late Eliot Elisofon.
Therefore, the art does not seem like something that materialized out of
thin air. It is shown as a living part of the culture. The art and the culture,
art and life, are inseparable. This educational aspect of the show
contributes a great deal to our understanding of the art object. Fortunately,
too much is not made of the didactic. Such a disproportionate emphasis
could diminish the impact of the art and the show as a whole.
The Dogon people live in villages in Mali. The photographs of the people
in their natural habitat, bastion-like structures near the Niger – give us an
inside glance into their living habits. Their rituals make us more acutely

525
265
aware of the symbolic significance of the sculpture, mirroring their

concepts about the beginnings of man and the world.526
Elisofon’s work helped to bring the Dogon world into the mind of the exhibition’s
audience. Some reviewers regarded this show as the next best thing to booking a ticket to
Mali and heading out to the Bandiagara Escarpment. Robert Taylor, after viewing the
Boston MFA installation of the Dogon show, wrote: “In the beginning, one enters a defile,
as it were, of photo-murals by the late photographer and Africanist, Eliot Elisofon. The
land springs to life; immense cliffs pocked by forts, gnarled baobab trees, conical straw
huts. We are in Dogon country, a rockscape of myth and mystery near the great bend of
the Niger River of Mali.”527
One could argue that Elisofon’s Dogon photographs and film support the vision of
timeless Africa, but that critique also applies to Wunderman’s images, and those by
Richard de Liberto seen in the exhibition catalog. Overall, Elisofon’s work helped people
appreciate Dogon art. Taylor explained:
To make sense of the Dogon, we must understand them in their total

environment. Context is a word one hears frequently in museum work; and
it is context which the MFA exhibition provides.
Edmund Barry Gaither, curator of the show here…has done a job that may
be described as no less than brilliant in providing a comprehensive setting.
What Gaither has done is to install the pieces – hemispherical cups,

towering ceremonial masks, ritual stools for priest and ruler – so that the
mysterious relations of the Dogon to their visual language becomes
immediate.
Progressing from the corridor of photo-murals, which is not unlike a
mountain pass, into a roomful of smaller metal pieces and then into a
gallery where the drums, masks, granary shutters and free-standing figures

526
David Shirey, “African Art Display Shown in Brooklyn; African Art in Brooklyn,” The New
York Times, April 22, 1973: 85.
527
Robert Taylor, “African Art of the Dogon,” Boston Globe, July 17, 1973: 26.
266
mounted among coves of rock, is an experience that includes various sides

of art and society.
…As Wunderman points out, such a society may be considered simply
another and perhaps happier alternative human organization. I guess what
impressed me most about the fine installation was a poignant phrase: ‘The
Dogon conceive heaven as being just like earth.’528
This passage is very evocative of an alternate reality; the Dogon live in another world, an
ideal world. And according to Taylor, Elisofon’s “corridor of photo-murals” transported
the viewer to that world, where one could then learn about the art objects in a more
genuine manner. It is a realm where museumgoers, the press, and collectors accept
African art as a fine art, and its visual expressiveness is properly appreciated. In this case,
despite the superficiality and romance of this otherworldliness, perhaps the good
outweighed the bad.
An Adventure Interrupted: The End of Two Lives
“While sitting here I’ve been thinking of how lucky I am to do what I want
to, not just on the weekends, but day in and day out, to go everywhere in
the world and savor it. Money alone could not have given me the
privileges I’ve enjoyed; experiencing strange landscapes, primitive
peoples, exotic arts. For thirty years my camera has been my magic
carpet.”
- Eliot Elisofon529
When LIFE magazine suspended publication at the end of 1972, it was not a
surprise to Elisofon. While the magazine was still incredibly popular, the advertising
revenue could not match its high circulation costs, as advertisers increasingly looked to
the television market. In a February 1973 newspaper interview Elisofon remarked, “It
was obvious that television would kill LIFE. When I was offered the opportunity to make

528
Robert Taylor, “African Art of the Dogon,” Boston Globe, July 17, 1973: 26.
529
Eliot Elisofon, Java Diary (New York: Macmillan, 1969): 262-63.
267
television documentaries, I took it.”530 However being a freelance photographer and
documentary filmmaker was an even more demanding lifestyle than being a salaried
LIFE photographer.
I’m 57 and suppose the machine (will) slow down somewhere along the
line, but no sign of it yet. I think that I have made tougher trips in the last
two years than ever before. All the animal behavior filming in East Africa,
as well as climbing Mt. Kilimanjaro to 18,500 ft. in 1966 and last year,
really crazy, ten weeks crossing the Congo basin from Bukavu to Kinshasa
by jeep, truck and steamer, a fast moving cookbook assignment going
from Hawaii to Tahiti, to Korea, Japan and Thailand, and then three
months to Indonesia, ten of them (weeks) in a remote game sanctuary on
the Western tip of Java. That doesn’t seem like slowing up, but
accelerating. To where, I don’t know.531
On March 18, 1973 at the age of sixty-one and four months after the demise of LIFE,
Elisofon sustained a cerebral hemorrhage in his New York apartment. He was brought to
Bellevue hospital for two weeks and then his family moved him to the New York
University Medical Center. He never regained consciousness. On April 7th, at two in the
morning, Elisofon died.532 Analyzing Elisofon’s posthumous reputation, Roy Flukinger
wrote: “His career covered many professions—photographer, writer, adventurer, painter,
art collector, curator, explorer, filmmaker—and the results far exceeded any need for

530
Maureen D’Honau, “Living in Japan; Feminine Focus: Hellsapoppin Elisofon,” Mainichi
Daily News, February 12, 1973: 6B. (HRC 71.11/66.11, IMG_6556.)
531
Eliot Elisofon, “Far East Diary,” unpublished manuscript, December 3, 1968, Bombay, 8 am,
532
“Lensman Elisofon dies at 61,” Bangor Daily News, April 9, 1973. Biographical information
summarized from Roy Flukinger, “To Help the World to See:” An Eliot Elisofon Retrospective
(Austin: Harry Ransom Humanities Research Center, University of Texas at Austin, 2000): 3-8,
23.
268
self-promotion. Indeed, as his archive and legacy so fittingly demonstrate, there is no
need to prove what has been there all along.”533
Is there truly “no need to prove what has been there all along?” Elisofon’s legacy
is far from well known in the way that some of his fellow LIFE photographers are
immediately recognized and remembered. Without access to the Elisofon archives and
online resources it would be very difficult to examine his legacy. The publications, both
books and magazines; lectures; exhibitions; interviews; newspaper articles; television
shows; Hollywood motion pictures; biographic entries; and obituaries all stand as
testaments to a successful, multifaceted career. But these projects are so widespread and
held in such a variety of places that only a scholar would invest time in researching them.
Elisofon’s legacy has not yet been condensed, curated and commodified for mass public
consumption in a way that would stand as proof.
Warren Robbins was quoted in an Elisofon obituary in 1973: “Eliot was one of
the pioneers in the studying and teaching of appreciation and collecting of African art in
this country…He loved Africa. He made innumerable trips there, drove from South
Africa to Cairo and really knew the continent, the people and the terrain.”534 A little more
than a year after Elisofon’s death, in the August 1974 issue of African Arts, Robert and
Nancy Nooter’s article, “Eliot Elisofon: Photographer of Africa,” appeared as a tribute to
his life and work in Africa.535 It addressed only the highlights of his career and major

533
Ransom Humanities Research Center, University of Texas at Austin, 2000): 8.
534
Warren Robbins, quoted in Jacqueline Bolder, “Eliot Elisofon, 61, Dies: Noted Photographer,”
Star-News (1973). (HRC 71.17/66.17, IMG_2751.)
535
(August 1974): 8-13.
269
activities that were connected with African art. These types of articles pigeonholed
Elisofon.
Even when accounts of Elisofon’s accomplishments are readily available in
obituaries or articles, they offer little deep analysis of his life, career and fame. As an
example, the December 6, 2013 article for Smithsonian magazine’s website on Elisofon
offered these observations:
Meet the Real "Most Interesting Man in the World": On view at African
Art, a retrospective of Eliot Elisofon, who drank scotch and was allowed
to touch the museum's art
The real "Most Interesting Man in the World" didn’t sell Dos Equis; Eliot
Elisofon took pictures. And yes, Elisofon was allowed to touch the
artwork in the museum, because he gave it to them. He also put the
Brando in Marlon. And strippers kept photos of him on their dressing
tables.
His Latvian last name (accent the first syllable: EL-isofon) so confounded
General George S. Patton that the commander simply called him
“Hellzapoppin.”
…Beginning in 1947, when Elisofon crossed the continent from “Cairo to

Capetown,” he became the first Western photographer to portray Africa’s
peoples and traditions without stereotype or derision.536
In 2013 there was the retrospective for the 40th anniversary of the EEPA at the NMAfA,
which this Smithsonian.com article highlighted. Most of the recent publicity about
Elisofon is tied to this exhibition and his connections to Africa, however, his career
cannot be cut up and placed into neat little boxes. Every project he worked on influenced
subsequent assignments. But most of the posthumous coverage of Elisofon’s life focused
on his work in Africa and his donations to the MAA, forcing him into one role:
“Photographer of Africa.”

536
Beth Py-Lieberman, “Meet the ‘Real Most Interesting Man in the World,” smithsonian.com,
December 6, 2013. http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsonian-institution/meet-the-real-most-
interesting-man-in-the-world-180949043/#IEQvKJFPZkEl5Jwy.99
270
This dissertation seeks to complicate this simplified vision of Elisofon. He was
not “the first Western photographer to portray Africa’s peoples and traditions without
stereotype or derision,” as stated on Smithsonian.com. Perhaps he is legendary. Maybe he
did love Africa. But these are superficial statements. While he did create many
groundbreaking projects, he also presented as many stereotypes as the next photographer.
Again, Elisofon was both ahead of his time, and a man of his time.
271
Conclusion: Eliot Elisofon and African Art
Much has been written about the changing status of African objects from
curiosities, ethnographic materials, and artifacts to fine art that now appears in the
hallowed halls of the greatest art museums of the world. By the time Eliot Elisofon first
traveled to sub-Saharan Africa for LIFE in 1947, the new status of African art was
beginning to be recognized. Elisofon’s work related to African art helped boost the
reputation and appeal of the field by using the mass media’s attention of the general
public. Over the course of the twentieth century, he contributed to the developing idea
that African art was valuable and sophisticated. He wanted the public to understand
Africa’s aesthetic achievements. However, he was not an art historian and his
contributions to the field highlight the question of who is qualified, or even has the right,
to judge art, to label something fine art instead of artifact, or even to separate the
masterpieces from the mundane. Despite being a commercial photographer, Elisofon’s
successful contributions to the study and appreciation of African art suggest that people
who are not art historians continually shape art history.
An episode that highlights the fact that Elisofon was not an anthropologist, nor an
anthropological photographer, occurred in 1961. He was invited to be a member of an
expedition to film native life in New Guinea, organized by Robert Gardner, the Peabody
Museum, and Harvard’s Film Study Center.537 During this trip, Gardner produced his
famed ethnographic documentary Dead Birds on the Dani.538 Elisofon arrived later than

537
The interior of New Guinea would eventually be ‘suppressed’ by the Dutch government, but at
this point in time it was one of the last areas on Earth not yet touched by Westernization, though
missionaries had already come to the island.
538
The Current Biography 1972 entry on Elisofon stated that he did the camerawork for the film
Dead Birds. This is an error, as Gardner did most of the filming himself, and Elisofon most likely
272
the rest of the team and found himself in an unfamiliar and frustrating situation. Since
this was an ethnographic project, the team was only allowed to observe. Elisofon referred
to this as an “anthropological straight-jacket.”539 He could not ask the Dani to hunt nor
dance nor prepare for battle. He could only photograph what they were already doing.
Elisofon’s patience ran thin and he left New Guinea a month later when LIFE messaged
him to go on an assignment elsewhere.
Elisofon often had an idea or image in his mind of how a scene should be
photographed long before he set foot in the location. This habit was partially due to his
personality, always thinking of the next step, but it was also a consequence of years spent
working from magazine scripts. To plot out the where, when, and who of every shoot was
a necessity for a viable production timeline. With wildlife photography, Elisofon was
more accustomed to the sit-and-wait mentality, although it did frustrate him and he got
around it every chance he could. For example, for the ‘Literary Africa’ LIFE photo essay
(1961), he had his assistant, Priya Ramrakha, chase down a herd of zebras with a
Volkswagen so that they would be running in Elisofon’s shots. For humans, Elisofon was
used to being their director, constructing the idea/image he had created during the
planning stages.

never even touched a video camera in New Guinea. Elisofon’s name does not even appear
anywhere in the credits in the film. This calls into question the reliability of these biographic
collections.
539
Peter Matthiessen, letter to Elin Elisofon, March 26, 1986, quoted in Elin Elisofon, Elisofon
Biography Draft, Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection, Harry Ransom Center, The
University of Texas at Austin. (HRC 79a.1-4/72.2-5, IMG_1517.)
273
Despite the continued categorization of Elisofon as an Africanist, he
photographed people all over the world, from a variety of cultures, classes, and economic
backgrounds. In her biography of her father, Elin Elisofon referred to him as a “pictorial
anthropologist.”540 He was always looking for the oldest, purest forms of art. There is
really no such thing as a pure art form, but he wanted to find it. He believed in their value,
and he was motivated by what he thought would look best in photographs – ritual
costumes and adornments, dancing, ceremonies, unique activities, native art forms –
items, people, activities, shapes that would pop for the camera.
Elisofon put a high value on old traditions, regarding them as genuine and pure. It
may be said that he was stuck in the past, but, in general, the world he regarded as ‘reality’
never existed. He was idealistic, and did not want cultures to change, to Westernize, to be
diluted. For example, writing in 1955, Elisofon discussed his impressions of post-war
Japan:
The serene landscape has been stuck like a pincushion with endless
telegraph poles and high voltage towers, billboards no less obtrusive
because of their charming calligraphy are liberally scattered between
motifs reminiscent of famous old woodcuts….541
Is Japan perfect? It is perfect in its perfection and ghastly in its imitations.
The garden and temple can never be surpassed but the cheap ideas
borrowed unwittingly from the West are a seed that will fast throttle a
culture sprung out of centuries of evolvement.542

540
541
Eliot Elisofon, “A Japanese Kaleidoscope,” manuscript draft, 1955, Eliot Elisofon Paper and
53.7.)
542
Eliot Elisofon, “A Japanese Kaleidoscope,” manuscript draft, 1955, Eliot Elisofon Paper and
53.7.)
274
Elisofon had a particular image in his mind about Japan – kimonos, woodcut prints,
scrolls, beautiful gardens, majestic temples and shrines – and when he did not find it
easily, he was bothered. The billboards, smokestacks, and telephone poles annoyed him.
In a similar manner, Elisofon had an image of Africa in his mind long before he
traveled there, but this was not ‘real’ Africa. The ‘Africa’ he projected in his work cannot
be quickly labeled as wrong or right, good or bad. It is much more conceptually complex.
Elisofon did operate within Western constructions of adventure and exoticism. Instead of
breaking down Elisofon’s image of ‘Africa’ to construct an opposing image of the ‘true’
Africa, this dissertation has examined the various contexts of his ‘Africa,’ looking at both
the positive and negative aspects of his work.
In her article, “Safari Adventure,” Amy J. Staples wrote a brief analysis of early
twentieth-century African safari films. She described how they showed “African cultures
with spectacular dances, colorful costumes, and exotic practices,” which “became
emblematic of the continent.”543 The belief in a timeless Africa spoke to the white
European romanticization of the continent. These safari films depicted “Africa as
populated by iconic tribal peoples.” Elisofon contributed to this construction of an iconic
Africa. “African people were often portrayed as living in isolated, traditional villages and
eager to perform welcome dances, cultural rituals and subsistence activities for the
tourist’s camera,” Staples explained. The same description could be used for Elisofon’s

543
An International Journal, vol. 18 (2006): 394.
275
African image world. “These cultures were, in fact, produced as spectacle through
photography and motion picture film,” Staples concluded.544
Elisofon’s experience of African art and Africa was constructed through his
camera lens, and his photographs were taken to be manipulated by the popular media.
The fact that most of Elisofon’s African photographs only included blacks or whites, not
both together, is one example of Elisofon’s minimization of Westernization in these
pictures, and his construction of an ideal Africa. Westerners were usually hidden away
from African life in his images, and, in turn, white people had their own African world
when they were photographed. Elisofon probably believed that a Western presence in his
images of African art creation and performance ruined his attempt to convey the visual
pleasure and spectacle of ‘authentic’ Africa.
However despite his manipulation of reality, Elisofon’s images are still used and
valuable to publishers and researchers today. The EEPA tracks the most frequently used
images by month and posts this information online.545 For May 2014, 29 out of 31 of
these top images were taken by Elisofon, even though the Archives also hold thousands
of photographs by other people, including Herbert M. Cole, Simon Ottenberg, Constance
Stuart Larrabee, Emile E.O. Gorlia, and Philip L. Ravenhill, as well as hundreds of
postcards. The image use has been tracked since January 2009 and Elisofon’s
photographs are always in the majority each month. Even 40 years after his death, his
pictures still play a large role in influencing public perception about Africa and African

544
An International Journal, vol. 18 (2006): 394.
545
“Collection Highlights: Top Images,” Smithsonian Institution Research Information
System, http://sirismm.si.edu/siris/topimages.htm.
276
art. Just as they have helped to commodify African art, Elisofon’s photographs are
commodities today, offered up for easy consumption. They still speak for African art,
even though they are decades old and their production context is rarely discussed.
However, as this dissertation has demonstrated, the photographs tell us more about the
society that produced them, than the culture that produced those objects.
A Life of Influencing the Language of African Art
Dissatisfied with the 1970 National Gallery African Sculpture show, Warren
Robbins took it as his responsibility to create a better show. He organized The Language
of African Art to appear at the National Portrait Gallery from July-September 1970. More
than 300 of the 425 objects in the exhibition were from the Museum of African Art
collection. The rest were loaned from other public and private collections. Elisofon lent
thirteen objects to this show.
In a June 8, 1970 letter to Elisofon, Robbins stated, “As you can see, we have put
together with your support and that of others, a first rate show which many people feel is
much better than the National Gallery one, despite the latter’s very special material. Our
installation is completely different – warmer, closer to the viewer, much more
informative.”546 Included in the “many people” who felt that Robbins’ show was “much
better than the National Gallery one,” was New York Times writer John Canaday. His
review for this exhibition began:
Last February, 119,000 people attended the elaborate and rather

disappointing exhibition at the National Gallery in Washington, and

546
Warren Robbins, letter to Eliot Elisofon, June 8, 1970, Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic
277
another 36,000 saw it in a somewhat improved presentation at the

Brooklyn Museum before it closed there last month.
I wish that each of these 155,000 people could see another African
exhibition that has turned up unexpectedly. It was unexpected even by the
organizing institutions. Washington’s young Museum of African Art,
which had the idea, negotiated the loans, and achieved an exemplary
installation in quarters borrowed for the summer from the National Portrait
Gallery…all in a matter of 10 weeks.547
What made Language so different, so much better? Canaday’s review was titled “In Its
Own Language, For a Welcome Change.” Of course, it could be argued that the
‘language’ presented was really Warren Robbins’ curatorship, but still Canaday insisted
“it is the only exhibition I have ever seen where African sculpture is allowed to speak for
itself, although we have been putting words into its mouth for a long time now.”548 This is
a large statement, but has some validity. In many of the exhibitions previously discussed
in this dissertation, a louder voice was heard above that of African art.
As Canaday explained in this review, the voice of the Westerner has truly steered
the presentation of African art. His description of this situation could easily be applied to
Elisofon’s journey with African art over the previous four decades: “Usually we subject it
to the rhetoric of 20th-century esthetics, identifying it with the School of Paris and
German expressionism, or at the other extreme we treat it as illustrative material for
ethnological dissertations in museums of natural history.”549 Elisofon had grown up
seeing ‘primitive’ art in natural history museums. He understood this type of presentation.
When he became involved with African art, he did frame it in “the rhetoric of 20th-

547
John Canaday, “In Its Own Language, For a Welcome Change,” The New York Times, July 12,
1970. (HRC 63.22/58.22, IMG_0220 thru IMG_0207.)
548
1970. (HRC 63.22/58.22, IMG_0220 thru IMG_0207.)
549
1970. (HRC 63.22/58.22, IMG_0220 thru IMG_0207.)
278
century esthetics, identifying it with the School of Paris and German expressionism.” We
have seen this in his work on the subject throughout his career.
Elisofon, and many others, believed that in order for African art to be considered
as fine art, its ethnological framing had to be minimized. What we see in The Sculpture of
Africa in 1958, as an example, is a response to the anthropological perspective that
treated the objects as artifacts only, not as aesthetic entities. The imagery of the objects
dominated, not the information. However, as an opposing voice, Canaday was
uncomfortable with this type of simplified presentation. He wrote:
Between the two [aesthetic vs. anthropological], although weaned on the

former, I have lately inclined toward the latter approach, and can
remember writing an enthusiastic report on the new Hall of Africa at New
York’s Museum of Natural History when it was opened last year.
It was good to see African sculpture attached to its own world, even to a
remote and synthetic echo of its own world, after having seen it for so
long exhibited as material for esthetic consideration alone, extracted from
all contexts that accounted for its creation.550
The fine art museum versus the natural history museum. Two Western constructs, neither
of which provides a satisfactory display for African art. In both, it exists as a foreign
entity. Neither one is its true world. And yet, the question has become ‘Where do we
show African art?’ and is no longer, ‘Why do we show African art?’
Canaday was not echoing the public response we had seen in the 1950s, such as
‘Will we ever get used to this?,’ ‘This isn’t for everyone,’ and “It was ‘bongo, bongo,
bongo,’ at the Boston Museum of Fine Arts last night.” Instead he conducted an
intelligent examination of how the West could best serve African art. While he was

550
1970. (HRC 63.22/58.22, IMG_0220 thru IMG_0207.)
279
initially enamored of the new installation of the Hall of Africa, his thought process did
change. He explained:
However, without shifting allegiance in principle, I must admit that on

another visit a few weeks ago the finest sculptures in the Hall of Africa,
which formerly I had enjoyed spotting in the crowd, did seem to be
suffering under the weight of their neighbors and the complexity of the
subject matter.
Their inherent beauty as works of art was indeed a bit dimmed by the
didactic purpose they were serving. “You can’t have everything” would
seem to be the lesson of that. But not so.551
Canaday deemed the Language exhibition as the answer to this perpetual conundrum of
how to display African art: “Let’s avoid the word ‘compromise’ and say that the Museum
of African Art’s Washington show fuses the two opposing attitudes toward African
sculpture to the advantage of both.”552
African art had transformed from purely anthropological artifact, to fine art under
Western terms, and arrived at a new destination where it was recognized as art in its own
context. Some ethnographic information was included with the objects, but not too much,
as Canaday explained in his article:
The point is made when you begin reading labels. Explanatory labels are
anathema to museum curators and are usually a bore to the public, and are
naturally passed by, but these labels are read because they are terse and
clear on a fascinating subject.
They do no more than explain the original function of each piece, with any
immediately pertinent extensions into tribal beliefs and reference to
specific details in the example at hand – all of which, surely, sounds
elementary enough.
But what happens is that each work takes on individual life in this
particularized treatment. Even a representative of one of the most familiar

551
1970. (HRC 63.22/58.22, IMG_0220 thru IMG_0207.)
552
1970. (HRC 63.22/58.22, IMG_0220 thru IMG_0207.)
280
types – a Senufo ancestor figure, a Fanti fertility doll, a Dogon granary

door – becomes not a good or bad example of its kind but an eloquent
spokesman of the invisible forces believed in by its people….
“The Language of African Art” has an educational value that any number
of exhibitions could have in whatever branch of art you want to mention,
but is not often met.553
The labels did not include more information than any other piece of art would have with
it at any other show. African art had come into its own, being seen and appreciated, and
valued on its own terms. It was no longer beautiful because it looks like a Picasso, or
valuable because of its tribal background. It stood on its own as art.
In a way this is the journey Elisofon had been on all along, bringing African art
into the public eye. Then as he did this, reacting to the various ways in which it was done.
Elisofon’s early fine art studio photography of African art, without cultural context, was
an extreme response to the purely anthropological viewpoint. But then the pendulum
came back part way to blend the two fields, serving the art better and encouraging greater
appreciation. Elisofon was always interested in documenting the creation, use and
performance of African arts; for example, the complete costume and dance of a masked
character. This approach to African art helped him understand the art, and then convey
that information and comprehension to the public. But it was really only during the 1960s
and 70s that he was able to push more of his field photographs into popular media. Today,
as Amy J. Staples stated, “For many audiences, Elisofon’s photographs of art in situ and

553
1970. (HRC 63.22/58.22, IMG_0220 thru IMG_0207.)
281
African artists (in some cases, named individuals) have contributed to the authenticity
and aesthetic value of museum objects.”554
She continued, “The meanings created by photographic images are not static but
continue to change as they circulate and are re-interpreted in new museum settings and
public venues of exhibition and display.”555 For Elisofon’s images, we often think of
them in museum settings, exhibitions, public displays, but during his lifetime they had a
much more complex existence. By the end of his life his photographs had seeped into the
collective public psyche. In a book review for The New York Times on Dec. 2, 1971,
Anatole Broyard explained: “…if you study the sculpture of tribes like the Dogon and
Benin, it’s difficult to imagine what Western civilization could offer them…without
adulterating their cultures. Or simply look at the landscapes of Africa, particularly those
photographed by Eliot Elisofon, and ask yourself whether there is anything in the world
worth sacrificing them for.”556
It is difficult to depict Elisofon’s work on African art as a single-minded crusade.
His projects were purposeful, and his photography was an extension of himself. His work
did influence the world around him; each of his projects took on a life of its own, as this
dissertation demonstrates. One could say he campaigned for global understanding and the

554
555
556
Anatole Broyard, “Books of The Times: Africa, Before and After,” The New York Times,
December 2, 1971. (HRC 71.11/66.11, IMG_6544.)
282
universal dignity of man, perhaps in a naïve way. But he knew that photography was
inherently problematic; a photograph is not reality and can be a falsification.
Did Elisofon become more serious about African art and Africa as time went on?
Did he gain more respect for African art? Studying his career it is evident that what began
as awe moved toward respect and understanding. Elisofon had limited control over the
final product of any project he worked on, but particularly at LIFE magazine where every
photo essay was a team effort. But even with this caveat in mind, his projects became less
sensationalistic; and gained an increasing specificity. By the end of his life the Western
world was beginning to recognize that Africa was not a playground for entertainment, but
a place with valuable history, culture, traditions, and people that should be respected and
admired.
The modern separation of African art history and African studies did not exist for
Elisofon. They were one and the same thing. His work publicizing Africa supported his
work on African art, and vice versa. But increased specialization of academic fields has
placed African art squarely into the realm of pure scholarship. In the field of African art
history today, there is no room for another Elisofon. There is a line between appreciation
and pure study.
At the beginning of The Scramble for Art in Central Africa, Tom Beidelman
commented, “One of the nice things about studying African art is that we are all so ill at
ease doing it.”557 The field is so complex and filled with so many potential controversies
that many Africanists approach the subject with caution, constantly questioning their own

557
Tom Beidelman, quoted in Enid Schildkrout, The Scramble for Art in Central Africa (New
York: Cambridge University Press, 1998): 1.
283
perceptions and motives in their scholarship. Elisofon had no such doubts. He knew he
had a valuable role to play for African art history even before it had fully germinated as
an academic field. Elisofon once commented: “I’m willing to take a chance. You must be
willing to commit yourself, to die for it, not for a war, but for a love.”558 Though he was
talking about his career in general, he could have been discussing the way that he
approached African art. He tirelessly pursued the subject from all angles, as photographer,
researcher, collector, filmmaker, etc. But overall, he was an advocate for its wider
appreciation; he wanted others to admire African art as much as he did.
Like the artists he discussed at a 1953 conference, Elisofon worked to “extend
man’s limited vision, to expose mankind to ‘new beauties, new pleasures,’ and ‘new
understanding.’”559 He once said, “If we do not attempt the new because it is unfamiliar,
we will not progress.”560 African art had been consistently judged through the Western
definition of fine art. The twentieth century was a turning point in this mindset, and
Elisofon participated in this transition. Mankind needed to think broader, more
universally, about what was art, and what art could be.
This dissertation has provided a scholarly study of the career and
accomplishments of Eliot Elisofon in relation to his work on and interest in African art.
Such a study has never been produced before. Overall, Elisofon was a famous LIFE

558
Eneid Routte, “Hellzapoppin’ Elisofon,” San Juan Star Magazine (January 4, 1970): 2-3.
(HRC 71.11/66.11, IMG_6535.)
559
560
284
magazine photographer who has not been studied. There are no published books on
Elisofon, no prior dissertations. His commercial work has rarely been discussed, let alone
more specific aspects of his career. The projects this dissertation has presented are only a
small portion of his activities. But they do enlighten us as to how much commercial
photography has shaped art history, especially via public opinion and interest.
My work has also examined the history of taste and collecting, commercial
aspects of African art history, social and cultural history in connection with African art,
the impact of photography on the field, and how African art appeared in the mainstream
in the twentieth century. Just as African art had many layers of meaning and significance
for African peoples, it was also multivalent for the other societies that collected, stored,
and exhibited it. Dealers, critics, artists, experts, and collectors had forged the reputation
of African art. But once it became part of mainstream culture, African art took on
additional significance, meaning and identities — both good and bad. It became a cultural
touchstone and proof of civilization for some; for others it represented the Other and
therefore was sexy, dangerous, and even frightening. Yet by the end of Elisofon’s life,
African art was being written about, photographed, and exhibited as fine art, with an
increasing awareness and sensitivity to its purposes, uses and aesthetics in the context of
African cultures.
The biggest question of the age was: Now that we have determined that Africans
created great art and had a glorious past, what does this mean for their present and future?
Fine African art was used as proof of the equality of the races, and an argument that
Africans were just as capable as Westerners (if not more so, as some argued). Since
Africa had an illustrious history that meant that it could have a bright future. This was a
285
potent concept for the civil rights movement and for the many African nations that were
seeking independence from European powers. The public slowly realized that
colonization had not been the savior of Africa, but had been a hindrance to these great,
“lost” civilizations. African art sat at the heart of these discussions, a cultural beacon to
rally around and celebrate, both in Africa and in the United States.
Elisofon’s career introduces a number of interesting topics to explore. For
example, how African art was connected to the aesthetics of popular publications in the
mid-twentieth century. We often discuss how African art is displayed in various types of
museums. How was African art displayed in magazines and books created for the general
public, such as LIFE? Public perception and awareness of artworks has such an impact on
their value, both to collectors and to institutions. Yet only recent studies from the past
fifteen years have examined LIFE magazine as a historical topic. LIFE, TIME, Inc., or
LIFE staffers produced the majority of publications on the magazine. The common
format for these texts is an oversize photographic compilation with little scholarly input.
In general, historians, not art historians, have written on the magazine. The LIFE
photographer and his/her photographs have been the endpoint for art historical studies.
The images became fine art objects, suitable for museum walls and aesthetic
appreciation, but removed from their initial context. This dissertation has gone back to
the original publications and settings of Elisofon’s projects in an attempt to investigate
how the projects were generated and edited, and how the public viewed them during his
lifetime.
There have been no extensive examinations of how African art was displayed in
LIFE. The same can be said of Africa and Africans. This dissertation is one step into this
286
unexplored territory. By approaching Elisofon’s life through the lens of African art
studies, I take a rare approach. In addition, few African art dissertations have been
written on collecting and the history of taste for African art. It tends to be a subject
addressed in articles and book chapters. Projects also usually focus on an earlier time
period, at the beginning of the twentieth century. This dissertation examines the meaning
of African art for a different generation of collectors, critics and the general population.
From a broader historiographic perspective, this dissertation contributes to the
tradition of reflexive, self-analytical research that has been done in the field of African art
history. Africanists use Elisofon’s photographs on a daily basis, but rarely understand the
production context of them. They are still a valuable source of information, but they are
more a record of Elisofon’s work and objectives than a record of Africa. In this way, I
echo previous Elisofon scholars: be careful how you use his photographs in presentations,
publications, and classrooms. Do not take them at face value, but instead explore their
rich history. Few Africanists know about Elisofon’s many African art-related projects,
such as his articles, exhibitions and studio photographs, though they recognize his name
and most famous images. For the projects they do know about, for instance, The
Sculpture of Africa, Africanists have little idea of Elisofon’s level of involvement. But
during his lifetime, Elisofon’s images, articles, exhibitions, and more were repeatedly
presented to the American public via the mass media. By examining commercial
photography, and mass media representations of African art, this dissertation expands the
typical techniques for studying how the field itself was shaped.
By approaching the largely overlooked career of Eliot Elisofon through his impact
on the appreciation of African art in the United States, this dissertation brings to light the
287
larger context of his well-publicized images, the vigor and depth of his involvement in
African art-related projects, and his passion for sharing African art with the public.
Elisofon’s interests and interpretations influenced the presentation and very presence of
African art in the mainstream. Ultimately, by tracing Elisofon’s African art-related
activities, this dissertation shows a microcosm of how African art transformed in the
American public’s eye from ethnographic object to primitive art to fine art, and the
impact one individual had on that metamorphosis.

288
Figures
Introduction and State of the Literature
Fig. 0.1. Eliot Elisofon.
Fig. 0.2. Elisofon’s photograph of a Shilluk woman on the cover of LIFE, November 20,
1950 –The first time a black woman appeared on the cover of LIFE.
289
Fig. 0.3. Myrlie Evers and her son on the cover of LIFE, June 28, 1963 – The second
time a black woman appeared on the cover of LIFE.
Figs. 0.4-0.8. LIFE article, “The Nile” (November 20, 1950) with images by Elisofon.
290
291
Fig. 0.9. Cover of the Tribute to Africa: The Photography and Collection of Eliot
Elisofon, 1974.
Figs. 0.10-0.11. Cover of “To Help the World to See:” An Eliot Elisofon Retrospective,
2000; and title page.
292
Chapter One – Elisofon Biography and Career Overview
Fig. 1.1. Elisofon’s Lower East Side, New York City, street photography of fashion
models in industrial settings.
Figs. 1.2-1.3. Elisofon’s LIFE articles on tintype photographers and Jewish holidays,
September 20, 1937.
293
Fig. 1.4. Elisofon’s LIFE cover photograph of Carol Bruce, September 9, 1940; his first
LIFE cover.
Chapter Two – 1947: Africa or Bust
Figs. 2.1-2.2. LIFE article, “England’s King Visits South Africa,” sample pages, March
10, 1947, including Elisofon photographs.
294
Figs. 2.3-2.6. Examples of Elisofon’s photographs of objects in the Musée de la Vie

Indigène, 1947.
Figs. 2.7-2.13. Kuba bridge, sculptural poles, Kuba man with hat and pipe, 1947.
295
296
Figs. 2.14-2.15. Kuba capital of Mushenge, blacksmith forge, and King’s bedroom, 1947.
Fig. 2.16. Kuba King’s wives dancing and playing music, 1947.
Fig. 2.17. Making of Kuba velours, 1947.

297
Figs. 2.18-2.19. Kuba men weaving a floor mat and carver with animal-shaped backrest,
1947.
Figs. 2.20-2.22. Kuba King in his coronation costume, 1947.

298
Fig. 2.23. Elisofon with the King, caption: “Elisofon & Friend: The King adores ground
glass,” 1947.
Figs. 2.24-2.25. Some of the gifts Elisofon received from the Kuba King, 1947.
Figs. 2.26-2.27. Kuba King wearing the necklace Elisofon gifted him, 1947.
299
Fig. 2.28. Mask Elisofon received from the King, 1947.
Fig. 2.29. Kuba masks Elisofon acquired on the 1947 trip.
Figs. 2.30-2.31. Kuba man dancing in mask, impromptu performance, 1947.

300
Fig. 2.32. Songye child with power figure, 1947.
Fig. 2.33. Songye man with two power figures, 1947.
Figs. 2.34-2.35. Songye power figures on their platform, 1947.

301
Fig. 2.36. Luluwa boys training in the forest with masked instructor, 1947.
Figs. 2.37-2.39. LIFE article, “African Big Shot,” pages, March 31, 1947, images by
Elisofon.
302
303
Fig. 2.40. Arnold Newman photograph of the Kuba King, 1958.
Figs. 2.41-2.42. Arnold Newman with the Kuba King, 1958.

304
Figs. 2.43-2.46. LIFE article, “Polygamy Passing,” pages, December 12, 1960.
305
Chapter Three – Meeting African Art, Collecting
Fig. 3.1. Elisofon photograph of David Smith’s studio, 1938.

306
Figs. 3.2-3.5. Elisofon photographs of African art in his New York City apartments,
throughout his life.
307
Fig. 3.6. African art in Chaim Gross’s 1957 publication, The Technique of Wood
Sculpture.
Figs. 3.7-3.8. LIFE article on Isamu Noguchi stool, which was based on a Kuba stool in
Elisofon’s collection.
308
Figs. 3.9-3.10. Elisofon’s multiple exposure photograph of a woman teetering on

Noguchi’s stool and Noguchi’s stool next to Elisofon’s Kuba stool.
Fig. 3.11. Small Pende ivory sculpture given to Elisofon by Gypsy Rose Lee, his first
African art object in his collection.
309
Fig. 3.12. A four-faced helmet mask, Fang, NMAfA #73-7-290, Elisofon collected in the
field, town of Ibea in Republic of the Congo, 1951.
Fig. 3.13. Possible Kwele dancer performing this mask.

310
Figs. 3.14-3.15. Cynthia Kellogg article, “Living with Sculpture,” New York Times
Magazine, October 5, 1958; Inexpensive items to collect.
Figs. 3.16-3.17. Kellogg article main pages.

311
Fig. 3.18. “Dr. Elisofon, I Presume,” image with the f.y.i. magazine article about
Elisofon.
312
Chapter Four – Photographing, Exhibiting, and Writing about African Art
Fig. 4.1. Cover of The White Witch Doctor, published 1950.
Fig. 4.2. The White Witch Doctor 1953 film poster.

313
Fig. 4.3. Example of 1947 Africa trip photographs, objects clustered on blankets and shot
from above. Often distorted by heavy shadows.
Fig. 4.4. Example of an Elisofon studio photograph of African art made for publication in
a reference source, Suku headdress.
314
Fig. 4.5. Elisofon’s detail photographs of African art, which were published in Tribute to
Africa (1974), exhibition catalog pages with Dogon and Songye figures.
Fig. 4.6. Elsy Leuzinger, The Art of Africa (1960), plate 18, Baule mask on top of Baule
cloth.
315
Figs. 4.7-4.9. African art objects shown in the 1951 Alter Ego exhibition at the Cooper
Union, Nos. 90 (the cover of the exhibition catalog) and 93 are Elisofon collection
objects.
316
Figs. 4.10-4.44. Elisofon’s Understanding African Negro Sculpture, exhibition, 1952.

Installation photographs of Chicago, from photocopies.
317
318
Installation photographs of MoMA, photographs by Dick Meek.

319
320
321
Fig. 4.45. Marcel Duchamp’s Nude Descending a Staircase, 1912.

322
Figs. 4.46-4.47. Examples of Elisofon’s multiple exposure photographs of African art.
Figs. 4.48-4.49. Gjon Mili’s stroboscopic, i.e. multiple exposure, photographs of Gene
Kelly and Pablo Picasso (late 1940s-late 1950s).
323
Fig. 4.50. Gjon Mili’s photograph of a “Nude Descending a Staircase” (1942).
Fig. 4.51. Elisofon’s photograph of Duchamp descending a staircase (1951).
Fig. 4.52. Gjon Mili’s photograph of Gene Krupa’s drum-playing (1941).

324
Fig. 4.53. Gjon Mili’s photograph of Willie Hoppe’s billiard trick shot (1941).
Figs. 4.54-4.55. More examples of Elisofon’s multiple exposure photographs of African

art.
Figs. 4.56-4.58. Elisofon’s “multiples” series on a small Dogon figure.

325
Fig. 4.59. Elisofon’s silhouette picture of Guro heddle pulleys.

326
Fig. 4.60. Elisofon’s views of a Fang figure.
Figs. 4.61-4.65. Elisofon’s “Mystic Art of Tribal Africa,” 10 pages, LIFE, September 8,
1952.
327
328
Figs. 4.66-4.79. Elisofon’s “Africa,” 25 pages, U.S. Camera Annual 1954.

329
330
331
332
Fig. 4.80. Table of Contents page of The Atlantic Monthly, April 1959.
Figs. 4.81-4.85. Elisofon’s “African Sculpture,” pages with images, The Atlantic
Monthly, April 1959.
333
334
Fig. 4.86. Image of the entrance to the 1936 Museum of Modern Art exhibition Cubism
and Abstract Art, Pablo Picasso’s Dancer (1907) is next to a Kota reliquary figure, by
Beaumont Newhall.
Fig. 4.87. Alfred Barr’s exhibition catalog pages with a Kota reliquary figure clustered
with three works by Picasso, Cubism and Abstract Art, 1936.
335
Figs. 4.88-4.99. Elisofon’s ‘Literary Africa,’ “The Storied World of Africa,” 22 pages
and cover, LIFE, October 13, 1961.
336
337
338
Fig. 4.100. Elisofon multiple exposure image of a Dogon figure as the cover of Think
magazine, IBM Corporation, January 1962.
339
Figs. 4.101-4.102. Elisofon’s “African Art: Primitives to Picasso,” 4 pages, Think

magazine, January 1962.
Chapter Five – 1958 Was a Very Big Year
Fig. 5.1. The cover of the exhibition catalog for the Masterpieces of Primitive Art show at
the Boston Museum of Fine Arts, 1958.
340
Figs. 5.2-5.3. Invitation to the exhibition opening, Masterpieces of Primitive Art, Boston
Museum of Fine Arts, Fall 1958.
Figs. 5.4-5.5. 1952 film Latuko: We Saw Primitive Man, photographed and directed by
Edgar M. Queeny, poster images.
341
Fig. 5.6. The Sculpture of Africa, showing African art in a modern way—stark, bold,
abstract.
Figs. 5.7-5.10. Elisofon photographs of the set of The African Queen, the Belgian Congo,
LIFE issue September 17, 1951, 5-page article, “…Katie and Bogie Hit the Congo.”
342
Figs. 5.11-5.13. Elisofon’s still photographs of Moulin Rouge film, 1952 in LIFE’s
“Razzle-Dazzle Paris of Toulouse-Lautrec,” January 19, 1953.
343
Figs. 5.14-5.16. LIFE magazine story on Bell, Book and Candle, November 24, 1958.
344
Fig. 5.17. Bell, Book and Candle, 1958; Kim Novak’s name is paired with Kota reliquary
figure in film titles.
Figs. 5.18-5.19. Elisofon’s stills of Kim Novak’s character Gil, shown wandering among
the ‘primitive’ sculptures in her shop at night, talking to her cat, Pyewacket.
Figs. 5.20-5.22. The shop and character transformation after Gil loses her powers.
345
Figs. 5.23-5.24. Blue gelatins seen underneath the art objects in Gil’s ‘primitive’ art shop,
lit from below through milk glass shelves, as per Elisofon’s recommendation.
Fig. 5.25. The ‘Pende’ mask in her shop, which breaks during Gil’s argument with Shep.
346
Fig. 5.26. Gil’s magical familiar, Pyewacket, hiding amongst the sculptures, running
away from Gil.
Fig. 5.27. Man Ray’s Noire et Blanche, 1926
Figs. 5.28-5.30. Robert Coburn photographs of Novak as Gil in a gauze gown with an
African mask.
347
Figs. 5.31-5.34. Coburn photographs of Novak as Gil with a large Kota reliquary.
Chapter Six – Film and Television Projects in the 1960s and 1970s
Figs. 6.1-6.4. Bete/Dan-Ngere mask Elisofon lent to the 1970 National Gallery exhibition
of African sculpture, and TIME magazine article with Elisofon pictures on this exhibition,
Feb. 2, 1970.
348
Fig. 6.5. On set the set of Black African Heritage with Lamidi Fakeye, Eliot Elisofon, and
Georges Bracher.
349
Figs. 6.6-6.8. Examples of African art being created in Black African Heritage, set
photography by Elisofon.
Fig. 6.9. Group W advertisement for Black African Heritage.

350
Fig. 6.10. “Filmmaker perplexed by black response,” Ohio U showing of Black African
Heritage. Dave Sekal, “Filmmaker perplexed by black response,” The Post, Ohio
University, Athens, Ohio, October 18, 1972: 1.
Chapter Seven – The Final Years
Figs. 7.1-7.6. Elisofon’s Akan gold article, “Africa’s Ancient Splendor,” for Smithsonian
magazine, January 1973, including cover.
351
352
Figs. 7.7-7.8. 1973, African Art of the Dogon, exhibition installation photographs.
Fig. 7.9. Dogon kanaga performer mannequin in regalia in Wunderman exhibition.

353
Bibliography
M.L.A. “Bell, Book and Masks: A Dealer in Magic.” Daily Boston Globe. November 22,
1958: 24.
ABC press release. June 14, 1966. Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection. Harry
Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin. (HRC 48.9.)
Adlow, Dorothy. “Masterpieces of Primitive Art; 207 Objects on Display at Museum of

Fine Arts.” The Christian Science Monitor. October, 20, 1958. (HRC
62.28/57.28.)
______. “Old Masters and New in an Array for the Reader with a Taste for Art: Beauty
in Many Forms From Around the World.” The Christian Science Monitor.
November 20, 1958: 14.
Africa. Four-part documentary created for the American Broadcasting Company

(ABC). 1967.
“African Art in LIFE.” Jet, vol. 2, no. 21 (September 18, 1952): 22.
“African Art of the Dogon: The Lester Wunderman Collection.” Review. African Arts,
vol. 7, no. 1 (Autumn, 1973): 72.
“‘African Art of the Dogon: The Lester Wunderman Collection;’ Opening at Brooklyn
Museum on April 4, 1973.” Press release. Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic
Collection. Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin. (HRC
63.27.)
“African Big Shot.” LIFE (March 31, 1947): 128-132. (Includes Elisofon photographs.)
Ahlander, Leslie Jud. “Negroes’ artistic past.” The Christian Science Monitor. July 1,
1964: 5.
“Among the many books….” Citizen. Jackson, Michigan. March 11, 1962. (HRC 11.2.)
Angelou, Maya. “For Years We Hated Ourselves.” The New York Times. April
16, 1972. (HRC 51.9/46.9.)
______. Letter to Eliot Elisofon. May 25, 1972. Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic
51.9/46.9.)
“Art Institute Photograph Gallery: Eliot Elisofon, Top Magazine Photographer, One Man
Exhibit.” Association News of Chicago Camera Clubs Association, vol. 20, no. 6
(February 1952). (HRC 62.10.)
354
“Art: Museums Between Covers.” TIME (December 8, 1958). (HRC 11.2.)
Baker, Bevo. “Broadcast Beat: More Wins than Losses.” Dallas News. September 11,
1967. (EEPA V-13, 4.)
Bachrach, Judy. “The Dark Continent Comes Up Rather Gloomy.” The Baltimore Sun.
March 10, 1972. (EEPA X-9, 62.)
Barr, Alfred H. Cubism and Abstract Art. New York: Published for the Museum of
Modern Art by Arno Press, 1966, reprint of 1936 edition.
Beaufort, John. “James Stewart, Kim Novak Starring in Comic Fantasy.” The Christian
Science Monitor. January 2, 1959: 9.
Beidelman, Tom. Quoted in The Scramble for Art in Central Africa. Enid Schildkrout.
New York: Cambridge University Press, 1998: 1.
Benbow, Charles. “Eliot Elisofon- Artist of Expanded Interest.” Tampa Times. May
1972. (HRC 71.11/66.11.)
Berzock, Kathleen B., and Christa Clarke. Representing Africa in American Art
Museums: A Century of Collecting and Display. Seattle: University of
Washington Press, 2011.
“Black Africa: Primitive Society Holds Out South of the Sahara.” LIFE (May 4, 1953):
91-98, 100. (Includes Elisofon photographs.)
“Black African Heritage Series.” In Africa on Film and Videotape 1960 – 1981: A
Compendium of Reviews. David Wiley, ed. East Lansing, MI: African Studies
Center, Michigan State University, 1982: 62.
Bolder, Jacqueline. “Eliot Elisofon, 61, Dies: Noted Photographer.” Star-News (1973).
(HRC 71.17/66.17.)
Boston Museum of Fine Arts. Invitation to Masterpieces of Primitive Art. Eliot Elisofon
Paper and Photographic Collection. Harry Ransom Center, The University of
Texas at Austin. (HRC 62.28/57.28.)
Brady, Mary Beattie. “The Arts.” Library Journal (February 1, 1959). (EEPA E-2, 11.)
Brink, Margaret J. “Photographer Eliot Elisofon: His life has been an adventure story.”
The Globe-Democrat. March 7, 1963: 14a. (HRC 71.11/66.11.)
Brockway, Merrill. Letter to Ned Cramer. CBS employees. April 3, 1970. Eliot Elisofon
355

Texas at Austin. (HRC 48.11.)
Browning, Bill. Letter to Eliot Elisofon. January 14, 1971. Eliot Elisofon Paper and
Photographic Collection. Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at
Austin. (HRC 50.12.)
Broyard, Anatole. “Books of The Times: Africa, Before and After.” The New York Times.
December 2, 1971. (HRC 71.11/66.11.)
Camera III: African Sculpture. Two-part series for CBS Television. 1970.
Canaday, John. “In Brooklyn, the Splendid Art of Africa.” The New York Times. April 5,
1973: 50.
______. “In Its Own Language, For a Welcome Change.” The New York Times. July 12,
1970. (HRC 63.22/58.22.)
Candide. “Only Human.” Daily Mirror. April 5, 1939. (HRC 71.9/66.9.)
Carlson, Amanda. “Object Photography: African Art in the Photographic Frame.” M.A.
Thesis. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University, 1996.
Cedrone, Lou. Untitled document. The Baltimore Evening Sun. March 15, 1972. (HRC
51.9/46.9.)
Chodorov, Stephan. Letter to Eliot Elisofon. May 12, 1970. Eliot Elisofon Paper and
Cohan, Phil. "The Photographic Legacy of Eliot Elisofon." Topic (1990): 55-61.
Cole, Herbert. “The Sculpture of Africa by Eliot Elisofon; W. B. Fagg.” African Arts, vol.
12, no. 3. (May 1979): 20, 23.
“Collection Highlights: Top Images.” Smithsonian Institution Research Information

System. http://sirismm.si.edu/siris/topimages.htm.
Conroy, Sarah Booth. “Capturing a Visual Philosophy.” The Washington Post. May 31,
1974: B1.
Cooper Union Museum for the Arts of Decoration. Alter Ego: Masks, Their Art and Use.
New York: Cooper Union Museum for the Arts of Decoration, 1951.
Coughlan, Robert. “Black Magic: Vital Force in Africa’s New Nations.” LIFE (April 21,
1961): 118-120, 123-124, 126, 129-130, 132. (Includes Elisofon photographs.)
356
Crowther, Bosley. “Screen: A Witch in Love; ‘Bell, Book and Candle’ at Fine Arts,
Odeon.” The New York Times. December 27, 1958. (HRC 28.7.)
“A Culture of Think,” http://www-

03.ibm.com/ibm/history/ibm100/us/en/icons/think_culture/transform/. (Accessed
April 9, 2013.)
Davidson, Basil. Great Ages of Man: African Kingdoms. New York: Time, Inc., 1966.
(Includes Elisofon photographs.)
Devree, Howard. “Study in Primitive Beauty.” The New York Times Book Review.
December 7, 1958: BR56. (HRC 11.2.)
D’Honau, Maureen. “Living in Japan; Feminine Focus: Hellsapoppin Elisofon.” Mainichi

Daily News. February 12, 1973: 6B. (HRC 71.11/66.11.)
Distribution of print run documentation. The Sculpture of Africa, 1958. Eliot Elisofon
Division of Education. “Masterpieces of Primitive Art.” Boston Museum of Fine Arts

press release. October 9, 1958. Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection.
Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin. (HRC 57.28.)
Dooley, William Germain. “Primitive Masterpieces Assembled Here.” Boston Globe.

October 5, 1958: A19.
Doss, Erika, ed. Looking at LIFE Magazine. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution
Press, 2001.
Driscoll, Edgar J., Jr. “2000 Attend Primitive Art Show Opening.” Boston Globe.
October 16, 1958: 1, 22.
_______. “This Week in the Art World: Halloween Updated By Eerie Museum Show.”
Boston Globe. October 19, 1958: A_30.
Edey, Maitland. Eulogy for Eliot Elisofon. Quoted in Elisofon Biography Draft. Elin
Elisofon. Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection, Harry Ransom
Center, The University of Texas at Austin. (HRC 79a.1-4/72.2-5.)
______. Quoted in Tribute to Africa: The Photography and the Collection of

Eliot Elisofon: a Memorial Exhibition at the Museum of African Art, Frederick
Douglass House, June Through December 1974. Eliot Elisofon and Warren
Robbins. Washington: Museum of African Art, 1974: 5.
357
______ and Constance Sullivan. “Fight Trainer, February 12, 1951.” In Great
Photographic Essays from LIFE. Boston: New York Graphic Society, 1978: 80.
(HRC 71.17/66.17.)
The Editors. “Dr. Elisofon, I Assume.” f.y.i. magazine, (1951): 3. (HRC 71.10/66.10.)
“Eliot Elisofon at Home: Eclectic Collector.” Black African Heritage press release.
Undated. Eliot Elisofon Papers. Eliot Elisofon Photographic Archives, National
Museum of African Art, Smithsonian, Washington, D.C. (EEPA X-9, 23.)
“Elisofon’s Africa.” The Washington Post. July 21, 1974: PO13.
Elisofon, Elin. Elisofon Biography Draft. Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic
Collection, Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin. (HRC
79a.1-4/72.2-5.)
Elisofon, Eliot. “Africa.” In U.S. Camera Annual 1954. Tom Maloney, ed. New York:
U.S. Camera Publishing, 1953: 162-184.
______. “Africa’s Ancient Splendor Still Gleams in the Akan People’s Golden Art.”
Smithsonian (January 1973): cover, 20-29.
______. “African Sculpture.” The Atlantic Monthly, vol. 203, no. 4 (April 1959): 48-60.
(HRC 53.21.)
______. “Artful Primitives.” Think, vol. 28, no. 1 (January 1962): cover, 30-33. (HRC
53.24.)
______. “Being White, Do I Love Africa Less?” The New York Times. May 14, 1972.
(HRC 51.9/46.9.)
______. Black African Heritage. Group W, The Westinghouse Broadcasting Company,

1972. Eliot Elisofon Photographic Archives, National Museum of African Art,
Smithsonian, Washington, D.C.: DVDs.
______. ‘Camera as Magic Carpet.’ Lecture for the “Learning the Photo Journalism
Conference in the West.” Asilomar, CA. September, 26-29, 1961. Eliot Elisofon
______. Color Photography. New York: Viking Press, 1961.
______. “Dynamism in High School Yearbooks.” Lecture Transcript. October 11-

12, 1963. Columbia University, New York, 23rd Annual Conference Columbia
Scholastic Press Association and Short Course on Yearbook Production,
concluding event at the Waldorf-Astoria. Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic
358
Collection, Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin. (HRC

53.47.)
______. “Far East Diary.” Unpublished manuscript. December 3, 1968, Bombay, 8 am.
Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection. Harry Ransom Center, The
______. Food is a four letter word. New York: Rinehart, 1948.
______. “The Ethics and Morals of Creative Expression.” Lecture for Conference on
Moral Standards at the Jewish Theological Seminary 50th Anniversary, September
13-15, 1953. Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection. Harry Ransom Center,
The University of Texas at Austin. (HRC 53.11.)
______. “How to Photograph Primitive Art.” Transcript of lecture given on May 7, 1971.
Traditional African Art, Peabody-CAAS Symposium, May 4-7, 1971, Peabody
Museum, Harvard University. Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection.
______. Java Diary. New York: Macmillan, 1969.
______. Letter to Carlotta. Undated. Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection.
Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin. (HRC 62.10/57.10.)
______. Letter to David E. Henderson, President of Group W Productions, Inc. May 31,
1972. Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection. Harry Ransom Center,
______. Letter to F. Weston Fenhagen. January 3, 1972. Eliot Elisofon Paper and
______. Letter to Georges Bracher. October 25, 1972. Eliot Elisofon Paper and
Austin. (HRC 49.3.)
______. Letter to Mrs. John A. Pope. May 19, 1971. Eliot Elisofon Paper and
Austin: 1. (HRC 63.27.)
______. Letter to John Smith. February 10, 1970. Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic
49.5.)
______. Letter to Perry T. Rathbone, Director of the Boston Museum of Fine Arts. June
359
25, 1958. Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection. Harry Ransom
Center, The University of Texas at Austin. (HRC 57.28.)
______. Letter to Phil Wotton. November 22, 1957. Eliot Elisofon Paper and
Austin. (HRC 69.2.)
______. Letter to TIME-LIFE office in New York City. “First Trip Report.”
January 12, 1947. Eliot Elisofon Papers. Eliot Elisofon Photographic Archives,
National Museum of African Art, Smithsonian, Washington, D.C. (EEPA P-2, 1.)
______. Letter to TIME-LIFE office in New York City. “Letter of Intent.” January 24,
______. Letter to TIME-LIFE office in New York City. Report #2. Jan. 1947. Eliot
Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection. Harry Ransom Center, The
______. Letter to TIME-LIFE office in New York City. Report #3. January 31, 1947.
Eliot Elisofon Papers. Eliot Elisofon Photographic Archives, National Museum of
African Art, Smithsonian, Washington, D.C. (EEPA P-2, 3.)
______. Letter to Wilson Hicks. December 15, 1948. Eliot Elisofon Paper and
Austin. (HRC 13.7.)
______. “A Japanese Kaleidoscope.” Manuscript draft. 1955. Eliot Elisofon Paper

and Photographic Collection. Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at
Austin. (HRC 53.7.)
______. Masterpieces of Primitive Art. Boston: Museum of Fine Arts, 1958.
______. The Nile. New York: Viking Press, 1964.
______. Notes and correspondence for Black African Heritage production costs. Eliot
______. “Primitive Art.” Essay draft. Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection.
Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin. (HRC 62.28/57.28, also
EEPA Items D-4, 3 and 4.)
______. Quoted in Black African Heritage press release. December 21, 1971. Eliot
University of Texas at Austin: 3. (HRC 51.8/46.8.)
360
______. “In Search of Soul.” Essay draft for Black African Heritage. Undated. Eliot
Elisofon Papers. Eliot Elisofon Photographic Archives, National Museum of
African Art, Smithsonian, Washington, D.C. (EEPA X-8, 2.)
______. A week in Agata's world: Poland. [New York]: Crowell-Collier Press, 1970.
______. A week in Joseph's world: Zaire. New York: Crowell-Collier Press, 1973.
______. A week in Leonora's world: Puerto Rico. New York: Crowell-Collier Press,
1971.
______ and Alan Watts. The temple of Konarak: Erotic Spirituality; photographs Eliot
Elisofon; text Alan Watts. London: Thames and Hudson, 1971.
______ and Arthur Knight. The Hollywood Style. [New York]: Macmillan, 1969.
______ and Marvin E. Newman. Africa's Animals. New York: Doubleday, 1967.
______ and Patrick B. Kinross. “The Nile.” Horizon. 8 (1966): 80-99.
______ and Santha Rama Rau. The Cooking of India. New York: Time-Life Books,
1969.
______ Thomas D. Blakely, and Robert Gardner. African Carving: A Dogon

Kanaga Mask. Watertown, MA: Documentary Educational Resources, 2008.
(Originally produced as a motion picture in 1974. Photography, Eliot Elisofon;
editing, Thomas Blakely; ethnographic consultant, Hans Guggenheim; Dama
dance material, the Wunderman Foundation.)
______ and Warren Robbins. Tribute to Africa: The Photography and the Collection of
Eliot Elisofon: a Memorial Exhibition at the Museum of African Art, Frederick
Douglass House, June Through December 1974. Washington: Museum of
African Art, 1974.
______ William Buller Fagg, Ralph Linton, and Bernard Quint. The Sculpture of Africa.
New York: F.A. Praeger, 1958.
Elisofon, Joan. Communication with Elin Elisofon on June 28, 1985. In Elisofon
Biography Draft. Elin Elisofon. Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection.
Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin. (HRC 79a.1-4/72.2-5.)
“Elisofon Show on Display at Art Institute.” Chicago Daily Tribune. January 18, 1952.
“Employment Agreement.” Between Phoenix Productions and Eliot Elisofon for Bell,
361
Book and Candle color consultant position. December 23, 1957. Elisofon Paper
Austin. (HRC 28.6.)
“Exhibition of African Negro Sculpture to Go on View at Museum.” Press preview. July

1, 1952. Press release. July 2, 1952. Eliot Elisofon Papers. Eliot Elisofon
Photographic Archives, National Museum of African Art, Smithsonian,
“Facts about The Atlantic.” www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/about/atlfaqf.htm#circulation,

2007. (Accessed April 9, 2013.)
Fagg, William B. African Sculpture: [loan Exhibition] Circulated by the International

Exhibitions Foundation, 1970. Washington: International Exhibitions Foundation,
1970.
Field, Michael, and Frances Field. A Quintet of Cuisines. New York: Time-Life Books,
1970. (Photographed in Poland by Elisofon.)
Fleming, James. “Africa on U.S. Television: The Making of a Marathon Show.” Topic
USIA magazine, 1967. (HRC 48.9.)
Flukinger, Roy. “To Help the World to See:” An Eliot Elisofon Retrospective. Austin:
Harry Ransom Humanities Research Center, University of Texas at Austin, 2000.
Frederick A. Praeger Inc. Letter to Eliot Elisofon. October 9, 1961. Eliot Elisofon Paper
Austin. (HRC 11.1.)
Frederick A. Praeger, Inc. company brochure. The Sculpture of Africa in the Books that
Matter series. Undated. Eliot Elisofon Papers, Eliot Elisofon Photographic
Archives, National Museum of African Art, Smithsonian, Washington, D.C.
(EEPA E-2, 1.)
Freyer, Bryna. Personal communication. May 16, 2011.
N.G. “Eliot Elisofon, 1911-1973.” f.y.i magazine (April 16, 1973): 5. (HRC 71.17/66.17.)
Gardner, Bob. Quoted in Elisofon Biography Draft. Elin Elisofon. Eliot Elisofon Paper
and Photographic Collection, Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at
Austin. (HRC 79a.1-4/72.2-5.)
Geary, Christraud M. “On Collectors, Exhibitions, and Photographs of African Art: The
Teel Collection in Historical Perspective.” In Art of the Senses: African
Masterpieces from the Teel Collection. Suzanne Preston Blier, ed. Boston:
Museum of Fine Arts, 2004: 25-42.
362
______. “Photographic Practice in Africa and its Implications for the use of historical
photographs as contextual evidence.” In Fotografia e
storia dell’Africa: Atti del Convegno Internazionale Napoli-Roma 9-11 settembre
1992. Alessandro Triulzi, ed. Naples: Istituto Universitario Orientale of Napoli,
1995: 103-130.
______. “Two Days in Mushenge: Eliot Elisofon’s Images of the Kuba (1947).” African
Arts, vol. 26, no. 2 (April 1993): 72-77.
______ and Krzysztof Pluskota. In and Out of Focus: Images from Central
Africa, 1885-1960. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian National Museum of African
Art in association with Philip Wilson, London, 2003.
______ Melissa A. N. Keiser, and Joan Stahl. "Museum Image Banks." Museum News,
vol. 70, no. 6 (1991): 53-57. (Includes info on the Eliot Elisofon Photographic
Archives, National Museum of African Art.)
Genauer, Emily. “Artists of Africa and the Modern West: In Both Cultures, the Stress is
on Idea and Essence.” Herald Tribune Book Review. January 11, 1959: 4. (EEPA
E-2, 9.)
Getlein, Frank. “The World of Art: Photographer of African Sculpture is Also Painter,
Scholar, and Explorer.” Milwaukee Journal. December 28, 1958: Part 5, 5. (HRC
66.10.)
Goldwater, Robert J. “An Approach to African Sculpture.” Parnassus vol. 7, no. 4 (May
1935): 25-27.
Gourielli (Rubinstein), Helena. Letter to Eliot Elisofon. December, 5 1958. Eliot Elisofon
Gramont, Sanche de. (aka Ted Morgan) “We Are Happy With Things As They Are.”
Horizon, vol. 16, no. 1 (Winter 1974): 84-95. (Includes Elisofon photographs.)
Granqvist, Raoul J. “Eliot Elisofon’s Africa Old, Updated, Worse.” Africa is a Country
blog. February 13, 2014. http://africasacountry.com/eliot-elisofons-africa-old-
updated-worse/.
______. “Eliot Elisofon’s Famous Portrait of Chinua Achebe.” Africa is a Country

blog. September 18, 2013. http://africasacountry.com/eliot-elisofons-famous-
portrait-of-chinua-achebe/
______. “Eliot Elisofon i Sverige 1944: spion, fotojournalist och livsnjutare (Eliot
Elisofon in Sweden 1944: spy, photo journalist and bon vivant).” Nya Argus, vol.
363
104, nos. 11-12 (2011): 294-301.
______. “Elisofon’s möte med Jean Sibelius: nationalism och jazz (Elisofon’s meeting
with Jean Sibelius: nationalism and jazz).” Nya Argus, vol. 105, no. 4 (2012): 89-
92.
______. http://www.sprak.umu.se/om-institutionen/personal/raoul-granqvist. (Accessed

June 21, 2013.)
______. “Med matkorg och kamera på resa: Eliot Elisofon i krigets Finland 1944
(Traveling with a Sack of Food and a Camera: Eliot Elisofon in Wartime Finland
1944).” Nya Argus, vol. 104, no. 9 (2011): 213-220.
______. “På gränsen till ett krig: Eliot Elisofon och Life i Finland 1939 (On the
Threshold of a War: Eliot Elisofon and LIFE in Finland 1939).” Nya Argus, vol.
104, nos. 5-6 (2011): 143-146.
______. “Photojournalism's White Mythologies: Eliot Elisofon and LIFE in Africa, 1959-
1961.” Research in African Literatures, vol. 43, no. 3 (2012): 84-105.
Gross, Chaim. The Technique of Wood Sculpture. New York: ARCO Pub. Co, 1965.
Gross, Mimi. “Common Bonds.” In The Sculptor’s Eye. New York: Sotheby’s, May
2009: 6.
Guide to UNESCO Conference. Eliot Elisofon Papers. Eliot Elisofon Photographic

Archives, National Museum of African Art, Smithsonian, Washington, D.C.
(EEPA D-18, 4.)
Gysel, Dean. “Africa a Really Great Show.” Chicago Daily News. September 11, 1967.
(EEPA V-13, 7.)
Hamblin, Dora Jane. That was the Life. New York: Norton, 1977.
Harvard University. Letters of appointment for Eliot Elisofon. February 17, 1958; April
18, 1966; and June 11, 1969. Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection.
Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin. (HRC 73.10/68.10.)
Hepburn, Katharine. The Making of “The African Queen.” New York: Alfred A. Knopf,
1987. (Includes Elisofon photographs.)
Hersey, Irwin. "Necrologie." Arts D'afrique Noire (1972): 47-48. (Obituaries of Robert
Goldwater, director of the Museum of Primitive Art, and Eliot Elisofon,
photographer.)
______. “A Tribute.” In The Sculptor’s Eye. New York: Sotheby’s, May 2009: 7.
364
Hevesi, Dennis. “Warren M. Robbins, Collector of African Art, Dies at 85.” New York
Times, Dec. 16, 2008: B12.
“The Hopeful Launching of a Proud and Free Nigeria.” LIFE (September 26, 1960): 54-
68, 71-72, 74. (Includes Elisofon photographs.)
“If there’s one thing future generations of black Americans need, it’s a past.” Group W
Black African Heritage advertisement clipping. Eliot Elisofon Paper and
Austin. (HRC 51.9/46.9.)
Imperato, Pascal J. A Wind in Africa: A Story of Modern Medicine in Mali. St. Louis:
W.H. Green, 1975.
Invoice between Eliot Elisofon Productions and the Boston Museum of Fine Arts. July 5,
Johnson, Weldon. Letter to Warren Robbins. February 20, 1975. Eliot Elisofon Papers.
Eliot Elisofon Photographic Archives, National Museum of African Art,
Smithsonian, Washington, D.C. (EEPA K-1, 6.)
Jones, G.I. “The Sculpture of Africa by Eliot Elisofon.” Africa: Journal of the
International African Institute, vol. 29, no. 2 (April 1959): 198-199.
Kan, Michael. Quoted in “African Art of the Dogon: The Lester Wunderman Collection.”
Review. African Arts, vol. 7, no. 1 (Autumn, 1973): 72.
Kaye, Danny, Carl Sigman, Bob Hilliard, Allan Roberts, Lester Lee, and Vic Schoen.
Civilization (Bongo, Bongo, Bongo). Decca, 1947: MP3.
Kellogg, Cynthia. “Living with Sculpture.” New York Times Magazine (October 5, 1958):
48-49, 51-52. (HRC 71.11/66.11.)
Kennedy, John. F. Telegram to conference. Delivered October 22, 1961 as opener by Dr.
William S. Dix, Chairman of the U.S. National Commission for UNESCO.
Quoted in “Africa and the United States: Images and Realities, 8th National
Conference: Final Report.” Simon Ottenberg, Phoebe Ottenberg, and U.S.
National Commission for UNESCO. Washington, D.C.: U.S. State Dept., 1961: 2.
Knowles, Allen. “Postmarked.” Letter to the editor. Ohio University Post, vol. 63, no. 19.
Undated. Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection. Harry Ransom
LaCamera, Anthony. “‘Black African Heritage’ Makes Bow.” Record American. March
365
17, 1972. (EEPA X-9, 61.)
Lach, Alma. “Fine Fare from African Safari.” Chicago Daily Sun-Times. Good Food
section. January 8, 1959: 1. (HRC 66.10.)
Last, Jay T. “Preface: The Collector’s Perspective.” In Art of the Lega. Elisabeth L.
Cameron. Los Angeles: UCLA Fowler Museum of Cultural History; Seattle:
Distributed by the University of Washington Press, 2001: 12, 14.
Latouche, John Treville and Andre Cauvin. Congo. New York: Willow, White, and Co.,
1945.
Laude, Jean. African Art of the Dogon: The Myths of the Cliff Dwellers. New York:
Brooklyn Museum in association with the Viking Press, 1973.
“Lensman Elisofon dies at 61.” Bangor Daily News. April 9, 1973.
Lesley, Everett P., Jr. Letter to Eliot Elisofon. February 20, 1951. Eliot Elisofon Paper
Austin. (HRC 62.7 and EEPA Z-6, 14.)
Lewis, Ida. “Black Mask of Angry Africa.” LIFE (April 2, 1965): 111-112, 115, 117-118,
120, 122-123. (Includes Elisofon photograph.)
Lindsay, Vachel. “The Congo.” Quoted in “Storied World of Africa: A Writer’s Land of
Primitive, Eloquent Beauty.” LIFE (October 13, 1961): 86-87.
List of Dogon (Wunderman collection) exhibition tour locations. Early 1970s. Eliot
Elisofon Papers. Eliot Elisofon Photographic Archives, National Museum of
African Art, Smithsonian, Washington, D.C. (EEPA Z-4, 17.)
List of object photographs in the show. Understanding African Negro Sculpture. c. 1951.
Eliot Elisofon Papers. Eliot Elisofon Photographic Archives, National Museum of
African Art, Smithsonian, Washington, D.C. (EEPA M-5, 3.)
Loengard, John. “Search for a Black Past, Part IV: A Separate Path to Equality.” LIFE
(December 13 1968): 82-89, 90B, 93-94. (Includes Elisofon photographs.)
“Lost Peaks and Big Game.” LIFE (May 4, 1953): 75-86. (Includes Elisofon
photographs.)
Luce, Henry R. Letter to Eliot Elisofon. December, 8, 1958. Eliot Elisofon Paper and
Austin. (HRC 11.1.)
Luparello, Ben. “What’s On; TV and Radio; Black African Heritage is Scenic but
366
Scattered.” Unmarked newspaper clipping. Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic

51.9/46.9.)
Luskey, Judith. "Profile of the National Museum of African Art." International Bulletin
for Photographic Documentation of the Visual Arts, vol. 12 (1985): 16-18.
Lyons, Leonard. “The Lyons Den.” New York Post. Undated. Eliot Elisofon Paper and
Austin. (HRC 11.3.)
______. “The Lyons Den.” New York Post, January 31, 1947. (HRC 11.3.)
______. “The Lyons Den.” New York Post, November 21, 1958. (HRC 11.2.)
MacArthur, Harry. “A Fascinating Look at Africa.” Washington Evening Star. March 14,
1972. (HRC 51.9/46.9 and EEPA X-9, 64.)
Mahaniah, Kimpianga J. “An African Agrees with African Series.” The Philadelphia
Evening Bulletin. March 31, 1972. (HRC 51.8/46.8.)
“Mana from Harvard.” TIME (November 24, 1958): 78. (Includes Elisofon photographs.)
Marks, Robert W. “Elisofon Takes Both Sides of the Tracks.” Minicam. (April 1942): 30-
37. (HRC 71.9/66.9.)
______. “Portrait of Eliot Elisofon: Up from the Tenements He Carries a Camera with a
Social Conscience.” Coronet (August 1940): 28-35.
Matthiessen, Peter. Letter to Elin Elisofon. March 26, 1986. Quoted in Elisofon
Biography Draft. Elin Elisofon. Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection.
Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin. (HRC 79a.1-4/72.2-5.)
McCray, Porter A. Letter to Eliot Elisofon. July 13, 1955. Eliot Elisofon Papers. Eliot
Elisofon Photographic Archives, National Museum of African Art, Smithsonian,
Messina, Matt. “Around the Dials: ABC-TV Sets Africa Study.” Daily News. May 18,
1966. (HRC 48.9.)
Mitchell, Henry. “‘African Heritage’ – Seven Steps to Pride.” The Washington Post.
March 14, 1972. (HRC 51.9/46.9.)
______. “The Secrets of Eliot Elisofon.” The Washington Post. April 25, 1974: B7.
Moritz, Charles, ed. “Eliot Elisofon.” Current Biography, January 1972, vol. 33, no. 1.
367
New York: The H.W. Wilson Company, 1973: 19-21.
“Mystic Art of Tribal Africa.” LIFE (September 8, 1952): 116-125. (Includes Elisofon
photographs.)
National Museum of African Art. Selected Works from the Collection of the National
Museum of African Art. Washington, DC: Smithsonian, National Museum of
African Art, 1999.
“Negro Sculpture: A Weapon Against the Supernatural.” Réalités (September 1960): 41-
47. (Includes Elisofon photographs.)
“The Nile.” LIFE (November 20, 1950): cover, 118-129. (Includes Elisofon
photographs.)
Nooter, Robert and Nancy. “Eliot Elisofon: Photographer of Africa.” African Arts, vol. 8,
no. 1 (August 1974): 8-13.
Nordell, Roderick. “African art: museum on the move.” The Christian Science Monitor,
June 4, 1971: 4.
“N.Y. to L.A.,” f.y.i. magazine (undated). Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection.
Parker, T.H. “Art and Artifacts.” The Hartford Courant. October 5, 1958. (HRC
62.28/57.28.)
Parkins, Barbara. “TV Spots.” San Francisco Chronicle. March 17, 1972. (EEPA X-9,
50.)
Perdreau, Connie. “Postmarked.” Letter to the editor. Ohio University Post, vol. 63, no.
19. Undated. Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection. Harry Ransom
Petridis, Constantine. “Bwadi Bwa Chikwanga: A Ram Mask of the Bakwa Luntu.”
African Arts, vol. 38, no. 2 (Summer 2005): 50-59, 93, 95.
______. “Luluwa Masks.” African Arts, vol. 32, no. 3 (Autumn 1999): 32-47, 91, 94.
“Photographer Eliot Elisofon Dies at 61.” The Washington Post. April 9, 1973: C4.
Polier, Rex. “‘Black African Heritage’ Takes Museum Approach.” The Philadelphia
Evening Bulletin. March 20, 1972. (EEPA X-9, 58.)
Pollack, Peter. Letter to Eliot Elisofon. March 5, 1952. Eliot Elisofon Papers. Eliot
368
Elisofon Photographic Archives, National Museum of African Art, Smithsonian,

“Polygamy Passing.” LIFE (December 12, 1960): 79-81. (Includes Elisofon photograph.)
Pomeroy, Ralph. Chicago Art Institute wall text draft for Understanding exhibition.
Undated. Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection. Harry Ransom
Center, The University of Texas at Austin. (HRC 62.10/57.10.)
Pope, Mrs. John A. Letter to Eliot Elisofon. October 28, 1971. Eliot Elisofon Paper and
Powell, Barbara. “Around Chicago…at the Institute.” WHERE magazine (January 26,
1952): 5. (HRC 62.10/57.10 and EEPA M-4, 6.)
Praeger Publishing. Letter to TIME magazine. October 8, 1958. Eliot Elisofon Paper and
Austin. (HRC 11.2.)
Price, Martin and Mary. “New Art Books.” Harper’s magazine. Undated. Eliot Elisofon
Papers. Eliot Elisofon Photographic Archives, National Museum of African Art,
Smithsonian, Washington, D.C. (EEPA E-2, 10.)
“Primitive Art Fascinates Socialites.” Boston Traveler. October 16, 1958: 28. (HRC
62.28/57.28.)
Primus, Pearl, and Eliot Elisofon. "Africa: Photos by Eliot Elisofon; Text by Pearl
Primus." Dance Magazine. (1958): 43-49.
Putnam, John J. “Yesterday’s Congo, Today’s Zaire.” National Geographic 143 (March
1973): 398-432. (Includes Elisofon photographs.)
Py-Lieberman, Beth. “Meet the ‘Real Most Interesting Man in the World.”
smithsonian.com. December 6, 2013.
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsonian-institution/meet-the-real-most-
interesting-man-in-the-world-180949043/#IEQvKJFPZkEl5Jwy.99
Quine, Richard, director. Bell, Book and Candle. Screenplay by Daniel Taradash. Play
by John Van Druten. Performers Kim Novak and Jimmy Stewart. Columbia
Pictures, 1958: DVD.
J.R. “Talent alone is not sufficient.” South China Morning Post. July 24, 1973: 5. (HRC
71.11/66.11.)
Rathbone, Perry T. Foreword in Masterpieces of Primitive Art. Boston: Museum of Fine

369
Arts, 1958: 3-4.
______. Letter to Eliot Elisofon. December 10, 1958. Eliot Elisofon Paper and
Austin. (HRC 62.28/57.28.)
Receipt of Loan. Signed by Dorothy Dudley of MoMA. May 7, 1952. Eliot Elisofon
Papers. Eliot Elisofon Photographic Archives, National Museum of African Art,
“Return of the Head-Hunter.” f.y.i. magazine (May 29, 1958): 3. (HRC 62.24.)
Rhodes, John. “Writer Finds African TV Series Informative.” Philadelphia Tribune.

March 18, 1972. (EEPA X-9, 56.)
Robbins, Warren M. Eulogy for Elisofon. In Elisofon Biography Draft. Elin Elisofon.
Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection. Harry Ransom Center, The
University of Texas at Austin. (HRC 79a.1-4/72.2-5.)
______. The Language of African Art: a guest exhibition of the Museum of African Art at
the Smithsonian Institution; Fine Arts & Portrait Gallery Building, May 24 to
Sept. 7, 1970. Washington, D.C. Museum of African Art, 1970.
______. Letter to Eliot Elisofon. June 8, 1970. Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic
63.22/58.22.)
______. Speaking of Introductions: Vignettes of a Cultural Pioneer: a

Journey Through Four Careers and Three Continents. Washington, DC: Robbins
Center for Cross Cultural Communication, 2005.
______. Quoted in “Eliot Elisofon, 61, Dies: Noted Photographer.” Jacqueline Bolder.
Star-News (1973). (HRC 71.17/66.17.)
“Robbins Center for Cross Cultural Communication.” http://www.robbinscenter.org/.

(Accessed April 28, 2014.)
Rockefeller, Michael C, and A A. Gerbrands. The Art of the Asmat, New Guinea. New
York: The Museum, 1962.
Rockefeller, Nelson A. Letter to Eliot Elisofon. October 6, 1952. Eliot Elisofon Papers.
Eliot Elisofon Photographic Archives, National Museum of African Art,
______. Quoted in “Art and Artifacts.” T.H. Parker. The Hartford Courant. October 5,
1958. (HRC 62.28/57.28.)
370
Rome, Harold. Eulogy for Eliot Elisofon. Quoted in Elisofon Biography Draft. Elin
Elisofon. Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection. Harry Ransom
Center, The University of Texas at Austin. (HRC 79a.1-4/72.2-5.)
Ross, Lillian and Brendan Gill. “The Talk of the Town: Fictional Color.” The New
Yorker. (March 14, 1953): 23-25.
Routte, Eneid. “Hellzapoppin’ Elisofon.” San Juan Star Magazine (January 4, 1970): 2-3.
(HRC 71.11/66.11.)
Scher, Dotty. Letter to Eliot Elisofon. December 23, 1970. Eliot Elisofon Paper and
Austin. (HRC 49.7.)
______. Telegram to Eliot Elisofon. Undated. Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic
49.7.)
Sekal, Dave. “Filmmaker perplexed by black response.” The Post. Ohio University,
Athens, Ohio. October 18, 1972: 1. (HRC 49.3.)
Shain, Percy. “Night Watch: Special on Africa ‘Fascinating, Exciting.’” The Boston
Globe. March 17, 1972. (EEPA X-9, 59.)
Shirey, David. “African Art Display Shown in Brooklyn; African Art in Brooklyn.” The
New York Times. April 22, 1973: 85.
Sieber, Roy. Quoted in Tribute to Africa: The Photography and the Collection of Eliot
Elisofon: a Memorial Exhibition at the Museum of African Art, Frederick
Douglass House, June Through December 1974. Eliot Elisofon and Warren
Robbins. Washington: Museum of African Art, 1974: 7.
Sigman, Michael. “‘Civilization’ and its Disc Contents.” The Huffington Post Blog. July,
23, 2009. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-sigman/civilization-and-its-
disc_b_218587.html.
Smith, Terry. “Life-Style Modernity: Making Modern America.” In Looking at LIFE

Magazine. Erika Doss, ed. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press,
2001: 24-39.
“Smithsonian Magazine History.” www.smithsonianmag.com/about/magazine-

history.html. (Accessed April 9, 2013.)
Sontag, Susan. On Photography. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1977.
371
Sotheby’s. The Sculptor’s Eye. Gross Collection Auction Catalog. New York: Sotheby’s,
2009.
Steinberg, Rafael and the Editors of Time-Life Books. The Cooking of Japan.
Photographed by Eliot Elisofon. New York: Time-Life, 1969.
Stewart, Reed F. “Aspects of a Complex Heritage.” The Patriot Ledger. March 23, 1972.
(EEPA X-9, 60.)
Stamberg, Susan. “‘Life’ Photographer Showed Africa Through A New Lens.” NPR
interview. February 10, 2014.
http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=272041622
Staples, Amy J. “Africa ReViewed: The photographic Legacy of Eliot Elisofon.” Tribal
Art, vol. XVIII, no. 71 (Spring 2014): 84-94.
______.“‘Life’ Photographer Showed Africa Through A New Lens.” NPR radio

interview with Susan Stamberg. February 10, 2014.
______. “Popular Ethnography and Public Consumption: Sites of Contestation in

Museum-Sponsored Expeditionary Film.” The Moving Image 5, no. 2 (Fall 2005):
50-78.
______. “Safari Adventure: Forgotten Cinematic Journeys in Africa.” In Film History:

An International Journal, Vol. 18 (2006): 392-411.
______. “Visualism and the Authentification of the Object: Reflections on the

Eliot Elisofon Collection at the National Museum of African Art.” Collections: A
Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals, vol. 3, no. 2 (Spring 2007): 181-
188.
“Storied World of Africa: A Writer’s Land of Primitive, Eloquent Beauty.” LIFE

(October 13, 1961): cover, 66-87. (Includes Elisofon photographs.)
Sweeney, James Johnson, James Radin and Elinor Marvel. African Folktales and
Sculpture. New York: Pantheon Books, 1952.
Sweeney, Louise. “TV: ‘Africa’ and points west.” The Christian Science Monitor,
September 11, 1967: 6.
“Table of Contents.” LIFE (November 20, 1950): 29.
“Table of Contents.” LIFE (September 8, 1952): 27.
“Table of Contents.” Think, vol. 28, no. 1 (January 1962): 1. (HRC 53.24.)
372
Taradash, Daniel. ‘First Estimating Draft’ of Bell, Book and Candle. October 12, 1956.
______. Letter to Eliot Elisofon. December 19, 1954. Elisofon Paper and Photographic
67.1/66.9.)
Tashman, George. “Tashman on TV.” The Independent. May 16, 1972: 15. (HRC 46.9.)
Taylor, Robert. “African Art of the Dogon.” Boston Globe. July 17, 1973: 26.
______. “Events in Art: Primitive Masterpieces on View at Museum Through

Nov. 23.” The Boston Sunday Herald. Oct. 26, 1958. (HRC 62.28/57.28.)
______. “The Roving Eye: The Many Masks of Eliot Elisofon.” The Boston
Herald. November 7, 1958. (HRC 71.10/66.10.)
Television Age. June 6, 1966. Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection. Harry Ransom
“Television Reviews: Africa.” Variety. September 13, 1967. (EEPA V-13, 9.)
Terrell, Angela. “An Elisofon Tribute.” The Washington Post. May 31, 1974: B3.
Time-Life Book Editors, “Eliot Elisofon,” in Photography Year 1974. New York: Time-
Life, 1974: 224. (HRC 71.17/66.17.)
“Tom J. Maloney, 83; Published Magazines.” The New York Times. January 28, 1988.
http://www.nytimes.com/1988/01/28/obituaries/tom-j-maloney-83-published-
magazines.html.
“Helmet Mask.” Object Number: 73-7-290. Online Collection Information. National

Museum of African Art, Smithsonian, Washington, D.C.
http://africa.si.edu/collections/view/objects/asitem/items$0040:4600. (Accessed
May 15, 2014.)
Trowell, Margaret. “The Sculpture of Africa by Eliot Elisofon; William Fagg.” Man, vol.
59 (May 1959): 88.
“Two more are ‘The Thrones and Earth and Heaven’ and ‘The Sculpture of Africa,’ by
Eliot Elisofon, with text by William Fagg….” Chicago Tribune. November 30,
1958. (HRC 11.2.)
Vogel, Susan. ART/artifact. New York: Prestel Verlag, 1988.

373
______. “Whither African Art? Emerging Scholarship at the End of an Age.” African
Arts, vol. 38, no. 4 (Winter 2005): 12-17, 91.
Vorhees, John. “Absorbing Africa.” Seattle Post-Intelligencer. September 12, 1967.

(EEPA V-13, 6.)
A.W. “Fox Travels to Africa for ‘White Witch Doctor’ at the Roxy – Hayward. Mitchum
Star; At the Roxy.” The New York Times. July 2, 1953.
Wainwright, Loudon. The Great American Magazine. New York: Knopf, 1986.
Watson, Phil. “The World of Books.” The San Jose Mercury-News. December 21, 1958.
(HRC 11.2.)
Willett, Frank. “Obituary: William Fagg.” The Independent. July 14, 1992.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/obituary-william-fagg-1533203.html
“With Elisofon in Darkest Africa.” f.y.i. magazine (July 21, 1947): 3. (HRC 11.3.)
Woo, William F. “Visual Goals Mark Varied Life.” The Kansas City Times. January 22,
1962: 2C. (HRC 71.11/66.11.)
“Works of Fear.” TIME (April 1, 1935): 49.
Wunderman, Lester. Description for African Art of the Dogon, proposed exhibition.
October, 1971. Eliot Elisofon Paper and Photographic Collection. Harry Ransom
______. “Preface.” In Art of the Dogon. Kate Ezra. New York: The Metropolitan
Museum of Art and Harry N. Abrams, 1988: 7.
X, Malcolm. Malcolm X on Afro-American History. New York, London, Montreal,

Sydney: Pathfinder, 1992, 4th edition.
______ and George Breitman. Malcolm X Speaks: Selected Speeches and Statements.
New York: Grove Weidenfeld, 1990.
Zimmer, Heinrich Robert. The art of Indian Asia, its mythology and transformations.
New York: Pantheon Books, 1955. (Includes Elisofon photographs.)

Katherine E Flach Dissertation

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Katherine E Flach Dissertation

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Katherine E Flach Dissertation

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ELIOT ELISOFON: BRINGING AFRICAN ART TO LIFE

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements

For the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Dissertation Advisor: Dr. Catherine B. Scallen

Dr. Constantine Petridis, Co-Advisor

Department of Art History and Art

CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY

CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY

SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES

We hereby approve the thesis/dissertation of

candidate for the ________________________________degree *.

(chair of the committee)

proprietary material contained therein.

This dissertation is dedicated to my family

John, Linda, Liz and Sam

An African Art Expert? ............................................................................................ 103

Introduction and State of the Literature................................................................. 288

Figs. 4.101-4.102. Elisofon’s “African Art: Primitives to Picasso,” 4 pages, Think

The Smithsonian’s National Museum of African Art,

The Harry Ransom Center, The University of Texas at Austin

Jose E. Banda, Linda Briscoe Myers, and Roy Flukinger

Elin and Jill Elisofon

Catherine Scallen, Constantine Petridis,

The Olszewski Graduate Travel Fund

The College of Arts and Sciences Dissertation Fellowship

Dr. Edwin Shirley

Roxy and Trixie Flach

Eliot Elisofon: Bringing African Art to LIFE

As a public figure and a famous LIFE magazine photographer, Eliot Elisofon

scholars. He publicized African art in magazine articles, exhibitions, books, lectures,

encountered during the formation of the field of African art history.

As Elisofon first discovered African art, he appreciated it because of its influence on

work could encourage black pride.

Eliot Elisofon and African Art: An Introduction

consideration of what most people regarded as a foreign and intimidating topic.

As a public figure and a famous LIFE magazine photographer, Elisofon

Through stimulating interest in African art, he helped to contribute to its transformation

African art history.

in how his work could encourage black pride.

of his craft: ‘to help the world to see.’”2

he found in Africa and its art.

African art in a variety of resources: websites, textbooks, exhibition catalogs, magazines,

to-day existence. He was a LIFE photographer long before he was a photographer of

Africa, so it should be within that context – historically and biographically framed as an

ambitious, commercial magazine photographer – that we should study his work on

African art and culture.

New Yorker in 1953.4 When we look at Elisofon’s photographs we are looking at an

Americans. His photographs belong in the same category as “colonial photographic

A Susan Vogel quote reverberates throughout this dissertation: “An examination

The equipment analogy was one Elisofon often used:

that much of Elisofon’s work is inherently flawed as an African art

mass media, always taking on a new meaning within each context.

Despite being non-anthropological and non-ethnographic, Elisofon strongly

creating commercial products that sometimes pandered to stereotypes and were

We must make a deeper examination of what his photographic practices were,

Elisofon and LIFE

people per copy, each issue reached as many as 40 million people.13

culture. Loudon Wainwright, a long-time LIFE employee, explained:

It was clear to everybody that we were assembling each week a very

potentially dangerous oddity of external and international differences.”15 Africa and