Partisan Review: American political and literary quarterly

Origins and editorial stance

The review was established by editors William Phillips and Philip Rahv as an outgrowth of discussions in left-leaning literary circles and as an alternative to the Communist-affiliated magazine New Masses. Many early contributors were children of Jewish immigrants and other émigré families, and the journal's pages reflected a cosmopolitan engagement with European as well as American literature. Although it began with sympathies toward proletarian literature and the international left, Partisan Review moved sharply away from allegiance to the Soviet party line after the Stalinist turn in the 1930s, developing a distinctly anti-Stalinist, anti-authoritarian stance while remaining committed to serious political engagement.

Content and critical practice

Partisan Review favored long-form essays, rigorous book reviews, literary criticism informed by close reading, and original short fiction and poetry. Its editors promoted literary modernism and a high standard of cultural judgment: contributors sought to treat aesthetic questions and political commitments together rather than subordinating one to the other. Over decades the magazine became known for measured, erudite prose, sustained polemical exchanges, and an insistence on intellectual independence.

Contributors and network

The journal played a central role in the life of the so-called New York Intellectuals, a loose network of writers and critics influential in mid-20th-century American letters. Notable figures associated with the journal included critics and writers who helped shape postwar cultural debate and academic thought. Its pages published essays and reviews that became touchstones for debates about modernism, liberalism, and the responsibilities of public intellectuals.

Influence, recognition and controversies

Partisan Review's influence peaked from the late 1930s through the early 1960s, when its debates reached beyond literary circles into broader political and academic life. The magazine was not without controversy: its anti-Stalinist positions, critiques of both Soviet communism and mass culture, and shifting alliances provoked sharp arguments among writers and readers. In 1949 the review recognized George Orwell — George Orwell — for the contemporary significance of his novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, an episode often cited to illustrate Partisan Review's engagement with literature as political warning.

Later years and legacy

William Phillips remained central to the journal for most of its life and died in September 2002. After his death the review continued under the editorship of Edith Kurzweil, but publication ceased in 2003. In later decades the magazine struggled to maintain the influence it had enjoyed in mid-century cultural debates as new journals and academic institutions altered the landscape of criticism.

Today Partisan Review is studied as a key venue in the history of American letters: a place where literary form, cultural criticism and political conviction intersected. Its essays and reviews remain of interest to scholars tracing the development of modern literary criticism, Cold War cultural politics, and the careers of the many writers and critics who published in its pages. Many libraries and research institutions hold runs of the magazine and anthologies of its work continue to be used in courses on twentieth-century literature and intellectual history.

• Founders: William Phillips and Philip Rahv
• Active years: 1934–2003 (with a 1936–1937 suspension)
• Notable features: literary modernism, close reading, anti-Stalinist left critique

For those seeking primary texts, annotated selections and archival runs of Partisan Review can be consulted in academic libraries and special collections. The magazine's career illustrates how a small quarterly can exert disproportionate influence on national conversations about art, politics and the responsibilities of intellectual life.