Two Portraits of Edward Atkinson

Edward Atkinson as St. Martin de Porres, taken by Carl Van Vechten, 1942

Edward Atkinson in costume, 1946.  (Van Vecten)

In 1942, the young and very handsome Edward Atkinson posed as St. Martin de Porres, the early black South American saint, for Carl Van Vechten.  In 1946, he posed for the same photographer as someone else!  But who was he?  The most that I've been able to find out about Edward Atkinson is that he may have been an actor from Harlem, and that he may have been in an on again-off again relationship with Harlem's first poet laureate, Countee Cullen. Perhaps that's one maybe more than what I'm comfortable with, but it will have to do for now! 

In Gerald Early's My Soul's High Song: The Collected Writings of Countee Cullen, the author acknowledged that at least three highly respected scholars of African American studies had previously admitted that Cullen was a same gender loving man.  Yet, he ignored the strong body of evidence in Cullen's own letters (and those of his ex-wife, Yolande DuBois, daughter of W.E.B. DuBois) and asserted "There is no evidence that Cullen was engaged in any homosexual relations with any figures of the Renaissance. Some scholars have read letters and poems that seem suggestive in this regard but have offered nothing conclusive." 

Technically, he is correct; there is no real evidence of involvement with anyone of the Renaissance period - male or female - until DuBois.  But what he's really trying to do is deflect any homosexual assumptions at all and further root and ground Cullen into the same sense of false heterosexuality that others have tried to do with Langston Hughes.

Early also apparently never read the groundbreaking essay, Strange Fruits: Rethinking the Gay Twenties by Mason Stokes!  Allow me to say that I only wish I had written it, and I will be examining it later this month, but in it, Stokes provides an astounding blow by blow account of Cullen's disastrous first marriage to Yolande Dubois.  "What would it mean to call Countee Cullen “gay” or “homosexual” asks Stokes.  "In 1940, he married another woman, Ida Mae Roberson; the couple remained happily wed until his death in 1946" he continues.  "Cullen also began an affair with a young man named Edward Atkinson in 1937; it would last well into his marriage to Ida" he further reveals.  Where he got that bit of information I cannot say!

As for Juan Martin de Porres, he was born in Peru on December 9, 1579, the illegitimate son of a Spanish nobleman and a former black slave born in Panama.  He is considered the patron saint of mixed-race people and all those who seek interracial harmony.  Among the many miracles attributed to the black saint were those of levitation, bilocation, instantaneous cures and the ability to communicate with animals. 

I wish I could tell you that much about Edward Atkinson!

 

Comments

[Derrick from Philly]

Interesting about Countee Cullen and Langston Hughes and others. The issue about why many biographers do not want to label historical figures as Gay. The argument often given (even when the historical figure's homo or bi sexual activities are admitted) will be, "well, there was no such thing as a Gay identity back then," or "...these people didn't belong to any sub-culture--they were just people who had some same sex sexual relations."

OK, I'm too old and too weary to argue with anybody about "outing" historical figures.

BUT I will say this. Many young people who are or will be "in the life" feel very isolated before, during and after puberty. Many are not fortunate enough to have other LGBT friends "like themselves" who they can share their feelings, concerns, fears, hopes for the future with. To know that you are not and never have been alone...to know that some of the most revered folks in our history were "like you" can be of value. It can help an LGBT teenager feel that his sexual orientation (or gender role behavior differences) are not something to be ashamed of, and certainly not something new to the world. There have always been people like us.

The other reason for "outing" some people is more immediate and practical. When I was young and being tormented by some evil neighborhood trade sometimes they would see me with some other queen--sometimes a queen from another neighborhood. Suddenly. the evil trade stopped their gay-bashing. Well, what shut the trade up was that the queen had had sexual relations with them. The trade knew that my fellow queen was going to dish that information to me. Suddenly, they weren't calling me faggot anymore...atleast not to my face.

...oh, and what made the "dirt" even more potent information to have was that my queen friends often "topped" the trade in anal sex. That took me a while to believe, but it silenced the gay-bashers so it must've been true.

Sometimes, it's good to know who is what, and even who was what.

[Corey]

Derrick from Philly said "To know that you are not and never have been alone...to know that some of the most revered folks in our history were "like you" can be of value. It can help an LGBT teenager feel that his sexual orientation (or gender role behavior differences) are not something to be ashamed of, and certainly not something new to the world. There have always been people like us."

DING DING DING - THERE IT IS! - DING DING DING

And that last parting shot about who's topping who? Yes, my friends told me things about the neighborhood boys that I found hard to believe, too. But I was soon to find out THEY WERE TELLING THE TRUTH ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

Tell the truth, shame the devil and THANK YOU!

[ed cookman, way2ec]

I agree with Derrick, I too am too "old" (or maybe just too tired) to argue about outing anyone, historical OR contemporary. There are such fine lines between private and public, "secrets" and "closets". But in addition to being able to claim as "our own", and to know that we are not and have not ever been alone, I like to think that the work you are doing Corey HONORS the lovers and the loves (and even the hardcore sexual expressions) of historical figures that maybe couldn't have come out even if they had wanted to. If we could travel back in time and ask them about their love lives most would probably tell us to mind our own business but if we could assure them that their same sex loves would be honored in the future when and where no one could harm them or their loved ones, how many would take advantage of being able to openly declare their loves?

As for who topped who, when and where? I wish the straight dating sites forced questions like are you a breeder? prefer missionary style? doggie style, oral anal preferences... let alone if these details were considered "of historical interest" when reading about straight historical figures. It is bad enough to feel like I need to declare my Kinsey number of 1 to 6 (as if it were fixed my whole life, it hasn't) or be defined by my interracial color preferences or lack thereof (same color only, blacker the better, any color but my own color, no freckles, no red heads, please). I like the balance you continue to maintain as you explore historical figures, whether they had same sex lovers, were bisexual, or straight with lots of gay friends, your bottom line (is that a pun?) WHATEVER the truth, let the truth be told, and if we ere and assume a same sex love, consummated or not, there is NO SHAME. President Abraham Lincoln shared his bed in the White House with a man. I would LOVE to know if he topped or was topped or both, and OF COURSE there is no evidence of what went on under the sheets... but DANG... I am glad to claim him as one of my own, in the White House no less. Leonardo da Vinci"s man, Salai, complete with a sketch of him with a hard-on, OK, no "evidence" that they enjoyed each other more "completely" but again, I claim them as mine.

I've wanted to express these thoughts here on your site for quite a long time. Maybe this post about Edward Atkinson is sufficiently "innocent", so totally without sexual innuendo, that it serves me well... a young handsome maybe actor going about his business then, posed for some photographs, and whatever his private life, I'm glad we can claim him, as a beautiful young man who maybe...

[Jenus]

Wow Cory! Once again you've enlightened me ... thank you.

[Corey]

@Jenus, thank YOU, sir!

@Ed, thank you so much for your comment because reading it only makes me want to step my game up even more. And you are welcome to express your thoughts at any time! I appreciate it.

I actually agree with both you and Derrick about the issue of outing. I also think it takes what might be construed as negative energy to divest into someone else's life like that. I prefer not to go there. At the same time, I do acknowledge a fine line or delicate balance with some of the writing that I do. Thank you for figuring it all out for ME! LOL!

C.

C.

[DesperateArtist]

another great history lesson. Thanks Corey!