Head: 

MAR 31 1923

August 20, 1952

Professor McGeorge Bundy
21 Berkeley Street
Cambridge, Massachusetts

Dear Professor Bundy:

Now that the minutes of the recent meeting of the Advisory Board have been
mimeographed, I am able to send you a copy. Mr. Geiger and Father Murray
are not members, but they were invited by Professor Elliott and Mr. Kis-
singer to join us and give the benefit of any ideas they might have.

Although the greater part of the time was spent on editorial problems, you
will see that another matter also had our attention - at present claiming
a great deal of attention. Our recently-acquired underwriting takes care of
many expenses, but got that of publishing costs, and in order to meet that
most vital item we must raise money through subscriptions in this country
now, and possibly later in Europe. We have a nucelus of about 2,000 names
of individuals and institutions in the United States who have received the
first two issues free. They will also receive the third issue, but we will
have to enclose a mailing piece with a subscription blank attached.

One of our first problems is to get outside lists. We have the promise of
subscription lists of three magazines - Partisan Review, Kenyon Review, and
Sewanee Review - and a few hundred names of personal friends of one of our
writers which looks quite promising. Professor Cheever has been most oblig-
ing in suggesting several sources which we might approach, using his name,
and asking to borrow or buy their membership lists. We think several other
friends here at Harvard will give us similar help, but it is not easy to get
names of persons with the broad intellectual interests that would include a
keen appreciation of such an international forum as CONFLUENCE.

Would you have any suggestions of groups or sources which might have the sort
of mailing list that we could use? We are today writing to Brookings Insti-
tution, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, the World Peace Found-
ation and the United Council on World Affairs, Foreign Affairs and Yale
Review.

We hope to acquire 15,000 to 20,000 names some time in September, so that we
can tie in direct mail with the publication of the third issue early in the
month.

I am on extension 754 if you care to phone me at any time. I would be very
happy to answer whatever questions you may have, and on our part we would be
grateful for any suggestions you could give us.

["Marie P. Carnoy", "Sincerely yours,", "grateful for any suggestions you could give me.\nkindly to answer whatever questions you may have, and on my part I would be\nI am on extension 244 if you come to phone me at any time. I would be very\nhappy to answer any questions you may have.", "can tie in direct mail with the publication of the third issue early in the\nWe hope to acquire 12,000 to 20,000 names some time in September, so that we\nwill have any suggestions of groups or sources which might have the sort\nof suggestions that we could use. We are today writing to Brookline Instru-\nment to tell them that we could use. We are today writing to Brookline Instru-\nment that we could give you some to phone me at any time. I would be very\nhappy to answer any questions you may have.", "ation and the United Committee on World Affairs, Foreign Affairs and State\nof writing that we could use. We are today writing to Brookline Instru-\nment to tell them that we could give you some to phone me at any time. I would be very\nhappy to answer any questions you may have.", "Dear Professor Bandy,\n\nI have to express my sincere thanks for your assistance in this matter.", "I am very grateful for your assistance in this matter. I am very\ngrateful for your kind assistance in this matter. I am very\ngrateful for your assistance in this matter. I am very\ngrateful for your

September 29, 1952

Dear Professor Bundy:

I am writing to you today to follow up our meeting of the Editorial Board of CONFLUENCE in July. As you will remember from the minutes, the problems discussed ranged from those of circulation and subscription, about which Miss Carney has since written to you, to those involving the more editorial questions of contributors, topics, and the like, My purpose in this letter is to elaborate more fully on the latter part of our discussion and to ask your advice and help accordingly.

To take the most immediate problem. We are now preparing a topic for CONFLUENCE to be carried on through two or three issues on "The Diffusion of Ideologies." We are using the enclosed statement of the problem by Raymond Aron as the nucleus of the discussion and are submitting copies of his statement to various possible contributors. I believe we can count on a satisfactory number of manuscripts for consideration from abroad. As yet, I cannot be as confident about a number of articles reflecting the American point of view.

May I ask you, after reading M. Aron's statement, to advise me
of any possible American contributors on this topic? I would not expect
that any of our contributors cover all four points outlined on Pages 4 and
5 but rather concentrate on one and two and illustrated them with concrete
examples. What I have in mind is a discussion of the diffusion of ideologies
together with the sociological and theoretical conditions for it. The
discussion would, of course, involve the whole concept of Point Four as well
as an analysis of the apparently great attractiveness of Communism in many
areas. I should like, if possible, to include articles from contributors in
various fields — economics, sociology, political science, etc. I am enclosing
additional copies of M. Aron's article to distribute should you know of a
possible contributor.

besetple contraputor.

additional codes of M. Vrou's article to distribute enough to know of a
various fields — economics, sociology, biological science, etc. I am enclosing
a copy of the abstract of the abstracts of economics in mind
quotation mark, of course, in the whole concept of point form as well
together with the sociological and theoretical conditions for it. The
examples. What I have in mind is a discussion of the dilution of ideas
put rather concentrate on one and two and illustrate them with concrete
text and of our contraputors cover all four points outlined on pages 4 and
of any besetple American contraputors on this page? I would not expect
that I ask you, after reading M. Vrou's statement, to advise me

American point of view.

As yet, I cannot see any confident apart a number of articles rejecting the
coment on a satisfactory number of numerates for consideration from abroad.
codes of the statement to various besetple contraputors. I believe we can
prove by Raymond Vrou as the most famous of the discussion and are submitting
"The Dilution of Ideas." We are making the enclosed statement of the
family for CONCLUSION to be carried on through two or three pages on
To take the most immediate problem. We are now preparing a

part of our discussion and to ask him advice and help accordingly.

**like?** Will you please in this letter to elaborate more fully on the latter
involving the more editorial questions of contraputors' force, and the
recognition, apart which was carried away since written to you, to those
minutes, the problems discussed raised from those of orientation and
effortful Board of CONCLUSION in July. We know will remember from the
I am writing to you today to follow my meeting with the

Dear Professor. Bungy:

Comming, Messrs.
St. Berkeley Street
Professor McGeorge Bungy

September 29, 1925

Professor Bundy

-2-

September 29, 1952

The problem which I have encountered in securing American contributors to write on "The Diffusion of Ideologies" illustrates one of our most serious difficulties -- one on which I should also like to ask your advice. Up to now, we have approached most of our contributors on an ad hoc basis and usually from our immediate circle of acquaintances. If CONFLUENCE is to realize its potentialities we will have to broaden its base, however. I would be very grateful for any names you could suggest to me of people who might be interested in writing for us. If we could build up a group of possible contributors from various fields, we could then call on them when a topic is contemplated for CONFLUENCE which is in their field of interest.

We also have another problem of a similar type. As was discussed at the Board meeting, we hope to develop a book review section in the near future. Here again, I feel we can count on a number of interested Europeans but we lack the necessary contact with Americans who might be willing to contribute. I would like to develop a number of informal correspondents who call out attention to significant articles, significant books, and significant publications together with a brief critical appraisal. In each issue, we hope to review two or three books, each book to be reviewed by one American and one European.

As I have indicated, our most immediate problem is obtaining American contributors on the problem of "The Diffusion of Ideologies." In order that all articles may be submitted to M. Aron for a concluding statement, we will need to have our American contributors lined up within the very near future. Could I, therefore, ask to hear from you on this as soon as possible?

On the general problem of American contributors to future topics and the book review section, the editorial deadline is not as imminent. However, we are most anxious to move ahead quickly here, too. I shall greatly appreciate any advice you may care to give.

HAK:ms
Encs.

Eucè.
HAK:me

Henry V. Knaufner.

Strohreizd Jouns.

Kesthly abbracate und sqarce Joun wach care to give.

Homerar, we are moat snxions to move spesd spesidly pere, too. I apoy and the pook review section, the eperiorl qesulte is not se imminent.

On the general propof of American contriftors to future fobles

as soon as besaipfe?

the aerl user future. Conq I, therefore, sak to peer from Joun on fine atatement, we will need to have our American contriftors lined up within In order that all articles wul pe anmifted to M. Van to a concfing American contriftors on the propof of "The Difluation of Idecoges."

Ya I have indicated, our moat immediate propofe is operating

of one American and one Emobeaun.

conq fames, we pube to review two or fives pocks, each pock to be reviewed af significant publications together with a chief critical abbracate. In who eill our attention to af significant articles, af significant pocks, and contriftes. I wouid like to qesefob a number of inform correcbongents put we lack the necessary contact with America who might pe wiffling to future. Here again, I feel we can confu on a number of interested Emobeaun at the Board meetuf, we pube to qesefob a pook review section in the user.

We wac have another propofe ot a similar fable. We wae qneamed

in their field of interest.

then call on them when a fabric is contemblated for CONFLIENGE which is partly nb a Grob of besaipfe contriftors from asions tiefes, we conq to me of bedbe who might pe interested in writing for me. If we confu pase, pomever. I wouid pe aerl strategy for and wame houconq abbracat. It CONFLIENGE is to realize ita bofeufialtify we will have to proceed ite on su sb pock pats and namely from our immediate circle of subsistances. Sak Joun, eqaice. Up to now, we have abraccated moat ot our contriftors ot om. wac asions qulifiques — one ou which I wouid sauo like to contriftors to write on "The Difluation of Idecoges." illustrates one the propofe which I have encountered in secoming American

Professor Bumby

-5-

September 59, 1925

February 20, 1953

Mr. Walter Lippmann
3525 Woodley Road, N.W.
Washington, D.C.

Dear Walter:

I write to ask your help in support of a Harvard enterprise that I think you know something about — the magazine, CONFLUENCE, which has been put out under the auspices of the Summer Semesters in the last year and brilliantly edited by one of our teaching fellows in Government, Henry Kissinger. The magazine is now at the financial crossroads, and its future is largely dependent on a decision which is pending in an outfit called Intercultural Publications, Inc. which is a subsidiary of the Ford Foundation. James Laughlin is President of this unit. He says that the decision will depend in large measure upon the opinions of his Board and that these in turn are much affected by the views of citizens whose word carries weight. Your name was specifically mentioned as one such citizen.

I know that you have seen copies of CONFLUENCE and that you will have had no difficulty divining its editorial intent which is fundamentally to demonstrate to European intellectuals that there can be an American magazine in which rational discussion of issues important to the Atlantic Community can take place. This does not seem at first sight a very difficult thing to do, but it is impression that of all of the undertakings aimed in this direction — like PREUVES and PERSPECTIVES — CONFLUENCE has been the most successful. It seems to have a low-pitched sanity of tone and temper which carries a good deal more weight with European literary and intellectual figures than some of the more stridently anti-Communistic sheets. But this very modesty of temper and method seem to make the magazine hard to sell to Americans who may not know the temper of the first-rate European. Kissinger has just been to Europe and he reports a very high level of interest and acceptance among figures as diverse as Aron, Camus, Sartre and the ESPRIT group in France and a similar friendliness in Rome, in western Germany and in London.

The total level of expense involved in this undertaking is exceedingly modest as magazines go. The most that it is likely to cost in any one year is $35,000 and it seems plain that the

financial problem is the least of the concerns of the Ford
people. They simply need to be persuaded that this is something
worth doing.

If you feel like writing the members of the Board of
Intercultural Publications, their addresses follow. A note
from you to anyone of them would be most helpful.

Charles Garside, 1148 Fifth Avenue, N.Y., N.Y.

Richard Weil, Jr., 350 East Palisade Avenue,
Englewood, N.J.

William J. Casey, Glenwood Road, Roslyn Harbor, N.Y.

Henry John Heinz II, Rosemont Farm, Sharpsburg,
Penna.

Alfred A. Knopf, Purchase Street, Purchase, N.Y.

Joseph W. Hambuechen, Lloyd's Neck, Long Island, N.Y.

If you don't know any of them, perhaps you would be
willing to send your comments to Mr. Laughlin himself at
Intercultural Publications, Inc., 2 East 61st Street, New
York, New York.

Sincerely yours,

March 13, 1953

Mr. Walter Lippman
3525 Woodley Road, N.W.
Washington 16, D.C.

Dear Mr. Lippman:

At the suggestion of McGeorge Bundy, I am sending you
the enclosed copy of the latest issue of CONFLUENCE. While
it takes time for a new venture to hit its stride, I hope you
will agree with us that each issue has improved on the preceding
one. Also, I think the sustained interest in CONFLUENCE is
indicated by the fact that the level of our collaborators is
constantly rising. For example, we have already obtained articles
for Part II of the discussion on "The Diffusion of Ideologies"
From Moravia, Aron (a second article), Byron Dexter, and John
Galbraith among others.

HAK:ndj
Enc.

February 25, 1953

Mr. Byron Dexter
FOREIGN AFFAIRS
58 East 68th Street
New York 21, New York

Dear By:

This is a begging letter and I hope you will forgive me
for the intrusion.

Our little magazine, CONFLUENCE, for which you have done
a piece that Kissinger tells me is excellent — although he
won't show it to me — is now at the financial crossroads.
It has been supported from hand to mouth through various Summer
School funds in the last year or two but now it must either
get long-term support or suspend operations.

We have applied to the Ford Foundation for support and
they are now considering this application through a subsidiary
called Intercultural Publications, Inc. The officers of this
outfit have expressed interest in hearing the opinions of outside
students as to the quality of the magazine. So I write to ask
you if you think well enough of CONFLUENCE to write a letter
about it to anyone of the gentlemen whose names and addresses
I will list at the end of this letter in case you happen to know
them personally.

My own feeling is that in CONFLUENCE Kissinger has established
an international forum which has the kind of even-tempered sanity
which is extremely hard to get in such undertakings and which is
well worth support. It is not difficult to produce brilliant
anti-Communist tracts like PREUVES or even uncommunicative examples
of national intellectualism like PERSPECTIVES. It is quite another
thing to write in such a way that you do in fact succeed in
communicating from one continent to another in terms which command
intellectual respect. You know this, of course, from your long
experience of persuading foreign authors to write effectively for
a primarily American audience. What seems to be a difficulty in
"selling" CONFLUENCE to Americans is, in fact, its great asset
abroad — namely, the very simplicity and moderation of its
editorial tone. Or, at least, this is how it appears to me and
if you feel at all the same way I hope you may feel able to say

McGEORGE BUNDY
21 BERKELEY STREET
CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS

March 5, 1953

Mr. Henry Kissinger
Harvard Summer School
Weld Hall

Dear Henry:

I have a letter from Walter Lippmann reaffirming his enthusiasm for Confluence, but stating that he has a fixed policy against joining in appeals for money. This general rule is reinforced in this particular case by the fact that he is on one of the boards of the Ford Foundation.

He does say that he is always happy to express his opinion when a direct question is put to him by those who are trying to make a decision. If, therefore, Mr. Lauchlin were willing to write to him directly and ask for his opinion of Confluence, I think we could count on Lippmann to fire a shot in the right direction.

I send this along unsigned because I think you will want to have it quickly.

September 15, 1953

Mr. McGeorge Bundy
21 Berkeley Street
Cambridge, Massachusetts

Dear McGeorge:

I am writing to you today about the topics we are currently considering for
CONFLUENCE. I would very much appreciate your suggestions of possible contributors.

The topic in which we are most immediately interested is "The Role of Science
in the Twentieth Century." Here I have in mind the contribution of science in the
various disciplines and the impact of science on the modern crisis. These are just
suggestions, however, and a contributor would be perfectly free to concentrate on
any aspect of the problem he considers significant.

The second topic is "The Role of Religion" ("The Influence of Modern Religion").
I do not think that much need be said to clarify this. In general, the effort in all
our discussions is to have each article deal with a specific aspect of the problem
from the point of view of a special discipline or position as an aspect of a more
general position. We try in each discussion to include a treatment of the topic from
the point of view of philosophy, politics, and the humanities. In this way we hope
that CONFLUENCE can make a small contribution towards reintegrating Western thinking.
Perhaps you could keep this in mind when making your suggestions.

I shall greatly appreciate any help you could give me on this. One of
CONFLUENCE's continuing problems (aside from the ever present financial one) is to
attract the most vital thought to its pages.

I should also be very grateful for any suggestions of possible topics for
discussion.

HAK:ndj

HARVARD UNIVERSITY

FACULTY OF ARTS AND SCIENCES

OFFICE OF THE DEAN

5 UNIVERSITY HALL
CAMBRIDGE 38, MASSACHUSETTS

September 18, 1953

Dear Henry:

I have your letter about future topics for *Confluence* and I must say I find myself pretty much at a loss for bright ideas.

I think on the science topic I would try one or more of the following: Purcelland Ramsey in the Harvard Physics Department, Zacharias and Wiesner in M.I.T. Physics, Bruner or Stouffer in Harvard Social Relations, or perhaps Frank Sutton who is in charge of the Behavioral Science inquiry in Cambridge this year. Of course, the best man of the lot in the country for this kind of thing would be Oppenheimer, but I don't dare to believe that you would persuade him although there can be no harm in trying. Scientists who might have useful things to say seem to be fairly scarce. You might try Morton White, but you used him fairly recently, and I think you might see if Andy Gleason in Mathematics would talk about this matter, but I don't know whether he writes good and effective prose or not. For this subject, or perhaps better for your religious topic, you might wish to get in touch with Zeph Stewart in Classics who is a young and rising star in that area and who is a bright and independent brain.

Now I find myself thinking like a dean about people within our Faculty and I don't feel that I am adding much to your own wisdom. So forgive me if I let it go at this. Thanks for asking and for letting me know what you do. doing not.

Mr. Henry A. Kissinger
10 Weld Hall

October 9, 1953

Mr. McGeorge Bundy, Dean
University Hall

Dear McGeorge,

In looking over our Rockefeller correspondence, I find that they
have not definitely closed the door on giving us a grant but that their
main concern is not to support a venture which is already well-established.
A note from someone not directly concerned with our operation - and
therefore not likely to be accused of crying wolf - explaining our plight
might prove useful. The man we have dealt with mostly is Edward D'Arms.

I found your note in the office this afternoon. It made me feel
all the worse that I seem destined to debase every gesture of gratitude
by following it up with a plea for help. Maybe the enclosed extract of
my final remarks to the Seminar will explain - if anything can - my badger-
ing persistence.

Many thanks for taking time out among other and, I am certain, more
pressing things.

HAK:of

HAK:et

Henry V. Kissinger

Sincerely yours,

blessing things.

ing benevolence.

my final remarks to the Seminar will explain - it anything can - my pedag-

p following it up with a pie for help. May be the enclosed extract of

all the worse that I seem destined to degenerate every feature of gratitude

I taking your note in the office this afternoon. It made me feel

might prove useful. The man we have dealt with mostly is Howard D'Amme.

therefore not likely to be accused of crying soft - explaining our bright

main concern is not toembark a venture which is already well-established.

Dear McGeorge,

University Hall
Mr. McGeorge Eunby, Dean

October 9, 1953

HARVARD UNIVERSITY

FACULTY OF ARTS AND SCIENCES

OFFICE OF THE DEAN

OCT 16 1953

October 14, 1953

Dear Henry:

I don't know Edward D'Arms of the
Rockefeller Foundation, but I'm having
luncheon with Gilpatric next Monday; he
is also an associate director (or whatever
they call him) and I will say a word to
him.

I have written Jim Perkins at the
Carnegie Corporation and I'm sure he will
give you a friendly hearing.

CC: Dean Bundy
    ->HAK
    Dean Keppel

NOTES ON CONVERSATIONS WITH DEAN BUNDY AND DEAN KEPPEL

ON PROCEDURES FOR APPROACHES TO FOUNDATIONS FOR SEVERAL SUMMER SCHOOL PROJECTS

October 27, 1953

It was decided that:

I. Dean Keppel will approach Dupont for funds for continuing the Science Education program inaugurated by President Conant and carried on by Professor Watson. The funds would be used both for instruction and for scholarships, and the latter might cover related courses outside the program as well as those strictly within it.

II. If the approach to Dupont is successful, Professor Elliott will ask Mr. Dollard for Carnegie funds to develop a similar program in the Social Sciences for secondary-school teachers.

III. Dean Keppel will ask Mr. Gilpatrick of the Rockefeller Foundation for funds for a similar program in the Humanities.

IV. Professor Elliott will ask the Bollingen Foundation for $1000-$1200 for the conference on Modern Architecture and $700-$800 for the one on Music.

V. International Seminar:

1. Dean Bundy will check with Mr. Reynolds on whether it is appropriate at this time to approach Amory Moughton of Corning Glass for $20,000 for the Seminar, and the Sloan Foundation for a similar amount. If so, Dean Bundy will write to Moughton, with support from President Pusey.

2. If these requests are successful, we will try to get the remaining funds from the Rockefeller Foundation for 1954, and for 1955 will present the whole "package" to the Ford Foundation.

3. The latter, meanwhile, is expected to continue to support Confluence.

ambassador conference.

3. The latter, meanwhile, is expected to continue to
   Lord Ranelagh.

1934, and for 1935 will present the whole "backgroun" to the
the remaining funds from the Rockefeller Foundation for

3. It is expected that these releases are successful, we will try to get
write to Washington, and if we succeed from President Breck.

laboratory for a similar amount. It so, Dean Rundb will
conduct research for $20,000 for the Seminar, and the loss
is approximate at this time to about $10,000 which would be
about $10,000 for the Seminar, and the loss
is approximate at this time to about $10,000 which would be
1. Dean Rundb will check with Mr. General on whether it

A. International Seminar

$100-$200 for the one on Music.

1A. Professor Elliott will ask the Department Foundation for
humanities.

11. Dean Kebbel will ask Mr. Gribicki of the Rockefeller
department.

similar program in the Social Sciences for second-year-under-
will ask Mr. Delford for Carnegie funds to develop a
11. It the abstract to submit is successful, Professor Elliott
will be given authority to submit it.

after might cover related courses outside the program as
permed funds for instruction and for conferences, and the
Concert and carried on by Professor Rabin. The funds would
the Science Education program initiated by President
I. Dean Kebbel will abstract about $100 for funds for continuing
It will be decided that:

October 23, 1933

ON PROCEDURES FOR ADVOCATES TO FOUNDATIONS FOR SCIENTIFIC SUMMIT SCHOOL PROCEEDINGS
NOTES ON CONVERSATIONS WITH DANN BUNDY AND DANN KELMAN

Dean Kebbel

HAK

CC: Dean Rundb

HARVARD UNIVERSITY

SUMMER SCHOOL OF ARTS AND SCIENCES AND OF EDUCATION

2 WELD HALL, CAMBRIDGE 38, MASSACHUSETTS

WILLIAM YANDELL ELLIOTT, Director
ALAN KEITH CAMPBELL, Assistant Director

DANA MESERVE COTTON, Associate Director
MARGUERITE HILDEBRAND, Executive Secretary

November 3, 1953

Dean McGeorge Bundy
5 University Hall

Dear Mac:

I fully accept your decision about Amory Houghton, who seems to have been badgered too much for his own patience and good will to last through another assault.

I should like to make it clear, however, that a confidential informant, whose name I gave you informally, had indicated that Mr. Houghton had expressed a specific interest in gifts in this area. I think that if the undertaking were somewhere else than at Harvard, he would not feel any particular reluctance. However, the situation at the present time does not seem to be propitious in the light of his large gift to the Divinity School endowment. I should like to hold it open to approach him next year if we don't do better with the Ford Foundation than we have done this year.

I would now propose to approach the Sloan Foundation and perhaps try the Whitneys and the Mellons for something like $10,000 apiece, on the basis of matching funds through Carnegie, Rockefeller, etc.

If we get no results in this direction, I am prepared to throw in the sponge myself. I have become quite weary of being a begging friar, even for so good a work as the International Seminar, and I think both Henry and I have about worn out our welcome, unless we get more direct and specific backing from some of our Visiting Committee of the Summer School and from you and the President. I know what a problem this presents you with, but I must leave it to you as to whether - after we have explored all the channels that I have talked over with you - we had better not just fold up the Seminar and lose the momentum which we have built up in the past years.

It may be that I am feeling discouraged on this point because of the atmosphere generated in Washington toward such ventures, too. If ever there was a time when we needed to redouble our efforts, this is it, but for once my head is not only sanguinary but somewhat bowed.

Dictated but not read
by Mr. Elliott.

by Mr. Elliott.
Distributed but not read

Director
W. Y. Elliott

Bettmann-Korn, 1911

for once my head is not owningly but somewhat pensive.
there we a time when we needed to remember our efforts, 'till it's put
atmosphere generated in Washington power such a force, too. It ever
It may be that I am feeling disappointed on this point because of the
the past years.

that held up the Seminary and lone the moments which we have built up in
all the circles that I have talked over with you - we had better not
miss it, but I must leave it to you so to speak - after we have explored
and from you and the President. I know what a problem this presents for
absolute packing from some of our Visiting Committee of the Summer School
and I have about some of our welcome, whereas we get more direct and
for so good a work as the International Seminary, and I think both Henry
abandon itself. I have become quite nearly of being a paying client, even
it we set no result in this direction, I am prepared to throw in the
of reporting funds through Canada, Rockefelt, etc.

Witness and the Reference for something like $10,000 apiece, on the basis
I would now propose to abstract the gross Foundation and hereafter try the
first year.

Dear us, we don't do better with the Lord Foundation than we have done
School endowment. I should like to hold it open to abstract this next
not seem to beitions in the light of the large bill to the Diocese,
Brattican Refinances. However, the situation at the present time goes
underlying more somewhere else than at Harvard, he would not feel any
blessed a specific interest in life in this area. I think that it the
whose name I gave you intently, he indicated that Mr. Houghton had ex-
I should like to make it clear, however, that a confidential inquiry,
another matter.

performed too much for the own patience and good will to treat through
I fully accept your declaration about your Houghton, who seems to have been

Dear Mac:

S University Hall
Dean McGeerie Bungy

November 3, 1923

VIRGIL KELLY CUMBERLAND, Assistant Director
WILLIAM YARNDIEFF ELLIOTT, Director

MARGUERITE HILDEBRAND, Exchequer Secretary
DAVID WESSLEY CUMBERLAND, Assistant Director

S WEID HULT, CAMBRIDGE 38, MARYCHURZELLS

SUMMER SCHOOL OF ARLS AND SCIENCES AND OF EDUCATION

HARVARD UNIVERSITY

NOV

REC'D

[10]

HARVARD UNIVERSITY

FACULTY OF ARTS AND SCIENCES

OFFICE OF THE DEAN

October 30, 1953

Dear Bill:

I have talked with Jim Reynolds about Amory Houghton, and I regret to have to say that this does not look like the time to go after him for the summer seminar. He has just given a large sum to the Divinity School Endowment, and since the amount is about twice as much as he had ever given in all his life to the University, we are disposed to leave him in peace for awhile.

This situation would be somewhat different if we could feel that the specific undertaking of the seminar is one in which Mr. Houghton has already made plain a direct and intense personal interest. But my understanding, both from you and from Reynolds, is that he is a man of good will and cares a lot for Harvard but has not shown as yet any sharp and specific concern for one particular area. And I do not mean this as an invitation for you to persuade him to such an interest in the summer seminar in time for this year's problem. If you should build up such an interest, it should be done well before we make an appeal for funds, in a case of this kind.

I'm sorry about this, but I think Reynolds is right in view of the facts. We have had some muttering from Mr. Houghton, indeed, that in the course of this academic year he has been approached nine times for different Harvard causes.

Professor W. Y. Elliott
2 Weld Hall

January 28, 1954

Dean McGeorge Bundy
University Hall

Dear McGeorge:

I am writing to you about a topic we are currently considering for CONFLUENCE on which I would very much appreciate your suggestions of possible contributors.

For some time now we have been asked by a number of our friends in Europe to discuss the question of McCarthyism. I have resisted up to now because I have always felt that it might lead to a debate characterized by ignorance on the one hand and a tendency toward self-righteousness on the other. I have, however, formulated the subject now in a manner which I think will permit a fruitful discussion. It is the Ethics of Loyalty, and I shall focus it primarily on the relationship between the moral precepts of the individual and those of the group. In this sense the American experience could be discussed in a much wider context and the whole problem discussed from the point of view of the trend toward conformity which is in no way confined to the United States. I do want some fairly concrete articles about the role of the investigating committee in the United States, but not as the only feature or to be discussed for their own sake. I am not asking any European to discuss the American experience since too much of what they write is superficial and based on false analogies. Instead I am asking them to discuss their own Loyalty problems raised by the existence of significant Communist parties or by the experience of foreign occupation or totalitarian governments.

Who could deal with these various problems in a substantial manner on the United States side? I would, of course, love to have something from you with specific relation to the role of educational institutions, but I rather suspect that you are too busy and also that CONFLUENCE is not the platform on which you would care to fight this particular issue.

I much appreciated your comments on the manuscripts I left with you. I agreed with all your stylistic suggestions. There is really no excuse for an editor to use so many adjectives unless it is the eagerness to say everything in the first few chapters. I think you will find the later chapters under better control in that respect. Some of your substantive suggestions you will also find taken care of in later chapters, particularly my overemphasis on the difference between Castlereagh and Metternich. It was simply that in introducing the protagonists I thought it best to indicate their differences in order to fix their point of view and to let the similarities emerge in later chapters.

Dean McGeorge Bundy

-2-

January 28, 1954

Some of the other questions you raised are less easily answered. It is extremely difficult to do anything with Metternich because in him an essentially sterile conception of statemanship was coupled with a most extraordinary diplomatic skill. A tale of his negotiation will, therefore, always seem a little bit out of scale. For what is one to make of a diplomat who, on at least four different occasions, succeeded in supplanting the foreign minister with whom he was negotiating; who on one of these occasions wrote the reports for both sides; to whom the two monarchs who had most to gain from an Austrian collapse, Prussia, Germany, and Russia in the Balkans submitted all their domestic measures for final approval before implementing them. This, I suggest, was an extraordinary tour de force. It was, to be sure, no more than a tour de force, and as fragile as a house of cards. But in order to show its fragility, I have first to demonstrate its successes. The trouble with Metternich's statesmanship was, as I see it, not its short term sterility but its long term lack of conception. It would be easy enough to show that he "failed" because he failed to recognize the trend of the times, but this makes it much too simple. He recognized it, but did his best to arrest it.

I also agree with you as an abstract proposition that no statesman is all "one." Nevertheless, in any given instance, this may not apply. I think an analysis of the thought of most great statesmen will show a much more substantial consistency than psychologists would admit. I think you have shown this in your *Pattern of Responsibility* with respect to Acheson. The difference between a man like Acheson and the statesmen I am considering is not that they were wiser, but that they had a longer tenure of office and fewer domestic pressures, and were therefore able to implement their maxims more consistently.

One final point: the phrase "I like the spiders because I have always admired them" is a direct quote from Metternich. I admit it doesn't make any sense and it is a bit morbid, but I thought it would illustrate a certain whimsical strain. Rather than assume the responsibility for it myself, however, I have taken it out.

In any case, many thanks for taking time out to look at it, and I am looking forward to your suggestions on the CONFLUENCE problem.

HAKstep

HARVARD UNIVERSITY

FACULTY OF ARTS AND SCIENCES

FEB 2 1954

OFFICE OF THE DEAN

February 1, 1954

Dear Henry:

I really don't have any good ideas on McCarthyism. I know a lot of people who have worked on and around the topic, but so do you. Among those who seem to me to have made most sense are Sam Stouffer, Jerome Bruner, and Alan Westin. I do not know who has been working on it in other places, and I must say that an awful lot of bad stuff has been written, so I shall take a bystander's position on this and watch with interest to see what you come up with.

As for the thesis, I think there is a lot to be said for the modifications you suggest to my comments, and on second thought, I certainly don't think I would cut out the phrase about spiders.

COPY

Kenneth E. Colten

323 2-Chome, Shinmachi
Setagaya-Ku, Tokyo
Japan

16 February, 1954

Henry A. Kissinger
Executive Director
Harvard University International Seminar
10 Weld Hall
Cambridge 38, Mass.

Dear Mr. Kissinger:

.........

At a recent meeting of the new board of the 1954 officers of the Harvard Club here the 1954 Seminar was discussed. All those present were keenly anxious to do all that was possible to insure as good a delegation this year as in the past. The committee to handle the publicity and to make the selection will undoubtedly be headed by Mr. Takashi Komatsu, one of our most active and effective Harvard men, a former president and long time member of the Harvard official family here. The Board wishes me to advise you of its strong faith in the results of the past two Seminars in which Japanese members joined, for the Board believes the Seminar experience has broadened horizons, has given insights and incentives to tolerance and understanding, not alone of the United States, but of the other countries represented in the summer sessions. We believe too that something of the spirit of Harvard's devotion to truth, unqualified, has been passed on. We therefore would strongly back the Seminar program, knowing that the good of the past will be improved in the future.

.........

May I add a personal word by saying that I and many others here are pleased at the way Harvard has met some of the slanderous attacks of the past months. We expect the torch never to go out. With kind regards.

regards.

of the past months. We expect the torch never to go out. With kind
are blessed at the way Harvard has met some of the slandelous attacks
May I add a personal word by saying that I and many others here

........

We therefore would strongly pack the Seminar program, knowing that
of Harvard's devotion to truth, unqualified, has been passed on.
in the summer sessions. We believe too that something of the spirit
not alone of the United States, but of the other countries represented
has given insight and incentives to tolerance and understanding.

for the Board believes the Seminar experience has progressed well,  
results of the past two Seminars in which Japanese members joined,  
here. The Board wishes me to advice you of its strong faith in the  
former president and long time member of the Harvard official family  
Takashi Kometani, one of our most active and effective Harvard men, a  
proficient and to make the selection will undoubtedly be passed by Mr.  
degregation this year as in the past. The committee to handle the  
were kind and anxious to go all that was possible to insure as good a  
Harvard Board here the 1924 Seminar was discussed. All those present  
At a recent meeting of the new board of the 1924 officers of the

Dear Mr. Klaasen:

Cambridge 38. Was.
10 Weld Hill
Harvard University International Seminar
Executive Director
Henry A. Klaasen

10 Decembar, 1924
Jedediah
Settlement-Kn. Tokyo
353 S-Chome, Shimbashi

Kenneth E. Colton

COPY

May 20, 1954

Dear McGeorge:

I am writing you on behalf, indeed I might almost say at the insistence, of Mr. Elliott to inform you of the financial plight which has now struck CONFLUENCE. I confess I am quite reluctant to do so because I think you did more than your share last year. At any rate, quite surprisingly the Ford Foundation has now turned down our request for support while it seems willing to accept support of the International Seminar for a two-year period. The reasons for the turndown are complicated and almost entirely bureaucratic, having to do with the policy of the Foundation to get rid of publications, the activity of the Reece Committee, and related factors. But whatever the reason, it appears now that the Ford Foundation is out as a possible support despite energetic efforts of such people as Wyzanski.

My first reaction was to let CONFLUENCE die, since I am a little tired of playing the Grand Inquisitor, but everyone to whom I mentioned this decision here seemed to feel that this would be an irresponsible gesture and that CONFLUENCE was by far the more significant of the two ventures. I tend to agree with this estimate, and I think that in view of our really extremely limited budget, we have spent less than $60,000 in three years and our relatively small circulation, the impact of CONFLUENCE has been considerable. Only last week the London *Times* Literary Supplement devoted a leading article to us. About a month ago the leading Danish newspaper gave us a whole page, and I could cite some other instances from Germany, Italy and France. Despite our extremely low honoraria, I think we have managed to keep a fairly substantial level of contributions, and it would be a pity if CONFLUENCE collapsed now that it has quite established itself. Still I am at my wits' end about getting additional funds since the big foundations are notoriously reluctant to support publications. I would not have bothered you with this had not Mr. Elliott felt that at least I should present the case to you and to see whether there is anything you might wish to do or whether you might have any suggestions as to possible sources.

["wish to go on whether you might have and suggestions as to bosepfe sources. I should be present the case to you and to see whether there is anything you might I would not have considered you with this had not Mr. Elliott felt that at least I would not have considered you with this had not

Dean McGeorge Bundy

2.

May 19, 1954

A second subject about which I write you with much more pleasure is the forthcoming International Seminar. We have finally scraped together about ten thousand dollars less than previous years, but enough to be able to conduct a Seminar on a somewhat reduced scale. The level of our participants promises, however, to be at least as good as in previous years. I am enclosing a list of participants so that you can judge for yourself.

I am now in the process of arranging a group of guest speakers for the summer. Stassen has already agreed to come up again, and I hope I can induce Acheson to function as our opening speaker since he indicated last year that his chief reason for declining was his self-imposed silence. I should hope very much that you would agree to address the Seminar again as you have in the previous years. In their final comments our participants were almost unanimous in their appreciation of your talk and the subsequent discussion. I will leave it to you to pick any Monday, Tuesday, or Thursday between July 13 and August 20. I hope you will be able to do it.

HAK:ebp
Enclosure 1

Enclosures f
HAK:epb

Henry V. Krasufinger

I hope you will be able to do it.
It is for you to pick and choose, Thursday, or Thursday between July 12 and August 20.
In their appreciation of your talk and the subsequent discussion, I will leave
breviations here. In their further comments our barbitrants were so much grateful
very much that you would agree to express the Seminar again as you have in the
last original reason for choosing me for self-imposed influence. I should hope
you would consider me as our opening abeides since he indicated that last year
summer. I am sure I should agree to come again, and I hope I can induce
you now in the process of arranging a bomb of great abeides for the
ot barbitrants so that you can judge for yourself.
However, to be at least as good as in briefs here. I am enclosing a flat
Seminar on a somewhat reduced scale. The level of our barbitrants brownies,
thousand dollars less than briefs here, put enough to be able to condense a
torquing international Seminar. We have successfully carried together a
second subject apart which I write you with much more Bjørnson to the
V.

Dean McGeorge Bundy

May 19, 1924

Dean McGeorge Bundy

S.

May 19, 1924

June 8, 1954

Dean McGeorge Bundy
University Hall 5

Dear McGeorge:

For some time now I have been meaning to write to you about what I take to be one of the chief problems facing higher education and Harvard in particular: the state of mind of the graduate student and junior faculty member. I have refrained until now because unasked advice is presumptuous at best and from someone in my status anomalous in addition. But while waiting for a "proper moment," I came to realize that there is never a "proper moment" and that if I wanted to state the problem I should have to be willing to run the risk of being misunderstood. I do not expect to tell you much not already known to you except in so far as a worm's eye view may prove of interest.

That the state of mind of the graduate student and junior faculty member leaves much to be desired is without question. This is not only my opinion, but that of every serious person I know. I shall therefore confine myself in this letter to a description with which I am certain most of my acquaintances, including some you know and I think respect, would concur. (I base this on my interpretation of conversations over a long period of time. I have not shown anyone this letter nor told anyone that I was writing to you). The state of mind I am referring to is a strange mixture of insecurity and self-righteousness, of gentility and the most devious kind of manipulation, of strained application and indolent drifting. It is without humor and without joy. Despite its appearance of pedantry, it is always on the verge of hysteria. Despite its claims to universality, it is characterized by almost total isolation. While occasionally substantial works are produced, they testify to the strength of an individual to transcend his environment, not to an impetus derived from it. Nothing makes for creativity, for spontaneity, for inspiration. All the pressures make for conformity, a high level of mediocrity and safety.

I am not saying that this is the "fault" of Harvard. I would even go further and grant you that the atmosphere at other universities I am familiar with is even worse. But this is small consolation. A lesser evil is still an evil and ameliorated despair is not happiness. Among my friends here at Harvard, there is not one who

["paddiness. A few years ago, there was a time when I was not one who liked to talk to people. But this is not an isolated incident. It is rather a reaction to the environment in which I find myself. I am not so much a loner, but I am not afraid of my own company. I am not so much a loner, but I am not afraid of my own company

Dean Bundy

- 2 -

June 8, 1954

has a meaningful alternative, but there is also not one who is proud
of or even satisfied with his condition. An acquaintance who has
successfully taught a large General Education course and will now
begin to lecture in his department told me when I complemented him
on his achievement: "And still I never feel the need of inviting
any friends to show Harvard off ... because above all there is no
joy." Another, a senior tutor of one of the houses, cannot conduct
a conversation without discussing his "escape" from here, an attitude
which becomes all the more pathetic because it is clear that he will
never do so. A third, up for an assistant professorship next year
and reasonably certain of obtaining it, is frantically looking for
another job as "the only means of maintaining his self-respect." And
I, too, have seriously thought of giving up the academic career and
going to Law School

It can not be superficial factors which cause these feelings. It
is not an easy matter even to consider giving up an activity so worth-
while in itself and which represents the investment of nearly a decade.
Nor is the demoralization due to material factors, however inadequate
they may be. The academic profession will remain unattractive what-
ever its salary scale until a beginning is made to reform some of its
present attitudes. For salary, in my estimation, is not the only or
even the chief determinant in the choice of careers and even if it
were the present financial position of most universities would not
permit a serious revision of their wage scales. At least as important
as income is the sense of achievement that goes with the recognition
of one's professional group, the sense of community engendered by
shared activity in a worthwhile effort, the sense of challenge which
is inseparable from the accomplishment of difficult tasks.

To be sure, academic life is difficult is difficult at best particu-
cularly in its psychic pressures. In no other profession is one so de-
pendent on the approbation of one's colleagues and yet in no profession
must one so much create the substance out of oneself. In no other
field is the disparity between the creative act and its reception so
marked. The academic profession requires a special degree of dedi-
cation, therefore. More than any other activity it must be done for
its own sake. To an unusual extent it depends on an atmosphere which
does not inhibit inspiration. Its crucial problem is to maintain its
standards against the forces that tend to dissolve them. But just
because there exist no "objective" standards or because true creativity
constantly transcends existing norms the danger of atrophy by medio-
crity always lurks beneath the surface. It is not that quality will
be consciously suppressed; it is rather that the _sense for quality_
may be lost.

I am not saying that Harvard has as yet reached this point, but
the symptoms are unmistakable. While a certain amount of production
is still occuring, it is becoming increasingly narrow and even sterile.
Above all, it deteriorates as one descends in the age groups. This
is due to a number of factors, to the system and the criteria of promo-
tion, to the spirit of atomism, and the resulting absence of a sense

tion, to the spirit of atomism, and the resulting apsence of a sense
is due to a number of factors, to the atom and the criteria of bromo-
apove all, it deteriorates as one decends in the state of kroma. This
is still occurring, it is becoming increasingly narrow and even sterile.
the symptom are unmathematical. While a certain amount of production
I am not asking that Harvard has as yet reached this point, but
may be lost.

be concretely understood it is rather that the sense of duality
critically away from the amaze. It is not that duality will
constantly transgress existing norms the danger of aridity by medio-
cause there exist no "objective", standard or because true creativity
standards against the forces that tend to dissolve them. But that
does not inhibit inspiration. Its crucial problem is to maintain its
its own sake. To an irrational extent it debends on an atmosphere which
cation, therefore. More than any other activity it what be done, or
marked. The academic proleation requires a special degree of art.
field is the disability between the creative act and its reception so
what one so much create the aptitude out of oneself. In no other
bendent on the appropriation of one's colleagues and yet in no proleation
only in its beachy breames. In no other proleation in one so de-
to be ame, academic life is difficult at best barbi-
the inseparable from the accomplishment of difficult tasks.

shared activity in a worthwhile effort, the sense of challenge which
of one's proleational kroma, the sense of community engendered by
as income is the sense of achievement that goes with the recognition
benefit a serious revelation of their made sense. At least as important
were the braent financial position of most multinationals would not
even the chief determinant in the choice of careers and even if it
present attitudes. For salary, in my estimation, is not the only or
ever its salary scale until a beginning is made so reform some of its
they may be. The academic proleation will remain attractive what-
nor is the demoralisation due to material factors, however, insgesdinate
while in itself and which represents the investment of nearly a decade.
is not an easy matter even to consider giving up an activity so worth-
ing it can not be anemb利of factors which cause these feelings. It

going to law school
I, too, have seriously thought of giving up the academic career and
another top as "the only means of maintaining his self-repect." And
and reasonably, certain of obtaining it, is practically looking for
never to do so. A third, up for an assistant proleation should next year
which becomes all the more bathetic because it is clear that he will
a conversation without disanning his "escape" from here, an attitude
that." Another, a senior clerk of one of the houses, cannot conduct
and friends to show Harvard all ... because she spoke all there is to no
on his achievement: "And still I never feel the need of inviting
begin to lecture in his department told me when I complemented him
sincerely taught a large General Education course and will now
of or even installed with his condition." An acquaintance who has
has a meaningful alternative, put there is so far not one who is brong

Dean Bungy

- 3 -

June 8, 1924

Dean Bundy

- 3 -

June 8, 1954

of community. While no institution can produce inspiration - this is a self-conscious or immature conception - it should leave room for it and be able to recognize it. But this is precisely what is lacking at Harvard. No one really cares about any one else's work and even less about his human development. To be sure, professors are usually accessible for criticism. But it is not so much criticism that one requires as encouragement. A half-hour appointment with an individual who tensely perfoms his duty but is essentially indifferent does not supply an incentive for major efforts. Mr. Elliott, the person most responsible for my development, did not do so primarily because of his learning but above all because of his humanity, by giving me the feeling that someone I could respect was concerned with my growth. I personally cannot complain therefore. But a friend of mine, a junior faculty member, has told me that in seven years at Harvard his supervisor and now colleague has not once asked to see what he was working on. And even if his experience is untypical, it is closer to the average than mine.

The results are what may be expected. Since there does not exist a community truly interested in each other's growth, each individual stakes out his field with the tenacity of a gold-mine prospector and guards it with a commensurate jealousy. The isolation is almost complete. At best one knows the subject-matter one's colleagues are investigating; it is almost unheard-of that there occurs a substantive discussion. Thus graduate study becomes a draining process in which the sense of excitement of one's undergraduate and early graduate efforts is gradually being dissipated. Intellectual effort is transformed from a challenge into a technique. Gone is the sense of power which accompanied one's early productions. Instead in an atmosphere of solipsism, standards tend either to dissolve or come to seem unattainable. Because no real interest exists, reputations are built on a series of myths which both over- and underpraise and which in any case are only accidentally related to any concrete achievement. Few people know what anyone has accomplished; but everyone knows what the "eagles" think one has accomplished. This gives rise to a type becoming more prevalent with each year that I have been in graduate school: the academic operator, the man who can research anything, the expert on the latest slogan and the most up-to-date gimick, the classic recruit for the big research institutes. In the absence of any meaningful relationship between faculty and student the best way to attract attention is to take the road of orthodoxy. I have never ceased being amused and appalled in the seminars with which I have been associated at the care with which most students analyze what the professor might like to hear and then supply him with it. I have heard the same student deliver diametrically opposite papers in different seminars more than once. This cynicism occurs not only below the surface or subconsciously. I have had a person tell me that when it came time for him to select a Ph.D. topic, he chose one with which he knew no one in his department would be familiar and then put it together largely from newspaper clippings.

lawyer and then but it together largely from newspaper ctributions. He chose one with which he knew no one in his department would do person tell me that when it came time for him to select a Ph.D. tophi, became not only below the average or substandardly. I have had a site paper in different seminaries more than once. This criticism with it. I have heard the same student deliver dramatically analyze what the professor might like to hear and then supply him which I have been associated at the care with which most students I have never ceased being earned and abhorred in the seminaries with the best way to attract attention to take the road of orthodoxy. the absence of any meaningful relationship between faculty and student and the classic noncredit for the PhD received institution. In anything, the expert on the latestajan and the most up-to-date graduate school: the academic operator, the man who can reason take becoming more prevalent with each year that I have been in what the "eagles" think one has accomplished. This gives rise to a few people know what someone has accomplished; put everyone knows and case are only accidentally related to and concrete achievement. on a series of maths which both over- and underperform and which in attainment. Because no real interest exists, reputations are pulled of, above all, standards tend either to dissolve or come to seem un-which accompanied one's early productions. Instead in an atmosphere formed from a challenge into a technique. One is the sense of power effort is gradually being dissipated. Intellectual effort is trans- the sense of excitement of one's undergraduate and early graduate discussion. Thus graduate study becomes a draining process in which vestigating it is almost mindless-but that there occurs a somewhat negative fatigue. At least one knows the subject-matter one's colleagues are in- charge it with a commensurate jealousy. The isolation is almost com- atesee out his life with the tendency of a gold-mine broker and a community truly interested in each other's growth, each individual The results are what may be expected. Since there does not exist average than mine.

Dean Bundy

- 3 -

June 8, 1954

Dean Bundy

- 4 -

June 8, 1954

This demoralization is magnified by the system of making appoint-
ments. There is no doubt that the departments possess well-defined
criteria for their choice; but it is equally without doubt that to
the junior faculty members their decision seems almost completely
indeterminate. At a time of his life when he should be most produc-
tive, the junior faculty member sees before him a road certain to
discourage all but the strongest or most insensitive. At stated inter-
vals, first at the end of three and then at the end of another five
years, his case will be reviewed and he knows or at least believes
that many of the factors that will determine his fate are almost
completely beyond his control. While in any other profession increas-
ing service brings a consciousness of achievement and of power, in the
academic life the reverse is true. Who dares to disagree fundamentally
with a man whose vote may prove so crucial? Who will run the risk
of deviating too far from the norm? Where so much depends on first
coming to the attention of someone and then staying in his good graces,
everything makes for obsequiousness of a genteel type and for a system
of mass-production devoid of all creativity. Any junior faculty mem-
ber faced with the choice of writing a potentially great work over
a 6-year period or several pedantic disquisitions and articles will
unhesitatingly choose the second alternative.

The system of cooptation by the departments compounds the problem
both for the permanent and the junior faculty members. It is almost too
much to expect a dissociation between personal contacts and academic
achievements when the final decision is being taken after often a decade
of close association. Whether it is or not, there exists an almost
general belief that personal relationships and staying power are the
prime requisites for a permanent appointment. As a consequence life
among the junior faculty members has all the characteristics of an abso-
lute monarchy. Individuals obtain prestige by the degree of their
assumed proximity to the throne, in the happy phraseology of some de-
partments by the number of "eagles" they know. They live in tormenting
uncertainty about their fate which is merely the reverse side of a
growing sense of personal insignificance. Their conversation is re-
vealing: it is confined almost entirely to departmental politics, to
denigrating others which is a means of salving one's self-esteem and to
determining the trends of favors to be bestowed. In such an atmosphere
every gesture becomes significant and the cause of endless analysis:
a chance remark by a professor, a frown or even silence. I know two
individuals in our department who refuse to have any social contact
within the department precisely because they can no longer stand
the inevitable gossip. All this gives rise to an atmosphere almost
certain to produce mediocrity; an atmosphere above all to which a
first-rate man will expose himself with decreasing frequency. It
measures all actions by their "utilitarian" aspect in terms of per-
sonal advancement and it seeks advancement by reducing the academic
profession to a trade. You may recall a discussion between ourselves
regarding tutorial at a faculty meeting shortly after you had been
appointed departmental chairman. I forget the precise nature of our

appointed departmental chairman. I forget the precise name of one meeting at a faculty meeting shortly after Don had been produced to a trade. You may recall a decision between our associate advancement and it seeks advancement by reducing the academic measures all sections by their "utilitarian" aspect in some of ber-
�at-rate men will expose himself with decreasing frequency. It
certainly to produce medicality; an atmosphere arose all to show a
within the department precisely because they can no longer stand
individuals in our department who refuse to have any social contact
a chance remark by a broker, a town or even audience. I know two
every beatme becomes significant and the cause of audience sufls:
determining the trends of flavors to be produced. In such an atmosphere
distracting others which is a means of avoiding one's self-eatem and to
deserve: it is confined almost entirely to departments' policies, to
knowing sense of personal insignificance. Their conversation is re-
insurance, apart, their late which is merely the reverse side of a
partments by the number of "eagles" they know. They live in tormenting
assumed proximity to the person in the habit, brouserology of some de-
vice moneracy. Individuals obtain breathe by the degree of their
among the junior faculty members has all the characteristics of an spa-
brine renegade for a permanent appointment. As a consequence life
benefit per cent that personal relationships and attacking power are the
of close association. Whether it is or not, there exists an almost
improvements when the final decision is being taken after often a decade
such to expect a disassociation between personal contracts and academic
part for the permanent and the junior faculty members. It is almost too
The system of cooperation by the departments compounds the problem
makeatstinfly choose the second alternative.
a 3-year period or several consecutive graduations and articles will
per, led with the choice of writing a potentially best work over
of mass-production devoid of all creativity. And junior faculty mem-
everything makes for opaqueness of a Genteel life and for a system
coming to the attention of someone and then attacking in his food braces,
or defating too far from the norm? Where so much depends on that
with a man whose vote may prove so crucial? Who will run the risk
academic life the reverse is true. Who dares to diagree Impassiontly
ing service brings a consciousness of achievement and of power, in the
completely beyond his control. While in any other profession increases-
that many of the factors that will determine his tape are almost
ready, his case will be reviewed and he knows or at least believes
after that at the end of three and then at the end of another five
disconduct all put the strongest or most insensitive. At stated inter-
tive, the junior faculty member sees before him a road certain to
indeterminate. At a time of his life when he should be most broade-
crimes for their choice put it is equally without doubt that to
menta. There is no doubt that the departments bosess self-defined
This demoralization is magnified by the system of making abbot-

Dean Bumby

- 4 -

June 8, 1944

Dean Bundy

- 5 -

June 8, 1954

dispute, but upon its conclusion one of our colleagues, a junior faculty member, put this question to me: "Tell me Henry, what did you really think when you argued with Mac?" The particular remark is an indictment only of the person who made it. But that it could be made at all is an indictment of a state of mind which is pervasive.

I have said enough, I think, to indicate what the problem is, although I fear that it may seem exaggerated. I have purposely omitted mentioning some of the compensating features, in order to keep this letter within tolerable bounds. I am moreover suffering under the handicap that my description of the condition will have to remain more complete than any remedies I might propose, that many of the remedies are palliatives only, partly because the problem is connected with those of our whole cultural situation, partly because contrary to the classic Rationalist tenet, recognition of a dilemma does not always ensure its solution. Nevertheless I should like to advance a few proposals for your consideration:

If my analysis is correct, two related steps seem indicated: an attempt to increase the sense of community particularly among the junior faculty and an alteration in the system of making appointments. Unless intellectual effort can again be infused with a challenge even the most talented graduate student or junior faculty member will atrophy. Unless his isolation can be overcome, energies will be wasted in a sterile and vicious competition for the attainment of "formal" achievements: courses, personal acquaintance with senior faculty members, etc. Now I am sufficiently a conservative to know that an atmosphere can not be brought about by an act-of-will. Any improvement will have to be gradual and must reflect the tradition of Harvard. But it should be possible to devise institutions which place a premium on reflection and intellectual attainment instead of on academic "operating." This will not eliminate mediocrity but it will cause it to seek advancement in emulating eminence instead of in attempting to impose its pattern on it. Maybe a partial answer could be found in a series of interdepartmental seminars to which appointment would be a distinction, perhaps in the creation of a body similar to the Institute of Advanced Study headed by the Dean or the President but confined to junior faculty members obliged to meet together. Of course, the Society of Fellows could furnish the nucleus of such a group. But I think it is safe to say that the Society reflects, rather than helps to overcome the existing malaise. It is striking to observe how little cross-fertilization occurs within the Society and how negligible is the impact of all but a few of the Senior Fellows. Moreover recent appointments tend to reflect the quest for the safe, sane and balanced man, which is the bane of our culture. Of the three Junior Fellows among those appointed this year whom I know I look in vain for a sign of inspiration. Two of them I should have thought below the criteria for nomination and none in the class of say Carl Kaysen or Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. Not that they are bad; they are simply plausible and mediocre; they have reached their level and the Society will do nothing for them except to increase their material comfort.

material comfort, and the Society will do nothing for them except to increase their skills and be simply blaseful and medicent! they have reached their level. Ask Carl Kelso on Arthur Seifinger, tu. Not that they are bad; thought below the criteria for nomination and none in the class of look in vain for a sign of inspiration. Two of them I should have three: Junior Rellows among these aboighted this year whom I know I am and balanced men, which is the pane of our ontoine. Of the Moreover recent appointments tend to reflect the dread for the sale, negligible is the impact of all put a few of the Senior Rellows. some how little cross-fertilization comes within the Society and how they help to overcome the existing malaise. It is striking to observe "operating". This will not eliminate mediocrity but it will be a premium on reflection and intellectual attainment instead of on Harvard. But it should be possible to devise institutions which place improvement will have to be gradual and what reflect the tradition of that an atmosphere can not be brought about by an act-of-will. Any Youthful memper, etc. Now I am sufficiently a conservative to know "Common" achievements: comes, personal acquaintance with senior wisedom in a sterile and vicious competition for the attainment of atrophy. Unless his isolation can be overcome, energies will be even the most talented graduate student or junior Youthful memper will. Unless intellectual effort can again be infused with a challenge, Junior Youth and an alternation in the system of making appointments attempt to increase the sense of community barterly among the

to the Institute of Advanced Study headed by the Dean or the President, must be a distinction, because in the opinion of a pedagog similar to the long in a series of undergraduate seminars to which aboitting attempting to impose its pattern on it. Maybe a barter answer could cause it to seek advancement in emulating prominence instead of in acmele "operating". This will not eliminate mediocrity but it will be a premium on reflection and intellectual attainment instead of on Harvard. But it should be possible to devise institutions which place improvement will have to be gradual and what reflect the tradition of that an atmosphere can not be brought about by an act-of-will. Any Youthful memper, etc. Now I am sufficiently a conservative to know "Common" achievements: comes, personal acquaintance with senior wisedom in a sterile and vicious competition for the attainment of atrophy. Unless his isolation can be overcome, energies will be even the most talented graduate student or junior Youthful memper will. Unless intellectual effort can again be infused with a challenge, Junior Youth and an alternation in the system of making appointments attempt to increase the sense of community barterly among the

a few probesels for your consideration: always assume its solution. Nevertheless I should like to advance to the class of Nationalistenes, recognition of a difference does not with those of our whole national sentiment, hardly because contrary remedies are baliwickes only, hardly because the problem is connected more complete than any remedies I might probeels, that may of the handled that my description of the condition will have to remain letter within tolerable pompa. I am moreover antlering under the mentioning some of the compensating leammes, in order to keep this although I learn that it may seem exaggerated. I have deliberately omitted I have said enough, I think, to indicate what the problem is,

all is an indictment of a state of mind which is burdensome, ment only of the person who made it. But that it config be made at think when he agreed with Mac. The barterian remark is an indictment, but this question to me: "Tell me Henry, what did you really diabute", put upon its conclusion one of our colleagues, a junior Youthful

Dean Bumby

- 2 -

June 8, 1954

[A]