To Rosemary Arnold (21 August 1953)

My dear Rosemary,

Thank you for your warm personal response, however negative it may appear on the mater itself. I shall not fail to do my share and to continue to make an utmost effort to understand, even if I cannot ye see my way to it. I beg you to note my words carefully.

I am grateful to you for the kind intention of your words, for I do know you well enough to take them at their full value. My letter was not so much an appeal to our friendship, Rosemary, but rather an attempt to rescue our friendship, should the intended institutional co-operation in the new phase of my work come to nought even before it is really started, and that on account of your incomprehensible decision. In case this could not be avoided, it need not affect our co-operation outside the new Project, and that is why our friendship for the sake of our broader intent, can and should continue. The Dahomey work certainly will continue. The new project, being the successor of the old, safeguards that. But it would be, you will agree, a damned tragedy on all couts if matters came to that without any grave, compelling reason.

You should, I think, as a first step help me to understand why it is, as you wrote in your brief note, “physically impossible” for you to do “anything” further on Dahomey, i.e., not even a briefer version of the work you so enthusiastically subscribed to in May? Your lines how, that you somehow assume that I know, or should know, while, as a matter of fact, I do not. I am completely in the dark about the reasons which, as it appears, sometime at the end of June made you completely change your mind on a matter of such gravity. I do not ask for details. Should the crises in your personal affairs have aggravated; should outside factors have produced circumstances “beyond our control”, as you wrote or should other developments have occurred which would explain such an utterly extreme course, tell me in general terms what you have in mind so I can at least start thinking about it.

But please do not take it for granted that I would then, necessarily agree with you on your conclusions. My present position puts on me the moral duty of doing all in my power to continue the work that I have initiated. That is the meaning of the Ford award, given to Arensberg and myself, the purpose for which I have entrusted with full responsibility in selecting my subjects and personnel. On Dahomey therefore the transcending interest is the safeguarding of the work already done: the research material in toto and the most valuable interim results must not be lost. In case of a transference of the work there is, then, the necessity for a discussion of the state of the work - material and drafts - in the light of our plans of May last. From this it should emerge what is still to be written up. For the purposes of this write-up brief reasoned outlines of the remaining parts are needed. Such outlines are a requirement of an orderly handing over of this comprehensive piece of research, carried on over years. On this, I am afraid, I would have to insist. You will understand that before entering upon a new stage in which to consolidate what I regard as my life's work, I must consider my total responsibilities.

Some of which I spelt out in this letter concerning the Interdisciplinary Project you may not, so far, have realized. I can not doubt that once you have pondered the discipline which, for better or worse, the new Project imposes on all of us, as I have done myself, you will agree that some of your ideas were wholly out of touch with reality.

So I very much hope that you will decide to stay with the Project as Executive Secretary for 1953/54; in any case a personal meeting here of two or three days' duration should be arranged at your earliest convenience to make the necessary arrangements for either alternative (any date would suit my wife and myself equally).

It was a great pleasure to me how frankly and finely you responded to the call of friendship. This time for common sense and common duty. Again I am confident of your response.

As ever,

Correspondence

< Rosemary Arnold's letter: 18 August 1953 | Rosemary Arnold's response: 25 August 1953 >

Letter Informations

KPA: 49/02, 36-37