“His ignorance seemed to widen with everything he read.” ―from HALF A LIFE (2001) by Nobel Laureate V. S. Naipaul
In a narrative that moves with dreamlike swiftness from India to England to Africa, Nobel Laureate V. S. Naipaul has produced his finest novel to date, a bleakly resonant study of the fraudulent bargains that make up an identity. The son of a Brahmin ascetic and his lower-caste wife, Willie Chandran grows up sensing the hollowness at the core of his father’s self-denial and vowing to live more authentically. That search takes him to the immigrant and literary bohemias of 1950s London, to a facile and unsatisfying career as a writer, and at last to a decaying Portugese colony in East Africa, where he finds a happiness he will then be compelled to betray. Brilliantly orchestrated, at once elegiac and devastating in its portraits of colonial grandeur and pretension, Half a Life represents the pinnacle of Naipaul’s career. READ an excerpt here: https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/…/half-a-life-by-v-s-na…/
John Robert McCloskey(September 14, 1914 – June 30, 2003) was anAmericanwriter and illustrator ofchildren's books. He wrote and also illustrated ninepicture books, and won twoCaldecott Medalsfrom theAmerican Library Associationfor the year's best-illustrated picture book.[1][2]Four of the nine books were set inMaine:Blueberries for Sal,One Morning in Maine,Time of Wonder, andBurt Dow, Deep-water Man; the last three were all set on the coast. His best-known work isMake Way For Ducklings, set in Boston. In longer works, he both wrote and illustratedHomer Priceand he illustratedKeith Robertson'sHenry Reedseries.[a]
オハイオ州ハミルトン生まれ。1932年、ニューヨークのナショナル・アカデミー・オブ・デザインに学ぶ。1942年『かもさんおとおり』（Make Way for Ducklings）でコルデコット賞を受賞。日本では1965年に渡辺茂男が二つ目の翻訳をおこない、ロングセラーとなっている。57年『すばらしいとき』で二度目のコルデコット賞を受賞。妻は児童文学作家ルース・ソーヤー（英語版）の娘。
Ugly as sin, the ugly duckling—or maybe you fell out of the ugly tree? Let’s face it, we’ve all used the word “ugly” to describe someone we’ve seen—hopefully just in our private thoughts—but have we ever considered how slippery the term can be, indicating anything from the slightly unsightly to the… Read More
Polyphemus: ‘A Monster of a Main’ Dame Ragnell: ‘She Was a Loathly One!” A Grotesque Old Woman: ‘The Ugly Duchess’ William Hay: ‘Never Was, Nor Will Be, a Member of the Ugly Club’ Julia Pastrana: ‘The Ugliest Woman in the World’ Orlan: ‘A Beautiful Woman who is Deliberately Becoming Ugly.” Ugly Ones: Uncomfortably Grouped
Two Ugly Groups: Resisting Classification
Monsters and Monstrosities: Bordering Uglies Outcasts and Outward Signs: Signifying Uglies Primitives and Venuses: Colonizing Uglies Broken Faces and Degenerate Bodies: Militarizing Uglies Ugly Laws and Ugly Dolls: Legislating Uglies Uglies United? Commercializing Ugly Groups
Three Ugly Senses: Transgressing Perceived Borders
Ugly Sight: Seeing Is Believing? Ugly Sound: Do You Hear What I Hear? Ugly Smell: A Nose for Trouble? Ugly Taste: Are You What You Eat? Ugly Touch: Do You Touch? Sixth Sense: Feeling is Believing?
Epilogue: Ugly Us: A Cultural Quest?
References Acknowledgements and Photo Acknowledgements Index
Burrhus Frederic Skinner (March 20, 1904 – August 18, 1990), commonly known as B. F. Skinner, was an American psychologist, behaviorist, author, inventor, and social philosopher.[2][3][4][5] He was the Edgar Pierce Professor of Psychology at Harvard University from 1958 until his retirement in 1974 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B._F._Skinner
B. F. Skinner died in Cambridge, Massachusetts on this day in 1990 (aged 86).
“We shouldn't teach great books; we should teach a love of reading. Knowing the contents of a few works of literature is a trivial achievement. Being inclined to go on reading is a great achievement.” ― B.F. Skinner
The basic book about the controversial philosophy known as behaviorism, written by its leading exponent.
Particulars of My Life: Part One of an Autobiography, 1976 The Shaping of a Behaviorist: Part Two of an Autobiography, 1979. A Matter of Consequences: Part Three of an Autobiography, 1983.
****
Psychologist Burrhus Frederic Skinner died in Cambridge, Massachusetts on this day in 1990 (aged 86).
“Compare two people, one of whom has been crippled by an accident, the other by an early environmental history which makes him lazy and, when criticized, mean. Both cause great inconvenience to others, but one dies a martyr, the other a scoundrel.” ―from ABOUT BEHAVIORISM (1974) by B. F. Skinner
In 1912, Gerard and his younger brother Anton Philips converted the business to a corporation by founding NV Philips' Gloeilampenfabrieken.
Anton Frederik Philips (14 March 1874 – 7 October 1951) co-founded Royal Philips Electronics N.V. in 1912 with his older brother Gerard Philips in Eindhoven, the Netherlands. His father and Gerard had founded the Philips Company in 1891 as a family business. Anton Philips served as CEO of the company from 1922 to 1939.
***** Anton Frederik Philips (March 14, 1874, Zaltbommel – October 7, 1951, Eindhoven) co-founded Royal Philips Electronics N.V. in 1891 with his brother Gerard Philips in Eindhoven, the Netherlands. He served as CEO of the company from 1922 to 1939. During World War I, he managed to increase his sales by taking advantage of a boycott of German goods in several countries, providing them with substitute products. He died in Eindhoven in 1951. His father, Benjamin Frederik David Philips (December 1, 1830 – June 12, 1900) was a banker at Zaltbommel in the Netherlands. His mother was Maria Heyligers (1836 – 1921). He was a first cousin of Karl Marx. He married Anne Henriëtte Elisabeth Maria de Jongh (Amersfoort, May 30, 1878 – Eindhoven, March 7, 1970), and had:
Anna Elisabeth Cornelia Philips (June 19, 1899 – ?), married in 1925 with Pieter Franciscus Sylvester Otten (1895 – 1969), and had:
Diek Otten
Frans Otten (d. 1967), manager in the Dutch electronics company Philips
Henriëtte Anna Philips (Eindhoven, October 26, 1906 – ?), married firstly with A. Knappert (d. 1932), without issue, married secondly with G., Jonkheer Sandberg (d. September 5, 1935), without issue, and married thirdly in New York City, New York, on September 29, 1938 with ..., Jonkheer Gerrit van Riemsdijk (Aerdenhout, January 10, 1911 – Eindhoven, November 8, 2005), and had:
..., Jonkheerin Gerrit van Riemsdijk (b. Waalre, October 2, 1939), married at Waalre on February 17, 1968 with Johannes Jasper Tuijt (b. Atjeh, Koeta Radja, March 10, 1930), son of Jacobus Tuijt and wife Hedwig Jager, without issue
..., Jonkheerin Gerrit van Riemsdijk (b. Waalre, April 3, 1946), married firstly at Calvados, Falaise, on June 6, 1974 with Martinus Jan Petrus Vermooten (Utrecht, September 16, 1939 – Falaise, August 29, 1978), son of Martinus Vermooten and wife Anna Pieternella Hendrika Kwantes, without issue, married secondly in Paris on December 12, 1981 with Jean Yves Louis Bedos (Calvados,Rémy, January 9, 1947 – Calvados, Lisieux, October 5, 1982), son of Georges Charles Bedos and wife Henriette Louise Piel, without issue, and married thirdly at Manche, Sartilly, on September 21, 1985 with Arnaud Evain (b. Ardennes, Sedan, July 7, 1952), son of Jean Claude Evain and wife Flore Halleux, without issue
..., Jonkheerin Gerrit van Riemsdijk (b. Waalre, September 4, 1948), married at Waalre, October 28, 1972 with Elie Johan François van Dissel (b. Eindhoven, October 9, 1948), son of Willem Pieter Jacob van Dissel and wife Francisca Frederike Marie Wirtz, without issue
Frits Philips, who has died at the age of 100 from complications after a fall on his estate at Eindhoven, in the southeast Netherlands, spent his whole working life with the great Dutch electrical conglomerate that his uncle had founded as a light-bulb factory. He headed the organisation during the 1960s and became a virtual national institution in Holland, as demonstrated by the celebration of his centenary earlier this year.Eindhoven, still the home of the firm, is a quintessential company town. Its world-class football team, PSV, started as the Philips factory side - the initials stand for Philips Sport Vereniging (association) - and Frits was probably its most passionate supporter. The town boasts a Frits Philips concert centre, and he was one of the founders of its technological university. For his 100th birthday, Eindhoven was renamed after him for the day and the team was temporarily restyled simply Frits. A lavish illustrated biography was published and 100,000 Fritske coins, bearing his likeness, were issued in his honour. Dutch media gave the celebrations blanket coverage. Frederik Jacques Philips, always known as Frits, was born in Eindhoven, where his uncle Gerard had founded a factory to make incandescent lighting, then at the forefront of electrical technology, in 1891. Frits's grandfather put up the capital from his profits as a tobacco and coffee trader, landowner and banker, who financed gas lighting for his local town. Frits's father, Anton, whose only son he was, joined his technically-minded brother a year later as business manager. It was Anton who began the expansion of the Philips company, becoming its chief executive in 1922. Eindhoven mushroomed from a small village to a considerable urban centre as the company grew, reaching a peak of 400,000 employees worldwide 50 years later, before Far East competition forced it to draw in its horns. At the age of 18, Frits began his studies at the internationally respected technical high school in Delft. He gained his doctorate in mechanical engineering in 1929, married Sylvia van Lennep from the minor nobility of The Hague in the same year, and joined the family firm in 1930. He started as a factory engineer and soon became joint manager of the bulb plant. The company survived the economic depression of the early 1930s, and Philips developed a humane concern for the poor and the unemployed, coming under the influence of Frank Buchman, the American evangelist and eventual founder of Moral Rearmament. As scion of a wealthy family, Philips could probably have got out of the Netherlands and avoided the appalling consequences of the German invasion of May 1940. The Dutch surrendered after just five days of fighting, brought to an end by a Nazi threat to use the Luftwaffe against defenceless cities, as demonstrated by the bombing of Rotterdam. But he decided to stay on, hoping to be able to protect his workforce from the Nazis, and even to obstruct their inevitable determination to use the Philips plants for war production. Then, in April 1943, the occupation regime announced that all 300,000 members of the Dutch army of 1940, who had been released after the surrender, would be rounded up and sent to Germany as conscript labour. This led to a spontaneous wave of strikes. Some 18,000 Philips workers at Eindhoven - almost the entire workforce - walked out, along with miners, transport workers, teachers and even farmers, who refused to supply the dairies. For this, Philips was taken hostage for the future compliance of his employees, and spent five months in a concentration camp. The Germans also made him set up and run a camp workshop to be staffed by Jewish prisoners, and Philips made it his business to protect them as far as he could. Of the 469 Jews forced to work there, 382 were alive at the end of the war, a far higher proportion of survivors than of the general Dutch-Jewish population, which was almost wiped out. Israel decorated him with the Yad Vashem medal in 1995. From 1945 onwards, Philips devoted himself to the reconstruction and expansion of the company in South America and Asia, and in many technical innovations. He became president (chief executive) in 1961; on his retirement from the top job in 1971, he became a member of the supervisory board until 1977. He thus had a share in the hard decisions, including making substantial redundancies, that helped the firm to survive fierce competition from east Asia. Despite this disruption, Philips, a much warmer character than the founders of the firm, remained personally popular among employees and in Eindhoven, where he was universally known as "Mr Frits". Today, a somewhat leaner and meaner Royal Philips Electronics has 160,000 employees worldwide and a turnover of more than €30bn, making it Europe's largest electronic and electrical company and a member of the small but formidable club of Dutch multinationals, alongside Royal Dutch-Shell and Unilever. Philips' wife died in 1992. He is survived by three sons and three daughters; another daughter predeceased him. &#'183; Frederik 'Frits' Jacques Philips, industrialist, born April 16 1905; died December 5 2005
萬里兄罹病之初，我建議他寫書出版。因為這是使他投入極有意義的目標，藉以減輕他的悲痛最好的方式，也使他精神生命能在人間延續而感安慰。我建議分三部份：（一）編輯他與雲戀愛的情書及跟他的學生卡羅（Carlo）討論的書信；（二）編寫遊記（附印他所拍的攝影作品精選）；（三）寫一生所思所感及罹病醫治經歷等等。這兩年來，我們透過電郵，有極多書函來往。萬里兄以過人的堅強意志，在病體急速惡化的狀況之下，在老同學與老友鼓勵、協助之下在香港出版了英文原文《Bahn Mai Roo Roy: The Blossom Which Dosen’t Know How To Fade》一書，及正要付梓的這本中文版《不知如何凋謝的花》。至此，很可惜，萬里兄已無力繼續編寫其他著作了。這是我深感遺憾，亦無可奈何的事。
那時他體力雖弱，還能行走，三天裡，除了在田野散步，就是交談。他已不能清楚發音，交談時是他筆寫，我口說。在認為生命短暫的心態下，他最為急切的是要把他和 Air 之間的長達二十年的曲折、堅韌的愛情歷程記錄下來；用他和他的摯友，也是他的博士生卡羅持續討論愛情和文化的書信來陳述他對藝術和愛情的深切體認。在活動能力持續下降之際，雖知來日無多，萬里沒有驚慌和抱怨。他對宇宙本源和個體生命的認知也沒有因而改變。作為他年輕時代的朋友，我不能不承認，對這位素有才華而喜愛思考的大學同學低估了。萬里不只是有才華，他具有的是令人感佩的大勇氣和大智慧。
萬里以他堅強的意志力，用一隻微弱 抖的手寫完這本書，他以與雲和與卡羅的書信為經，對生命與藝術的信念和感悟為緯， 編織成了這本《不知如何凋謝的花（Ba h n Ma i Ro o Roy）》；書名來自一種淡紫色的泰國花，他家附近就有很多。
A brilliant book by Nobel Prize winner Eric R. Kandel, The Age of Insight takes us to Vienna 1900, where leaders in science, medicine, and art began a revolution that changed forever how we think about the human mind��ur conscious and unconscious thoughts and emotions��nd how mind and brain relate to art. � At the turn of the century, Vienna was the cultural capital of Europe. Artists and scientists met in glittering salons, where they freely exchanged ideas that led to revolutionary breakthroughs in psychology, brain science, literature, and art. Kandel takes us into the world of Vienna to trace, in rich and rewarding detail, the ideas and advances made then, and their enduring influence today. � The Vienna School of Medicine led the way with its realization that truth lies hidden beneath the surface. That principle infused Viennese culture and strongly influenced the other pioneers of Vienna 1900. Sigmund Freud shocked the world with his insights into how our everyday unconscious aggressive and erotic desires are repressed and disguised in symbols, dreams, and behavior. Arthur Schnitzler revealed women's unconscious sexuality in his novels through his innovative use of the interior monologue. Gustav Klimt, Oscar Kokoschka, and Egon Schiele created startlingly evocative and honest portraits that expressed unconscious lust, desire, anxiety, and the fear of death. � Kandel tells the story of how these pioneers��reud, Schnitzler, Klimt, Kokoschka, and Schiele��nspired by the Vienna School of Medicine, in turn influenced the founders of the Vienna School of Art History to ask pivotal questions such as What does the viewer bring to a work of art? How does the beholder respond to it? These questions prompted new and ongoing discoveries in psychology and brain biology, leading to revelations about how we see and perceive, how we think and feel, and how we respond to and create works of art. Kandel, one of the leading scientific thinkers of our time, places these five innovators in the context of today's cutting-edge science and gives us a new understanding of the modernist art of Klimt, Kokoschka, and Schiele, as well as the school of thought of Freud and Schnitzler. Reinvigorating the intellectual enquiry that began in Vienna 1900, The Age of Insight is a wonderfully written, superbly researched, and beautifully illustrated book that also provides a foundation for future work in neuroscience and the humanities. It is an extraordinary book from an international leader in neuroscience and intellectual history.
約11年前，就此名著的翻譯者寫的： 「凡是對東京歷史有興趣的人，非看美籍日本文學專家Edward Seidensticker寫的《東京．下町．山手》和《東京起來》兩本書不可。但是，書中一句話，叫我這個老東京非常吃驚。老日本通寫道：東京新宿以西是文化沙漠，既看不到傳統日本文化又找不到西方高級文化，除了酒和色以外，就是一無所有。….. Seidensticker的兩本書在一九八三年以及九二年問世。後來，新宿以西建設了西方高級文化之府幾所：例如，新國立劇場、TOKYO OPERA CITY、府中森藝術劇場等。然而，即使在二十年以前，恐怕大部分東京人不肯同意美國日本通的說法，因為自從二十世紀初，東京的文化前衛始終在新宿以西。 ……」
如果你是＜Simon University＞ 的Seidensticker的忠實讀者，而且記性很好，或許知道此「美國人日本通」是日本文學的名翻譯家，尤其以川端康成作品和＜源氏物語＞（The Tale of Genji ）馳名。我們舉過大江先生的諾貝爾獎演講中對於川端康成標題的歧義之處理。
最近google scholar很方便，你想列舉他的作品，彈指間就完成了（希望再幾年也收入「萬國學者作品總匯」，完成全球化大業）。我這回拜此工具之賜才知道他近年還有一本回憶錄 Tokyo Central: A Memoir (Seattle, Wash.: University of Washington Press, 2002 ) 和論「翻譯技巧」之文收入J Biguenet, R Schulte 主編的The Craft of Translation (Chicago, The University of Chicago Press, 1989)； 論文Chiefly on translating the genji (The Journal of Japanese Studies)。 前google scholar前兩頁標題大要。
日本： Tokyo Rising: The City Since the Great Earthquake - E Seidensticker , Charles E. Tuttle, 1991 《東京起來》【hc：《東京新興起：1923年大地震之後再興記》】
Low City, High City: Tokyo From Edo to the Earthquake, 1867-1923 - E Seidensticke Middlesex, New York: Knopf, 1983 /UK: Penguin, 1985 《東京．下町．山手》
Japan EG Seidensticker Time-Life, 1968 這本不是台灣翻譯的『早期日本』
Tradition and Modernization in Japanese Culture -DH Shively, C Blacker - Princeton University Press, 1971
This Country Japan EG Seidensticker Kodansha, 1984 Showa: The Japan of Hirohito -C Gluck, SR Graubard Norton, 1992 ---- 日本古典文學：【Key Words
The Tale of Genji (Everyman's Library, No.108) Murasaki Shikibu (著), Edward G. Seidensticker (著), Murasaki Shikibu (著) The Tale of Genji (Everyman's Library, No.108)
Genji Days - E Seidensticker New York: Kodansha International, 1983 （翻譯 ＜源氏物語＞日紀感言整理。） 【舉個例，第97頁10月7日周六 整天早上和前午都在翻譯Hotaru…..Yes, the treatment of Genji is distinctly ambiguous, ironical, one might wish to say; and there is an interesting foretaste of Niou. …（foretaste noun [S] 1. 【事】 先嚐,試食;預嚐到的滋味;預示,前兆,徵象）】
The Gossamer Years: A Diary by a Noblewoman of Heian Japan EG Seidensticker -Tuttle, 1964
“There are as many sorts of women as there are women.” ―from "The Tale of Genji" by Murasaki Shikibu
In the early eleventh century Murasaki Shikibu, a lady in the Heian court of Japan, wrote what many consider to be the world’s first novel, more than three centuries before Chaucer. The Heian era (794—1185) is recognized as one of the very greatest periods in Japanese literature, and The Tale of Genji is not only the unquestioned prose masterpiece of that period but also the most lively and absorbing account we have of the intricate, exquisite, highly ordered court culture that made such a masterpiece possible. Genji is the favorite son of the emperor but also a man of dangerously passionate impulses. In his highly refined world, where every dalliance is an act of political consequence, his shifting alliances and secret love affairs create great turmoil and very nearly destroy him. Edward Seidensticker’s translation of Lady Murasaki’s splendid romance has been honored throughout the English-speaking world for its fluency, scholarly depth, and deep literary tact and sensitivity.
Reinhard Bendix (1916 - 1991) was professor of political science at the University of California in Berkeley, where he has been teaching since 1947. Born in Berlin in 1916, Bendix fled the Hitler regime when he was twenty-two, and came to the United States, where he entered the University of Chicago. There he studied sociology and obtained a B.A. in 1941, an M.A. in 1943, and his Ph.D. four years later. In 1970 he was president of the American Sociological Association. Among his numerous books are Work an Authority (1956), Nation-baking and Citizenship (1964), Embattled Reason (1970), and Kinds or People (1980).
Sigmund Freud waited too long. Throughout the 1930s, as the Nazis rose to power in Germany and took ever more aggressive action against the country’s Jews, the father of psychoanalysis had insisted on remaining next door in Austria, where he had lived virtually his entire life. On March 13, 1938, in the so-called Anschluss, Germany annexed Austria. Freud, nearing his 82nd birthday, realized that the prospects for Jews there were dismal indeed and agreed to leave. But by then, as his physician, Max Schur, later wrote, “we had to wait for ‘legal permission.’”
The bureaucratic wheels ground slowly, and the situation in Vienna grew darker by the day. On March 15, the American chargé d’affaires there, John Wiley, sent a message to the State Department, to be passed on to William C. Bullitt, the U.S. ambassador to France: “Fear Freud, despite age and illness, in danger” from the Nazis. A few weeks later, Wiley sent Bullitt a cable that amplified his concern: “The treatment of the Jews has exceeded anything that took place in Germany. It has been an economic pogrom; burglary in uniform.”
Bullitt was looped in because he had a special interest in events in Austria: Freud was his friend, his onetime psychoanalyst and his co-author on what might be the oddest literary project in the Freudian canon.
In the preceding years, Bullitt had kept a watchful eye over the doctor, promising him in 1933 that “if things should become difficult for you in Vienna the same welcome will be awaiting you in America as if I were at home.” Now, five years later, Bullitt, who earned $17,500 a year as ambassador and came from a wealthy Philadelphia family, cabled the American ambassador to Germany that if Freud and his family needed aid, “please render every possible assistance including financial for which I will be responsible.”
Several of Freud’s close relatives left Austria, one by one, as the spring progressed. By early June, Freud, his wife and their daughter Anna were the only ones still in their home. On June 4, they boarded the Orient Express, bound for Paris. When the train pulled into the Gare de l’Est, on the platform to meet it were Freud’s nephew and grandnephew, his good friend Marie Bonaparte and Ambassador Bullitt, dashing in a gray herringbone suit and tan homburg. The doctor and the diplomat walked into the city arm in arm.
**********
If Woody Allen’s film Zelig didn’t exist, we might describe a figure who continually rubs up against famous figures and famous events, without quite becoming famous himself, as a “Bullitt.” Bill Bullitt was voted most brilliant in Yale’s class of 1912 (which included Averell Harriman, Cole Porter and Gerald Murphy), and he covered World War I for the Philadelphia Public Ledger. His work was so impressive that he was appointed assistant secretary of state at the age of 26. In 1919, he led an American mission to assess Soviet Russia. His verdict: “We have seen the future, and it works.” The writer Lincoln Steffens, who accompanied Bullitt on the mission, later claimed the line as his own.
Bullitt sat on the American commission that negotiated the Treaty of Versailles after World War I, but he eventually resigned in protest after President Woodrow Wilson refused to accept his recommendation to recognize the Soviet Union. He sent the president a scathing (and prophetic) letter charging that “our Government has consented now to deliver the suffering peoples of the world to new oppressions, subjections and dismemberments—a new century of war.” His forceful testimony before Congress in September 1919, Janet Flanner wrote in the New Yorker, “was considered to have brought the greatest weight against America’s joining the League” of Nations.
It also ruined, for the time being, Bullitt’s diplomatic career.
In 1923, he married Louise Bryant, the widow of the journalist John Reed (Diane Keaton played her in the 1981 film Reds), and lived with her among the expatriates in Paris. Writing to F. Scott Fitzgerald in 1927, Ernest Hemingway referred to Bullitt as “a big Jew from Yale and a fellow novel writer.” (Bullitt’s mother descended from wealthy German Jews who had converted to the Episcopal Church many years before.) Bullitt’s revenge was that his first and only novel, It’s Not Done, a racy sendup of Philadelphia society, sold 150,000 copies in 24 printings—a far better initial showing than Hemingway’s The Sun Also Rises.
In the mid-’20s, Bullitt appears to have suffered a nervous breakdown of sorts. Bryant wrote to a friend that he “developed the utmost of eccentricities. He would lie in bed and be afraid of anyone coming into the room.” Like many well-to-do Americans in such straits, Bullitt traveled to Vienna to be psychoanalyzed by the great Sigmund Freud. Later Bullitt would claim it was Bryant, not he, who was treated, but Freud on several occasions in his letters describes Bullitt as a patient.
**********
After Bullitt went into treatment, his relationship with Freud deepened fairly quickly into friendship. His characteristic salutation in their warm, intimate correspondence was, “Dear Freud.” According to Freud’s biographers, Bullitt was one of just three people permitted to address him by name, and not as “Herr Doktor.” (The others were H.G. Wells and the French entertainer Yvette Guilbert.) Freud, in turn, closed his letters to Bullitt, “Affectionately yours.”
Given that the two men were different in virtually every way—not least a 35-year age gap—the relationship that developed between them was hardly predictable. But in retrospect it is not shocking. Freud was known for being drawn to charismatic individuals, and that adjective fit Bullitt as well as his suits did. George Kennan, who worked closely with him in the diplomatic corps, observed that “he resolutely refused to permit the life of those around him to degenerate into dullness and dreariness.” Beyond that, however, a specific interest also drew the men together. As another American patient and student of Freud’s, Mark Brunswick, would put it, “Bullitt and Freud fell in love at first sight on the basis of their hatred of Wilson.”
Bullitt’s animosity was so enduring that he wrote a play titled The Tragedy of Woodrow Wilson in the late ’20s. It was, deservedly, never produced, though when the playwright sent Freud a copy, the doctor wrote him back, in English: “I soon was swept away by the passionate rhythm. I enjoyed the thing immensely. I see I was right for trusting your powers as a writer. Take my congratulations for your work.” Freud frequently blamed the American president for the breakup of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. He told a friend, “As far as a single person can be responsible for the misery of this part of the world, he surely is.”
In 1930, the two agreed to collaborate on a Wilson biography, Freud accepting a co-author for the first time since he co-wrote Studies in Hysteria with Josef Breuer in 1895. Bullitt—free to relocate following his divorce from Louise Bryant—started spending large chunks of his time in Vienna.
“I still greatly loved the prison from which I have been released,” Freud (with Marie Bonaparte, left, and William Bullitt, center) wrote of Austria. (Ellen Jane Rogers)
As it happened, their book wouldn’t come out until 1967—28 years after Freud’s death. When it did, Thomas Woodrow Wilson: A Psychological Study outdid Bullitt’s novel for shock and outrage. As the historian Barbara Tuchman put it at the time, Freudians received the book as “something between a forged First Folio and The Protocols of [the Elders of] Zion.”
In the New Republic, the psychiatrist Robert Coles wrote, “The book can either be considered a mischievous and preposterous joke, a sort of caricature of the worst that has come from psychoanalytic dialogues, or else an awful and unrelenting slander upon a remarkably gifted American president.” And in the New York Review of Books, Erik Erikson characterized the work as “Freudulence” and asserted: “For me and others, it is easy to see only that Freud could have ‘written’ almost nothing of what is now presented in print.”
This reaction established the general reputation of Thomas Woodrow Wilson over the past half-century: It has been considered either a complete or partial fraud perpetrated by Bullitt, who affixed Freud’s name to his own didactic and inept application of Freudian principles to his bête noire, Wilson.
But that reputation is wrong—or, at least, a gross caricature of their collaboration. Bullitt’s papers, made available to the public after the death of his daughter in 2007, demonstrate not only that Freud was deeply involved in writing the book, but also that he composed some of the passages that especially provoked the reviewers’ wrath. Further, the papers answer two questions that have always surrounded this bizarre partnership: Why would Freud, who at that point was an eminent figure in Western thought, agree to collaborate with an unemployed journalist and junior diplomat? And why did it take so long to get the book into print?
After Bullitt finished his play—which he dedicated to Freud, “who, because he has acted always with both intellectual integrity and moral courage, is a great pathfinder for humanity”—he decided to write a nonfiction book on the Treaty of Versailles, comprising studies of Wilson and the other main participants. One day in early 1930, Bullitt met Freud in Berlin and described his plans. “Freud’s eyes brightened and he became very much alive,” Bullitt recalled. “Rapidly he asked a number of questions, which I answered. Then he astonished me by saying he would like to collaborate with me in writing the Wilson chapter of the book.”
Bullitt replied—with uncharacteristic modesty—that “to bury” Freud’s contributions in a chapter of a Bullitt book “would be to produce an impossible monstrosity; the part would be greater than the whole.” The two men went back and forth over the next few days and emerged with an agreement: They would collaborate on the entire book, and it would be a psychological study of Wilson.
This classic edition of “The Basic Writings of Sigmund Freud” includes complete texts of six works that have profoundly influenced our understanding of human behavior.
It’s easy to see why Bullitt would be so attracted to this undertaking. It’s less immediately obvious why Freud would go for it. But he had his reasons.
Bullitt recalled that when they met in Berlin, Freud was “depressed. Somberly he said that he had not long to live and that his death would be unimportant to him or to anyone else, because he had written everything he wished to write and his mind was emptied.” Bullitt was prone to hyperbole, so Freud may not have said those exact words, but he was certainly at a low point. Seven years earlier, he had been diagnosed with cancer of the jaw, and in addition to radiation treatments and several operations, he had to contend with an uncomfortable metal prosthesis, which he called “the Monster,” that essentially replaced the roof of his mouth. In fact, he happened to be in Berlin for readjustment of the Monster, undergoing hours of fittings every day for several weeks. Beyond that, over the previous decade he had experienced the deaths of a cherished grandson and other family members, as well as the defections of several disciples, including Carl Jung, Alfred Adler and Otto Rank.
Freud also needed money, especially for his struggling publishing company, the Verlag. Given Bullitt’s track record with It’s Not Done and the still-intense interest in Wilson and his legacy, Freud likely imagined the book as a potential best seller. Leaving aside his fondness for Bullitt, the man was a rich American, and Freud had a tendency to see his patients from across the ocean primarily as sources of income. As he once remarked to his Welsh disciple Ernest Jones, “What is the use of Americans, if they bring no money? They are not good for anything else.”
In any case, the men quickly agreed to embark on the Wilson project. On October 26, 1930, Bullitt wrote to his friend and mentor Edward House, “Tomorrow, F and I go to work.” Three days later, Freud made a three-word entry in his diary: “Work taken up.”
Anna Freud recalled that the two men met during the evenings in a secretive, almost conspiratorial manner. Bullitt’s diary gives a vivid sense of the texture of those evenings, as in these entries (never previously published), written after two of their early meetings:
Saw Freud this evening at 6. He was seated in his study at his desk, dressed in pajamas & a dressing gown. He jumped up and seemed genuinely glad to see me. He looked well—eyes sparkling—but he told me he was just recovering from an attack of pneumonia. It was the first time he had been out of bed...he had seen no one but his family for some weeks. “I think I recovered more quickly,” he said, “because I wanted so much to see you and the material you have brought.”
...He said: “I hope one result of the publication of this book will be your re-introduction to politics.” I told him I hoped it might be. “That is really, I think, my chief reason for wanting to write it,” he said, “my affection for you is very great.” Then he laughed & added: “But my dislike of Wilson is almost as great as my liking for you.”
Freud (sculpture at right) collected antiquities (left) as primal expressions of the human mind. (Ellen Jane Rogers)
Eleven days later, Bullitt recorded this exchange:
While working today with Freud, he said—“You and I know that Wilson was a passive homosexual but we won’t dare say it.”
I said “Certainly we’ll say it but subtly.”
Freud answered: “That’s the equivalent of not saying it at all.”
The division of labor worked out this way: Bullitt wrote what turned out to be a 30-page account of Wilson’s early life. Freud wrote an introduction and Chapter 1, which set out some of the principles of psychoanalysis as they applied to Wilson. And Bullitt composed the remaining 33 chapters, sending them to Freud for his editorial notes and eventual approval. And approve he did. In September 1931, after Bullitt sent on a draft of the entire book, Freud responded: “While I made many changes to the general section and rewrote the whole in German, I found in the specifics, when you turn to W himself, very little, and from page 43 on absolutely nothing, that would have required my intervention. It really has been done excellently.”
That first chapter by Freud—preserved in the Bullitt Papers in 24 pages of his German Gothic script—contains many of the sort of passages that drew the reviewers’ scorn, as when he wrote: “The introduction of the superego of course does not resolve all the difficulties associated with the Oedipus complex, but it does provide a location for a certain part of the libido flow, which originally appeared as activity toward the father.”
Bullitt’s sections, by contrast, while marred by the occasional psychoanalytic jargon and reductiveness, more often show, in vigorous prose, the fruit of his extensive research and his personal history with Wilson and many of the other characters. Here is Bullitt on the first meeting between Wilson and House, who would serve as the president’s primary adviser on European affairs during and after World War I:
After looking for the first time through Wilson’s eyeglasses at his pale gray eyes, House told a friend that the time would surely come when Wilson would turn on him and throw him on the scrap heap. This did not disturb House. He was happy to use his power so long as it might last. He soon learned that Wilson did not like open opposition but that he could make a suggestion to Wilson, drop the matter if Wilson disapproved, and remake the suggestion a few weeks later in a slightly different form and be reasonably sure that Wilson would answer him in the words of the first suggestion.
And on the Paris Peace Conference in 1919, which Bullitt attended:
On June 10, he [Wilson] refused to sit again for the portrait that Sir William Orpen was painting of him because Orpen had drawn his ears as large and protuberant as they actually were, and he was persuaded to sit again only by the promise that the ears should be reduced to less grotesque dimensions. They were.
In January 1932, the writing partners signed a contract stipulating that Bullitt would receive two-thirds of any royalties on the book and Freud one-third. At the same time, Bullitt gave his co-author an advance of $2,500—more than $40,000 in today’s money, and a substantial sum in the depths of the Depression. “The book is at last finished,” Bullitt wrote to House in April, “that is to say the last chapter has been written and it could be published if both F. and I were to die tonight.”
But no publication plan ensued. In December 1933, Freud complained to Marie Bonaparte (who was the great-granddaughter of Napoleon’s younger brother, Lucien): “From Bullitt no direct news. Our book will never see the light of day.”
Why the holdup? According to Bullitt’s account, in the spring of 1932, Freud made changes in the text and wrote “a number of new passages to which I objected. After several arguments we decided to forget the book, and to attempt then to agree. When we met, we continued to disagree.”
Evidence in Bullitt’s papers suggests that he rejected a number of Freud’s passages, all of which might be perceived as unfounded and indecent. He jettisoned speculation that Wilson masturbated excessively and had a castration complex, and he nixed a passage in which Freud directly links Christianity with homosexuality. Bullitt’s foreword to the finished book suggests that that may have been a particular sticking point. In comparing their personalities, he wrote, “Both Freud and I were stubborn, and our beliefs were dissimilar. He was a Jew who had become an agnostic. I have always been a believing Christian.”
Another reason for the delay in publication—and perhaps the most important—had to do with politics. With the nomination of Franklin D. Roosevelt for president in 1932, Bullitt’s banishment appeared to be coming to an end. House, a Democratic power broker, wrote him, “I should like to see you play a great part in foreign affairs during the next administration, and there is no reason why you should not do so provided our crowd is successful.” It obviously wouldn’t do to come out with a book that portrayed the last Democratic president as a homosexual with a killer Oedipus complex. Freud predicted to a friend that the book would never be issued “as long as a Democratic administration was in office.”
The remark was prophetic. Roosevelt appointed Bullitt as the first U.S. ambassador to the Soviet Union in 1933, and as ambassador to France in 1936. After helping Freud escape from Austria in 1938 and settle in London, Bullitt visited him there and, he wrote, “was delighted when he agreed to eliminate the additions he had written at the last minute, and we were both happy that we found no difficulty in agreeing on certain changes in the text.”
Freud’s amenability was hardly surprising; Bullitt had helped rescue him and his family from the Nazis. But even then the book was not offered to publishers. The reason, Bullitt wrote in his foreword, was that it would not be proper to put out such a lacerating portrait while Wilson’s second wife, Edith, was still alive.
Both men signed the last page of each chapter, and Bullitt ordered a hand-tooled leather folder into which to put the manuscript, with Freud’s initials engraved on the front. The doctor died the following year, 1939. Bullitt’s diplomatic career reached its apex in 1940: After the Germans occupied Paris, he was the last ambassador to remain in the city, and served for a time as its de facto mayor.
Then Bullitt made a dire political miscalculation. Later in 1940, a State Department rival of his, Undersecretary Sumner Welles, sexually propositioned a male railroad porter. Bullitt presented this information to Roosevelt, hoping to torpedo Welles’ career. Instead, FDR remained loyal to Welles and effectively blackballed Bullitt from government service.
Bullitt spent the rest of his life writing and speaking, most often about the dangers of Communism—like many young leftists, he took a hard rightward turn later in life. Meanwhile, the Wilson book remained in its leather case.
In 1946, for reasons Bullitt never publicly discussed, he transferred ownership of the manuscript to his daughter, Anne. That’s how matters stood until 1965, when Bullitt, now pushing 75, wrote a letter to Henry A. Laughlin, recently retired as chairman of the board of the Houghton Mifflin publishing company, saying she had deeded the manuscript back to him. Edith Wilson had died four years earlier, and Bullitt no longer had a political career to protect. He offered the manuscript to Laughlin, who accepted.
Fortunately, Bullitt, like his co-author, would never know how Thomas Woodrow Wilson was received. He had had leukemia for years, and it reached a terminal stage just as the book was published. He died on February 15, 1967.
At the time, Freud’s reputation in the United States was at its high-water mark. Philosophically, he was considered one of the troika of modern thinkers—along with Darwin and Einstein—who had upended traditional notions of man and the world. Medically, his ideas ruled: In a 1966 survey, three-quarters of American psychiatrists reported using psychoanalytic methods. It is little wonder the Wilson book’s faults were laid at Bullitt’s feet.
But the book’s critical reception hinted at things to come for Freud. Gradually, then swiftly, medication overtook talk therapy as the dominant mode of psychiatric treatment. And Freud’s ideas took hit after hit, including multiple revelations that he had fudged or misrepresented his findings.
Bullitt’s reputation, meanwhile, dropped from minimal to nil. Perhaps the discovery that he did not, in fact, write the worst passages in the book—that his contributions offer useful observations on the thinking and behavior of the 28th president—will help draw this 20th-century Zelig out of the shadows.
Read more: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/what-drove-sigmund-freud-write-scandalous-biography-woodrow-wilson-180970042/#IcplaEyrjZhi4770.99 Give the gift of Smithsonian magazine for only $12! http://bit.ly/1cGUiGv Follow us: @SmithsonianMag on Twitter
Gerald Marvin Weinberg (October 27, 1933 – August 7, 2018) was an American computer .... Jerry Weinberg's own website · Gerald M. Weinberg at the Internet ...
Gerald M. Weinberg (October 27, 1933 – August 7, 2018) was an American computer scientist, author and ... Gerald M. Weinberg (1992) cited in: Hannes P. Lubich (1995) Towards a CSCW Framework for .... Jerry Weinberg's own website.
Hanching Chung經濟新潮社與傑拉爾德‧溫伯格（Gerald M. Weinberg )真有緣。謝謝將他引進來。
Aug 22 Wed 2018 19:25軟體管理學權威傑拉爾德‧溫伯格（ Gerald M. "Jerry" Weinberg）過世傑拉爾德‧溫伯格（ Gerald M. "Jerry" Weinberg，1933年10月27日~ 2018年8月7日） 圖片來源 http://www.geraldmweinberg.com/Site/Home.html 感謝網友告知，我們的作者，永遠的軟體開發專家、顧問、著作等身的作者，傑拉爾德‧溫伯格（Gerald M. Weinberg, 1933~2018），2018年8月7日過世了，享年84歲。 他所留下的智慧遺產，不光是給軟工、程式設計師，也是給予我們芸芸眾生，在繁複的工作生活中浮沉的人，一點慰藉與釋懷，與一大堆幽默。有你在真好！溫伯伯。 我們也會記得Dani Weinberg，以及您們的狗狗。 這項消息第一報是 Sue Petersen 徵得溫伯格夫人 Dani Weinberg 同意後，報喪如下。.....溫伯格是美國軟體工程界最著名的人士之一。他曾任職於IBM、Ethnotech、水星計畫（美國第一個載人太空計畫），並曾任教於多所大學。他更是傑出的軟體專業作家和軟體管理思想家，因對技術問題與人性問題所提出的創新思考法而為世人所推崇。
1997年，溫伯格因其在軟體領域的傑出貢獻，入選為美國計算機博物館的「計算機名人堂」（Computer Hall of Fame）成員。他也榮獲J.-D. Warnier獎項中的「資訊科學類卓越獎」，此獎每年一度頒發給在資訊科學領域對理論與實際應用有傑出貢獻的人士。
Keynes—who was born on June 5th 1883—deserves to be remembered for much else besides his economic works. In addition to being an economist, the great man was also a boy genius, a civil servant, a national opinion-shaper, a lover, a connoisseur and aesthete, and a statesman
"If someone as economically literate and well-connected as Keynes found it difficult to time currencies, then the rest of us should think twice before believing we can do any better."
John Maynard Keynes struggled as a foreign-exchange trader, finds the…
CAM.AC.UK
Economic history A Keynes for all seasons
Nov 26th 2013, 13:30 by C.R.
IN THE years since the publication in 1936 of "The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money", John Maynard Keynes’s name has been irretrievably linked to the idea that fiscal stimulus should be used to combat recession during downturns. Such ideas came to dominate economics in the 30 years after the second world war, so much so that Republican president Richard Nixon declared in 1971 that “we are all Keynesians now”.
Although Keynes’s ideas went out of favour in the 1980s and 1990s, they came back into fashion as the financial crisis of 2007-09 unfolded. The use of fiscal stimulus to fight recessions in America, Britain and Asia led Keynes’s most prominent biographer, Robert Skidelsky, to declare the “return of the master”. Keynes's notoriety among the public rose so much that a hip-hop video of him arguing the merits of fiscal stimulus with his rival, F. A. Hayek, went viral on YouTube back in 2010.
But whether Keynes’s ideas were ever as simple or consistent as some modern-day Keynesian economists suggest is a matter of great contention. The Economist noted as long ago as the 1960s that the ideas of Keynes the man were diverging from contemporary Keynesian economics. While Keynes emphasised austerity in the good times as much as stimulus in the bad, many Keynesians considered stimulus a “one-way road” in the 1960s and 1970s. As Keynes himself wrote in 1937: “The boom, not the slump, is the right time for austerity at the Treasury.”
Even during his lifetime he was concerned that some people were accepting the conclusions of the "General Theory" too uncritically. In 1940, A.C. Pigou, one of the examiners of the Economics Tripos at Cambridge University that year, wrote to Keynes to complain that both staff and students were taking much of his work too literally:
The chief bad thing we found was that a very large number of people had been stuffed like sausages with bits of your stuff in such a way that (1) they were quite incapable of applying their own intelligence to it, and (2) they perpetually dragged it in regardless of its relevance to the question… the parrot-like treatment of your stuff is due to the lectures and supervision of the beautiful Mrs [Joan] R[obinson]—a magpie breeding innumerable parrots.
To the modern reader, the "General Theory" can appear very much a book of its time. It was written in a world facing very different problems from those of today. Keynes developed the theoretical ideas in his work to justify running a budget deficit of just 3% of GDP during recessions in a Britain where the state only accounted for around 25% of the economy. Today’s situation seems a world away in comparison. Peacetime deficits reached 13% of GDP in America in 2009, and in Denmark, Belgium and France, taxation approaches nearly 50% of GDP.
Even Keynes himself, by the end of the second world war, was considering writing a new book to correct and develop much of what he was unsatisfied with in the "General Theory". But due to his untimely death it was Joan Robinson who extended Keynsianism into the future, giving it a left-wing tinge by mixing it with the ideas of Karl Marx in her book "The Accumulation of Capital".
This has confused impressions of what Keynes's ideas were, but even with this overlay removed they are hard to pin down. A perusal of his work in the interwar years makes Keynes, on the surface, look like a very inconsistent thinker. He appears to have supported deflationary policies in the early 1920s and then inflationary ones in the 1930s. He spent most of his life as a free-trade campaigner, only to perform a volte-face in 1930 to support tariffs and then aggressively defend Britain’s use of them against America in the second world war. And he changed his mind many times about other issues too; for example, on the use of capital levies and controls.
But one theme does emerge unscathed throughout his work: a search for macroeconomic stability. According to Mr Skidelsky at Warwick University, much of Keynes’s work was motivated by a desire to return to the stability and growth of the pre-1914 period that had been shattered by the first world war. Although the workings of the Victorian and Edwardian gold standard did a good job of this, they had broken down by 1919.
Keynes’s work in the interwar period was in many ways a reaction to the chaos of the times. "A Tract on Monetary Reform" (1923) attacked policies which caused excessive inflation or deflation in an economy. "The Economic Consequences of Mr Churchill" (1925) critically reviewed the wisdom of Britain’s return to the gold standard at an arbitrary fixed rate of exchange. Once freed from the shackles of gold, stimulus policy became an available tool for stabilising GDP during recessions—as he explored in "A Treatise on Money" (1930) and the "General Theory" (1936). All these works share one underlying feature—the idea that the internal stability of an economy (of prices and unemployment) should be prioritised above abstract principles that were directed at maintaining external stability (of exchange rates or the free movement of capital, for instance) at all costs.
Keynes was more of an empiricist, at heart, than his critics have claimed. He did not consider himself tied down to any particular economic creed. For instance, he pointed out that the most effective and appropriate economic theory for a particular period changes, because the structure of the world economy mutates and evolves over time far more quickly than, say, the natural world and its systems:
Economics is a science of thinking in terms of models joined to the art of choosing models which are relevant to the contemporary world. It is compelled to be this, because, unlike the typical natural science, the material to which it is applied is, in too many respects, not homogeneous through time…Good economists are scarce because the gift for using "vigilant observation" to choose good models, although it does not require a highly specialised intellectual technique, appears to be a very rare one.
So, can Keynes’s seemingly contradictory views on economics can provide a message to policy-makers of the future? Perhaps they can contribute more to a general outlook on the dismal science rather the advocacy of any particular policy tool in its own right. As Cambridge University oral tradition claims he often used to say when retorting to criticism of his latest ideas: “When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?”
You can read The Economist's obituary of John Maynard Keynes, from 1946, here.
Suggested reading:
R. Harrod, (1951). "The Life of John Maynard Keynes". London: Macmillan.
D. E. Moggridge, (1995). "Maynard Keynes: An Economist’s Biography". London: Routledge.
R. Skidelsky, (2010). "Keynes: A Very Short Introduction". Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Selected Keynes bibliography:
J. M. Keynes, (1919). "The Economic Consequences of the Peace". London: Macmillan.
J. M. Keynes, (1923). "A Tract on Monetary Reform". London: Macmillan.
J. M. Keynes, (1930). "A Treatise on Money". London: Macmillan.
J. M. Keynes, (1931). "Essays in Persuasion". London: Macmillan [includes “The Economic Consequences of Mr Churchill” (1925), “The Economic Possibilities of our grandchildren” (1930) and “Proposals for a Revenue Tariff” (1931)].
J. M. Keynes, (1936). "The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money". London: Macmillan.
J. M. Keynes, (1940). "How to pay for the war: A radical plan for the Chancellor of the Exchequer". London: Macmillan.
约翰·梅纳德·凯恩斯（John Maynard Keynes， 1883年6月5日 - 1946年4月21日），英国经济学家。 凯恩斯可谓经济学界最具影响的人物之一。他的发表于1936年的主要作品《就业、利息和货币通论》引起了经济学的革命。这部作品对人们对经济学和政权在社会生活中作用的看法产生了深远的影响。 除《通论》外，凯恩斯另外两部重要的经济理论著作是《货币论》（A Tract on Monetary Reform 1923）和《货币论》（A Treatise on Money, 1930）。这两部著作是其研究货币理论的代表作，但均未能脱出古典货币数量论的窠臼。
Exploring the scientist’s interest in alchemy, theology and eschatology
THE-TLS.CO.UK The oddness of Isaac Newton One of the shocks of reading Rob Iliffe’s study of Isaac Newton is that its subject fancied himself as something very much like a mujaddid
What It Takes to Build a $100 Million Art Collection
Investors can learn a lesson in portfolio diversification from the collecting career of John Maynard Keynes
By
Jason Zweig
A hundred years ago this week, the most influential economist of the 20th century began assembling what became one of the best collections of modern art then in private hands. Every investor hoping to diversify a conventional portfolio with nontraditional assets can learn from the collecting career of John Maynard Keynes (1883-1946). Wealthy investors often […]
この画像を表示
3点すべてのイメージを見る
See this image
