资治通鉴2-49

conclusively that I did not have cancer. But what did I have? And so the testsat home and abroad 555continued and I continued to have to live on baby’s food and other suchpabulum.Since that time I have made several journeys abroad, though none so longas that to Pugwash. I ?ght shy of longer journeys partly because I fear if I goto one country people in other countries who have pressed me to go therewill be a?ronted. The only way around this, for one who is not an o?cialpersonage, is to renounce distant travels. In 1958, however, I journeyed to aPugwash conference in Austria. I stayed on after the meetings and, with mywife, made a journey by motor car. We drove along the Danube to Durnsteinwhich I had wished to see ever since my boyhood delight in Richard Coeurde Lion. I was greatly impressed by the magni?cent bleak grandeur of Melkon its blu? about the river and by the beauty of its library. Then we drove in alarge circle through the mountains back to Vienna. The air was delicious andspicy. It seemed like a journey into the story books of my youth, both in thecountryside, which is that of fairy books, and in the kindness and simplicityand gaiety of the people. Above one little village there was a great lime treewhere the villagers gathered to gossip of an evening and on Sunday. It was amagical tree in a magical meadow, calm and sweet and full of peace. Once,as we drove along a narrow lane beside a dashing stream at the foot ofa mountain, we were held up by a landslide. Great trunks of ?r trees werepiled up across the road. We stopped, wondering how to turn or to pass it.Suddenly, men and women appeared, as if sprung from the ground, from thenearby farms and set to work, laughing and joking, to move the obstruction.In a trice, it seemed to me, the road was free and we were being waved on bysmiling people.But to return to Pugwash – I was kept in close touch by letter and tele-phone with the proceedings of the ?rst conference and was pleased withwhat I heard. We had decided that not only physicists but biological andsocial scientists should be invited to attend. There were twenty-two par-ticipants in all – from the United States, the Soviet Union, China, Poland,Australia, Austria, Canada, France, Great Britain, and Japan. The meetingswere carried on in both English and Russian. It pleased me especially that itshowed that real co-operation such as we had hoped, could be achievedamong scientists of extremely divergent ‘ideologies’ and apparently opposingscienti?c as well as other views.The conference was called the Pugwash Conference of Scientists and forthe sake of continuity the movement has continued to be identi?ed by thename Pugwash. It established among other things a ‘Continuing Committee’of ?ve members of which I was the Chairman to organise further confer-ences. More important, it established a form that future conferences followed.A number of plenary meetings were held at which important papers wereread. There were a greater number of meetings of the small committees setthe autobiography of bertrand russell 556up at the start, at which particular aspects of the general subjects were dis-cussed and decided. Most important of all, it was held in an atmosphereof friendliness. Perhaps the unique characteristic of this and subsequentPugwash Conferences was the fact that the members consorted with eachother in their spare time as well as during the scheduled meetings and grewto know each other as human beings rather than merely as scientists of this orthat potentially inimical belief or nation. This most important characteristicwas in large part made possible by the astute understanding by Cyrus Eatonof the situation and what we wished to accomplish and by his tactfulhospitality.As I was not present, I shall not attempt to describe in detail the action or?ndings of this or any of the other conferences. Professor Rotblat compiledan excellent and comprehensive history of this and the following seven con-ferences that were held up to the time of its publication in 1962. Su?ce it tosay here, that there were three committees at the ?rst conference: (1) on thehazards arising from the use of atomic energy; (2) on the control of nuclearweapons, which outlined the general objectives of disarmament which sub-sequent conferences discussed in detail; and (3) on the social responsibilitiesof scientists. The ?ndings of the ?rst, as Professor Rotblat points out, probablycomprise the ?rst agreement reached between scientists of East and West onthe e?ects of nuclear tests. The third committee summarised its ?ndings ineleven items of common belief which became, little more than a year later,the basis of what is known as the ‘Vienna Declaration’. This ?rst Pugwashconference published a statement that was formally endorsed by the SovietAcademy of Sciences and warmly welcomed in China, but less publicised andmore slowly in the West.The Continuing Committee ?rst met in London in December, 1957, anda further and similar conference, again made possible by Cyrus Eaton, washeld at Lac Beauport in Canada in the spring of 1958. Then came a moreambitious endeavour: a large conference in September, 1958, at Kitzbühel inAustria. It was made possible through the good o?ces of Professor HansThirring, under the auspices of the Theodor-Koerner Foundation. It wasfollowed by meetings held in Vienna. At the former conferences no press orobservers had been permitted to attend. At this third conference not onlywere observers present but they included members of the families of theparticipants. At the great meetings at Vienna the press was in evidence. At themeeting in the Austrian Academy of Sciences on the morning of September20th the Vienna Declaration was promulgated. It was a statement that hadbeen accepted with only one abstention by all the members of the conferenceat Kitzbühel and it forms, as Professor Rotblat has said, the credo of the Pug-wash movement. It is too long to be included here, but may be found in hishistory. The meeting was opened by the President of Austria, Dr Adolf Schaef,at home and abroad 557for the conference had been given a very generous welcome by the AustrianState. Amongst others of both East and West I spoke in my capacity of presi-dent of the movement and chairman of the Continuing Committee. It seemedto me an impressive and unforgettable formal occasion. In my speech Irecalled my grandfather’s speech at a Congress (also in Vienna) during theCrimean War in which he spoke in favour of peace, but was overruled.Following the great meeting, we attended the President’s lunch in the AlterHof. Then came an important meeting when ten of the participants in theconference addressed ten thousand people at the Wiener Stadthalle – but thisI could not attend.The most obvious achievement of the Pugwash movement has been theconclusion, for which it was largely responsible, of the partial Testban Treatywhich forbade nuclear tests above ground in peace time. I, personally, wasnot and am not happy about this partial ban. It seems to me to be, as I shouldexpect it to be, a soother of consciences and fears that should not be soothed.At the same time, it is only a slight mitigation of the dangers to which weare all exposed. It seemed to me more likely to be a hindrance than a helptowards obtaining the desired total ban. Nevertheless, it showed that Eastand West could work together to obtain what they wished to obtain andthat the Pugwash movement could be e?ective when and where it desired tobe. It was rather a give-away of the bona ?des of the various ‘DisarmamentConferences’ whose doings we have watched with some scepticism for agood many years.The Pugwash movement now seems to be ?rmly established and partof the respectable progress of scienti?c relations with international a?airs.I myself have had little to do directly with its progress in the last years.My interest turned to new plans towards persuading peoples and Govern-ments to banish war and in particular weapons of mass extermination,?rst of all nuclear weapons. In the course of these fresh endeavours, I feltthat I had become rather disreputable in the eyes of the more conservativescientists. The Pugwash movement held a great meeting of scientists fromall over the world in London in September, 1962. I was to speak aboutthe founding of the movement and I warned my friends that I might behissed – as I was fully convinced that I should be. I was deeply touchedby being given a standing ovation when I rose to speak which included,I was told, all the participants, all, that is, save Lord Hailsham. He was pres-ent in his capacity as the Queen’s Minister of Science. He was personally, Ithink, friendly enough to me, but, weighed down by o?ce, he sat tight. Thatwas the last occasion on which I have taken public part in a Pugwashconference.the autobiography of bertrand russell 558LETTERSFrom Bernard BerensonI TattiSettignanoFlorenceMarch 29, 1945Dear BertieMary died the 23d, & as I know that she remained very fond of you to theend, I wish you to hear of her end. It was a liberation, for she su?ereddistressingly, & increasingly in recent years.Not many months ago, I read out to her yr. article in Horizon about America.It delighted her & me as well.Of other publications of yours we have seen nothing in years. We havebeen cut o? from the Western World for a good ?ve years. I learned withpleasure that you had returned to your Cambridge & to Trinity. It makes mebelieve that we may meet again some day. It will have to be here, as I doubtwhether I shall get to England soon.You must have a grown up son by now. What of him?With a?ectionate remembrance.Sincerely yoursB.B.Hotel Europa e BritanniaVeneziaJune 1, 54 till JulyDear BertieI hear from Mrs Sprigge that you would like to revisit I Tatti. It wouldgive me real pleasure to see you again, and your wife whom I remember.I propose your coming for ten days or a fortnight at any time betweenDec. I and April I. The other months we are either away or too crowded &I want you to myself. For many years I have been reading what youpublished about things human, feeling as if nobody else spoke for me asyou do.Do not delay, for in these weeks I shall be reaching my 90th year & le GrandPeut-être may want me any day.With a?ectionate remembrance.Ever yrsB.B.at home and abroad 559I TattiSettignanoFlorenceJuly 12 ’54Dear BertieThank you for Nightmares. I have enjoyed yr. wit, your evocation, yourGalgenhumors. Continuez!Yes, any time between Jan. 10 & March 1 would suit me best. I should behappy if you could stay a fortnight.Sincerely yoursB.B.P.S. Later, you will give me precise dates. B.B.I TattiSettignanoFlorenceNov. 16, ’54Dear BertieYour note of the 12th grieves me. I looked forward to seeing you, thelast of my near-contemporaries, & one with whom I have so much incommon.Unless work chains you to London you could carry it on at least as wellhere as at home. I never see guests except at meals, or if they want to join mein my now so short walks.If Jan. 15–March 15 are impossible is there another time that would suityou better.Could you come in the summer? We three are at Vallombrosa in a paradisebut rustic, & far less roomy & comfy.Incline yr. heart toward my proposal.SincerelyB.B.P.S. I never shall cross the Alps again. London, Paris, New York etc. are far, fartoo tiring for me now.Saniet Volpi-TripoliMay 8, 55Dear BertieOf course I knew you were in Rome, & I had a faint hope that you might?nd time to spend a day or two with me in Florence. I was disappointed thatyou could not make it.Let me urge you again to come for a fortnight or so any time between Nov.15 & March 15, preferably Jan. 15 to March 15. You could work as well as atthe autobiography of bertrand russell 560home for I never see guests except at meals & evenings – if they care to keepme company after dinner.It would be a joy to live over the remembered days of so long ago. Of yourwife too I retain pleasant remembrance & should be happy to renew ouracquaintance.Do you really hope that disaster can be averted? I fear experiments can notbe avoided, & damn the consequences.Sincerely yrs.B.B.I wrote the following soon after going to live in Richmond in the house which I shared with myson and his family.May 12th, 1950I have been walking alone in the garden of Pembroke Lodge, and it hasproduced a mood of almost unbearable melancholy. The Government isdoing great works, all bad. Half the garden is incredibly lovely: a mass ofazaleas and bluebells and narcissus and blossoming may trees. This half theyhave carefully fenced in with barbed wire (I crawled through it), for fear thepublic should enjoy it. It was incredibly like Blake’s Garden of Love, exceptthat the ‘priests’ were bureaucrats.I su?er also from entering into the lives of John and Susan. They were bornafter 1914, and are therefore incapable of happiness. Their three children arelovely: I love them and they like me. But the parents live their separate lives, inseparate prisons of nightmare and despair. Not on the surface; on the surfacethey are happy. But beneath the surface John lives in suspicious solitude,unable to believe that anyone can be trusted, and Susan is driven beyondendurance by sharp stabs of sudden agony from contemplation of this dread-ful world. She ?nds relief in writing poetry, but he has no relief. I see that theirmarriage will break up, and that neither will ever ?nd happiness or peace. Atmoments I can shut out this terrifying intuitive knowledge, but I love themboth too much to keep on thinking about them on a level of mundane com-mon sense. If I had not the horrible Cassandra gift of foreseeing tragedy, Icould be happy here, on a surface level. But as it is, I su?er. And what is wrongwith them is wrong with all the young throughout the world. My heart acheswith compassion for the lost generation – lost by the folly and greed of thegeneration to which I belong. It is a heavy burden, but one must rise above it.Perhaps, by su?ering to the limit, some word of comfort may be revealed.To Charles W. Stewart, the illustrator of my Nightmares of Eminent Persons. I longed to?nd a Daumier or, better still, a Goya to point up the savage irony of this book as well as thewarning contained in my Human Society in Ethics and Politics.at home and abroad 56120 Nov. 1953Dear Mr StewartThank you for the roughs. I like them very much and shall be glad to haveyou do the pictures. I note what you say about Stalin and am assuming thatthe picture will be somewhat di?erent from the rough. I particularly like theexistentialist’s nightmare and the one in Zahatopolk where the lady is beingburnt. In the other Zahatopolk picture I like it all except that I think the valleyought to be more smiling and full of ?owers, but perhaps it will be so whenyou have ?nished the picture. In the picture of Dr Southport Vulpes I supposethe things in the sky are aeroplanes, and I think it might be a good thing ifthey were somewhat larger and more emphatic. I quite agree to your sugges-tion of a single heading for every other nightmare, and I have no objection tohaving Vulpes put between Eisenhower and Acheson as you suggest. I amlooking forward with pleasure to a picture of the quarrel between the twoladies in Faith and Mountains. As this story is at the printers, I am sendingyou a spare typescript which, however, I should like to have back when youhave ?nished with it.I am engaged on another book, not of stories, but on ethics and politics, tobe called Human Society: Diagnosis & Prognosis. I want in this book to have threepictures, or one picture in three parts, like a triptych, illustrating the uses ofintelligence in the past, present and future. If you feel inclined to undertakethis and if Stanley Unwin is agreeable, I shall be very glad. Any time withinthe next four months would do. I should like all three as savage and bitter aspossible.I return the roughs herewith.Yours sincerelyBertrand RussellFrom Ion Braby about The Good Citizen’s AlphabetQueenslandSt Nicholas-at-Wadenear Birchington, KentMarch 31 1953Dear Lord RussellThank you so much for the book. It is delightful. I am not sure whether thedrawings are worthy of the text or the text worthy of the drawings. In eitherevent they could hardly be better. I think ???????, ?????? and ????? are myfavourites, but I am very fond of ??????, ????????? and ???????? andmany more. And, also, of the opening address (I feel that is the word) and itsillustrations. I am sure you and the artist will be due for a triple dose ofhemlock, for you will be accused of corrupting not only the young but themiddle-aged and elderly too – and corrupting the latter two is very wrong, asthe autobiography of bertrand russell 562they have less time to recover. Anyway, I am very glad to be subverted by it;thank you again.I sent my book o? to The Bodley Head at the end of the week before last,and hope to get an answer soon. I need hardly say once more how much Iappreciate your interest and help.With best wishesYours sincerelyIonFrom Rupert Crawshay-WilliamsCastle YardPortmeirionPenrhyndeudraethMerionethAugust 1, 1953Dear BertieI was so delighted by your story – and especially as I read most of it in aremarkably dingy cubicle in a Divinity student’s hostel in Dublin – that Idetermined to write you a letter long enough for comment on the particularbits I liked; and I’ve been putting this o? – largely because my holiday inIreland did not do as a holiday is supposed to, but somehow put me into astate of mind in which all my work was worse – and much slower – than ithad been before. (But this may have been a bit because revising, and particu-larly cutting down, is so much more boring than the actual working outof ideas.)Anyway Faith and Mountains is certainly my favourite of all your stories sofar. I suppose this is partly because its theme is a cup of tea just up my street.But I think you have worked it out beautifully, with just the right amount –not too much – of pastiche and exaggeration. The pseudo-scienti?c plausibil-ity of the two opposing doctrines is delightful, especially in the light ofMr Wagthorne’s later point about man’s ability to believe what afterwardsappears to have been nonsense. Incidentally, that whole paragraph on p. 43builds up with beautifully timed comic e?ect to all the names beginningwith M. The timing of your e?ects in general – for instance, the momentsyou choose for understatement or for sharp statement – is now technicallymost e?cient. (The Professor’s opening speech at the grand meeting; theconciseness of the paragraph at the beginning of Chapter VII in which hisfuture is outlined – nice bit about Tensing!; ‘And with that they fell into eachother’s arms’.)Also there are a nice lot of sly digs put over with a straight face (which isone of your ?nger-prints, of course): The Magnets’ dismissal of mere brawn;the believers ?nally remaining in out of the way suburbs. And I liked theat home and abroad 563conceits about the very narrow valley and about Mr Thorney’s use of asextant. And the ??? pastiche, with its ‘shallow certainty’ and ‘deeper sourcesof wisdom’ and ‘the coldly critical intellect’.Your ‘message’ of course is highly commendable; and as a matter of factZachary’s answer to his father at the end is most concise and decisive. But, forme, even more decisive – because it made me laugh out loud (and alsoElizabeth, who sends her love and entire agreement) – is the last paragraph.You have caught so neatly and ludicrously the dingy commonplaceness of somany hymns. (Now I come to think of it, part of the e?ect comes from theslight confusion of thought between third and fourth lines: diseases of thechest and Makes our muscles grow.) And then comes – perfectly correctly –the word ‘Sublimities’ in the last line.I was glad to see, by the way, your emphasis, in a review in the Sunday Timessome weeks ago, upon the role of power politics rather than ideologies – andalso your re-emphasis upon the way in which science and scienti?c methodhave conditioned (all that is ‘best’ in) Western Values. It is maddening theway in which the opposite ‘soupy’ belief is accepted even by most unsoupypeople.My word ‘soupy’ was used the other day – in exactly my sense – by anovelist called Angus Wilson when reviewing a book on Georges Sand in theObserver. I very much hope this is a sign that it is spreading; Angus Wilson is Ibelieve a friend of Cyril Connolly’s to whom I did once introduce the word.The names Tomkins and Merrow (together) ring a faint bell in my mind.Should it be a loud bell, and should I recognise it?Yours everRupertIt’s now Sunday, and I’ve just remembered that the local post o?ce boxwon’t take large envelopes. So I’ll send the MS back to-morrow.From J. B. S. HaldaneUniversity College LondonDepartment of Biometry5th November, 1953Dear RussellThank you very much for your information. I have, of course, altered thepassage to bring it into line with the facts. In my old age I am getting ratherinterested in animal behaviour, and have even done something to ‘decode’the bees’ language (of which a fair account is to be found in Ribband’s TheBehaviour and Social Life of Honeybees). As you know, bees returning from a richsource of food dance. The class of all dances is a propositional function withfour variables, which may be renderedthe autobiography of bertrand russell 564‘There is a source of food smelling of A, requiring B workers, at a distance C indirection D.’A is indicated by demonstration, B, C, and D symbolically. I have broughta little precision into the translation of the symbols for C. The paper willbe sent you in due course. If, however, bees are given honey verticallyabove them they cannot communicate this fact, though they dance in anirregular manner. There are undanceable truths, like the ine?able nameof God.The political system of bees, discovered by Lindauer, is even more surpris-ing. He has records of a debate as to a nest site which lasted for ?ve days.You will perhaps correct me if I am incorrect in describing a propositionalfunction as a class of propositions. If one comes to them ‘from outside’ as inthe observation of bees, this seems a natural way of looking at the matter.Meanwhile various Germans (not v. Frisch and Lindauer) are plugging the?xity of animal behaviour in a rather Nazi manner (v. reprint by my wife).The word ‘imprinting’, due to Thorpe, is used for long-lasting changes inconduct due to a juvenile experience (e.g. the following of Spalding bychickens).Yours sincerelyJ. B. S. HaldaneFrom H. McHaigh Esq.87 Orewa Rd.Auckland, N.Z.17/vii/’51Dear SirI had the pleasure of lecturing you last year: while you were in Sydney.But, one evening this week you were closer: here, in Auckland, I heard yourvoice – reproduced from 1.Y.A. Auck. Radio broadcast.Now I understand how, or why, the ‘Bulletin’ artist was able to depict soterribly the vile personality shewn in that weekly’s columns – labelled withyour name: as well as seeing you in the ?esh, he must have heard you speak.Frequently, while the radio is turned on, I have wondered whether mem-bers of Broadcasting Boards have ears; or, whether, having ears, they have agrain of good taste amongst them. But, as soon as the announcer named youas the person emitting those dreadfully disgusting sounds, I knew that, earsor no ears, those men are utterly careless about in?icting pain – and aboutdisclosing the shocking ruin that (as in your case) a human being can make