After an introduction, Creeley talks about Whitman and starts his reading with "Histoire de Florida" Reading and brief discussion : MP3 This recording is courtesy of Jack Krick. Sequenced by Mike Hearst and Ben Swanson. For more info see Jacket 2's feature on this. Sidney Goldfarb appears near end or recording. Search PennSound.
Studio Recording at Black Mountain College, c. Creeley Interview, :. All rights to this recorded material belong to the author. Used with permission of Robert Creeley. Thompson in the Cavendish Laboratory. In he moved to Manchester, where he worked in Professor Ernest Rutherford's laboratory. Rutherford's discovery of the atomic nucleus became the basis of Bohr's investigation of atomic structure.
In , Bohr developed his model of atomic structure, which held that electrons travel in orbits around an atom's nucleus.
The chemical properties of the element, his theory held, were determined by the number of electrons in orbit. When an electron dropped from a high-energy orbit to a lower-energy orbit, it emitted a photon of discrete energy. This discovery was central to the development of quantum theory. Bohr held the position of Lecturer in Physics at Copenhagen University from , and at Victoria University in Manchester from From until his death in , he led the Institute for Theoretical Physics, which was established for him and eventually named for him.
In the s and s, Bohr's laboratory hosted most of the world's leading theoretical physicists. In , Bohr received the Nobel Prize in physics "for his services in the investigation of the structure of atoms and of the radiation emanating from them. Bohr also invented the principle of complementarity, the notion that items could be understood as having contradictory properties. Albert Einstein was a vocal opponent of this principle, and he and Bohr had several famous arguments over its feasibility. In , just before he was to be arrested by Nazi police, Bohr escaped to Sweden.
He spent the remaining years of the war in England and the United States. The younger scientists on the project valued Bohr's contribution as a mentor and consultant. His concern about a nuclear arms race, he explained, was "why I went to America. They didn't need my help in making the atom bomb.
Bohr believed that atomic secrets should be shared by all in the international scientific community. Bohr visited President Roosevelt to convince him to share the Manhattan Project with the Russians for the purpose of speeding its progress. Upon Roosevelt's suggestion, Bohr took this idea to England, where Prime Minister Churchill completely opposed the idea. After the war, Bohr returned to Copenhagen.
He spent his last decades developing and promoting the peaceful applications of atomic physics. In his lifetime, Bohr authored or co-authored more than published works. Bohr married Margrethe Norlund in They had six sons, of whom two died in childhood.
The Committee on Global Thought. 91 Claremont, Suite 513, New York, NY 10027. (212) 851-7293
The other four led successful lives. The collection contains offprints of published writings by and about Bohr and his work. The collection also includes mimeographed copies of letters and the transcripts of lectures and a debate between Bohr and Albert Einstein. The materials date from to , the year after Bohr's death. The collection is divided into three series. Series I, "Writings by Bohr," contains the page proofs and typescripts of several articles authored by Bohr.
Guide to the Niels Bohr Collection 1909-1963
To this conclusion I have adhered. Whilst the most famous professors of history were thus enrolled in the uniform of their imperialist masters, I found that among the small groups of socialist workers with whom I was in contact, who had no such benefits of higher education, there was an entirely different type of discussion of the war as a war between rival masters and exploiters for the spoils of the world.
Let us ask the question in the light of contemporary knowledge: who was closer to the truth of history? The great and famous bourgeois professors of history? Or the handful of socialist workers with limited advantages of education? At the present day the essential analysis of Great Power rivalry leading to the First World War is the commonplace theme of conventional history text-books even in schools.
But the litter of Oxford War Pamphlets, as they were called, which poured out in a flood from the university professors of history at this time, today crumble in oblivion and contempt. How was this possible? Why were these workers, deprived of educational facilities, closer to what is today universally recognised as historical truth even by present-day Oxford historians who remain as wildly astray as their predecessors in relation to the modern contemporary world of the Cold War than all these professors of history?
Was it superior mental capacity? The professors had on the contrary been chosen by a rigorous selective process, even though from a narrow stratum of the population, for mental capacity.
- Search Google Appliance!
- BOOKS BY MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR..
- Whipped Cream (Creme du Jour Book 2).
- The Art of Living - Lecture 4 - Awakening your Consciousness @ Think in a Box - Saigoneer.
- Newest listings by Rudolf Steiner.
- Footer left.
But their basically false theory rendered them incapable of reaching a correct historical judgement, although they were supposed to be trained historical experts. Socialist theory enabled these class-conscious workers to reach, however crudely, the essential kernel of historical truth. There were many further experiences of this nature.
Russell, who was soon after imprisoned and deprived of his fellowship at Trinity College Cambridge, and for this won the devotion of us students as the shining exception to the record of academic shame, presented the familiar indictment of the prewar Entente diplomacy, Agadir, Algeciras, the corrupt alliance with Tsarism, the partition of Persia, etc. We waited with attention the reply of Lindsay, who presented himself arrayed in khaki uniform, not as a soldier, but to indicate his official status.
And that was all the answer. Academic service to imperialism had collapsed completely when faced with open argument. It was indeed these and many similar experiences and deepening disillusionment with the hollowness of official bourgeois academic claims and theories during my apprenticeship at Oxford which led me, from the very generalised socialist outlook I had already drawn from earlier years, to the serious and systematic study of Marxism since Here I began to find the answers to the insistent questions which the world situation raised and which all the professors and tutors, when I in all innocence pressed them on these questions, avoided and refused to discuss.
Before I was twenty years of age I had some experience of various prisons.
At twenty-one years, in the last week of October , that is, ten days before 7 November , I had the honour to be expelled from Oxford University for the offence of propagating Marxism. The circumstances of this expulsion also have their interest for this problem of truth and history. In the summer of , at a joint meeting of the Socialist Students Society and the Majlis or Asiatic Students Society, I had carried a resolution declaring the necessity of a second socialist revolution in Russia if the counter-revolution were not to prevail, and pledging support in advance to that impending second socialist revolution, that is, the Bolshevik Revolution.
There was the usual attempt of some hooligan jingo students to create a disturbance; but our stewards were well organised, and the rowdies did not succeed in entering or preventing the peaceful completion of the meeting; but only broke some windows and shouted jingo slogans outside. Next morning the wrath of the university authorities was visited, not on the rowdies who had created the disturbance, but on me for organising the meeting; and I was ordered to leave Oxford permanently within twenty-four hours.
When a year later I was allowed to take the final examination of Literae Humaniores, it was only under the explicit condition that I had to undertake to arrive only the night before the examination, to leave the day the examination ended, and to address no public meetings during the examination. It may be worth adding that AD Lindsay, later Lord Lindsay, who as my tutor held official responsibility with the other governing authorities for the decision to expel me for socialist propaganda, was himself a member of the Fabian Society and in this sense claimed to be socialist.
When he was subsequently appointed Vice-Chancellor of Edinburgh University, in his inaugural address he dwelt on the tradition of academic freedom of opinion, including political opinions, as the treasured characteristic of the university tradition in Britain. As an example of this freedom he called attention to the fact that he himself was a socialist and yet was appointed Vice-Chancellor of Edinburgh University — an example to which an enlightened footnote might possibly have been added from his own previous record, and illustrating once again the familiar truth that there are two kinds of socialists in this sense, those acceptable to the capitalist authorities and those not acceptable.
The next stage of education in the pursuit of pure truth at Oxford University followed. Having taken the first place among students of my year in whatever examinations and honours were open, I discovered that every avenue of employment appeared closed. No professor or tutor was prepared to give me the necessary testimonial, but all said that in place of a reference I could ask any prospective employer to write to them. The Oxford University Appointments Bureau, then newly established, with exquisite irony offered me as their sole suggestion to become a settler in Kenya.
The professors and tutors, when written to by prospective employers to whom I had applied for work, invariably replied that I had such and such academic qualifications, but that whether the extreme political views I held were suitable for any responsible position under them was a matter entirely for their governing authority to decide. This invariably finished the approach.
To Oxford I remain indebted, both for many friendships and for the opportunity to study the great classics of literature and thought, and especially the basic course on Plato, Aristotle, Kant and Hegel, which is an invaluable foundation for the study of Marxism. To Oxford I also remain indebted for a practical political education, which helped to teach me that social and political theory is no mere discussion of ideas in the air, but must be lived, and that in existing class society any person can serve freedom and truth on one condition only, that he is prepared to pay for this freedom at any time with whatever consequences may follow.
Rudolf Steiner Books - Biography and List of Works - Author of 'Theosophy Of the Rosicrucian'
In that sense I chose freedom and have never regretted the choice. Let us now broaden the argument and consider the response of Western academic historical science and educated opinion to the titanic events of our epoch, of the general crisis of capitalism, world wars and the advance of the socialist revolution. Sir Winston Churchill relates how, on entering politics as a young man in , he took advice of the distinguished Liberal Elder Statesman Sir William Harcourt, to ask him what to expect in the coming years.
The war of came upon Western historians and enlightened opinion, according to their own subsequent account and memoirs, as a wholly unforeseen and unforeseeable bolt from the blue suddenly and violently disturbing the rational order of the universe. But what of Western historians and Liberal educated opinion? Listen to Professor Toynbee, who has been widely presented, on the basis of his ten-volume monumental Study of History , as the oracle.
People of your age in the professional and middle class in England just before took it for granted that they were living in a world that was civilised — meaning reasonable, humane, orderly, predictable. A hundred similar statements could be quoted from similar voices of the learned at Oxford and Cambridge and elsewhere, describing the world before as a kind of lost golden age of happiness and reason and peace before some strange demon of violence brought it to an end.
How is it possible that they could have lived in such ignorance of the horrors of imperialism, on whose profits they were subsisting in luxury? Their lamentations today for the supposed lost golden age before , their nostalgia for a picture of a kind of eternal summer afternoon of smooth lawns and country mansions, only reveal the cloistered cotton-wool chloroformed existence of the social stratum to which they belonged in complete unawareness of the realities of the world in which they lived and whose history they professed to interpret. But this was only the beginning of the demonstration which our epoch has given and is further giving of the collapse of bourgeois historical science in face of the changes of the modern world.
What was the impact of the Russian Revolution on such a mental equipment?
Related The Awakening : 1963 Lectures
Copyright 2019 - All Right Reserved