Print

Print


In-Reply-To: <l03110701b16f0e101ee3@[195.17.73.64]>
James:
> Insecure???  He would have had 250,000 FFr under his belt...  That
> was quite a pension in those days.
 
Kjell:
> Certo, ma in qual grado poteva ille creder lo? E que, concretemente,
> deberea ille facer pro iste moneta. Il sembla del altere letteras que
> ille era conscie de possibile postulatos (exigentias).
 
Indeed.  The letter Don posted at 20:07:23 on Wed, 29 Apr 1998 (message
<[log in to unmask]>) suggests that the offer did
not make Zamenhof feel he and his family would be secure, in particular
because the 250,000 FFr would definitely not be "under his belt".
 
> I can [throw away my medical practice] only in such case if I have a
> complete guarantee that the new ground under my feet is completely
> solid and independent.  Unfortunately, from your letter of Sep. 7,
> which I received in Reinerz, I _don't_ see this; because your letter
> opens credit for Mr. _Lemaire_, but gives no guarantee to _me_; and if
> for example I were to stop pleasing Mr. Lemaire tomorrow, or if he
> were to die or leave for Africa, then I would remain in the air with
> my family.
 
I am sure James was not being dishonest in saying that the money would
have been "under his belt" but these little details make all the
difference.
 
The phrase "I were to stop pleasing Mr. Lemaire tomorrow" also suggests
that Zamenhof did not feel that he would remain independent.  Indeed he
says so explicitly:
 
> [...] because I am very much afraid that then I will lose what is for
> me dearest and most necessary -- my moral independence.
 
His fears about the offer being conditional on him agreeing to what the
reformists wanted is expressed in the following passage:
 
> About your proposal relating to my person we shall speak only
> _afterwards_, not earlier than when our discussions about
> _improvements_ are quite finished, because the acceptibility or
> unacceptibility of your noble offer will fully depend on whether we
> can come to mutual agreement on the form and quantity of
> improvements. If after five or six days of discussion we come to
> mutual agreement about the improvements, then -- only then -- can we
> begin the discussion of the personal arrangement.
 
As for the idea that the fact that Zamenhof himself entertained reforms
could be see as meaning that there were no strings, I do not totally
accept this argument.  Firstly, whilst he personally might have been
happy with some reforms it is not at all clear that he would have wished
to promote them against the wished of the E-istaro.  Secondly, the
hesitations cited above suggested that he felt that he might have been
pressured to accept reforms that he could not go along with, even
personally.  I recall reading something that suggested that reform camp
were disappointed with what he'd come up with.  This suggests that there
was quite a distance between the two sides idea of what reforms should
be made and that Zamenhof was quite right do fear that he might "stop
pleasing Mr. Lemaire"
 
Likewise, the fact that Zamenhof maintained courteous relations with the
people making him the offer does not detract from the argument that they
were trying to influence him unduly.  Firstly he may well have con-
sidered these people as basically well-intentioned and have hoped that
the terms of the offer could have been modified so as to make it
acceptable (which he clearly felt it wasn't in its original form).
Secondly, even if he felt that the motives behind the offer were
dishonourable, he might have wished to avoid provoking a split, feeling
it better to decline the offer in a way that caused no offence.  There's
is little point in turning rich and influential people against you.
(I'm playing a game of email Diplomacy at the moment.  Believe you me, I
am cordial and polite to everyone, even if I consider them double
[whoops! I mean "duplicitous"] toe-rags, only to be trusted when my
armies have driven the last of theirs into the sea.)
 
-- jP --