CERNING RALPH SCHOENMAN Plas Penrhyn. 8 December, 1969.
I am writing this memorandum concerning Ralph Schoenman, not necessarily for publication, but for reference in case any of my actions in relation to him should be called in question by him or, possibly, by his friends or by anyone else. In part, I am writing it for my own satisfaction since I have been told that he has it in writing that I am senile"-the implication being that whatever now do or say in regard to him is said or done, in reality, by someone else using my name. This is not true. My relations to him have been mine from our fist meeting when he came to see me at Plas Penrhyn towards the end of July, 1960, to the time of my letter breaking off relations dated 19 July, 1969. character is given on page 109ff. of the Allen and Unwin edition of the third volume of my autobiography. In it I tried to give my first impres sions of him, both pro and con, and to indicate what I later discovered In the first draft of this analysis I was somewhat more adversely outspoken than in the published version which I toned down partly to avoid both the possibility of libel and the difficulties of recriminations and long-winded "evidence" and "defence", and partly because I did not wish to injure him in any way or his position in working for causes that seem to me to be just.
I had said in the first draft that I found him "surprisingly unlicked". found him not only impetuous but "aggressive and entirely undisciplined and I realized that these characteristics might well make him seem a dangerous young man' ", as anyone of whom he did not approve." early recognized his importance of his own role in the centre of the stage. His conviction of his unshakable belief in the pene tration and breadth of his understanding were obvious. I did not for some time, however, grasp the closely related characteristic of his utter incapability of imparting reliable information. His reports of people's reactions and his observations were-and unfortunately, I fear, still arevery often excessively and misleadingly incorrect and his quotations must always be verified. I was impressed by his courage, both moral and physical although it too often flouted necessary caution and resulted in unnecessary provocation. And was impressed by his generosity in helping anyone of suffering injustice, although often led to useless waste of effort and money, both of which might have been far more advantageously spent.
His companionship was as welcome delicious fresh breeze on a muggy day Were I to list his kindnesses to me the list would be very long and would include many generous deeds that must have cost him dear in worry and work. I found the quickness of his mind, although it made for considerable superficiality and glibness, immensely refreshing as I did his sense of fun and absurdity and irony, although this often created difficulty, unrestrained as it was by any sense of decorum. In fact, in a world made up largely of people who act, if at all, only upon second "UL more
even erased, by time and experience.
They seemed to me to be the outof his prodigious driving energy. I underestimated, because, certainly in the early years of our acquaintance, it was rarely shown in my presence, the extreme irritability that sometimes accompanies such quick energy. Only afterconsiderable time did I come to appreciate, as I graphy, opposition and the ruthlessness of his rush towards whatever happened to be his immediate objective." I did not understand in him at first "the ascendancy of the ego over intelligence" which has prevented him from profiting by his experience or his recognised mistakes. He has not grown up-only grown older and more rigidly confirmed in all his characteristics. He has amassed a great deal of experience, but it remains a mass of experience. The pattern of his thought and attitude this fact increasingly often. He himself sometimes alluded to it in deference to my criticisms.
To the admirable obverse of Ralph's characteristics there is always the reverse to be feared. His optimism, for instance, is invaluable. It permits him to see the practicability of ideas that anyone ess hopeful would not even attempt to carry out and to inspire others to isht shed upor Cuban affair. It in flated more than I at the time realized. When, for instance, he went to China on my behalf at the end of 1962, or the beginning of 1963;
considered it, of the moralities and customs inculcated by their Government. At the first interview given to him and his companion by Premier Chou En Lai they were received most courteously and the Premier was friendly and helpful. At their second interview, they were received cordly and severely chided for their behaviour and tactless indiscretions while in China. As their sponsor, naturally, was rendered suspect. To my distress and to the grave embarrassment of our work, I have never been able to recover the warmth and friendliness formerly accorded me by the Chinese Government.
On the other hand it was necessary to balance against Ralph's vided a way out of the entanglements the Sino-Indian Border Dispute. Against great odds, he and his companion had managed to reach Nehru and obtain this message from him. And they had also obtained the backing of Mme. Bandaranaike. then for from within to someone of whom he disapproved was flinched from by him. No engagement for a fixed time, whether made with an elderly or a distinguished pundit or one of his friends could be kept on time. He was unable to restrain himself from taking over the conversation if it seemed to be going as he did not wish. Sometimes this was extremely unfortunate. I remember two occasions in particular when this happened. Once when an old friend with whom I had worked closely and had had many vehement discussions, came to see me concerning our joint work and disagreed with me, Ralph drew the unhappy impression that I my friend remarked angrily that he to leave us. On another occasion, Ralph believed that I did not hear correctly what was being said by an American acquaintance. He under took to reply, himself, to all questions put to me until my acquaintance. like my friend. pointed out that the questions were addressed to me. Both these unwarranted intrusions caused considerable trouble. In spite of my remonstrances, I do not think Ralph ever understood the dis courteous stupidities of which he had been guilty. The basis of them was perhaps the amiable one, , from my point of view, of a wish to protect me, a wish that sometimes led him into fulsome follies or worse, as it did at the end of my speech at the The Perhaps to send his open letter of withdrawal had it not been for Ralph's encouragement and work or for the telegram that he sent to Khrushchev for me in the early hours of 26 October, 1962. By well after midnight had become very tired by the stress of the day. I went to bed after a long discussion with Ralph and after arranging what might be done in various eventualities. I exacted a promise from him that he would wake me if anything further transpired before breakfast. He did not wake me, but woke my wife to obtain her backing in sending a further tele gram to Khrushchev, the possibility of which we had discussed. It was sent and, when I awoke, I approved of its having been sent. It did not occur to me that Ralph did more than a good secretary should have been expected to do in the circumstances. I did not know until considerably later that he was most indiscreetly and inaccurately putting it about, or perhaps allowing it to be phat about, that the correspondence at time initiated accomplished by him. At first I did not believe this of him, but reports coming through the years giving chapter and verse concerning this and similar indiscretions have con vinced me that he is not to be trusted where his ego is concerned. I am now forced to believe that he has made it incorrectly evident that he or, to a lesser extent, others have been entirely responsible for various writings and statements published by
----- pull-quotes -----
lively instinct for self-dramatization, his swashbuckling assumption of the
said in the first draft of my autobio- "the essential intolerance of
and action remains the same. I have had occasion to call his attention to
he took it upon himself to teach the Chinese whom he met the folly, as he
infamous folly in China the fact that he had gone there bearing a message from Nehru which might have pro-
was being brow-beaten and not being treated with due deference. Finally,
had come to see me and not to see Ralph. In the end, I had to ask Ralph
should never have sent the telegrams that gave Khruschev an opportunity