Letter to Władysław Tatarkiewicz written 12.08.1968

Roman Ingarden
Cracow, Biskupia 14

Cracow, 12 August 1968


Dear Władysław,

                thank you very much for your letter, which I just received. I’m writing back [O1] immediately, so that maybe you’ll receive my reply before your departure.

                I haven’t nominated any candidates for the Polish Academy of Sciences award for philosophical work, because I wasn’t given any regulations governing this type of committee and I didn’t know that committee members should nominate candidates prior to the meeting of the committee. I know nothing about Geblewicz’s work (no books make it to Cracow at all; I find some of them when I come to Warsaw). As for Ms Rzepińska’s work, I think it’s good work, but neither Ms Rzepińska nor her work has anything to do with philosophy. In terms of aesthetics, she’s completely naive. I’m outraged that Ms Wojnar is going to Uppsala[O2]  for a congress of aesthetics; in philosophical terms, she’s a complete tenderfoot, and her books ‒ promoted so heavily in Warsaw ‒ are simple transmissions of the views of others. Maybe they’re useful for pedagogy, but that’s another matter. The exceptional cunning she shows in career matters aside, I can’t concede her the right to represent Polish aesthetics abroad. Gołaszewska was twice refused a passport to go to Uppsala, and for the third time to Vienna, despite the fact that the organising committee granted her a stipend for the journey and stay. The Ministry denied everyone from Cracow ‒ except myself ‒ support for passport applications for the Congress to Vienna (four people received stipends), citing the fact that the list had been agreed upon with the Philosophy Society and the Polish Academy of Sciences. It was not considered appropriate either in the Polish Academy of Sciences[O3]  or in the Philosophical Society to inform me of the deliberations on the subject of this list, even though I’m the chairman of both the Cracow Branch and the Aesthetics Section of the Polish Philosophical Society. There are seven papers from Cracow. I intend to resign the presidency of the Aesthetics Section and in general to withdraw from the Society. I greatly regret that you didn’t tell me in Cracow that the proposal for me to take over the editorship of Studia Estetyczne [Aesthetic studies] originated from the Institute of Philosophy and Sociology of the Polish Academy of Sciences; I thought it was your own idea. In any case, I wouldn’t accept the function of editor-in-chief. I believe, however, that the Institute of Philosophy ought to have turned to me, prior to the decision about what to do with Studia, with a request to consider this matter. This matter of arranging everything in Warsaw from Warsaw’s point of view and leaving out other centres (over a dozen people from Warsaw are going to the Congress in Vienna, among them a number of cyberneticists) is starting to get on my nerves ‒ I’m referring here to the harm done to people who are working diligently here and are no worse than these assorted Warsaw protégés.

                               Cordial greetings and best wishes for a good trip to Uppsala and a nice time at the congress.

                                                                                                                         Your Roman



[O1]Oryg: pisze, chyba piszę
[O2]Oryg: Upsala, właściwie Uppsala
[O3]W oryg: Pan, chyba PAN