{ } = word or expression can't be understood
{word} = hard to understand, might be this

...saw that in playing, we want to manipulate time. And we got ourselves into the prismatic varieties or diversities of timing. And we saw that in every one of us, there are all the elements of the artist, of the actor. You can be lyrically minded, dramatically, epically, or naturalistically. If you look into the four types of literature: the lyricist, the poet, the dramatist, the novelist, and the -- narrative, the fairy-tale-teller, the ta- -- tale-teller I should say, you find these four forms of man's spiritual existence to this day embodied. If you look back into great literature -- has anybody ever read Homer? Who has? That's a minority. Well, the great things then are for the others still to come. You will find that Homer is such great literature because he is all four in one. It is not true to say that The --Iliad or The Odyssey is epics. That's a superstition of your textbooks. Anybody who has read Homer himself -- and of course these people are dying out in the United States -- but anybody who has knows that the excellency and the greatness of this first, great literature of the world, the first great deliverance of man's individual power to manipulate time, which is literature; that this, the great freedom in Homer contains all the four elements of drama, two-thirds of Homer -- so-called epics or songs are dialogue. Real drama. Then there are similes. Real lyrics, you see. And then there is, of course, the ship -- the catalog of the ship, the description of the -- how the shield was made. There are the laws; that is analytical, you see. And then you have of course, the epics, the narrative in its majestic sequence of one hero coming to the fore and having -- holding the limelight in one song. Diomedes, and Aias, and Odysseus, and one after another, you see, in repetitive order going to their glory, until finally Achilles and Hector appear.

What I wanted to say is, gentlemen: I have given you an alphabet of primary forces of man's life on this earth, his freedom to play with time. And that enables you to test the literary criteria, the sport criteria, which you use in everyday life. I mean to say that in using the phrases, "drama" or "epics," you are now completely superior to the critic who, because on the title page it reads "drama," has to say, "It is a drama," and because on the title page or in an introduction, some philologist says, "This is epics," he has to believe that it is epics. You don't have to do this. You can look into the matter itself and can ask yourself how to distribute these four facets, these four prismatic appearances of reality, you see, in this one work. And I think only then are you free of dogmatism and this ridiculous behavior. Americans al- -- boys always tell me that they are not dogmatic. But I've never seen any one of -- more dogmatic than Americans with regard to their terms they use for human achievement.

You don't call a poet, a playwright, and a writer -- a novelist "a poet," if

you once knew that this is all poetry. You would know that the curtailment of calling a c- -- poet only somebody who writes doggerels or things that rhyme is ridiculous. You can't get -- on with this division, you see. It's perfectly arbitrary. It's external. You don't -- look into the heart of the matter, and then you will learn that poetry, the creation of a world in which you can exchange slow time and -- and double-time, so to speak, and dramatic time, the change of time, and repetitive time, that this creation of a world that has to have one com- -- comprehensive name. And that means what the Greek said -- when he said that "We can make the world." Po- -- to -- "poetry" means making a second world. The word "poetics" comes from poiein, which means "to do," "to create," "to produce," "to bring forth that which in a second world now duplicates reality." That's poetry: the creation of a second world.

Now gentlemen, when we play, we create a second world. And as one of you once wrote, that baseball to him is lyrical and dramatic, he meant it. He knew that was poetry. And it is, because poetry, gentlemen, in its most comprehensive sense, will always mean man's faculty to put into the world into which we -- in which -- to which we are born a second world of our own making. And that's poetical. And anybody who cannot do this, gentlemen, hasn't learned to play. And anybody who cannot play with reality is not a human being. Because in -- in playing, we gain time. And in ga- -- play, we get the freedom to decide when to enter reality, and when to withdraw from reality; when to approve of it, and when to disapprove of it. And if you cannot partly disapprove and approve, you cannot live as a free man. Think of Mr. Edl- -- Adlai Stevenson. He has to -- withhold full support of the Eisenhower government, or -- there is no Democratic Party, and there is no future of the two-party system in the United States. That is, we allow him to play at this moment. He's -- at least he is less serious than the Republicans. He's less engaged in the decisions of the moment.

And your and my freedom, gentlemen, your humanity in America depends on some such party playing for time, and waiting. Otherwise we have a dictatorship, you see. And we are licked, because there are no reserves for a day after this administration, you see, has gone the way of all flesh. It will. Any -- power that be, you see, must be overcome, overplayed, so to speak, by a power that at this time is not in full power, you see, but can abide its time. This is the miracle of the two-party system: not that there are at once logically two parties, A and B, at this moment; but that you allow reality, you see, to outgrow itself. And now there are certain elements that are playing around for time, you see. And you allow them to gather strength and to come of age at one time.

Freedom, gentlemen, is not the existence of criticism at this moment, but the allowance you make that there may be another time. Can you see this? Your whole brain is completely ruined by geometry. You always see things at once;

that is, A and B, timelessly. And so you look into politics, and think there are a two-party system; that means that here is one party and there is the other. The two-part- -- two party system obviously can only be realized in due time, you see. As long as one party has prospects of becoming the majority, there is a true two-party system.

Now in Germany, for example, it may very well appear at this moment that after the Adenauer victory, there is no hope ever for the Socialist Party to gain the upper hand. They have played their card of Marxism and class struggle, and that's gone, you see, through National Socialism. They have enough of Socialism for the next 200 years in Germany. Hitler did too well about this. And they have, of course, also no prospects by any act of their own volition to reunite Germany. I meant to say it's interesting to watch: seemingly there -- are two parties at this moment in Germany. But morally, spiritually, I don't think there are. I think there is no prospect, not the slightest prospect that the Labor -- the -- that the Social Democrats can come to power, because of their program, because it's all looking backward. It has absolutely no -- nothing of a growing power into the future.

Well that may -- I may be misjudging the situation. This doesn't matter at this moment. What I want to draw your attention to is this: you have one country in which there are two parties, and you have another country in which there are two parties. And it may not at all mean the same thing. You have only as long a two-party system as the party that is not in power, you see, has founded hopes -- well-founded hopes that at one time it will be called upon to replace the other party.

That's all I am trying to say at this moment. Which means, gentlemen, that to play is -- has even been made, by great wisdom, an element of politics. One party, so to speak -- represents the leg that plays -- you know all men in sculpture are given on a standing leg, and on a playing leg, you see. One leg is the one that carries the full load. And the Greek sculpture is very often criticized because of its mastery of this problem, of -- I don't know, -- you -- does anybody -- has anybody studied art? How do you call the two legs? There is in German a special expression for the leg that -- that carries the burden, the Standbein, and the other that is playing, you see. It is less pronounced, the Spielbein. Does no- -- -body know the English term? Who has taken a course in art appreciation? Wie? That's the first thing one has to learn there. No? Well, I am against the course, anyway.

So we have -- always to play with time and to be serious about time. And in these --.

(Sir, could you { } play that the -- the Democrats are doing right now, could you apply the same criteria that you did to -- to the play when you first began? In other words, it -- it may be repeated, and it is -- it is a -- a thing which is -- is out of a separate entity in serious time?)

Well, wouldn't you say that at this moment the Democrats are just marking time? And that's all they're doing.

(Are they doing something which they can repeat again?)

Wie? Pardon me?

(Are they doing something which they can repeat again? I mean, that's one of your --.)

They are not doing anything -- fully real at this moment. So there is nothing to be repeated. They are playing for time. See, this is -- your question is --.

(Well, I'm just trying to find that if you --)

They aren't doing. In the full sense of the word, their actions at this moment are not, you see, at least where they don't have the -- the governorship or the majority. I mean, in federal policies, they are -- the acts of the Democrats can be discounted, because they have no consequence. I mean, what you think as a Democrat at this moment is of no consequence for the time being. It can only have consequence after the -- next election. Isn't that true? So you -- trying to gain time for the Democratic party, because at this moment, they may be gathering strength or they may be losing strength. I don't know this, you see. But they are out, aren't they?

So in this -- in this situation, what I'm driving at, at this moment, you should not speak of their actions, because these are non-actions. It's play. So it's not real acting. Can't you see this? I can only act when the consequences of my acts go on inter- -- in-intermittently. I told you "to play" means to call at random beginning and end. But once you are in government, you see, you cannot begin or end at random, you see. You enter the negotiations and there are, you enter the deficit of the government as it is, and there you are, you see. And you have to carry on the ball from there. And it isn't up to you to choose -- to elect the beginning, you see. And that's why the Stock Exchange is down right after the Republican victory, because if they could have arranged it, you see, the Stock Exchange would be higher than in November, you see. But now it's lower. Why is that so? Just to prove what is serious business, you see, and what's just elec-

tion hoax, you see, where you fool around with figures and hoax, you see. But in reality, you see, we are all in one boat, of course. The whole two-party system is a great hoax, because the taxes are paid by the Democrats as well as by the Republicans. The army is served in by the Democrats and the Republicans.

Don't overrate the two-party system, you see. It's a very na‹ve idea to say that you are a Democrat, and you are Republican. Gentlemen, you are 5 percent of a party man in the United States and 95, you are just an American, you see. The idea of -- of defining yourself as a Republican or Democrat doesn't help you at all, because your whole destiny and fate is shaped by the H-bomb, and by your -- the territory in which you live, and by the tax load which your carry, and by the state of war or peace which we declare, and everything else. And that we all have in common. And especially that you enjoy to call yourself a Democrat or a Republican, you see, is a very minor matter. Very minor. Anybody who begins to define himself by "I'm a Republican," or "I'm a Democrat," just shows how little about his own real existence he knows, you see. It's a very little percentage of your being that can be classified away by your political -- allegiance.

But for the government, it makes all the difference, because it allows the head of the government, you see, to be prepared, to gain ground, you see, to refresh himself, to be regenerated. And if you look at the government, the twoparty system is the one thing that allows the regeneration, the rebirth of America. So it isn't so very much what -- the difference it makes in your life, but it makes a tremendous difference in the life of government, you see, because otherwise government would be monolithic. It would be stalactitic. It would be steel, and not alive. But with the threat, you see, of a rebirth, even the government that is in power has, you see, sometimes to come to its senses, by the threat of being replaced.

Now this thing I want to drive into you today is that by looking into sports, we also have prepared the ground to look at the other pastimes. We already rec- -- recognize, gentlemen, that in any sport, the spectators represent the onlooker -- onlooking mind. If you take here the -- the athletics field in the boxes, and in the tribunes of the -- of the spectators, you meet with a humanity which is all interest in reflecting the game, but not -- in looking on, but not in doing.

So their own bodies sit back, and they are -- as I said, they are looking like here; the spectators at a football game are the most disagreeable part, certainly, of the situation. I mean, you can very well be frightened when you look at the human types you meet at the -- as spectators, including the whisky bottles. I think if you have a friend from another country, take him to a football game, but try to seat him in such a way that he doesn't see the spectators, which is diffi-

cult. He will be very much impressed by the football team -- by the team, but he will not be impressed by the spectators. He will think the end of the world has come, because the spectators represent the opposite from the discipline, the physical, you see, muscular virility of the athlete. They let themselves go. They are undisciplined -- that's the first thing we may say -- in their outer appearance.

And we already said they are the people, the critics. The spectators are the people, the talkers. This is then the inside, conversational group. And it may very well be compared to the student body as sitting here in a classroom or in a bull session, conversing about the game in the outer world.

And the inner exchange of views, gentlemen, of things we see outside, that is study. That is the ivory tower of the academic profession. That is the world of the mind. In the mind, pe- -- two or more people reflect on the outergoing -- on -- goings-on in the outer world. And they play with these impressions, gentlemen. To study is to play with ideas, with impressions, to reflect on them in -- as the exchange of dialogue, as in a Platonic dialogue, where the people meet in the street, or they meet in the dressing room after the game. And Socrates says to one of these young athletes, "Now tell me what -- what do you think in general, and in -- in particular?" you see. And the intermission, gentlemen, of the athletic games is the birth of the university, of the -- birth of the academic clan. We are here because at one time in Greece the onlookers of the athletic games settled down to more than just a short chat. They made it a professional business to follow up what they had seen, you see, and to pursue it into its last consequences.

And philosophy has then come from the fact that the spectators of games and plays began to reflect more thoroughly and more permanently on what they see -- saw with the eye and they heard with their ears; which is a very strange thing that we, as of today, in Dartmouth, reflect very well the Greek -- original Greek situation: plays outdoors, and games; and a little bit of chat, and conversation, and criticism inside. If you -- if you for example analyze the kind of philosophy, sociology, and psychology that you learn in this college, that has very much to do with an idea: here is a man playing the game, baseball, or tennis, are taken as the rules of the game, the natural, enlightened self-interest, teamwork and what-not. And you don't find much more in a lecture in this college or in a course as prerequisite to -- for the understanding of the student. You no longer have to know even Latin or Greek, let alone English. And you just have to have played in order to know that people may -- can make themselves, so to speak, understood to you. The basis of our conversation is usu- -- more or less the experience of your family life and -- and baseball. As you know, the -- in -- in the state of New York, the superintendents -- the people who apply for the superintendency of schools are examined, and have to -- to -- to -- to

prove that they know the football and baseball heroes of the last 20 years by name.

So you can't fall deeper. So much do the games in this country, the sports, make law, for the knowledge of educators, that you can't become a superintendent of schools in New York state if you cannot prove that you know which idiot won the game in 1934. It's quite an achievement.

(Is there a possibility of drawing an analogy between a -- spectators in an athletic contest and a power -- political power out of power, so to speak?)

Well, we'll do so later. The greens, and the blues, and the famous circus of Byzanz, they were of course parties of the circ- -- of spectators, you see. And they ran the government in -- in -- in Byzantium in the 6th -- 7- -- or 7th -- in the 7th century. So these spectators can develop political significance. And -- but I don't see at this moment that I should go into this, you see. This is -- we -- we'll come to politics from another angle.

Gentlemen, the older people, as I told you, who have the ritual of common meals at these great events in life, where dinners are in order, we said inauguration, christening, funeral, and wedding, you see, where the inevitable short event has to be embellished by slowing down the ceremony around it, by making the coronation last 24 hours, you see, when in fact the crowning can take place within a second, you see -- these rituals, of course, can also be divided into the lyrical, the epical, the dramatic, and the -- what was the last?

(Analytical. Natural.)

Natural. Also the study group. And obviously, gentlemen, that which is dramatic in its truest sense, that gives you the illusion of a change of epoch, of entering a new age, the arts themselves -- here we put ceremony or ritual. I give you the word free, because it -- has nearly dropped from our daily language, so it is very hard for me to know which term will convey to you the lar- -- large ritual of common meals, where you don't buy food, but where you sit down to celebrate. Well, you can call it "celebration," of course, if you want to have it. And the arts, they are -- all containing these elements of the four treatments -- manipulations of time. The Prisma of time, the spectrum of time is to be found in all of these. We'll see it right away the study.

But at this moment, I just have to tell you that of course drama is the most of -- artistic in art. Naturalistic art, that is the mere copying of fact, Mr. Zola or Mr. Joyce, or whatever you have, is, so to speak, less artistic than Shakespeare's Hamlet. Or the Greek tragedy. The art of art -- art, so to speak, to the second

power, appears in drama. Drama is, so to speak, art in the second power; as I also would say that in athletics, that which is completely extrovert, which is completely overcoming a most difficult, external, you see, obstacle, would be sport in the second power, you see, would be the sport of sports.

So drama, novel, ballad, and lyrics would be the four -- literary or the four artistic forms -- within the art of the word. But we -- this would be wrong again to put here, because there is painting, there is music, there is architecture. And you will immediately see that our eyes are opened now to a very wonderful organization of all playlike, playful life. Everything that is outside the immediate question of life and death in an order which is again strangely unknown today. If you have in literature, in {frank}, drama, as leading art within the use of the word, you must ask yourself, "What about music?" Well, music obviously is lyrics in the second power. If you have music without -- "Song Without Words" by Mendelssohn, he exploits the power of mood -- of moodiness to such an extent that he even forgoes the connection with that little bit of drama which any speech would involve, you see, and he can plunge into mere lyrics. Lyri- -- music is purified lyrics. It is lyrics to the nth degree, so to speak. It is inward movement. You can -- close your eyes and listen to the music and have a whole world of inner movement inside of you. Music is pure inwardness. Much -- as much as drama is pure future. Future of mankind purified to a yet-unheard solution.

In drama, the hero, as I told you, represents the new era to come, a world for which the real people are not yet born. That's why he has to die. But in his person, you see -- Socrates, or Jesus, or any tragic hero, represents a type of mankind, you see, around whom the next people should really form themselves so that they can -- enter a new era of better men, and greater -- of greater stature.

Now we get -- come of course, to painting. Painting is the op- -- very opposite of music. It is absolutely static. That is, you can't have a -- a -- a mural that moves. There it is. It's there-ness, you see. And it is connected with the outer world. But it makes this outer world meaningful. It is not just a chaos of impressions. But your picture, if it is any good, gives you this landscape to possess, as a possession forever. If you -- look at a Gauguin, or you look at a -- at a van Gogh, the -- the landscape that they have produced has never existed before. He -- they have created out of the raw, over the last 50 years, something that has nothing to do with the paintings which you see on -- by Mr. Rockwell Kent or any of these non-painters in this country. They cannot create landscapes. They can just sell them. And I -- remarked already enough about the difference between saleable art and real art.

All new art, gen- -- real art, gentlemen, is never at the first moment for sale. It never fetches any price. It's priceless. And your great mistake is that you think an artist is a man who is successful in selling his stuff. Of course, he's not an artist. He's successful in selling his stuff. That's just stuff. And he's just selling. So better call him a salesman.

And most of this country's, you see, misery, comes from the fact that you believe that the people who sell their short stories to the Saturday Evening Post are to be respected. They are prostitutes. Do you respect whores? They write because they know it will sell. And that is the one reason not to write.

The word -- gentlemen, believe me one thing. It's perhaps too early for you to understand, but I have to announce it, so to speak. The -- the -- the chastity of a woman's body must always be com- -- paralleled by the chastity of a man's mind. Your body -- the sins of your body are not visited on you. Per- -- I think God is perfectly indifferent whether you go and have intercourse or not with somebody else. That is not -- He is not interested in that, despite all the Puritans. But He is terribly interested that what -- you mean what you say. And you are utterly lost, once you become accustomed to the fact that you can say that which sells. As soon as you begin to believe that a man can say that for which he gets a price, you are just a -- male harlot. Man is not a harlot -- the male is not a harlot because he gives away his body. He is a harlot because he gives away his -- his mind. And this is the prominent story of this country, that there is not even a warning uttered in this country towards young men, that they must not do this. They call it "integrity" with the last remnant of reminiscing.

(Well, what would you say about the story of Dostoevsky, which he wrote for a periodical, in order to sell -- in order to deal with -- get something to eat?)

Well, he vomited. That's why he was so sick. The poor man knew exactly when he did one thing and when he did the other. Don't you think? He knew. But of course the whip of reality is on him. As long as such a man say, "I'm cursed" -- says to himself, "I'm cursed because I have to do this," all his sins can be forgiven him, you see. When we confess that this is wrong, the wrong isn't visited on us, you see. A -- a man who goes to the police and says, "I have committed a crime," and gives himself up, is through with the crime. You can send him to the penitentiary. That's an out- -- external measure. In his soul, this is finished, you see, because he has called what he has done with the right name. He has said, you see, "This was wrong." That's enough. That's the confession of sins by which we are forgiven our sins. So the writer who says, "I have to feed my wife and my child, but it is a cursed existence, and I should be a welder,

I should be a cobbler instead," it's all right. But a man who gets the Pulitzer Prize for literature for doing such doings, you see, he's lost, because he believes that he has to be honored.

(Well, does that -- does that which { } then affects the quality of work that he turned out? In other words, you -- would you say that the things that Dostoevsky turned out for the periodicals are -- are therefore not particularly good?)

Oh no. There is -- you see, the -- the man is a very great abyss inside himself. If you lift yourself over the tragedy that you have to write for money, and say, "It's cursed, but I'll do better. I'll not do it because I write," you can always free yourself from any chain of fate, you see. Man is a very strange animal, you see. By confessing what we are -- seem to do in the world, you see, you can always rise above it, you see. You can even sell the truth when you seem to -- only to sell commercial { }, you see. But it takes a special effort, and it doesn't happen by itself. It doesn't happen because you like, that you're freed, you see. That would lull you into a false security, would it not? And so you couldn't sin.

Gentlemen, the most attractive, I think, opening or revelation to me has always been that I have been able to understand why architecture is an art by itself, a much greater art than, for example, sculpture, and an art of a character as universal and as important as drama. Architecture, gentlemen, is not the building of spaces. But it is the formation of movement into contact, into organized -- into organ- -- organized, repetitive, epical, so to speak, you see, fulfillment. If you build a palace, if you build a -- a supreme court, if you build a Capitol Hill, you have to consider the coming out, and the going, and the sitting down of the people, you see, who have -- want to meet regularly, repeatedly in a legal, legitimate way at a certain place.

The problem of architecture has been com- -- totally misunderstood in this -- last centuries of scientific death, of treating only dead things and mechanical things, or physics and chemistry, because people have said, "Well, you have a roof over a certain amount of space, 10,000 square yards, and then you have a factory underneath, and that is a building."

That has nothing to do with architecture, gentlemen. Architecture is always the tremendous art of honoring, of ennobling repeated movements of people. If you build a modern housing development, that's not -- has nothing to do with architecture. That's a machine. That's a -- as much as the wrappings around your cigarettes, I mean. These poor people who are thrown into these housing apartments. I mean, Wigwam and -- and Sachem Village are tragic

examples of this ugliness, we were promised that the -- these temporary buildings would be taken out by 1948. They are still with us and probably will be always with us, as long as you do not say something about it. I hope you will. It's a scandal that these buildings hang around our neck here. It's just incredible. But you don't even see it. You think it's normal, because all Americans want to live in tents.

Now gentlemen, if you go into Sanborn Hall, you can learn what is not architecture. Sanborn Hall is an absolute misunderstanding of architecture, because when you open the door, what you run into is the newel. You see, you are not sucked into either left or right, and not -- are not pulled up the stair, you see, or meant to go down. But you run into the point where you shouldn't go.

Now that is the special art of the architect who has misbuilt and misconstrued Dartmouth College for the last 30 years. And if you look at the Hopkins Center, there is a model of this, I think, in existence somewhere. I have never seen such a heap of non-architectural ugliness than this. Poor Mr. Hopkins finally has escaped this { } the inflation only, that his name was connected with this -- with this box of ugliness and misunderstanding of architecture. Most the things you have -- have been built, I mean, look at the Rollins Chapel, you see. I mean, for a collector of mushrooms, it is very interesting to { }.

You see, but a church was built -- gentlemen, you know how the old churches had to be built? That they would lead you through the Old and the New Testament, and through the six ages of the world. The six, the famous {sex aetates}, the six ages of the world: Adam, you see; Noah; Israel; Jesus and the Apostles; the Old Church; and the messianic age, the eschatological age, the last judgment -- they had to be incorporated into any cathedral. And the meaning of the great cathedrals, which you would -- I -- all agree to be architectural monuments, you see, is not that they have built over space, but that they have formulated movement through time, from the old into the new era, that they have dramatized known movements.

The difference between drama and architecture then is very simple, gentlemen. Architecture believes in the consecration of things already experienced, of acts already known. And drama believes, you see, in the creation of new acts not yet real, you see, anticipated. That's the whole difference. But you never come into Heaven as long as you do not free yourself from this superstition that architecture has to do with bricks, or with steel, or with square yards, or with so many feet of ground to be covered. Our highways and the George Washington Bridge are the greatest pieces of art at this moment in this country, because they invite us to smooth movement, you see. They make us feel how to move with dignity, and honor, and power, and -- and order across the stream

and through the land.

And therefore at this moment, if you want to have great art, you have to go to the unrecognized builders of highways, because -- take this from me, gentlemen: great art is always incognito in its own days. It's always unrecognized. Mozart had to go up the back stage -- the back stair in the palaces for which he composed the music. And as soon as Beethoven was received by the noblemen of his time, music began to become so individualistic that today it's -- is no longer in existence. Music is gone from too much honor, from --.

The artist, gentlemen, as much as his art, lives in the future. Art is prophetic. Art is prophetic. Architecture -- I mean drama. And -- and -- and all art is prophetic. But you can give more to the architect than you would do -- to the dramatist. The musician, and the painter, and the architect, and the poet however will always be to certain extent strangers to their own time, because they do anticipate something. All art does -- anticipate solutions not yet known. Therefore, you cannot believe that they will be honored in their own time, because honor is only given at any time to the people you are quite sure of, you see. And you mustn't feel uncertain about their achievement. When you get much money by sponsors of the arts, you may always be sure that 90 percent gets -- goes to the poor artist. Perhaps 10 percent to the good artist. It cannot be helped, because the eyes, as the Bible says, the eyes of the people that live are held. They are kept, you see, under a veil. The future they cannot see. And the artist represents the future. And although he may tell them, "I am the future," they won't believe it, you see.

So artists, gentlemen, are prophetic. All the arts are prophetic. But with regard to architecture, and drama, and lyrics, and painting -- music and painting, there is a distinction. Drama is most prophetic. It is most fledgling of the future. It flies really into the future, so to speak, without any difficulty. Pain- -- architecture is tied down much more to the experiences of the past, and in -- music is pent up with our experienced feelings, which it tries us to relive, and painting is creating the landscape in which we live -- the reality -- the outer reality in which we live into something organized, unified, into something that makes us feel that it is fulfilled.

Fulfillment then is the problem of the arts, gentlemen. Anticipated fulfillment. Van Gogh paints landscapes that have never been seen by any mortal eye before. Nobody has lived them. Now he creates them. And the same is true of the Ninth Symphony. The millions have not embraced in love, you see, and joy. But the composer has -- composer -- right to anticipate the solution. And if you take any building for a coronation, or for a funeral, or for a -- or a great -- any architectural thing, the movement anticipated by the architect is always a

little better than we actually perform. It is, you see, also training {has then} -- into this new movement, you see. We behave better, because of the architect's imaginative planning, as we did before.

So I have now distributed, gentlemen, lyrics, epics, analytics, and drama among the four arts. And I have showed you that out of one root, the power to create a second time, playing with time and a second space, all the arts unfold into various directions. And you can now subdivide, gentlemen, and you can say that in music the symphony is the purest music, because it's -- lyrics is -- enhance into mere music without words. And then in music, you have a dance -- that is still purposive, you see; you have a song, that is still containing words, and therefore not pure music, you see. Think of all the -- the songs -- folk songs of Schubert, or the -- the chorus in the Ninth Symphony, or the opera, you see. Opera is mixed up with painting and architecture, obviously, you see. But if you have the symphony, you may say that's the -- or the quartet, that's mixed up -- that's the purest music again.

So you can inside music again divide into the epical, the analytical, the dramatic, and the lyrical element, you see. And you come then to the purest inside of the inside. And that would be, you see, the mere music, the purest -- pure music, you see. Not connexed with jazz band, or opera playing in the Metropolitan, or any such thing.

If you try to see into the center of all these artistic movements and behaviors, you will perhaps find dance as representative of all the four arts. Dance needs some formed space, as in architecture, you see; and it needs some externalization. It must be a picture. I mean, you want to see something, you see, that is { }. It has to be musical, you see, and it has to be in a -- to a certain extent dramatic.

So in dancing, you get between architecture, music -- literature, and painting in a -- in a strange completeness. And that's why dance is the most -- the frailest, and yet the most perfect art. And it has been said by a father of the Church, that the Church would only have done her part if they would recognize that the revelation of Christ could only be fulfilled by Christ in dance, by dancing, because that is the utter freedom, the complete emancipation of the human soul if he could -- if she could show herself in dance. But it is frail, too.

You also must understand then the four arts, gentlemen -- architecture, literature, painting, and music -- as temptations. They try to freeze out, they tried to solidify, they tried to crystallize something that probably should be, you see, as alive as your breath. A dance must have the freshness, you see, of the dres- -- the life moment. All the other arts to me are -- have already signs of

lopsidedness. They are more powerful. The building is bigger than a dancing green, you see. But I prefer the dancing green. The symphony has 120 musicians, you see, instead of one fiddler. But I prefer the fiddler. And the -- the same about the murals of -- of a fresco, of Michelangelo in the Sistine Chapel, you see, and the beauty of a dancing couple, of a -- young people who really are beautiful to look at. I prefer these liv- -- liv- -- living people who can be seen for only five minutes. Tomorrow they'll be ugly. They'll be married. And the beauty is gone, the morning dew.

Gentlemen, the frail is also a consideration in art. Frailty is the -- the frailer something is, the more lovable it is. We love babies, because you could destroy them just with one punch of your fist. And that's what forces you to revere them, because they are so delicate, so frail. You need not have any reverence before the solid forms of a tank, because you are not tempted to take your fist and knock it out against the tank, you see, or a battleship. The strong is not lovable. The frail is lovable.

Now art, gentlemen, is an imitation, or an anticipation of the lovable. In unreality, in play, art plays with love, in other words. Art plays with love. And love can only be the weak. You cannot love anything that is just power. Power is not lovable. The frail is lovable. And this is a very simple situation, gentlemen. That's why whenever man tries to arm himself with armor, with tanks, with battleships, with -- with jet planes, you see, he's going the way of all flesh. He's going to the animal kingdom. And he -- you must remember than when the great sauriae existed on earth, they all had the power which we are now trying to have in our armed forces. They were very strong, but they couldn't be loved, and so they died out. And then man comes into being, the most frail, ma- -- pe- -- person in his cradle, you see. And as I said, you just shake your head. It begins to cry, and to despair, and commit suicide from fear that you might kill it, so weak is man. Weak is always -- man is always in a depressive mood. One -- one bad look of your girl in the morning, and your whole day is spoiled. And that makes you a real -- into a real human being, that you are frail, that you are fragile, that you can be destroyed any moment.

So whenever you find in the world of ours as of today these tremendous armament races, you may be sure that around the corner for the refreshment of life, there looms the Gospel again of our weakness. You are absolutely uninteresting when you are big and strong. You are only interesting to anybody by whom you want to be loved, if she -- she knows that -- you need her, and admit it.

(Sir? Do you mean to say that life in comparison with marriage, that marriage is strength and before marriage is weakness, and that's why you { },

like you said?)

Well, that's why -- you see -- would you repeat your question, pardon me?

(You said that -- you said that before marriage -- and after marriage...)

[tape interruption]

She is, but he isn't.

({ }.)

Pardon me? I mean, don't you run away from all these overpowering housewives, and -- and lady women voters? I think they are terrible.

Now, gentlemen, if architecture, and lyrics, and music, and painting, and literature together really form the arts, with the dance as its core -- at -- at the constant origin of all the arts -- because that you and I should dance in exuberation, you see, means -- makes -- means that we can love. Love makes us dance, joy makes us dance. If you can't -- ever feel the stress of having to dance, you are lost. And then you may hang yourself.

Dance is the natural form in -- by which we feel -- free to enter a future in a -- in a mood that frees us from all the fetters of the present, and all organized law, and organized custom. Dance is exuberant. If you see this, then -- we -- you -- also will learn the lesson that art is love at play, or playing with love, training for love, gaining time for love, preparing us to love better, learning how to love, you see. Finding the -- the style for love. This is art. Then you will also ask me, "What is then athletics?" Well -- it's all sports -- taken together obviously are training for war. That is, it is playing with war, with warlike situations. That is, the real threat on our existence has to be lifted, you see, a struggle.

And therefore, gentlemen, we put now on the front here, the arts as suggesting our being challenged by love. And all the sports suggest that we are challenged by struggle. We have competitive sports, because we have a competitive society. Once you have Socialism, I'm sure football will be on the decline, you see, because no need for it, for training for competition. Then you will have other sports, lyrical sports, you see, like skiing. And as you know, Amer- -- Dartmouth shows the development of American economy very clearly in its -- in its wavering between skiing and -- and football.

Obviously, the boys in lacrosse now want to become rich, and you have

given up all hope, so you go skiing, and lose in -- against -- against Holy Cross. And the Holys become rich.

Now gentlemen, what is then covered up with ceremony? And what is covered up by studies? Which other challenge? At this point, only I wanted to give you this completeness. We have four types of playing with reality. And we have already found that the sports train us -- gain time so that we be more efficient in war, in all the war times. The arts train us so that we be more powerful in love. Arts and love go together. If you don't take your girl to a show, you are not in love. It's unnatural, because you want to be exposed to some artistic impression together, you see; or to music, or whatever it is. Everybody does this. Or you want to go to Italy on your honeymoon, you see, to see the palaces and the architecture of Rome. Have you ever thought why this is so, you see? Because the arts and love are, you see, the -- in relation as serious life is, { } its corresponding play.

Let's stop at this moment and have a -- what time is it?

[tape interruption]

In the four forms, gentlemen, of ceremony, we always affirm our tradition, our civilization, our culture. And in this sense, the civilized being in us creates forms, certain forms. Take the -- your know -- foreknowledge that on certain occasions you will have to wear a gown, or you will have to wear a tuxedo and a black tie, or even a long-tailed coat and white tie, a uniform on parade, you see. This gives you the feeling that you belong to a dignified outfit. Or anything that you call "honorable" and "dignified" comes under this heading. -- Your mothers, for example, always must tell you what -- at what time to put on what, when you come home and you're invited. They -- they can tell you whether it's enough to have flannels, or whether you should put on a blue -- a blue suit. What does this mean, that they represent the dignity of the human race? Our back- -- what you call "background." Ceremonies, gentlemen, say that we are somebody's children, that we have come a long way in history.

And so I would prefer the expression that forms reveal us as historical beings. You can say that they reveal us as wanting to be civilized, or act under the molding and plastic influence of culture. That's why it is so terrible to hear in this country people talk of "cultural patterns," or "patterns of behavior." Gentlemen, as soon as I hear of patterns, I don't want to be patterned. And I rebel. A free man, a man with a soul, and a man with a spirit, and a man who wants to be loved cannot afford to live according to any pattern. Schedules, and patterns, and laws are there to be broken. They are not good enough for human beings, you see. Chinaware has patterns. Wedg- -- Wedgwood has, you see.

And -- and Paul Revere silverware has a certain pattern. And you can imitate that. But the -- the downfall of America at this moment comes from the fact that an expression of mechanic status or origin is applied to what would give you honor and dignity. To be a lieutenant -- a first lieutenant in an army is not a pattern, not a cultural pattern, you see. It's an honor.

Two days ago, I was -- I had the visit of a boy, a Dartmouth '51, who had to serve under an ass of a company commander who had only ROTC training. My friend had no such training, and he is just there in a -- in the boot camp for four months. And this ROTC boy from Syracuse showed his asinine character especially in that he always assured his men that he was condescendingly kind to them.

For example, they had this heat wave. And he didn't give them any water. So a superior officer came by and said, "For Heaven's sake, on such an extraordinary day of course, they have to get an extra ration of water. These people are -- dying from thirst."

So he had of course to come around. The superior officer told him so, but he made a speech how kind he was to give them water.

Now this man, you see, mistakes his position of quality, which he has as a company commander, completely because he doesn't know that it is a great honor to command good American boys. And if you -- who is in an ROTC outfit? Gentlemen, the worst you can do is to forget that any man who is a corporal is enjoying an immense privilege, because other people are at his mercy. And if you have not -- cannot preserve this feeling of the privilege that it is, to stand in front of 10 men, you don't deserve your epaulets. You don't deserve your uniform. You deserve to be degraded. You can be the most effective officer, just the same. But the one thing you must know is that you have been exalted into a position, you see, of privilege, because of an historical chain of events, which dignifies you beyond your own merits.

Gentlemen, when Elizabeth is queen of England, it's a frank admission that she doesn't deserve it as a human being. It just happens to be that way, you see, in the dynastic stream. So the -- the -- Englishmen are all very humble, because having the dynasty, they know that the accident of birth isn't dignity, given dignity, but the way you respond to the dignity, you see, which comes to you; you know that you are not up to the occasion. You are less than the quality history bestows on you.

Would you take this down, gentlemen? Ceremonies warn all men that they are less than the office that has fallen upon you. It will always be held to

Mr. Truman's credit that he had such a great opinion of being the president of the United States. And I -- say this without disparagement. I think that Mr. Eisenhower has no such feeling. He thinks that Mr. Eisenhower is the man, or the general is the man, or the -- trust of the electorate is the man, but it isn't the office that is so great. But for Mr. Truman, who was a very small man, the presidency of the United States, so to speak, was everything, you see, that made him. He looked up to it. He said, "This is greater than me." And in all this discussion between Democrats and Republicans, gentlemen, you never focus on the central thing: is this office you -- something that you feel honored by, you see? That you really feel made by, you see? And -- that's the opposition, you see, to the selfmade man. And that's why this country has no forms, no ceremonies, no ritual, no liturgy, no understanding even of quality, because here people say, "The best man is the self-made man." And in England, the people say, "A self-made man is no man. He's uncivilized." It's an error of judgment, you see. No man is selfmade, because the fact that anybody who is willing to listen to you comes to you only as a gift, you see, of the historical process by which you happen to have something the other man needs, or the other man is asking for. The fact that he can speak to you is already something, you see, that is not of your own making.

Now test yourself, gentlemen. There is I think in 90 percent of the American students in colleges at this moment, a complete ignorance about quality, or dignity, or honor. Some of you may bandy around these words. I don't care. And even overdo their importance. In hazing, I mean, you may think it's very important to join a certain fraternity, and have the honor of being a member of this outfit. Now wrong honor, of course, and wrong dignities may blind your sense to the true sense of honor and -- and real dignity. You can always test it when you think of being a corporal.

It is however true, gentlemen, that through ceremony and -- and title, and emblems, and symbols, and uniforms, and costumes, we are entering the halls of the past, as in great architecture. Architecture, you see, reflects, of course, this tremendous hall of antiquity out of which we come, and out of which we receive our meaning, our name, our status, our profession, our calling -- everything we have, our property. Property is form. That you have property makes you into a formed gentleman, into somebody of the landed gentry in England, for example, of somebody of means, of somebody of background, and whatever you call it.

So gentlemen, your contempt of form stands in the way of your happiness, just as much as your sneering at art would stand in the way of your power to love. As you know, these are the two danger zones of the American male. The American male mistakes sex for love, because he's unartistic. He doesn't write poetry. He doesn't make music. He doesn't build tasteful palaces. But Rollins

Chapel is an -- is an -- an indictment that this ever has been possible as a place of worship. I mean, if you do not suffer from the ugliness of Rollins Hall, you are not fit for the kingdom of Heaven. That's a contradiction in term to a place for divine worship. It is a -- it is a -- it is a -- it is a slap in the face of God Almighty who created a beautiful world outside Rollins Chapel. And to worship and praise Him, we go into Rollins Chapel. Well, any hill in Vermont and New Hampshire is better. And that isn't the meaning of architecture. We try to improve on the landscape by building a temple to God Almighty, obviously, you see. Do a little bit better.

So gentlemen, this is your lacuna: art and ceremony. You are very good at mechanical -- knowledge, about the know-how, as you call it, and that we learn in science, in studying. There you are excellent. And you are very good at sports.

So on this cross-beam, gentlemen, of inner and outer, inner reflection and outer reaction, you are outstanding. There is no other country in which the sports are so over-cultivated, and in which there is a better know-how. And know-how is of course -- comes from an inner reflection of processes, and we study them step-by-step, and try to reflect on them, you see.

So gentlemen, the world of work, the -- is reflected on in your studies. And the world of struggle is very well taken care of in our sports. Work and struggle. But the world of tradition, the world of origin, and the world of ends is not there. Struggle, gentlemen, and work after all are the worlds of means, of instruments, of tools. Of energy stored up, you see, 100,000-volt, and 200,000-volt, and a million volt, and so many watt -- kilo- -- kilowatt in our -- coming down Boulder Dam, I don't know how many, you see. This really are -- nobody does this as this country does. But you not -- need not be ashamed to confess that the nations of the world have entered into a kind of division of labor. And that's why people go to Paris, and they go to England from this country -- in order to learn dignity, and in order to learn something about art. Where you go into the English Parliament, you know -- see how dignified people can behave, you see, and if you go to Montmartre, you see how artistic people can dance.

And this is therefore, gentlemen, the life line of America. Paris and London are no accidents of geography. But they replenish that which America has not: a natural relation to forms, to ceremony, to ritual on the one-hand side, and a -- and a spontaneous relation to creative art. As -- the more we shall perform in this direction, the less Paris and London will have anything to teach us.

But I think I should point out to you that in the world of play, there is also a thirst for the complete human being. And we have now stated some great

truth, which is very important for you to -- really to digest, and not just to listen to for one minute. Wherever you walk in life, you will be pulled into these four directions: of war, of work, of love, and of dignity or honor.

And you may now remember that I have asked you to read the book by Cabot. And he has a different cross. But I don't mind in exposing you to this contradiction. I am not completely in agreement with Mr. -- our friend Richard Cabot. But you cannot breathe without these four things, because, gentlemen, honor is time already gained. If you are uttered as a son of your father, you see, you already have a starting, you see. They give you a chance, because you are more than just an insect. You have a certain status, as an American, for example, you see. You are on -- begin on a higher level than a man from Iraq at this moment, obviously. You haven't -- you haven't -- they haven't given -- the times -- the past has given you more credit.

So gentlemen, honor is time already gained. Love is time to be gained. We must marry, or we must fall in love, when otherwise the race would come to an end in us. We have to explode into a new future by falling in love. War is time running away, you see. And work is a world at peace, in itself -- with itself, and therefore allowing everyone to indulge in his own activity. You can only work when other people work, too. Work always presupposes a division of labor, you see. War always se- -- presupposes that somebody else wants to destroy your -- your organization, your society in which you can work. So war tries to break up peace.

Now peace and war are the two attitudes in the present. And I think Americans are good at work and in war. But love renews the life, changes it in a way unknown before. That cannot be -- neither be -- you can work your head off; if you can't love, you'll fall dead on the ground. And the same with war. You can't make peace without the love of your enemy. And honor, you would be drifting if you have no credit to your -- you see, in your account of the past. You cannot inherit the earth. Then you work { }. Anything you here at this moment -- you have on you, my dear men, is inherited. This you can only have by getting credit for it. You see, people honor you and you honor the past; that's a reciprocal movement, you see. They accept you as a Dartmouth student, for example. Now all the honor due to Dartmouth, you see, goes to you, without any merit. Just open an account, you see. You get the credit for it, at this moment. And they give you 30 or 40 years to -- to make good, you see. So far, you are credited with something that was started -- an account in 1769, long before you were born, just because you are {taken out} to be a Dartmouth boy, and you are credited with being an American. And so on and so forth. All these are credit accounts, you see, open to you from the past.

Now gentlemen, you don't -- let me finish this one sentence, gentlemen. Honor is reciprocal. You have no relation to honor, because you think it's the honor that others want you to give them, George III of England, or an English peer. Gentlemen, it is -- as much the honor which you can only receive in a system of honor. If you do -- honor -- don't honor, you can't be honored. Dog eats dog. And wolf bites -- kills wolf. You want honor. Therefore you have to -- you see, to attribute honor. You need all the credit, you see, in order to be a -- a student, because at this time, you are achieving nothing. You are a drone. If people would judge you by what you are doing today, you see, they must say, "Out he goes," you see. "We'll tax him out of existence, because he is a never-dowell." It is only by crediting your future, you see, as deserving now the support of society that you can afford to be here doing nothing for four years.

Therefore you need honor. Honor is nothing what you -- what you think it is. It is not the medal -- Congressional Medal and so. Honor means time around you, already gained. The best definition of honor. Take a judge. Take old Justice Holmes. He was 90, on the bench. Of course, you had to pay some respect to his weakness. It took him a lot longer to sit down and to move out. But he enjoyed honor. That is, time given to him, you see. You gain -- you give -- make room for him, because he deserves it, you see. He has gained honor through a long life. And why shouldn't an old man take a little longer time in his movements? Why shouldn't you say, "Out he goes," because he hasn't the muscular strength? It would be ridiculous to judge him by this external skin. Yet in this country, it's done all the time, because you don't know what honor is. Honor is reciprocal, gentlemen; love is reciprocal; work is reciprocal; and war is reciprocal. Life is not given you -- to -- us -- to individuals. If you analyze these four situations, as we shall do next time, you will find the miracle of our existence is that it is each time a social birth. Society, the group, gives birth to us in our honor, in our love, in our work, and at -- in our struggles.

Thank you.