Machine transcription, not yet edited
====================
1980-07-08 Kathy Wilkes - dopis_Stránka_1.jpg
====================
To whom it may concern: 8/vii/1980 I write about two things: one, the 'Oxford visits' to Prague, the second the Educational Trust. I hope to make our ideas here as clear as possible, so that they might serve as a basis for further discussion, either verbally or written. First, the 'Oxford visits'. The Sub-Faculty of Philosophy at Oxford declared its intention, at a meeting of 5 May 1980, to 'continue to seek for ways in which philosophers from outside Czechoslovakia could meet to discuss philosophy with their colleagues inside the country in conformity to Czechoslovak law and without police intervention'. In other words, the series of visits does not hinge upon Dr. Tomin or rather, would not do so if/when he left the country. At present we continue to send all visitors primarily to Dr. Tomin, because we know exactly where we are with him: the position is absolutely clear, and we know that he is willing to accept the risks that such visits may and do bring. The Sub-Faculty of philosophy has a working sub-committee (Professors Michael Dummett & Charles Taylor; Mr. Alan Montefiore; Dr. Newton-Smith; Dr. Wilkes) to arrange for visitors not just from Oxford but from other universities, in the U.K. and elsewhere, as well; as you may know, Oxford has assumed this ' role of organizer of the philosophical visits because Dr. Tomin had asked us to, to ensure that visitors were known-about in advance, that not too many came at any one time, and that the visitors had at least a little information about what they should do and where they should go. This committee, if it were thought desirable in Prague, would continue to operate even if Dr. Tomin left Prague; indeed, if he and his family came to Oxford, as we hope they will, the committee would evidently be enormously assisted by the advice and information that Dr. Tomin and Zdena Tominová would be able to offer. So, I think, the next step is up to you that is, to other philosophers in Czechoslovakia who might want to see the visits continue. Our only ambition is to do whatever might be helpful or welcome; but above all we do not want to send along philosophers (from Oxford or elsewhere) whose presence would not be welcome. In other words, it would help us enormously if the sub-committee knew what you wanted; so that we didn't send along philosophers whose presence might be an embarrassment or a danger. Any philosophers who visited would of course be willing to come on any basis: either to talk to groups of people, or to one or two, or to small groups in several sessions we just need to know what is required or desirable or welcome. The fact is that once Dr. Tomin leaves, we remain willing and enthusiastic (we all know how much we gain from these visits) but ignorant about the best course of action. This point is important, so if you will excuse me I'll re-state it: in the last few months it has been increasingly apparent to us how little any of us have to risk (at worst, a few hours inconvenience) but how much Czechoslovak philosophers risk by conducting and attending seminars; so our central concern just now is to ensure that if the visits continue after Dr. Tomin's departure, they continue in the right way. Therefore a clear invitation, or at least a summary of what you think, would be really invaluable to the Oxford sub-committee. I should perhaps add two points. First and I am sure that you are only too familiar with this there is fairly massive ignorance about the position in Czechoslovakia, and, further, that many good and valuable western philosophers are rather cautious individuals. Thus, if possible, it would be helpful (though perhaps impossible) if we received the kind of invitation that did not involve too much secrecy; what made it possible for the Oxford Sub-Faculty to accept Dr. Tomin's offer with such enthusiasm was, in part, the fact that he did not ask us to act surreptitiously. Of course, we know that prudence and sense are essential; on the other hand it assists us here if we are able to describe the visits in all honesty as 'regular' academic visits to colleagues in Czechoslovakia. }
1980-07-08 Kathy Wilkes - dopis_Stránka_1.jpg
====================
To whom it may concern: 8/vii/1980 I write about two things: one, the 'Oxford visits' to Prague, the second the Educational Trust. I hope to make our ideas here as clear as possible, so that they might serve as a basis for further discussion, either verbally or written. First, the 'Oxford visits'. The Sub-Faculty of Philosophy at Oxford declared its intention, at a meeting of 5 May 1980, to 'continue to seek for ways in which philosophers from outside Czechoslovakia could meet to discuss philosophy with their colleagues inside the country in conformity to Czechoslovak law and without police intervention'. In other words, the series of visits does not hinge upon Dr. Tomin or rather, would not do so if/when he left the country. At present we continue to send all visitors primarily to Dr. Tomin, because we know exactly where we are with him: the position is absolutely clear, and we know that he is willing to accept the risks that such visits may and do bring. The Sub-Faculty of philosophy has a working sub-committee (Professors Michael Dummett & Charles Taylor; Mr. Alan Montefiore; Dr. Newton-Smith; Dr. Wilkes) to arrange for visitors not just from Oxford but from other universities, in the U.K. and elsewhere, as well; as you may know, Oxford has assumed this ' role of organizer of the philosophical visits because Dr. Tomin had asked us to, to ensure that visitors were known-about in advance, that not too many came at any one time, and that the visitors had at least a little information about what they should do and where they should go. This committee, if it were thought desirable in Prague, would continue to operate even if Dr. Tomin left Prague; indeed, if he and his family came to Oxford, as we hope they will, the committee would evidently be enormously assisted by the advice and information that Dr. Tomin and Zdena Tominová would be able to offer. So, I think, the next step is up to you that is, to other philosophers in Czechoslovakia who might want to see the visits continue. Our only ambition is to do whatever might be helpful or welcome; but above all we do not want to send along philosophers (from Oxford or elsewhere) whose presence would not be welcome. In other words, it would help us enormously if the sub-committee knew what you wanted; so that we didn't send along philosophers whose presence might be an embarrassment or a danger. Any philosophers who visited would of course be willing to come on any basis: either to talk to groups of people, or to one or two, or to small groups in several sessions we just need to know what is required or desirable or welcome. The fact is that once Dr. Tomin leaves, we remain willing and enthusiastic (we all know how much we gain from these visits) but ignorant about the best course of action. This point is important, so if you will excuse me I'll re-state it: in the last few months it has been increasingly apparent to us how little any of us have to risk (at worst, a few hours inconvenience) but how much Czechoslovak philosophers risk by conducting and attending seminars; so our central concern just now is to ensure that if the visits continue after Dr. Tomin's departure, they continue in the right way. Therefore a clear invitation, or at least a summary of what you think, would be really invaluable to the Oxford sub-committee. I should perhaps add two points. First and I am sure that you are only too familiar with this there is fairly massive ignorance about the position in Czechoslovakia, and, further, that many good and valuable western philosophers are rather cautious individuals. Thus, if possible, it would be helpful (though perhaps impossible) if we received the kind of invitation that did not involve too much secrecy; what made it possible for the Oxford Sub-Faculty to accept Dr. Tomin's offer with such enthusiasm was, in part, the fact that he did not ask us to act surreptitiously. Of course, we know that prudence and sense are essential; on the other hand it assists us here if we are able to describe the visits in all honesty as 'regular' academic visits to colleagues in Czechoslovakia. }
====================
1980-07-08 Kathy Wilkes - dopis_Stránka_2.jpg
====================
2. It is no exaggeration to say that philosophers all over the world are very eager to visit and to play some small part in what they have recently realised is an important and an exciting enterprise. But I would be acting dishonestly if I did not say that a high proportion of these would be deterred if they thought it would be unduly surreptitious, dangerous, or illegal. (I know, and you know, that nothing illegal is done in any of the unofficial seminars; but, I repeat, it is impossible to overestimate the level of ignorance of Czechoslovak law internationally, and many of my colleagues, if asked to adopt measures of extreme security, might get frightened-off by the belief that they would be doing something 'illegal'.) Second and perhaps more trivially and this is a postscript the majority of the philosophical visitors so far have not been people working in the phenomenological tradition. This has not mattered hitherto, because Dr. Tomin and his students were not themselves primarily working in the phenomenological tradition, so his visitors fitted-in reasonably well into his own courses. However we understand that the central theme of Czechoslovak philosophy is phenomenological; and I think you should know this, because although many people are very willing to visit Prague, theyr are for the most part relatively ignorant of the phenomenological tradition. Finally I believe that other scholars ( for example in history, psychology, literature, economics etc.) have considered the possibility of extending invitations to colleagues in the west; perhaps, initially, via Oxford, since Oxford philosophers would be in a position to encourage a response. I think that if this were still felt to be desirable, there would be a good response; so long as the invitation were on the same terms: that is, making it clear that people inside Czechoslovakia were prepared to extend an invitation, explaining to potential visitors what they should do and where they should go, assuring, in fact, nervous western scholars that their visits were indeed welcome (instead of being an unwanted extra risk). I hope that I do not need to say that all such visitors would be willing to come on whatever basis was thought best: to talk to large groups, small groups, individuals whatever. Again we have to bear in mind always that the risks are yours and not ours, so that it is important above all to make it clear that visits on these terms by western academics are not made irresponsibly. (As a member of the sub-committee of the philosophy sub-faculty, I should of course be most willing to assist in whatever way possible any approaches made to other faculties in Oxford.) Second, the Educational Trust. Again, I am afraid, the main need is for information from you. The Trust is set up in such a way that the money collected can be used for any purpose that is clearly describable as education or scholarship. (This would cover acting, music, theology: the term 'education'. is very broad.) As yet we do not know how much money we will be able to collect. We have recently decided not to engage the services of professional fund-raisers, because their charges are too high, and we think perhaps optimxistically that we can manage without them. But we have gathered a lot of information about the preconditions for raising money; and what seems the most important is a very precise statement of needs and priorities. (We will be asking for donations from firms, banks etc. who have up to 30,000 requests each year: so we need to backup the request for donations with convincing and realistic detail, they are assured that we can indeed use their money with good effect. so that In our own discussions we thought of three main possibilities: (1) to provide full fees & maintenance for Czechoslovak students who might wish or need to study abroad for a few years. In U.K. universities, this would come to about £5,000 p.a.; elsewhere it might be less expensive. (2) to buy books, and ^each ..
1980-07-08 Kathy Wilkes - dopis_Stránka_2.jpg
====================
2. It is no exaggeration to say that philosophers all over the world are very eager to visit and to play some small part in what they have recently realised is an important and an exciting enterprise. But I would be acting dishonestly if I did not say that a high proportion of these would be deterred if they thought it would be unduly surreptitious, dangerous, or illegal. (I know, and you know, that nothing illegal is done in any of the unofficial seminars; but, I repeat, it is impossible to overestimate the level of ignorance of Czechoslovak law internationally, and many of my colleagues, if asked to adopt measures of extreme security, might get frightened-off by the belief that they would be doing something 'illegal'.) Second and perhaps more trivially and this is a postscript the majority of the philosophical visitors so far have not been people working in the phenomenological tradition. This has not mattered hitherto, because Dr. Tomin and his students were not themselves primarily working in the phenomenological tradition, so his visitors fitted-in reasonably well into his own courses. However we understand that the central theme of Czechoslovak philosophy is phenomenological; and I think you should know this, because although many people are very willing to visit Prague, theyr are for the most part relatively ignorant of the phenomenological tradition. Finally I believe that other scholars ( for example in history, psychology, literature, economics etc.) have considered the possibility of extending invitations to colleagues in the west; perhaps, initially, via Oxford, since Oxford philosophers would be in a position to encourage a response. I think that if this were still felt to be desirable, there would be a good response; so long as the invitation were on the same terms: that is, making it clear that people inside Czechoslovakia were prepared to extend an invitation, explaining to potential visitors what they should do and where they should go, assuring, in fact, nervous western scholars that their visits were indeed welcome (instead of being an unwanted extra risk). I hope that I do not need to say that all such visitors would be willing to come on whatever basis was thought best: to talk to large groups, small groups, individuals whatever. Again we have to bear in mind always that the risks are yours and not ours, so that it is important above all to make it clear that visits on these terms by western academics are not made irresponsibly. (As a member of the sub-committee of the philosophy sub-faculty, I should of course be most willing to assist in whatever way possible any approaches made to other faculties in Oxford.) Second, the Educational Trust. Again, I am afraid, the main need is for information from you. The Trust is set up in such a way that the money collected can be used for any purpose that is clearly describable as education or scholarship. (This would cover acting, music, theology: the term 'education'. is very broad.) As yet we do not know how much money we will be able to collect. We have recently decided not to engage the services of professional fund-raisers, because their charges are too high, and we think perhaps optimxistically that we can manage without them. But we have gathered a lot of information about the preconditions for raising money; and what seems the most important is a very precise statement of needs and priorities. (We will be asking for donations from firms, banks etc. who have up to 30,000 requests each year: so we need to backup the request for donations with convincing and realistic detail, they are assured that we can indeed use their money with good effect. so that In our own discussions we thought of three main possibilities: (1) to provide full fees & maintenance for Czechoslovak students who might wish or need to study abroad for a few years. In U.K. universities, this would come to about £5,000 p.a.; elsewhere it might be less expensive. (2) to buy books, and ^each ..
====================
1980-07-08 Kathy Wilkes - dopis_Stránka_3.jpg
====================
to assist with the expenses of their safe delivery. This, as I know you are aware, has become immensely expensive in recent years, with inflation running at around 20%. (3) to offer Research Fellowships to scholars working inside Czechoslovakia, as the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung has been doing; either for 6-month periods or for a year. My guess is that approximately £4,000 p.a. would be the right sort of sum, but we would be glad of your opinion. These are (a) only possibilities as yet, (b) only our guesses as to what would be the most useful. Further ideas, and a list of priorities, are important, and here we depend on you. Only after we have, with your help, drawn up the detailed programme can we go to banks, businesses, individual donors etc. So it will not be for about 6 months from now that we will be able to guess at the sorts of sums we have, and might have, at our disposal. I am afraid that I just don't know how to estimate what amount we might be able to collect. If we are out to get large sums, so as to build up a substantial capital, then the better-prepared the appeal document, the more likely it will be. Looking back over what I've written, I see that I have said nothing about the possibility of assisting with the expenses of, for example, the Living Room Theatre, or music inside Czechoslovakia. Obviously money from the fund could be used in this way too; but we know little about needs in that area, 80 would have to get that information from you, This Trust will be, we all hope, a long-term thing, and we hope to continue to build it up over the years. To ensure success we must get things right in the planning stage. Once we have, with your advice, drawn up the programme we shall all set to work as fast as possible; and we will try to keep you informed regularly of all developments. One small clarification. The money collected so far (not very much) is the product of lots of small, unsolicited donations sent mainly by philosophers and intended "to assist Dr. Tomin and his students". We know that there is at the moment a very pressing need for some of his students, and we're trying to arrange something; but this money should be regarded as an independent sum which is already earmarked. To sum up: could you somehow let us know what your views are about this Trust; and in particular, as long a list of possible of uses to which the money could be put, preferably in order of priority ? Many thanks. With best wishes, 1 : кая Willen 3.
1980-07-08 Kathy Wilkes - dopis_Stránka_3.jpg
====================
to assist with the expenses of their safe delivery. This, as I know you are aware, has become immensely expensive in recent years, with inflation running at around 20%. (3) to offer Research Fellowships to scholars working inside Czechoslovakia, as the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung has been doing; either for 6-month periods or for a year. My guess is that approximately £4,000 p.a. would be the right sort of sum, but we would be glad of your opinion. These are (a) only possibilities as yet, (b) only our guesses as to what would be the most useful. Further ideas, and a list of priorities, are important, and here we depend on you. Only after we have, with your help, drawn up the detailed programme can we go to banks, businesses, individual donors etc. So it will not be for about 6 months from now that we will be able to guess at the sorts of sums we have, and might have, at our disposal. I am afraid that I just don't know how to estimate what amount we might be able to collect. If we are out to get large sums, so as to build up a substantial capital, then the better-prepared the appeal document, the more likely it will be. Looking back over what I've written, I see that I have said nothing about the possibility of assisting with the expenses of, for example, the Living Room Theatre, or music inside Czechoslovakia. Obviously money from the fund could be used in this way too; but we know little about needs in that area, 80 would have to get that information from you, This Trust will be, we all hope, a long-term thing, and we hope to continue to build it up over the years. To ensure success we must get things right in the planning stage. Once we have, with your advice, drawn up the programme we shall all set to work as fast as possible; and we will try to keep you informed regularly of all developments. One small clarification. The money collected so far (not very much) is the product of lots of small, unsolicited donations sent mainly by philosophers and intended "to assist Dr. Tomin and his students". We know that there is at the moment a very pressing need for some of his students, and we're trying to arrange something; but this money should be regarded as an independent sum which is already earmarked. To sum up: could you somehow let us know what your views are about this Trust; and in particular, as long a list of possible of uses to which the money could be put, preferably in order of priority ? Many thanks. With best wishes, 1 : кая Willen 3.