KLUYVER AS SEEN BY HIS PUPILS 



many photographs of friends, pupils, and colleagues, as well as curios 

 and mementos, such as a replica of a Leeuwenhoek microscope, a stuff- 

 ed kingfisher, and an Iowa State College pennant that often aroused 

 the curiosity of visitors. The room had two doors, one leading to the 

 house, the other to the laboratory. It contained the desk and chair 

 that had belonged to Beijerinck, and it was said that during the first 

 several years Kluyver could hardly overcome his awe, and did not 

 dare use them. A weird assortment of four easy chairs around a small 

 table in a corner of the room, and a huge table with six beautiful, 

 antique, straight-backed chairs around it completed the furniture. It 

 was in the chair at the head of this table that Kluyver did most of his 

 work; when his collaborators were in the study, they installed them- 

 selves to his left and right. Visitors were accommodated in the 'cosy 

 nook', offered cigars and cigarettes, and interrogated shrewdly, yet 

 so courteously, that they hardly noticed how much they revealed. 

 Every interview was afterwards recorded on a separate sheet of note 

 paper in a few highly pregnant words or sentences. 



All the drawers bulged with papers, especially in later years. Kluy- 

 ver received innumerable reports and reprints, and because most of 

 them contained something of interest to him, he could hardly ever 

 bring himself to discard a single one. They were therefore stored in 

 his 'bar of science', a specially constructed set of shelves, from which 

 he could always extract the most diverse information pertinent to a 

 particular discussion. 



The over-all impression of the room was neither one of beauty or 

 academic, awe-inspiring austerity, nor of bohemian carelessness. Its 

 quality was in harmony with its occupant; each object, by its nature 

 and place, possessed a vital and graphic significance. There was noth- 

 ing to hide, and hence it revealed, honestly and unpretentiously, 

 what its owner did and how he did it. It was a workshop that never 

 failed to bring the visitor under its spell, radiating adventure and ac- 

 complishment. 



No wonder that many of the students felt an instantaneous affinity 

 when visiting the director in his room. This did not occur frequently, 

 however; most discussions with the students took place at the work- 

 bench in the laboratory or in the library, the domains of the students 

 and of experiment. The formal guidance they received was negligible, 

 and consisted mostly in the tacitly implied conclusions that could be 



