KLUYVER AS SEEN BY HIS PUPILS 



very end. Only if a number of theses are written in quick succession 

 is it possible that he may show some signs of fatigue ; but these he 

 overcomes in an amazingly short time.' 



With advancing seniority the assistants gradually became more in- 

 volved in the organizational work of the laboratory and acted as aides 

 to the director in many different spheres. Thus they had an opportun- 

 ity to observe, behind the scenes as it were, how he worked and han- 

 dled people. 



Kluyver's working days always started with a perusal of the mail. 

 All 'easy letters' were disposed of right away, in later years the answer 

 being dictated to his secretary. Some letters might fall into the cate- 

 gory of 'procurement of labour', and these were put on one of the 

 piles on the table, according to urgency and interest. Proofs were im- 

 mediately corrected and returned. The receipt of reprints and other 

 publications was generally acknowledged in a personal note that al- 

 ways contained some cheering and pleasing remarks, in tune with the 

 personality of the addressee. It was hard for Kluyver to use the same 

 text twice, and he detested printed or mimeographed forms. 



He was always ready to help whenever his assistance was solicited. 

 On the other hand, he was disinclined to beg favours from others, to 

 'make a bow', as he called it, unless it was absolutely necessary. Then 

 his letter made it clear that a favour was being asked, and that there 

 was no obligation whatever to fulfil his request, for this was the way in 

 which he himself liked to be treated; as he had learned, it minimized 

 the chances of getting into trouble. No one could ever claim the right 

 to the cooperation of others, and one should be duly grateful if it was 

 granted. All in all, his attitude was reminiscent of the nobleman's 

 courtesy. 



He often referred letters to one of his associates for an opinion or to 

 have some details checked before answering them. Now and then such 

 letters indicated the author's incompetence, or a distressing kind of 

 reasoning. But Kluyver never allowed censorious or deprecatory re- 

 marks to be made on such occasions ; disposing of the clumsy aspects 

 of the letter in some poignant statements, he would proceed to explain 

 the material difficulties under which the writer worked, and empha- 

 size his attainments in other respects. 



Sometimes inquiries were made about details of investigations still 

 in progress, by people working on the same subject. In such cases 



57 



