One chapter down, two to go...

I sent to the other authors the first of the three chapters that I'm responsible for in the GHK biography. It's actually the second of the three, that covers Kerr's advocacy for Taiwan during the late 1940s-mid 1950s and the effects of McCarthyism on his academic career. It's interesting writing about this with a Taiwanese audience in mind because I have to make sure that I discuss the American historical context in more detail than I might have to with a US audience. (Then again, as I was reminded by a colleague, I should probably not expect the US audience to be that much more informed about the McCarthy era, unless they have studied it. I think folks today would consider it ancient history. Which they shouldn't, for some very pressing reasons... But I digress.)

The other concern I have is about my style/tone. It's going to be translated into Chinese, so I tried to write with that in mind, but I had some trouble figuring out how academic vs. how popular I should sound. I'm afraid I might have erred on the side of sounding academic. That might need some work depending on what the editors and publishers expect. To me, it's interesting stuff, but it might sound a bit dry and boring to readers. Perhaps I should spice it up a bit. I tried to include quotes from Kerr and others to bring their voices into it, but of course the results will depend on how it gets translated. 

One extended quote that I liked was from a political science professor at Stanford who was interviewed by the Civil Service Commission about Kerr's loyalty when Kerr was applying for a contract position at the Hoover Institute that was funded by the International Cooperation Administration. He appears to have responded rather testily to the interviewer's questions:

In the last few years I have been interviewed by Government Investigators at least three or four times concerning George Kerr. I have always given George the highest recommendation and my opinion of him has not changed since the last time I was interviewed about a year or a year and a half ago. If I had any reason to question him either securitywise or from the standpoint of loyalty, I would surely inform the proper government agency. 

I first met George while we were both assigned to the Formosa Research Unit at Columbia University while serving with the United States Navy around 1944. I have known him ever since. Last semester at Stanford University he taught a course in my department. He has been out at the University for a good number of years now. I think that any man who has served as a Naval Attache and a Vice-Consul for this government does not have to be investigated every time he turns around. 

George’s character, habits and morals are beyond reproach. He is completely honest and trustworthy and a gentleman of the highest integrity. I can only reiterate all the statements I have made in the past. I cannot question his loyalty to this country. I feel the government is lucky to get his services and I would recommend him highly for work involving our national security program.

I'd love to know who this was, but unfortunately, his name has been redacted. I suppose I could figure it out pretty easily, though, if I did a little searching to find out who was at Columbia and then went to Stanford. 

But I have those two other chapters to work on now... due 8/15! Wish me luck!

Source: James M. Murtha, investigator, Report of Investigation, George Henry Kerr, CSC [Civil Service Commission] Case Serial No. 5.22.55.5235, 2nd Regional Investigations Division (New York, NY: U.S. Civil Service Commission, Intermittently 24 June-12 July, 1955). (FOIA request).