BRACERS Record Detail for 47234

To access the original letter, email the Russell Archives.

Collection code
RA3
Recent acquisition no.
1A
Box no.
6.36
Source if not BR
Columbia U. Libraries
Recipient(s)
W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.
Norton, Warder
Sender(s)
BR
Date
1938/07/02
Form of letter
ALS(X)
Pieces
2
BR's address code (if sender)
AMH
Transcription

BR TO W.W. NORTON & COMPANY, INC. / WARDER NORTON, 2 JULY 1938
BRACERS 47234. ALS. Norton papers, Columbia U.
Proofread by K. Blackwell and A. Duncan


<letterhead>
Amberley House
Kidlington
Oxfordshire.1
2 July 1938

Dear Warder

Many thanks for two letters and two cheques, the latter for $300 and $150 respectively, to me and Peter.

What you propose re Atlantic Monthly is quite satisfactory to me, so far as your part is concerned. But some of Weeks’s proposed omissions seem to me rather undesirable.

1. The paragraph of p. 2 which he wants omitted seems to me essential. It explains the division of the article into four parts, and the way in which I view the subject. I should much regret its omission.

2. I do not mind the omission suggested on p. 3.

3. Ditto p. 5.

4. There is a long passage on pp. 6–7 which, I agree, might well be omitted down to the end of Section I; but I want the 1st paragraph of Section II left in.

5. I agree to the omission on p. 9.

6. I do not understand the pencilled comment on p. 14; in any case, I do not wish to alter what I have said.

7. On p. 15, I should delete “In connection with the psychology of power, we saw that”, which refers to a previous chapter. Thus the sentence should begin with “Fear”.

8. I do not mind the proposed omission on p. 17, though I do not see the point of it.

I do not insist on any of the above points; they are only what I should wish. I am quite content to leave the matter in your hands.

Your other letter, most unfortunately, seems to have blown into the waste-paper basket and got thrown away. I remember its general tenour, which was most gratifying; I am very glad you don’t mind the book being a trifle shorter than 100,000. As for the details I know I acquiesced as I read, except when I couldn’t judge without looking it up. I think the points can be dealt with in the proofs, if they have queries at the appropriate places. I haven’t got a spare typescript, so in any case I couldn’t do much at the moment. (When proofs come, please make sure the typescript is also sent.) Many apologies.

Yours sincerely
Bertrand Russell.

  • 1

    [document] Proofread against a microfilm printout of the original.

Permission
Everyone
Transcription Public Access
Yes
Record no.
47234
Record created
May 08, 2003
Record last modified
Jun 23, 2025
Created/last modified by
duncana