In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

  • Stanley Hoffmann (1928-2015)In memoriam
  • Arthur Goldhammer (bio)

Stanley Hoffmann, the Paul and Catherine Buttenwieser University Professor emeritus at Harvard, died at his home in Cambridge, Massachusetts, on September 12 after a long illness. In his fifty-eight years on the Harvard faculty, he introduced hundreds of students to the study of French and European politics and international relations. François Furet called him “one of the great professors of the twentieth century.”

Born in Vienna to an American father and Austrian mother, he moved with his mother to France in the 1930s. Mother and son joined the mass exodus from Paris in the days preceding the arrival of German troops in June 1940. Though classified a Jew by the Nazis (despite his nonreligious upbringing), he attended school in Nice throughout the war, where his brilliance dazzled his teachers. He then attended the Institut d’Etudes Politiques (SciencesPo) in Paris, where he eventually took his doctorate, but not before a first sojourn at Harvard in 1951, where he joined a group of students of international relations who would leave their mark on the field: Henry Kissinger, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and Samuel Huntington. There Stanley also met the woman who would become his wife, Inge [Schneier] Hoffmann, a psychologist, with whom he would later interview the statesman he admired above all others, Charles de Gaulle. Their joint portrait of de Gaulle as an “artist of politics” appears in Decline and Renewal, one of his 19 published books. [End Page 17]

Stanley returned to Harvard in 1955. In addition to introducing several generations of students to European thought and culture, which he epitomized in his person, he founded what is now the Minda de Gunzburg Center for European Studies and was one of the creators of the social studies concentration. In both ventures his goal was to overcome what he saw as the tendency of American higher education to confine students within the straitjackets of the academic disciplines. Stanley was un intellectuel in the authentic French meaning of the term. For him, culture was essential to the understanding of man, and the idea that there could be a science of society or politics held little appeal for him. He placed more faith in literature than in economics or statistics, and therefore, in his legendary course on “War,” he assigned his students Tolstoy’s War and Peace—all of it, not just a single chapter or excerpt—among dozens of other readings. He loved Camus and Rousseau and in his later years, as a university professor free to teach in whatever department he liked, he co-taught courses on both writers.

Another of his favorite writers was Charles de Gaulle, but of course de Gaulle was far more than a writer for Stanley. He was not only an “artist of politics” but a kind of tutelary deity, a symbol of the eternal France that continued to inspire and protect the frightened adolescent in wartime France. Stanley had the greatest of admiration for those French men and women who protected the vulnerable in their midst during the war. Once, when the famous résistante Lucie Aubrac came to Harvard, Stanley embraced her at the end of her talk and thanked her for being one of those teachers who defended as well as taught their wartime pupils. Although he was not an emotionally demonstrative man, there were tears in his eyes on that occasion. And for him de Gaulle was not only “the greatest statesman” of his lifetime but, in a sense, the ultimate protector of France’s schoolchildren, le professeur-en-chef.

Stanley was a great teacher because he knew that the best way to bring a student to recognize the inadequacy of her thinking was to encourage its full expression. His remarkably gentle corrections then taught you to enlarge your own thought, and even if you continued to disagree with him, he was lavish with his praise of your progress toward greater depth, nuance, and complexity—for him, the touchstones of true understanding. Although English was not his native language, he spoke it impeccably, in a deeply resonant voice [End Page 18] with an accent that added a certain je ne sais quoi...

pdf

Share