Categories
Columbia Funny Business

Columbia. Fairy tale by economics PhD alumnus (1953), Thomas Mayer

The monetary economist whose methodological contributions will likely be read long after the heated debates about monetarism lie cold in university archives or buried in the footnotes of historians of economics, Thomas Mayer, was born January 18, 1927 in Vienna. His family was able to leave Austria in the late 1930s which gave him the opportunity to go to college (Queens) and graduate school (Columbia) in New York City. This led to a long, distinguished academic career that culminated in a professorship at the University of California, Davis. He died in Berkeley, California June 12, 2015. 

This post adds to the subcollection “Funny Business” here at Economics in the Rear-view Mirror that is dedicated to attempts at nominal and real humor by economists. At the time of the writing of the following “Fairy Tale” (est. ca. 1952-53), Thomas Mayer was probably still a doctoral candidate, or perhaps a freshly-minted Ph.D., in economics at Columbia University. Martin Bronfenbrenner thought enough of this little mimeographed paper to have kept it in his files of macroeconomic teaching materials. There is no clue there, when or how he came to have a copy of the paper. In preparing this post, I discovered that only some archival boxes away at Duke’s Economists’ papers archive there is also another copy of the “Fairy Tale” in the Thomas Mayer Papers collection.

In his brief biographical tribute to Thomas Mayer, Kevin Hoover (see below for exact citation) wrote “Tom reported that Keynes’s General Theory was perhaps the first economics book that he read while still in school in England and that he was driven to keep studying economics until he was able to understand the book – a feat that he, unlike many others, claims to have accomplished”.  My favorite lines from Hoover are the following:

[Thomas Mayer] was neither a market fundamentalist nor a government romantic, but occupied the ideologically uncomfortable middle: the left thought that he was a monetarist; the right, a Keynesian. He reported having been cast off the monetarist Shadow Open-Market Committee for left-wing deviationism.

__________________________

Tributes to Thomas Mayer

Monetarism and the Methodology of Economics, edited by Kevin D. Hoover and Steven M. Sheffrin (Edward Elgar, 1995) is a collection of 14 original essays in honour of Thomas Mayer focusing on the themes of monetarism, the transmission mechanism for monetary policy, the political economy of monetary policy and the methodology of empirical economics. Contributions by: King Banaian, Mark Blaug, Martin Bronfenbrenner, Richard C.K. Burdekin, Thomas F. Cargill, Milton Friedman, C.A.E. Goodhart, D. Wade Hands, Abraham Hirsch, Kevin D. Hoover, David Laidler, Thomas Mayer, James L. Pierce, Steven M. Sheffrin, Richard J. Sweeney, Thomas D. Willett, Wing Thye Woo.

Hoover, Kevin D. (2015). Thomas Mayer. Journal of Economic Methodology 22 (4):526-527.

__________________________

AER Membership Bio, 1974

Mayer, Thomas, academic; b. Vienna, Austria, 1927. Educ. B.A. Queens Coll., 1948; Ph.D., Columbia U., 1953. Doc. Dis. The Population Argument of the Stagnation Thesis, 1953. Fields 310, 020. Pub. Permanent Income, Wealth and Consumption, 1972; Monetary Policy in the United States, 1968; Intermediate Macroeconomics, 1972. Res. Interpretation of Interest Rate Snap-Back; Explanation of Excess Reserves in 1930’s. Prev. Pos. Vis. Assoc. Prof., U. of Calif., 1961-62, Assoc. Prof., Mich. State U., 1956-61, Asst. Prof. U. of Notre Dame, 1954-56. Cur. Pos. Prof., U. of Calif., since 1962. Address 3054 Buena Vista Way, Berkeley, CA 94708.

Source: American Economic Review (October 1974). Directory of Members, 1974, p. 262.

__________________________

A FAIRY TALE1

By Anon Ymous2

Long, long ago there lived in a far and distant country a Happy Family. They were the Natural and the Market Rate of Interest. They loved each other dearly, and had two beautiful and good children: Price Level Stability and Full Employment. The parents always stuck together, for they knew that if they should part their children would be lost.

Near their house was a big wood. It was largely unexplored, and in it there lived a fierce Giant with the terrifying name of Central Bank Policy. He was a great, big, strong man. But instead of helping the two parents to keep their children happy, he would often fight with them. He pretended to love their two children dearly, but in reality he loved his own child more. His child had a shock of golden blond hair, and was for that reason known as Goldie Standard. Sometimes this child would get sick, and then her father wanted to separate our happy family. He would try to take the mother, the Market Rate of Interest, into the wood with him to take care of Goldie Standard, and to make her well again. Of course the father, poor Natural Rate of Interest, could not follow. The two sweet children would not have had the care they needed, and would starve. Poor little Full Employment would lose her full, round cheeks, and her sister, Price Level Stability, would feel so weak that she would stumble and fall many times. But Central Bank Policy did not mind this, though he pretended to, for he loved Goldie Standard above anything in the world — even though she was often naughty, and taught little Price Level Stability many naughty tricks like climbing up and down all over the Time Series.

Since the giant Central Bank Policy would have had great difficulty in stealing dear Market Rate of Interest by himself alone, he had a group of supporters called Orthodox Economists. They were on his side, for they thought that if Goldie Standard should die there would be nobody to exercise loving care over him; then, in a fit of temper, he might start to play around with the Printing Press.

One bright day a fair prince from far away arrived in this country. His name was Prince Keynes. He was the son of the ruling house of Cambridge. He saw at once what was going on in the country. Indeed, he did not find this difficult, for he had once read a vague prophecy by a Swede that such a country existed. He soon had Tract the matter down, and decided to help the poor family, but at first he did not quite know how. He studied for a long, long time, writing down his observations in a big diary. So that the giant would not find it, he hid it in a tree (not in a pumpkin [Curator’s note: a clear reference to the “Pumpkin papers” hidden by Whittaker Chambers then revealed in the case of Alger Hiss. Very much in the news 1949-50]), and for this reason it is until this day called “Tree-t’is”. (Sorry!)

Now in watching the animals playing around, especially the bears and the bulls, Prince Keynes got an idea. He built a trap, with a Schedule like a ladder; and if you followed it down you fell into a Liquidity Preference. Now the Giant’s helpers, the Orthodox economists, did not know this, and themselves fell into it, and became All Wet. Then Prince Keynes came up and told them: “I will help you out and will tell you a great Secret, if you will help me to free the poor mother, dear Market Rate of Interest.” They agreed, and so in a low voice he told them: “Always and ever and ever, when the sun setteth and when it rises, in every land and on every sea, S equals I.”

The orthodox economists were very glad to learn this Secret, and led Prince Keynes to the place where the poor mother, dear Market Rate of Interest, was imprisoned. They were the Prince’s friends by now, and went with him wherever he went, always telling each other: S equals I. Then they visited the Giant and taught him a new Canticle our Prince had invented. It went like this:

“To keep the Economy in a boom?3
Raise the Propensities — Invest and Consume —
For the rate of interest is but the consequence
Of the amount of money and liquidity preference.
And S = I whatever you say,
Unless you use young Robertson’s “day”.
Under-employment an equilibrium can be
As during the thirties any fool could see.
Wage-cuts can never full employment quite bring;
To be sure that you know it, this ditty I sing.”

The Giant was more or less convinced by this Canticle. And in any event, Goldie Standard had been so naughty that even the lady who lived in Threadneedle Street, and loved her like a mother, did not want to have anything more to do with her.

So the Giant decided to make peace with the family; and he grew to love both children, though he preferred Full Employment to Price Level Stability. Not only did he spend [his] time in keeping the family happy, but he even persuaded an animal which had inhabited the woods with him, called Fish-Call-Policy, to join him in this enterprise. So then all lived happily ever after until the next Depression.

With apologies,4
Thomas Mayer

Columbia University

Footnotes
  1. The following is an excerpt from the author’s forthcoming magnus opium, “Economics for Every Child”.
  2. The author is Lecturer in Economics and Nursery Tales at the Progressive Progress Kindergarten, Atlantis 5. He is indebted for help and criticism to himself, who however is not to be charged with any responsibility for the following. Since consumption determines the course of production, all the responsibility rests with the reader.
  3. Just what did you expect to find down here? A definition of a boom, perhaps? You might have known that a paper like this has no sensible footnotes. Of course, if you are scholarly enough to insist on a reference, look at pages 385-403 of the General Theory, where you will find an excellent summary of its doctrines — arranged alphabetically. [Curator’s note: pages are the index of Keynes’ General Theory.]
  4. The author categorically refuses to apologize to the reader. If he has read this far it is his own fault and it serves him right, and anyone who had not read this far has no business looking at the final footnote.

Source: Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Martin Bronfenbrenner Papers, 1939-1995. Box 25, Folder “Teaching Materials: Macro-econ n.d.”.

Copy also in Box 1 of the Thomas Mayer Papers, also in the Economists’ Papers Archive at Duke.

Categories
Economists Funny Business M.I.T.

M.I.T. Economics in the Rear-view Mirror’s collection for Robert Solow at work and play, December 2023

 

Much has been noted and posted across traditional and social media regarding the contributions and reception of the work of Robert Solow who died on December 21, 2023. I was one of the legion of economics apprentices (a.k.a. graduate students) whom Bob Solow introduced to the art and craft of summoning meaning from the chaos of everyday trends and fluctuations. Economics in the Rear-view Mirror has, to date, posted transcriptions of sixteen archival artifacts from his M.I.T. work-and-play-ground.

Bob Solow was like a favorite uncle to those lucky enough to have had him as a teacher. 99 years was one helluva long-run and besides having been a great economist, he was a good man.  

A great interview from March 3, 2023: Robert Solow on growing up in Brooklyn, fighting Nazis, and everything that came after.

___________________________

Solow at Work

Course Outline of Economic Statistics. Robert Solow, 1960

Advanced Economic Theory (Capital and growth). Solow and Phelps, 1962

Advanced Economic Theory Course, Solow, 1962

Advanced Economic Theory. Uncertainty and Capital Theory. Readings and Exam. Solow, 1965

Economic Growth and Fluctuations. Readings and Midterm Exam. Solow, 1966

Suggestions for New Fields. Domar, Kuh, Solow, Adelman, 1967

Core Economic Growth and Dynamics. Readings and Final Exam. Solow, 1968

Student evaluations of second term core macroeconomics. Solow, Foley. 1967-70

Applied Price Theory Readings. Robert Solow, 1971 or 1972

Core Dynamic Macro Half-course. Readings and exam. Solow, 1973

Capital theory. Course outline, suggested readings. Solow, 1975

Solow at Play

Dystopian Faculty Skit by Solow, 1969

Economics faculty M*A*S*H theme skit. Robert Solow, 1977

Faculty skit. Robert Solow as the 2000 year old economist, ca. 1979-80

Rewrite of 1940s blues hit “Why don’t you do right, like some other men do”. Solow, ca. 1983-84

Robert Solow’s Last Skit. “Dr Rudi Tells You How”, Late 1980s.

 

 

Categories
Chicago Funny Business

Chicago. Economics skit based on Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar. Friedland, Niskanen, Oi. Ca. 1960-61

 

Future generations of economics graduate students and junior faculty, having been raised in a world of TikTok and able to bring the tools of sound and image processing to their media productions, will probably find the following sixty-some year old Chicago economics skit dull reading. Even the curator of Economics in the Rear-view Mirror, a veteran of this art-form from M.I.T. in the mid-1970s [cf. Analysis in Wonderland, Wizard of E-52-383cCasablank], finds this Chicago artifact in need of a major revise-and-resubmit. But we transcribe our artifacts as we find them, with minor editorial revisions to improve formatting, corrections for obvious misspellings, and annotations that have become necessary due to the passage of time. Material in square brackets (in italics) have been added to the transcription.

For those who wish to compare the skit with the text of Julius Caesar by Shakespeare

_____________________

About the authors

Claire E. Friedland

1929. Born 20 November in New York City.
1951. B.A. Queens College, City University of New York. Phi Beta Kappa.
1955. M.A. University of Chicago.
1957-59. Statistical analyst, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
1959-71. Research Economist, University of Chicago (research assistant to George Stigler).

See: Chicago’s Hidden Figure: A Chat with Claire Friedland on her Work with George StiglerPromarket (website), November 22, 2017.

William A. Niskanen

1933. Born 13 March in Bend Oregon.
1954. A.B. Harvard University.
1955. M.A. University of Chicago.
1962. Ph.D. University of Chicago. Thesis: The Demand for Alcoholic Beverages.
1957-61. Defense policy analyst at RAND.
1962-64. Director of special studies in the Office of the Secretary of Defense.
1964-70. Director of Program Analysis Division at the Institute for Defense Analyses.
1970-1972. Assistant director for evaluation of the Office of Management and Budget.
1972-75. Professor of economics at the University of California, Berkeley.
1975-80. Chief economist of Ford Motor Company.
1980-81. Professor in the Graduate School of Management, UCLA
1981-85. Member of the Council of Economic Advisers.
1985-2008. Chairman of the board of directors, Cato Institute.
2008-11.  Chairman emeritus, Cato Institute.
2011. Died October 26 in Washington, D.C.

See: William A. Niskanen, A Life Well Lived (Cato Institute, 2012). Above screen-shot is from that memorial presentation.

Walter Yasuo Oi

1952 UCLA Yearbook Portrait

1929. Born July 1 in Los Angeles, CA.
1952. B.S. UCLA.
1954. M.A. UCLA.
1958-62. Research Economist, Northwestern University.
1961. Ph.D. University of Chicago. Thesis: Labor as a Quasi-Fixed Factor of Production.
1962-67. University of Washington
1967-. Professor, Graduate School of Management, University of Rochester.
1993. Elected a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.
1995. Named Distinguished Fellow of the American Economic Association.
2000. Received the Secretary of Defense Medal for Outstanding Public Service.
2013. Died December 24 in Brighton, N.Y.

Image Source: University of California Los Angeles. Yearbook Southern Campus, 1952, p. 176.

_____________________

[Opening] Song to the tune of
Jamaican Farewell“.

Prelims are done,

‘Tis a night for fun,

Don’t let worries

upset your equilibrium.

The faculty’s here,

They’re drinkin’ the beer,

The price of the liquor

For them is too dear.

On our play

We’ll soon raise up the curtain

You may judge it

true false or uncertain
[Note: a good chunk of the canonical prelim exam at Chicago featured questions having this format: example ]

Ficticious characters are in this scene

They bear no resemblance to Human bein’s.

Let the liquor flow

get on with the show,

Don’t let the faculty get out the door

They want to go home

to their little babes

To see if they’ve finished

with the prelim. grades.

_____________________

BRAVE OLD WORLD

A Tragic Comedy in Three Acts by the Adam Smithsonian Players.

by
Clare [sic] E. Friedland, William A. Niskanen,
& Walter Y. Oi

Cast of Characters:

Julius Freemarket [Milton Friedman]: Popular leader of Marshallia and Head of the Ministry of Money.

Capt. Marc Caganthony [Phillip Cagan]: Freemarket’s first lieutenant and pilot of the plane.

Llaius Mysticus: [The initials happen to match Lloyd Metzler. The double “Ll” is the give-away.] A soothsayer, and prophet of things to come.

Gregaryous Wrecker [Gary Becker]: A dope peddler.

A. Sovereign Consumer [Representative Graduate Student]: Exerciser of the right of free choice and beneficiary of the fruits of capitalism.

Carlos Cassius [Perhaps a reference to Carl F. Christ?]: Proprietor of the “Do it Yourself, Ph.D. Components” shop. A leading citizen of the community.

H. Greggo Brutus [H. Gregg Lewis]: Seller of Ph.D.’s New and Used, also a leading member of the business community.

G. Dale Jolly [D. Gale Johnson]: The Key Resource Person of the Ministry of Money.

Sancho Humbugger: Former brainchild of the Chicagocrats. [probably played by Marto A. Ballesteros, Chicago Ph.D. 1957].

Act I: Bliss

Narrator: The scene takes place in the brave old world of 1894 — or some permutation thereof.

If this scene seems utopian, a slight word of explanation may be in order.

In an attempt to conform to the justice and impartiality of the marketplace, a new electoral system has been inaugurated, according to which one dollar equals one vote. Thus, the Chicagocrats (with the aid of John D. [Rockefeller] & sundry other foundations) have become the majority party and a new regime has been established based upon the principle of free enterprise, in which Julius Freemarket has become the popular leader of the entire stationary state of Marshallia. All artificial market restrictions and evidences of paternalism, such as child labor laws, pure food and drug acts and compulsory sewage disposal, have been abolished; and in response to price incentives of the purest kind, we find many new industries flourishing in the marketplace.

The scene opens as we find Julius Freemarket, together with his trusted lieutenant Marc Caganthony, taking their morning constitutional — as all important people must — observing the well oiled functioning of the competitive mechanism.

_______________

Enter Freemarket and Caganthony

_______________

Free: Isn’t it wonderful that all is in static equilibrium?

Cagant: Yes, it certainly is.

Free: Except, of course, those things which are in moving equilibrium.

Cagant: Yes, of course.

_______________

Enter soothsayer, Llaius Mysticus

_______________

Llaius: Julius! Julius!

Free: Ha! Who calls? I hear a tongue shriller than all music calling “Julius!”. Speak, Freemarket is turned to hear.

_______________

Llaius comes up to Freemarket and tugs at sleeve.

_______________

Llaius: Beware the Ides of March.

_______________

Freemarket, turning to Caganthony

_______________

Free: What man is that?

Cagant: A soothsayer bids you beware the Ides of March.

Free: It is only Llaius Mysticus. He is a dreamer, a dreary prophet of gloom and doom. He has no empirical basis for his prophesies. Let us leave him and visit with Gregaryous Wrecker.

_______________

Enter Gregaryous Wrecker, singing “I’m an Old Dope Peddler”
[Tom Lehrer song (1953), Lyrics, Performance]

Upon completion of song, enter A. Sovereign Consumer (coded “Cons.”)

_______________

Cons.: (in hushed tone) Psst,…psst…hey buddy.

Free: Don’t be bashful young man. Just step right up there and tell the gentleman what you want. There’s nothing to be afraid of now. The dollar’s almighty.

Cons.: What’s today’s price on king-sized, filter tipped, Tiajuana marijuana?…Fresh ones.

Wreck: Current price is one dollar,… but March futures are fifty cents.

Cons.: Yeah? So high?

Wreck: Well, you see, the idea is this. We’ve got the phenonmener [sic] that the stuff has become a teenage fad, ever since the kids found out Alvis Regs-ley [Elvis Presley] is a user.

[Almost the same word “phenomener” appears in the Tom Lehrer song “Don’t Major in Physics”. Lyrics, Backstory.

…More often a king weds a commoner
Than a physicist makes a housewife,
For they only are versed in phenomener
⁠That have nothing to do with real life.

….

I like physics and my girl does not.
I tried showing her my apparatus,
But a blank smile was all that I got.
She asked me why I was in Physics,
⁠And advised me to transfer to Ec,
And whenever I tried to talk Physics,
All she wanted to do was to neck! ]

Cons.: You got anything cheaper?

Wreck: Well, advertised brands, like Tiajuana Marijuana sell for a few cents more than cheaper substitutes, but they’re worth it for the prestige.

Cons.: Prestige hell! I’ll have plenty of that when I get my Ph.D. Give me the cheap one.

_______________

Exit, Gregaryous Wrecker, as A. Sovereign Consumer moves from that booth to the booth of Carlos Cassius who is found on the telephone.

_______________

Cass.: “Do it Yourself, Ph.D. Components”, … Carlos Cassius speaking. Well, I’ve got simple and multiple regressions, higher r-squares are a bit more expensive. I’ve got a sale on permanent and transitory variables (in an aside to audience) I stole these out of Speedy Read’s [“speed reading” is implicit, one may suppose. The gendered pronoun makes it clear that Margaret Reid was being referred to] wastebasket when she wasn’t looking——— Oh! You’re at Haskell High. [Perhaps a reference to “Haskell Hall”?] Well then, I’ve got some spurious correlations here, ——— very cheap———I lose money on every one of these, but I make it up in the volume. … No, we can’t guaranty that you’ll pass your thesis seminar with these. (pause) Alright, thank you very much for calling. (turns to consumer). What can I do for you?

Cons.: Wow! I see you got a new jomping [sic] point. I’ll take it.

Cass.: Well, that ought to just about complete your set.

_______________

A. Sovereign Consumer moves away from Cassius’s desk to that of H. Greggo Brutus, who is found on the telephone.

_______________

Brutus: This is Greggo Brutus speaking … “Labor Exchange, Ph.D.’s new and used”.

Well, I’ve got a Ph.D. in physics for $2,000, and one in economics from Cambridge for $3,000. (pause) What? … you’ve got only $350? Well, the best I can do for you then, is a Masters degree in planning. (pause) Very fine, I’ll have Mrs. Jones send it out to you first thing in the morning.

(in an aside to audience) Great Jupiter! Here comes another one of those Israelis. Every time I sell one of them a degree, I begin to worry about my job. [Possibly a reference to Zvi Griliches (Ph.D., 1957)?]

(to consumer) Good morning.

Cons.: I want to buy a Chicago Ph.D.

Brutus: I have one here that I’m selling for a customer named Frank Fright, [Frank Knight] who’s decided to give it up and go into Hindu Philosophy. It’s a little old, but I can throw in his endowed chair, and 400 of his reprints, at a price that’s a bargain for the set.

Cons.: A tie in sale? You’re nothing but a reactionary. … a throwback to the old regime. (As he walks off) Heretic! Subversive! Thief!

Brutus: (reflectively) Could it be possible, that I, H. Greggo Brutus have been throwing sand into the wheels of the competitive machine? Perhaps, I have erred ——— yes he is right. Oh those Israelis, they see through everything.

Act II — Scene I

Props: table, chair, blackboard, sign: “Freemarket Watches You”.

From George Orwell’s dystopian novel 1984, film version (1956)

Nar: So…, life in Marshallia goes merrily on its way.

Guided by the velvet glove of the invisible iron hand and watched by Freemarket’s careful eye, consumers happily go around computing their marginal utilities, and entrepreneurs are rocking happily in the cradle of competitive equilibrium.

Freemarket has preserved only one authority from the government of the decadent Past — the Ministry of Money. This Ministry is really quite harmless, as its activities are entirely financed out of the secular rate of growth of the money supply. As the only equipment of the Authority consists of a printing press and an airplane [by the end of the 1960s Friedman’s metaphor had morphed into one using helicopters], the costs are in any case quite meagre.

We now visit the Headquarters (and sole office) of the Ministry in a tower at Halfway Airport [“Midway” was the actual name of Chicago’s airport], to see Freemarket’s weekly meeting with his Key Resource Person, G. Dale Jolly, Time: Morning, March 1.

Free: Everything in equilibrium today as usual, Jolly?

Jolly: (Laughs) I have a catastrophe to report, sir.

Free: Catastrophe? Impossible! We’ve purged all the reactionary elements, smoothed all the frictions, removed all the controls, dissolved the rigidities, exiled all the labor organizers, and turned Harvard Yard [Note: the “competition” in Cambridge Mass was still Harvard and not M.I.T.] into a parking lot.

Jolly: It’s the price index, Freemarket; remember, you told me never to take my eyes off the price index.

Free: Of course; this is the variable we chose to stabilize as a guide to our monetary policy. (aside) See my JPE article of 1951, reprinted in my Essays in Negative Economics [reference to Friedman’s “Essays in Positive Economics” (1953)], only $5.75, at the bookstore.

Jolly: See for yourself: The Multivac [a fictional supercomputer that was to appear in over a dozen Isaac Asimov science fiction stories] shows that wholesale prices have dropped 20 points in the last week.

Free: A random-transitory-stochastic type shock, no doubt. Nothing to worry about. What is the money supply, Jolly?

Jolly: (Laughing) I think I lost the series, sir. It was either lost or stolen; in this section of Chicago you can’t be sure which.

Free: You lost the whole series?

Jolly: Not all of it. Some of the data is…

Free: (Quickly) You mean “data are

Jolly: Data is, are, (we didn’t use such fancy language down on the farm), not all missing.

Free: This poses a serious problem. Capt. Caganthony, what do the rules state for this situation?

Cagant: (typically thumbing through phone book) Rule 412, Section A2 states that 80,000 assorted $10, $20, and $50 bills be dropped in a Latin Square design [see the Wikipedia article, probably application in statistics] over each city of over one million population.

Jolly: (Leaving) I won’t rest until I find the lost money data, sir. (Exit)

Free: Marc, the loss of that money series is quite serious, but I trust Jolly.

Let me have men about me that are fat;
Sleek-headed men and such as sleep of nights,
Blond Cassius, for example, has a lean and hungry look.
He thinks too much: such men are dangerous.

Cagant: Fear Cassius not, Freemarket, he’s not dangerous.

Free: Would he were fatter.

Such men as he be never at hear’ts [sic] ease
While they behold models better than their own.

Cagant: But the rules, the rules!

Free: Oh yes, the rules. Your watch should read 0800, Capt. Caganthony. Release the money over Chicago at exactly 0900 hours and over the other specified cities at subsequent 3-hour intervals.

Cagant: Roger, and off. (Exits, runs askew, whirring like a plane.)

_______________

Sound effects: Wagner’s Ride of the Valkyries.

_______________

Act II — Scene 2

Props: Table, chair, candle lit on table.

Nar: Let your eyes now adjust to the darkness of a cellar at the home of H. Greggo Brutus. The time, the evening of March 14.

_______________

On stage, Brutus. Enter Cassius.

_______________

Brut: How now Cassius. How goes the night?

Cass: (Shaking money from his coat) Did I go thru a tempest dropping money? This disturbed sky is not to walk in. But worst of all, paper has risen so high in price, due to this mad money-printing that I am forced to run my correlations on the backs of twenty dollar bills.

Brut: This glut of currency is slowing the chariots on the streets. Jolly reports it is smothering the crops. Who knows what adverse expectations it may cause in the marketplace.

Cass: All was prosperous until the ministry of money was moved to action. And now prices fall all the more as each new planeload of manna falls. It is as though the fundamental equation might contain some fundamental flaw.

Brut: Speak not such heresy in my house Cassius. Freemarket is a true and noble Marshallian. Did he not refuse the title of Supreme Bureaucrat when it was offered him by Cagananthony? I am certain he will be swayed from this policy when Jolly finds the lost money series and he sees the extreme to which he has gone.

Cass: Why must he sit in his airport tower and wait upon the money series? Is the error of his ways not obvious to every Marshallian who but looks about him? Brutus, think not that Freemarket is above the weaknesses of ordinary men. Did I not swim with him in the Tiber the other day and see him nearly carried away by the foam? So it is with this new power with which he seems drunk. Has not our noble sage, Frank Fright [Knight], warned us that “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts, absolutely”? [Knight clearly was quoting Lord Acton (1889)]

Brut: There is truth in what you say. Freemarket promised us an economy free of all government interference. (Did he not condemn Adam Smith for suggesting that a state might build roads and schools and provide for the common defense?) Yet he insisted on this one ministry which would harmlessly follow a set of prescribed rules. And now he blindly follows his model and his rules, we know not where. Perhaps he has started us on the dreaded Road to Serfdom. [Homage à Hayek (1944)]

Cass: Then you are with us Brutus. I have moved already some of the noblest-minded Marshallians to undergo with me a plan. But there is none among us who is schooled in planning anymore.

Brut: Wait? …approach Sancho Humbugger, the brain-child of the Chicagocrats before Freemarket’s victory! He was suspected of deviationist tendencies and exiled to some southern outpost.

_______________

Enter Sancho, to Latin tune, wearing a huge sombrero and serape.

_______________

Sanche: Ole! (with wide sweep of hand)

Cass: Sancho! You’ve been away too long. Was it hot down there?

San: No, Chile.

Brut: Time enough later for such nonsense. Sancho, how do you happen to be in Marshallia?

San: Well, I was on this luxury airliner, see, when I starts up a conversation with this dame sitting next to me see. It seems she’s a white sox fan like me, see. (She wuz wit some slob who just made a killing selling cheap paper to the Marshallian Ministry of Money.) And she tells me how going from Professor to Bureaucrat was too much for Freemarket, and so he’s dropping this dough like mad. So I thought I’d take a hop to Marshallia and see if I could do something to help maybe.

Cass: Sancho, you must construct a plan for us to restore the price index to its former level, by any devious means, even (ugh?) Public Works, so as to stop the exercise of Freemarket’s excessive power with (Stage whisper) countervailing power.
[Clear reference to Galbraith’s American Capitalism: The Theory of Countervailing power (1952)]
Our whole way of life rests on your shoulders, Sancho.

San: You need a plan eh? I get the picture. Let’s see now.
(Paces nervously, mumbling, grabs for pencil & paper, scribbles furiously.)
I’ve got it! This is our action! We’re home!

_______________

All join in huddle.

_______________

Brut: (emerging) Do so; and let no man abide this deed but we the doers.

Act II — Scene III

Props: telephone, table, chair, sign (askew)

Nar: More men than these are disturbed on this troubled eve.

Free: (Alone, tired, slowly walking the room.)

Nor heaven, nor earth have been at peace tonight. That phone has screamed at each hour of the clock. (phone rings)
Jolly? What? The second derivative of prices is now falling? Oh, well, I’ll merely follow rule 205 next. Go bid the Multivac do present calculate and bring me its clanking opinion of success.
(picks up phone again.)
Capto Caganthony? He’s asleep? (With amazement and anger.) Give him this urgent message: “Another plane.” No, that’s all. He’ll know what to do.

Act III — Scene I

Props: Desk, chair, sign, blackboard.

Nar: The ides of March are come…but not gone. And, as we shall see, the events of the early day are false portent of the fate which for Freemarket lay.

_______________

Freemarket sits at desk, chin in hands, brooding.
Capt. Caganthony is at stage left and rear. Enter Jolly, whistling “Whistle as you work”. [From the Disney Film “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs” (1937)]

_______________

Jolly: Tra, la, la, la, la, la, la (Whistles again.)

Free: Jolly, this is no time for glee; look, now my hair has started to fall out. [merely gratuitous bald-shaming of Friedman]

Jolly: (Laughing) But I’ve found it! Under my tractor seat cushion!

Free: My hair?

Jolly: No, that’s been gone too long. I found the lost money data.

Free: Thank Jupiter. Oh, Jolly, I could kiss you. Now all our troubles are over.  Did you hear that, Marc, he’s found it. I knew I could trust you, Jolly.

Cagant: Now all our troubles are over. (In a monotone)

Free: (To Jolly) Tell me, did you put the data through the Multivac?

Jolly: Yes I did. But there are some strange results. (Laughing) Prices are still falling in all the cities on which money was dropped. But there has been a phenomenal reflation in the backward river valleys of the South and West.

Free: Are you certain?

Jolly: Yes, if my assumptions are true.

Free: That’s irrelevant. Just the facts, Jolly, just the facts. [Probably an indirect homage à Sgt. Joe Friday from the then popular radio/TV series Dragnet]

Jolly: (Laughing) Of course, Freemarket, Just the facts. There are disturbing signs that the permanent component of the income of farm laborers has increased substantially.

Free: Impossible, my book is not published yet. Those cotton pickers will be buying Ph.D.’s next. (To Cagant) Marc, are you sure you dropped the money only in large metropolitan areas?

Cagant: (Monotone) Your instructions were carried out explicitly, so help me Mints. [Friedman’s old Chicago teacher in money matters, Lloyd Mints]

Free: (To himself, disturbed) The money must have been dropped in the wrong place. Marc, when was your last eye check?

Cagant: Why, when I worked for the National Bureau.

Free: That explains it, they hire anybody. Come, Marc, sit here.

_______________

Cagant is blindfolded, turned away from blackboard toward audience.

_______________

Free: Now, as I write these symbols on the board, read them back to me. [as if reading a chart in an eye examination]

Cagant: Delta, Gamma, Beta, Alpha (Freemarket smiles), X, G, M=KPZ. (Freemarket actually writes M=KPY)

Free: Z? (Angrily) Not Z…Y!

Cagant: Why? [punning on “Y” and “Why” sounding alike] I don’t know. I saw Z as in Z. I said, Zed. [perhaps just a silly rhyme “said”/“Zed”]

Free: (Calmly) Don’t repeat yourself, Marc. Let’s go over this last line again.

Cagant: M= KPZ

Free: Now, Marc, you don’t really want to go back to the National Bureau, do you? You know what these symbols are.

Cagant: You look at Y, I look at Z. Utility preferences differ, you know.

Free: (In a rage) This is a matter of doctrine, not of consumer choice!

Cagant: (Angrily) Under the new free-market system, this is a matter to be settled in the market place, not by a government decree.

_______________

Cagan [sic] stalks out agrily.

_______________

Free: (Upset) Jolly, the fundamental Truth of the Fundamental Equation has been questioned Call the Chamber of Chaos into session — I need reassurance.

Jolly: Stand firm, Freemarket these men are fallible; (in a shocked tone) they could even utter a non-sequitur! (Exit)

_______________

Enter Cassius, Brutus, and Humbugger

_______________

All except Free: Hail, Freemarket, Hail. You called for us?

Free: Yes, come in, Cassius, come in, noble Brutus. Ah, worthy Humbugger is with you. Good. Let me put our problem in my own terms.

Sancho: (Aside to Cassius and Brutus) Our cause is dead if he does.

Cass: (Quickly) No, glorious Freemarket, we know the problem and we know its cause. Pray hear friend Sancho speak for us.

San: Witness, noble Freemarket, how, with these quick strokes, if

(Writing on blackboard, allowing audience to see)

I = I*
G = G*
C = a + bY
and
Y = C+ I + G
then we’re home!

Free: Great Jupiter, is this the Keynes’ mutiny [punning Herman Wouk’s novel The Caine Mutiny (1952)]? This is heresy!

San:     Heresy or no,

We have this to show,
Prices still fall in Chicago.
But in the West and South, on my advice,
Migrant workers have picked up quite a slice
Of permanent income; the rest don’t rhyme so nice.

Free: (Sharply) Doesn’t rhyme as nicely. Your grammar is abominable, Sancho.

San:     By organizing unions to boost their wages,

By building dams to water their crops,
Income increased first by stages,
And then by leaps, and bounds, and hops.

Free: (in fury) Damn! Damn! Damn!

San:     Yes Freemarket.

It is Dams we built this day.
And thru these public works disaster did allay.

Free:    I must warn thee, Sancho.

These symbols and your reasoning
Might fire the blood of ordinary men,
And turn pre-ordinance and first decree
into the law of children.

(Sternly)

Thy model, and thyself, by decree, are banished.
Know all, Freemarket doth not wrong, nor
without cause will he be satisfied.

Cass: I, Cassius, do beg enfranchisement of Sancho’s model.

Free:

I could be well moved if I were as you.
If I could pray to move, prayers would move me.
But I am as constant as velocity

(Becoming emotional)

Of whose true fixed and resting quality
There is no variable in the literature.
Cassius, stand you with Humbugger?

_______________

Cassius walks in front of Freemarket to stand beside Sancho, and remains silent.

_______________

Free:    (Disturbed)

Good Brutus, when all is said and done
Stand you with models with equations four,
Or with the Fundamental One?

_______________

Brutus silently joins Cassius and Sancho.

 _______________

Et tu, Brute! Then die, Freemarket, die!

_______________

Freemarket clutches at sign, pulls it down, and collapses on table.
The whole cast gathers around the table on which Freemarket lies, as an audience for the following speech:

_______________

Cagant:

Friends, Marshallians, Chicagocrats, lend me your ears.
I come to bury Freemarket, not to praise him.
The models that men build live after them,
Their meaning oft interred in their books.
So let it be with Freemarket.

All (including MAB): [almost certainly, Marto A. Ballesteros]

How many ages hence
Shall this our lofty scene be acted o’er
In states unborn and accents yet unknown.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Papers of Zvi Griliches, Box 129, Folder “Faculty skits, ca. 1960s.

Image Sources: The Tusculum portrait, possibly the only surviving sculpture of Caesar made during his lifetime, now housed at the Archaeological Museum in  Turin, Italy.
Milton Friedman portrait: Hoover Institution.

_______________

Note on Marto A. Ballesteros identification for “MAB”

Fellow 1957—Asst Prof. 1960 at the University of Chicago according to the 1969 AEA Directory of Members.

Publications

Argentine Agriculture, 1908-1954: A Study in Growth and Decline By Marto A. Ballesteros (University of Chicago, 1958). (PhD thesis)

Ballesteros, Marto A. Desarrollo agrícola chileno, 1910-1955. Santiago: Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales,1965. p. 7-40.

Newspaper Accounts

The Peninsula Times Tribune (13 Sep 1957). Marriage to Jill Sidnell Geer of Los Altos. Off to Chile to live for one year. His parents are from Madrid, his undergraduate studies were at the University of Madrid, MA and PhD at the University of Chicago. Just received his doctorate in economics from the University of Chicago, Junior fellow at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences for a year  1956-57.

The Galion Inquirer (23 Sep 1957) that “[Balesteros] will be doing research and teaching in economics at the Universidad Catolica de Chile, Centro De Investigaciones Economicas, Santiago, Chile, under sponsorship of the University of Chicago and the International Cooperation Administration of the U.S. Government”.

Miami Herald (8 Apr 1965), “Dr. Marto Ballesteros, chief of the Pan American Union’s public finance unit”.

Categories
Funny Business Psychology

Cornell. True Tale of the Dr. Vosberg Hoax, 3 Dec 1921

Advisory: the following post contains merely trace elements of history of economics content. 

That said, the curator of Economics in the Rear-view Mirror has returned from a month of visiting friends and family and is eager to bring you more of the kind of original content you have come to expect. This post is one to amuse and to provoke reflection. Who dare say that a similar hoax as recounted here could not occur in economics?

 Just over one hundred years ago, the wife of the newly inaugurated fourth president of Cornell University, Margaret Kate Farrand (pronounced “Fair-And”) née Carleton, along with a first year graduate student in architecture, Charles Morse Stotz, the psychology professor Harry Potter Weld, and other co-conspirators, was able to pull off an academic hoax, news of which apparently even reached the ears of Professor Sigmund Freud of Vienna for comment. Read below to vicariously experience the faux lecture “The Freudian Theory with Later Developments” held by Professor Herman Vosberg, as performed by Charles M. Stotz.

____________________

 A Gratuitous History of Economics Preface

Serendipity struck as I was tracking down the sequence of distinguished careers of economist Dexter Merriam Keezer, a Brookings Graduate School Ph.D. (1925). Keezer’s autobiography turns out to be available as a $2.99 Kindle download from Amazon: Along an Entertaining Way: The Autobiography of Dexter M. Keezer, 1895-1991 by Dexter Keezer (Author), Ted Ladd (Editor).

The following passage from Keezer’s autobiography caught my attention:

As I shifted gears from newspaper reporting to a concentrated study of economics, my interest in reporting did not evaporate. And I wasn’t long at Cornell before I had an entertaining opportunity to indulge this interest. Mrs. Livingston Farrand, the wife of the Cornell president, conspired in perpetrating a hoax (if this is what you do with hoaxes) on members of the Women’s Faculty Club and their guests. It consisted of a lecture on “Analyzing Dreams” by a Dr. Vosberg of Vienna, “a distinguished disciple of Sigmund Freud,” who was in real life a student in the Cornell College of Architecture. Made up to look every inch an Austrian professor, unloosing floods of English words highly tinctured with a convincing Viennese accent, rushing to a blackboard to produce the most striking diagrams and equations, the student imposter gave a lecture that was a smash hit. With its startling and sometimes shocking revelations about the significance of dreams, it was the talk of the campus. It was not until the following week that Vosberg, pretending to be en route back to Vienna, sent a farewell message that was redolent of fakery. It had been a marvelous hoax, fooling a company including what their possessors would have regarded as among the best minds in the community.

I expected the Cornell student newspaper, the Cornell Sun, would have a field day with the story but it printed nothing. And neither did any other local paper. So I wrote a story of Vosberg’s (and Mrs. Farrand’s) triumph and sent it to the New York World, where it ran as a column on the first page and on into the inner pages of the paper. The story was also picked up by some newspapers overseas. No one ever asked me if I wrote it and I never had occasion to tell anybody. I simply enjoyed the experience.

Source: Keezer, Dexter. Along an Entertaining Way: The Autobiography of Dexter M. Keezer, 1895-1991 (pp. 95-96). Kindle Edition.

I confess Dexter Keezer had me at the word “hoax”. Immediately I thought of the so-called Sokol affair in the mid-1990s that resulted from a mathematical physicist’s prank article that he had submitted and which was dutifully reviewed, accepted, and published by Social Text in its Spring/Summer issue of 1996. I wondered, might the Dr. Vosberg hoax at Cornell on December 3, 1921 have been a Sokol precursor in the balloon popping of scientific pretension?

Executive summary:

From the two accounts written by Charles Stotz, transcribed and included below, one contemporaneous and the other just over forty years after the fact, we can glean that as far as intentionality of the conspiring agents is concerned, nothing more than collegiate mischief was involved. These folks regarded themselves as merely playing a confidence man’s game for the fun of it. They could have rightfully posted a note on the door leading from the scene of the crime stating that no dogmas were hurt in the making of their hoax. In comparison Alan Sokol’s essay was a masterpiece of satirical assassination. However, as far as reception of the hoax is concerned, one can discern a distinct resemblance between the hoaxes when one sees how the reports and interpretation of the facts of the Dr. Vosberg hoax were to made to fit clearly held preconceptions.

Before we glance behind the scene at Cornell’s Women’s Cosmopolitan Club in December 1921, let us examine the text with accompanying lantern-slides of Dr. Vosberg’s lecture as published by Charles Stotz in 1964.

Incidentally Stotz’s senior year portrait along with the sole photograph taken of him dressed and made-up to play Dr. Vosberg are displayed at the beginning this post.

____________________

The Hoax Lecture

THE FREUDIAN THEORY
With later developments

by Dr. Herman Vosberg

“Dreams”, as Dr. Freud tells us, “are that bodily process above which the world-soul and immortality are raised as high as the blue ether above the lowest sandy plain.”

The world has only two-thirds of our life. During the other third our interest is suspended in the outside and we live another existence—the psychic life.

Why then, dear friends, do we ignore, or at most ridicule, that chief activity which occupies one-third of our mortal existence; namely, dreams—

This afternoon I shall attempt to justify the viewpoint of a new school of psychoanalysts— giving the dream its proper significance and value.

A study of history will do much to give us faith in this study. Is there anyone who does not know of Pharaoh’s dream, Joseph’s interpretation and the consequences? Has anyone forgotten the dream of Pilot’s wife and its disastrous results? Are we not told that Alexander the Great never undertook any great campaigns without his most trusted dream interpreters; it would have been as impossible as a campaign today without aviation scouts.

In contrast, interest in dreams in modern times has deteriorated into superstition and asserts itself only among the ignorant. As Dr. Freud himself says, “The study of dreams is regarded with suspicion as a fantastic mystery study and is left to laymen, poets, natural philosophers, mystics, and nature-cure fakirs.” He said to me in warning when I confided my intention to pursue this work, “I will tell you now that by so doing you will ruin your chances of success at any university and when you go into the world you will be regarded as a fanatic and fakir.”

So is it any wonder that when this man appeared, strong enough to speak his convictions, in a society which does not understand his aims, which regards him with suspicion and hostility, and which turns loose upon him all the malicious spirits which lurk within it, I say, is it any wonder he should be little appreciated? I refer to my revered master, Dr. Sigmund Freud, a persecuted pioneer.

FIRST SLIDE: a portrait of Dr. Freud
[not necessarily the portrait projected]

I cannot, in the short time given me this afternoon, digress with a eulogy on Dr. Freud, but will give a single instance to indicate his scientific fortitude. When a young student and very poor, he lived in Vienna with his brother in the garret of a tenement. His brother took sick and became steadily worse. One day Freud was nearing the end of a long experiment, the result of years of conscientious effort and his brother in the next room was dying of fever. Late into the night he kept calling “Water, water.” But Freud could not hear him so vitally interested was he in the solution of an experiment which would revolutionize science. Finally he achieved success, concluded his experiment, and, going into the next room, closed the eyes of his dead brother. Such sincerity of purpose could not fail to produce marvelous results.

I shall now proceed to give you the chief elements involved in dream interpretation, avoiding all technical terms and omitting many phases of psycho-analysis itself, in which I am sure you would not be interested this afternoon. To make these lectures possible in this country, this step has been necessary. I will now bother you with a definition which will make the following matter plainer.

Psychiatry is the treatment of mental disorders. Psycho-analysis gives to psychiatry the omitted psychological foundation.

I would say here that it is not possible to give public dream interpretations, as you may have expected; because, first, you would be constrained from speaking your true mind because of the audience; secondly, you would, very probably, either be embarrassed or insulted by my analysis. Hence, no one has ever heard a true public dream analysis. Absolute privacy and confidence between the psycho-analyst and the patient are necessary —so do not expect me this afternoon to interpret your particular dreams.

I shall, rather, give you the key to the analysis of your own dreams which you may easily use yourself, provided you do not ignore the following idea. I quote this from Dr. Freud in his well known book on psychoanalysis. This is the keystone of our science.

“The dreamer does know what he dreams, but does not know that he knows, and therefore believes he does not know.”

You will not, at first, admit dreams even to yourself. As Freud says, “It is a pre-disposition to consider an unpleasant idea untrue.” We must realize some truth in Plato’s statement, “The virtuous person contents himself with dreaming what the wicked person does.” So the first step is to admit the truth to yourself. If you obey that impulse without any hesitation you have made the first step.

I shall now, before taking up Wish-Fulfillment, show you a few of the happy results obtained in the laboratory from the application of Calculus to the Dream. This will materially simplify the dream mechanism itself and enable you to grasp the essence of the dream content.

In our dreams appear various symbols which scientists have accepted as having a relation to earthly life. I shall not bother you with a description of them and mention this only to say that these graphs were developed from the comparison of these symbols with everyday objects.

Professor Schraum of Budapest says, “the content of the dream is analogous to tones which the ten fingers of a musically illiterate person would bring forth if they ran over the keys of the instrument.” It is our purpose here to collect these scattered elements and arrange them in their proper harmony.

Patients usually say when awakened, Freud tells us, “I could draw it but cannot say it.” So we see dream experiences are preeminently pictures.

So we searched for a long time to find a medium which would make all this evident without the burdensome mass of technical explanation. Calculus finally filled this need and I shall now show you the principal dream types described by graphs.

This graph is plotted with relation to two axes—the horizontal one, the axis of time, and the vertical one, the axis of intensity or degree of unconsciousness. In this first example, the troubled dream, we have three areas: the spiritual area, the nebulous or blurred area, and the area of actuality. The troubled dream includes all types of dreams disturbed by unpleasant happenings, the sensation of being confronted by terrible images, murders, and includes what is commonly called the “night-mare.”

SECOND SLIDE

It is a very common dream and indicates the improper motives in daily life. As you see, the graph proceeds through the common point of the two axes, or the point of dropping asleep, and passes into the nebulous, the foggy area between the sleeping and the waking life. It wavers, unable to pass into the area of rest, returns several times to wakefulness and then passes for a short time into the spiritual life, is disturbed again by disagreeable experiences and then, due to some suddenly introduced cause, plunges through the nebulous area—and the terrified dreamer awakes.

This is the normal dream of one who is beyond psycho-analytical treatment. Being happy and contented, all the factors are nicely adjusted and a beautiful smooth curve results, parabolic in contour. The greatest intensity of the unconscious is attained at a point approximately three-fourths of the way through the dream after which a more sudden but gradual decrease is detected.

THIRD SLIDE

The keen observer will notice that this curve has a remarkably great number of applications. It well symbolizes life itself, if we regard the area below the horizontal axis as the prenatal state and that above, life itself. The person is born, or crosses the life line at the zero point, progresses with uniformly increasing intensity of consciousness to the critical point of maturity and then, through the failing of the senses, more quickly, but still uniformly, declines to the second point of crossing, or death. In musical composition we find this curve symbolic of the best symphonies. The degree of interest in the music increases to crescendo at this point and then dies away.

This graph represents the inspired dream. It is the symbol of the vision seen by the Hindu. The degree of consciousness passes into the spiritual area, wavers a moment and then passes off into infinity, finally becoming tangent to the axis at infinity and then returning to the area of actuality, carrying with it the inspiration of communion with the great heart of the spiritual or mystic world itself.

FOURTH SLIDE

This was the mechanical action of the prophetic dreams of history to which I referred before.

This slide represents the graph of the sleeping sickness. If anything has encouraged me in the development of the analogy between dreams and the calculus it is the experimentation upon the cure of this terrible disorder. As you plainly see, the sleeper has a tendency to return to the horizontal axis and return to waking life, but the curve extends far out on the time axis before this is accomplished.

FIFTH SLIDE

So we have effected a cure in the following manner. The patient is induced to sleep under favorable conditions and by the operation of outside agencies he is caused to dream. This, of course, introduces a break in the sleep curve and he passes across the axis into wakefulness. I shall quote a little from Freud to show how these dreams are induced. These experiments were conducted in Budapest in conjunction with Professor Friml. I quote from his Psycho-analysis: “The dreamer was induced to sleep. We placed a bottle of perfume under his nose. He soon awoke and told us he had been walking through the poppy fields at Cairo and the strong pungent odor had suffocated him. Another patient was pinched by the nape of the neck. He later awoke telling us he had dreamt someone was applying a mustard plaster to him and the pain had almost overcome him. A third time we placed a few drops of water on the brow of the patient. He soon awoke telling us he had dreamt of rowing a boat in a stormy sea, until perspiring, he had succumbed to exhaustion.”

So much for calculus and its invaluable addition to psycho-analysis.

Let us proceed to our third and last consideration— that of wish-fulfillment. Let me give you the essence of the Freudian theory. Let us assume that for some reason or other a terrible idea occurs to us; for instance, the first sin of man, the desire to kill our brother. What do we immediately do? Our conscience tells us it is a wrong idea and we suppress the fiendish desire. Soon, we entirely forget it and if anyone should suggest it to us, we laugh at them. We say, “Why such a terrible thing would never occur to me!” But here is the point—we have not forgotten it after all. It secretes itself in our inner subconsciousness and then some night in our dream when our conscience, or as Freud has it, “the censor” does not operate, we dream of killing our brother and awake horrified and proceed immediately to throw the idea from our mind. This is where I give you the key to the whole matter. Do not reject these dreams that seem absurd or terribly impossible to you. Take them and ponder over them and you will find that the most ridiculous dream has often the greatest significance. Why do you laugh when you tell someone of how you dreamt you were falling from some great height? Reflect. Do you never remember of having stood on some building or precipice and looking down, saying to yourself, “What if I should jump? With one movement of my foot I could end this whole world that seems too serious to me. What a sensation it would be!” Then your saner mind said to you, “Fool—step back. Do you wish to be a suicide?”

And again in dreams we struggle to attain our ideals or ambitions. We have often watched birds soaring and wished to experience what we imagine to be a blissful sensation. But our sordid everyday selves say, “You were made to keep both feet on the ground. Don’t waste time imagining an impossibility.” Then what do we do? We go home and dream of flapping our arms and soaring off into space with absolute ease. The early aeronauts took this thing seriously and were derided, but yet today, right over our very heads we see man flying in machines of his own creation.

So look in your dreams for that serious idea which may decide your life. Take it, ponder on it, admit everything to yourself, withhold nothing, do not allow it to become buried within you, only to recur time after time, the object of ridicule. Then through our dreams we come to know ourselves as we really are.

Let me close after first giving you a glance at this picture which is the symbol of our science. It is the frontispiece of Dr. Freud’s inimitable work on psycho-analysis.

SIXTH SLIDE, The prisoner’s dream
[by Moritz von Schwind, 1836]

Here is the prisoner, symbolic of ourselves shut up in our puny earthly frame, dreaming of escape which he knows, when he is awake, is impossible. These little figures represent the help of psycho-analysis pointing out the way of escape, pushing aside the bars of prejudice and intolerance, and pointing the way to the great eternal comprehension of the universe where our spirits may dwell untrampled by life’s vicissitudes.

Tomorrow morning when you come down to the breakfast table with what you think is a foolish dream on your lips, before you tell it, before you laugh—stop—think!

Source: Cornell Alumni News, Vol. 67, No. 5 (December 1964), p. 10-11.

____________________

Fake News
Dec 5, 1921

RISLEY STIRRED BY H. VOSBERG’S FREUDIAN IDEAS

Famous Psycho-analist [sic] Reveals Key to Interpretation of Cornell Dreams.
THE CALCULUS GIVES CUE
Exhaustive Scrutiny of Subconsciousness Necessary to Realize a Fuller Life.
WILL ANSWER QUESTIONS
Revered Scientist Deeply Interested in Students — To Reply to Queries by Mail.

“Tomorrow morning when you come down to the breakfast table with what you think Is a foolish dream on your lips, before you tell It, before you laugh — stop! think!” Such were the concluding words of Dr. Herman Vosberg’s address at the Women’s Cosmopolitan Club bazaar Saturday afternoon and evening. At the beginning of his speech, Dr. Vosberg was introduced with an appreciation by a prominent member of the faculty, subdued the restlessness of the audience, resulting from his striking and highly individual presence, by the following remark: “The world has only two-thirds of our life; dreams have the other third. Why then, dear friends, do we ignore or at most ridicule that chief activity which occupies so much of our mortal existence?”

Proceeding with a short resume of the great dreams of history, from Joseph to Alexander the Great and Pilate, he proved the importance of dream Interpreters in all ages. It was not possible for him to analyze the subconsciousness of his audience, as he believed that such would be embarrassing. He stated, however that it was easy for the individual to interpret his own dreams by recognizing this fundamental truth in the Freudian Science: “The dreamer does know what he dreams, but he does not know that he knows, and therefore believes that he does not know.”

Scientists Have Fortitude.

Illustrating the scientific fortitude of psycho-analysts, the speaker gave an anecdote from the life of a great Austrian scientist. While this scholar was nearing the end of a long experiment which was to revolutionize Thought, his brother in the next room was dying of a fever. Late into the night he kept calling, “Water, water!” But the Doctor, occupied with the solution of his problem, could not hear him. In the early morning he successfully concluded his experiment and going into the other room, closed the eyes of his dead brother. Such sincerity of purpose, said Dr. Vosberg, could not fail to produce marvelous results. Going deeper into his subject, the scholar said that The Calculus was found after much research to be the best medium by which to clarify the dream mechanism and avoid the burdensome mass of technical explanation. He proceeded to show the three principal dream types by lantern slide diagrams. They were the troubled dream, the normal dream, and the inspired dream. This point in the lecture aroused not a little adverse criticism on the part of those who thought his statements somewhat radical, but no one doubted the sincerity of the man.

Calculus Cures Sleeping Sickness.

Dr. Vosberg justified the introduction of Calculus into his science by describing its use in the cure of sleeping sickness. In this case the graph of sleep is shown to pass across the time axis into the area of the spiritual, reaches a high point on the axis of intensity, and gradually approaches again the horizontal or time axis. As this is not always accomplished, the sleeper is in danger of death before awaking; so dreams are injected into his sleep which cause a break in the graph with the result that it passes over the time axis, awaking the patient. “This treatment,” he said, “is obviously quite simple.” He gave as a tried method of inducing dreams, the following: A few drops of water were placed on the brow of the sleeper; he soon awoke, telling that he had dreamed of rowing a boat in a stormy sea, until, perspiring, he had succumbed to exhaustion. Summing up his discourse. Dr. Vosberg advised his hearers to look into a dream for that serious idea which might decide the destiny of their lives. “Take it, ponder on it, admit everything to yourself, withhold nothing, do not allow it to become buried within you, only to recur time after time, the object of ridicule. Then through our dreams we come to know ourselves as we really are.”
Dr. Vosberg was entertained at a meeting of the Manuscript Club immediately after his evening lecture, and left for New York on a night train. In the Metropolis, he will spend ten days, and according to his letter printed elsewhere in this issue, will answer any questions on his subject before sailing for Vienna.

CORRESPONDENCE

Lehigh Station.
11 P.M., Dec. 3, 1921.

Editor CORNELL DAILY SUN—
Through you I wish to thank my good friends at Cornell. I have seldom enjoyed talking to such an appreciative audience, and as I now board the steam cars for New York and then the boat for dear old Vienna I realize what your hearty support has meant to me. If I have only done a little to simplify Cornell dreams I am deeply repaid.

Yours in haste,
HERMAN VOSBERG.

P.S.— I will be in New York about ten days before sailing and will gladly answer any questions submitted to me through your paper.

Source: The Cornell Daily Sun, Vol. XLII, No. 64, Dec. 5, 1921.

____________________

Hoax Revealed
Dec 6, 1921

Dr. Vosberg Was Not Himself
During Talk

To the amazement of this intellectual community, and those students of psycho-analysis who constituted the rapt audience in Risley Hall on Saturday, it has been disclosed by a local daily that Dr. Herman Vosberg, alleged disciple of Freud, in reality was not Dr. Vosberg at all. In fact, a perusal of the Austrian “Who’s Who” does not discover the name of any such celebrity. According to our source of information the lecturer was C. M. Stotz ’21, a student of Architecture, but not of Freud. If this is true there has been exploded the greatest hoax foisted upon a trusting community of intellectuals since the visit to this city of Col. G. H. Hardly ’68 in the spring of 1919.

Source: The Cornell Daily Sun, Vol. XLII, No. 65, Dec. 6, 1921.

____________________

An early report of the hoax

A NEW THEORY OF DREAMS

Doctor Hermann Vosberg, who discussed “Dreams and the Calculus, or the Freudian Theories with Later Developments by Vosberg,” at the bazaar of the Women’s Cosmopolitan Club last Saturday, perpetrated one of the most stupendous hoaxes that Cornell has seen. It far exceeded the exploits of the great Colonel Hardly, whose name was used in describing the “Hardly Fair.”

Doctor Vosberg, ostensibly hailing from the University of Budapest, and with an accent that partook of all the languages of continental Europe, was none other than Charles Stotz ’21, with a make-up that defied detection, although at dinner in Risley Hall he was fearful lest his putty nose would slip off into the soup. He mystified many of the highbrows with his quotations from Freud, and some of them confessed that they were thrilled although they admitted that some of it was over their heads.

Professor Weld of the Psychology Department introduced Dr. Vosberg, and it is rumored that Mrs. Farrand had something to do with getting the doctor to come to Cornell.

Source: Cornell Alumni News, Vol. XXIV, No. 11, December 8, 1921, p. 122.

____________________

Stotz’s own Account,
January 1922

Confessions of a Psycho-analyst.
The Noted Vosberg Explains the Secret of His Rise to Fame
By Charles Stotz

The Era asked me to write something about this man Vosberg. I had almost succeeded in getting him out of my mind and so was not particularly delighted at the prospect. But since the papers have so miserably painted the whole thing out of its true proportions and people in general on the campus seem little better informed, I shall lay out the main facts of the case, from the viewpoint of my old friend, the Doctor, himself.

The Management of the Women’s Cosmopolitan Club asked me to give a stunt at their annual bazaar. They suggested a bogus lecture and recommended something Freudian. The idea seemed to have possibilities so I began reading a little psycho-analysis. Before long I had plenty and then wrote a lecture which brought me back to myself again. We started a little publicity in the Sun. I read, with many vague premonitions, that Hermann Vosberg had done more than any other to “clarify the dream mechanism,” that he had written a book— “Dream and the Calculus,” and that he would speak twice in Risley next Saturday. I hardly recognized myself.

I told everyone I was leaving town over the week-end and retreated to my room Friday night to polish up the lecture and practice modeling a putty nose. I was quite skeptical about getting away with any delusions in the way of make-up. Early in the morning the haircut occurred. The barber had no sense of humor, but with a little reassurance he finally produced a masterpiece. We followed a photo of Anders Zorn, the etcher, but missed it a little. Anyway, it was a good “Heinie” haircut, and doggone scientific. The rest of the morning was spent on the nose, gestures, pacing the floor with all manner of limps and eccentricities till we found a good one, and general first-aid on the accent which had a tendency to wander from the German into French, Wop, negro, and all the dialects I have heard in Vaudeville. Promptly at 1:30, Merrill started on the beard and mustache. No one knows the high and low spots we touched until that last hair was glued on. I felt like an animated plate of spinach. We used only the best sources in this make-up, working from reproductions of the great paintings of the best beards of history. We owed most to Albrecht Dürer’s “Head of Himself.” At quarter to five, I hopped into an automobile and started for Risley. I didn’t smile again that day. We picked up Professor Weld on the way and sneaked thru the side door into the room behind the stage of the Recreation Hall. Beyond the curtains was the hum of people and music. The enormity of my proposition swept over me. Why spoil all the fun? They were having a good time. How inappropriate psycho-analysis seemed just then. But the papers had advertised and— My thoughts were interrupted by my nose. The sudden change from cold to warm air had started irritation. I dared not touch it with my handkerchief. Just then the curtains rustled open and all was quiet. What if I should sneeze and blow it off. Professor Weld nudged me and we walked out, he to the center of the stage and I to my chair, with head on one side, right arm limp, and a slight strut like a rooster. It felt quite unnatural. Professor Weld launched into a technical introduction which was far over my head, even if I had been in a condition to listen. I think parts of it were over his own head, too. The audience seemed satisfied, though. I hoped it would be good and long because I had many, many premonitions of just what reactions and reflexes would occur when I started to speak. After talking nearly two years, Professor Weld finally said— “He will speak for himself.” He looked at me, they applauded, and I rose, magnified nine diameters, bowed to him awkwardly and then to the audience, holding one hand over the toweling with which I had made my stomach.

I walked to the reading desk, rustling out the papers and acting as mystical as I knew how. A little pause, with blinking of the eyes to stop the twittering, and I was off, with all doubts thrown to the winds; I was Hermann Vosberg and the greatest scientific prophet of modern times. I was proud of my nose and my beard and even of my haircut. It was a condescension to speak to hoi-poloi and their twittering irritated me….

[long direct quotations from the lecture omitted here]

…Then a gruesome story, just to sober things up well, about the poor scientist and his brother in the garret. His brother was dying of fever but the patient was so occupied in concluding safely an experiment which was the result of years of experiment and study, that he ignored his brother’s cries. Here was the critical point in the lecture for me as I had never gotten past this story before without laughing when I said— “Late into the night he kept calling— ‘water—water’.” To add to the trial I just then caught the eye of the man in the front row whose shirt and collar I was wearing. My voice caught, I hesitated and went on. It only added a pathetic note, as though my voice had nearly failed me upon the relation of so sad an occurrence. “Such sincerity of purpose could not fail to produce marvelous results.”

The impossibility of giving public dream interpretation was then explained. The patient would not speak his true mind before the crowd and would probably be either insulted or embarrassed by the interpretation. The audience twittered a little here but we got right down to brass tacks again with this abstruse idea— “the key-note of our science.” “The dreamer does know what he dreams, but does not know that he knows, and therefore believes he does not know.” Another twitter. It is a curious thing that this remark in the speech was quoted in papers all over the country and in the London Times as the best nonsense of all, and yet it is a direct quotation from a book on psycho-analysis.

Then I gradually worked up to Calculus with reference to the dream which was the rawest of all. I hardly hoped to survive it. As the Sun article had stated— “His greatest contribution to psycho-analysis is his book, ‘Calculus and the Dream,’ which will be soon put on sale, after translation from the German.” I dared not think what they expected. I shall describe two of the most flagrant of the dream graphs of which lantern slides were thrown on the screen—the Troubled Dream and the Graph of the Sleeping Sickness….

[long direct quotations from the lecture omitted here]

…A little twittering occurred here. There were some skeptical people among the audience and I was keenly aware of the same. I stopped and blinked my eyes, even taking off the spectacles and tapping on the desk until these disrespectful, thoughtful few had finished. Then we went on, telling about wish-fulfillment, giving the true essence of the theory, which involved many delightfully indelicate things, such as killing one’s brother, etc….

[long direct quotations from the lecture omitted here]

..I was gaining attention. Then followed a few flowery tributes to this grand science, ending in this climax— “These little figures represent the help of psycho-analysis, pointing out the way of escape, pushing aside the bars of prejudice and intolerance, and pointing the way to that great, eternal comprehension of the universe where our spirits may dwell untramelled by life’s troubles and vicissitudes.”

 Then, leaning over the desk with my most insidious expression, and menacing them with my spectacles, I spoke the last line with all the mystic power at my command— “Tomorrow morning, when you come down to the breakfast table with what you think is a foolish dream on your lips, before you tell it, before you laugh, stop—think.”

There was a distinct pause. Then clapping, the curtain, and the atmosphere in my immediate neighborhood lowered some eighty degrees. There were some in the audience who caught on at the first, either recognizing my voice or disguise or using their general common sense—there was a second class who swallowed the thing whole, and there was a third and largest class of those who didn’t know what to think and didn’t care.

A few went to the committee and apologized for those who had no better manners than to twitter thru a scientific lecture. One lady said— “I was opposed to having a lecture here by an Austrian so soon after the war but after I heard it I be came reconciled.” One man heard the lecture, thought it was poor logic but was so interested that word reached me he was coming in the evening to meet me and to hear the lecture again. So my fun had only begun. I stayed back-stage until the crowd had gone and then we all went to supper in the Main Dining Hall. This was my first appearance at close range and my putty nose wasn’t standing up very well under the strain. The walk down the aisle to the head table, past the crowd, who stood till we were seated, seemed several miles long. I strutted like a rooster—head cocked to one side, one arm dangling loose, and feeling like an ass. Finally we were seated— Mrs. Farrand, Miss Nye, Professor Weld and Mrs. Weld, and a few guests invited to meet me. The first thing, I found myself confronted by a bowl of soup. I could not manipulate the spoon with out drinking some of my mustache. I wonder how Albrecht Dürer did it. And, strange as it may seem, I was forever getting crumbs in my beard. And, together with this, we were carrying on a highly colored conversation for the sake of our impressed guests. The subjects for talk ranged everywhere from the psycho-analysis of a toothpick to the deplorable American habit of chewing gum and the hopeless jazz. We carried thru pretty well although a giggle would break thru now and then. We held in, however, until the crowd had dispersed and then treated ourselves to a spell of hysterics. After dinner I held a little informal reception in Miss Nye’s room—scraping bows and jabbering nonsense. The gentleman appeared who so wished to meet me and I had a lively five minutes. He couldn’t see Calculus and Dreams. I dragged out every possible argument, about the staff of Calculus experts in the insurance offices, the broad general interpretation of Calculus, etc., but there wasn’t much of a definite nature to say, I soon found. When I was pressed for an answer I waited a long time, seeming to think but really stalling for time and trying to give him the impression that his puny little views irritated me. Well, finally he asked me if I had ever read the works of Stephen Leacock. [Curator’s Note: Canadian humorist who was a Veblen student, awarded a Ph.D. in political economy by the University of Chicago in 1903] Evidently he was sounding bottom. I said— “I think little of that man. He is one of those kind of men that mix sense with nonsense so that you can’t tell when they’re talking sense. That, in my opinion, is the greatest fault a human being can possess.” This helped tremendously, and, as luck would, have it, someone else shortly came in to meet me. This individual started in German—one little difficulty I had feared would occur. “But wouldn’t it be more considerate to speak the language we all understand? Then there will be no embarrassment.” This was alright until she began talking about Vienna, our common birth place. I winked to a friend, who extricated me. One person confided to another— “That’s what Charlie Stotz is going to look like when he grows up.” This sort of thing kept up until it was time for the evening lecture.

We went thru the crowd to the stage. Professor Weld laid it on a lot thicker for things had leaked out a little since afternoon. But the ones who knew were considerate and formed some of our most interested spectators. He succeeded in calming down the others pretty well. I staggered thru the thing again, having to stop frequently to gain absolute silence, without which I refused to speak. After the lecture, Professor Weld announced that there would be an informal reception for me immediately following. I came off the stage with many fears aroused. The last glance in a mirror revealed a terribly red and disfigured nose. The bridge of the spectacles had worn a little groove which looked strange to say the least. However, I was feeling rather prime, with the last lecture off my chest and took a chance. A couple of ladies earnestly requested me to write down, for them, the names of a couple of good books on Psycho-analysis, which I did, not disparaging my own. Then I saw a playful group of young Collech fellas coming my way. I knew that here’s where somebody was going to grab me by the beard and say— “Take off your whiskers, Foxy Grandpa, we know you.” I extricated myself with some difficulty, only to have someone introduce me to three Austrians whose names I couldn’t even repeat. I excused myself and soon made an informal farewell by the back door.

That is the story of Herman Vosberg. I make no moral of it all, draw no inferences, and leave it to you and the Associated Press. All I say is— it was the rarest and richest adventure in my young life.

SourceThe Cornell Era, vol. 54, January 27, 1922

____________________

Stotz’s Expanded Account,
December 1964

The Vosberg Hoax
by Charles M. Stotz ’21

A hoax is defined as “a deception for mockery or mischief.” This hoax was designed solely for mischief. However successful as a hoax, it did accomplish the purpose of the prime conspirator, the late Mrs. Livingston Farrand, “to enliven the campus.” Some may think this an extraordinary project for the wife of Cornell’s fourth president, less than three weeks after his inauguration. But she was an extraordinary woman, whom Morris Bishop describes in his book, A History of Cornell as “a great and vivid person who imposed upon the community her robust vigor, humor and charm.” Her role in the episode is here recorded for the first time as, at her request, I did not involve her in the account that appeared in the Cornell Era of January, 1922.

As the hoax appeared to the campus, the facts are these. On Saturday, December 3, 1921, the Cornell Women’s Cosmopolitan Club held an International Carnival in Risley Hall. The Cornell Daily Sun announced that the chief feature would be a lecture by a young Viennese psycho-analyst and pupil of Freud, named Dr. Herman Vosberg, who would speak on The Freudian Theory as modified by his book Dreams and the Calculus. This article quoted Professor Harry Weld of the Cornell department of psychology, of course of the inner circle, as saying, “Vosberg has with this work clarified the hitherto complicated dream mechanism.” Some objections were raised to bringing a German savant to the campus only three years after the war, but many were titillated at the prospect of hearing first-hand the new and daring revelations of psychoanalysis dealing with sex and dreams.

The good doctor appeared as advertised, bewiskered, speaking with halting accent, and walking with a limp acquired in the late war. There was an afternoon lecture followed by a dinner in Risley for a few carefully chosen guests at which Mrs. Farrand and Miss Gertrude Nye, dean of Risley Hall, presided as hostesses. Receptions for Dr. Vosberg were held in Miss Nye’s parlor before and after a second evening lecture.

Reactions in the audience varied from the suspicious to the credulous, from the indifferent to the enthusiastic, but apparently Vosberg was generally accepted by students and faculty alike as a bona fide, if eccentric, apostle of his formidable master in Vienna, Dr. Sigmund Freud. Some inevitably recognized behind the painstakingly careful disguise the voice and lean form of a campus graduate student and would-be entertainer. The campus buzzed over the weekend.

Mrs. Andrew D. White let it be known that the University had compromised itself in permitting a vulgar German to speak on its campus. A gracious review appeared Monday in the Cornell Daily Sun with a word of gratitude from Vosberg for the consideration shown him as he “boarded the steam cars for New York.” This review, as well as the announcements preceding the lecture, had been carefully arranged with the editor of the Sun who had been pledged to secrecy until the Tuesday morning edition. He was understandably disgruntled to have the Ithaca Journal-News scoop him with the denouement of the hoax in their Monday evening edition. An Associated Press correspondent, (Judge Elbert Tuttle ’18, then a law student) broadcast an account of the hoax, with photographs of Vosberg which received front page banners and editorials in most of the newspapers in the United States and Europe.

Mrs. Farrand sweeps in

As viewed from the inside, it must be admitted that there was no hope or intention on the part of the conspirators of making this an international affair. For my part, there had been no thought of giving a hoax at all. The sequence of events that led to this bizarre experience are as follows.

After graduation in 1921, I returned as a Fellow in Architecture of the Cornell Graduate School. At the request of the faculty of the College of Architecture, I had written and directed a play for the Semi-centennial of the College. This play, “The Purloined Thumbtack,” was duly presented at the celebration in October. At a repeat performance for a campus audience in November, the Farrand family were guests of honor. After the performance, Mrs. Farrand swept into our improvised dressing room to offer her compliments and ask me to tea the following day. Then, with sparkling eye, she said she had just had “a simply wonderful idea” to discuss.

The hoax shapes up

I was staggered to learn the next day that Mrs. Farrand’s “idea” was to hoax the university. Mr. Farrand, sitting nearby with his suave smile, made no comment that I can remember, but I wondered how he felt as president in hoaxing a campus on which he had just set foot. Apparently he had no more resistance than I to this formidable personality, who launched merrily into plans and details. The Women’s Cosmopolitan Club’s International Carnival, just three weeks away, offered an appropriate setting for a foreign lecturer. After deciding that the hoax was to deal with psycho-analysis, then a subject of popular interest, the services of Professor Harry Weld of the department of psychology were enlisted. He readily agreed to make the formal introduction to the lectures and provided me with several books on psycho-analysis as well as a briefing on the subject. I then concoted a fairly plausible treatise, with legitimate quotations, and an equal amount of original material on the Calculus as applied to dreams. The name, Herman Vosberg, was chosen out of thin air.

In the meantime, we organized the coterie of faithfuls needed in the execution of the hoax. This must include Lucy Owenstein, the president of the Cosmopolitan Club, Ruth Seymour (Mrs. Stayman Reed, Grad) who ran the slides and a few other officers and, of course, Miss Gertrude Nye, dean of Prudence Risley Hall, where the lectures were given. The editor of the Cornell Daily Sun agreed to let me write the preliminary notices and the review on Monday morning to insure a consistent story.

As to my personal disguise. Following a photograph of Anders Zorn [cf. Zorn’s 1911 painting of the economist, A. Piatt Andrew at the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum in Boston], I grew my hair longer than usual on the back and sides and had an unamused barber trim it very short on top and front. When he said “You look like a ‘heine’”, I knew we had succeeded. The beard and mustache were applied by Merrill, make-up expert of the Dramatic Club, so well as to defy detection at close quarters. I applied face putty to the small depression in the ridge of my nose, a prominent feature that I thought might otherwise be recognized. Pince-nez glasses with a long black cord lent a professional [Curator’s note: sic, ‘professorial’ intended?] air.

The long half-hour

My wardrobe consisted of a full dark tie with a gates-ajar collar, striped trousers borrowed from Louis Fuertes and a frock coat loaned by my fellow graduate student, Lake Baldridge. I paid dearly for this clothing by having Louis and Lake sit in the very front row, broadly grinning and, to add one more hazard to a perilous experience, they had brought President Farrand with them.

My dialect was a compound of German and Jewish, acquired in entertaining over the years. Some time was spent in establishing a routine of gestures and a limp in my right leg.

At 5:30 on the afternoon of December 3rd, my classmate Tokisuke Yokogawa picked me up at Founder’s Hall with his automobile, one of the few on the campus, and, after stopping for Professor Weld, delivered us to the rear stage door of the Recreation Hall of Prudence Risley.

We could hear beyond the curtains the sound of what was then called a “tea dance” which was shortly interrupted to assemble the audience for the lecture. How inappropriate a lecture on psychoanalysis seemed just then! This was a long half hour for us both as we were not at all confident that we would not be promptly unmasked. The curtains finally rustled open. Weld walked briskly to the podium and spoke so calmly and convincingly of the speaker and his subject that I felt a degree of reassurance. After bowing awkwardly to him and the audience with one hand held over the toweling that made the stomach I lacked, I limped to the desk. As always the first few words dispelled the uneasiness that precedes the plunge and I lived another’s life for the next few hours, a sort of self-hypnosis. Vosberg was a man of tense earnestness who never smiled.

“The dreamer does know”

As pre-arranged, the room was darkened after the introduction with only the reflection from the papers on the reading desk and light from the screen to illuminate my features. This was not only a defense against recognition, but gave an atmosphere suitable to a discussion of dreams and the sub-conscious. The use of lantern slides further diverted the attention of the audience.

Any speaker is keenly aware of the reactions of his audience, but it was puzzling to find a relatively calm acceptance of the fictitious dream graphs and active tittering at the authentic quotations; especially, “The dreamer does know what he dreams, but does not know that he knows, and therefore believes he does not know.” This was quoted as prime nonsense in most of the newspaper accounts.

“Hi, Charlie”

It was difficult to assess the degree of acceptance of the lecture. A poll of the audience would probably have yielded few candid answers. Undoubtedly, many considered the speaker and his ideas suspect, but others, uninterested or uninformed on the subject, were merely content to be there among the intelligentsia. At any rate, except for a few ripples of laughter, there was respectful attention. The text of the lecture, reproduced in full elsewhere in this issue, will permit the reader to make up his own mind about the subject matter. After the curtains closed, Weld and I exchanged glances of relief, content that we had not been openly challenged.

We remained backstage until the room had cleared and then joined Mrs. Farrand, Mrs. Weld and Miss Nye for dinner with a few guests who had been invited to meet me. We proceeded down the center aisle to the head table of the dining hall with the girls standing at their places. One of these, Gert Lynahan, whispered as I passed, “Hi, Charlie.” It was apparent my disguise could not fool those who knew me well. As the head table was somewhat removed and included but a few persons not yet in on the hoax, Mrs. Farrand could not resist the desire to ply me with leading and provocative questions. She was having a very good time. But I was preoccupied with new and unanticipated problems, how to keep the soup out of my mustache and the crumbs out of my beard.

Mrs. Farrand to the rescue

Following dinner an informal reception was held in Miss Nye’s parlors. Mrs. Farrand introduced the guests with fitting ceremony and listened to the interviews with great relish. I soon realized that we had indeed risked everything with these face-to-face encounters. For instance, my first was a man who had heard the afternoon lecture and came back for the reception solely to challenge my application of Calculus to the dream. Having had a full year of Calculus, I was as well aware as he that my theories were too superficial to be defended. As we talked, I could see the light dawn in his face. When he asked, “Have you read Stephen Leacock?” I made some lame remarks about those who could not distinguish sense from nonsense. He withdrew like a gentleman so as not to disillusion the others waiting to talk to me. Mrs. Farrand who had been listening with great glee, agreed to forestall any more long interviews. As a matter of fact, she retrieved me adroitly from several ventures on thin ice such as the moment when she brought forward a young co-ed who spoke to me in German. I said that it would be impolite under the circumstances to speak in German. The girl then asked me in English just where I lived in our common birthplace, Vienna. At this juncture Mrs. Farrand mercifully came forward with a large group who had just arrived for the evening lecture and who were introduced separately without being given an opportunity to talk. They were asked to return for the later reception as I must leave to prepare for the evening lecture.

Professor Weld in his second introduction laid it on somewhat thicker, as we assumed there had been some “leaks” since the afternoon lecture. In fact, we now realized our temerity in repeating the lecture. However, if the evening audience included any disillusioned persons, they were considerate and things moved along with only a little more disturbance. I would stop occasionally and tap my spectacles on the podium to gain absolute silence.

— and again

After the lecture, when Dr. Weld announced that another reception would be held, I came off the stage with fears fully aroused. A glance in the mirror revealed a terribly red and disfigured nose in which the bridge of the spectacles had worn an unnatural groove. Hasty first-aid in the lavatory helped a little. My first encounter was with two elderly women who asked for names of some good reference books on psycho-analysis and the publisher and date of appearance of my own work on Dreams and the Calculus. They were so earnest I felt like a common forger. Then three Austrian students spoke to me in a flood of German. Mrs. Farrand adroitly put out this fire by interrupting them to take me away for a series of innocuous introductions and handshakings. At this point I saw an unmistakably mischievous group of young students making their way across the room. Whether or not they were bent on unmasking me, I signaled Mrs. Farrand, who, as pre-arranged in such an emergency, announced that I must leave immediately to pack for the late train to New York. I escaped by the rear door.

Dr. Vosberg had lived the four hours of his brief life in the tense atmosphere of the espionage agent, or at least confidence man. Making my way across the campus, it was fine to breathe the cold night air and to realize that Vosberg no longer existed and that I still had a whole skin. I tested my disguise on an old friend, a drug store proprietor from whom I frequently bought tobacco. He insisted on taking my picture with a great burst of old-fashioned flashlight powder. This is the picture that was used by the newspapers and put on sale in the campus store—and the only one taken.

Newspapers delighted

It was not too late to stop at Martin Sampson’s house for the weekly meeting of the Manuscript Club where I gave the only repeat performance of the hoax lecture. Two of the members of the Club reported the lecture many years later, E. B. White in the New Yorker, and Morris Bishop in his A History of Cornell. Later, Martin Sampson bet me a hundred dollars that no matter what I did, I would never again get an editorial in the Boston Transcript.

However complete its deception was on the campus, the hoax was an unqualified and sweeping success in the newspapers. Tuttle’s Associated Press story was reasonably correct in its details but the account acquired apocryphal form as it traveled and was invariably written as a laugh at the expense of the faculty. “Cornell University, at least an important intellectual portion, is recovering from one of the severest shocks in its existence. Venerable professors and aged residents are raising a cry, ‘What are we coming to’” (New York World). “Culture camp ‘goes cuckoo’ when it learns great psycho-analyst is mere student” (Boston Traveler). “When teacher gets fooled there is rejoicing in the classroom” (Brooklyn Eagle). “But may not a valuable educational lesson be learned from this outrageous performance? . . . Why not select the most imaginative and mendacious among the pupils and let them do the lecturing and invent all the ‘experiments?’” (Baltimore Sun).

Freud interviewed

Psycho-analysis as a new science was derided. “Psycho-analysis . . . imposes no obligation upon the thinker. One may drift into the spaces of irresponsibility, while he or she yet retains his or her standing as a sane person” (Cincinnati Enquirer). “It may be folly to be wise on a subject where ignorance permits free play to fancy.” Such stuff as dreams are made of “either defies analysis or the task becomes too delightfully easy” (Brooklyn Eagle). “What is the difference, the students are now asking, between psycho-analysis and hocus-pocus if a mere student can put on a false beard and pass for a famous scientist?” (New York Evening Mail). A man named Bradford Wester wrote me: “Hearty congratulations on your service to general sanity and Americanism by your satire on the pervert breed of psychic jack-asses!”

The editors moralized on the value of such hoaxes. “The health of the mind, as well as the body, demands a good purgative occasionally. Such a hoax . . . pricks the professional bubble of self-esteem” (Pittsburgh Sun). “The brain . . . needs an escape valve. When it becomes surcharged with intellectuality, it needs a way to blow off the excess . . . the large audience . . . was vastly in need of a mental cathartic. If they can laugh at their own stuffiness they are safe.” (Louisville Courier). The Brooklyn Eagle’s representative in Vienna interviewed Dr. Freud himself, who stated “Like every inquiry into abberations of the human mind, it carries with it an element of danger for gullibles; who are the ready victims of amateur exponents.”

The London Times took a sober view: “The Freudian psychology is both exciting and difficult to understand; it is therefore misunderstood by many people who wish for excitement. . . The remedy is in hoaxes like that of Ithaca, and also in a realization of the fact that the new psychology is not easily understood, and still less easily practiced, though, as the lecturer in Ithaca has proved, it is very easily parodied, whether consciously or unconsciously.” Incidentally, only three months later a similar hoax on psychoanalysis was carried out at Oxford University.

Dr. Faust, professor of German at Cornell, received from a friend in Germany an account of the hoax from the Berlin Allgemeiner Zeitung. Across the clipping his friend had written “Ist dass ein Hallowe’en Scherz (joke)?“ Dr. Faust, who considered the hoax a slight on German culture, was indignant and was persuaded with great difficulty to give me the clipping.

“Daisy” the magnificent

The climax came when I found a letter from Germany in my mailbox one night two weeks after the lecture. Was Freud himself on my trail? As I could not read German, I spent an anxious 24 hours until it was deciphered as merely a request from a minister in Russow, Germany, named Herbert Vossberg, a family-tree hound who had read an account of the hoax in the Rostock Buntes Allerlei and wanted to know why and how I chose the name Vosberg as an alias. About this time, the disturbing and distracting effects of publicity, verging on notoriety, led me to cut short any further correspondence or public contacts relating to Vosberg and his ideas about dreams.

This account, made for the record at the request of former President Deane future presidents’ wives who yearn “to enliven the campus” but it is most improbable that any campus will ever again see the likes of Mrs. Margaret K. (“Daisy”) Farrand.

Source: Cornell Alumni News, Vol. 67, No. 5 (December 1964), pp. 6-11.

____________________

Margaret Kate “Daisy” Farrand,
née Carleton

Source: 1929 portrait of Daisy Farrand painted by Olaf Martinius Brauner in the Cornell portrait collection.

Image Sources:  Senior year portrait of Charles Morse Stotz from The Cornellian, 1921, p. 127.

Categories
Economists Funny Business NBER

NBER. An Ode to Arthur F. Burns, sung to the tune of “Silver Dollar”, George Shultz, 1970

 

 

As I was paging through images of some documents I had examined a few years ago in the papers of Arthur F. Burns at Duke University’s Economists’ Papers Archive, I found an image of a sheet of paper with the following brief  “Ode to Arthur Burns.” It was typed (perhaps printed) in the lower left quadrant of a sheet of paper. As often happens to us archive rats, we find an interesting document but one that comes with no clear indication of either authorship or the circumstances surrounding the creation of the particular document.

I will admit that I liked the Ode because it captures the essence of the Schmoller-Menger Methodenstreit and its 20th century revival seen in the Koopmans-Burns-and-Mitchell controversy regarding the proper dosage of theory required for scientific economic measurement. Recall: Burns and Mitchell got burned pretty badly by Koopmans’ review of Measuring Business Cycles.

Moderation was to come to the Cowles Commission in its 1952 shift from its chosen motto “Science is Measurement” to “Theory and Measurement”. On the other side, the NBER has long become a lot more like the Cowles Commission of old than it has to its statistical-institutionalist ancestors of the first half of the 20thcentury.

The theory versus empirical split is analogous to the normative versus positive economics split recognized in the earliest methodological tracts of philosophically inclined economists. Working economists in the mainstream view themselves bathed in the flattering light of moderation along both methodological dimensions. Both-side-ism is not just a journalistic weakness. Those who work on the frontiers of human knowledge love striking an Aristotelian pose of reasonable moderation (don’t we all?).

But getting back to the issue of the authorship of the Ode and its larger context, let me identify the two suspects of Ode authorship swept up in my duly diligent Google search:

  • George P. Shultz (1920-2021): a 1949 M.I.T. Ph.D. alumnus in industrial economics, Dean of the Business School at the University of Chicago, and successively Secretary of Labor, Director of the Office of Management and Budget, Secretary of the Treasury, and Secretary of State in Republican Administrations.
  • Edward Teller (1908-2003): the “father of the hydrogen bomb”, and if not Stanley Kubrick’s human model for Dr. Strangelove then a Doppelgänger to a second-order approximation. It is not altogether obvious how he could possibly fit into the picture.

So Whodunnit? We begin at the scene of the literary crime.

__________________________

Ode to Arthur Burns

A fact without a theory
Is like a ship without a sail,
Is like a boat without a rudder,
Is like a kite without a tail.

A fact without a theory
Is as sad as sad can be
But, if there’s one thing worse
In this universe,
It’s a theory without a fact.”

Source: Duke University, David M. Rubinstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Arthur F. Burns Papers. Box 6, Folder “Other papers 1926-1987 (1 of 2)”,

__________________________

Sometimes it just turns out that you get lucky with a Google search using just a snip of a quotation. George Shultz was reported to be the author of lyrics that he sang to “the lively tune of Silver Dollar”. This title meant nothing to me. But before turning to the further power of the internet, let us enter the relevant portion of the Time magazine profile of George Shultz with its lede that takes the reader back to a “VIP-stacked Manhattan dinner”, ca. 1970. We note minor differences in the middle of the second stanza but it seems likely that at the latest the Ode was performed in 1970.

The Economy:
Another Professor with Power

CONCLUDING a speech on economic policy at a VIP-stacked Manhattan dinner three years ago, George Shultz startled the audience by abruptly breaking into song. To the lively tune of Silver Dollar, the then director of the Office of Management and Budget [sic, he was Secretary of Labor at the NBER dinner in 1970] belted forth in full voice:

A fact without a theory
Is like a ship without a sail,
Is like a boat without a rudder,
Is like a kite without a tail.

 

A fact without a figure
Is a tragic final act,
But one thing worse
In this universe
Is a theory without a fact.

Shultz is seldom short on either fact or theory, although the softspoken, smooth-faced economist seldom expresses his ideas in song. His quick grasp of facts and theories, his skill in persuading the federal bureaucracy to act on them—plus an ironclad loyalty to the President—are the qualities that have prompted Richard Nixon to keep investing his Treasury Secretary with added clout. By now Shultz has become one of the two or three most powerful men in Washington….

Source: Time Magazine. Monday, Feb. 26, 1973.

__________________________

This evidence was enough to get me to take a deeper dive into another folder in Burns’ papers at Duke where I had found a copy of the pamphlet that was prepared as memorial to Arthur F. Burns after his death with brief tributes from President Ronald Reagan, Rabbi Joshua Haberman, Milton Friedman, Senator Pete Domenici, Fed Chairman Paul Volcker, Secretary of State George Shultz, and former Presidents Gerald Ford and Richard Nixon.

In his tribute George Shultz clearly staked a claim of authorship to the Ode to Arthur Burns. 

George P. Shultz

O’Bie [nickname of George Shultz’s wife, née O’Brien] and I have a wonderful friend in Arthur Burns. We have lost him, but his influence and example live on with us. As Arthur Burns has touched and enriched our lives as individuals, so he has left our country an enduring legacy of scholarship and statesmanship.

Arthur lived according to deeply held values, both moral and intellectual. There was never a more devoted, or a more effective, defender of democratic freedoms — political and economic, and also intellectual — than soft-spoken Arthur Burns.

Arthur’s scholarship was truly of Biblical scope. Helmut Schmidt called him the Pope of Economics. But he was also a great student of the bible, and he lived by the values he found in the Scriptures. Arthur believed in learning, in work, in service, in personal discipline. He thrived on the creative tension between an idea and its application. His legendary tolerance for debate and discussion was a measure of his rigorous respect for intellectual integrity. This same respect for human intelligence also meant that Arthur suffered no fools gladly.

Facts held a fascination for him that no grand theories could match. He insisted that statements be meticulously accurate. He believed that theories, like his beloved New England houses should stand four-square on a solid foundation of facts.

Arthur suspected that someone who was careless with facts was likely to be careless in thought and unsound in judgment. For a dinner in his honor years ago. I wrote words to an old tune to describe this attitude of his:

(Sung)

A fact without a theory is as sad as sad can be.
But if there’s one thing worse
In this universe,
It’s a theory without a fact.

This combination of intellectual and moral values, an insatiable capacity for disciplined work, and an ability to bridge the distance between concept and reality gave Arthur Burns a tremendous force of personality. When convinced of something Arthur was more powerful in his advocacy than just about anyone I have known. But convinced he had to be. Ever the student, Arthur was the first to admit when he didn’t know something and the first to seek out an answer.

I remember seeing Arthur in Germany in 1982, not long after his arrival as ambassador. He was already in his late seventies; yet, like a kid with a new toy, he was determined to master the German language and to understand the society and the economy. Master them he did, during a period of special challenge for our bilateral relations and for the NATO alliance. He never stopped learning. That’s why his life was so full.

Arthur is now mourned on both sides of the Atlantic on both sides of the aisle, in government, in business, in finance in academia. For years to come, Presidents and professors, Secretaries of State, and students of economics, even Governors of the Federal Reserve, will continue to learn from Arthur Burns, through the enduring force of his intellectual legacy.

We — his family, friends, colleagues — have had the great joy and privilege of knowing Arthur, the man. We will miss his infectious curiosity. We will miss his kindness. We will miss his counsel, his candor and his integrity. And, we will carry him in our hearts always.

Source: Duke University, David M. Rubinstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Arthur F. Burns Papers. Box 6, Folder “Memorial and remembrances, 1987-2003”, pp. 19-20.

__________________________

50th Anniversary Celebration
of NBER

The New York Times (March 2, 1970 p. 55 ) reported a dinner at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel to honor the 50thanniversary of the National Bureau of Economic Research where both Arthur F. Burns (chairman of the Federal Reserve Board) and George P. Shultz (Secretary of Labor) were in attendance.  

THE HONORABLE GEORGE P. SHULTZ…now let me talk for a moment about Burns’ Laws, and here I’m talking to the Federal Reserve Board staff, of course. (Laughter)

Well! First, all calculations must be checked at least twice, independently.

Second, we must develop measurements of all the key variables. Be sure they’re as good as possible, and understand their strengths and limitations.

Third, always identify the logical structure of the argument, and if it has none, discount it and him. (Laughter)

Fourth, be willing to live with ambiguity, have patience, suspend judgment, wait for the facts to come in.

Fifth, certainly don’t be satisfied with examination of the aggregates. Look below the aggregates and the over-all movement of the figures; at the components, as certainly the components may be the most revealing, let alone appealing.

An finally, it’s important to examine the facts, and as Professor Leontief stated, to have a good conception for the relationship of the facts to the theory.

And so I would like to close with a little song, which I will try to sing to you. And this is by way of a sort of a ballad for Arthur Burns, and it’s my nomination for the alma mater, at least for the old National Bureau, if not for the new, and the theme song for the new Federal Reserve Board. And I’ll tell you I’ll give it a riffle through the first vers, and then I expect especially the head table, which has some briefing, to at least join me on the second, but I expect all of you to join me, too.

Ready? (Laughter)

A fact without a theory,
Is like a ship without a sail,
Is like a boat without a rudder,
Is like a kite without a tail!

A fact without a theory
Is like a tragic final act.
But if there’s one thing worse
In this universe
It’s a theory—I said a theory—I mean a theory—
Without a fact! (Laughter and applause)

[…]

THE HONORABLE ARTHUR F. BURNS: …And then I heard George sing a song, second time I heard it, and I’m puzzled. I asked George, sitting beside him, what would be the subject of his address tonight? And he mumbled, oh, something about guidelines. I said, “Oh no, you ought to sing that song, George.” Now I don’t know whether I inspired George to sing that song or whether the thought occurred to him independently. Somehow George and I have been on the same wavelength for so long, that though communicated itself from one to the other….

Source: National Bureau of Economic Research. Fiftieth Anniversary Dinner: Transcript of Proceedings, A Supplement to National Bureau Report 6 (June 1970) p. 20, 25.

__________________________

Handwritten copy of the Ode in Edward Teller’s desk
on White House stationery.

One shouldn’t think that the issue of authorship of the Ode would be a slam-dunk affair. Actually the first lead Google provided me was to an article in Hungarian (!) about the poetry (I am not making this up) of the nuclear physicist Edward Teller.

Having no reason to doubt Google’s translation of the Hungarian text, I learned that after the death of Edward Teller “a small note was found in a drawer.” An image of a handwritten note on White House stationery (without a date) was included and is provided below.

Source: Nyomhagyók Rovat, “Gyönyörködni titkos, mély harmóniákban” Teller Ede versei. Ponticulus Hungaricus, XXIII. évfolyam 12. szám ·2019. December.

This handwritten text bears more than a passing resemblance to the Ode found in Burns’ papers at Duke as well as the NBER version of the Ballad for Burns above. The second and fourth lines of the second stanza differ significantly. It is not unusual for songs and covers of songs to display variations after all. The author of the Hungarian article claimed/suggested the English original had been composed by Edward Teller.

Perhaps some kind visitor to Economics in the Rear-view Mirror  has easy access to Edward Teller’s and/or George Shultz’s handwriting to make a determination of the identity of the above scribe in the White House. But even if the note should turn out to be written in Teller’s hand, it does not exclude the possibility that he just copied the verses he heard or read.

In any event it seems to me less likely that Shultz would have plagiarized from Teller than Teller would have instead kept a copy for himself. Besides, Schultz had significantly more opportunity to jot down notes on a White House memo pad than Teller did. This doesn’t take away from the mystery of how this alternate Ode came to Teller’s desk. 

My final forensic note is that Teller was the sort of Central European intellectual who moved from home to home with a Steinway piano throughout his life compared to George Shultz who was a veteran of the U.S. Marines known to have a Princeton tiger tattooed on his (ahem) butt cheek. Which of the two men seems more likely to have recalled the words from a hit single in the early 1950s that covered a 1907 recording? 

__________________________

Which recording served as inspiration to George Shultz?

There are numerous interpretations recorded of Silver Dollar. The Website SecondHandSongs displays 32 versions.

Fun fact: Petula Clark, singer of the Hit “Downtown” (1964), also covered Silver Dollar in December 1950!

But for my silver dollar, the closest variation to the Shultz version is found in a 78 rpm record released in 1950.

Silver Dollar by Clancy Hayes
and his Washboard Five

A man without a woman is like a ship without a sail,
Like a boat without a rudder, just like a kite without a tail.
Yes, a man without a woman is the saddest thing what am.
But if there’s one thing worse in this universe,
It’s a woman without a man! […]

Image Source: Time Magazine cover August 16, 1971.

 

Categories
Funny Business Theory

Funny business. Emily Dickinson explains the 2nd theorem of welfare economics. 2023

I just asked ChatGPT

« Explain the second theorem of welfare economics in the style of an Emily Dickinson death poem. »

[Spoiler alert: her death poems can be sung to the tune of The Yellow Rose of Texas]

The response:

The Second Theorem lies in wait,
Its logic cold and clear,
It whispers to the market’s fate,
And marks the end so near.

With mathematics sharp as a knife,
It cuts through trade and choice,
Revealing truths about our life,
In market’s still, small voice.

It states that perfect competition,
Is what leads to best result,
For welfare of each citizen,
And market’s every pulse.

Yet still the Theorem’s voice is kind,
For it is but a guide,
To lead us to a better mind,
And market where all thrive.

So heed the Second Theorem’s call,
And let its wisdom lead,
For perfect competition’s all,
That our market needs.

Image Source: Wikipedia.deDaguerreotype of Emily Dickinson, c. early 1847. It is presently located in Amherst College Archives & Special Collections. Colorized by Economics in the Rear-view Mirror.

 

Categories
Economists Funny Business Harvard Undergraduate

Vermont. Yearbook account of economics lecture by Harvard PhD Charles W. Mixter, 1904

While trolling the yearbook of the University of Vermont in search of a portrait of Professor Charles W. Mixter (Harvard Ph.D. 1897), I came across the following student account of what one presumes is a not an untypical classroom performance by Professor Mixter. He appears to have been pretty proud of his Harvard connection, in particular with Professor O.M.W. Sprague.

Incidentally, I have yet to discover a photograph of Charles W. Mixter anywhere on the internet, and I have tried…

…and what pray are “Persian Alexis overshoes” anyhow?

_______________________________

Pol. Econ. à la Mixter

A room in the Old Mill. The bell strikes and during the next ten minutes the class straggles in. The second bell strikes; some minutes elapse during which Burrows ’o4 amuses himself — and the class — by crayon sketches from life ( ?). Macrae, to whom art of so high an order does not appeal, looks at his watch and announces that the five minutes are up. A discussion follows as to the advisability of cutting. Finally better instincts prevail and the class decides to stay. At the end of another five minutes, Pomeroy, from his lookout at the window, descries the Professor in the distance. Informed of the fact the class rushes up just in time to see His Portlyship, in Persian Alexis overshoes, and English Ulster [Note: apparently the sort of overcoat worn by Sherlock Holmes], rounding the statue of Lafayette and puffing like a tug under full steam.

 

The Professor’s tread is soon heard on the stair and the class take their seats just as he enters the room. In answer to the chorus of good-mornings, he nods a general recognition, divests himself of ulster, overshoes and Alexis and takes his seat. These preliminaries over, he fumbles for some time in the recesses of an inner pocket and at length pulls forth a slip of paper upon which is the frame-work of a lecture. After vainly trying to read his own writing, the Professor gives up in despair, puts back the notes, and launches out on another tack.

 

His eye lighting on Macrae nodding on the back seat, he explodes this poser at the offending member:

 

My friend Sprague — the great economist — of course you’ve all heard of him — edited Dunbar blur—r—r um and all that sort of thing — well he’s just returned from Oklahoma — he says the banks are holding the largest deposit in the Territory’s history. What does that indicate for general prosperity, Mr. Macrae?

 

Macrae, to whom reciting is a bore, pulls himself together with a supreme effort and begins a learned disquisition on the inter-relation of loans to deposits and the utter uselessness as an index to prosperity of bank statements in general and of this report in particular.

 

Whenever a glint of truth appears in Macrae’s remarks — which is far from often — the Professor nods approvingly, assumes his Rooseveltian grin and rumples his hair encouragingly.

 

Macrae finally comes to the end of his rope and the Professor, suddenly recollecting an anecdote that “my friend Sprague” told him at Harvard, springs it on the guileless members of Economics II. When the laughter incident on this effort has subsided, the Professor has some interesting things to say on railroad stocks.

 

Prof. (clearing his throat and groping for his handkerchief in a hip pocket) Um — yum yum yum yum yum — I own some stock myself — huh — oh yes — huh (grimace à la Roosevelt). Hasn’t paid me any dividend for seventeen years, though. Speaking of railroads puts me in mind of a man I met up in the Berkshire Hills once. Oh yes — um I — I was up in the Berkshires and I met a man who had lost his fortune during the war — well he — huh — huh huh. The Professor, anticipating the ludicrous end of his tale, cannot resist the temptation to laugh, and the rest of his speech is lost in a gurgle of merriment, in which the class feels itself called upon to join.

 

Turning from the Berkshire Hermit the Professor travels to Tennessee, where he tells how he proffered a check in payment and how that check was actually received! Next he leads the class a pretty pace through Threadneedle Street, where they enter the Bank of England and help the Professor cash a ten pun’ note, after which they awake to find themselves reposing quietly in their seats none the worse for wear but a little dazed in spirit.

 

The remainder of the Professor’s talk is a brilliant counterpane, with which he covers his subject, resplendent with purple patches of travel, finance, the stock exchange, international trade, panics, industrial organization, underwriting, indigestible securities, and bank history from Daniel to Dunbar, freely interspersed with the dicta of Ami Sprague. The Professor is in the midst of an interesting Harvard reminiscence when the bell strikes and he makes a hasty end, regretting  — as always — that he hasn’t covered as much ground as he had hoped to. The class escapes furtively while the Professor worms himself into his ulster, sticks on the Alexis and descends the stair ruminating on the value of anecdote as a means of inculcating the fundamental principles of that most abstruse science of political economy.

Source: The University of Vermont Libraries, Digital Collections.Yearbook, The Ariel 1905, Vol. XVIII, pp. 277-278.

Image Source: University of Vermont (between 1900 and 1906) from the Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division, Washington, D.C. Colorized by Economics in the Rear-view Mirror.

Categories
Chicago Economists Funny Business

Chicago. The School of Chicago 1972 by Roger Vaughan (Ph.D. 1977). IDs by Gordon, McCloskey & Grossbard

The 1500th artifact added to Economics in the Rear-view Mirror deserves to be a celebratory post for visitors. For this honor I have chosen a  pastiche drawn by a Chicago economics graduate student in 1972. Roger Vaughan (Ph.D. 1977) was the principal, if not only, illustrator for the student-produced satirical publication P.H.A.R.T., an issue of which has been transcribed for an earlier post.

I first saw a copy of Roger Vaughan’s reworking of Raphael’s “School of Athens” added to a photo from a Tweet of a few years back. At that time it did not occur to me to engage in a serious search for the backstory to the drawing. And yet, serendipity turned out to be kind to me when, on a visit to the Harvard Archives last year, I stumbled upon a folded, mint-condition copy of  Vaughan’s “The School of Chicago 1972” in the papers of Zvi Griliches. Of course I had this masterpiece of economics funny business copied and it now has pride of place in my home study.

A few identifications of the figures seen in “The School of Chicago 1972” are obvious (e.g. Milton Friedman and George Stigler, duh) and others could be identified from other Vaughan caricatures that likewise are found in Griliches’ papers (e.g. Marc Nerlove, Stan Fischer, and Robert J. Gordon). Still, most of the renderings remained unidentified. My first idea was to seek out the artist himself, but alas I could only confirm that he had passed in October 2021. The next idea was to seek a living eye-witness to the Chicago economics department of a half-century ago. Here I was luckier, the Stanley G. Harris Professor in the Social Sciences at Northwestern University, Robert J. Gordon, responded to my inquiry almost immediately and as quickly forwarded my request for further information to Distinguished Professor of Economics, History, English, and Communication at the University of Illinois at Chicago, Deirdre McCloskey, for her confirmation and further commentary. Following the initial posting of this artifact, Professor Shoshana Grossbard of San Diego State University spotted a few misspelled names (mea culpa), but, more importantly, was able to identify Margaret Reid by her beret(!).We can all be grateful to these colleagues for their identifications provided below. There remains one unidentified man in the back-row standing to George Stigler’s left plus a couple of yet-to-be identified graduate students. Peeps, Economic in the Rear-view Mirror needs your help! You can leave comments at the end of this post.

___________________________________

About the artist, Roger Vaughan

From his 1981 AEA Biographical Listing, p. 421

Vaughan, Roger J, 421 Hudson St., Apt. 406, New York, NY 10014. Birth Yr: 1946

Degrees: B.A., U. of Oxford, 1968; M.A., Simon Fraser U., 1970; Ph.D. U. of Chicago, 1977. Prin. Cur. Position: Dep.Dir., Off. Of Develop. Planning, State of New York, 1980-

Concurrent/Past Positions: Econ., Citibank, 1978-80; Econ. The Rand Corp. 1974-78. Research: Urban Policy, finance, taxation training.

Roger J. Vaughan’s Rand Reports,
1974-1980

• The Urban Impacts of Federal Policies: Vol. 1, Overview 1980
• Federal Activities in Urban Economic Development 1979
• Recent Contributions to the Urban Policy Debate 1979
• The Urban Impacts of Federal Policies: Vol. 4, Population and Residential Location 1979
• Assessment of Countercyclical Public Works and Public Service Employment Programs. 1978
• Regional Cycles and Employment Effects of Public Works Investments. 1977
• The Urban Impacts of Federal Policies: Vol. 2, Economic Development 1977
• The value of urban open space 1977
• The Economics of Urban Blight. 1976
• Getting People to Parks. 1976
• Public Works as a Countercyclical Device: A Review of the Issues 1976
• The Use of Subsidies in the Production of Cultural Services. 1976
• The Application of Economic Analysis to the Planning and Development of the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area. 1975
• The Economics of Expressway Noise Pollution Abatement. 1975
• The Economics of Recreation: A Survey. 1974

Source: Rand Reports. Published Research by Author, Roger J. Vaughan.

Sage. Research Methods.

Communicating Social Science Research to Policymakers
By: Roger J. Vaughan & Terry F. Buss
Published: 1998
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412983686

___________________________________

Raphael’s Scuola di Atene (1509-1511)

For some explanation of what we see in the original, cf. “The Story Behind Raphael’s Masterpiece ‘The School of Athens'” by Jessica Stewart at the Modern Met Website.

___________________________________

Roger Vaughan’s Pastiche

Open the image in a new window to see a larger image

Source: Harvard University Archives. Papers of Zvi Griliches, Box 129. Folder “Posters, ca. 1960s-1970s”.

Background

The statues standing in the upper alcove are of the President and Vice-President of the United States, Richard M. Nixon (holding a lyre, a sweet visual pun) and Spiro T. Agnew (with the pennant “Effete Snobs”, abridged from his description of self-characterized intellectuals as an “effete core of impudent snobs” in his  “Generation Gap” speech given in New Orleans on October 19th, 1969.)

1126” refers to the street address of the Social Science Research Building, 1126 E. 59th St.

MV=PT” inscribed in the center of the dome is the Equation of Exchange (cf. Irving Fisher’s The Purchasing Power of Money). Cf. at the left of the back-row of Chicago economists, Arnold Zellner is carrying papers with “MV=PY“. Milton Friedman’s vanity license plates on his red cadillac used “MV=PQ” for the Equation of Exchange. Everyone seems to have agreed on the notational virtues of “M”, “V”, and “P”. Does anyone know whether there was any substantive reason for differences regarding the choice of “T”, “Y”, and “Q” for the final term?

Economics in the Rear-view Mirror comment: Though his arm is blocking part of the equation, Zellner is clearly displaying the equation of exchange, MV = PY.

Deirdre McCloskey’s comment: “Underneath Nixon is Marc Nerlove pointing into the ear, by the way of insult, of Hans Theil the great Dutch econometrician (the four great econometricians at Chicago, which had included Zvi Griliches, who had just moved to Harvard, hated each other).”

Economics in the Rear-view Mirror comment: Robert J. Gordon served as an editor of the Journal of Political Economy (J.P.E.) from 1971-1973.

Economics in the Rear-view Mirror comment: Stigler’s position corresponds to that of Aristotle’s in Raphael’s fresco. There Aristotle holds a copy of his own Nicomachean Ethics. Stigler is seen here holding a book by [Adam] Smith, presumably Wealth of Nations.

Deirdre McCloskey’s comment: “George Tolley [is] in a garbage can because he did urban economics (Vaughan was his student).”

Shoshana Grossbard’s comment: “[Margaret Reid]…not only [wore] the dark beret, but also [has] her hair in a bun, under the beret. that was her typical look. She and I attended Becker’s workshop in applications of economics in the years 1974-76.”

And guess what a casual search just turned up…

Margaret Gilpin Reid, professor emeritus of Home Economics and Economics

Source:  University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf1-07052, Hanna Holborn Gray Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

Economics in the Rear-view Mirror’s comment: On the high-resolution hard-copy hanging on my study wall, the beret looks sort of like an ink blot and I regreted that imperfection. But now, thanks to Shoshana Grossbard’s careful observation combined with her memory of Reid’s “typical look” and an archival sighting of said beret, I am convinced and grateful that we now have another positive identification!

Deirdre McCloskey’s comment: “D. Gale Johnson…has a pitchfork because he was an agricultural economist. ”

Deirdre McCloskey’s comment: Ted Schultz […] is pointing down to say “This is where the true Chicago School is, where I am!”.

Foreground

The identification of Robert F. Pollard was made by Roger Vaughan’s work and life partner, Anna Nechai.

 

Deirdre McCloskey’s comment: “…Dick Zecher [is] sticking his finger through an IBM card because he was in charge of the Department’s mainframe computer access.”

Another visual pun: Harry Johnson is portrayed writing on a literal Edgeworth-Bowley-box, a two-dimensional representation of allocations that could be Pareto efficient exchange equilibria. The two tradeable goods are measured in Edgeworth and Bowley units, respectively.

Deirdre McCloskey’s comment: “Mary Jean Bowman, one of two tenured women in a small department; she did educational and demographic economics.  The other woman was Margaret Reid, the inventor of household economics…”

The triangle seen in the previous detail is Arnold Harberger’s measure of deadweight loss (efficiency cost resulting from a natural or policy induced distortion of markets).  See Robert J. Gordon’s historical photo of Al Harberger stripping down to reveal himself as “Triangleman” ca. December 1970. In Raphael’s fresco Harberger’s place was that of Euclid.

Robert  J. Gordon’s comment: “I think the bearded student is Dan Wisecarver

Robert  J. Gordon’s comment: “The woman holding the ball is Carolyn Mosby, the head of the department staff.”

 

 

 

 

 

Categories
Chicago Funny Business Harvard M.I.T.

Chicago. Lyrics from “With a Little Bit of Luck”, ca. 1962

 

The following number comes as the last sheet of a stapled collection of skit numbers, beginning with an economics version of “Dear Officer Krupke” from West Side Story, already posted. That number was written about 1962 and My Fair Lady ran on Broadway from 1956 through 1962, so this too could have been written sometime around 1962 as well.

_____________________________

FINALE
(To the tune of “With a Little Bit of Luck
from My Fair Lady)

Oh we are all perpetually students
Because the army we would like to shirk
Oh we are all perpetually students
But with a little bit of luck, with a little bit of luck
We will never have to go to work

With a little bit, with a little bit
With a little bit of bloomin’ luck

The men upstairs harass us with their prelims
To write the answers always makes us fret
The men upstairs harass us with their prelims
But with a little bit of luck, with a little bit of luck
We will pass them all without a sweat

(Repeat Chorus)

Ingersoll and Earhart pay us money
And the reason we don’t understand
Oh Ingersoll and Earhart pay us money
But with a little bit of luck, with a little bit of luck
They’ll increase it by another grand

(Repeat Chorus)

Oh we have spent long years in these damn workshops
Hearing all the young professors shout
Oh we have spent long years in these damn workshops
But with a little bit of luck, with a little bit of luck
They’ll have pity and they’ll let us out

(Repeat Chorus)

The MIT men get the best job offers
The Harvard men get all the business dough
The MIT men get the best job offers
But we just never get the luck, we just never get the luck
All that’s left for us is Chicago

We just never get, we just never get
We just never get the bloomin’ luck

Oh everybody thinks that we are madmen
And we have no say in policy
Oh everybody thinks that we are madmen
But with a little bit of luck, with a little bit of luck
We will publish in the J-P-E.

No final Chorus

Source: Harvard University Archive. Papers of Zvi Griliches. Box 129, Folder “Faculty Skits, ca. 1960s.”

Image Source: Stanley Holloway (center) as Alfred P. Doolittle from the Broadway presentation of My Fair Lady. At left is Gordon Dillworth and at right, Rod McLennan. From Wikimedia Commons.

Categories
Chicago Funny Business

Chicago. The Journal of Progressive Hedonists Against Radical Thought (P.H.A.R.T.), Rodney Smith & Roger Vaughan, 1971

During the first year and a half of their graduate studies in economics at the University of Chicago in the 1970s, Rodney Smith and Roger Vaughan collaborated in the publication of the (Monty Phython inspired) satirical Journal of Progressive Hedonists Against Radical Thought (a.k.a., P.H.A.R.T.). Smith and Vaughan came to Chicago from UCLA and Oxford, respectively, and clearly shared a common sense of smell. Both later worked as economists at the RAND corporation. Roger Vaughan was responsible for pen-and-ink artwork which will be featured in a later post. He passed away in October 2021, but Rodney T. Smith is alive and well, President of the economics and strategic planning consulting firm Stratton Inc.

The second issue of the Journal of P.H.A.R.T. transcribed for this post was found in Milton Friedman’s papers at the Hoover Institution.

Request: if any visitors to Economics in the Rear-view Mirror have a surviving copy of other issues of the journal or of Roger Vaughan’s Chicago artwork, please let it be copied/transcribed and/or posted here for the benefit of future generations of economists yet untrained.

_____________________________

Vol. 1, No. 2   May, 1971

P.H.A.R.T. EDITORIAL

Mother Apathy, blindfold across both breasts, was aroused, albeit temporarily, when it was announced recently that the dynamic new publication ‘P.H.A.R.T.’ (whose first edition is already a collectors’ item) had engulfed the revered, but aging, ‘P.E.C. Notes’. From the autumn of 1971, a spokesman said, both journals would be published jointly under the P.H.A.R.T. banner. The entire publishing world, normally oblivious to news worth printing, was thrown into confusion. Exclaimed a Time-Life editor, “I’m padlocking my staff to their desks by their private parts!”

Wall Street reacted with typical concern. Both P.H.A.R.T. shares changed hands many times, but speculation was terminated when the purpose of the flimsy pieces of paper was misunderstood and they were flushed into the Hudson.

Smiled a P.H.A.R.T. staffer from his tax-deductible air mattress in sun drenched Lake Michigan, “Anyone who can print the kind of *%¢#$* that we do, is bound to succeed in a place like the Economics Department.

Comparison with Hugh Hefner’s Empire is obvious, a comparison which seems even closer in light of P.H.A.R.T.’s intention of running a pull-out center-fold of economics books without covers.

Certainly the new combined journal should prove to be a bright super-nova in the Gutenberg Galaxy.

P.H.A.R.T. INTERVIEWS

Chicago Charlie: In this issue we are honored to have a pleasantly in depth interview with an obscure, but nevertheless vital, member of the economics community, an economics groupie. We all know that surfers are followed by beach bunnies, musicians are plastered by groupies, but few of us are aware that economists have their own followers who admire them for their abstractions. Enough of such preliminaries. Let’s get it on. How long have you been an economics groupie?

Economics Groupie: I was a know-nothing college dropout until I, sort of, wandered into this economics class and saw this guy draw this groovy diagram. Minutes later I was the virtuous path of abstraction wherein what I adored was emphasized, and what I abhorred was forgotten. Like, nobody else would have me.

C.C.: Very interesting. Which abstraction really turns you on. I mean, what do you really hold near?

E.G.: What to, duckie? I cherish the nominal versus the real distinction; compensated versus uncompensated elasticities, and market versus non-market activities.

C.C.: A strange collection. What exactly do you mean by the latter?

E.G.: Man, like sometimes it’s a drag to hurl my bod on the market just to get what the traffic will bare. Non-market activity can be really heavy, like just getting an economics biggy to fondle my copy of Smith’s ‘Wealth of Nations’, I mean….

C.C.: Thank you. Have you ever had any bad experiences… that is, as an economics groupie?

E.G.: Yes; whenever I attend conventions, like five people on the same abstraction…

C.C.: Who are your favorite personalities?

E.G.: Friedman’s money, Lewis’ labor, Becker’s fertility, Harberger’s compensated triangles, Chez’s jiggles, Nerlove’s heteroscedasticity, Johnson’s distribution, Zecher’s….

C.C.: Really! Familiarity breeds contempt!

E.G.: No, baby, just frustration.

C.C.: Well, I must draw this interview to a close.

E.G.: Regretfully, we never started.

 

P.H.A.R.T.’s NEWS IN BRIEF

Boston: Following on the immense commercial success of rock musicals ‘Hair’ and ‘Tommy’, the songwriting team of Samuelson and Solow is rumored to be working on a rock opera based on the formers’ best selling ‘Foundations of Economic Analysis’. The star part of ‘Negative Semi-Definite Matrix’ is rumored to be played by Samuelson himself, but speculation is rampant concerning the famous nude scene in which cross-elasticities emerge, bare to the world, from the matrix determinant.

Chicago: The long held belief that all economists orbit around Chicago was cast into serious doubt, when, with the aid of powerful econometric telescopes, at least 200 economists were observed going ‘round in circles in the Boston area. “We are submitting the model builder to close questioning”, said a spokesman for the Chicago Inquisition. “I think we can show that these so-called observations were: (a) never made, and (b) not ‘proper’ economists anyway.”

New York: Although much doubt has been cast on the ‘as if’ approach to economic theology, Chicago feels it has, at last, come up with vindication for its views. After experimenting with several hundred dogs on the top of the brand new Trade Center, a Chicago scientist reported, “After we held each dog some five feet from the parapet, every single canine behaved as if they fully understood the Newtonian laws of gravity.” Surveying the pulp-covered street, he added, “That’s exactly the kind of empirical data we like to build on.”

Houston: Initial reports on analysis on moon rock samples brought back by Apollo 11, 12, and 14 confirm the fact that the moon is made of money, spokesman announced here today. “At first glance”, he read from a prepared statement, “they appear to be 19th century British gold sovereigns, with a picture of Milton Friedman and the inscription ‘Veni, Vidi, Vici.’”

London: The real purpose of the American policy of benign neglect towards international payments, masterminded by Harvard’s Gottfried Haberler became evident today when an English postman reported being molested by “A kind of satan-like figure, with an American accent, shouting something about my soul and throwing dollars everywhere”. Under separate questioning, the Federal Reserve admitted to attempting to buy the world and promised that next time, its agents would behave with more discretion and dignity.

Philadelphia: The following rumor, entirely unsubstantiated by P.H.A.R.T. foreign correspondent in Philadelphia, is circulating concerning famed British economist, Sir Roy Harrod. It appears that Sir Roy, unadjusted to the American matriarchal society was accustomed to addressing a sexually integrated class at the University of Pennsylvania, as “Gentlemen”. As attendance dwindled he was faced one day with an entirely female class. He gazed around for a few seconds, and then left muttering, “Since there is no one here, I shall not lecture”. Norman Mailer, eat your heart out.

 

P.H.A.R.T.’s LIVES OF THE GREAT ECONOMISTS

In a bold attempt to instill in economists a sense of pride in the historical development of their discipline, P.H.A.R.T, brings you, in each issue, a brief sketch of one of the giants upon whose shoulders we stand.

Crasso the Greek (? – 410 BC)

It is fitting that the first reference we have to this great economist occurs in the poetry of Obesia, the Fat-Woman of the caves, in those oft-quoted lines.

“The hills are alive with the sound of Crasso,
As he and his acolytes perform the dance of the drachma.”

Already the young Crasso, and his ‘Crassic’ followers were famous for running naked into holy shrines and leaving the walls covered in ‘graphiti’ (or graphs) illustrating some of the new concepts they had discovered. It is to this early period that the world owes the famous Crassic doctrines.

“When prices rise, things tend to become more expensive.”
“What lays ahead of us is in the future.”

Little else is heard of Crasso until he sprung to fame when called to the service of the King of Sicily to fight a serious outbreak of inflation. He successfully stemmed the fearsome tide of price rises by offering 21,000 warm chicken livers to the God, Hypa (a method, incidently, the Federal Reserve is currently considering). His triumph was short lived and as serious food poisoning decimated the population, popular feeling ran against him and he was forced to dust his naked body with flour and escape disguised as a statue.

He moved to Lydia where he perfected a technique of depicting, with amazing clarity, small cameo-like pictures of unequalled pornography on round pieces of metal. His art work became immensely popular, and although known deprecatingly by the Greeks as “Khoynos Pornos” (Foreign Filth) they circulated in Crasso’s native land and became popularly known as Khoyns.

Immensely wealthy, he returned to his native Corrinth idling his time gambling on the innumerable Greco-Persian wars, and was bankrupt when he offered 100 to 1 on Persia at Salamis.

He never again achieved his former glory, and in spite of nearly discovering the formula for the velocity of money, inventing, during hard winter, the concept of a wages freeze, and writing a prodigious number of strange tracts he moved slowly downhill. He gave one or two guest lectures, but was jeered from the podium when he spoke, with missionary zeal, of money floating down from the heavens. He is last recorded as the tragic model for Thucydides’ description of the effects of the plague during the Peloponnesian Wars.

P.H.A.R.T. MISCELLANY

As Others See Us

(From Berman’s ‘The Underground Guide to the College of Your Choice’.)

“The graduate school here (Chicago) is the old apprenticeship type of learning. The difference between the University of Chicago and other universities is like the difference between English Justice and French Justice — at other universities the professors consider you innocent of stupidity until you prove otherwise while here you are presumed guilty of stupidity until you prove yourself innocent.”

* * *

We hope, in each issue, to bring you some of the ‘bon mots’ that are the obvious concomitant of a concentration of high powered minds.

Stigler: “The government take-over of the railways is a vain and abortive attempt to make the post office look efficient.”

Johnson (H.G.): “When a professor leaves M.I.T. for Harvard, the average intelligence in both places rises.”

Samuelson: “If you take a 15 trillion year plan, then the theorem is correct.”

* * *

P.H.A.R.T. would take great privilege in awarding its most treasured prize, a corroded plastic waterbed, to all those sophisticated individuals who manage to reduce student-faculty visits to informal economics seminars. At the risk of belaboring the obvious, P.H.A.R.T, would like to announce, that:

(a) the esoteric economic pun is the lowest form of humor;

(b) there just may be someone in the room who is less than enthralled by the ability to play ‘Obscure-Journal-Article-Snap’ with all comers:

(c) the breath-taking account of how to take-apart a speaker, complete with a 20 minute digression of ‘statistical- discrepancies-I-have-seen-through’, should be saved for the autobiography.

It takes considerable ignorance to assume that everyone present is fascinated by economics 24 hours a day. Those who do have nothing else to talk about should try not to see it as a virtue. A more comprehensive ‘weltanschauung’ would make brighter living.

It was not clear, when the fire and smoke-laden Delphic rumblings had passed, whether or not the Nobel Laureate had actually said anything. After following the pillar of fire around the campus like the children of Israel, the Economics Department received a ‘lecture’, an experience not unlike speed reading a Dictionary of Quotations while being assaulted by a poorly-programmed 360. The quality of evening speakers this year has rarely risen above the esoteric. To quote Leijonhuvfud: “If this is how economics develops — where will it end?”

* * *

P.H.A.R.T. REVIEW OF BOOKS

In response to our previous reviews, readers submitted the following:

The Sensuous Criminal, by G.G. (Alcatraz, 1971) . Discusses in frank, no-nonsense language, the implications of over fifty Neuman-Morgenstern utility functions for criminal behavior. Explains why criminals with Moebius-strip utility functions usually get caught; why most extortionists have homogeneous-of-degree-less-than-one time preference functions; and many, many more. J. Edgar Hoover loved it — you will too. yours for only U= a + bI dollars!

The Godfather (A Story of Money, Interest, and Prices), by Donaldo Patinkini (Extortion Press, 1971). An inside man reveals the true interworkings of a powerful group of variables. Gives a detailed but chilling analysis of how inept government has allowed the Ma Fed to extract millions from society through monetary control.

The Holy Bible (The King Milton Version) Heavenly Press, 1971. In the beginning God created money. That took 6 days, on the 7th day he rested, and so nothing else matters.

 

P.H.A.R.T. CONTRIBUTIONS TO ECONOMIC THOUGHT

A Scatological Theory of Nominal Income*

Few things stand the economics profession in such shame than the narrowness of the treatment accorded to the determination of nominal income. The intensity of the Keynesian/Monetarist debate has obscured the more fundamental limitations of the logical possibilities examined.

It is the contention of this paper that this entire debate is hollow, and it is to the agricultural sector and the determinants of the demand for guano1 that we must look for any truly logical transmission mechanism. In Section 1 of this paper, below, the basic model for the determination of income is outlined, while Section 2 examines some of the implications for the American economy today.

Section 1: The Model

The rapid pace of industrialization in England has long proved a fertile hunting ground for the economist anxious to achieve tenure. Weber blamed it on the Church, Marx on the greedy bourgeois, McLuhan on the printing press, and Rostow argued that take-off was a result of take-off. Few have linked the unbinding of the industrial Prometheus to the discovery of guano deposits in Peru by strong-stomached British sailors in the first half of the 19th century.

Consider the fundamental identity,

Q= k Sh. Y

where Q is the quantity of agricultural output, Sh. is the quantity of soil nutrients, and Y is the quantity of land. It should be obvious that an increase in Sh., holding Y and k constant, will increase Q.2 It is not for nothing that the favorite Anglo-Saxon toast has come to be: “May the Bird of Paradise add nutrients to your soil.”

Neither is it a coincidence that British development should slow adown disastrously in the later 19thcentury when this supply dried up, and the wily Peruvians, under a seagull dictator, clamped a high tariff on this most valuable of bowel-movements.

Section 2: Post Guano Ergo Propter Guano?

It is only recently that the amazing correlation between the depth of guano deposits and the rate of growth of real output has received the attention it richly deserves. Since it avoids the quagmire of nominal and real debates, so long the bane of monetarism, the Federal Reserve has recently taken to publishing guano depth-counts taken at strategic points along the New England coast, and is currently contemplating setting up manure counting stations (M1 and M2) in. Nebraska and New Jersey. However, much pseudo-scientific pressure is levelled against this approach by economists who should know better, and there has been not a little reluctance to admit to using it. Few people, in fact, realize that the oft-repeated ‘1065’ figure was, in fact, the depth to which a now-famous aide to the budget supervisor sunk (in millimeters)3 when supervising one the first ‘counts’.

The theory leads to some important policy regulations:

(1) The removal of the welfare distorting Regulation P, by which a 10¢ surcharge is levelled on guano booths throughout the country.

(2) The conversion of banks into mere guano warehouses, to act as receptacles for such deposits and withdrawals, with a 100% reserve requirement.

(3) The automatic issuing of Feen-A-Mints with food stamps.

(4) The regulation of the guano growth rate to a fixed 5% per annum by an intensive, federally sponsored, seagull training program.

(5) The appointment of seagulls to replace Connally, Schultze, and Nixon to engender a harmonious, non-political environment in which to stabilize the economy.

It is hoped that this analysis proves a fertile hunting ground for the development of economic theory.

*The original idea was suggested by John Graffiti, although the author accepts all credit for the penetrating analysis. The future of 5 assistants is inextricably entwined with any potential faults.

1 Guano (Spanish). Literally, “the food from the heavens” or, more colloquially, “birdshit”, (Ed.).

2 For this proof, the author is indebted to a small, but persistent, Lake Michigan seagull.

3 Believed to proximate the distance from his feet to his neck, (Ed.).

 

P.H.A.R.T. PUZZLE CORNER

Answers to last issue’s questions:

  1. (a) False

(b) Uncertain. Such activity would involve income redistribution from bakers to hens.

(c) False. 1.5976 is, of course, the nominal number of students, which would be about 0.002 in real terms.

(d) True.

  1. (a) What do you receive when purchasing a buffalo?

(b) Which of the following can be categorized as an inferior good: sex or drink?

(c) What is the equilibrium weekly wage of an M.B.A.?

(d) Which?

  1. The quote, of course, was Keynes, page 40, and he was illustrating the importance of choosing units.
  2. H.A.R.T. FORKED TONGUE AWARD remains unawarded.
  3. H.A.R.T. MOST PERFECT COMPETITOR TROPHY is awarded to that perceptive reader who pointed out that the market for splinters from the cross of Christ would seem to fulfill Smith’s conditions an infinite number of buyers, a large number of suppliers, and an amazing invisible hand. More copies of this beautiful sculpture remain to be won for more insights into ‘Our Competitive Environment’.

This issue’s questions:

  1. Quote of the month. What amazing economist wrote the following and where?

“latex$ \left( X^{\prime }_{\ast }X_{\ast }\right)^{-1}  X_{\ast }\bar{y}&s=2$”

(This is to test that you are doing your reading.)

  1. TRUE, FALSE, IGNORANT.

Your grade will be largely independent of anything you write.

(a) Since when care packages were dropped into prisoner of war camps it was cigarettes and not prunes that were adopted as currency: prisoners were not acting rationally.

(b) Three helicopters in formation at sunset is an omen of inflation.

(c) Racehorses sometimes earn tens of thousands of dollars in stud services. Since economists are rarely paid as much for similar services, they are either being exploited, or earn non-pecuniary benefits.

  1. An economist of repute defined homotheticity in the following way: “You stand at the origin and jiggle your head this way and that way and nothing changes.” Utilizing this definition, determine whether the following is true. A compensated jiggle of the head will cause a non-homothetic function to appear homothetic.
  2. If Irving Fisher had defined the money stock as M7, then the business cycle would be the dance of the 7 veils?

* * *

SHELDON DE F’ART SAYS : “PER ARDUA AD INSOMNIA”

* * *

P.H.A.R.T, is an underground journal of negligible literary merit dedicated to the proposition that some followers of economics may possess a sense of humor. It is hoped to stimulate everyone into some form of response. For those who are leaving and wish to subscribe, the cost is $1.00 per annum, plus postage, for 8 copies (or more)

Most of the blame, any personal inquiries, submissions, letters, or donations should be directed to Rodney Smith or Roger Vaughan.

P.H.A.R.T.
Box P
Department of Economics
Social Science Building
West 59th Street
Chicago, Illinois 60637
U.S.A.

Source: Hoover Institution Archives. Papers of Milton Friedman, Box 79, Folder “79.6 University of Chicago Miscellaneous”.