CHAPTER I

ALFRED NOBEL: THE CONDITIONS OF HIS WILL AND LITERARY RESULTS

_Nobilius_ was the ancestral name, by tradition, of that family whose representative, Alfred Nobel, has left a name synonymous with inventiveness and large benefactions to humanity. The grandfather, Imanuel, an army surgeon, is accredited with changing the family name to _Nobel_. His son, Emanuel, father of Alfred, taught science in Stockholm, as a young man. With inventive ability he experimented with explosives, submarine mines, and other destructive forces and, by paradox, became designer of surgical appliances and India-rubber cushions to relieve suffering. He was interested in ship construction and spent some time in Egypt. To his sons he transmitted his spirit of scientific research, with all the dangers as well as the inspiration of such ambition. Two explosions, during experiments with nitroglycerine and other chemicals, caused severe loss. The first, occurring about 1837 in Stockholm, shattered the nerves of the people as well as their windows, so that Emanuel went to Russia, on the advice of friends prominent in affairs of industry and government. Here he was employed by the Russians to continue his experiments with submarine mines; with his family, he remained here until after the Crimean War, contributing to naval warfare by his inventions. An older son, Ludwig, remained in Russia when his family returned to Sweden. This son gained repute as an engineer and discovered the petroleum springs at Baku.[1] A second explosion in one of the factories of Sweden, in 1864, caused the death of a younger son of Emanuel Nobel and shocked the father so severely that he was an invalid physically for the rest of his life.

Alfred Bernhard Nobel was born at Stockholm in 1833. He was less robust than his brothers; he was sensitive and nervous, suffering from headaches all his life. His mother, Karoline Henriette Ahlssell, was his devoted comrade from the early days when he would lie on the couch while she read to him or told him sagas and hero-stories. She was wise and happy by nature, confident that Alfred would become “a great man,” in spite of poor physique and moods of depression. He never married, although he loved a young girl who died in her youth, but he was devoted to his mother to the end of her life. Letters and frequent visits to her in Sweden, in his later life, kept alive his affectionate nature and his idealism.

Like his father he showed studious interest in chemistry, physics, and mechanical engineering. Shipbuilding attracted his attention for a time and, when he was about seventeen, he was sent to the United States to increase his knowledge of mechanics, as applied to ships, by association with John Ericsson. At the home of the latter on Franklin Street, New York, where a tablet has been placed to commemorate the services of this inventor in the Civil War, young Nobel lived for a time. His father sent him to John Ericsson in order to investigate an invention of his, an engine which was supposed to work by heat from the sun. He stayed several months, probably not more than a year. Ericsson was passing through a period of fluctuating fortunes. At the end of 1849 his balance was only $132.32--his total receipts for the year had been but $2,000. Two years later he recorded a balance of $8,690.10. In the interval he had sold several patents and had received congratulations from the King of Sweden upon the great future for his “test caloric engine.” This was the goal of his experiments during these years; its success was to be tested in the trial trip of _The Ericsson_, February 11, 1853. A squall came up as the boat was launched and making headway, and it sank, carrying with it hopes of the inventor after years of experiment, and half a million dollars of invested capital. Ericsson was crushed for a few weeks. How pluckily he recovered his courage, made his plans for _The Monitor_, offered that to the United States government and won success for the cause of the North, is familiar history.[2]

Upon Alfred Nobel, with his quick, impressionable temperament, this direct contact with Ericsson must have left strong influences. Perhaps he decided then that, should fortune favor him, he would leave a fund to aid scientists in their experiments and to protect them against financial duress during periods of discouragement. When he returned to Sweden and Russia, he coöperated with his father and brothers in manufacturing nitroglycerine and other explosives; he was constantly seeking for a compound which would be more powerful and less dangerous. In 1857, at St. Petersburg, he had taken out a patent for a gasometer. It has been said that the discovery of what was later known as dynamite came by accident to Alfred Nobel, during an experiment about 1865-66. Some nitroglycerine had escaped into the siliceous sand of the packing and this brought about a partial solution of his problem. Dynamite, which was composed of 75 per cent nitroglycerine and 25 per cent kieselguhr, or infusorial earth, was produced. He applied for patents in several countries, and sought for funds to start factories which he believed would make a fortune by manufacture of this new explosive. It was sometimes called “Nobel’s blasting-oil.” He told French bankers that he had invented “an oil that would blow up the world”; a facetious commentator declared, “French bankers thought it for their interest to leave the globe undisturbed” and refused him credit.[3]

Napoleon III became interested and arranged for funds for Nobel’s factories in France. With some samples of dynamite in his hand bag, Alfred Nobel came to the United States on the same commercial mission. New York hotels received him with suspicion because of rumors about the “deadly explosive”; he went to California where, through the aid of Dr. Bandman, a friend of Nobel’s brother, a factory was started near Los Angeles. In a few years manufactories were in operation in Italy, Spain, France and Scotland, as well as England and Sweden. When Alfred Nobel was forty years old he was making his fortune out of this “giant powder.” For several years he lived in Paris where he had laboratories for further experiments with gelatin, balastite, and forms of smokeless powder. In his later home, in San Remo, he carried on developments and took out more patents in petroleum and artificial gutta-percha. He received the tribute of scientists and educators but the ignorant people regarded him with a mixture of awe and fear--“he had put the long hammer of Thor to work again among the giants.”

In spite of his inspiring life-work and many successes, in spite of his wealth and honors, Alfred Nobel was a lonely man. His health was unstable; he often worked with bandaged head and in intense pain, accentuated by the gaseous fumes of his laboratory. He was self-distrustful and fearful that people were attracted to him _only_ by his wealth. One of the few individuals who gained and kept his confidence was Baroness Bertha von Suttner. In her _Memoirs_ the personality of Alfred Nobel is revealed in comments and letters. She came to him in response to an advertisement in a Paris newspaper, asking for a secretary for “a very wealthy, cultured gentleman.” She remained only a few days in her joint capacity of secretary and housekeeper, for a happy solution of her interrupted romance with the Baron von Suttner eventuated in her speedy marriage. She exchanged letters and visits with Alfred Nobel for many years and was devoted to him in life and in memory. She describes him as somewhat below average height, without physical attractiveness but in no sense “repulsive,” as he imagined himself to be. He was a fine linguist, somewhat of a philosopher, a good conversationalist and entertaining as a story-teller. He allowed her to read a long philosophical poem which he had written in English and she found it “simply splendid.” He was critical of the shallow, false-hearted people, especially those who importuned him with low motives; but he had faith in a better development of humanity as education progressed. One of his few intellectual companions in Paris was Madame Juliette Adams, author and editor of the _Nouvelle Revue_; at her salon in Rue Juliet, Nobel would meet, occasionally, men of science and letters.

In the _Memoirs_ of Baroness von Suttner may be located the first intimations of Nobel’s motives which led to the Nobel prizes, especially the specific form which was known as “the Peace Prize.” It will be recalled that the Baroness von Suttner was one of the early winners of this prize by her widely-read romance, _Die Waffen nieder_ (_Lay Down Your Arms!_). In 1890, after the publication of this story, advocating world peace, Nobel wrote letters of high commendation. On another occasion he said to her, “I wish I could produce a substance or a machine of such frightful efficacy for wholesale devastation that wars should thereby become altogether impossible.”[4] He contended, with the mind of a prophet, that a day might come when “two army corps may mutually annihilate each other in a second”; then he believed that “all civilized nations will recoil and disband their troops.” On January 7, 1893, three years before his death, he wrote to the Baroness from Paris.[5] “I should like to dispose of a part of my fortune by founding a prize to be granted every five years--say six times, for if in thirty years they have not succeeded in reforming the present system they will infallibly relapse into barbarism.... If the Triple Alliance, instead of comprising only three states, should enlist all states, the peace of the centuries would be assured.” Affirming his belief in “reasonable Socialism,” he deplored the custom of leaving large fortunes to heirs; too often the results were lapses in mental ambitions and industry.

On December 10, 1896, Alfred Nobel died suddenly in his workshop at San Remo. For a long time he had realized his condition of reduced vitality. He consulted doctors unwillingly and heeded their counsel with reluctance. He kept a record of his own pulse and heart action but he never desisted from a full day’s work in his laboratory. His last letters have a sad note that is sometimes sarcastic yet he kept faith in and with humanity to the last. He had been carefully considering the disposal of his fortune, determined that it should contribute to progress in science and literature, for the welfare of mankind and the education towards world peace. His will startled the civilized world by its originality and idealism. The man who had been most successful in inventing elements of destruction, by a paradox, had left most of his large fortune to constructive, creative purposes.

Because he distrusted many lawyers he had been his own legal adviser in large measure; sometimes he had acted as his own secretary, lest an outsider might abuse his confidence. In appointing M. Ragnar Sohlmann as executor, he explained that here “was a man who had never asked anything of me.” (Later the manager of the factory at Bergen became associate executor.) He left legacies of five thousand pounds each to his nephews but some efforts to “break the will” were threatened. Emanuel, then head of the family, refused to sanction such interference and, after many complications and delays, the will was allowed, and varied equivocal, or impractical, conditions were interpreted by “Code of Statutes,” issued by the King of Sweden, June 29, 1900.

From this pamphlet is quoted here the extract from the will:[6] “Extract from the Will and Testament of Dr. Alfred Bernhard Nobel, Engineer, which was drawn on the 27th day of November, 1895: ‘With the residue of my convertible estate I hereby direct my executors to proceed as follows: They shall convert my said residue of property into money, which they shall then invest in safe securities; the capital thus secured shall constitute a fund, the interest accruing from which shall be annually awarded in prizes to those persons who shall have contributed most materially to benefit mankind during the year immediately preceding. The said interest shall be divided into five equal amounts, to be apportioned as follows: one share to the person who shall have made the most important discovery or invention in the domain of Physics; one share to the person who shall have made the most important chemical discovery or improvement; one share to the person who shall have made the most important discovery in the domain of Physiology or Medicine; one share to the person who shall have produced in the field of Literature the most distinguished work of an idealistic tendency; and finally, one share to the person who shall have most or best promoted the Fraternity of Nations and the Abolishment or Diminution of Standing Armies and the Formation and Increase of Peace Congresses.’”

In further details the will provides: “The prizes for Physics and Chemistry shall be awarded by the Swedish Academy of Science in Stockholm; the one for Physiology or Medicine by the Caroline Medical Institute in Stockholm; the one for Literature by the Academy in Stockholm (_i.e._ Svenska Akademien) and that for Peace by a Committee of five persons to be elected by the Norwegian Storthing. I declare it to be my express desire that in the awarding of prizes, no consideration whatever be paid to the nationality of the candidates, that is to say, that the most deserving be awarded the prize, whether of Scandinavian origin or not.”

Because of difficulties in interpreting certain sections and elucidating other phrases, this Code of Statutes was drawn up “in consultation with a representative, nominated by Robert Nobel’s family, and submitted to consideration of the King.” After adjustments of interests had been “amicably entered into” by the testator’s heirs, June 5, 1898, it was decreed that “The instructions of the will above as set forth shall serve as a criterion for the administration of the Foundation (Nobel) in conjunction with the elucidations and further stipulations contained in this Code.” One “stipulation” was that “each of the annual prizes founded by the said will shall be awarded at least once during each ensuing five-year period after the year in which the Nobel Foundation comes into force.” The phrase used by Nobel in the words relating to the prize in Literature, “the Academy at Stockholm,” was interpreted “as understood to be the Swedish Academy--Svenska Akademien.” Another significant explanation was--the “term, ‘Literature,’ used in the will shall be understood to embrace not only works falling under the category of Polite Literature, but also other writings which may claim to possess literary value by reason of their form or their mode of exposition.” This last provision, which seems elastic and somewhat vague, has not led thus far to undue difficulties and criticisms.

The phrase “during the preceding year,” as applied to scientific and literary achievements alike, was a strange, impractical provision which was well interpreted broadly in the Code thus: “only such works or inventions shall be eligible as have appeared ‘during the preceding year’ is to be understood, that a work or invention for which a reward under the terms of the will is contemplated, shall set forth the _most modern results_ of work being done in that of the departments as defined in the will to which it belongs; works or inventions of older standing to be taken into consideration only in case their importance has not previously been demonstrated.”

Two other stipulations were made that have been applied to the awards in literature, as elsewhere, “The amount allotted to one prize may be divided equally between two works submitted, should each of such works be deemed to merit a prize.” Thus, in 1904, the prize was divided between José Echegaray, the Spanish dramatist, and Frédéric Mistral, the poet of Provence; again, in 1917, it was divided between two Danish writers, Gjellerup and Pontoppidan. On the other hand, if all of the “works under examination fail to attain to the standard of excellence” required, no award need be given that year, the “amount added to the main fund or may be set aside to form a special fund for that of one of the sections to promote the object of the testator.” In 1914 and 1918 there were no awards in literature.

To facilitate impartial judgment it was directed that each of the four sections of the Swedish corporation of award “shall appoint a committee--their Nobel Committee--of three or five members to make suggestions with reference to the award.” To be a member of this Nobel Committee one need not be “a Swedish subject or member of the Corporation.” “How are these candidates for prizes nominated?” is a frequent question. It is stated explicitly in this Code of Statutes, section 7: “It is essential that every candidate for a prize under the terms of the will, be proposed as such in writing by some duly qualified person. A direct application for a prize will not be taken into consideration.” Further explanations are given of “qualifications entitling a person to propose another for the receipt of a prize”--he must be “a representative, whether Swedish or otherwise, of the domain of Science, Literature, etc. in question and the grounds for the award must be stated in writing.” In this same Code of Statutes, in a later section (p. 23) there is expanded information regarding “The right to nominate a candidate for the prize-competition”--this shall “belong to Members of the Swedish Academy and the Academies in France and Spain which are similar to it in constitution and purpose; members also of the humanistic classes of other Academies and of those humanistic institutions and societies that are on the same footing as academies, and teachers of æsthetics, literature and history at universities and colleges.” For publicity it was provided that these “regulations shall be publicly announced at least every five years in some official or widely circulated journals in each of the three Scandinavian countries and in the chief countries of the civilized world.” The names of candidates must be presented by February first of each year.

Although the successful candidates for the various prizes are usually “broadcasted,” in these days of shrewd journalism, sometime in November, the official announcements of the awards are made on “Founder’s Day,” the tenth of December, the anniversary of the death of the testator. “At this time the adjudicators shall make known the result of their award and shall hand over to the winners of the prizes a cheque for the amount of the same, together with a diploma and a medal in gold, bearing the testator’s effigy and a suitable legend.” The last word may be more freely translated, _inscription_. In further explanation the Code of Statutes decrees: “It shall be incumbent on a prize winner, whenever feasible, to give a lecture on the subject treated of in the work to which the prize has been awarded, such lecture to take place within six months of the Founder’s Day at which the prize was won, and to be given at Stockholm or, in the case of the Peace prize, at Christiania.” This feature of the award has not often been “feasible” in literature, although a few of the winners have received the prizes in person at Stockholm and made fitting responses, as we shall note in later chapters. The decree is final:[7] “Against the decision of the adjudicators in making their award no protest can be lodged. If differences of opinion have occurred they shall not appear in the minutes of the proceedings, nor in any other way be made public.” To assist in their investigations and to further the “aims of the Foundation, the adjudicators shall possess powers to establish scientific institutes and other organizations. The institutes so established and belonging to the Foundation, shall be known under the name of Nobel Institutes.”

While the general administration of the funds and awards rests with the Nobel Foundation, consisting of five persons (“one of whom, the President, shall be appointed by the King and the others by the delegates of the adjudicating corporations”) the specific work of investigation and judgment rests with the organization cited in the will. In literature, the “prizes are assigned” by the Swedish Academy, after careful investigation by its members, and the assistance of the Nobel Institute and Librarian. A large collection of books, mostly of modern writings, forms the Library. In all languages, translations, when necessary, are found here, also reports concerning works of recent publication. The Swedish Academy was founded by King Gustavus III in 1786. It has devoted itself to “the arts of elocution and poetry, to the preservation of purity, force and elevation of diction in the Swedish language both in scientific works and products of pure literature.” Annual prizes have been offered, for scores of years, in elocution and poetry. Eighteen members, all Swedes, comprise this Academy, of which the King is patron. He appoints the Inspector of the Nobel Institute of the Swedish Academy but its “immediate management is by a member of the Academy, chosen by that body.”

Two conditions of the will of Alfred Nobel have been faithfully followed--the recipients in all branches have done something (if not “most”) “to benefit humanity”; in the second place, “no consideration whatever has been paid to the nationality of the candidates,” in the way of favoritism. The most reasonable criticism of the awards, especially in literature, has been a failure to carry out what seems to have been the assumed, but not expressed, desire of the donor, namely, to _stimulate_ work as well as to _reward_ past achievements. Otherwise, why that puzzling phrase about “the year preceding”? Not wholly without foundation is the comment that too many of the awards in literature have been “tombstones rather than stepping-stones.” Many of the earlier recipients were past seventy, with productive faculties low, before the honor. It is a satisfaction to the public to know that a worthy writer has had world recognition before he dies, and that his last days may have many comforts possible through the financial award of about $40,000--but such conditions do not seem in accord with the spirit of the Nobel will and the attitude of the donor toward creative work. The awards have been too often retroactive rather than stimulating to further writing. Other winners, as will be noted later, have accomplished vigorous literature, _after_ the award as well as _before_ the honor.

During the years from 1901, when the first prizes were given, to 1925, twelve nationalities have been represented in literature. Germany and France have had the largest percentages in awards: Spain, Italy, Poland, Norway, Sweden have had two winners each. Great Britain (including the awards to Rabindranath Tagore and to Yeats as well as Kipling) has been thrice honored. Denmark divided the prize one year; Switzerland came into the lists with her poet, Carl Spitteler. In science and “promotion of peace,” America has such names on the roster of honor as A. A. Michelson in physics, T. W. Richards in chemistry, Dr. Alexis Carrel in medicine, and Theodore Roosevelt, Elihu Root and Woodrow Wilson in the “peace prize.”

What have been the influences of the will of Alfred Nobel and the awards upon international literature? An unquestioned result has been to arouse both curiosity and aspiration among writers and readers. No other prizes, among any peoples, have caused such widespread interest. The announcement of the Nobel prizes each year has become an event of outstanding significance. Journals enter into competition, in recent years, to get the first word over the wires and to publish the most informing articles upon the winners. Tense interest precedes and follows the awards. Whatever may be one’s individual opinion about the justice in every instance, the fact remains that the chosen writer becomes the center of study and discussion for the current season and later years. To some critics this method of appreciation is offensive; sometimes it may seem to be a sensational “thrust into the limelight” of an insignificant or mediocre writer. In the majority of cases, the result is like that of a strong telescope which can distinguish the “fixed stars from the meteors” in the literary horizon.

The second influence is upon writers of every nationality--an incentive to produce “a distinguished work of an idealistic tendency,” some book which will prove of “benefit to humanity.” This term, idealistic, is difficult to render in all languages. In the French explanation of the will, it is explicit, “le plus remarquable dans le sens de l’idéalisme.” It is not easy to justify the prizes in literature, in several cases, if one emphasizes the usual meaning of “idealistic.” Occasionally, the award was given for some less recent work, some hitherto unappreciated note of idealism in an earlier writing. Two examples, among many, are Björnson’s tales of peasant life, with interwoven sagas and poetry, _Arne_ and _A Happy Boy_, or Mistral’s _Mireio_, the pastoral poem of Provence which was written more than forty years before the prize was given. In these two cases, as will be noted later, there was appreciation of efforts to rescue a dialect or language from literary desuetude. Upon both writers and readers, the influence of the Nobel awards in literature has been to promote broader interests and sympathies, more earnest study of standards and aspirations in widely separated races.

FOOTNOTES:

[1] _Westminster Review_, 156, 642.

[2] _The Life of John Ericsson_ by William Conant Church, 2 Vols., New York, 1901.

[3] Vance Thompson, in _Cosmopolitan_, September, 1906.

[4] _Memoirs of Bertha von Suttner; Records of an Eventful Life_, Vol. I, p. 210, New York, 1910. By permission of Ginn & Co.

[5] _Ibid._, Vol. I, p. 438.

[6] Nobel Stiftelson, The Nobel Foundation, Code of Statutes given at the Royal Palace in Stockholm on June 29, 1900 (Stockholm, 1901). Objects of the Foundation. From copy in Library of Congress.

[7] _Ibid._, section 10.

##