2016/10/25

박범신 - 나무위키

박범신 - 나무위키



박범신

최근 수정 시각 : 
주의. 이 문서는 현재 논란이 되고 있는 국내 인물을 다룹니다.

이 문서는 현재 논란이 되고 있는 국내의 인물을 다루고 있습니다. 감정적인 서술로 인해 편향적인 시점으로 작성되었거나 다른 사람에게 불쾌감을 주는 욕설을 포함한 비하적 내용이 등장할 수 있으니 주의하시기 바랍니다.

또한, 명예훼손 혐의로 형사처분을 받을 수 있으니 출처가 분명하지 않거나 주관적인 서술은 자제하시고 고소의 위험이 없도록 논리적 · 중립적으로 작성하시기 바랍니다. 자세한 사항은 인물 관련 정보의 지켜야 할 사항을 참고하시기 바랍니다.

http://image.kmib.co.kr/online_image/2014/0901/201409010337_13150922776776_1.jpg
1. 개요2. 성희롱 논란

1. 개요[편집]

대한민국의 소설가1946년 8월 24일 충청남도 논산에서 태어났다. 영원한 청년 작가로 불리고는 한다. 종교는 천주교이며, 세례명은 아우구스티노이다. 1973년에 중앙일보 신춘문예에서 '여름의 잔해'로 등단했다. 대표작으로는 '겨울환상', '소금', '겨울 강 하늬바람' ,'더러운 책상'[1]등이 있다. 1995년부터 명지대학교에서 문예창작학과 교수로 지냈으며, 2007년에는 한국방송공사 이사장까지 맡았다. 현재는 상명대학교 국어교육학과와 대학원 소설창작학과에서 석좌교수로 지내며 후학을 양성 중이다.

최근에 갈망 3부작 (촐라체, 고산자, 은교)을 발표하였는데, 세 작품 모두 대중적으로 크게 흥행했다. 네이버에 연재했던 촐라체의 경우는 누적 방문 100만을 돌파하였고, 은교는 영화화되어 여러 의미로 엄청난 반향을 일으켰다. 고산자의 경우도 강우석 감독에 의해 영화화가 확정되었다.

카카오페이지에 신작 장편소설 <유리> 를 연재하였으며 완결되었다.

16년 10월 20일, 방송작가, 여성팬 등을 성희롱, 성추행했다는 주장이 나와 논란이 되고 있다.

2. 성희롱 논란[편집]

주의. 사건·사고 관련 내용에 대해 설명합니다.

이 문서는 실제로 발생한 사건·사고에 대해 자세한 내용과 설명을 포함합니다. 불법적이거나 따라하면 위험한 내용도 포함할 수 있으며, 일부 이용자들은 불쾌감을 느낄 수 있으므로 열람에 주의하셔야 합니다.

또한, 실제 사건·사고를 설명하므로 충분히 검토 후 사실에 맞게 수정하셔야 하며, 경솔한 수정 혹은 삭제 시 비생산적인 논쟁을 야기할 수 있습니다. 일부 사건사고 문서는 유머성 서술 및 취소선을 사용할 수 없도록 제한될 수 있습니다.

또한, 이 틀을 적용하시려면 적용한 문서의 최하단에 해당 사건·사고에 맞는 분류도 함께 달아주시기 바랍니다. 분류 목록은 분류:사건사고 문서에서 확인하실 수 있습니다.

사건 관련 글 국민일보 기사

2016년 10월 20일 트위터에 박범신 작가를 고발하는 글이 올라왔다. 작가가 방송작가, 팬, 자신에게 성추행을 했다는 내용이다. 글쓴이는편집자였으며, 작가의 수필을 편집했었다고 한다.

글쓴이는 은교(영화) 촬영 당시, 작가가 여성 팬과 방송작가의 허벅지를 쓰다듬고 '늙은 은교' '젊은 은교' 등의 표현으로 자신에게 모욕감을 줬다고 밝혔다. 심지어 은교를 연기한 배우에게도 '은교는 남자를 알아야 한다.'며 성 경험 여부에 대해 묻다가 제지 당했다고 말했다. 여기에 지금은 편집 쪽에 몸 담고 있지 않기 때문에 고발할 수 있다고 덧붙이기도 했다. 그 결과 김고은 팬들은 분노하는 중. 또한 은교 여주인공을 고사했던 박민지 쪽은 다행으로 여겨야 할 지경.

논란이 불거진 후 작가는 트위터에 '스탕달이 그랬듯 살았고 썼고 사랑했다.' '나이 든 내 죄이다. 누군가 상처 받았으면 미안하다.'라는 내용의 사과를 올렸다. 사과문의 어투는 '해요~' 정도로 가벼운 편이었다. 이후 '나이 든 죄'라는 표현을 지운 글을 다시 올렸으나, 그럼에도 비판 여론이 지속되자 글을 내렸다. 현재 '나로 인해 기분이 불쾌했다면 내 불찰이다.' 라며 계속 사과의 태도를 비추고 있다.

그러나 동시에 사건의 진의가 왜곡됐다고 항변하고 있다. 손을 만진 적은 있으나 허벅지를 쓰다듬는 추행은 하지 않았다고. 또한 '은교'의 의미는 '갈망의 대상'일 뿐, 성적인 대상은 아니라고 말했다.

이후 편집자의 글에서 피해자로 언급된 방송작가가 SNS에 글을 남겼다. '성추행으로 느낄 일은 없었다. 오히려 아이템을 위해 성추행을 참는 사람으로 몰려 모욕감을 느낀다.'는 요지의 내용이다. 원문 해당 페이지는 현재 삭제된 상태인데 이유는 알 수 없다. 현재는 해당 방송작가의 글에 대해서 최초 폭로자의 피드백이 나온 상태이다.

현재 작가의 주장과 전직 편집자의 주장 중 어느 쪽도 확실하지 못하다. 교차 증언이나 물증이 아직 나오지 않았기 때문이다. 섣부른 판단은 삼갈 필요가 있다.

그런데 이후 방송작가말고도 술자리에 있었던 여성팬도 박범신이 성추행을 하지 않았다는 진술을 했고, 이를 전직 편집자가 반박하자 재반박했다. 이들은 자신들은 성추행으로 느끼지 않았는데 제3자인 전직 여성 출판인이 자신들이 성추행당한 것으로 단정했다고 이의를 제기했다. 이에 여성 출판인이 재차 자신의 뜻을 굽히지 않음을 밝히자 여성 방송작가는 성추행으로 몰고가는 사람들에 의해 자신들이 더 큰 피해를 당한다는(2차가해) 취지의 말을 하면서 이들을 비판했다. 다만 아직 이들말고 다른 여성 동석인들은 입장을 내놓지 않고 있다. 2016년 10월 23일 네이버-뉴스1 '성희롱 논란' 박범신 술자리 동석자들 '성추행은 없었다'

박범신 작가 페이스북 사과문 과 반응 | 취미정보게시판 | 루리웹 모바일

박범신 작가 페이스북 사과문 과 반응 | 취미정보게시판 | 루리웹 모바일

박범신 작가 페이스북 사과문 과 반응
이나ds | 추천 2 | 조회 4290 일시 2016.10.23125.188.***.***

원본출처 | https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=1276736505710981&id=100001239314731&pnref=story

--
내 일로 인해~상처받은 모든 분께 사과하고 싶어요. 인생-사람에 대한 지난 과오가 얼마나 많았을까, 아픈 회한이 날 사로잡고 있는 나날이에요.팩트의 진실여부에 대한 논란으로 또 다른분이 상처받는 일 없길 바래요. 내 가족~친구-지인~동료작가들~날 사랑해준 모든 독자들께도 사과드려요. 나는 얼마나 많은 결함을 지닌 인간인가, 그런 맘이에요.생애를 통해 나로인해~맘 다친 모든 분들께도 아울러 사과드려요.본의는 그것이 아니란 말조차 부끄러워 못 드려요. 부디, 나의 철모르는-뜨거운 생에 대한 갈망을 접으면서 드리는 진정한 맘으로 받아주세요.






















댓글 | 총 14 개
1
------------


BEST
노벨문학상 못 받는 건 역시 수준미달이라서 못 받는 거였음
★샤우드★ | 220.89.***.*** | 16.10.23 15:08
1 35

BEST
음 메갈작가 쉴드 치던 짹짹이 그대로 옮겨놓은거 같네요 서브컬쳐랑 순문학이랑 작가와 팬관계가 놀랍도록 닮아 있네요
토쓰 | 112.150.***.*** | 16.10.23 15:17
1 29

BEST
정몽주니어 의문의 1승 할 댓글들이 많이 보이네
수미래 | 125.137.***.*** | 16.10.23 15:07
1 15

BEST
안 좋은 기억 지우시고 < ㅋㅋㅋㅋ 웃고 간다 진심
수미래 | 125.137.***.*** | 16.10.23 15:07
1 15

BEST
작가들이 트위터에다가 4과문쓰는거 아무래도 지가 잘했건 잘못했건 듣고싶은말만 트위터에서 해줘서 그런듯 아이고 ㅜㅜ 우리자까님 ㅜㅜ 이래주는데도 반론하나없는게 트위터니 이런 답정너만 보고싶다면 트위터가 최고지
망사표콘돔 | 211.36.***.*** | 16.10.23 15:15
1 15



정몽주니어 의문의 1승 할 댓글들이 많이 보이네
수미래 | 125.137.***.*** | 16.10.23 15:07
답글
1 15

수미래
안 좋은 기억 지우시고 < ㅋㅋㅋㅋ 웃고 간다 진심
수미래 | 125.137.***.*** | 16.10.23 15:07
답글
1 15

노벨문학상 못 받는 건 역시 수준미달이라서 못 받는 거였음
★샤우드★ | 220.89.***.*** | 16.10.23 15:08
답글
1 35

★샤우드★
님 팩트폭력 자제욧...!
코사인 | 183.101.***.*** | 16.10.23 16:08
답글
0 3

무슨 노래 부르나? '~'가 엄청 들어가네
조잘 | 211.36.***.*** | 16.10.23 15:13
답글
0 2

평소에 병맛이라는 소리를 듣는 작자들이 오히려 이런 사태때 정상이라는거 ㅋㅋㅋ
Maria- | 1.221.***.*** | 16.10.23 15:14
답글
0 4

작가들이 트위터에다가 4과문쓰는거 아무래도 지가 잘했건 잘못했건 듣고싶은말만 트위터에서 해줘서 그런듯 아이고 ㅜㅜ 우리자까님 ㅜㅜ 이래주는데도 반론하나없는게 트위터니 이런 답정너만 보고싶다면 트위터가 최고지
망사표콘돔 | 211.36.***.*** | 16.10.23 15:15
답글
1 15

음 메갈작가 쉴드 치던 짹짹이 그대로 옮겨놓은거 같네요 서브컬쳐랑 순문학이랑 작가와 팬관계가 놀랍도록 닮아 있네요
토쓰 | 112.150.***.*** | 16.10.23 15:17
답글
1 29

토쓰
사실 말이 순수문학이지, 마이너리티라는 점에서는 그냥 서브컬쳐잖아요.
포광의 메시아 | 222.101.***.*** | 16.10.23 17:02
답글
0 4

팩트의 진실여부에 대한 논란으로: 다 내가 한 짓이라고 인정한 적 없다. 나의 철모르는-뜨거운 생에 대한 갈망을: 철없고 발정나서 한 짓이니 넘어가달라.
맥모닝먹고옴 | 61.74.***.*** | 16.10.23 15:23
답글
0 6

한국인 수준에 딱 맞는 문학인^^
새드스틱디자이어 | 124.254.***.*** | 16.10.23 16:37
답글
1 1

시발 존나 답답하네 이게 한국인의 정인가? 잘못해도 부둥부둥하는게
튜르리 | 220.85.***.*** | 16.10.23 17:11
답글
0 4

저딴 글을 사과문이라고 싸갈기는게 이 나라 문인이라니, 내가 이제 앞으로 한국 문학을 보나 봐라.
만렙대위아무로 | 121.124.***.*** | 16.10.23 21:04
답글
0 1

저새끼들은 헬조선 운운할 자격 없음. 남의.인생에.커다란 트라우마를 남길 악마짓을 비판하기는 커녕 옹호하는데.지옥에 살 사람들이 아니면 무엇이랴
Co2QQQ | 110.47.***.*** | 16.10.23 21:07
답글

2016/10/24

Howard Brinton - Wikipedia

Howard Brinton - Wikipedia


Japan and later years[edit]

In 1949, Anna Brinton left Pendle Hill to work with AFSC. Howard continued until 1952, when he retired and the couple moved to Japan, in AFSC service. They returned to Pendle Hill in 1954. Howard's Japanese secretary, Yuki Takahashi, a widow, returned with them to help her employer write his memoirs, which have never been published. In May 1972, the nearly blind and aged Brinton, having obtained consent from his adult children, surprised everyone by marrying Takahashi.

Howard Brinton died on 9 April 1973.[7] He is buried with his wife at the Oakland Friends Cemetery, West Chester, Chester County, Pennsylvania.[8]
Publications[edit]incomplete list
A Religious Solution to the Social Problem (1934)
Quaker Education in Theory and Practice (1940)
Guide to Quaker Practice (1943)
The Society of Friends (1948)
Friends for 300 years (1952)
Pendle Hill pamphlets by Howard Brinton[edit]
A Religious Solution To The Social Problem by Howard Brinton, Pendle Hill pamphlet #2, available as a free download as .pdf file
The Quaker Doctrine of Inward Peace by Howard Brinton, Pendle Hill pamphlet #44, available as a free download as .pdf file
The Nature of Quakerism by Howard Brinton, Pendle Hill pamphlet #47, available as a free download as .pdf file
The Society of Friends by Howard Brinton, Pendle Hill pamphlet #48,available as a free download as .pdf file
Prophetic Ministry by Howard Brinton, Pendle Hill pamphlet #54,available as a free download as .pdf file
Reaching Decisions by Howard Brinton, Pendle Hill pamphlet #65,available as a free download as .pdf file
How They Became Friends by Howard Brinton, Pendle Hill pamphlet #144, available as a free download as .pdf file

Quaker Theology #22 - Cover & Contents



Quaker Theology #22 - Cover & Contents

An Excerpt from Howard and Anna Brinton: Re-inventors of Quakerism In the Twentieth Century, An Interpretive Biography, forthcoming from FGC Quakerbridge, by Anthony Manousos

-----

Growing Up in “Brinton Country”

To tell the story of the Brintons or of the Beans and the Coxes, Anna’s family, is to tell the story of Quakerism as it developed in America. Anna and Howard both took pride in the fact that they could trace their ancestry to the early days of Quakerism. Quakers are not ancestor worshipers, but old Quaker families like the Brintons and the Coxes reverence, and draw inspiration from, their ancestors to a greater degree than do members of most other religious groups. To understand Howard and Anna, and many other Quakers of their generation, one must appreciate the role that ancestry played in their moral and spiritual development.

In 1935, Howard gave a talk about the importance of Quaker “ancestor worship” at a family reunion. As often was the case when discussing a serious topic, Howard began with a joke: “An old saying is that a man who has nothing to boast about but his ancestors is like a potato vine– the only good belonging to him is underground.” Howard went on to argue that giving reverent attention to one’s ancestors is not “to be despised” since ancestors can be extremely important in influencing how we develop as individuals:


“A common modern American way of thinking which holds that every tub stands on its own bottom, that every man is an isolated individual and responsible for his own ability and character is not true biologically, psychologically, nor spiritually. Those who have preceded us are bone of our bone, flesh of our flesh, and we can no more separate ourselves from them than a plant can separate itself from its roots.”

For Quakers like Howard and Anna, ancestry was significant because it linked them to a “pattern of life,” a religious culture, that could not be reduced to a theological system. This Quaker culture was, paradoxically, conservative and radical at the same time. Quakers were active in the great reform movements while at the same time preserving a way of life rooted in tradition modes of dress, speech, and outlook that could not be taught in school, but which were transmitted through the family. . . .

Howard saw himself as part of a tradition, rooted in an inward spiritual experience, that went back to the beginning of the Quaker movement, and which linked him with other Quaker families. Old Quaker families did not have ancestral busts, like the Romans, or ancestral altars, like the Chinese, but they did have genealogical records that functioned in a similar fashion to link the present and the past. Howard reflected:


“As I take down from my library shelves the Smedley Book, the Sharpless Book, the Brinton Book, the Kirk Book, the Darlington Book, and the Cox Book and look at these solid, serene, strong faces expressing a simple but carefully worked out mode of life, I feel that I can understand them, but my children never will.”

One of the reasons that Howard dictated his Autobiography during the last year of his life was in hopes of conveying something about this Quaker way of life not only to his descendants, but to posterity.

To tell the story of Howard and Anna one must also tell the story of their ancestors, and of Quakers in America – a story that Anna and Howard spent a lifetime exploring, explaining and “reinventing” . . . .

Howard traced his family’s lineage back eight generations to the founders of the American line, William Brinton, Sr. (1635-1699):


“William and Ann Brinton, our first American ancestors, came early into the Society of Friends. They were married in 1659 by Friends’ ceremony seven years after the Quaker movement began. William, in his testimony regarding his deceased wife, says she “received the Truth from the first publishers of it” in 1656 and that her mother was a Friend. We do not know when William joined the Society of Friends, but, as his later life indicated, he was the kind of independent person who would join [an] outlawed radical movement. He did not hesitate to be a non-conformist even towards his fellow Quakers.”

Like most of the Quakers who settled in Pennsylvania, William came to America to escape persecution. According to “records of suffering” that Quakers scrupulously kept, “William was twice fined for attendance at a Quaker meeting and since, like other Quakers, he refused to pay, his goods were sold for five times the value of the fine.” Deprived of his property and hopes of any livelihood, he left England with his wife and son William, Jr, and arrived in America in the spring of 1684.

Upon his arrival in Philadelphia, he found a temporary residence for his wife and son and went into the wilderness to scout out the best land. “Crossing a small creek, after a journey of about 30 miles, he found just what he wanted,” wrote Howard, “fertile soil watered by small streams and abounding in springs of clear, cold water.” William returned to Philadelphia and purchased 1,000 acres of land for 10 cents per acre so that there would be enough land for his extended family.

During the first winter he lived in a cave and was kept from starving by friendly Indians. The Brintons soon moved from a cave to a log cabin. They cleared the forest, farmed the land, and held meeting for worship in their home until Concord Meetinghouse was built in 1697. Nearby, in 1704, William Brinton, Jr. (1670-1751), who is referred to by the family as “William the Younger” or “William the Builder,” built a two-story brick house in a medieval English style. This home was restored and became a National Historic Landmark in 1968. Today the Brinton family has not only a Book, but also a Website.

The Brinton family flourished in America and so did the Religious Society of Friends until the American Revolution polarized the Colonies and left Quakers marginalized. Because Friends generally did not take sides during the Revolutionary War, they lost a great deal of political and social influence. In the decades after the Revolution, Friends began to drift apart theologically and socially. Those in urban areas became increasingly influenced by evangelical Protestantism while those in the country tended to keep to the traditions and doctrines of what they called “primitive Quakerism.”

In the 1820s, these difference came to a head and American Quakers split into two camps, the Orthodox and the Hicksites. “Orthodox” refers to Quakers who emphasized the outward historical events in Scripture while Hicksites (named after Elias Hicks) referred to those who emphasized inward mystical experience. In the 1840s Orthodox Quakerism also split between those who emphasizing the inward and those emphasizing the outward aspects of religion. The Orthodox- Hicksite separation was the beginning of a series of schisms that eventually divided American Quakerism into four main branches and numerous twigs. As a result of this separation, many Orthodox Friends did not consider Hicksites to be “true Quakers” and vice versa.

Howard was a product of this separation. Born 24 July 1884, Howard grew up in a “peaceful, happy home” in a community consisting of both Orthodox and Hicksite Quakers. His hometown was West Chester, which is located 35 miles west of Philadelphia. The historian Henry Seidel Canby called Chester county “Brinton country” since this area along the Brandywine contains “two Brinton mills, Brinton’s island, Brinton’s dam, Brinton’s bridge, Brinton’s run, Brinton’s road, and Brinton’s quarry.” Howard noted that “others besides Brintons settled here of course, but most of these others sooner or later married Brintons; so we claim them all.”

Howard’s father, Edward G. Brinton, was a prominent Orthodox Friend whose Quaker genealogy was meticulously documented by his son. As Howard explained, “My ancestors for eight or nine generations were nearly all Friends. I know this because I have looked up the names and religion of some 400 of them, all settlers in early Pennsylvania. But I myself was not technically a birthright Friend, for my father was Orthodox and my mother Hicksite.”

Up until this time, being a “birthright” Friend conferred status since it meant that both one’s parents were bona fide Quakers.. . . Nowadays no distinction is usually made between birthright and “convinced” (converted) Friends.

Howard’s mother Ruthanna Brown was a Hicksite Friend whose family suffered a fall in fortune when her father, a prosperous businessman named Jeremiah Brown, made a poor investment and lost all his property. When Edward Brinton met Ruthanna at one of the gatherings of Hicksite and Orthodox Friends that took place at this time, she was an “impecunious teacher at the Hicksite Friends School in West Chester.”

Even though Howard’s mother was Hicksite and his father Orthodox, the tensions that had once characterized these two Quaker factions had largely subsided. As Howard points out, “The Hicksite and Orthodox meetings had little to do with each other religiously, but they were united through the Home Cluster” a kind of club or “social society which met monthly with a literary program.” Howard noted that “some marriages of Hicksite and Orthodox took place as a result of these gatherings, including that of my parents.”

Although Howard’s parents were married in the manner of Friends in the presence of the Mayor of Philadelphia, and their marriage certificate was worded like any other Quaker marriage certificate, some Orthodox Friends considered young Howard to be a Hicksite (and hence not a “true” Quaker). Others argued that the somewhat isolated Hicksite group to which his mother belonged was never actually “disowned” by the Orthodox Yearly Meeting, so that Howard could still be considered a birthright Friend. Eventually both Howard and his mother were received into the Orthodox meeting.

These arcane distinctions did not prevent Howard’s father from going into the farm equipment business with a prominent Hicksite named Herbert Worth. “Together they arranged many joint undertakings of the two meetings,” wrote Howard, “including such occasions as picnics on the Brandywine and boat trips on the Delaware.”

Quakers of different theological persuasions were not only able to work together, they were also able to laugh about their differences. As Howard recalled, “On one occasion my father went to a wealthy Hicksite, Philip Sharpless, to beg money for the new Y.M.C.A., which was to be open only to members of evangelical churches. They became so bogged down in a theological argument that the interview ended in a laugh and a contribution.”

Given this “mixed” background, it is not surprising that Howard eventually felt drawn to help heal the divisions that had separated Hicksite and Orthodox Friends since 1827. As he recalled later, “At the turn of this century Friends had neither sufficient religious insight nor enough humility to create a genuine synthesis. The Hicksites claimed that the separation was caused by a difference of opinion on church government. The Orthodox held that the difference was caused by a lack of agreement in theology. We young people in the Orthodox meeting in West Chester in the eighteen nineties had a vague idea that the Orthodox believed in the divinity of Christ while the Hicksite did not, but we were not at all clear what the word ‘divinity’ might mean.” It was not until 1955 that the Hicksites and Orthodox branches of Philadelphia Yearly Meeting united.

The Brintons had four children three boys (Howard, George, Edward) and a girl (Marguerite) who arrived when Howard was twelve (he says that his cousin Nan “served as a sister until then”). The Brinton household was “well supplied with pets, including rabbits and crows as well as cats, dog, and chickens.” Edward Brinton’s business ventures thrived – he started a successful creamery and later opened a farm equipment warehouse and the family was well off enough to have a servant, an attractive Irish girl whom the children called “Aunt Annie.”

A family crisis occurred when Edward Brinton showed symptoms of tuberculosis. Edward’s brother Ralph (Nan’s father) had died of TB, so the matter was considered quite serious. The doctor recommended that Edward go to New Mexico for a cure. It was at this time that Herbert Worth became Edward’s business partner. He took care of the warehouse while Edward took time off to regain his health. Edward left his three sons to the care of his wife and ended up spending a year in New Mexico. There he enjoyed the high desert landscape, rode on horseback and had some interesting adventures that he reported in letters to his family. One of his most memorable experiences was visiting the Indians call Penitentes who tortured themselves and caused one of their members to hang on the cross in the imitation of Christ. By hiding his camera under his coat, Edward photographed this ritual, even though taking pictures was forbidden.

The firm of Brinton and Worth sold carriages and agricultural equipment from a large warehouse. Howard and his brothers often played there, and it made such an impression that at age ten he wrote one of his first poems, called “Pop’s Warehouse.” Howard learned how to ride a horse and also how to harness a horse to a carriage, a “very complicated operation.”

Howard prided himself on the practical skills that he learned from his father. “When I reflected on the whole course of my education from its beginning to my doctoral dissertation,” wrote Howard, “I consider the most important part of it to be the time when I received a complete set of carpenter’s tools from my father. I had a shop in our attic where I spent several hours each day. I made and repaired almost everything that was make-able or repairable.”

Howard’s skills as a handyman and carpenter proved extremely useful when he eventually became the director of Pendle Hill. There he not only taught courses, wrote books, advised students, planned curriculum, and did administrative work, he also did plumbing and repairs. Howard proved similarly adept at constructing lab equipment when he taught physics at Earlham College.

According to Howard, his first religion was “nature worship.” He experienced “a kind of religious ecstasy” in exploring the meandering tributaries and streams of West Chester. “Of all the streams, the Brandywine received the most reverence.” At Haverford College, he wrote a rather flowery essay celebrating the river that had been to him “a friend and companion.” In the spirit of Wordsworth and Coleridge, he bemoaned the “cold hand of science” that caused him to “wander, wonderless, amid the great mysteries of nature.”

Howard is probably referring to his decision to major in mathematics and physics, but he never really lost his love for the natural world. When he eventually married and started a family of his own, they were known for their numerous pet animals, including rabbits that Howard loved to have nearby, especially when writing. One of his Howard’s deeply felt concerns in his final years at Pendle Hill was that Highway 476 (known locally as the “Blue Route”) would pave over nearby Crum Creek.

Howard compares this early stage of his life to that of the romantic child described in Wordsworth’s “Ode: Intimations of Immortality” (which Howard had memorized along with numerous other poems). Howard wrote: “I was Nature’s priest’ and attended by the vision splendid,’ but it was many years before it faded into the light of common day.’ I remembered clearly the vivid colors in nature pervaded by a kind of supernatural glow.”

Howard apparently inherited his love of poetry from his grandmother, Deborah Garrett Brinton. She was a “very strict Quaker, who wore a plain bonnet and shawl” and sometimes took Howard to Meeting in West Chester. She also read him verses out of a book called Original Poems. As a child, Howard once asked: “Why does Grandmother read such sad poetry?” Later, however, Howard himself would write “sad poetry” as an outlet for feelings that he could not otherwise express.

Howard’s father was an outgoing and friendly man who loved to arrange picnics and other social events for both Hicksite and Orthodox Friends. One of these monthly events, called the Home Cluster, included a literary program with something called “spice,” which entailed making fun of various members. “Father was a very successful ‘spice’ writer,” recalled Howard, who carried on this tradition with Log Nights at Pendle Hill.

Howard also showed an early interest in science. When he visited his Grandmother, he “spent most of the time reading and illustrating a book about astronomy.” Howard also recalled that Charles Chester, “a weighty [i.e. influential and well- respected] Quaker farmer who was clerk of Philadelphia Yearly Meeting,” would discuss scientific topics with the boys “the constellations in the sky and the minerals in the earth” and once he showed them “an Indian arrowhead he found in his field.”

Another important aspect of Howard’s development was his religious upbringing. He declares the Quaker faith “the most mature in existence” and it clearly made a profound impression on his mind, but many of his childhood memories of Quaker meeting for worship are tinged with humor. He describes several melodious Quaker preachers on the facing bench who would chant in the old Quaker style, a “medley of Scripture texts set to the Gregorian chant.” (As liberalism took hold in the first decades of the 20th century, this style of singsong preaching would largely disappear among Friends.)

Howard also recalled those who gave rather odd, quaint messages, such as that of a farmer who stood up and intoned: “Dear Friends, I would advise you to keep sheep. Their wool is wearable, the flesh is eatable, and even their horns are good for making buttons.’ This was sung in the usual chant.”

Another memorable visiting Friend turned to a member of meeting and said, “Thou art a speckled bird” (an allusion to Jeremiah 12: 9).

“As he went on, his sermon became more peculiar and a Friend stood up beside him and asked him to discontinue his remarks immediately,” recalled Howard. “The speaker left the room, went downstairs, and preached up through the hot air register so he could still be heard.”

Howard observed that most meetings were “without any unusual happenings.” He attended meeting for worship twice a week (once on First Day and once in midweek at school) and found them generally “inspiring.”

“It might seem that the silent worship is too mature for a young boy,” observed Howard, “but I did not find it to be the case. The sermons were very simple. There was no theology or social problems; only a simple appeal to follow the inward light wherever it might lead. It was accordingly an appeal to feeling and not to the intellect.”

Another important influence on Howard’s upbringing was the West Chester Friends School, which, he later recalled, “influenced [him] more than any other school of the many that [he] attended.”

All his life Howard was able to quote from memory a poem about the school written when he was a little boy a poem he was exceedingly proud of when he first wrote it:

In West Chester down on Church Street Is the school to
which I go.
It isn’t much for beauty And it isn’t much for show.
But I tell you it’s a dandy. It’s the place to learn the rule.
And generally people call it Church Street Friends
School.

In a letter he wrote at Mills College in 1932, Howard reminisced about the importance of this school and expressed the wish that his own children could have the benefit of such an education:


“My most important habits, both good and bad, were formed within its walls. There are four young and tender Brintons in this house, all eager to learn, and their education in this un-Quakerly land presents a real problem. I would, if I could, conjure up out of the past that red brick building, even though it is not an architectural marvel, and those boys and girls of all kinds who were in it, and more important than anything else I would have Teacher Abbie, Teacher Julia, and Teacher Elizabeth teach it, and then I would send my children to this school rather than to any other that I know.”

Much of Howard’s childhood was spent not in the school or meetinghouse, but in the outdoors. He reminisces at length about the times that he and his “gang” of friends spent trekking about the “Barren Woods” and following various streams. They made tree-houses, built dams, cooked dinners outdoors, caught frogs and fish and butterflies. Howard confesses that he later went out to shoot rabbits and concludes, “I always have been very glad that I did not hit any.”

One of his most memorable activities was helping to form a society of boys called the Boys’ Sporting League.


“We made for it a very elaborate constitution which was never followed,” he recalled. The League required an oath of membership, which all the boys were eager to take except for one who presumably adhered to the Quaker testimony against oath taking. The League meant so much to Howard that he kept the minutes of this quaint, quasi-Quaker society.
“The society met at the home of Joseph Cope. There being no business on hand, the society adjourned to play with the turtles and give them a bath. Signed: George Comfort, Secretary.”

Howard includes several more pages of minutes, which seem like a Lilliputian version of those kept by adult Quaker Meetings. . . .

Camping and hiking on the banks of the Brandywine was “one of the most important undertakings” of Howard’s childhood. Howard and a group of friends once went on a weeklong walking tour about 100 miles to the Susquehanna River and back. Another time Howard and his friends walked from Harper’s Ferry down the Shenandoah Valley to the Luray Caverns a trip of around 100 miles. These excursions meant so much to Howard and company that they took detailed notes, which Howard preserved and included in his Autobiography.

Reading Howard’s recollections of his childhood, it is easy to see why he placed so much emphasis on “organic community” in his later life. Howard grew up in a close-knit Quaker community with ties of friendship and family that were interwoven with a love of nature and a sense of God’s presence in everyday affairs. From this community he learned to be both practical and mystical. He acquired a love of science as well as of poetry. He also learned to appreciate those of different religious background – an important trait since he ended up working for nearly every branch of Quakerism, including the Orthodox, Hicksite, Gurneyite, Wilburite/Conservative, “pastoral” (i.e. meetings led by paid pastors, as in conventional Christian churches) and “unprogrammed” (worship without prearranged liturgy, as were the early Friends’ meetings).

Dreamy, introspective, and highly intelligent, Howard was still quite immature when he left “Brinton Country” at age sixteen and entered the turbulent world of Haverford College. Here his faith would be deepened by new discoveries in science and philosophy, and he would find a mentor in one of modern Quakerism’s greatest thinkers and writers, Rufus Jones.

Meanwhile, three thousand miles away, Anna Shipley Cox, the grand daughter of one of Quakerism’s most controversial figures, was growing up in a very different Quaker environment the world of independent Western Friends.

Growing Up a Western Quaker: Anna Shipley Cox

Like Howard, Anna’s life was profoundly influenced by her forebears, particularly her grandparents, Joel Bean (1825-1914) and his wife Hannah Elliot Shipley Bean (1830-1909). When Anna and Howard retired to Matsudo (their cottage at Pendle Hill, whose name means “Pine Door” in Japanese), Anna placed a painting of Grandmother Bean, in her Quaker cap and kerchief, in a prominent place.

Howard deeply admired the Beans. In recounting the life of this important Quaker couple, he noted that both were equally “gifted and consecrated” ministers:


“[Joel Bean] was born of Quaker parents in 1825 in New Hampshire and died in Hawaii in 1914. In 1859 he married, in Philadelphia, Hannah E. Shipley, sister of Samuel R. Shipley, who founded the Provident Life and Trust Company, and daughter of Thomas Shipley, a well known abolitionist. She was as gifted and consecrated as he and, like him, a highly acceptable minister. Under a sense of Divine Guidance they went to Hawaii in 1861, where they traveled for nine months in the ministry. Ten years later, they traveled extensively with a similar concern in England, Scotland, and Ireland, and in 1882 Joel Bean accompanied Isaac Sharp in his visits to American meetings.”

Joel and Hannah were what Quakers called “weighty” or “public” Friends, highly respected both in the United States and in England. During their stay in England they became friends with the leading lights of British Quakerism, such as Bevan Braithwaite, Isaac Sharp, and others, who visited them in Iowa and kept up a lifelong correspondence. Though the Beans were conservative in their outward behavior and lived like the “Quaker of the Olden Time,” according to Augustus Murray, they were open to the intellectual currents of their era – evolution, “Higher Criticism” of the Bible, and the latest scientific discoveries.
Like the Brintons, the Beans were a two-career couple. Hannah was a school teacher. Joel taught school and later became vice president of a bank. Both served as clerks of Iowa Yearly Meeting.

Their lives changed dramatically when they returned from England in 1877. The revival movement which was spreading like wildfire throughout the West reached Iowa and radically transformed Iowa Yearly Meeting. “The Revival spread,” wrote Bean. “As it gained power it became intolerant of dissent. Opposition was suppressed and resistance silenced. It was thus that unity was claimed. West Branch was the main point of attack and Revival aggression.They regarded themselves advanced to an experience and knowledge of truth to which no others had attained. Elders of sound judgment and discernment, were powerless to stem the stem the tide. Few could know what we passed through in that, and a few subsequent years, of desertion of friends, of charges of unsoundness, and of heresy.”

The Beans did their best to reconcile the differences among Friends, but their efforts were in vain. Iowa Yearly Meeting split into evangelical and Conservative branches.

“The strain wore me down,” wrote Joel, “and preyed upon my health.” The Beans decided to “remove in 1883 to California and to retire if possible from the conflict.” In San Jose, the Beans formed a worship group which met without a pastor. Because California Yearly Meeting hadn’t yet been formed, the Beans asked for recognition as a monthly meeting from Honey Creek Quarterly Meeting in Iowa, but were refused, even though the Friends Church in San Jose was faltering and the Beans’ meeting was flourishing with an attendance of over forty, including many well-known and respected Friends.

In 1885 the Beans built a meetinghouse and in 1889 formed a non-profit organization called the College Park Association of Friends, independent of any quarterly or yearly meeting. Finally, in 1893, Iowa Yearly Meeting withdrew its recognition of Joel as a recorded minister after he failed to answer doctrinal questions “soundly.” In 1898, the entire Bean family (including Anna), along with other San Jose Friends, was removed from membership by New Providence Monthly Meeting in Iowa. This removal stirred international controversy among Friends.

In 1884, a year after the Beans moved to San Jose, Charles Cox, a mathematics instructor who graduated from Haverford College, moved to California to marry their daughter Lydia. He had met her while he was principal of the Friends Academy at Le Grande, Iowa. (Lydia taught there after graduating from Penn College.) Charles was a professor of mathematics at the College of the Pacific from 1886-1891, and then was a member of the mathematics department at Stanford University from 1891-1900. Charles then left academia and turned to selling insurance through the Provident Life and Trust Company of Philadelphia. He was a deeply committed Quaker. For fourteen years he served as president of the College Park Association, which was founded by his father-in-law.

Anna was born in 1887 in San Jose, California, to the Beans’ daughter Lydia and her husband Charles Cox. Anna grew up next door to her famous grandparents and visited them often. Traveling Friends frequently came to her grandparent’s home and shared stories of their travels to exotic places. An English Friend named Isaac Sharp was one of Anna’s favorites: he told her about going to Japan to a house where the walls were paper-thin and noticing little holes in the wall where “black eyes” peered through to see what the Englishman had underneath his clothes when he went to bed. He also told Anna about a Norwegian Friend who trained his parrot to say: “Dear Isaac Sharp’s again in Norway.”

During the summer the Beans went on vacation to their cottage in Pacific Grove, not far from Monterey. There the Chautauqua Assembly pitched its tents and speakers held forth on a variety of inspiring and stimulating topics. (Chautaquas were an educational movement popular in the late 19th and early 20th century, with speakers, preachers, teachers, musicians and various forms of entertainment for the whole family.) Children played in the grove and on the seashore. The Beans held meetings for worship at the beach, in which little Anna no doubt took part. One participant recalled what it was like: “Imagine the outward setting of the meeting, the semicircular beach, the protecting blue cliffs, the glorious blue sky, the softly breaking waves, the peaceful silence. Presently the sweet voice of Hannah Bean broke the silence with the words of prayer: ‘Beside thy sea, O God, we turn to the light of Thy presence like that of the Master on the shores of Galilee.’”

The Beans’ cottage at Pacific Grove became a place for family holidays where “grand children learned the possibilities of sand and rocks and sea.” Birthdays, honeymoons and other celebrations took place there. (Howard and Anna spent time in Pacific Grove on their honeymoon.) There were family picnics in the grove and poetry readings at “Organ Rock.” This scenic place was where little Anna spent many of the happiest times in her childhood.

She also enjoyed attending meeting for worship at San Jose Meeting, which she later called her favorite meeting, no doubt because it was thriving and lively. As a British Friend observed, “The Friends’ Meeting in San Jose, attended by Joel Bean, contains many Friends known even in this country – the family of Samuel Brun and Anna Valley, from Nimes; Augustine Taber and his family (he is a brother to Susan T. Thomas recently in England; Elizabeth Shelley, and some of the Professors of the neighbouring Stanford University. They have an ordinary attendance of about forty, and are growing.”

The Beans were conservative in their dress and behavior, but open to new ideas. They didn’t drink, smoke, dance or go to plays, but Joel published dozens of poems in Quaker publications and was very fond of the Quaker poet John Greenleaf Whittier. Hannah did not wear any jewelry, not even a wedding ring, but she wore a lovely white silk bonnet when she was being courted by Joel. (Anna wore a wedding ring, but Howard never would – it seemed un-Quakerly to him.) Despite the Quaker testimony against play acting, Joel took Anna to see her first play, Antigone, in the original Greek, when she was only ten years old.
“The main figure was a revered minister in the Society of Friends,” recalled Anna, “so grandfather thought he’d take a chance on it, and he got me interested in Greek for the rest of my life. I’d never seen a play before, and it was a great experience.”

Anna also learned about “traveling in the ministry” through her grandparents. Having met Hawaiian kings as well as the British Quaker aristocracy, the Beans had many tales to tell of their far-flung and sometimes perilous travels.
“Grandfather went out to the Hawaiian islands because he wanted to see what the New England missionary enterprise there meant for Friends,” recalled Anna.


“After staying there a year he decided that it wasn’t our way and he came back. The king tried to persuade him to stay and offered him a school, and [even] offered him a strip of land from the mountain top to the sea. It came right down through what is now the business district of Honolulu. If Grandfather stayed, we might have been in the fix of those missionary children it tells about in [James Michener’s novel] Hawaii – where you see how the big plantations and the monetary interests are in the same names as grandfather’s friends, the first generation of missionaries. . .”

Voyaging across the Pacific could be very risky in those days, particularly for parents with infants. Recalled Anna: “When Grandfather and Grandmother went to Hawaii in 1862, they took my mother who was a little baby. Someone had the idea of giving Grandmother a tin box it was the size of a breadbox, and we used it as a cake box. The label said it could be used for a bathtub for the baby on the boat, and if she died at sea to bury her. That was a relic of my grandmother’s early explorations.”

Like Howard, Anna spent her early years in a secure, close-knit, semi-rural Quaker community that adhered to traditional ways: “[Anna’s parents] Charles and Lydia Bean Cox lived in College Park, a suburb of San Jose, California, and here their two daughters grew up in a redwood shingled house on a large corner lot. The streets, unpaved and without sidewalks, were lined with beautiful poplar trees. Yellow leaves raked into heaps in the autumn made lovely bonfires. There were few homes near them. But the little Friends’ meeting house was less than two blocks down the street. Here Anna and her younger sister, Catharine, learned to sit quietly, which they felt deeply and pondered.”

Anna described her birthplace as a “transplanted village of mostly New Englanders who lived like [their] forebears in a Quaker community where everybody did everything together, and looked out for each other.”
Since both their parents were school teachers, the Cox girls received their elementary education at home. They attended a local intermediate school.
In her declining years Anna observed that her early training helped her in her work at Pendle Hill.

“I had a good experience in my childhood,” she recalled. “[I was] initiated into things I was going to have to do afterwards in my life, and one was begging money from people. I learned to write not by the copy book but by writing letters to the older Friends to help in the autumn with the California Indians, and in the spring in helping on the Friends School in Ramallah in Palestine.”

An eager and able student, Anna was sent to Westtown, a co-ed prep school located in West Chester, Howard’s hometown. To enter Westtown at that time, students were required to be members of an officially recognized meeting. Since the San Jose meeting her grandfather started was unaffiliated and therefore unrecognized, Anna applied at age twelve for membership in Twelfth Street meeting in Philadelphia. (She remained a member of that meeting for the rest of her life.) At Westtown she encountered excellent teachers and memorized her Latin grammar, thanks to Hannah Pennell, a woman whose toughness Anna remembered with fondness: “She was the best drill master I ever had.”

Discipline and hard work were key to Anna’s academic success as well as a mark of her character. And her diligence paid off. In 1906, she was admitted to Stanford University. During the spring of her freshman year the great San Francisco earthquake shook San Jose and Northern California. According to her sister, Anna was unfazed: “It was characteristic that Anna went off on her bicycle about two hours after the quake to catch her usual train to Palo Alto. Riding with her friends to the University, she and they were shocked by the devastation: deep cracks in the stone walls, and many of the recently constructed buildings reduced to rock heaps. The front walls of the church and the tall entrance tower lay shattered on the ground.”

Classes at Stanford were cancelled for the rest of that semester, but resumed in the fall.

Anna majored in Classics and had the opportunity to study with the famous Quaker Classicist Augustus Taber Murray who would in 1928 take a leave of absence to become the religious advisor of America’s first Quaker president, Herbert Hoover.

Anna completed her four years at Stanford with honors and went on to complete her doctorate in Classics in 1917 at age thirty – no mean achievement, especially for a woman. (Howard did not complete his doctorate until he was over forty.)

Anna’s grandmother did not live to see her beloved granddaughter graduate. Hannah Bean died in San Jose on January 31, 1909, at age 78, after a “slight indisposition” and “without a moment’s suffering.” According to her daughter Catharine, “the sad news went like a flame over San Jose and every one had a word of love; the wires carried it east and west and kindred and friends arose to call her blessed.’”

Not long after Hannah’s death, Joel moved to Hawaii to be with Catharine and her family. There he spent his final years enjoying a much deserved rest. In 1914 he passed away peacefully at age 89 in a tropical paradise that most New Englanders only dream about.

Like her grandparents, Anna loved traveling to exotic places.

“It runs in families, this taste for travel,” Anna once observed. “Friends have a great propensity for going about doing good, especially when doing good involves going about.”

During her summer vacations, Anna often traveled abroad with her legendary Aunt Catharine Shipley, also known as Aunt Kate. The colorful and eccentric Quaker matriarch came from a wealthy Philadelphia family and did pretty much as she pleased.

“It was Aunt Kate who got me over being excessively timid,” Anna confided to Eleanor Price Mather, who could not imagine Anna ever being fearful. “At Westtown, I was so timid I could hardly brace up to anything,” Anna insisted. “It was Aunt Kate and her trips that cured me. I carried luggage and bought tickets, and waited on Aunt Kate and Cousin Sue Shipley. Once in Switzerland a hotel manager said to them, ‘These are your rooms. The maid can go downstairs.’ ‘There is no maid,’ said Aunt Kate frostily.”

Copyright © by Anthony Manousos.
Reprinted by permission.

<< Contents

Howard and Anna Brinton: Anthony Manousos: 9781937768102: Amazon.com: Books



Howard and Anna Brinton: Anthony Manousos: 9781937768102: Amazon.com: Books
A Beautiful Portrait of a Powerful Quaker Couple
ByJim F. Wilsonon August 19, 2015
Format: Paperback

This is a beautifully written biography of a Quaker couple whose powerful presence pervasively influenced the Quaker community for much of the 20th century. Their lasting influence can be found in organizations and essays and through their life example as well. They were the catalysts for the founding of the Pacific Yearly Meeting on the West Coast, and for the flourishing of Pendle Hill (a Quaker community devoted to study and practice) on the East Coast.

Writing a biography of a couple is not easy. The biographer has two foci and if not handled well it can become somewhat confusing. Manousos strikes just the right balance. It helps that Manousos is writing about a married couple so that their lives overlap. I was impressed that Manousos was able to balance their lives so that the reader gets a good portrait of Howard and Anna as individuals, and Howard and Anna as a couple. Manousos does this by devoting some chapters to Howard, some chapters to Anna, and other chapters, or sections of chapters, about their life as a married couple. Taken together the reader gets a multi-faceted portrait of these two powerful personalities and their interactions.

Reading this book also gives us insight into the struggles and schisms that pervaded the Quaker community during the period covered. The Brinton’s knew, and worked with, Quakers of different persuasions, while retaining a strong commitment to their own understanding. The Brinton’s were a significant force in the emerging Liberal Quaker perspective and their legacy is strongest among those who align themselves with that tradition (that would be the ‘Independent’ Yearly Meetings, such as the Pacific Yearly Meeting, and more broadly those affiliated with Friends General Conference).

If there is a weakness in the book, I would say it is in the way that Evangelical Quakers are characterized. The book frequently uses the term ‘fundamentalist’ to describe the Evangelical Quaker tradition. The term is being used loosely and, I think, somewhat inaccurately. Most Evangelicals are not fundamentalists. Fundamentalism is a particular tradition or perspective in Conservative Christianity with specific doctrines and formulations that do not necessarily map onto the Evangelical tradition. To be fair to the author, it appears that the Brintons used the term in this loose, and I would argue misleading, way; so Manousos is reflecting that usage. Still, I think it would have been helpful to point out that distinction. This, however, is a minor point and does not undermine the efficacy of the biography.

For those who, like me, are Liberal Quakers, this book will open a significant chapter of that history. For those who are Quakers of other persuasions, this book has many thoughtful insights regarding the Quaker tradition and its overall place in Christianity and World Religions. And if you want to be inspired by a couple that embodied the Quaker Spirit in their lives, their marriage, and their work, this book is highly recommended.

LA Quaker: Yuki Brinton and the Autobiography of Howard Brinton

LA Quaker: Yuki Brinton and the Autobiography of Howard Brinton


Saturday, January 19, 2013

Yuki Brinton and the Autobiography of Howard Brinton

Today, as I do my final revision of my biography of Howard and Anna Brinton, I feel a deep sense of gratitude to Yuki Takahashi Brinton for transcribing Howard's autobiography during the final year of his life. Without her help, and cooperation, I would not have been able to write my biography of the Brintons, as I explain in this epilogue.

Origins of the Autobiography of Howard Brinton

For over thirty years, the Autobiography of Howard Brinton, one of the foremost exponents of 20th century Quakerism, lay in a cardboard box, unread and virtually unknown. I learned of it when I gave a series of talks to promote a book I had written about Western unprogrammed Quakers. During my presentations I invariably discussed Howard and Anna Brinton because they startedFriends Bulletin (the Western Quaker magazine that I used to edit) and played an essential role in the founding of Pacific Yearly Meeting, whose history I chronicled in AWestern Quaker Reader. I bemoaned the fact that little had been written about the Brintons, who were key figures in the development of American Quakerism both in the Eastern as well as in the Western USA. I concluded that someone should write a book-length study of these important figures, as was the case with other leading Quakers of this period, such as Henry Cadbury, Rufus Jones, Clarence Pickett, Thomas Kelly, and Douglas Steere.

After I gave this talk in Philadelphia, a lively, white-haired woman stepped forward and introduced herself as Catharine Cary, the daughter of Anna and Howard Brinton. She asked if I knew about an Autobiography that her father had dictated to Yuki Brinton just prior to his death. I confessed that I had not heard of it, but was very interested in seeing such a document. I also wondered if any historian was working on this project. I was surprised to discover that this unpublished memoir had been languishing in the Haverford College Quaker collection for 30 years and no one had written anything about it.

I was given a photocopy of this work, which turned out to be over 130 pages long and was full of personal information not found anywhere else. Unlike his teacher Rufus Jones, Howard was reticent about his personal life and revealed little about it in print. His one attempt at personal history, a talk for the Historical Society entitled“Friends for 75 Years,” provided more theological than autobiographical data.

One reason that this Autobiography may have been dormant for so many years is that it was the “offspring” of an unusual marriage, which I describe in my biography of the Brintons. In May 1972, three years after the death of his first wife Anna, with whom he had been married for over fifty years and produced four children, Howard married Yuki Takahashi, a Japanese teacher, translator, and student of Quakerism. Howard was 88 years old, nearly blind, and in failing health. Yuki was 60 years old, though she looked much younger. Howard decided to re-marry because he was in failing health and needed a caretaker, but his relationship with Yuki was much deeper than that and was based on a friendship going back two decades. The marriage lasted less than a year, but it produced a remarkable memoir that Howard dictated to Yuki during his final days. This collaborative effort, written under the shadow of mortality and lovingly if not always accurately transcribed, enhances our understanding not only of Howard’s life but also of 20th century Quakerism.

While it is uncertain whether Howard intended for his memoir to be published, he did devote his usual care to writing it and probably had some thought of its being published or at least read by future historians. After Howard’s death, Yuki sent Anna Brinton Wilson (“Cousin Nan”) a copy of the Autobiography. She sent back comments and wrote, “I shall want to buy a copy of the book as soon as it is out.”[1] It is clear that at least one member of the Brinton family felt that the manuscript was publishable. Most felt it needed editing and fact-checking, and did not want it to be published.

Because of her Japanese upbringing, Yuki was also reluctant to share this work, or any details about her life. It took considerable coaxing for me to find out as much as I did about her life and her relationship to Howard. In a letter date August 22, 2004, she wrote: “I enjoyed talking with you. I enjoyed because you listened! That’s why I talked too much. That is dangerous.”

Where Yuki saw danger, I saw opportunity. Besides, I very much enjoyed listening to this remarkable woman tell her story. She had a lot of wisdom to share, as well as great humility—qualities that are usually connected. Here are some facts I was able to glean about her remarkable life.


Born on Dec. 20, 1912, Yuki Takahashi was one of five children born in Dairen, Manchuria, to Motokichi Takahashi (1873-1920) and Naoko Takahashi (1881-1971). Yuki’s father was a high-ranking Japanese government official who had majored in political science at Princeton University. There he met Woodrow Wilson, whom he greatly admired, and became a Presbyterian. Yuki’s father was sent as a Japanese envoy to the United States after WWI, where he died of a heart attack in Seattle, Washington, at age 47.


Yuki’s family had moved from Manchuria to Tokyo, Japan, in 1914. There Yuki was educated at a private school run by Sophia Anabelle Irwin and Robert Irwin. She was trained as a kindergarten teacher. In the 1930s she worked as a kindergarten teacher in Dairen, Manchuria.


Yuki’s sister Taneko went to Pendle Hill in 1939 and stayed until war broke out between Japan and the United States in 1942. At that time, her sister returned to Japan. Hearing her sister’s glowing reports about Pendle Hill sparked Yuki’s interest in Quakerism. She eventually went to work at the Quaker Center in Tokyo around 1950.


A prominent Quaker named Passmore Elkinton introduced Howard to Yuki, who became his interpreter and assistant. Impressed by her passion for Quakerism, he encouraged Yuki to come to Pendle Hill, even though she felt her English was not good enough.


There she translated Friends for Three Hundred Years into Japanese, a daunting task she was able to accomplish with the help of Howard and Elizabeth Vining.
In transcribing Howard's autobiography, Yuki was painfully conscious that she lacked the editorial skill that Anna possessed, but did her best. Howard also did his best to recall what happened in his life, but with his failing health and eyesight, he had to rely on his memory and could not verify dates and other details. How much of what Yuki wrote were Howard’s exact words, and how accurate some of Howard’s memories were, we will never know for certain. I have done my best to verify names and dates, and was surprised to find that most of the names and dates that Howard remembered could be verified. I became convinced that, despites its many deficiencies, Howard’s Autobiography is an invaluable resource and an excellent starting point for a biographer.

Many of the errors are trivial. Because of her difficulties in pronouncing English, Yuki sometimes mixed up“L’s” and “R’s” (as in the sentence, “we attended a concert in London where the English loyalty showed up”). Some of the errors involved recalling events out of order, like recounting his trip to Scotland after his first trip to Britain Yearly Meeting rather than after his second.

Howard was also unable to polish the style and to make his narrative flow as he would if he had been able to read and edit what he had written. According to Yuki, Howard’s daughter Lydia helped in editing the Autobiography and it would not have been readable without her assistance.

“I am undertaking this with much hesitation and some embarrassment,” Howard wrote. “My principal handicap is that I cannot read or write (because of my poor eye sight) so I am dictating these memoirs to my secretary and general helper Yuki Takahashi….In dictating this I cannot go back and make revisions. I must always go forward recklessly, not always knowing just where sentences or paragraphs may end.”

Because Howard had a disciplined mind, he was able to write coherently in spite of these handicaps. His lifelong exposure to Quaker autobiography and journals no doubt helped prepare him for this work. He liked to reminisce about his past and had also been thinking of writing a memoir since he was in his forties.[2]

Although the memoirs contain inaccuracies, as one would expect from such a “raw” work, they also have the freshness of a tape-recorded oral history. In some cases, Howard reveals feelings and opinions that he would have expressed guardedly or not at all in a work less “reckless.” For instance, when he describes going to Friends World Committee Conference in Oxford in 1952, soon after the publication of Friends for 300 Years, Howard says, “I sent a copy… to every American delegate. Many of the American delegates were from Pastoral meetings. I wanted to be sure that they knew what real Quakerism was.”[3]This unusually frank comment reveals quite clearly that Friends for 300 Years was not written as objective history, but to promote an unprogrammed Friends’ perspective of Quakerism. He also talks about mystical experiences that he had at Glastonbury and frankly discloses his personal feelings while working on numerous Quaker projects.

The memoir that Howard and Yuki had worked on for a year extended as far as Howard’s trip to Japan in 1952. This being time when he and Yuki met, it is a fitting conclusion to their collaborative effort. As Howard tells us as well as his grateful amanuensis and spouse, “the most important event [that happened to me] in Tokyo was to secure Yuki Takahashi as my secretary and guide and interpreter.”

After Howard’s death, Henry Cadbury asked Yuki if she’d like to stay on at Pendle Hill to assist in the library. She accepted the offer and stayed until 1993 when she moved, somewhat reluctantly, to Kendal, a Quaker retirement center near Pendle Hill. There she died on July 3, 2006, after a brief illness. Her memorial minutes noted :

At Pendle Hill she helped and befriended many foreign students and was a gracious presence representing Japanese culture. She also served faithfully for many years on the Pendle Hill publications committee.

Yuki had a keen eye for small things: for English expressions like “Thank you very much” and all cats for they spoke Japanese, and modest gifts like oranges or cookies, or an introduction to her friend who might become your friend, too. Sometimes the gift was a sharp question but often an invitation to tea or Scrabble. With children she became a child, and with adults a keen watcher as her hearing grew less serviceable.


One of her gifts was her devotion to Howard Brinton. Had it not been for Yuki, we would have no way of knowing the personal side of Howard’s life. For this reason, I feel a profound debt to Yuki for encouraging Howard to persevere with his memoirs. Without her labor of love, I probably would not have undertaken this biography, my own labor of love.

----------
[1] See “from Anna Brinton Wilson’s letter 1973 or ’74,” Box 1189.
[2] See letter to Mary James, Mills College, June 18th 1930. “As I sit here looking out my study window on San Francisco Bay I am attempting to conjure up on the dim background of the hills beyond it the faint images of the time when I first set my feet on the long road to learning. They came with great difficulty at first and then faster and fast like ghosts pouring out of a deserted building…” He wrote about the importance of West Chester Friends School and the “Boys Sporting League” and other childhood memories, including poems that later appear in his Autobiography.
[3] Autobiography, p. 96.

Japan's Modern Prophet: Uchimura Kanzô, 1861-1930 - John F. Howes - Google Books

Japan's Modern Prophet: Uchimura Kanzô, 1861-1930 - John F. Howes - Google Books

アズワンコミュニティ鈴鹿を訪問して|里山成功哲学コラム

アズワンコミュニティ鈴鹿を訪問して|里山成功哲学コラム

どしゃぶりの中、鈴鹿山脈の山道を走る。土山から亀山に抜ける国道1号線はカーブが多い。といっても道幅が十分あるので、熊野から土山に抜ける道に比べたら全然走りやすい。


日野町は三重県との県境に位置し、鈴鹿山脈を越えると反対側は三重県だ。綿向山や僕が竹を切っている水無山も鈴鹿山脈に属し、鈴鹿山脈というのは僕にとって庭のような存在になりつつある。


そう、そして、今日は鈴鹿に向かっている。鈴鹿サーキットに行くためではない。アズワンコミュニティ鈴鹿を訪問するためだ。



アズワンコミュニティについてはEDEの鎌田さんからチラッと聞いたぐらいで、詳しいことはほとんど知らなかった。



今回、ジュレー・ラダックがアズワンコミュニティ訪問ツアーを組み、スカルマ・ギュルメットさんも来るということで、思い切って参加してみることにした。スカルマさんとは2006年からの知り合いで、地球祭に出演してもらって以来、年に一回ぐらいは必ずどこかで出会っていた。最近では『幸せの経済学』の試写会でインタビューさせてもらった。



『幸せの経済学』試写会動画レポート

http://sozonowa.net/index.php?%E3%80%8C%E5%B9%B8%E3%81%9B%E3%81%AE%E7%B5%8C%E6%B8%88%E5%AD%A6%E3%80%8D%E8%A9%A6%E5%86%99%E4%BC%9A 




僕らはまず鈴鹿カルチャーステーションという場所に集合した。ここはカフェにもなっていて、講演会やコンサートなどのイベントも定期的に開催され、アズワンコミュニティのメンバーや地域の人たちが集える場所となっている。




伯宮幸明 ロハスピ・コラム 
鈴鹿カルチャーステーション




ツアーの参加者は東京、名古屋、島根、そして滋賀から集まり、まずみなで自己紹介をした。アズワンのメンバーも何人か同席した。



鈴鹿カルチャーステーションの代表理事を務める坂井和貴さんがコミュニティの説明をした。アズワンカンパニー、アズワンコミュニティ、鈴鹿カルチャーステーション、サイエンズスクール鈴鹿、サイエンズ研究所といろいろ出てきて、正直のところどういう場所なのかよくわからなかった。会社なのか、コミュニティなのか、学校なのか。



部分、部分はわかるのだが、全体像が掴めない。で、結局のところ、ここは何なのだ。



アズワンカンパニーというのは会社であり、いくつかの事業を展開させている。お弁当屋さん、農場、工務店、不動産屋、人材派遣業など。



その後、カルチャーステーションを後にして、街のはたけ公園という所に行った。


伯宮幸明 ロハスピ・コラム 




この日は雨で地面が濡れていたので長靴にはき替える。ここは地元のショッピングセンターの協力で1.5ヘクタールの畑を借りた場所。市民農園、学校の体験学習、シニアの活動の場などに利用されているそうだ。



こことは別に出荷用のアズワンファームという農場がある。


続いてアズワンカンパニーの事業のひとつである「おふくろさん弁当」を訪問する。アズワンファームでとれた野菜を使った弁当屋で、地域の人に手作り弁当を販売している。学校から注文が来ることもあるという。




伯宮幸明 ロハスピ・コラム 




こうした職場にはコミュニティのメンバーも勤務していれば、そうでない人もいるという。従ってアズワンカンパニー・イコール・アズワンコミュニティではないようだ。実際、コミュニティのメンバーといっても、誰がメンバーで誰がメンバーでないかもはっきりしていないようで、自分がメンバーかどうかわからない人もいる。それだけ境界線がはっきりしていないということで、いろいろな人が出入りしている。



職場にはルールのようなものがないという。遅れてきても誰も咎められない。みなが仲良く、心地よい雰囲気で働けることを目指しているようで、上下関係も存在しないという。何でも話し合える空間にしている。給料も各自異なり、会社と話し合って決めるのだそうだ。休日もそう。週休3日の人もいれば2日の人もいれば1日の人もいる。それぞれの希望や必要に応じて決めるそうだ。もちろん会社の必要もあるので、双方の希望や条件を出し合い、話し合ってお互いにとってベストな状況を選ぶのだという。


その後、お肉とやおやさんという店に行った。



伯宮幸明 ロハスピ・コラム 




ここでは鈴鹿山麓産の豚肉や野菜などが売られている。街のはたけ公園でシニアのメンバーがつくっている野菜も売られている。



伯宮幸明 ロハスピ・コラム 



伯宮幸明 ロハスピ・コラム 




そして、ここではリンカという地域通貨を使用することも可能だ。



伯宮幸明 ロハスピ・コラム 




これがリンカのカード。全額リンカで買えるものもある。街のはたけ公園でシニアがつくっている野菜はすべて全額リンカでも買えるようだ。


その後、鈴鹿カルチャーステーションに戻り、サイエンズスクール鈴鹿とサイエンズ研究所の説明を聞いた。


サイエンズスクールというのは人としての成長をサポートする教育機関で、様々なセミナーを開講している。マイライフセミナー、内観コース、自分を知るためのコース、自分を見るためのコース、人生を知るためのコース、社会を知るためのコースなど。



コミュニティのメンバーの多くがこれらのセミナーを受けていて、ここで共有される価値観、考え方、姿勢がコミュニティをつなぎとめるグルー(接着剤)の役割を果たしているのだろう。


サイエンズ研究所というのは、そうした事柄を研究する場所のようだ。スクールで開講するセミナーも、それ自体が完成版ということではなく、参加者のフィードバックを基に研究し、改善すべきところは改善していくという。コミュニティの生活から見えてくること、アズワンカンパニーという職場で見えてくることも研究材料になり、そこでも改善が行われていくそうだ。つまり研究所というのは、コミュニティを停滞させることなく、常に進化し続ける場にするために重要な役割を果たしているようだ。


宿泊先はセミナーハウスだった。サイエンズスクールが提供するセミナーの多くが泊りこみの合宿形式で、ここで開催されるらしい。宿泊施設にもなっている。



伯宮幸明 ロハスピ・コラム 




伯宮幸明 ロハスピ・コラム 


夕食の風景


夜はツアー参加者とコミュニティのメンバーで集まり、懇親会を開いた。



伯宮幸明 ロハスピ・コラム 




懇親会ではアズワンコミュニティについてやラダックについての情報交換が行われた。参加したコミュニティのメンバーに女性が何人かいたことも印象的だった。


コミュニティのメンバーはだいたい100人ぐらいいるそうだが、メンバーと非メンバーの境界線がはっきりしておらず、正確な人数は誰もわからないという。共同生活をしているわけではなく、世帯はそれぞれ別々だ。ただ、みな近所に住んでいる。ここは鈴鹿市の中心だが、ほとんどが歩いて行き来できるぐらいの界隈に住んでいるという。従って同じ屋根の下でこそ生活をしていないものの、行き来は頻繁にあり、みな家族のような付き合いだという。大多数の人たちがアズワンカンパニーに所属し、共に仕事をしているので昼間接する時間も長い。カンパニーが複数の会社に分かれているので、接するといっても全員が顔を合わせているわけではないが。


ミーティングも、個々のミーティングはあっても、全体ミーティングのようなものはないそうだ。


そして、メンバーと自覚していない人たちの中にも、アズワンカンパニーのパート社員や、サイエンズスクールの受講生、鈴鹿カルチャーステーションが提供する講演会やコンサート等の常連客、街のはたけ公園の利用者等、何らかの形でコミュニティに関わっている人たちもたくさんいて、そうした周辺の人たちも含めると数はさらに多くなる。



ここがこのコミュニティの全体像をわかりにくくしている要因かもしれない。境界線がはっきりしていないので、どこからどこまでが何でどこからどこまでが何なのかが見えにくいのだ。


結局、僕は訪問中は最後までその辺がよくわからなかったのだが、後になってわかってきて、また、わかりにくいこと自体がコミュニティの良さであることもわかった。


翌日の午前中は植樹体験をした。里山を再生するプロジェクトで、広葉樹が増えるようにコナラやクヌギなどを植林しているのだ。炭焼きも復活させようとしている。これは僕がまさに今熊野でやりたいと思っていることだ。



伯宮幸明 ロハスピ・コラム 



伯宮幸明 ロハスピ・コラム 



ここにはこうした様々なプロジェクトがある。これは一種のサークル活動のように、やりたい人が手を挙げて始めていることだという。街のはたけ公園での活動もそうだが、参加者はコミュニティのメンバーに限定されていない。


その後はお茶会を体験した。



伯宮幸明 ロハスピ・コラム 



伯宮幸明 ロハスピ・コラム 




そしてコミュニティ食堂にて昼食。



伯宮幸明 ロハスピ・コラム 


コミュニティのメンバーやそれ以外の人たちも入れる家庭レストランだ。


これで、「普段着で探訪DAY」のツアーは終了。


午後は、鈴鹿カルチャーステーションのイベントとして「ラダックmeetsスズカ」という写真トークショー&ワールドカフェが行われた。プレゼンをしたのがスカルマさんとジュレー・ラダックのメンバー。



伯宮幸明 ロハスピ・コラム 



伯宮幸明 ロハスピ・コラム 




ラダックでのコミュニティのあり方とここ鈴鹿で行われている取り組みを見ながら「未来へと続いていくコミュニティの姿」について話し合う。


ラダックとはヘレナ・ホーバーグ・ホッジさんの『ラダック―懐かしい未来』にも登場する北インドにある地域のことで、持続可能で相互扶助的な地域社会が存在していた。


詳しくはジュレー・ラダックのサイトをhttp://julayladakh.org/ 



ここまでがツアーだ。


アズワンコミュニティというのは僕の目にどう映ったのだろうか。


ひとつは今までにない形のコミュニティであるということ。木の花ファミリーのようなコミュニティとも違うし、僕が移住者ネットワークと呼んでいる鴨川や小川町のような場所とも違う。トランジション・タウンとも違う。ひとつの枠組みに収められない不思議な場所だ。


強いて定義付けするなら、エコビレッジか、共通の目的を持った生活集団という意味のインテンショナル・コミュニティと言えるのだろうか。


ここでも多くのことが自然発生的に起きてきたが、共通の目的を持って何人かが集まり、意図的にコミュニティづくりをしたという点では、やはりインテンショナル・コミュニティだと思う。鴨川や小川町の場合、意図する人が誰もいなかったのだから。


では共通の目的とは何なのか。「誰もが家族のように親しく安心して暮らせる社会を作ろう」ということのようだ。


そして、その方法論をサイエンズ研究所で研究し、できあがったノウハウをサイエンズスクールで共有しているのだろう。


だから、やはり核になっているのがサイエンズというもので、そのあり方を実社会において実践する場がアズワンコミュニティであったり、アズワンカンパニーだったりするのだろう。


となると、気になるのが、サイエンズの中身なのだが、僕もそれについてはまだよくわからない。スピリチュアルなものではなさそうだ。誰かが神がかって得たビジョンに基づいて生まれたわけではない。彼らは科学という言葉を使っている。生き方、社会のあり方、人との関わり方を科学するということなのだろうか。


僕の感覚では、心理学的な要素(サイコセラピー、自己啓発セミナー等で扱われる手法)が大きく影響しているように見える。ただ、それも何か固定された体系に基づくというより、白紙の状態で人間や社会を観察し研究する、オリジナルのもののようだ。


ここの素晴らしい点は、自由意志というものを尊重し、特定の思想体系を上から押し付けるということがない点だ。科学と呼んでいるのも、常に観察、実験を繰り返しながら研究し、改善の余地を残そうとしているからだろう。


そして、その姿勢があらゆる所で表れている。ひとつはサイエンズのセミナーを受けることがコミュニティに入る条件になっていないことだ。フィンドホーンでさえも(さえもというのはフィンドホーンは自由意志が大きく尊重されている場所だから)体験週間プログラムを受けることが条件になっているのに、ここではそうでない。


自由に意見を言い合える空間をつくりあげていて、どんな意見でも尊重されるという。それが咎められたり、反対されたりすることはないという。


そのために上下関係を取り払い、誰もが対等な立場で意見を言い合える雰囲気ができている。


また、ここにはリーダーがいない。アズワンカンパニーには代表取締役がいるが、その人がリーダーというわけでもないという。ツアーの指揮を取った坂井さんがリーダーというわけでもないらしい。(実際、坂井さんが指揮を取っていたのかもどうかわからないほど入れ替わり立ち替わり別の人がガイドを務めた)


もうひとつは職場というものが提供され、コミュニティのメンバーが外に仕事に出て現金収入を得る必要がないこと。そしてその職場が心地よい労働環境を提供していること。利益を上げることや会社を維持することよりも何よりも、働く人が心地よい状態で働けるということを優先している。ほとんどの職場が(エコ的な商品やサービスを提供しているような所でも)、理想はそうであっても、二つを天秤にかけなければならなくなった時、前者を優先せざるを得ないというのが現状だと思う。しかし、ここでは、後者が優先できないのなら事業をやめることまで覚悟しているのだ。


また、アズワンコミュニティ、アズワンカンパニー、サイエンス研究所、サイエンズスクール鈴鹿、鈴鹿カルチャーステーションなどが相互につながっていることが、ホリスティックな展開を可能にしていること。例えば、サイエンズスクールのセミナーで学んだことを実践する場があり、そして実践の場で気づいたことがさらにセミナー作りにも反映させられている。


では、ここには問題点はないのだろうか。強いて挙げるのなら循環型のライフスタイルが徹底されているわけではないということだろうか。都市型のコミュニティであることや、自給自足や小さな農ということには大きく意識が向けられていないように見えた。(もっとも、多様なニーズに応えるためには都市型も必要なので、まして鈴鹿のような小都市での試みなら、十分ありだとも思っている)


同時にそれがここの良さでもある。循環型のライフスタイルが徹底されるということは、そうしたことが上から押し付けられやすくなってしまうことにもなる。自由意志を尊重するということにコミットした場合、メンバーが望むのであれば、そうでないライフスタイルを選択する自由も認めることになる。


これは非常に重要なポイントで、自由意志の抑圧は多くの理想郷づくりが陥りやすいことだ。特に僕のような純粋な理想主義者は要注意。(笑)


そして、今の形はあくまでも2011年の時点における途中経過であり、今後このコミュニティがどう進化していくかには、様々な可能性が残されているのだろう。


また、これはすべて僕が2日間の訪問で感じたことであり、実像の10分の1も掴めていないと思う。訪問者は歓迎しているようなので、直接訪れ、自分の目で確認してみるのが一番いい。


アズワンコミュニティ鈴鹿

http://as-one.main.jp/ 



アズワンカンパニー

http://asonecompany.com/ 



サイエンズ研究所

http://www.scien-z.org/ 



サイエンズスクール鈴鹿

http://www.scienz-school.jp/ 



鈴鹿カルチャーステーション

http://www.scs-3.org/