“A Free Godlike Soul”: The image of William James in the letters of Wincenty Lutosławski. Prolegomenon to the Study of Wincenty Lutosławski’s correspondence with William James

Abstract

The aim of the paper is a preliminary presentation of previously unpublished letters of the Polish philosopher and social activist Wincenty Lutosławski (1863–1954) to William James (1842–1910), offering some insight into the relationship between the two thinkers. In this friendship, which lasted almost 17 years and was based mainly on exchanging correspondence, Lutosławski, known for his love of writing letters, was more active and effusive. The extensive body of letters he sent to James is arecord of private—often on the verge of intimate—experiences and reflections of the Polish philosopher. However, the personal nature of Lutosławski’s letters was a result of his specific attitude towards James, as well as his conviction of the special character of the American philosopher. This article attempts to characterize the relationship between the philosophers, but from Lutosławski’s perspective; it also explores how Lutosławski perceived James and how he was building his image of a perfect human being. The letters referred to in the paper, still not edited, provide ample testimony to the long-standing friendship between the two philosophers and constitute an important source of information about Lutosławski as well as James. This article should be considered as the start of further research on this correspondence.

Keywords:

• Wincenty Lutosławski
• William James
• Théodore Flournoy
• philosophy
• psychology
• yoga
• pluralism
• Polish national philosophy

PUBLIC INTEREST STATEMENT

The friendship between the Polish philosopher Wincenty Lutosławski (1863–1954) and William James (1842–1910) has been known for a long time. Until now, however, the specifics of this relationship remained unexplored. James’ correspondence to Lutosławski shed some light on it, but it was not a complete picture. This article presents, for the first time, the letters of Lutosławski to James. The material presented here would be an important source of information about both philosophers for all those interested in the history of philosophy viewed through the prism of personal experiences. The extensive body of Lutosławski’s letters to James is a record of intimate reflections of the Polish philosopher. The deeply personal nature of this correspondence was a result of his specific attitude towards James, whom he considered “a free godlike soul.” This article explores how Lutosławski perceived James and how he was building his image of perfect human being.

This paper presents apreliminary discussion of hitherto unknown letters from the Polish philosopher and social activist Wincenty Lutosławski (1863–1954) to William James, offering some insight into the relationship between the two thinkers. These unedited letters constitute avery valuable source of information about Lutosławski’s biography, activity, and the evolution of his views, and may also be of great interest for scholars of William James’ life. The letters are testimony to along-standing and close—at least as seen from Lutosławski’s perspective, for James was much more restrained—friendship between the two philosophers.

Although Lutosławski and James’ contacts as well as their rich correspondence have been known for quite along time, these issues have been given little attention by researchers. They were briefly mentioned by William James’ biographer Gay Wilson Allen (William James, 1967)¹ and by James’ friend, the philosopher Ralph Barton Perry (The Thought and the Character of William James, 1935).² Nathan A.Greenberg (In Search of Lutoslawski, 1985)³ presented as lightly more detailed description of the relationship between Lutosławski and James, revealing a rather ambivalent attitude of the American to the Polish philosopher, based on James’ letters to third parties. The first comprehensive study on this subject was published by Franciszek Lyra (The Letters of William James to Wincenty Lutoslawski, 1976),⁴ who was the first to characterize James’ correspondence with Lutosławski. Based on James’ letters to Lutosławski, acquired by the Yale University Library, Lyra attempted a factual reconstruction of the friendship between the two thinkers. He strove to gain a deeper insight into the nature of the relationship, and especially elucidate James’ attitude towards Lutosławski, with some interesting implications for an understanding of James’ character. However, as Lyra noted, his study was incomplete due to the inaccessibility of the letters written by Lutosławski.

The history of this friendship has attracted the attention of Polish researchers only recently, and it has yet to be given acomprehensive treatment.⁵ James and Lutosławski’s relationship was briefly mentioned in the biography of the Polish philosopher authored by Tomasz Mróz,⁶ who gave a short account of the very beginnings of their acquaintance.

To date, it has been most thoroughly analyzed by Piotr Gutowski in his extensive article Wincenty Lutosławski in the eyes of William James (2009).⁷ Rather than merely recounting historical facts, Gutowski expressly set out to combine biographical studies with a discourse on the history of philosophical doctrines as, in his opinion, it would not be possible to describe the relationship between the two thinkers without referring to the doctrinal layer of their views.⁸ In the long-lasting, 17 years acquaintance of Lutosławski and James, Gutowski distinguished three phases that were determined by the themes which dominated their correspondence: the first stage (1893–1898), in which the letters, from both sides, were quite official and distanced, and the topics discussed concerned mainly philosophical issues (pluralism, individualism, etc.); the second stage (1899–1905), in which the correspondence took on a distinctly personal and emotional character, on the “professional” level, the topics discussed concerned an introduction that James wrote to one of Lutosławski’s books; the third stage (1906–1910), when the correspondence of philosophers revolved around Lutosławski’s therapeutic experiments (especially yoga) and his trip to the USA along with the lecture he gave there. Gutowski conceded, that his study was incomplete because it was almost exclusively based on the published correspondence of James to Lutosławski, and only very few letters of the latter (the author did not have access to the entire collection of Lutosławski’s letters to James). Hence, as he emphasized, his aim was limited to presenting relations between philosophers only from the James’ perspective. In fact, all the above-mentioned studies presented the account of the Polish and American philosopher in this exact manner.

Lutosławski’s letters to James, which are now about to come to light and become the subject of systematic research, and which are briefly presented in this paper, undoubtedly constitute a major source of information on friendship between the two philosophers and shed new light on the characters of their authors. Lyra, who had access only to James’ correspondence and hence focused on him, has already pointed out that “among the multitude of his [James’—A.Ś.] friends, acquaintances, and colleagues, Lutoslawski was probably the least congruous in personality with James”.⁹

These letters, which are just becoming the subject of the research, will certainly allow us to show the exact nature of the philosophers’ acquaintanceship from the perspective of Lutosławski in the personal as well as “professional”, philosophical levels. However, this will require a detailed analysis of very extensive and multi-threaded letters of Lutosławski. The purpose of this article is much more modest. Its aim is to present how Lutosławski perceived James. In my opinion, it was this specific attitude towards the American philosopher that gave the letters that Lutosławski sent to him a unique character, making them not only a testimony of friendship and commonality, at least to some extent, of philosophers’ interests, but also giving an insight into Lutosławski’s emotional and—at several instances—even spiritual life. Iattempt to show how Lutosławski, consistently, almost from the very beginning of his relationship with James, built in his letters to him an image of his American colleague as an exceptional person with special qualities that became the basis for creating—as the Polish philosopher understood it—a true “human affinity” between them.

1. Wincenty Lutosławski

In English-speaking countries Lutosławski is primarily known as ascholar of Plato. He gained an international reputation for establishing the chronology of his dialogues using a novel stylometric method he had himself developed.¹⁰ Lutosławski’s seminal book, and at the same time his most comprehensive work on the history of philosophy, The Origin and Growth of Plato’s Logic: With an Account of Plato’s Style and of the Chronology of His Writings (1897),¹¹ made him a leading authority on the subject. However, far from being accepted uncritically, the book triggered considerable discussion and polemics, partly due to Lutosławski’s attitude towards Plato, which could be best described as highly personal. Lutosławski proclaimed the Greek philosopher’s supreme place in the history of philosophy, and treated his thought as a measure of the truth of all other ideas, claiming that “a deep knowledge of the one truly great thinker [i.e., Plato] provides the key to understanding and assessing different authors trying to explain reality in their own ways.”¹² Nevertheless, the stir caused by the views presented in Lutosławski’s book shows that his work met with vivid interest in the philosophical milieu of the time¹³; indeed, he can be said to have made a significant contribution to the international debate on this aspect of the history of European philosophy.

In Poland, before the outbreak of the World War I, Lutosławski’s achievements were quite well known and their importance was recognized, and yet the philosopher was not appreciated.¹⁴ It is significant that The Origin and Growth of Plato’s Logic was never translated into Lutosławski’s native tongue. Mróz writes even that “[…] the interest in Lutosławski in his own country was only a slight reflection of the response he evoked in Europe, which can seemingly be justified by the indifference of Polish philosophers to the discussion on the Platonic issues”.¹⁵ In philosophical circles, he was perceived as a controversial figure: many were offended by his uncompromising intellectual independence, often ignoring even justified criticism. Not without significance was also the fact that Lutosławski, with many advantages, had adifficult character,¹⁶ and his mental ailments (see below) did not facilitate intercourse with him. The rejection of Lutosławski not only by the philosophical environment, but almost by all intellectual trends of Poland at that time was largely due to the fact that—after publication of Plato’s Logic—Lutosławski began to move away from Platonic studies and shifted his focus to building a Polish national philosophy prominently featuring messianism. His efforts stirred up controversy and became the subject of criticism and ridicule. Lutosławski did not stop at that; he sought to foster a spiritual revival of the Polish nation, which was in turn supposed to bring about a spiritual transformation of all humanity.¹⁷ In Poland, he was mainly known for his endeavors to translate his visions into practical actions. Lutosławski founded and ran a number of educational organizations in pursuit of his program, with the most important one being the Religious and Patriotic Association “Eleusis”,¹⁸ a youth organization which he established in Cracow in 1903 with the aim of educating young generations of Poles so that they would become the agents of Poland’s moral, religious, and spiritual renewal, a precondition for regaining independence. Lutosławski defined “Eleusis” as a new Catholic order dedicated to active participation in social life with the object of reforming it both at the biological level and in terms of the nature of social relations. Lutosławski wrote: “Eleusis groups are the nuclei of a new religious order that trains its members in charity by temperance, which radically changes relationships between the sexes by chastity, and thus elevates the race”.¹⁹ Lutosławski’s other initiatives, such as the Order of Smiths, the Forge (desribed by Lutosławski as “laboratoire de psychophisique intégrale”²⁰), the Mickiewicz University, Philaret Societies, and the National Education Seminary, had asignificantly smaller scope and less formal character. These organizations were built by Lutosławski at different times and in different circumstances. Therefore, he adapted them to the requirements and needs of the current moment: their form, methods of operation, detailed objectives and target groups were slightly different at each time. However, the basic goal of all these initiatives was the same—regaining the sovereignty by Poland and then building a strong Polish state—less in the political, and more in the moral, social and spiritual sense.

Being aware of the limited scale of his practical activity, Lutosławski kept publishing a variety of books, articles, and brochures in which he set forth his postulates and outlined aprogram to reform the nation on the physical, intellectual, moral, and spiritual levels. In fact, he presented full-fledged scenarios for those who would like to pursue their own development, and then lead others along the same path. These people were supposed to become, in Lutosławski’s words “the real leaders of the nation, who would not forfeit their nation’s power, but would develop and ennoble it, gaining new strength arising from national consciousness and the formation of the mind”.²¹ Owychowaniu narodowem [On National Education] (Cracow 1900); Praca narodowa: program polityki polskiej [National Effort: APolish Political Program] (Vilnius 1922); Ludzkość odrodzona. Wizje przyszłości [Humanity Reborn. Visions for the Future] (Warsaw 1910) and acollection of essays Na drodze ku wielkiej przemianie [Towards a Great Transformation] (Warsaw 1912)] are just a few of Lutosławski’s works on the subject. It is also worth mentioning the book Rozwój potęgi woli przez psychofizyczne ćwiczenia według dawnych aryjskich tradycji oraz własnych swoich doświadczeń podaje do użytku rodaków Wincenty Lutosławski [Developing the Power of Will Through Psychophysical Exercises According to Ancient Aryan Traditions and the Author’s Own Experiences Given by Wincenty Lutosławski for the Use of His Compatriots] (Warsaw-Cracow 1909), commonly regarded as the first Polish yoga reference book. In the book Lutosławski described an original method of self-improvement, which he claimed to bring perfect health to practitioners, boost their intellectual abilities, and enable unparalleled self-control.²² Lutosławski based his method on selected yoga practices, whose efficacy he apparently verified himself.²³ His discovery of yoga and the beneficial effects of his routine on his physical and mental health became an important subject in his letters to James.²⁴ As mentioned above, social activity and national philosophy overshadowed the philosophical work of Lutosławski, but neither has received a systematic treatment to date. After the World War II, Lutosławski’s philosophical and social views fell into oblivion. He himself almost entirely abandoned writing, and his works were not reissued. Zaborowski points out that Lutosławski was the author of over 700 works in seven languages, but none of them were reprinted after 1939 (except for Plato’s Logic, which was published in 1983 by the German publishing house Georg Olms Verlag). The reason for this oblivion, as well as deliberate omission and marginalization of Lutosławski in this period (it should be remembered that after 1945 Poland found itself in the orbit of the USSR’s influence) were his views: his emphasis on the national issues, the belief in the special character of the entire Polish nation, but also his mysticism and spiritualism, as well as openly declared hostility towards Russian, German and Jewish thought.²⁵ In Poland, the eccentric but undoubtedly multifaceted figure of Lutosławski has only recently begun to attract the interest of researchers.

Lutosławski was a polyglot who easily made acquaintances and got in touch with a very wide group of people whether directly or, more often, via letters. According to Gutowski,²⁶ Lutosławski was particularly attracted to famous, outstanding individuals. When traveling, he tried to approach such people whenever possible—meet them, talk to them, and engage them in discussions on matters that interested him. Lutosławski also had a habit of sending letters with information about his books or papers (sometimes with a copy attached), asking for a review or just an informal opinion. The philosopher also regularly sent letters to scholars, writers, artists, esotericists, religious authorities, and various institutions with questions regarding the issues he found puzzling and wanted to explore. Lutosławski often asked for a confirmation or verification of some information, requested opinions or advice on questions that occupied his mind at a given time, and sometimes sent comments or polemics to the authors of books he read. Lutosławski also carried on extensive private correspondence. It should be remembered that although his social activity was frowned upon by the Polish intelligentsia, he attracted aconsiderable number of faithful students, followers and supporters, with whom he corresponded on aregular basis. The social profiles of Lutosławski’s correspondents were extremely diverse; while many were ordinary, anonymous individuals who may have perceived him as a guru or ultimate authority on spiritual, moral and patriotic matters, others were leading Polish and international personalities of science and culture, such as: philosophers Kazimierz Twardowski (1866–1938),²⁷ Leon Chwistek (1884–1944), Nikolaj Aleksandrowicz Bierdiajew (1874–1948), Hermann Keyserling (1880–1940), Henri Bergson (1859–1941), Arnold Toynbee (1889–1975), and Henry Sidgwick (1839–1900); political thinker and social activist, but also a psychologist, organizer of the first psychological laboratory in Poland Edward Abramowski (1868–1918) as well as a psychologist Théodore Flournoy (1854–1920); linguists Jan Baudouin de Courtenay (1845–1929) and Tadeusz Lehr-Spławiński (1891–1965); Orientalists Andrzej Gawroński (1885–1927) and Paul Deussen (1845–1919); writers Aldous Huxley (1894–1963), Edward Carpenter (1844–1929), and Thomas Mann (1875–1955); painter Wlastimil Hofman (1881–1970), religious and spiritual leaders Mahatma Gandhi (1869–1948), Cardinal Désiré-Joseph Mercier (1851–1926), and Swami Abhedananda (1866–1939, student of Swami Vivekananda), and many more. Sometimes their correspondence was formal, often occasional and short-lived, but with several people Lutosławski exchanged letters over many years, developing deep and emotional relationships. Lutosławski characterized his correspondence as follows:

Over the last fifty years²⁸ I have written more than one hundred thousand letters to several hundred people. These letters were usually strictly confidential and personal, so they would provide rich material for an objective biographer. Their volume exceeds tenfold that of all of my published works taken together. As a writer, I have mainly authored personal and confidential letters.²⁹

Among Lutosławski’s most interesting correspondents was William James, one of the most renowned American psychologists and philosophers. Their correspondence is special in that it reflects a unique relationship between the thinkers, who exchanged letters for almost 17 years on aregular basis and with great intensity (more so on Lutosławski’s side, with James being somewhat less effusive).

2. The letters

The collection of Lutosławski’s letters addressed to James is kept in the Archive of Science of Polish Academy of Sciences (PAN) and Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences (PAU)³⁰ in Cracow. It consists of 49 letters³¹ and 60 postcards, with the first letter being dated 6January1897 and the last one 1January1910.

One letter and six postcards from Lutosławski to James are in the possession of the Houghton Library, Harvard.³² One of those postcards, dated 5May1910 seems to be the last item of correspondence written by Lutosławski to James. The Houghton Library also possesses Lutosławski’s letters to James’ wife, Alice Howe James (née Gibbens)³³ and their son Henry James 3rd,³⁴ written after James’ death.

However, according to Lutosławski’s meticulous record of both his outgoing and incoming mail, the two collections do not contain the complete correspondence between the thinkers as they lack three crucial, long letters from Lutosławski to James dated 4April1904 (Port Said, 60 pages), 6December1905 (Palermo, 60 pages) and 24June1906 (Petersfield, 40 pages). In one letter to James, Lutosławski mentioned them and their content, stressing their importance:

I have read now for the first time since they were written the long letters to you from Palestine and Algeria, on religious conversion and yoga. I think they ought to be published with acommentary from my present point of view. They might do good to many readers, though they would perhaps spoil my own reputation.³⁵

The above-mentioned letters could not be found. Their content can only be partially reconstructed: they provided an inspiration for James’ Presidential Address delivered at a conference of the American Philosophical Association at Columbia University on 28December1906 which was later published as apaper entitled The Energies of Men.³⁶ In it, James quoted several long fragments from Lutosławski’s letters from 1904 and 1905. This paper is currently the only source allowing at least a fragmentary reading of those three missing letters written by Lutosławski.³⁷

The manuscripts of James’ letters to Lutosławski are kept in the Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Yale University and Harvard’s Houghton Library. More than half of the 82 letters were published in full in The Correspondence of William James,³⁸ with summaries of the remaining ones given in a “calendar” at the end of each volume. The Correspondence of William James also included several full versions or summaries of Lutosławski’s letters from the Houghton Library collection; they are the only ones that have been publicly accessible to date.

Moreover, Lutosławski’s collection held at the Archive of Science PAN & PAU, contains a notebook into which the Polish philosopher had 36 letters sent by James from 27September1893 to 20December1900 copied.³⁹

James’ correspondence was far less extensive. Well aware of this disproportion, James wrote to Lutosławski: “I hope that your graphomaniac tendencies will not diminish, for though I can’t pretend to compete with you in the way of answering, your letters are among the best things Ican possibly receive”.⁴⁰ In a letter to his friend, Frances R.Morse, he described Lutosławski and his correspondence in the following words: “So he spends most of his time writing letters and will send 8 sheets of reply to apost-card—that is the exact proportion of my correspondence with him. He has a great chain of friends and correspondents in all the countries of Europe”.⁴¹

Both philosophers meticulously collected each other’s letters. In 1907, James returned Lutosławski’s letters,⁴² while James’ letters were sent back by Lutosławski to his son, Henry James Jr., only after William’s death. Henry Jr. had insisted on getting back his father’s correspondence for several months and in his letters of July8, October27, and 29November1911 Lutosławski assured Henry that he would dispatch it soon, explaining the delay by his intention to copy all of James’ letters.⁴³ The Polish philosopher emphasized that those letters were of special value for him because “they show the influence of Polish thought on your father’s philosophy since he came in touch with it first in 1893 and more specially after 1899”.⁴⁴ Finally, Lutosławski sent back the complete correspondence in February1912.⁴⁵ At the same time, the Polish philosopher asked Henry James Jr.to return all his letters that remained in James’ collection. These were also of great importance for Lutosławski, though for a different reason: “When I seen [sic] your father in 1907 he has shown [sic] me that he kept all my letters and I should like very much to get them back, because I have not written to anybody so much about myself and they will be important to my biographers”.⁴⁶ At the same time, Lutosławski encouraged Henry to “make such extracts of my letters as you consider necessary for understanding everything in your father’s letters”⁴⁷ .

In March1912, Lutosławski received his remaining letters,⁴⁸ which he placed in his private archive. At the beginning of 2000, Lutosławski’s daughter—Janina Lutosławska (1922–2006) handed them over, along with her father’s other materials, to the Archive of Science PAN & PAU.

3. The history of the acquaintanceship between Lutosławski and James

Lutosławski met James in September1893 during his first trip to America in the aftermath of his unsuccessful efforts to secure atenure with the Jagiellonian University. He had applied for the chair of philosophy at the oldest Polish university in great hopes of obtaining that post; he sought professional stabilization and dreamed of devoting himself to the education of Polish youth. When his application was turned down, the disappointed philosopher, decided to leave the country and consider employment opportunities abroad. He was looking for people who could help him find a job, and it seems that it is for that reason that he got in touch with James. Although Lutosławski’s initial letters to James are missing, the fact that the Polish philosopher repeatedly asked him for help in securing employment with an American university justifies this assumption.

Upon his arrival in the United States in mid-September 1893, Lutosławski headed for Chicago to take part in the World Parliament of Religions, which was held on September11–27.⁴⁹ While there, Lutosławski apparently contacted James. In a letter dated September27 the latter wrote:

My Dear Sir, I myself, and doubtless also my colleague Prof. Münsterberg will be most happy to show you what there is to be shown in our psychological department here [in Harvard]. Pray notify me as soon as possible of the exactday of your arrival, so that we may make sure of a free afternoon. I am with fraternal regards yours sincerely, William James.⁵⁰

However, it seems that the meeting eventually did not materialize. On October16 James sent another invitation to Lutosławski, this time urging him to take part in his seminar on the pathology of mind and inviting him to lunch the following day:

Dear Sir, It happens that on Wednesday next I am excessively busy all day. In the evening at ½ past seven I meet some students in the laboratory for a course in mental pathology. If you care to be present I should be delighted to see you. We could then make arrangements for the next day. If you cannot come Wednesday evening, we can meet at the laboratory on Thursday morning. I will be there at ten and Professor Münsterberg tells me that he has already asked you to meet him. If you will come and lunch with me on Thursday at one my wife and I will be much pleased . Faithfully yours, William James.⁵¹

This time Lutosławski and James did meet, although the details of the encounter cannot be reconstructed. Lutosławski was undoubtedly pleased as the meeting resulted in a long-lasting friendship and enabled him to make another journey to America 14 years later. Recalling in his autobiography his first trip and his relationship with James, Lutosławski wrote:

An even greater role in my life was played by William James, whom I met at that time [in 1893– A.Ś.], with whom I kept up extensive correspondence until his death, and to whom I owe my 1907 invitation to Boston to give a series of lectures on Poland at the Lowell Institute.⁵²

It seems that for the next three years the philosophers did not stay in touch. Their acquaintance was most probably renewed by Lutosławski, who sent James a card “expressing the desire to hear his news” at the end of May1896, and briefly informed him that he was close to completing his book on Plato’s logic.⁵³ James responded three months later with a short letter, expressing interest in Lutosławski’s book as well as regret that he did not know more about the history of Poland.⁵⁴

In September1899, Lutosławski visited James in Bad Nauheim, a spa town in Germany. Writing about the meeting with the Polish philosopher to his friend Frances R.Morse, James characterized him as “to the last degree genial”, but at the same time he called him a “wunderlicher Mensch” professing his own specific philosophy of friendship, which Lutosławski apparently presented to James. According to this, the American wrote, immortal souls are the subjects of fate, and the goal of each soul is to create bonds of friendship with other souls, thanks to which each soul can develop.⁵⁵

In 1907, Lutosławski met James again. In the fall of that year, the Polish philosopher embarked on his second, almostyear-long journey to America. This time, Lutosławski pursued two goals, a pecuniary and an educational one: to replenish his depleted personal finances and to familiarize Americans with the history of Poland and the Polish national philosophy that he had developed and was now promoting.

Lutosławski partially managed to attain the former objective as his lecture fees were substantial,⁵⁶ but most of his proceeds were used to cover the costs of his travels and hotels. The second goal, however, had to be redefined. It turned out that American audiences and publishers, on whose interest Lutosławski counted, were not appreciative of his chosen subject matter. In this situation, Lutosławski decided to focus on patriotic and educational activities among the American Polonia. He wanted to awaken the Polish spirit in his countrymen and encourage them to support independence-oriented actions; he also promoted self-improvement by “fourfold abstinence” from alcohol, tobacco, sex, and gambling, and taught “Polish yoga,” a system of self- that he had developed.⁵⁷

James initially supported Lutosławski in his endeavors. Over almost 15 years of correspondence, Lutosławski regularly consulted him about employment opportunities with various institutions and in different capacities (including a university librarian⁵⁸). He was particularly interested in the post of philosophy lecturer as he was convinced that his intellectual and academic competence in the field made him a perfectly suitable candidate (he wrote, e.g., “now I believe sincerely to be very fit for a first-rate professorship anywhere”⁵⁹). Subsequently, while preparing for his American journey, he confided in James: “how happy I should be if you could get for me an invitation to lecture at Harvard”.⁶⁰ Finally, James put an end to Lutosławski’s repeated questions, suggesting a different solution, which the Polish philosopher eventually followed:

There was no chance of the authorities here inviting you to come over from Europe. Only the greatest sommités & celebrities can be so invited, and though you are sure to become one, you are not one yet. Can’t you come at your own risk? You might then, with your great versatility and facility, get a number of paying lectures at different places. But at this moment you are known only as a somewhat eccentric genius of whom people will be afraid. One of our Greek professors told me he distinctly did not wish his students to be put to such unintellectual work as counting Plato’s words etc.⁶¹

Upon arrival in America, Lutosławski stayed at James’ house. In his autobiography he recalled:

When I arrived in America, I first stayed with James, and after a few weeks I rented a room in the neighborhood. I met many people among whom was Horace Fletcher, the author of many works on mastication . At James’, I met other professors of Harvard University, but this did not lead to closer relations.⁶²

Lutosławski had very positive memories of his journey. While still in America, he wrote to James: “I was so happy with you that I had no thoughts that it may end, you had opened to me once again the gates of eternity by your friendship”.⁶³ However, for his hosts, Lutosławski’s visit was quite troublesome. According to Gutowski, James’ wife Alice was not too keen on the Polish philosopher and was probably also concerned about James’ health. Gutowski suggests that her aversion to Lutosławski was attributable to her belief that the Pole was using her husband’s good-naturedness to make money and bask in the splendor of his fame. Lutosławski’s idiosyncrasies, such as nude sunbathing on the balcony of James’ house, scandalized his neighbors⁶⁴ and certainly did not help in changing Alice’s mind. On the other hand, it may be assumed that his eccentric conduct was neither very surprising nor outrageous for James, who himself embraced a rather idiosyncratic attitude to life and, as already mentioned, was familiar with Lutosławski’s rich and unusual experiences. Gutowski suggests that James would treat such excesses with reserve resulting from his pluralistic views and from his own experience with this kind of personality. He knew his friend’s naturist and fasting practices, which were supposed to have healing effects, and looked at them with stoic calmness and some amusement. In aletter written before his arrival in America, Lutosławski enthused about the supposedly wonderful results of naked sunbaths, suggesting that James should also benefit from them. The Polish philosopher wrote:

Now I am again strong and powerful thanks to an entirely new method of curing nervous exhaustion and as you wrote that you also are tired and need peace, I venture to give you an account of the beautiful fruits of my sun-cure . [A]n Austrian physician devised asystem of sun and air cure. His patients go naked the whole day and they sleep outdoors so that every evil poison is drawn out by the sun and by the air. If you sweat much in a pleasant way, that is under the direct action of air and sun without clothes you get rid of all the poisons accumulated in your organism by your unhealthy life, and you feel a wonderful vigour in all your limbs. Now– as I own here⁶⁵ a pine forest on sandy grounds I have arranged very cheaply (for my personal use) a Suncure Kurort. I have taken a small clear place… and surrounded it by a wall. There I remain day and night under the action of sun and air in this beautiful forest, quite naked… . I feel another man. It is quite a miraculous action… . There is here ample room for you and your family. I say, be a man, be an American and do not be afraid of thousand kilometers more, once crossed the sea. Come here, and you will be much better than in Nauheim… I might show you a whole gallery of people interesting to a psychologist if you chose to remain psychologist internally though returning externally to the Adamitic state of simplicity.⁶⁶

Despite many encouragements, James did not take him up on his invitation. He responded to Lutosławski’s letter in asomewhat playful way, and his humorous tone (which did not offend Lutosławski in the least) stands as testimony to cordial intimacy between the philosophers. James wrote:

The cordiality of your invitation is perfect, and it wrings my heart to say no to it, but dergleichen Ausschweifungen passen augenblichlich in mein Lebenschema gar nicht hinein. Your Adamic nudity is no doubt a glorious thing, but I am sorry that you should need it as a cure. Ipropose that your English S.P. should have your portrait as a frontispiece, taken in this state of nature!– it would harmonize most completely with the absolute candor and sincerity with which your soul displays itself throughout the book. I feel hopeful for my baths; but I HATE the curort life and should infinitely prefer your nudity and pine trees.⁶⁷

However, James’ wife was definitely less forgiving. She considered Lutosławski’s behavior unacceptable and ultimately, against her husband’s will, asked the Polish philosopher to leave their home.⁶⁸ In spite of this, James continued to help Lutosławski throughout his journey in America. The psychologist used his contacts to enable Lutosławski to speak at various venues.⁶⁹ James himself was involved in organizing several lectures in Cambridge for his Polish friend. In a letter to his daughter, Lutosławski reported: “He [W. James—A.Ś.] has already arranged two lectures to be held in Cambridge (this is a suburb of Boston with the oldest and most famous university) for free, but very prestigiously—in front of an audience of professors and students”.⁷⁰ As already mentioned, thanks to James’ support, Lutosławski also received an invitation to lecture at the Lowell Institute,⁷¹ which he described in the following words:

William James persuaded Professor Lowell, the president of the institution called the Lowell Institute in Boston, to invite me to give eight lectures in this place on a topic chosen by me… . I chose the post-partition history of Poland.⁷²

In fact, Lutosławski’s lectures went far beyond the designated subject. The philosopher focused more on Polish national philosophy and historiosophical visions than on historical facts. According to Lutosławski’s account, his lectures aroused substantial interest, attracting hundreds of attendees on most occasions. After finishing lectures, he would stay on in the auditorium to take questions and talk to the public, although it was not customary. In spite of this, Lutosławski fell short of establishing longer cooperation with the Lowell Institute. Again, the issue seems to have been his character—the Polish philosopher was remembered as acontroversial and difficult person.⁷³ This opinion was corroborated by James in a letter to Théodore Flournoy, in which he wrote that Lutosławski was constantly excited and focused on himself and his eccentric views, which he fiercely defended.⁷⁴ To Lutosławski James wrote straightforwardly: “Don’t hope for anything more from Lowell, who probably thinks he has done all he can for Poland by having had you!”⁷⁵ Indeed, Lutosławski gave up his hopes concerning the Lowell Institute in particular and the American academia in general and decided to shift his efforts in a different direction. In a letter to James, he wrote:

You say that there is nothing more to expect from Lowell and this is also my impression. I generalise it and say there is nothing more to expect from America for me. I have fought and lost. I did not succeed in conquering Boston, because I remained myself and this myself is not what here is wanted. As to this work among your country men here, it can be done by my disciples. Polish yoga is not for Americans, I do [sic] better to spread it among the Poles of Poland… there is my real field… . I do not yet clearly see my way.⁷⁶

At the end of the same letter Lutosławski thanked James for his support and help. These words of the Polish philosopher show clearly the degree of James’ involvement in his affairs, but also the very emotional attitude of Lutosławski to the American psychologist:

As to you– we shall meet again– there is a permanent link between us, and nothing can break it. I am in debt with you– you have made great efforts, and partly successful for my welfare, but you have given me no opportunity of serving you. The only hope I had was to improve your health. But this is impossible in the present condition of your life. So I am of no earthly use to you, except that you feel free with me as with few!⁷⁷

Subsequently, James ceased to help the Polish philosopher around in America by way of his private and professional contacts. In his response to Lutosławski’s letter, mailed the following day, James wrote:

As regards the general question of what you had better do next, I confess that I have no advice to give. Your lines of activity– Yoga and Poland– are so remote from anything that I have had experience of, that I have no intuitive impressions. All I know is that one can’t build up anything solid all of a sudden… . I can do nothing in the way of help, for I have no access either to Yoga circles or Polish circles, and having seen you started in both those ways… I must leave the resultant in the hands of yourself and Time!⁷⁸

In spite of this, James took vivid interest in Lutosławski’s activity, which the latter described at length in the letters he regularly sent to the psychologist. During his stay in America, Lutosławski sent to James 16 letters and postcards.⁷⁹

After Lutosławski’s return to Poland, for the next two years, until James’ death, the thinkers maintained a lively and very personal correspondence.

4. “My lovely dear twin brother pluralist”⁸⁰—William James in the eyes of Wincenty Lutosławski

Lutosławski was convinced that the American was one of very few people (or perhaps the only one) capable of reading his intentions and fully understanding his thoughts and experiences without judging or criticizing him. Lutosławski wrote: “My dear James, no better New Year’s gift I could dream of than your kind letter of Dec.16th. I see how you are one of the few souls on earth to whom I may write in my own fashion without fear of being misunderstood”.⁸¹ In another letter he wrote: “Yes indeed, you are now the only one to whom I may write about everything personally and universally with the conviction that you will try to understand me and sympathize with my mistakes”.⁸² On several occasions Lutosławski also expressed the desire to talk to James. The Polish philosopher believed that James, due to his unusual sensitivity, had a direct insight into his deepest secrets, which he intimated to the latter: “I need very, very much to have a talk with you. You are the only man on earth to understand certain mysteries of mine”.⁸³ In another letter, in a state of considerable emotional arousal, he asked James: “Art thou still in thy wretched body—or free already and with me? Why, I have no time for letters now, and still thou art the only man to whom I must write about my joyous news. Thou art the first human being… to recognize my power—thou hast predicted what happens now. Thou art the only man on earth probably capable of understanding it. Let everything wait. I must speak unto thee, William James, my brother”.⁸⁴ At the same time, Lutosławski believed that the strength of this friendship would even allow him to talk to James telepathically. He tried to convince his American friend: “My dear J., since Athens I had [sic] no news from you. But I do not want to use any of your time in writing private letters. This is on the whole the loss of time, for we can sufficiently converse with our friends by telepathy”⁸⁵ .

It is not surprising then that Lutosławski confided in James almost all of his problems and dilemmas, and shared all his joys, ideas, and thoughts with him. Lutosławski’s letters to James are all very personal, to the point of intimacy, and very emotional, with their tone depending on the author’s mental state at a given time. As already mentioned, in his letters to James Lutosławski devoted much space to his health problems and the remedies he used, and he also described his financial problems at length, sometimes asking James for help (which the American philosopher at several occasions provided); he also discussed family matters and complicated social relations. Lutosławski kept informing James about books and papers he wrote or published, sent him proofs, asked for opinions and suggestions, and even managed to persuade him to write a foreword to one of his books.⁸⁶ Visiting America, after parting with James, Lutosławski kept him informed of the places he visited, people he met, topics of lectures he gave in churches, synagogues, clubs, etc., the fees he received; sometimes, he even recounted his daily expenses. He also shared his observations on the nature of American listeners and commented on his feelings towards them.

However, the issue that cropped up in almost all Lutosławski’s letters, and was most emotionally charged, was the revival of the Polish nation and the restoration of the Polish state. The Polish philosopher described the actions that he took to that end and complained about the obstacles, criticism, and sometimes even ostracism that he faced. Lutosławski also interpreted his health problems from that perspective: a loss of strength did not allow him to deal with the national case, while regaining it was important so that he could again devote himself to work for his homeland.⁸⁷ In moments of emotional excitement, Lutosławski presented himself to James as a savior of Poland, and eventually the whole of humanity.⁸⁸ Lutosławski attempted to turn this issue, which was so important to him—the loss of independence and the enslavement of the Polish nation—into a topic which, he believed, could interest James as a psychologist, but he also had his own important reasons for it. He encouraged James to visit Poland during his stay in Bad Nauheim. He wrote to him:

I’m glad to hear you come to Europe, because this will give us an opportunity of meeting. It would be difficult for me to go to Nauheim, but it is a trifle for you to come here. I should show you many things interesting psychologically. In fact, you might find here ample materials for your Gifford lectures. The boundless oppression of a superior race by barbarians is a phenomenon not very frequent in the present time ”.⁸⁹

One can guess that it was important for Lutosławski that a scholar with such a position as James became interested in this issue and made it known in the international environment. Showing the misery of his motherland to the wider world was, after all, one of the reasons why the Polish philosopher constantly spoke about the “national cause” during his travels abroad. It seems that Gutowski is right in saying that if Lutosławski treated James instrumentally, it was primarily in these national issues, which were always a priority for the Polish philosopher.⁹⁰

This does not change the fact that James was inspired by some of Lutosławski’s experiments, whose goal was to revive the Polish nation and regain sovereignty in a political sense. Without any doubt, this was the case with yoga. It must be mentioned at this point that there are many indications suggesting that Lutosławski suffered from a bipolar disorder.⁹¹ James himself noticed it. He mentioned it several times in his letters to Flournoy. The American philosopher wrote about the Pole that he is “most lovable man, but it seems to me a mild form of circular insanity”.⁹² This ailment of Lutosławski James associated with his restless nature, mood swings, as well as his excessive activism, along with “profound superficiality which leaves them [people suffering from this particular illness] deficient in moral delicacy when that is most needed”.⁹³ James also suggested this to Lutosławski, signaling that the condition he was struggling with—depressive states, but also moments of euphoric arousal—were the result of “unstrung conditions of nerves”⁹⁴ or that their basis was “neurastenia by no means objectively alarming, but subjectively exceedingly formidable”.⁹⁵ In his letters, especially those written in the period 1899–1904, Lutosławski repeatedly and extensively confided to the American about his dark moods, weaknesses, and lack of will to live. “I feel a fallen angel”,⁹⁶ “life has been an unbearable burden for me”,⁹⁷ “I have reached such adeep level of weakness that I forget everything”,⁹⁸ “I am so mortally wounded”⁹⁹—these are just a few examples showing the emotional states that Lutosławski faced. Because severe depressions which affected him were not alleviated by conventional medicine, he experimented with various alternative therapeutic strategies. In his letters written to James between 1899 and 1904, Lutosławski repeatedly and extensively described not only his dark moods but also his various therapeutic experiments. He also often encouraged James to try out those he considered effective. The list of Lutosławski’s experiences which he mentioned includes, hydrotherapy, magnetic treatments, vibrations therapy, heliotherapy, and various dietary experiments (e.g., fruitarian treatments, fasting) and—what seems to be the most important—yoga.¹⁰⁰ The discipline that Lutosławski discovered as a remedy for mental ailments and physical weakness became in his interpretation a strategy of national revival.¹⁰¹ It was an issue that Lutosławski often mentioned in his correspondence with his American friend, especially between 1906–1910. James was one of the first people whom Lutosławski told about his successes in yoga practice and reported his reflections on the topic. James was also one of the first people whom Lutosławski tried to persuade to take up yoga with the object of regaining health, strength, and perhaps youth, so that he would be able to continue his work for the benefit of others.¹⁰² Moreover, convinced of his competence and having considerable experience, Lutosławski offered James guidance and suggested that they could practice together:

I long to see you. If I knew that we could spend somewhere in loneliness 6 weeks at least talking on Yoga and helping each other to progress, I should gladly cross the sea as a secret passenger… . You are the only man I know who could probably understand my experiences and benefit by that. I want to help you to such perfect health as I have gained. It is really difficult to make [sic] yoga alone and if no guru is to be found, a chela is of great help.¹⁰³

I should like very much to come over next year if this year this cannot be done. I might also visit you without an opportunity to lecture, if I knew that you would give me a sufficient opportunity to practice yoga with you.¹⁰⁴

James never accepted Lutosławski’s proposal,¹⁰⁵ but kept following the experiences of the Pole with interest. Lutosławski’s experiments with yoga, described in his letters in detail and with great candor, made James take acloser look into this issue, the more that the psychologist noticed the changes that the Polish philosopher underwent, which came through even in his correspondence. In response to one of Lutosławski’s letters—unfortunately it is one of those lost letters in which a Pole wrote extensively about yoga (6December1905)—James wrote:

Your long and beautiful letter about Yoga etc. greets me on my return from California. It is a most precious human document; and someday along with that sketch of your religious evolution, and other shorter letters of yours, it must see the light of day. What strikes me first in it is the evidence of improved moral “tone”– a calm, firm, sustained joyousness, hard to describe, and striking a new tone in your epistles– which is already aconvincing argument of the genuineness of the improvement wrought in you by Yoga practices. Your account of these is wonderfully clear… ¹⁰⁶

Lutosławski’s accounts afforded James a glimpse into the “machinery of his [Lutosławski’s] mind”, which was most valuable to the American psychologist.¹⁰⁷ This issue was pointed out by Gutowski,¹⁰⁸ who noticed that for James, Lutosławski was an interesting figure, undoubtedly because he shared his metaphysical intuitions, but above that because he was aware of his mental ailments and changing moods in both short and long and long-term perspectives; he was a careful and conscious observer of his mental life, he tried to modify it, and he was able to precisely articulate his observations and conclusions drawn from them. The letters from the Polish philosopher prompted James to look closer at a subject which he also found interesting not only as a psychologist and philosopher, but also as a person suffering from depression, namely, the energy latent in man that could be used for self-healing. As already mentioned, yogic experiences described by Lutosławski in his letters provided an inspiration for James’ paper The Energies of Men. In it, James quoted several long fragments from Lutosławski’s letters from 1904 and 1905 (the missing ones) as an example and proof that people possess enormous unused reservoirs of energy, of which they are usually unaware. This energy may be released spontaneously at a time of crisis or excitement or activated consciously by means of specific ascetic practices.¹⁰⁹

The honesty and openness with which Lutosławski communicated with James and the confidence he had in him resulted from his special feelings for his American friend. The Polish philosopher held him in high esteem and appreciated his academic competence, but above all he saw him as an exceptional man. Lutosławski was convinced that James intellectual competence was a manifestation of his exceptional sensitivity and unique attitude to life. Commenting on his The Will to Believe, which the American philosopher sent him, Lutosławski wrote:

I want to tell you that your book as a whole is in my eyes a great and good action. Even in these points in which I have objections as aphilosopher, I must recognize the practical, convincing force of your way of presenting your views. Your book is, as you say, in the Preface, not for specialists. It is meant as a medicine to those who suffer the greatest blindness, who do not see that they are free beings, that they have responsibilities and power, that they may and must do something in this life. You fight a real battle for rights and duties of the individual. Herein we belong to the same party with the difference that I call knowledge a good number of those truths which you present only as beliefs.¹¹⁰

All this made Lutosławski see James as aperfect human being, a personification of the fullness of humanity, which he praised with what was to him the highest compliment: “I have read your book now to the end, the highest appreciation I can give of it is to say: you are a true Pole, a free godlike soul, free enough to leave others the freedom of their faith”.¹¹¹ Elsewhere, he added:

I should be so happy to give up every other engagement in order to secure for you another century of healthy and useful work. I have not yet seen another American like you. All others are soulless or make that impression on me. You alone are truly immortal being and you have to teach that immortality in your own most artful but efficient way. The varieties of religious experience are only the beginning… ¹¹²

But I am glad and grateful to you to have this peculiar irreligious experience in visiting America. How different things would be if this country had many men like you!¹¹³

Lutosławski went so far as to claim that James had a Polish soul, which had been accidentally incarnated in an American body, and so he called him an “American Pole.” He wrote: “This American world appears to me ignorant, uneducated, uncultured, childish, priggish, snobbish—forgive me—I forget I am writing to a Pole who believes himself to be American!¹¹⁴ To some extent Lutosławski felt responsible for “James’ Polishness.” In one of his letters, he explained that James’ way of thinking “has come telepathically under the strong current of Polish national thought—you are becoming a Pole—perhaps under Towiański’s influence whom I introduced to you. Iam exceedingly proud of this acquisition—of your conversion to Polishness if Imay call it so”.¹¹⁵ For the Polish philosopher the word ‘Pole’ had a special meaning—it denoted a ‘Spirit-King,’ afree man, always steadfast in spirit, fearless, almost all-powerful, ready to sacrifice himself to achieve his goals.¹¹⁶ Little wonder then that Lutosławski wanted to make James honorary president of the Mickiewicz University—one of the national educational ventures that he organized. He asked his American friend: “Would you allow me to use your name as ‘honorary president’ of Mickiewicz University”? This would mean in my eyes only that you like the idea, that you believe in its possible though distant realization, and that you trust my good will”.¹¹⁷ Although James expressed interest in the project, he did not oblige. He emphasized that he did not want to participate, even in a nominal way, in an undertaking for which he could not take at least some responsibility. He explained:

I long ago had to make a resolve never to let my name be used at all where I was not taking some practical responsibility. My name is already identified with so many unorthodox things, such as psychical research, antimperialism, mind-cure medicine, etc. that if I were now to begin to figure as a Polish patriot the only place left for me in public esteem here would be the lunatic asylum!¹¹⁸

Lutosławski greatly valued his friendship with James and considered it to be in a way metaphysical, or, if one may say so, transcending the reality of time and space. In the eyes of the Polish philosopher, it was an example of a perfect relationship.

I believe in an absolute true love that does not admit a destructive evolution. So I believe in such absolute unconditional friendship or brotherhood which cannot be destroyed by any material fact not even by crime. I love you, I love something which is far deeper than all your actions, a permanent cause of all accidents, a durable similarity noticeable to my feeling, though not definable in words. Love being the highest degree of friendship it must be then more unconditioned or absolute than friendship. And in friendship I have found more than once such links. For such I hold also the link between us.¹¹⁹

5. Conclusions

Undoubtedly, the friendship between the two philosophers—at least as Lutosławski perceived it and expressed it in the presented letters—was special. The correspondence of Lutosławski and James, apart from the aforementioned long, almost seventeen-year duration and regularity, was deeply personal and emotional, despite numerous differences between the two parties, including age, personality, interests, cultural context, and material status (a prosaic matter, but not without consequence). It seems that James was the only person, and certainly one of the few, with whom Lutosławski corresponded in a free, unrestrained manner, remaining convinced that his American colleague as a person with a special character had the ability to fully understand him. The Polish philosopher explained to James:

I like you and I trust you simply because the first personal impression I had from you has been confirmed by the lecture of your writings. I consider you a candid and sincere soul, with great power of understanding others. This seems to belong to the family as I find some of your psychological subtlety in your brother’s novels.¹²⁰

Lutosławski was also deeply convinced that James could properly evaluate his actions. He did not expect, however, a substantive assessment of his works or activities: the Polish philosopher had no doubts about their high value and aptness. He rather awaited James to understand the motivations and emotions that lay behind them, to recognize and perhaps sympathize with his mental states. Eventually, in his relationship with James Lutosławski sought for a kind of purely human bond that James was supposed to be capable of. Lutosławski did not build his friendship with James based on recognition for his aptitudes or philosophical competence. These, as I mentioned above, the Pole highly appreciated and expressed it many times in his letters, but they were not the ground on which Lutosławski sought the American’s understanding. Recalling his first meeting with James, Lutosławski made it clear that this very issue made them very different. He wrote:

William James, who was to become one of my closest friends, was a living symbol of the American spirit. I recognized in him anoble, extremely intelligent and capable man, though deprived of those decisive criteria that gave me knowledge of the history of philosophy. He did not know the Greek language, and he did not read Plato or Aristotle in the original. That alone was enough to make the difference between us. For him, any opinion could claim an equal right to be recognized, and its acceptance or rejection was entirely at its own discretion. For me there was a golden thread which united true thinkers of all peoples and ages, and which created the unity of this philosophia perennis which resulted from the work of many thinkers over the centuries.¹²¹

According to Lutosławski, James was characterized by a certain kind of ignorance, which for the Polish philosopher was in a way a sign of “Americanness”. It meant that on philosophical level Lutosławski did not see the possibility of full communication with James. To his American colleague Lutosławski wrote directly about this inability to “to attain true philosophy”, suggesting that he was not “on the same path” as him. He even expressed his regret at the fact that although he had almost fraternal ties with the American philosopher, he was unable to make him attain this particular “state of mind”.¹²² And yet, on the—as it may be said—human level, the Polish philosopher considered James a kindred soul. In one of his letters from America, addressed to his daughter Izabela Lutosławski, tired of the American bureaucracy concealing—as he believed—common ignorance, he wrote: “At last I managed to get to James, with whom I am supposed to stay, and I immediately feel as if I were in Poland, thanks to the great simplicity and kindness of my host”.¹²³ Paradoxically, Lutosławski, although he saw in James “a living symbol of the American spirit” (which was not acompliment), in his letters to him built his image in a clear opposition to everything that constituted this kind of “spirit”. Lutosławski—which in this context should be emphasized—was extremely critical of the American culture and the Americans en masse. In the letters to his daughter sent from the USA on a regular basis, almost everyday, which make up an interesting account of philosopher’s trip, but also giving an insight into his reflections on the character of the American society and the customs prevailing, there are a lot of critical, if not scathing, remarks about the character and habits of Americans. Comparing them with French, Italians or Spanish and—of course with Poles—Lutosławski described them as crude, occupied only with the material side of existence and measuring everything with the “unit they know best”, i.e., the dollar,¹²⁴ insensitive (unlike Poles) to feelings. He considered them as soulless, “sensitive to small things, and incapable of pure sacrifice for a great thing”,¹²⁵ accused them of dilettantism, lack of mental clarity and, at the same time, excessive focus on creating detailed bureaucratic solutions.¹²⁶ The greatest fault of the Americans, however, was, according to Lutosławski, the “lack of spirit”, the inability to understand and experience the true freedom, and thus the incapability to appreciate the greatness of the Polish nation.¹²⁷ Lutosławski believed that despite his “Americanness” James possessed all these qualifications. Hence, according to him, the friendship with the American philosopher was entirely different from other friendly relations he maintained with various people. Having in mind Polish philosopher’s vision of his friendship with James, it is quite interesting to note Lutosławski’s remarks on his contacts with the German philosopher Paul Natorp (1854–1924), which he made in one of the letters addressed to the American colleague. Despite the great kindness that the Pole experienced from Natorp, which he highly valued, despite the appreciation for his work and the sympathy he had for him, Lutosławski—as he himself recalled—did not establish arelationship with the German philosopher comparable to that between him and James. The Pole wrote: “Now let me tell you my impression after leaving you. I felt very much alone, because my friendship with Natorp is of another kind, we have no fundamental agreement in Weltanschauung. He is German and you are to me a Pole”.¹²⁸ In this case, of course, Lutosławski’s anti-German resentments were not without significance. It is important, however, that although the Polish philosopher liked and valued Natorp, he did not consider him to be a Pole: the empathetic and free soul, the aforementioned “Spirit-King”. Quite acontrary to James, who—despite his Americaness—in the eyes of Lutosławski was a Pole. It is therefore not surprising that it was in his correspondence with James that Lutosławski could allow himself full openness and sincerity, the more so since the American philosopher assumed the role of a kind of Lutosławski’s confidant and guardian, thus confirming his convictions about unique character of his American colleague. James advised Lutosławski on professional matters, as much as he could supported publishing his works, read proofs, and passed on to his acquaintances and colleagues the literature sent by Lutosławski. After all, the success of Lutosławski’s second trip to the USA was largely due to James’ efforts, who supported his Polish fiend almost throughout his stay. Lutosławski himself was aware of this, and he linked James’ attitude precisely with his special character. Resigning from university lectures and going on a trip around America to talk about the “Polish case”, Lutosławski wrote to the American in a slightly playful tone:

I love you but I do not need you and as soon as I discovered that I may be a burden to you, that you might not stand me, that you were not Pole enough to love me under every conceivable circumstance, not always and everywhere as I love you, but only sometimes. I learned Anglo-Saxon reserve and limited my calls because I thought you knew that you are always welcome to me, your company is always a great joy.¹²⁹

The sincerity that Lutosławski allowed himself towards James, resulting from the “kinship of souls” so strongly emphasized by the Polish philosopher, gave his correspondence one more important dimension. For Lutosławski, writing letters to James served as therapeutic self-expression. Lutosławski was very much aware of that as he wrote to James:

Writing letters is my passion and has often brought me to grief because most people understand little of “Stimmungen” - disbelieve unreserved individualistic sincerity without aim and seek an aim behind it until they find something repulsive. I had very sad experiences in that line. Never having been untrue to a friend myself, I have lost some friends only in consequence of this mania of letter writing.¹³⁰ [F]or me letters offer the chief opportunity for displaying my thoughts and feelings, because I have never in my life yet found the right place in which I might be the right man.…¹³¹ I might write to you along letter if I were certain that you would read it. But you are a busy man, and my letters generally contain nothing definite. They are mere pictures of the states of my mind and my stages of mind are not new, they are already known to you from other sources.¹³² I have written many letters which, on an afterthought, I did not even post. If I trust somebody very much, I post almost every letter written to him. As a matter of fact, I do not even expect an answer. I write for my own sake.¹³³

Indeed, many of the letters Lutosławski sent to his American friend were pictures of the states of his mind, even more, they were a kind of vivisection of his emotional life. Pouring his feelings on paper was a way in which Lutosławski could express his experiences and emotions, objectify them and organize in a certain way. Such expressive writing, it seems, was for Lutosławski a natural activity¹³⁴: the philosopher liked to talk (and write) about himself, he also had the need to confide in his feelings. He was also aware of his experiences and changing moods so verbalizing his mental and emotional, inner life was easy for him.¹³⁵ The presence of James, on the other hand, gave him a sense of security and, above all, understanding. Moreover, Lutosławski understood this mechanism perfectly. He himself described it accurately to the American friend:

Now I wish to express what I feel and what I experience, perhaps for the sake of becoming myself clearly aware of it, perhaps in order to understand better that life of wonder I am living now and to increase my consciousness of it. I find I can do it best by imagining I am talking to you, and I fancy you are listening to me with that kind sympathetic face I saw in Nauheim, and I sit down to talk to you. The mechanism of writing is purely additional, my pen writes without any effort what my lips would have spoken were you there. I wish only to talk with you, with you alone, because you alone in this small world of ours may be able to follow the flight I am talking, to grasp every trifle in its relation to the whole of a general scheme of life.¹³⁶

Hence, in his letters to James, Lutosławski referred not only to current affairs or those that took place in a relatively recent time, but he went deeper into the past to organize step by step the key events for his biography and to reconstruct the path that—in his belief—led him to his present point and state of consciousness. In his letters to James, the Polish philosopher also performed a kind of self-psychoanalysis, examined the reasons for his weakness, changes in mood, and analyzed the feelings that appeared in various situations.¹³⁷ He himself admitted that James was the only person to whom he wrote so much about himself.¹³⁸

It should be emphasized that it was the American philosopher who was the addressee of the private and highly emotional letters regarding the matter which Lutosławski considered the most important i.e. the “national case”—the rebirth of the Polish nation (above all moral and spiritual)—and, as aconsequence, the independence of the country.¹³⁹ However, Lutosławski’s choice of James as a witness of his emotional turmoil related to independence issues is in itself interesting and in a way paradoxical. As it seems, the fact that the Polish philosopher kept returning to this matter and his readiness to give up all his personal plans and ambitions for the sake of this value¹⁴⁰; it was one of the few, if not the only, issue that James was unable to understand. Throughout his relationship with Polish philosopher, James tended to downplay what from his point of view was a symptom of Lutosławski’s madness. American philosopher was convinced that in the current situation, as much as he could judge, efforts to regain independence by Poland were inessential and absorbed Lutosławski too much, distracting his talented and even brilliant colleague’s attention from matters in which he could be successful.¹⁴¹ In his letters, James suggested that Lutosławski should focus his efforts on other tasks, which had a much greater chance of success, and their implementation would be much more beneficial. He also tried to persuade the Pole that the excitement and fever that pushed him to act were in fact the expressions of his mental disturbances, hence they should be toned.¹⁴² Lutosławski was aware of James’ attitude and views. And yet, even though he disagreed with the opinion of his American friend, still it was James who became the addressee of the patriotic and emotional outbursts of the Pole.¹⁴³ Thus, for Lutosławski it was not only the letter itself with a certain informational value that was important, but equally essential was the self-expressive process of writing letters, which reached the sympathetic and non-judgmental reader, even if he did not understand and did not share the same values. Such thinking about Lutosławski’s correspondence with James—about its therapeutic character—may be also supported by the fact that the Pole did not expect from the American any definite answer to these emotional letters (whereas in many other cases he clearly demanded feedback¹⁴⁴). All he wanted to know was that James had received the letter and had read it. The above-mentioned letter, in which Lutosławski described himself as the savior of the Polish nation, the philosopher concluded with the words: “If you read this letter, wire at once a few words that I may know that you are”.¹⁴⁵

So far, I have not been able to find Lutosławski’s correspondence comparable to the one addressed to James, which would allow me to conclude that the Polish philosopher established asimilar bond with other people, the foundation of which was his conviction on human affinity between both parties. At the present stage of research, it obviously cannot be said with the absolute certainty that there are no such materials, taking into account the enormous, as I mentioned, resource of the preserved correspondence, which is, without any doubt, not complete anyway. However, I attempted a very preliminary reading of Flounoy’s letters addressed to Lutosławski (I do not have the access to Lutosławski’s letters and they would be crucial), looking in them for the elements that would give me the basis for characterizing the relationship between them. When selecting this particular correspondent of the Polish philosopher, I took into account Flournoy’s profile of interests and research. It was also not without significance that in his letters to James, the Pole wrote very positively about the Swiss psychologist, emphasizing the existence of a kind of intellectual link between them,¹⁴⁶ as well as common, at least to acertain degree, interests in yoga practice.¹⁴⁷

The preserved correspondence includes acollection of 40 short letters and postcards that Flournoy wrote to Lutosławski between 1904–1915. Although they are casual and warm, they are clearly letters of two acquaintances and not close friends. The topics discussed in them cover general matters—professional interests, passions, readings, experiences, but not the most personal ones. Interestingly, the topic of yoga—and they both had experience with its practice—does not appear often, although it is known from other sources that Lutosławski introduced Flournoy to his experiments in this area.¹⁴⁸ This—what should be emphasized once more—preliminary reading of this correspondence, only from Flournoy’s side, who, as one may suspect, was more restrained in transferring his thoughts into paper than Lutosławski, does not allow us at the moment to believe that the contacts between them took on such a private character as this was the case with the Polish philosopher and James. Such a comparative study of Lutosławski’s correspondence with various people, although it would be an extremely difficult task, would be interesting and informative. It would allow not only to characterize the relations that the philosopher maintained with other people but could also show the way Lutosławski perceived James and his friendship with him on a wider background. However, the preliminary analysis of Lutosławski’s letters to James presented here reveal an important trace, interesting for the biographers of both James and Lutosławski. The relationship linking the philosophers, as can be seen from the letters discussed above, was particularly friendly, pointing to Lutosławski’s exceptional attention to James.

Unpublished

From Houghton Library, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.; William James papers, 1803–1941 (inclusive) 1862–1910 (bulk). MS Am 1092.10 (116):

Letters of W.Lutosławski to H.James 3rd:

• 27October1911, http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:FHCL.HOUGH:23863918 [accessed 23April2021].

• 1 March1912, http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:FHCL.HOUGH:23863918 [accessed 23April2021].

• 9 March1912, https://iiif.lib.harvard.edu/manifests/view/drs:52794356 USD9i [accessed 23April2021].

From the Archive of Science of Polish Academy of Sciences (PAN) and Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences (PAU) in Cracow; Wincenty Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155:

Letters of W.Lutosławski to W.James:

• 21October1897

• 1 January1898

• 21November1898

• 11February1899

• 24March1899

• 21June1899

• 29June1899

• 15July1899

• 12August1899

• 23August1899

• 25August1899

• 27August1899

• 26September1899

• 1 January1900

• 4 January1900

• 22January1900

• 7–8November1900

• 8 November1900

• 20July1902

• 8 August1902

• 20September1903

• 19November1903

• 14March1905

• 4 June1905

• 2 October1905

• 29October1905

• 5 May1906

• 6 May1906

• 22May1906

• 4 February1907

• 6 April1907

• 27July1907

• 14October1907

• 20November1907

• 22November1907

• 25November1907

• 7 January1908

• 13June1908

• Letter of W.James to W.Lutosławski, 27September1893 (the copy made by I.Lutosławska)

• Letter of W.James to W.Lutosławski, 16October1893 (the copy made by I.Lutosławska)

• Letter of W.Lutosławski to I.Lutosławska, 14October1907

• Letter of W.Lutosławski to I.Lutosławska, November21, 1907

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This paper is made open access with funding support from the Jagiellonian University under the Excellence Initiative– Research University program (the Priority Research Area Heritage)

Notes on contributors

Agata Świerzowska

Agata Świerzowska, historian of religion and historian of ideas, associate professor at the Centre of Comparative Studies of Civilizations at the Faculty of Philosophy, Jagiellonian University in Kraków, Poland. Her research interests include the theory of religion, myth and ritual, Indian yoga traditions with aspecial focus on the history of ideas and practice in Poland, esoteric threads in the Polish religiosity of the interwar period. She authored, among others, papers: From Rāmacharaka’s “Standard of the Normal Man” to Lutosławski’s Strategy of National Revival, „Anthropos” 2019, Vol.114, No.2, pp.437–452; Szukając wsparcia. Korespondencja Wincentego Lutosławskiego i Hirama Erastusa Butlera [Seeking support. The correspondence of Wincenty Lutosławski and Hiram Erastus Butler], „Przegląd Religioznawczy” [The Religious Studies Review], nr 1 (259), pp.123-138.

Notes

1. G.W.Allen, William James, NewYork: The Viking Press 1967.

2. R.B.Perry, The Thought and the Character of William James, Boston: Little Brown, 1935. Cf. also P.Gutowski, Wincenty Lutosławski, p.128.

3. A.Greenberg, In Search of Lutoslawski, “Revue Informatique et Statistique dans les Sciences humaines”, XXI, 1–4, 1985, pp.123–137.

4. F.Lyra, The Letters of William James to Wincenty Lutoslawski, “The Yale University Library Gazette”, Vol.51, No.1 (July1976), pp.28–40.

5. It must be said that Lutosławski’s life, worldview, as well as academic and social activity have only recently become the subject of scholarly interest. The first comprehensive biography of the philosopher, written based on archival materials and showing an evolution of his views, was not published until 2008 (T. Mróz, Wincenty Lutosławski 1863–1954. Jestem obywatelem utopii [Wincenty Lutosławski 1863–1954: I am a citizen of Utopia], Kraków: Polska Akademia Umiejętności 2008).

6. T.Mróz, Wincenty Lutosławski, p.111.

7. P.Gutowski, Wincenty Lutosławski

8. Ibidem, pp.129–130.

9. Ibidem, p.28.

10. Cf. W.Lutosławski, Principes de stylométrie appliquésà la chronologie des oeuvres de Platon, Paris: E.Leroux 1898.

11. W.Lutosławski, The Origin and Growth of Plato’s Logic. With an Account of Plato’s Style and of the Chronology of His Writings, London, NewYork: Longmans, Green and co. 1897.

12. W.Lutosławski, Jeden łatwy żywot [One Easy Life], Warsaw: H.Hoesick 1933 [1994], p.209.

13. Cf. P.Mróz, Wincenty Lutosławski—polskie badania nad Platonem [Wincenty Lutosławski—Polish research on Plato], Zielona Góra: self-published, 2003, see also P.Paczkowski, Wincenty Lutosławski i polski wkład w światowe badania nad Platonem [Wincenty Lutosławski and the Polish Contribution to International Research on Plato], “Galicja. Studia imateriały. Czasopismo Uniwersytetu Rzeszowskiego” 2 (2016), pp.113–125 and R.Zaborowski, Platon w ujęciu W.Lutosławskiego (1863-1954) i A. Krokiewicza (1890-1977) [Plato as Depicted by W.Lutosławski (1863-1954) and A.Krokiewicz (1890-1977)], [in:] R.Zaborowski (ed.), Filozofia i mistyka Wincentego Lutosławskiego [Wincenty Lutosławski’s Philosophy and Misticism], Warszawa: Stakroos 2000, pp.47-89. On the reaction of the foreign philosophical mileu to this book cf. also T.Mróz, Wincenty Lutosławski, pp.97-101.

14. More about this issue see Korespondencja Wincentego Lutosławskiego zKazimierzem Twardowskim: lata 1895-1936 [Correspondence of Wincenty Lutosławski and Kazimierz Twardowski], listy zoryginałów przeczytali, przepisali, opracowali oraz wstępem poprzedzili R.Kuliniak, D.Leszczyna, M.Pandura, Ł. Ratajczak, Kęty: Wydawnictwo Marek Derewiecki 2017, p.14.

15. T.Mróz, Wincenty Lutosławski, p.260.

16. On Lutosławski’s personality cf.interesting remarks of R.Zaborowski, Przyczynek do analizy osobowości W.Lutosławskiego (6 VI 1863–28 XII 1954) [Contribution to the Analysis of W.Lutosławski’s personality (6 VI 1863–28 XII 1954)], [in:] R.Zaborowski (ed.), Filozofia imistyka Wincentego Lutosławskiego, pp.185-239.

17. It should be noted that Lutosławski flourished at a time when Poland was deprived of its nationhood, and later during the interwar period. Poland had lost its independence as a result of three partitions in 1772, 1793 and 1795, with its territory divided between the Russian Empire, the Kingdom of Prussia, and the Habsburg Monarchy of Austria, and did not reemerge as a free state until 1918. Lutosławski was raised in patriotic and pro-independence traditions. His father, Franciszek Lutosławski (1830–1891), participated in resistance against the Russians, for which he was arrested twice. Although after the birth of his son he abandoned conspiracy for the sake of family safety, he still cultivated patriotic ideas at home. In secondary school Lutosławski was exposed to the great Polish Romantic poets (the so-called “Three Bards”), i.e., Juliusz Słowacki (1809–1849), Adam Mickiewicz (1798-1855), and Zygmunt Krasiński (1812–1859), who became a major source of inspiration for his national philosophy and his belief about a special historic role of the Polish nation. In his autobiography, Lutosławski recalled his school years: “I could increasingly see for myself the unparalleled beauty and wisdom of our Bards. An awareness of and pride in my Polishness and the chosenness of the Polish nation in the history of mankind grew in me” (W. Lutosławski, Jeden łatwy żywot, p.45).

18. The name “Eleusis” is derived from the Greek phrase “eleutheroi laon soteres” (“those who are free are liberators of the peoples”).

19. W.Lutosławski, Objektywne wiadomości o towa-rzystwach i bractwach wynikających ze Sprawy [Objective Information on Societies and Fraternities Arising from the Cause], “Eleusis. Czasopismo Elsów”, 1903, Vol.1, p.289.

20. Letter of W.Lutosławski to K.Twardowski, 23August1912 (Korespondencja Wincentego Lutosławskiego z Kazimierzem Twardowskim, p.278).

21. W.Lutosławski, Sprawozdanie z kursów robotniczych Wszechnicy Mickiewicza odbytych w Krakowie od listopada 1906 do lipca 1907 [Report on Workers’ Courses Ran by the Mickiewicz University in Cracow from November1906 to July1907], “Eleusis. Czasopismo Elsów”, S.Witkowski (ed.), 1907, Vol. II, p.141.

22. For more on the subject see: A.Świerzowska, Esoteric Influences in Wincenty Lutosławski’s Programme of National Improvement. Prolegomena, “Estetyka i Krytyka,” series: “The Polish Journal of the Arts and Culture” (Esoteric Studies: Polish Contributions), 13 (1), 2015, pp.147–173, see also A.Świerzowska, Joga w Polsce od końca XIX wieku do 1939 roku: konteksty ezo-te-rycz-ne i interpretacje [Yoga in Poland from the End of the 19th Century to 1939: Esoteric Contexts and Interpretations], Kraków: Wyd. Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego 2019, pp.147-173.

23. Lutosławski writes about developing this program in the introduction to the aforementioned book, cf. W.Lutosławski, Rozwój potęgi woli [Developing the Power of Will], Warszawa-Kraków: Gebthner iWolf—Gebethner i Spółka 1909, pp. V–XXIV.

24. It is briefly mentioned further on in this paper; for a detailed analysis see A.Świerzowska, Listy o jodze. Wincenty Lutosławski do Williama Jamesa [Letters about Yoga: Wincenty Lutosławski to William James], [in:] A.Gomóła, K.Gęsikowska (eds.), Joga w kontekstach kulturowych 2 [Yoga in Cultural Contexts 2], Katowice: Wyd. Uniwersytetu Śląskiego 2017, pp.67–92.

25. R.Zaborowski, Przyczynek do analizy osobowości W.Lutosławskiego, p.189.

26. P.Gutowski, Wincenty Lutosławski, p.132.

27. This correspondence has already been published, cf. Korespondencja Wincentego Lutosławskiego z Kazimierzem Twardowskim

28. Lutosławski wrote this in 1933, being 70 years old.

29. W.Lutosławski, Jeden łatwy żywot, p.20. (All translations from Polish by A.Ś.). Only asmall part of Lutosławski’s correspondence have been published. A large collection of over two thousand letters (outgoing and incoming) is deposited in the Archive of Science of Polish Academy of Sciences (PAN) and Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences (PAU) in Cracow. For a list of Lutosławski’s published correspondence see: Korespondencja Wincentego Lutosławskiego z Kazimierzem Twardowskim p.10-11.

30. All letters from this collection are quoted as: Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155.

31. They add up to atotal of 420 pages of manuscript. Lutosławski’s letters were usually quite long, rarely shorter than four or five pages. His longest preserved letter is 40 pages long. Two of the missing letters described in greater detail further on in this paper were even longer (60 pages each).

32. Wincenty Lutoslawski, 14 letters, Letters to William James from various correspondents and photograph album, MS Am 1092. Houghton Library, Harvard College Library; https://id.lib.harvard.edu/ead/c/hou00109c00637/catalog [accessed 23April2021].

33. Wincenty Lutoslawski, A.L.s.; [Paris] 14December1910 1910. William James papers, MS Am 1092.9-1092.12, MS Am 1092.9, (4320), Houghton Library, Harvard College Library; https://id.lib.harvard.edu/ead/c/hou00373c04545/catalog [accessed 23April2021].

34. Wincenty Lutoslawski, 5 letters; 1911-1912., 1911–1912. William James papers, MS Am 1092.9-1092.12, MS Am 1092.10, (116), Houghton Library, Harvard College Library; https://id.lib.harvard.edu/ead/c/hou00373c05111/catalog [accessed 23April2021].

35. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 7January1908 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155). James returned Lutosławski’s letters in 1907 (more about it in what follows). I was not able to establish when exactly those three letters went missing or perhaps were deliberately removed form the bulk of Lutosławski’s letters to James. (The excerpts from Lutosławski’s letters given in this paper have been proofread for spelling errors only.)

36. The paper has been published several times, e.g., W.James, The Energies of Men, “Philosophical Review” 16January1907 pp.1–20; W.James, The Energies of Men, “Science” 635/1907, pp.321–332, and more recently, W.James, The Energies of Men, [in:] idem, Essays in Religion and Morality, Cambridge: Harvard University Press 1982, pp.129–146. I write a little more about these letters below.

37. The content of those letters was discussed in greater detail in A.Świerzowska, Listy o jodze. Wincenty Lutosławski do Williama Jamesa

38. I.K.Skrupskelis, E.M.Berkeley, H.James (eds.), The Correspondence of William James, Vols. 1–12, Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press 1992–2004. Letters to Lutosławski are contained in volumes 7–11.

39. Most probably it was Lutosławski’s daughter—Janina Lutosławska (1922–2006) who copied them.

40. Letter of W.James to W.Lutosławski, 31May1899 (I.K.Skrupskelis, E.M.Berkeley, H.James (eds.), The Correspondence, Vol.8, p.539).

41. Letter of William James to Frances R.Morse, 17September1899 (I.K.Skrupskelis, E.M.Berkeley, H.James (eds.), The Correspondence, Vol.8, pp.44–45).

42. Lutosławski mentioned this in one of his letters to James. Reporting on his visit to psychologist Théodore Flournoy Lutosławski wrote: “I have shown him [Flournoy—A.Ś.] those letters of 1900 which you have sent me back lately and he says they have interested him” (unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 6April1907 Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

43. Perhaps Lutosławski copied only selected letters by James, those which are found in the aforementioned notebook of the Polish philosopher. Other copies have not been found.

44. Letter of W.Lutosławski to H.James 3rd, 27October1911; William James papers, 1803–1941 (inclusive) 1862–1910 (bulk). MS Am 1092.10 (116); seq. 3, Houghton Library, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass., http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:FHCL.HOUGH:23863918 [accessed 23April2021].

45. Letter of W.Lutosławski to H.James 3rd, 1March1912; William James papers, 1803-1941 (inclusive) 1862–1910 (bulk). MS Am 1092.10 (116); seq. 7, Houghton Library, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass., https://iiif.lib.harvard.edu/manifests/view/drs:52794356 USD7i [accessed 23April2021]

46. Letter of W.Lutosławski to H.James 3rd, 27October1911; William James papers, 1803–1941 (inclusive) 1862-1910 (bulk). MS Am 1092.10 (116); seq. 3, Houghton Library, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass., http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:FHCL.HOUGH:23863918 [accessed 23April2021].

47. Letter of W.Lutosławski to H.James 3rd, 29November1911; William James papers, 1803–1941 (inclusive) 1862–1910 (bulk). MS Am 1092.10 (116); seq. 5, Houghton Library, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass., https://iiif.lib.harvard.edu/manifests/view/drs:52794356 USD5i [accessed 23April2021].

48. Lutosławski briefly confirmed receipt of the package: “I thank you for my letters to your father, which reached me safely. Whenever in editing your father’s letters you need some explanation, I shall be very glad to answer your questions” (Letter of W.Lutosławski to H.James 3rd, 9March1912; William James papers, 1803–1941 (inclusive) 1862–1910 (bulk). MS Am 1092.10 (116); seq. 9, Houghton Library, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass., https://iiif.lib.harvard.edu/manifests/view/drs:52794356 USD9i [accessed 23April2021]).

49. In Chicago Lutosławski lectured on the existence of an immortal individual Self, which is totally separate and different from all other Selves. The lecture was a kind of polemics with the views expressed on this subject by the representatives of Brahmin thought. Lutosławski recalled: “With the Indians on the ship and then in Chicago, I talked a lot about religion, but they could not convince me of their chief dogma of the identity of all the Selves. I was aware of the complete separation of my Self, which was nothing but myself. In Chicago, I gave my first public lecture in English, it was at the meeting with Dr.Foster, the organizer of the Parliament of Religion. The theme was the existence of the Self” (W. Lutosławski, Jeden łatwy żywot, p.194). The lecture delivered in Chicago was later published as: W.Lutosławski, On the Difference Between Knowledge and Belief as to the Immortality of the Soul, “The Journal of Speculative Philosophy” 22, 4/1893, pp.436-441.

50. Letter of W.James to W.Lutosławski, 27September1893 quoted after the copy made by J.Lutosławska (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

51. Letter of W.James to W.Lutosławski, 16October1893 quoted after the copy made by J.Lutosławska (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

52. W.Lutosławski, Jeden łatwy żywot, p.195.

53. This card has not been found. Its content can be partly reconstructed based on aletter from James dated 2September1896 which constituted areply to it. Iquote after this letter (Letter of W.James to W.Lutosławski, 2September1896; I.K.Skrupskelis, E.M.Berkeley, H.James (eds.), The Correspondence, Vol.8, p.196).

54. Ibidem.

55. Letter of William James to Frances R.Morse, 17September1899 (I.K.Skrupskelis, E.M.Berkeley, H.James (eds.), The Correspondence, Vol.8, pp.44–45).

56. W.Lutosławski, Jeden łatwy żywot, p.283

57. Cf. also already mentioned book of Lutosławski Rozwój potęgi woli in which he presented his own interpretation of yoga. The system of self- created by him was supposed to contribute to the revival of the Polish nation in its struggle for independence. Lutosławski called his system “Polish yoga” and intended to gain supporters among Americans. In one of his letters from the United States (written at the time when he was staying with James) to his daughter Izabela, he noted: “[L]ectures about Poland are only a preliminary skirmish. It is more important to show the power of the Polish spirit through deeds. Well, the main battle in which my Polish spirit challenges America is the application of Polish yoga. If it works, I will do more for Poland than all the lectures. James trusts me and holds a favorable attitude towards me, he wants to help and perhaps will take part in these experiments himself (unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to I.Lutosławska, 14October1907; Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155). Lutosławski’s “Polish yoga” is discussed at length in my book Joga w Polsce, pp.367ff.

58. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 6January1897 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155). Lutosławski wrote: “I had a passing thought that I might be useful for a short time as alibrarian until I could get a chair of philosophy”. He was ready, as he stated “degrade a philosopher to the position of librarian”. James replied frankly and with a touch of humor that it would not be possible: “I hasten to answer your question about our Librarianship. The appointment is not made yet, but will unquestionably be an American, as we think in this country that we have created the organization of libraries for the real use of readers, just as we think we have created the art of dentistry. There isn’t the slightest chance of any European being appointed” (Letter of W.James to W.Lutosławski, 23December1897; I.K.Skrupskelis, E.M.Berkeley, H.James (eds.), The Correspondence, Vol.8, p.328).

59. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 21November1898 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

60. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 5May1906 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

61. Letter of W.James to W.Lutosławski, 4November1898 (I.K.Skrupskelis, E.M.Berkeley, H.James (eds.), The Correspondence, Vol.8, p.449).

62. W.Lutosławski, Jeden łatwy żywot, p.283.

63. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 22November1907 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

64. P.Gutowski, Wincenty Lutosławski, p.157, cf. also W.G.Allen, William James, NewYork: The Viking Press 1967, p.460.

65. The Lutosławski family owned a land estate in Drozdowo near Łomża (north-eastern Poland).

66. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 15July1899 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

67. Letter of W.James to W.Lutosławski, 5August1898 (I.K.Skrupskelis, E.M.Berkeley, H.James (eds.), The Correspondence, Vol.9, p.16).

68. G.W.Allen, William James, p.460.

69. Cf. for example W.James’ letter to W.Lutosławski, in which he wrote: “I had already written to the Chautauqua people about you. I fancy that the very most you could hope from that quarter would be 6 or 8 lectures at 50 dollars each, next July or August” (letter of W.James to W.Lutosławski, 28January1908; I.K.Skrupskelis, E.M.Berkeley, H.James (eds.), The Correspondence, Vol.11, p.532).

70. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to I.Lutosławska, 14October1907 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

71. One of the lectures from the Lowell Institute (delivered on 21October1907) was published in the book W.Lutosławski, The Polish Nation, Paris 1917. This book also includes alecture given the University of California on 9March1908.

72. W.Lutosławski, Jeden łatwy żywot, p.280.

73. T.Mróz, Wincenty Lutosławski, p.143, cf. also a letter of L.Lowell (1May1916) quoted there.

74. Letter of W.James to Th. Flournoy, 3January1908 (I.K.Skrupskelis, E.M.Berkeley, H.James (eds.), The Correspondence, Vol.11, pp.502–503). In aletter to Lutosławski, James explicitly stated: “Lowell will certainly not appoint you again” (letter of W.James to W.Lutosławski, 28January1908; I.K.Skrupskelis, E.M.Berkeley, H.James (eds.), The Correspondence, Vol.11, p.532).

75. Letter of W.James to W.Lutosławski, 21November1907 (I.K.Skrupskelis, E.M.Berkeley, H.James (eds.), The Correspondence, Vol.11, p.484).

76. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 22November1907 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155). Having completed lectures at the Lowell Institute, Lutosławski began an ine-month journey around America. During this time he gave, as he proudly wrote “a hundred dozen lectures in twenty or so places. Ihave never had such an intense activity before, and my newly recovered health has withstood this hard test” (W. Lutosławski, Jeden łatwy żywot, p.290).

77. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 22November1907 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

78. Letter of W.James to W.Lutosławski, 23November1907 (I.K.Skrupskelis, E.M.Berkeley, H.James (eds.), The Correspondence, Vol.11, p.485).

79. The first letter after leaving James’ home was sent by Lutosławski on 20November1907 and the last one was written on his way back to Europe on 16October1908.

80. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 22January1900 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

81. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 1January1898 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

82. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 20September1903 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

83. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 8August1902 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

84. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 8November1900 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

85. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 14March1905 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

86. At Lutosławski’s urging, James wrote a foreword to the English edition of his book Seelenmacht. Abriss einer zaitgemässen Weltanschauung (Leipzig 1899). This work, along with James’ introduction, did not appear until 1924 under the title The World of Souls (London). As it seems, Lutosławski felt somewhat intimidated about asking James to pen a foreword. He felt that this was, at least to some extent, an abuse of his friendly relationship with the American. However, eventually he decided to do it because the publisher considered the book to be too “radical” and made publication conditional on the foreword being written by “a man with a big name”. Hence Lutosławski wrote to James: “Now this is entirely repugnant to my nature to ask anybody such a service. Friends with big names in philosophy have none—except if I am allowed to consider you as a friend, no doubt your name is a big name as it is proved by your invitation to be Gifford lecturer. If I knew that you could write 3 pages of such an Introduction, I should accept it gratefully, not for myself because I trust my book to be a useful blow against many evil powers. But I should never ask you such athing as apersonal friendly service. If you think it is right and well, then only it will be a good thing to do, not to help me, but to help the Truth” (unpublished letters of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 21June1899 Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155). In this case Lutosławski had also objections of a financial nature. After agreeing to write the introduction, James felt obligated to review the English proofs, investing his time and effort and not receiving any remuneration (unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 8August1899 Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155; cf also letters of W.James to W.Lutosławski, 4August1899 and 15October1900 (I.K.Skrupskelis, E.M.Berkeley, H.James (eds.), The Correspondence, Vol.9, p.14 and 340).

87. Cf. for example, letters dated 23August1899; 25August1899; and 1January1900 in which Lutosławski complains on his lack of energy, palsy, dark moods. He wrote, for example: “So [sic] great plans—and no power! So serious promises and no means to keep them” or, in another letter, “[I have to] ring the great bell to awake the dreamers and to kindle the fire which will consume the rule of injustice. But I am physically unfit” (unpublished letters of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 4January1900 and August23 1899, Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

88. This is one of the most emotional letters that Lutosławski wrote to James. To a large extent, it was devoted to the issue of the revival of the Polish nation, regaining independence, and the role which Lutosławski wanted to play in this process. The philosopher wrote: “I have prophesized Poland’s freedom out of 20million Poles I have been selected by Providence to do that deed. Why is mankind so base that there was not one worthier than me? How is it possible that I should now be designed to lead the noblest nation to its own freedom and through it the whole of mankind to a new regeneration. I shall not fail. I shall go straight ahead, fearless. In three years, Poland will be free. In a century Europe regenerated. May I be forgotten, may I undergo eternal damnation if such a thing exists at all, if only I’m allowed to do the slightest step on the true Road of mankind emancipation from Evil” (unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, November7–8, 1900, Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

89. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 29June1899 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155). James did not accept the invitation. He wrote back to Lutosławski that he would love to see Poland, but for health reasons and lack of time he is unable to do it (letter of W.James to W.Lutosławski, 4August1899 (I.K.Skrupskelis, E.M.Berkeley, H.James (eds.), The Correspondence, Vol.9, p.14).

90. P.Gutowski, Wincenty Lutosławski, p.163.

91. In the literature, usually appears a laconic information about mental problems of Lutosławski. More about attempts to define Lutosławskiʼs mental condition, see P.Gutowski, Wincenty Lutosławski, p.145-149.

92. Quoted after: F.Lyra, The Letters of William James to Wincenty Lutoslawski, “The Yale University Library Gazette”, Vol.51, No.1 (July1976), p.36.

93. Ibidem.

94. Letter of W.James to W.Lutosławski, 18August1899 (I.K.Skrupskelis, E.M.Berkeley, H.James (eds.), The Correspondence, Vol.9, p.25).

95. Letter of W.James to W.Lutosławski, 5September1899 (I.K.Skrupskelis, E.M.Berkeley, H.James (eds.), The Correspondence, Vol.9, p.37).

96. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 23August1899 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

97. Ibidem.

98. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 25August1899 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

99. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 27October1899 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

100. Cf. unpublished letters of W.Lutosławski to W.James, for example: 26September1899; 15July1899; 2October1905 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

101. Cf. W.Lutosławski, Rozwój potęgi woli

102. Unpublished letters of W.Lutosławski to W.James dated: 4June1905; 2October1905; and 29October1905; cf. also letters quoted further in this paper: 22January1908; 13June1908 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

103. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 22May1906 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

104. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 6May1906 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

105. Cf. aletter of W.James to W.Lutosławski, 24November1905 where he states that he has read abook about hatha yoga by Swami Vivekananda and tried to do some of the breathing exercises, but as he wrote: “I am a bad subject for such things, critical & indocile, so soon it stopped” (I.K.Skrupskelis, E.M.Berkeley, H.James (eds.), The Correspondence, Vol.11, p.114).

106. Letter of W.James to W.Lutosławski, 3May1906 (I.K.Skrupskelis, E.M.Berkeley, H.James (eds.), The Correspondence of William James, Vol.11, Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press 2003, p.219).

107. Cf. W.James, The Energies of Men, “Science” 635/1907, p.329.

108. P.Gutowski, Wincenty Lutosławski, p.157.

109. It must have been important for Lutosławski. In one of his letters to James he wrote: “My Dear James, many thanks for your lecture on the energies of men. You are quite right to use your authority and influence in favor of true psychophysical experimentation, which always must include some kind of yoga” (unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 4February1907 Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155). In one of his letters to his daughter Izabela, Lutosławski also welcomed the event in the context of his own yoga practice, and then his endeavors in building the system of “Polish yoga”. Lutosławski stated: “At Christmas, the Americans invite me to aphilosophical congress that takes place once a year. Last year at such aconvention James spoke of me—not mentioning my name but quoting my letters in his lecture ‘The energies of man’, which had attracted great attention here […]. Well, they want me to say something about Polish philosophy and the Polish yoga that I create with such a difficulty” (unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to I.Lutosławska, 21November1907 Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

110. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 21October1897 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155). This letter is extremely extensive. Over 40 pages, Lutosławski discussed a dozen or so issues on which he and James differed, or which—in his opinion—would be better presented in a different light.

111. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 20July1902 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

112. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 22January1908 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

113. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 13June1908 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

114. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 22November1907 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

115. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 14March1905 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155). Apart from his works on national philosophy, Lutosławski regularly sent to James Polish literature, that which, in his opinion, best disclosed the spirit of the Polish nation. He also claimed that the philosophy represented by James was, in fact, identical to the Polish philosophy that Lutosławski created. Hence, he claimed about James’ Polish patriotism, even despite his resistance. Cf. letter of W.James to W.Lutosławski, 1January1904 (I.K.Skrupskelis, E.M.Berkeley, H.James (eds.), The Correspondence, Vol.10, p.353, apart of this letter is quoted below). Lutosławski expected James to carefully read the texts he got from him. He was usually disappointed if he did not (cf. for example, unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 27July1907 Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155, in which Lutosławski expressed his astonishment and dissatisfaction with the fact that James did not mention the Polish poet, the “bard” Adam Mickiewicz in his lectures on pragmatism). Traces of Lutosławski’s activity can be found in James’ works (though identifying all of them would require a detailed research) cf. for example, his note on Andrzej Towiański (1799-1878), the Polish philosopher and messianic figure, which James placed in his Varietes of Religious Experience, while discussing an issue of mercy as a factor removing barriers not only between people, but also animals. The philosopher emphasized that he owed this information to “his friend” W.Lutosławski. In this work, in the introduction, he also mentioned, among others, the Polish philosopher, thanking him for “for important suggestions and advice” (W. James, The Varieties of Religious Experience, London, Bombay: Longmans, Green & Co. 1902, p.VI and 281).

116. Lutosławski referred here to the historiosophical poem Król-Duch [The Spirit-King] by Juliusz Słowacki, one of the Polish national Bards. According to Lutosławski, his works embodied Polish national philosophy and the spirit of Polish nation in the most comprehensive and profound way; cf. Współczesne kierunki umysłowe w społeczeństwie polskim [Contemporary intellectual currents in Polish society]. “Głos” 1902, No.26, p.422.

117. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 19November1903 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

118. Letter of W.James to W.Lutosławski, 1January1904 (I.K.Skrupskelis, E.M.Berkeley, H.James (eds.), The Correspondence, Vol.10, p.353).

119. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 26September1899 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

120. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 24March1899 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

121. W.Lutosławski, Jeden łatwy żywot, pp.201–202.

122. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 25November1907 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155). In this letter Lutosławski compared James and James Hervey Hyslop (1854-1920) on one side with Abhadananda and himself on the other. He wrote: “[…] you all have not attained true philosophy. I must say that Abhedananda in this respect—though much les sincere than either of you or Hyslop—is ahead of you and on the same path with me. But why can I not bring you, my Western Aryan brother to this good state of mind!”

123. Letter of W.Lutosławski to I.Lutosławska, 15October1907 (J. Dużyk (ed.), Listy Wincentego Lutosławskiego zAmeryki [Wincenty Lutosławski’s Letter form America], “Życie Literackie” 51-52/ 1986, 21-28 XII (no 1813-1814), p.4).

124. Letter of W.Lutosławski to I.Lutosławska, 6October1907 (J. Dużyk (ed.), Listy Wincentego Lutosławskiego zAmeryki, p.4).

125. Letter of W.Lutosławski to I.Lutosławska, 14October1907 (J. Dużyk (ed.), Listy Wincentego Lutosławskiego zAmeryki, p.4).

126. Letter of W.Lutosławski to I.Lutosławska, 15October1907 (J. Dużyk (ed.), Listy Wincentego Lutosławskiego zAmeryki, p.4).

127. Letter of W.Lutosławski to H.Lutosławska, 22October1907 (J. Dużyk (ed.), Listy Wincentego Lutosławskiego zAmeryki, p.4).

128. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 26September1899 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

129. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 20November1907 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

130. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 1January1899 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

131. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 21November1898 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

132. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 11February1899 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

133. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 24March1899 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

134. Cf. Lutosławskiʼs letter to his parents in which he compared himself to a steam boiler writing that thoughts accumulated in his head which demand expressing he “pours into a convenient form of letters”. Such a letter allowed him to use “the literary steam of thoughts”, and at the same time was a sign of remembrance of his correspondents (letter of W.Lutosławski to his parents, 14.02.1886, J.Dużyk (ed.), Z listów Wincentego Lutosławskiego do rodziców z lat 1884-1886 [Wincenty Lutosławski’s Letters to His Parents 1884-1886], “Rocznik Biblioteki Naukowej PAN iPAU wKrakowie”, Vol.45, 2000, p.299).

135. These are the basic qualification needed to apply expressive writing, from the late 1980s. considered as atherapeutic method, helping, among others to free the writer from the effort of suppressing thoughts and emotions, to confront and understand problems, to assimilate difficult content, and finally to discharge emotions and experience akind of catharsis. Cf. for example, J.Pennebaker, J.F.Evans, Expressive Writing: Words that Heal, Enumclaw, WA: Idyll Arbor, Inc., 2014 as well as many Pennebaker’s papers.

136. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 1January1900 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

137. These kinds of reflections appear in many letters of Lutosławski to James. For the most detailed and “emotionally charged” cf. unpublished letters of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 12August2023 25 1899 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

138. Letter of W.Lutosławski to H.James 3rd, 27October1911; William James papers, 1803–1941 (inclusive) 1862-1910 (bulk). MS Am 1092.10 (116); seq. 3, Houghton Library, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass., http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:FHCL.HOUGH:23863918 [accessed 23April2021].

139. It is extremely interesting to observe the changes in Lutosławskiʼs handwriting and how much it reflects the growing tension and emotional arousal of the philosopher. It refers mainly to the letters in which he which he raised issues related to the sovereignty of Poland. Cf. for example, almost mystical unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, November7–8, 1900, (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155), quoted in ft. 88 of this paper. This letter was marked by Lutosławski as “Strictly personal. Very confidential. Not to be burnt—preserve it for posterity”. Other letter dealing with the same issues and written in the same emotional tone Lutosławski marked with anote “Very private indeed. To be burned” (unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 12August1899 Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

140. Mixed, to put it mildly, feelings that Lutosławski left at the Lowell Institute and the fact that the cooperation with him was not extended, as mentioned above, were caused not only by the Polish Philosopher’s difficult character and his often-arrogant behavior towards his listeners, but also by the fact that in his speeches he focused mainly on presenting his historiosophical visions and interpreting the history of Poland in this specific way. For the American listeners such narratives were difficult to understand, they were also considered as unscientific.

141. P.Gutowski, Wincenty Lutosławski, p.163.

142. Cf. for example, Jamesʼ letters to Lutosławski, December1 and 20, 1900 also 3March1901 (I.K.Skrupskelis, E.M.Berkeley, H.James (eds.), The Correspondence, Vol.9, p.372, 387, 431). The first of those letters is Jamesʼ response to the emotional and prophetic letter of Lutosławski (quoted already several times and dated November7–8, 1900). It was in it that James wrote: “The whole situation is so remote from anything with which I have practical acquaintance, that Iam forced to take a psychiatric view of it”.

143. For example, unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski do W.James, 3November1903 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155), in which Lutosławski tried to convince James that his actions concerning the “national cause” were cared over by aprovidence that will not allow him to go astray or get into trouble.

144. Cf. for example, already mentioned unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 21June1899 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155), in which the Polish philosopher demanded from James aclear answer and declaration on the preparation of the introduction to Seelenmacht. But such examples are numerous.

145. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, November7–8, 1900 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).

146. See unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 4April1904 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155), in which the philosopher stated: “So far I know, we [i.e., Lutosławski, James, Flournoy—A.Ś.] are only three living souls on earth who fully understand individuality as a subjective work to which all objective standards are only approximative rules”.

147. Unpublished letters of W.Lutosławski to W.James, 6April1907 and 16October1908, though in the latter Lutosławski expressed his strong dissatisfaction with the fact that Flournoy did not find time to meet him due to his participation in yoga practice.

148. Unpublished letter of W.Lutosławski do W.James, 4April1907 (Archive of Science PAN & PAU, W.Lutosławski’s Correspondence, KIII-155).