|
Correspondence
| Telegram to LP, LP's reply, Harvard's reply. February 19, 1959. |
LP's reply - Page 01
|
Author: Linus Pauling
LP's reply - Page 01
| Title: |
Linus Pauling's reply to the Harvard Department of Chemistry [1 of 2] |
| Alternative Title: |
Linus Pauling's reply to the Harvard Department of Chemistry, Feb. 19, 1959 |
| Creator: |
Pauling, Linus, 1901- |
| Publisher: |
|
| Date: |
1959-02-19 |
| Subject: |
Pauling, Linus, 1901- -- Correspondence
|
| Description: |
|
| Type: |
Text |
| Format: |
text/plain |
| Language: |
en |
| Identifier: |
harvard01-pg02.jpg |
| Source: |
Master file format: TIFF, 600 dpi, Epson GT-10000+ flatbed scanner. |
| Rights: |
http://osulibrary.oregonstate.edu/specialcollections/coll/pauling/dna/copyright.html |
| Full Text: |
I am pleased to apply to tell that asking my opinion of Francis Crick.
I think that Crick is a very clever and intelligent man-the sort of man who should be a professor.
He has a good knowledge of the field of x-ray crystallography. I don't know how much he knows about biochemistry good sum
of his work has been brilliant. Much of that has been done with collaborators, and might be hard to decide how good the contribution
is that Crick made in this collaborative work. Crick has an interesting personality. I judged he cannot get along very well
as Professor Sir Lawrence bag. I think that, on the other hand, he does get along on the most people.
It is not easy to compare Crick with other people in the same general field. I think he knows much more about x-ray crystallography
than Alex Rich does, and that he probably is more original man. He's not so sound and though as Professor Robert B. Corey,
my collaborator, but on the other hand he is more imaginative and, of course, much younger. He probably has a greater originality
and David Harker, although I think they David Harker knows much more about structural chemistry and Crick does. Parker has
done some find jobs in the field of x-ray crystallography, such at his determination, with two students, of the structure
of decaborane. Harker's work on the structure of proteins has, however, been disappointing.
I may say that if I'm looking for another man to carry on work on the determination of the structure of crystalline globular
proteins (that is, if Prof. Corey without doing this work in our laboratory) I probably would have a strong inclination to
appoint Dr. Murray Vernon King, who is one of Harker's collaborators, and who has been, I think, a large part responsible
for the progress that they made on that project. King, who received his training with Lipscomb, impresses me as being an
April and original man who gets things done.
Crick probably has bought interests, Sophia's biochemistry does, than Kendry, who is, of course, making good progress in his
attack on the structure of myoglobin.
|
|
