had supervised when he obtained his doctorate in 1932 and who was now in
danger of being dismissed from the civil service because of his “Jewish origins”.
On 1 August 1933, shortly before he himself became a target, Staudinger wrote a
letter to vice-chancellor Martin Heidegger:
Since they work together, there is a strong feeling of solidarity in my laboratory between
the laboratory staff, the lecturers, the assistants and the students. Dr Trommsdorff is a fully
integrated member of this team. Last year, for example, he and seven other assistants helped
me to write a book about rubber and cellulose. This community spirit will be destroyed if a
member of the team is required to leave in these circumstances. (Quoted from [16], p. 175)
In another line of argument, Staudinger deliberately tried to portray
Trommsdorff as someone who sympathised with the Nazi movement, with the
aim of taking the wind out of the sails of those who wanted to harm him:
In all his opinions, Dr Trommsdorff has a very positive attitude towards the state as it is
today. One of his brothers is a member of the Hitler Youth organisation. The position Dr
Trommsdorff holds among his comrades is made most clear by the fact that he has acted as
group leader in military sports exercises. I have discussed this matter with Dr (Ernst Otto,
editor’s note) Leupold (born in 1903, editor’s note) too, who is the representative of the
assistants in the laboratory for which I am responsible; he agrees with my view that the
assistants and students do not feel that Dr Trommsdorff should be covered by the [. . .] Act
(to restore the civil service, editor’s note). This statement was important to me, since Dr
Leupold has been a member of the SS for a long time now and has studied Nazi issues
intensively. (Quoted from [16], p. 174)
It may well have been quite a clever move “to make progress with his own
cause” [16, p. 191] for Staudinger to “assume or use moral concepts followed by the
ruling class” [16, p. 183]. Anyone who believes that “one does not change at all in
the process” [16, p. 191] is subject to an error of judgement; however, like it or not,
one’s own personality is distorted as a result.
Staudinger did not succeed in preventing Trommsdorff from being dismissed;
the latter was unable to pursue a normal scientific career in the Nazi state. “I would
have liked him to have qualified as a professor here, but this is not unfortunately
possible at the moment”, Staudinger regretted in a letter of recommendation to the
British chemist Sir Robert Mond (1867–1938), with which he tried to help his
assistant to make a career for himself in England (quoted from [16], p. 176). Instead
of this, Trommsdorff joined Ro ¨hm und Haas AG, Esslingen and Philadelphia,
where he became Research Manager in 1939.
• “Not only Staudinger was accused of spending too much time abroad; one of his
staff was among those who faced the same charge. Political pressure had
increased in the meantime. No-one needed to be an ‘enemy of the state’ any
more [. . .] in order to suffer professional problems. It was sufficient for someone
not to stand up for Nazi ideology actively enough, ‘to fail to show commitment
to the Nazi state’”, as can be read in [16, pp. 193–194]. In June 1941, Dr Rolf
Mohr (born in 1910), one of Staudinger’s staff, who he wanted to make his
scientific assistant, was the victim. The application to this effect was initially
approved by the Dean of the natural science/mathematical faculty, but the Nazi
Courageous Questioning of Established Thinking: The Life and Work of Hermann. . .
119
danger of being dismissed from the civil service because of his “Jewish origins”.
On 1 August 1933, shortly before he himself became a target, Staudinger wrote a
letter to vice-chancellor Martin Heidegger:
Since they work together, there is a strong feeling of solidarity in my laboratory between
the laboratory staff, the lecturers, the assistants and the students. Dr Trommsdorff is a fully
integrated member of this team. Last year, for example, he and seven other assistants helped
me to write a book about rubber and cellulose. This community spirit will be destroyed if a
member of the team is required to leave in these circumstances. (Quoted from [16], p. 175)
In another line of argument, Staudinger deliberately tried to portray
Trommsdorff as someone who sympathised with the Nazi movement, with the
aim of taking the wind out of the sails of those who wanted to harm him:
In all his opinions, Dr Trommsdorff has a very positive attitude towards the state as it is
today. One of his brothers is a member of the Hitler Youth organisation. The position Dr
Trommsdorff holds among his comrades is made most clear by the fact that he has acted as
group leader in military sports exercises. I have discussed this matter with Dr (Ernst Otto,
editor’s note) Leupold (born in 1903, editor’s note) too, who is the representative of the
assistants in the laboratory for which I am responsible; he agrees with my view that the
assistants and students do not feel that Dr Trommsdorff should be covered by the [. . .] Act
(to restore the civil service, editor’s note). This statement was important to me, since Dr
Leupold has been a member of the SS for a long time now and has studied Nazi issues
intensively. (Quoted from [16], p. 174)
It may well have been quite a clever move “to make progress with his own
cause” [16, p. 191] for Staudinger to “assume or use moral concepts followed by the
ruling class” [16, p. 183]. Anyone who believes that “one does not change at all in
the process” [16, p. 191] is subject to an error of judgement; however, like it or not,
one’s own personality is distorted as a result.
Staudinger did not succeed in preventing Trommsdorff from being dismissed;
the latter was unable to pursue a normal scientific career in the Nazi state. “I would
have liked him to have qualified as a professor here, but this is not unfortunately
possible at the moment”, Staudinger regretted in a letter of recommendation to the
British chemist Sir Robert Mond (1867–1938), with which he tried to help his
assistant to make a career for himself in England (quoted from [16], p. 176). Instead
of this, Trommsdorff joined Ro ¨hm und Haas AG, Esslingen and Philadelphia,
where he became Research Manager in 1939.
• “Not only Staudinger was accused of spending too much time abroad; one of his
staff was among those who faced the same charge. Political pressure had
increased in the meantime. No-one needed to be an ‘enemy of the state’ any
more [. . .] in order to suffer professional problems. It was sufficient for someone
not to stand up for Nazi ideology actively enough, ‘to fail to show commitment
to the Nazi state’”, as can be read in [16, pp. 193–194]. In June 1941, Dr Rolf
Mohr (born in 1910), one of Staudinger’s staff, who he wanted to make his
scientific assistant, was the victim. The application to this effect was initially
approved by the Dean of the natural science/mathematical faculty, but the Nazi
Courageous Questioning of Established Thinking: The Life and Work of Hermann. . .
119