Apart from this, Schnabel ([39], p. 230) criticises the fact that Staudinger makes
no mention at all of the research he did that was of importance to the war effort,
something which he had played as his trump card during the time of the Nazi
regime, in the “Report about the influence of National Socialism on the teaching
activities of the chemical institute” [37], which has just been quoted above. In his
review of the “Third Reich”, Staudinger criticised party-political nepotism in the
making of appointments to scientific and university administration positions and the
lack of funding for young academics:
In my practical experience, it was frequently the case during the Nazi period that qualified
assistants contemptuously rejected suggestions that they pursued an academic career and
opted instead to accept technical positions – not just for financial reasons but also and
primarily due to the uncertainty of an academic career because of intervention by the Nazis;
during this time, the institute director was unable to guarantee even the most capable of
chemists a successful academic career, as the official controller responsible for the students
and lecturers as well as the head of the training camps had much greater influence than the
performance of the applicant. A successful academic career was as a result dependent more
on party activities than on scientific achievements. [37, p. 7]
3.11 Veil of Silence
After 1945, it was not unusual for chemists to cast a veil of silence over their
involvement in the crimes of the Nazi regime. Deichmann ([19], p. 414) brought up
this painful subject: “In contrast to prominent German physicists, who professed
after the war that they had not been in favour of the production of the atomic bomb
for moral reasons, neither Staudinger nor other chemists claimed that they were
unable to synthesise an artificial fibre, an explosive, a poison gas or an antidote
because they had not wanted to for moral reasons. They were honest about this.
However, Staudinger (and all his fellow chemists) failed to comment on the
enormous crimes that were committed with the involvement of chemists. [. . .]
The killing of mentally disturbed Germans by carbon monoxide and of European
Jews by Zyklon B (is, editor’s note) not mentioned.”
4 The Life and Work of Hermann Staudinger: 1945–1965
Staudinger’s life’s work culminated in the Nobel Prize in Chemistry, which he
received from the Swedish king on 10 December 1953, 60 years ago now. This was
late recognition for a 72-year-old retired professor, who no longer represented the
avant-garde of his subject but whose achievements are still being acknowledged
today. In 1999, 34 years after Staudinger’s death, the American Chemical Society
paid tribute to his life’s work by unveiling a plaque in his honour at the Institute of
Macromolecular Chemistry at Freiburg University (“Hermann-Staudinger-Haus”;
see Appendix 5). This final section covers the post-war period until Staudinger’s
124
M. Weber and G. Deussing
no mention at all of the research he did that was of importance to the war effort,
something which he had played as his trump card during the time of the Nazi
regime, in the “Report about the influence of National Socialism on the teaching
activities of the chemical institute” [37], which has just been quoted above. In his
review of the “Third Reich”, Staudinger criticised party-political nepotism in the
making of appointments to scientific and university administration positions and the
lack of funding for young academics:
In my practical experience, it was frequently the case during the Nazi period that qualified
assistants contemptuously rejected suggestions that they pursued an academic career and
opted instead to accept technical positions – not just for financial reasons but also and
primarily due to the uncertainty of an academic career because of intervention by the Nazis;
during this time, the institute director was unable to guarantee even the most capable of
chemists a successful academic career, as the official controller responsible for the students
and lecturers as well as the head of the training camps had much greater influence than the
performance of the applicant. A successful academic career was as a result dependent more
on party activities than on scientific achievements. [37, p. 7]
3.11 Veil of Silence
After 1945, it was not unusual for chemists to cast a veil of silence over their
involvement in the crimes of the Nazi regime. Deichmann ([19], p. 414) brought up
this painful subject: “In contrast to prominent German physicists, who professed
after the war that they had not been in favour of the production of the atomic bomb
for moral reasons, neither Staudinger nor other chemists claimed that they were
unable to synthesise an artificial fibre, an explosive, a poison gas or an antidote
because they had not wanted to for moral reasons. They were honest about this.
However, Staudinger (and all his fellow chemists) failed to comment on the
enormous crimes that were committed with the involvement of chemists. [. . .]
The killing of mentally disturbed Germans by carbon monoxide and of European
Jews by Zyklon B (is, editor’s note) not mentioned.”
4 The Life and Work of Hermann Staudinger: 1945–1965
Staudinger’s life’s work culminated in the Nobel Prize in Chemistry, which he
received from the Swedish king on 10 December 1953, 60 years ago now. This was
late recognition for a 72-year-old retired professor, who no longer represented the
avant-garde of his subject but whose achievements are still being acknowledged
today. In 1999, 34 years after Staudinger’s death, the American Chemical Society
paid tribute to his life’s work by unveiling a plaque in his honour at the Institute of
Macromolecular Chemistry at Freiburg University (“Hermann-Staudinger-Haus”;
see Appendix 5). This final section covers the post-war period until Staudinger’s
124
M. Weber and G. Deussing