THE CITATION WHICH PRESIDENT COOK OF THE ASSOCIATION of Foreign Student Affairs read at my seventieth birthday celebration in Los Angeles (see page 295) said in part:

You are meeting a major need in our present world and through The Experiment's imminent advance into new areas your greatest service is still ahead.

With all my heart and mind I believe The Experiment's "greatest service is still ahead," and I shall attempt to make that citation both concrete and plausible by saying how I believe the movement for international understanding will develop in the future. I am expressing it in the form of five predictions---things I believe.

I believe that the world is on the edge of a great surge toward international understanding, when the policies of many governments will be influenced by the feelings of respect and desire for cooperation on the part of their citizens. This statement will be looked upon by many as too idealistic and some on reading it will hear the old refrain, we have always had wars and shall always have them.

I am indebted to Dr. Stuart Mudd, one of the four persons to whom I submitted my plan for The First Experiment, for providing scientific support to my incurable optimism that "people will learn to live together by living together."

At the 51st Reunion of our Princeton class he told us about the work of Dr. Theobald Smith, one of the greatest of microbiologists, who in 1924 had called attention to the fact that microparasites and their hosts, over a period of time, slowly but surely acquire a tolerance toward one another. Simply and without using technical terms Dr. Mudd said that the same tendencies toward tolerance are found in very much higher forms of life including human beings. He felt that The Experiment's method of educating for peace was supported by this biological principle.

The Experiment must supply in ever increasing quantities "controlled human situations which will produce understanding and friendliness between people of different cultures in a limited period of time."

I am therefore going to predict what I believe some of the future achievements of The Experiment toward international tolerance will be.

First, I believe that in the next ten years the estimated 400,000 people who, through The Experiment, have converted strangers into friends, will add up to at least a million.

Second, I believe that the representatives of the United States and other governments will in the next ten years be trained to co operate with the people in whose country they are working.

Third, I believe that within twenty-five years the repetitive method of learning to speak a foreign language will develop to such an extent that most educated people in most countries will command a second language and possibly three or four.

Fourth, I believe that likewise in about a quarter of a century the science of human relations will bring the nations to a point where spending billions to kill people will no longer seem necessary.

As to my first supporting credo there are the following things to be said.

The Experiment's steady growth has now been supplemented by other large organizations where the homestay is the central feature of visits abroad, although this movement is, at present, largely confined to the secondary schools. The fad to "study abroad" among colleges, even with the large government assistance that they are about to receive, will remain simply "study abroad." For most institutions of higher learning the need for arranging for their students to earn credits will overwhelm all other considerations. United States faculty members will be sent to guarantee these credits. The students will live in little enclaves of United States culture, well isolated from the living Europe. Living in the same place but not living together is the ideal condition for creating race problems. Some institutions of higher learning have already seen the value of learning to know people as well as facts. It is not unreasonable to expect that in ten years the idea of "learning to live together by living together" will be generally adopted by universities.

Another large group of potential international friends are the families of Experimenters, both those who have seen the results of living abroad in their children as well as those who have received someone into their family. Unquestionably, interest has been aroused in thousands of parents of Experimenters and in other thousands of families receiving people from abroad. These families have already started in a small way to exchange with their opposite numbers. Although this movement is at present unorganized, when we think of the time before 1932 we realize there was not the steady flow of the young back and forth which has today reached 5,000 a year in The Experiment alone.

It is not known how numerous these family exchanges are nor what is still more important, how long they last. The fear of imposing on hospitality is a restraining influence. The movement has all the disadvantages of having no clearly understood procedures, with travel facilities and the standard Experiment preparation. It seems that only an understood pattern is needed before a large part of the parents will be enjoying the advantages that have meant so much to their young people. Although there must be thousands of cases of happy family visits, I am going to cite the case of a three generation relationship between a Mexican family and a family from the United States. It is an example of the closeness which people from different countries can now achieve which fifty years ago would have been unthinkable.

Joan Root wrote the following:

Little did I realize the impact my Mexican trip would have on my life, and the lives of my parents, my husband and my children. When I alighted to meet my Mexican family in Puebla in 1944---the last one off the bus---I was terrified. But it did not take me long to relax and get settled in my new "home." Señora Tagle, my Mexican "mother" was a small person with an angular face and a high pitched voice. She had English language records and we helped one another often, sitting in their formal French style living room furnished with red petit point chairs and gold framed mirrors and pictures, while her daughters would provide background music on the piano. Ofelia, my "sister," was small, dark, and rather quiet. Susanna, her younger sister, was gay and garrulous with a voice similar to her mother's. Alfonso, nicknamed Popo, was a young handsome boy, and my "father" was a large man with a wonderful sense of humor. The family opened their hearts to me. They taught me Mexican songs and dances in the formal dining room and showed me how to shape tortillas, cook rice and prepare chocolate in the kitchen. They took me to mass, to many movies, to bingo games, for drives and for walks around the Zocalo (the principal square of the city where it was the tradition of many of the citizens to take a promenade on Sundays). My "father" introduced me to copitas (little cups) of anise and my "mother" and -sisters" baked delicious pies for me.

When our group of five tall American girls took trips our Mexican "sisters" would sometimes go with us and it happened that Angelitos Guzman, the "sister" of another American, and I became fast friends. She was a lovely looking girl with sad eyes and a pensive face which lit up showing her dimples when she laughed. When I returned to Puebla from a two-week trip taken only by the Americans the Tagles were planning to go to Mexico City and Angelitos invited me to spend the time at her home. Now I had two families!

Señora Guzman was a large woman with a twinkle in her eye and a smile on her face. The children of the family, Teto, Cato, Maicha, Alicia, and Angelitos, were always playing jokes on each other and me. I retaliated by pieing their beds. I loved both families and when I sadly left at the end of August we all faithfully promised to write and visit each other. We all cried inside the bus and they all cried outside the bus.

Unknown to me, that winter a group of Mexicans were arriving in Philadelphia for the Christmas holidays. It was comprised of most .of the boys and girls we had known from the past summer, including Angelitos. I was thrilled. She arrived at my home in the middle of the night during a snowstorm and during her visit charmed everyone with her beauty, graciousness and sense of humor. Since I was an only child, my parents adopted her as their daughter with great sincerity.

Many years passed when we did not see one another, although letters continued to flow between the countries. Then one day after I had married, Maicha, Angelitos' older sister, arrived in Philadelphia for several days. She phoned and stayed with us. Later, Abelardo Sanchez, Maicha's delightful husband, arrived in Philadelphia for a convention and also stayed with us. My father and I played lots of golf with both ,of them.

By now Maicha had seven children, Angelitos three, Alicia two and I had two. Maicha and Abelardo decided to send their boys to boarding school in Philadelphia when they reached the age of twelve. When Cato came he spent each weekend with us so we got well acquainted with the younger generation. My husband and boys became accustomed to hearing Spanish.

In 1955 my father and mother decided they had to see Mexico and the rest of this fabulous family. I was green with envy. They flew 'down not knowing what to expect and were met at the Mexico City airport by Dr. Guzman and Angelitos. It did not take long for the two families to become one. Señora Guzman, Maicha, Angelitos, and Alicia went sightseeing with my mother. The fathers played golf and told stories. The four of them played bridge and took many trips together. On one of these the whole family laughed and sang its way to the famous hotel at Fortin de las Flores, where the swimming pool is filled with bushels of gardenias every day.

Twenty years had passed and it seemed as though Angelitos and I were doomed only to write to each other. My father always spoke of returning to Mexico to see his "brother." Then we received an invitation to Cato's wedding and I sadly tucked it away in my desk. Shortly thereafter my father phoned and said, "We are flying to Mexico next week for Cato's wedding. All your friends will be there and we want you to come."

People can change a lot in twenty years and I wondered what Angelitos would be like. When she and her father met us at the airport it seemed that only twenty-four hours had passed. We drove to Puebla in the sunshine for Cato's magnificent wedding where the Archbishop of Puebla officiated in his comical hat.

The next morning I surprised Señora Tagle. She was grey, had not gained a pound, and knew me immediately. We had a wonderful visit together in the same formal living room which was exactly as I had remembered it. I promised to return to see all the family when we came back from Acapulco with the Guzmans.

What a celebration we had with this delightful family! On the highest hill overlooking the harbor of Acapulco there is a huge house with balconies surrounding each floor, and all the rooms have floor-to-ceiling windows so that one can see the ocean everywhere. There were fifteen of us staying here. The four happy grandparents now had their daughters and granddaughters together. There were Maicha, Maichita and two younger sisters, Angelitos and her two daughters and the two daughters of Alicia. It was a sunny, happy, sleepless week of swimming, fishing, eating, watching the exciting Fronton games and the cliff divers, playing bridge and pinching each other to make sure it was real.

In September Maicha brought her son Hector to Philadelphia. She was as attractive and funny as ever. I had told her we were having a Mexican dinner party and she brought tortillas from her home, frijoles (beans) from their farm, mole (a fiery sauce in which, unbelievably, the two important ingredients are chile powder and chocolate), paper decorations, candy and a game of Mexican bingo. She spent hours in my kitchen showing me how to cook the various dishes. The party was a huge success. In the winter we now make our hot chocolate with a molinero (hand mill) so it will be frothy.

Now the time is coming when my children will begin to make their own Experiment in International Living with the Guzman family and with other foreign children they have come to know, respect, and enjoy. I am confident that what I started by my homestay in Mexico in 1944, and which has produced three generations of delightful congeniality, will continue for more generations.

I have seen that people from another country have an attraction which those from one's own country cannot have. Joan's story sounds so simple and convincing that there doesn't seem any good reason why it should not be multiplied by tens of thousands. But sweeping changes will not be an easy thing to bring about. Negative attitudes toward anyone from a different country in the case of a large part of the world's population still seems to have the almost automatic force of an instinct. It will take a long time to change these attitudes.

Although the following example happened a long time ago I am afraid it is still a good illustration of the parochialism of the people of the United States. I was able to arrange an interview with the educational director of overseas personnel of one of our best organized giant industries. I explained to him that The Experiment had sent a group of college students to Brazil, the country in which he was working, and that in two months, by living with families there they found themselves on the best of terms with Brazilians. I suggested that it would be a good plan for the men of his company who were going to Brazil to work, to learn about the people of that country by living in their homes, learning their language, literature, customs, likes and dislikes. I said that The Experiment would be glad to show these employees how to live more agreeably and work more effectively in that country.

The executive was not impressed. "My friend," he said, "you simply don't understand. When you have done a hard day's work you want to associate with your own kind. You don't feel like 'messing around' with Brazilians." I went away puzzled. I had found Brazilians to be outstandingly agreeable and charming people.

There is no doubt that a start has been made and a small part of the population of the United States has to a very considerable degree overcome its insularity. The Experiment with its thirty-five years of finding homes for people from abroad in the United States has discovered a marked difference in the willingness to take people from another country, sight unseen, into their homes. In 1951 when a branch of the government asked me to find homes for vacation visits of Latin American students, I found that Experiment families reacted positively to a written appeal and 30 per cent of their responses were offers of entertainment, whereas the members of an organization interested in international government (presumably far above the national average in their interest in foreign countries) responded positively in less than 2 per cent of their numbers. The times have changed since 1951 and now it is found that among the small villages throughout the country it will be rare to find one where the people would be completely uninterested in a foreign guest.

For a few people, entertaining those from abroad has become a hobby in which they delight. In the village of Pigeon, in eastern Michigan, Mr. Al Degrow, manager of the Benjamin Franklin stores, with his wife Judith and their three children, have been the hosts of fifteen different students from abroad in the space of twelve years. Moreover, responding to the warm invitations of those they entertained, they took a trip to Europe where they joyfully accepted the extended hospitality of six of their adopted children.

Sarah Rotilla of Niagara Falls, after receiving many guests in her home, took a six-month trip which included Mexico, three South American countries and four European countries, visiting the people that had been her guests.

I suspect that there are hundreds of other families, both inside and outside The Experiment, that have enjoyed similar experiences which are unknown to me. The time is not far off when people from many nations, influenced by similar exchanges, will find it impossible to believe the misrepresentations and the distortions of the truth which have come down to us from the bad old days. Then we will no longer have the desire to inherit the hates which possessed our forebears for generation after generation from time immemorial. The preposterous falsities which the public of one country believes of another will gradually disappear. However, just as the thousands of Experimenters and the thousands of families who received them did not change from suspicion to admiration without carefully acquired self-control, so in the future fears and hates will not disappear without planned effort.

My second supporting credo is: I believe that the representatives of the United States and other governments will in the next ten years be trained to cooperate with the people in whose country they are working.

Franklin H. Williams, United States Ambassador to United Nations Economic and Social Council, came to Putney to be the principal speaker at the installation of Eugene Winslow as President of rapidly growing Windham College. At a tea which Gordon Boyce gave to the college Board of Trustees in his new home, I was surprised and pleased to find that Mr. Williams was well acquainted with The Experiment. Since my mind was so full of it, we soon got to the subject of writing this book. Williams was emphatic that I should not fail to point out that The Experiment had developed a method of training for overseas service that was so important that it should be much more widely known than it is.

The contribution which The Experiment makes to train men and women to deal with international affairs is a simple one, as I have attempted to show. In 1933, it demonstrated both the possibility and the benefit of learning how to develop friendliness and respect for .people abroad and to enjoy the benefits which this produced. Simple as this idea was, it did not gain recognition from Americans in general, and from the Foreign Service in particular, for many years.

Finally in 1963 Dr. John Gardner, formerly the Director of the Carnegie Foundation and now Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, in reporting on the effectiveness of the United States Exchange Program, wrote in a report called A Beacon of Hope the following statement:

To a foreign visitor of whatever rank, the American character and the American people are the most illuminating discovery, and America's greatest asset. From virtually every part of our survey comes overwhelming testimony that visits with American people and their homes and families are one of the most effective and memorable parts of a grantee's (scholarship student's) United States visit.

And I now assume that the government recognizes friendly relations as assets.

Only a short time ago the representatives of various nations looked upon the relations between their own and other countries as sort of an armed neutrality, with suspicion and hostility the normal attitude. While beginning with the Marshall Plan and continuing with the many foreign aid programs, the government policies of the United States have changed to cooperation, as its billion dollar foreign aid programs have shown. Along with this change, but not without considerable difficulty, the old attitudes of suspicion have given way and appropriate changes have been made. For example, tours of duty, as the term of a foreign service officer in a given country is called, is being increased from the two-year period---which was just long enough to make it impossible for any official to know the country to which he was sent---to considerably longer periods.

Even more hopeful, most officers are being taught to speak the language of the country in which they are working. If this trend continues, it would seem that the State Department will decide that knowledge of a country and friendships with its people may actually be one of their objectives. When that time comes, the method demonstrated in this book of learning to work and live with people of other countries will be available to them.

Undoubtedly, the best evidence that can be brought to support the effectiveness of The Experiment's methods is what people who work abroad for the government say about the value of their own Experiment experience.

In the thirty-five years since The Experiment started, there has been time enough for some of the early members to have developed into important public figures. Harlan Cleveland, Assistant Secretary of State and Ambassador to NATO writes:

UNITED STATES PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVE
ON THE NORTH ATLANTIC COUNCIL

Paris, France,
August 23, 1966

Dr. Donald B. Watt
The Experiment in International Living
Putney, Vermont, 05346

Dear Dr. Watt:

You have asked me whether I can trace some connection between my experience with the Experiment in International Living and the other things I have done, or that have happened to me, in the course of a career devoted largely to international affairs.

The more I think about the question, the more difficult it becomes. Was my Experiment cause or effect? My interest in going, in 1935, and Buel Trowbridge's interest in taking me, were naturally connected with the fact that I had spent three years in Europe when I was a child. If, therefore, my going on the Experiment (like most of the things that happen to one) was a sort of accident; at least I was "accident prone" already.

I am not prepared to say that without the Experiment I would have been disinterested in international relations for the rest of my life. But there is no doubt at all that the intensity of a good Experiment experience enormously increases whatever internationalist tendencies were built in when young. I would theorize that for those boys and girls whose first overseas experience takes the Experiment form this is even more clearly the case.

In any event, put it down that I was much more "accident prone" for studying, working and living overseas after that 1935 Experiment than I was before. It led quite directly to my applying for a Rhodes Scholarship, to go back to study in the place where we spent a couple of days on the Experiment trip. It doubtless increased my propensity to travel to the Far East during a later college summer; to get caught in a revolution in Iraq the next year; and to work in Italy and China during and after the War.

A continuing contact with your burgeoning Experiment was certainly what got me interested enough in the problems of "overseasmanship" to spend $175,000 of the Carnegie Corporation's money, and a good deal of Maxwell School time and talent, in producing the (I think) definitive study of overseas service recorded in The Overseas Americans (McGraw-Hill, 1960).

As you know, this study was focused on individual success or failure in adjusting to the total process of working and living in an overseas environment. It is arguable that if I had not been exposed to the Experiment's doctrine, which holds that individuals and family groups are the most difficult and relevant international relationships, I might have focused the study of Americans abroad more on institutions and less on individuals and families. I like to think that our book on this subject, which has been widely used in overseas training programs, by Government, business and missionary societies, has helped spread into everybody's overseas program the spark of truth which you built into a major voluntary program.

I don't know whether it was cause or effect, but when the Peace Corps got going, Sargent Shriver bought a couple dozen copies of The Overseas Americans and asked each of the top members of his staff to read it.

Now that I am once again living and working abroad, I am once again struck by the central importance, even in large-issue crisis diplomacy, of the personal relationships each overseas representative establishes with the representatives of other nations. It is this personal dimension---that special feeling that is produced by mutual visits in each other's homes---that makes it worthwhile for governments to send representatives to a central place like the NATO Council in Paris, or the United Nations in New York, rather than merely communicating directly between Foreign Offices by telegraph or telephone.

So whether it's Faith or analysis which leads me to this conclusion, there is no doubt in my mind that any adult who practices the arts of diplomacy will be the better for it if the Experiment in International Living has had a crack at him in his youth.

Warmest regards.

Sincerely,

Harlan Cleveland

The Experimenter who is most in the public eye is Sargent Shriver, three time a participant. He has the following to say about how The Experiment contributed to the design and managing of the Peace Corps:

In the late summer of 1934, still in my teens, I came home from Austria after my first experience as an Experimenter. What I had witnessed there left a marked and lasting impression upon me.

I had seen a continuous procession of loud, brash, condescending tourists, contemptuous alike of the language, customs and culture of their hosts, leaving in their wake a shocking impression of my country. In strikingly sharp contrast, my own Experiment group had gone to Austria with the express purpose of learning as much as possible about her people and her customs, absorbing themselves into family life, making fast friends wherever they went-not for a summer-but for a lifetime.

Happily, this was not to be my last Experiment. Two years later I was the assistant leader of a group to Germany, and in 1939 I led my own Experiment group to France. It is not too much to say that it was out of these rich experiences; out of the startling contrasts I had observed; out of our sometimes frustrating, always challenging efforts toward mutual understanding; out of our rewarding opportunity to wear another man's shoes for a while---that I developed the attitudes and the convictions which would one day be put to a world-wide test.

The Experiment fitted me well for the role I was to play in carrying out President Kennedy's then explosively startling proposal to launch the Peace Corps. For while most of us initially involved were still absorbed by its awesome over-all implications, I had already commenced to frame certain premises on which I was not open to argument.

For example, I was convinced that volunteers must learn the language of the country to which they were assigned; must serve in but one country; must have no more money in their pockets than their counterparts, and must find their pleasures in the local way. If, to my fellow Experiment alumni, there is a familiar ring to these precepts, it is because each of them has been a built-in feature of every Experiment program since its founding in 1932!

The Peace Corps' roots are set deep in Experiment philosophy and in Experiment practice. It is natural and understandable that I should be proud of the organization which I once served and which, in so many effective ways, continues to serve me and our country so remarkably well.

Eric Sturley, four times an Experimenter or an Experiment Leader, graduated from Yale University in 1936. In a letter to me of November 23, 1965, from Bamako, Mali, he indicates that in war and peace his Experiment experience was valuable to his country.

Dear Dr. Watt:

I am Chief of party of the Southern Illinois University Contract Team, AID, that is working in the Ministry of Education to help the Malians develop their educational system. We have experts in textbook writing, guidance, curriculum development, and library work and hope soon to have someone in audio-visual work in English, and an extension man.

Of course my work with The Experiment was instrumental in getting me into this. At SIU I was a professor of mathematics and assistant dean of the Graduate School; when they found that I could speak French and that Bette and I wanted to go to Mali, there was no question. It was 20 years since I had been in France, but with some intensive study I lucked through with a 3 rating on the Foreign Service Institute examination.

As you remember, my first experience with The Experiment was as assistant to my mother, who led the 1934 Freiburg in Breisgau group. On the ship returning to the United States, you asked me if I would like to go to France the next summer. In spite of my feeble high school French, I jumped at the chance, took a course in French literature that winter at Yale, and I had a wonderful summer as assistant to Mrs. H. V. Kaltenborn in the Bourg-en-Bresse group. After two more summers with the Pau 1936 and 1937 groups, my French was fluent, though not always correct.

When the war came, after a variety of jobs with the army, I found myself censoring German prisoner mail at Fedala near Casablanca. Even here my knowledge of French and France was useful; large numbers of Frenchmen were escaping through Spain to Morocco to join the Free French Forces. I was assigned to interrogate all who came from the Mediterranean coast and to find out all I could about the German defenses. This was a fascinating job, and needless to say, some remarkable people went through our office. Later on, just before the seventh army left Italy, I was assigned as a liaison officer with the seventh infantry regiment for the landing and campaign in Southern France. My job was liaison with the F.F.I. or anyone else who would give us information about the enemy. When we landed they gave me four soldiers to act as a bodyguard; the regimental commander thought that the French partisans might try to assassinate me. I sent three of the men back to their units and kept one with me to carry messages to the regiment.

HARLAN CLEVELAND

STURLEY DISCUSSES WITH THE DIRECTOR DE L'INSTITUT PEDAGOGIQUE NATIONALE, THE MODERNIZING OF THE SCHOOL SYSTEM IN MALI

Of course, the most obvious advantage of The Experiment experience was being able to speak and understand colloquial French, but a second equally important aspect was The Experiment point of view. Often the French underground people were mistrustful; they had had their difficulties with German agents. Persuading them that I was not a German spy involved more than credentials which could be made up, but required a feeling for France and the French conscience that could best be acquired by the type of experience that at that time was a monopoly of The Experiment.

In Mali we are working with French and Malian educators. Most of the Malians have been educated in France or in French schools in Mali. We are dealing with an ancient culture that dates back to the Ghana and Mali empires with an overlay of French sophistication. It takes the background of Experiment training to steer a policy course between the Malians' desire to combat neo-colonialism and their intellectual dependence on France.

One of the sad things here is the attitude of many of the American personnel in the Embassy and AID. There are a few outstanding people who are making a real effort to understand the country and its problems and to help, but a great many should have a two-week orientation course in Putney on how to behave in another country. I am surprised that the State Department doesn't do this. Of course, the number of American missions abroad has increased so fast in the last few years that it is very difficult to find personnel to staff them, but even some of the old timers would make poor Experimenters. One of the next great tasks for The Experiment should be to infiltrate the State Department. I realize that a start has been made (Shriver, Cleveland, etc.), but it should be done at all levels to indoctrinate in The Experiment outlook.

When we received our orientation in Washington before leaving for Mali, we were told what AID is doing in Mali and what a correct American attitude is vis-à-vis other countries that have missions here, but nothing was told us of Malian history and culture, the feelings and aspirations of the people.

A few months ago I was at the airport seeing a friend off. Prime Minister Nyerere of Tanzania was leaving on the same plane, and Prime Minister Keita and other Malian dignitaries were there to see him off. While the band was playing the Malian and Tanzanian anthems, a group of people from the United States embassy were singing loud farewells to a member of the United States military mission who was also leaving. The Malians present were too polite to comment.

Bette sends her best wishes; please remember us to Mrs. Watt.

Sincerely,

/s/ Eric Sturley

My third supporting credo is: I believe that within twenty-five years the repetitive method of learning to speak a foreign language will develop to such an extent that educated people in most countries will command a second language and possibly three or four.

Since we were bringing groups from many different countries to the United States it did not take long to find out that in some countries the ability to speak English was strong and in others weak. The students of small countries like Holland, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland and, though it was not small, Germany, were quite fluent in English, French and German when they went abroad. Their university students generally could speak, read and write two if not three foreign languages. In contrast, the French, English and American students could scarcely speak any foreign language at all. This was in spite of the fact that, for example, the French educational system is demanding to the point of damaging the children's health. Once I asked a French student how it was that after studying English, so hard for so many years they did not speak it. He replied that they studied literature. I suspect that their instructors also could not speak English which was probably the reason for studying literature. The point of this tale is that the countries that needed to know foreign languages learned them, while the French, the British and the people of the United States who could depend on the population abroad knowing their language learned very little.

Then, in the year 1964, following a well known trend, The Experiment achieved what I consider nothing less than an educational miracle. In the summer of that year Experimenters learned to speak Spanish, Italian or even the difficult German in ten weeks' time. A new method of learning language had been perfected. Abandoning the academic approach the student simply learned as a baby learns, repeating the phrases that they hear---short ones at first and then gradually longer and longer ones. For three weeks this exhausting process went on for six hours a day and when The Experimenters arrived in their European homes they could carry on a simple conversation. They had set out to learn to speak and speak they could. They knew little about grammar nor could they read or write. The three weeks of intensive work not only gave them a vocabulary of expressions but equally important a tremendous desire to learn more. After seven weeks in their homes they were carrying on conversations at a relatively complicated level. Moreover, during their homestay they learned both to read and to write without any instruction.

All this is in high contrast to the years of depressing drudgery of the old language teaching methods. My own case, although it happened forty years before the new methods were discovered, is a good example. I studied French for four years in school and college and when I went to France could scarcely express myself at all. I was no exception. And the worst thing about it was that the drudgery through which I had gone gave me no enthusiasm to learn a language. However, I learned German while living with a German family in the university city of Goettingen. The work was just as hard as learning French but it was associated with pleasant times: a month in a family and a second month walking and climbing in the mountains. Having learned German in this way it was simple to learn the very much easier Spanish while enjoying myself in Spain, and Mexico and the other countries of Latin America.

There may be certain disadvantages to learning a language only by speaking it, although I have never felt them. I had an experience in Austria, in the summer of 1937, which my associates found amusing. Experiment groups had been visiting the delightful Austrian mountain village of Bad Aussee for five years. A schoolteacher of that town, Hans Gielge, was a master of the folk arts. He not only taught us games, dances and singing, but we celebrated our fifth anniversary in the town in a way that only he could have brought about. He wrote the text and music of a chorale in eight voices, taught the Austrians and Americans to sing it, and finally conducted it at the celebration. It was my job to thank Herr Gielge and the people of Bad Aussee for making the celebration possible. My speech was written by two professors of German. I reached the platform and made the decision that had gradually been growing upon me. The words of the speech they had written were too stiff and formal. They didn't sound like me at all. So I announced in German that I was going to speak, "Aus dem herz" (from the heart) and proceeded to do so entirely without the benefit of grammar. The Austrian people were very much amused but understood both my German and my effort to be friendly. What more was needed?

Leslie and I spent many happy summers in Germany and Austria. We learned to enjoy the German and Austrian people. Unfortunately it was a most unsuitable time to be friendly to the Germans since the Second World War was upon us. There is no doubt that I made myself unpopular by not hating the Germans as everyone was supposed to do. In the long run it seems to have done The Experiment no harm.

Summer after summer we had the privilege of living with families somewhere in Europe. After Germany and Austria came England, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, and finally Spain and Italy. When I went to Asia I found there the same common humanity which in Europe could be counted upon to provide a warm welcome to The Experimenters and to us. The people of Asia wanted the same things from life as the Europeans. They wanted to offer us their hospitality; they wanted to receive from us our interested attention and respect.

The millions of tourists who are taking their vacations in countries where their own language is not spoken are for the most part unable to communicate with anyone except guides and hotel servants. Gradually these tourists will learn what they are missing---the opportunity to exchange ideas with people who are much more like themselves than they ever dreamed. The opportunity to add a new culture, another window through which to look at the world and to enjoy its people is now available at little cost in time and energy.

Knowing how to speak the language of the country which we visit makes the difference between an observer and a participant. I remember two experiences which made the difference clear. In the first case I went to hear a Russian concert. The singers looked interesting and their songs were attractive but my inability to understand them made me an observer, like a tourist who gazes at an historic monument without enough information about it to make it something to remember. Shortly after the Russian concert I attended the farewell party of a group of Mexicans in the United States. When they began to dance and sing, with a feeling of warmth and pride I was delighted to show off that I could sing their songs and dance their dances. I could participate.

It is hard for me to believe that the death knell of the old grammatical approach is not imminent when through the new method one can learn a language quickly and enjoy doing it. Moreover, in addition to making it possible to enjoy the people of a country, living with them also makes it possible to read their literature with an understanding that was not possible before. Until a student of literature acquires a "vocabulary" of the customs of another country, no matter how many years he studies it, he will not be able to understand it in the way that the people of the country understand it. There is no dictionary that can give the exact equivalent for many foreign words and expressions simply because the concept or the custom does not exist in the reader's language. I crave for other people the enjoyment which I get from being a participant when I live in countries where French, German or Spanish is spoken.

My fourth supporting credo is: I believe that likewise in about a quarter of a century the science of human relations will bring the nations to a point where spending billions to kill people will no longer seem necessary.

I cannot understand the childish competition of reaching for the moon in which our President, our Congress and probably a majority of our people are interested so keenly. The most recent triumph in this field, which must have cost the Russians billions of dollars badly needed for other things, was to discover that the moon was a ball of dust. Using machinery of unbelievable delicacy and astronomical cost, we added to the world's knowledge by proving that the dust was yellow. The physical and the natural sciences have developed within recent years to a degree that the scientists of the past generation did not dream possible. In these fields our extraordinary progress goes forward and since we seem to be inextricably involved in competing with the Russians in this arms race the Army and the Navy are supporting immense programs of research in these sciences.

The mental and the social sciences have always trailed far behind and continue to trail even farther. The science of human relations is so much of a beginner that by some it is not considered a science at all and yet I venture to make the assertion that the people of our country and the world would live very much happier lives if a small fraction of the funds for defense and offense could be spent on helping us to understand ourselves better than we do now. I believe that human communication will overcome the traditional fears and make unnecessary the present custom of spending the greater part of our national income on war.

Of the four requirements needed to teach the people of the world to live peacefully together three already exist. The economic progress which all the continents have made in the past fifteen years has meant that the numbers of people able to visit foreign countries has multiplied by a large factor. The speed, the economy and the safety of air travel has made it possible to travel in an hour's time what a short time ago required a day, a week or a month. I have tried to demonstrate that we have good reasons to expect that the ability to communicate in foreign languages will go ahead with an ever-increasing velocity until it will become possible for the waves of travelers to go to all the countries of the world not as tourists, sitting and looking, but travelers who participate in the thoughts and activities of their foreign hosts.

The fourth factor is not well known and its full name, while relatively clumsy, I think can be correctly stated as "the individual reflexive study of international human relations." This book has made an effort to describe what the wordy title means. Briefly, it is the knowledge of how to live in foreign countries.

The word "individual" means, from the point of view of education, that there is no such thing as a nation or a state. The only working relationship which exists in human society is that between one human unit and another. To talk about a city doing something is to produce confusion because the only effective doer is the human being and we must keep this fact in mind if we do not want to talk nonsense. There is no such thing as educating a school grade, a village, a town, but only the members of the groups one by one.

The word "reflexive" is used to indicate that knowledge is of value only when the one who possesses it relates and applies its meanings to himself. What good is a saxophone or a computer to a person who cannot use them? Human relations when concerned with two individuals from different countries has been a lifelong preoccupation of mine. In my lifetime it has become an interest of perhaps half a million people who were not interested before. Likewise in my lifetime a modest body of knowledge has been created which needs to be vastly increased. To persons interested in international understanding I recommend the simple recipe printed in Appendix D, page 335, at the end of this book. It needs to be much expanded through the active interest of thousands in all countries. I earnestly hope that this book will prove to be sound guidance to many people and many organizations now floundering in their efforts to create more respect and trust between people. The stumbling block is the fact that in general, under the influence of our universities, people are led to believe that knowledge is the greatest good in bringing about mutual confidence. This book has tried to show that it is not knowledge but emotions which determine whether the relationship between one individual and another will be hostile or friendly. In practicing the art of living abroad, the next step which is needed is the general realization that intelligence is not enough.

The writing of this book has presented me with one insoluble problem. There are thousands of people whose names I would have liked to mention and whose stories I would have liked to tell but this has proved impossible. Just making a list of the names of the people who have won the right to be mentioned here would produce a sizable volume. I can only hope that the readers of these pages will be reminded of their own interesting experiences with the peoples of other countries and that they will take great satisfaction from the contribution which they have made to international understanding.

The way to learn to speak a foreign language is to hear it and to speak it. Colleges and schools teach us to learn a language by reading and studying grammar. If we want to learn to talk, we must forget these study habits. We must give up the idea of translation and grammar. We must get the habit of direct rather than indirect learning. We must get the habit of using whole expressions, clauses, and sentences as units. We cannot take time to think of the individual words when speaking a foreign language-at least, not at first.

Qu'est-ce que c'est que cela is one unit of speech learning, not eight units. Another unit would be: "How-do-you-do?"

We must learn to speak as a child learns. He sees a cat and someone says, "Cat," to him. He makes a sound which may sound something like "cat." Then he tries to imitate the sound whenever he sees a cat.

A little later someone says, "The hot stove will burn you." He touches the stove and gets burned. The child probably does not understand the meaning of any of the words, hot, stove, or burn, but the sounds, "The hot stove will burn you," mean an unhappy experience.

Many situations in the child's life leave a jumble of sounds that go with them and only after a long time does the child distinguish the elements and form new combinations from them.

One will learn expressions appropriate to situations by listening carefully. We must memorize the sounds and learn to speak them---at first not bothering about the English equivalent.

Most of us will read the foreign language well, know the meaning of a word if we see it, but not when we hear it. It is the sound which is important for speaking On the ship, we will gather in groups and listen to two persons reading a dialogue in German. The first time we hear it, we will probably understand little, so that it will be read over and over again, and each one will get a little more each time. Then, when the learners have heard it often enough to pronounce correctly, two learners will take the books and read the dialogue. When they see the words, they will probably understand much more than when they have only heard them. The complete meaning will probably be made clear by the context, by pictures, by gestures, or by acting. We should try hard to avoid translating at this point.

All memorizing of conversational expressions must be done reading aloud, preferably in the presence of someone who knows the language. We read aloud for two reasons:

1. To get accustomed to hearing ourselves saying strange sounds. Some people are so afraid of the sound of their own voices that they wait for weeks and even months before trying to speak a foreign language.

2. To learn to pronounce correctly.

If by the time you get off the boat, you have reached the point where you will take every opportunity to use what you know and to practice understanding, you will go forward rapidly.

There is only one thing more you have to know about the method of learning to speak. It requires boundless effort and enthusiasm. After the novelty wears off, there will be a real tendency to lose interest. It is so much easier to speak English, and Europeans are so anxious to have one do so, that progress will soon stop unless we are just as ambitious learners as the Europeans are.

Since the first year of The Experiment in 1932, when twenty-three boys under my leadership spent the summer in Europe, we have learned a great deal about The Experiment's chief job of how American boys and girls can make friends in Europe. In recent years I have tried through personal contact with each Experimenter or his leader to give some of these ideas to everyone who embarked on this interesting undertaking. Now, however, the time has come when it seemed better for me to write to each of you some of the things which we have learned, in the hope that you will read, mark and thoughtfully digest these suggestions. I have tried to put into this Experimenter's Handbook only those things which are most important in the fascinating game of living with foreign families, so that when you leave them both they and you will be very happy that the venture was made.

Whether or not The Experiment continues to be the success which it has been in the past will depend on the individuals of the group. If an Experimenter's attempt to make friends abroad turns out to be an unpleasant experience, not only will he feel no desire to see the movement grow in America, but the family with which he lived will be one vote against, rather than one vote for, the growth of The Experiment idea in Europe.

In Crossroads you have read that "living successfully with a European family is for each member of every group an Experiment which calls for all of the intelligence, enthusiasm, tolerance and tact that the best of us possesses." From the beginning we have felt that if The Experiment was to be a success we would have to select people who were truly interested in its ideals and well qualified to pursue them. We felt, however, that this was not enough, and that unless Experimenters received some training in their job the chances of success would be much less. Therefore, we have always tried to give Experimenters the facts which would be useful in helping them to have the right attitude in dealing with their problem of doing the right thing at the right time.

This Handbook is to try to help each Experimenter get as much as possible from his summer's experience. The first and most important reason for going abroad is to make friends, because we expect this will provide a basis of understanding for future international cooperation and peace. We will therefore take up in the order in which they will be used all the things which we think will be helpful in achieving our purpose.

Putney, Vermont
June, 1939

THE ART OF EXPERIMENTING

Although the following fourteen suggestions have been made by a Frenchman, and while the details of the suggestions in many cases do not hold true for other countries, it is impossible to give set rules which would hold true for every country. These suggestions can be taken only as examples of what one should expect. Following the suggestions you will find more general ideas which will hold true for practically all countries.

Monsieur Enginger says:

1. In your family ask politely and pleasantly for anything you want, without passing through the American leader as intermediary; but if you do not get what you want, let your leader know at once.

2. After a few days in your French family ask your own family in the United States to write a note or a postscript to a letter which they are writing to you, especially for your foster family which you can show them. You will find your French family very grateful for little attentions of this sort.

3. Ask your French family to have your laundry attended to, and to have your shoes cleaned; they will be glad to do it. (Experimenters should realize that in families where there is a maid she will expect to shine shoes, for which she should be tipped on leaving.) Be careful not to bring in mud or dust on a carefully polished floor.

4. It sometimes happens that a young man, in a hurry, having gotten up late, goes off to his class without making a "brin de toilette." It is very bad judgment. In the same order of ideas, it is possible that toward the end of the day one may have dusty shoes or neglected costume; but in the morning one ought always to be clean.

5. In general, one may be as informal in dress as the members of his family; but if, during the day, one has been swimming or camping and then wants to visit in the evening, it is better to change.

6. Meals: In many French families meals have an importance they do not have elsewhere. Do not tip your chair back, whistle or sing. Accept whatever is offered you; make at least a fair trial of it. But, if you really do not like a thing, do not hesitate to say frankly but pleasantly: "Je regrette beaucoup, mais je n'aime pas telle chose," or else ´je suis navré de ne pas aimer telle chose."

7. For your breakfast, for example, it is possible you will not be served as plentifully as you would like. In that case try to accustom yourself to the lighter breakfast, or else ask, without being bashful, to be served more. But if you are served well do not hide in a closet two or three slices of bread and butter in the hope of having it later on if you get hungry; it is better to leave what you do not want for breakfast and ask freely later on for something to eat.

8. At table a dish is served once and then is served again. It is therefore unnecessary to serve one's self too copiously the first time; for one can always count on a second helping.

9. If you are offered second or third servings of food it is with the kindest intentions; therefore, refuse pleasantly if you do not wish more. Above all, do not say: "Je suis plein," as I have heard Americans say. (Note: When offered anything in French the proper reply, if you wish to accept, is "Volontiers" or "Je veux bien." "Merci," on the other hand, generally means "No thank you" if said in answer to an offer.)

10. Look out for wine at table. The custom of the nicer French families is to fill your glass without waiting for it to be empty. This might lead to excessive use of wine. Do not hesitate to ask repeatedly for water, as it will not otherwise be served. Some may prefer to dilute their wine with water.

11. Restaurants, stores, etc. Do not be bashful about verifying your change or your bill. Generally in a café the price of your "consommation" is marked on the saucer and on your bill at a restaurant. Figure it up and do not let yourself be imposed upon. In a pastryshop, where you are not served at table, it is not necessary to tip; in a café, always tip. If you go in a group to a café do not hesitate to accept a "treat" from someone; but be sure to return the compliment in your turn, preferably on another occasion.

12. Sending back cards, etc., is very important; for if you have shown the family where you have been living, or the friend you have made, that you like them and then go away and never give a further sign of life, what will they think of you? I know a Frenchman and an American who met one day nearly twenty years ago and who, thanks to occasional cards or letters, have maintained the contact and have become and remained the best of friends. This will do more for friendly relations between two peoples than 325 political speeches, 43 congresses, or 57 international conferences!

13. If you are a guest in a home and wish to smoke, always ask permission of your hostess and offer a cigarette.

14. It happens sometimes that a student puts his feet on the table during a class; this is not considered good manners.

These specific suggestions give a good idea of the problem of "international living." A discussion of attitudes follows.

ATTITUDES

There is no question of whether Americans or Europeans are right in these differences in habits. We may have a perfect right to think that the Europeans would be better off if they observed more of our customs; but if we go to Europe with the idea of teaching them how much better things are done in "God's Country," we shall only succeed in irritating them. When we visit another country for the sake of making friends, the only thing we can do is to try to be sensitive to the differences between our ways and theirs, and to conform to theirs as well as we can.

When a group of young Americans first arrive in a foreign country they generally laugh loudly at everything they see that is different and strange. This is probably the most innocent way of giving away our superiority complex. When one catches himself doing this it would be well to think how we would feel if we had guests from abroad who laughed at things we did and said. Don't go to Europe to teach, but to learn.

Many Experimenters enjoy discussing national differences with their hosts. Laughing together with one's host over such things is of course perfectly acceptable so long as one is laughing at his own customs as much as at those of his host. It is the implied superiority in the laugh that hurts.

The question of how far one should go in temporarily adopting foreign customs is not so easy to determine. For there are places where an American may feel that he must act against his principles in order to conform. While it is true that the number of "principles" one has is probably a good gauge of his "narrowness," each must determine for himself how "broad" he can be. This question is most likely to arise concerning alcoholic beverages. In France, for example, a host wishing to be especially gracious will urge wine on his guest. It will be hard for this French person, having always been accustomed to drinking wine, to understand why one would not accept it. The best way to handle the situation is for the American to explain, at another time (not at the table) that he is not accustomed to drinking wine and does not like it, being careful of course not to imply that in refraining he is much more righteous than those who drink it. For those who can do it, it is more gracious to adopt the French habit of using wine temperately. Don't forget to do unto others as you would have others do unto you.

A WORKING BASIS

The habit of talking things over with one's host is by all odds the best basis for arriving at a happy solution of international living. American young people, because they are generally taller and more independent than Europeans of the same age, often give European parents the impression of being much more adult than they are. One should make clear to his hosts, young and old, that he wants very much to be told when he commits a faux pas, or whenever he does anything that is disagreeable to the family. Don't fail to ask repeatedly for criticism.

Many of the innocent offenses that Americans commit may be avoided if they will bear in mind the reasons back of differences in customs. Europeans in general have very much less money than Americans. Their furniture and all household effects are to be treated with the greatest consideration, for they are expected to be used for generations. Experimenters have been known to put their feet on the furniture. This is the classic example of barbarian behavior. When shod, one's feet belong on the floor and on the floor only.

Europeans are usually more considerate of their elders than Americans are. An American boy who accompanied one of the German groups visiting America scoffed at the Germans because they always consulted their leader before doing even the most trivial thing. It is well to remember that one's European parents will expect to be consulted at all times. American guests who go out of their way to show such attentions as reporting at length on what happened since last talking with their hosts will go a long way to win their hearts.

I shall never forget that during our first trip to France one girl drew an extremely undesirable family; the French girl was unattractive and speechless, the home was threadbare and dull, yet under all circumstances the first thought of the American girl was for her family. If it was not convenient for them to join some picnic or party our heroine stayed at home with them. When she went out with them she was always by their side. She didn't forget that her chief reason for going to Europe was to make friends.

In the following Experiment sayings from a long series of Experimenter's Handbooks and of Crossroads, there are relatively few statements where the ideas are not clear and are not generally accepted-unlike the question of orientation.

The purpose of The Experiment is to build up in various countries a group of people who are interested in promoting mutual understanding and respect between their own and other countries.

The privilege of becoming a member of The Experiment is won by achievement in one or more of the following requirements for admission:

1. A real interest in making friends abroad.
2. Satisfactory general academic achievement.
3. Participation in extracurricular activities.
4. The ability to get on well With people.
5. Special achievements in personal interests.
6. Interest and experience in simple outdoor living.
7. Successful study of the language to be spoken.

The group leader is the chief factor in determining whether contacts with people in the country visited are successful. The qualifications of an Experiment leader are: A leader must know the language of the country beyond the possibility of misunderstanding. He must know the customs of the country from having lived with its people. Above all, he must have a love of its people which will be unconsciously transferred to the members of his group.

If we visit another country for the sake of making friends, the only thing we can do is to try to be sensitive to the differences between our ways and theirs and conform to theirs. Don't go to Europe to teach, but to learn.

Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.

Ask repeatedly for criticism. Bear in mind the reasons back of differences in customs.

Living successfully with a European family is for each member of every group an Experiment which calls for all of the intelligence, enthusiasm, tolerance, and tact that the best of us possesses.

The following attitudes seem especially important for the Experimenter to develop to the utmost if he is to succeed in his purpose:

1. Humility. (Later called Open-mindedness.)

2. A willingness to be set right.

3. Willingness to suspend judgment.

4. Specific attitudes:

a. Respect for parents and elders of family.
b. Willingness to share experiences with other members of family.
c. Respect for property and family possessions.

The mind is capable of absorbing only a certain limited number of impressions in a given time. Therefore, Experimenters spend time in one country rather than in much travel.

Since time is required to make friends, the undertaking must be looked upon primarily as a living rather than as a travel project, where sightseeing must be sacrificed in favor of giving time to personal contacts. In practice, we believe that three weeks are necessary to develop worthwhile personal contacts with people speaking a different language.

The home is still the most important educational institution in existence.

Lasting friendship can be developed best under pleasant conditions. Therefore, every effort is made to give the group a happy, healthy, interesting time with schoolishness reduced to a minimum. In practice, every effort is made to exclude from the group people who would not enjoy the simple outdoor program, while an understanding that each works for the good of all, eliminates to a large degree hard and fast rules and regulations.

Discussion has been adopted as the group's method of self-government and of instruction. The discussion method has proved itself a remarkable instrument for developing a sense of group responsibility and for enthusing each member of the group with the objectives of the whole undertaking.

The Experiment has a thinking apparatus all its own which has created ideas that its members, thinking individually, would have been incapable of producing. It is group discussion.

The educational principles of The Experiment as produced at Heiden were as follows. Although additions to the constitution have been made more recently, relatively few changes have been made in the educational principles.

1. People learn to live together by living together.

2. Learning by experience is basic to effective education for international understanding.

3. Success in living with people of another country is extremely difficult to achieve. Therefore, each individual should be aided by careful selection, preparation and leadership.

4. Placing an individual in a home is the best way of introducing him to the people of the country. This individual experience is augmented by living in a group where the individual learns self criticism through the Discussion Method.

5. It is the responsibility of the visiting Experiment group member to make every effort to adjust to the life of the country visited.

6. It is the responsibility of the Experiment family in the other country to help him in his adjustment.

7. Both the Experiment member and the members of the Experiment family profit from the heightened opportunity for learning which is provided by the dynamic relationship between hosts and guest.

8. The experience of the individual becomes apparent to him only after careful evaluation which at the same time enables and encourages him to transmit his experience to others.

9. The combination of all the seven aids for learning---selection, preparation, leadership, homestay, group life, discussion, and evaluation---provide an optimum situation for the development of mutual understanding and respect in a limited time.

10. It is imperative that each Experiment organization remains flexible in its policies and procedures, continually evaluating itself, preferably with the assistance of science, in light of the experiences of its members to translate today's "Experiments" into benefits for tomorrow.

---

This recipe is for those who go abroad without the guidance of The Experiment.

In order to understand the people of another country, one must have the desire to do so. To develop the desire to understand, one must make up his mind to learn and not to teach. To keep this desire, the mutual enjoyment of one another's company must be the ultimate objective. To achieve this objective, one must put himself in a position where he can learn to adjust. Adjustment to another country is difficult. One must realize that most tourists going abroad never find themselves in a position to make a satisfactory adjustment.

Respect for others is the necessary requirement for those wishing to learn. Experience has shown that to maintain one's attitude of respect, one must expect that in living abroad trivial details will be the trouble makers and one's own principles will cause much less difficulty than one would suppose.

The final requirement in developing the correct attitude is the realization that one must always try to understand but never expect to do so fully. One must bear in mind that the reward of making friends abroad is worth more than the effort that has to be put into achieving it.

Table of Contents