Report on Visit to U.S.C.:
Met with John 0'Brian [sic] who heads the department of queer studies. This young promoter energetically answered all questions to his own satisfaction and partially ours. I said, "If we hand over all of our extensive data, the Homosexual Information Center will no longer have a basis to exist. How available will this material be to us and with what restrictions?" The answer was that it would be available to us at any time. After going into this, he finally said, "You needn't hand anything over. We'd be glad to come to you and simply make an inventory of what you have although we'd prefer to have it here."
We went into their prospects thoroughly to find out if there was a likelihood of a change in leadership resulting in new viewpoints. He insisted that they were there to stay and that my fears of the material being sanitized were unfounded. In other words, no one ever will have the power to change their goals which are to propagate the theories that queers have a culture of their own and demand special legislation to protect their specialness. Presented with the thesis that history goes in cycles and that progress is largely an illusion, he replied that they think positively and do not think reversion possible.
He thought any philosophic considerations were beside the point and the only realism is that they not only have changed history but have endless funds available. If USC changes its mind about allowing them space rent-free they'll easily pay whatever rent is required. Hal Call recently gave them 50 thousand and made available another 300 thousand.
It didn't strike him that their wealth, success and political power are irrelevant. No political power is permanent. I declined to go through their building since I went over there to find out what would happen to the HIC's invaluable archives and who the people are who assure us that they'll make good use of them.
My findings are ambivalent. Since the HIC archives are sitting in the basement, largely unused, there is a chance that these promoters will put them to use. However I feel that USC's basic motive in wanting them (and they really want them badly) is for the purpose of enhancing their prestige and promoting more money. I'm fairly sure that once they got their hands on the HIC collection, they'd wash their hands of us.
In fact, I think they want the HIC collection so much they might be persuaded to buy it. 0'Brian laughingly said they might publish my own history of the movement — "but the Board would have to approve it, of course." I said I'd have to have an advance to induce me to drop everything and devote my full time to a book. That elicited no assurances.
I was more attracted to William's mind. He joined us later and offered less of a promoter's spiel than that of a scholar furthering research. However even he is convinced that they are a turning point in history and that there's no danger of a change in national tolerance. Having enjoyed the study of history, I find such self-assurance alarmingly immature. True, it would be better that they inherit the collection than risking its destruction by fire, theft and vandalism at 1354. But when I am urged to make a decision right now this instant, I remember all the times that I was badly mistaken in giving in to such urging. Also, we know what they will get by getting the collection but what will the HIC get? It might be an idea to apply for a seat on their board. I'd propose your name and list your attainments. That would raise the transaction into a win/win situation for both sides instead of a one-sided donor/donee relationship that does not guarantee HIC even a Christmas every Leap Year.
Lastly, they are not friendly to our views. Once on the board, you could be eliminated quickly. When I made an analogy between an incident in the Dutch porcelain trade and the writing of homosexual history, 0'Brian missed the point entirely that queer historians copy one another's mistakes. He exclaimed, "But we want as many different viewpoints as we can get! No one can be completely right or wrong!" I replied, "I can tell you that Simmons was completely wrong putting my mother down as a commie cell leader." He stunned me by dismissing the remark with, "That's your opinion. She might have been a cell leader without you ever guessing."
It's not a judicious remark coming from someone who doesn't know my politics or my feelings for my mother but very much wants to lay hands on the HIC archives. If, it's typical of his reasoning, I suspect his organization is on thin ice.
My reaction is on the negative side. But we'll see how he answers the questions that you pose.
Yours,
<signed Dale>
(The Dutch analogy came up when I mentioned that homosexual writers often have been repeating one another's questionable data instead of doing their own thorough research. In sixteenth century Holland, the well-to-do Dutch discovered Chinese porcelain and found that they could order the designs duplicated down to the last detail. One lady was fond of a particular set of Dutch scenes in blue on white. Sending a damaged cup which she no longer wanted, she asked that the pattern be copied. In due time her set arrived, copied exactly down to the smallest detail including an identical nick in each cup. Instead of seeing the wry point, 0'Brian exclaimed, "But isn't that what she wanted?")
Give my best to Melba.
