|
 |
 |
12.08.04
Comments of D.Entin to Kadakin's letter
Dear redaction,
I have just read your exchange of messages with Alexander Kadakin. Some parts of his response to you left me speechless with surprise, but not so speechless that I cannot overcome my speechlessness and offer some response.First, I would like to address the question of Mr. Kadakin's modesty. He does not give himself credit, in his response to you, for all of his own many achievements in India in strengthening the institutions and activities in India that are connected with the Roerichs. Whether in Kullu, or in Kalimpong, or in Bangalore, the evidence of Mr. Kadakin's committment is clear. The Trust and the Museum/House in Kullu are secure and flourishing because of him. Helena Roerich's stupa in Kalimpong is maintained and honored mostly because of him. The rescuing of Tataguni in Bangalore, and the building of the memorials there, are due to his devoted efforts. Let us offer gratitude to him for all these things. Let us give credit where credit is due.
Still, some of the things he states in his message to you are contradicted by the facts. He emphasizes that the International Centre of the Roerichs in Moscow, and only that Centre, and no one else, has ever offered or given help. This ignores completely the help given over the many years, beginning long before there was a Moscow Centre or a Trust, by so many people. Katherine Stibbe and Ingeborg Fritschi, on the behalf of our Museum, sent funds regularly to help Ursula Eichstadt in her work, and continued to do so for many years. Our Museum donated materials -- postcards, prints, and books -- regularly for them to sell. The Roerich Gesellschaft Deutschland always sent help. Many volunteer workers from all over Russia and elsewhere gave their time and labor. The Samara Centre has given much valuable help in recent years. And even Mikhail Lunev, when he was in India, helped them greatly. No one can claim to be the only one to care or to help. So again, let us give credit where credit is due.
To state that the Trust is a Russian-Indian project is true, but without recognition of the founding and the history of Urusvati Institute and the Roerich home. And that blindness to history is not beneficial to anyone. Originally established by the Museum in New York, it was a branch of that museum. All its activities were supported and maintained by the New York museum. It would not even exist without that history. Let us give credit where credit is due.
Now, to turn to the difficult question of the copyrights to the symbols and names. There are enough quotations in the book Hierarchy to show the true meaning and purpose of the symbol of the Banner of Peace. That symbol belonged to no person, no matter what is written or said nowadays by people with a personal interest in establishing control over it. The symbol, remember, was part of the Roerich Pact, developed in New York and Paris, and signed in Washington by all the members of the Pan-American Union. It is not a dead treaty, it is a treaty in force. If the symbol belongs to any entity it belongs to the Roerich Pact. That Pact has no nationality, it is a global pact. The Pact, and its symbol, the Banner of Peace, belong to everyone.
Perhaps the most breathtaking statement in Mr. Kadakin's message is that the son, Svetoslav Roerich, can reverse the decisions of his parents regaring rights and copyrights. Can a son take back what his parents have given? Even Svetoslav Roerich himself made no such audacious a claim. In his letter of gift to the Soviet Roerich Fund, he states clearly that his gift of materials and rights does not include anything given previously by any member of his family. So evidently the son understood the ethics and legalities, but the present claimants do not. And the very same exception is included in the Power of Attorney given by Svetoslav Roerich to the International Centre of the Roerichs -- that same document that Mr. Kadakin saw with his own eyes when it was being signed. It is, by the way, the same document whose validity is being challenged in the courts, because, as a Power of Attorney, it ceased to be valid at the moment of Svetoslav Roerich's death.
I will leave to others to conjecture and discuss the reasons for saying these things. I simply want to set the record straight.
Daniel Entin
This is not a private letter to you, and you have my permission to show it or give it wherever you wish.
© is free
