MY ACCOMMODATIONS IN FRIBOURG were not to be as Gertrude predicted when she suggested I become Pax Romana's North American Secretary in the fall of 1958. My steamer trunk was addressed to "3, rue Gachoud", where she shared an apartment with the student from Jamaica. Gertrude wrote that their one-year assignments would both end in September while I was en route, but another new hire was coming and wanted to share the rent.
It turned out, however, that Thom Kerstiens, the Dutch Secretary-General of P.R., wanted that apartment for his own use.
I thought it odd that the boss himself would meet my train, but he did have some explaining to do. About ten years older than I, at least 6 foot 2, he was a lean, good-looking career diplomat who spoke English fluently with Dutch gutturals. He had arranged for me to rent a furnished room in a home he said I would enjoy much more than 3, rue Gachoud.
I didn't say I would have preferred to make the decision myself, but he must have seen by my expression that I was, let's say, puzzled.
How would you, in totally new territory, deal with a stranger who had unilaterally revised your plans and was going to be your boss for the coming year? I chose to keep my mouth shut and wait to see where my angels were leading me.
To a magic world, that was where!
Instead of having to find a library for research materials, I was about to live and work within an amazing network of movers and shakers with access to virtually anything I could want to know about Switzerland or many other countries, the Catholic Church, several higher education disciplines, major international organizations, politics on both sides of the Iron Curtain...in a nutshell, the world!
Thom carried my suitcase to a taxi, then began telling me about the people I would live with, the family of Polish-born Mieczyslaw, or Mietek, de Habicht. As a diplomat in the Far East when WWII began, he had decided not to return to Poland and thus lost his citizenship. Although the Vatican gave him a passport (Pius XII's bureaucracy did many unusual things to make refugees' lives easier 1939-45), he was legally stateless. His wife, as Charlotte van Berckel of Nijmegen in the Netherlands, had spent two and a half years in Ravensbruck concentration camp because she helped her doctor father save Jews from Nazis. Dr. Van Berckel was executed for that but in 1945 the Allies liberated Charlotte's camp before the Germans could liquidate it as they did some others.
Thom talked for as long as a taxi ride could last in a town of 30,000. Almost as riveting as his story about my landlords-to-be was a sudden change in our surroundings: modest 20th century low- and highrise concrete buildings lining straight streets were replaced by weathered stone ones when we began to descend a twisting downward cobblestoned slope. The driver stopped between an unadorned public water tap splashing into a small area enclosed by a low concrete wall, and a wide, low old wooden door in a grey stone wall on our right. Beside it I saw "26" in large rusty wrought iron digits. What turned out to be my bedroom's two windows were one storey above us.
That ride, the streetscapes, my first sighting of rue des Alpes and no. 26, are among my clearest, most awesome memories.
Over time I learned that the Vatican had appointed Mietek Permanent Secretary of International Catholic Organizations, and Fribourg was an ideal location for both its office and his family. It was easily accessible by rail from all European capitals and had the bilingual (French/German) Universite de Fribourg which Jesuits established in the 16th century.
In 1958 it was run by Dominicans, a teaching order of Catholic priests. (In English, they're identified by the letters OP after their names, standing for Order of Preachers.) The de Habichts had daughters Gabrielle, 8, and Isabelle, 5, and in a couple of years the family would acquire Swiss citizenship, which required 10 years of residency and a payment of 25,000 francs.
Being their "paying guest" turned out to be one of the most joyful and fruitful experiences of my life.
Mr. Needham had introduced me to readers of his op-ed page in the Globe and Mail as a student of pedagogy, and because I saw very interesting behaviours in Fribourg's children I offered him an article about them. It was inspired particularly by the sight of pre-teens shaking hands with each other when they met going to and from school.
I felt comfortable with the topic because during my final year at U of T I had been the live-in English-speaking nanny of three grade-schoolers from France. Their father, Philippe Missoffe, was improving his English during a one-year stint in Toronto for Procter and Gamble, which also paid for his wife to attend English classes every weekday. (The man obviously was on a major career track.) Because I had to support their parenting style, the Missoffes carefully explained the culture behind it. The attitudes of the de Habichts and their friends were similar.
The Globe and Mail, Thursday, Jan. 22, 1959 Page 7:
"The Swiss Know How
"'Best-Raised Children I Have Ever Known' Impress the Visitor
"By WandaS BERNE
"In this small corner of the world are some of the best-raised children I have ever known. A first meeting with one of them is a delightful experience. They are polite, sincere, and so 'alive' — it is hard to describe the impression one gets of an ambitious, inquisitive zest for living politely restrained behind bright eyes.
"Neither shy nor forward, both boys and girls shake hands with each other as with an older person, and answer or ask questions in a way which makes conversation with them a pleasure. And from about the age of seven they seem never to be confused as to the order in which they should greet persons in a group of adults, or in what order to make introductions.
"There seems to be an underlying philosophy in Switzerland to the effect that the more one has to do, the more one gets done. The people both work and play with all their might. And I have been deeply impressed by the patient and loving discipline by which this serious attitude toward living is instilled into children.
"They are not nagged, but in everything they do they have the security of knowing that their parents are concerned for their welfare. The morning quiet in a home is not broken by any rough-housing youngsters. The ones who attend school (from 8 or 8:30) are sent off punctually while younger ones play quietly in their beds, or at least in their rooms, until mothers come for them.
"Table manners are carefully watched and patiently corrected from the youngest days. As early as possible, little ones have the privilege, and the responsibility, of sitting at 'the big table', where they must keep their backs straight and hold their forks properly, and wait for the elders to begin. All these small things are treated seriously both by parents and by children. 'If they don't do small things properly, out of habit, how will they deal with important ones?' a mother said to me.
"The rule that 'Children should be seen but not heard' might be said to apply here, but it has two implications worth noting: children are never ignored, and they benefit from adult conversation so long as they deserve to be present. Furthermore, when the topic is something about which they can speak, their opinions are heard and accepted seriously by adults.
"They share in their parents' lives. The smaller ones shop with their mothers, the older ones usually have lunch (the principal meal of the day, and for which many businesses still allow two hours) at home. In the evenings there is often time set aside for them to be with their fathers.
"They usually meet visitors who come to the house, and are expected to shake hands with each. If there are guests present at bedtime, the children shake hands again when saying 'Good night.'
"Perhaps most striking to a North American visitor in a home here is the fact that children often kiss their parents. They do so in the mornings before leaving for school, when they return and before going to bed. The action is in no way sentimental, nor is it matter-of-course. (One sees a minimum of romancing in public, yet no lack of spontaneous and true affection in intimate family circles.)
"'Discipline' and 'love' are very meaningful words in connection with the raising of children here, and so is 'interest'. Just as children are interested by the events in the lives of their parents, so the parents are very interested in the lives of their children.
"I remember, sadly, how often the parents of my friends in Canada had no idea where their children were, or when they might return. Parents here know with whom their children play, and where;make sure that homework is done, and usually check it; they take an interest in school plays and projects, yet I was surprised to find that there are no Home and School Associations — parents know one another socially and are aware of what goes on in schools throughout the year, not just at required intervals.
"Over the Christmas period, when many poems, carols and skits were learned, children were encouraged to recite them at home, and to reenact scenes from plays. Youngsters taking piano or other lessons occasionally have the thrill of 'performing' for guests some special number. But if they take too much advantage of the interest adults show, they are promptly set back in their places.
"The place of the child here is not, I would say, that of an independent, irresponsible creature, free to 'express' himself all over everywhere, nor is he kept in an infantile, unattended 'world of his own'. Children here are not treated as miniature adults, or as bothersome brats. They receive the respect due a human being, together with the loving care and discipline required to mold such a being into a balanced adult.
"When I was discussing the raising of children with one father, he said 'My wife and I believe that having children is a privilege and a sacred trust. Americans seem to treat them as though they were unfortunate accidents, or at least burdens.' When I asked for his opinion of 'problem children' he told me, rather curtly: 'When people use that expression, they never seem to distinguish between children who have problems, and children with whom they, the adults, don't know how to deal.'"
-------
Re-reading that in the 21st century, I was surprised by the number of issues which are as current now as they were then.
Shortly after that, Mr. Needham asked for the following.
The Globe and Mail, Monday, Feb. 9, 1959 page 7:
"Alternative to Suffrage
"'Strength in Subtlety' For Swiss Women
"By WandaS BERNE
"The men of Switzerland have voted down women's suffrage, and femininity seems to have scored a victory.
"A near-record turn-out of 66.2 per cent of eligible voters on February 1 marked the climax of a fascinating and exciting month for anyone observing public opinion here. During January and even before, there were daily newspaper articles, radio broadcasts and public meetings in favor of feminine suffrage, with arguments that ranged from the sublime to the ridiculous.
"These public commentaries were strictly fair, with writers and speakers (almost all of whom were men, by the way) giving both sides of the issue objectively. Very few 'public' voices were raised against it, and their arguments were few and relatively weak, in the face of ones based on justice, logic and democratic principles.
"The matter became one of federal voting due to the efforts of Federal Councillors and Deputies and, in accordance with the Constitution, the Cantons would still have been free to reject feminine suffrage in Cantonal affairs. Only the Canton of Vaud chose to make the February 1 vote one of double significance — the outcome would apply to both Federal and local matters — and it is interesting to note that Vaud was one of the three Cantons where the results were in favor.
"Civic and ecclesiastical authorities had much to say in defense of women's suffrage, and armed themselves with quotations from Swiss statesmen, French philosophers and even Pope Pius XII. Most politicians and about 60 per cent of the numerous Federal and Cantonal parties supported the issue. The bulletins of chain food stores not only favored it, but took the opportunity to flatter their clients shamelessly.
"Chauvinists screamed that Switzerland was behind all the rest of Europe except little Lichtenstein and Monaco. Others said that the country's trade and neutrality rendered it isolationist enough without its being 'different' in the matter of suffrage.
"At a committee meeting in favor of the vote (Swiss direct democracy means that men are called upon to vote on federal and/or Cantonal issues about 20 times a year, and the forming of committees is a matter of course) I heard a man say that perhaps the strongest argument against women's vote was the male ego.
"Another said that a negative result would be a victory for immobility, and a woman suggested that since men were now concerning themselves with matters of outer space, they could at least give women a little ground in the tiny field of Swiss politics. But these were meant as jokes to lighten the serious deliberations.
"As regards justice, the Federal Council declared 'No individual should be forced to submit to juridical norms which he himself has had no part in shaping.' With recent changes in the social functions of women — more of them now having to work in paid employment, for economic reasons — there should come changes in their political status.
"It was pointed out that since about a third of all Swiss women work, among these 71 per cent of all single women, they should have a voice in the way their taxes are spent.
"There were those who said that the defeat of the issue would amount to discrimination and disrespect toward women, because the Swiss Constitution, in barring them from voting, groups them with children, criminals and insane persons.
"Those who stood on the grounds of logic pointed out that every argument against feminine suffrage was equally one against that of men. The argument that they could not do military service (which is compulsory here) held no water because it is not legally linked with civil rights, and men who have a valid reason for not doing it pay money.
"The reputation of Swiss democracy was said to be at stake. In the words of the Federal Council, 'Switzerland is such an advanced and long-standing true democracy. Doesn't equality of treatment demand that women, who for so long have had the same obligations as men, have the same rights?'
"Someone pointed out that women's suffrage was arrived at elsewhere by revolutions or orders of Parliament, and that Switzerland should proudly achieve it by wise political action on the part of her menfolk.
"But all these opinions had overtones of pessimism. All the writers and speakers mentioned that they intended to continue their fighting 'if we do not succeed this time'.
"Their pessimism arose from the fact that, alongside the loud and numerous voices of press, radio and committees, one heard a few women's voices and committees speaking against feminine suffrage. They defended their position (which someone ungraciously described as 'stabbing their sisters in the back') by saying that politicians just wanted to use them as pawns; that what was called a right in January would be just another duty in February.
"They said that the women who raised their voices in support of the vote were not necessarily the wisest ones, but the loudest. They said that since Swiss politics demand so much time of anyone who would do them justice (each day at the polls is heralded by countless pamphlets full of detailed information on the issues at stake, and these and committee meetings do take time) their family affairs would suffer.
"They said that they had enough of discussing politics with brothers, fathers and husbands, through whom their influence was certainly felt, without needing to deposit ballots themselves. They saw their own nature as being geared to view everything from the point of view of individual and family safety, and therefore not always to be trusted in connection with national affairs.
"The women who opposed having the vote sympathized with those who wanted it, but they insisted that, just as in family life a husband and wife complement each other and thus form a unit, so each of them is suited for different roles in public affairs — and the field of politics is in the men's territory.
"The one argument which I never saw in print or heard spoken except in small groups of women, and which was probably the strongest of all, was 'Feminine influence is strongest when it is subtle, and men prefer it that way.'
"Since the matter does not stand a chance of again being the subject of a federal vote for several years, it will be interesting to watch the men, and the politics, of the Canton of Vaud, where women will vote hence forward on Cantonal issues."
CHAPTER 11 of GLIMPSES -- 30