Gergely Pál: Bartók Béla ismeretlen levelei a Tudományos Akadémia Könyvtárában (A MTAK kiadványai 22. Budapest, 1961)

refer to examples — last year 1 had to dismiss the niece of our own secretary for lack of talent; this year a nephew by name of Lajta of Ministerial Counsellor Neményi, for similar reasons; the niece of my colleague Kemény was this year given pass-marks, with which her further progress will be impeded, etc. I am sorry that people importune you with matters of this sort, in which I cannot, do anything. If, however, a more "possible" way of rendering a favour should arise, I shall gladly be at your service. Many greetings from your nephew, Béla. II. [To Jenő Ilubay] 4, Szilágyi-tér, Budapest June 20th, 1922. Dear Jenő,

2 it is with the greatest regret that 1 must inform you that 1 cannot take part in the committee for the preparation of the jubilee celebrations of the Academy of Music. The differences of principle between some members of the committee and myself are so great, that it would not be possible to count on successful co-operation. At any rate I thank you for your confidence in me and emphatically ask you not to regard this refusal as in any way being a gesture directed against you, for since our exchange of views last year 1 do not wish by any means to disrupt- the peace of the Institute. I shall shortly draw up a list of the faults of the pianos in the class-room and hand it over to the caretaker, Mr. Bugovics. All I would ask is - if you have possibly not yet given him instructions to have these, incidentally not grave, faults repaired — to do so now, as the good results of instruction are at stake if the repairs do not take place during the summer. Wishing you pleasant holidays and recreation, I remain truly yours, Béla Bartók. III. [To Róbert Graggor]

3 4, Szilágyi-tér, Budapest. June 22nd, 1925. Highly honoured colleague, by today's post I am returning to you sheets 10 and 11 (pp. 145—17(1), whose Hungarian text is now almost faultless. I have also looked through the German translation; there were still a number of trifles which it would be very advisable to correct. It would also be good to eliminate some faults of a graver kind; I have assembled a list of these on the accompanying paper — (1 have not marked them in the proof) — I leave it entirely to you, whether they should be left as they are, or should be changed. I do not require further proofs of these sheets, 10 and 11. On the other hand I very much await sheets 12 and 13, in which there were also very many mistakes. Your letter dated 17th, which arrived today, appears to imply that you did not intend to send proofs of this part. What is more, it appears as though the proofs of sheets 12 and 13, whose Hungarian part I corrected and sent back together with sheets 10 and ! I at the time, had not even been sent to the printers'. — Yet this would be a very great pity because the Hungarian part, too, was full of mistakes. If I do not receive this missing part = The background to the letter addressed to the then director of the Academy of Music, the world famous artist and teacher of the violin, was that the organisers and participants of the fifty-year jubilee of the Institute's foundation included people who had declared the behaviour under the Hungarian Soviet Republic of Bartók, moreover of Zoltán Kodály, Imre Molnár and others to have been "unpatriotic", and had reported it to the so-called Verification Committee which had functioned in autumn l!)li). — It is understandable that Bartók did not wish to participate in the festivities in the company of such colleagues. a Róbert Granger (1887—1112(1). a Germanist, was director of the Hungarian Institute of Berlin University and editor of the Ungarisehe Jahrbiiehcr. He published Bartók's volume which is here mentioned, (lie German translation of "Hungarian Folkmusic", in 11)26. [The list of mistakes of the Bartók letter here published is not available!} 12