Financial insecurity of the Institute pushed Neumann away from it toward secure state work

Evidence

But when Neumann suggested that he might be able to continue to work within the Institute, either for 1200 per year in the form of weekend consultations, or for 2400 per year as a part-time associate working half of each week, Horkheimer had reservations. The project was not a secure basis for the future. It was uncertain whether there would be an extension or prolongation of it. He, Horkheimer, would be acting irresponsibly towards Neumann and the Institute if he were to encourage him to abandon what was the best solution from the financial point of view, namely a full-time job in Washington. From this point on, contact between Neumann and the Institute became rare, but never actually broke off: Neumann wrote to Horkheimer in March 1946, after a meeting with Pollock, saying he would prefer to return to the Institute to be able to do his own work again. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 1225

Categorization

• XREF: Horkheimer’s cautious financial stewardship mirrors the Institute’s chronic funding fragility seen throughout the exile period. — connects to: Administrative duties at the Institute starved Neumann of the publications American academia required — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 948; Exile and financial insecurity destabilized every Institute staff member — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 1091