A Book of Remembrances

Clyde Hertzman 1953 - 2013 Clyde Hertzman March 24, 1953 - February 8, 2013 1 This book is a compilation of tributes complied by staff at UBC’s Human Early Learning Partnership from the many e-mails, social media and newspaper clippings received in memory of Dr. Clyde Hertzman. 2 It is with the deepest sorrow that we announce the sudden passing of Dr. Clyde Hertzman. Clyde’s influence in the fields of early child development, population health and epidemiology has been significant within B.C., nationally and internationally. We have lost a dear friend, an inspiration to all of us and a leader whose shoes can never be filled. Our thoughts are with his family, Marcy, Eric, Emily, Amos, his mother Eileen, and his brother Owen. Staff and Faculty at the Human Early Learning Partnership 3 Sorry that this one is long ... but it’s heartfelt. I didn’t work closely with Clyde but that does not mean that I wasn’t inspired by him. Three memories of him are with me at this time ... and probably forever. Clyde was, of course, an intellectual giant. I have met few people who could think at his level and even fewer who were as able as Clyde to understand and meaningfully integrate ideas from a wide range of fields. I remember once having lunch with Clyde and two rising stars of economics and medicine from Princeton and Berkley. (Having just written that, I am pretty sure Clyde would pick up on the fact that it sounds a bit like the start of a joke, “An economist, a scientist, and Clyde walk into a bar...”) Anyhow, as was often the case, the subject of conversation was the impact of early years on child development. The energy level was remarkable -- as was the role that Clyde played in the conversation. It was as though he was an interpreter who, by way of some interdisciplinary Rosetta Stone embedded in his grey matter, would hear each participant’s contributions to the discussion. He would then rephrase the ideas, work with them, add his own, and integrate things for the rest of us. Thanks to Clyde, the conversation spanned econometrics, physiology, sociology and policy in a way that made the whole truly greater than the sum of the parts. It was one of the most memorable hours of my academic career. On another occasion, I sheepishly asked Clyde if he would stand in for Fraser Mustard, who had become ill just days before being a keynote speaker at CHSPR’s 2009 annual health policy conference. The request was a big one in part because Clyde’s calendar was unimaginable. Not only did he have travel commitments of an academic superstar, he was also committed to meeting with people in communities throughout BC to discuss the pioneering work he was doing on early learning and with development indicators that required their support. Freeing up his schedule would not be easy! But Clyde was a loyal friend of the people and the purpose of CHSPR. So he moved things around and stepped in for us. And he blew the audience away. His talk was every bit an inspiration and listened to here along with slides: Slides: http://www.chspr.ubc.ca/sites/... Audio: http://www.chspr.ubc.ca/sites/... Finally, the memory that I will hold on to most of all was from a brief hallway conversation with Clyde just a few weeks ago. It was my first opportunity to congratulate Clyde on becoming an Officer of the Order of Canada. I told him that I thought the honour was great and thoroughly deserved. What struck me was Clyde’s story about it. Looking at me, like always, making eye contact that made it clear he really did care about the conversation he was having with me at that moment, Clyde said that it was an exciting moment to get the call and to hear the official on the other end of the line say, “Dr. Hertzman, in recognition of your service to your country...” He paused for a moment and smiled. It was clear to me that what stood out for Clyde about being an Officer of the Order of Canada was that this was not recognition of some inherent attribute of his. It was not an award for being one of the greatest scientists of his time -- though he was. It was not an award for being able to transcend disciplines like nobody else -- though he could. It was an award for making the lives of Canadians better -- which he did. His smile on that day (and likely on many other days he had surely been enjoying recently) spoke volumes about Clyde. It said to me that, whether in the way he talked to colleagues and students on a day-to-day or in the way he marshalled scientific evidence to affect policy change, Clyde found joy in helping others. That smile said everything and will be an inspiration to me always. Steve Morgan 4 I have been thinking a lot about Clyde over the past few days. I can’t believe it. Between his relative youthfulness and boundless energy it is hard to understand and feels incredibly untimely, unfair, and just not right at all. At first I was numb but have been deeply sad and can’t put him out of my mind. I also find myself remembering the old days working with Clyde. Remembering his energy, his enthusiasm, his support and the deep way he affected and helped me. I keep remembering all these good things about him. I graduated with my masters degree from the department in spring 1986. I didn’t meet him at that stage. I graduated and went off and did some consulting for the Ministry of Health. It was in 1987 when I began to work with Clyde on the sawmill cohort. I was 35 years old. At this time in my life I was craving the need to find good and progressive work to do and a team of people to work with. I really needed a place to be and I needed a work identity. The need for place and identify became even more intense, just a few months after I had begun to work with Clyde as I got divorced and felt completely depressed and shattered for some time. I worked for about 3 years managing the study. I felt useful, skilled, and encouraged by Clyde. I think he understood what I was going through. He was very important to me in this stage of my life. He reached out to help me in other ways too. At work I learned so much from Clyde. He was a great teacher and the format was perfect for learning from him. It was a small research team and discussions were intense, focused, and we were designing new ways to gather information and to link complex information on workers to health data. It was a real feeling of a team engaged in creative intellectual pioneering and Clyde’s creativity and intellectual leadership in all this was really something to be a part of. One of the best things I’d see and participate in during these meetings was the creative adaptation of complex methods to new problems. This was not textbook stuff that we were doing. It was kind of new, especially the data linkage work, and being in these meetings talking through the problems was exciting and intense. It was a huge intellectual adventure. Another things I really liked about the way Clyde thought is that he would stay focused on the basic idea in such a clear sighted way. He had an amazing gift of understanding the essential, the foundational dimension of a problem, a concept, method in order to move an idea forward. Clyde had a way of simplifying complex issues, by stripping them down to their essential dimension so that the next step would be clear. Such a clear thinker. To me at the time he seemed so intelligent and accomplished, at times a bit intimidating, and yet part of his charm was that he had a kind of vulnerability and he wasn’t perfect. He would sometimes be quite volatile. He’d get upset about things, about people, or situations. He’d rant a little bit unreasonably at times about these things. He’d get worked up and passionate. Sometimes he’d take himself a bit too seriously but sometimes too I’d feel like bursting out laughing (just feel like it but never actually do it). It was his theatrical side. To me he had a strong Jewish spirit. Part of this was obvious in his sense of humour and his irreverence. Part of it was his ethical sense –so very strong. I’ve never worked with anybody with such a strong sense of intellectual integrity. By that I mean he was, not overtly or obviously but, fundamentally (it was part of his soul) always concerned that the idea under consideration was the right one, that it was framed in the right way, that all reasonable aspects of its operationalization had been considered and discussed, and that after honest open assessment, appraisal, and debate that in this way with this kind of intelligent rigour the right course of action was being taken to bring it to fruition. This intellectual rigour, excitement and intensity, this creativity, and its linkage with progressive ideas and good ways of being in the world is what I most remember about Clyde. As well, he didn’t have a cynical bone in his body.

Load more