Who was Jack Whitehead?

Making it at MIT

In the early 1980s, Whitehead and his associates began talking with David Baltimore, then at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who had won the Nobel Prize in 1975 for his discovery of how retroviruses multiply.

“David and Jack could reach understandings quite quickly,” comments Robert Weinberg, Whitehead Institute Founding Member. “Both were very decisive people who thought quickly. They rapidly found a meeting of the minds.”

“David convinced my dad that if he wanted the best and brightest scientists, he needed to focus more on basic research and less on applied bioengineering,” says John Whitehead. “Further, David argued that the best environment for such an institute would be in a major urban setting with an existing research infrastructure, like Boston or New York.”

“I told them that the field that was then exploding, and around which one could build a great institution, was developmental biology,” recalls Baltimore. “Later Jack said I was the only person they interviewed who didn’t suggest building an institute around his or her personal interests.”

“There was great skepticism about Jack Whitehead,” Baltimore adds. “Setting up things at Duke, he had been very controlling. When Jack knew what he wanted, he knew what he wanted, and he went out to get it. He didn’t have a deep understanding of academic environments, as is true of most industrialists. I had to be convinced, and was convinced, that he had learned a lot from the Duke experience.”

After Baltimore signed on, and began working out an affiliation with Massachusetts Institute of Technology, that trust proved out: “He was terrific. He was very open. He was very clear about the things he really wanted, and about the things he didn’t understand well.”

“In particular, he didn’t understand why MIT was not overjoyed,” Baltimore notes.

In an era when academics viewed commerce far more suspiciously than they do now, many MIT faculty members were alarmed by the potential deal. The debate flared across the campus in 1981—partly for good reasons, partly not.

“There were entirely legitimate concerns about creating full MIT faculty members who were employees of another organization,” says John Pratt, former Whitehead Institute Associate Director. “But some people thought this was all a scheme of Jack Whitehead to make a bundle off the intelligence of MIT. What was wrong with that argument was that we were setting up a non-profit, where no individual had any equity. He really was being accused of outrageous things.”

“It was a nasty year,” says Baltimore. Whitehead described the experience in a famous and rueful quote: “It’s more difficult to give away $100 million than to make it.”

When the MIT faculty finally voted overwhelmingly in favor of the affiliation, Baltimore called Whitehead and congratulated him. “You know, democracy is terrific,” Baltimore commented. “When you win.”

With the green light, the Institute roared into being. Twenty months later, 9 Cambridge Center labs opened for business, with five Founding Members, one Associate Member and one Whitehead Fellow. In addition to Baltimore, the other Founding Members were Gerald Fink from Cornell University, Rudolf Jaenisch from the University of Hamburg, and Harvey Lodish and Robert Weinberg from MIT. The Associate Member was Richard Mulligan. The Fellow, a newly minted MD from the Harvard-MIT Health Sciences and Technology Program, was David Page.

“My dad and David Baltimore had a very fruitful, productive and constructive relationship,” says John Whitehead. “With their energy, creativity, varied experiences and willingness to consider different viewpoints for the benefit of the collective enterprise, they built an incredibly successful place.”

Because of tax concerns, Whitehead had no seat on the Institute’s board. But “he was really, really active here,” says Susan Whitehead. “He adored this place. He spent a lot of time here.”

“The Institute had made quite a stir by the time he died,” says Arthur Brill. “It was Camelot-like for many years and, almost from the outset, had an international reputation for excellence. That was extremely gratifying to Jack.”

“Jack died a happy man,” says Robert Weinberg. “From all points of view, the Institute was extremely successful. It became one of the top five biomedical research institutions in less than a decade. No one had the right to expect it, but that’s what happened.”

“He knew many people in the biomedical community, and they would pat him on the back,” says Baltimore. “He got to know the scientists, and that became extremely rewarding to him. People developed a real respect for Jack. There was sort of a love affair between him and the Institute, which is very rare with founders.”

View "Knowing Jack," the continuation of this story.

CONTINUED   1  2  3  4  5  Next >