Remarks of Harvey B. Rubinstein
at the memorial service held
at the Robinson House Friday, September 25, 2009
I
knew
Dan Harkins for only a few years, yet we became good friends and felt
comfortable sharing personal confidences. Dan usually spoke candidly,
even bluntly, and, as an accomplished lecturer in his professional
life, he would launch into a monologue on virtually any subject that
concerned him, and there were many. When he did, I tried my best to
stay with him, but not often with much success. He proved to be a
disciplined thinker and a persuasive advocate.
Dan loved history and, in particular, the Delaware Heritage Commission.
We both were members and rode together to the meetings in Dover. He did
all of the driving and most of the talking. He had an
overpowering interest in the welfare of Eastern Brandywine
Hundred. More than once, I heard him emphasize the prominent role that
Claymont played in the school desegregation case and describe the
historical exhibits at Claymont Elementary School, including his
photograph in a Claymont High School Football uniform. He spoke with
pride about the Robinson House and the Stone School, and he strongly
opposed converting the Philadelphia Pike into an expanded thoroughfare
that might remove neighborhood businesses and adversely impact adjacent
communities.
One day, after lunch at the Marsh Road Diner, he took me on a tour of
the area east of the Philadelphia Pike. As he drove, his discourse
became an educational lesson for me and made me realize that
there was much that I really did not know about that part of Brandywine
Hundred. The experience encouraged me to propose a similar tour for the
benefit of the CCOBH Board, of which we were members, with Councilman
John Cartier as the outstanding guide. I view the episode as Dan
Harkins at his best, helping to open minds and lay the groundwork for a
wider community understanding.
Over time, we talked about so many things. Dan's knowledge on subjects
seemed inexhaustible. His instincts were true, his perceptions astute,
his views thoughtful, and his judgments emphatic. Whether it was at a
music performance or at an art exhibit or at a political function or at
a discussion at breakfast, lunch, or dinner, Dan's presence was valued
for he frequently offered an alternative and informative opinion.
There was a subtle complexity to Dan that I admired for he was not
without his seeming contradictions, neither magnifying his faults nor
exaggerating his virtues. He was intensely serious about issues, yet he
carried it with more humility than I thought was possible. He had no
difficulty inviting, even welcoming, government action, yet he had a
healthy skepticism about the actions of government officials. He was
candid even caustic in his comments, yet he was gracious in his
relationship with others and always concerned that he offended someone
unknowingly. He was an unabashed liberal and intellectual enhanced by
and intrinsic, yet he was sensitive and generous, with an instinctive
respect for the least of us. He sometimes displayed a crusty demeanor,
yet beneath it resided a most decent human being.
Dan Harkins is gone now, but he left this place so much better for
having been a part of it. And, like all of you, I will miss him.
