The Re birth of Inorganic Chemistry

Inorganic chemistry is not general chemistry. Inorganic chemistry is not general chemistry. 

Therald Moeller, Inorganic Chemistry An Advanced Textbook (1952) 

What was the status of inorganic chemistry in US academia at the time of Nyholm s pronouncement Recollections of prominent inorganic chemists, concerning programs that are now regarded among the leaders in the field, strongly 

Labinger, Up from Generality, SjaingerBriefs in History of Chemistry, DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-40120-6 3, The Authorfs) 2013 

A little over a decade later (1940, to be precise), Fred Basolo (Fig. 3.3) came to UIUC as a graduate smdent. Unlike Bailar, he did have some prior interest in inorganic chemistry, having been impressed by one of his undergraduate teachers and he decided to work for Bailar, although he seems to have been fully aware, even at the time, that he was choosing an unpopular field. As he describes it, in 

---

Fred Basolo makes a similar point, with regard to similar mid-twentieth century characterizations Everyone talks about the renaissance of inorganic chemistry. Actually, I m inclined to call it the birth of inorganic chemistry because renaissance means that you re coming back to something that has already been done [4], Be that as it may, I will bow to common practice and continue to apply revival , renaissance, etc. to all (real and/or perceived) upgrades in status. 

---