Did the CIA fund creative writing in America?

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: Did the CIA fund creative writing in America?

Postby Joao » Fri Oct 30, 2015 7:51 pm

“T.S. Eliot Entered My Dreams,” Allen Ginsberg (1977):

On the fantail of a boat to Europe, T.S. Eliot was reclining with several passengers in deck seats, blue cloudy sky behind, iron floor below us. “And yourself,” I said, “what do you think of the domination of poetics by the CIA? After all, wasn’t Angleton your friend? Didn’t he tell you his plans to revitalize the intellectual structure of the West against so-to-speak Stalinists?”

Eliot listened attentively—I was surprised he wasn’t distracted. “Well, there are all sorts of chaps competing for dominance, political and literary . . . your Gurus for instance, and the theosophists, and the table rappers and dialecticians and tea-leaf-readers and ideologues. I suppose I was one such, in my middle years. But I did, yes, know of Angleton’s literary conspiracies, I thought they were petty—well meant but of no importance to literature.”

“I thought they were of some importance,” I said, “since it secretly nourished the careers of too many square intellectuals, provided sustenance to thinkers in the Academy who influenced the intellectual tone of the West . . . After all, . . . the government through foundations was supporting a whole field of ‘Scholars of War’ . . . the subsidization of magazines like Encounter which held Eliotic style as a touchstone of sophistication and competence . . . failed to create an alternative free vital decentralized individualistic culture.”

(Learned of this brief piece from Talbot's Devil's Chessboard, BTW. Some interesting stuff can be found by searching for other texts which include it...)
Joao
 
Posts: 522
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 11:37 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Did the CIA fund creative writing in America?

Postby winsomecowboy2 » Sat Oct 31, 2015 6:20 am

Lets appreciate Edward Abbey and Hunter S Thompson all the more.
winsomecowboy2
 
Posts: 83
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 7:04 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Did the CIA fund creative writing in America?

Postby backtoiam » Sat Oct 31, 2015 8:01 am

I will be damned. winsomecowboy2 is not dead. I crossed you off the list. My bad. I'm gonna put you back on a respirator. :yay
"A mind stretched by a new idea can never return to it's original dimensions." Oliver Wendell Holmes
backtoiam
 
Posts: 2101
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 9:22 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Did the CIA fund creative writing in America?

Postby FourthBase » Tue Nov 03, 2015 6:33 pm

Joao » 30 Oct 2015 15:56 wrote:I don't think the point of CIA-as-Ministry-of-Culture is to make every aspect of Western arts and literature conform to their program, but rather what they sought (and largely achieved, it seems) is the ability to selectively manipulate as needed and to control the window of acceptable discourse, subject matter, and even style. The political leanings of individual authors/artists and the extent to which workshopping is somehow anti-individualist just aren't that important if the boundaries of the whole milieu are prescribed. And it's laughable to see this subject dismissed as something that only capital-C Communists should care about.


What is supposed to have been excluded from the milieu, the boundaries of which were where? What literature is supposed to have been too radical for the CIA's taste? How left wing is the art that we're supposed to be concerned never got the chance to be partially subsidized and touted by the CIA?
“Joy is a current of energy in your body, like chlorophyll or sunlight,
that fills you up and makes you naturally want to do your best.” - Bill Russell
User avatar
FourthBase
 
Posts: 7057
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 4:41 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Did the CIA fund creative writing in America?

Postby brekin » Wed Nov 04, 2015 1:17 pm

FourthBase wrote:
Joao » 30 Oct 2015 15:56 wrote:I don't think the point of CIA-as-Ministry-of-Culture is to make every aspect of Western arts and literature conform to their program, but rather what they sought (and largely achieved, it seems) is the ability to selectively manipulate as needed and to control the window of acceptable discourse, subject matter, and even style. The political leanings of individual authors/artists and the extent to which workshopping is somehow anti-individualist just aren't that important if the boundaries of the whole milieu are prescribed. And it's laughable to see this subject dismissed as something that only capital-C Communists should care about.


What is supposed to have been excluded from the milieu, the boundaries of which were where? What literature is supposed to have been too radical for the CIA's taste? How left wing is the art that we're supposed to be concerned never got the chance to be partially subsidized and touted by the CIA?


Paul Robeson knows...

More specifically, there was a good related story about a novelist finding out that the Paris Review was a CIA zine and why his novel about revolutionary Ethiopa subsequently didn't get published because it conflicted with the cause. Here it is:

The Real Agenda
By Richard Cummings


"We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time Magazine, and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the work is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national autodetermination practiced in past centuries."

~ David Rockefeller, founder of the Trilateral Commission, in an address to a meeting of the Trilateral Commission, in June 1991

Somehow, I knew it all along. But I got my personal whiff of world empire after my article on Haile Sellassie and the coming Ethiopian revolution appeared on the Op Ed page of the New York Times in 1974. I had been a visiting professor at the Haile Sellassie I University in Addis Ababa and had witnessed the student unrest that ultimately culminated in the overthrow of the monarchy. A number of publishers contacted me, including George Braziller and Putnam, through its editor in chief, Ned Chase (father of Chevy) asking me to submit book proposals. I wrote the proposal and gave it to my agent, John Schaffner.

Braziller came to my house, where he sipped ice tea and waxed euphoric about the proposal. Ned Chase took me to lunch at Billy’s and told me I was the "most exciting writer" of my generation and that he was going to get me a five book contract. Then, it all went cold. After weeks of silence, Schaffner phoned to tell me that a terrified Braziller tore into his office, threw the proposal on his desk, and fled. Ned Chase then reported that he had lost the proposal and was searching for it. Needless to say, he never found it. Months later, he phoned my agent to tell him he was withdrawing his offer to me.

Ethiopia was in the throes of a Marxist revolution, an event that threatened to tip the balance of power with the Soviet Union. Directly across the Red Sea from Saudi Arabia, Ethiopia was the home to a major American air force base and MAP installation. It was common knowledge that U.S. air force jets had flown to Saudi Arabia to put down an attempted coup by Saudi air force officers who sought to overthrow the House of Saud and replace it with a Marxist regime. Had this happened, the Russians would have been in control of the world’s largest oil reserves, virtually check mating the Americans.

What I did not know, but which I found out many years later through a routine news report on public radio and small articles in the press, was that the CIA had informed the American publishers that it did not want anything published on the subject of Ethiopia. It was easy for the Agency to do it, since Robie Macauley, a top literary editor at Harcourt, Brace, was, while he functioned in his literary capacity, the head of the CIA Africa desk. I know he was, because he told me so not long before he died. He explicitly said to me that his literary career was his cover. When his obituary appeared in the New York Times, it listed his accomplishments in the literary field, but failed to mention in his real career with the CIA. I rang up the author of the obituary and said, "You left out Robie’s career with the CIA." There was a long pause. Then he said, "We can’t put everything into an obituary."

From failing to report that it knew about the impending Bay of Pigs invasion, to not mentioning Robie Macauley’s CIA career, the Times went along with Agency policy, complicit in the Rockefeller agenda of global domination that culminated in the creation of the Trilateral Commission. The Agency’s tentacles, on behalf of this agenda, reached far and deep, including, in violation of the legislation that created it, domestic snooping and the trashing of American publications that opposed this agenda. Barney Rosset, who ran both Grove Press and Evergreen Review, which had been vocal in its opposition to the war in Vietnam, asked me to examine his CIA file to help him understand what it meant. I told him. When the editors of Grove went on strike and ruined Grove, they were part of a plot instigated by Jay Lovestone, the head of the international office of the AFL-CIA, to bring down Grove. Lovestone was at all times a CIA operative reporting to his CIA case officer, James Jesus Angleton. Angleton was the boss of E. Howard Hunt, who was Buckley’s boss at CIA. Not long ater Grove published The Pied Piper, my biography of Allard Lowenstein, which revealed Lowenstein’s CIA connection, a furious Frank Carlucci, who had served as Deputy Director of the CIA and was close to Lowenstein, had denounced Rosset, who was summarily thrown out as publisher of Grove by its new owners, Ann Getty and Lord Weidenfeld.

I was exposed to the perfidious undercover operations without realizing it. Part of a group of writers and artists in the Hamptons, I would celebrate Christmas at the home of Swedish artist, Hans Hokanson at his home and studio in Northwest Woods in East Hampton. Invariably, the novelist and nature writer, Peter Matthiessen was one of the guests. On the Christmas after I had returned from a year teaching in Barbados, (I was in Barbados when I had written the Times Op Ed piece), I was sitting in a corner of Hokanson’s living room, from which vantage point I could see Matthiessen glaring at me from across the room, his eyes as malignant as those of a poisonous snake.

Hokanson’s wife, Barbara, who had been standing next to Matthiessen, came towards me. She said that Peter wanted me to know something. She said, "Peter wants you to know that you should feel lucky that he doesn’t let you close to him, because he could really hurt you." She turned and left me bemused. Some years later, the Times revealed in a story that Matthiessen had been in the CIA. This was clever of it a subtle enactment of what Rolland Barthes called "the inoculation principle," whereby power reveals a bit of the truth to conceal a bigger lie. The bigger lie, I was to learn even later, was that the Paris Review, which Matthiessen allegedly founded and which was ostensibly funded by Prince Sadruddin Aga Kahn, was his cover and that the money all came from the CIA. His ex-wife Patsy told me everything, as did his closest friend, John Sherry as well as Jamie Linville, the managing editor of the Paris Review. Linville told me that Matthiessen was "haunted by the CIA," and Sherry said he was "tormented," but not enough to come clean directly by himself.

I still wonder how Peter thought he could "hurt me." After all, CIA intelligence officers are bureaucrats of the state. Was he going to do something awful to me in the name of the state, when I was not a criminal and had done nothing illegal? Matthiessen, like William Buckley, the founder the National Review, were, like many in the CIA of that generation, recruited out of Yale, part of the elite corps of intellectuals who were going to run the world along with David Rockefeller. Their goal was a super-state, in which the economy and the culture would be run for the benefit of a handful of the self-appointed chosen.

It is no accident that this has culminated in the American occupation of Iraq, with the plans for world domination set out yet again, after it was derailed by the debacle of Vietnam, in the Project for a New American Century. With George W. Bush, of Yale and Skull and Bones, at the head of the project, the dream lives on. Except it is not a dream. It is a nightmare that turned America into a kind of police state. And it has exploded.

Richard Cummings [send him mail] taught international law at the Haile Selassie I University and before that, was Attorney-Advisor with the Office of General Counsel of the Near East South Asia region of U.S.A.I.D, where he was responsible for the legal work pertaining to the aid program in Israel, Jordan, Pakistan and Afghanistan. He is the author of a new novel, The Immortalists, as well as The Pied Piper — Allard K. Lowenstein and the Liberal Dream, and the comedy, Soccer Moms From Hell. He holds a Ph.D. in Social and Political Sciences from Cambridge University and is a member of the Association of Former Intelligence Officers. He is writing a new book, The Road To Baghdad — The Money Trail Behind The War In Iraq.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/1970/01/ric ... s/cia-usa/
If I knew all mysteries and all knowledge, and have not charity, I am nothing. St. Paul
I hang onto my prejudices, they are the testicles of my mind. Eric Hoffer
User avatar
brekin
 
Posts: 3229
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 5:21 pm
Blog: View Blog (1)

Re: Did the CIA fund creative writing in America?

Postby FourthBase » Wed Nov 04, 2015 2:34 pm

brekin » 04 Nov 2015 12:17 wrote:
FourthBase wrote:
Joao » 30 Oct 2015 15:56 wrote:I don't think the point of CIA-as-Ministry-of-Culture is to make every aspect of Western arts and literature conform to their program, but rather what they sought (and largely achieved, it seems) is the ability to selectively manipulate as needed and to control the window of acceptable discourse, subject matter, and even style. The political leanings of individual authors/artists and the extent to which workshopping is somehow anti-individualist just aren't that important if the boundaries of the whole milieu are prescribed. And it's laughable to see this subject dismissed as something that only capital-C Communists should care about.


What is supposed to have been excluded from the milieu, the boundaries of which were where? What literature is supposed to have been too radical for the CIA's taste? How left wing is the art that we're supposed to be concerned never got the chance to be partially subsidized and touted by the CIA?


Paul Robeson knows...


So, that left wing?

More specifically, there was a good related story about a novelist finding out that the Paris Review was a CIA zine and why his novel about revolutionary Ethiopa subsequently didn't get published because it conflicted with the cause. Here it is:

The Real Agenda
By Richard Cummings


Ethiopia was in the throes of a Marxist revolution, an event that threatened to tip the balance of power with the Soviet Union. Directly across the Red Sea from Saudi Arabia, Ethiopia was the home to a major American air force base and MAP installation. It was common knowledge that U.S. air force jets had flown to Saudi Arabia to put down an attempted coup by Saudi air force officers who sought to overthrow the House of Saud and replace it with a Marxist regime. Had this happened, the Russians would have been in control of the world’s largest oil reserves, virtually check mating the Americans.


Are we supposed to be rooting for the Soviet Union there?

Richard Cummings [send him mail] taught international law at the Haile Selassie I University and before that, was Attorney-Advisor with the Office of General Counsel of the Near East South Asia region of U.S.A.I.D, where he was responsible for the legal work pertaining to the aid program in Israel, Jordan, Pakistan and Afghanistan. He is the author of a new novel, The Immortalists, as well as The Pied Piper — Allard K. Lowenstein and the Liberal Dream, and the comedy, Soccer Moms From Hell. He holds a Ph.D. in Social and Political Sciences from Cambridge University and is a member of the Association of Former Intelligence Officers. He is writing a new book, The Road To Baghdad — The Money Trail Behind The War In Iraq.


Cummings was a spook, too, eh? The kind of spook concerned that the anti-Communist leftists employed by the CIA weren't left wing enough?
“Joy is a current of energy in your body, like chlorophyll or sunlight,
that fills you up and makes you naturally want to do your best.” - Bill Russell
User avatar
FourthBase
 
Posts: 7057
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 4:41 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Did the CIA fund creative writing in America?

Postby brekin » Wed Nov 04, 2015 3:28 pm

I think the chestnut is that many people think there should be a diverse range of voices without state approval, control or vetting that the public gets to hear from and make up their own mind about what they say. You don't have to be pro-soviet expansion in Saudi Arabia to want to read a novel about Ethiopian revolutionaries with communist leanings. Even a strident anti-communist would lose out from the opportunity of not being able to read it, or to even know if its existence. I'm not saying the publishing industry has to get down on their knees and bless every opinion out there either but just look at this case, the CIA had informed the American publishers that it did not want anything published on the subject of Ethiopia. They didn't want anything published. Anything.

Here a whole country was was to be excluded from the milieu, the boundaries of peoples consciousness were to limited to outdated information regarding it. A college professor's (ex-spook's maybe) novel about events there were too radical for the CIA's taste. Basically any art about Ethiopia seems to have been too left wing by possibly mentioning contemporary events there at the time. Whatever your political stripe, thats pretty radical.
If I knew all mysteries and all knowledge, and have not charity, I am nothing. St. Paul
I hang onto my prejudices, they are the testicles of my mind. Eric Hoffer
User avatar
brekin
 
Posts: 3229
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 5:21 pm
Blog: View Blog (1)

Re: Did the CIA fund creative writing in America?

Postby FourthBase » Wed Nov 04, 2015 4:32 pm

brekin » 04 Nov 2015 14:28 wrote:I think the chestnut is that many people think there should be a diverse range of voices without state approval, control or vetting that the public gets to hear from and make up their own mind about what they say.


Does that include the state approval that Robeson enjoyed via the Soviet Union? Or is state-controlled communist propaganda exempt from that principle?

You don't have to be pro-soviet expansion in Saudi Arabia to want to read a novel about Ethiopian revolutionaries with communist leanings. Even a strident anti-communist would lose out from the opportunity of not being able to read it, or to even know if its existence. I'm not saying the publishing industry has to get down on their knees and bless every opinion out there either but just look at this case, the CIA had informed the American publishers that it did not want anything published on the subject of Ethiopia. They didn't want anything published. Anything.


The supposedly status-quo-preserving industry was on its knees and blessing it. Until the CIA cockblocked it, according to Cummings, who was unjustly deprived of...a major publisher's fawning business. So, then, did he get it published by a smaller house? Did he self-publish it? If not, why? Why at that particular point in time did Cummings need his novel about Ethiopian Marxist revolutionaries to enjoy the reach of a major American publisher?

Here a whole country was was to be excluded from the milieu, the boundaries of peoples consciousness were to limited to outdated information regarding it. A college professor's (ex-spook's maybe) novel about events there were too radical for the CIA's taste. Basically any art about Ethiopia seems to have been too left wing by possibly mentioning contemporary events there at the time. Whatever your political stripe, thats pretty radical.


1. Ex-spook? "Maybe", lol?

2. If this novel by a self-confirmed spook HAD been published, what are the odds that you'd be pointing to it now as a golden example of the publishing industry serving the interests of the American empire with milieu-trimmed propaganda?

3. Let's imagine you find out that Cummings was not just an American intelligence officer but also a KGB asset, how would your opinion change?

4. What else wasn't published about Ethiopia in that timeframe? Surely it wasn't just this one Cummings book, if there was a blanket ban? Or, perhaps there were books about Ethiopia published, but they were less sympathetic to the revolutionaries, or were put out by lesser publishers? What is the "routine news report" he mentions?
“Joy is a current of energy in your body, like chlorophyll or sunlight,
that fills you up and makes you naturally want to do your best.” - Bill Russell
User avatar
FourthBase
 
Posts: 7057
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 4:41 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Did the CIA fund creative writing in America?

Postby Luther Blissett » Wed Nov 04, 2015 4:57 pm

FourthBase » Tue Nov 03, 2015 5:33 pm wrote:
Joao » 30 Oct 2015 15:56 wrote:I don't think the point of CIA-as-Ministry-of-Culture is to make every aspect of Western arts and literature conform to their program, but rather what they sought (and largely achieved, it seems) is the ability to selectively manipulate as needed and to control the window of acceptable discourse, subject matter, and even style. The political leanings of individual authors/artists and the extent to which workshopping is somehow anti-individualist just aren't that important if the boundaries of the whole milieu are prescribed. And it's laughable to see this subject dismissed as something that only capital-C Communists should care about.


What is supposed to have been excluded from the milieu, the boundaries of which were where? What literature is supposed to have been too radical for the CIA's taste? How left wing is the art that we're supposed to be concerned never got the chance to be partially subsidized and touted by the CIA?


They probably wanted to quiet or silence intellectual support for values like peace; clean air, water, and soil; mutual aid; civil rights; equality of genders and sexualities; gardening; etc. Depending upon what one feels about the public figures of the sixties, this may or may not have been a successful operation.

The most recently I heard / thought about the Iowa Writers' Workshops was when it was in a subplot of the HBO series "Girls," the one everyone loves to hate. What's fascinating to me is that the creator of the show writes her own main character as a villain, or at least an anti-hero, but not generally a likable or good, ethical person in any way. She attends the Iowa Writers' Workshop and is a slacker outcast antagonist. The program is then staged personified for the viewer as the hero of the plotline, the arbiter of all that is good.

I think it's still happening.
The Rich and the Corporate remain in their hundred-year fever visions of Bolsheviks taking their stuff - JackRiddler
User avatar
Luther Blissett
 
Posts: 4991
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Did the CIA fund creative writing in America?

Postby brekin » Wed Nov 04, 2015 7:44 pm

FourthBase » Wed Nov 04, 2015 3:32 pm wrote:
brekin » 04 Nov 2015 14:28 wrote:I think the chestnut is that many people think there should be a diverse range of voices without state approval, control or vetting that the public gets to hear from and make up their own mind about what they say.


Fourthbase wrote:
Does that include the state approval that Robeson enjoyed via the Soviet Union? Or is state-controlled communist propaganda exempt from that principle?


Ahh no. Why would it? Oh I get it, you've got this underlying theme for people who can't believe the soviet dream was built on bones? I don't see any easy marks standing around here holding a copy of The Daily Worker do you?

You don't have to be pro-soviet expansion in Saudi Arabia to want to read a novel about Ethiopian revolutionaries with communist leanings. Even a strident anti-communist would lose out from the opportunity of not being able to read it, or to even know if its existence. I'm not saying the publishing industry has to get down on their knees and bless every opinion out there either but just look at this case, the CIA had informed the American publishers that it did not want anything published on the subject of Ethiopia. They didn't want anything published. Anything.


Fourthbase wrote:
The supposedly status-quo-preserving industry was on its knees and blessing it. Until the CIA cockblocked it, according to Cummings, who was unjustly deprived of...a major publisher's fawning business. So, then, did he get it published by a smaller house? Did he self-publish it? If not, why? Why at that particular point in time did Cummings need his novel about Ethiopian Marxist revolutionaries to enjoy the reach of a major American publisher?


Maybe because he had just finished writing it, thought it was good and wanted to get paid and props for it? Really not understanding if you curious about this or just rascally. The industry was out of step and then was brought back in step to what was politically correct. Happens everyday based on owners, advertisers, interest groups and apparently also some governmental agencies whims. Your other questions about evasive publishing cock blocking maneuvers taken or not taken seem like an email from you to Cummings would be the best route.

Here a whole country was was to be excluded from the milieu, the boundaries of peoples consciousness were to limited to outdated information regarding it. A college professor's (ex-spook's maybe) novel about events there were too radical for the CIA's taste. Basically any art about Ethiopia seems to have been too left wing by possibly mentioning contemporary events there at the time. Whatever your political stripe, thats pretty radical.


Fourthbase wrote:
1. Ex-spook? "Maybe", lol?


Not sure, probably, don't care. Your uncle and mine were probably ex-spooks to. Its a growth industry.

Fourthbase wrote:
2. If this novel by a self-confirmed spook HAD been published, what are the odds that you'd be pointing to it now as a golden example of the publishing industry serving the interests of the American empire with milieu-trimmed propaganda?


If it showed communist leaning revolutionaries in a positive, or just accurate light, I doubt I would. But I doubt it would have made much of splash anyways, imho. He was probably competing with Even Cowgirls Get The Blues during that time frame. But you never can know, more than one novel has started a revolution. Neither of us having read the book, but it being obvious from his article it got dropped by receptive publishers like a hot potato makes that all seem very doubtful it would serve any U.S. gov interests at the time as propaganda lite.

Fourthbase wrote:
3. Let's imagine you find out that Cummings was not just an American intelligence officer but also a KGB asset, how would your opinion change?


I would see him as much more ambitious and accomplished than I already surmised. Also, long suffering. I'd wonder about his family dynamic and whether any of that contributed to his decision to be a double agent. I'd probably see him as being a little shorter and pudgier. I'd also wonder what the titles of the novels he tried to publish in Mother Russia that got cocked blocked to were. And he'd definitely be reclassified as a Gemini, and not a Libra as originally read.

Fourthbase wrote:
4. What else wasn't published about Ethiopia in that timeframe? Surely it wasn't just this one Cummings book, if there was a blanket ban? Or, perhaps there were books about Ethiopia published, but they were less sympathetic to the revolutionaries, or were put out by lesser publishers? What is the "routine news report" he mentions?


Is this Information Please? Date a Reference Librarian or let your fingers doing the walking.
If I knew all mysteries and all knowledge, and have not charity, I am nothing. St. Paul
I hang onto my prejudices, they are the testicles of my mind. Eric Hoffer
User avatar
brekin
 
Posts: 3229
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 5:21 pm
Blog: View Blog (1)

Re: Did the CIA fund creative writing in America?

Postby FourthBase » Wed Nov 04, 2015 7:54 pm

Luther Blissett » 04 Nov 2015 15:57 wrote:
FourthBase » Tue Nov 03, 2015 5:33 pm wrote:
Joao » 30 Oct 2015 15:56 wrote:I don't think the point of CIA-as-Ministry-of-Culture is to make every aspect of Western arts and literature conform to their program, but rather what they sought (and largely achieved, it seems) is the ability to selectively manipulate as needed and to control the window of acceptable discourse, subject matter, and even style. The political leanings of individual authors/artists and the extent to which workshopping is somehow anti-individualist just aren't that important if the boundaries of the whole milieu are prescribed. And it's laughable to see this subject dismissed as something that only capital-C Communists should care about.


What is supposed to have been excluded from the milieu, the boundaries of which were where? What literature is supposed to have been too radical for the CIA's taste? How left wing is the art that we're supposed to be concerned never got the chance to be partially subsidized and touted by the CIA?


They probably wanted to quiet or silence intellectual support for values like peace; clean air, water, and soil; mutual aid; civil rights; equality of genders and sexualities; gardening; etc. Depending upon what one feels about the public figures of the sixties, this may or may not have been a successful operation.


Please tell me which of those values would have been quieted or silenced by championing the Non-Communist Left.

Only plausible one I can see is peace, in the sense that the generally anti-war NCL still probably did not want to be conquered by the Soviet Union.

The most recently I heard / thought about the Iowa Writers' Workshops was when it was in a subplot of the HBO series "Girls," the one everyone loves to hate. What's fascinating to me is that the creator of the show writes her own main character as a villain, or at least an anti-hero, but not generally a likable or good, ethical person in any way. She attends the Iowa Writers' Workshop and is a slacker outcast antagonist. The program is then staged personified for the viewer as the hero of the plotline, the arbiter of all that is good.

I think it's still happening.


You think what is still happening? You think that leftist-dominated elite writers' and artists' workshops are encouraged by the CIA to enforce boundaries of left wing acceptability?
“Joy is a current of energy in your body, like chlorophyll or sunlight,
that fills you up and makes you naturally want to do your best.” - Bill Russell
User avatar
FourthBase
 
Posts: 7057
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 4:41 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Did the CIA fund creative writing in America?

Postby FourthBase » Wed Nov 04, 2015 7:58 pm

Is this Information Please? Date a Reference Librarian or let your fingers doing the walking


I pasted that into Google Translate and apparently what brekin means is, "I got nothing and I'm totally full of shit."
“Joy is a current of energy in your body, like chlorophyll or sunlight,
that fills you up and makes you naturally want to do your best.” - Bill Russell
User avatar
FourthBase
 
Posts: 7057
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 4:41 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Did the CIA fund creative writing in America?

Postby FourthBase » Wed Nov 04, 2015 8:06 pm

I don't see any easy marks standing around here holding a copy of The Daily Worker do you?


Do you realize how much of an overlap there'd be between this board and The Daily Worker, or are you just being coy?
“Joy is a current of energy in your body, like chlorophyll or sunlight,
that fills you up and makes you naturally want to do your best.” - Bill Russell
User avatar
FourthBase
 
Posts: 7057
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 4:41 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Did the CIA fund creative writing in America?

Postby Luther Blissett » Wed Nov 04, 2015 8:26 pm

FourthBase » Wed Nov 04, 2015 6:54 pm wrote:
Luther Blissett » 04 Nov 2015 15:57 wrote:
FourthBase » Tue Nov 03, 2015 5:33 pm wrote:
Joao » 30 Oct 2015 15:56 wrote:I don't think the point of CIA-as-Ministry-of-Culture is to make every aspect of Western arts and literature conform to their program, but rather what they sought (and largely achieved, it seems) is the ability to selectively manipulate as needed and to control the window of acceptable discourse, subject matter, and even style. The political leanings of individual authors/artists and the extent to which workshopping is somehow anti-individualist just aren't that important if the boundaries of the whole milieu are prescribed. And it's laughable to see this subject dismissed as something that only capital-C Communists should care about.


What is supposed to have been excluded from the milieu, the boundaries of which were where? What literature is supposed to have been too radical for the CIA's taste? How left wing is the art that we're supposed to be concerned never got the chance to be partially subsidized and touted by the CIA?


They probably wanted to quiet or silence intellectual support for values like peace; clean air, water, and soil; mutual aid; civil rights; equality of genders and sexualities; gardening; etc. Depending upon what one feels about the public figures of the sixties, this may or may not have been a successful operation.


Please tell me which of those values would have been quieted or silenced by championing the Non-Communist Left.

Only plausible one I can see is peace, in the sense that the generally anti-war NCL still probably did not want to be conquered by the Soviet Union.

The most recently I heard / thought about the Iowa Writers' Workshops was when it was in a subplot of the HBO series "Girls," the one everyone loves to hate. What's fascinating to me is that the creator of the show writes her own main character as a villain, or at least an anti-hero, but not generally a likable or good, ethical person in any way. She attends the Iowa Writers' Workshop and is a slacker outcast antagonist. The program is then staged personified for the viewer as the hero of the plotline, the arbiter of all that is good.

I think it's still happening.


You think what is still happening? You think that leftist-dominated elite writers' and artists' workshops are encouraged by the CIA to enforce boundaries of left wing acceptability?


I suppose I meant all of the values could be those that the CIA would want to quiet, and would promote any figure who might do so. I imagine that there could have been a Rachel Carson before Rachel Carson, but she wasn't given a chance for whatever reason.

I also imagine there are still-standing operations to infiltrate and redirect dissent, now even more than during the cold war. I'm involved with groups and organizations from mainstream professional creative organizations to radical groups and, despite being mostly non-paranoid about myself, I don't imagine that any are free from intelligence. I attended a farewell toast for the executive director of one of my groups and the joke was raised about his murky past work in Southeast Asia and the fear that he himself was a spook. I was actually flummoxed. In more radical groups, the stakes are higher but the signs can feel more insidious and personal.
The Rich and the Corporate remain in their hundred-year fever visions of Bolsheviks taking their stuff - JackRiddler
User avatar
Luther Blissett
 
Posts: 4991
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Did the CIA fund creative writing in America?

Postby brekin » Wed Nov 04, 2015 9:44 pm

I don't see any easy marks standing around here holding a copy of The Daily Worker do you?

Fourthbase wrote:
Do you realize how much of an overlap there'd be between this board and The Daily Worker, or are you just being coy?


Are you serious? Like for one, didn't the DW think Stalin was a good guy? Like who has said that here? And didn't they cease publication in the 50's or something? Who here has 50's era Communist ideology? Am I'm missing the threads on this? And all this begs the question as to whether you have a problem or not with the government stepping in cases like this?

Is this Information Please? Date a Reference Librarian or let your fingers doing the walking

Fourthbase wrote:
I pasted that into Google Translate and apparently what brekin means is, "I got nothing and I'm totally full of shit."


Ok, good first attempt but don't give up on internet research. And its good your fingers are starting to get their exercise but just remember your first time out you may end up some strange places. Bring a friend to help you, maybe team up with Ask Jeeves on your first few forays. I think you, Ask Jeeves and old Joe McCarthy would be a great fellow travelers.
If I knew all mysteries and all knowledge, and have not charity, I am nothing. St. Paul
I hang onto my prejudices, they are the testicles of my mind. Eric Hoffer
User avatar
brekin
 
Posts: 3229
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 5:21 pm
Blog: View Blog (1)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests