Did the CIA fund creative writing in America?

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: Did the CIA fund creative writing in America?

Postby FourthBase » Sun Nov 15, 2015 5:54 am

JackRiddler » 06 Nov 2015 17:35 wrote:FB, of course you won't attend a Left Forum, or anything else apparently. Observing the outside world would be hazardous to this essentially hallucinated world-view of yours. I call it hallucinated not because it or you are "crazy," but because one only need read what you write to see that you don't cite examples, or readings, or arguments of individuals, or aggregate studies, or anecdotes, or any evidence at all. You spin general condemnations around given names or keywords, then weave speculative webs where anything else you feel like can be thrown in.


Again, what in the fuck is the difference between sitting through the panels as televised on C-SPAN versus being there in person? What's so special about the extracurricular schmoozing, bickering, and bullshitting? What's to miss? That personal touch and the peer pressure so key to recruitment in religious cults, secret societies, spy networks, political conspiracies?

Please list which worldview components and condemnations I owe examples and evidence for. I'll happily oblige.

Your fellow cultists just so happen to dominate the realm from which the readings, citations, "arguments of individuals", and studies you demand be used as authority-chips and debunking-currency would be derived...how convenient.

As with the example of Luther's environmental project, it takes you little time to reach some environmentalists you don't name who once said something horrible, so that you can always repeat it as if it constitutes an eternal essence of the category.


"Eternal essence of the category", lol? How in the fuck did you get to that? There is more than one notable environmentalist certain and desperate enough about worst case scenarios to have openly daydreamed about the human species being culled. Are you seriously going to fucking deny that? I'm assuming most people here are familiar with a deep ecologist or two saying shit that extreme. Probably been a sentiment expressed at times on this very board. But to satisfy the minimum requirement of two names, Pianca and Finkola.

I'll give only one example of what empirical observation might have done for you. You should know that on your "leftist" NPR, on the day after the "universally venerated" Howard Zinn died (it's funny reading your shit from within a history department where I now am, where I can see the reality of how universally unvenerated he is, sadly, but anyway...) yes this very NPR, arm of the Left Culture Attack on America, did something I have never observed them do with any other obituary piece: They gave time to David Horowitz to trash the dead man as a traitorous beast who seduced and destroyed a whole generation of students with his America-hating lies -- basically, to talk as you do about the Left Forum, etc. That is the reality of NPR, of the status of the left, and of the continued right-wing hegemony over American culture -- where it's Planned Parenthood under attack by Congress. Zinn may be taught in thousands of classrooms, but many thousands more are under the sway of the Texas School Board standards for history. The closest thing to a KGB in the U.S. today is the state of Arizona.


Oh, the humanity. During the course of what had to have been a week full of ceremonial adoration, public radio had the nerve to let somebody on the air who found it very problematic that Zinn had been a Communist who desired the overthrow of the America government, military, economy and whose polemical propaganda was now being taught to children as righteous gospel in thousands of the kind of history classrooms disproportionately attended by public schools' most elite students as opposed to ordinary riff-raff.

Venerated within a history department where, however ideologically captured they may be, historians with some semblance of professional integrity might still work and gather? No, I wouldn't be surprised if he wasn't uniformly venerated in that one specific environment.

I'm not horrified by Horowitz, actually...which I'm sure is a horrifying thing to say here. I take Frontpage as seriously as I take Jacobin. I especially pay attention to apostates like Horowitz, in fact. He was once somebody like you.

By the way, did you seriously fucking contend above that NPR doesn't give airtime to anti-war voices, lmao? I guess I've hate-listened to NPR way more than you, then? Or is anyone even slightly less anti-war than Ramsey Clark a hawk?

It's an amazing act of self-distraction you are pulling on yourself. I guess it can happen -- to have seen the power and the crimes of the neocons, it's not so surprising that many then need some miniature and preferably harmless target to adopt instead, like poor Judith Butler. (!!!!!!) (Butler and Cheney to the dock!) Or ethnic studies.


You think parapolitical stereoscopy distracts from the 2D radical orthodoxy that your identity needs to be the One True Explanation, wherein your side is perpetually fragile, vulnerable, and disadvantaged...well, until it isn't.

Pop quiz for everyone: How many countries are governed by the Socialist International? (Not including countries like China, Cuba, Vietnam, North Korea, or Greece.)

Percentage of EU ruled by the "center-left" on a spectrum defined by The Guardian, wherein a Socialist government earns you neither the label "left wing" nor the color red...

"ONLY" one third

....a disappointing 32.5%.

Image

In many cases of such undisciplined mish-mashes and turning of every term on its head I see intentional confusionism at work, but yours comes across like some serious emotional displacement going on. Confronted with the reality of the crimes in which we are all forced to participate, I hit a lot of walls just for the fuck of it, myself. You make up a parallel universe with more manageable crimes, where the masterminds are Zizek or Peter Singer or some ethnic studies curriculum.


Displacement...like the kind of displacement that happens when one commits to a position so far to the left that 99% of the world stands to your right? Displacement where everything that isn't pro-socialist is counter-revolutionary and pro-fascism?

Have there ever been leftist masterminds, Jack? Leftist power elites? Do leftists belong to any secret societies? Have there ever been leftist conspiracies? Leftist spies? Were there not leftists in the KGB? Are there leftists in charge of China today?
“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 JackRiddler » Sun Nov 15, 2015 7:47 pm

FB, you win. I won't be discussing with you about Howard Zinn, the Chinese ruling party, Syriza before and after July 2015, its identical-twin regimes in North Korea and Cuba, Judith Butler, Vietnam, the past or present Horowitz (one of me! both of'em!), Left Forum, environmentalists, NPR, Ramsey Clark, Vietnam, KGB, Hollande, the liberal CIA, Matteo Renzi, the current Leftist reign of terror in the European Union, and/or the Socialist International, either sequentially or all at once, not in one or multiple posts. Because basically you are right! They're all one thing, one origin, one cult, one unified hegemony deployed by Them and enveloping the globe, preparing the extermination of homo sapiens, and suffocating the public school children who would otherwise be patriots. And anyway, despite so many cases of identical leftism to worry you, you still have 99% of the world on your side. You win!!! (You forgot the National Socialists, by the way! Just trying to be helpful.)

Thanks for a preview of the Republican attack campaign on Sanders or Clinton, depending. Happy Benghazi to ya!!!
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 16007
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Did the CIA fund creative writing in America?

Postby FourthBase » Sun Nov 15, 2015 8:33 pm

Ah, rather than run the risk of sincere engagement, the "I'm above all this! (Actually, I got nuthin)" play, hmmm. Real smooth, Jack, lol. No backbone, no bravado? No fucking integrity? Where'd it go? Was it ever there? Is that all you really are? An ordinary far leftist? Just a fucking organ yourself? Thought you were better than that.
“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 JackRiddler » Sun Nov 15, 2015 8:52 pm

I am immune, sir. Read your own post and outline how it could possibly be answered. Am I to spend three hours going point-by-point on your kitchen-sink check-list of things unrelated and not? Why, so I can do it again after your answer? You want to associate me with the Chinese communist party, Greece with North Korea, etc.? No problem! If you think what you wrote above merits the effort of an answer, then I demand that you answer for General Custer, William Buckley, St. Paul, Savaranola, Sulla, Vlad the Impaler, Elizabeth Bathory, J.P. Morgan, Columbus, Foucault and Edmund Burke. Because I've decided, with about as much logic as you have applied, that these are all intimately related outgrowths of the exact same body of thought, and that you are representing it right here!
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 16007
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Did the CIA fund creative writing in America?

Postby FourthBase » Sun Nov 15, 2015 9:05 pm

JackRiddler » 15 Nov 2015 19:52 wrote:I am immune, sir. Read your own post and outline how it could possibly be answered. Am I to spend three hours going point-by-point on your kitchen-sink check-list of things unrelated and not? Why, so I can do it again after your answer? You want to associate me with the Chinese communist party, Greece with North Korea, etc.? No problem! If you think what you wrote above merits the effort of an answer, then I demand that you answer for General Custer, William Buckley, St. Paul, Savaranola, Sulla, Vlad the Impaler, Elizabeth Bathory, J.P. Morgan, Columbus, Foucault and Edmund Burke. Because I've decided, with about as much logic as you have applied, that these are all intimately related outgrowths of the exact same body of thought, and that you are representing it right here!


What a bunch of dishonest horseshit. Bummer.
“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 JackRiddler » Sun Nov 15, 2015 9:18 pm

It's totally killing me. Loop back to my earlier posts, the answers you aren't seeking are more or less in there.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 16007
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Did the CIA fund creative writing in America?

Postby brekin » Mon Nov 16, 2015 1:26 pm

brekin wrote:

I've got the book on order, Workshops of Empire, that was just published this month by the author of the first article.


Joao wrote:

Due respect to Brekin for an interesting topic but I found the OP article atrocious. More power to you, I guess, if you can make it though a whole book by that guy.


Book arrived. Book was attempted to be read. Strangely, author may be further example of a writer's brain being workshopped to academic mush.
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 Joao » Mon Nov 16, 2015 7:10 pm

brekin » Mon Nov 16, 2015 10:26 am wrote:Book arrived. Book was attempted to be read. Strangely, author may be further example of a writer's brain being workshopped to academic mush.

Easy to believe. Too bad though, I was hoping you'd have the patience for it and would fill us in...

brekin » Fri Oct 30, 2015 3:27 pm wrote:But I think this is possibly an important example of milieu setting or at least tampering.

The following cover similar ground and may be informative. I'm not familiar with the authors and haven't reviewed in detail, though, so no endorsements made.

Although I have deep interest and basic familiarity with this topic, I admit to finding myself a little hesitant to dig in more. Just about everybody outside this board seems to find it utterly mind blowing and beyond the limits of comprehensibility to have the words "CIA" and "Ministry of Culture" used in the same sentence. I'm alienated enough already and, for now, am willing to live with the basic position that bourgeois societies produce culture which, ipso facto, serves their masters' agenda. Wealth worship, reducing everything to winning and losing, and the cult of (atomized) individualism are in the air we breathe. It's much more subtle and insidious, IMO, than even many SF Bay Area lefties are willing to acknowledge.

I realize the term "bourgeois" is a turn-off / thought-stopper for some but I use it because it has a specific definition which I find useful and accurate.

Sometimes I even wonder if Darwinist "survival of the fittest" is just the bourgeois pseudoscience equivalent to Soviet Lysenkoism. (The term doesn't originate with Darwin himself, of course.)
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 brekin » Tue Nov 17, 2015 3:17 pm

Thanks for the links, Joao. Try to peruse some when I get a chance. Book just had to many qualifiers and modifiers for me where anything, could, kind of, sorta be surmised and implied.

A good book that I'm a 1/4 in related to this matter (kind of the inverse, where the CIA fought to have a Russian novel published) discussed below.
The Finn and Couvee one, don't know about the Mancosu one.

Obviously a great example of the CIA's international offensive literary game (which I think we can all agree was needed in this instance) but also makes you wonder again about their domestic defensive game.

The CIA’s ‘Zhivago’
Michael Scammell
July 10, 2014 Issue
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archive ... s-zhivago/

The Zhivago Affair: The Kremlin, the CIA, and the Battle Over a Forbidden Book
by Peter Finn and Petra Couvée
Pantheon, 352 pp., $26.95

Inside the Zhivago Storm: The Editorial Adventures of Pasternak’s Masterpiece
by Paolo Mancosu
Milan: Feltrinelli, 402 pp., €40.00

In its headquarters in Langley, Virginia, the CIA has a museum that’s not generally open to the public. The museum’s function, according to its website, is to “inform, instruct and inspire” members of the CIA as they practice the craft of intelligence.1 Among its prize exhibits, alongside the Enigma encryption machine, a semi-submersible submarine, and Osama bin Laden’s AK-47, is an unassuming paperback book measuring five-and-a-half inches high, three-and-a-half inches wide, and three quarters of an inch thick. It’s a pocket edition of Boris Pasternak’s Doctor Zhivago, six hundred pages printed on bible paper for smuggling purposes. The caption reads: “Copy of the original Russian-language edition of Doctor Zhivago, covertly published by the CIA. The front cover and the binding identify the book in Russian; the back of the book states that it was printed in France.”

So far as I know, it’s the only literary exhibit in the museum and its presence in such incongruous surroundings indicates the importance the CIA once placed on “soft” warfare and propaganda, though when exactly the book was put there and information about it released online is not clear. For over half a century the CIA kept totally quiet about its involvement with Doctor Zhivago and only very recently admitted to it. Perhaps it was in 2009, when the Russian journalist and broadcaster Ivan Tolstoy published The Laundered Novel: Doctor Zhivago between the KGB and the CIA, the first serious investigation of the subject for many years. The museum’s caption refers to Tolstoy’s book as “alleging that the CIA had secretly arranged for the publication of a limited-run, Russian-language edition of Doctor Zhivago,” but coyly adds (as if the museum had no connection with its bosses), “the CIA officially declined to comment on Tolstoy’s conclusions.”

Perhaps that will change now, with the publication of two new books, Inside the Zhivago Storm: The Editorial Adventures of Pasternak’s Masterpiece by Paolo Mancosu, and especially The Zhivago Affair: The Kremlin, the CIA, and the Battle Over a Forbidden Book by Peter Finn and Petra Couvée. The authors of both books describe in great detail the way the CIA successfully covered its tracks and the mechanisms it used to get a Russian-language edition of Doctor Zhivago published in Europe with great speed, but Finn and Couvée have a trump card in the form of a collection of “approximately 135” declassified CIA documents that reveal the thinking behind the operation and the many missteps in carrying out what was till then a completely unfamiliar enterprise. There is a vast literature about Pasternak and Doctor Zhivago, and much of it has referred to the CIA’s involvement in the novel’s publication either in passing or at length, but no one has previously had access to firsthand material of this nature.2 Fortunately, Finn and Couvée’s book is about far more than the CIA. They cover every aspect of the Zhivago affair in detail, from Pasternak’s early life and the origins of his novel to the bombshell of its first publication in 1957, the nature of the CIA’s intervention, and the aftermath for Pasternak and his associates.

It took Pasternak half a lifetime to write Doctor Zhivago. A poet of genius in his youth, he had less facility with prose, yet decided early in his career that he wanted to write a “big,” nineteenth-century style novel “with a love intrigue and a heroine in it—like Balzac.” His subject would be the February and October revolutions and the civil war between Reds and Whites, all of which he had lived through and experienced personally. He made a start on the novel in 1932, when he was still sanguine about the revolution’s outcome, but destroyed most of what he had written when Stalin’s Great Terror and the purges put an end to his optimism and made it too dangerous to write down his true thoughts at all.

Pasternak had two brushes with Stalin during the next few years, the first in 1934, when Stalin phoned him out of the blue to ask his opinion of Osip Mandelstam, newly arrested for composing a biting epigram about the dictator. Pasternak knew the epigram, but waffled so much in his reply that Stalin apparently accused him of not sufficiently sticking up for a friend. As news of their conversation raced around the grapevine, some accused him of cowardice, though Mandelstam and his wife, Nadezhda, didn’t agree. Later, when Pasternak’s name appeared on a list of people to be executed, Stalin apparently said contemptuously, “Leave the ‘holy fool’ [a sobriquet that has also been translated as ‘cloud-dweller’] alone.”

Pasternak deliberately cultivated an image of modesty and otherworldliness (“what century is it outside?” was an oft-quoted line from one of his poems) and played possum throughout the purges, surviving while preserving his integrity, a rare feat in those times. It seemed unlikely that the cloud-dweller would toss a bomb as explosive as Doctor Zhivago into the stagnant Soviet pool a couple of decades later, but his experiences with Stalin, especially the Mandelstam affair, and other compromises he made during the Terror left a residue of guilt and remorse that certainly figured among his motives.

Pasternak returned to his novel in 1946, encouraged by the brief easing of Soviet repression during World War II and a deep patriotism that impelled him to speak out. Another powerful stimulus that year was his encounter in the offices of the literary magazine Novy Mir with a young editor and translator named Olga Ivinskaya. Pasternak, fifty-six and married to his second wife, Zinaida, with two sons at home, was completely dazzled by Olga’s movie star looks and smoldering sensuality. She was ardent, talented, energetic, and—unlike his wife—passionate about literature. “My life, my angel, I love you truly,” he wrote soon after meeting her, showering her with books and letters and extravagant compliments. Olga, twenty-two years his junior and a single mother, with two young children of her own, was awed and flattered by the famous poet’s attentions. Encountering Pasternak, she wrote in her memoir, was like meeting a god.

Soon they were taking long walks together, then they were lovers, and before long, Olga became Pasternak’s unofficial secretary and personal assistant as well, for which she was to pay dearly. In 1949 she was arrested for “anti-Soviet political activities” (Pasternak himself was too famous to be touched) and sentenced to five years in the Gulag—reduced to four as the result of the Stalin amnesty in 1953. Many thought she and Pasternak would split up after that, but Olga had apparently miscarried Pasternak’s child in prison, and in addition to feeling guilty about her incarceration, he felt she had saved his life by refusing to betray him during lengthy interrogations by the KGB. He wrote their relationship into Doctor Zhivago, and included many of the poems he dedicated to her in the twenty-six he appended to the novel.

By 1954 the novel was finished. Its plot, too convoluted to summarize in any detail, follows the life and wanderings of Yuri Zhivago, a dreamy young doctor swept up in World War I, then the revolution, then the civil war, while moving back and forth between European Russia and western Siberia. Through a series of coincidences he has repeated encounters with a young nurse, Larissa (Lara) Guichard, and though both are married, they embark on a passionate affair. They are separated when Zhivago is kidnapped by Red partisans during the civil war and forced to serve as their medical officer. Released at the end of the war, Yuri spends some idyllic months with Lara, before persuading her to travel to eastern Siberia, while he returns to Moscow and has two children with another woman before dying of a heart attack. Lara manages to attend the funeral and is then arrested and flung into the Gulag. The novel ends with two family friends meeting an orphaned laundry girl during World War II and concluding that she is the daughter of Yuri and Lara.

Pasternak submitted Doctor Zhivago to Novy Mir and the journal Znamya in early 1956, and it was months before a reply came back, partly because the KGB had to be given time to investigate Pasternak’s counterrevolutionary views and partly because discussions of the novel had gone all the way up to the Presidium of the Party’s Central Committee, where it was characterized as “a malicious libel.” In September 1956 Pasternak received a formal letter signed by five members of Novy Mir’s editorial board offering a detailed analysis of the plot and explaining what was wrong with it. Pasternak was judged to be alienated from the society he lived in and anti-Soviet in his views, and there could be no question of publishing his novel.

Meanwhile, rumors of the novel’s existence had spread far and wide among literary circles, and soon a young Italian journalist, Sergio d’Angelo, came calling at Pasternak’s dacha to ask if he would consider having it published in Italy. The proposed publisher was a Communist, Giangiacomo Feltrinelli, which would make it more palatable, in d’Angelo’s view. Pasternak wasn’t convinced by the argument, but eventually handed the young man a typescript, adding with a grim laugh, “You are hereby invited to my execution” (translated by d’Angelo as “face the firing squad”).

D’Angelo carried off the prized text, setting off a months-long correspondence between Pasternak and Feltrinelli, carried on clandestinely through a variety of intermediaries, with the active participation of Ivinskaya. Much, but not all of it, was intercepted and copied by the KGB. The Soviet authorities, through the Writers’ Union, brought immense pressure on Pasternak to get the novel back, and the Italian Communist Party put pressure on Feltrinelli. There were even promises of a suitably toned-down version being published in the Soviet Union, but it was too late. Pasternak told Isaiah Berlin, who was appalled by his action and tried to dissuade him, that he was ready to sacrifice his life if necessary. He was so determined that he gave Berlin a copy to take back to England with him, secretly smuggled another copy to Jacqueline de Proyart, a Russian-speaking friend in France, and gave a fourth to George Katkov (a prominent émigré historian also based in England). By now Pasternak almost didn’t care who published his novel, as long as it appeared in print somewhere.

The nature of Pasternak’s anguish, frustration, and joy over the complex negotiations needed to realize his dream can be seen in Paolo Mancosu’s Inside the Zhivago Storm, which gives us the complete correspondence between Pasternak and Feltrinelli for the first time. Pasternak’s torments are paralleled by the young Feltrinelli’s less mortal but still stormy combat with the Italian Communist Party, and their emotional letters add up to a nonfictional epistolary novel that is a treasure house for Pasternak scholars. Feltrinelli rushed the Italian translation of Doctor Zhivago to market in November 1957, and translations into English, French, German, and other languages followed in the spring of 1958.
scammell_2-071014.jpg ITAR-TASS
Anna Akhmatova with Boris Pasternak just after he began writing Doctor Zhivago, 1946

While the Soviet authorities maintained a tightlipped silence on the subject, Doctor Zhivago spent the next six months on the New York Times best-seller list and was an international sensation. It seemed to have everything: peace, war, revolution, civil war, a wide variety of settings, and a huge cast of characters, just like the books of Pasternak’s literary hero, Lev Tolstoy. With an illicit love affair at its center, the novel appeared to roll War and Peace and Anna Karenina into one, but it presented critics with a quandary. Even before it was published, Kornei Chukovsky called it “alien, confusing and removed from my life,” and Akhmatova echoed his verdict. “It is my time, my society, but I don’t recognize it,” she said, “It is a failure of genius.”

Vladimir Nabokov, one of the few critics in the West to agree with them, notoriously derided Doctor Zhivago as “a sorry thing, clumsy, trite and melodramatic, with stock situations, voluptuous lawyers, unbelievable girls, romantic robbers and trite coincidences,”3 and from the literary point of view he was right.4 But that wasn’t really the point of the novel’s fame or success. Nabokov’s old friend and literary sparring partner, Edmund Wilson, put his finger on the matter (and had the pleasure of contradicting Nabokov once again) when he emphasized Doctor Zhivago’s political and historical importance, and the symbolic significance of Pasternak writing such a book inside the Soviet Union, publishing it abroad, and surviving. “Doctor Zhivago will, I believe, come to stand as one of the great events in man’s literary and moral history,” wrote Wilson. “Nobody could have written it in a totalitarian state and turned it loose on the world who did not have the courage of genius.”

Content, rather than art, is the key to Doctor Zhivago’s importance. “Revolutionaries who take the law into their own hands are horrifying, not as criminals, but as machines that have gotten out of control, like a runaway train,” says the autobiographically rooted Zhivago to Lara at one point, and when Lara remarks, “You’ve changed, you know. You used to speak more calmly about the revolution,” he rejoins, “Those who inspired the revolution aren’t at home in anything except change and turmoil…because they haven’t any real capacities, they are ungifted.” Still later he comments:

Revolutions are made by fanatical men of action with one-track minds, men who are narrow-minded to the point of genius. They overturn the old order in a few hours or days…but for decades thereafter, for centuries, the spirit of narrowness which led to the upheaval is worshipped as holy.

The novel’s main action ends in 1929, suggesting that the decades of narrowness started then, and it reads like a requiem for Russian politics and Russian culture. Nothing like it had been seen in the Soviet Union since the early 1920s and it’s no wonder the authorities regarded Pasternak and his novel as anti-Soviet.

The CIA quickly came to a similar conclusion. Less than a month after Doctor Zhivago’s appearance in Italy in November 1957, a CIA memo cited an expert’s view that it was “more important than any other literature which has yet come out of the Soviet Bloc,” and that care should be taken not to harm Pasternak in taking advantage of its publication. In early January the agency received two rolls of microfilm from British intelligence, a photographic replica of Feltrinelli’s original manuscript, and began to ponder how to use them.5

The timing was propitious, for as Finn and Couvée point out, the CIA had a large number of officials who had strong literary credentials and loved books. They believed in the power of ideas, and agreed with the CIA’s chief of covert action that “books differ from all other propaganda media primarily because one single book can significantly change the reader’s attitude and action to an extent unmatched by the impact of any other single medium.” Crass and reductive as the sentiment may be, it acknowledges an important aspect of literature that cannot be denied. Ironically, the idea seems to have been borrowed from the Soviets themselves, who were guided by Maxim Gorky’s 1934 dictum (itself reflecting centuries of Russian attitudes) that books are weapons, “the most important and most powerful weapons in socialist culture.” The Soviets were already masters of propaganda and the manipulation of culture in the 1930s, as George Kennan, author of containment and the intellectual father of the cold war, well knew.

Kennan’s ideas had led to the foundation of the Congress for Cultural Freedom in 1950, and in 1956, just before the appearance of Doctor Zhivago, the device of mailing American books and magazines across the iron curtain was beginning to be tried. The next step was a small program to translate Western books into Russian, which functioned alongside a multimillion-dollar enterprise to publish and or distribute thousands of titles in Soviet-controlled countries. Finn and Couvée estimate that up to ten million books and magazines were clandestinely smuggled into the Soviet bloc in this way. It was an effort much less known to the public and much less controversial than cold war cultural activities in the West, although some argue that the problem was the CIA and secrecy itself the offense. The authors respond that in 1950s America no other agency could have done it, for it would have been impossible to get Congress to openly appropriate money for the support of art and culture, especially when most of the money went to institutions and publications with a liberal profile.

The appearance of Doctor Zhivago presented the CIA with a new kind of challenge. It was certain of the book’s “great propaganda value,” but mailing an English translation of the novel into the Soviet Union didn’t seem to promise many dividends, and since it had not yet appeared in Russian, it couldn’t simply be reprinted. It decided to publish its own “black” edition, but that presented problems too. The British asked the CIA not to print the book in America in order not to harm Pasternak, and Pasternak had sent word that no Russian émigrés should be involved either.

The chosen solution was to farm out the job to a New York publisher named Felix Morrow, a former Trotskyite, journalist, and author, passionately anti-Communist, who also had a security clearance. On June 23, 1958, a contract was signed with Morrow requiring him to prepare the Russian manuscript of Doctor Zhivago for typesetting and to produce two sets of photo-offset proofs by July 31. The goal was to have copies of the book printed in Europe in time to distribute them to Soviet visitors to the Brussels International World Fair in September, and also to give copies to sailors on ships bound for the Soviet Union.6

It was a harebrained scheme and it ran into numerous problems. Morrow welcomed the assignment as “an astonishing and attractive task,” but drove an extremely hard bargain over his fee, blabbed about what he was up to, and couldn’t find a European printer. Failing to blackmail the CIA into buying a large number of printed copies at inflated prices, he sent a copy of the manuscript of Doctor Zhivago to an old friend at the University of Michigan Press with a suggestion that they publish it instead. He was convinced, he later wrote, that “the Russian desk at the CIA was, at the least, not much interested in the success of this task” and was dragging its feet.7 Before long, Michigan was offering copies of a planned edition to members of the US government and to the CIA itself, and officials had to scramble to get the university to hold off.

The reason for the delays was problems in finding a European publisher, where another comedy of errors unfolded. The CIA turned for help to the Dutch intelligence service, BVD. Feltrinelli was rumored to be bringing out a Russian edition with the Dutch academic publishing company Mouton, and when it turned out that Feltrinelli was in no hurry to act, the CIA and BVD decided to go ahead without him. The director of the local branch of Paix et Liberté, a dyed-in-the-wool anti-Communist, was asked to bring the proofs to Mouton, and a deal was struck to print a rush edition of Doctor Zhivago of just over a thousand copies (1,160, to be precise). At the last moment a Mouton employee, under the impression that this was the Feltrinelli project, pasted on a slip identifying Feltrinelli as the publisher.

The books were ready by early September, just in time for the Brussels Universal and International Exposition, and about a third were distributed through the Vatican pavilion:

Soon the book’s blue linen covers were found littering the fairgrounds. Some who got the novel were ripping off the cover, dividing the pages, and stuffing them in their pockets to make the book easier to hide.

A CIA memo concluded that “this phase can be considered completed successfully,” though its success was qualified. Feltrinelli was furious that his name had been used and suspected outright fraud, unable to imagine the cause as an innocent misunderstanding. The CIA kept mum, Mouton issued an abject apology and agreed to print an additional five thousand copies for Feltrinelli, and the University of Michigan Press went ahead with its own edition in early 1959.

Pasternak won the Nobel Prize at the end of 1958 and was denounced by the head of the Komsomol, Vladimir Semichastny, as “a pig fouling its own sty” who should be kicked out of the Soviet Union to “breathe capitalist air.” An ailing Pasternak, fearing deportation, rejected the prize, and a year later he died of lung cancer. Ivinskaya was arrested and sentenced for a second time (with her daughter, Irina) to eight years in the Gulag for “foreign currency manipulations,” but released after four. In 1965 David Lean released his blockbuster movie of Doctor Zhivago, starring Omar Sharif as Zhivago and Julie Christie as Lara, which far more people remember than the novel (on Google the movie comes before the book), and in 1978 Ivinskaya published a best-selling memoir of her years with Pasternak.

Since then there has been an avalanche of books on one or another aspect of the Zhivago affair. Mancosu lists over 150 titles in his bibliography; Finn and Couvée list 184. It was Tolstoy’s flawed 2009 book, The Laundered Novel, that set off the subgenre devoted to the machinations of the CIA. The best and most accurate of those accounts before Finn and Couvée is to be found in Mancosu’s chapter two, a tour de force of literary detection worthy of a scholarly Sherlock Holmes. I feel sorry for him over his timing, but the detail he offers, together with the Pasternak–Feltrinelli correspondence, offers a different angle on the episode.

Meanwhile Finn and Couvée have written a fascinating book that is thoroughly researched, extraordinarily accurate in its factual details, judicious in its judgments, and destined to remain the definitive work on the subject for a very long time to come. Though it will be advertised and sold on the basis of the declassified material from the CIA, only two of its sixteen chapters are devoted to that subject; the rest cover every aspect of the creation of Doctor Zhivago and its consequences in rich and convincing detail. I was particularly impressed by their fair treatment of Olga Ivinskaya, who after Pasternak’s death was viciously attacked not only by the government but also by some members of Pasternak’s family and friends. My only wish is that they had delved a little more deeply into the love affair between Pasternak and Ivinskaya and the details of Pasternak’s strange ménage-à-trois, but perhaps that calls for a novelist rather than a journalist.

Also largely missing is an assessment of Pasternak’s historic achievement. Finn and Couvée refer briefly to literary successors such as Solzhenitsyn, Andrei Sinyavsky, Yuli Daniel, and Joseph Brodsky, but Pasternak’s feat had epoch-making repercussions in ways that deserve more notice. In sending his book for publication abroad, for example, he deliberately broke Soviet law and acted in a way unthinkable since the punishment of Boris Pilnyak, the last person to do the same, in 1929. Pasternak thus punched a huge hole in the iron curtain and Soviet censorship. By surviving legally unscathed he also set a precedent for behavior that had not been seen since the late 1920s, and Doctor Zhivago became in essence the first serious example of samizdat. Solzhenitsyn once criticized Pasternak for rejecting the Nobel Prize, but it’s likely that without Pasternak, he would have had a far harder time getting One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich published, let alone surviving to win the Nobel Prize himself. Pasternak was the true father of the Soviet dissident movement and singlehandedly influenced the course of the cold war.

As for the CIA, the publication of Doctor Zhivago in Russian and the smuggling of copies into the Soviet Union contributed to the novel as a samizdat phenomenon, but it had nothing to do with Pasternak’s fame or him winning the Nobel Prize. The KGB and the Soviet government’s noisy campaign of repression did much more to help than the CIA. It was the CIA’s future books program that gained most from the experiment. Meanwhile the CIA’s error-prone approach to its publications hasn’t entirely changed. The book on display in the CIA Museum is not a copy of “the original Russian-language edition of Doctor Zhivago,” but a later edition, in paper rather than hard cover, and brought out by an entirely different publisher.
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 » Tue Nov 17, 2015 4:28 pm

brekin » 17 Nov 2015 14:17 wrote:Obviously a great example of the CIA's international offensive literary game (which I think we can all agree was needed in this instance) but also makes you wonder again about their domestic defensive game.


I doubt you will all agree with that.
It'd be stunning news to me if you all did.
"It's Unanimous: RI Approves CIA Literary Op", lol.
“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 » Tue Nov 17, 2015 7:07 pm

FourthBase » Tue Nov 17, 2015 3:28 pm wrote:
brekin » 17 Nov 2015 14:17 wrote:Obviously a great example of the CIA's international offensive literary game (which I think we can all agree was needed in this instance) but also makes you wonder again about their domestic defensive game.


I doubt you will all agree with that.
It'd be stunning news to me if you all did.
"It's Unanimous: RI Approves CIA Literary Op", lol.


I know, and then your quixotic crusade would "poof" being taken from you.
Don't worry comrade there's still more work to do.

Image
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 » Tue Nov 17, 2015 9:55 pm

Well, lol, that will be its own interesting sidethread.
“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 18, 2015 2:38 am

JackRiddler » 15 Nov 2015 20:18 wrote:It's totally killing me. Loop back to my earlier posts, the answers you aren't seeking are more or less in there.


Image
“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 18, 2015 2:46 am

FourthBase » 17 Nov 2015 15:28 wrote:
brekin » 17 Nov 2015 14:17 wrote:Obviously a great example of the CIA's international offensive literary game (which I think we can all agree was needed in this instance) but also makes you wonder again about their domestic defensive game.


I doubt you will all agree with that.
It'd be stunning news to me if you all did.
"It's Unanimous: RI Approves CIA Literary Op", lol.


"RigInt-ers All Agree: CIA Literary Ops Needed Sometimes"

Like, when?
“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 Sounder » Wed Nov 18, 2015 7:13 am

Content, rather than art, is the key to Doctor Zhivago’s importance. “Revolutionaries who take the law into their own hands are horrifying, not as criminals, but as machines that have gotten out of control, like a runaway train,” says the autobiographically rooted Zhivago to Lara at one point, and when Lara remarks, “You’ve changed, you know. You used to speak more calmly about the revolution,” he rejoins, “Those who inspired the revolution aren’t at home in anything except change and turmoil…because they haven’t any real capacities, they are ungifted.” Still later he comments:

Revolutions are made by fanatical men of action with one-track minds, men who are narrow-minded to the point of genius. They overturn the old order in a few hours or days…but for decades thereafter, for centuries, the spirit of narrowness which led to the upheaval is worshipped as holy.




Sharp fellow
All these things will continue as long as coercion remains a central element of our mentality.
Sounder
 
Posts: 4054
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests