The unsurprising link between authorship
and espionage
“CHAMPAGNE, if you are seeking the truth, is better than a
lie detector,” Graham Greene (pictured above) wrote in “Ways of Escape”
(1980). “It encourages a man to be expansive, even reckless, while lie detectors
are only a challenge to tell lies more successfully.” Greene sought the
truth in the people around him for the sake of his writing, but one can’t
read this reflection without wondering how it was informed by his involvement
in another kind of lie detecting. When he wasn’t writing (and sometimes
when he was), Greene worked as an agent for MI6, the British intelligence
service.
Greene was recruited in 1941, after he had already established
his career as a writer. It was a credible cover for intelligence gathering
and his penchant for traveling to certain significant regions for his novels—Liberia,
Mexico, Haiti, Cuba, Vietnam—made him a valuable informant. Spying had the
added perk of offering Greene intriguing material. Some of his books, like
“Our Man in Havana” (1958) and “The Quiet American” (1955), feature spies
directly, but the relationship between writing and spying goes deeper and
is more intriguing.
Greene, who died 25 years ago this month, was by no means
the first novelist to experiment with espionage. When Cambridge hesitated
to award Christopher Marlowe his degree due to frequent absences, Queen
Elizabeth I’s Privy Council explained that he was working “on matters touching
the benefit of his country.” Marlowe is thought to have been recruited by
Sir Francis Walsingham, Elizabeth’s spymaster. He died under mysterious
circumstances at age 29, stabbed in a tavern brawl in the company of other
Walsingham acquaintances.
Ian Fleming and John Le Carré’s careers in British intelligence
are well known, but less obvious figures were recruited too. Roald Dahl
served as a spy from Washington. Peter Matthiessen joined the CIA out of
Yale. The Paris Review, an esteemed literary magazine, was born—somewhat
scandalously—out of Matthiessen’s intelligence duties: “I needed more cover
for my nefarious activities, the worst of which was the unpleasant task
of checking on certain Americans in Paris to see what they were up to. My
cover, officially, was my first novel, but my contact man… had said, ‘Anything
else you can do while you’re here?’”
Ernest Hemingway (pictured below) had contacts in American
intelligence agencies as well as the Soviet Union’s NKVD, the predecessor
to the KGB. He gathered intelligence with a French resistance group during
the second world war. He patrolled the Caribbean in search of German submarines.
He wasn’t particularly successful, but he seems to have enjoyed the game.
According to declassified documents, Hemingway’s concept of operations was
to “pretend to be fishing, wait until a German submarine came alongside
to buy fresh fish and water, and then attack the enemy with bazookas, machine
guns, and hand grenades.” The Soviets later recruited him “for work on ideological
grounds”, and codenamed him “Argo”. Perhaps they hoped he would report on
prominent Americans—he had notable contacts—or influence public opinion
through his writing.
It is not so surprising that so many writers have worked
in intelligence. Writers create plots; spies uncover them. In a sense, all
writers function like spies—observing the people around them, studying character
types, becoming flies-on-the-wall for the purpose of their art. “Everything
is useful to a writer,” Greene insisted. “Every scrap, even the longest
and most boring of luncheon parties.” Writers are obsessed with plot and
character, motive and perspective, and with the space between interior and
exterior worlds, between what people think and what they say. Mr Le Carré
has suggested that espionage is a kind of metaphor; we all live undercover
and mask our private selves with projected social personalities. “Most of
us live,” he said, “in a slightly conspiratorial relationship with our employer
and perhaps with our marriage.”
Writing is a means of decoding experience, of piercing through
the surface of things to get at the truths beneath. Hemingway, in particular,
was obsessed with the idea of concealment—so much so that he embedded it
in his very style of writing. His famous minimalism derives from his “iceberg
theory,” the principle that a writer should keep seven-eighths of a story
beneath the surface—unspoken but implied. “The dignity of an iceberg,” Hemingway
wrote, “is due to only one-eighth of it being above water.” When this was
done well, he believed the reader would “have a feeling of those things
as strongly as though the writer had stated them”. By representing only
the bare tip of a story, without exposition or more revealing dialogue,
he sought to mirror in fiction the concealment and uncertainty we experience
in the world.
Hemingway—like all writers—intended his reader to uncover
the truth he submerged, to dig below the surface clues of the text. In this
way, authors extend the reconnaissance game, setting down their webs of
meaning for readers to unravel. The best spy-writers leave us with the sense
that the whole world is a vast text to be deciphered, but they caution about
deciphering too. In the world of espionage, as in the real world, the greatest
tragedies and failings are often matters of misinterpretation. Of the CIA
spy, Alden Pyle, Greene’s narrator in “The Quiet American”, observes, “I
never knew a man who had better motives for all the trouble he caused.”