Welcome author Barry Eisler and Host, Jeff Kaye.
[As a courtesy to our guests, please keep comments to the book. Please take other conversations to a previous thread. - bev]
“Just wanting information makes you a threat.” — Daniel Larison, in Inside Out
Barry Eisler’s new novel, Inside Out, is a spy thriller that takes off from the past years’ headlines about missing CIA torture tapes. But it is something even more: it is one of the most politically astute novels of our generation. No other work of fiction has pointedly posed the alternatives for those who would seek political change in the United States in the 21st century. And what are the possibilities in a system where conspiracy is impossible because “everyone is complicit”? Political nihilism, revolutionary adventurism, martyrdom, or subornation by the Establishment.
Or is there another way out? By the end of Inside Out, the book’s main character, Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) black ops specialist Ben Treven, is pondering that very question, having begun a political consciousness-raising transformation that begins when he is tasked with a mission that pits him against the CIA, dangerous contractors, an ambiguous FBI agent, a former Vice Presidential Chief of Staff (David, ahem, Ulrich), and a renegade JSOC operative in the hunt for the torture videotapes that show more than the American people think they know about the Bush/Cheney CIA torture program. The result is a rollicking fun ride that takes us from Florida tract housing to the gay party scene in Costa Rica, from Washington D.C. secret meetings to clandestine Blackwater operations.
Already, Inside Out has achieved a degree of fame for its meticulous documenting of the torture scandal, which is the skeletal outline for the book’s action and the subtext for the book’s soul. What other novel comes complete with a full bibliography? In addition, Eisler continues the sly references to bloggers that began in the preceding Ben Treven novel, Fault Line, where Ben’s JSOC boss is one Colonel Scott “Hort” Horton. (Inside Out also introduces us to a fictional Marcy Wheeler and Juan Cole, among others, who are not quite the same individuals you may be familiar with.)
It’s Hort who comes and bails out Treven early in the book, after he’s gotten into serious trouble and been thrown into a Manila jail. The conditions in the jail foreshadow what the reader will learn about the fate of the torture prisoners in U.S. secret black sites, and late in the book Treven will draw upon these memories again at a crucial moment when his own soul must find its way through a thicket of bad options. Describing the Manila jail, Eisler writes:
In his few nightmarish days within the beast, he’d already run into guys who’d been here for years — years — without being sentenced, without even a hearing. He imagined that once you passed a certain point in a system like this one, the overseers wouldn’t let you up for air even if by some amazing coincidence they became aware of your case…. After a certain time without a hearing, being innocent would probably be the worst thing that could happen to someone in a place like this. What were they going to do, admit that for three, five, seven years, they’d caged up a guy who — oops — hadn’t done anything, and never even given him a hearing? Yeah, fat chance of that.
Yet Treven isn’t a Guantanamo prisoner. He’s a JSOC specialist, a trained assassin, and he’s rescued by his boss in order to track down former JSOC operative Daniel Larison, who apparently has stolen dozens of videotapes of CIA torture, including the torture of an untold number of innocents — ghost detainees, whose very existence is a state secret. At first, Ben Treven isn’t impressed by the politics behind the scandal. He’s a man appointed to do a job.
He was accustomed to thinking in terms of who. And when. And where. And how. But why? For the second time in as many days, he reminded himself that why was someone else’s problem.
As can be expected, Treven must fight his way out of a number of scrapes, not to mention figure out if FBI agent, the beautiful Paula Lanier, is really a friend or a foe. Such ambivalence makes for a dynamite sex scene. (For a taste of the novel itself, Barry and Ballantine Books have allowed Truthout to post the book’s very interesting Prologue.)
The heart of the book remains Treven’s political education, which is also the reader’s education. Treven — and the reader — learn that the government’s torture wasn’t really for interrogation, but to manufacture a supposed link between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein, in order to justify the invasion of Iraq. There are hints of other, more dire purposes, and today, we already have evidence that one of the purposes was human experimentation. In the end, American ideals and institutions are shredded as finely as if run through an Ecologia machine (you’ll have to read the novel to get that reference).
As one character explains it to Ben:
The Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, the Federalist Papers… that’s all just window dressing now, the artifacts of an ancient mythology, the vestments of a dead religion. We need something different now, something suited for the modern world.
Treven’s attempt to make sense of it all — and no spoilers here, unless you don’t mind hearing that the book’s hero does not die — is a piece of character development it’s nice to see, although Eisler doesn’t overplay it. The JSOC assassin comes to care about what’s happening, even if he doesn’t quite understand it all:
Not so long ago, he honestly wouldn’t have cared…. But now… he did want to know. He wanted to know what all these people had died for.
Character development is one of Barry Eisler’s specialties, as anyone who has followed his John Rain series knows. It’s fun to think that Ben Treven and John Rain may be hooking up in the near future. And what is one to make of the fate of Inside Out‘s antagonist, Daniel Larison? More importantly, what about the options presented to Ben Treven after he is left with the fateful knowledge of the initiated? Is this not a question for us all, as the Obama administration and Congress appear dead set upon letting the past torture scandal sink into the unexamined past, while current governmental operations of black sites, assassination, even torture, continue under the current regime?
With these questions, and more, in mind, let’s welcome the author of Inside Out, Barry Eisler, to Firedoglake.



107 Comments





Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Barry, Welcome to the Lake.
Jeff, Thank you for Hosting today’s Book Salon.
Thanks to Bev, and Firedoglake, for making this Book Salon possible. Thanks, Barry for taking time out from your book tour to spend some time with us. We know you appreciate bloggers, and even named some characters in recent books after some prominent bloggers, including our own Marcy Wheeler. Let me ask you a question to start things off. An obvious question.
While you’ve mentioned torture in past books, and alluded to the Bush administration’s torture program — along with other important political issues for which, according to today’s headlines you appear prescient, e.g., government assassinations and warrantless surveillance — what led you to center an entire book around the issue of torture?
It’s a pleasure to be here, Bev.
Hi Barry, thanks so much for the fundraiser yesterday. And thanks, Jeff, for hosting. Can’t wait to read the book, what fun.
But how did you end up in the CIA?
Barry, welcome.
Good afternoon Jeff and Barry, welcome to FDL this afternoon. I hope you sold a thousand copies last night in Baltimore!
Barry, I have to say that Inside Out definitely passed the first test for me when I read action/adventure type novels – it was a good yarn (although I’ll admit it was a bit disconcerting sometimes to read the names of characters)
I guess, here’s the $64K question, as a roman-a-clef how do you go about the writing process to avoid problems while providing enough info for folks to be able to say “Yep, I know who that is?”
Barry is answering the first question.
Welcome to Firedoglake – glad you could join us!
Welcome Barry, and great post, Jeff.
Given how closely the book maps onto recent history, I’m curious when you first decided to write it, when you started, and when you finished?
Elliott and dakine01… what good questions!
Working with Barry – sorry
Thanks Bev and Jeff, and Jane, too, of course — in my not terribly humble opinion, FDL is one of the best political blogs around, and it’s an honor to be here.
Torture… I’m not proud to admit it, but not so long ago, my attitude to the practice was unfortunately (and perhaps typically) cavalier. My exposure to the blogosphere, which started about five years ago, is what changed it. Articles by bloggers like Scott Horton, Glenn Greenwald, Andrew Sullivan, Andy Worthington, and of course you, Jeff, and FDL’s own Marcy Wheeler, were what made me realize how wrong-headed and immoral I was being in turning a blind eye to what the government was doing in the name of the citizenry. I started blogging on the issue myself on my website blog Heart of the Matter and reading more and more — Matthew Alexander, Mark Danner, and many others, all of which led me to my current position, which is that torture is not only profoundly immoral and illegal, but also counterproductive in that, by creating new jihadists and jihadist sympathisers, it worsens the threat it purports to resolve. As I put it in a Six Questions interview with Harpers’ Scott Horton last year, paraphrasing Oscar Wilde, torture is worse than immoral: it’s tactically stupid.
And because, too, torture is so horribly corrosive to a democratic society, it’s gradually become one of the issues I blog about most frequently and passionately (the other is gay equality). When I first read Mark Mazzetti’s NYT piece in Dec 2007 about the missing CIA interrogation videos, I realized it could be not only the basis of a great thriller, but also of a thriller that might help change some hearts and minds on torture, as exposure to the blogosphere changed mine.
Thanks for the very thoughtful and personal reply, Barry. I’d say that for most of us, torture was off the radar only some years ago, or we didn’t realize how important it was. It’s a journey many of us have been through.
Thanks, Elliott, it is extremely gratifying to be able to use the book to support real journalism. I plan to do lots more of it, and hope to encourage other novelists to follow suit.
The CIA… since I was a kid, I’ve been interested in what I sometimes call “forbidden knowledge” — anything the government wants only a select few to know. If you’re familiar with Paladin Press or the tragically defunct Loompanics Unlimited, you know what I’m talking about. Anyway, combine that interest with a newfound interest in the world and geopolitics when I was in college, and the CIA came to intrigue me as a possible career choice (that, and a certain lack of direction… until I started writing seriously at about 30, I really didn’t know what I wanted to do with my life).
So in 1988 or so, I stopped by the Cornell career center, picked up a brochure, and one thing led to another.
One of the things I found most fascinating was the interplay of actual news and fiction (my PhD was on novels–including Count of Monte Cristo–that showed up in the political newspapers and interacted with the events of the day). So when you put the original Mazzetti article in there you had me.
You’ve talked and written some about how the left needs to get better at using fiction (more effective narratives, after all, than whatever the pundits can invent). Can you say more about this?
Thanks, Dakine, really glad you enjoyed the book. I’m never worried about using real names for my characters — you’d have to create a pretty awful person who was clearly intended to be the real world counterpart for any theory of legal liability to come into play. So for me, it’s just a way of saying thank you to people I’ve learned from and admire. Or sometimes someone will win a charity auction to have a character named after him or her, which typically means you’ll wind up getting killed or being in a sex scene (hope Paula Lanier, who won such an auction, is okay with Inside Out!).
My villain, David Ulrich, OTOH… well, I just don’t know where people get the idea that he’s modeled on David Addington. Naturally any such resemblance is purely coincidental. :)
Yeah, the disappearing of the innocent is quite reminiscent of Chateau D’if – for the same reasons.
Let me piggyback onto dakine01′s question @6:
The character of “Hort” seems supremely cynical to me. Maybe that’s my take. Is he modeled after anyone? Is he typical of a certain kind of character in the upper echelons of JSOC?
Thanks, Egregious, it is great to be here.
Are there any action authors you’ve used as a model for your writing style?
My dog, McCaffrey the MilleniaLab, who is 8, heard that Marcy Wheeler the character has an 8-year old child and he’s been insufferable ever since, thinking he’s gotten a big promotion.
Though he refuses to do his homework.
hmm, as easy as that.
Fascinating. But then again, anything to get out of the freezer that is Ithaca, eh?
but he still gets toys and pancakes — so it ain’t all bad
Barry mentioned his blog, Heart of the Matter, and interested readers can check it out at this link.
Hi Marcy, great to be here with you. I’ve learned so much from your dogged reporting on the torture tapes and everything related — I’m in awe of how much you’ve uncovered through your diligence and of your close analysis, too. So naturally I had to name a character after you — and she wasn’t even killed or in a sex scene!
I was already playing around with some ideas for the book involving my black ops guy, Ben Treven, when I read Mazzetti’s Dec 2007 piece on the missing interrogation videos. At the time, I thought, “Two or three? No way… what were they… home videos?” It just didn’t make sense and I figured there were more (although I didn’t suspect 92). And why did a CIA source “leak” this story to Mazzetti? I started playing around with ideas about what really happened and outlining a rough plot. And then when Mazzetti wrote his March 2009 piece with the news that it was actually 92 tapes, it fit in perfectly with what I’d already outlined. As did so many other things that I read about during the year and a half or so that I was working on the book — for anyone who’s curious, there’s a whole list of sources in the book itself and on my website.
My sound bite for the book has become, “It’s all about Blackwater, assassinations, Guantanamo, black sites, ghost detainees, and those missing CIA interrogation videos… all the things that are bad for America and great for thriller writers.”
Sorry, and when I finished… I turned in the first draft in August last year, so about ten months ago.
Haven’t read the book, but I hope to get to it. I was looking at a book today on the participation of medical professionals in the murders and huiman experimentation performed in service of the government of
Germany in the first half of the 20th century, and the importance of that government’s control of the availability of information regarding that work. In other words, they were able to use medical personnel to do the killing and human experimentation more easily because that government was able to control access to information about it, such that people could say they “didn’t know” een while they “knew”, and such that they could treat their camps like they were another world. (Or, as the FBI agent said to the captive in Afghanistan very early on, “there are no lawyers here” so you can give up all hope.).
What relationship does the subject of your book – torture tapes and torture for that matter, and control over them – have to that kind of governmental control over information? And, for that matter, to the kind of prior restraint on the press referred to in Marcy’s post earlier today on the Pentagon’s banning from Gitmo the Canadian reporters most versed in the Khadr case, until after hte suppression hearing is concluded?
A mouthful, I know. Sorry.
I do think that’s true for a lot of people. And while sometimes I get pretty pessimistic about the prospects for America, other times I’m heartened by the thought that if the blogosphere could have this kind of impact on me, it can on others, too.
Yes, but it wasn’t Larison’s child! (If I caught that right…)
Btw, for those interested in the sources to Inside Out, here’s the link. Notice that EW’s torture timeline is prominently listed there!
Great intro/review of Barry’s must-read book Jeff! And Barry, I will note that one of the issues you spoke about earlier in the week regarding the media’s failure to call torture torture was borne out by the recent Harvard study, which Marcy has written about this week. Have you had a chance to look at the study and the response by the NYT?
Barry – Welcome. The frequent use of recognizable names (like Marcy and her intrepid child/hound or Horton) is an interesting feature. Do you have any fear that the repeated discussion and focus on this somehow obscures the work itself and the strength of the characters?
And secondly, have you had any issues with convergence/divergence of your characters with the real life personas? For instance do you catch any grief because your Horton or your Wheeler are not the same ones readers expect from their knowledge of the real people.
I seem to remember that John Rain had a dim view of SERE training. That it was basically training on how to inflict torture as much as it was how to resist it.
How can this be avoided? How do we change things so that torture is avoided as tactically stupid?
Hi Barry -
Chris Martinez here. Sorry I missed you at the signing last night. My question is about the writing craft. If you had ONE piece of advice on writing action, what would it be?
I haven’t seen Mary here — one of our intrepid commenters, and sometimes blogger — and she asked the other day that I post the following:
Ah, don’t get me started or I’ll never shut up!
Most of the thriller writers I know are instinctively progressive. Which is a weird shorthand for saying they believe in the Constitution, are against torture (redundant, I know, if the Eighth Amendment means anything, but still), and believe that the law should be applied impartially. And they tend to agree that the best thrillers are the most realistic. And yet, because they’re human, they sometimes resort to cartoonish takes on things like torture (not throwing stones here; I’ve fallen into this trap myself. Often, a cliche is just the first thing your lazy mind pulls off the shelf; the trick is to get in the habit of recognizing and rejecting it when this happens). So I’m hoping to demonstrate and evangelize that you can write a realistic thriller closely tied to real-world events that’ll still be — especially be — a kickass story and a commercial success.
I want to demonstrate that if you write a reality-based novel and are unashamedly liberal, you can get a lot of support from the blogosphere. Right now, there’s an unhelpful self-fulfilling prophecy going on, in which publishers think you need Glenn Beck et al to ensure a book’s commercial success. I want to prove otherwise, and in doing so, again encourage other novelists and publishers to write and publish reality-based fiction. In doing so, simultaneously, I want to showcase the growing power of the blogosphere. Another subject I could go on and on about, but suffice to say, I feel a special reverence for people who’ve taught me a lot. My mother; my freshman writing instructor in college; a boxing coach in college; an old veteran at the Kodokan who took a shine to me and really helped my judo along when I was in Tokyo for the first time. And when I think about how much I’ve learned from bloggers like you and Jeff — not just on torture, but on the media generally, on how to read the news — I want to do what I can in return.
For more on all this, here’s a piece I wrote for the Huff Post in February called Torture Tales:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barry-eisler/torture-tales_b_458757.html
Mary is likely out horsing around.
One more thought on this. I think you can illustrate the real workings of the government and media, and other areas, too, differently in dramatic form than you can in an essay, as you suggest. Part of the notion of the prologue of Inside Out was, I wanted to demonstrate — no, that’s not right, I wanted to *depict* — the way collusive relationship between the government and the MSM. After all, Mazzetti didn’t get his scoop through investigative reporting; someone at the CIA called him and told him, which means the CIA wanted that information fed to the public through the New York Times. I had a lot of fun depicting the process in dramatic form and having Ulrich describe it as “information laundering,” a term I borrow from Bart Gellman. The government can’t just issue a press release or people would discount its value — after all, the government is issuing it, it’s bound to be self-serving. So instead, the government gets stenographer journalists to repeat its talking points under their own bylines, and the public is fooled by the presence of the cut-out into thinking this is news, not propaganda. Anyway, it’s one thing to describe this phenomenon, and Glenn Greenwald, for one, does so frequently and brilliantly. What I’ve done, and want to continue to do, is take what I’ve learned from Glenn and others and dramatize it, creating a one-two fiction/non fiction punch and reaching a new audience.
Told you I could go on about this. :)
How dare she!
Yes, that was a brilliant scene, and the same kind of information laundering was done over the Iraq War (and likely in the propaganda we hear about Afghanistan now). Marcy wrote a great deal about this, too. It’s infuriating, and like a positive feedback loop, it also creates the mania over “access” that infects so much of the press now.
Any ideas on why it was so easy to make torture respectable in our country, as long as there were no videotapes?
Thanks. In spite of the fact that I live just a few miles from Juan Cole I didn’t meet him until we were on the same plane to DC a few weeks ago. We were having fun pretending to be characters from the book.
And thanks, too, for not consummating that potential sex scene w/ “Dan Froomkin.” Those righty bloggers big gossips and I’m not sure if they understand fiction enough not to talk….
Yes, Col. Scott “Hort” Horton is so cynical he makes wonder where cynicism bleeds off into evil. And BTW, for anyone who’s wondering, this example alone should demonstrate that my characters aren’t intended to be any reflection at all on the people who they’re named after! The name itself is the hat tip. Some people on Obsidian Wings were alarmed last year when a certain Hilzoy was gunned down in the opening pages of my previous book, Fault Line, and I was at pains to reassure them that I was a huge Hilzoy fan, which is why I named a character after her.
I don’t know if I’ve known anyone quite like Hort, or at least someone with his magnitude of cynicism and capacity to act on it. But I have known people who use cynicism as an excuse for inaction, and as a novelist, I always try hard to understand the motivations of people who do bad things. Dick Cheney, for example, strikes me as someone who’s deeply cynical and who’s done terrible, terrible damage to America. And yet, when he looks in the mirror, he sees a hero. Not an easy contradiction to resolve, and yet it exists… so how does a guy like Cheney see the world, how does he justify his actions? (On this example in particular I’m indebted to Jane Mayer for The Dark Side and to Bart Gellman for Angler — great insights into what makes men like Cheney and Addington tick).
So the broader question for me, WRT to Hort, became: how do people who set about destroying the country in the belief that they’re saving it function? Hort is like that.
At the same time, I have to admit I *love* some of the shit Hort says about the Constitution at the end of the book, which you quoted in your nice introduction. I mean, when you look at what what even Obama is doing on life imprisonment without charge, trial, or conviction, on presidentially ordered assassinations, on transparency and the rule of law generally, you have to ask… is Hort wrong? About his diagnosis, anyone, even if you disagree with his course of treatment.
They were more mystery writers than thriller authors, but Swedish writers Per Wahloo and Maj Sjowall did an excellent job in the 1970s of combining exciting fiction with societal critique (including of police torture, by the way). So the Europeans may have done a better job of this than the Americans, up until now, that is.
You ask:
Short answer: he thinks he’s right and, as they say, ende gut alles gut.
Not exactly stylistic influences, but some thriller writers I’ve loved who’ve influenced me generally would include Trevanian, John le Carre, Graham Greene, and Andrew Vachss. Great characters, deep political and philosophical themes, and great anti-heroes. For style, Cormac McCarthy and Pat Conroy. And T.S. Eliot. Not comparing myself in anyway (!); just describing the influence.
Oh, and George Orwell. In fact, I just wrote an essay for NPR examining 1984 as a thriller. But it’s pretty political (how could it not be?), and might not be quite what they were looking for. We’ll see…
Two years ago my wife and daughter broke me down and made me agree to have a Chihuahua join our household. A big hit to my brand as a tough-guy thriller writer. I swear, that dog practically thinks she has human rights. Though she is pretty cute, I admit.
Hort definitely is an engaging character. His diagnosis is quite beguiling, in that it’s difficult to look at America and not see rule by an oligarchy. Of course, Hort’s solution (assuming it’s not just a further subornation of the main character) is one that can only be born out of despair… a loss of belief in the democratic process and in the essential goodness of people.
I see Hort as a kind of serpent, enticing, but can’t be trusted.
I was curious because I enjoyed the books of Alistair MacLean and Jack Higgins (though both tend more towards the story with the politics being more of an aside)
I have to say, I really loved Ithaca — was there for seven years, undergrad and then law school. Cold winters, true, but such a great campus and town and a beautiful part of the world.
Btw, John Rain fans will think me quite remiss if I don’t ask:
In your book, you hint at a possible sequel including some kind of lash-up of the characters in your current series and John Rain and Dox from the Rain books. Are you working on that?
Are you all ready working on your next novel?
I see separate but related problems here. One is the metastasis of official secrecy; the other is government/media collusion. Both are helpful, perhaps necessary, for a government to carry out a criminal program of torture and secret prisons. Through the first, the government is able to suppress and obscure evidence of crimes; through the other, it’s able to manage public perceptions of any information that leaks out (I’m sure everyone here has seen the Harvard Study on the NYT, LAT, WSJ, and NPR selective use of the word “torture” to describe waterboarding, something David Ulrich reflects upon in the prologue of Inside Out as he settles on the NYT as the appropriate venue to leak the first story about the torture tapes).
So the citizenry’s battle has to be waged on at least two fronts.
Welcome, Barry. Haven’t read your book yet, but I’ve ordered it online. Do you thinkn that perhaps the cynical people like Cheney, Addington, Yoo, etc. are concerned about ‘saving the country’ (whatever that means in their sociopathic psyches), but in reality they’re only concerned with saving it for the members of THEIR ‘club’? with no concern for average folks.
Jeff, thanks for including the links! Typing as fast as I can and it’s a huge help. And good point about Larison’s child… okay, Marcy, I guess your character was in a sex scene, albeit off camera. This is my highest form of praise other than having someone killed off. Clearly some part of my persona got frozen in time when I turned 14.
Hey Barry, it was great to see you last night. The dogs and I are in CT on the way to Maine, so we pulled over to a rest stop to say “hi.”. They were so thrilled to meet you and are now your biggest fans. Lucy has assured Katie that you have not inspired her to be an assassin.
Hey Jason, great to have you here and thanks for stopping by. I’ve read about the study on several blogs — Glenn, Scott, Sullivan — and saw that Glenn has something about Keller’s response today, but this has been a tough week with the tour and I’m not nearly as on top of the news as I like to be. In fact, I’ve barely even checked my fav sites today. But will…
In addition to the media, there are a whole slew of think tanks, institutes, and centers, all with pretty much the same people, that serve as adjuncts to the Washington echo chamber and “expert” validators of the Conventional Wisdom.
Reminds me… Inside Out can be purchased at your favorite local bookseller, or if you prefer, online at Amazon, Amazon UK, Borders, Barnes and Noble, or IndieBound
wow, i’m gonna have to get this book.
Also would like to share my favorite quote of Addington:
“We’re going to push and push and push until some larger force makes us stop,”
as reported by Jack Goldsmith. It is a remarkably honest statement from a remarkably evil man. It typifies not only so much of what went on under Bush but what continues to happen under Obama.
Hi Bmaz, great to have you here, and I love your work — especially (IIRC, I’m a little sleep-deprived at this point) your riposte to Risen after his pajama-clad parasites! outburst re the Afghan minerals.
It’s hard to say whether the real names distract people. Some, probably, but probably only a pretty small (but I hope growing) percentage of my audience recognizes the names I use. So no problem overall, I think. Among people in the know, it will vary. My own experience in such matters is that the name will make me smile as at an inside joke, after which it ceases to be a distraction and I just take the character at face value. So I figure other people will have similar reactions — though again, not all.
And yes, as I mention above, occasionally someone will think that if I have a character killed, it’s because of some animus to whomever the character is named after. But anyone who takes a quick glance at my blog or has just heard about my politics and views on the blogosphere will probably be quickly disabused.
Jeebus Barry, you were just at the Poisoned Pen in Scottsdale Wednesday?? I wish I would have known, it is literally like three or four minutes from my house; I would have come over if I had known. Please let me or Marcy know if you are coming to the Phoenix area in the future.
Glad to oblige. You’re doing a great job, and I’m sure everyone appreciates your very thoughtful and respectful attention to their questions.
That is a remarkable and revealing quote. It almost begs an unconscious wish to be stopped.
Oh, wow! i’m still in time for the salon! Hello, Barry!
Now to catch up.
Stryx, your recollection about Rain is correct. As to how we can avoid torture, I think the most important means (at a high level, at least; the details would make for a much longer response) is education. Matthew Alexander, Steve Kleinman, and various other military and ex-military people with tremendous real-world experience are on a mission to make people within and without the military understand that torture is not merely useless, but hugely counterproductive, as well. Their work is stacked up against an effective PR campaign by people like Liz Cheney and Marc Thiessen, and against the atavistic emotional appeal of torture, too. So there’s a lot of work to be done.
I’ll tell you one thing… Dems just suck at messaging. Obama’s reticence to take a stand on torture (other than to say he’s “prohibited” it — perversely reinforcing the notion that torture is merely a policy, which one president can permit and another prohibit) creates a vacuum in which the Cheney Sr/Thiessen/Cheney Jr. narrative takes hold. Cheney et al all work hard to convince the country that Obama’s prohibition on torture has exposed America to danger — ergo, when the next attack happens, it will mean we need to torture again. You can’t undermine this kind of insidious narrative with silence; instead, you need a more compelling counternarrative, such as, “Torture has made us less safe. Bush/Cheney created tens of thousands of jihadists and jihadist sympathizers through torture. They’ve put the country at terrible risk, and if we get hit again, it will be their fault.” Then, when the next attack comes, there will already be an accurate and beneficial narrative in place in which the attack can be understood.
Alas.
Missing Barry? A list of his appearances, through August 26, can be accessed here.
Thank you for putting this info out there in such a manner that harried people can take it in, complete with context. Really brilliant, and a major crack in the wall of obfuscation.
Hey Chris, good to have you here, and no worries — we’ll get another chance.
My advice on writing action is the same as my advice on writing sex (which, if you think about it, is another kind of action). Don’t worry so much about the actual mechanics, and instead focus on character and the way the character feels about the action.
I once heard this good advice: “Don’t describe the rain; describe the way the rain feels.” It has broad applicability.
Heh, I actually have the damn list; came with my book. Just was too stupid to look at it earlier to see if there was a promo here.
So many good questions here. If you happen to get to this one before the Salon is over, fine; if not, maybe we could take it up off-line….
I’m curious to know if you have read previous critiques of the agency written by former employees, and what you might think of them. I’m thinking of some that go back a few decades, like Philip Agee (“Inside the Company”) or Victor Marchetti (“The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence”, written with John D. Marks). Do you see Inside Out as related to these exposes in any way?
Great question, and I don’t know the answer. My books tend to have ambivalent endings — evil might be held in abeyance, but it’s not as though good has triumphed.
I wish I had a better answer… the truth is, I just don’t know. As I mentioned above, sometimes I feel pretty bleak about America’s prospects. The way I beat back the bleakness is by reminding myself that my job is to do what I can — and to do it. I’m not sure how this plays out in my fiction, other than to note that I always try to make my stories as realistic as possible, but factually and emotionally.
Yeah, like, who goes to Scottsdale?
;-)
Yes. The fact that the public doesn’t engage in a coast-to-coast group vomit over the White House Correspondents Dinner, and the squirt gun fest at Joe Biden’s is extremely depressing. It’s one thing to have corruption and collusion. It’s another thing when the perpetrators publicly boast of it… and the public thinks it’s cute.
Which gets back to the unlikelihood of happy endings.
I talked about this at length with Jane last night at B&N. Short answer: first, you have to come up with the right sanitized nomenclature… something like, say, “Enhanced Interrogation Techniques.” Next, make sure you’re using the right test cases to introduce the principle. KSM, for example, someone universally hated and regarded as “other.” Once you’ve established the principle with the right nomenclature and fact patterns, you can start to expand it.
That Huff Post article I mentioned above, Torture Tales, has lots more on this. The right has been impressively effective, and the left feckless, in creating a narrative to advance torture. Reader’s Digest: The right reduces torture to a single talking point: Can you really say it never works? And then answers it in fiction with Jack Bauer et al. And then promotes Jack Bauer to the public.
LOL! Ah, the scandal…
Have a great trip, Jane. Don’t let the dogs drive!
Barry, you background includes a law degree and some practice, yet you do not seem to include in your writing as much from that part of your history as the others. Is there any particular reason for that?
Agreed — and I like that description. One of the things I love about Hort (I admit it, I love all my villains) is that he doesn’t think he’s cynical — he thinks he’s a realist, maybe the only one. Which puts me in mind of Oscar Wilde again: “That quality of seeing things as they really are is called cynicism by those who have not got it.”
Yes! And I love where the story is going. Some friends of mine jokingly refer to it as “The Justice League of America” — all these dangerous loners coming together for various reasons, with various motives, to take on the Oligarchy.
Not as hard as my agent and publisher would like, but I have lots of notes… Will be working on it furiously this fall when the Inside Out promotion has died down, and hope to turn in the manuscript in January for another June/July release.
That’s what I thought. The redemption of Larison, eh? Somehow I think Hort will yet again convince them all to work for him one more time… or meet an ugly death? Those of us who are at this point emotionally attached to Rain are waiting for with traditionally bated breath.
JLA, yeah, I like that. But, how will that jibe with no happy endings? I suppose, like everyone else, I’ll have to wait and see.
Yes, I do think this kind of mentality is part of human nature, and is likely exceptionally outsized in the Cheneys of the world. It’s a kind of selective perception… I think Pat Buchanan, for example, honestly believes “America” means “White America.” He would have a hard time knowing what you were talking about if you tried to explain the difference.
Jane, it was so great so see you last night — thanks again for being there, and for the invitation to do this extremely engaging book salon!
As we come to the end of this Book Salon,
Barry, Thank you for stopping by the Lake and spending the afternoon with us discussing your new book and pollitics.
Jeff, Thank you very much for Hosting this great Book Salon.
Everyone if you would like more information here is Barry’s website.
Thanks all.
Happy July 4th!!
Absolutely, and many of them, like Brookings, are misleadingly branded “liberal.” For more on the insidious power of “Death Defying Institutional Brands” (Tom Friedman as wise pundit, for example) there’s a piece on my website blog, Heart of the Matter.
Yes — I think that made it into both Jane’s and Bart’s book, and it is so revealing. And, I think, I call to action.
Ah, I’m sorry I missed you! And will holler next time for sure.
Thanks, Bev. And a big thanks to Barry, who has taken the struggle against torture and enlarged its effectiveness by extending it to the world of fiction (and for all of his great entertaining novels), for giving his time to open himself up to the community.
Finally, a big thanks to the great commenters at FDL, who always ask the best questions.
Thanks, Kathryn — and thanks to Jeff, Marcy, Bmaz, and all the other bloggers whose work made my novel possible. Not a coincidence that it’s dedicated “For the bloggers.”
Death-Defying Institutional Brands
It’s funny, I did read those books — when I was with the Agency! And I can’t remember at this point what kind of lasting impression they made. I don’t think I was in the habit of thinking terribly deeply at the time. One I read recently that I found dead-on, though not by an insider, was Tim Weiner’s Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA. Devastating indictment of incompetence and corruption. Wrote a review on my blog, called “If the Hippocratic Oath Applied to Intelligence.”
Jim Moss is upstairs!
Plugging The Wrong Side of The Dam: Immigration
You know, I’ve never thought that much about it. I do have a lawyer and some legal thriller themes in my previous book, Fault Line, which takes place in part at a high tech Silicon Valley law firm, but for the most part, when story ideas come to me, they have more to do with spies and assassins than with lawyers.
I’ll have to read it. Thanks again for being here.
Heh, well the spies and assassins are probably more honorable people to work with…..
Thanks so much Jeff, Bev, Jane, and everyone else — this was completely worth carpel tunnel syndrome! Kidding, kidding, though my fingers are a little tired, even for a guy who makes a living at the keyboard. Really an honor to be here with so many smart, passionate people from whom I’ve learned to much — please keep doing what you’re doing, and I’ll keep trying to build on it, and get out the word, through my fiction.
Cheers,
Barry
most excellent.
Thanks to Bev and Jeff for making this possible, and to Jane, for inviting Barry. Glad you could be here Barry, you have provided some great insight. Happy 4th!
Thank you!
And thanks Jeff
and as always, Bev :)
It is Bev who makes it all go.
For sure.
Damn, I missed the WHOLE salon.
No, it’s still here, frozen in cyber-time now. Sorry you missed the live portion, Gitch, as I’m sure you would have had some great questions and/or observations.
That’s so gracious of you, Jeff.
For some inexplicable reason, I thought it was being held an hour later than it actually was.
Damn!
I meant what I said. Anyway, I know how it feels to miss something like this, and I hope there will be more such events (something tells me there will be). In any case, we can be thankful that there’s something special happening every day here at FDL.
See you at EW or some other thread.
We’;ll have to pick this up some time.
Yes, the conversation is complicated.