How the CIA Played Dirty Tricks With Culture如何中央情報局發揮骯髒伎倆與文化

By LAURENCE ZUCKERMAN由勞倫斯朱克曼
New York Times紐約時報

Many people remember reading George Orwell’s ”Animal Farm” in high school or college, with its chilling finale in which the farm animals looked back and forth at the tyrannical pigs and the exploitative human farmers but found it ”impossible to say which was which.”許多人還記得讀奧威爾的"動物農莊" ，在高中或大學，其寒蟬總決賽，其中耕畜往前發展，並提出了在暴虐的豬和人剝削農民，但發現它"不可能說哪是哪"

That ending was altered in the 1955 animated version, which removed the humans, leaving only the nasty pigs.這結束是變造的，在1955年的動畫版本，其中去掉了人，只留下了惡劣的影響。 Another example of Hollywood butchering great literature?另一個例子是好萊塢拔毛偉大文學？ Yes, but in this case the film’s secret producer was the Central Intelligence Agency.是的，但在這種情況下，電影的製片人的秘密被中央情報機關工作。

The CIA, it seems, was worried that the public might be too influenced by Orwell’s pox-on-both-their-houses critique of the capitalist humans and Communist pigs.中央情報局，似乎是擔心公眾可能太受奧維爾的痘上都-其-房子批判資本主義對人類和共產豬。 So after his death in 1950, agents were dispatched (by none other than E. Howard Hunt, later of Watergate fame) to buy the film rights to ”Animal Farm” from his widow to make its message more overtly anti-Communist.所以他去世之後，在1950年，代理商，分赴（莫過於霍華德亨特，後來的水門名利） ，以購買電影的權利， "動物農莊" ，由他的遺孀作出自己的信息，更公然反共產主義。

Rewriting the end of ”Animal Farm” is just one example of the often absurd lengths to which the CIA went, as recounted in a new book, ”The Cultural Cold War: The CIA and the World of Arts and Letters” (The New Press) by Frances Stonor Saunders, a British journalist.重寫年底"動物農莊" ，只是其中一個例子，就是人們常說的荒謬長度而中央情報局每到一地，作為回憶，在一本新書中， "文化冷戰：中央情報局和世界的藝術和文學" （即新的新聞） ，由弗朗西斯stonor桑德斯，一名英國記者。 Published in Britain last summer, the book will appear here next month.發表在英國，去年夏天，這本書將出現在這裡下個月。

Much of what Ms. Stonor Saunders writes about, including the CIA’s covert sponsorship of the Paris-based Congress for Cultural Freedom and the British opinion magazine Encounter, was exposed in the late 1960’s, generating a wave of indignation.不少是女士stonor桑德斯描寫，其中包括美國中央情報局的秘密贊助，總部設在巴黎的國會文化自由和英國輿論雜誌遇到的，是暴露在六十年代後期的發展，生成波的憤慨。 But by combing through archives and unpublished manuscripts and interviewing several of the principal actors, Ms. Stonor Saunders has uncovered many new details and gives the most comprehensive account yet of the agency’s activities between 1947 and 1967.但梳理檔案和未發表的手稿和面試幾個主要演員，女士stonor桑德斯已經破獲了許多新的細節，並給出了最全面的帳戶，但該機構的活動， 1947年和1967年。

This picture of the CIA’s secret war of ideas has cameo appearances by scores of intellectual celebrities like the critics Dwight Macdonald and Lionel Trilling, the poets Ted Hughes and Derek Walcott and the novelists James Michener and Mary McCarthy, all of whom directly or indirectly benefited from the CIA’s largesse.這張照片的美國中央情報局的秘密戰爭的想法有他出現，由數十名知識分子名人一樣，批評者德懷特麥克唐納和萊昂內爾trilling ，詩人特德休斯和德里克女和小說家詹姆斯michener和瑪麗麥卡錫，他們都直接或間接地得益於中央情報局的largesse 。 There are also bundles of cash that were funneled through CIA fronts and several hilarious schemes that resemble a ”Spy vs. Spy” cartoon more than a serious defense against Communism.也有捆現金被漏斗通過中央情報局戰線和幾個搞笑的計劃，類似於"間諜對間諜"的漫畫更比一個嚴重防禦對抗共產主義。 Traveling first class all the way, the CIA and its counterparts in other Western European nations sponsored art exhibitions, intellectual conferences, concerts and magazines to press their larger anti-Soviet agenda.旅行頭等艙所有的路，美國中央情報局和其對應的其它西歐國家主辦的藝術展覽，智力會議，音樂會和雜誌的記者，他們較大的反蘇議程。 Ms. Stonor Saunders provides ample evidence, for example, that the editors at Encounter and other agency-sponsored magazines were ordered not to publish articles directly critical of Washington’s foreign policy.女士stonor桑德斯提供了充分的證據，例如，編輯在遇到與其他機構主辦的雜誌被命令不得發表文章，直接批評美國的外交政策。 She also shows how the CIA bankrolled some of the earliest exhibitions of Abstract Expressionist painting outside of the United States to counter the Socialist Realism being advanced by Moscow.她還說明了美國中央情報局bankrolled一些最早的展覽，抽象表現主義繪畫在美國以外的國家來反社會主義現實主義被先進的，由莫斯科。

In one memorable episode, the British Foreign Office subsidized the distribution of 50,000 copies of ”Darkness at Noon,” Arthur Koestler’s anti-Communist classic.在一個令人難忘的插曲，英國外交辦公室資助的分配50000本的"黑暗的中午， "亞瑟凱斯特勒的反共產主義經典之作。 But at the same time, the French Communist Party ordered its operatives to buy up every copy of the book.但在同一時間內，法國共產黨責令其操作工購買了每一個副本的圖書。 Koestler received a windfall in royalties courtesy of his Communist adversaries.凱斯特勒收到了意料之外的版稅出於禮貌，他的共產主義敵人。

As it turns out, ”Animal Farm” was not the only instance of the CIA’s dabbling in Hollywood.不過現在看來， "動物農莊" ，是不是唯一的，例如在美國中央情報局涉足好萊塢。 Ms. Stonor Saunders reports that one operative who was a producer and talent agent slipped affluent-looking African-Americans into several films as extras to try to counter Soviet criticism of the American race problem.女士stonor桑德斯報告說，一個手術的人是一個生產者和人才代理下滑富有前瞻性的非洲裔美國人分成幾個電影演員，設法對付蘇聯的批評，美國的種族問題。

The agency also changed the ending of the movie version of ”1984,” disregarding Orwell’s specific instructions that the story not be altered.該機構還改變了結局電影版的" 1984年" ，不顧奧維爾的具體指示說故事，不能有任何改變。 In the book, the protagonist, Winston Smith, is entirely defeated by the nightmarish totalitarian regime.在這本書中，主角的，溫斯頓史密斯，完全是敗在惡夢般的極權主義政權。 In the very last line, Orwell writes of Winston, ”He loved Big Brother.” In the movie, Winston and his lover, Julia, are gunned down after Winston defiantly shouts: ”Down with Big Brother!”在很最後防線，奧威爾寫的溫斯頓， "他熱愛老大哥" ，在電影中，溫斯頓和他的愛人，朱莉婭，是槍殺後，溫斯頓公然高喊： "打倒老大哥" ！

Such changes came from the agency’s obsession with snuffing out a notion then popular among many European intellectuals: that East and West were morally equivalent.這種變化，來自該機構的痴迷與snuffing出一個概念，那麼受歡迎，許多歐洲知識分子：東方和西方在道德上相等的。 But instead of illustrating the differences between the two competing systems by taking the high road, the agency justified its covert activities by referring to the unethical tactics of the Soviets.而是說明兩國間的分歧競爭制度，採取高道，該機構有理由它的隱蔽活動，是指以不道德的手法，蘇聯人。

”If the other side can use ideas that are camouflaged as being local rather than Soviet-supported or -stimulated, then we ought to be able to use ideas camouflaged as local ideas,” Tom Braden, who ran the CIA’s covert cultural division in the early 1950’s, explained years later. "如果對方可以利用的想法是偽裝的，因為被當地而非蘇聯支持或刺激的，那麼我們應該能夠利用偽裝的理念作為本地的想法， "湯姆（ Braden ，誰然中央情報局的秘密文化師我國早在1950年的解釋，年後的事。 (In one of the book’s many amusing codas, Mr. Braden goes on in the 1980’s to become the leftist foil to Patrick Buchanan on the CNN program ”Crossfire.”) （在一本書中的許多有趣codas先生（ Braden下去，在20世紀80年代成為左派襯托帕特里克布坎南對美國有線電視新聞網節目"交火" ） 。

The cultural cold war began in postwar Europe, with the fraying of the wartime alliance between Washington and Moscow.文化隨著冷戰的開始，在二戰後的歐洲，隨著磨損的戰時聯盟，華盛頓和莫斯科之間。 Officials in the West believed they had to counter Soviet propaganda and undermine the wide sympathy for Communism in France and Italy.官員在西自認有對付蘇聯的宣傳和破壞廣泛同情共產主義，在法國和意大利。

An odd alliance was struck between the CIA leaders, most of them wealthy Ivy League veterans of the wartime Office of Strategic Services and a corps of largely Jewish ex-Communists who had broken with Moscow to become virulently anti-Communist.很奇怪的同盟關係，在兩者之間中央情報局領導人，他們大多是有錢人常春藤聯盟的退伍軍人戰時辦公室戰略服務，並總隊在很大程度上猶太人的前共產黨員，他們打破了與莫斯科成為virulently反共產主義。 Acting as intermediaries between the agency and the intellectual community were three colorful agents who included Vladimir Nabokov’s much less talented cousin, Nicholas, a composer.代理中介機構之間和知識界三個豐富多彩代理商，當中包括弗拉基米爾納博科夫的少得多人才表姐，尼古拉斯，是作曲家。

The CIA recognized from the beginning that it could not openly sponsor artists and intellectuals in Europe because there was so much anti-American feeling there.中情局承認，從一開始就知道它不能公開贊助藝術家和知識分子在歐洲，因為有這麼多的反美情緒。 Instead, it decided to woo intellectuals out of the Soviet orbit by secretly promoting a non-Communist left of democratic socialists disillusioned with Moscow.相反，它決定向胡知識分子脫離蘇聯的軌道，暗中推動一個非共產主義留下的民主社會主義者幻滅了莫斯科。

Ms. Stonor Saunders describes how the CIA cleverly skimmed hundreds of millions of dollars from the Marshall Plan to finance its activities, funneling the money through fake philanthropies it created or real ones like the Ford Foundation.女士stonor桑德斯描述如何中央情報局巧妙地掠過了數億美元，從馬歇爾計劃，以資助其活動，他們得逞，這筆錢是通過假慈善它創造或以假亂真像福特基金會。

”We couldn’t spend it all,” Gilbert Greenway, a former CIA agent, recalled. "我們可能不會花這一切， "吉爾伯特綠色通道，一名前中央情報局特工回憶。 ”There were no limits, and nobody had to account for it. "有沒有額度限制，也沒有人曾交代。 It was amazing.”這是了不起的" 。

When some of the CIA’s activities were exposed in the late 1960’s, many artists and intellectuals claimed ignorance.當一些中央情報局的活動暴露在六十年代後期，許多藝術家和知識分子聲稱無知。 But Ms. Stonor Saunders makes a strong case that several people, including the philosopher Isaiah Berlin and the poet Stephen Spender, who was co-editor of Encounter, knew about the CIA’s role.但女士stonor桑德斯提出了強烈的情況下，一些人，包括哲學家以賽亞柏林和詩人斯蒂芬富豪，他們共同主編的遭遇，知道中情局的角色。

”She has made it very difficult now to deny that some of these things happened,” said Norman Birnbaum, a professor at the Georgetown University Law School who was a university professor in Europe in the 1950’s and early 1960’s. "她說得很艱難，現在要否認一些這類事情發生，說： "諾曼birnbaum ，教授，他在喬治城大學法學院的一位大學教授在歐洲，在20世紀50年代和60年代初。 ”And she has placed a lot of people living and dead in embarrassing situations.” " ，而她寄予了很多人的生活和死亡的尷尬情況" 。

Still unresolved is what impact the campaign had and whether it was worth it.仍未解決的是什麼樣的影響運動了，它到底是值得的。 Some of the participants, like Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., who was in the OSS and knew about some of the CIA’s cultural activities, argue that the agency’s role was benign, even necessary.一些與會者一樣，阿瑟施萊辛格米小，他們是在OSS和知道的一些中央情報局的文化活動結合起來，爭辯說，該機構的作用是良性的，甚至是必要的。 Compared with the coups the CIA sponsored in Guatemala, Iran and elsewhere, he said, its support of the arts was some of its best work.相對於政變中央情報局贊助了在危地馬拉，伊朗和其他地方，他說，它支持藝術，是它的一些最好的作品。 ”It enabled people to publish what they already believed,” he added. "這使人們發表什麼，他們已經相信， "他補充說。 ”It didn’t change anyone’s course of action or thought.” "它並沒有改變任何人的行動過程或思想" 。

But Diana Josselson, whose husband, Michael, ran the Congress for Cultural Freedom, told Ms. Stonor Saunders that there were real human costs among those around the world who innocently cooperated with the agency’s front organizations only to be tarred with a CIA affiliation when the truth came out.但戴安娜喬斯爾森，其丈夫邁克爾，然國會文化自由，告訴女士stonor桑德斯說，有真正的人力成本，其中包括在世界各地的人天真地配合該機構的掩護組織不但要tarred與中央情報局無黨派人士當真相出來。 The author and other critics argue that by using government money covertly to promote such American ideals as democracy and freedom of expression, the agency ultimately stepped on its own message.作者和其他批評者認為，用政府的錢，暗地裡以促進這種美國理想，因為民主和自由的表達，該機構最終踏上自己的訊息。

”Obviously it was an error, and a rather serious error, to allow intellectuals to be subsidized by the government,” said Alan Brinkley, a history professor at Columbia University. "很顯然，這是一個錯誤的，是比較嚴重的錯誤，讓知識分子必須由政府補貼，說： "艾倫布林克利，歷史學教授在哥倫比亞大學。 ”And when it was revealed, it did undermine their credibility seriously.” "時，據透露，但它的確損害其公信力嚴重" 。

Comment on 'How the CIA Played Dirty Tricks With Culture' : 評論』如何中央情報局發揮骯髒伎倆與文化' ：

RSS 的RSS TrackBack URL 跟踪 RUI

Related News: 相關新聞：