Picture of author.

Sam Tanenhaus

Teoksen Whittaker Chambers: A Biography tekijä

5+ teosta 618 jäsentä 11 arvostelua

Tietoja tekijästä

Sam Tanenhaus was born on October 31, 1955. He received a B.A. in English from Grinnell College in 1977 and a M.A. in English literature from Yale University in 1978. He is an American historian, biographer, and journalist. His books include Old Greenwich Village: An Architectural Portrait, Season näytä lisää of Power, Louis Armstrong: Biography of a Musician, The Death of Conservatism, and Whittaker Chambers: A Biography, which won the Los Angeles Times Book Prize. (Bowker Author Biography) näytä vähemmän

Includes the name: Tanenhaus Sam

Image credit: Christopher Bierlein

Tekijän teokset

Associated Works

Merkitty avainsanalla

Yleistieto

Syntymäaika
1955-10-31
Sukupuoli
male
Kansalaisuus
USA
Koulutus
Grinnell College
Yale University
Ammatit
editor
Organisaatiot
The New York Times
Vanity Fail

Jäseniä

Kirja-arvosteluja

The author does as well with words as he does in photograph to paint a picture of the character of this neighborhood through time.
 
Merkitty asiattomaksi
Deni_Weeks | Sep 16, 2023 |
Where else can you find elements of a spy story, good guys against bad guys, weird characters, and cognitive dissonance all rolled into one? The Hiss/Chambers case riveted the nation, laid the groundwork for Nixon's rise, and epitomized national phobia.

Chambers, who died comparatively young at age 60, certainly made a mark. Considered by many to be an uncouth individual (with notoriously bad teeth - a key component at the Hiss trial), Chambers like many others during the depression feared Capitalism was moribund and unable to address the inequities that had been exposed so they were tempted by Communism which appeared to have solved some of those problems. Almost all became disenchanted especially following the pact Stalin made with Hitler and revelations of his ruthlessness. Post WW II anti-Communist fervor became the rage and HUAC (the House on Un-American Activities, itself spectacularly un-American in its behavior) became a mechanism for politicians to loudly trumpet their pseudo-Americanism.



Many of those had actively spied for the Russians including Hiss and Chambers. Chambers, who had been early in his disenchantment moved with his family dozens of times in a no-to-unrealistic paranoiac fear of the NKVD's possible revenge.



Chambers had a fascinating background. His family life was a mess, but he managed to get into Columbia where he first considered himself a conservative and where his literary career began. He was considered a talented writer (indeed, Witness, his autobiography is considered by many to be a masterpiece.) Following a trip to Germany where he witnessed wretched poverty, he joined the Communist Party and left college. Soon disenchanted, he left the Communist Party, and eventually became editor of Time Magazine and a favorite of William Buckley. Jacques Barzun and Meyer Shapiro said that had he not gotten mixed up with the CP he might have gone on to be one of the great poets of the 20th century, he was so talented. Once tarred by the Hiss brush, however, his life was virtually ruined.



No need to go into the details of the trials here, other than to report that both men became larger-than-life symbols: Hiss representing the New Deal and Chambers the rising anti-communist political movement. Each was used rather abysmally by his respective disciples to each's detriment. Chamber target was modernism, not just Communism, and his weapon was the scatter shot which hit all sorts of groups including liberals, socialists, and humanists, as well as Communists, all of which he blamed for societal ills. Chambers became more and more religious and mystical. He became an Episcopalian, then a Quaker from whom he was quickly estranged. He also considered Hiss to be one of his best friends and only wanted him dismissed from his post, certainly not jailed. He was a man of ideas but of inconsistent ideology, refusing to be labeled or identified with any group. He didn't last long writing for The National Review after alienating many of its readers by defending the right of Hiss and Robeson to get US passports.



He wrote, "counterrevolution and conservatism have little in common. In the struggle against Communism the conservative is all but helpless. For that struggle cannot be fought, or much less won or even understood, except in terms of total sacrifice. And the conservative is suspicious of sacrifice; he writes first to conserve, above all what he is and what he has. You can’t fight against revolutions so." But just what a counter-revolutionist stood for, except as the opposite of revolutionist, he never said.

Ironically, had Hiss simply fessed up to having been a member and having passed documents (mostly on European economic policy) that probably would have been the end if it, but he made the fatal mistake of suing Chambers. That brought to light the famous pumpkin and typewriter that were Hiss's downfall.



The left according to Arthur Schlesinger, in a review of Witness, led a whispering and vilification campaign of Chambers that continued for decades, much of it homophobic even though Chambers was certainly not homosexual, and that this campaign was no less horrible than that orchestrated by HUAC.



The unanswered question we are left with is why out society requires a constant enemy. In the fifties and sixties it was the bugaboo of the Red Scare; today it's Islamic Facism. Is threat required as a glue for society? Just walk into any airport and realize you have become the sheep required to suffer indignities and silliness all in the name of the illusion of safety. Chambers and Hiss both served as useful stereotypes and straw men when each was far more interesting and complicated. The Communism each man was briefly enamored with never existed either; it was a chimera that Chambers recognized as such long before Hiss.



For a terrific series on the Hiss/Chambers case watch the 38 part series done by John Beresford on Youtube. It's very good. (A Pumpkin Patch, A Typewriter, And Richard Nixon .) On another note regarding government secrets -- the Chambers/Hiss thing was all about secrets, after all -- Thomas Powers wrote a review of Secrecy: An American Experience by Daniel Moynihan, which discusses, at length how secrecy is used within the government to hide things they don't want the rest of government to dins out about. This often puts decision-makers in awkward positions, e.g. Kennedy was never told of the CIA's own report on how the Bay of Pigs wouldn't work, and Truman was never informed of the VENONA decryptions. Moynihan writes:



All the bitter divisions of the McCarthy years, the exaggerated Republican charges of “twenty years of treason” and the Democratic countercharges of witch-hunting, might have been avoided, Moynihan suggests, with who knows what profound consequences. There might have been no fight to the death over who lost China, no lingering nightmares at the outset of the Kennedy administration that hands-off realism in the Caribbean and Southeast Asia would inexorably summon up new howling mobs demanding to know: Who lost Cuba? Who lost Vietnam?



I.e., there would have been no Hills/Chambers controversy, either. In the end, the secret documents Hiss passed along and the dotty actions Chambers was required to do undercover before he broke with the party, had no impact or consequence to anything. Looking back, it was like watching a children's game. I wonder how much of that has changed.



For an examination of why did otherwise reasonable men, at the highest levels of our political culture, succumb to these extreme suspicions see Ellen Schrecker’s book, Many are the Crimes. Her answer to this question is that the excesses of the cold war originated in “a sense of panic” that dated back to the Russian Revolution of 1917. That panic manifested itself in the fifties and continues today. The press failed during Hiss/Chambers.. To quote one reviewer, "Hysteria and paranoia aren't the exclusive preserve of ambitious politicians and the voters they seek to steer through the latest minefield of awful threats. Hysteria and paranoia aren't the exclusive preserve of ambitious politicians and the voters they seek to steer through the latest minefield of awful threats. The press made another muck of it here, too. The press couldn't cope with nuance or indecision." Watching the news today, you realize things haven't changed.
… (lisätietoja)
 
Merkitty asiattomaksi
ecw0647 | 5 muuta kirja-arvostelua | Apr 6, 2022 |
My 4th grade granddaughter chose this book for a nonfiction book report. It is quite definitely not a child's book, but a skillfully presented biography, rich in details but with a narrative line which organizes the flow; one can read carefully or float for the flavor. It's a short text but short does not mean it is meant for school age audience.
 
Merkitty asiattomaksi
MaryHeleneMele | 1 muu arvostelu | May 6, 2019 |
Tanenhaus shows Chambers to be a mess, but he does so sympathetically in the beginning and then, as the book proceeds to the trial and beyond, heroically. Nixon comes off as only he could and Hiss as someone who could have avoided it all if only he had followed John Foster Dulles advice.

If you are upset about the rants going on in the 2010s, then this book puts the US fight between raving righters and liberals into perspective. It hints at the lure of commies in the '20s, it shows the infighting between true believers, but it dwells on the HUAC days.

A good history read if you are young and need background to understand today's US politics. Also, if you do not believe that the world is run by the arrogant, self-serving, and ruthless, this is a good antidote to your naïveté.
… (lisätietoja)
 
Merkitty asiattomaksi
kerns222 | 5 muuta kirja-arvostelua | Aug 24, 2016 |

Palkinnot

You May Also Like

Associated Authors

Tilastot

Teokset
5
Also by
1
Jäseniä
618
Suosituimmuussija
#40,697
Arvio (tähdet)
4.1
Kirja-arvosteluja
11
ISBN:t
29

Taulukot ja kaaviot