The main thesis of Hixson’s article is that researching the relationship between popular culture and national security policy will help historians understand the processes through which society “absorbs and perpetuates predominant themes of national security discourse. Specifically, novels by authors such as Tom Clancy, le Carre, or Fleming, reflect perceptions of Russian and American behavior and perpetuate American myths, symbols, and images.
Tom Clancy is cited as reflecting American policy during the Reagan administration, and authors such as Spillane reflect an earlier era (1950s). By the 60s and 70s, the literature had become more ‘morally ambiguous,’ and authors such as Ambler, Greene, and le Carre dominated the scene. Whereas in earlier eras there was a defined evil and good, by the 70s, popular fiction adopted the trick of identifying with the evil doer.
Some of the strengths of the article are the comprehensive coverage of the popular literature throughout the cold war. Picked apart are novels from the start of the 20th century through the 1980s. The majority of the article focuses on books by Tom Clancy and their mirroring of the Reagan administration in the use of nostalgic images of America counterpointed against a dehumanizing ‘evil’ Soviet Union.
The main weakness of the article is the focus on Tom Clancy’s novels. The Hunt for Red October, Red Storm Rising, and The Cardinal of the Kremlin are all cited as perpetuating American myths regarding both self and the enemy ‘other.’ Another weakness is the leap between the novel and the actual foreign policy. Hixson repeatedly states that security elites exploited these books to promote a cult of national security, however, aside from Dan Quayle holding Red Storm Rising on the Senate floor, there is no direct evidence of the exploitation.
References:
Hixson, W.L. (n.d). “Red Storm Rising”: Tom Clancy Novels and the Cult of National
Security. Diplomatic History. 599-613
