Author: Jennet Conant
Edition: Nook
Read: Nov 2012
377 pages
Rated: 2½ out of 5
Synopsis:
During the war years, 1941-45, the
Office of Strategic Services (OSS) was created under William
Donovan's leadership. Donovan was a friend of Roosevelt's and highly
influential. Some of the people whom he attracted was Paul Child,
Julia McWilliams (Julia Child) and Jane Foster. This book is a history of these
people and the departments they worked in. It continues out through
the McCarthy years.
The story takes us through Europe post
WW II where the Child's were on assignment with the Foreign Service
through the USIS and Foster had taken up life in Paris. The book
talks about the time in the OSS where they created “black”
propaganda to be used against the Japanese, alone with a group of
mostly women who were part of the OSS intelligence network. In the
50's Jane Foster, who has become Jane Foster Zlatovski, is enmeshed
in being accused of being a spy for the Soviet Union. The Child's
stand behind her.
Thoughts:
Paul Child really was more interested
in Jane Foster, but realized she would not be someone he could live
with. As it turned out, she was already secretly married, but at
first it seemed more of a marriage of convince than of love. As Child
got to know McWilliams, he felt more of a brotherly love, than a
desire for her. It was she who desired him. Child took her on more as
a project than as a companion. From my view, Paul Child used Julia
McWilliams like a girl uses a doll. She was there to be dressed up,
not as a person to be explored. His initial relationship seemed so
much callous. But McWilliams was devoted to him and her love
eventually was returned. How did this relationship evolve like this?
Obviously, in the long run, the relationship was real.
The nature of war is no holds barred.
One of the tools developed is the art of misinformation. Both Foster
and McWilliams (Child) were involved in this. The question which
formed is do we value truth when we purposely spread lies? Could a
Christian be considered for this job? If not, how does a Christians
support this? Even now, we have misinformation. When you read between
the lines in this war on terror, we do not know what is correct and
what are lies.
While the book's title suggests that
the OSS is the main emphasis of this book, it is the prelude to the
effects of McCarthyism. The people Conant follows went through South
East Asia OSS' misinformation regime. As McCarthy grew in power, the
accusations was this group worked with the communists to bring them
into power in China, Vietnam and other places. From this group, the
suspicions centered on Jane Foster. Others who were her friends fell
under suspicion because of their association. This included Paul
Child. You realize from Conant's writing, and she does this well, how
being associated with suspicion, even though not associated with the
wrong, affects the person. The self-doubt, the anger. How some people
will rise to occasion and some fall short of their standards. Or as
Charles Chaput commenting on Leon Bloy,We have that freedom. This is
why suffering breaks some people, while it breaks open others into
something more than their old selves, stretching the soul to
greatness.
While everyone, well most everyone,
thinks that McCarthy went well over the top in his chasing down
communists and suspected communists, there is the aspect that a
person who may have or probably did commit espionage has friends and
accomplices. How do you root out the problem without damaging the
unsuspecting or those aiding? Is mere association reason to
potentially destroy a life? In this case, there was a high degree of
suspicion about Jane Foster actively passing on secrets. But where
does the suspicions stop? In this case Paul Child was able to show
that even though he was a friend of Jane Foster, he did not know of
her other connections. But in our world of terrorism and those within
the US possibly planning terrorist activities, how do you identify
those who have that connection? No easy answers from my point of
view. Is it better to hurt a few to save a lot?
I suspect that Jennet Conant had
material left over from her previous books about the Irregulars and
William Donovan. She found an interesting character, Jane Foster, but
few people would pick up a book on Foster. But you put Julia Child's
name on the cover and people are interested, particularly if it
involves spies. So the book was written with some Julia Child
material, but telling the Jane Foster story.
Evaluation:
As a history, the book relates the
story line of the OSS and people Jane Foster embroiled in the turmoil
surrounding McCarthyism. But if you are looking for more background
on Julia Child, you will be disappointed. The story revolves around
Jane Foster with Julia Child being the big draw for readers. And that
is the crux of the problem. The title of the book is not true, making
you concerned with the rest of the book. The book is about Jane
Foster, the Child's are supporting characters to the main story. The
Jane Foster story is compelling, but you keep on thinking there will
be more of Julia Child—there is not, just enough to keep you going.
Good Quotes:
- First Line: It started with the arrival of a telegram.
- Last Line: Unfortunately, her [Jane Foster] flawed and incomplete account raises more question than it answers
References:
- Jennet Conant Wikipedia
- Jennet Conant Publisher's Site
No comments:
Post a Comment