So. What are the unwashed reading these days? What's influencing the opinions of average Americans wrt spying?
Dan Brown's "new" book is called
Digital Fortress. Is it pre-emptive or just well timed? He copyrighted it back in 98. First publication seems to be before some of his more well known recent books? Seems it's being marketed as his latest. I guess marketing is what matters. More importantly for me though is how it was written. Is it Conservative propaganda... written to muddy the waters wrt Bush's spying... or just a fortuitous prognostication, the result of a gifted mind at work that can see the future unfolding? Is it the result of his personal experience with his students as he claims? Am I paranoid? Damn skippy. And with good reason of course... seeing as how the White House has officially been found guilty of
Covert Propaganda. And isn't that our jobs in the digital age, to be paranoid... sans a legitimate fourth estate? I think Brown's argument is actually, "yes." Whatever this book is about, it was obviously formatted to become a second tier John Grisham type movie staring Ashley Judd.
The book is certainly a bit eerily prescient and takes on the issue of spying by the NSA in a so-called 'Post 911' world. Leaders in the codebreaking bizz in our government are spying on everyone... thanks to an alien-like supercomputer. And unbeknownst to the world, they've got designs to make every email, every communication 100% transparent to their scrutiny.
It plays both sides of the fence... but in the end, I think the rhetoric stacks up on the Conservative side... and is only undermined by one man's apparent "obsession" to safeguard his country. How predictably pudding-filled and wishy-washably "palatable" for us Amur'cans.
And sure, Brown's book is pulp-fiction and of such average quality that you almost want to pitch it about 5 pages in... but I for one think it's interesting to understand what the average illiterate American calls "reading" these days.
And surely that's even Brown's plan: to write books that average folks can read. I'm sure that has to be true. Because surely he could write more challenging work if he wanted... having the qualifications he has.
So you put your head down and plow through while visiting the relatives.
Here are his two basic competing themes:
page 266: Srathmore, operation's head of the NSA codebreaking division: "Over the past few years, our work here at the NSA has gotten harder and harder. We've faced enemies I never imagined would challenge us. I'm talking about our own citizens. The lawyers [oohhh, evil lawyers!], the civil rights fanatics [those damn fanatics!], the EFF [Electronic Freedom Foundation or some such ridiculous conspiratorial sounding rubbish]-they've all played a part, but it's more than that. It's the people. They've lost faith [lost Faith? God help us!!]. They've become paranoid [damn those paranoid pot-smoking lefties!]. They suddenly see us as the enemy [George Bush the enemy? Now why would that be?]. People like you and me, people who truly have the nation's best interests at heart, we find ourselves having to fight for our right to serve our country [your rights include ripping up the Constitution?]. We're no longer peacekeepers [you did it to yourselves by electing Bush]. We're evesdroppers, peeping Toms, violators of the people's rights." ... "Unfortunately, there are naive people in the world [Ie liberals? Yeah, right... try Bush voters], people who can't imagine the horrors they'd face if we didn't intervene. I truly believe it's up to us to save them from their own ignorance."
And such is of course the Conservative line. All based on "horrors" underlined by the likes of average pulp-fiction writers like Dan Brown. "Horrors" represented to America by "orange alerts" that apparently don't occur except during election time. Conservatives really are just braindead ignorant.
But to be somewhat fair, Strathmore is of course a character, not the book's "message" necessarily.
However, Brown balances the above with this paltry offering:
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes: Who will guard the guards?."
Ie, who will make sure our leaders are acting ethically. Obviously it's suppose to be our press. But since they're just corporate whores owned by the White House (ie the NYT), it's up to us paranoid liberals I guess. My problem here isn't so much that Brown offers this latin quote to balance Strathmore's rhetoric. It's that one side is represented by practicality and the other by philosophical semantics. I think the deck is stacked for the reader. "If you want to be safe of course, don't trust the liberals and their idealistic academic philosophizing."
So... it's circular logic, to avoid being paranoid. And like all Conservative logic, it therefore isn't logic at all... but rather Faith. And that's the way the powerful like it. Stupid conservatives. Poor, stupid cowardly conservatives, willing to give away their rights because Bush let 911 happen.
Now, in the end, Strathmore of course turns out to be the "villain." But his downfall is only the result of him trying to secure the nation... and going outside the law to do so. I'm sure Brown might legitimize this by saying that it's all "shades of grey."
Really, it's just Brown playing the role of a Falafel-like stooge for the Conservative movement... in my opinion.
Paranoid? Maybe... but sans a legitimate media in 2005... that's my job.
I guess Brown and Ashley Judd will at least make some cash off this pulp.
In closing, to be fair to Brown, here are two quotes from his website about the book:
"I couldn't figure out how the Secret Service knew what these kids were saying in their E-mail."
Q: A rather startling event inspired you to write Digital Fortress. Can you elaborate on what happened?
A: A few years ago, I was teaching on the campus of Phillips Exeter Academy in New Hampshire. One Spring day, unannounced, the U.S. Secret Service showed up and detained one of our students claiming he was a threat to national security. As it turned out, the kid had sent private E-mail to a friend saying how much he hated President Clinton and how he thought the president should be shot. The Secret Service came to campus to make sure the kid wasn't serious. After some interrogation the agents decided the student was harmless, and not much came of it. Nonetheless, the incident really stuck with me. I couldn't figure out how the secret service knew what these kids were saying in their E-mail.
I began doing some research into where organizations like the Secret Service get their intelligence data, and what I found out absolutely floored me. I discovered there is an intelligence agency as large as the CIA... that only about 3% of Americans knows exists.
It is called the National Security Agency (NSA), and it is home to the country's eavesdroppers. The agency functions like an enormous vacuum cleaner sucking in intelligence data from around the globe and processing it for subversive material. The NSA's super-computers scan E-mail and other digital communiqués looking for dangerous word combinations like "kill" and "Clinton" in the same sentence.
The more I learned about this ultra-secret agency and the fascinating moral issues surrounding national security and civilian privacy, the more I realized it was a great backdrop for a novel. That's when I started writing Digital Fortress.
The death of privacy may have some wonderful side effects we don't yet imagine--it may just make us a more moral society..."
Q: The scenario sounds grim. Can you leave us with any words of hope?
A: Sure. The death of privacy may have some wonderful side effects we don't yet imagine--it may just make us a more moral society. If we are more visible to our peers, our behavior as a society will undoubtedly improve. Think about it... if your whole town knows when you are on the Internet sneaking a peek at Lois Lane in her underwear, you might just decide to do something else... maybe even curl up with a good book.
More moral? Less porn? I think Brown gives himself away right there folks. 100%. And exactly what kind of psycho can justify the loss of our privacy by the above semantics? Conservative covert op? I think there's good reason to believe someone left a message on his answering machine with a topic for a book, and an angle. Or do people like Dan Brown, Falafel, and Jeff Gannon even need prompting? Probly not.
And ps.
For anyone who wants to read a good book, I'm reading "Idlewild" by Nick Sagan to cleanse my post Brown cyber-tech palate. And Walter Mosley's "The Man in the Basement" is next up to bat.