MAOIST.WS

Maoist Information Web Site


Maoist movie reviews

"The Falcon and the Snowman" (1985)

The Falcon and the Snowman
Directed by John Schlesinger
Hemdale Film
132 minutes
1985

2009 June

Apart from being based on the alleged true story of former defense 
contractor TRW employee Christopher John Boyce and friend Andrew 
Daulton Lee (as told in Robert Lindsey's true crime book), "The 
Falcon and the Snowman" is in some ways more compelling as a work of 
realism than "The Spook Who Sat by the 
Door." In "The Falcon and the Snowman," two Euro-Amerikans appear 
to do damage in an intelligence context, without becoming CIA 
officers or leading a revolution. One of them, Chris Boyce (played by 
Timothy Hutton) is a kind of clerk with top secret clearance and 
access to CIA secrets, like the fictional character Dan Freeman in 
"The Spook Who Sat by the Door." Unlike Freeman, Boyce does not train 
to become a CIA officer. He gains his security clearance through 
nepotism seemingly.

Obviously, the idea that running a photocopier in Langley is of no 
importance except as a token job is erroneous. In the real world, 
clerks doing boring work have been spies. It's not clear to this 
writer that operating an encrypted teletype system as the real-life 
Boyce did is much more challenging than the job of Dan Freeman in 
"The Spook Who Sat by the Door." However, readers will notice that 
MIWS's review of "The Spook Who Sat by the Door" says almost nothing 
about the CIA per se. This is because "The Spook" isn't really about 
the CIA. Whether or not a Black man could have really gotten a job 
like Dan Freeman's in the CIA, whether the movie's portrayal of the 
CIA is accurate, etc., the main character of "The Spook Who Sat by 
the Door" knows what he is doing and he does it purposefully, even if 
he couldn't have predicted his exact job in the CIA. This is related 
to a theme of revolutionary passive-aggressiveness that unfolds 
dialectically in "The Spook Who Sat by the Door." The movie's lessons 
for people who are lumpen-influenced in a negative way, for example, 
are much more important than anything connected to the CIA internally 
with middle-class people. "The Spook" was and is quite timely and 
realistic, not as a movie depicting Black revolutionary infiltration 
of the CIA, but in other ways. The Black Panthers ridiculed people 
who got hung up over grammar, but they also criticized those who 
wanted to fire off quick speeches and who disdained education and 
theory. The Black Panthers are famous for their armed image, but the 
vast majority of the people who followed Huey Newton degenerated in 
one way or another despite the advances the Black Panthers made. Much 
energy was let out and lost, and those who followed or supported the 
Black Panthers or individual leaders went in all kinds of directions. 
"The Spook Who Sat by the Door" raises some ways to sustain a 
movement. "The Spook Who Sat by the Door" is less instructive or 
useful in other ways. Despite the Black Panthers' experience, Robert 
F. Williams' experience, despite the whole COINTELPRO experience and 
books about COINTELPRO, U.$. activists are often ignorant of the FBI 
in practice, and it is questionable whether U.$. activists in 
particular should be too interested in the CIA in general in terms of 
its inner workings before dealing with the FBI. Another reason not to 
take "The Spook Who Sat by the Door" too literally is that people are 
likely to make inappropriate comparisons to Freeman. One thread on a 
discussion forum for youth suggests that Barack Obama is a "spook 
sitting by the door." Obviously, Barack Obama is a Black token as 
elected by white liberals, but he is the boss of the spy bosses. 
There is a big difference between being revolutionary working with a 
small minority (or potentially working with an internal colony 
plurality amidst oppressor state power), and trying to unite and 
manipulate a majority of Amerikans or lead as the head of a majority 
of Amerikans. Others, pursuing careers, have likened themselves to 
Dan Freeman and slandered Freeman as being just a very clever person 
serving his own individual interests and ego. Though Freeman reflects 
something other than an infiltrator of the CIA, that does not mean 
"The Spook" is a general integrationist movie (it is not 
integrationist at all except perhaps in its impact on Euro-Amerikan 
viewers and Black viewers who take the movie as a call to overcome 
stereotypes and other obstacles to integration), or an individualist 
movie the way some have suggested.

While the imperialist state is relevant with "The Spook Who Sat by 
the Door," the CIA as a reality and a specific institution is more 
relevant in the context of "The Falcon and the Snowman." The various 
police and spy agency recruiters on U.$. campuses looking to recruit 
Asians, Blacks and Latinos aren't a joke. Anyone who tries to pull a 
"Dan Freeman" will probably find out quickly that "The Spook Who Sat 
by the Door" for that purpose is just a movie. What might be more 
controversial is the usefulness of people already in a government 
agency or body, who are non-revolutionary. "The Falcon and the 
Snowman" raises two things: that people who enter the 
intelligence/counterintelligence arena at a high level cannot leave 
even if they want to, and that Euro-Amerikan action accidentally or 
otherwise helpful to the international proletariat is more likely to 
take the form of disgruntlement than any kind of deep progressive 
idealism, and individual rather than collective action.

In "The Falcon and the Snowman," Boyce, reading misrouted messages in 
a guarded communications center of "RTX" (TRW) in Redondo Beach, 
California, is upset to learn of CIA spying against a U.$. ally, 
Australia, an imperialist country, and other U.$. allies. The content 
of that distress could be Liberal-democratic, or Catholic, as Boyce's 
background dealt with by the movie suggests. Boyce seems to resent 
being deceived himself. The main theme of the movie seems to be, "How 
could he do this?" He came from privilege, rich by Amerikan 
standards. The movie points to different things, Boyce's relationship 
with his father being one. Boyce seems to have something to say about 
Watergate, but it comes out as cynicism. Unlike the main character in 
"The Spook Who Sat by the Door," Boyce appears the type to go along 
with something, but not go through with it, and grumble about it. 
Focusing on Boyce's psychology, the movie suggests contradictory 
explanations and explanations that are not weighted with respect to 
each other. The constant is that Boyce is an individual who is 
dissatisfied with something. In the United $tates, there are many 
bourgeois and petty-bourgeois people who perceive themselves as not 
being in control of their life. A lot of ideas and rhetoric attaches 
itself to that -- Christian, New Age, proto-fascist, anarchist, 
"communist," etc. -- but the solutions remain at an individual level 
and in turn shape ideas and rhetoric. "Communism" can end up looking 
very similar to a Christian sect.

Even when idealism is expressed, no practice specific to that 
idealism may accompany it. In "The Falcon and the Snowman," Boyce 
sells secrets to the U.S.S.R., but why not Australia, for example. 
Boyce's reasoning isn't clear on going to the Soviets, rather than an 
Australian embassy. Boyce's reason is probably opportunistic, an 
assumption that the U.S.S.R., not China or any other country, would 
be able to do the most with the information he has to offer. There is 
a controversy over whether and the extent to which the real-life 
Boyce was driven by a desire for money, but this writer would argue 
that Boyce in "The Falcon and the Snowman" is opportunistic even if 
he doesn't really want money and asking for money is just a way of 
convincing the Soviets that he is not a too-eager triple agent.

Boyce's heroin addict, drug-dealing friend Daulton Lee (played by 
Sean Penn), who amusingly reads spy novels, ironically shows more 
intellectual interest in what he is doing than Boyce does. Lee has a 
goal, even if it is just money or drugs, and he knows he needs to 
learn things to reach that goal. Lee is not confused about what he is 
doing. Before "delivery boy" Lee and Boyce start spying for the 
Soviets, Lee hesitant accuses Boyce of subjectiveness. "Did it ever 
occur to you that maybe you're seeing just exactly what you want to 
see?" In contrast with Lee, Boyce goes from being a seminary student 
to being a spy as if on a whim. He seems to be very muddled. He 
becomes aware of something as an individual working in a company, but 
his response to this is not driven by any principle except perhaps a 
kind of Christian retribution. He has an idea that publicizing the 
CIA's wrongdoings would not be effective with the majority of 
Amerikans, but he is quick to act after the shock of learning about 
CIA interventions. In fact, it is not clear whether Boyce's actions 
are at all helpful to anyone.

Even when done informally and against an agency's rules, the sharing 
of secrets between agencies of different imperialist countries can be 
a way of cooperating or building for cooperation. In fact, that is a 
common reason for having a back channel, cooperation. During the 
1960s and the 1970s, the United $tates and the U.S.S.R. cooperated 
against China through back channels (and openly in other cases). On 
another level, people who take part in back channels between 
competing imperialist country organizations, such as the Democratic 
and Republican Parties during times of election commotion, are 
suspect as seeking unity against the Third World or organizations not 
in the loop. Even some back channels indistinguishable from 
infiltration may function for cooperation, as may some infiltration 
indistinguishable from one-way back channels. In "The Falcon and the 
Snowman," Boyce mentions CIA intervention in Chile against democracy 
as one of his complaints, but it is hard to tell whether Boyce's 
actions actually weaken the U.$. intelligence apparatus. 
Structurally, any kind of intelligence cooperation between two rival 
imperialist countries may make some of each country's intelligence 
effort redundant, so the question becomes how are the countries 
affected in relation to each other and in relation to third 
countries, not just what happens to the power of a country's 
intelligence network. The size, for example, of the CIA may decrease, 
but if the decrease is a result of cooperation with other countries' 
intelligence agencies (or other U.$. intelligence agencies), the 
synergy may be worse for the Third World. The bourgeoisie has 
discussed how CIA-KGB cooperation made unnecessary some CIA spying in 
the United $tates, some KGB spying in the U.S.S.R., and some CIA and 
KGB spying in the Third World. Imperialist country intelligence 
cooperation for world peace is a myth.

Not that this is that relevant to "The Falcon and the Snowman" per 
se, but a satellite program that the real-life Christopher John Boyce 
allegedly compromised was reportedly used to spy on Third World 
countries, not just the U.S.S.R. As Christopher Boyce dealt in 
cryptographic keys, not just technical specifications etc., for all 
he knew he could have easily helped the Soviet Union to spy on China 
using the United $tates as an unwitting proxy, not just fool the 
United $tates with disinformation as commonly discussed. Since the 
satellite program was reportedly used for both eavesdropping and 
monitoring rocket development, for certain reasons Boyce could have 
ended up contributing to a situation where a nuclear attack on China 
was more likely. (Suggestively, in "The Falcon and the Snowman," 
Boyce and his colleagues in the defense contractor communications 
center play the world domination strategy board game "Risk." One of 
the colleagues says she wants to "keep North America" and proceeds to 
"wipe out" a state elsewhere.) The allegations against Boyce point to 
how spying structurally favors imperialist countries with lots of 
resources to spend on spying. Imperialist countries spy on each 
other, but they also spy on oppressed nations. Generally speaking, 
information flows between imperialist countries, but from oppressed 
nations to imperialist countries. Oppressed nations don't have the 
dough to spend on buying the best information from spies or on 
acquiring it by their own intelligence efforts or formally from other 
countries. Regardless of oppressed nations' own intelligence efforts, 
which are typically smaller than any imperialist country's 
intelligence effort, imperialist countries with large intelligence 
apparatuses end up becoming entangled in various ways -- dependent on 
each other for information about other countries to fill in gaps; 
reluctant to act against each other with too much to lose or too many 
government secrets and knowing that the other has information about 
it; mutually invested in diplomacy because of diplomatic cover 
requirements in rich countries with restrictive entry and immigration 
policies etc.; and other ways -- while oppressed nations are 
relatively isolated amidst the formation of these relationships, but 
are subject to being spied upon. Oppressed nations that take up 
spying while allowing foreign penetration via tourism and other 
openings, as some oppressed nations do, subject themselves to an 
unequal spying regime. Oppressed nations that find this tolerable may 
have governments inherently subservient to imperialists such that 
their intelligence efforts are to some extent extensions of 
imperialist country intelligence efforts, or have independent state 
power and large populations. The Black Panthers didn't have state 
power. China does, though it is an exploited country.

In "The Falcon and the Snowman," Chris Boyce goes to the Soviets as 
if going to someone outside the CIA and the defense contractor is 
inevitable. But, First Worlders' sabotaging their own organizations 
without communicating with anyone outside could have done more damage 
than communication with external spies or Third World organizations 
in the 1970s. At some point, there will need to be a "surrender" 
movement in North Amerika winding things down so the inevitable can 
be allowed to take place with minimal bloodshed. It should not be 
mistaken for a consciously anti-imperialist or internationalist 
movement and is neither pro-Amerikan nor consciously anti-Amerikan. 
Pointing out the need for a movement of surrender is not opportunist 
except to people with delusions about the U.$. class structure as 
containing a proletariat. People can fantasize about large and 
concentrated revolutionary movements in First World nations, but any 
activity in the First World contributing to its defeat will 
correspond to the First World's class structure. If that activity 
involves more than individuals or small networks of people, it will 
be because the proletariat has made advances in psychological warfare 
against the First World.

"The Falcon and the Snowman" suggests two reasons for capitulation 
among others: drug addiction, and age vaguely. The First World class 
structure being what it is, it is understandable that a movie would 
focus on individual motivations (a special rebelliousness in Boyce's 
case), but "The Falcon and the Snowman's" attempt to explain how two 
all-American boys ended up in prison for spying is misleading. 
Studying the biographies of two dissidents or "traitors" will not 
result in an advance in practice as much as studying polls and 
surveys, such as those done of various groups that lived during the 
1960s-1970s. Being interviewed by investigators, Boyce talks about 
the United $tates' use of nuclear weapons and his fear of people who 
make powerful equipment that ends up in untrustworthy hands. Ideas 
about Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the Manhattan Project have been 
floating around for decades. Not only are there not magical 
combinations that will cause Amerikans or particular individuals to 
act, studying the behavior of groups and the intersection of various 
groups and events will generally be more informative than studying 
another biography. In "The Falcon and the Snowman," even if Boyce 
isn't a patriot as he suggests he isn't at different points 
(referring to other Amerikans' likely perception of his actions), 
Boyce's motivations are both similar to and different from numerous 
alleged un-Amerikans, who are each typical, and unique in their own 
way.

In addition to telling biographies of Boyce and Lee, "The Falcon and 
the Snowman" raises that there is no such thing as ex-KGB. At one 
point, having gone to Mexico City himself to transact with the Soviet 
embassy/KGB there directly, Boyce informs the Soviets of his 
intention to leave RTX to go to college. Lee's and Boyce's Soviet 
handler says, "Christopher, you remember one thing. Impulsively or 
not, you came to us; we didn't come to you. Whether you realize it or 
not, you are a professional. . . . You can't leave here tonight free 
of it all any more than I can. Did you really think you could? It's 
not over, Christopher. It's just beginning." Also, one of Boyce's 
colleagues has the line, "Once FBI, always FBI." The United $tates 
alone has tens of thousands of spies in various agencies, so it seems 
as though one could fantasize about a least a few of them opposing 
First World interests. However, the popular idea that there is no 
such thing as an ex-spy is true not just for the KGB, but for the CIA 
and other contexts in which people are trained to act, sometimes 
independently, on the basis of secrets that thousands of people won't 
know. It is not just that ex-spies with certain knowledge and 
abilities are subject to threats and manipulation like in Hollywood 
movies.

Much more than imperialist country intelligence agents/workers 
offering assistance, the oppressed are likely to face questions about 
interacting with people who have probably been in contact with an 
intelligence agency, but who do not present themselves as having 
security clearances or secrets. The best spies are those who don't 
even know they are spies, because their cover is psychologically and 
biographically impenetrable. The ignorant and the lazy themselves 
under surveillance, for example, can function as spies. Others 
unconsciously carry out political warfare on behalf of an imperialist 
country. The oppressed have to discern what kinds of things 
contribute to advancement in international contexts and what does 
not, when principles are being violated, and when there are no 
principles.

About | Home | Theory | Reviews | Document Archive | What's New?