They say you should never meet your heroes. Having grown up in 1970's Ireland, when portraits of Pope Paul VI and JFK took pride of place in almost every Irish home, I finally took the plunge by way of Seymour Hersh's well-researched tome to shatter any lingering illusions.
When this book was first published in 1997, it was manna from heaven for those who rejoiced at our loss of innocence. But, long before the forces of cynicism and resentment took hold of our national psyche, we knew that the powers-that-be lived by different rules. Just like our favourite Hollywood stars, it was what they represented that really mattered — not their breathtaking hypocrisy. And let's be clear that the "untold stories of the rich and famous" were well-dissected by the dogs on the street long before they became a staple of the mainstream media.
Great leaders have always courted controversy, especially in challenging times, because to do otherwise is a dereliction of duty. Great leaders also attract formidable enemies — both from within and without — and this places incredible strains on their emotional stability. Seasoned politicians live by the mantra: if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. But catch them in a vulnerable moment and they will admit that the very personality traits which can survive the pressure cooker of public office usually have the opposite effect in private.
We can all relate to the basic human need to let off steam in times of unmitigated stress. So when you are living in the proverbial fish bowl and the daily grind reaches a point that few of us can imagine, the consequences behind the scenes are almost inevitable. In the great scheme of things, human frailty is a given. But when it is hidden behind a saintly facade, there is even greater cause for concern. And this is where the most grievous sins of the family patriarch, Joseph Kennedy, clearly rubbed off on his political heirs.
I am reminded of our own Michael Collins and his precarious "moral standing" amongst the chattering classes as he took on the might of the British Empire while also being groomed as a scapegoat by his "holier-than-thou" compatriot, Éamon de Valera. Had the irrepressible Collins shown a little more of JFK's and de Valera's Machiavellian streak, he might have lived to shape the future of our fledgling nation. In so doing, he could have spared us the trauma of de Valera's dour legacy and the inevitable backlash which is already tearing shreds out of de Valera's finest achievement — the Irish Constitution of 1937.
Like Collins, JFK's life was cut short by assassination even if he was granted a few extra years to make his mark. And here we find eerie parallels with Collins' reckless attempt to reconcile with de Valera in the anti-treaty heartland of County Cork. In JFK's case, it was a fence-mending mission to Texas which also showed scant regard for personal safety. Indeed, as Hersh's book indicates, JFK's wild side seemed to have exhausted itself in the months prior to his final date with destiny as his loved ones moved centre stage.
Interestingly, there is no suggestion by Hersh that this was just a cynical re-alignment of priorities in advance of JFK's re-election campaign. In fact, like Collins, there is a distinct sense of burn-out and foreboding at this critical juncture in his nation's history. However, unlike Collins, JFK's gruesome death in Dallas was in full public view and the grainy TV footage still retains its shock value even in our de-sensitised times. This gave his successors the impetus to bring his bold initiatives to fruition — especially in the critical areas of space exploration, détente and civil rights.
But JFK's handling of the Cuban missile crisis — with his loyal brother at his side — demonstrated that theirs was more than just the legacy of ineffectual martyrs (Robert Kennedy also succumbed to an assassin's bullet five years after his older brother). In the face of incessant pressure from the Military-Industrial Complex to unleash Armageddon, the twin towers of Camelot held the nation's nerve and drew a line in the the sand from which the Soviet Union and other police states under its sphere of influence never recovered. This astounding feat, with all of its chicanery, could never have been pulled off by a bunch of choir boys and must be seen as a counterpoint to the less salubrious activities of JFK, his confidantes and their no less infamous successors.
To reach the pinnacle of temporal power in the USA of the 1960's required an unrivalled grasp of realpolitik, a carefully contrived image, a wad of cash and no shortage of friends in low places — and the same is true today even if those same agents of influence carry a thicker veneer of respectability.
Who amongst us could have coped with the pressures of political life at the highest level during that tumultuous period? Who amongst us would have suffered in silence from crippling health issues unbecoming the leader of the most powerful nation on Earth? Who amongst us could have retained our sanity without the safety valve of high-octane antics behind the scenes? Who amongst us would have indulged the quiet, understated effectiveness of a Harry Truman or Dwight D. Eisenhower in that chaotic era of post-colonial upheaval, communist insurgency, counterculture, social unrest, cable TV and predatory news cycles? Who amongst us can now penetrate the fog of hindsight when contextualising the revelations in this book?
Seymour Hersh has left us with a treasure trove of deeply personal and political insights which will make for uncomfortable reading if, like me, you were once smitten by the JFK legend. On the face of it, Hersh has done us a great service without straying too far from responsible journalism. However, his proven gullibility in relation to the Laurence Cusack document hoax does not sit easily with his excessive reliance on anonymous sources. Transgressions are always likely when investigating such a controversial figure because all kinds of hidden agendas come out of the woodwork — including those that seek to cloud the truth by bringing the author into disrepute. But that does not detract from the broad thrust of this book which cannot be too far off the mark since it (eventually) passed legal muster. Of course, this is where we must make clear distinctions between stated fact and conjecture.
Nevertheless, it is ultimately a question of emphasis which, in this case, is clearly on the "dark side" as the book title contends. So, even in that respect, it is hardly a balanced narrative; nor does it claim to be.
When this book was first published in 1997, it was manna from heaven for those who rejoiced at our loss of innocence. But, long before the forces of cynicism and resentment took hold of our national psyche, we knew that the powers-that-be lived by different rules. Just like our favourite Hollywood stars, it was what they represented that really mattered — not their breathtaking hypocrisy. And let's be clear that the "untold stories of the rich and famous" were well-dissected by the dogs on the street long before they became a staple of the mainstream media.
We can all relate to the basic human need to let off steam in times of unmitigated stress. So when you are living in the proverbial fish bowl and the daily grind reaches a point that few of us can imagine, the consequences behind the scenes are almost inevitable. In the great scheme of things, human frailty is a given. But when it is hidden behind a saintly facade, there is even greater cause for concern. And this is where the most grievous sins of the family patriarch, Joseph Kennedy, clearly rubbed off on his political heirs.
I am reminded of our own Michael Collins and his precarious "moral standing" amongst the chattering classes as he took on the might of the British Empire while also being groomed as a scapegoat by his "holier-than-thou" compatriot, Éamon de Valera. Had the irrepressible Collins shown a little more of JFK's and de Valera's Machiavellian streak, he might have lived to shape the future of our fledgling nation. In so doing, he could have spared us the trauma of de Valera's dour legacy and the inevitable backlash which is already tearing shreds out of de Valera's finest achievement — the Irish Constitution of 1937.
Like Collins, JFK's life was cut short by assassination even if he was granted a few extra years to make his mark. And here we find eerie parallels with Collins' reckless attempt to reconcile with de Valera in the anti-treaty heartland of County Cork. In JFK's case, it was a fence-mending mission to Texas which also showed scant regard for personal safety. Indeed, as Hersh's book indicates, JFK's wild side seemed to have exhausted itself in the months prior to his final date with destiny as his loved ones moved centre stage.
Interestingly, there is no suggestion by Hersh that this was just a cynical re-alignment of priorities in advance of JFK's re-election campaign. In fact, like Collins, there is a distinct sense of burn-out and foreboding at this critical juncture in his nation's history. However, unlike Collins, JFK's gruesome death in Dallas was in full public view and the grainy TV footage still retains its shock value even in our de-sensitised times. This gave his successors the impetus to bring his bold initiatives to fruition — especially in the critical areas of space exploration, détente and civil rights.
But JFK's handling of the Cuban missile crisis — with his loyal brother at his side — demonstrated that theirs was more than just the legacy of ineffectual martyrs (Robert Kennedy also succumbed to an assassin's bullet five years after his older brother). In the face of incessant pressure from the Military-Industrial Complex to unleash Armageddon, the twin towers of Camelot held the nation's nerve and drew a line in the the sand from which the Soviet Union and other police states under its sphere of influence never recovered. This astounding feat, with all of its chicanery, could never have been pulled off by a bunch of choir boys and must be seen as a counterpoint to the less salubrious activities of JFK, his confidantes and their no less infamous successors.
To reach the pinnacle of temporal power in the USA of the 1960's required an unrivalled grasp of realpolitik, a carefully contrived image, a wad of cash and no shortage of friends in low places — and the same is true today even if those same agents of influence carry a thicker veneer of respectability.
Who amongst us could have coped with the pressures of political life at the highest level during that tumultuous period? Who amongst us would have suffered in silence from crippling health issues unbecoming the leader of the most powerful nation on Earth? Who amongst us could have retained our sanity without the safety valve of high-octane antics behind the scenes? Who amongst us would have indulged the quiet, understated effectiveness of a Harry Truman or Dwight D. Eisenhower in that chaotic era of post-colonial upheaval, communist insurgency, counterculture, social unrest, cable TV and predatory news cycles? Who amongst us can now penetrate the fog of hindsight when contextualising the revelations in this book?
Seymour Hersh has left us with a treasure trove of deeply personal and political insights which will make for uncomfortable reading if, like me, you were once smitten by the JFK legend. On the face of it, Hersh has done us a great service without straying too far from responsible journalism. However, his proven gullibility in relation to the Laurence Cusack document hoax does not sit easily with his excessive reliance on anonymous sources. Transgressions are always likely when investigating such a controversial figure because all kinds of hidden agendas come out of the woodwork — including those that seek to cloud the truth by bringing the author into disrepute. But that does not detract from the broad thrust of this book which cannot be too far off the mark since it (eventually) passed legal muster. Of course, this is where we must make clear distinctions between stated fact and conjecture.
Nevertheless, it is ultimately a question of emphasis which, in this case, is clearly on the "dark side" as the book title contends. So, even in that respect, it is hardly a balanced narrative; nor does it claim to be.