Novel Ideas

Statesmen once looked to great works of literature to help them understand the world. No longer.

BY CHARLES HILL | AUGUST 13, 2010

Late on the morning of February 21, 1972, I listened at my desk in the U.S. Embassy Saigon as an Armed Forces Radio announced the arrival of President Richard Nixon in Beijing. I had been a Foreign Service "China watcher" through the horrendous years of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, when Chairman Mao sent thousands of young Red Guards out to burn books and put an end to China's traditional culture. For more than two decades, American strategists considered themselves engaged in a colossal struggle against revolutionary communism, an ideology bent on destroying and replacing the established international state system of world order. Now here were Nixon and his chief advisor, Henry Kissinger, presenting themselves to the "Great Helmsman" of the People's Republic of China.

In the manner of dictators, Mao suddenly summoned the two Americans to his private residence in the sequestered Chungnanhai compound next to the Forbidden City. Kissinger later described Mao's study in his memoirs: "Manuscripts lined bookshelves along every wall; books covered the table and the floor, it looked more like the retreat of a scholar than the audience room of the all-powerful leader of the world's most populous nation." The few unfrequented bookshops left in China offered little else but the writings of Mao and Marx and Lenin. But here in his lair, Mao had hoarded all the great texts his heart desired. He knew them well, and marked them up. ("If you don't put your pen in action, it cannot really be considered reading," he had said.) The Outlaws of the Marsh (or The Water Margin), a tale of bandits in rebellion against oppressive lords, inspired him, and classical Chinese poetry too, much of which concerns matters of war and statecraft; Mao inflicted his own considerable poetic output on the masses.

But what are we to make of Mao's love for the huge 18th-century novel The Dream of the Red Chamber, which he boasted of having read five times? What are dictators, generals, and strategists looking for in the books they keep around them or carry with them? Certainly Mao was not made a better person by his extensive reading in classic texts. Inhumane leaders have made use of humane letters; the Nazis cultivated the arts. But admirable underlying principles of statecraft can be found in nearly all classic texts. Literary works address the conundrums of statecraft in ways that may be used for good or ill by people in power.

Alexander the Great carried the Iliad with him on his eastern conquests, keeping it, Plutarch said, with a dagger under his pillow, "declaring that he esteemed it a perfect portable treasure of all military virtue and knowledge." Prior to sainthood, Thomas More read Roman poets and playwrights. Queen Elizabeth I read Cicero for rhetorical and legal strategy. Frederick the Great studied Homer's Odysseus as a model for princes. John Adams read Thucydides in Greek while being guided through the "labyrinth" of human nature by Swift, Shakespeare, and Cervantes. Abraham Lincoln slowly read through Whitman's Leaves of Grass and was changed by it. Gladstone, four times prime minister under Queen Victoria, wrote volumes of scholarly commentary on Homer and produced vivid translations -- the best kind of close reading -- of Horace's Odes. Lawrence of Arabia, who wrote himself into history as a fictional character leading Arab tribes in revolt against the Ottoman Turks, carried Malory's Morte d'Arthur, if not in his camel's saddlebags then in his head.

Getty Images

 SUBJECTS:
 

Charles Hill is diplomat in residence at Yale University, where he teaches the seminar "Studies in Grand Strategy." Selection from Grand Strategies reprinted by permission of the author care of Writers' Representatives LLC, permissions@writersreps.com. All rights reserved.

ASHOK2718

1:17 AM ET

August 14, 2010

your conclusion is highly debatable

but about your article

I can bet that if those old guys had decent TV they would have watched it rather than reading some boring millennium old book just to show their scholarly credentials.

Classics are books which everyone recommends but nobody reads.

I can understand why world leaders you mentioned would re-read the books you mentioned again and again and still wouldn't reach any conclusion.

But then enlightenment sets in and they realise what bullshit, I wasted my time on this crap should have just taken a stroll in garden or wrestled a bear(in case of Lincoln)

(What I mentioned above was for work of fiction )

 

OLDFELLOW

10:10 AM ET

August 15, 2010

the reading of literary classics

Classics are books that everybody recommends but nobody reads? Sounds like you live somewhere with a lot of hucksters who throw a little false erudition into their talking points. Don't worry, though, because there really are a few readers of classics out there. Never a lot of them, in fact so few that you might overlook them, if you can get past the erroneous idea that looking for them is bullshit.

 

ASHOK2718

4:00 AM ET

August 16, 2010

It is not my fault that I wouldn't recommend anyone to read any

books (fiction)

Today's society asks only one question from anyone who reads books -- If you are so smart (reading books, eh ?) then why are you not rich.

Yesterday people used to frown on MBA today the same people would recommend to their grandchildren business studies (more money)

You had a chance and you made the world that exists today. Blame yourself not me.

 

DISIGNY

11:09 AM ET

August 14, 2010

It's about Education

It's not fact vs. fiction. Having said that we seem to be following in the footsteps of the British Empire, I had no idea exactly how closely until I read "A Peace to End All Peace", an academic study of Middle East history around WW1; where America's present problems started. It's like reading the script "in advance". Of course, one could say the same of Vietnam history.

 

HARISDOGAR

5:37 AM ET

August 15, 2010

Absolutely Right

Yeah right bro.

The US war is the war to end all peace of the world.

Whether it is Vietnam or Afghanistan, they are the looser. "A Peace to End All Peace", an academic study of Middle East history around WW1; is absolutely amazing and worthy to study.

In all my essay writing I tend to wrote on the same topic.

 

CASSANDRAAA

5:45 PM ET

August 15, 2010

I recommend that those in

I recommend that those in official Washington read Orwell's "1984", since we are rapidly becoming the kind of state depicted in it.

 

CARADOC

9:18 AM ET

August 16, 2010

Meanwhile....

Meanwhile back in the real world, I've noticed that kids who read alot are much more intelligent and open to new studies. TV (electronic media) is the drug of the nation, a pacifier for those who feel no impetus to mature and grow intellectually. Watching is easy...learning to discern truth from fiction is not. A book speaks to you whereas electronic media speaks at you.

 

ASHOK2718

1:54 AM ET

August 17, 2010

yeah but don't forget the difference between

fiction and non fiction

reading Illiad won't get anyone anything but reading the republic or the laws may. (just my opinion)

I am not against the creativity boost part of reading classics but that it leads to crappy vampire/potter fiction of today.

 

GERONIMO

11:44 AM ET

August 16, 2010

Hill's Great Books

Being well-read doubtless provides sinew to crafting state policy. It buttresses self-confidence and that, in turn, helps to push ideas. Mr. Hill's reading appears to have done for him just that. But I get the impression that the most meaningful impact that it had on him was in the area of great ideas focussed on Macchiavelli's The Prince. But what do I know?

 

VICTORCHERRIE

11:44 PM ET

August 21, 2010

i understand

I can understand why world leaders you mentioned would re-read the books you mentioned again and again and still wouldn't reach any conclusion.
viec lam seo sim nam sinh day chuyen kinh mat chup anh