Dead Drops & Triple Agents
I’ve been reading The Main Enemy, an account of the 1980s showdown between the CIA and the KGB. Every time I read one of these non-fiction books about the CIA it leaves me shaking my head at pop entertainment’s inability to cash in on some of the cooler aspects of The Spy Life. Most pop depictions of spy work depict guys with guns (drawn) running around getting into shootouts. While that’s great for an action scene, there are some more interesting aspects of spy work that fascinate me.
Spies often leave information concealed in ‘dead drops’ - a location agreed upon by the CIA case officer and the ’spy’ who has been recruited to deliver the materials. Yet I rarely see dead drops in fiction or movies. Why? Am I the only one fascinated by the idea of evading surveillance for 3 hours, losing the ‘tail,’ and then sneaking away to a dead drop?
We’re all familiar with the concept of a double-agent. But what about a triple agent? A defector who flip-flops during or after their defection and starts spying for their own country again? It’s the kind of twist to make your head spin. So where are the triple agents in fiction or Hollywood? Is the concept too complicated?
While I’ll always settle for a good gunfight, top secret super spies or not, I’d love to see a more sneaky tactical side to stories featuring intelligence organizations and spy characters. Show me you’ve done more than typed ‘CIA’ into Wikipedia search. Show me you’ve read a book or two on spy games. Popularize concepts like a case officer, a dead drop, or a triple agent.
While I’m sure some stories have this stuff, I’m not familiar with them. Writers steeped in these memes could do well to turn over a few stones and use these lesser mined concepts.
Trackbacks/Pings
Leave a reply
Comments
August 25th, 2006 at 3:13 pm
Yeah, don’t count on seeing that anytime soon. Apparently what sells in Hollywood is the quick pop and burst of violence, not the slower-paced buildup that many of us enjoy. So that is likely what will always dominate the silver screen. Unfortunately, it seems that far too many of us have short attention spans, too short to hang onto the kind of story elements you describe. I’m like you - I’d like to see more actual storytelling in movies and a bit less action. I think the action is made better when there’s a story - a reason - for it. And there are so many more fascinating things that can be done with movies if directors and screenwriters would just tap into those resources.
August 26th, 2006 at 6:31 am
I thought “Spy Game” with Pitt and Redford was a more realistic depiction of espionage (at least compared to the typical Hollywood fare.) Also, although it dealt with assassins and not spies, I thought “Munich” did a great job of dispelling the “espionage is sexy” meme.
August 27th, 2006 at 9:39 pm
Munich was awesome. I’m listening to The Bourne Identity in the car right now. Very different from the movie. There’s a lot more detail into the conspiracy and government ‘black ops’ programs, and way more insight into the Bourne character.
I need to watch Spy Game again. The first time I saw it, I was in a room full of my nephews and nieces who were screaming and throwing things around. Not condusive to my undivided attention. ;)
August 29th, 2006 at 1:06 am
I’ve always liked dead drops and the other more interesting stuff about spies and Cold War shenanigans. Not only should there be more literature that delves more seriously into the milieu, I’m also convinced you could make a great stealth-style spy game that would be significantly different than Hitman/Splinter Cell/etc.
Oh and Red, if you can catch it, there’s a History channel program about the Russians’ infamous research and deadly use of poison during the Cold War and after–very nicely tracking the Cold War stuff (famous story about a guy getting killed with a tiny pellet fired into his leg from the tip of an umbrella) up to that one politician poisoned with dioxins. As always, the truth is always stranger than whatever you can make up or recycle from other stories.
August 29th, 2006 at 2:13 am
Yeah, The Main Enemy mentions the umbrella assassination. The Russians also had a special chemical (pheromones?) they could lace on dead drops or other items/places that would allow them to figure out who had touched certain things using dogs or sensors. Crazy stuff.