Download the full version of the textbook now at textbookfull.

com

Gender, Sexuality, and Intelligence Studies:

The Spy in the Closet Mary Manjikian

https://textbookfull.com/product/gender-sexuality-
and-intelligence-studies-the-spy-in-the-closet-
mary-manjikian/

Explore and download more textbook at https://textbookfull.com

 Recommended digital products (PDF, EPUB, MOBI) that
you can download immediately if you are interested.

Biota Grow 2C gather 2C cook Loucas

https://textbookfull.com/product/biota-grow-2c-gather-2c-cook-loucas/

textbookfull.com

Rethinking Gothic Transgressions of Gender and Sexuality;

New Directions in Gothic Studies 1st Edition Sarah Faber

https://textbookfull.com/product/rethinking-gothic-transgressions-of-
gender-and-sexuality-new-directions-in-gothic-studies-1st-edition-
sarah-faber/
textbookfull.com

The Palgrave Handbook of Gender, Sexuality, and Canadian

Politics Manon Tremblay

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-palgrave-handbook-of-gender-
sexuality-and-canadian-politics-manon-tremblay/

textbookfull.com

Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics: From Air Pollution to

Climate Change John H. Seinfeld

https://textbookfull.com/product/atmospheric-chemistry-and-physics-
from-air-pollution-to-climate-change-john-h-seinfeld/

textbookfull.com
Concepts in Bioinformatics and Genomics Jamil Momand:
Alison Mccurdy

https://textbookfull.com/product/concepts-in-bioinformatics-and-
genomics-jamil-momand-alison-mccurdy/

textbookfull.com

Essentials of Men’s Health Shalender Bhasin

https://textbookfull.com/product/essentials-of-mens-health-shalender-
bhasin/

textbookfull.com

Journalism Tim P. Vos

https://textbookfull.com/product/journalism-tim-p-vos/

textbookfull.com

Invisible the dangerous allure of the unseen Ball

https://textbookfull.com/product/invisible-the-dangerous-allure-of-
the-unseen-ball/

textbookfull.com

William S Burroughs and the Cult of Rock n Roll Casey Rae

https://textbookfull.com/product/william-s-burroughs-and-the-cult-of-
rock-n-roll-casey-rae/

textbookfull.com
Introduction to Policing Steven M. Cox

https://textbookfull.com/product/introduction-to-policing-steven-m-
cox/

textbookfull.com
Gender, Sexuality,
and Intelligence
Studies
The Spy in the Closet

Mary Manjikian
Gender, Sexuality, and Intelligence Studies
 Mary Manjikian

Gender, Sexuality, and

Intelligence Studies
The Spy in the Closet
Mary Manjikian
Regent University
Virginia Beach, VA, USA

ISBN 978-3-030-39893-4    ISBN 978-3-030-39894-1 (eBook)

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39894-1

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer
Nature Switzerland AG 2020
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the
Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of
translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on
microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval,
electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now
known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are
exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information
in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the
publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to
the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The
publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and
institutional affiliations.

This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature
Switzerland AG.
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
To Ara
 Acknowledgments

This volume grew out of a panel discussion presented at the International

Studies Association Annual Conference in San Francisco in April 2017.
The panel, on gender and intelligence, represented the first cosponsored
panel by two diverse groups within the International Studies Association—
the Feminist Theory and Gender Studies group and the Intelligence
Studies group. It also served as a reminder of the ways in which intelli-
gence studies itself is moving into a more interdisciplinary space, with
intelligence studies borrowing and learning from fields as diverse as gen-
der studies, literary theory, and critical theory approaches within interna-
tional relations.
For this reason, I would like to acknowledge the pioneering efforts in
this regard of scholars like Stephen Marrin at James Madison University,
Jan Goldman at The Citadel, and Cristina Matei of the Naval Postgraduate
School. Your insights have helped to shape my thinking and hopefully
helped me to produce a better book.
I’d also like to thank, as always, our hardworking library staff at Regent
University, including Harold Henkel in particular. In addition, I am grate-
ful to my research assistant Brian Lennart for his editorial assistance.
Finally, I would like to thank the anonymous reviewers who provided
early and later feedback on this manuscript. Their comments have chal-
lenged me and helped me to clarify my thinking on several matters, par-
ticularly in regard to how this work does and does not fit into the larger
project of queer theory. (More on that in Chap. 1!)
Any errors in the manuscript are of course my own.

vii
 Contents

1 Introduction  1
Why Don’t IR Scholars Study Intelligence?   3
Bringing Intelligence Back In: To the Study of International
Relations   6
Bibliography  16

2 The Queerness of Intelligence 19

Asking Queer Questions About Intelligence  20
Intelligence Activity as the Third Way  33
The Queer Mission of the Intelligence Community  40
Accepting the Reality of Our Queer Foreign Policy  53
Bibliography  62

3 Queer Spies 67
Intelligence Agents: Bodies Behaving Queerly in Space  68
The State as Container/State as Vault: The Spy’s Queer
Moral Status  77
Her Naked State/Our Naked State: The Myth of Artemis and
the Ethics of Spying  80
Bibliography  97

4 Treason, Agency, and Sexuality101

The Prevailing Orthodoxy About Treason 102
Three Narratives About Homosexuality 108
Bibliography 139

ix
x Contents

5 Queerness, Secrecy, and Revelation143

Intelligence and Secrecy 145
What Is a Secret Society? 148
The Mythology of the Intelligence Community 156
Parallel Organizations as a Violation of Statecraft 157
Intelligence, Stigma, and the Wall of Separation 166
Accountability, Performativity, and the Wall of Separation 170
Outing, Policing, and Disciplining Intelligence Activities 176
Bibliography 185

6 Coming Out as an Intelligence Agent189

Memoirs as Sourcebooks 192
The Silence of the Spy and the Ability to Tell His Story 193
Other Types of Queerness: The Double Agent and the Torturer 205
Coming Out as a Spy 207
Conclusion 212
Bibliography 216

7 The Politics of Covert Activity219

IR Theory and the “don’t ask, don’t tell” of Covert Activity 223
Queer Presidents/Queer Precedents 238
Rescuing the State by Blaming the Intelligence Community 251
Queer Behavior and the Theater of Accountability 253
Conclusion 255
Bibliography 260

8 The Future Is Queer: New Developments in Intelligence

Activity263
Prying Open the Closet: The Erosion of Secrecy in an Era of Big
Data 265
Join Us in the Closet: Adding New Actors to the Intelligence
Community 267
Artificial Intelligence: Robots, Bots, and Spies 273
Normalization: Spying Emerges from the Closet 274
Bibliography 277
 CHAPTER 1

Introduction

Among all the functions which governments—both authoritarian and

democratic—engage in, intelligence activities are often the least discussed
and least understood, both by the general public and by academics. Rather,
the existence of covert and clandestine activities such as government pro-
grams to support candidates in foreign elections or training and equipping
foreign fighters functions as something of a “dirty little secret” both in
Washington and surely in other national capitals as well. Politicians, news
media, and the general public—as well as academic analysts—are aware
that such activities do occur, but prefer not to look too closely at them or
to acknowledge what they are seeing.
And even though the United States spends nearly one trillion dollars
annually on national security programs and agencies, and that intelligence
functions are routinely carried out by seventeen federal agencies, along
with state and local intelligence fusion centers,1 the study of these activities
and functions is particularly poorly integrated within the discipline of
international relations. Indeed, while almost five million Americans (nearly
two percent of our population) now hold security clearances, as Christopher
Andrew noted in 2004, “intelligence … is all but absent in most contem-
porary IR theory,” including, tellingly, in theorizing about the Cold War.2
Here one might begin to address this conundrum by asking why the
work produced by intelligence studies scholars is not better integrated
into the study of international relations. Indeed, the intelligence studies
community—both in the United States and in other English-speaking

© The Author(s) 2020 1

M. Manjikian, Gender, Sexuality, and Intelligence Studies,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39894-1_1
2 M. MANJIKIAN

countries—appears to function as its freestanding entity, with its own jour-

nals, its jargon, and its own set of accepted assumptions and theories,
many of which are unique to itself. It is indeed striking to see the degree
to which the intelligence studies community has developed largely in isola-
tion, unaffected by and perhaps even hostile to trends within the larger
international relations discipline—such as an attempt to move beyond
Western and American-centric analyses, to include voices of the subaltern,
or to consider the contingent nature of knowledge itself.3
Even today, intelligence studies analyses focus almost exclusively on the
Western intelligence tradition, with an emphasis on the rise and practice of
intelligence in the United States and England, along with some compara-
tive work on Western Europe. And literature produced by the academic
intelligence studies community (which often includes retired intelligence
practitioners among its ranks) tends to fit into one of four formats: Analysts
have taken an institutional approach in considering the structures of the
intelligence community, how they function and how they are policed or
regulated by other actors. In addition, analysts have produced case studies
that have been historical in nature, examining phenomena like how par-
ticular leaders have utilized intelligence or the circumstances which led to
intelligence failures. Also, there is a growing literature that is method-
ological, asking questions about how one might articulate and test assump-
tions or identify bias in carrying out intelligence analysis, including some
which is interdisciplinary.
Finally, if intelligence studies have been integrated into larger studies
within international relations, it has often been through the utilization of
a “crime frame,” thus establishing intelligence as a sort of deviant interna-
tional relations.4 Elizabeth Anderson, a former National Security Agency
analyst who later became an academic, has faulted the scholarship pro-
duced by practitioners as “journalistic in nature,” since what is produced
is often simply a narrative of the events themselves from an operational
perspective which focuses, in her words, on “action, adventure, and scan-
dal.”5 That is, intelligence scholars have sought to understand events like
the 1985 Iran-Contra scandal, which occurred under then-president
Ronald Reagan not as one of many ways in which states practice politics—
but as a “scandal”—because to acknowledge intelligence activity as inter-
national relations would upset many of our long-standing (and
unquestioned) assumptions about what does and does not constitute nor-
mal international relations.
Visit https://textbookfull.com
now to explore a rich
collection of eBooks, textbook
and enjoy exciting offers!
 1 INTRODUCTION 3

Why Don’t IR Scholars Study Intelligence?

At the same time, academics within the larger discipline of political science
have tended not to include intelligence studies as a variable within tradi-
tional international relations analyses, nor to include organizations like the
Central Intelligence Agency within a study of public administration
bureaucracies, and not to include studies of the intelligence community
within larger studies of, for example, foreign policy elite decision-makers.
Here, one can certainly identify legitimate logistical or practical reasons
why academics might avoid adding intelligence agencies to their data sets
or cases for comparison. First, the closed nature of the intelligence com-
munity and its overwhelming emphasis on secrecy (often for real reasons
of national security) make it particularly challenging to study. Analysts
become used to working with sources where keywords—including dates,
names of places, and names of individuals—have been redacted through a
publication review process, even when a successful Freedom of Information
Act (FOIA) request has been filed. In cases where documents have been
released, or an official has been compelled to speak with an academic inter-
locutor, problems may arise concerning the representativeness of the
information being made available. Is it possible that the organization has
safeguarded its image through redacting information of an embarrassing
nature, rather than merely withholding that which is strategically necessary?
Historian Kaeten Mistry presents this perspective in describing the dif-
ficulties she encountered in researching the part which the US Central
Intelligence Agency (CIA) played in attempting to influence Italy’s elec-
tions in the aftermath of World War Two. She writes:

None of this is to imply that the CIA did not channel covert funds … Rather,
it emphasizes the difficulties in authoritatively supporting claims dependent
on evidence that is withheld, inaccurate, or perhaps non-existent. Agency
records could settle such scores, particularly in curtailing the useful myths
surrounding critical and triumphant interpretations. Yet with the declassifi-
cation process in statis, it poses a dilemma for historians.6

As a result of these difficulties, she argues that much of what the aca-
demic intelligence community accepts as “knowledge” is deeply inter-
twined with mythologies about agencies like the CIA, along with wishful
thinking, rumors, and even conspiracy theories. For this reason, she
4 M. MANJIKIAN

s­ uggests that the study of intelligence is often rather divorced from other
types of academic endeavors.
A second compelling reason for this academic divorce is that the intel-
ligence agencies are often regarded as so unique in their culture, their
leadership styles, and their missions that analysts may conclude that it
makes little sense to include them in a more general database of agencies
or agency activities and that it also may be pointless to generalize about
the behavior of, for example, the Central Intelligence Agency in making a
statement about how agencies behave. Here, intelligence scholars them-
selves point to the phenomenon of “intelligence exceptionalism” in argu-
ing that the intelligence community has unique or distinctive rules, values,
and procedures. As Turner notes, intelligence activities may differ from
other traditional activities of foreign policy since the guiding principle is
secrecy, the activities may include illegal activity including violating other
nation’s laws, and the use of techniques like deception and deniability by
those producing information creates problems for analysts regarding the
credibility of information obtained.7 Proponents of this “exceptionalism”
viewpoint argue that analysts, lawmakers, and the general public should
not expect the intelligence organizations to behave like any other govern-
ment agency since they have a unique mission. Furthermore, proponents
argue that an intelligence agency does and must have special or unique
powers and policies, including less oversight of its practices by the legisla-
tive branch, more secrecy in the conduct of its affairs, fewer budget con-
straints, and less transparency overall regarding its budget, as well as an
acceptance of the understanding that such powers may and often do vio-
late legal and/or ethical understandings in areas such as transparency and
public oversight of the agency’s practices and policies. In this way, the lit-
erature on “intelligence exceptionalism” can be read as a sort of defense of
the IC and its practices, created from within the IC itself, in order to
establish conditions for what Nathan refers to as a “dispensation”8—a jus-
tification for why the IC should not be held to the same standards with
reference to adherence to regime sovereignty or understandings in the
areas of transparency, constitutionality, or adherence to human rights
regimes.
However, I contend that it is not logistical capabilities or even method-
ological concerns alone which cause traditional international relations to
give short shrift academically to the phenomenon of intelligence. Rather,
it is because there is something subversive about the practices and values
of intelligence which both cause it to fit awkwardly, if at all, into traditional
 1 INTRODUCTION 5

international relations theoretical paradigms, and furthermore, because a

full-fledged analysis of the role of intelligence in international relations
threatens to destabilize some of the understandings which form a sort of
ground truth for a mainstream international relations scholar. In examin-
ing the discourse of intelligence studies, we encounter a reflection of this
assumption about the subversiveness of intelligence. In scholarly histories
of the organization, we encounter language describing the CIA as having
“siphoned off money” from legitimate organizations and operations, or
having performed an “end-run around” legitimate politics and
procedures.9
As Daugherty has noted in describing public attitudes towards the
Central Intelligence Agency:

In the wake of Vietnam and Watergate … the very idea of spying and acting
covert became disreputable … For most of my adult life, any mention of the
spy Agency has prompted suspicion of unlawful meddling, dirty tricks, scan-
dal, and a kind of bullet-headed redneck American approach to for-
eign policy.10

That is, there appears to be something unseemly or perverse about the

activities of the intelligence community in particular. As an example, we
may consider the claims that Russia, led by its intelligence community,
succeeded in penetrating US domestic politics through interfering in our
2016 presidential elections. The crime which America’s president and his
administration are accused of is collusion, which is defined by
Dictionary.com as:

1. A secret agreement, especially for fraudulent or treacherous purposes;

conspiracy and 2. Law: a secret understanding between two or more persons
to gain something illegally, to defraud another of his or her rights, or to
appear as adversaries though in agreement (i.e., collusion of husband and
wife to obtain a divorce).11

That is, collusion—a type of irregular politics and irregular interstate

relations—is described in terms which are overwhelmingly not political or
legal, but rather both ethical and moral. While an armed intervention
might be described in language derived from international law and mili-
tary agreements, there is no similar body of language used to describe
actions by intelligence agents. Instead, the language—as seen in the
6 M. MANJIKIAN

e­ tymology of the term “collusion”—is drawn from criminal law and eth-
ics. It is not neutral but highly normative. Collusion and espionage, while
they may be the bread and butter of activities for the intelligence commu-
nity not only in the United States but internationally, are described not as
part of international relations but instead as something unseemly, dirty,
and rotten. They are described in terms that present them as fraudulent
activities—unnatural, unreal, and twisted, rather than straightforward.
Thus, in a discipline like international relations, which focuses on iden-
tifying and upholding the rules of the international system, it is difficult to
know where to place an organization or set of organizations that appear to
be plagued by scandal and allegations of corruption, whose very existence
feels somewhat disreputable. Perhaps to admit certain truths about intel-
ligence would thus mean admitting certain truths about the discipline and
practice of international relations as a whole—including identifying the
problems which it has failed to solve, the gaps which it leaves in our knowl-
edge about the international system as a whole, and ultimately the hypoc-
risy of certain types of statements which we make about state behavior
while ignoring other ways in which states behave.

Bringing Intelligence Back In: To the Study

of International Relations

In this work then, I interrogate exactly this understanding—that there is

something dirty, disreputable, and “queer” in the activities of intelli-
gence—in order to better integrate intelligence into the study of interna-
tional relations as a whole. Here, queer theory is deployed as part of the
newly emerging field of critical intelligence studies.
In a recent essay about this subfield, Hamilton Bean presents critical
intelligence studies as concerned with apprehending and considering the
“forces of domination and subordination in both societies and organiza-
tions” with an overall mission of emancipation, a breaking free from tradi-
tional understandings and a breaking down of those understandings which
are proven to be false or predicated upon a faulty foundation. Here, he
notes that critical studies—of whatever field we choose to examine—often
have a goal of “problematizing” the understandings that we accept
unquestioningly within our fields. Here Bean identifies a largely unques-
tioned consensus that the goal of intelligence studies is to improve intel-
ligence analysis. However, as he points out, there is a significant divide
 1 INTRODUCTION 7

between the projects of improving intelligence analysis and of problema-

tizing intelligence analysis. Problematizing intelligence analysis involves
reconsidering the categories and methodologies we use, and also includes
asking why we adopted such methodologies and categories in the first
place. Problematizing a field may lead to the jettisoning of previously
unexamined assumptions, methodologies, and findings.12
This work, therefore, has several goals: First, to advance critical intelli-
gence studies through showing how queer theory and gender theory help
us to apprehend the spy and how his identity has been constructed both
internally within the intelligence community and externally (from with-
out) by other branches of the defense community, as well as by main-
stream and popular cultural representations of this individual. Utilizing
memoirs, in particular, I show how intelligence community practitio-
ners—both individually and in the aggregate—have created their brand of
identity politics. To be a spy is to be many things—to present one face to
the world while simultaneously maintaining a different interior and pro-
fessional identity, as well as to “play with” identities through sharing some
facets of one’s true self with one’s family and community while keeping
other facets hidden. In Chap. 5, I consider how the ideas of performativity
and the closet can lead to a richer understanding of what it is to be a mem-
ber of the intelligence community’s clandestine services.
But in this work, I examine not only the figure of the intelligence ana-
lyst but also the role and agency of the intelligence community within
international relations. Here, I claim that there is something fundamen-
tally queer about espionage, as well as clandestine and covert activity
(terms which I define later in this work). In establishing this claim, I show
how spies thus exist as part of what Puar has termed the “queer assem-
blage” in international relations.13

Queer Phenomenology
The claim that intelligence is queer is not a claim about sexuality—either
of the intelligence community (IC) itself or of the sexuality of a particular
agent. Instead, we are asking, as Daggett does, how a phenomenon is
queered within international relations. Phenomenology is a branch of phi-
losophy dedicated to the study of “phenomena”—which includes how
things appear, as well as how they appear in our experience. Phenomenology
is thus concerned with how we experience things and how we attach
meaning to things that we experience.14 Daggett asks us to consider the
8 M. MANJIKIAN

queer phenomenology of the drone—how drone warfare is considered

relative to traditional forms of warfare, and how traditional gendered
notions of warfare are and are not relevant in considering drone warfare.15
Similarly, we can consider intelligence’s queer phenomenology. We
might begin with the claim (often made by intelligence practitioners) that
intelligence is “the world’s second oldest profession.”16 In making this
claim, practitioners rightly acknowledge that as long as people have formed
societies, they and their leaders have engaged in practices like intelligence
collection—usually to identify and respond to threats. (While today intel-
ligence activities are largely the province of the state, in the past, a leader
might have had his own intelligence arm—whose aim was to identify and
perhaps neutralize threats to his power position.)
But the linguistic phrase “world’s second oldest profession” also calls to
mind prostitution, the world’s oldest profession. In attaching this label to
intelligence, then, practitioners are also implicitly making an analogy:
Prostitution is to marriage as intelligence is to legitimate state foreign
policy practices. Just as prostitution (or paying for sex) is regarded as a
deviant sexual practice—in contrast to the norm in which one doesn’t pay
for sex but has it with a partner in the context of an ongoing relation-
ship—intelligence can be viewed as a deviant set of practices within inter-
national relations in contrast to the legitimate foreign policy practices of
actors like the defense or diplomatic communities.
In her seminal work on queer phenomenology, Ahmed introduces the
notion of “orientation”—or how objects are situated in relation to one
another to create a space. One could situate objects, she notes, to create
either a dining table or an eating table. The placement of objects thus
encourages certain types of activities while constraining others.
Phenomenology, she argues, thus includes “how bodies are turned toward
the objects around them and how this ‘direction’ matters in understand-
ing orientation.”17 One’s “orientation” may be regarded as normative,
while another may be regarded as non-normative or in Cynthia Weber’s
terminology, “perverse.”
In this volume, then, we consider how intelligence activity—including
covert activity—has been situated in relation to “normal international
relations.” Normal international relations practices are overt, in keeping
with acknowledged international law including the law of armed conflict,
and are “owned” and acknowledged by the state. In contrast, states (and
policymakers) may conduct intelligence operations in secret—engaging in
practices that deviate from “normal international relations,” including
 1 INTRODUCTION 9

v­ iolating the sovereignty of other states through interfering in domestic

elections, assassinating other world leaders, and funding domestic insur-
gencies. If a state is asked to account for its participation in such activities,
it may deny knowledge of the activity or its part in the activity.
Here, we can consider, for example, a verbal exchange that occurred
during the first series of televised electoral debates in the United States in
the summer of 1960. Before the debate, democratic candidate John
F. Kennedy received an intelligence briefing in which (according to many
historians) he was made aware of ongoing American plans to carry out
covert operations in Cuba aimed at overthrowing the regime of Communist
Fidel Castro. However, such plans were classified and not a matter of pub-
lic knowledge at that time. During the debate, Kennedy called out then-­
president Nixon, accusing him of being “soft on communism” and
demanding to know what, if anything, Nixon planned to do in response to
the rise of Castro. In memoirs later written by members of the Nixon
Administration, these officials fault Kennedy for having put Nixon in an
impossible situation.18 Nixon knew full well that there were plans under-
way for an armed invasion of Cuba, but he was forbidden to say anything
publicly about these plans—particularly in such a public setting as a televi-
sion broadcast where all of his utterances would be “on the record.”
Kennedy knew that Nixon would be unable to respond truthfully and fully
in this public setting and thus was able to humiliate him, making him look
weak and as if he had no plan when in point of fact he did. That is, Nixon
was forbidden to speak of his nation’s queer foreign policy since the terms
of the debate were such that only normal foreign policy could be uttered
and spoken about.
We might also consider recent impeachment proceedings in the United
States, in which diplomats, congresspeople, and the press also grasped for
language which they might use to describe and label the activities of indi-
vidual associates of President Trump, who traveled abroad to Ukraine
beginning in the summer of 2016. A situation in which American officials
who work for the president, rather than for the state, and who hold no
formal diplomatic credentials seek to meet with foreign officials was
described as “a backchannel” or an “irregular channel”—in contrast to a
regular or official channel in which legitimate diplomats with diplomatic
accreditation and official titles carried out official activities with their offi-
cial counterparts abroad.19 Describing these events required creating a
new set of understandings and new set of juxtapositions between the
10 M. MANJIKIAN

a­ ctivities of official and unofficial actors, and between official (normative)

and unofficial (non-normative) practices.
In this volume, then, the claim that intelligence is “queer” is not meant
to imply that unofficial, sub-rosa intelligence practices themselves are
somehow emancipatory or liberating, either to the international system or
to those who live in a world in which power and justice claims are often
inequitably distributed and responded to. Indeed, one can easily claim
that unofficial, sub-rosa forms and variations of state activity are perhaps
more unjust and more illegitimate than official forms of state intervention
by great powers within the international system. Thus, some may fault the
author for not using “queer” in the usual sense—which carries with it this
emancipatory or liberatory thrust, or the notion that queer analysis (along
with queer activism) should ultimately seek to liberate subjects from the
oppressive patriarchal state, creating new modes of organization and being.
In terms of whether it is appropriate to use queer theory in a way which
may imply a degree of sympathy or understanding for those who work
directly within and for the intelligence community—an organization
which is often described as a tool of oppression and brutality—I believe
that if recent American political experiences like the Congressional testi-
mony of American ambassadors like Marie Yovanovitch and Phil Reeker
have shown anything, it is that the “faceless bureaucrats” who serve within
government structures are in many ways as powerless as those who exist
outside the state and its structures, as subject to the whims of their state’s
leaders and as voiceless to resist or dissent as anyone else. And just as dis-
empowered individuals may join the military as a way of procuring access
to goods (like education) which may be scarce or out of reach for certain
members of society, individuals may join the intelligence community for a
variety of reasons. It is, I feel, too simplistic to say that organizational
members are always “all in” with the goals of the state, or that those
within an organization form a monolithic bloc of individuals who mind-
lessly follow orders and do not think critically. It is thus well worth consid-
ering the motives, lives, and voices of those within an organization like the
intelligence community.
Furthermore, I believe that in seeking to make the practices of intelli-
gence visible both in their own right and also in relation to more “legiti-
mate” forms of foreign policy, the project of political emancipation may be
brought forward—since it is necessary to know and name a phenomenon
fully in order to question its claims and indeed even its existence. And in
making visible the sub-rosa, non-normative ways in which states act, we
 1 INTRODUCTION 11

can interrogate states’ own claims that they are law-abiding upholders of
the international system, by calling attention to the hypocrisy which often
accompanies these claims.
Thus, in this volume, I suggest that intelligence activities have existed
as a sort of “third option”; that is, they are described by Powers as a tool
of middle resort (available to US presidents), “lying somewhere between
a note of diplomatic protest and sending in the Marines.”20 The intelli-
gence community, then, can be understood as a sort of transgressive actor
which refuses to be located neatly between either of the existing binary
identities commonly found in international relations (the hard power of
the military intervention or the soft power of the note of diplomatic pro-
test), and its activities can be said to occupy a similar queer space.
Thus, making such activities visible allows the reader to also rethink the
myths of the unitary state and the unitary foreign policy of that state. I
take up these themes in my analysis of paramilitary, covert, and clandestine
operations undertaken by the United States in particular, through consid-
ering how presidents have exercised their prerogative to undertake such
relations as well as how they have read the environment and defending the
legitimacy of such operations.21 In this section, I introduce the figure of
the individual who openly presents one’s self as heterosexual while engag-
ing in occasional homosexual acts “on the down-low,” unable to reconcile
the two halves of one’s self and not altogether comfortable with their
covert desires. Similarly, it can be suggested that states may have an open
or public foreign policy with which they pursue their normal, more accept-
able desires within the international system (i.e., to strengthen structures
of international economic cooperation) while simultaneously having a sec-
ond foreign policy “on the down-low” with which they pursue the desires
which—though they violate norms and propriety—nonetheless still mani-
fest and perhaps are even necessary for state survival (i.e., the need to
control a specific natural resource or ensure the outcome of another coun-
try’s internal elections).
In my work, I demonstrate that the US foreign policy, in particular, has
always been queer through inviting the reader to look within the state—to
examine both our overt and our closeted US foreign policy, in particular,
to consider both the overt hegemonic masculine military and the closeted
arm of covert affairs. In this way, I seek to continue what Weber has
described as a rapprochement between different schools of
IR—“disciplinary, critical, and/or feminist IRs and queer work.”22 Here,
she notes that even mainstream IR theorists are coming to acknowledge
12 M. MANJIKIAN

that ignoring queer international theories and practices “risks undermin-

ing its own claimed expertise in its core areas of interest – state and nation
formation, war and peace and international political economy.”23 In
understanding the queerness of all these phenomena, it is of crucial impor-
tance to consider the figure of the spy, the intelligence community, and
the implementation of covert activities as part of a queer foreign policy.
The plan for the book is as follows:
In Chap. 2, I explore more fully the theme of how intelligence activities
and operatives have been ignored and silenced in contemporary interna-
tional relations scholarship, suggesting that the actions of intelligence
operatives have a queer ontological status, since such events are often not
made a part of a nation’s formal history, are often covered over, and are
somehow treated as less real than the formal politics of treaties and
invasions.
In Chap. 3, I argue that intelligence operatives themselves are queer
due to the liminal space they occupy within the structures of foreign pol-
icy, as well as the liminal status which all members of the IC have, regard-
less of their sexuality. That is, we consider the spy and their queer vocation,
how the queerness of the spy calls into question other aspects of IR which
we might otherwise have taken as given—how they present themselves as
being a particular nationality, including the performance of that nationality.
In Chap. 4, I focus on the specific crime of treason and how homosexu-
ality, in particular, has long been understood as a security threat. Here I
examine more closely the relationship between sexuality, secrecy, trust,
and betrayal, as it has traditionally been understood within the intelligence
community. We also consider another type of spy—specifically, the double
agent. We also consider how new attitudes within the United States about
queer people, including the acceptance of queer employees at intelligence
organizations like the CIA, have in some instances led to the cooptation
of the queer within the national security apparatus. Drawing upon the
work of Jasbir Puar, we consider what it means for this to occur.24 I also
briefly introduce the debate about whether “passing” as queer helps one
to “pass” as a spy or whether it is instead a factor which affects one’s pro-
ductivity and serves as a distraction.
In Chap. 5, I turn away from the figure of the intelligence operative to
consider the intelligence community as a whole. Here I apply the notion
of a secret society—drawing upon the work of sociologist Georg Simmel—
to explain how such organizations are configured and how secrecy can act
as a source of power or internal social capital. The model of the CIA as a
Visit https://textbookfull.com
now to explore a rich
collection of eBooks, textbook
and enjoy exciting offers!
 1 INTRODUCTION 13

secret society helps to explain why they are sometimes regarded as a sort
of parallel structure in foreign policy, carrying out a “parapolitics” which
both is and is not foreign policy. Here, I advance the claim that it is neces-
sary for political structures like the president and the legislature to con-
duct hearings in which the IC is regularly called upon the carpet to justify
and explain those of its actions in the international system, which might be
construed as illegal both domestically and internationally. In this way, the
formal actors in international relations (like the president) enact a pageant
aimed at distancing themselves and the sovereign state from the messy
politics of the intelligence community, since being too closely associated
with such a subversive actor is bad for a state’s image internationally. The
IC is thus necessary—while simultaneously being stigmatized, denied, and
silenced.
In Chap. 6, we return to the figure of the individual spy, specifically
through analyzing memoirs written by intelligence operatives themselves.
Here we consider how agents have both outed themselves and been outed
and the goals achieved through outing oneself as a member of the intelli-
gence community.
In Chap. 7, we turn more specifically to the politics of covert activity.
In this chapter, I offer a queer reading of both covert activity itself and the
mainstream narratives regarding covert activity as a practice that exists in
contemporary international relations theory. In particular, I suggest that
each of these narratives serves to “rescue the state” from charges that it is
queer or that the state has a queer foreign policy—through deflecting the
charges of queerness to another actor. Thus, the first narrative posits the
state may engage in queer behavior (such as conducting covert activities
against even its democratic allies) from time to time (on the down-low),
but that doesn’t make it queer; indeed, there are situations where the
international community can benefit from a decision to collectively ignore
queer behavior. In this way, one can argue that in certain situations, the
international community adopts a “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy when it
comes to the subject of such queer behavior. The second narrative sug-
gests that the state may appear to be queer in its foreign policy from time
to time, but that is because the president, independently, behaved queerly,
and such behavior is therefore not indicative of the state’s identity. The
third narrative suggests that from time to time, the intelligence commu-
nity itself oversteps its role, leading to the carrying out of activities which
might create the impression that the state has a queer foreign policy—but
14 M. MANJIKIAN

this is due to an agency refusing to perform its expected role, rather than
because the state itself is queer.
Finally, in Chap. 8, I conclude by arguing that the US foreign policy
has been and will continue to be “queer” due to tensions between diplo-
macy, military, and intelligence as well as between the presidency, the leg-
islature, and intelligence. In making this claim, I remind the reader of the
ways in which nonstate actors such as corporations have historically been
involved in American foreign policy from our earliest founding history, as
well as the possibility that the “wall of separation” which is purported to
exist between the intelligence community and other players like the presi-
dency,25 the state department, and the military is in fact an illusion or a
construct, rather than reality. Here, I suggest that this wall is perhaps com-
ing down, as new technologies and forces of globalization will inevitably
lead to a blurring between official and unofficial (or covert) foreign policy,
as well as the ability to hide state activities, through new types of transpar-
ency and surveillance.26

Notes
1. Michael German, “The US Intelligence Community Is Bigger Than Ever
But Is It Worth the Cost?” in “Rethinking Intelligence,” special issue,
Defense One, February 6, 2015, accessed August 8, 2018, https://www.
defenseone.com/ideas/2015/02/us-intelligence-community-bigger-ever-it-
worth-it/104799/?oref=d-river
2. Christopher Andrew, “Intelligence, International Relations and ‘Under-­
theorization,’” Intelligence and National Security 19, no. 2 (2004):
170–184.
3. However, this is changing somewhat. Here, see Mary Manjikian,
“Positivism, Post-Positivism, and Intelligence Analysis,” International
Journal of Intelligence and Counterintelligence 26, no. 3 (2013): 563–582.
4. See, for example, Eveline Lubbers, “Undercover Research: Corporate and
Police Spying on Activists. An Introduction to Activist Intelligence as a
New Field of Study,” Surveillance & Society 13, no. 3/4 (2015): 338–353.
5. Elizabeth E. Anderson, “The Security Dilemma and Covert Action: The
Truman Years,” International Journal of Intelligence and Counterintelligence
11, no. 4 (2010): 403–427.
6. Kaeten Mistry, “Approaches to Understanding the Inaugural CIA Covert
Operations in Italy: Exploding Useful Myths,” Intelligence and National
Security 26, no. 2–3 (2011): 225.
 1 INTRODUCTION 15

7. Michael A. Turner, “A Distinctive U.S. Intelligence Identity,” International

Journal of Intelligence and Counterintelligence 17, no. 1 (2004): 50.
8. Laurie Nathan, “Intelligence Bound: The South African Constitution and
Intelligence Services,” International Affairs 86, no. 1 (2010).
9. Tim Weiner, Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA (New York, NY:
Doubleday, 2007).
10. William J. Daugherty, Executive Secrets: Covert Action and the Presidency
(Lexington, KY: University of Kentucky Press, 2004), p. xi.
11. “Collusion,” Dictionary.com. Available at https://www.dictionary.com/
browse/collusion
12. Hamilton Bean. “What is Critical Intelligence Studies?” LinkedIn. July
23, 2019. Available at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/what-critical-
intelligence-studies-hamilton-bean/
13. For more on this point, see also Cynthia Weber, Queer International
Relations (Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2002), p. 143.
14. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2003. “Phenomenology.” Available
at: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/phenomenology/
15. Cara Daggett. 2015. “Drone Disorientations: How ‘unmanned’ weap-
ons queer the experience of killing in war,” International Feminist
Journal of Politics 17(3), 361–379. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461674
2.2015.1075317
16. See, for example, Joe Mazzafro, “The Second Oldest Profession,” Signal
Magazine. April 30, 2012. https://www.afcea.org/content/second-oldest-
profession?page=1
17. Quoted in Dai Kojima. 2008. “A Review of Sara Ahmed’s Queer
Phenomenology: Orientations, Objects, Others.” Phenomenology and Practice
2(1), 89.
18. See, for example, H.R. Haldeman with Joseph Dimona. 1978. The Ends of
Power. New York: New York Times Books, 39.
19. See, for example, Gabriella Munoz. “Irregular Channel: Impeachment
Probe zeroes in on Trump Fixer Rudy Giuliani,” The Washington Times,
November 11, 2019. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/
nov/11/rudy-giuliani-ukraine-irregular-channel-center-don/
20. Thomas Powers, The Man Who Kept the Secrets: Richard Helms and the
CIA (New York, NY: Alfred Knopf, 1979), 7; John Jacob Nutter, The
CIA’s Black Ops: Covert Action, Foreign Policy and Democracy (Amherst,
NY: Prometheus Books, 2000).
21. Bob Jessop, “The Gender Selectivity of the State: A Critical Realist
Analysis,” Journal of Critical Realism 3, no. 2 (2004): 21–29.
22. Cynthia Weber. “What is told is always in the telling: Reflections on Faking
It in 21st century IR/Global Politics.” Millennium 45, no. 1 (2016):
119–130.
16 M. MANJIKIAN

23. Cynthia Weber, “‘What is Told is Always in the Telling’ Reflections on

Faking It in 21st Century IR/Global Politics,” Millennium 45, no. 1
(2016): 119–130.
24. Jasbir K. Puar, Terrorist Assemblages: Homonationalism in Queer Times
(London, UK: Duke University Press, 2007), 27.
25. Samuel J. Rascoff, “Presidential Intelligence,” Harvard Law Review 129,
no. 3 (2016): 84.
26. For more on this point, see Jack Goldsmith, “Secrets in a Transparent
World,” in “Intelligence and Cyberwar,” special issue, Hoover Digest 4,
October 16, 2015, 1–5.

Bibliography
Anderson, Elizabeth. 2010. The Security Dilemma and Covert Action: The
Truman Years. International Journal of Intelligence and Counterintelligence 11
(4): 403–427.
Andrew, Christopher. 2004. Intelligence, International Relations and ‘Under-­
Theorization’. Intelligence & National Security 19 (2): 170–184.
Bean, Hamilton. 2019. What Is Critical Intelligence Studies? LinkedIn, July 23.
Available at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/what-critical-intelligence-stud-
ies-hamilton-bean/. Accessed 24 July 2019.
Daugherty, William J. 2004. Executive Secrets: Covert Action and the Presidency.
Lexington: University of Kentucky Press.
German, Michael. 2015. The US Intelligence Community Is Bigger Than Ever
But Is It Worth the Cost? In “Rethinking Intelligence”, special issue. Defense
One, February 6. https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2015/02/us-intelli-
gence-community-bigger-ever-it-worth-it/104799/?oref=d-river. Accessed
8 Aug 2018.
Goldsmith, Jack. 2015. Secrets in a Transparent World. In “Intelligence and
Cyberwar”, special issue. Hoover Digest 4, October 16: 1–5.
Jessop, Bob. 2004. The Gender Selectivity of the State: A Critical Realist Analysis.
Journal of Critical Realism 3 (2): 21–29.
Lubbers, Eveline. 2015. Undercover Research: Corporate and Police Spying on
Activists. An Introduction to Activist Intelligence as a New Field of Study.
Surveillance & Society 13 (3/4): 338–353.
Manjikian, Mary. 2013. Positivism, Post-Positivism, and Intelligence Analysis.
International Journal of Intelligence and Counterintelligence 26 (3): 563–582.
Mistry, Kaeten. 2011. Approaches to Understanding the Inaugural CIA Covert
Operations in Italy: Exploding Useful Myths. Intelligence and National Security
26 (2–3): 246–268.
Nathan, Laurie. 2010. Intelligence Bound: The South African Constitution and
Intelligence Services. International Affairs 86 (1): 195–210.
 1 INTRODUCTION 17

Nutter, John Jacob. 2000. The CIA’s Black Ops: Covert Action, Foreign Policy and
Democracy. Amherst: Prometheus Books.
Powers, Thomas. 1979. The Man Who Kept the Secrets: Richard Helms and the
CIA. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
Puar, Jasbir K. 2007. Terrorist Assemblages: Homonationalism in Queer Times.
London: Duke University Press.
Rascoff, Samuel J. 2016. Presidential Intelligence. Harvard Law Review 129
(3): 634–716.
Turner, Michael. 2004. A Distinctive U.S. Intelligence Identity. International
Journal of Intelligence and Counterintelligence 17 (1): 42–61.
Weber, Cynthia. 2002. Queer International Relations. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
———. 2016. What Is Told Is Always in the Telling: Reflections on Faking It in
21st Century IR/Global Politics. Millennium 45 (1): 119–130.
Weiner, Tim. 2007. Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA. New York: Doubleday.
Random documents with unrelated
content Scribd suggests to you:
America first. Evans, L. B. (Ja ’21)
America via the neighborhood. Daniels, J: (Ja ’21)
American army in the European conflict.
Chambrun, J. A. de P. de, and Marenches, C: de.
(Mr ’20)
American boys’ handybook of camp-lore and
woodcraft. Beard, D. C. (D ’20)
American business law. Frey, A. B. (Jl ’20)
American colonization society
Fox, E. L. American colonization society, 1817–
1840. (D ’20)
American credo. Nathan, G: J., and Mencken, H:
L: (Ap ’20)
American democracy. Forman, S: E. (F ’21)
American democracy versus Prussian Marxism.
Birdseye, C. F. (O ’20)
American engineers in France. Parsons, W: B. (D
’20)
American foreign policy. Carnegie endowment for
international peace. Division of intercourse and
education. (D ’20)
American guide book to France and its
battlefields. Garey, E. B., and others. (Ag ’20)
American history. Muzzey, D: S. (O ’20)
American labor year book, 1919–1920. (D ’20)
American literature
Boynton, P. H. History of American literature.
(Mr ’20)
Collections
Rees, B. J., ed. Modern American prose
selections. (Ag ’20)
American medical biographies. Kelly, H. A., and
Burrage, W. L. (N ’20)
American police systems. Fosdick, R. B. (Ja ’21)
American school toys and useful novelties in
wood. Kunou, C: A. (My ’20)
American soul. Farriss, C: S. (F ’21)
American Supreme court as an international
tribunal. Smith, H. A. (F ’21)
American towns and people. Rhodes, H. G. (Ja
’21)
American world policies. Hill, D: J. (Ag ’20)
Americanism
Emerson, G. New frontier. (Ag ’20)
Americanism versus bolshevism. Hanson, O. (Mr
’20)
Americanization
Beck, H. M. Aliens’ text book on citizenship. (O
’20)
Bogardus, E. S. Essentials of Americanization.
(Ag ’20)
Daniels, J: America via the neighborhood. (Ja
’21)
Davis, P., and Schwartz, B., eds. Immigration
and Americanization. (Mr ’20)
Drachsler, J. Democracy and assimilation. (F
’21)
Stewart. W. Making of a nation. (My ’20)
Talbot. W., comp. and ed. Americanization. (Jl
’20)
Thompson, F. V: Schooling of the immigrant. (N
’20)
Americanization of Edward Bok. Bok, E: W: (D
’20)
Americans all. Heydrick, B: A., ed. (O ’20)
Americans by adoption. Husband, J. (Jl ’20)
American’s London. Hale, L. (O ’20)
America’s aims and Asia’s aspirations. Gallagher,
P. (O ’20)
America’s position in music. Simpson, E. E. (Ag
’20)
Among the Ibos of Nigeria. Basden, G: T: (Ja ’21)
Amusements
Ripley, G: S. Games for boys. (Ja. ’21)
Anarchism and anarchists
Ganz, M., and Ferber, N. J. Rebels. (Ap ’20)
Anchor. Sadler, M. (My ’20)
Ancient Allan. Haggard, H: R. (Je ’20)
Ancient man. Van Loon, H. W. (F ’21)
Andalusia
Maugham, W: S. Land of the blessed Virgin. (S
’20)
Anderson Crow, detective. McCutcheon, G: B. (Je
’20)
Anecdotes
D’Oyly, W. H. Tales retailed of celebrities and
others. (N ’20)
Anglo-American relations, 1861–1865. Shaw, F:
J:, and Chesson, W. H. (My ’20)
Animal husbandry. Tormey, J: L., and Lawry, R.
C. (F ’21)
Animals
Burgess, T. W. Burgess animal book for
children. (D ’20)
 Ingersoll, E. Wit of the wild. (D ’20)
Animals, Legends and stories of
Bates, K. L. Sigurd our golden collie. (Ap ’20)
Eaton, W. P. On the edge of the wilderness. (D
’20)
Hawkes, C. Master Frisky. (O ’20)
Long, W: J. Wood-folk comedies. (N ’20)
Lytle, J: H. Story of Jack. (F ’21)
St Mars, F. Way of the wild. (O ’20)
Animated cartoons. Lutz, E. G: (Je ’20)
Animism
Zwemer, S: M. Influence of animism on Islam.
(Ag ’20)
Anne. Hartley, O. (N ’20)
Answer to John Robinson. (N ’20)
Antarctic regions
Shackleton, E. H: South. (Ap ’20)
Anthology of another town. Howe, E. W. (Ja ’21)
Anthology of magazine verse for 1919.
Braithwaite, W: S. B., ed. (Ap ’20)
Anthology of newspaper verse for 1919, and year
book of newspaper poetry. Davis, F. P., ed. (F
’21)
Anthology of recent poetry. Walters, L. D’O. (D
’20)
Anthony Aston. Nicholson, W. (Ja ’21)
Antichrist. Nietzsche, F. W. (Je ’20)
Apocalypse of John. Beckwith, I. T. (O ’20)
Application for positions
Gunion, P. C. Selling your services. (Je ’20)
Applied business law. Bush, C. H. (My ’20)
Applied science for metal workers. Dooley, W: H:
(Mr ’20)
Applied science for wood-workers. Dooley, W: H:
(Mr ’20)
Aranha, Joseph Graça. See Graça, Aranha, J.
P. da
Arbitration, Industrial
Beman, L. T., comp. Selected articles on the
compulsory arbitration and compulsory
investigation of industrial disputes. (N ’20)
Archaeology
Marshall, F. H: Discovery in Greek lands. (F ’21)
Archaic England. Bayley, H. (D ’20)
Architecture, Colonial
 Cousins, F., and Riley, P. M. Colonial
architecture of Salem. (My ’20)
Robinson. A. G. Old New England houses. (N
’20)
Arctic regions
Stuck, H. Winter circuit of our Arctic coast. (Je
’20)
Argentine Republic
Description and travel
Dreier, K. S. Five months in the Argentine
from a woman’s point of view. (F ’21)
Argonaut and Juggernaut. Sitwell, O. (Ap ’20)
Argonauts of faith. Mathews, B. J. (Ag ’20)
Arguments and speeches. Evarts, W: M. (My ’20)
Arlen, Michael, pseud. See Kouyoumdjian, D.
Armenia
History
Aslan, K. Armenia and the Armenians from
the earliest times until the great war (1914).
(Je ’20)
Armies of labor. Orth, S: P. (D ’20)
Arms and armour
Dean, B. Helmets and body armor in modern
warfare. (O ’20)
Army and religion. (Mr ’20)
Army mental tests. Yoakum, C. S., and Yerkes, R.
M., eds. (My ’20)
Army of 1918. McCormick, R. R. (D ’20)
Army with banners. Kennedy, C: R. (My ’20)
Arnot, Frederick Stanley, 1858–1914
Baker, E. Life and explorations of Frederick
Stanley Arnot. (D ’20)
Arrows of desire. Mackenzie, J: S. (Jl ’20)
Art
Clutton-Brock, A. Essays on art. (Ap ’20)
Gibran, K. Twenty drawings. (Je ’20)
Sirén, O. Essentials in art. (D ’20)
Art, Commercial
Whiting, J: D. Practical illustration. (Ja ’21)
Art, Japanese
Stewart, B. Japanese color prints. (Ja)
Art of biography. Thayer, W: R. (D ’20)
Art of fighting. Fiske. B. A. (Je ’20)
Art of interesting. Donnelly, F. P. (N ’20)
Artificial light. Luckiesh, M. (Ag ’20)
Artists
 Birnbaum, M. Introductions. (Jl ’20)
As the wind blew. Troubetzkoy, A. (D ’20)
As the wind blows. Phillpotts, E. (S ’20)
Asbestos
Summers, A. L. Asbestos and the asbestos
industry. (My ’20)
Ask and receive. Crane, A. M. (F ’21)
Asquith, Mrs Margot (Tennant), 1864–
Asquith, M. Margot Asquith, an autobiography.
(D ’20)
Aston, Anthony, 1712–1731
Nicholson, W. Anthony Aston. (Ja ’21)
At fame’s gateway. Mix, J. I. (My ’20)
At random. Creevey, C. A. (N ’20)
At the sign of the Red swan. Elwell, A. (Ag ’20)
At the sign of the Two heroes. Aldon, A. (O ’20)
Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe railway
company
Bradley, G. D. Story of the Santa Fe. (Jl ’20)
Athletics
Clark, E. H. Track athletics up to date. (Ag ’20)
Atlantic coast line railroad
 Dozier, H. D. History of the Atlantic coast line
railroad. (Je ’20)
Atlantida. Benoit, P. (S ’20)
Aurelia, and other poems. Nichols, R. M. B. (O
’20)
Austen, Jane, 1775–1817
Firkins, O. W. Jane Austen. (Ap ’20)
Australian victories in France in 1918. Monash, J:
(Ja ’21)
Austria
Foreign relations
Gori[)c]ar, J., and Stowe, L. B. Inside story of
Austro-German intrigue. (Ap ’20)
Authorship
Cushing, C: P. If you don’t write fiction. (Ag ’20)
Hearn. L. Talks to writers. (D ’20)
Klickmann, F. Lure of the pen. (My ’20)
Stevenson, R. L: B. Learning to write. (Ag ’20)
Autobiography. Carnegie, A. (N ’20)
Autobiography of a race horse. Yates, L. B. (Ag
’20)
Autobiography of a Winnebago Indian. (S ’20)
Autobiography of Buffalo Bill. Cody, W: F: (Jl ’20)
Automobile owner’s guide. Scholl, F. B. (N ’20)
Automobile starting, lighting, and ignition. Pagé,
V: W. (D ’20)
Automobiles
Pagé, V: W. Model T Ford car. (D ’20)
Schaefer. C. T. Motor truck design and
construction. (Mr ’20)
Scholl, F. B. Automobile owner’s guide. (N ’20)
Electric equipment
Pagé, V: W. Automobile starting, lighting, and
ignition. (D ’20)
Lighting
Collins, A. F: Motor car starting and lighting.
(S ’20)
Starting devices
Collins, A. F: Motor car starting and lighting.
(S ’20)
Autumn
Keeler, H. L. Our northern autumn. (D ’20)
Aviation
Dargon, J. Future of aviation. (D ’20)
Avowals. Moore, G: (My ’20)
Awakening. Galsworthy, J: (Ja ’21)
Bach, Johann Sebastian, 1685–1750
Forkel, J. N. Johann Sebastian Bach. (D ’20)
Bad results of good habits and other lapses. Park,
J: E. (Je ’20)
Bairnsfather, Bruce, 1887–
Bairnsfather, B. Bairnsfather case. (F ’21)
Bairnsfather case. Bairnsfather, B. (F ’21)
Balfour, Arthur James, 1848–
Raymond, E. T. Life of Arthur James Balfour.
(Ja ’21)
Balkan states
Sloane, W: M. Balkans. (S ’20)
History
Buxton, N. E:, and Leese, C. L. Balkan
problems and European peace. (S ’20)
Balkans. Sloane, W: M. (S ’20)
Ballads
Olcott, F. J. Story-telling ballads. (Ja ’21)
Some British ballads. (F ’21)
Ballads of old New York. Guiterman, A. (Mr ’20)
Bands (music)
Woods, G. H. Public school orchestras and
bands. (Je ’20)
Banks and banking
McCaleb, W. F. Present and past banking in
Mexico. (Ap ’20)
Barbarous soviet Russia. McBride, I: (S ’20)
Barbelllon, W. N. P., pseud. See Cummings,
B. F:
Barent Creighton. Shafer, D. C. (S ’20)
Barry Leroy. Bailey, H: C. (Je ’20)
Barstow, Mrs Montague. See Orczy, E.
Baseball
Frost, H., and Wardlaw, C: D. Basket ball and
indoor baseball for women. (S ’20)
Basil Everman. Singmaster, E. (Ap ’20)
Basket ball
Frost, H., and Wardlaw, C: D. Basket ball and
indoor baseball for women. (S ’20)
Battle of Jutland. Bellairs. C. W. (Je ’20)
Beaconsfield, Benjamin Disraeli, 1st earl
of, 1804–1881
Buckle, G: E. Life of Benjamin Disraeli, earl of
Beaconsfield. (O ’20)
Beautiful Mrs Davenant. Tweedale, V. (O ’20)
Beauty and the bolshevist. Miller, A. (D ’20)
Beck of Beckford. Blundell, M. E. (F ’21)
Bedouins. Huneker, J. G. (Je ’20)
Before and now. Harrison, A. (Je ’20)
Before the war. Haldane, R: B. H. (Ap ’20)
Beginner’s history of philosophy. Cushman, H. E.
(Ap ’20)
Behavior of crowds. Martin, E. D. (Ja ’21)
Belgian Congo and the Berlin act. Keith, A. B. (Ap
’20)
Belgium
Edwards, G: W. Belgium old and new. (F ’21)
Linden, H. V. Belgium. (F ’21)
German occupation
Mercier, D. F. F. J. Cardinal Mercier’s own
story. (My ’20)
History
Essen, L. van der. Short history of Belgium.
(Ap ’20)
Belgium old and new. Edwards, G: W. (F ’21)
Belonging. Wadsley, O. (O ’20)
Bengal fairy tales. Bradley-Birt, F. B. (Ja ’21)
Benjy. Stevenson, G: (Je ’20)
Bentley, John Francis, 1839–1902
L’Hôpital, W: de. Westminster cathedral and its
architect. (My ’20)
Berkshire hills
Eaton, W. P. In Berkshire fields. (N ’20)
Bernstorff, Johann Heinrich Andreas
Hermann Albrecht, graf von, 1862–
Bernstorff, J. H. A. H. A. My three years in
America. (Ag ’20)
Bertram Cope’s year. Fuller, H: B. (My ’20)
Best American humorous short stories. Jessup, A.,
ed. (S ’20)
Best plays of 1919–20. Mantle, B., ed. (D ’20)
Best psychic stories. French, J. L:, ed. (S ’20)
Best short stories of 1919. O’Brien, E: J. H., ed.
(Ap ’20)
Better letters. (My ’20)
Better world. Dennett, T. (F ’21)
Between you and me. Lauder, H. (Ap ’20)
Beverages
Stockbridge. B. E. What to drink. (Ap ’20)
Beyond the desert. Noyes, A. (D ’20)
Beyond the horizon. O’Neill, E. G. (S ’20)
Bible. Whole
About the Bible
Wheeler, E. P. Lawyer’s study of the Bible.
(Ap ’20)
Literary character
Genung, J: F. Guidebook to the Biblical
literature. (My ’20)
Bible. Old Testament
About the Old Testament
Schoff, W. H. Ship “Tyre.” (F ’21)
Parts of the Old Testament
Job
Jastrow, M., jr. Book of Job. (Ja ’21)
Single books
Genesis
Morgenstern, J. Jewish interpretation of
the book of Genesis. (D ’20)
Isaiah
Gordon, A. R. Faith of Isaiah. (D ’20)
Stories
Wood, I. F. Heroes of early Israel. (F ’21)
Bible. New Testament
Parts of the New Testament
Epistles
 Kennedy, H. A. A. Theology of the Epistles.
(F ’21)
Parry, R. St J: Pastoral epistles. (F ’21)
Single books
Revelation
Beckwith, I. T. Apocalypse of John. (O ’20)
Texts
Moulton, R: G., ed. Modern reader’s Bible for
schools. (Je ’20)
Bibliography
Guthrie, A. L., comp. Index to St Nicholas. (Ap
’20)
Bickerstaffe-Drew. Francis Browning
Drew, 1858– See Ayscough, J:, pseud.
Big-town round-up. Raine, W: M. (F ’21)
Biography
Courtney, J. E. Freethinkers of the nineteenth
century. (S ’20)
Dombrowski, E. German leaders of yesterday
and today. (S ’20)
Ellis, J. Fame and failure. (S ’20)
Fryer, E. M. Book of boyhoods. (D ’20)
Hutchinson, H. G. Portraits of the eighties. (S
’20)
Raymond, E. T. All and sundry. (Jl ’20)
Thayer, W: R. Art of biography. (D ’20)
 Dictionaries
Grove, G: Dictionary of music and musicians.
(F ’21)
Kelly, H. A., and Burrage, W. L. American
medical biographies. (N ’20)
Who was who. (D ’20)
Biology
East, E: M., and Jones, D. F. Inbreeding and
outbreeding. (Ag ’20)
Smallwood, W: M., and others. Biology for high
schools. (O ’20)
Thomson, J: A. System of animate nature. (Ja
’21)
Bird houses
Baxter, L. H. Boy bird house architecture. (My
’20)
Birds
Chapman, F. M. What bird is that? (Je ’20)
Hudson, W. H. Birds in town and village. (Je
’20)
Hudson, W. H. Birds of La Plata. (F ’21)
Morgan, A. B. Little folks tramping and
camping. (N ’20)
Birds. Squire, J: C. (D ’20)
Birds of La Plata. Hudson, W. H. (F ’21)
Birmingham, George A., pseud. See Hannay,
J. O.
Birth control
Marchant, J., ed. Control of parenthood. (F ’21)
Sanger, M. H. Woman and the new race. (F ’21)
Birth of God. Heidenstam, K: G. V. von. (My ’20)
Black Bartlemy’s treasure. Farnol, J. (Ja ’21)
Black buccaneer. Meader, S. W. (N ’20)
Black gold. Elliott, L. W. (F ’21)
Black knight. Sidgwick, C., and Garstin, C. (O ’20)
Black man’s burden. Morel, E. D. (Ja ’21)
Blacksheep! blacksheep! Nicholson, M. (Jl ’20)
Blind. Poole, E. (D ’20)
Blind wisdom. Hall, A. B. (F ’21)
Blood of things. Kreymborg, A. (F ’21)
Blood red dawn. Dobie, C: C. (Jl ’20)
Bloom of cactus. Bennet, R. A. (Mr ’20)
Blower of bubbles. Baxter, A. B. (Mr ’20)
Blue pearl. Scoville, S:, jr. (N ’20)
Blue print reading. Wyatt, E. M. (F ’21)
Blue prints
Wyatt, E. M. Blue print reading. (F ’21)
Blue room. Hamilton, C. (D ’20)
Blue smoke. Baker, K. (My ’20)
Blueberry bear. Sherard, J. L: (O ’20)
Bluestone. Wilkinson, M. O. (O ’20)
Boardwalk. Widdemer, M. (Mr ’20)
Boats and boating
Yates, R. F. Boys’ book of model boats. (N ’20)
Bobbins of Belgium. Kellogg, C. (My ’20)
Bobby and the big road. Lindsay, M. M. (O ’20)
Bohemians
Capek, T: Cechs (Bohemians) in America. (Mr
’20)
Böhme, Jacob. 1575–1624
Böhme, J. Confessions of Jacob Boehme. (F ’21)
Bok, Edward William, 1863–
Bok. E: W: Americanization of Edward Bok. (D
’20)
Bolshevik adventure. Pollock, J: (F ’21)
Bolshevik Russia. Antonelli, É. (Mr ’20)
Bolshevik theory. Postgate, R. W. (D ’20)