Discuss The Americans
Discuss → TV Shows → The Americans → General
slightly slanted portrayal
posted by write2topcatSTAFFMOD on March 30, 2017 at 6:02 PM
I think this show portrays the USSR and it's foreign agents in a somewhat sympathetic light. For a Hollywood portrayal, it isn't as biased a portrayal as some shows are. The protagonists are Soviet spies. Naturally, it is normal to show the protagonists as sympathetic characters.
But on the whole the show could have given a more balanced view of the Soviet Union and of Soviet espionage work in general. For instance, most of the Soviet budget for espionage was not used for the sort of work Philip and Elizabeth do in the show. The majority of the budget was used for disinformation. Disinformation is a sophisticated conspiracy for basically spreading slanderous rumors. (The remnants of the organizations set up by the Soviets are still in operation today, and sometimes are used by American politicians for their own purposes. ) For example, in the mid 1990s a report came out alleging that there was an epidemic of arsons of black churches in the American South. Pres. Bill Clinton signed a law assigning stiff penalties for anyone found guilty of setting fire to black churches. To this day people around the world believe that America is a horrible racist country. But it wasn't true. During the years in question, not a single black church burned due to arson. Church fires for all reasons were on the decrease during those years. It was a disinformation campaign run by an old Soviet organization, still active in America and other countries. This was the main focus of Soviet espionage.
A defector who enjoys life in America is shown in an unsympathetic light, with several characters stating that he ought to be shot. His family appears to hate him for bringing them to America. He talks about what a failure the Soviet system is, but is criticized for pointing this out.
Philip, Elizabeth, and other Soviet expats frequently speak with pride about having to scrounge for enough food to survive back in the USSR as children.
They speak as if having plenty of food available is morally reprehensible, but subjecting children to malnourishment is something to be proud of.
Granted, children who survive through adversity sometimes learn valuable life lessons. But others are traumatized. Certainly those without proper nutrition face health challenges, poor development, etc. But to Philip and Elizabeth, growing up in abject poverty is morally superior to living in a country whose economic system is efficient enough that everyone can find food.
Overall, the show is not that bad. At least it is not overt and obvious.
Reply by TiffanyFontaine
on March 31, 2017 at 4:01 AM
I agree that some of the facts about 1980s Russia are probably distorted, but all fictional stories take liberties with historical realities. The writers as well as the actors in The Americans do an admirable job of presenting complex and conflicted characters struggling to make sense of their environment and beliefs.
Reply by write2topcat
on March 31, 2017 at 6:12 AM
It's a great show, one of my favorites. But the political persuasion of writers often bleeds through into their work, and I usually pick up on it. Fictional stories need not take liberties with historical realities. There is a literary term called verisimilitude which is "likeness to the truth i.e. resemblance of a fictitious work to a real event."
Verisimilitude ensures that even a fantasy must be rooted in reality, which means that events should be plausible to the extent that readers consider them credible enough to be able to relate them somehow to their experiences of real life.
In fact the show does a pretty good job in many ways. But there are subtle clues to the writers' leftist political stance. I am not put off by them to the point that I cannot enjoy the show by any means.
Reply by TiffanyFontaine
on April 1, 2017 at 3:31 AM
I think I get your point. Your suspicion that there may be a liberal or left slant underlying the series is probably valid. A majority of film writers and producers tend to be progressive democrats.
I am very familiar with verisimilitude. Having spent several years in college, undergrad and grad, as an English (writing and literature major) it would have been difficult to avoid the study of verisimilitude. Most film scholars would probably agree that a strong case could be made that The Americans does a fairly good job presenting the storylines as credible and that the narratives relate to real experiences in the lives of some people in the 1980s world of espionage.
Reply by write2topcat
on April 3, 2017 at 7:52 PM
Yes I agree. In many ways the show does a pretty good job of showing life in the 1980's, and probably life from the perspective of Soviet spies as well. I don't argue that point.
Reply by TiffanyFontaine
on April 4, 2017 at 12:27 AM
Do you know if this story is based on any real Soviet spy couples living in the U.S in the 80s? Were there ever actually Soviet spy couples, such as these two, who went under the radar and lived normal lives as Americans?
Reply by write2topcat
on April 4, 2017 at 2:21 AM
Yes there were couples like that here in America. In fact, I believe the series was inspired by an FBI bust of some Russian spies in 2010 if I am not mistaken. They were spies who came here to live as Americans, open businesses, etc. (I am sure the Soviets had spies like that here in the 80s as well. ) I have not read up on the details, and don't know much more about that spy ring that what I just wrote about them. I do know that the majority of the Soviet espionage budget was not devoted to the kind of spies we usually think of, i.e. spies who steal secrets or assassinate targets. Most of it went into setting up ostensibly independent organizations and for other efforts for the purpose of disseminating disinformation. That effort was not to steal secrets, but to destabilize, de-legitimize, and demoralize countries. But of course, they did also have the kind of spies depicted in this series.
It is a good show. I watched it from the beginning and was hooked from the start. Philip and Elizabeth have mellowed somewhat from that first season I think. They seemed somehow harder and colder in those first episodes.
Reply by TiffanyFontaine
on April 4, 2017 at 2:45 AM
What surprises me is that there was nothing in the press in the 80s about these undercover Russian couples. It's hard to believe that no investigative journalist ever uncovered any of these spy couples. Today, someone in the news media would at least get a hint of an incredible Soviet operation like this one. It would be all over the internet. :)
One of the reasons Philip and Elizabeth seem to have mellowed, toward each other especially, may be because in real life Matthew Rhys and Keri Russell fell in love. As the star of the show, I 'm sure Matthew Rhys has a lot of input about the scripts and the direction of the character's development.
Reply by write2topcat
on April 4, 2017 at 4:48 AM
I guess that if they are good at their spycraft, they don't stand out. They are unremarkable and people don't notice them as different or suspect anything. Some of them might be journalists for that matter. I have known people who did intelligence work, field work. They seem as normal as anyone you would ever meet. Certainly nothing about them that would lead one to believe they were anything other than what they appeared to be. I should add that they were both long retired from their work, and they never divulged anything to me. I remain fascinated by that field. It was frustrating in the extreme to me to ask them questions and never get any answers from them. I quickly figured out that I never would, and I shouldn't ask about stuff I had no need to know.