After the series aired in
Britain in the fall of 2004, the BBC received thousands
of letters from viewers. Here's how director, Adam
Curtis responded to some of their questions.
|
Adam Curtis wrote, produced and narrated
the series, Power of Nightmares first
broadcast on BBC.
His other work for the BBC includes The
Century of the Self, The
Mayfair Set, Pandora's
Box, The Living
Dead and An Ocean Apart.
|
VIEWER: The films were
biased.
DIRECTOR ADAM CURTIS: The
films were far less biased than the overwhelming
majority of media reporting of the al-Qaeda threat
over the past three years.
Almost all of this reporting was based solely
on unsubstantiated briefings from government and
security sources. As with politicians, the media
also stumbled on a way of reasserting their authority
because they could portray themselves as powerful
figures who knew about the terrifying hidden world
of "al-Qaeda".
In this way a fantasy became the received wisdom.
Just because one is challenging the received wisdom
on the basis of historical facts and journalistic
investigation does not make one biased.
VIEWER: How can we
not take the nightmare scenario seriously with
the increasing threat of available WMD? How will
this series be remembered when that happens?
DIRECTOR ADAM CURTIS: The
world is full of threats. But you cannot let
your judgment be distorted or overwhelmed
by the politics of fear.
VIEWER: Are you saying
that there is no threat?
DIRECTOR ADAM CURTIS: No,
the series did not say this. It was very clear
in arguing that although there is a serious threat
of terrorism from some radical Islamists, the
nightmare vision of a uniquely powerful hidden
organization waiting to strike our societies
is an illusion.
As the films showed, wherever
one looks for this "al-Qaeda" organization
- from the mountains of Afghanistan to the "sleeper cells" in America - the
British and Americans are pursuing a fantasy.
The bombs in Madrid and Bali showed clearly the
seriousness of the threat - but they are not evidence
of a new and overwhelming threat unlike any we
have experienced before. And above all they do
not - in the words of the British government - "threaten
the life of the nation". That is simply untrue.
VIEWER: Maybe al-Qaeda
does not exist as a highly organized and structured
group. But it is a terrifically powerful ideology,
which makes it even more dangerous.
DIRECTOR ADAM CURTIS: No
- the extreme Islamist ideas are dangerous, as
Madrid, Bali and 11 September showed, but to portray
them as a terrifying new viral form of terrorism
is also part of the politics of fear.
If one looks at the history of the Islamist movement and its ideas it is clear
that its high point came in the late 80s when it seemed on the verge of success
across the Muslim world.
But then in the 1990s Islamism failed dramatically
in its attempts to create revolutions because the
ideas failed to inspire the masses. They did not
appeal to the majority of people. The attacks on
11 September were not the expression of a confident
and growing movement, they were acts of desperation
by a small group frustrated by their failure which
they blamed on the power of America. It is also
important to realize that many within the Islamist
movement were against this strategy.
VIEWER: Is it possible
that the ideology of radical (political) Islam
has a better chance of succeeding where it failed
in the 1980s now that the West has responded as
it has to the perception of its threat in Afghanistan,
Iraq etc?
DIRECTOR ADAM CURTIS: I
think one has to be very careful about this.
The films showed that Islamism is not a new phenomenon.
Its trajectory in the 1980s and 90s is that of
rise and fall. It tried to create a pan-Arab
revolution and failed because it couldn't inspire
the masses.
The answer is that no-one knows whether the war
on terror is re-creating mass Islamism and giving
it a new revolutionary appeal, or whether it is
actually fueling a more nationalist opposition
that uses an Islamist rhetoric - as seems to be
happening in Iraq. The problem is that it is so
dangerous to report anything in Iraq that everyone
- both pro and anti - project what they want to
see onto the insurgency.
Yet again our perception of reality is being driven
by political fantasies rather than an accurate
understanding drawn from reality.
VIEWER: Do you
believe that there have been any real threats
to Western countries that have been 'pre-empted'
by the authorities, or have all the arrests
fallen down on a lack of evidence? Is the
pre-emptive strategy a successful one, and is
it not best to be safe rather than sorry?
DIRECTOR ADAM CURTIS: On
the surface the policy of pre-emption - detaining
people ahead of time before they can do their attacks
- is logical and sensible. The problem with it
though is that it does undermine one of the fundamental
principles of our legal system and democracy, the
ability to prove your innocence.
If we lock up people on the basis
of "future crimes", in other words things that
haven't even happened, then you have a huge
responsibility to get it right in what you
imagine might happen. At the moment, as the
series showed, in both Britain and America
we are detaining people on the basis of a series
of assumptions about international terror networks
that when one examines the evidence largely
do not exist.
In other words we are locking
people up on the basis of a magnified and
distorted vision of what might happen - a process
driven by the politicians' dark imaginations
rather than reality. Those who have been detained
then find it impossible to disprove this because
there is, by definition, no substantive proof
in a policy of pre-emption.
VIEWER: The Power
of Nightmares starts with conclusions
and makes up the evidence to support it. The
neo-Conservatives didn't come to power in the
US as a result of 9/11. Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz
were already in the Defence Department before
9/11.
DIRECTOR ADAM CURTIS: The
neo-Conservatives were part of the administration
but if you talk to the neo-Cons, which I did, they
will tell you candidly that they had very little
influence during the early part of the Bush administration,
particularly in foreign affairs.
It was the events of September 11 that showed
the president, they say, that what they had been
warning of since the early 1990s was correct -
that America faced dangerous threats in a new unipolar
world, and the need for America to fight pre-emptive
wars. This, as the series said, brought them
back to power in America. They would agree with
this.
VIEWER: Do
you believe it possible that the American Neo-Cons engineered the 9/11 atrocity
as a catalyst for their program?
DIRECTOR ADAM
CURTIS: No.
VIEWER: Hearing so
much that we are being misled by the government,
how could I determine that series like yours
isn't misleading as well?
DIRECTOR ADAM CURTIS: Welcome to the
modern world. I agree with you, I think that "the truth" has become
a much more contentious issue since the end of the Cold War. Back
then the world was much simpler and more certain, and patrician elites
on both sides of the Iron Curtain were confident in putting forward
the received wisdom on all important issues.
Today we all have to work
much harder to weigh up the different versions of the truth that
are being presented to us. This is exactly what
I tried to do in the series.
I looked at both
historical and contemporary factual evidence
and judged the politicians' and the media's
versions of what we were threatened by against
this evidence. In doing this I found a severe
mismatch between the rhetoric and the evidence.
I then put forward an argument which tried to
explain why this has happened - that in this
new and uncertain world politicians have found
in fear a way of restoring their patrician authority.
My aim in doing this was to say
to people: "Look, have you thought of it this
way?" as a means of encouraging
them to question the received wisdom they are told by governments
and the media. You don't have to agree with my argument about
why this has happened, but what I do hope is
that the basic journalism and evidence in the
series will make people see how weak and partial
the official version is.
In a bewildering and confusing
time I think that is proper public service broadcasting.
VIEWER: Has there
been any response (official or unofficial) from
the government to the arguments put forward by
your series?
DIRECTOR
ADAM
CURTIS: None
-
either
official
or
unofficial.
But the Archbishop of Canterbury liked it and
the President of Venezuela has asked for a tape.
VIEWER: Since
the series first screening and the recent
repeats, have you noticed any significant impact
the series has had among politicians and/or
the public?
DIRECTOR ADAM CURTIS: I
don't think that television series really change
things. Television
is a
reinforcing medium
- it
tends to
express and amplify already existing changes
that are in motion.
In
the case
of the
Power
of
Nightmares I
think
the
series
gave
a
sharp
and
focused
expression
to a widespread and growing disquiet about the way governments and
the
media had been reporting the threat.
If
there
is
a terrorist attack in the coming months -
which
there may be - then I think there will be
a
counter-reaction
from within both the political and media elites. They will seek to
say
loudly that this proves there is a hidden
and
terrifying
network unlike anything we have faced before.
But
I think that there is now a strong enough
body
of opinion that will challenge this and say
that
it shows nothing of the kind.
We
have faced
urban
terrorism before and dealt with it calmly
and
bravely
and I would hope that our politicians will
help
us do so again without hysterical overreaction.
But I really don't think that this state of fear will last.
VIEWER: Can I get
a video or DVD of the series?
DIRECTOR ADAM CURTIS: There
are no immediate plans to release the series on
DVD or video as it would be difficult to secure
the archival footage and music rights.
For more information visit the BBC
website.  |
