The 48 Laws Of Power

166 LAW 22

allmore

intelligent

thanthemembersofthecommittee.

Why

lowerthem-

selvestotheleveloftheir

opponentsbyarguing

with

them?

Why

notout

foxthecommittee

by

appearing

tosurrendertoitwhile

subtlymocking

it?

The

Hollywood

19 listenedtoBrecht

politely,

butdecidedtosticktotheir

plan,leaving

Brechtto

go

hisown

way.

The

committee

finally

summonedBrechtonOctober30.

They

ex-

pected

himtodowhatothers

among

the

Hollywood

19 whohadtestified

beforehimhaddone:

Argue,

refusetoanswer

questions,challenge

the

committee's

right

toholdits

hearing,

even

yell

andhurlinsults.Muchto

their

surprise,

however,

Brechtwasthe

verypicture

of

Congeniality.

He

worea

suit

(something

he

rarely

did),

smoked

a

cigar

(he

had

heard

that

thecommitteechairmanwas

a

passionatecigar

smoker),

answered

their

questionspolitely,

and

generally

deferredtotheir

authority.

Unliketheother

witnesses,

Brechtansweredthe

question

ofwhether

he

belonged

totheCommunist

Party:

Hewasnota

member,

he

said,

which

happened

tobethetruth.Onecommitteememberasked

him,

“isit

true

you

havewritten

a

numberof

revolutionaryplays?”

Brechthad

writ-

ten

manyplays

withovertCommunist

messages,

buthe

responded,

“I

havewrittenanumberof

poems

and

songs

and

plays

inthe

fightagainst

Hitler

and,

of

course,

they

canbe

considered,therefore,

as

revolutionary

because

I,

of

course,

wasfortheoverthrowofthat

government.”

Thisstate

ment

went

unchallenged.

Brecht’s

English

wasmorethan

adequate,

butheusedan

interpreter

throughout

his

testimony,

atacticthatallowedhimto

play

subtle

games

with

language.

WhencommitteemembersfoundCommunist

leanings

in

lines

from

English

editionsofhis

poems,

hewould

repeat

thelinesinGer

man

for

the

interpreter,

who

wouldthen

retranslate

them;

and

somehow

they

would

come

outinnocuous.Atone

point

acommitteemember

read

oneofBrechfs

revolutionarypoems

outloudin

English,

andaskedhimif

hehadwrittenit.

“No,”

he

responded,

“IwroteaGerman

poem,

whichis

very

differentfromthis.”Theauthor'selusiveanswersbaffledthecommit-

tee

members,

buthis

politeness

andthe

way

he

yielded

totheir

authority

madeit

impossible

forthemto

getangry

withhim.

After

only

anhourof

questioning,

thecommitteemembershadhad

enough.

“Thank

youvery

much,”

saidthe

chairman,

“Youarea

good

ex-

ample

tothe

{other}

witnesses.”

Not

only

did

they

free

him,

they

offeredto

help

him

if

hehad

any

trouble

with

immigration

oficialswho

might

detain

himfortheirownreasons.The

followingday,

BrechtlefttheUnited

States,

nevertoreturn.

Interpretation

The

Hollywood

19’sconfrontational

approach

wonthem

alot

of

sympa~

thy,

and

years

later

theygained

akindofvindicationin

publicopinion.

But

they

werealso

blacklisted,

andlostvaluable

years

of

profitableworking

time.

Brecht,

ontheother

hand,

expressed

his

disgust

atthecommittee

more

indirectly.

Itwasnotthathe

changed

hisbeliefsor

compromised

his

values;instead,

during

hisshort

testimony,

he

kept

the

upper

hand

byap-