The First Amendment; E.J. Kahn, Jr.

The First Amendment and the Free People Weekly examination of civil liberties in the media in the 1970s produced by WGBH radio Boston in cooperation with the Institute for democratic communication at Boston University. The host of the program is the institute's director Dr. But it will be. One of the glories of Western Civilization I think is the New Yorker magazine along with our own the Atlantic here which is public published in Boston and one of the glories of the New Yorker magazine is of course E.J. Khong Jr. who has been very much involved over a 42 year period with such sections as profiles and talk of the town and almost everything else that can be done too. Be submitted to The New Yorker and by the way Jake can like all other writers has to face the editor each time he turns in a piece which is after 42 years I think rather condescending on their part Mr. Khan. He just published a book called about the New Yorker and me which is published by JP Putnam and sons. And for those of you who don't know about E.J. Kahn

aside from the New Yorker he has written literally scores of fine books including the China hands about the Foreign Service offices in China. The American people. The Boston underground gourmet. Harvard through changing storm reporter in micro Nisha the world of Swope about Herbert Bayard Swope a reporter here and there G.I. jungle the Army life and so on. E.J. Kohn this book. About the New Yorker and me is a diary of 977 in which you review a good deal of your mature life. Is that a fair statement. Yes. I wouldn't be presumptuous enough to try to write an autobiography. I don't think anybody ought to try that until the end of his life anyway. And I didn't want to write a conventional memoir. In fact this didn't really start as a book I began to. Keep a sort of daily journal on January 1 1977

because of the muesli and because it was a sort of milestone a year of my life I would have been out of college 40 years that year and and that year I celebrated my 40th year with The New Yorker and I don't want to take a chance and what do you know 50. So I began keeping a daily journal as I said largely for my children and grandchildren perhaps even more for myself. And about halfway through it I began to see it as a kind of informal memoir because as I wrote down places I'd been to in the course of a particular day or people I'd run into that reminded me of something that had happened in the past and I got into my childhood and my parents and my education my drivers and all that. So in a way it's it is turned out to be a kind of autobiography too long a one some people have already suggested. Actually I don't know. Incidentally I have two rooms of the publishers made me got

out about 30000 words that's out of which I prized highly. Well we will look forward then to Volume 2 about 977 the unexpurgated version. It's a fascinating book and their literary style of course is first class. I think that I expected that because having read Talk of the town over the years I want to ask you about that particular section perhaps one or two other sections of the New Yorker magazine and your experiences with it the way it is written. We were at the Guggenheim Museum this past week and happened to come across a most bizarre incident on the second floor and it and it flows on like that. Do those gems actually flow first time or do they get pounded into shape. Well some do and some don't. Some talk of the town stories require a lot of planning. I did want to couple years ago for instance involved going to Athens Greece. It was

about saving the Parthenon. Well you know I just didn't happen accidentally did they and I have friends Grace. That was a very exceptional case we don't generally range that far afield. I'll give you an example of. A sort of spontaneous league combusted TALK OF THE TOWN story if that's the right phrase. Last week I happened to read the newspapers as did everyone else that Jimmy Carter and spend a holiday on the island with polo of the coast of Georgia. I haven't been on SAPO couple of years ago and I had a picnic lunch in the house. Carter stated that when I realize of the president been allowed inside they were staying at Jiko Iowa next door and there were no feature stories in the papers at all about Zappa which happens to be an exceedingly interesting speck of land off the Georgia coast.

I sat down one afternoon and just out of my memory I dashed off a very short piece a hundred words maybe about sat below and handed it to our editor with whom I had had no previous discussion of this at all. Usually before you do a talk story you get it approved and then you go and do what I just that is the sort of man to do the next day it was in page proof in the next week this week published. That's so that's the kind of story that takes absolutely no planning and in the end we leave my desk. But sometimes you have a plan in your own mind which The New Yorker doesn't buy and I'm recalling on one day of 977 you referred to a trip that you made when min was first coming to power in Uganda and you were near there and so you went to Kampala. And somehow or other it never got into the New Yorker. Well that was a comedy of errors very identity Uganda just

before I mean took over and I was and when I was a Tanzania Zambia I think in Lusaka Zambia when I heard the news of the coup d'etat. And so I wanted to be the hotshot foreign correspondent and I flew back to Nairobi where I actually I was supposed to be in Nairobi Kenya anyway because my wife and children are meeting me there. And as soon as I got to Nairobi I called the American embassy and found out that the plane would be flying into and Tevye airport in Uganda the following morning at dawn. So I got on that plane and flew in. And a few hours later was that means house. The conference he had called to reassure the all the way heads of all the churches in Uganda how much he believed in human kindness and freedom of religion and various other things and it turned out he didn't altogether seem to believe in. And when I got to the camp Allah I

sent a cable to Bill Shaun of the New Yorker saying I'm here and can I send you a piece for next week. I'm arriving I have as bad of a Hilton hotel Ethiopia Tuesday please let me know how many words you want something like that. And when I got to the house about I found a cable from Shaw saying he wasn't interested and in every room in the next issue I never really got around to asking why until several years later I did use SLE. Uganda experience and a book ultimately So the trip was no together wasted and it turned out then that he didn't know exactly where can power was his geography has no deeper size and he by trying to discourage me from writing the piece really meant to discourage me from going there because he thought I might get shot or something. Well I had already been there and the shots that already been fired and they

weren't very many shots fired by the time I got there. So that was a rather frustrating experience but that was not a TALK OF THE TOWN story that was for a fairly that would have been a letter from Uganda or a lot of the Gabala something. I'm glad you moved there. Some of the most interesting political correspondents through the years has been found in The New Yorker. In these letters from here there and everywhere else you've probably done some of them yourself I have done quite a few of them from the Soviet Union and Panama. Many places and Asia from from the South Africa seem to last more or Las Vegas don't forget Las Vegas seems to be much more room for the author of even though the editing must be harsh to comment on all sorts of small details as well as a large scene. It does have the flavor of a chatty letter which contains the Major and the minor events. That of course is done by design of the New Yorker editors as well I think it's done more by design of the writers.

But of course the writers wouldn't be writing for The New Yorker unless they were the kinds of writers the editors favored. It's marvelous for The New Yorker. Well in most circumstances I give you all the space you like now there are qualifications that have to be made for that I cover the Olympic Games for The New Yorker and I hope to be in Moscow next year doing that. When I cover the Olympics I am writing against a deadline a very tight deadline and then I have to know in advance how much space are holding open for me and I have to fill that space and not go over it I better not go too much under it either there I will. But in that instance. I cant have total freedom and I don't want total freedom I want to know exactly how much space I have to fill. What's the most difficult story in terms of your own personal safety and the trickiness of the story that you that you have ever covered for The New Yorker.

Well in terms of personal safety I suppose. Covering the Korean War for The New Yorker because there were a lot of shots being fired at that time and I come to know Margaret Higgins at that time. Now I wasn't but I don't think our time there overlapped I O and any that I didn't know were over there. I was there mostly in the winter of 1951 which was the time when the fighting was seesawing back and forth around so all of the Chinese had come in and they were pushing us around rather a good deal. What What work have you done on profiles there that shows the difficulty of getting the inside story on a public figure. Well I'm not sure it's all that difficult. For one thing if you work for The New Yorker that gives you and Aunt Trevor a better entree to public figures who were likely to be familiar with the magazine than it does to private figures. And I've never had really too much difficulty getting hold of anybody

I'd want to do a profile on. I remember one about Avril Harriman some years ago that remains fixed in my mind is almost completely beautiful profile. Well I wrote that piece on Armand back in the 1950s I think. When I thought he'd sort of finished his career and he's still going strong now the age of eighty seven or eight is not strange you know but I can remember one of your lions that I've kept with me all through these years that was on the eye for it was a line about the fact he never carried any money in his pocket. Oh that's right it went everywhere nobody wanted him. And I've I've always wanted to be like that to have somebody chase after me with money in their pockets. Well you know the very rich rarely worry about cash they usually have somebody around got pocket money or at least a dime to make a phone call with they have to. I've done a number of pieces profiles of people whom I regard as quite rich. Arman of course for

one David Rockefeller John Whitney. And I've never I don't remember ever seeing any of them actually handling money. Did you ever come into contact with Tom is he doing. I've met him once or twice over the years and I. Did a piece for The Talk of the town department I recall because I had to be looking over some old stuff a couple weeks ago about doing at a ball game and I just I guess I just happened to be at a baseball game at the Yankee Stadium or maybe at Evans field of the program when the Habs failed in the Polo Grounds had baseball in New York and he was there any must have been sitting fairly close to him because I don't recall that I actually went there to spy on him. Anyway I wrote about how doing bad at a ball game. And he behaved rather stiffly. And I thought you know this man is not going to get anywhere in a high public office if he can't relax and enjoy a ball game and he didn't get where he

wanted to get your take on. I know you're very much concerned about your book on Jon Stewart service and John Davis and Davies and other foreign service officers as well as a great deal of your other work shows that I liked us sort of a general question. What are you some of your concerns now. Without a concert in one case how do you see the the American polity you know as regards journalistic freedom. Well it worries me that the courts seem to be. Less and less protective of journalists right. So I believe that the First Amendment should be very broadly construed and that the press is one of the most important. The elements of maintaining and preserving freedom that we have in this country if it hadn't been for the press with the assistance of course of people I Judge Sirica

the whole Watergate scandal might not have been a expose if it hadn't been for the press. I think the war might have lasted even longer than it did last which God knew was long enough too long. And now there seems to be a tendency in recent Supreme Court decisions having to do with searching journalistic offices having to do with examining the state of mind of journalists that worry me because I think other people are going to interpret or even misinterpret court decisions including other judges in lower courts and make life more difficult for journalists than it is now. It's difficult enough a lot of people don't want to tell journalists things particularly things that reflect adversely on these people. And I think it's the responsibility and the duty of of the press in this country.

Get hold of people who are doing bad things and and make these misdeeds public. And if the courts are going to take the view of the journalists should be curbed and of journalists face going to prison or having to pay large fines. If they overstep the bounds that are not even clearly defined then the journalists are going to pull in their horns and be rather circumspect about what they do and their editors who are going to be held responsible also for printing what the journalists bring in the editors are going to be much more cautious. So I think it's for the moment at least a rather unhealthy situation and I hope it improves within the inner sanctum of the New Yorker over the years have there been times when one said Well I always think of The New Yorker as. Not only glossy in terms of the quality of its paper but classy in terms of the kinds of things it handles first rate in other words from the

paper to the writing from the thought to the to the actual presentation. Have there been times when the editors have gotten concerned the editors and writers and banded together and say how does the New Yorker handle this. While there there may have been times when I haven't been privy to many I'm but I can tell you one thing that happened back in 1950 when Harold Ross who founded the magazine was still editing. This is the time when Senator McCarthy was coming up fast and I wrote an article under our wayward pressed department which was a rather vehement attack on certain members of the right wing press for the Hearst papers and a number of columnists in the Daily News mirror the mirror was a hypocrite who. It was weird saying things that I didn't like. Well now there was some talk around the New Yorker this might cost us a lot of advertising and it may cost some subscribers and Harold Ross hadn't seen the

article. Bill Shaw and his successor as editor had approved it bought it and had it set up in time. And Harold Ross hadn't seen the article until just before was going to press it and he was a conservative man politically. His right his role far to the left of him not that were very far left and a lot of the stuff that his people put in the magazine where it was she disapproved of me maybe he was on for good personal terms with some of the people I Westbrook Pegler of I was attacking Ross my enemy and you know in a carter just before the piece is going to press and he stopped and he said something I've never forgotten. He said Jesus Christ why did you have to go and write this goddamn piece. Now I've got to run it. In other words he felt that there was no question about it. It was one extra little bases in a central piece and was it whatever the consequences were in monetary terms or in any other terms to the magazine he was going to stand by as a writer and print it.

I remember in that biography of James Thurber there was a description of the little cubicles that people worked in and Ross kept everything very private and he was a hard man to get along with. But I'm reminded in your book about The New Yorker and me you said during the war that a lot of the people went off to war. World War Two and people like Lillian Hellman came on board nearly a million were asked a little Ian Ross excuse me pardon the slip. I came on board and he accepted them as being quite professional I was a little surprised but he accepted women because they were darn good reporters right. Yes. Well he had always taken the position that women were. You know I think you've always taken the position that women were good for some things and not for others actually it's a method that he downgraded women before them because look he had Janet Flannery writing for the magazine from the very outset of his first London correspondent was Mollie Panter-Downes his first book review or one of his first book review was Dorothy Parker one of his best early cartoonist was Helen Hogans and Lois long

for many years they ran our fashions column was a pillar of the magazine in the light of that evidence it's really hard to say that Ross was anti woman was he was he pro men in the sense that almost everybody said they had a rough time with him. I don't lovely men but they had a rough time. I know a lot of people said that I never had a rough time with them at all. It couldn't have been kinder to me. I don't think every hour that when I just started in there as a kid right out of college he frequently rewrote my copy. And and this is very educational for me. Well he could have some of me to his office to see the changes he made or just could have made them without notifying me at all it was his and I was in it and I was an employee. But instead he would. Free when he comes shuffling down the corridor he didn't exactly walk he she moved on his feet but it was more or less amble or a shuffle or

something like that. He'd come down to my office and ask me if I approved of what he done. Well a lot of this is very exciting for me the great man should deign to talk to me at all and to consult me as it were about something that he had improved in that I was going to be credited with what could have been greater. You said it it was a one man magazine. There's still a quality about the New Yorker being headed by one personality having one flavor. Once you know they they have a little cartoon character the New Yorker. That same same cover on their cover under the cover. But there is a flavor of the magazine of having very tight control is the new editor pretty much in the same vein. Well the new editor has been there when it was just 1951 things have only the two edits we've only had to let it just in 54 years which is not a bad track record. Bill Shawn is quite different from Ross and in terms of personality but they have one thing in common that they're both geniuses I think.

And that they're both autocrats. I mean they're real hard autocrats. They make the decisions. Sean makes even more than rosted because when Ross was the editor he had joined as a deputy. Sean has no Sean he's Azzam Sean. Which means he has to work twice as hard I guess. And he does everything I mean he handles every tiny detail and self. I don't know how he does it or how he manages to keep everything straight but he does and I think that this has in large measure determined the quality of the magazine and a sustained sense of excellence that I think it's always had and certainly had strived for. I compared it not facetiously with the Atlantic because they are similar in that they're essentially literary magazines no matter what the subject is covering for a ticket article. Fine writing. I think they're rather unique in American journalism as such yes with course we have cartoons which they love and wonderful cartoon. The Atlanta doesn't.

And we have more space somewhere weekly and there are a monthly So we have to contrive to put up four issues for everyone. They put out is it possible that some of that that facade of Ross being in Thai women came from a review of some of those women's book group cartoons. I've forgotten who did the missus Hodgkinson I saw nothing. How can smoking somehow happens for many years which was wonderful satire when reviewed from this does tend to convey a sad condescension to me. I don't know I have a feeling that maybe Ross wasn't quite as good as gallantly as he might have been to some of the women who were working in subsidiary roles of the New Yorkers. You know secretaries of proofreaders copy writers that sort of thing. I have no evidence of that's true but I do know that he had as I said all these fine women contributors and it's been the policy of the New Yorker both under

us and now under Sean that the contributors a person who counts most which makes a great if like me you are a contributor. Everybody else there has one duty and that is to take the writing or the artworks of the contributors furnish the magazine with as it were raw material and polish it and hone it and refine it until that's made just as great as it can be and then give all the credit to the person who did it originally. No matter how they just bribe themselves they are functionaries. Unless they are creative people right. France is the New Yorker has a whole bunch of editors very gifted and creative people whose names are practically unknown outside the New Yorker and who have chosen anonymity. Because they like to work there too.

Other any changes coming up for example some years ago you told me about 10 years. Seems less than that. You put in a table of contents modest as it is and for many many years the only way to find out who wrote an article as I recall was to go all the way down to the end of it. That's right which was the place where it was put on. There was a good reason for that Ross believed that it was the writing of that counted not the writer and therefore the name of the writer should go at the end. But then we began getting complaints or queries from readers including old subscribers who said well you know they can be bought or the US is getting too thick. They wanted a table of contents. We used to have a binder table of contents but it only listed departments like the theater right of the racetrack and so about 10 years ago or whenever it was the magazine yielded and. Put in a rather full table of contents but that's about the only only change in format of consequence that there's been more than 50 years. I mean New York is an elegant magazine. I have a hunch that E.J. Kahn is kind of an elegant

man is elegance in the true sense of the way I do traditional sense of the word. One of the criteria of the contributors of the magazine I don't know my wife frequently tells me that I look like a barber. I'm not sure where I look and we've got all kinds of contributors. We have people who belong to clubs and people who don't people who live in fancy homes and people who don't well I don't mean elegance and that's I mean scintillating. I mean people who crave to to jostle an idea around people who are interested in the next issue of The New York of people who write books about their work like their magazine the number of books have come out about that are you going to sell. Well I think I prefer the word excellence. I think elegance has one year you have one definition for it I have another. And I think in the best sense of the word elegant that we've got a lot of elegant people who when you saw it when you saw a wonderful painting that you really like you wouldn't call it excellence. You would call it

elegance wouldn't you. I defer to you on. Well I hope that you do simply because that's that's something that I think is a matter of my pride in you and in the New Yorker. Mr. E.J. can I want to thank you for being with us and I would I very rarely recommend a book but for a darn good diary it shows the inside of a man and his times and his work the people that he knows and even such things as I was not feeling well and they brought me some chicken soup and I must tell you a little more about that man there. They're wonderful people. You know some awfully wonderful people and I'm privileged to have talked with you. So E.J. Come on about The New Yorker and me by G.P. Putnam is something we ought to read for this edition Bernard Reuben. The First Amendment and a free people weekly examination of civil liberties in the media. In the 1970s the program was produced in cooperation with the Institute for democratic

communication at Boston University. Why didn't you GBH radio Boston which is solely responsible for its content. This is the station program exchange.