W. Craig Reed, click
here to update your pages on AuthorsDen.
Blogs by W. Craig Reed
Red November Comments 6/6/2010 3:13:32 PM
Red November, Inside the Secret U.S. - Soviet Submarine War was published by William Morrow/HarperCollins on May 4, 2010. Since then the book has received quite a few rave reviews, and a few negative ones. I've also received numerous emails, many with comments and questions. All are welcomed, and several will help me improve the book for future releases, as well as my craft, for future books. Below are answers to some of these comments and questions, and explanations that may help clarify some of the book's content. As the author of Red November, I expected some mixed reviews. Books that take on this topic are bound to stir up some controversy. This was a big project to tackle in less than a year on my own, given that Blind Man’s Bluff took several years with three authors. In hindsight, I probably should have begged my publisher for more time, but the demands of our world today make life tough for all of us.
I’ve read most of the books published about submarine operations from WWII through the Cold War and beyond, and my favorite is still Blind Man’s Bluff. Probably because I experienced some of its content first hand. I also enjoyed Peter Huchthausen’s latest book, Hide and Seek, and found all those facts interesting, but a bit dry to read (just being honest). I also heard from dozens of my fellow submariners and many others that both books delivered good information, but very few “real life stories.”
When I set out to write Red November, I struggled with several decisions: First, how can I ensure that oaths and gag orders are not violated, or that the security of current operations is not compromised? Second, how can I bring to life the actual experiences of submariners, navy divers and espionage operatives while not angering the purists who demand 100% accuracy and loathe dialog? How do I separate the wild sea stories from the true ones, and how do I tackle controversial topics without angering both sides? I found my answer in the word “balance,” and by staying true to my conviction to honor those who served with my words. In a few places, however, my words fell short.
Every book has its share of copy editing glitches, and Red November is no exception. I must fall on my sword for some of them, and a few are somewhat embarrassing. This book was reviewed by half a dozen qualified submariners, a few with publishing experience, a navy historian (who loved it), a Cuban Missile Crisis historian (who hated it), and a half dozen copy editors. Still, all of us missed some things (carrier vs. cruiser, kilo vs. mega, one wrong hull number, HMB-1 vs. HGE, harry vs. hairy, etc.). The criticism I’ve read in emails and online postings regarding these errors is justified, and these “typos” will be corrected in the next release. While I’ve received dozens of emails from submariners and others who praise the book and thank me for writing it, I’ve also received a few one-stars and questions about my sanity. I’d like to address some of the negative comments in this posting, rather than try to respond to each individually. The latter tends to escalate versus explain, which serves little good. The main topics of contention seem to center around the following topics, in order of presentation in the book:
Gardner Brown and the USS Cubera on “Main Street:” The submarine community knows Brown well. He fought as a marine on Iwo Jima, then rode diesel boats into Soviet harbors. He later served under Rickover to help ring in the nuclear navy while doing spec ops on the Seawolf. To question whether this humble submariner was telling “whiskey tales” because a few details aren’t geographically perfect is simply not justified, and I apologize to Gardner on behalf of those with little respect for veterans.
Foxtrot submarine crew dialog: I’ve been blasted for using “invented dialog” spoken by the crews of the four Foxtrot submarines that participated in the Cuban Missile Crisis. As noted above, Red November is not a book of dry facts. My heartfelt desire was to allow others to experience, through the eyes of the participants, the real life struggles, feelings, despair, fear, anger and dedication displayed by those who were there. I believe Stephen E. Ambrose sought to do the same in his fine book, Band of Brothers, which contains dialog recalled by soldiers from WWII. No dialog in Red November was “invented.”
While some dialog was edited or paraphrased for readability, all came directly from taped interviews with individuals or from published works. I spent ten days in Saint Petersburg, Russia in March 2009 interviewing five officers who rode those Foxtrots, some former sub captains. They told me what happened and reiterated dialog they spoke to each other. I included those conversations because I felt they were material to the historical record. For those that disagree, I encourage you to publish your own book sans dialog. In the mean time, let’s not call the words of these veterans “fiction” because they include some dialog.
William J. Reed’s White House Briefing: fellow writer Michael Dobbs has condemned Red November to the fiction pile given that secret service logs of White House visitors have not yet been obtained to validate that my father visited the White House during the Cuban Missile Crisis. I have contacted the JFK Library and the records are forthcoming.
USS Scorpion Loss: this is a hotly debated event in history that took the lives of almost 100 American submariners in May 1968. I have received some rather scathing emails, and even nastier comments posted online. Some of these cast me in the image of Hitler, Hussein and the Devil all rolled into one for even mentioning the other side’s viewpoint. While only two of Red November’s 378 pages (around 0.5%) discuss this topic, perhaps I did overstep by trying to play fair to all parties. For the record, I did not include my own personal opinion in the text, but simply presented information available publicly in books, online or elsewhere. Some argue that such data is fabricated, ludicrous and even hurtful. Perhaps they are right, but I leave that to readers to decide. I do understand that some families may still have deep feelings about this tragic event in history, and I will endeavor to diffuse some of the more controversial information in a future release. In the mean time, I must unfortunately remain in the middle of a shooting war that has raged on for decades. One side wants me to apologize for including information from two books they consider bunk, and the other for calling them conspiracy theorists.
I even received one comment that pulled a line out of context wherein I discussed my thoughts regarding how an Echo II probably sunk the Scorpion. This was deep inside a scene when I was twenty-two on my first boat after an Echo II shot a torpedo at us. A few of my crew mates were on the USS Haddo when she tailed the Echo II that got handed off to the Scorpion just days before that boat went down. At that time, in the seventies, there was still a lot of speculation about what happened, and yeah, that was one of my thoughts. Decades later, my thoughts have changed. One last comment here. R.B. Rule has new information that contradicts the navy’s assertion (printed in Blind Man’s Bluff) that the K-129 accelerated to 200 knots before hitting the bottom. You mean the navy got something wrong? Darn, give me one star for believing those guys.
K-129 Loss: Several books have been written about the K-129 sinking and the Azorian salvage project, and the CIA recently released a fifty-page accounting of the Azorian’s history, albeit with several sections redacted. Michael White has produced a video and Norman Polmar has written a book. I bring nothing new to the party related to “facts,” as this is not the focus of my book. I do, however, bring an entirely new personal perspective to the forefront through the eyes of participants, including Joe Houston, an engineer involved in a critical component of the program who worked for Mr. P who worked for Carl Duckett—the project’s CIA boss.
One or two critics have claimed that “every paragraph contains errors.” They’re probably right, from someone’s perspective. Point being that dozens of sources have dozens of conflicting facts and all claim to be the “ultimate truth.” There’s been almost as much misinformation sprinkled over the years about the Azorian project as there’s been about President Kennedy’s assassination. As such, I’m not even trying to be the ultimate word, in exacting detail, about what really happened. In fact, I encourage dissenters to read to the end of that chapter where I state, “at least that’s the story told by the CIA.” And that’s the point of the entire section. The CIA was caught with an open fly when the story leaked, and Houston’s conversations with his friend, Duckett, combined with other eyewitness reports, intimate that more was recovered than previously reported. I’m just the messenger here and leave readers to draw their own conclusions on this point.
Regarding the Swordfish and K-129 sinking, one reader perhaps misconstrued some of the information here, and stated that it’s “all wrong.” Like the Azorian project, there are numerous sources and just as many versions. Most of my sources were submariners who were there. I tend to believe their versions more than other sources, but again, the dissenters are welcome to write their own books and use any sources they choose. If their sources turn out to be more accurate than mine, I applaud them for updating the historical record. In the mean time, I choose to believe my credible witnesses.
As for other claimed inaccuracies, again, we all have our points of view and our sources of information. Which version is correct is often a matter of opinion. I’m always open to new and potentially more accurate updates to what I’ve published, and will endeavor to make appropriate corrections in future releases.
In conclusion, Red November is not a perfect book, but I’m hopeful that other veterans, military enthusiasts and fans of Tom Clancy-style books will find it exciting, enjoyable and informative. The following review, posted by a former U.S. Navy saturation diver unknown to me, let’s me know that despite harsh words from a few critics, many are grateful that this book honors the service and sacrifices of submariners, divers, spooks, operatives, engineers and technicians during the Cold War. This book is dedicated to these individuals, and I apologize to any who feel it does not do them justice.
“This review of Red November is based upon my enjoyment of the book. Having served a career as a Navy Deep Sea Diver, 16 yrs as a Saturation Diver, with tours on a couple Submarine Rescue Ships, SUBDEVGRU One, instructor a Naval School of Deep Diving Systems, etc. I found the book a very enjoyable read. Exciting, interesting, humorous and filled with many back stories that fill in gaps in my understanding of events. IMHO, The most enjoyable book on the subject since `Blind Man's Bluff'. To those "experts" that are annoyed by typos or claimed inaccuracies in a specific portion of the book, I appreciate the information they provided, but it doesn't diminish my satisfaction with the book overall. Trying to get new, accurate details, from old sailors, about events from many years ago, can be challenging at best. I found the reference portion at the back to be especially interesting, not having seen such in other books. (Though, I don't claim to be a prolific reader) I have purchased extra copies to give to my shipmates and family. From the Son of a Son of a Sailor, Good job and Bravo Zulu to Author, W. Craig Reed.”
