What do you think?
Rate this book
A Covert Affair: Julia Child and Paul Child in the OSS
Bestselling author Jennet Conant brings us a stunning account of Julia and Paul Child’s experiences as members of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) in the Far East during World War II and the tumultuous years when they were caught up in the McCarthy Red spy hunt in the 1950s and behaved with bravery and honor. It is the fascinating portrait of a group of idealistic men and women who were recruited by the citizen spy service, slapped into uniform, and dispatched to wage political warfare in remote outposts in Ceylon, India, and China. The eager, inexperienced 6 foot 2 inch Julia springs to life in these pages, a gangly golf-playing California girl who had never been farther abroad than Tijuana. Single and thirty years old when she joined the staff of Colonel William Donovan, Julia volunteered to be part of the OSS’s ambitious mission to develop a secret intelligence network across Southeast Asia. Her first post took her to the mountaintop idyll of Kandy, the headquarters of Admiral Lord Louis Mountbatten, the supreme commander of combined operations. Julia reveled in the glamour and intrigue of her overseas assignment and lifealtering romance with the much older and more sophisticated Paul Child, who took her on trips into the jungle, introduced her to the joys of curry, and insisted on educating both her mind and palate. A painter drafted to build war rooms, Paul was a colorful, complex personality. Conant uses extracts from his letters in which his sharp eye and droll wit capture the day-to-day confusion, excitement, and improbability of being part of a cloak- and-dagger operation. When Julia and Paul were transferred to Kunming, a rugged outpost at the foot of the Burma Road, they witnessed the chaotic end of the war in China and the beginnings of the Communist revolution that would shake the world. A Covert Affair chronicles their friendship with a brilliant and eccentric array of OSS agents, including Jane Foster, a wealthy, free-spirited artist, and Elizabeth MacDonald, an adventurous young reporter. In Paris after the war, Julia and Paul remained close to their intelligence colleagues as they struggled to start new lives, only to find themselves drawn into a far more terrifying spy drama. Relying on recently unclassified OSS and FBI documents, as well as previously unpublished letters and diaries, Conant vividly depicts a dangerous time in American history, when those who served their country suddenly found themselves called to account for their unpopular opinions and personal relationships.
416 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 2011
132 people are currently reading
1661 people want to read
About the author
Jennet Conant
20 books73 followersJennet Conant is an American non-fiction author and journalist. She has written four best selling books about World War II, three of which have appeared on the New York Times Best Seller list.
Born in Seoul, South Korea and raised in Asia and America, she received a BA degree in Political Theory from Bryn Mawr College in 1982, and double-majored in Philosophy at Haverford College. She completed a Master's degree in Journalism from New York City's Columbia University in 1983. She was awarded a John J. McCloy Fellowship to study politics in Germany.
Conant went on to work at Newsweek magazine for seven years, and wrote profiles for Rolling Stone, Spy magazine, and The New York Times. Additionally, she was a contributing editor for Esquire, GQ, and Vanity Fair, from which she resigned to write her first book, Tuxedo Park. Her profile of James Watson, the co-discoverer of the double-helix, was featured in The Best American Science & Nature Writing 2004.
Born in Seoul, South Korea and raised in Asia and America, she received a BA degree in Political Theory from Bryn Mawr College in 1982, and double-majored in Philosophy at Haverford College. She completed a Master's degree in Journalism from New York City's Columbia University in 1983. She was awarded a John J. McCloy Fellowship to study politics in Germany.
Conant went on to work at Newsweek magazine for seven years, and wrote profiles for Rolling Stone, Spy magazine, and The New York Times. Additionally, she was a contributing editor for Esquire, GQ, and Vanity Fair, from which she resigned to write her first book, Tuxedo Park. Her profile of James Watson, the co-discoverer of the double-helix, was featured in The Best American Science & Nature Writing 2004.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 306 reviews
January 23, 2022
A Covert Affair: Julia Child and Paul Child in the OSS was a gripping account of the early days of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), the forerunner of the CIA, in the Far East during World War II where one is immersed in the lives of Julia McWilliams, Paul Child and so many others that we came to know and embrace, such as Betty MacDonald and Jane Foster. It was in these very tumultuous years that these Americans were caught up in the unrelentless Joseph McCarthy hunt for Communists that showed no mercy.
As a fan of Julia Childs, I loved how she was portrayed in this book as she embraced her position with the OSS during the war. It clearly showed another more endearing side of Julia Child. It was equally endearing to see the beautiful friendship with Paul Child that became a lasting love sustaining them both. In Julia's words:
"How were they to know that disaster lay just around the corner? That what Bernard DeVoto had once called "the avalanching danger" of rumor, insinuation, slander, and malice hung over them all? The quiet men with the credentials were closing in. They never heard them coming."
As a fan of Julia Childs, I loved how she was portrayed in this book as she embraced her position with the OSS during the war. It clearly showed another more endearing side of Julia Child. It was equally endearing to see the beautiful friendship with Paul Child that became a lasting love sustaining them both. In Julia's words:
Reflecting on her late-in-life-success, Julia would often say, "The war made me." She was very nostalgic about her years overseas with the OSS, when she finally came into her own, fell in love, and first tasted the spicy Indian curries and savory Chinese dishes that awakened her senses and her deep affinity for food. Yet she was never inclined to romanticize the past, remaining characteristically clear-eyed and forthright about the demagoguery that had blighted the postwar period. She and Paul had escaped relatively unscathed, but too many friends had not been as fortunate. For all that those years had brought them, they could never look back on that time, and Paul's 'shameful episode,' without bitter regret, like 'the taste of ashes' in their mouths."
April 4, 2011
The first thing you should know, is that the subtitle of this book is a little misleading. While Paul and Julia Child are in a fair amount of the book, this book is mainly about Jane Foster. The book also covers a fair amount of time after all of these folks have left the OSS.
Having said that, this is a fascinating, well-researched read. Jennet Conanat has written many books on the subject of covert operations during WWII, so she knows what she is writing about. While it is non-fiction, the narrative rips along like a good thriller. An interesting appendix and copious notes show the amount of detailed research that went into this book.
The subject is the OSS in the Pacific theater of WWII. It tells how ordinary people were recruited with seeming disparate or unconventional backgrounds. It tells of some of the morale operations undertaken to counteract attacks and occupation by the Japanese. The book goes into what the post-war was like in Vietnam and Indonesia, and how the operatives could see problems, but were powerless to report on those issues as their department was being disbanded around them.
During the post-war portion, it also goes into detail about Jane Foster and her troubles with McCarthy Era America. Evidence is given (such as it is) and the author maintains an unbiased opinion in presenting it until the epilogue. The conclusion she reaches is fair and well thought.
Morale operations in the Pacific, being hounded to near insanity by McCarthy's goons, good times and bad. If this interests you, I recommend this book.
Having said that, this is a fascinating, well-researched read. Jennet Conanat has written many books on the subject of covert operations during WWII, so she knows what she is writing about. While it is non-fiction, the narrative rips along like a good thriller. An interesting appendix and copious notes show the amount of detailed research that went into this book.
The subject is the OSS in the Pacific theater of WWII. It tells how ordinary people were recruited with seeming disparate or unconventional backgrounds. It tells of some of the morale operations undertaken to counteract attacks and occupation by the Japanese. The book goes into what the post-war was like in Vietnam and Indonesia, and how the operatives could see problems, but were powerless to report on those issues as their department was being disbanded around them.
During the post-war portion, it also goes into detail about Jane Foster and her troubles with McCarthy Era America. Evidence is given (such as it is) and the author maintains an unbiased opinion in presenting it until the epilogue. The conclusion she reaches is fair and well thought.
Morale operations in the Pacific, being hounded to near insanity by McCarthy's goons, good times and bad. If this interests you, I recommend this book.
May 23, 2011
Disappointed by cheap lure to garner readers in this rehashing of WWII, OSS, and red hunt in the State Department. I know, I know, just because I paid attention to the Washington Post et al, I might know more than the average fan of Julia Child's TV shows. But it offends that old photos of Julia and Paul Child, as well as the tag line: Julia Child and Paul Child in the OSS, would be USED, used, used to sell a boring book. It was mudraking, muckraking, in the worse sense of the word to drag the reader through the sad lives of rich girls who dabbled in communism in the 30's and 40's.
Not Julia, she was busy doing an efficient job in Ceylon as her war effort - but you don't find that out into halfway through the book. In fact you read relatively little about the Childs, after a horrendous, out of sequence first chapter. Which I felt was slanted until the end when, sure enough, Paul was exonerated but then I had read about that in one of Julia's books.
As for Jane Foster, it seems the red-hunt continues on her, again with very scanty evidence. She was also in Ceylon and China for the OSS, serving with the Childs -- seems like she was doing an extraordinarily good job at her assignment, and then chastised for applying those same executive gifts in the post war years. Red baiting makes me cringe, even now, shame on Nixon, McCarthy, etc. But this is a book with no heart and lots of exploitation of people's lives. And Julia is demeaned. Everyone is demeaned in this book. I give it a yuck review.
Not Julia, she was busy doing an efficient job in Ceylon as her war effort - but you don't find that out into halfway through the book. In fact you read relatively little about the Childs, after a horrendous, out of sequence first chapter. Which I felt was slanted until the end when, sure enough, Paul was exonerated but then I had read about that in one of Julia's books.
As for Jane Foster, it seems the red-hunt continues on her, again with very scanty evidence. She was also in Ceylon and China for the OSS, serving with the Childs -- seems like she was doing an extraordinarily good job at her assignment, and then chastised for applying those same executive gifts in the post war years. Red baiting makes me cringe, even now, shame on Nixon, McCarthy, etc. But this is a book with no heart and lots of exploitation of people's lives. And Julia is demeaned. Everyone is demeaned in this book. I give it a yuck review.
March 8, 2012
I enjoyed this book, though like everyone else, I quickly figured out it had little to do with the Childs. It gave me great insight into the way that the US, appeasing its imperialist Allies, the French, Dutch, and, most notably, the English, mistreated the native people in SE Asia that had helped them fight the Japanese. That treatment made it quite logical these peoples would not only struggle for their independence after the war, but hate the US, too.
For example, I had no idea that after the war British and Dutch imperialists actually put Japanese soldiers in charge in places like Indonesia and allowed terrible atrocities to take place, even though the independence movements there and elsewhere had risked their lives to help fight those same Japanese.
I hadn't known of the way that the Dutch and French soldiers went about shooting civilians for fun after the war was over either. This isn't a book that makes you admire the British. It seems like a major theme of my reading this year is a de-romanticizing of the way the snobbish British upper classes exploited everyone in the world they possibly could for their own selfish gain. They certainly behaved badly in Asia.
The descriptions of the kinds of activities the US covert operation did you will read here are fascinating, too.
The main frustration for me with this book was that I didn't feel Conant gave the ending of the book enough attention. It ended very abruptly after delivering some major shocks that should have been foreshadowed, at least to some extent, earlier in the story.
I ended up feeling the ending didn't live up to the quality of the rest of the book. But the rest of the book was impressive and taught me much that was new to me. (I too have read my share of Julia Child bios and memoirs, and I was actually fine with not having to rehash what I'd already learned elsewhere about this brilliant, entertaining, delightful woman.
For example, I had no idea that after the war British and Dutch imperialists actually put Japanese soldiers in charge in places like Indonesia and allowed terrible atrocities to take place, even though the independence movements there and elsewhere had risked their lives to help fight those same Japanese.
I hadn't known of the way that the Dutch and French soldiers went about shooting civilians for fun after the war was over either. This isn't a book that makes you admire the British. It seems like a major theme of my reading this year is a de-romanticizing of the way the snobbish British upper classes exploited everyone in the world they possibly could for their own selfish gain. They certainly behaved badly in Asia.
The descriptions of the kinds of activities the US covert operation did you will read here are fascinating, too.
The main frustration for me with this book was that I didn't feel Conant gave the ending of the book enough attention. It ended very abruptly after delivering some major shocks that should have been foreshadowed, at least to some extent, earlier in the story.
I ended up feeling the ending didn't live up to the quality of the rest of the book. But the rest of the book was impressive and taught me much that was new to me. (I too have read my share of Julia Child bios and memoirs, and I was actually fine with not having to rehash what I'd already learned elsewhere about this brilliant, entertaining, delightful woman.
August 29, 2012
They say not to judge a book by its cover. In this case, you should also be wary of judging it by its title, jacket summary, and overall presentation. This book is fine for what it is: a history of the Office of Strategic Services and a chronicle of both the Red Scare and the Jane Foster spy drama. Unfortunately, through it's own promotion and marketing, the book claims to be something much different - a story about Julia and Paul Child - which it really is not.
Although Paul and Julia Child both worked for the OSS (which was the WWII precursor of the CIA), this book tries extremely hard to tie their story into the one the author really wants to write (the sage of Jane Foster) in ways that are as tenuous now as they were when McCarthy's investigators attempted the same feat.
The first chapter of the book, which opens with an account of Paul Child's State Department Loyalty investigation, recounts his testimony that as regards Jane Foster, he and Julia "had kept up only an intermittent friendship. After the war, he had not laid eyes on Jane again until the spring of 1946, when he happened to run into her on the street in Georgetown and they stopped to have a brief conversation. That was the only contact he had had with her in the United States. He had next seen her in 1952, sometime after he had joined the staff of the embassy in Paris. At that time, he had met her husband, a Russian American named George Zlatovski. Over the next few years the two couples had occasionally met for dinner, though Paul estimated it was not more than ten times. He had last seen her and her husband in the fall of 1954, when they had spend a few hours visiting together." Does this sound like enough of a relationship to hang your whole book on? For Jennet Conant, the answer seems to be yes, but probably only because Julia Child went on to become so famous.
The parts of the book that are interesting are the details that it provides about life in the OSS. The recruitment and training and strategic plans are all quite fascinating, and a provide rare insight into the inner workings of the organization. The political background that it provides on the postwar liberation movements in Southeast Asia was also extremely worthwhile, and especially sickening in light of the mistakes the United States would make there over the course of the quarter century to come. But as a reader, I never got over my feeling of being misled. The narrative thread of this book does not follow the Childs (as there are at least three chapters in which they don't even appear, and probably three more in which they are a marginal presence at best), it follows Jane Foster.
If this were merely a lure to make people read this book, a simple bait-and-switch to draw readers into a great book that might otherwise be overlooked, that would be one thing. But if we look at this as a book about Jane Foster and the OSS, it's still not very good on those terms either.
Jane Foster is interesting because she is an enigma. Was she working as a Russian agent? Was she duped by an American double agent into thinking she was working for the Russians? Was she set up by government forces, and actually innocent of all charges? If you are going to write a book about an enigma, it is a good idea to try to unwrap the layers and solve the riddle. Or to at least shed some light on the pieces of the puzzle. But we don't learn anything about her association with her alleged spymaster Boris Morros until he has come out as a double agent and accused her of being in a communist cell. Even the author of this book seems to have no clear position about Jane's relative level of guilt or innocence, putting in an epilogue of sorts which asks, "When Jane told the DST she had been deceived by Martha Dodd Stern and Boris Morros and deliberately misled into working for the Soviets under the guise of doing odd jobs for the Party, was she telling the truth? Or was it, at least in part, a case of wishful thinking? Surely she was too intelligent and too sharp, not to have seen through them eventually. And when she finally realized she was working for the NKVD, did she allow herself to be further drawn into its scheme rather than incriminating herself and her entire circle of friends?" Excellent questions, but ones that the author perhaps could have endeavored to answer over the course of 300 plus pages.
In addition to all this, Conant has a habit of attributing emotions to characters with no sourcing, and throwing in random exclamations or embellishments that don't belong to any of her subjects. I am sure that she is making these stylistic choices to liven up the writing of historical non-fiction, but that doesn't make it any less dreadful. Chapter Five begins with the words "Thank Buddha, it was the third day of sunshine in a row." Who, exactly, is the speaker here? The paragraph goes on to say that Jane had come to recognize the signs that monsoons were coming, which being stationed Kandy during the rainy season, I am sure that she had. But what is up with the opening statement about sunshine? It's distracting, and it has no point. Similarly, on page 257, we have "Both Julia and Paul felt sick. At one level, they were furious with Jane. If not for her big mouth, messy bohemian lifestyle, and utopian beliefs, none of this would have happened. At the same time, they were enormously fond of her and genuinely feared for her future." How does the author purport to know the levels of their feelings at this time? If she had a quote from a letter or an interview or any kind of primary source documentation, why not give that to the reader? And where does this big mouth bohemian nonsense come into it? If Conant is so so clairvoyant as to be able to read into the emotions of Julia and Paul (which, make no mistake, she presents as their actual emotions - as opposed to saying 'they may well have felt...'), it is a shame that she did not use her powers to get us any closer to the truth of Jane Foster's case.
Although Paul and Julia Child both worked for the OSS (which was the WWII precursor of the CIA), this book tries extremely hard to tie their story into the one the author really wants to write (the sage of Jane Foster) in ways that are as tenuous now as they were when McCarthy's investigators attempted the same feat.
The first chapter of the book, which opens with an account of Paul Child's State Department Loyalty investigation, recounts his testimony that as regards Jane Foster, he and Julia "had kept up only an intermittent friendship. After the war, he had not laid eyes on Jane again until the spring of 1946, when he happened to run into her on the street in Georgetown and they stopped to have a brief conversation. That was the only contact he had had with her in the United States. He had next seen her in 1952, sometime after he had joined the staff of the embassy in Paris. At that time, he had met her husband, a Russian American named George Zlatovski. Over the next few years the two couples had occasionally met for dinner, though Paul estimated it was not more than ten times. He had last seen her and her husband in the fall of 1954, when they had spend a few hours visiting together." Does this sound like enough of a relationship to hang your whole book on? For Jennet Conant, the answer seems to be yes, but probably only because Julia Child went on to become so famous.
The parts of the book that are interesting are the details that it provides about life in the OSS. The recruitment and training and strategic plans are all quite fascinating, and a provide rare insight into the inner workings of the organization. The political background that it provides on the postwar liberation movements in Southeast Asia was also extremely worthwhile, and especially sickening in light of the mistakes the United States would make there over the course of the quarter century to come. But as a reader, I never got over my feeling of being misled. The narrative thread of this book does not follow the Childs (as there are at least three chapters in which they don't even appear, and probably three more in which they are a marginal presence at best), it follows Jane Foster.
If this were merely a lure to make people read this book, a simple bait-and-switch to draw readers into a great book that might otherwise be overlooked, that would be one thing. But if we look at this as a book about Jane Foster and the OSS, it's still not very good on those terms either.
Jane Foster is interesting because she is an enigma. Was she working as a Russian agent? Was she duped by an American double agent into thinking she was working for the Russians? Was she set up by government forces, and actually innocent of all charges? If you are going to write a book about an enigma, it is a good idea to try to unwrap the layers and solve the riddle. Or to at least shed some light on the pieces of the puzzle. But we don't learn anything about her association with her alleged spymaster Boris Morros until he has come out as a double agent and accused her of being in a communist cell. Even the author of this book seems to have no clear position about Jane's relative level of guilt or innocence, putting in an epilogue of sorts which asks, "When Jane told the DST she had been deceived by Martha Dodd Stern and Boris Morros and deliberately misled into working for the Soviets under the guise of doing odd jobs for the Party, was she telling the truth? Or was it, at least in part, a case of wishful thinking? Surely she was too intelligent and too sharp, not to have seen through them eventually. And when she finally realized she was working for the NKVD, did she allow herself to be further drawn into its scheme rather than incriminating herself and her entire circle of friends?" Excellent questions, but ones that the author perhaps could have endeavored to answer over the course of 300 plus pages.
In addition to all this, Conant has a habit of attributing emotions to characters with no sourcing, and throwing in random exclamations or embellishments that don't belong to any of her subjects. I am sure that she is making these stylistic choices to liven up the writing of historical non-fiction, but that doesn't make it any less dreadful. Chapter Five begins with the words "Thank Buddha, it was the third day of sunshine in a row." Who, exactly, is the speaker here? The paragraph goes on to say that Jane had come to recognize the signs that monsoons were coming, which being stationed Kandy during the rainy season, I am sure that she had. But what is up with the opening statement about sunshine? It's distracting, and it has no point. Similarly, on page 257, we have "Both Julia and Paul felt sick. At one level, they were furious with Jane. If not for her big mouth, messy bohemian lifestyle, and utopian beliefs, none of this would have happened. At the same time, they were enormously fond of her and genuinely feared for her future." How does the author purport to know the levels of their feelings at this time? If she had a quote from a letter or an interview or any kind of primary source documentation, why not give that to the reader? And where does this big mouth bohemian nonsense come into it? If Conant is so so clairvoyant as to be able to read into the emotions of Julia and Paul (which, make no mistake, she presents as their actual emotions - as opposed to saying 'they may well have felt...'), it is a shame that she did not use her powers to get us any closer to the truth of Jane Foster's case.
December 1, 2011
This book isn't very much about either Julia or Paul Child, it's about Jane Foster, a friend of theirs from their days in the Office of Strategic Services during World War II. Foster was implicated in a rather amateurish Soviet spy ring after the war, persecuted by the U.S. State Department and F.B.I., and forced to live in France to avoid extradition and arrest. Whether or not she was a Communist, whether or not she knew she was supplying information to the U.S.S.R., is the mystery which drives this book and which, at the end, is hardly clarified. What is clear is that agencies of the government of the U.S.A. believed she was a spy and that at least one person claiming to have been a spy knew her and implicated her. Whatever the case, neither she nor her accuser were very important, her story deserving at best a footnote in any history of Cold War espionage or the McCarthy era persecutions.
Julia and Paul Child come into the story primarily to sell the book. The only interesting thing told about them is that Paul was himself investigated, probably because he knew Jane Foster. Beyond that nothing told about their lives is very interesting. Their relations with all the spies and/or supposed spies were not very close after the war's end.
I suppose a real biography could be written about the Childs, but this certainly isn't it.
Julia and Paul Child come into the story primarily to sell the book. The only interesting thing told about them is that Paul was himself investigated, probably because he knew Jane Foster. Beyond that nothing told about their lives is very interesting. Their relations with all the spies and/or supposed spies were not very close after the war's end.
I suppose a real biography could be written about the Childs, but this certainly isn't it.
March 28, 2011
This is not really a book about Paul and Julia Child, although it provides a look at life in the OSS and some aspects of World War II. This is a mildly interesting book about a woman named Jane Foster who worked for the OSS in Asia during World War II and was suspected of being a spy for the Soviet Union during the 1950s "McCarthy era," when the House Unamerican Activities Committee (HUAC) was searching for Communist spies and sympathizers under every rock, especially in U.S. government agencies like the (by then, former) OSS. The book begins with an account of Paul Child's call back from Paris to Washington, D.C. to be questioned about his loyalty to the United States and about his relationship to Jane Foster during the war. Then the book goes on to tell Jane Foster's story. She was acquainted with Julia (then Julia McWilliams)and was good friends with Paul during their WWII OSS assignments, and some of the information about her during this time and later was taken from Paul Child's letters to his brother, Charles, which were daily diary entries in many respects. About halfway through the book the author includes a chapter about Paul and Julia's developing friendship at the end of the war, when they were both stationed in China. Then the war ends, with only minimal discussion of the "adventures" of the Childs during their service in the OSS (perhaps, in part, because Julia was so properly discreet about her secret activities that there is no record of them).
After the war, as the author briefly recounts, Paul and Julia decided to see if they could be suited for marriage, and after they marry, they are stationed in France by Paul's employer, the U.S. Information Service. Most of the information about their life in Paris is appropriately brief, as it is best told in Julia Child's excellent autobiography, My Life in France. Another good and entertaining source of information about the Childs during and after their sojourn in Paris is the movie, Julie and Julia. Readers will learn far more about the Childs from those sources, which are much more informative and entertaining, than from this book. Meanwhile Conant (the author of this book) goes back to Jane Foster's life in Paris, where she and her husband occasionally socialized with the Childs, and Jane's trouble with the U.S. Justice Department, which indicted but was unable to convict her for being a Soviet spy. The characters' later lives are summarized in an epilogue.
Again, this is not a book about Paul and Julia Child's adventures in the OSS, as the cover suggests--their service is over halfway through the book, and their appearances throughout the book are tangential and in the nature of "cameo appearances" in the life of the real subject of the history, Jane Foster, a somewhat unsympathetic person whose story probably would not sell many books. Furthermore, Paul Child is not a particularly sympathetic character during his bachelor years, as reported in his letters to Charles Child. Hence the exploitation of Jane's relationship to Paul and Julia Child and of their mature, delightful relationship during their marriage, as known best from other sources. Some purchasers of the book will undoubtedly feel "used" by this marketing tactic.
After the war, as the author briefly recounts, Paul and Julia decided to see if they could be suited for marriage, and after they marry, they are stationed in France by Paul's employer, the U.S. Information Service. Most of the information about their life in Paris is appropriately brief, as it is best told in Julia Child's excellent autobiography, My Life in France. Another good and entertaining source of information about the Childs during and after their sojourn in Paris is the movie, Julie and Julia. Readers will learn far more about the Childs from those sources, which are much more informative and entertaining, than from this book. Meanwhile Conant (the author of this book) goes back to Jane Foster's life in Paris, where she and her husband occasionally socialized with the Childs, and Jane's trouble with the U.S. Justice Department, which indicted but was unable to convict her for being a Soviet spy. The characters' later lives are summarized in an epilogue.
Again, this is not a book about Paul and Julia Child's adventures in the OSS, as the cover suggests--their service is over halfway through the book, and their appearances throughout the book are tangential and in the nature of "cameo appearances" in the life of the real subject of the history, Jane Foster, a somewhat unsympathetic person whose story probably would not sell many books. Furthermore, Paul Child is not a particularly sympathetic character during his bachelor years, as reported in his letters to Charles Child. Hence the exploitation of Jane's relationship to Paul and Julia Child and of their mature, delightful relationship during their marriage, as known best from other sources. Some purchasers of the book will undoubtedly feel "used" by this marketing tactic.
July 21, 2011
This book was unsatisfying in so many ways, I'm not sure where to begin. Most importantly, the book is about Jane Foster and the Red Scare. It is not about Paul and Julia Child nor about service in the OSS. Erase the Childs, tighten the research, tone down the "author presence" and it might be a decent book. Otherwise, it illustrates how to write pages and pages about someone's wartime service in a sensitive position without discussing much of any relevance. As for the author's claim to have poured through newly declassified documents, those didn't relate to the Childs or anyone's OSS service. They related to the seizure of Jane Foster's passport and later allegations of espionage. According to the endnotes, the OSS chapters were primarily based on Elizabeth McDonald's memoir, author interviews with Elizabeth McDonald, Jane Foster's memoir and papers from the Paul Child collection. The author spent a fair portion of the Epilogue questioning the veracity of Jane Foster's memoir, because it was written late in life in reaction to her indictment as an alleged spy and because it was edited after her death by her husband (who was included in the same indictment).
Bottom line: Stay away. Maybe read Elizabeth McDonald's wartime memoir and her later writings about women in espionage instead.
PS. Cooper: given your interest in this one, I wrote my status updates with more detail than usual so you have a better picture of how the book develops.
Bottom line: Stay away. Maybe read Elizabeth McDonald's wartime memoir and her later writings about women in espionage instead.
PS. Cooper: given your interest in this one, I wrote my status updates with more detail than usual so you have a better picture of how the book develops.
June 9, 2011
The title is somewhat misleading as for the majority of the book, Julia and Paul make only cameo appearances. Most of the book is taken up with Jane Foster who served with both Childs in the OSS during WWII and then was hounded in the 50's by McCarthy and his cronies. If you've read "My Like in France" by Julia, you've already read Julia and Paul's story. That all being said, I still enjoyed this one; the war in China gets short-shrift in most histories of WWII (I can only think that's a hang-over from McCarthyism and seeing a Commie around every corner), but this book puts a face on America's efforts in SE Asia and the mistakes made during the 40's and early 50's that lead directly to our involvement in Viet Nam. And we all know how that turned out.
March 20, 2012
It really is a pet peeve of mine when a book does not match its title. (I am aware that this is not always the fault of the author, and that the author has limited if any control over the cover, so I am not laying this at the feet of the author. Editors and publishers, please take note!) This book definitely falls into that category.
The book really touches on Julia only in passing- its main focus is on the OSS in Southeast Asia, a handful of OSS agents and their lives during and after the war, particularly Jane Foster, who is subsequently targeted as an alleged Communist spy for the Soviets during Joe McCarthy's witch hunt. The charge seems dubious, but despite having not laid out very strong evidence, the author writes in the end as if convinced Foster was a spy- this despite having acknowledged that all sources she draws on (excepting the Childs, who seemed frankly bemused by the idea that someone as disorganized and directionless as Foster could be a spy) had motive to present biased accounts. I did like the insight into the war in southeast Asia and post-war American policy in the region, both topics I freely admit I am stunningly underinformed about. It's a little horrifying that people who knew what they were talking about were saying in 1945 that we had no business in Vietnam, yet we got involved anyway.
Short version: I would probably still have read the book without the hook about Julia Child, and been less frustrated by the absence of Julia for much of it. It's a decent book without the celebrity cachet- shame it isn't being presented as such.
The book really touches on Julia only in passing- its main focus is on the OSS in Southeast Asia, a handful of OSS agents and their lives during and after the war, particularly Jane Foster, who is subsequently targeted as an alleged Communist spy for the Soviets during Joe McCarthy's witch hunt. The charge seems dubious, but despite having not laid out very strong evidence, the author writes in the end as if convinced Foster was a spy- this despite having acknowledged that all sources she draws on (excepting the Childs, who seemed frankly bemused by the idea that someone as disorganized and directionless as Foster could be a spy) had motive to present biased accounts. I did like the insight into the war in southeast Asia and post-war American policy in the region, both topics I freely admit I am stunningly underinformed about. It's a little horrifying that people who knew what they were talking about were saying in 1945 that we had no business in Vietnam, yet we got involved anyway.
Short version: I would probably still have read the book without the hook about Julia Child, and been less frustrated by the absence of Julia for much of it. It's a decent book without the celebrity cachet- shame it isn't being presented as such.
December 12, 2012
I was greatly disappointed in this book. It was
hardly about Julia Child at all. The narrative was unfocused, mainly about two women with interesting romantic lives who were members of the OSS with some post-war politics, the
evils of McCarthy and a bit about the Childs thrown in.
hardly about Julia Child at all. The narrative was unfocused, mainly about two women with interesting romantic lives who were members of the OSS with some post-war politics, the
evils of McCarthy and a bit about the Childs thrown in.
January 12, 2021
An interesting read. The title is a bit misleading . I'd say 2/3 is about Jane Ford.
February 5, 2025
I liked it but I thought the title was misleading. This was at least as much about an OSS colleague of the Childs, Jane Foster Zlatovski, as it was about the couple, their wartime adventures, and their post-war experiences. Due in part to a youthful flirtation with Communist ideology, Jane was accused of spying for the Soviet Union; while it is unclear whether she was a full-fledged spy or the dupe of the Soviets, it's clear that she at least gave them some information, perhaps unwittingly. Author Conant strikes a clear throughline from the World War II era in the South East Asia Command to the McCarthy trials and red scare of the 1950s. It's clear that she sees Jane as a potential victim and her case as an instance of "what could have been" if Paul Child (and possibly the irrepressible Julia, who always voiced her opinions and stood up for her ideals) had been accused as well. People in their circle - i.e. educated intellectuals - fell victim to hysteria and unsubstantiated and often erroneous charges.
The book paints a tender picture of the blossoming relationship between Julia and Paul and is particularly charming when it relates their later life, after Julia became a celebrity. As a history fan, I really appreciated the detail about the war in places like Ceylon and China, because Americans tend to be educated about WWII in Europe and in the Pacific skies, but somewhat less educated about developments in far-flung regions where the OSS and the Allies had outposts. I appreciate all that I learned and I went down several "rabbit holes" in search of more information (I'm planning to eventually read the Ian Toll trilogy about the Pacific in WWII). But while I liked what was shared, it wasn't always clear how it connected, and it felt like the author was trying to tell two stories without tying them together as tightly as she could. I still would like to read her book about author Roald Dahl's WWII exploits, though - The Irregulars: Roald Dahl and the British Spy Ring in Wartime Washington. 3 1/2 stars.
The book paints a tender picture of the blossoming relationship between Julia and Paul and is particularly charming when it relates their later life, after Julia became a celebrity. As a history fan, I really appreciated the detail about the war in places like Ceylon and China, because Americans tend to be educated about WWII in Europe and in the Pacific skies, but somewhat less educated about developments in far-flung regions where the OSS and the Allies had outposts. I appreciate all that I learned and I went down several "rabbit holes" in search of more information (I'm planning to eventually read the Ian Toll trilogy about the Pacific in WWII). But while I liked what was shared, it wasn't always clear how it connected, and it felt like the author was trying to tell two stories without tying them together as tightly as she could. I still would like to read her book about author Roald Dahl's WWII exploits, though - The Irregulars: Roald Dahl and the British Spy Ring in Wartime Washington. 3 1/2 stars.
May 31, 2023
I’m tired of publishers giving books misleading titles. I’m tired of picking up a book that isn’t about what the title promises. I don’t know how this book came to be, but it has all the earmarks of a book originally written as a biography of Jane Foster that, I’m guessing, publishers decided wouldn’t sell unless a thin layer of info about Julia and Paul Child was added. At best, it is wishful thinking (“they’ll start reading it and love to learn about this other person”). At worst, it shows disdain and a lack of respect for readers (“heh heh, they’ll buy it and won’t know till they read it.”) I used to give authors the benefit of the doubt but it happens so regularly now that it impacts my experience of the book. I wasn’t delighted to discover that this book is essentially the story of Jane Foster. I was angry that I’d picked up a book that I thought (silly me) would be about Jane and Paul Child and their time in the OSS. Please, please, authors and publishers, stop doing this.
April 4, 2019
DNF before ch. 4, at somewhere b/w 60 - 70 pages. The 1st ch. was good, but then it got really dull. A lot of telling & not showing about the OSS that seemed like it was all meant to convey some crazy, whack-a-doodle quality about the organization & the tale.....but it was just inconsistent, disjointed, & bloody boring. There might be a story in there somewhere that someone could pull out, but this text was not it. I have to suggest skipping this one.
July 23, 2022
Fascinating book. Well-written. Reads more like a novel than non-fiction. Such an interesting perspective on Julia and Paul Child and those they worked with while in the OSS. The McCarthy years were a terrible time in US history, and this book vividly portrays how it harmed and ruined lives.
May 11, 2022
This book is really two different stories and a bit misrepresented by it's dust jacket. The first story tells of OSS and US State Department doings in World War II and is informative and entertaining. It plays up on the popularity of Julia Child, but honestly she and her husband Paul are just some of the many players in the saga. The second story is a the McCarthy-era hunt for Communists sympathizers and spies in the decades following the war, and is tedious, repetitive, and for me, not that enjoyable. The Childs, who dominate the tagline and the book cover, are barely mentioned in this second half as they only seem to matter when they correspond or react to what happens with indicted-for-espionage Jane Foster and some other accused acquaintances. There is a cursory outline of Julia and Paul's comings and goings, and they are included in the afterword with several other characters. So, five stars for the first half of the book and two for the second half. As a side note, I watched the HBO series Julia while reading this book and for the few parts of the book that talked about the Childs, it was nice to see them represented on the screen in a way that meshed with how the characters are portrayed in the book.
February 17, 2018
As most of the reviewers have said, the title is misleading. There is a lot about Paul and Julia Child in the book but there is also a lot about the OSS and its founding and its operation and personalities in it.
But a large part of the book is focused on one OSS operative named Jane Foster who worked in the same group and locations as Paul and Julia. She did her job very well and if the US government had listened to her reports and others from the OSS, Vietnam and other problems in Asia might not have happened or been lessened.
Apparently part of the problem was the European countries wanting to reestablish their empires and local people wanting freedom. FDR was pushing for freedom for a lot of these countries but the book implies that Truman folded to European interests. Partly because of fears of communism.
The book spends a good bit of time going into the trials and tribulations of the OSS and other people after the war because of Joseph McCarthy's redbaiting. McCarthy hated Dan Donovan, the head of the OSS and many good people's careers were ruined by McCarthy and his henchmen. Paul and Julia had a run in with one of McCarthy's henchmen, Roy Cohn. If the name sounds familiar, after McCarthy, he became a bulldog of a lawyer and often represented the mob and also Donald Trump.
A lot of the last part of the book involves McCarthy's ruthless chase of Jane Foster. Most of the accusations seem totally absurd. However, the book leaves open the possibility that Jane may have given some information to the Russians. But the general feeling seems to be that it is either doubtful or the information was mostly available publicly or was low level stuff of little value. That part seemed to waffle a bit and the author could have been clearer but that may be because no one knows the answer as to what really happened.
I need to read more on McCarthy. What was presented in this book made my blood boil. In trying to protect America supposedly he helped destroy a lot of capabilities in the State Department and OSS/CIA. Kind of like what is going on now.
But a large part of the book is focused on one OSS operative named Jane Foster who worked in the same group and locations as Paul and Julia. She did her job very well and if the US government had listened to her reports and others from the OSS, Vietnam and other problems in Asia might not have happened or been lessened.
Apparently part of the problem was the European countries wanting to reestablish their empires and local people wanting freedom. FDR was pushing for freedom for a lot of these countries but the book implies that Truman folded to European interests. Partly because of fears of communism.
The book spends a good bit of time going into the trials and tribulations of the OSS and other people after the war because of Joseph McCarthy's redbaiting. McCarthy hated Dan Donovan, the head of the OSS and many good people's careers were ruined by McCarthy and his henchmen. Paul and Julia had a run in with one of McCarthy's henchmen, Roy Cohn. If the name sounds familiar, after McCarthy, he became a bulldog of a lawyer and often represented the mob and also Donald Trump.
A lot of the last part of the book involves McCarthy's ruthless chase of Jane Foster. Most of the accusations seem totally absurd. However, the book leaves open the possibility that Jane may have given some information to the Russians. But the general feeling seems to be that it is either doubtful or the information was mostly available publicly or was low level stuff of little value. That part seemed to waffle a bit and the author could have been clearer but that may be because no one knows the answer as to what really happened.
I need to read more on McCarthy. What was presented in this book made my blood boil. In trying to protect America supposedly he helped destroy a lot of capabilities in the State Department and OSS/CIA. Kind of like what is going on now.
July 17, 2011
The sub-title of this book is misleading. The book isn't so much about the Childs as about Jane Foster. So if you are expecting a biograhy of the Childs, you are going to be disappointed.
I knew that the Childs met during WW II, and knew that Julia Child had done some top secret hush-hush work. Conant goes into great detail about OSS operations, focusing mostly on the Foster. There is a reason for this. The book opens with Paul Child being investigated and questioned about possible Communist actitives. This question occurs during the McCarthy area. The reason behind his questioning seems to have been his relationship with Jane Foster. Hence the focus of the book.
There are some details about the Childs (Julia exploding a goose in an oven) and thier courtship, but Conant is far more interested in Foster and the McCarthy witch hunts. While this shift is disappointing, the book is still engrossing, at least to someone who was born long after the era. Conant conveays the sense of being unjustly hunted and the confusion of friends and family. While she is sympathic to Foster, she doesn't seem blinded by it. This focus isn't suprising considering Conant's earlier work about Oppenheimer.
Additionally, if you have read or are planning on reading In the Garden of Beasts: Love, Terror, and an American Family in Hitler's Berlin, you might want to pick this up. Foster knew Martha Dodd Stern, and the Sterns have a cameo.
I knew that the Childs met during WW II, and knew that Julia Child had done some top secret hush-hush work. Conant goes into great detail about OSS operations, focusing mostly on the Foster. There is a reason for this. The book opens with Paul Child being investigated and questioned about possible Communist actitives. This question occurs during the McCarthy area. The reason behind his questioning seems to have been his relationship with Jane Foster. Hence the focus of the book.
There are some details about the Childs (Julia exploding a goose in an oven) and thier courtship, but Conant is far more interested in Foster and the McCarthy witch hunts. While this shift is disappointing, the book is still engrossing, at least to someone who was born long after the era. Conant conveays the sense of being unjustly hunted and the confusion of friends and family. While she is sympathic to Foster, she doesn't seem blinded by it. This focus isn't suprising considering Conant's earlier work about Oppenheimer.
Additionally, if you have read or are planning on reading In the Garden of Beasts: Love, Terror, and an American Family in Hitler's Berlin, you might want to pick this up. Foster knew Martha Dodd Stern, and the Sterns have a cameo.
November 4, 2011
You somehow don't think of PBS French Chef, Julia Child, as being a spy but both her and her husband, Paul, were covert operatives for the OSS (forerunner of the CIA) during World War II.
Written by journalist and best-selling author Jennet Conant, the granddaughter of former high commissioner for West Germany, James B. Conant, under whom they served while in Bonn in the 1950's,the book details their early covert lives in the far east, their unlikely romance, the events which led to Julia's becoming an expert personality in French cooking, their turbulent ensnarement in the McCarthy red spy hunts of the 1950's, and the career destruction suffered under that regime by many of their contemporaries in the OSS, notably their friend, Jane Foster, whose name was splashed all over the media of the time as being part of a Soviet spy ring. It's a fascinating and well-researched book which sheds thoughtful light from a different angle on a dark and disturbed period in American history.
Apart from being a gripping personal story, which it certainly is, the book brings out some interesting sociological and historical points, such as McCarthy being almost directly responsible for the Vietnam war due to his gutting of the foreign service, which effectively rendered the U.S. blind to the events building in southeast Asia, and his help in turning America from the most admired nation at the end of the war to one of the most despised within a few short years due to what were seen as betrayals of emerging independent nations being forced back into colonialism by short-sighted American foreign policy. It's an interesting and enlightening read. - BH.
Written by journalist and best-selling author Jennet Conant, the granddaughter of former high commissioner for West Germany, James B. Conant, under whom they served while in Bonn in the 1950's,the book details their early covert lives in the far east, their unlikely romance, the events which led to Julia's becoming an expert personality in French cooking, their turbulent ensnarement in the McCarthy red spy hunts of the 1950's, and the career destruction suffered under that regime by many of their contemporaries in the OSS, notably their friend, Jane Foster, whose name was splashed all over the media of the time as being part of a Soviet spy ring. It's a fascinating and well-researched book which sheds thoughtful light from a different angle on a dark and disturbed period in American history.
Apart from being a gripping personal story, which it certainly is, the book brings out some interesting sociological and historical points, such as McCarthy being almost directly responsible for the Vietnam war due to his gutting of the foreign service, which effectively rendered the U.S. blind to the events building in southeast Asia, and his help in turning America from the most admired nation at the end of the war to one of the most despised within a few short years due to what were seen as betrayals of emerging independent nations being forced back into colonialism by short-sighted American foreign policy. It's an interesting and enlightening read. - BH.
September 6, 2014
I debated what to rate this book and I ended up giving it two stars. I enjoyed Conant’s writing style and it was an easy, fast read. However, as has been noted by other reviewers, this is not a story about Julia and Paul Child. There are entire chapters that do not even mention Julia and Paul which left me wondering what they were actually doing during most of the war. Basically Conant used the Child’s as a way to introduce Jane Foster. It is like writing an essay for an assignment without actually answering the question but throwing in a lot of background information to make it look like you did a lot of research. If the book had been presented as a story of the OSS in Asia I may have had a different reaction to it. I was also confused by the whole Soviet espionage spy-ring and how Jane and George fit in to it. After giving such detailed descriptions of Jane’s life in the OSS (not Julia’s) all of a sudden we skip forward to Jane being accused of being a Soviet spy after a brief respite in the book where Julia and Paul were actually discussed.
If anything, this book now makes me want to read an actual history on McCarthyism and how it ravaged the US. The book definitely left me with a fear of politicians and press running awry and how innocent people ended up paying for it. The book didn’t really give me any better insight into Julia and Paul that Meryl Streep hadn’t done already in Julie and Julia (which Conant oddly mentions in the Epilogue).
If anything, this book now makes me want to read an actual history on McCarthyism and how it ravaged the US. The book definitely left me with a fear of politicians and press running awry and how innocent people ended up paying for it. The book didn’t really give me any better insight into Julia and Paul that Meryl Streep hadn’t done already in Julie and Julia (which Conant oddly mentions in the Epilogue).
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
June 29, 2012
This is a fascinating book, but I felt it was less about Julia and Paul Child than about their friend and OSS (Office of Strategic Services) colleague, Jane Foster. I think that the author touted the Childs because she knew it would draw readers (like me) in. I have read a lot of books about WWII, but most of them deal with the Holocaust and the war fought in Europe. It was interesting and eye-opening to learn more about the war in Asia and the covert operations, as well as the living conditions, for the people over there. The ways in which they worked, amused themselves and became family reminded me of the TV show MASH--practical jokes, nicknames, drinking, etc.
After the war, Paul Child got caught up in the Red Scare because of his friendship with Jane, who, along with her husband, was eventually accused of being a Soviet spy. The treatment of the people who were suspected of being Communists and/or spies was appalling, not least because many of them sacrificed many years away from home and family to the service of the country during WWII.
I would definitely recommend this book to anyone wanting to learn more about the Asian theater in WWII.
After the war, Paul Child got caught up in the Red Scare because of his friendship with Jane, who, along with her husband, was eventually accused of being a Soviet spy. The treatment of the people who were suspected of being Communists and/or spies was appalling, not least because many of them sacrificed many years away from home and family to the service of the country during WWII.
I would definitely recommend this book to anyone wanting to learn more about the Asian theater in WWII.
October 8, 2014
As all reviews note, this book is not solely focused on the Childs, but more a group biography of OSS personnel in Asia, with Jane Foster as the focal point of the story. After finishing the book there is a feeling of "bait and switch," even though Julia and Paul's work alone (she as filer and he as war room designer) would not have had as much interest if the secret operations agents hadn't provided such a swirling background of intrigue and a web of relationships that affected their post-war lives. It was an interesting and surprisingly quick read that introduces women who lived adventurous lives beyond the traditional roles we have heard women played in WWII--setting up "mental operations" in all media, flying over the Himalayas as they were transferred from one far flung outpost to the other, and, in the case of Julia Child, endlessly cross-indexing the top secret dispatches of the Asian war. So it was worthwhile to learn of their work during the war and what happened in the anti-Communist witch hunts afterwards. It is hard to believe that some of this stuff is true, but the long bibliography in the back shows that most of it came from primary sources.
July 17, 2015
Aside from the misleading title, this book was right up my alley, providing historical context for many things: biographical stories, spies, artists, propaganda, World War 2 in the Pacific, the Conflict between Communism and Nationalism and Colonialism/Imperialism ... And a greater understanding of the roots behind the Red Scare in America.
It also provided a look at at least two visual artists' propaganda work during the WW2. This inspired me to track down more information on propaganda art. Always interested in the use of arts, as an artist.
I wonder if propaganda art is in any art history course?
This book follows a select few people's OSS careers and beyond, primarily the life of Jane Foster, only mentioning Paul and Julia Child as context.
The detail is revealed in a comfortable and very informed tone, allowing the reader to see 'the big picture'. Also leaves the reader plenty of space to make educated guesses for motivations for the Korean war and the Vietnam war.
I loved this book because it answered questions I didn't know I had - and I usually know my questions.
The author has more books. I am going to check them out, for certain.
It also provided a look at at least two visual artists' propaganda work during the WW2. This inspired me to track down more information on propaganda art. Always interested in the use of arts, as an artist.
I wonder if propaganda art is in any art history course?
This book follows a select few people's OSS careers and beyond, primarily the life of Jane Foster, only mentioning Paul and Julia Child as context.
The detail is revealed in a comfortable and very informed tone, allowing the reader to see 'the big picture'. Also leaves the reader plenty of space to make educated guesses for motivations for the Korean war and the Vietnam war.
I loved this book because it answered questions I didn't know I had - and I usually know my questions.
The author has more books. I am going to check them out, for certain.
January 7, 2022
This is an amazing book.
Julia and Paul Child find true, devoted love and "live happily ever after". . .
Jennet Conant laid out many facts about geo-politics in the mid-century modern era which had confused me for decades.
Epilog, p. 327. Censure by fellow Senators came too late to undo much of the blindness inflicted by the drunken activities of Senator Joseph McCarthy.
Despite the actual Cold War threats which kept Boomers ducking and covering for years, i indulge in a question which could imaginatively be implied by the penumbra of the Red Scares chronicled in this book.
¿It is almost as if Senator McCarthy himself was a KGB Soviet operative enlisted to disable the capabilities of the US State Dept., et al.?
(Epilog, last paragraph: "The wrong done by the McCarthy lancers, under McCarthy leadership, was to poke out the eyes and ears of the State Department on Asian Affairs, to blind American foreign policy. And thus flying blind into the murk of Asian politics, American diplomacy carried American honor, resources, and lives into the triple-canopied jungles and green-carpeted hills of Vietnam, where all crashed.")
Julia and Paul Child find true, devoted love and "live happily ever after". . .
Jennet Conant laid out many facts about geo-politics in the mid-century modern era which had confused me for decades.
Epilog, p. 327. Censure by fellow Senators came too late to undo much of the blindness inflicted by the drunken activities of Senator Joseph McCarthy.
Despite the actual Cold War threats which kept Boomers ducking and covering for years, i indulge in a question which could imaginatively be implied by the penumbra of the Red Scares chronicled in this book.
¿It is almost as if Senator McCarthy himself was a KGB Soviet operative enlisted to disable the capabilities of the US State Dept., et al.?
(Epilog, last paragraph: "The wrong done by the McCarthy lancers, under McCarthy leadership, was to poke out the eyes and ears of the State Department on Asian Affairs, to blind American foreign policy. And thus flying blind into the murk of Asian politics, American diplomacy carried American honor, resources, and lives into the triple-canopied jungles and green-carpeted hills of Vietnam, where all crashed.")
June 25, 2011
Jane Foster, later Mrs. George Zlatovski, was an enigma. A daughter of wealth, she had lived in Southeast Asia learning the customs and language. When WW2 began, she willingly joined the OSS (often referred to as the pre-CIA) where she could put her knowledge to good use. Paul Child and Julia McWilliams (the future Julia Child) were also employees of the OSS. They became friends with Jane.
Jane was a woman of intense feelings and little tact. She was fearless in her causes which would later come back to bite her after the war. Think McCarthyism. A truly fascinating woman, living in a fascinating time, this book is more a biography of her than anything else. Julia & Paul Child are merely supporting players.
I felt misled by the book title and cover. I thought I would be reading about the Childs' experiences in the OSS. Perhaps their experiences lacked enough intrigue or the author was just truly excited about recounting Jane's life. Then, I guess it was determined that the Julia Child link would sell more books.
Jane was a woman of intense feelings and little tact. She was fearless in her causes which would later come back to bite her after the war. Think McCarthyism. A truly fascinating woman, living in a fascinating time, this book is more a biography of her than anything else. Julia & Paul Child are merely supporting players.
I felt misled by the book title and cover. I thought I would be reading about the Childs' experiences in the OSS. Perhaps their experiences lacked enough intrigue or the author was just truly excited about recounting Jane's life. Then, I guess it was determined that the Julia Child link would sell more books.
May 8, 2015
People reading this book because they think it is going to be about Julia and Paul Child are going to be somewhat disappointed, and in that sense the book cover and description are somewhat misleading. This is unfortunate, because the story as a whole is quite interesting, highlighting two connected stories: the role of the OSS in Asia in the second world war and the McCarthy anti-Communist hearings from the perspective of a number of people, of whom Julia and Paul Child are only two and not even close to being the most interesting. Indeed, the book does suffer from being a bit slow at times, especially in the beginning, and this is mostly to their story being dragged out as much as possible. The book gets more interesting when the focus is not on them.
As long as you realize this, and are interested in this period in history, I can recommend this book.
As long as you realize this, and are interested in this period in history, I can recommend this book.
November 2, 2016
I read this for one of my book groups and started it without knowing too much about it. The title is somewhat misleading as the book is really more about Paul and Julia Child's colleague, Jane Foster. Their story is told at the beginning and the end of the book, with a more general story about the OSS in Southeast Asia during and after World War II. The premise of the story was interesting, but the details were mind numbing at times. Jennet Conant writes well, and while I am a huge fan of The French Chef (I watched it when I stayed home sick from school as a child), this book became a slog to get to the parts I wanted to read. It will be an interesting discussion, as spies and the Cold War have not been discussed in this reading group. I wish that the book was more about the Childs' work in World War II and less about Jane Foster.
November 28, 2012
I enjoyed this book but it was two three different books. Really more about Paul Child than Julia, and really most about Jane Foster, who is the reason that Child fell under suspicion as a Communist, or indeed, Soviet spy. The story of Jane is a story deserving telling, and well told the by the author. Foster, a smart but not particularly careful beloved only child of California Republican stock, was both brilliant and not inquisitive about politics, even tho' she was key operative inEast Asia for the OSS. It's good to be mindful that sides weren't clear pre-1945, but her resistance to seeing her circle for what it was in the end is the most narcissistic (and alcoholic) denial. Folks coming for a story about Julia and Paul will not be happy.
January 18, 2016
This was a good book, but it was trying to tell too many stories at once. I had the impression that Julia Child and her husband Paul were included because of name recognition. (It is what caught my attention, after all...) The real story is about their friend and former OSS associate Jane Foster.
Despite that, it is a fascinating look at the period immediately after World War II in Southeast Asia when several countries thought this was their chance to become independent countries rather than colonies of European countries. It reveals the quandary of American leaders who wanted to support new democracies but felt an obligation to their allies. It is a good history lesson about a time that is eclipsed by the events of World War II. And, it is a tragic tale of the effects of McCarthyism.
Despite that, it is a fascinating look at the period immediately after World War II in Southeast Asia when several countries thought this was their chance to become independent countries rather than colonies of European countries. It reveals the quandary of American leaders who wanted to support new democracies but felt an obligation to their allies. It is a good history lesson about a time that is eclipsed by the events of World War II. And, it is a tragic tale of the effects of McCarthyism.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 306 reviews