The Fourth Man

by Andrew Boyle

Boyle's portrait of Britain's three most notorious traitors recreates their conversions, activities, and defections to the Soviet Union

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Espionage, Biography, British Literature, Russia

8 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 1979

About the author

Andrew Philip More Boyle was a Scottish journalist and biographer.

Reviews

[Esdaile · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book was easy to read, informative and somehow at the same time unsatisfying. The writer is either unwilling or unable to comprehend the mind set of the Cambridge spies, still less to draw any conclusions or lessons from the saga. Andrew Boyle is a competent journalist but nothing more. What he misses is what I would call the particularly British gullability towards anything which has established itself in the public eye as "Establishment". British poltiicians and people have always stood in awe of anyone whose profile is resolutely Establishment and cannot or will not believe ill of members of said establishment in the face of the most persuasive possible evidence. Also very British in my opinion, is a lack of interest in the psychology of the enemy, which makes it easy for spies to operate or any other kind of subversive activity in any given situation. For hundreds of thousands if not millions, the Russian revolution, whose true face as reported by the likes of Douglas Reid was ignored, was a new dawn for mankind. Negative reporting on the workers' paradise objectively served the intersts of reaction. Stalin was the prophet of a new humanity. British communists (in contrast to say French or even German ones) were wholly unable to comprehend how anyone could embrace national socialism with the same kind of blind fervour which had overwhelmed them, and for many of the same reasons, in their embrace of historical materialsm. On the one hand, there are those like Boyle, who condemn without understanding and on the other hand there are those whose understanding blinds them to the hypocrisy which these men harboured and the the damage which they caused.

There is no discussion here of the pressing question of what it means to be a traitor. The German language distinguishes, helpfully I think, between "Staatsverräter" (traitor to oen's country) and "Volksverräter" (traitor to one's people). Were "Lord Hawhaw" Ezra Pound, traitors for believing in fascism? Douglad Maclean for believing in communism? At the very least, there is a qualitative difference betweeen the ideological traitor and the mercenary one, for example the director of the "Bundesverfassungsschutz" (Committee for the Defence of the Constitution) Hans-Tiedge, who for years sold secrets to East Germany for a tidy sum of money and appeared to be without ideological conviction of any kind. Such distinctions are beyond Andrew Boyle's grasp.

Perhaps these criticisms are unfair, since Andrew Boyle's book makes no pretense of presuming to be more than a detailed factual account of the careeers of the Cambridge spies. As such this account is successful.

[Robert · Rating 4 out of 5]

Ponderously written but informative. Excellent research.

I don't where someone came up with this version of the book. The one that I read was written by Anthony Boyle and has not yet been entered into the Goodreads database as best I can determine.

The edition of the book I read was published under the title "The Fourth Man."

[Bsldavio · Rating 5 out of 5]

nonfiction

[Steve · Rating 4 out of 5]

I have no idea how I got into this particular genre of books but I suppose it began with James Bond books my mother in law bought me for Christmas. From there I think it was newspaper headlines about yet another spy scandal from the likes of Chapman Pincher, and I do remember keeping up with events in the Christine Keeler/Mandy Rice Davis episode, well I was a paper boy at the time. But I came across this book in a charity shop and it was bedtime reading for quite a while as the story Andrew Boyle told was not only unbelievable but, unfortunately, very true.

The story of Burgess, Philby, Maclean, and Blunt ( to be joined by Cairncross not long after) is now well known even though there are various variations along the way. I took with a big dose of scepticism Kim Philby's My Silent War seeing as it was edited by the then KGB but I dare say there was some truths amongst the fiction. Andrew Boyle's book is as clear and precise as spy stories can be detailing the rise, and eventual fall of our most wrote about traitors. But it also gives an insight of how the KGB were clever enough to nature such talent from our best universities who were also from some of Britain's better families.

Burgess hardly had to conceal his work for the Russian's as no one took him seriously anyway, Philby had a stammer that he often used to pass over awkward questions that were asked of him from time to time. Blunt, Sir Anthony Blunt, how could anyone look on him as a Russian Spy, and lover of Guy Burgess. Director of Courtauld Institute of Art, Surveyor of the Kings Pictures, a Russian talent spotter? Russian Spy? And Donald Maclean, son of a Liberal politician, Sir Donald Maclean, who became a British diplomat based in America with such a high level security clearance that he was allowed in many sensitive places that even American's were not.

The story of this quartet is put together with copious informative background information that has you scratching your head in disbelief at our security services ineptitude at catching them. Along with other books of the same story it really does beggar belief how these privileged men could be so misguided in serving a regime even after that regime had signed a non aggression pact with Hitler who was anathema to their beliefs. A compelling read.

[Peter Burton · Rating 5 out of 5]

An exhaustive account of the Cambridge spies,probably a bit out of date now as more is revealed.Nevertheless well worth the read if you have the time as it is long.It’s easy to read if you have some idea of the story already and provides lots of detail on their background (parents,schools,impressions of friends).To me it shows the dangers of youthful enthusiasm for fashionable causes which can trap people into roles they may later regret,although McLean and Philby remained true to their beliefs.Blunt and Burgess perhaps felt some regret,Burgess for ending up stuck in Russia and Blunt for perhaps the public shame.I was surprised at how the Americans were watching McLean and Philby closely and knew about their activities but somehow the British let them slip through their fingers.The book also reveals the human cost of spying and how difficult it is to live a double life.Was it worthwhile?Communism discredited now ( despite some youthful attention now) and seemingly in decline.Will we ever know the full extent of their spying and the numbers who died from their activities?And how can we tell the world if we do find out?Does anyone care now?