The Most Feared Man In America

DEDICATION

This work is gratefully dedicated to the loved ones in my life, and to the men and women of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

The FBI has long been and remains an integral aspect of American law enforcement. This historical analysis is not meant to criticize the contemporary FBI in any way. In fact, the courage of former-Director James Comey during President Donald Trump’s unsubstantiated allegations of wiretapping against President Barack Obama and related Trump mischief documents the honesty and effectiveness of the Bureau. All Americans should be grateful to and respectful of the FBI and all of its personnel.

I wish to acknowledge three very fine men who have been my best friends since high school, and a recent best friend. Max Ghezzi and I played two-man football in the dead of winter against all challengers, and vanquished them. Although short in stature, Max is as tough and strong as any man, a fact best exemplified by his double knee replacement surgery, a medical condition that few of us could endure. John Kuknyo was my first high school debate partner, and my opponent in one-on-one basketball competition for years. He is an extraordinarily intelligent and unusually good and loyal person, but only an average basketball player. George Chialtas has been closer to me than anyone else for approximately fifty years. He is a gifted artist, an absolutely awesome friend and family member, but only an average whist player. And I’d like to send kudos to my most excellent friend, Adan Garcia. Adan is an Emmy award-winning documentarian, an expert technician at all kinds of media technology, and a man of God. These four men have my eternal gratitude, respect and love.

My brothers and sister deserve to be mentioned in this dedication. My older brother Dennis has been a successful entrepreneur and businessman for all of his adult life. He showed his true colors when he cared for our mother in her declining years. My sister Laura has a strong religious faith and is an intelligent, warm and loving person. She was the primary caregiver for our mother and her husband Mark before their death, and she is now fulfilling a promise to Mark by taking care of his mother until her death. My younger brother Dean is by far the most talented of us, and has been a professional musician since high school. He is a jubilant and loving person who has taken care of his older brothers and sister at times.

I’d like to thank my cousin in law, Terry Livingston, for staying in touch with me over the years. Similarly, my cousin Sandy and her husband Sparky have been and remain an important part of my life. Never play Zit with Sandy. Of course, my beloved aunt, Hunky Doris Kitto-Whipple, merits recognition.

My niece Emily and my nephew Adam are special people with extraordinary skill sets. Emily is a school counselor and a very sweet person. Adam is a former Marine who has been a drone pilot and is now working on a graduate degree in forensic psychology. His beautiful wife Chelsea, and their children Lilly and Jett, round out their family.

Special recognition goes to my cousin Cheryl and her awesome husband Ardie. Cheryl and Ardie are two of the kindest and most loving relatives anyone could have, and I’m grateful that they are in my life. They have two wonderful children, Janet and Judie. I love them all.

I conclude this dedication with a shout-out to two of the most wonderful human beings that God has ever made. They are the temporal center of my life.

My daughter Erica has always been a source of happiness for me and others. She has overcome numerous serious health challenges after spending the first month of her life in neonatal intensive care, then contracting meningitis. She works full-time and is going to school in preparation for a career in elementary and secondary education. She is an excellent basketball player (who has endured two arthroscopic surgeries) but is not quite as good a shot as her Daddy. And she still believes that Barbie Lizard is real. I am so very proud of my bad-ass daughter whom I love very much.

My son Mitchell has been spreading joy ever since he was born. He is a deeply cognitive and sensitive young man, and probably the finest human being I have ever met. And despite the fact that he stands six feet four inches tall, he cannot beat me at basketball. He is also afraid of Spike. I am so very proud of my wonderful son. I love you very much, son.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

All authors actually are indebted to a variety of others in the production of any book. In the case of my book this is especially true. Because of the use of the historical-critical and integrative research methods, and the decision to share much of the verbatim substance of previous works on this subject, this book is particularly dependent upon previous publications on this topic.

This rhetorical biography of J. Edgar Hoover is comprised of three main sections. The first two sections rely extensively on the extant literature concerning Hoover, primarily book-length biographies of the man and histories of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and contemporary periodicals on these subjects. The first section of this work posits and documents a unidimensional, stereotypical caricature-like representation of Hoover and the FBI, which I refer to as the Hoover God Myth. This myth was intentionally created by a long-term FBI public relations campaign. Hoover’s personal life, professional performance and those of the FBI are described in detail, as reported upon by a wide variety of books and periodicals. Virtually every published source on Hoover was extensively quoted in this section, to flesh out and prove the existence of this myth.

The second section of this book parallels the first, except that these three chapters describe the Hoovers Devil Myth. Hoovers personal life, professional performance and that of the FBI are described in detail, based on the extant literature. In the three God Myth chapters and the three Devil Myth chapters I quote liberally and frequently not just from one or two books but from each salient publication. The result of this use of these secondary sources is the transformation of the individual publications into a holistic data base, a unified body of knowledge. This transformation is completed in the third section of the book, which uses declassified FBI memoranda to cast the content contained in the prior publications in an entirely new light based upon the primary source information.

My extensive use of the Hoover literature lies within the boundaries of fair use, because of the transformative nature of this research. In addition, it should be noted that this book does not compete with the previous publications at all, but actually publicizes and promotes them. Therefore publication of this book ought to stimulate a resurgance of sales of these extant publications, and not result in reduced sales of the previous publications.

I have made specific acknowledgments at the end of the chapters with substantial secondary source citation. But these authors deserve as much acknowledgment of their important contributions to the literature on Hoover and the FBI as is possible, so it is appropriate to recognize these authors here because of the significance of their work. This is particularly true for early critics of Hoover and the FBI, like Max Lowenthal, Fred Cook, Hank Messick, and Jay Nash. Bravest and most deserving of praise of all were ex-FBI agents like William W. Turner and William Sullivan.

It is therefore with great gratitude and considerable respect that I acknowledge my considerable reliance on the following authors and their books on J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI: Ackerman, Kenneth D. (2011). Young J. Edgar: Hoover, the Red Scare, and the Assault on Civil Liberties. New York: Perseus; Aryeh, Neier. (1975). Dossier. New York: Stein and Day; Breuer, William B. (1995). J. Edgar Hoover and His G-Men. Westport, Connecticut; Praeger; Collins, Frederick. (1943). The FBI in Peace and War. New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons; Cook, Fred. (1964). The FBI Nobody Knows. New York: MacMillan Co.; Demaris, Ovid. (1975). The Director. New York: Harper’s Magazine Press; De Toledano, Ralph. (1973). J. Edgar Hoover. New Rochelle, New York: Arlington House; Floherty, John T. (1951). Our FBI. Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott and Co.; Garrison, Omar. (1967). Spy Government. New York: Lyle Stuart; Geary, Rick. (2008). J. Edgar Hoover: A Graphic Biography. New York: Wang; Gentry, Curt. (2001). J. Edgar Hoover: The Man and His Secrets. New York: W.W. Norton; Hack, Richard. (2004). Puppetmaster: The Secret Life of J. Edgar Hoover. New York: Phoenix; Halperin, Morton. (1976). The Lawless State. New York: Penguin Books; Jones, Ken. (1957). The FBI in Action. New York: Signet Books; Karpis, Alvin. (1951). The Alvin Karpis Story. New York: Coward, McCann and Georgianna; Lewis, Eugene. (1980). Public Entrepreneurship. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press; Lowenthal, Max. (1950). The Federal Bureau of Investigation. New York: William Sloane Associates; Macy, Christie, and Susan Kaplan. (1980). Documents. New York: Penguin Books; Messick, Hank. (1972). John Edgar Hoover. New York: David C. McKay and Company; Morgan, Richard. (1980). Domestic Intelligence. Austin: University of Texas Press; Nash, Jay R. (1972). Citizen Hoover. Chicago: Markham; Ollestad, Norman. (1967). Inside the FBI. New York: Lyle Stuart; Overstreet, Harry and Bonaro. (1969). The FBI in Our Open Society. New York: W.W. Norton and Company; Powers, Richard Gid. (1987). Secrecy and Power: The Life of J. Edgar Hoover. New York: Free Press; Schott, Joseph. (1975). No Left Turns. New York: Praeger; Sentner, David. (1965). How the FBI Gets Its Man. New York: Avon Books; Sullivan, William. (1979). The Bureau. New York: W.W. Norton and Company; Summers, Anthony. (1993). Official and Confidential: The Secret Life of J. Edgar Hoover. New York: Putnam; Theoharis, Athan. (1978). Spying on Americans. Philadelphia: Temple University Press; Tiger, Edith. (1979). In Re Alger Hiss. New York: Hill and Wang; Turner, William. (1970). Hoover’s FBI. New York: Dell; Ungar, Sanford J. (1975). FBI. Boston: Little, Brown and Co.; Watters, Pat, and Stephen Gillers. (1973). Investigating the FBI. New York: Ballantine Books; Weiner, Tim. (2012). Enemies: A History of the FBI. New York: Random House; Whitehead, Don. (1956). The FBI Story. New York: Random House; Wise, David. (1976). The American Police State. New York: Random House; Wright, Robert O. (1974). Whose FBI? La Salle, Illinois: Open Court Books.

Books on the CIA and intelligence agencies were also of great value: Colby, William. (1978). Honorable Men. New York: Simon and Scheuster; Marchetti, Victor, and John D. Marks. (1974). The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence. New York: Dell Books; Mosley, Leonard. (1978). Dulles. New York: The Dial Press; Power, Thomas. (1979). The Man Who Kept the Secrets. New York: Pocket Books; Wise, David, and Thomas B. Ross. (1964). The Invisible Government. New York: Random House.

Books on myth also deserve acknowledgment in this research on Hoover’s political myths and the FBI: Arnold, Thurman. (1935). The Symbols of Government. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, Inc; Boorstin, Daniel J. (1961). The Image. New York: Harper and Row; Cassirer, Ernst. (1964). Language and Myth. New Haven: Yale University Press; and (1946). The Myth of the State. New Haven: Yale University Press; Duncan, Hugh D. (1962). Communication and Social Order. London: Oxford University Press; Edelman, Murray. (1971). Politics As Symbolic Action. Chicago: Markham Publishing Company, and (1962). The Symbolic Uses of Politics. Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press; Elder, Charles, and Roger W. Cobb. (1983). The Political Uses of Symbols. New York: Longman; Eliade, Mircea. (1963). Myth and Reality. New York: Harper and Row; Frye, Northrop. (1976). Spiritus Mundi. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press; Langer, Suzanne. (1942). Philosophy in a New Key. New York: New American Library; Lasswell, Harold D., and Kaplan, Abraham. (1950). Power and Society. New Haven: Yale University Press; Nimmo, Dan, and Combs, James E. (1980). Subliminal Politics. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc; Postman, Neil. (1967). Language and Reality. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston; Wheelwright, Phillip. (1962). Metaphor and Reality. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press.

In addition, a few scholarly journal articles warrant special recognition: Bennett, W. Lance. (1980, Autumn). Myth, Ritual and Political Control. Journal of Communication; Braden, Waldo. (1975, June). Myths in a Rhetorical Context. Southern Speech Communication Journal; Breen, Myles, and Farrel Corcoran. (1982, June). Myth in the Television Discourse. Communication Monographs; McDonald, Lee. (1969, Fall). Myth, Politics and Political Science. Western Political Quarterly; McGee, Michael. (1975, October). In Search of the People: A Rhetorical Perspective. Quarterly Journal of Speech; Mechling, Elizabeth. (1979, Summer). Patricia Hearst: MYTH AMERICA 1974, 1975, 1976. Western Journal of Speech Communication; Solomon, Martha. (1979). The ‘Positive Women’s’ Journey: A Mythic Analysis of the Rhetoric of STOP-ERA. Quarterly Journal of Speech.

Last but not least, the initial study of Hoover and the FBI should be acknowledged; Alexander, Jack. Director Hoover. The New Yorker. (September and October, 1937).

AUTHOR’S NOTE

This may be a very different book than you are accustomed to reading. For this reason it may be beneficial for your author to share a quartet of things with you in this note to facilitate your comprehension of this book. This note will discuss four factors; 1) dated research, 2) different social values, 3) contradictory content, and 4) substantial use of quotations.

DATED RESEARCH

Initially, it should be borne in mind that this is a study of the past. The focus of this book is the conduct of J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI between 1924 and 1972. Therefore the majority of sources were published during that time frame, and that is necessary because they were then-contemporary publications reporting on the subject of this book.

DIFFERENT SOCIAL VALUES

The America of the 1920s through 1972 was a very different nation then it is today. It was a relatively sexist and racist country. Male pronouns and persons are pervasive in this book, but not many references to women will be encountered. That is because women were excluded from employment with the FBI except for secretarial work for most of the time period covered by this research. The same is true with respect to ethnicity, the FBI was a predominately if not entirely white organization. And there was also religious discrimination, as very few members of the Jewish faith worked for the FBI. Sexual orientation was also a variable, as acceptance of anyone who was not heterosexual was atypical.

This poses a challenge to analysts of events during this time period. If we use a contemporary, modern, more open-minded perspective in describing the past, then we are guilty of using irrelevant standards of judgment. It is ethnocentric and misleading to judge the past by today’s values, because they were not the prevailing standards and judgments of the time and any conclusions will be suboptimal if not completely useless. But on the other hand, it seems to strange and decidedly uncomfortable to describe issues involving homosexuality from the vantage point of the past, where that sexual orientation was criminalized and a LGBT lifestyle was taboo.

The language in quotations referencing Blacks exemplifies the social changes during the recent past in the U.S. Members of this ethnicity were called colored persons, Negroes, and blacks in this book.

CONTRADICTORY CONTENT

This book could be a very confusing one to read, unless the reader is mindful of the unusual nature of research into dichotomous myths. The book you are about to read documents the existence of two opposite myths, a God myth and a Devil myth. It is perhaps noteworthy that it is possible to use secondary sources like histories, biographies and topical studies, add to them some media reports, and document two completely contradictory perceptions of a prominent public personage.

The first unit of this book describes and details a depiction of J. Edgar Hoover as a God-like person and crime-fighter, and the FBI as a virtually perfect investigative agency. A significant amount of documentation will be provided, including statistics, examples, cases and expert opinion, to prove that Hoover was a God-like man.

The second part of the book, however, totally contradicts the first part. Hoover is proven to be a very bad person, who faked being religious, shunned his family when they needed him and was a very bigoted individual. He was a joke as a cop, and the FBI was no better. Again, as with the first unit of the book (the God myth), there is substantial persuasive proof presented to prove the reality of the Hoover Devil myth.

It is perhaps mentally challenging to ponder these radically divergent perspectives on Hoover. Reality is complex and complicated, as are human beings, and we are all partly good and partly bad. The final unit of this book will use Hoover’s hand-written comments on FBI internal documents to provide a third perspective on Hoover and the FBI, a rhetorical one.

SUBSTANTIAL USE OF QUOTATIONS

We live in a world where there exists a marketplace of ideas. Everyone is free to share their opinions and ideas and information, and we are free to peruse them or not. With the advent of the Internet, this has never been more true. But there is a potential problem, dishonesty and prevarication. Simply put, some people put selfish private interest ahead of honesty, integrity and the social responsibility to be truthful. The marketplace of ideas presupposes fidelity of the ideas submitted.

At the time of the writing of this book, public discourse in the United States is in crisis. Vested interests representing political and economic parties typically misrepresent facts and do so to profit from their dishonesty. This is best characterized by the reluctance of a few in America to recognize the reality of global warming, because concerted action against this global danger would negatively affect their private interests. This is only one example of a long-standing partisan tendency to disregard the truth and willfully dissemble if it protects profitability.

Kellyanne Conway, a counselor to American President Donald Trump, has coined a term in an attempt to legitimize partisan untruthfulness—alternate facts. As difficult as it is to believe, Conway and many like her believe that it is acceptable to create and communicate to others an ‘alternative’ to the truth that is somehow meaningful.

Credibility is vital to public discourse, and that includes the authors of books. For that reason, the decision has been made to maximize the use of quotations in this book. Paraphrasing has been a common way for authors to share documentation in their books, but in an era of alternative facts it is difficult to know who can be trusted. The credibility of this book is enhanced by the frequent use of quotes from histories of the FBI and biographies of Hoover.

FOREWORD

Professor Gibson, in his latest book, THE MOST FEARED MAN IN AMERICA: A Rhetorical Perspective on the Political Myths of J. Edgar Hoover takes a literary side road from his usual well-traveled super highway of serial killers. Although this book, like his others, is criminal justice related, it is a totally new arena for Dirk. This author is extremely well known for his numerous books on episodic violence.

The Most Feared Man is a scholarly work with a nod toward true crime lovers. The references are impeccable covering a wide range of Hoover’s career. Even the author’s notes, which are often glanced over by readers, are helpful in sorting out this work about a past American icon; focusing on his humanity.

What is truly amazing in this book is Dirks’ ability to delve deeply into the psychological, behavioral and professional lives of a true enigma of a man. Using the dichotomy of Hoover as God, Hoover as Devil, like two opposing armies, or politicians with extremely different viewpoints, the author gives the reader an unusual and interesting insight into a man who ruled the Federal Bureau of Investigation under eight United States Presidents. The man, who for better or worse, was the face of law enforcement for generations.

In the Hoover as God chapters, the author portrays Hoover as almost saintly, a god-man. Using what can be considered pro-Hoover references, the subject is shown to be hero-for-the-times, administering a smooth running, crime-busting law enforcement organization for all things good. He is a loving family man without a family of his own. He is steeped in what are now known as conservative family values: hard work, kindness toward others, and fairness to subordinates.

In these sections, Mr. Hoover is a standard bearer for what is right. He championed civil rights; opposed the internment of the Japanese-Americans during World War II; treated suspects and arrestees with respect and was an ardent foe of Senator Joseph McCarthy’s anti-Communist pogroms.

Director Hoover formed the FBI into a world class law enforcement entity. This national investigative agency smashed organized crime, thwarted Nazi spies, brought to justice a plethora of bank robbers, with Hoover often investigating crimes and making arrests single-handedly.

If there was a model of a perfect man, it was Hoover.

The God chapters are quickly followed by Hoover as Devil, tarnishing the knight’s armor or dulling the halo of America’s guardian angel. John Edgar Hoover was a man of many flaws; petty, vindictive, and prone to dysfunctional behavior.

Although Hoover attempted to run a tight ship agency, he eschewed personal involvement in cases, never made an arrest, and was disliked by many of those in the bureau. He seemed to be capricious in punishing those supervisors who did not meet his standards, often transferring them to remote office postings. He touted the FBI Academy as the state-of-the-art training facility, when in fact there were local police training facilities far superior. There are strong indicators that the FBI under Hoover was involved in criminal behavior.

By all accounts in the devil chapters, Hoover was a blatant racist, hating anyone who wasn’t a WHITE ANGLO-SAXON PROTESTANT. He abhorred Mexicans, Asians, homosexuals, and liberals among many other groups.

Certainly Professor Gibson made a concerted effort to present a complete picture of J. Edgar Hoover, a daunting task by any standards. Determining which man, God or the Devil is closest to reality lies on the shoulders of the readers. But there can be no doubt, the reader will have more than enough ammunition to assist in deciphering the MOST FEARED MAN IN AMERICA.

Steve Daniels, Chair

Cold Case Review Team

WISCONSIN ASSOCIATION OF HOMICIDE INVESTIGATORS

PREFACE

Abstract: The Introduction to this book provided a context to facilitate reader comprehension of this study of J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI. The purpose of this book was explained. A guiding research question was discussed. This book’s significance was documented. A five-part literature review was provided—information about Hoover and the FBI, information about the FBI public relations campaign, and information about declassified memoranda, myth, and political myth. Finally, this Preface previewed the remainder of the book.

Keywords: Americans for Effective Law Enforcement, Central Intelligence Agency, Committee for Public Justice, Crime Records Division, Devil myth, Federal Bureau of Investigation, four-baggers, God myth, marginalia, memoranda, National Security Agency, political myth, Princeton University, public relations, rhetoric, rhetorical artifacts, rhetorical function, rhetorical perspective, STOP ERA movement, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs.

INTRODUCTION

John Edgar Hoover was one of the most influential actors on the American political stage during his forty-eight year tenure as Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. He was both hated and loved, reviled and respected. Despite his fame or notoriety, or perhaps because of them, this man who served each American President from Calvin Coolidge to Richard Nixon remains somewhat of an enigma [1]. His political prominence notwithstanding, Hoover today is thought of as little more than a stereotypical caricature, a God or a Devil, a unidimensional portrayal. These recollections of the Director usually reveal more about the political philosophy and opinions of the beholder than the conduct of Hoover and the FBI.

If it is important to better understand Hoover, for historical or contemporary reasons, then it is necessary to move beyond the competing Hoover myths. One way to arrive at an optimal understanding of Hoover is to use his own words, his rhetoric. For this reason, the crux of this research into Hoover involves careful appraisal of his communication style, topics and motives.

Traditional rhetorical analyses typically involve criticism of rhetorical artifacts such as speeches, letters, sermons and reports. These symbolic acts are often examined to discern the rhetorical characteristics such as style, evidence, organization, and motives of a rhetor. This information is believed to yield insight, in turn, into the character, personality, attitudes, behavior and interactions of the subject of the study.

Although this study of Hoover is similar to traditional rhetorical analyses in these respects, the rhetorical artifacts employed in this research project differs considerably. Instead of using Hoover’s speeches or articles to draw conclusions, his marginalia, known as four-baggers within the FBI, will serve as the primary resource for this study. These blunt, candid and utterly revealing scrawled messages on internal FBI memoranda, declassified pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, offer students of Hoover and the FBI the opportunity to perceive the unvarnished reality of his personality, in his own words.

In this Introduction, the stage will be set for presentation of this research. The purpose of this study of Hoover will be described, and a solitary research question will be postulated and explained. The significance of this research will be posited and documented. A review of pertinent research will comprise the third main section of this Introduction. Finally, the remainder of this book will be previewed.

PURPOSE OF THIS BOOK

Simply put, the purpose of this research is to shed light on the personality and professional performance of Hoover and the FBI. By doing so, it may be possible to better understand the conduct of the FBI, as well as any high-level decisions made during Hoover’s tenure as FBI Director to which he was privy.

The purpose of this study can readily be appreciated when one considers the research question—What characteristics were typical of Hoover’s rhetoric? An assumption of this study is that there were certain traits consistently displayed through Hoover’s communication. Through observation of these common characteristics, it may be possible to arrive at an enhanced understanding of Hoover and the FBI.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE BOOK

The real significance of this study, in the simplest terms, is that of the subject, Hoover and the FBI. Although a later chapter will detail his frightening power in an ostensibly democratic society based on law, not men, it is in order at this point to offer an initial indication of Hoover’s impact within his immediate realm of influence. A suitable source to testify about Hoover’s character and personality was his faithful Black retainer, honorary agent Sam Noisette, who was once asked about how he got along so well with his boss. It’s easy, Noisette replied. If it’s snowing and blowing outside and the Director comes in and says it’s a beautiful, sunny day, it’s a beautiful, sunny day. That’s all there is to it [2].

Beyond that, the importance of this study lies in several directions. One major contribution of this book about Hoover and the FBI is that, for the first time, the Hoover God and Devil myths are systematically and comprehensively documented. Although most authors who have written about Hoover and the FBI have at least implicitly supported one of the two competing Hoover myths, no one has completely surveyed the Director’s personality and professional performance, and that of the FBI. Certainly, no one has systematically described both mythical Hoovers.

The FBI public relations campaign which created and maintained the Hoover God myth will also be described and evaluated. Thus, this research is also meaningful as a case study in the creation of political myth through modern public relations practices. Judgment will be offered of this campaign with respect to justification, effects and ethics.

Another value of this research involves an already-mentioned concept, more accurate knowledge of Hoover and the FBI. The use of declassified FBI internal memos obviates any need to rely on anecdotal material. Therefore this study can yield insight into Hoover based on his own words and thoughts, not the opinions of others no matter how qualified to offer an opinion. In fact, the use of declassified FBI documents not intended for public release means that Hoover’s unvarnished, gut-level candid self can be studied by researchers, not his verbal behavior as presented by ghost writers and polished by professional communication consultants. This means that the reality of Mr. Hoover, not an intentionally-projected image, can be examined.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Another way to assess the importance of this work is to place this study within the context of related studies. A review of salient literature available on this subject reveals the relative paucity of published scholarship on Hoover and the FBI. Simply put, there is little in the way of serious study of Hoover’s communication prowess or proclivities.

This review of the relevant literature will include five types of salient works. Initially, books about Hoover and the FBI will be examined. Next, published studies of the FBI’s public relations campaign will be reviewed. Then analysis of declassified memos will be considered. Myth will be discussed. The last part of the literature review focuses on political myth.

Books by and About Hoover

Full-length studies of Hoover have appeared in numerous books and periodicals since he ascended to leadership over the Bureau. Although numerous such works are of considerable value, one periodical series and fourteen books are deserving of special recognition in this chronological review of literature.

Alexander’s three-part series on Hoover in The New Yorker in 1937 was the seminal piece on this topic. Hoover’s early years were objectively described in this series. Unfortunately, scores of post-1937 scholars took Alexander’s articles as primary sources and forsook rigorous independent research efforts of their own, resulting in a disturbing homogeneity and substantive similarity among subsequent stories and books on Hoover and the FBI [3].

Seven years later Collins published a decidedly pro-Hoover book, The FBI in Peace and War. This book included a nine-page introduction by Hoover himself, and in general it extolled the virtues of the Director and his Bureau in no uncertain terms. The final chapter, The Director, serves as a nice summary of the main tenets of the Hoover God myth. Throughout this work comments by Hoover are spliced in on a liberal basis amidst thrilling tales of FBI victories against evil-doers [4].

Another seven years passed before the initial criticism of Hoover and the FBI appeared in book form. Lowenthal’s 1950 study of this subject was in fact a relatively objective treatment of this controversial topic and only mildly critical of Hoover and the FBI. Nevertheless, Lowenthal was criticized severely for his realistic criticism of Hoover and the FBI. Lowenthal was specifically and significantly critical of FBI violations of civil liberties and of the FBI public relations campaign [5].

Two-time Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter Don Whitehead’s 1956 book, The FBI Story, was written in part because of Whitehead’s access to FBI files. This book is one-sided in its praise of Hoover and the Bureau, and it includes a foreward by Hoover [6].Whitehead’s errors in fact and judgment may have resulted from advice by his FBI consultants and Bureau research assistance.

Cook’s 1964 critique of Hoover was, in the opinion of some scholars, the catalyst for the substantial criticism of Hoover and the Bureau that emerged in the mid-nineteen sixties. Extreme in tone and often unreliable in fact, this book nevertheless was the opening salvo in the barrage of criticism directed at Hoover and the FBI, and the creation of the Hoover Devil myth [7].

Six years later, ex-FBI agent William Turner wrote Hoover’s FBI. This book was similar to the Cook book in that it was characterized by vehement and vocal criticism of the Director and the Bureau. Facts were exaggerated and sometimes embellished beyond recognition. However, this ‘insider’s account’ of the FBI by a former FBI agent shocked and galvanized many into closer scrutiny of Hoover and the FBI. In fairness to Hoover and the FBI, both Cook and Turner were prone to overstatement, and selective in their editorial decisions [8].

A pair of 1972 books, by Messick and Nash, both purported to unmask Hoover. However, both Messick’s John Edgar Hoover and Nash’s Citizen John Edgar Hoover failed to achieve public credibility and book sales. It was alleged that incomplete analysis and exaggerated interpretation of facts were responsible for the lack of popularity of both books. Nevertheless, they did provide additional insight into Hoover’s character and personality and the performance of the FBI [9].

A 1971 conference on Hoover and the FBI was held at Princeton University under the auspices of the Committee for Public Justice and the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs. This conference produced a 1973 book, Investigating the FBI. Contributors to this book included Yale Law School professors and ex-FBI agents, and the tone and analysis was scholarly and moderately critical of Hoover and the Bureau [10].

A defense of the Director appeared in 1973, De Toledano’s J. Edgar Hoover. This book was very supportive of Hoover and the FBI, although there were a few relatively minor criticisms of both. The liner notes put it well, this book is generally sympathetic but not uncritical of the Director and his Bureau [11].

In 1975 an oral history of Hoover and the FBI was published. The biography by Demaris was an interesting and anecdote-rich account of Hoover’s life. Hundreds of friends, acquaintances, and associates of Hoover offered their recollections of the Director, in a fascinating treatment of this subject. The major drawback of this book is an almost complete lack of organization or structure, reducing the usefulness of this book [12].

Ungar published a lengthy analysis of Hoover and the FBI, a 682-page book in 1975. This book was generally praised and considered as a reasonable and balanced depiction of the FBI. Interestingly, this book seems to deemphasize Hoover and focus more on the Bureau. Like Whitehead, Ungar benefitted greatly from the provision of FBI material and assistance, but unlike Whitehead he seemed to maintain his objectivity a bit better [13].

A 1976 book by Wise devoted a single chapter to Hoover and the FBI. Nevertheless, The American Police State is worthy of our consideration because of the content of that chapter. Wise was a critic of Hoover and this chapter investigated Hoover’s strained relationships with American Presidents, Congress and other federal executive agencies. Considerable attention is paid to the issue of FBI illegality, and Hoover’s personality and personal life are also discussed in some detail in an objective and reasonable manner [14].

Ex-agent William Sullivan was not merely an ex-agent, he was an Assistant Director responsible for one of the basic divisions of the Bureau. His 1979 book sounds like it was written by someone with an axe to grind. However, it is still a valuable resource on Hoover and the Bureau because of the insight provided into both. Especially valuable is the insight into the upper-echelon decisionmaking processes at the FBI and Hoover’s role in and style of management of the Bureau. It is important to note that Sullivan was forced into early retirement by Hoover after a dispute between the two men, which left Sullivan bitter, vindictive and unemployed. Although this book is not very objective in tone or evidence selection, the information contained is worthwhile [15].

Another book about the Bureau should be considered. A 1980 study by Lewis investigated Hoover’s management style. This book focused on public management styles, with two chapters devoted to Hoover’s style as a public entrepreneur. Examined in detail were Hoover’s management tendencies and communication style. In addition, Hoover’s public relations prowess was documented in this objective and well-documented analysis [16].

Most of the Hoover literature was produced between 1940 and 1980, but a second cluster of books appeared between 1987 and 2012. Eight such books will be briefly discussed, beginning with Secrecy and Power: The Life of J. Edgar Hoover, by Powers. This 1987 biography is relatively critical of Hoover [17]. Next was the controversial Official and Confidential: The Secret Life of J. Edgar Hoover. Summers’ 1993 book is a sensationalized expose, featuring the claim that the Mafia possessed photographs of Hoover wearing a dress. Summers contacted the author of this book requesting assistance in 1991, and his questions were very basic and did not reveal much understanding of Hoover and the FBI [18]. Two years later Praeger published J. Edgar Hoover and His G-Men, by William Breuer. This relatively balanced 1995 study focused on Hoover’s professional performance [19].

Gentry’s 2001 critical study of Hoover is an 846-page attack on Hoover and the FBI. This book was the harshest assessment of the Director and his Bureau [20]. Three years later a similar book appeared, Hack’s Puppetmaster: The Secret Life of J. Edgar Hoover. The title conveys something of the content of this ultra-critical study of Hoover. This 2004 book documented Hoover’s political aspects [21].

Two 2008 books on Hoover differed considerably. Geary’s J. Edgar Hoover: A Graphic Biography, is supportive of Hoover and the FBI while appearing in comic book format [22]. On the other hand, Kenneth Ackerman published the most specialized study of Hoover. Young J. Edgar: Hoover and the Red Scare examines