Power in Oliver Stone's Nixon

Words such as decentralized, dispersed and organic pave the way for a thematic understanding of postmodern power. Oliver Stone’s Nixon (1995) is particularly useful in illuminating these major themes in Michel Foucault’s work. Three scenes especially help the viewer form connections to Foucault’s notion of power: Nixon’s conversation with J. Edgar Hoover at the horse races, his discussion with Richard Helms, Director of Central Intelligence and finally his late night visit to the Lincoln Memorial. In addition, the narrative taken in its entirety shows a failed attempt at centralizing power; the fall of Nixon and the collapse of his politics support Foucault’s idea that the natural tendency of power is to be decentralized and dispersed. Reflecting on each scene in turn with an accompanying commentary will elucidate the image of power in the works of Foucault and Stone.

Intensity abounds from the opening shot of scene 12: a fallen horse lies suffering on the dirt of the track. The image foreshadows the outcome of the scene’s race. J. Edgar Hoover, chief of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and Johnny Roselle, a noted mob figure, scrutinize through binoculars every move the horses make. Hoover complains to Roselle that their horse is performing poorly; Roselle asks for his patience and soon thereafter one horse goes down, allowing their pick to sprint to victory. The race is a dramatic allusion to the presidential race that Nixon has come to discuss. When Nixon arrives at the races, the conversation quickly turns to Robert F. Kennedy’s popularity as a presidential candidate. Nixon explains Kennedy’s “rock star” status and suggests that he will “ride his brother’s corpse right into the White House.” Hoover responds with the suggestive comment, “If things remain as they are.” Moments later, Hoover’s colleague suggests they should just “shoot the son of a bitch.” Nixon and Hoover exchange an awkward glance. The point here is not that Stone wants to connect Nixon to RFK’s assassination. Instead he wants to suggest that a particular system of power asserts itself through a collective of actors.



Hoover’s small monologue explains that a power structure is in place that has the ability to protect itself from any threats. Referring to the Kennedy brothers as threats to that system, he makes the following speech:

"I look at it from the point of view that the system can only take so much abuse. It adjusts itself eventually. But there are times, there are savage outbursts…sometimes the system comes very close to cracking. We’ve already had one radical in the White House. I don’t believe it can survive another."

What is implied in Hoover’s speech is that power, here manifested in a political system, has somewhat of an organic awareness of outside threats. It can identify and even prevent these threats when it uses a decentralized method. This is suggested by the presence of different group representatives at the discussion: Nixon as a politician, more specifically a representative of the Republican Party; Hoover representing the FBI; and Roselle representing the mob. Power here manifests itself in the complex and interactive relationship of interests within these groups. Through this collective web, power is able to protect itself from a threatening presence: Robert F. Kennedy.

Later in the scene, Nixon details his involvement in a venture called Track 2, a unit that designed overseas operations in secret. His explanation to Chief of Staff H.R. Haldeman informs the viewer that Track 2 was responsible for assassination attempts on Castro. When Haldeman asks why “if Kennedy was so clean in all of this [why] didn’t he cancel Track 2?” Nixon’s response is enlightening: “Because he didn’t even know about it. The CIA never told him. They just kept it going. Like it had a life of its own, like it was some…kind of a…thing, that doesn’t even know it exists. It just eats people when it doesn’t need them any more.” Within these comments, Nixon presents power as an organic entity that solicits the image of a virus for the viewer. By giving Track 2 a life of its own, Nixon refers to this group in the terms of Foucault’s power, which is necessarily organic. In the context of this scene, the comments imply to the viewer that other government groups are of a similar nature; Nixon had just previously mentioned the omniscience of the FBI and CIA. By discussing these groups as themselves organic, Stone implicitly argues for a type of power that manifests itself in a decentralized presence immanent in the groups yet beyond their control.

In a scene deleted from the theatrical version of the film, Nixon pays a visit to Richard Helms at the Central Intelligence Agency. What follows is perhaps the most intense confrontation of the film. Two aspects of their conversation stand out: first is Helms’ description of Nixon’s foreign involvement during his vice presidency, and second is his recitation of Yeats’ The Second Coming. Early in the scene, Nixon requests that Helms gather all documents that connect Nixon to a string of overseas blunders. Helms then comments on the special operations group that Nixon chaired as Vice President, saying “as you know, that was unique. Not an operation so much as an organic phenomenon. It grew, it changed shape, it developed appetites.” This description is consistent with a theme shared by Stone and Foucault: the organic nature of power structures. The group, though theoretically controlled by Nixon as its chair, simply took on a life of its own beyond his jurisdiction. Such is the nature of many groups considered in the film. In this scene, that idea is complemented by the presence of many flowers in Helms’ office. As they discuss the nature of the special operations group and the CIA, Helms moves through the office examining and considering all the flowers. The implication is that Helms, perhaps the most powerful man in the film, gets his ability from an understanding of the very organic nature of power. His obsession with flowers can be seen as an allusion to his ability to comprehend the manifestations of power as comparable to flowers.



As the scene closes, Helms recites his favorite poem by Yeats. The poem itself, The Second Coming, summarizes some of the themes that occurred in the conversation. His recitation of its opening lines brings together this exploration of the scene: “Turning and turning in the widening gyre / The falcon cannot hear the falconer; Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold…” The opening lines suggest the decentralized nature of power. Perhaps Helms would have done well to speak some of the middle lines as well. Yeats writes that “somewhere in the sands of the desert / a shape with lion body and the head of a man, a gaze blank and pitiless as the sun, is moving its slow thighs.” These lines as well might be applied to this description of power as understood by Helms to be, like flowers, definitively organic in nature.

The final scene to be considered in Nixon is perhaps the most relevant. Opening with a time lapse shot of the Washington Monument, it continues with the President weaving through sleeping protestors to visit the Lincoln Memorial. The screen reads “May 9, 1970 – 4.00 AM.” As he contemplates Lincoln’s figure and his words inscribed on the wall, the protestors awake and begin to crowd around him. The conversation soon turns to the Vietnam War. Nixon defends his desire for “peace with honor” but is soon accused by a young girl of being powerless. Their conversation ensues:

GIRL: You don’t want the war. We don’t want the war. The Vietnamese don’t want the war. So why does it go on?
GIRL: You can’t stop it, can you? Even if you wanted to. Because it’s not you, it’s the system. The system won’t let you stop it.
NIXON: There’s…there’s more at stake here than what you want or what I want.
GIRL: Then what’s the point? What’s the point of being president? You’re powerless.
NIXON: NO. No, I’m not powerless. Because I understand the system, I believe I can, uh…I can control it, maybe not control it totally…but tame it enough to do some good.
GIRL: Sounds like you’re talking about a wild animal.
NIXON: Yeah, maybe I am…[to his aide] Nineteen year old kid. She understood something that has taken me years in politics to understand. The C.I.A., the Mafia, those Wall Street bastards. The beast. Nineteen year old kid. She called it a wild animal.

Several pieces of this conversation stand out as intrinsic to this viewing through a Foucaultean lense. The girl’s characterization of “the system” calls for investigation. What exactly does she mean when she uses this phrase? In this case, it can be assumed that she refers to the complex network of relationships between government, government agencies and even nations. Her choice of the word “system” implies a mechanistic and methodical presence but one that is decidedly not human. The girl believes that this system renders any one man, even the President, “powerless.” Nixon, true to his character, responds to this claim with an emphatic “NO!”



Yet even his attempt at defending his power backfires. He tries to explain his understanding and comprehension of the system but his effort clearly pales in comparison to men depicted in the film as truly powerful, such as Helms. Where such men exhibit a clear vision of a decentralized and organic power, Nixon struggles to explain “the system” even in simple terms. His confusion betrays his ignorance of Foucault’s concept of power, or at least his lack of commitment to it. This lack of vision leads to the downfall of Nixon and his concept of power in the film’s narrative. Commentary on the narrative of Nixon’s political life as a whole will conclude this chapter.

In the film, as in life, Nixon’s political career ends in disaster. His connection to the Watergate break-in led to his resignation on August 9, 1974. Taking Nixon’s life as a narrative, as the film does, can be useful in showing how Stone’s presentation is in line with Foucault’s power. From beginning to end, Nixon is convinced that he needs a powerful office to give credibility to his ideas and work. He admits to his wife in scene 11 that he desires the presidency more than anything else: “Yes, this above all!” As his words to the young girl at the Lincoln Memorial indicate, he considers the Presidency to be a position of great power and control. Indeed, as President his actions are to continue to centralize power to the executive branch and more specifically to a small team of insiders. In scene 21, one of his aides suggests the creation of a White House intelligence agency to spy on other parts of government; acting as “plumbers,” these men would operate in order to prevent leaks to the press. Nixon responds that he “likes the idea” and subsequently arranges for “plumbers.” It is these plumbers who break into the Watergate building. Stone’s presentation of these happenings provide a direct link between Nixon’s desire to appropriate power to one central source and his downfall as a politician. By creating the intelligence agency within the oval office, Nixon wants the ability to spy on and control every part of the government. This would give him personal oversight over areas of government in which he theoretically has no jurisdiction. As fate would have it, this type of power structure was inconsistent with reality. According to Stone’s presentation, and perhaps what could have been Foucault’s viewing of the film, the system corrects itself. Nixon’s efforts at the centralization and appropriation of power must inevitably lead to his destruction. According to Foucault, his power structure that puts control in the hands of one person must necessarily fail.