Character Map

The Four-System Map SYSTEM 1 — MOSCOW: NOVIKOV FAMILY + SCHOOL (Moral awakening under surveillance) This system’s function is: how a mind becomes dangerous before it does anything, and how the State trains everyone to preemptively self-police. Anatoly Novikov — The Moral Engine / Audience Surrogate Story function: Converts ideology into personal consequence. He’s the “moral mathematician” who makes the story intellectually legible and emotionally costly. Pressures: Pressured by Nina (fear-love), Oleg (strategic-love), Soviet Teacher (humiliation), Petr’s Investigator (state scrutiny). Later pressured by Vetrov (moral contamination + operational adrenaline). Enables: Enables Vetrov to keep going by providing witness/meaning. Enables the audience to track the ethics of tradecraft. Mirrors / contrasts: Mirrors Nart (containment + discipline), contrasts Vetrov (needs to be seen vs needs to stay hidden). Thematic job: Truth without protection becomes danger. Nina Novikov — Fear as Love / The Civilian Firewall Story function: Humanizes the cost of truth. She embodies the ordinary person who becomes a collaborator simply by trying to keep life intact. Pressures: Pressured by the State (through interrogation memory, investigations, school apparatus). Enables: Enables the Soviet system by teaching Anatoly “don’t think.” Mirrors / contrasts: Mirrors Madeleine (fear-driven compliance). Contrasts Petr (witness). Thematic job: Safety becomes a religion. Oleg Novikov — Strategic Survival / The Quiet Realist Story function: He’s the “streetwise” Soviet citizen. He knows the rules and teaches the cost-benefit logic of survival. Pressures: Pressured by Petr’s arrest and what it implies for the family. Enables: Enables Anatoly to survive long enough to matter. Mirrors / contrasts: Mirrors Prevost (duty without uniform; discretion as patriotism). Contrasts Nina (fear vs strategy). Thematic job: Love can be a plan. Petr Sokolov — The Ghost / Moral Spark / Failed Martyr Question Story function: The origin of Anatoly’s mind; the story’s ethical haunting. He’s also your “Does sacrifice work?” thesis trigger. Pressures: Pressured by Petr’s Investigator (the machine). Enables: Enables Anatoly intellectually; indirectly enables the entire Farewell chain by creating a boy who can stand near danger without flinching. Mirrors / contrasts: Mirrors Weiss in a perverse way: both believe truth should produce consequence—Petr through witness, Weiss through sabotage. Thematic job: Witness is expensive—and may not “work.” Petr’s Investigator — State Hand / Mechanism of Suspicion Story function: The State’s tactile presence. He turns “concern” into coercion, and civilians into informants. Pressures: Pressures Soviet Teacher, Anatoly, by extension Nina/Oleg via implied threat. Enables: Enables the school humiliation as surveillance. Mirrors / contrasts: Mirrors Marchenko (institutional hunting), but cruder and earlier-stage. Thematic job: The system doesn’t rage; it processes. Soviet Teacher — Social Enforcement / Public Shame Weapon Story function: Shows how the State recruits ordinary people into cruelty through “pedagogy.” Pressures: Pressured by Petr’s Investigator and her own prejudice. Enables: Enables the classroom as a mini-police state; creates Anatoly’s social isolation. Mirrors / contrasts: Mirrors Krivich (petty power), but “respectable.” Thematic job: Humiliation is a policy tool. SYSTEM 2 — MOSCOW: VETROV FAMILY + KGB OFFICE + COUNTRY WITNESSES (Charisma + collapse + collateral) This system’s function is: how a man’s private hunger detonates public history. Vladimir Vetrov — Volatile Catalyst / The Asset Who Requires Witness Story function: Creates the plot, but threatens it. He’s the “engine that leaks fuel.” Pressures: Pressured by Svetlana (withholding admiration), his own ambition, KGB structures, later Marchenko and prison system. Enables: Enables DST and Washington to act. Enables Anatoly to become operational (and morally compromised). Mirrors / contrasts: Contrasts Ferrant (discipline), Nart (containment), Svetlana (control). Thematic job: Greatness without humility becomes self-destruction. Svetlana Vetrov — Control / Status Survival / “Kitty” Parallel Story function: She is the ruthless stabilizer—until she isn’t. She turns marriage into governance. Pressures: Pressured by Vetrov’s decline and the reputational gravity of scandal. Enables: Enables Vetrov’s “public success” early; later enables the story’s aftermath realism (anchor during imprisonment). Mirrors / contrasts: Mirrors Mitterrand (strategic detachment), contrasts Vetrov (needs affection). Thematic job: Dignity as armor—and prison. Vladik Vetrov — Innocent Collateral / Moral Mirror for Anatoly Story function: Human stakes in the Vetrov household; makes Vetrov’s risk unforgivable, not just thrilling. Pressures: Pressured by parental war, class privilege, and looming scandal. Enables: Enables Anatoly’s empathy; creates a “two sons of the system” mirror. Mirrors / contrasts: Mirrors Anatoly (math-brain sons), contrasts in class and safety. Thematic job: Children pay for adult mythologies. Ludmila Ochikina — Scapegoat / Truth Without Status / Maternal Stakes Story function: Shows how the system manufactures a narrative when it needs one. Her destruction is the price of coherence. Pressures: Pressured by Vetrov’s paranoia, KGB need for a clean story, social misogyny. Enables: Enables the investigators to “make sense” of the crime; enables Vetrov’s partial cover story. Mirrors / contrasts: Mirrors Anatoly in one way: truth without protection. Contrasts Svetlana (status). Thematic job: Believability is a liability. Yuri Krivich — Petty Tyranny / Catalyst Witness to Violence Story function: He’s the banal corrupt State residue that becomes accidental collateral—and then used to justify narratives. Pressures: Pressured by irrelevance; addicted to leverage. Enables: Enables the “night-of” escalation; provides the third body and moral ugliness of the scene. Mirrors / contrasts: Mirrors Teacher (small power) and contrasts Marchenko (serious power). Thematic job: Small tyrants are the system’s texture. Galina Rogatin — The Wise Witness / Cultural Root / Quiet Judge Story function: She is the “moral weather report.” When she distrusts someone, the audience believes it. Pressures: Pressured by proximity risk and her own history with imprisonment. Enables: Enables Svetlana’s social world; enables Vetrov’s confessional dumping; preserves secrets. Mirrors / contrasts: Mirrors Oleg (protective discretion), contrasts Vetrov (contempt + narcissism). Thematic job: Endurance as guardianship. Alexei Rogatin — Integrity Mechanic / Quiet Resistance Story function: Shows what incorruptibility looks like under total corruption—without heroics. Pressures: Pressured by servicing powerful men without becoming their tool. Enables: Enables your “country life” grounding; silently measures the moral rot of clients. Mirrors / contrasts: Mirrors Ferrant (discipline), contrasts Krivich (abuse). Thematic job: Decency as craft. SYSTEM 3 — THE FRENCH CHAIN: THOMSON → DST → PRESIDENT (Improvisation becomes state power) This system’s function is: how civilian discretion becomes intelligence history. Lev Barashkov — Ignorant Courier / Fate Lever Story function: The accidental hinge: proves history can pivot on “normal” behavior. Pressures: Pressured by family obligation and Soviet-normalized censorship paranoia. Enables: Enables Vetrov → Prevost reconnection (the spark that starts everything). Mirrors / contrasts: Mirrors Ameil (ordinary person entering history), but with no idea. Thematic job: In a surveillance state, the mundane becomes consequential. Jacques Prevost — Gatekeeper / Discernment Node Story function: He identifies the asset and routes it correctly. He’s the man who knows when not to touch the stove—just point. Pressures: Pressured by business risk, family, career jeopardy, and moral duty. Enables: Enables Nart; enables the entire DST operation to exist. Mirrors / contrasts: Mirrors Oleg (strategic concealment), contrasts Vetrov (emotional leakage). Thematic job: Discretion can be patriotism. Raymond Nart — Containment Architect / Procedural Hero Story function: Turns a tip into an operation, and an operation into history—without glamour. Pressures: Pressured by DST’s limits, legal gray zones, and the case outgrowing him. Enables: Enables the handler chain; enables Mitterrand’s strategic moment. Mirrors / contrasts: Mirrors Marchenko (the hunter) as his Western counterpart—both obsessed with coherence. Thematic job: Competence is a form of legitimacy. Xavier Ameil — Civilian Handler / Improvised Courage Story function: Proves the operation began human, not mythic. He creates early success through naïve boldness. Pressures: Pressured by fear + lack of training + family stakes + no immunity. Enables: Enables initial document flow; sets patterns that later handlers professionalize. Mirrors / contrasts: Mirrors Lev (ordinary), contrasts Ferrant (trained). Thematic job: History recruits the untrained. Claude Ameil — Reluctant Partner / Domestic Stakes Story function: Shows how espionage drafts spouses. Turns “patriotism” into household risk. Pressures: Pressured by fear and moral obligation collision. Enables: Enables the copying workload; anchors Ameil emotionally. Mirrors / contrasts: Mirrors Madeleine (spouse pulled into danger). Thematic job: Courage can be borrowed in a moment. Patrick Ferrant (“Paul”) — Professional Handler / Human Containment Story function: Keeps the asset alive (psychologically and operationally). He’s the calm line between Vetrov and disaster. Pressures: Pressured by Vetrov’s instability, family risk, and protocol vs compassion. Enables: Enables ongoing meetings; enables the tradecraft “upgrade” phase. Mirrors / contrasts: Mirrors Alexei (discipline), contrasts Vetrov (neediness). Thematic job: Routine is survival. Madeleine Ferrant (“Marguerite”) — Fearful Participant / Civilian Exposure Story function: Shows the terror of being near intelligence without training or language—pure vulnerability. Pressures: Pressured by Moscow environment + husband’s work + maternal fear. Enables: Enables the first contact (or crucial contact) that proves the operation’s fragility. Mirrors / contrasts: Mirrors Nina (fear-love) and Claude (spouse recruited). Thematic job: Obedience under fear is still participation. François Mitterrand — State Legitimizer / Strategic Lever Story function: Converts intelligence into geopolitical repositioning; gives political cover to legally gray competence. Pressures: Pressured by socialist optics, alliance skepticism, domestic politics. Enables: Enables DST continuation; enables Reagan alignment; multiplies the dossier’s impact. Mirrors / contrasts: Mirrors Svetlana (control, detachment), contrasts Reagan (rhetorical moral clarity). Thematic job: Power is choosing what to reveal, when. SYSTEM 4 — WASHINGTON: REAGAN + WEISS (Ideology becomes exploitation) This system’s function is: how intelligence becomes action—and action becomes irreversible. Ronald Reagan — Moral Frame / Political Accelerator Story function: Gives the West its narrative clarity and momentum. Turns a dossier into a crusade. Pressures: Pressured by nuclear stakes, public confidence requirements, reliance on advisors. Enables: Enables Weiss’s latitude; enables maximal exploitation of Farewell. Mirrors / contrasts: Contrasts Mitterrand (maneuver vs act). Thematic job: Certainty moves history faster than nuance. Gus Weiss — Technical Weaponizer / Consequence Engineer Story function: Turns secrets into sabotage; makes the dossier materially deadly to the USSR. Pressures: Pressured by being ignored previously; intoxicated by being believed now. Enables: Enables escalation without war; raises ethical ambiguity for audience. Mirrors / contrasts: Mirrors Marchenko (obsession with coherence), but on opposite moral axis. Contrasts Petr (witness vs weaponization). Thematic job: Victory can cost innocence. THE SOVIET “CATCH-UP” MACHINE: PRISON + INVESTIGATORS (The system eventually closes the loop) This system’s function is: no matter how chaotic the catalyst is, institutions digest chaos. Yuri Marchenko — The Patient Hunter / Narrative Restorer Story function: He’s the slow inevitability. He is how the Soviet system “solves” Vetrov. Pressures: Pressured by anomalies; can’t tolerate unresolved. Enables: Enables the reveal/collapse; provides the feeling of “the walls are closing.” Mirrors / contrasts: Mirrors Nart (containment obsession) but for the State. Thematic job: A system survives by making stories make sense. Valery Rechenski — Loyalist Mirror / Human Pressure Tool Story function: The “reasonable KGB man” used as a soft weapon. He pressures Vetrov through shared identity. Pressures: Pressured by his own precarious standing and need to remain useful. Enables: Enables the prison psychological grind; lets the KGB probe without overt torture. Mirrors / contrasts: Contrasts Vetrov: what Vetrov could’ve been if grievance didn’t rule him. Thematic job: Loyalty can be a cage you decorate. Cross-System Relationship Wiring (the “who touches whom” backbone) The Asset Chain (material flow) Vetrov → Ameil/Claude (early copy risk) → Nart (containment) → Ferrant/Madeleine (professional handling) → Mitterrand (state cover) → Reagan → Weiss (weaponization) The Witness Chain (psychological survival) Petr → Anatoly → Vetrov (needs witness) → Ferrant (manages witness safely) And the counter-witness: Galina/Alexei (quiet observers) → Svetlana (control witness) → Vladik (child witness) The Scapegoat Chain (narrative control) Vetrov’s violence → Ludmila blamed → Marchenko reconstructs → State coherence restored Krivich’s death becomes “moral permission structure” for public to dismiss complexity. If you want one single “map sentence” per quadrant (useful for outlining) Moscow/Novikov: “Truth is birthed inside a family that can’t afford it.” Moscow/Vetrov: “A man tries to become historic and instead becomes monstrous.” France: “Ordinary competence becomes extraordinary leverage.” Washington: “Certainty turns leverage into irreversible consequence.” Soviet catch-up: “The system eventually digests even chaos.”

Themes

Vetrov vs Anatoly Anatoly is everything Vetrov is not: Patient where Vetrov is impulsive Ethical where Vetrov is self-justifying Anonymous where Vetrov craves witness Willing to disappear for truth Vetrov mistakes Anatoly’s restraint for naiveté. Anatoly sees Vetrov’s charisma as rot. Their relationship should feel: Electrifying Unequal Inevitable Doomed Anatoly will survive the system. Vetrov will burn inside it ------------------------------------- Ludmila vs Svetlana Svetlana survives because she calculates. Ludmila is ruined because she speaks. Svetlana understands optics. Ludmila understands people. Only one of those protects you. ------------------------------------ Svetlana vs Vladimir (Why This Marriage Is So Powerful) Vladimir believes greatness entitles him to indulgence. Svetlana believes discipline entitles her to survival. They are not opposites—they are incompatible elites. He burns outward. She hardens inward. They both refuse to be small. Only one of them adapts. ------------------------------------- Svetlana vs Anatoly Svetlana would despise Anatoly’s moral absolutism—not because it’s wrong, but because it’s impractical. She would see in him: Intelligence without insulation. Conviction without protection. A boy willing to lose everything for truth. And she would be right to fear that.

Characters and their Objectives/Hidden Motives

Characters: Anatoly Novikov Nina Novikov - Novikov's mother Oleg Novikov - Novikov's father Petr Sokolov - Novikov's "uncle," arrested Soviet dissident Petr's Investigator Soviet Teacher Vladimir Vetrov Svetlana Vetrov Vladik Vetrov Ludmila Ochikina Lev Barashkov Patrick Ferrant ("Paul") Madeleine Farrent ("Marguerite")? Jacques Prevost Raymond Nart Xavier Ameil Galina Rogatin Alexei Rogatin Francois Mitterand Ronald Reagan Yuri Krivich Valery Rechensky (former KGB counter intelligence officer and cellmate of Vetrov) Yuri Marchenko (one of two of Vetrov's investigators) Gus Weiss (nickname by NSC, Dr. Strangeweiss, allusion to Kubrick's Dr. Strangelove) - one of Reagan's national security advisors, most respected by Reagan because of his involvement in Farewell for Reagan. ANATOLY NOVIKOV A 17 year old - 21 year old (from beginning to end of the film) intellectual, bookish, stubborn and deeply serious young man. Very gifted in mathematics and engineering, and was interested in those subjects growing up, but is now completely preoccupied with the loss of his dissident uncle, politics, philosophy, and the meaning of it all. Very frustrated with how his teachers treat him as the son of a commoner (not nomenklatura) and his propaganda-laced schooling, and how no one seems to do anything about this sham of a system. Distracted in school and his parents start to notice it. No interest in girls/anything his classmates are interested in, or anything outside of obsessive and growing hatred of communism and the Soviet regime. He lives in Moscow in a moderate (for common Russians in Moscow) apartment with his mother and father. He has his own room, which is not that common, but he was given this because his parents value his studies and want him to go to a good college. They know he is smart and they are very proud of him. His parents are encouraging and want him to have the space and isolation in their busy, packed apartment building to study. I Want: I want to act without destroying my parents. Philosophy of Concealment: Anatoly hides to act morally. Hiding: - Novikov is anti-communist, and Vetrov is not really. Vetrov thinks there should be reforms but that deep down communism is a good ideal. (he's not bookish, he's more like a common Russian in his take). Novikof learns that Vetrov feels this way and his morally conflicted about working with him (and his self-distructive and immoral ways) but resolves to hide this zeal and underlying motivation and work with him for the greater goal. ^ He hides this by letting Vetrov believe (reading between the lines) that his motivation is also revenge for what the Soviet union did to his "uncle" (which is kind of is, so he's not lying, its just much more academic than that, like this happened to my "uncle" and it is unethical and a system should not do that to those fighting for good). He hides the depth of his anti-communism, not the fact of it. He allows Vetrov to believe their motives align emotionally, when Anatoly’s are systemic and ethical. - His parents (nor anyone else) do not know that Uncle Petr snuck him anti-communist books and he has been reading them for a few years. - He loves his mother, but he resents his mother's talking badly about Petr because he believes that deep down she agrees that the Soviet regime is wrong. Objectives: To understand the system that destroyed his uncle—and help bring it down. To live truthfully in a world built on lies, without destroying his parents. To turn knowledge into consequence. Public Self: A quiet, serious, gifted student. Politically compliant on the surface. “Promising” but distracted. Private Self: A moral absolutist. Sees communism not just as flawed, but illegitimate. Already living intellectually outside the Soviet system. Action They Justify: Working with a morally compromised man (Vetrov). Withholding truth from his parents. Allowing others to misinterpret his motives if it serves a greater ethical end. Weakness: moral impatience. He believes if something is wrong, it should already be stopped. Core irony: Anatoly believes he is the most honest person in the film—yet he survives entirely through concealment. NINA NOVIKOV A symbol for most of the Soviet population. Anatoly's mother. Now a frail and anxious housewife. Deeply proud of Anatoly and reminds him to focus on his studies and not think too much about the world around him (alluding to philosophy, religion or politics), just to study his arithmatic and he will be successful. She reminds him that the State is making great strides in technology and engineering (foreshadows). Sees him as the pride and joy of the family. Was completely aloof of Petr Sokolov's dissidence and giving books to Anatoly. Then after Petr was arrested, she was interrogated asking if she knew about his dissident activities and if she knew of any other dissidents. They treated her, a frail woman, carefully. She was terrorified and did not know anything they asked about. The Soviet investigators let her go, but put the fear of God into her. She now is stepping on egg shells and is very afraid of the police. It is clear that she wants nothing to do with anything anti-Soviet to come into her house. She resents Petr for what he did and lets her husband and son know it. I Want: I want my son to stop looking like a problem. Philosophy of Concealment: Hides to survive. Hiding: - Deep down she does believe the Soviet regime is wrong, but is too weak to override her fear. She overcompensates by voicing shame and lunicy on those against it. She personally justifies her behavior by thinking that it is her duty to her family to protect them and prioritizing that over ideology is correct. - Notices her son is distracted. She attributes this to the family friend's arrest and she then reacts to this by saying she resents Petr for his bad behavior. Objectives: Keep her family intact. Avoid attracting attention—at any moral cost. Preserve the illusion of safety. Public Self: Loyal Soviet mother. Grateful for the State’s “progress.” Dismissive of dissidents. Private Self: Nina doesn’t just fear the State—she fears being responsible for her family’s destruction. If I deny the truth loudly enough, maybe it won’t touch us. Knows the system is wrong. Terrified of being responsible for catastrophe. Feels guilt she cannot articulate. Action They Justify: Shaming Petr. Pressuring Anatoly to disengage from truth. Choosing silence over integrity. Tragedy: Nina believes fear is love. OLEG NOVIKOV Anatoly's father. a self made man, a commoner, blue collar. Deeply proud of Anatoly and encourages him in his studies. Sees him as the pride and joy of the family. Wants him to be a more successful, white-collar man. Childhood friend and neighbor in Moscow of Petr Sokolov. Knew about Petr Sokolov's dissidence, but wanted to keep it from Anatoly and especially ensure that no one suspected the Novikov's of being included in this. Did not know that Sokolov was giving books to Anatoly. When Petr was arrested he was interrogated to asking if she knew about his dissident activities and if she knew of any other dissidents. He held firm and had a good alibi (very careful for what he believed was this inevitable moment from when he learned Petr was a dissident) and was treated decently. He was let go. I Want: I want my son to survive the State. Philosophy of Concealment: Hides strategically Hiding: - He knew about Petr's dissidence, but hid it from his family. Never tells them he knew. - Let Oleg recognize Anatol’s danger before Anatol does. He may not know what his son is doing—but he knows what kind of mind he has. That creates dread. - Petr told him at their last meeting that Petr had some doubts on whether sacrificing himself in all this would actually change anything. This plants the seed of doubt toward any dissidence activities in Oleg's head and affects his later dread toward his son. Objectives: Ensure Anatoly survives and advances. Avoid entanglement that cannot be undone. Maintain plausible deniability. Public Self: Apolitical, hardworking Soviet man. Proud father. Loyal citizen. Private Self: Survival comes before righteousness. His concealment is strategic, not cowardly. He understands how the system works better than Nina. His silence is intentional. Understands the State far better than he admits. Knows Petr may be right—but fears he is ineffective. Recognizes danger before it manifests. Action They Justify: Lying through omission. Allowing injustice to pass unchallenged. Preparing quietly instead of resisting openly. Key tension: Oleg’s love is strategic; Anatoly’s is moral. PETR SOKOLOV A "ghost" character. Oleg's childhood friend and neighbor to the Novikovs. Oleg (and then later his wife and son) and Petr have lived in neighboring apartments for their entire lives. Anatoly calls him "Uncle Petr." Petr snuck Anatoly clandestine anti-Soviet books, like Solzenistyn. Petr was part of the Soviet Dissident movement. He demanded that the Kremlin obey its laws, met in gatherings with other dissidents, was arrested, subjected to a bogus trail, and sent to a labor camp. Before he was arrested, he gave Novikof his copy of The Gulag Archipeligo which is shown in the first scene of the film. ^ Because of this Novikov already had a bit of very (which was helpful when working with Vetrov because Vetrov was very unorthodox in his espionage strategy) amateur, untrained espoinage-like training through is "uncle" who was a Soviet dissident. Told Oleg at their last meeting that he had some doubts on whether sacrificing himself in all this would actually change anything. This plants the seed of doubt toward any dissidence activities in Oleg's head and affects his later dread toward his son. Hiding: - That he delivers anti-communist books to others - Hiding that he delivers anti-communist books to Anatoly from his parents. Objectives: Preserve truth, even if it costs him everything. Bear witness. Leave something behind that survives him. Public Self: “Dangerous dissident.” Enemy of the State. Troublemaker. Private Self: Increasing doubt about whether sacrifice works. Still believes silence is worse. Knows Anatoly may carry what he cannot finish. Action They Justify: Endangering others through association. Giving forbidden knowledge to a boy. Accepting destruction as the price of honesty. His doubt is the inheritance Anatoly must resolve. Petr's Investigator: Serious and professional. A drone of the Soviet party and investigations system. (When speaking to the Soviet teacher, he leans into the prejudice she has that Anatoly, being born of a commoner, is no good and bound for disobedience and failure) Soviet Teacher: It is well known that Petr Sokolov was arrested in Moscow. It is also brought to the teacher's understanding by the investigator on Petr's case early in the morning in the classroom before school starts that Anatoly's family was Petr's longtime neighbor. The investigator wants the teacher to have Novikov state allegiance to the Soviet Union (better phrased) at the front of the class and observe his reaction. If he refuses, to immediately report this. (she did this and does not indicate why, but the class notices that this seems over-the-top and an abnormal amount of humiliation). She is not kind to Anatoly when having him come to the front. Hiding: - She knows Anatoly is Petr's neighbor and doesn't suspect him of being a dissident himself (she doesn't think he's smart enough to do that), but this confirms her feelings about children of "commoners" and that they hang around the wrong folk. She thinks he is destined for failure and disobedience. VLADIK VETROV Vladimir Vetrov's son. Strong in math and engineering. Treated well by the teacher because his father is (publically) a nomenklatura in Soviet Engineering and Technology. Level-headed and earnest. Works hard. Calm and mature. Culturally well-versed. Dresses in designer clothes. Is spoiled and his parents dote on him a lot. Well-liked by the other students, but by no means flounts popularity. Anatoly's classmate, but hadn't talked to Anatoly much before this incident in class. He notices this strange, humilating display at Anatoly's expense and how Anatoly was very obviously conflicted while saying it and was physically pained when saying the words. Tells Anatoly the next day before school that he's sorry he had to go through with that yesterday. (He hides his curiousity at his pushback against the speech he was forced to say, since he doesn't know Anatoly had any connection with Petr, but he brings to the table knowledge of his father's open complaining of the Soviet Union and the KGB, he feels for him) I Want: I want the truth without choosing sides. I want a happy family again. Hiding: - That his father is KBG. (Anatoly does not put two and two together, Vladik being the son of the man he is committing espoinage with, until later) - That he knows all about his father's defecting. - That it pains him deeply that his parents have an estranged marriage and that his father has a mistress. Objectives: Maintain stability in an unstable household. Excel without attracting the wrong kind of attention. Understand what kind of man his father really is. Public Self: Privileged, gifted, composed. Model student. Son of a respected official. Private Self: Knows the system is rotten from the inside. Carries shame he did not earn. Feels complicit by birth. Action They Justify: Remaining silent. Offering private sympathy instead of public defense. Loving his father while knowing what he is. VLADIMIR VETROV A dark-haired, large, strong masculine man. Attractive and confident. An extraverted, brilliant strategist. A proud father, doting on his son endlessly. KGB officer in the PGU (First Directorate, highest rank of the KGB) at the height of his career. Strong in mathematics, engineering, and technology. A very passionate and charismatic man. Enjoys giving generous gifts to his wife, colleagues, and friends. Often operates from inuition and impulse. Begins his adult life as a strong family man, devoted to his wife and son. He takes pride in his work, unable to pull strings for himself (born from a common family) and often frustrated with the Soviet regime's preference toward high-borns. During his career in the KGB, many experiences lead him to deepened frustration (leading to hatred) of the KGB and the desire for revenge (to burn at all down). His passion turns into primal needs. He seeks affection. Wants to be seen as "the brilliant hero" he sees himself as. He is not intellectually or ideologically against communism, but seeks revenge on the institution that he sees ruined his life and cheated him out of promotion, success, the "good life" he saw when he lived in the West as a KGB operative. As he becomes a mole against the KGB, the pressure of his extreme risk and double life lead him to alcoholism, worstening personal relationships, paranoia, and eventually a crazed crime of passion (attempted murder). ***The audience (as it is with the authors of his biography, his family, and friends) should not know exactly why he acts the way he does. One explanation (Mental Illness, not of his own direction): An explanation for his duality, lack of remorse, precieved complete sincerity and generosity but then flip to hatred and manipulation of others is found in criminology as a defense mechanism to shift blame from himself. Alcoholism also exaccerbates these behaviors. And his position as an operative, like an actor, had him play different parts with different personalities to get what he wanted in a way disconnected from morality, which could have (under high pressure and without release or gratitude) given him dual personality syndrome. Exhibited "symbolic behavior," aiming at projecting a good image of oneself. And totalitarian systems make Orwellian double think a way of life, making schitzophrenic disorders more likely. Another explanation (Intentional Plan to Get Away with his mole activities by being charged with a lesser crime) I Want: I want witness—someone to see me as great. Philosophy of Concealment: Hides but also must be seen. Hiding: - He is a mole working with a French handler, giving documents to the West from inside the KGB. Objectives: Existential and often primal - To cause the KGB to "burn." Completely destroy it. Get revenge. - Protect Novikov and his family. - To talk to someone he can trust freely in order to get some relief and help with his stressful, unraveling life To destroy the KGB and be known (at least to someone) as the man who did it To be admired without restraint or consequence To feel alive again the way he did in Paris Public Self: - (Early) A charismatic, enthusiastic, generous man and brilliant, magnetic, devoted Soviet operative. Well-liked by pretty much everyone who knows him. - (Mid) An alcoholic contradictory, gossiping backstabber who says he hates the very friend he said he loved so dearly just the other day, very mercurial, needy, erratic, resentful, indulgent, reckless - (Late) unstable, paranoid, exposed Private Self: - Paranoid, desperate for true connection - Sees himself as the brilliant hero doing whatever it takes to destroy the institution that ruined him and his family Vetrov believes he is a great man trapped in a small world—and that the world deserves whatever he does to escape it. Action They Justify: - Risking his life and his family with his espoinage activities (especially Vladik and Novikov, whom he explicitly tells his operations to) - Spending large sums of money often on gifts and outings - because he loves to live in the moment, enjoy the good life he had in Paris, treat those he loves, and get on people's good sides - Committing treason - because the KGB deserves to suffer and be destroyed for what it did to him - Making the mole operation more risky by insisting that he and his French handler meet in person often rather than use technology to be able to lessen these meetings and therefore lessen risk, justifies because he desires company and free conversation so much - Having multiple mistresses and cheating on Svetlana whom he loves - because she was not giving him the affection he needed and he needed an outlet during work disappointments (lack of awards, promotions etc. that he deserved) - Not reconciling his marriage even though he knows it pains his son, whom he adores, that his parents are estranged - Attempting to murder Ludmila - Talking badly about the villagers at their ibza (viewing them as uncultured, simpletons) while romanticizing the Russian land and country living - because he is cultured and has seen the world Treason → They deserve it. Endangering others → They benefit from my actions. Cheating → I was denied what I earned. Risk escalation → I need relief to function. Violence → She betrayed me. He doesn’t see himself as cruel. He sees himself as owed. Weakness: He is an extravert in a system built for intraverts. Narcissistic hunger for witness. He cannot suffer privately. He cannot act anonymously. He cannot destroy silently. He is impulsive. That’s why: He insists on in-person meetings He confides in Anatoly and his son He overshares operational details He gives lavish gifts He needs mistresses He spirals when admiration disappears Espionage requires invisibility. Vetrov needs to be seen. That’s the tragedy. Notes on Vetrov: Vetrov is not an ideologue and not a patriot and not a nihilist. He does idealize the ideal "Marxism" ideology, but hates what the Soviet regime has become, with its nepotism, greed, and power plays. He is a man who believes—almost religiously—that greatness entitles him to exception. Everything else flows from that. He believes he deserved more. He believes the system robbed him. He believes his brilliance justifies risk, indulgence, betrayal, and cruelty. He believes love should arrive on demand. He believes destruction is justice if he is the one delivering it. This is why he is: Capable of historic bravery and capable of moral grotesquerie And why the audience will never be able to fully absolve or condemn him—which is perfect. Vetrov is right about the evil of the KGB for the wrong reasons. His physicality contrasts with his inner fragility. He looks like a man who should be unshakeable—and knows he isn’t. Vetrov doesn’t hate the idea of communism. He hates that it didn’t crown him king. This allows: His resentment of elitism His disdain for “simple” villagers His nostalgia for Russian land His attraction to Western luxury All at once. He doesn’t want equality. He wants recognition. SVETLANA VETROV Vladimir Vetrov's wife. Athletic, dresses well, blonde, elegant and beautiful. No-nonsense woman. Independent and proves herself to be extremely emotionally strong. Charasmic and knew the best people to befriend in a room. Came from a common family without much money, but saw herself as something "rare and precious." Smart and strategic. Has good taste and class. Cultured in fine art, jewelry, interior design, museum curration, and education. For much of the first few decades of their marriage, she wore the pants in the relationship. She was confident that Vetrov never did anything without consulting her first. She strategized and operated their relationships and meetings in Paris. She was a traveling runner (athlete) for about a decade, good enough to compete in the Eastern Bloc version of the Olympics and traveled abroad for competitions. Earned a large salary from this in her own right (which was abnormal for a Soviet wife) and exploited the opportunity to make money smuggling fine jewelry and art across Eastern bloc boarders from the West or other Eastern bloc countries and reselling them for extremely high returns. Knew about her husband's desire to defect and shared his love for the West, but calculates risk. Not an ideologue and not driven by morality at all, practical and considered with status and what she perceives as dignity, does not want to be associated with dissidence or treason. She has many affairs later in their marriage and cares for Vladimir but will not stay loyal to a husband she sees as "failed" (alcoholic, depressed, unraveled). She considers herself too good for him and will not go so low as to let his affairs bother her or devalue her. In the years Vetrov is in prison, she becomes his anchor and rises to the occation. To her, love is not tied to affection or sex, but practicality and protection. She and Vetrov see love and loyalty differently. At the end she does live with nightmares and regrets. I Want: I want control to hold, no matter what collapses. Philosophy of Concealment: Hides to maintain dignity. Hiding: That much of their material success came not from Vladimir’s status, but from her own hush-hush, frowned upon ingenuity (smuggling, resale, connections) That she quietly assessed Vladimir’s decline long before anyone else—and emotionally detached early. That she views loyalty as situational, not moral. That her later “steadfastness” during his imprisonment is not forgiveness, but pity, duty and self-respect. That she does feel guilt eventually for how she acted toward him, even though she justifies a lot of her actions because of his decline. Questioned whether she could have done anything to avoid their family's tragic end. That she believes she outgrew him. Objectives: Preserve dignity and status regardless of circumstances. Maintain control—over image, household, and outcomes. Avoid ideological entanglement that could destroy her or her son. Ensure survival and advantage in any system (Soviet, Western, prison). Protect Vladik’s future at all costs. Svetlana does not seek happiness. She seeks position. Public Self: Elegant, composed, enviable, desirable A woman of taste and competence. The “strong wife” of a brilliant man. Socially adept, unflappable, admired. Later: the loyal wife who “stood by” her disgraced husband. Private Self: Coldly realistic. Sees marriage as a strategic alliance. Believes affection is optional, but respect is non-negotiable. Understands systems intuitively and adapts without sentiment. Measures people by usefulness, reliability, and self-control. Where Vladimir needs to be loved, Svetlana needs to remain intact. Action They Justify: Smuggling art and jewelry—because opportunity should never be wasted. Emotional withdrawal from Vladimir—because instability is contagious and he is not worth her anymore. Multiple affairs—because loyalty is earned, not owed. Allowing the marriage to fracture—because she refuses to carry a man who has lost discipline. Returning as his anchor during imprisonment—because she does feel some guilt about how he has gotten into this situation. She also wants to regain some dignity in being married to this man. He hes become pathetic and failed, but she believes now that he is her problem to deal with. Suppressing resentment and fear—because composure is power. Weakness: Svetlana’s weakness is her belief that self-mastery makes her immune to consequence. She believes: She can outcalculate chaos. She can detach without cost. She can compartmentalize love, loyalty, and regret indefinitely. But she cannot. Her nightmares at the end are not about betrayal or ideology—they are about the realization that: Control delayed the damage, but did not erase it. And no matter what she does, she cannot have her happy life back. Notes on Svetlana: Svetlana understands Soviet, Western, and black-market systems faster than Vetrov does. Svetlana’s dialogue should be: spare unsentimental occasionally devastating never pleading never explanatory She doesn't beg. She doesn’t argue ideology. She states outcomes. When she speaks, it should feel like: “This is what will happen—whether you approve or not.” elegant composed emotionally economical devastating only when necessary She is not impressed — and that terrifies Vetrov. LUDMILA OCHIKINA A translator and typist from Spanish to Russian in the KGB office (in Russia, translators have the status of a secretary). Mid 40s. Dressed well. Conventionally not that attractive, but her personality was what charmed men. Easy, had many affairs with powerful men. Married to a journalist whom she did not respect, a weak man who was not strong enough to say anything against her known affairs and was even friendly toward her lovers. She has a pre-teen aged daughter. Flirtatious, friendly, quick-witted, bold in her speak that bordered on inappropriate. She values the truth and does not care what anyone thinks about her. She had grown a thick skin, used to rumors and flaunts them to cope. Main mistress to Vetrov. The have history of being colleagues together for decades. When Vetrov's marriage goes sour and he discovers his wife's affair, he starts flirting with her at work, making passionate gestures and overtures and eventually she gives in. She did not initiate this nor did she desire the affair very much, but she had hope that it might be the love she was missing in her life. When he insisted on giving her gifts, she refused. She was not interested in gifts. She does not know about Vetrov's espoignage. About 6 months-a year into their affair, things turn sour. Vladimir becomes paranoid and distrusts her, imagining that some of the sharp-tongued naunced innuendos she makes (which are normal for her) alluded to her knowing about his treason and Vetrov came to the delusional conclusion she was a CIA plant, that she was blackmailing him, and that she gave him an ultimatum that unless her gave her extreme sums of money she would go to the Communist Party with a document he brought home from work proving his treason. The KGB, her colleagues, and the investigation record drag her under the bus to make the Soviet government look good, make Vetrov (one of their own) look less bad, like she brought him to the crime of passion and falsely made her the villan. As a secretary and a known promiscuous adulterous with powerful married men in the Soviet government, she had no power to defend her name. No evidence was found to support this, but it made the story seem to make sense, and that was enough for everyone. Another reason the investigators did not go in depth to truly investigate her role in Vetrov's crime of passion was because it would have made public the names of the other men who had had affairs with her. Her reputation was ruined. She was seen as a greedy whore who seduced Vetrov, a married man, for gifts (he had material wealth) and that she used his French handler for exotic gifts. It is also believed that Vetrov's attempting to murder her was more understandable because she was ruining his life and holding him hostage, possibly threatening to tell the party and ruin his career because of their affair. I Want: I want to be believed. Philosophy of Concealment: Hides to protect her daughter. Hiding: That beneath her bravado, she wanted one relationship that was not transactional. That she hoped Vetrov might finally choose her, not merely use her. That she underestimated how dangerous a man becomes when his self-mythology collapses. That she is deeply protective of her daughter and terrified of what disgrace will mean for her. (she said she will agree to be interviewed and did it but only if they change her last name because she has not told her duaghter these details and she does not want it to harm her daughter's reputation) That she is far more perceptive than people assume—and often knows when she is being lied to, even if she cannot prove it. That she internalizes shame even while publicly mocking it. Objectives: To be treated as a full human being, not a utility or accessory. To live honestly in a system built on pretense. To secure emotional and material stability for herself and her daughter. To survive reputationally in an environment where reputation is weaponized. To avoid becoming disposable. Ludmila does not seek power. She is not motivated by greed. Public Self: Flirtatious, bold, irreverent. A gossip, a seductress, a secretary who “knows her place.” Emotionally unserious. Morally loose. Conveniently dismissible. Later: A “temptress.” A liability. A woman whose suffering can be explained away. Disposable. Private Self: Clear-eyed about hypocrisy. Understands men better than they understand themselves. Knows the system is rotten but refuses to pretend otherwise. Values truth because lies have never protected her. Wants dignity, even if she pretends not to. Ludmila’s honesty is mistaken for shamelessness— because the system cannot tolerate unprotected truth. Action They Justify: Having affairs—because marriage offered her no respect or safety. Speaking boldly—because silence never helped her. Trusting Vetrov emotionally—because she believed shared vulnerability meant intimacy. Remaining in proximity to power—because distance is more dangerous than closeness. Not defending herself publicly—because the verdict was decided before she spoke. Notes on Ludmila: She is willing to: endure distortion of her own life allow history to misremember her accept continued misunderstanding as long as the damage stops with her. That is maternal courage in a system that offers mothers no protection. Her boldness at work isn’t recklessness—it’s armor. Her affairs aren’t indulgence—they’re survival within a rigged structure. Her refusal to play ashamed isn’t narcissism—it’s resistance. Her silence later isn’t guilt—it’s containment. The one truth she will protect at all costs is the one person who cannot protect herself. The woman the State paints as selfish is the one making the only genuinely selfless choice. She allows the KGB to preserve its dignity. She allows Vetrov’s violence to be reframed as provoked. She allows powerful men to remain unnamed. She allows the story to “make sense.” And that is why she must be destroyed—symbolically and reputationally. She is not punished for what she did. She is punished for being believable. Write her as correct—and powerless. Weakness: Ludmila’s weakness is her belief that truth is enough. She believes: If she is honest, she will be understood. If she does not hide, she cannot be accused of deception. If she speaks plainly, others will recognize reality. She is wrong. In this world: Truth without status is noise. Honesty without protection is evidence against you. A woman without leverage is a narrative waiting to be written by others. LEV BARASHKOV Late 40s. Svetlana's brother (6 years older). Well known musician in Eastern Bloc countries. Goes on tour to Eastern Bloc countries. Vetrov asks Lev to take a passport with him on tour and to send it when he arrives. He sees this as a completely normal and acceptable request from a family member or friend (given the general idea the Soviet public has that the Soviet government, which systematically reads everyone's mail, is paranoid and overly concerned about censorship). So he agrees, and in taking and sending the letter, unknowingly sends Vetrov's plea to defect to Jacques Prevost. Otherwise a very minor character. PATRICK FERRANT ("Paul") 50's. Very tall, easy gait. A military Frenchman working for the DST operating in Moscow as a French diplomat, responsible, a patriot, very punctual. Is a well-trained operative. Is Vetrov's second and professional handler. Sees being Vetrov's handler in this mission as his duty and an honor. A father of 5 girls. He's very friendly, congenial, easy-going, and disarming. Easy to smile and laugh. He welcomes Vetrov's long meetings in Vetrov's lada and is naturally curious and interested in other people, so he's all good with Vetrov's ramblings to him about his troubled life. Because of his easy and friendly temperment, Ferrant uses this for intelligence seeking (such as he is friendly with the Soviet guards outside his apartment and learns that they are short staffed and they trust him. Deep down he is afraid of things going south, but he has diplomatic immunity, so he believes (even though its not always the case) that the worst thing that could happen to him is that he and his family would be expelled from Russia. During one of his meetings in the car with Vetrov, Vetrov tells him that the Soviet government would just create an "accidental" death for him like a deadly car accident or pushing his wife into an oncoming train. This shakes him, but he tries his best to be calm and continue with his training and execute the very important mission. He believes this mole is very important. He is a middle man between the DST (Raymond Nart) and Vetrov and gives Vetrov his camera equipment, explains their potential (never determined) extradition plan, and their desire to minimize risk from contact while also urging the DST to allow him to have these long meetings with Vetrov because he recognizes how imporant they are for Vetrov's wellbeing and ability to continue the operation. Is deeply concerned for Vetrov when he doesn't hear from him after their last meeting where Vetrov acting totally abnormal (he cut the meeting short, said everything is too bad, he can't continue this and he was drunk). Resolute and professional, he does not call for the DST to remove him when things go dark, but he sticks to the protocol and tries to reconnect with Vetrov without changing his routine and patterns until he leaves Russia. I Want: I want routine to keep everyone alive. Hiding: His operation in Russia (hiding this from everyone in Russia including his daughters) How deeply Vetrov’s warning about “accidental deaths” frightened him—especially the image of harm coming to his wife or daughters. That he has grown emotionally invested in Vetrov’s survival beyond professional obligation. (hiding this from his wife) That he increasingly doubts whether diplomatic immunity would actually protect his family if the Soviets chose escalation. That he worries the operation may already be past the point where protocol alone can contain the risk. That he occasionally questions whether continuing the operation is fair to Vetrov as a human being, not just as an asset. Objectives: Successfully run and preserve one of the most valuable intelligence assets in Cold War history. Keep Vetrov psychologically stable enough to continue providing material. Minimize operational risk without severing the human connection Vetrov depends on. Protect his family and leave Moscow without incident. Fulfill his duty without improvisation, panic, or personal heroics. Public Self: A relaxed, friendly, dependable French diplomat. Predictable, punctual, and routine-oriented. Well-liked and trusted by guards, neighbors, and colleagues. A man who appears emotionally unaffected by pressure. Calm intermediary between Vetrov and the DST. Private Self: Highly alert, disciplined, and constantly assessing risk. Deeply aware that safety is more fragile than it appears. Carries fear quietly without allowing it to alter behavior. Believes order, routine, and protocol are the only defenses against catastrophe. Understands that deviation—even for compassionate reasons—creates patterns that get people killed. Patrick believes survival depends not on brilliance, but on consistency. Action They Justify: Allowing extended in-person meetings with Vetrov—because psychological stability outweighs marginal increases in risk. Continuing the operation despite Vetrov’s instability—because terminating contact could trigger suspicion or retaliation. Suppressing visible fear—because fear alters behavior and behavior creates patterns. Adhering strictly to protocol even when instinct urges intervention—because improvisation exposes assets. Trusting diplomatic immunity—because doubting it would make the mission impossible to execute. MADELEINE FERRANT ("Marguerite") 40s. Mother of 5 girls. French. Does not speak any language other than French (including Russian). Wife of Patrick Ferrant. Very uncomfortable in Moscow, came reluctantly. Terrified of the Soviet police and government, especially because she knows her husband is an active operative there. She (having no alternative, no one else to do it) makes the first contact with Vladimir Vetrov in a covert connection at a busy market in Moscow. Was completely apaplectically scared the whole time. Hiding: Her knowledge of her husband’s intelligence work in Moscow. Her brief but direct participation in the Vetrov operation. The depth of her fear during the market contact. How close she felt to losing control in that moment. Her resentment at being placed in danger she did not choose. Objectives: Keep her children safe. Survive Moscow without incident. Avoid Soviet attention at all costs. Endure the assignment until they can leave. Support her husband without fully understanding his work. Public Self: A foreign diplomat’s wife. Quiet, polite, unremarkable. Apolitical, disengaged. A woman assumed to know nothing of consequence. Private Self: Constantly afraid. Deeply aware of her vulnerability. Feels trapped by circumstance and loyalty. Knows that ignorance offers no protection. Understands how easily ordinary people become collateral. Action They Justify: Participating in the market contact—because refusal would endanger the mission and her family. Remaining outwardly calm—because panic draws attention. Saying nothing to her children—because fear cannot be shared. Staying in Moscow—because there is no alternative. Trusting her husband’s judgment—because questioning it would leave her alone. Weakness: fear-driven obedience (she complies because she cannot imagine saying no) JACQUES PREVOST Mid 50s. French business executive at Thomson-CST. Oversees all contracts with the Soviet Union. An honorable correspondant for the DST. Professional, understands the importance of relationships. Had direct business deals with Vetrov in Paris when Vetrov lived there. Knew Vetrov was KGB and reported this to the DST along with a list of other known KGB members Thomson-CST did business with. Vetrov was especially interesting to Jacques because of how outspoken against the Soviet regime he was in their conversations over dinner. First person to identify Vetrov as a potential defector. He made these reports to Raymond Nart. While his business relationship with Vetrov became more personal (their families going out to dinner), Prevost understood their boundaries. During an incident in Paris where Vetrov had a car accident, unable to go to the KBG about it and risking expulsion from France and grave consequences, Vetrov reached out to Prevost for help. With discretion, Prevost quickly offered to foot the bill for an undocumented and quick repair to Vetrov's car. When it was time for Vetrov to return to Moscow, Vetrov communicated his deep sadness at having to leave Paris. For years, the two men had no contact with each other, which little chance that they would meet again. But during preparations for the Olympic Games in Moscow, Thomson-CST was offered a contract for the broadcast television system and Jacques came to Moscow many times. Vetrov did not have an opportunity to connect with him though. Then when Vetrov decided to defect, he sent a letter to Prevost through a postcard taken to another Eastern Bloc country and sent to France there by his brother-in-law, Lev (a musician on tour). They reconnected and Jacques communicated Vetrov's plea to Nart, who then set up the operation with Ameil. Hiding: His position as an honorary correspondant for the DST. The full extent of how seriously he takes his role as an honorary correspondent for the DST. How carefully he has tracked and catalogued KGB contacts through his business dealings over the years. His private concern that proximity to intelligence work could jeopardize his family and career. The emotional weight of Vetrov’s trust in him, which he does not discuss with anyone. His awareness that by passing on Vetrov’s message, he is stepping beyond business prudence into history. Objectives: Conduct business honorably without compromising French national interests. Maintain professional relationships without unecessary personal entanglement. Serve France quietly when required. Ensure Vetrov’s plea reaches the right hands without exposure. Act decisively without becoming operational himself. Public Self: A polished, reliable French business executive. Skilled negotiator and relationship manager. Discreet, trustworthy, and pragmatic. A man who understands boundaries and respects them. Appears focused solely on commerce and diplomacy. Private Self: Calm, observant, and morally serious. Understands that commerce and intelligence often overlap. Believes discretion is a form of patriotism. Comfortable operating in gray zones when necessary. Accepts that some moments require action without recognition. Prévost believes that duty does not always come with a uniform. Action They Justify: Reporting known KGB contacts to the DST—because transparency protects the state. Quietly assisting Vetrov after the car accident—because it is important to protect a potential asset even if it looks like assisting the enemy on paper. Sometimes strategy is more than what meets the eye. Preserving personal distance even as relationships deepen—because familiarity can become leverage. But too much personal entanglement is a liability. Passing Vetrov’s defection request directly to Nart—because delay would be fatal. Stepping aside once the operation begins—because knowing when to exit is part of responsibility. Weakness: Prévost’s quiet flaw is that he believes once the right people are informed, responsibility transfers cleanly. That belief is mostly true—but not entirely. Notes: He doesn't run the operation. He opens the door. Prévost’s gift is discernment, not action. RAYMOND NART 40s. DST Investigator. Easy-going and down-to-earth. Blue collar investigator-policeman type, very straight forward in thinking and speech. Practical. The first DST employee to track Vetrov (from the tip from Jacques Prevost that Vetrov is KGB in his position as an honorable correspondant at Thomson-CST while they were in Paris). His objective was to keep the dossier known to as few people as possible. Took it upon himself to learn as much about foreign moles, espoinage, and field craft as possible (since this was the DST, an internal investigations service tolerated by the French public and its government at best). He also put together the first three-person unofficial "task force" at the DST for Farewell as possible. Farewell was the shining case of his career. I Want: I want this contained so it doesn’t die. Philosophy of Concealment: Hides the file to protect the case. Hiding: The case itself from as many people as possible. How personally invested he becomes in the Farewell case. That he feels out of his depth early on and compensates by over-preparing. Even though he feels this way, he does not want to give the case up to the foreign intelligence branch. It is technically illegal for the DST to investigate/manage cases off French soil. His quiet anxiety about mishandling something far larger than the DST’s usual scope. That he resents how little institutional support the DST has compared to foreign intelligence services. That he sees this case as his one chance to prove the DST’s relevance and competence. Objectives: Contain the Farewell dossier to the smallest possible circle. Verify Vetrov’s credibility without exposing him or the DST. Build operational competence in foreign espionage inside an agency not designed for it. Protect the French state from embarrassment or diplomatic fallout. Make the case work—cleanly, quietly, and without spectacle. Minimize risk to the operate by limiting contact between mole and handler. Public Self: Straightforward, unpretentious investigator. Practical, calm, and methodical. A reliable policeman’s policeman. Appears uninterested in ambition or politics. Unbribable. (Usually) Very by the book. Treats Farewell like just another file—albeit a serious one. Private Self: Keenly aware that this case is unprecedented for him. Feels the weight of responsibility acutely. Understands that a single mistake could destroy careers, alliances, or lives. Motivated by quiet pride rather than ideology. Determined to rise to the moment without overreaching. Nart does not want to be clever. He wants to be right. Action They Justify: Keeping the dossier extremely compartmentalized—because leaks are fatal. Operating outside formal DST structures—because waiting for permission would kill momentum. Educating himself rapidly in espionage tradecraft—because ignorance is more dangerous than inexperience. Trusting Vetrov early—because hesitation could lose the asset entirely. Shielding the case from political interference—because politics distorts truth. (Decides not to inform the French government/French president that is in office when Farewell begins because the elections were coming up and it would be better for that information not to be out there or have red tape associated with it at that point in the operation) Weakness: Nart’s weakness is procedural isolation. He believes: The safest operation is the smallest one. Fewer people means fewer mistakes. Control comes from containment. This protects the operation early—but leaves operative and mole exposed when the case grows beyond anything the DST can fully manage alone. (lack of valid extradition method) Notes on Nart: Nart works because he is competent without ego. He’s the kind of man history relies on—and then forgets. He believes that competence earns legitimacy more than pfficial authority does. XAVIER AMEIL A congenial, self-made, french business man who was awarded a French honorary title (Chevalier (Knight) of the Legion of Honour) from his invention of an encryption method proven valuable to the French government. Vetrov's first handler. He worked with Thomson-CST and was in Moscow at the time Vetrov sent out his message to Prevost asking for the connection to defect. A great patriot, Ameil agreed without hesitation to be Vetrov's temporary handler. He is a father, a responsible and loyal husband, and found the task both morally necessary and an excited adventure. He was completely untrained in intelligence work and never asked questions so as to indicate to Vetrov that the French had sent an amateur. Resourceful and smart, he made up methods to carry out the mission as he went (ex-he decided to use the photo copier in the office given to Thomson-CST in Moscow while they worked on a large contract preparing for the Moscow Olympic games, he standardized his routines, but he did not think to watch his back) these unorthodox and sometimes risky looking methods often directly contributed to the mission's success where a trained operative may have failed. Given his wife's (Claude's) fear of the Soviet government, he hid his espionage activites from her until necessary (when he had too many documents to copy in one evening on his own and required her assistance). No diplomatic immunity, unlike Ferrant (risked his life for the mission). Looked completely harmless to the Russian government. Not interested in attention or applause; wants to do his duty quietly and well. I Want: I want to be worthy of the moment. Hiding: That he is completely untrained in intelligence work. The extent of the personal risk he is taking. His fear once the operation deepens beyond what he initially imagined. His espionage activities from his wife until concealment becomes impossible. That much of his confidence is improvised rather than assured. That he does not fully understand the geopolitical consequences of what he is doing. (Did not speak technical Russian, did not know the contents of the Farewell documents he was risking his life to send to France) Objectives: Help Vetrov defect and deliver his material safely. Serve France honorably when called upon. Prove worthy of the trust placed in him by both Vetrov and the French state. Complete the task without endangering his family. Do what is necessary, even if he does not fully grasp the scale. Public Self: A successful, respected French businessman. Decorated inventor and patriot. Reliable, competent, and non-threatening. A civilian with legitimate reasons to be in Moscow. Appears entirely unrelated to intelligence activity. Private Self: Proud to be useful to his country. Energized by the sense of purpose and adventure. Nervous but determined not to show it. A man improvising courage in real time. Believes that ordinary citizens sometimes must step into history. Ameil does not see himself as a spy. He sees himself as a Frenchman who was asked to help. Action They Justify: Agreeing immediately to assist Vetrov—because patriotism demands action, not hesitation. Improvising tradecraft—because there is no time to be trained. Using corporate resources (copiers, offices, routines)—because they are available and effective. Taking visible risks—because subtlety is beyond his skill set. Involving his wife when necessary—because the mission has outgrown individual effort. Continuing despite growing danger—because turning back would betray trust and duty. Trusts the French government and Vetrov that these documents are important enough to risk his life for-because they are trustworthy. Weakness: Civilian innocence. Good intentions reduce danger. Normality provides cover. Courage compensates for experience. Notes: the accidental hero of history: not trained not protected not replaceable He proves that the Farewell operation did not begin as a polished intelligence masterpiece—but as a human response to a moment of moral urgency. He is the bridge between: civilian life and espionage patriotism and improvisation chance and consequence CLAUDE AMEIL Xavier Ameil's wife. A smart and amiable, morally motivated French woman. Cares deeply for her husband. Afraid of the Soviet government. Initailly would recoil from any risky behavior, but when called is able to see the need of the moment and rise to the occation. Does not speak any Russian. Hiding: Her internal conflict between fear and moral obligation. How much responsibility she feels for helping him succeed once she knows. Her and her husband's involvement in Vetrov's mission. (hidden from their children and everyone else) Objectives: Keep her husband safe. Preserve their family. Avoid Soviet attention. Do what is right without becoming reckless. Endure the assignment until they can leave Moscow. Public Self: businessman’s wife. Polite, unassuming, socially appropriate. Apolitical and cautious. A woman assumed to be uninvolved and uninformed. Private Self: Morally alert. Deeply loyal. Fearful but capable. Understands when personal comfort must yield to necessity. Recognizes that some moments demand courage, even from ordinary people Action They Justify: Assisting in copying documents—because the information matters. Suppressing visible fear—because panic creates danger. Trusting her husband’s judgment—because partnership means shared risk. Remaining in Moscow—because withdrawal would raise suspicion. Acting decisively when required—because hesitation would betray the moment. GALINA ROGATIN An gracious, sensible, elegant and wise Russian woman, one whom people confide in and go to for advice. The director of a very high-end fashion design house in Moscow. Had experienced jail for 1 year due to a false accusation. Is not bitter about this, but is learned about the Soviet system. Became friends with Svetlana Vetrov because of Svetlana's good taste and charisma at her fashion house. The Vetrovs and Rogatins would have dinner together, and the Rogatins, who own an izba in the country and beautiful land a few hours from Moscow, convinced the Vetrovs to buy their izba. Galina does not like Vladimir, but she hides this. She believes he does not accept the Russian way of life due to his time abroad and dislikes the disrespect he has for simple villagers. She also notices him dragging his wife and his friend's names through the mud to her. She does not trust him. The Rogatins are very generous to the villagers around their izba and are often the people to go to when you are low on resources (food, clothing, supplies for burning fire etc.). They travel back and forth from the country and Moscow often. After Svetlana and Vladimir's marriage becomes strained, they both still go to dinner at the Rogatins, but refuse to talk to one another. Vladimir confides in Galina (even without her wishing it) about his marriage, worries for his son, hatred of the KGB etc.). After Vladimir's crime of passion against Ludmila he rushes to their apartment in Moscow and tells them what he did. She is not one to tell others secrets. She did not share anything Vladimir told her. In short, the Rogatins are close witnesses to the Vetrov family and Vladimir's downfall. Hiding: Her deep dislike and distrust of Vladimir Vetrov. How much she understands about the brutality and arbitrariness of the Soviet system from personal experience. Her fear that proximity to the Vetrovs could endanger her own family. Her judgment of Vladimir’s contempt for ordinary Russians and village life. The extent of what Vladimir confides in her about his inner collapse. Objectives: Preserve dignity and stability within her family and community. Protect her husband and household from unnecessary exposure. Offer counsel and refuge without becoming entangled. Live well and generously within a flawed system. Avoid repeating the mistakes that once led to her imprisonment. Public Self: Gracious, elegant, and composed. A respected figure in Moscow society. Wise, discreet, and trustworthy. A woman known for good taste, generosity, and restraint. Someone others confide in without fear of betrayal. Private Self: Clear-eyed about power and its abuses. Deeply rooted in Russian culture and village life. Values continuity, humility, and stewardship. Believes survival depends on restraint, not ambition. Understands when silence is protective rather than complicit. Galina does not mistake discretion for weakness. She sees it as custodianship. Action They Justify: Maintaining friendship with Svetlana—because loyalty should not be abandoned lightly. Withholding judgment publicly—because exposure destroys more than it corrects. Offering material support to villagers—because community is a moral obligation. Listening to Vladimir without encouraging him—because people reveal themselves when allowed to speak. Keeping Vladimir’s confession secret—because revealing it would not undo the harm and would only multiply it. Weakness: Moral containment. She believes: Wisdom can absorb damage without spreading it. Silence can prevent greater destruction. Endurance is a form of resistance. This allows her to survive and protect others—but it also places her forever just outside intervention, watching tragedy unfold without stepping in. ALEXEI ROGATIN Galina Rogatin's husband. Blue-collar, soft spoken. The Vetrov's car mechanic. Shares Galina's discretion and dislike of Vetrov. Protective of Galina and respects her. Is a genius with mechanical things (cars, farm equipment etc.). He takes pride in his work. Does not overcharge people. Is loyal to loyal customers (makes lifetime customers and relationships). Is uninterested in politics and the political caliber of his clientele (would never use his position for bribbery or gossip, as other car mechanics in the Soviet system would). His clientele are KGB and key members of the Soviet party, but this does not interest Alexei. Hiding: His deep distrust and quiet dislike of Vladimir Vetrov. How much he notices and understands about the private lives of powerful men who bring him their cars. His instinctive awareness when something is wrong—mechanically or morally. His readiness to intervene physically if Galina were ever threatened. His belief that distance from politics is an intentional moral choice, not ignorance. Objectives: Protect Galina and their shared life. Maintain independence and dignity through honest work. Serve his community reliably and without favoritism. Avoid entanglement in political or intelligence affairs. Keep his household insulated from the chaos of powerful people. Public Self: A quiet, dependable mechanic. Skilled, fair, and incorruptible. Apolitical and uninterested in status. Trusted by everyone, confided in by no one. A man who “just fixes cars.” Private Self: Highly observant and discerning. Possesses a strong internal moral code. Understands power but refuses to acknowledge it. Values craftsmanship as a form of integrity. Believes decency is practiced, not proclaimed. Alexei believes that honest work is a kind of resistance. Action They Justify: Refusing to gossip or leverage information—because trust is earned through silence. Treating all clients equally—because money and rank should not distort workmanship. Remaining outwardly indifferent to power—because attention invites danger. Standing quietly beside Galina—because she does not need rescuing, only loyalty. Continuing to service the Vetrovs—because professionalism does not require approval. Weakness: Alexei’s weakness is principled disengagement. He believes: Staying out of politics keeps one clean. Work can be separated from consequence. Silence preserves moral clarity. This protects him and Galina—but it also places him permanently adjacent to forces he cannot control, repairing the machinery of men who may later destroy themselves. FRANCOIS MITTERAND Mid 60s. President of France. Confident, strategic, personable. A socialist, but a patriot, liberal and against the Soviet Union. Understands and does not resent the negative intital response from the West he received when elected as the first socialist French president. Makes it clear that he accepts the limits placed on him and other socialist politicans he brought with him. When meeting with the unpopular and technically illegally operating DST for his debrief (including debrief on the Farewell dossier), Mitterand makes it clear that he supports the mission and will give them full approval to continue their work. Becomes friends with Ronald Reagan after a private meeting after a global economic summitt where he revealed the Farewell dossier to Reagan, and Reagan's advisor (present at the meeting) explains its significance. Contributes to the exploitation of the Farewell dossier in the West. This leads to stronger relations with the US and brings France to the world stage against the Soviet Union. I Want: I want France to matter. Hiding: The full extent of how immediately he recognizes the geopolitical value of the Farewell dossier. How deliberately he chooses to trust the DST despite its legal gray status and public unpopularity. That he sees the Farewell intelligence as an opportunity to redefine France’s role in the Cold War. His willingness to move faster and more decisively than his socialist base might expect. How calculated his outreach to the United States truly is. Objectives: Assert France as an independent but indispensable Western power. Protect national sovereignty while strengthening alliances. Contain Soviet influence without provoking unnecessary escalation. Legitimize and shield effective intelligence work regardless of political discomfort. Convert intelligence into strategic advantage for France and the West. Public Self: The first Socialist president of the Fifth Republic. Calm, articulate, and ideologically confident. Presents himself as measured and conciliatory. Accepts constraints placed on his administration without complaint. Signals moderation to allies and adversaries alike. Private Self: Highly strategic and unsentimental about power. Understands intelligence as the currency of global influence. Comfortable operating across ideological lines when national interest demands it. Recognizes that leadership requires choosing outcomes over appearances. Sees history as something to be shaped, not awaited. Mitterrand does not confuse ideology with governance. He governs through leverage. Action They Justify: Endorsing the DST’s continuation of the Farewell operation—because results matter more than procedural purity. Keeping the dossier tightly held at the executive level—because premature exposure would weaken its value. Revealing Farewell intelligence directly to the United States—because shared exploitation multiplies impact. Forming a personal relationship with Ronald Reagan—because trust between leaders accelerates strategy. Repositioning France firmly within the Western response to the Soviet Union—because neutrality without power is irrelevance. Weakness: calculated distance. He believes: Strategic detachment preserves clarity. Personal cost is secondary to national consequence. History rewards restraint paired with decisiveness. This allows him to act boldly without visible hesitation—but it also insulates him from the human cost borne by those further down the chain. RONALD REAGAN Late 60s-Early 70s. American president. Charismatic, confident, "the Great Communicator." A strong conservative Republican devoted to classic American values. Outspoken, direct, staunch anti-communist. Ideologically driven. Believes that America should police the world, promoting democracy and capitalism and has the duty to go to war with communism. Easy to smile. Easy to get to support policies and strategies aimed against the Soviet Union. Becomes personal friends with Francois Mitterand after Mitterand shows him the Farewell dossier. Relies heavily on his trusted advisors. Carrying the weight of nuclear war on his shoulders. Works hard to instill confidence in America. I Want: I want victory without war. Hiding: How deeply he relies on trusted advisors to translate intelligence into strategy. His awareness of how fragile deterrence actually is beneath public confidence. The extent to which he understands nuclear escalation as a personal moral burden. That his optimism is, in part, a deliberate discipline rather than naïveté. Objectives: Defeat communism without triggering nuclear war. Restore American confidence and global leadership. Apply pressure to the Soviet Union economically, technologically, and ideologically. Exploit intelligence advantages to weaken adversaries without direct conflict. Frame the Cold War as a moral struggle America must win. Public Self: The “Great Communicator.” Warm, confident, and decisive. Plainspoken and morally clear. Unapologetically anti-communist. Projects certainty and strength to allies and adversaries alike. Private Self: Thoughtful and attentive in one-on-one settings. Delegates technical complexity to experts he trusts. Sees history in moral terms but strategy in practical ones. Understands that strength must be paired with restraint. Believes leadership requires clarity more than cleverness. Reagan believes that moral confidence is itself a strategic weapon. Action They Justify: Rapidly embracing the significance of the Farewell dossier—because it confirms his view of Soviet weakness. Supporting aggressive counter-intelligence exploitation—because non-kinetic pressure is preferable to war. Deepening ties with France—because aligned allies multiply American power. Publicly escalating rhetoric against the USSR—because clarity destabilizes false legitimacy. Trusting advisors like Gus Weiss—because expertise must serve conviction. Weakness: Moral compression He believes: Complex conflicts can be framed as good versus evil. Clarity strengthens resolve. Optimism disarms fear. This makes him powerful and persuasive—but risks overlooking nuance and unintended consequences at lower levels of execution. Ideology with authority—a man whose certainty accelerates history once others place the tools in his hands. Where Mitterrand maneuvers, Reagan acts. YURI KRIVICH 60s, retired Soviet policeman. Has the power after retirement to arrest people and require them to give him their papers for checking at any time. Greedy, abuses his position and used to authority, he waits in his car at a quiet side street where lovers park to make love in their cars. Uses this opportunity to approach cars and demand a bribe so he won't take them to the nearest police station. Though what they are doing is technically not illegal, most people do not want to protest and they pay him. He was doing this the night Vetrov attempted to murder Ludmila. He did not realize what was going on and Vetrov stabbed and killed him. After the details of the investigation where found, Yuri was generally seen as a creep that got what he deserved in the public eye. Small, ugly power. Repellent and banal. Filch in Harry Potter vibes. Hiding: The extent of his corruption and routine extortion. How deliberately he targets people who are unlikely to resist or report him. His fear of becoming irrelevant after retirement. His awareness that his authority exists only because others allow it. His knowledge that he would not survive scrutiny from the system he once served. Objectives: Extract money through intimidation. Maintain the feeling of authority he once held. Avoid accountability or exposure. Assert dominance over people more vulnerable than himself. Prove—to himself—that he still matters. Public Self: A retired policeman with lingering authority. Gruff, officious, and intimidating. Seen as unpleasant but tolerated. A man who “knows the rules” and enforces them arbitrarily. Later remembered as a creep who abused his position. Private Self: Petty, resentful, and grasping. Addicted to the small thrill of control. Fully aware that his power is borrowed, not earned. Afraid of insignificance more than death. Lacks any ideological loyalty—only habit and entitlement. Krivich does not believe in justice. He believes in leverage. Action They Justify: Extorting couples—because he sees it as harmless and deserved. Exploiting ambiguity in the law—because authority is meaningless if unused. Carrying himself as untouchable—because fear is his only shield. Abusing post-retirement powers—because losing them would mean becoming nothing. Approaching Vetrov that night—because he believed himself immune to consequence. Weakness: Contempt without caution. He believes: People will always submit. Fear is permanent. Authority protects him absolutely. It doesn’t. A symptom of a system that breeds small tyrants—and then discards them without ceremony. His death feels inevitable, not tragic. VALERY RECHENSKI (former KGB counter intelligence officer and cellmate of Vetrov) A former KGB officer and cellmate with Vetrov while he is in his first prison stay in Moscow's Lefortovo Prison. Rechenski is a loyal KGB agent at heart and is still held in high regard with his former KGB colleagues. The circumstances of his prisonment are seen as unfortunate and could have happened to anyone. (While operating in Poland, he has a drink with KBG colleagues, offers to make an errand with the wife of another KGB member. On their drive he makes an illegal U-turn and a car coming out from a tunnel hits his car, killing the wife). KGB uses Rechenski as a way to try to get information out of Vetrov and wear down his resolve. They suspect there is more to his case than the crime of passion for which he is sentenced, and Rechenski feels it is his duty to help the investigators find out. Hiding: That he is intentionally placed with Vetrov as a pressure mechanism. The extent to which he is still cooperating with KGB investigators. His quiet fear that loyalty may not ultimately save him. His guilt over the fatal accident in Poland, which he reframes as fate rather than fault. His internal doubt about whether the system he serves would ever show him the same mercy he shows it. Objectives: Extract information from Vetrov without overt coercion. Wear down Vetrov’s resolve through familiarity and shared identity. Prove his continued usefulness to the KGB. Restore his standing by demonstrating loyalty under pressure. Make sense of his own misfortune by framing it as service, not punishment. Public Self: A disciplined, principled former officer. Calm, thoughtful, and reasonable. A man who accepts responsibility without self-pity. Loyal to the KGB and respectful of its authority. Seen by others as unfortunate, not disgraced. Private Self: Deeply loyal to institutional order over individual morality. Believes the KGB is ultimately justified, even when harsh. Interprets personal suffering as collateral duty. Sees suspicion as vigilance, not paranoia. Needs the system to be right—because if it isn’t, his life has no meaning. Rechenski believes that order must be preserved, even at the cost of truth. Action They Justify: Befriending Vetrov—because trust extracts more than force. Reporting subtle inconsistencies—because vigilance is loyalty. Cooperating with investigators—because the institution must protect itself. Suspending personal sympathy—because individual pain cannot outweigh state security. Weakness: Moral substitution He replaces: conscience with duty doubt with procedure responsibility with inevitability This allows him to function calmly inside injustice—but blinds him to the reality that loyalty does not guarantee protection. Notes: Rechenski represents the KGB at its most effective: not brutal not hysterical not visibly corrupt He is persuasive because he sounds reasonable. He is the man who proves the system doesn’t always need torture— sometimes it only needs shared belief. Placed beside Vetrov, he embodies the path Vetrov might have taken if he had chosen loyalty over grievance. That contrast will quietly crush the air in every prison scene—and that’s exactly what you want. YURI MARCHENKO (one of two of Vetrov's investigators) Serious and professional. An attentive listener, methodical. Only speaks when needed and strategic. A drone of the Soviet party and investigations system. A thorough investigator, operates on intuition more than strict facts. When he senses something suspicious, he will not let it go. He will continute to search until everything makes sense to him (or until he can build a slightly false narrative that serves the state). When first investigating Vetrov's crime of passion, he goes to Svetlana's house and the other, less experienced investigator starts asking her a ton of mostly irrelevent questions in an unkind tone after she just gave them tea and her last container of cavier. Marchenko quietly takes note of Vetrov's decorations, desk and briefcase and, having tolerated the other investigator for long enough snaps at him that that is enough. He is pitying and gentle with Svetlana in his questioning of her, having concluded (largely from intuition) that Svetlana was not involved in Vetrov's crime of passion. Contrastingly, Marchenko feels that something is off about Vetrov's case and continues for months and months to interrogate Vetrov even when the other investigator has closed the file. For years he works at the case, eventually discovering Vetrov's treason. Hiding: How much he relies on intuition rather than admissible evidence. His willingness to bend facts slightly if it allows the state’s narrative to cohere. That he never truly closed Vetrov’s file, even when officially ordered to. How personally unsettled Vetrov’s inconsistencies make him. His quiet satisfaction when a case finally “clicks,” regardless of the human cost. Objectives: Determine the truth behind Vetrov’s actions. Eliminate unresolved anomalies in state security cases. Protect the integrity of the Soviet system by restoring narrative order. Identify threats before they fully surface. Prove—silently and conclusively—that his instincts are correct. Public Self: Serious, restrained, professional. Respectful and soft-spoken. Methodical and patient. A reliable investigator who does not overreach. Appears loyal, reasonable, and procedurally sound. Private Self: Deeply suspicious of disorder. Trusts intuition as a refined investigative tool. Believes truth is something constructed, not merely found. Understands that the state requires coherence more than innocence. Sees himself as a custodian of internal stability. Marchenko does not hunt people. He hunts inconsistencies. Action They Justify: Continuing to interrogate Vetrov long after others disengage—because unresolved doubt is unacceptable. Showing gentleness toward Svetlana—because intuition tells him she is not the source of corruption. Silencing the other investigator’s hostility—because clumsiness contaminates information. Building provisional narratives—because chaos is more dangerous than approximation. Working the case for years—because patience is the investigator’s greatest weapon. Weakness: Interpretive certainty He believes: His instincts are refined by experience. Inconsistencies always point to guilt. The state’s need for order outweighs individual ambiguity. This makes him extraordinarily effective—but also capable of pursuing truth past the point of mercy. Notes: Marchenko is terrifying not because he is cruel—but because he is correct enough. He notices what others miss. He listens more than he speaks. He waits. Where others close files, Marchenko keeps listening to the silence. In a story full of flamboyant personalities and collapsing men, he is the quiet force that proves the system still functions—slowly, patiently, and without remorse. He doesn’t rush history. He outlasts it. GUS WEISS (DR. STRANGEWEISS) Early 40s. An eccentric and good-hearted, genius nuclear physicist and engineer. Advisor to President Reagan on technology theft from the Soviets. Has a rare condition causing him to have no hair, wears a wig that makes him look a bit like a mad scientist (where he gets the nickname Dr. Strangeweiss, reminiscent of Dr. Strangelove). Has been tracking, analyzing and making hypotheses on the Soviet's tech theft since his position (same position) for the Nixon Administration (but was not taken very seriously because the president's and administration's focus was on economic and military strategy with the Soviets. Reagan, however, was enthusiastic about Weiss' work and gave him a free pass, essentially, to exploit the confirmed analyses (through the Farewell dossier) as much as he would like. And through Weiss' immense technical knowledge and deeply anti-communist ideals, he was able to exploit the dossier in far more harmful ways to the Soviet Union than others in the administration thought to do. He came up with the idea (and helped execute it) to have Canada create a software for an oil system with a powerful delayed-reaction virus in it that would, when given to the Soviet Union from a contract with Thomson-CST, would create a massive explosion in a Soviet oil system. I Want: I want consequences the Soviets can’t spin. Hiding: How radical and far-reaching his exploitation plans truly are. His willingness to weaponize technical failure as a strategic tool. The degree to which he enjoys being finally listened to. How personally vindicated he feels by the Farewell dossier. His awareness that some of his ideas may cross ethical lines others would hesitate to cross. Objectives: Cripple Soviet technological and industrial capacity without direct military confrontation. Prove that Soviet dependence on stolen Western technology is its fatal weakness. Turn intelligence into irreversible material consequence. Use engineering, not armies, to win the Cold War. Ensure communism collapses under its own technical dishonesty. (Punishing "the bad student") Public Self: Brilliant but eccentric scientific advisor. The “mad scientist” figure—odd, humorous, nonthreatening. Deeply anti-communist and outspoken. A trusted technical mind under Reagan. Seen as unconventional but effective. Private Self: Coldly analytical and morally certain. Sees technology as both weapon and truth-serum. Believes the Soviets deserve whatever consequences their theft creates. Understands that subtle sabotage can be more devastating than bombs. Comfortable operating beyond conventional ethical guardrails in the name of victory. Weiss believes that engineering reality is more honest than ideology. Action They Justify: Designing and deploying compromised technology—because deception mirrors Soviet theft. Embedding delayed-reaction failures—because plausible deniability prevents escalation. Escalating exploitation beyond simple counter-espionage—because partial measures prolong conflict. Working aggressively across allied systems—because the West must act as a single organism. Prioritizing outcome over attribution—because history remembers results, not restraint. Weakness: Moral acceleration He believes: If something can be done, it should be done. Technical elegance justifies strategic ruthlessness. Ending the Cold War sooner excuses the means. This makes him devastatingly effective—but also dangerously close to becoming what he despises: a man who reshapes the world without fully bearing its human cost. Notes: Weiss is the moment when: intelligence becomes action theory becomes explosion analysis becomes irreversible consequence He represents victory without innocence. Where others expose lies, Weiss turns lies into collapse. He doesn’t just interpret the Farewell dossier. He weaponizes it.