In 'Mandela: The Lost Tapes,' Veteran Journalist Finds His Golden Fleece In A Trove Of Archival Tape
Richard Stengel was hired as Mandela's ghostwriter when he was 37-years-old; thirty years later he revisits the project with a new set of tools and creates an entirely new story from an old project
In the audio world, the golden fleece for a narrative project is “good tape.” But the term “good” could be confusing, because it doesn’t always mean “best quality,” or “best location.”
Our ears, along with our imaginations, have grown along with our appetite for audio. “Good tape” is actually more about access, happenstance, or luck…anything which offers an in-the-thick-of-it or rare moment, captured on tape. Usually, it arrives warts and all.
It turns out that “good tape” doesn’t have to be good quality at all…not in the classical sense of quality. Sometimes, the lower quality the tape is, the more authentic it is. This might seem like converse thinking…I wrote a whole essay about this here.
Richard Stengel was 37-years-old when he was hired by Little Brown & Co to work with Nelson Mandela to write to be his ‘ghostwriter’ for his autobiography. The book, A Long Walk To Freedom, became an international bestseller when it was published in 1994, at the same moment as Nelson Mandela was elected President of South Africa.
Stengel spent many months interviewing Mandela in 1992. Most of those interviews were recorded for the purpose of gathering a transcript full of facts, quotes, and details that only Mandela would know.
To pull off this enormous task of writing in the voice of someone else, Stengel had to learn his voice, his turn of phrase, his diction, and his elocution. To be effective as a ‘ghostwriter,’ Stengel shared with me, he literally had to embody the voice of Mandela, like a method actor…but then write Mandela’s words so that he was invisible.
Most journalists tape interviews to get the facts. If you’re a writer, and not a radio producer, these tapes are a means to an end: To get a transcript down so that the details and facts could be melted into paper format, and then meted out in a draft.
Imagine the surprise to Richard Stengel, when he realized that those 70-odd hours of recordings he had recorded back in the early 1990s, on magnetic tape with the crappy built-in mic on a Sony tape recorder, were actually his golden fleece. Most of them were still in their original format collecting dust in the Mandela Foundation archive (and in an overlooked storage box in his own basement).
But now, with this project, they come back to us in a whole new way.
“Good Tape” and “Bad Tape”
The distinction between “good” and “bad” is more germane to folks who have spent years crafting audio stories, especially because the usual definitions of what is bad, or what is good, don’t apply.
Sometimes good tape needs some bettering. Editors and engineers who have ripped files through iZotope more times than they want to admit to trying to fix bad levels, remove that annoying hiss, or find a way to extract untimely sirens and buzzers can attest to this.
The goal is not perfection. Rather, the goal is usually to make it ‘good enough’ to fit with other great tape….the kind that you do have control over, such as narration or purposely recorded interviews from a studio. Quite often, it’s the “bad tape” that offers a project style, immediacy, connection and purpose. It’s often what makes the project good, as a whole.
Richard Stengel is a well-known journalist. He was the managing editor of Time magazine from 2006-2013. He also served as under secretary of state for public diplomacy and public affairs during the Obama administration, and he’s authored several books.
This project brings together a well-known journalist with a world figure…and finally, with Mandela: The Lost Tapes, we can connect the dots between these two people in a way that we couldn’t before.
Stengel helped get the voice of Mandela out into the world. These recordings helped A Long Walk To Freedom become the massive success that it was. And now, with this project, Stengel revisits this seminal project from his early career. Except this time, Stegel approaches these same recordings to offer new context, new insights, and some wonderful background stories that we haven’t heard before.
There are many layers of magic in these tapes
These tapes weren’t supposed to exist, at least not in this format. They had a job, a purpose, for which they had been captured, which has now passed.
Given that he had spent most of his adult years locked away in prison, Mandela must have had a tight circle around him. But yet, at the busiest time in his life, the transition from prison to President, we now learn that those moments were in fact captured, recorded on tape, ready to be caught in time. As the story begins, it feels a bit like a juicy secret to learn.
And then to learn that someone named Richard spent a whole lot of time with him: slowly hiking the trails in the Transkei, sitting down to dinner with his family, getting in the way at the office as important political matters were taking shape.
The primary magic of these tapes is that they hold the ability to virtually bring back to life one of the most iconic historical figures. The world only got a fleeting glance of Mandela as a free man before he died in 2013.
Moving from there, the fact that while Mandela is a household name, who graced every cover of every newspaper in the world, he was just that, a name, and a face with a radiant smile. But this project lets you get closer. When the archival tape plays it’s like you’re in the same room with him. You will listen, rapt, he reveals small parts of his personality through his unscripted words.
But this project, Mandela: The Lost Tapes, was different from the start. To begin, the goal was different; this time it was an excavation, an unearthing.
Here was Mandela, captured on tape without the pretense of a sit-down interview. What we discover, as the project builds, was a trove of unfiltered audio moments caught on tape. It’s these moments that have the power to bring the listener into the room with Mandela the person, not Mandela the world leader, nor Mandela figurehead.
And from Stengel, we hear the voice of a young man who is quietly enamored with Mandela, but working very diligently to be astute and prepared, as he steadied himself to write these iconic words in Mandela’s voice. With all of his 37 years of practice on this earth.
Mandela is a household name
He’s an icon of history and an iconoclast of the first order. With all the films and news articles and television spotlights, it’s tempting to think that we got to know Mandela over the years. But we’ve never heard him like this.
In The Lost Tapes, we actually learn that we know very little about this man. His life history, his career and his politics were much more complicated than we once knew. With grace and poise, Stengel teases out these details and offers a few new angles to consider. The benefit of time and space allow us to reflect on matters, and perhaps view them in a slightly different light.
There must have been mountains of audio to choose from, but this project manages to skillfully select those moments where humanity breaks through: a throw-away comment, an annoyed moment, the actual words someone uses in an interview when they are asked a question they don’t want to answer. It’s these delicious moments that make this a rare, uncut gem.
It’s also a platform to discuss Mandela in a new light, or maybe it’s just a good enough reason to put his name and likeness back into the world again for discussion…at a time when it’s expedient to conjure the words and the thoughts of a man who stood for racial equality and an unwavering conviction that he could lead his people to freedom through diplomacy and negotiation.
The Lost Tapes also leaves us to grapple with a new piece of history regarding Mandela. Although this fact has been previously reported, its significance bears repeating, along with further consideration.
The actual reason for his arrest, from which Mandela would go on to spend 27 years in prison, was because the CIA tipped off the South African police that he was a Communist. Recall, this was 1962, at the height of the Cold War, just weeks before the Cuban Missile Crisis.
The word “communism” is a loaded term. And to be clear, it means something wholly different in this century than it did in the 1950s and 1960s. It’s not meaningless now; but it’s also not the red-handed slur that could justify 27 years of imprisonment.
Stengel brings humanity to this story, with a sort of long-lost cousin approach. But he also offers an adept skillful eye for history, the rigor of diplomacy, statesmanship, and storytelling told with the voice of a veteran journalist.
Listen to this story if you would like to re-open this chapter of history. Do this and you will be graced with an eloquent, deep analysis of a public figure, never seen quite this way before. The story walks the tightrope to both share this part of the story with the world, but yet not valorize or deify Mandela into something he’s not. It speaks, cautiously and respectfully, about things that he did not want to discuss (such as his marriages). It brings new analysis to the inflection point of his arrest.
The skillful production choices make this a narrative podcast for the ages. Only the discovery of these ‘lost’ tapes could bring a beloved world leader back from the dead, but then also revive his message so adeptly for the future.
The following is an excerpt from a Zoom interview with Richard Stengel and Samantha Hodder. It has been edited for length and clarity.
[Samantha Hodder]: How did this project come to be…and how did it land at Audible?
[Richard Stengel]: A couple of years ago [I was approached by some] people who wanted to make a documentary about Mandela. [They] had access to some of the tapes, and and I was happy to work with them….[As we were working on the project] a light went off over my head [thinking of the tapes]. And I thought, [they] would make a fabulous podcast, audio book…narrative podcast!
Then I started talking to different companies and outlets. I wanted to work with people who I know already; Christopher Farley, who was then at Audible, had worked for me at Time (he was the music critic when I was editor). He made animpassioned pitch for it and understood it.
So I decided to go with with Chris and Audible because of our connection, and also because of I knew his boss, a fella named David Blum from the New York magazine world. So that's what how I ended up with Audible.
[SH]: I have a burning question about this: Was it a secret that you were the ‘ghostwriter’ for Mandela for some years?
[RS]: It was a secret when I was hired to do it, and when I was down in South Africa, during the period of interviews that you hear in The Lost Tapes. And then through the writing of the book and the publication [which was still a secret].
After the book was published, it was obvious that I had worked on it. I never talked about how much or how little I did, but helping [Mandela to] bring his memoir into the world became less of a secret.
My contract never said that I couldn't talk about it. In fact, he was just becoming President when the book came out, [so he couldn't] do much media for it, so I did some media for it. It wasn't something I was shouting from the rooftops on the other hand; [but] it [also] wasn't something that I had signed my life away not to talk about.
[SH]: Interesting, because the book uses the term “collaborator” and thanks you at the beginning, which I thought was funny, because you'd have had to write that yourself…was the term “collaborator” recognized as “ghostwriter?” Is that more of a modern use?
[RS]: I don't love the term ‘ghostwriter.’ [I think] I tell the story and in the podcast…but when I first started working with him, [we] went down with him to the Transkei, and when he's there, he speaks Xhosa, which is the language he grew up in. That's what everybody speaks.
And I remember when he would speak to crowds. I don't remember the word he would introduce me, the term “ghostwriter” was new to him, and he was sort of tickled by it. He would introduce me as his “ghost,” and use that word and Xhosa people would start yelling and laughing…it was really hilarious.
[SH]: I had this moment when I was listening when I thought to myself; there's a level of awkwardness when you're the collaborator, the “ghostwriter” working on the [biographical] story. But then I thought, it's also a gift because writing your own story is awful. It's very hard to do.
Probably most biographers have this to some extent, a coach, or someone who's helping you get to the nuggets of the memoir [out]. But there was a moment where I thought, not only structurally, [but practically], he just didn't have time in his life to do this. He was really busy!
[RS]: Yes, he just been let out of prison.
[SH]: And he was about to lead his country to a new future. [His] story had to get out. And there's no way he had time to sit down and write it all by himself. But at the same time, you were almost like a doula to kind of get that story out. I picture you in your late 30s doing it. What a gift, wow.
[RS]: Well, I appreciate you saying that. It was an incredible gift, that gift of internalizing him. I still think to myself in different occasions: What would Nelson Mandela do in this situation? And it's usually a pretty good answer. And yes, he had absolutely no time.
He was a lovely writer. In fact, I think his writing was, in some ways, more beautiful than [his] speak[ing]. He wrote [an autobiography] while in prison, which has never been published. I think you can access it on the Mandela Foundation website.
I think that [it] was the fastest writing I've ever done in my whole life. It [was] like playing a role, playing a part, and if you ingested or imbibed it, there [was] a kind of magic. It's a joke between my wife and me. All day long I spoke to her and the voice, literally in what I thought was the voice of Nelson Mandela. She now says every imitation I do if someone else sounds like Nelson Mandela…it was [all] kind of magical.
[SH]: I'm curious about the scripting process. How you move[d] from the written portion of this [the book], which was written in first person, to an audiobook, [which is] spoken in the third person? How much of that was done on your own? And how did you interface with it?
[RS]: It was a new medium for me. But I've been telling stories for 40 years in one form or another. I've done TV for 30 years. So I'm used to [oral presentation], but I wasn't used to the [narrative podcast] form.
That said, I've written 2 million plus words in my entire life and I've written every single one of them. I've never had anyone write anything for me. I wrote every word of the script. In the beginning, I would do a little bit of rewriting. And then [later], I ended up doing much more work than I thought I would have to.
It was Audible's idea to change the beginning, start with the episode with where he is captured in 1962 and has to decide whether to use his gun. Chris Farley said “Try this for the beginning.” And I thought: Wow, that's kind of great.
One of the things I learned, now as a listener to narrative podcasts, [is that] unlike a book, when you're a listener, you kind of go with what the narrator tells you to go with, particularly if the narrator is good and strong. It's like…I thought B would follow A, but it's fine to go to C and then go back to B or whatever. Chris [Farley] was kind, he [reminded me] not to worry about the literal-ness of it, and that the listener [will] go with it.
Even after I put together the episodes, I there was a couple that we broke in two; some stuff that was later to earlier. I think it works partially because it's the whole thing is strong and the narrow, and the narration is good…but I [also] realized that a very strictly Procrustean bed of structure wasn’t necessary in a podcast.
[SH]: Yes, the [narrative podcast] form kind of jumps around! It follows more of a screenplay format in some ways, where you start with the inciting incident, and then you give some backstory, and then create some tension, then you work towards some resolution towards the end.
It's true [that] chronology is very book-centered. I think that's one of the things that struck me about this project, it was really a hybrid of both. It was rigid about telling [Mandela’s] story; it's a life story so it's awkward to tell it in loops. [But then it] hooks the reader beginning, which is one of the things that a podcast must do to go forward.
Did you think of this as a podcast or as an audiobook when you were working on it? What [did you] tell yourself you were doing?
[RS]: I thought of it more as an audiobook, again, the terminology is so poor (as you know). It’s not an audiobook of a book that I wrote that I'm then reading…but an audio book, a book created for audio.
[I wanted] the good “bookly” qualities, you know, telling a story. I actually didn't think of the episodes as chapters.
I became less strict with the structure, [when] I realized that you can turn left here, you don't have to turn right, or you don't have to go straight ahead. Some of that was governed by the audio of him because there was 45 or 46 hours of tapes that we digitized.
And then the audio quality…maybe 20 per cent of them were just not resurrectable. It was made with crummy Sony tape recorder. There [were] things that I would put in the script, and that they would come back to me and say, the audio is not good enough. So I had to relax a little bit about the structure.
[SH]: It sounds like it was a fairly collaborative process.
[RS]: Yes, it was. Anne Heppermann was producer of it, along with Chris Farley [who was executive editor], and the other producers/researchers like Claire Tighe. At the end of the day, I think it turned out great. And everybody made significant contributions.
[SH]: [Based on] your experience working in the audio world…Are you sold by it? Are you intrigued to continue? Or are you going to stick to the written word?
[RS]: I feel like it's a new audience for me, and I’ve come to really enjoy listening to audio. And I just think [that] particularly in this day and age, every writer needs to have as many arrows in her quiver. This new project I'm thinking about would be in every form; audio, physical book, documentary. You have to use every part of the animal. It’s the it's the modern way.
[SH]: As someone, as you say, who's written more than 2 million words…do you listen more now than you used to? Or do you still read? Do you read books and not listen to them? In terms of your research and [how you] spend your time?
[RS]: If I'm writing something, I read, and [sometimes I also read] digitally. I don't listen to it. [There are] things [I listen to] for pleasure…10 years ago, I didn't listen to anything. If it's something that I need to kind of use my powers of analysis, and thinking and structuring and writing, I do I still [need to see] words on a page; [that’s] still the thing I remember the best.
[SH]: What was it like to hear your voice from 30-some-odd years ago?
[RS]: It wasn't as awful as I imagined it was going to be! I have to say I was expecting to sound more callow, or less prepared. I'm a pretty prepared person. I remember how much I would prepare for each time I talked to him. And I felt the kind of relief but that mostly comes across. But we also looked for moments, not only his moments, [but also] moments where I was a little more nervous, and bollixed up the question [so it would be interesting audio to use].
[SH]: I'm curious about [one detail in the series].
I was literally I was on a treadmill [when I was] listening to Chapter Two [which is about] the involvement of the CIA and [Mandela’s] capture. And I literally had to stop the treadmill.
This is an iconic moment of the world. And to learn that the CIA put him there…I felt a bit shocked to learn this. So I went back to do some more research.
I come from Canada; the word communism isn't a scary thing for me. I've been to Cuba many times (love that country). But this idea that he was a communist [which is why the CIA captured him], whether that’s a small c, big C…was it in An Inconvenient Truth?
Do we need to think about it differently in history now? How do we square that part of the biography and history with a contemporary context of how we [now] think about [communism]?
[RS]: I wrote a 4000 word piece for Time [where] I really tell the whole story so in greater depth than in the podcast…There's some there's some actual new material, because I did have a back-and-forth with the CIA.
It was a revelation to me too. Over the last 15 years or so, the fact that Mandela was with a 99.9% probability a member of the actual communist capital C party has emerged. On the day of his death, it was strange, both the ANC (African National Congress) and the SACP (the South African Communist Party), released a press statements saying that he had been a member; the Communist Party [even] said [he was] a member of their Central Committee, which is a big deal. So, I think I do believe all of that is true.
At the same time, there's no organization, or authority, that ever had any our complete power over Nelson Mandela. He was, in the best possible way, a kind of opportunist for ‘What can I do?’ And for: ‘What's the best way for me to achieve freedom for my people?’ And you know, [his] ends justify the means.
It’s hard to remember because it's so long ago, but in South Africa in the 50s, when [Mandela] was becoming politicized, in the beginning, he was against any non-white or Indian members of the ANC.
But there was one political party in the 50s in South Africa that allowed people of all races—the Communist Party. And so his colleagues were members of the Communist Party, they worked on him. And he realized: I can get to my big goal by working with them, rather than not working with them.
And I think that's why he ended up joining; not the party would have power over him; [but so] he would have power over the party.
In a way it was just another arrow in his quiver. I think he did join the Communist Party [the CP]. Most of the men he was with on Robben Island were all members of the CP. But interestingly, it's something that he really hid his whole his whole life. He hid [it] from me [while working on the book]. The reasons that seem pretty apparent; he was running for president. It was 1994; the Wall had come down, but it [still] wasn't a good thing to be a capital C Communist.
The reason the CIA was interested in him was he was a member of the Party, and [this] was the height of the Cold War; his capture was just a couple of weeks before the Cuban Missile Crisis. It's hard for people now to remember that Manichaean struggle, where everything was seen through the lens of Communism versus Democracy.
Those CIA people genuinely believed that he was really a Communist, and in the pay of Moscow. And they saw everything through the Cold War, [as in:] As an American patriot [I’m doing my job] by monitoring this guy, and tipping off the South African authorities about the “most dangerous Communist in Africa.”
[SH]: So I'm going to jump right into the right ahead to the end. There's this incredibly raw moment where you're wrapping up the series, giving your reflections on seeing Mandela at the end of his life, and you’re realizing he's [been] gone for 10 years.
As you were reading [the script], your voice quivers. And then [it’s like] the fourth wall came down…You're reading your script, but then you falter. And then you can hear a voice off mic that says: “Do you want to stop? Do you need a break?” And you say: “No, no, I'm gonna carry on. And I'll just stick with it.”
All that stayed in the story, which was a strong reminder that this [story] isn't just a script [for you]. This was a real project, it was a process, and it was raw.
Tell me the behind-the-scenes story about what happened there.
[RS]: The whole project was very emotional for me. In that last episode, where I'm sort of saying goodbye to him, and he gives me that hug. I [was] a very, very powerfull thing…Before the final final cut, Chris Farley said: “I want you to listen to Episode 10, and tell me if you're comfortable with that passage being in there.”
I obviously remembered exactly where I was. I remember being in the studio and I just thought, it's powerful for the listener to hear my emotion…I wasn’t bawling like a baby, [I was struck with emotion].
I also thought, as you say, it brings down the wall down on the process in a way that I also think is interesting and powerful for the listener.
I also thought [it] was a smart producer’s choice to do that. I didn't even think twice about it. I just thought, yeah, that makes sense.
If you’re an Audible subscriber, you can find Mandela: The Lost Tapes here.
