Spy Games

You’ve said the show is as much about marriage as about espionage.

Espionage adds drama and raises the stakes, but the thing people are going to care about is this couple and whether or not they make it. We already know how the Cold War ends. Nobody knows how this marriage will end. Plus, deep down, I’m more interested in marriage than espionage. Maybe I shouldn’t admit that.

The Americans’ title sequence contrasts the iconography of the U.S. and the USSR–say, a Jazzercise video next to Cossack dancing. Is the message that we were never so different after all?

The question at the heart of the show is whether you can relate to the enemy. That’s a heady intellectual idea, but honestly, the titles are just a cool concept.

The show often depicts mundane moments–you’ll see this badass guy finish a mission and then bicker with his kid about a lost thermos. Was that balance important to you?

The most interesting thing I observed during my time at the CIA was the family life of agents who served abroad with spouses and kids. Depicting the issues they faced seemed like something that, if we brought it to television in a realistic way, would be new.

There’s a moment when Philip accuses Elizabeth of lying to him, and she says, “Lying? What does that even mean to us?” Is emotional honesty possible for them?

In the CIA, I lied all the time, everybody I worked with lied all the time, and we were the biggest, fattest liars in the world, and it was definitely possible for us to be honest and heartfelt. Spies think of themselves as good people who, as part of their profession, have to lie.

What do Elizabeth and Philip imagine for their future? Returning to the motherland with their Americanized children?

There were some deep-cover agents who did go back. Others defected. I think Elizabeth and Philip assume they’re going to stay, but that doesn’t preclude retirement. Even spies retire.