4) The final segment of the book would also make a good film - his attempt to raise rebellion in Bolivia (which could be subtitled "suppose they try to overthrow a government but nobody came"). This started badly for Che and went from bad to worse to the ultimate tragedy. The Bolivians were determined not to bury him but wanted to prove he was dead - so as a compromise (!) they cut off his hands.
There are many words to describe Che: brave, asthmatic, indomitable,charismatic, ambitious. One word not used enough is "wanker". I'm sorry,but he was - he lacked humour, he spent his Sunday mornings in Havana volunteering cutting cane (you cannot negotiate with people like that they are too hard core). People poo-poo the idea of communists wanting to take over the world, but that was Che's goal. While the USSR were happy to go along in peaceful co-existence, Che was pushing for war everywhere - Africa, Asia, even global. In South America the local communist parties wanted to achieve power (gasp) peacefully but not Che,oh, no. Having said that the Yanks can take a deal of blame for making a bad situation worse, i.e. overthrowing a properly elected govt in Guatemala in 1954, and knocking back Fidel's overtures of friendship in the 1960s. (When will this silly country learn that it's better to stand for something than against something - "oh, we're anti-communist",as if there aren't better things to be.)
Why do people wear his face on T-shirts? Don't they know what he stood for? No elections, rule of the gun, no jokes, lots and lots of talk about the revolution. I think people just love charismatic martyrs, especially people who always seem so sure about everything. A dangerous, dangerous man, whose legacy is a poor one.
Oh and this book is brilliant - superbly researched, written, fair, not biased unless you're a political nutter. Surely it would have to be definitive. The main problem is unavoidable - sometimes you lose track of who is who.
No comments:
Post a Comment