August 04, 2005
Che Guevara's Failings
Reader and commenter Daniel sent an e-mail today with a link to an interesting article publised in the Argentine daily La Nacion. The article, written by author, journalist, and lawyer Marcelo Gioffré, deals with the failings of the mighty Che, and are translated into English here for your reading pleasure.
The original Spanish article is also included in the link at the bottom of the post.
A big hat tip to Daniel, thanks.
Che Guevara’s Failings
A Buenos Aires legislator has proposed the renaming of Cantilo Avenue to "Che Guevara Avenue, which leads one to meditate over the merits of the person whose name is being postulated.
Son of an Argentine aristocratic family, Guevara apostatized his origin and his country. He received the title of doctor and also declined the exercise of the profession. As a student, he tried to make gamexane with talcum powder, of Vendaval brand, but things didn’t work out in the company. In 1952, he left his friend Alberto Granado in a Venezuelan leprosarium with the promise of returning, which he never did. In Guatemala in 1954, he failed in vain the defense of Jacobo Arbenz from a coup d’etat. As provisional intendant of Sancti Spiritus, he prohibited alcohol and gambling, a rule that had to revoked the following day. He failed in his marriage to Hilda Gadea. For being so vain, he committed the error of publishing his book “War of Guerrillas”, which was very useful to the Pentagon for disclosing the secrets of armed subversion. He failed in underestimating the blockade. He was unsuccessful in his diplomatic mission in the Conference of Punta Del Este in 1961, where he should have reached an agreement with the United States. He failed in his plan of accelerated industrialization, and with it caused a debacle of the sugar harvest. He lost with Russian economists the controversy over the stimuli (that he tried morals - the "new man" - and the Soviet technicians, material). He failed in his valuation of China and could not convince Mao Tse-tung, in 1965, to wage another guerilla war in Latin America. He contributed in creating a monster in Cuba, then had to resign and leave. He failed as a son (at least in the famous moral dichotomy which Jean-Paul Sartre raises in Existentialism is humanism), since he could not be at his mother’s side when she died of cancer, and in a final letter, that would arrive late, wrote: "I have loved you all very much, just that I haven’t known how to express my affection”. He committed the error of confiding in Fidel by giving him a letter which was to be read after his death, which Castro read prematurely, thereby betraying him. He went to fight in the Congo and, beyond the picturesqueness of savoring butterfly soup, had to abandon the mission. He was armed with an unbelievable guerrilla in Bolivia and it also failed. He was not able to engage the communist Monje nor the farmers to join him for that guerrilla warfare. He was father of five children and, objectively, he let them go at their own risk to undertake a wild trip towards badly calculated utopias. His life as a whole could be seen as an impeccable aesthetic of failure, that concluded, posthumously, with a generation decimated in his name.
Which is his true merit, putting aside the fact of being a fetish of the rebels of the seventies, printed in infinite rowers made according to capitalist canons?
It is true that he achieved the difficult category of myth status, but to it contributed random circumstances that have nothing to do with his virtues. The military triumph in Cuba had much more to do with the prudence of Castro than to the irresponsible heroism of Che. The death and disappearance of his body helped to forge the legend. The necessity of the Cuban regime to have eminence also contributed. His fundamentalism of purity, that he shares with Hitler. But none of these aspects is genuine merit. His anti-Peronism also cannot be seen as the “vedette” of his beliefs, but rather like the typical intellectual leftist criticism of a reformist party.
There’s more: two years ago, having lunch in a bar on Salguero Street with Humberto Vázquez Viaña, a Bolivian who took part in the squadrons of guerrilla support that Guevara mentions in his diaries, I was the object of a frightening confession. This man conjectured that the true reason for which Guevara had fought was not ideological nor idealistic, but therapeutic. As is known, Guevara suffered of asthma but never experienced an attack in the middle of a battle - perhaps due to the additional adrenalin generated -, possibly explaining the hidden reasons for his campaigns, of his uncontrollable desire to continue fighting and to separate himself from tasks, which would not have been for any other reason than to avoid those bronchial spasms. A frankly spurious reason,
of which an eventual confirmation would mute so many demonstrators who hoist his photo with the pierced beret.
But there is a second subject: What is the limit to changes in cities? In New York, there is debate over the extension of the Whitney Museum of American Art, which is located at Madison Avenue and 75th Street. In agreement with the original project of Italian architect Renzo Piano, the extension requires the demolition of two old and arquetipical facades of brown stone, with its cast iron stairs on the outside, which in principle is prohibited by the local legislation.
But this impossibility could yield in the face of an express decision by the Landmarks Preservation Commission, whose task consists exactly of establishing permissible exceptions to the norm. When the subject was raised to the commission, it decided on an alternative, much more modest project, by which only one of the facades would be torn down, therby forcing a narrowing of the access door to the new museum, and following the original plans behind the façade which would remain intact, on the outside, over Madison Avenue.
Renzo Piano maintained his optimism, perhaps for personal rather than architectural reasons, and maintained that the small entrance will help to create an oblique element of surprise, acceding to a great flooded lobby of light, like in the gardens of Eden. The New York Times, however, criticized the decision in an article titled "Commission Preserves the Past at Cost to the Future", indicating that that commission must by agreement study when the rules should be broken and to establish, thus, a correct balance between historical preservation and the blossoming of new architectural efforts which, in return, has adopted a timid attitude which leaves to chance that of a "Potemkin facade", that paradoxically and symbolically seems to define the functions of the organism: to limit itself to the defense of the superficial.
The issue is that neither New York nor Buenos Aires live, as in the 60s and 70s, with the destructive threat of modernism. For that reason, it calls to attention certain reactionary voices that cling to the mere name of a street, as if that was the soul of the city, and its possible change could hurt it to death.
A few days ago, in a letter from readers, a gentleman lamented that his father’s doctor's office had been in an avenue that today has another name. The old struggle of traditionalists and modernists is already obsolete. It is the sum of different historical times, each one contributing its own values and visions of the world, that grants wealth and sense to things: cities are articulated and reinvented only in such a creative and dialectic dynamic, by which dogmatic intransigence in the face of change becomes unacceptable.
But between that tense and rich connection, the idea of paying homage to all-night dreamers, no matter how romantic a trail they have left, sits between a distance that can’t be saved without recklessness.
Un legislador de la ciudad de Buenos Aires ha propuesto la denominación de "Che Guevara" para la avenida Cantilo, lo que lleva a meditar sobre los eventuales méritos del personaje postulado.
Hijo de una familia aristocrática argentina, Guevara renegó de su origen y de su tierra. Recibió el título de médico y también declinó el ejercicio de la profesión. De estudiante, intentó fabricar gamexane con talco, marca Vendaval, pero le fue mal en la empresa. En 1952, abandonó en un leprosario de Venezuela a su amigo Alberto Granado, con la promesa de que volvería, cosa que nunca hizo. En Guatemala, en el 54, intentó en vano la defensa de Jacobo Arbenz frente a un golpe de Estado. Como intendente provisional de Sancti Spiritus, prohibió la bebida y el juego, regla que debió revocar al día siguiente. Fracasó en su matrimonio con Hilda Gadea. Por vanidoso, cometió el error de publicar su libro Guerra de guerrillas, que fue muy útil para el Pentágono, al poner en evidencia los secretos de la subversión armada. Fracasó al subestimar el bloqueo. No tuvo ningún éxito en su misión diplomática en la Conferencia de Punta del Este de 1961, donde debía llegar a un acuerdo con los norteamericanos. Fracasó en su plan de industrialización acelerada y con ello provocó una debacle de la zafra azucarera. Perdió con los economistas rusos la controversia sobre los estímulos (que él pretendía morales -el "hombre nuevo"- y los técnicos soviéticos, materiales). Fracasó en su valoración de China y no pudo convencer a Mao Tse-tung, en 1965, de hacer otra guerra de guerrillas en América latina. Contribuyó en Cuba a crear un monstruo y debió renunciar e irse. Fracasó como hijo (al menos en la famosa dicotomía moral que Jean-Paul Sartre plantea en El existencialismo es un humanismo), ya que cuando la madre murió de cáncer no pudo estar a su lado, y en una carta final, que llegaría tarde, escribió: "Los he querido mucho; sólo que no he sabido expresar mi cariño". Cometió el error de confiar a Fidel Castro una carta para ser leída después de su muerte y Castro la leyó prematuramente, traicionándolo. Fue a luchar al Congo y, más allá del pintoresquismo de saborear sopa de mariposas, debió abandonar la misión. Le armaron una guerrilla inverosímil en Bolivia y también fracasó. No fue hábil para captar al comunista Monje ni a los campesinos para esa lucha guerrillera. Fue padre de cinco hijos y, objetivamente, los dejó librados a su suerte para emprender un viaje disparatado hacia utopías mal calculadas. El conjunto de su vida podría verse como una impecable estética del fracaso, que concluyó, póstumamente, con toda una generación diezmada en su nombre.
¿Cuál es su mérito real, dejando de lado el hecho de ser un fetiche de la rebeldía setentista, estampado en infinitas remeras fabricadas según cánones capitalistas?
Es verdad que accedió a la difícil categoría de mito, pero a ello contribuyeron circunstancias aleatorias que nada tienen que ver con sus virtudes. El triunfo militar en Cuba se debió mucho más a la prudencia de Castro que al heroísmo irresponsable del Che. La muerte y la desaparición del cuerpo ayudaron a forjar la leyenda. La necesidad del régimen cubano de tener próceres, también. Su condición de fundamentalista de la pureza, que comparte con Hitler, también. Pero ninguno de estos aspectos son méritos genuinos. Su antiperonismo tampoco puede ser visto como la vedette de su pensamiento, sino más bien como la típica crítica del intelectual de izquierda a un partido reformista.
Es más: hace dos años, almorzando en un bar de la calle Salguero con Humberto Vázquez Viaña, un boliviano que integró los cuadros de apoyo guerrillero a quien Guevara menciona en su diario, fui objeto de una confesión estremecedora. Este hombre conjeturaba que el verdadero motivo por el cual Guevara había luchado no era ideológico ni idealista, sino terapéutico. Como se sabe, Guevara sufría de asma y nunca experimentó un ataque en medio de una batalla -quizá por la generación de adrenalina adicional-, razón por la cual el propósito oculto de sus campañas, de su irrefrenable deseo de seguir luchando y apartarse de las tareas de escritorio, no habría sido otro que evitar esos espasmos bronquiales. Un motivo francamente espurio, cuya eventual confirmación dejaría mudos a tantos manifestantes que enarbolan su foto con la boina calada.
Pero hay un segundo tema: ¿cuál es el límite a los cambios en las ciudades? En Nueva York se está dando un debate sobre la ampliación del Whitney Museum of American Art, que está emplazado en Madison Avenue y la calle 75. De acuerdo con el proyecto original del arquitecto italiano Renzo Piano, la ampliación requería la demolición de dos fachadas antiguas y arquetípicas, de piedra marrón, con sus escaleras de hierro colado por fuera, lo que en principio está prohibido por la legislación local.
Pero dicha imposibilidad podía ceder frente a una decisión expresa de la Landmarks Preservation Commission, cuya tarea consiste, justamente, en establecer cuáles son las excepciones admisibles a la norma. Planteada la cuestión a la comisión, ésta optó por un proyecto alternativo, mucho más modesto, según el cual se tirará abajo sólo una de las fachadas, lo que obligará a achicar la puerta de acceso del nuevo museo y seguir el ámbito previsto por detrás de la fachada que se mantendrá intacta, en su parte exterior, sobre Madison Avenue.
Renzo Piano mantuvo el optimismo, quizá por razones más crematísticas que arquitectónicas, y sostuvo que la pequeña entrada ayudará a crear un elemento oblicuo de sorpresa, al acceder a un gran lobby inundado de luz, como en los jardines edénicos. El New York Times, en cambio, criticó la decisión en un artículo titulado "La comisión preserva el pasado al costo del futuro", indicando que esa comisión tiene por cometido estudiar cuándo las reglas deben ser rotas y establecer, así, un correcto balance entre la preservación histórica y el florecimiento de los nuevos emprendimientos arquitectónicos y que, en cambio, ha adoptado una actitud timorata que lleva a una suerte de "fachada Potemkin", que paradójica y simbólicamente parece definir las funciones que cumple en la práctica el organismo: limitarse a la defensa de lo superficial.
La cuestión es que ni Nueva York ni Buenos Aires viven ya, como sí quizá pasaba en los años 60 y 70, con la amenaza arrasadora del modernismo. Llaman la atención, por eso mismo, ciertas voces reaccionarias que se aferran al mero nombre de una calle, como si eso fuera el alma de la ciudad y su eventual cambio pudiera herirla de muerte.
Hace unos días, en una carta de lectores, un señor se lamentaba de que el consultorio de su padre hubiera estado en una avenida que hoy tiene otro nombre. La vieja puja de tradicionalistas y modernistas es ya obsoleta. Es la suma de diferentes épocas históricas, cada una aportando sus propios valores y visiones del mundo, la que otorga riqueza y sentido a las cosas: sólo en esa dinámica creativa y dialéctica se van articulando y reinventando las ciudades, lo que torna inaceptable la intransigencia dogmática frente al cambio.
Pero entre ese ensamble tenso y rico y la idea de homenajear a soñadores trasnochados, por más romántica que sea la estela que hayan dejado, media una distancia que no puede ser salvada sin temeridad.
Posted by Robert M at August 4, 2005 08:24 AM
(UPDATED) »Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.babalublog.com/cgi-bin/mt/hut.cgi/2047
Comments
like i said when i sent this over to you, the amazing thing is it came from an argentine paper, where che has almost God like status in some circles.. ask an argentine to name 3 great argentinians, most likely than not they will rattle off evita peron, diego maradonna, and che, so to see this is pretty amazing..
Posted by: daniel at August 4, 2005 03:52 PM
Indeed daniel. I didn't mention that in the post, but it should be pretty obvious to those who have even a passing knowledge of Argentines and their fidel and che-loving tendencies.
Posted by: Robert at August 4, 2005 03:59 PM
I find it interesting that they condemn him for his failures as a family person, a rotten human being who abandoned his friends, screwed his children, forsake his nation. We don't usually see that, but it is as valid a reason as any to despise this miserable excuse for a human being.
Posted by: A.M. Mora y Leon at August 4, 2005 05:27 PM
I just had an American friend come back from Argentina, her som married a girl from over there and she went to meet her new in-laws.
She was a bit disgusted as they had indicated to her that a communist government would not be such a bad thing. I told her they are playing with fire and are going to get burned bad.
I am not surprised then, after she told me this, to hear that che is held in such esteem in your average social circle over there.
Human beings can be such "usefool" idiots!
Posted by: cohetedude at August 4, 2005 10:38 PM
The author of the article in LA NACION does not see "Che" Guevara with rose-coloured glasses, but he does have certain "blind spots" that need to be corrected. There was never anything "heroic" about Guevara. The Argentine mercenary was in fact a consummate coward. During the Bay of Pigs invasion, Castro sought refuge in a bunker, but Guevara did him one better -- he actually shot himself in the head rather than face the hordes of "Yankees" which he was sure would overrun the island in the wake of the Brigade 2506. Alas, Guevara was so incompetent that he couldn't even kill himself. Of course, "Che's" suicide attempt was labelled an "accident." It would be difficult to conceive of anyone being such a miserable marksman that he could shoot himself accidentally in the head with a rifle. The Argentine columnist does not mention either "Che" Guevara's personal supervision over the execution of 15,000 men at the Cabaña Fortress, reserving to himself the sadistic pleasure of giving the coup de grace. Nor does he cite the well-known incident of "Che" Guevara begging for life when he was captured by the CIA (i.e. Cuban exiles) and the Bolivian Army: "Don't kill me, I am "Che!" Like all cowards, he could dish it out but he couldn't take it. His posthumous fame as a tee-shirt icon, that is, as a poster boy of materialism, homoeroticism and radical chic, is exactly what this posseur and failure deserves.
Posted by: M.A.T. at August 5, 2005 05:15 PM
Where in Buenos Aires is this Cantilo Avenue that they propose to rename for "Che" Guevara located? Is is on a once magnificent esplanade that has seen better days? Is its neoclassical architecture crumbling and is the street littered with its various design elements? Are the great buildings vacant or coverted into shantytowns? Does raw sewage flow in the gutters and does garbage accumulate in 20 feet heaps on the curb? Is the spirit of the hapless people who live there even more devastated than their surroundings? Then, by all means, name that avenue for "Che" Guevara, or, better yet, name it "Republica de Cuba."
Posted by: M.A.T. at August 5, 2005 05:53 PM
Why are Argentines so eager to honor "Che" Guevara? Don't get me wrong: Anything that the Argentines do to claim Guevara as their own is OK by me. Let the world know, by all means, that "Che" Guevara was NOT Cuban. If the Argentines will but wait a little bit, Cubans will be glad to ship them the pre-fabricated Mausoleum with the Giant Statue of "Che's" Hand that Castro erected in his memory. In fact, we would even be willing to scoop up the dirt from every spot in Cuba where Guevara ever set his foot, and send that to his compatriots as well. Every Argentine should get down on his knees every night and thank Almighty God that He spared them the chalice that was sadly passed to us.
Posted by: M.A.T. at August 5, 2005 06:46 PM
Singer Ibrahim Ferrer is not a Terrorist but he supports the terrorist dictatorship of Cuba. That's why he was never allowed into USA.
MJP
Posted by: Michael J. Perez at August 8, 2005 11:59 AM
Ibrahim Ferrer was in New York with Buena Vista Social Club.....And I saw his last concert in Marciac the 2th of August....
Cheers Ibrahim, vaya con Dios
Posted by: nadine at August 11, 2005 08:32 AM
