====================================================================== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. ======================================================================
If anything, Galeano's alleged disavowal is a call for subtlety and careful analysis; the NYT's coverage of his remarks are anything but subtle and careful. It rests on these comments in the second para: '‘Open Veins’ tried to be a book of political economy, but I didn’t yet have the necessary training or preparation,” Mr. Galeano said last month while answering questions at a book fair in Brazil, where he was being honored on the 43rd anniversary of the book’s publication. He added: “I wouldn’t be capable of reading this book again; I’d keel over. For me, this prose of the traditional left is extremely leaden, and my physique can’t tolerate it.”' Fair enough! Later Galeano goes on to assert correctly I think, '“Reality is much more complex precisely because the human condition is diverse. Some political sectors close to me thought such diversity was a heresy. Even today, there are some survivors of this type who think that all diversity is a threat.
Fortunately, it is not.”' Anyone familiar with "political sectors close to [him]" will recognize that there used to a strong current that defined the working class and peasantry very narrowly and also dismissed the agency of women, indigenous people, Afro-latinos, gays and lesbians, many strata of the so-called middle class. And, of course, Galaeno is right, this diversity is anything but a threat to the left. For this reason, the Times has to concede, "But Mr. Galeano described himself as still very much a man of the left, and on other occasions he has praised the experiments in social democracy underway for the last decade in his own country, as well as in Brazil and Chile." [not-quite-an-aside: It should also be noted that his remarks on Venezuela, far from attacking Hugo Chavez's govt. are parodying of the opposition, calling Venezuela a "strange dictatorship [with] strange democrats" noting the government's electoral legitimacy and opposition's disproportionate access to mass media - http://aristeguinoticias.com/0603/mundo/debate-por-hugo-chavez-mario-vargas-llosa-y-eduardo-galeano/].
Galeano's choice of the word "survivors" is interesting when referring that part of he errant left close to him. After all, that left came under blistering physical attack in the 70s and well into the 80s. Their dogmatism may be unacceptable, but it is also understandable. That total assault on left happened at time Galeano wrote his book and continued into the intervening decades. None of that history is to be found in the NYT's account. Ironic absence in an article about a man for whom historical memory and amnesia are everything. For an entirely more interesting recent encounter with Galeano, read this interview by Gary Younge - http://www.theguardian.com/books/2013/jul/23/eduardo-galeano-children-days-interview It includes this Galeano-ism: "History never really says goodbye," he says. "History says, see you later." Heed that New York Times! h/t Dan DiMaggio and Louis N. Proyect for sharing the NYT piece.
________________________________________________ Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
