My question is, is it possible to read this book without reading into the person Che was to become?
Reading this book, we all know the revolutionary Che to become and there are obvious connections and links in the book. Our perspective is quite different from that of Che, who when he wrote this, did not know of his own fate. I purpose attempting to read the book against the grain – that is, reading it without knowing what he did later. We often read this book like we do reading a book that we already know the end to. I personally prefer to view this book as a Bildungsroman. It is a trip about personal growth. This is a very formative period in his life– he is only 23 years old when he takes this trip and has not completely entered the adult-working world. There is no doubt that there are very strong undertones about his future, such as “…I see myself, immolated in the genuine revolution, the great equalizer of individual will, proclaiming the ultimate mea culpa. I feel my nostrils dilate, savoring the acrid smell of gunpowder and blood, the enemy’s death; I steel my body, ready to do battle, and prepare myself to be scared space within which the bestial howl of the triumphant proletariat resound with new energy and new hope” (165). At the same time, we also see a somewhat immature Che, such as when he is heartbroken or when he gets a little too close to a local’s wife, so he and Alberto are chased out of town. Further, Che criticizes people of African descendant when he writes, “the black is indolent and a dreamer; spending his meager wage on frivolity or drink; the European has a tradition of work and saving, which has pursued him as far as this corner of America and drives him to advance himself, even independently of his own individual aspiration” (161). I believe it is important to resist the urge to jump to conclusions about his later life and appreciate this book in itself, appreciating a young, pre-revolutionary Che and not getting caught up in his almost mythical legacy.
Leave a Reply