PINAR DEL RIO


support babalú


Your donations help fund
our continued operation

do you babalú?

what they’re saying


bestlatinosmall.jpg

quotes.gif

activism


ozt_bilingual


buclbanner

recommended reading





babalú features





recent comments


  • asombra: Oh, this will get a response: Dear Ms. Paya: Thank you for your letter. The President understands he cannot please everybody,...

  • asombra: Courting dictators? Try dropping your pants and bending over, which is far more like it.

  • asombra: You know what bothers me most about the photo of Obama and Francis? That it is essentially the exact same photo we’d get...

  • asombra: There’s no telling what kind of cigar games, or their equivalent, JFK played with his little friends. The fact he was sold...

  • asombra: I suspect the NYT put Dr. Eire’s book on its dubious little list not because it liked his book, but because it wanted to...

search babalu

babalú archives

frequent topics


elsewhere on the net



realclearworld

The face of a mambí as metaphor

One of my favorite television series is the documentary The World at War. A twenty six part exploration of The Second World War, it always opened with a teaser about the episode that was about to be viewed, followed by opening credits (with a great theme by the British composer Carl Davis), throughout which haunted faces of war victims appear surrounded by flames. It is at the end of the credits that a young man or woman appears and is consumed by the flames to a fadeout. These images, but especially the last one in my view, act as a metaphor for the entire series, where the civilians, caught up in great destructive events, are the tragic victims.

Yesterday, upon seeing Ariel Sigler Amaya in the flesh, I couldn't help but think of the image of that haunted face. Sigler Amaya's countenance and body show the years of brutality he has endured in castro's jails, fighting his war against castro's tyranny. As Alberto wrote yesterday, he looked like he had walked out of a concentration camp. His sadness and pain were fully visible. His face, his legs, his entire broken body, are metaphors for the Cuba that has been created in the image and likeness of the Beast and his minions. A Cuba that has endured over a half century of evil and oppression.

But that is where the comparison ends. The other thing I saw in Sigler Amaya's face and heard in his words was defiance. Defiance against the brutal communists who stop at nothing to subjugate, intimidate, brutalize, and break the citizens of Cuba. Defiance against world opinion that paints a picture of castro's Cuba that is 180 degrees from the truth. I saw Ariel Sigler Amaya, a boxer in Cuba but now a paraplegic, sitting in his wheelchair, thanking America for allowing him to come to here to be healed, and then having someone help him put on a pair of boxing gloves with which he wanted to show the world that he is ready to continue his fight for the eventual liberty of Cuba, at whatever cost. He is broken, but not defeated; he is terribly hurt, but not dead. And he has already paid dearly.

We exiles may be guardians of our parent's and grandparent's traditions and memories, and the caretakers of the real history of our island, but Ariel Sigler Amaya is the real Cuba personified. Ariel Sigler Amaya is a mambí.

3 comments to The face of a mambí as metaphor

  • kenko

    It ocurred to me recently that kennnedy's arraingement with kruschev--that the U.S. would not invade Cuba if he(kruschev) would withdraw the missiles from Cuba--became null and void when the u.s.s.r. ceased to exist back in 1989. Any first year law student knows that if one party to a contract dies or ceases to exist, that in most cases, the contract between the two is over. Which brings to mind the question, what are we waiting for? How about it U.S. congress, where are your cojones?

  • asombra

    The Kennedy-Soviet deal was never an official, formal thing. It was simply JFK's way of getting himself out of the jam he'd put himself into; in other words, it was damage control to protect his own position and political future. The essentially private pact never had Congressional authority behind it; I expect any subsequent president could have ignored it if he'd really wanted to do so. Obviously, that never happened. By now the whole thing is moot. The US has absolutely no intention of taking out Castro, Inc. like it did with Saddam, that's all.

  • Felixthe3rd

    Couldn't have said it better myself, George.