8 thoughts on “Daily Beast (no less!) hails Carlos Eire’s book as among “Top five on Cuba!””

  1. Hey! I had nothing to do with this!

    The bastards refused to review the book when it was published. And also refused to list it as one of the best books of 2003.

    And when I won the National Book Award, instead of sending someone to interview me who had anything to do with literature, they sent one of their non-Cuban “Lateeen-oh” specialists and wrote up a story that was not focused on the book, but on my “privileged” Lateeeen-oh background.

    But I’ll take their compliments now, and the extra sales generated by this list.

  2. Wait! Retraction.

    I thought this list was from the New York Times. They listed my book today too, as one of the top 10.

    Sorry Daily Beast. All those accusations were meant for the NYT.

  3. I am shocked, shocked, that the New York Times would treat a Cuban exile academic author in that manner. Well, I am going to write a letter to the editor of the Times to express my outrage!

  4. I congratulate Dr. Eire for having his book listed as one of the five best books on Cuba, but I think that the rest of the books on that list do not fit that qualification. I truly hate when anyone makes a list of anything, especially when it is clear that they are not really informed. I’m sure the compiler of the list doesn’t know who Daina Chaviano is. I would have included one of her books in that list. And how can he not have included the great Reinaldo Arenas’s “Before Night Falls,” or Armando Valladares’s “Against All Hope.” With the exception of Eire’s book, this is nothing more than another superficial list. Sort of like the lists I’ve seen where someone pretends to list the best pizzerias in NY and he inlcudes some lousy pizzeria in that list and I say, how the hell?

  5. Both the Times get it right with Dr. Eire and then it goes downhill (mostly). Of course the NYT LOVES Telex from Cuba, about privileged yanquis associated with United Fruit – how much more of a sterotype can you get? Anderson’s take on Che being a must read? I confess that I am not a huge Humberto fan (just the writer, not the man) but if you are going to laud Anderson’s fawning portrait then toss in Fontova’s work as a companion piece. Everyone likes Trading with the Enemy…I don’t get it…it’s crap. And seriously, NYT has books on the list that no one has ever heard of before. To their credit they do list the Bacardi book (excellent if anyone has missed it).

  6. The Bacardi book was, uh, backed by Bacardi, which can be as anti-Castro as it wants now, but was not that way when it counted, especially given Bacardi’s position and influence in pre-Castro Cuba. It’s not just that it wasn’t anti-Castro when that could have made a difference, but that it was pro-Castro.

  7. 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 insult him by putting him on the same footing with someone like Anderson, Che’s hagiographic hack. At any rate, I’m insulted for him.

Comments are closed.