Exploring the Life of Plutarco - Essay Example

s s The proposition that history is written by the victors has never lost its value. Instead, the perceptions once built, true or not, are seldom changed and the distorted versions of history are rather accepted as mere facts. For the purpose of exploring the dimension, the much controversial figure, the President of Mexico from 1924-1929, Plutarco Elias Calles can be evaluated from various dimensions. Exploring the life of Plutarco from the mainstream history books, it can be concluded that it clearly contrasts with the documentary film produced by his own great-grand-daughter Almada named ‘EL General’. The contrast lies in the sense that while history portrays him as the Puppet President, the one who has Catholic blood on his hands, the one who deceived many to make his way through, on the other hand, Almada portrays him to be reasonable, logical and nonetheless ‘humane’ in contrast to popular opinion. One will have to explore facts and indulge in an in-depth study in this context to be fair in an analysis, and to explore as to which side of the story holds more truthful value. The paper aims at exploring the mainstream history books popular not just in Mexico but rather in the world. The study will focus on how Plutarco is portrayed and perceived in the world, also how the opinion has been altered. Furthermore, the opinions will be contrasted with data from the documentary produced by Almada who is Calles` great grand-daughter. This data will reflect how a daughter perceived her father, i.e. the firsthand account of someone who was directly associated with the much controversial figure. Thus, based on the analysis, contrasts would be made to predicate how history is de-shaped and de-framed by the historians. Calles is essentially portrayed as someone who was deeply indulged in a power struggle throughout his life, which poses certain paradoxes. He is perceived as a rather controversial yet revolutionary figure, a President who failed to deliver his promises, deported priests on a massive scale, destroyed covenants, closed Catholic schools while he was facing a huge scaled rebellion. However, he sent his daughter to the United States, and that too to study at a Catholic school. This poses a question-mark over the issue i.e. if he hated Catholics such deeply, why would he want his daughter to be indulged in an education purely based on those values he abhorred. Historically, Calles was many things, portrayed by mainstream history, i.e. a school teacher, a Guaymas native, someone who went as far as to become one of the Sonoran Generals and even emerged as a victor from the brutal Mexican Revolution initiated by the Catholics (Silvia 88-89). Despite the dark side to his personality where he belonged to an unfortunate background and had seen miseries in life, he still managed to prove himself as a leader. That too, not just while he held Presidency, in fact even after that where he ended up being the founder of the National Revolutionary Party. On the other hand, the archival tapes which were left behind and later, founded by Almada depict a different story. The documentary comments on the personal vindication of his daughter Alice who was a darling daughter to her father, for whom the father was rather a distant yet a close father figure (Almada 2009). The film adaptation is a product of six cassettes put together by Tita who aimed at producing a book out of the findings, with the name of ‘the Burn Heals’ or ‘the Man of Steel’ which never found its fate. Thus, when the film-maker Almada got hold of the recordings where there were interesting accounts and interviews of Tita, she turned the memoirs into a well documented film. The film doesn’t cover the typical historical angle with Calles being the central figure, rather, it does a situational analysis by taking into account various historical dilemmas. The story is narrated in a feminine voice to deliver effectively how a daughter saw the entire episode. Another significant feature of the documentary is that it is rather a family story which is awfully painful and one can relate to it, in contrast to the history books which analyze the character truly in context to those who were a target of the miseries imposed upon them. The documentary features him as a political figure who had dedicated his life earlier as a President and later, as a revolutionary. It depicts how difficult decisions had been made by him under extra-ordinary circumstances where he had no other choice and he did what he had to. In other words, he sacrificed his family and contributed towards achieving the most out of the situation he was faced with (Almada 2009). While he was the leader, he definitely had to face hard times, and later he was rewarded with the proclamation of exile. The same tragedy is depicted in the history books as violence and brutality consciously inflicted by him. The documentary solely focuses on the contradiction in power relations which complicate the scenario, i.e. the power relationship between the government and the people, in the form of taxes or elections which are directly related to how history is shaped and how memory is transformed. Another important aspect of the documentary has again to do with how he sent his daughter to Catholic school, where others portrayed a brutal version of the General. Thus, from the perspective of a daughter whose father is directly engaged in power struggle, where he has to take decisions which affect not only his life, but also other lives as well the documentary is extra-ordinary in essence. The history books in contradiction fail to take into account the holistic view of the situation and places the entire debt of miseries on one personality, which would rather be an overstatement. The violent public legacy of Calles is exaggerated in the history books where his story is told as someone who corrupted under the notion of absolute authority and in the race to take up the ladder, forgot not only his promises but also the basic principles of morality (Silvia 23). Furthermore, there was a point when the Calles` administrative agency came under a direct conflict with the US, especially over land holdings by major Oil Companies of the US. For this reason, he was labeled a communist and a brutal dictator in the US narrative which is the most popular one, and the entire world borrows from their views of distorted reality (Buchaneu 59-60). Thus, on one hand where it stands true that Calles took some brutal decisions yet there is much which can be brought to his credit as well, which is rather discredited by many historians. Thus, conclusively, the proposition that history is written by the victors has never lost its value. Instead, the perceptions once built, true or not, are seldom changed and the distorted versions of history are rather accepted as mere facts, which is depicted via this paper. For the purpose of exploring the dimension, the much controversial figure, the President of Mexico from 1924-1929, Plutarco Elias Calles has been under study from the perspective of not only the history books, but also a version portrayed by his own grand-daughter via a documentary. An analysis of the study indicates that while history portrays him as the Puppet President, the one who has Catholic blood on his hands, the one who deceived many to make his way through, on the other hand, Almada portrays him to be reasonable, logical and nonetheless ‘humane’ in contrast to popular opinion. Only after having explored facts and indulging in an in-depth study in this context to be fair, an analysis has been built to indicate how mainstream history can often be deceiving. Works Cited Almada, N., Alatorre, D., Calles, A., Altamura Films., Independent Television Service., Latino Public Broadcasting (Firm), & Women Make Movies (Firm). (2009). El General. New York: Women Make Movies. Buchenau, Jürgen. Plutarco Elías Calles and the Mexican Revolution. Lanham, Md: Rowman & Littlefield, 2007. Print. Silva, Carlos. Plutarco Elías Calles. México, D.F: Planeta, 2005. Print. Read More