2024-01-15 18:55:24
On his Facebook wall Ignacio Ramonet recently expressed a brief opinion about a hotel being built in Havana and unleashed a wide variety of reactions, some of them even bitter. He goes without saying that discrepancies are as natural to the human species as breathing. But it is also possible to appreciate, according to the different judgments at stake, how each person breathes: whether healthily or with organic obstacles and bad habits.
Here, too, it is worth applying the maxim —Let everyone draw their own conclusions— popularized by the teacher Eduardo Dimas, little remembered not because he was not wise, which he was, but perhaps because of his proverbial modesty, a virtue that, for some, seems to be a bad example.
Before specifically addressing the topic announced in the title of this article, the author believes it is sensible and honest to remember previous events, and stop at some personal reference. He was commissioned to review for Bohemia the ceremony where the University of Havana awarded Ramonet the title of honorary doctor in Communication Sciences. And very shortly after the review was published, a computer specialist who worked in a political leadership body approached him to express astonishment at something he had read in the text.
It was the allusion—in the midst of well-deserved professional praise—to what could be considered, at the very least, hesitations of the eminent Spanish-French journalist in the face of the invasion of Libya by NATO forces. “But it’s true,” said the computer scientist friend, who, with those words, and with the gesture that accompanied them, showed that at first he had not believed in the veracity of the allusion.
“If it weren’t true,” the author responded, “I wouldn’t have written it.” He had already done so before in the article “From one discreet charm to another”, which gave continuity to “Libya and the discreet charm of coinciding with the empire”. Both texts, which—like the aforementioned review—he published in his digital trough and Rebelión reproduced, were born in response to the deplorable attitude of sectors of the world left, particularly the European one.
More recently, this time on his Facebook wall, the columnist once again disagreed with Ramonet, which is why he understood and continues to understand that they were also hesitations of the distinguished communicator, now faced with the role of the Zionazi forces in the massacre that the people are suffering. Palestinian. There is no need to guess at Ramonet’s words in his own voice.
But it seems that none of these attitudes earned the prestigious journalist other adverse reactions in Cuba, where he continues to be seen, above all, as the author of the book One hundred hours with Fidel, friend of leaders and revolutionary processes of our America and enlightened denouncer of the disinformation techniques used by the capitalist media. According to what is visible, what has unexpectedly earned him hatred and rejection in different Cuban voices is his aforementioned opinion about the hotel that is being built on the side of 23rd Street, in the heart of El Vedado.
In that case, however, the author of this article shares with Ramonet his appreciation of said building. And, if he did not share it, it would not occur to him to question Ramonet’s right, for not being Cuban, to express his opinion. It would be like saying: the journalist can only comment on Cuba to praise it; otherwise, he must remain silent. If someone believed that such a “norm” did not resemble the worst of the sectarian secrecy that this country has suffered—doesn’t it already suffer from it?—the writer of this would remember the words of his grandparents: “May God come down and kill me!”
Due to his vision of the conspicuous hotel under construction, Ramonet has not only been the subject of approval on the one hand and rejection on the other. It has also raised questions that go beyond him and fall directly on Cuba, its institutional authorities and its architects. What if no one raised their voice in time to express displeasure at this work in progress. Where were the country’s architects… That and more. But these are unfair and uninformed extremes.
Nor were there any lack of warnings from architects about a construction that, by the mere fact of being erected on the chosen site, meant enormous expenses, given the requirements of a furnia that to non-specialized eyes appears to be of marine origin.
Whatever its origin, the foundations of the work would require, in addition to great efforts, quantities of materials with which who knows how many homes could have been made in a country and a city that need them so much.
For now, it was pointed out in 2022 by a text paying tribute to Fidel Castro that, published in Cubaperiodistas, lamented from within – not from the enemy’s hornet’s nest – the noticeable contradiction between the relatively low occupancy of rooms already available for tourism and the housing deficit. for the citizens, for the people. None of this seems to have been taken into account, despite the calamities that such a deficit causes even due to fatal accidents, not only due to problems of coexistence, and due to political effects.
As for urban planning, unless “cyber” viruses have accounted for them, it will not be difficult to find sharp assessments made by architects. They even reacted against the physical height of a building that—as the arguments put forward—would violate the limit set for Havana, not by any reference landmark, but by the obelisk of the José Martí Memorial in the Plaza de la Revolución that bears its name.
There was also talk of the incongruity of this work with the environment in which it would be built, and it is already being built. But, from what could be seen, or sensed, the criteria of renowned architects and urban planners, or other professionals, were not taken into account. The Office of the City Historian does not even seem to have been given its due voice.
But what has been put on the table in the face of Ignacio Ramonet’s brief judgment on that building goes far beyond what could be considered natural discrepancies in any sphere of life, especially in those where subjectivity plays a relevant role. Regarding that hotel, the most dissimilar positions may be had: whoever writes this will not be the only one to avoid looking at it, to save himself the displeasure of seeing it; But there will be those who feel fascinated by its ostentatious image, even if it is of a taste that for many is debatable, or more so.
However, what is most alarming is the sectarianism that is perceived in some of the opinions expressed around Ramonet’s. They even settle into a villageism that – as often happens in such cases – oscillates between vanity and ignorance. Without excluding hints of infertile rages and nothing at all related to the spirit of founding cordiality.
This article does not intend to ignore Ramonet’s relations with Cuba, where it is obvious—not by chance—that there are those who respect him as a disciple. If he wanted it, he would find himself in a reality that, by showing how lacking is the measure, balance and just passion that are needed for a healthy and fruitful exercise of judgment. It is a reality capable of stimulating the author to use an expression that, although useful, is far from pleasing him, to say that these successes seem to be some of our pending subjects.
#exercise #judgment #opinion #architecture