The Art of Political Murder: Who Killed the Bishop? by Francisco Goldman
My rating: 5 of 5 stars
This is an excellent book. Francisco Goldman is a beautiful writer and he somehow navigates the lives of many characters and the complicated intertwined interests of the case of Bishop Gerardi’s murder, introducing unfamiliar readers to the vast and complex relationships between military, church and state in Guatemala. I learned a lot about Guatemala’s recent history through this book, and gained a basic grasp of the interests at stake in the investigation of a case like this one.
I was disappointed when the book ended, however, because there were still so many unanswered questions. Obviously, that’s because there are still many unanswered questions in the case that may or may not go on unanswered forever. But Goldman set up foreshadowing and dangling questions throughout the narrative with the implication that he would in some way tie them up at some later point in the book. For many of these dangling issues, that never happened. We never found out more about Father Mario’s perspective? And there was little analysis of what exactly the motives were in this crime. “Why would the Army have killed the bishop two days after the release of the report?” is a question Goldman poses but never quite addresses. For me, the motives behind the crime were eclipsed by the intertwined lies and cover ups. The book carries the tone of a fly-on-the-wall journalist (albeit an extremely knowledgable one with incredible access to the case), who tirelessly describes everything that went on. Maybe the omission of clear conclusions was a safety measure for Goldman, who surely must have felt endangered himself by his close participation and contact with all the case’s stakeholders. More likely, the confusion and lack of clarity on most questions was natural and intrinsic to this case. He never clearly discounts any of the other accusations and theories that were put forth, although it’s clear he does not support them. The personal friendships that Goldman clearly had with the investigators in this case make him an ideal teller of this story.
The cliffhanger at the end leaves us wondering what happened with the “second stage” of the judicial process.
