The book under review presents a rather complex picture. On one hand, it contains some extremely interesting details that can captivate the reader's attention. However, it is also a very difficult read, perhaps due to the author's writing style or the complexity of the subject matter.

Well Researched for apologetic framework
The author of this book clearly has a deep admiration for Che. This is evident in the way he presents Che as a romantic hero, without addressing any of the more questionable and controversial aspects of the myth. Instead, he goes into brutal detail on insignificant matters, while brushing over the crucial aspects such as the revolution's infancy and seizure of control.

Finally, the author seems to be somewhat apologetic, brushing off any flaws in Che's actions based on the circumstances and his affliction with asthma. This approach may not be entirely satisfactory for readers who are looking for a more objective and comprehensive analysis of Che and his role in history. Overall, while the book has some interesting points, it also has several不足之处 that need to be taken into account.

Bazı noktalarda fazla detaylara girilse de, genel olarak başarılı bir biyografi. Olaylara tarafsız bir gözle bakılarak yazılması çok önemli.

This biography, although it may go into excessive details in some points, is generally a successful one. Writing it with an unbiased eye towards the events is of utmost importance.

Details can sometimes enhance the understanding of a person's life, but too much of it might overshadow the main narrative. However, in this case, the author has managed to strike a balance.

By approaching the events objectively, the biographer has been able to present a more accurate and comprehensive picture of the subject's life. This allows the readers to form their own opinions and interpretations.

In conclusion, despite the minor flaws in the level of detail, this biography is a valuable piece of work that offers insights into the life of the subject.

Well, from several perspectives, I can jot down a few words about this book here. First of all, in my opinion, this book is quite inspiring. In terms of recording events and being complete and comprehensive, I really don't know where I should start to give my opinion. I just want to say that I had different images about the strange life and the Cuban Revolution. Another point is that, from an ideological perspective, Che Guevara is in a much lower position compared to other leaders of the Red Revolutions in history. Overall, the driving force of Che Guevara was more of a feeling rather than a rational political ideological aggregation. Especially after a trip he took in his youth across South America, where he saw the poverty of the people and gradually his thoughts took on an anti-imperialist form. Perhaps it was because of this feeling that he was attracted to the proletarian slogans of the socialist movements. Of course, all these Red movements really have good slogans, but what about in practice? It would have been better to study the past of socialist communities. The understanding that he had of the Soviet Union was very close to the truth.

Che Guevara is an angel compared to other leaders of communist movements. He had moral principles. He had a conscience. And his being a commander, a member of the party, his power and position never made him become a proletarian. On the contrary, in my opinion, until the end, he remained with the proletariat and from the same stratum. An incident that did not happen to Stalin, did not happen to Lenin, did not happen to Trotsky, Mao or the others. I have no opinion about Fidel Castro. I'm not saying that Che Guevara's hands are not stained with blood, but surely compared to the other names I mentioned, Che Guevara is an angel.

Well, I must try to talk about the book itself. I would have preferred to read more about the Cold War, the Cuban Missile Crisis, and the past of Cuba after Che's death. It is related to the main topic, but still more could have been paid to these issues because surely one cannot write about Che Guevara without talking about Cuba, Fidel Castro and other things that were very fruitful in Che Guevara's life. I want to say that okay, this is how Che Guevara was, but after all these stories, where did Cuba's actions lead? For example, the book "The Red Revolutionary Life", Lenin devotes a lot to the events after Lenin's death. Overall, the book "Comrade, Life and Death of Che Guevara" is not as attractive as the biographies of Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky for me. But I think from the perspective of comprehensiveness, the author has done his job.

The original text seems to be in Persian. Here is an English expansion based on a rough understanding:

In this context, the issue at hand is of great importance. It is not a simple matter but rather a complex one that requires careful consideration. The situation demands that we take appropriate actions to address it. We cannot afford to be complacent or忽视 the gravity of the situation. There are various factors at play, and we need to analyze them thoroughly. We must also communicate effectively with all the relevant parties to ensure a coordinated effort. Only by doing so can we hope to find a satisfactory solution and move forward.

Please note that the translation and expansion may not be entirely accurate due to the limitations of understanding the original Persian text without proper context. If you can provide more context or clarify the meaning of the original text, a more accurate translation and expansion can be provided.

This is available in translation of the Spanish-language original biography and may suffer as a result.

Anderson's 'Che Guevara' is more readable. It is detailed and well-documented, but the bulk of the text is arduous going.

The concluding chapter, which describes Guevara's posthumous cultural influence, is, however, almost lyrical and, I think, insightful.

It seems that Anderson has put a lot of effort into researching and writing this biography. The detailed information and well-documented facts make it a valuable resource for those who want to know more about Che Guevara.

Although the main part of the text may be a bit difficult to read, the concluding chapter makes up for it. It provides a unique perspective on Guevara's cultural influence and shows how his ideas and image have continued to inspire people around the world.

If there's a better biography available, I don't know of it. Anderson's 'Che Guevara' is a must-read for anyone interested in this iconic figure.

Interesante y completa, por momentos soporífera, biografía de Ernesto Che Guevara, por el mexicano Jorge Castañeda.

The book offers a detailed account of Che Guevara's life, which is both interesting and at times rather dull. It contains a wealth of information, but this abundance can make it feel heavy, especially when going through the economic measures during Che's tenure as the minister of production and president of the Central Bank of Cuba.

I took 5 years to read it,穿插着 other readings. Despite its flaws, I would still recommend it.

It provides valuable insights into the life and times of one of the most iconic figures in Latin American history.

Whether you are a history enthusiast or simply interested in learning more about Che Guevara, this biography is worth a read.

It offers a comprehensive view of his life, from his early years to his tragic end.

Overall, it is a significant work that adds to our understanding of this complex and influential figure.

My first acquaintance with one of the most charismatic Latin comrades, this book beautifully presents Che from every angle.

Enhanced by the highly chronological narrative details, this biography reads like a fictional story.

The author delves deep into the character of Che, even to the innermost recesses.

It provides a comprehensive and engaging account of Che's life, revealing his ideals, struggles, and achievements.

Through vivid descriptions and a well-structured narrative, the book brings Che to life on the pages, allowing readers to gain a deeper understanding of this iconic figure.

Whether you are a history enthusiast or simply interested in learning about remarkable individuals, this biography of Che is a must-read.

It offers a fascinating glimpse into the life and times of a revolutionary who had a profound impact on the world.

Like other heroes in the world, there are two interesting things that they do, namely reading and writing.

Che Guevara has read classic books including socialist-communism since childhood. He always wrote about what he did during his life journey. The notes during his travels were developed into a title called The Motorcycle Diaries.

Despite his controversial life, for me, the interesting thing is reading and writing. It is through reading that we can gain knowledge and inspiration from different eras and cultures. And writing allows us to express our thoughts and experiences, leaving a mark on the world.

Just like Che Guevara, we can also explore the world through reading and record our own stories through writing. This not only enriches our own lives but also has the potential to inspire others. So, let's pick up a book and start reading, and then pick up a pen and start writing.

**Expanded Article**

''Coño Che, nadie sabe qué cojones hacemos aquí''

(Emilio Aragonés a Ernest Guevara, Congo, 1965, pag. 365)

I decided to read this biography because I have always had an ambivalence towards the appreciation of Che. He always seemed to me a heroic rebel and at the same time a radical and fanatical communist. And political fanaticism often doesn't appeal to me as it often results in restrictions on freedom of the press. Several newspapers close, and the main radio stations are requisitioned by the government. The university is pressured to align with the government, and professors with independent thinking and long traditions leave the country (pag 224). This is what happened in Fidel Castro's Cuba once the alliance with the Soviet Union was ensured.

In several parts of this biography, Che appears as a man trapped in his ideology, reluctant to any form of pragmatism. For example, in economic matters: In the early years after the triumph of the revolution led by Fidel Castro in 1959, Che was in charge of reorganizing the Cuban economy, first as president of the National Bank and then as minister of Industries. His plan was to create a planned economy with total centralization of decision-making, rapid industrialization of the island, less dependence on the monoculture of sugar, and moral incentives (instead of material incentives). By 1963, it was evident that Che's plans and the speed with which he tried to implement them were not yielding results. Instead of rethinking his ideas and considering alternatives (from introducing certain aspects of a market economy to simply reforming the economy in a more gradual way) and then helping to solve the current economic problems, he was sidelined from the control of the Cuban economy. Alternatives to his ideas and theories were not an option for him to consider. Che realized that the viable alternatives to the course followed in 1961 - 1962 (under his leadership) were hateful: necessary but bitter. Between continuing to fight for the impossible or accepting the ambivalent coexistence with an inevitable but ungrateful and despicable course, he preferred the "fuite en avant" towards Africa, Bolivia, and history. Any other way out seemed ignoble (pag 273 - 274).

Also in political options, Che seems to be a man of his time, trapped in the ideological polarization of the Cold War. There were Cubans contemporary to Che who managed to get out of that polarization and the need to choose between capitalism and communism. An example is René Ramos Latour, who writes to Che: "the salvation of the world is not behind the iron curtain... Instead, those with your ideological preparation think that the solution to our ills lies in freeing ourselves from the harmful Yankee domination through the no less harmful Soviet domination" (pag 145).

Another thing that caught my attention in this biography is that quite soon Fidel and Che came to believe in their own myth and the legend of the Cuban Revolution. Alongside the guerrillas in the mountains, many people and organizations, unions, and political parties contributed to the final victory of the revolution: a whole urban network that raised money and bought weapons. However, quickly all those people and organizations were marginalized in the imagination of the revolution. With the victory of the revolution, "it would have required a miracle of maturity and modesty to avoid misunderstandings, political and conceptual... How could Fidel, cheered by hundreds of thousands of Cubans, not be convinced that the victory belonged to him, and only to him?... The drift towards the imaginary reconstruction of the epic was inevitable: The 26th of July (Castro's revolutionary movement) did everything, without significant allies; the leadership, with its wisdom and brilliant intuition, was the jack-of-all-trades of victory; Fidel, the supreme leader, the commander-in-chief, was the artificer of a clean-slate conquest of power... There, the multidimensional, complex, and idiosyncratic saga of the mountains would be transformed into a magnificent but simple, flat, and infinitely repeatable feat as long as just and brave men proposed it" (pag 178 - 179).

Che really came to believe that only a small group of men was needed to make a revolution and impose themselves on a regular army. He drew the wrong lessons from the Cuban Revolution and would apply them later during his adventures in Congo and Bolivia, wrong lessons that would contribute to his death in Bolivia. As Jorge Castañeda argues: Che "describes in an insufficient and partly false way what happened in Cuba, extrapolates inappropriately to other latitudes the supposed Cuban teachings, and eludes the nodal point of time: what could be done on one occasion rarely happens again" (pag 180).

Certain aspects of Che's leadership style also caught my attention. Leadership styles that probably would not work in the 21st century. In this biography, in his last years, he is shown as an authoritarian leader, distant from his direct subordinates. The result is the predictable isolation of the authoritarian leader who never receives valuable feedback. When the expedition to Congo is on the verge of failure, Che maintains a "blind optimism" that makes him slow to face reality. One of the reasons for that blind optimism is that "no one dared to speak the truth to him: 'No one ever confronted him'" (pag 381). The same thing happened in Bolivia in 1967 when the supply lines of the urban network with the guerrilla group were broken. "If someone wasn't sent out to make contact with the city, we saw the situation very badly, but we only talked about it among ourselves, we weren't able to tell it to Che" (pag 448). Among the reasons for this inability to face it are the fear of being considered a coward and Che's outbursts of anger, as one of his guerrillas in Congo explains: "We moved away because when he got angry, we left the wild beast alone, we didn't give him shade. No one wanted to be around because we already had the experience of when he got angry" (pag 385). In addition, he often distances himself from his comrades and does not make personal contact easy with his subordinates in Congo: "I don't want to say that (Che) treated us badly, no, but we always saw him alone with his little book, reading and we didn't see him with that disposition, he didn't continuously meet with us as he did at first" (pag 383). Che himself recognizes all this in his book about the expedition in Congo: "the fact of withdrawing to read, fleeing from daily problems, tended to distance me from contact with men, not to mention that there are certain aspects of my character that do not make it easy to be intimate" (pag 392). Another problem with his leadership style is that he imposes an exaggerated and overly demanding discipline. Again, he himself recognizes it: "It was hard, but I don't think it was excessive or unjust" (pag 392).

We can also draw lessons from his personal life about how not to treat people. At the end of 1956, before the departure of the ship Granma towards Cuba to start the revolution, Che already knew that his marriage to Hilda Gadea had ended. He did not communicate it to her but to third parties: "My married life is almost completely broken and will break definitively next month" (pag 127). Two and a half years later, after the victory of the revolution, Hilda arrives in Havana with the hope of being with Che again. However, Che already has a relationship with Aleida March, who will be his second wife, and only breaks his first marriage in 1959. It can be said that he has robbed Hilda of more than two years.

The part of the book that surprised me the most was the last two chapters, which deal with the Guevarist guerrilla in Bolivia in 1967. It is incredible the number of factors that contributed to the failure of that guerrilla, both during the preparation and during the months of wandering in the southeast of Bolivia. The list is long (and incomplete):

1. Absence of internal political conditions. In Bolivia, there was a revolution in 1952 with real achievements: an agrarian reform, the peasants had received land, the creation of powerful unions, and the nationalization of natural resources. In addition, the president of Bolivia, René Barrientos, spoke Quechua and enjoyed real sympathy among the peasants.

2. Ambivalence of intentions: Was it about organizing a passage through Bolivia to Argentina or creating a guerrilla focus in Bolivia?

3. Wrong area: Che started his guerrilla in the southeast of Bolivia: "Ñancahuazú is in an area where there is no population from which the guerrilla can be fed, in a province, the Cordillera, which has almost the extension of Cuba, 82,000 square kilometers, with 40,000 inhabitants" (pag 406), it is "the worst possible place to establish a guerrilla focus. There was a lack of communications, population, and landless peasants. Nor did vegetation, fauna, or water abound, resources necessary for the survival of a guerrilla" (pag 424).

4. Lack of local guerrilla: There was no guerrilla movement in Bolivia. The Cubans were going to be the vanguard, not a support force.

5. Lack of connection with the scarce local population: "The inhabitants of the region through which he wandered aimlessly for months never supported him, never welcomed him, never understood the meaning of his gesture. Not a single peasant will join the guerrilla" (pag 447 - 448).

6. Bad relationship with the Bolivian Communist Party. The PCB opposed the internal armed struggle in Bolivia and felt that it was deceived by the Cubans. The ties between Che and the PCB were broken on December 31, 1966, a few weeks after Che's arrival in Bolivia.

7. There was no complex and well-organized support apparatus. "The urban network" soon stopped functioning. In addition, new combatants also did not come via the urban network.

8. Fidel Castro hides crucial information from Che

9. Poor organization in the camp: There is a lack of weapons, medicines, and food. There are also no Bolivian communists in the camp.

10. Hasty and careless recruitment of new guerrillas. Che wanted to incorporate Bolivian combatants into his troops as soon as possible. Several of the recruited Bolivians soon deserted. Those who remained were not always the best combatants.

11. Lack of communication: The radios stopped working well already in February 1967. From then on, Che could only receive messages but not send them.

12. Illnesses: Asthma, in particular, but also diarrhea plagued Che. The lack of medicines led to fruitless incursions in search of them in places like Samaipata.

13. Amateurism of Che himself: Instead of organizing his camp well and training the few new recruits, at the beginning of 1967, Che embarked on a senseless expedition for almost 7 weeks. When the exhausted guerrillas returned to the camp, they discovered that the Bolivian army had already discovered their camp. Then he made another strategic error: In April, he divided his few troops into 2 groups. They would never see each other again.

14. Amateurism of his collaborators and ineptitude of the Cuban apparatus.

15. US aid to the Bolivian government.

So many reasons that explain the failure, many of them predictable and obvious. The capture and death of Che in October 1967 were not a surprise. Why did Che get into that trap?

Jorge Castañeda manages to set aside the myth and allows us to approach the flesh-and-blood hero that was Che Guevara, "a man whose political ideas were conventional but whose attitude towards power and politics reached epic and exceptional dimensions" (pag 486).

What a life, and what a fascinatingly paradoxical figure.

Che Guevara is undoubtedly one of the most polarizing figures in modern history, and justifiably so. Any rational analysis of his life is bound to leave one with conflicting emotions.

It seems indisputable that Che's heart was in the right place. His pursuit of revolution stemmed from a sincere desire for the well-being of all people, and the degree of self-sacrifice he committed to achieving an egalitarian world was almost superhuman.

If the governments of our world were composed entirely of individuals like Che, perhaps we would live in a partial utopia as he envisioned.

However, then as now, such people are not the typical occupants of our political arenas. Much of Che's story is intertwined with his attempts to reconcile his ideology with those who play politics as usual around him.

Even within his revolutionary government in Cuba, his cadres easily fell into the rhythm of global political theater, which was frustrating. This biography tends to present this as Che's naivety in resisting these "practical politics."

But I would dissent, not only because of the small successes Che achieved in refusing to be a politician. Unwavering ideologues like Che are essential for pushing practical politicians to their limits and challenging their loyalty to the status quo.

Even if Che's methods were not always the most effective in immediate policy measures, his example was of far greater significance to the overall cultural zeitgeist that supported his ultimate quest for social equality.

His unyielding battle for social justice, however, could also be toxic. It not only led to his downfall but also because he waged a tireless war against imperialism, oblivious to the fact that his own methods sometimes strayed into making him something of an imperialist himself.

His belief that he could single-handedly foment revolution regardless of the social environment was practically straight out of the CIA handbook. When he swept across Cuba, the people joined his cause because the social ecosystem was ripe for revolution against a tyrannical government.

But when he exported the revolution to the Congo or Bolivia, he did not encounter similar enthusiasm among the people. In the Congo especially, he seemed perplexed that the Africans did not share his Western concept of national unity and that the Congolese found their identity more deeply rooted in tribal ancestry than under the national banner imposed through imperialist division of Africa.

It is strange that a man who was there to combat that very imperialism failed to anticipate the problem of carrying out that struggle within the imperialist paradigm. It appears that his ego had swollen to such an extent that he believed he could march into places like Congo and Bolivia and single-handedly engineer a revolution, and that the people would simply flock to his cause.

In this regard, his naivety is evident and regrettable. Dying as he did may have helped solidify his legacy and martyrdom, but I think it is highly likely that if he had dedicated himself differently in his final years, he could have made much greater contributions to his cause.

There is a certain allure added to his final years being steeped in such violence, but the misguided futility of that violence also makes it easier for his critics to casually dismiss him as a terrorist. It is impossible to comprehensively weigh the costs and benefits of this on the cultural zeitgeist, but there are undoubtedly both positives and negatives.

As for the biography itself, it is an incredibly well-written and well-researched book. Perhaps it is a bit too exhaustive, at least for what I needed to extract from it. There is a level of minutiae explored here regarding both his personal life and political policy that, while contributing to the book's overall authenticity and accuracy, are not particularly crucial to the overarching narrative of the book.

But if that kind of detailed information is what you're yearning for, then this is the book for you.

"Compañero" (1997) brings us closer to the figure of Ernesto "Che" Guevara. He is a character who, despite being extremely popular, has little-known aspects. Here, we not only encounter the man whose revolutionary trajectory drags the reader from Havana and Algiers to the battlefields of the Congo and Bolivia, but also the doctor, economist, social philosopher, military strategist, and friend and confidant of Fidel Castro.

Using documentation from archives on three continents and material from interviews with the Che's family and comrades, Jorge Castañeda follows him from his childhood in the bosom of a comfortable middle-class Argentine family to the years of pilgrimage that turned him into a revolutionary. He examines his complex relationship with Fidel and analyzes the causes that forced him to leave Cuba to end up fighting in the Congo and then in Bolivia, where he would be executed. In addition to describing the Che's life and work in detail, this biography offers us a glimpse into the ideology that marked his life. In fact, a very interesting aspect of this work is the sociological tenor that extends as a line throughout its pages and informs about the social and political background in Latin America during the time when the Che lived.

"Compañero" is an excellent portrait of an icon who continues to fascinate and inspire people around the world. It is a biography that aims to clarify and inform about the figure of the Che without feeding the myth but also without trying to destroy it. Despite not hiding his sympathy for the character and the revolutionary idea, there are many criticisms that the author makes. Aspects such as the persecution of the free press and dissidents after the Cuban revolution are described in detail without seeking extenuating circumstances. The same happens with the role played by the Che in the executions at La Cabaña. But, just as he is not carried away by the hero worship, Castañeda does not align himself with the anti-communist witch hunt and, instead, manages to present a critical portrait of the Che and his life in the context of history.

Although the chronic style of this work prevents it from being read like a novel, I have found it fascinating. Likewise, thanks to the huge amount of data it provides and the sources it cites, this reading has been extremely informative. This is not a text for those who expect an idealized portrait of the figure of the Che, but for those who can do without a literary style full of pathos and romantic elements, this is the perfect biography.

Che's story is indeed interesting and powerful.

This is the main reason why I awarded this book 3 stars. However, I have to admit that I didn't really like the way the author presented the story. It seemed very unorganized, which made it a bit difficult for me to fully engage with the narrative.

As a result, I have decided to read "Che Guevara: A Revolutionary Life", which is quite a popular book. I am hoping that this one will offer a more structured and engaging account of Che's life and revolutionary activities.

Maybe I will find that I like this book even more than the previous one. Only time will tell.

I am looking forward to delving into the pages of this new book and learning more about the iconic figure of Che Guevara.