About damn time indeed!

It is absolutely impossible to study Cuban literature in its proper context without access to the island itself. Understanding that literature is the key to understanding the Cuban cultures both on the island and in exile, as well as the various political positions that have resulted.

Politicians controlling our access to this information seem to confuse studying ideas with endorsing those same ideas.

It is impossible to gain any deep understandong of the island’s current literary milieu without observing it, visiting it, holding exchanges with it, taking part in it. There are enough complicating factors regarding access to Cuban literature, books, and information as is without the U.S., flagship of free speech and free press, adding to the problem.

If we cannot have access to what is actually being written in Cuba right now, and a study of circumstances under which that writing does (or does not) take place, we cannot possibly study Cuban literature in any meaningful way. Not being able to do so leaves everyone on ALL sides open to the real and physical dangers of half-baked, reductionist, cherry-picked, pseudo-intellectual approaches that the current administration has exhibited in its written plans for post-Castro Cuba.

writer, at 2:10 pm EDT on May 26, 2006

it shouldn’t be a vacation

Kevin, For what it is worth, you might want to actually ask the academics that have gone to Cuba what sort of accommodations they did. At best, there have always been currency controls on academics and journalists traveling abroad, so they probably did not spend money in the way that Europeans do. The few academics I know that went to Cuba lived modestly, and stuck pretty much to their research. I don’t really care one way or the other about Castro.

Larry, at 12:15 pm EDT on May 27, 2006

Any Americans going to Cuba

I agree with whatever group is trying to allow Americans to travel to Cuba. The United States prohibition of travel to Cuba is wrong. It hurts our Cuban brothers and sisters...With Love and Peace.

John Paul Cabrera, at 10:00 pm EDT on May 28, 2006

Kevin, Well, your story is somewhat disturbing. Some changes in the Dept. of State’s regs recently may prohibit some of the activities that you describe. Whether life in Cuba is a “horror” as compared to live in other 3d-world countries is anyone’s guess. Cuba probably has an edge over some countries with some form of Democracy in some areas, but not in others. For various reason, probably not relevant here, I am disturbed by the practice of calling undergrad junkets “research.” But what can I say? People seem to think that “Semester at Sea” is a neat thing.

Anyway, I had written, and posted what the legal arguments will probably be in this case. They didn’t make it the first time. In short, under the commerce clause of the constitution, the federal government gets to regulate commerce with Cuba. Art. I, 8, cl. 3. Careful to avoid trampling on peoples’ enumerated constitutional rights, Congress has delegated a lot of the decision-making regrading who can legally go to Cuba to the Department of Treasury. You can read the summary of them here: http://www.treasury.gov/offices/e...t/ofac/programs/cuba/cuba_tr_app.pdf. Essentially, activities that could arguably be protected by the 1st amendment are allowed. That is, press-related and church-related (and some academic) travel can be legally accomplished by applying for a permit to visit Cuba. It is a fairly comprehensive regulatory scheme which appears to reflect Congress’ and the executive’s desire, and perhaps need to regulate our relationship with Cuba, and accomplish some foreign policy goals. (Of course some think that they are misguided, but that isn’t my point.)

However, while the commerce clause provides the federal government with the power to regulate commerce between the US and other countries, by negative implication the states lack that power. So, for example, in Wardair Canada v. Florida Dept. Of Revenue, 477 U.S. 1, 7-8 (1986), the court held that, “In recognition of the importance of this conviction, we have acknowledged the self-executing nature of the Commerce Clause and held on countless occasions that, even in the absence of specific action taken by the Federal Government to disapprove of state regulation implicating interstate or foreign commerce, state regulation that is contrary to the constitutional principle of ensuring that the conduct of individual States does not work to the detriment of the Nation as a whole, and thus ultimately to all of the States, may be invalid under the unexercised Commerce Clause.”

Larry, at 2:05 pm EDT on May 30, 2006

Cuba

Kevin,

You mentioned boycotts of South Africa and ISrael, neither of which were as pervasive or devestating as the long, long, long, long boycott of Cuba, which as caused life to be very difficult for years and years and years for many civlilians in Cuba. I am not aware of any real boycott of Israel. I get clothes made from there in the stores, have been there to attend a conference. I remember when Woopie Goldberg went to South Africa and other stars complained, but nothing happened to her.

Margaret

Margaret, UNLV, at 5:15 pm EDT on August 22, 2006