Customer Reviews

Blood River

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

The author follows the footsteps of the explorer Henry M. Stanley across the Congo Republic and down the River to the Atlantic. What took Stanley three years, takes Butcher 45 days. That may seem like progress of sorts, but still is a very long time even for overland travel of a few thousand miles. Like Stanley before him, Butcher has to rely on a large number of friendly Africans, and is helped along the way be many capable and conscientious people whom he can offer little as reward.

Butcher describes a country which has deteriorated over the forty years since independence. Roads and railways have been reclaimed by the rain forest and rotted in the tropical weather. Schools, hotels, and government buildings are mere ruins of their former splendor. Good food and clean water are always a problem to find. Butcher describes how his mother could tourist through the Congo fifty years ago, traveling on trains, buses, and river steamers, which made their schedules on time and were comfortable and excellent. For decades nobody has traveled overland along the tracks taken by Butcher.

Butcher is a good writer, his descriptions are vivid and visible. Towards the end of the book he asks: why? Why has the Congo especially deteriorated so completely since independence? The outsiders in general, the Europeans during the colonial era were only interested in stripping the land of its assets, only in taking the ivory, rubber, copper, timber and other natural materials. Like others before him, Butcher offers some arguments in explanation. Africans have not been able to manage their sovereignty, have not been able to work together in democracy and law. I don't think he has the answer either.

Tim Butcher was Africa correspondent for the UK's Daily Telegraph when he decided to follow Stanley's route of 1874-77 down the Congo from central Africa to the Atlantic. Butcher's story is both riveting and depressing. Riveting as he writes well of his travels and is able to punctuate his story with relevant historical outlines of a regions past and with well chosen and revealing interviews (he is a journalist after all) with local individuals.

However it is also a depressing tale of a country which, in Butcher's words is not underdeveloped, but is un-developing. It is clear that it's post Stanley colonial period under the Belgians was far from pleasant but even the limited gains of this period have vanished in the post-colonial chaos largely instigated not just by ex colonial powers and African neighbours keen to control the Congo's vast resources, but also by a failure of indigenous leadership which has appeared happier to exploit rather than govern the peoples of the Congo. To me it seemed, to use the parallels of the continent just across the ocean, that the Congo has resources & potential like Brazil, but the self-destructive politics of late 19th century Paraguay.

On a personal level Butcher's trip appears a unique event. The Congo no longer has cross country links - by road or river. Cities, towns and settlements survive on their own in isolation, retreating into the bush when trouble comes, as it often has. The United Nations has a tenuous presence, often providing the only sense of order, but even then this appears to be restricted to isolated key towns.

Butcher was really only able to travel because of outside agencies such as the UN from whom he hitched lifts on UN ships and aircraft. Although there is a telling remark by one UN official who describes him not as journalist, historian or tourist but as an "adventurer". The real heroes are the (very few) local aid agencies, such as Care International and International Rescue Committee, working in great danger and difficulty and who offer both lodging and transportation to Butcher across the Bush. At times I felt the "adventurer" in the author was unnecessarily endangering the lives (and work) of these people as he strove to accomplish his journey. It is noticeable that little real help was offered by those few Congolese companies and agencies in a position to assist.

It is clear that Stanley would still recognise the vast region if he were to return today - that is what ultimately is most depressing to the author, as well as the reader.

The journalist Tim Butcher took to cross Zaire from East to West on the traces of Stanley. To reach the Congo River he had first to travel west, through provinces that have been in a state of near-permanent rebellion for more than 40 years, and where cannibalism remains as real today as it was in the 19th century, when bearer parties refused to take explorers there for fear of being eaten. Even if he made it to the river, he would still have 2500 km of descent before reaching the place where the Congo River spews into the Atlantic. A stretch where there was no more official traffic. It turned out to be a more nerve racking journey he could have ever imagined.
One has to know that Zaire was ever more run down economically since the colonial power left the country in the sixties. The whole infrastructure broke down, railway, streets, ferries, shipping, no matter which stage of a journey you choose it will not only be adventurous but also dangerous, because marauding gangs roam the country. What the author accomplishes is daring. His journey does not so much differ from the journeys of the explorers of the 19th century.
Butcher has an unbothering style of writing. He is not inclined to exaggerations. He is not in need of that. The events speak for themselves! He underwent the process of understanding the political and economical background which made Zaire to what it is now. Nothing to gloss over. The whites exploited the country but also built it up, that the exploitation could go on. The blacks exploited the country and its people even more. The people have no perspective, their hearts are broken and vulgarizing.
The territory that Stanley staked in the name of the Belgian King Leopold witnessed what many regard as the first genocide of the modern era, when millions of Congolese were effectively worked to death trying to meet the colonialists almost insatiable demand for resources. And since independence, foreign powers have toyed with the Congo, stripping its mineral assets and exploiting its strategic position, never mindful of the suffering inflicted on its people. At every stage of its bloody history, outsiders have tended to treat Congolese as somehow sub-human, not worthy of the consideration they would expect for themselves.
The author is often meeting eye witnesses of massacres and other atrocities. The safest place for a Congolese is the forest, in which he escapes whenever marauders haunt the village. And Butcher as well finds a liking in the jungles which are so much nicer than the dismal villages and decayed cities. There are also no embarrassing fraternization scenarios or occult orgies as for example Hanlon has it. Butcher is about humanity and reason, about development aid for the Congolese that they find to a humane life.
The wars had one major effect in that there were only two ways left for the Congolese to get on with life. Before, there was a system of schools to go to paid for by the state, a transport system so that people could reach other parts of the country, a health system so that one had a chance of recovery. But then all was gone "so that you only have two real options - you join a church, the only organisation that provides an education, a way for someone to develop, or you join one of the militias and profit from the war."
The collapse of the state meant that its people either relied on the charity of outsiders or took to violence.
"But the major lesson I learned on my trek through modern central Africa was that the most valuable asset stolen from the Congo was the sovereignty of its people."
Before Stanley and the white rule, the people of the Congo had a sense for local power. The society was tribal with the authority lying in the hands of the village chiefs. No chief could ignore the will of the subjects. Decisions had to be taken, at least partly with the interest of the people in mind. The whites stripped all aspects of sovereignty from the people and they got it never back.
"One of the great fallacies about white rule in Africa was that when it ended, power was handed back to the people of Africa:"
Instead it was hijacked by elites who publicly claimed they were working for the interest of the people, but were in fact only driven by self-interest. In Zaire it was Mobutu who ignored the plight of his people. Dictators and undemocratic regimes conceal their own malicious administration and corruptness by claiming sovereignty. They cloak themselves in it to dismiss the right of any outsider to hold them to account.
I can recommend this book. It is worth reading. It closes a gap in understanding this region and the problems of the black continent. It is altogether a stunning travel book through one of the remotest places on this Earth. But do not try to walk in his footsteps!

This is a bad book. Journalist Tim Butcher decides to retrace Stanley's journey across the Congo. Butcher is no expert in the region and his ignorance of both history and the Congo is constantly on display. Contrary to the impressions given, its safer to travel in Congo now than has been since the 1950s. And the route taken by Butcher is one of the safest routes. He talks about the remoteness of the Congo but throughout the book NGOs and the UN are shown to be operating almost everywhere. This book is ok as an exaggerated third-rate adventure story but you will not learn anything useful about the Congo. As alternatives I would suggest Lieve Joris' "Back to the Congo" which was written about a trip during a very dangerous time and "No Mercy" by Remond O'Hanlon.

For a man who constantly reminds us how 'obsessed' he has been by the story of Stanley and the Congo, Butcher makes an awful lot of mistakes. They begin on the first page when he compares his efforts at packing little more than a 'penknife' with Stanley's need to bring a small army to carry medicine against ebola and other fatal diseases. Butcher seems to be unaware that ebola didn't emerge until the 1970's. You get the feeling that he just hasn't read enough, certainly about Stanley, his supposed mirror image. He seems to accept wholeheartedly the concept of colonialist Stanley, shill to King Leopold rather than the more complex character, documented by biographers like Jeal, that Stanley's hopes for the Congo were benign. At least then, we can admire Butcher's efforts to force his way west through the jungle. Well, sort of. It's hard to think of a single leg of his journey that isn't aided by either an NGO (on the back of a bike) or else by the UN (in a boat or a helicopter). Compared to other Congo journeys such as Redmond O'Hanlon, this is Congo light. Butcher doesn't come across as a bad man, just unprepared. He may ask hard questions along the way, but there are few signs that the Congo and Stanley are true obsessions of his. His knowledge seems thin. No wonder when you read his slim bibliography, devoid of both Jeal and Meredith, two of the better historians who've dealt with central Africa.

Tim Butcher, a journalist for The Daily Telegraph decides to recreate H.M. Stanley's famous expedition in the 1870's. (Stanley had been also sponsored by the same newspaper!) He was also curious to see the country that his mother had visited in the 1950's as a tourist. He was told that by just about everyone he contacted that the journey was impossible, but against the odds he manages to enlist the help of aid workers (including a pygmy human rights activist and the Malaysian commander of a vessel working for the UN) and others. Each stage of the journey is uncertain, and he's constantly in danger of his life and in great discomfort. But he does manage in the end to find the transport he needs (motorcycles, dugouts, a UN barge) and the journey continues. It's impossible not to salute his courage.

Blood River : A Journey into Africa's Broken Heart is a fascinating account, not just because it takes us into a part of the world we wouldn't normally venture into and lets us share the journey (from our comfy armchairs!), but also for the historical perspectives which are woven into the narrative.

In the space of half a century, Congo has gone completely backwards - it is not "a developing country", or an "underdeveloped country", so much as an "un-developing country", going backwards so fast that almost nothing remains of the infrastructure left under Belgian rule due to the greed and incompetence of its leaders. It's a terrifying portrait of how quickly things can unravel. You also come to realise that putting things right isn't a matter of throwing financial aid at the problems, but in establishing the rule of law.

It's impossible not to really pity the ordinary people of this failed country, but that there is such potential for economic growth (minerals, fertile land) turns this missed opportunity into a grand tragedy.

The book was chosen as one of the reads for the Richard and Judy bookclub and of course made the shortlist for this year's Samuel Johnson Prize.

Initially, Tim Butcher's account of his "insanely dangerous" (his words, not mine) trip through the Congo raises the question why? Why put yourself through the very real risks of being captured or killed by the numerous rebel groups that infest the country? Why endure the mind-numbing boredom of hundreds and hundreds of kilometres on the back of motorcycles negotiating stiflingly hot jungle tracks? Why bother to retrace Stanley's already well documented expedition down the Congo river? Is this man mad?... certainly most of those he meets on this very strange journey think so.

But, mad or not, what he discovers makes for fascinating reading as he and we are taken into the heart of what has become an unbelievably shocking world... one that has degenerated in 50 years from ruthlessly harsh colonial discipline & order to complete and apparently irreversible anarchy. The roads are gone, the railways are gone, the buildings have been consumed by the jungle; there is no law and little or no administrative structure; towns have no electricity, clean water or medicine; bribery, theft and casual violence are rampant; people live in constant fear of raids from rebel groups, and hundreds of thousands are killed each year simply because they are in the wrong tribe or the wrong place. Sure, there are other third world countries in such a terrible condition but few with the huge natural resources and riches of the Congo, few where this state of affairs has existed for so long, and few that receive so little attention from the rest of the world.

Critics of the book suggest that the picture he paints is over-stated and that his grasp of the Congo's history is flawed - unless you or they are mad enough to emulate his trip who knows? But he's been around in enough of the world's trouble-spots to draw a measure over what he sees and, while his writing is less than tight in places and his understandable desire to "keep in the background" means that his discussions with the people he meets on the way are often cursory, the snapshots of life he returns with are vivid enough to make you question much more than his sanity in what is, in the end, a revealing and harrowingly thought-provoking account of one man's gruelling trek through a totally lost country.

Tim Butcher has written a thrilling account of his journey into Congo. It's a classic page turner - would he make it; what would happen round the next bend of the river? He writes with typical English sang-froid about some pretty hair-raising experiences that left me feeling sweaty. But I never felt I was anything other than immersed in his journey; Butcher writes powerfully and emotionally about the people he comes across and the book is very moving. It's also a fascinating insight into the collapse of an extraordinary country with a terrible history. Butcher's journey is a visceral and revealing account of how this happened. But this isn't just a book for Africa-watchers; it's a book for anyone who loves a rattling good story.

Greetings

This is a great read because of the back-drop. Tim Butcher has impeccable good taste and it is a very funny and moving account of his travels through the DRC Congo. The country acts as a prism for Tims character and judgement to really shine through -the worse the back-drop the more it resonates with his soul as he wrestles wih the moral/ethical, geo-political and logistical issues.

Key question -what does a basicaly decent guy do in a country gone to hell. Answer: Outrun the cannibals (and threaten to pee in their soup if put on the menu to be boiled and eaten). The answers are not as easy and the travel is a lot harder. The sins of the Fathers are visited upon the childen unto the 3rd and 4th generation, or something to that effect.

Here is what I enjoy about Tims great style in this book:

Discretion and diplomacy -he is the opitome of good taste (figuratively speaking)
Non judgemental
Sensitive spirit
Dream centered
Real life execution
Well researched
Factually correct
Accountable
Tell it like it is
Human
Funny
Sad and heart breaking
Spading the truth, calls a spade a spade "in the nicest possible way".

The moral of the story is that you do the best that you can with the options you have. In the DRC, that means that you dont outrun the cannibals, you just outrun the fat guy behind you, which, on a personal level, amounts to nearly the same thing.

Some thoughts that come to mind:

"Are there any nuns that have been raped recently that speak English?"

"In Congo, Put your trust in God, but keep your gunpowder dry".

A great read, highly recommended, at a medium heat, lightly salted.

Justice Malanot
South Africa