Customer Reviews

Dinner with Mugabe: The Untold Story of a Freedom Fighter who Became a Tyrant

5 star:		(7)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

Although Heidi Holland met Mugabe only a couple of times, she still provides some good interviews and insights into Mugabe. He has unfortunately proved to be one of the worst leaders of the past couple of decades. Look at the results of his presidency--100,000% inflation, massive food shortages and an 80% unemployment rate. Zimbabwe is an embarrassment to Africa and it didn't have to be that way. Here's a detailed critique of what went wrong, where it went wrong and who is responsible. Mugabe is an intriguing figure because he began his career largely heralded by everyone as a freedom fighter like Nelson Mandela. To see how tragically it turned out, leaves many questions; it's a void Holland is clearly trying to fill.

Holland writes well--the words are fluid and vivid and so it's easy to see how her years of reporting for the BBC, the Guardian and many other reputable news organizations has helped. The book is broken into 15 chapters with an index and bibliography for further reading. I do have one complaint, that I wish this were written by someone who had spent more time with Mugabe instead of relying mostly on interviews and a couple of brief encounters with him.

However, I am glad this book was written and even more glad that it was published in America! I heard Heidi interviewed on the BBC and was dismayed that the book was available for sale only in South Africa. (Note: The book was rushed into production here so the British grammar remains. IE: magnetised instead of magnetized.) Yes, we are interested in the subject here too and are horrified by the still unfolding tragedy of Zimbabwe. If only there was something more we could do to help, but what?

Ms Holland repeatedly interviewed many people close to Mugabe over the course of his political years, and a couple of people who have known him all his life. She also interviewed Mugabe himself, but those who complain that the book should have been written by someone who knew Mugabe well are missing the point. Her take on his life, career, and psychology is neutral and thoughtful, and although she is not a psychologist/psychiatrist herself she worked closely with several professionals in the field to arrive at her conclusions.

If you want to understand the situation in Zimbabwe, a country where I grew up (it was Rhodesia then), she makes it accessible and her analysis of Mugabe's character is logical and based on painstaking research. She doesn't excuse or downplay what Mugabe has done, but she offers explanations for his behavior which make sense, and plenty of insight into all the other factors which have played into the tragedy of that beautiful country. There is plenty of blame to go around!

This is one of the best books I have ever read. Robert Mugbae is clearly mentally unstable and to ignore that fact would be ignoring the truth about what is currently happening in Zimbabwe. Holland made an enormous effort to find and interview friends, relatives, acquaintances and priests that has ever known Mugabe. She explores the social and political environment that molded Mugabe as well as what it was like growing up with religious zealot for a mother and no father whatsoever. Muagbe's mother knew that Robert was a gifted and sensitive child from birth and told him that he was specially picked from God to lead the nation. Perhaps this is where his narcissism and persecutory delusions come from. Holland offers these valuable psychological insights into what is going on in his head. A lot of writers analyze political leaders in a chest-pumping way that only glamourizes their power and material wealth. Holland actually tries to understand who Mugabe is as a person and how that influenced him as a leader. I will highly recommend accompanying this book with Dr. Martha Stout's "The Myth of Sanity." It is about DID and once I finished reading it, I was convinced Mugabe had it. I highly recommend both books

This is a terrific approach to biography, and a very insightful read. President Mugabe is a difficult man to understand and Holland's work shows that it is just as hard to understand him if you are his tailor or his priest. One finds there are more questions than answers when examining this troubled leader.

With apologies to the above reviewer for twisting her review title, I agree with portions of the review. I found the book seemed to be an attempted psychoanalysis of Mugabe. Perhaps this would be a good idea by a professional psychiatrist or social worker but not from a journalist. For example at one point the author condemns Mugabe's immaturity for ordering his cabinet members to wear suits and ties to their meetings rather than t-shirts and other casual wear. The author states that due to Mugabe's immaturity and insecurity that he cannot be innovative and allow "traditional African wear" (combat fatigues and t-shirts!) I would assume that Mugabe only wanted to emphasize the serious nature of a cabinet meeting. When the author interviews Mugabe she does ask good questions relevant to the changes that have taken place over Mugabe's reign in Zimbabawe but again, in addition to quoting his remarks she then psychoanalyzes nearly every utterance. There are many other examples like this in the book.

Other than that repeating annoyance the book was quite good. Heidi Holland has constructed a biography of Mugabe that provides insight into his seemingly nonsensical change from a visionary, pro-democratic leader into his current destructive tyranny. The book was filled with information on what caused Mugabe's change over the years and contains many interviews with relatives, co-workers, mentors, political friends and enemies and I felt it was a very worthwhile read for that reason despite the psychoanalytical shortcomings.

The writer starts with a mysterious dinner that she was not invited to in her own home. The mystery guest is Mugabe prior to his leap to power. Holland also states how she nearly lost her job by putting Mugabe's photo on the front page of a magazine that she was writing for. She ends with a recount of her last interview with Mugabe with only several questions that she asked him (including "Did you ever love someone?" His response was, "I must have. I have married twice.")

Facts are missing in "Dinner with Mugabe." "Mugabe" by Martin Meredith outlines the facts behind the corruption of Mugabe's administration, including within his family. Holland talks (repeatedly and over many, many pages) about her accusation that Mugabe began to lose his moral compass when his first wife died-even though he had already had two children by his current wife when his first wife died.

It's a poorly written book with very hard hitting few facts that you couldn't get from various websites.

Save your money and buy "Mugabe" by Martin Meredith

This is a very interesting book and a poignant reminder of how Zimbabwe could have been a success story. The author is familiar with the history through her life as a radical and supporter of black rule in Rhodesia when she, and her husband a surgeon, lived in Ian Smith's outlaw colony. She interviews people who knew Mugabe well and then corrects their misrepresentations from her own knowledge. This is a very valuable technique and, with a man as private as Mugabe has always been, is as close as we will get to the inside story.

Robert Mugabe was a studious child, educated by Jesuits and abandoned by his father at an early age. His mother, something of a mystic, was always convinced that he had a special destiny. The author describes Mugabe's mother, Bona, as "a cold, stern nun of a mother."(page 7) He has been emotionally crippled all his life although, with his first wife Sally, a flamboyant and colorful Ghanaian teacher, he had a loving and loyal marriage. She is described by some of the interviewees as warm but by others as imperious and corrupt.

There is a very interesting interview with Mary Churchill Soames, Winston Churchill's younger daughter and wife of the last colonial governor of Rhodesia. Lord Soames became very close to Mugabe who, in a moment of truth just before the election of 1980, which put him in power, asked Soames to stay on for a lengthy transition period to help rule the country. "And Mugabe then said, 'I want you to stay because I need to be able to talk to somebody. I don't know anything about governing a country and none of my people do either.'" Soames told him that it would be impossible and Mugabe was on his own. When Lord Soames died, Mugabe and his wife arrived at Lady Soames' home uninvited to attend his funeral. This was an example of the rare personal empathy that Mugabe could establish with certain people.

There is also a chapter on Denis Norman, a wealthy white farmer who had no interest in politics but who was prevailed upon by Mugabe to take several ministries to solve problems created by incompetent members of his cabinet. Here was another white man trusted by Mugabe, who insisted on European dress by all his ministers and who emulated English manners and education. In fact, the author comments that his education policies (similar to those in India, in my opinion) left the country with too many white collar workers clamoring for government jobs and not enough auto mechanics and other technical trades.

Unfortunately, in another of the disastrous mistakes made by almost everyone in Zimbabwe, the white voters supported former dictator Ian Smith's party in the legislature, enraging Mugabe who had actually treated them quite fairly, even allowing Smith, who had imprisoned him, to live freely in the country and to seek office and serve in parliament. This was a serious mistake, compounded by Mugabe who then dismissed Denis Norman from his post as Agriculture Minister. He told Norman that the whites had chosen to treat him as a black and he would reciprocate, although he later called on Norman again and again to solve problems.

The story continues to 2000, when Mugabe was losing his power to a new generation and was besieged by "war veterans" while he watched white farmers donate checks to his political opponent on television. The result was the disastrous occupation of the commercial farms and the descent of Zimbabwe to ruin. It seems to me, after reading this book, that Mugabe is no more in control of his country than is Assad of Syria. Both are basically run by warlords and secret police.

The book is excellent and the lesson to me is that there were many opportunities for a happy, or at least happier, ending. Mugabe is an educated man, if emotionally stunted, and he did reach out to some of his white opponents for help early on. Some helped him and became friends. Many of the white residents foolishly voted for his enemies and fed his paranoia. I don't know what the chances for success in Zimbabwe were originally, but it seems that everything that could go wrong, did so. This is a very well written account of what happened. He is a monster now, but he wasn't always.

With an exciting tile like "Dinner with Mugabe" it is hard to resist picking this book up. However, before you impulsively jump into this book, keep in mind that though the title would make you think Holland had a long intimate discussion with Mugabe both before and after independence, her actually contact with him was quite limited. Keeping that in mind, I still thought this was a wonderful book...
In recent years, Mugabe has been villainized in international political and media circles largely due to the state of Zimbabwe and his ruthless policies. As an African Studies student, the history behind Rhodesia during the Imperial Era, and now Zimbabwe during the post colonial/moder eras are not foreign to me. Because of this, the limited amount of historical information included in this book was not much of an issue, however, if you are looking for something with a more historical take with more empirical evidence to the claims and opinions in this book I suggest looking elsewhere.
This book was wonderful at fusing perceptions of Mugabe from his youth, as a freedom fighter, and as a political despot. This fusion was interesting to me, as, at least at the institution which I study, African politicians are often portrayed as different people before and after independence. Many African leaders gained political power and public support during the colonial period were idolized at the coming of independence, and held onto that power going into the independent era often in roles of MP or Presidents. Many of these freedom fighters, while idolized in the previous era, became known internationally and/or nationally as corrupt, nepotistic, tyranical, and/or ruthlessly violent. Because of the great differences in these perceptions of these individuals, it is hard to fuse the two together. From my studies, I know of Mugabe, the intellectual liberator, and a completely different person... Mugabe, the tyrant.
This book makes an attempt to rationalize how these two entities could exist in one individual. It is for this reason, that I personally enjoyed reading "Dinner with Mugabe."
However, if you are considering picking this up, please keep in mind that, as with any other politically related book, that you must keep the authors agenda in mind. I also believe that this book is great if you have prior knowledge of Mugabe or the recent political history of Rhodesia/Zimbabwe... if you are looking for a more historically based read this is not the book for you, as this book takes a more pseudo-psychological and personal perspective on Robert Mugabe.

Ms. Holland has an interesting book on a monstrous human being. She uses family/friends/acquaintances to establish theories of "why" a former "freedom fighter" could become such a disaster. Theodore Dalrymple wrote an essay called After Empire which goes further to explain the basic motives of Mugabe-types and leaders left in the wake of brutal colonialism. Here is an example:

"The aim of education was, in almost every case, that at least one family member should escape what Marx contemptuously called the idiocy of rural life and get into government service, from which he would be in a position to extort from the only productive people in the country--namely, the peasants from whom he had sprung. The son in government service was social security, old-age pension, and secure income rolled into one. Farming, the country's indispensable economic base, was viewed as the occupation of dullards and failures, and so it was hardly surprising that the education of an ever larger number of government servants went hand in hand with an ever contracting economy. It also explains why there is no correlation between a country's number of college graduates at independence and its subsequent economic success."

And the get-away explanation: "After several years in Africa, I concluded that the colonial enterprise had been fundamentally wrong and mistaken, even when, as was often the case in its final stages, it was benevolently intended. The good it did was ephemeral; the harm, lasting. The powerful can change the powerless, it is true; but not in any way they choose. The unpredictability of humans is the revenge of the powerless. What emerges in any way they choose. The unpredictability of humans is the revenge of the powerless. What emerges politically from the colonial enterprise is often something worse, or at least more vicious because better equipped, than what existed before. Good intentions are certainly no guarantee of good results."

Between Dalrymple's essay-long explanation of the perils of colonialism (particularly the last quoted paragraph) and Ms. Holland, I believe Mugabe comes into focus as a living example of absolute power corrupting absolutely.

As for the rating of the book, Ms. Holland's method is good, but I never became comfortable with her writing style---however, this title is recommended..

I bought and read Ms Holland's book. I gave it away - it wasnt worth keeping. This has to be the worst, amateurish book on Mugabe that I have read. This book is symptomatic of the tendency of the publishing industry to over publish on a topical matter with subsequent publications hardly adding anything new to the topic. Ms Holland's book is precisely that. It adds nothing new. In fact it would have us believe that all Robert Mugabe ever wanted to do and be is to be an African Englishman who speaks the Queen's Language better than her subjects and enjoys high tea at 3pm everyday. What romantic hogwash. Zimbabwe has been the flavour of the times for a while now and the author's motivations seems to more out of a need to make quick buck than serious scholarship. Her book is composed of pseudo-psycho analysis that is precisely that: speculative and heavily tinted by her prejudices of the man. Serious students of African Politics and Personalities want facts. We want serious scholarship not this type of airport lounge literature. It appears that historical books written by journalists-cum-writers seem to fall in this category. If you are merely curious about RG Mugabe maybe you can waste your dollars and buy it. But if you are serious student motivated by a disinterested pursuit of truth, then this book is definitely not for you. I would suggest that you read books about Mugabe written around the early 1980s. These were a lot more factual and objective. And please avoid at all costs books written by journalists. Journalists are like Hip Hop artists, just because they can rhyme they think they can act.