“ Kozloff presents an American’s take on Venezuela as he documents his travels to the country and approaches his research with as an active spectator, observing everyday occurrences in the country as well as offering a scholar’s insight to things he notices. At times, he shifts back and forth from the occurrences he observes and facts he presents, which is rather confusing. He clearly has a passion for Venezuelan history and politics and while this is evident in his work, his book’s presentation is disorganized and exhibits an apparent bias.
Kozloff displays his leftist bias early in the book as he says he agrees with Chavez’s statements regarding United States foreign policy and American imperialism. Since most of his book deals with Chavez’s relationship to the United States, readers should recognize this bias. However, Kozloff later states that he is suspicious of some of Chavez’s courses of action. In the chapter titled “Chavez and His Fight Against Neoliberalism,” Kozloff states that he was not sympathetic to the right-wing opposition, which further explains his bias. During the 2000 election in the United States, Kozloff plainly states that he planned to vote for Green Party candidate Ralph Nader. Furthermore, in the epilogue, Kozloff criticizes George W. Bush and the Republican Party for not paying attention to America’s poorest inner cities, which the American people noticed with Hurricane Katrina. Since Kozloff displays a noticeable bias, readers should not take this book as a significant scholarly work.
Kozloff approaches his research already as an admirer of Hugo Chavez, which leads one to question his methodology. He offers little critique of Chavez’s policies, which is also questionable. His trips to Venezuela are his key approach to his research. Since he is an American journalist, he attempts to provide a more in-depth method by traveling to Venezuela as well as completing the usual research process. The sources he uses are mostly Internet articles from popular news channels and newspapers rather than scholarly articles that are based on primary sources.
While I learned much about Chavez and Venezuela in general, I believe that Kozloff is too pro-Chavez to discuss anything negative about him in depth. I believe the book strayed off-topic as the book is supposed to be primarily about the “challenge to the U.S.” as the title states, but Kozloff also discusses his relationship with other Latin American leaders. I thought he should have narrowed his book’s focus more, especially since it is such a modest sized account of one man. Kozloff lacked a focus as he jumped from Chavez to his research to the United States to other Latin American leaders to oil. I found this book extremely difficult to follow considering the organization. Kozloff cannot keep years in order, sometimes going back in time in the same page. He discusses other politicians and businessmen in length before finally discussing Chavez’s birth and childhood at the end of the first chapter. From what information Kozloff presents in this account, I can tell he is a respectable researcher, but as a writer and editor, it is an embarrassing contribution to the world of historical and political writing. His organization is not in chronological order and while chronological order is not always necessary, it helps in a book like this one where the reader wants to know how Venezuela changed or progressed with Hugo Chavez as its leader as well as how Chavez relates to American foreign policy over time.”
Miranda wrote this review Thursday, December 3, 2009.
(
reply |
permalink )
