In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Hispanic American Historical Review 84.1 (2004) 174-175



[Access article in PDF]
Modernization in Colombia: The Laureano Gómez Years, 1889-1965. By James D. Henderson. Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 2001. Photographs. Appendixes. Notes. Bibliography. Index. xvii, 508 pp. Cloth, $55.00.

Colombian historiography has tended to concentrate its attention on la Violencia, and the dominant approach of such studies has been either socioeconomic and cultural perspectives or regional and local. There are, of course, exceptions. James Henderson's previous works—When Colombia Bled: A History of the Violence in Tolima (University of Alabama Press, 1985) and Conservative Thought in Twentieth-Century Latin America: The Ideas of Laureano Gómez (Ohio University Press, 1988)—are excellent examples of rigorous scholarship. This latest work is a likewise a welcome addition to the discipline, in spite of some unsatisfactory interpretations.

This is not a biography of Gómez (1889-1965—the outstanding leader of the Conservative Party), although his life span is the framework for the study, and his protagonism appropriately takes center stage in the story. By covering this span, Henderson is able to shed light on the much neglected decades that preceded la Violencia. By providing a national picture, he addresses the need for holistic perspectives at a time when the spread of regional and local histories has probably gone too far in producing an image of a fragmented past. By devoting attention to politics, he contributes to our understanding of the partisan, sectarian origins of la Violencia—an extremely complex affair.

Henderson is at his best when dealing with the major political debates that involved Colombian politicians and intellectuals during those years. His analysis of the disputes between Gómez and President Marco Fidel Suárez—whom Gómez brought down from power after a brief but devastating speech in Congress—is superb. So too is his examination of the Republican movement and the Generación del Centenario, or of the rivalries between Gómez and the leaders of the Liberal Party during the 1930s and the 1940s. He examines in some detail the electoral politics of the period, particularly the policies of abstentionism embraced by Gómez and his party. Although Henderson thinks that this was a "brilliant political strategy in the short term" (pp. 267-68), it was ultimate a self-destructive policy for both the party and the nation. Henderson is able to distance himself from the leadership of both parties, and all are judged for their role in embittering and lowering the tone of political discourse (pp. 237 and 299), although Gómez's violent rhetoric stands out. And Henderson is right to praise the contrasting legacy of the moderate Centenaristas (pp. 417-18).

His book is not just about high politics. Henderson is mostly concerned to link the process of modernization to the politics of the times. Some of his passages here are interesting, informative, and make for good reading. His portrait of socioeconomic change and extraordinary institution building during la Violencia are thought-provoking. So too is his statement that "what in fact occurred in [End Page 174] Colombia during the 1940s and the 1960s was that most citizens managed either to avoid the politically inspired la Violencia or to turn it to their advantage" (p. 326).

There is little doubt that, after the second decade of the twentieth century, the country experienced unprecedented economic growth and prosperity. But it would be wrong to assume, as Henderson does, that the social changes brought about by this process took place against a static background. Historians working on earlier periods may find hard to accept his observations about the "unremarkable character" of Colombia's nineteenth-century history, that "conformity and control were watchwords through the centuries," or that the social setting was "virtually unchanged from colonial times" (pp. xiii, 1, and 5). He uncritically adopts José María Samper's view of the 1860s—"our masses are essentially submissive" (p. 29)—and suggests that such was still the reality in 1906 and even later. The passive peasantry he portrays for the 1870...

pdf

Share