Louis
Drouin, nicknamed Milou, was a thirty-one-year-old light-skinned man
who was also from Jeremie. He had served in the U.S. army — at Fort
Knox, and then at Fort Dix in New Jersey — and had studied finance
before working for French, Swiss, and American banks in New York. Marcel
Numa and Louis Drouin had been childhood friends in Jeremie.
The
men had remained friends when they'd both moved to New York in the
1950s, after Francois Duvalier came to power. There they had joined a
group called Jeune Haiti, or Young Haiti, and were two of thirteen
Haitians who left the United States for Haiti in 1964 to engage in a
guerrilla war that they hoped would eventually topple the Duvalier
dictatorship.
The
men of Jeune Haiti spent three months fighting in the hills and
mountains of southern Haiti and eventually most of them died in battle.
Marcel Numa was captured by members of Duvalier's army while he was
shopping for food in an open market, dressed as a peasant. Louis Drouin
was wounded in battle and asked his friends to leave him behind in the
woods.
"According
to our principles I should have committed suicide in that situation,"
Drouin reportedly declared in a final statement at his secret military
trial. "Chandler and Guerdes [two other Jeune Haiti members] were
wounded ... the first one asked ... his best friend to finish him off;
the second committed suicide after destroying a case of ammunition and
all the documents. That did not affect me. I reacted only after the
disappearance of Marcel Numa, who had been sent to look for food and for
some means of escape by sea. We were very close and our parents were
friends."
After
months of attempting to capture the men of Jeune Haiti and after
imprisoning and murdering hundreds of their relatives, Papa Doc Duvalier
wanted to make a spectacle of Numa and Drouin's deaths.
So
on November 12, 1964, two pine poles are erected outside the national
cemetery. A captive audience is gathered. Radio, print, and television
journalists are summoned. Numa and Drouin are dressed in what on old
black-and-white film seems to be the clothes in which they'd been
captured — khakis for Drouin and a modest white shirt and denim-looking
pants for Numa. They are both marched from the edge of the crowd toward
the poles. Their hands are tied behind their backs by two of Duvalier's
private henchmen, Tonton Macoutes in dark glasses and civilian dress.
The Tonton Macoutes then tie the ropes around the men's biceps to bind
them to the poles and keep them upright.
Numa,
the taller and thinner of the two, stands erect, in perfect profile,
barely leaning against the square piece of wood behind him. Drouin, who
wears brow-line eyeglasses, looks down into the film camera that is
taping his final moments. Drouin looks as though he is fighting back
tears as he stands there, strapped to the pole, slightly slanted.
Drouin's arms are shorter than Numa's and the rope appears looser on
Drouin. While Numa looks straight ahead, Drouin pushes his head back now
and then to rest it on the pole.
Time
is slightly compressed on the copy of the film I have and in some
places the images skip. There is no sound. A large crowd stretches out
far beyond the cement wall behind the bound Numa and Drouin. To the side
is a balcony filled with schoolchildren. Some time elapses, it seems,
as the schoolchildren and others mill around. The soldiers shift their
guns from one hand to the other. Some audience members shield their
faces from the sun by raising their hands to their foreheads. Some sit
idly on a low stone wall.
A
young white priest in a long robe walks out of the crowd with a prayer
book in his hands. It seems that he is the person everyone has been
waiting for. The priest says a few words to Drouin, who slides his body
upward in a defiant pose. Drouin motions with his head toward his
friend. The priest spends a little more time with Numa, who bobs his
head as the priest speaks. If this is Numa's extreme unction, it is an
abridged version.
The
priest then returns to Drouin and is joined there by a stout Macoute in
plain clothes and by two uniformed policemen, who lean in to listen to
what the priest is saying to Drouin. It is possible that they are all
offering Drouin some type of eye or face cover that he's refusing.
Drouin shakes his head as if to say, let's get it over with. No blinders
or hoods are placed on either man.
The
firing squad, seven helmeted men in khaki military uniforms, stretch
out their hands on either side of their bodies. They touch each other's
shoulders to position and space themselves. The police and army move the
crowd back, perhaps to keep them from being hit by ricocheted bullets.
The members of the firing squad pick up their Springfield rifles, load
their ammunition, and then place their weapons on their shoulders. Off
screen someone probably shouts, "Fire!" and they do. Numa and Drouin's
heads slump sideways at the same time, showing that the shots have hit
home.
When
the men's bodies slide down the poles, Numa's arms end up slightly
above his shoulders and Drouin's below his. Their heads return to an
upright position above their kneeling bodies, until a soldier in
camouflage walks over and delivers the final coup de grace, after which
their heads slump forward and their bodies slide further toward the
bottom of the pole. Blood spills out of Numa's mouth. Drouin's glasses
fall to the ground, pieces of blood and brain matter clouding the
cracked lenses.
The
next day, Le Matin, the country's national newspaper, described the
stunned-looking crowd as "feverish, communicating in a mutual patriotic
exaltation to curse adventurism and brigandage."
"The
government pamphlets circulating in Port-au-Prince last week left
little to the imagination," reported the November 27, 1964, edition of
the American newsweekly Time. "'Dr. Francois Duvalier will fulfill his
sacrosanct mission. He has crushed and will always crush the attempts of
the opposition. Think well, renegades. Here is the fate awaiting you
and your kind.'"
All
artists, writers among them, have several stories — one might call them
creation myths — that haunt and obsess them. This is one of mine. I
don't even remember when I first heard about it. I feel as though I have
always known it, having filled in the curiosity-driven details through
photographs, newspaper and magazine articles, books, and films as I have
gotten older.
Like
many a creation myth, aside from its heartrending clash of life and
death, homeland and exile, the execution of Marcel Numa and Louis Drouin
involves a disobeyed directive from a higher authority and a brutal
punishment as a result. If we think back to the biggest creation myth of
all, the world's very first people, Adam and Eve, disobeyed the
superior being that fashioned them out of chaos, defying God's order not
to eat what must have been the world's most desirable apple. Adam and
Eve were then banished from Eden, resulting in everything from our
having to punch a clock to spending many long, painful hours giving
birth.
The
order given to Adam and Eve was not to eat the apple. Their ultimate
punishment was banishment, exile from paradise. We, the storytellers of
the world, ought to be more grateful than most that banishment, rather
than execution, was chosen for Adam and Eve, for had they been executed,
there would never have been another story told, no stories to pass on.
In
his play Caligula, Albert Camus, from whom I borrow part of the title
of this essay, has Caligula, the third Roman emperor, declare that it
doesn't matter whether one is exiled or executed, but it is much more
important that Caligula has the power to choose. Even before they were
executed, Marcel Numa and Louis Drouin had already been exiled. As young
men, they had fled Haiti with their parents when Papa Doc Duvalier had
come to power in 1957 and had immediately targeted for arrest all his
detractors and resistors in the city of poets and elsewhere.
Marcel
Numa and Louis Drouin had made new lives for themselves, becoming
productive young immigrants in the United States. In addition to his
army and finance experience, Louis Drouin was said to have been a good
writer and the communications director of Jeune Haiti. In the United
States, he contributed to a Haitian political journal called Lambi.
Marcel Numa was from a family of writers. One of his male relatives,
Nono Numa, had adapted the seventeenth-century French playwright Pierre
Corneille's Le Cid, placing it in a Haitian setting. Many of the young
men Numa and Drouin joined with to form Jeune Haiti had had fathers
killed by Papa Doc Duvalier, and had returned, Le Cid and Hamlet-like,
to revenge them.
Like
most creation myths, this one too exists beyond the scope of my own
life, yet it still feels present, even urgent. Marcel Numa and Louis
Drouin were patriots who died so that other Haitians could live. They
were also immigrants, like me. Yet, they had abandoned comfortable lives
in the United States and sacrificed themselves for the homeland. One of
the first things the despot Duvalier tried to take away from them was
the mythic element of their stories. In the propaganda preceding their
execution, he labeled them not Haitian, but foreign rebels,
good-for-nothing blans.
At
the time of the execution of Marcel Numa and Louis Drouin, my recently
married, twenty-nine-year-old parents lived in Haiti, in a neighborhood
called Bel Air, about a thirty-minute walk from the cemetery. Bel Air
had a government-sponsored community center, a centre d'etude,
where young men and women — but mostly young men — went to study in the
evenings, especially if they had no electricity at home. Some of these
young people — not my parents, but young people who studied at the
center — belonged to a book club, a reading group sponsored by the
Alliance Francaise, the French Institute. The book group was called Le
Club de Bonne Humeur, or the Good Humor Club. At the time, Le Club de
Bonne Humeur was reading Camus' play Caligula with an eye to possibly
staging it.
In
Camus' version of Caligula's life, when Caligula's sister, who is also
his lover, dies, Caligula unleashes his rage and slowly unravels. In a
preface to an English translation of the play, Camus wrote, "I look in
vain for philosophy in these four acts.... I have little regard for an
art that deliberately aims to shock because it is unable to convince."
After
the executions of Marcel Numa and Louis Drouin, as the images of their
deaths played over and over in cinemas and on state-run television, the
young men and women of the Club de Bonne Humeur, along with the rest of
Haiti, desperately needed art that could convince. They needed art that
could convince them that they would not die the same way Numa and Drouin
did. They needed to be convinced that words could still be spoken, that
stories could still be told and passed on. So, as my father used to
tell it, these young people donned white sheets as togas and they tried
to stage Camus' play — quietly, quietly — in many of their houses, where
they whispered lines like:
Execution
relieves and liberates. It is a universal tonic, just in precept as in
practice. A man dies because he is guilty. A man is guilty because he is
one of Caligula's subjects. Ergo all men are guilty and shall die. It
is only a matter of time and patience.
The
legend of the underground staging of this and other plays, clandestine
readings of pieces of literature, was so strong that years after Papa
Doc Duvalier died, every time there was a political murder in Bel Air,
one of the young aspiring intellectuals in the neighborhood where I
spent the first twelve years of my life might inevitably say that
someone should put on a play. And because the uncle who raised me while
my parents were in New York for two-thirds of the first twelve years of
my life, because that uncle was a minister in Bel Air and had a church
and school with some available space, occasionally some of these plays
were read and staged, quietly, quietly, in the backyard of his church.
There
were many recurrences of this story throughout the country, book and
theater clubs secretly cherishing some potentially subversive piece of
literature, families burying if not burning their entire libraries,
books that might seem innocent but could easily betray them. Novels with
the wrong titles. Treatises with the right titles and intentions.
Strings of words that, uttered, written, or read, could cause a person's
death. Sometimes these words were written by Haitian writers like Marie
Vieux-Chauvet and Rene Depestre, among others. Other times they were
written by foreign or blan writers, writers like Aime Cesaire,
Frantz Fanon, or Albert Camus, who were untouchable because they were
either not Haitian or already long dead. The fact that death prevented
one from being banished — unlike, say, the English novelist Graham
Greene, who was banned from Haiti after writing The Comedians — made the
"classic" writers all the more appealing. Unlike the country's own
citizens, these writers could neither be tortured or murdered themselves
nor cause their family members to be tortured or murdered. And no
matter how hard he tried, Papa Doc Duvalier could not make their words
go away. Their maxims and phrases would keep coming back, buried deep in
memories by the rote recitation techniques that the Haitian school
system had taught so well. Because those writers who were still in
Haiti, not yet exiled or killed, could not freely perform or print their
own words outright, many of them turned, or returned, to the Greeks.
When
it was a crime to pick up a bloodied body on the street, Haitian
writers introduced Haitian readers to Sophocles' Oedipus Rex and
Antigone, which had been rewritten in Creole and placed in Haitian
settings by the playwright Franck Fouche and the poet Felix Morisseau
Leroy. This is where these writers placed their bets, striking a
dangerous balance between silence and art.
How
do writers and readers find each other under such dangerous
circumstances? Reading, like writing, under these conditions is
disobedience to a directive in which the reader, our Eve, already knows
the possible consequences of eating that apple but takes a bold bite
anyway.
How
does that reader find the courage to take this bite, open that book?
After an arrest, an execution? Of course he or she may find it in the
power of the hushed chorus of other readers, but she can also find it in
the writer's courage in having stepped forward, in having written, or
rewritten, in the first place.
Create
dangerously, for people who read dangerously. This is what I've always
thought it meant to be a writer. Writing, knowing in part that no matter
how trivial your words may seem, someday, somewhere, someone may risk
his or her life to read them. Coming from where I come from, with the
history I have — having spent the first twelve years of my life under
both dictatorships of Papa Doc and his son, Jean-Claude — this is what
I've always seen as the unifying principle among all writers. This is
what, among other things, might join Albert Camus and Sophocles to Toni
Morrison, Alice Walker, Osip Mandelstam, and Ralph Waldo Emerson to
Ralph Waldo Ellison. Somewhere, if not now, then maybe years in the
future, a future that we may have yet to dream of, someone may risk his
or her life to read us. Somewhere, if not now, then maybe years in the
future, we may also save someone's life, because they have given us a
passport, making us honorary citizens of their culture.
Continues...
Excerpted from CREATE
DANGEROUSLY by Edwidge Danticat. Excerpted by permission. All rights
reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without
permission in writing from the publisher. Excerpts are provided by
Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web
site.