Iconic heroes like Jose Marti, Fidel Castro and the charismatic Che Guevara appear frequently (though not as agitprop), as do depictions of the human heart, the Cuban flag and the shape of the island itself, speaking of both pride and isolation.
At what point then, did depictions of Muhammad become haram, or forbidden?
Its portrayal of a society built on anarchist principles remains inspirational, as does its depiction of relationships built on equality.
The desperate dutifulness of an impoverished nuclear submarine officer makes gripping reading, as does her depiction of the evils visited on Chechens both in Russia proper and their homeland, now a hellhole of cruelty and misery.Andrew Meier, Time magazine's former Moscow correspondent, covers some similar ground in his slim volume about Chechnya.
Such, then, are the reasons for saying that whatever else a literary artist does, his depictions must be truthful to human nature.
So, too, does its depictions of the military situations in Afghanistan and in Iraq, where attacks on American forces have continued.
Originally, I thought I'd also do a depiction of Jackie as a football player because he was in the Olympics.
As is the case with all major novels, the famous and the obscure, the writing itself matters as much as do the depiction of people and places and events.
In this instance, though, such a depiction doesn't withstand inspection.
Does this symbolic depiction match with the physiology of the heart?
