Movie Review of the Cost of Sugar--and the Rev. Christopher Hartley

This week is "Documentary Week" in Salem, OR. The "artsy" Salem Cinema is showing a variety of pieces, all of which would never make it to Salem under any other circumstance. Tonight's fare, which was actually reviewed in the NY Times just two days ago, was the docu/advocacy piece The Price of Sugar (Sugar). Set in modern-day Dominican Republic, Sugar presents the story of the Rev. Christopher Hartley, an upper class British-Spanish Catholic priest who has been laboring for a decade among the Haitian sugar cane workers in the DR to bring more humane conditions to their lives and work. The purpose of the film is to paint in broad brush strokes the conflict between the Haitians and the inhabitants of the DR, the exploitative practices of the Vicini Group, the owner of the fields and one bringing in around 30,000 Haitian laborers per year, and the heroic efforts of the Rev. Hartley to bring dignity and empowerment to the Haitian community of sugar cane workers in the "bateyes" (camps).

Even though the issue appears to be a human rights issue confined to this unfortunate island of Hispaniola, the film takes pains to show that the US is the largest importer of Dominican sugar, awarding favorable prices and trading arrangements for the sugar (It would have been nice if this were laid out more precisely in the film). Thus, the irony of sitting in the movie chomping on a chocolate chip cookie, which I wasn't actually doing tonight, would be stark. As it is, one of the not-so-delicious ironies or moral ambiguities behind the film is that you have the Rev. Hartley fighting for humane conditions for Haitian sugar can workers while he is the son of a British aristocrat who made his fortune by making jam. Thus, when the Rev. Hartley takes an unremitting and unbending stance, a clear moral position, in support of the Haitian workers, I think the irony is heightened. He is, in fact, a product of the long-simmering problem and his family has profited because of arrangements like this, if not in the DR then in other places where sugar cane is harvested.

But the film is not about exploring moral ambiguity. It is a clarion call to action, action on behalf of the oppressed Haitian workers, who are brought to the DR under false pretenses (relatively high wages are represented to them by the Vicini Group who, with the government's negligence or complicity, smuggles the Haitians into the country annually under cover of darkness), stripped of their Haitian legal papers and thus become stateless indentured servants or, worse, slaves of the owners of the sugar cane plantations. Wages are around $.90 a day, paid with vouchers that can only be redeemed at the company store. Thus, hunger, malnutrition, disease and ignorance are the daily life of the Haitian workers.

Into this situation arrived the Rev. Hartley in 1997, fresh from nearly 20 years of working with Mother Teresa in India. He is a man of steely determination, of uncompromising temperament and of charmingly compassionate heart toward the poor Haitians. They are, in fact, his people, and he will do anything to defend them and to advocate for more humane treatment of them agains the Vicini Group. Even though he is able to win some concessions over the years, leading to some better housing and meals, the Vicinis stir up protests in the nearby town of San Jose de los Llanos to oust the Padre. To rhythmic shouts of "Fuera!" (Leave!), the locals work themselves into a near frenzy in their detemrination to see the father go. He, however, states his determination to stay with the people forever. He is afraid to see what would happen if he left them; no doubt the Vicini would roll back all the advances made in the past decade and reimpose draconian conditions.

Analysis

Often think of the saints of the church as other-worldy people who were gentle souls, never offending and never giving reason for anyone to be offended against them. But what the portrait of Hartley shows is that the true saints of God often have a great deal of "pain in the ass" in them. They are determined, uncompromising, charismatic, articulate, and, in many cases, from rich backgrounds (take, for example, St. Francis of Assisi). I mention the last fact because only a person who has been brought up in a context where he feels the world ought to respond to his wishes could muster the kind of determination against corporate misfeasance, government neglect and, often, popular opposition (in this case, the opposition of many people from the DR). That is, only someone with Hartley's entitlement mentality could be such an effective witness for the poor and agains the "establishment."

But something doens't sit right about this film with me. Even though people are quoted as saying that Hartley is the most humble person they have met, because he is fighting solely for the Haitian workers, I am not sure I believe that. It is impossible when the pressures mount as they did not to become so identified with your ministry that you think that you are essential to its continuation. But, perhaps, you may also be an obstacle to compromising movements, which often is the way that "progress" happens. Indeed, one of the things that was never mentioned in the film is how Hartley was perceived by his priestly colleagues in the DR or how the "left-leaning" DR intellectuals or "union organizer"-types responded to him. Did he work well with them? Did he "share the sandbox?" I had the sense in some of his last speeches that he was so identified with the work that he fed the notion that if he was removed, things would collapse.

Well, in fact, as I understand it, the Catholic Church just last month did remove him from the DR and has sent him to a ministry in Ethiopia. I suppose the Church's thinking was that if you like civil wars, we will give you a huge one... But who knows if the Church was feeling that it was becoming torn in ways that it didn't want to be torn by Hartley's ministry. After all, the Church has to live with the fruits of his work for all time to come; maybe they decided that it was important to "declare victory" and embark on a different philosophy of relationship with the community and the Vicini. Perhaps they even felt that Hartley was fanning flames that he didn't intend to start (i.e., he was only trying to set up the Vicini as the "big evil power," but once the DR townspeople became involved in the struggle against Hartley, things got out of control for him).

Conclusion

We live in a world of crushing inequality, oppression, hopelessness and suffering. When we see someone enter into this world who brings a blinding moral clarity, a charismatic style, a determined spirit and a boundless energy, we are lulled temporarily into thinking that things are more simple than they actually are. But the complexity remains, even though expressions of clarity help us refocus or rethink our own commitments. I don't think I will ever look at the DR in the same way now that I have viewed the film. But I also will probably not stop eating all sugar. But I do feel a little bit more guilty for doing so.

2932