Analysis Of Deogratias: A Tale Of Rwanda

Ever thought about writing a book? If you have, let me give you a word of advice: the biggest challenge you will come across is not the story, but in creating a character. In order to be a captivating writer, you would need to create someone your readers could connect or even, relate to and when people feel sympathy for your character, then you know you have succeeded. This is generally achieved through flawed and conflicting characters that pursue a noble cause, or at least in their own mind. In Deogratias: A Tale of Rwanda, Jean-Philipe Stassen presents Deogratias as an innocent figure, which belies the fact that he is capable of committing atrocities and then attributing it for the greater good. We see the source of his miseries that defines
the unstable man he is today and we question the power of guilt, one that is able to reduce a man to an embodiment of a ‘dog’ (26-27). As a reader, I had a hard time sympathizing Deogratias, whose actions reflected those of an antagonist, because he failed to stand up for what is right, attributed his sacrifices to love when it was only the objectification of women, chose numbness rather than doing something constructive with the situation at hand and the fact that he pursued vengeance in the name of justice.
As the story progressed, I figured my hope in Deogratias hadn’t been misplaced when he chooses to stand up to those in power, but that diminished as soon as he lost his momentum toward the end.
His time with Benina after sleeping with her is cut short when Julius interrupts his day to rally Deogratias for his cause, which was to crush the Tutsi cockroaches (59). Deogratias could have just as easily given away Benina’s position but instead, chooses to hide her away in his home (58). As conflicting as it may seem, I sought to see the best in him as he had acted in the best interest of Benina not once, but twice, the latter being the time when the French sergeant was carrying out a roadblock (22-23). If he was truly in love with Benina, then what influenced his decisions later on in the book? For instance, we see that he tried to persuade Appolinaria into succumbing to his sexual desire while he was in a relationship with Benina and second, he did not stand up for the two girls he supposedly loved when Julius gave the orders to have them raped and murdered (39, 74). As we consider the extent of his actions, some might say that he prioritized his survival, as would many of us. While it is safe to say that this holds for many of us, it does not hold in Deogratias’ case. His choice to rape Appolinaria was not by chance, as we know he still had feelings for her, one that he probably resolved upon raping and killing her (71). At this point, we see that his actions from there on
displayed an intense selfishness; one that is bound to retract whatever that remained of a reader’s pity for him.
Furthermore, I was also enraged by the fact that he believed his sacrifices had been out of love, when he only saw women as a tool of sexual satisfaction. We see a lustful, depraved young man who attempts to seduce both of Venetia’s daughters, Appolinaria and Benina, and even Venetia herself when he tries to pay her for sex using the money he had stolen from the church (3-5). After failing to convince Venetia to sleep with him, Deogratias tries to woo her daughters by offering gifts instead (13-15). His manipulative nature is outright shameful and therefore, deserves no pity from the readers. Many might object by saying that this was just another childish quest for love, although born under a very unique circumstance, as it had brewed at the time of a racial conflict. Therefore, you would point out that all Deogratias did was to explore his sexuality, actions that he shouldn’t be penalized for, as he was only being human. I would have cut him some slack if he had done something to prove his love for Benina and even, Appolinaria. However, when life takes a turn for the worst, he not only chooses to rape Appolinaria and leaves Benina to the ‘dogs’, but he considered it the best way to have protected them (71). If he had died protecting the girls, I believe that his death would have been that of a hero; one that would have inevitably invoked sympathy amongst readers. Alas, that wasn’t the case. As much as I would love to deny the treachery he had committed in the name of love, I can only interpret his actions as a form of sexual conquest, nothing more and nothing less.
Next, his desperation to numb the pain made me wonder what could have reduced him to the mentally deteriorating man he is today. We are initially given an imagery of someone who is haunted by his memories so badly that he would literally transform into a ‘dog’ (26-27). Thus, for Deogratias to indulge in urwagwa, the banana beer, as a coping mechanism is understandable. However, when I found out that he played an indirect role in killing Venetia and her daughters, I had to reconsider my sympathy for him because he was acting cowardly by letting alcohol consume him, which did nothing to improve his life. Of course, since he received no psychological support or help, it was absolutely all right for him to react to the conflict in such a manner. As a counter, we see that Paul Rusesabagina in Hotel Rwanda, who was also a Hutu, chose to help the Tutsi refugees when he could have easily led a man-slaughter of his own or even, run off and drink himself to death. Nonetheless, Paul’s actions reveal that good could persevere over evil, if constructive measures are taken. This further begs the question: Why couldn’t Deogratias have pursued measures to undo his mistakes by helping others who were in need? Instead, we see that he chose to lose himself in alcohol, which only blurred the line between reality and illusion; paving the way for Deogratias to commit atrocious acts in the name of so-called justice.
Lastly, Deogratias’s action of taking justice into his own hands is clearly flawed as he was in no position to pass judgment onto others.
I can sugarcoat it all I like, but it doesn’t change the fact that resolving murder with murder does not accomplish anything. Unfortunately, Deogratias confuses revenge for justice, leading him to commit murders under the pretense that he had the authority to do so. We see that he cleverly uses the sergeant’s disregard for the cultural norm of tasting beer for poison to kill him (6). We see a significant level of intelligence in a supposed ‘madman’ and it makes us wonder whether Deogratias may have had the potential to restore balance in a country where chaos reigned freely. I believe that this might have been a better way for him to seek redemption. Of course, some may object that the murders he committed were intended to alleviate his guilt as well as redeeming himself for his previous transgressions. In his mind, he might thought that by ridding the world of the true vermin like the French sergeant and Julius, the world might eventually be better off. However, the murder of Bosco, a soldier of the Rwandan Patriotic Front whose only fault had been to let Deogratias live, puts our discussion of sympathy for the central figure back into perspective. Consequently, we see that Deogratias not only acted on loose judgments, but he also failed to distinguish right actions from
wrong.
Deogratias is eventually entrenched in madness that he is beyond the point of no return. I believe that there is nothing consequential about sympathizing a character that chose to cave in to numbness, subconsciously objectified women, was unable to accept the extent of his crimes and failed to determine right from wrong. While Stassen may have created this graphic novel to invoke sympathy in readers, it had an opposite effect on me as the balance in a sense of right and wrong is eventually offset by Deogratias’s unforgivable crimes. This tale surprisingly reveals that, as disconcerting as it may be to acknowledge, a tinge of good is rendered incomparable in a sea of evil.