For good or ill, Dr Eric Williams and CLR James cast long shadows across the political stage and they constituted an integral part of the nation's history. A Guardian editorial once said, in part, "Indeed, James's wide-ranging interests and his capacity to write seminally about them make him a unique figure in the literary world; he is at the same time novelist, historian, political philosopher, cricket connoisseur and man of letters." Interestingly enough, what I found most intriguing about Mr James was his love/hate relationship with his great friend/foe, the late and (in James's view) not-so-great Eric Eustace Williams. When Williams died there was a hue and cry that we had come to the end of a political era and that Willlams had passed on, at least, into local history. The effusive encomiums came through fast and furious.
The only discordant note was the resonant voice of CLR James, stating, quite unequivocally, that Williams had been "an absolute political failure." Whether this "judgment" was prompted by an objective assessment or simply churlish petulance, as I suspect, is entirely a matter of speculation. It is, however, generally conceded that whereas James did not bestride the corridors of political power, he may well have exercised some considerable political influence, though perhaps not of an obviously productive or overt nature. He might have been a confidant/adviser of a number of then emerging African leaders. There is also a history of close association/collaboration which ended in bitter conflict between those two scholars/politicians. An examination of that relationship and the legacy of the personal animosities, conflicts and petty quarrels may still be of general interest.
We may well be doing them an injustice if we only saw them through each other's eyes and did not look beyond their churlish, demeaning, unbecoming remarks, the invective, mutual insults and a surprising degree of exhibited puerility. Both individuals had brilliant intellects, were poles apart when it came to sharing a political world view, neither belonged to the order of the dove but were evidently of the tribe of the tiger. The clash of personalities, temperaments and objectives must have always been on the cards. James was perhaps the more balanced and accommodating personality of the two. In a strange way, although James appeared to have seen himself as Williams's political protector and intellectual mentor, and surprisingly even appeared awe-struck by the Williams enigmatic personality, there's evidence that James had a soft spot for charismatic personalities. Something I found not in consonance with his keen intellect and perceptive mind.
James was a seasoned politician and it baffled me how he, like so many others, could have fallen under Williams's mesmeric spell. At one time, he adamantly averred that until Williams's political personality was understood, we won't be able to understand the full measure of Caribbean politics. What some close erstwhile associates of Williams had deemed "the jagged edges" of the Williams personality, James dismissed as "sharp angularities" or some such nonsense, as I perceived it. On falling out of favour and grace with his apparent political idol, he condescendingly claimed to have cancelled that initially planned "biography" that "would have given Williams much needed international exposure."
It beats me how CLR could not have appreciated that the PNM party was akin to an extension of Williams's personal and political personality and the "Williams brand" did not require CLR's restructuring of the party to make it less tied to the founder's apron string.
In happier times, an otherwise intelligent James seemed almost bereft of reason and overcome by blind loyalty, akin to political infatuation, and was quick to consign Dr Williams's critics to the flames of some outer darkness while branding them congenital idiots, jackals and mongrels. The first crack in their relationship appeared when Dr Williams publicly stated that be was on the western side of the "Iron Curtain" and was not in the pocket of any communist or fellow traveller. This sharp rebuke fell squarely in CLR's garden and must have been a clear indication that his erstwhile friend had cut him loose and set him adrift. If I might put it that way, the intellectual mariner had become a political renegade and PNM castaway "at one fell swoop." That must have been a bitter pill for James to swallow. He contended that he fell out with Williams because Williams "sold out" to the Americans where the Chaguaramas issue was concerned.
Thenceforth and thereafter, James became the albatross about Williams's neck, the guest who had overstayed his welcome, the colleague who had outlived his usefulness and must promptly be cut loose, with the attendant humiliation. The stage was therefore set for confrontation and political surgery. That Williams cut loose and set adrift an uncharacteristically obsequious James with characteristic boorishness, if not cruelty, may well account for Mr James's abiding animosity and deep-seated resentment. Apparently, even James seemed to have fallen under Williams's charismatic spell. On being brusquely rebuffed, a dejected James mused, "I had placed myself at his disposal, adapted myself to his needs. He does not appreciate what that means." The humiliation was complete. Such harsh and cruel treatment at the hand of an old friend and close associate must have been a shattering blow to and traumatic experience for Mr James-a blow form which he never seemed to have recovered.