There are many striking episodes and occurrences, some well-presented characters (Trujillo, in particular), some very well done scenes. Chirot, Daniel (1996), Modern Tyrants: The Power and Prevalence of Evil in Our Age, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, ISBN 0-691-02777-3 . In a display of both aspects of machismo, Trujillo demanded that his aides and cabinet provide him with sexual access to their wives or daughters. Mario Vargas Llosa wrote of Trujillo's machismo and treatment of women, "[h]e went to bed with his ministers' wives, not only because he liked these ladies but because it was a way to test his ministers. He wanted to know if they were ready to accept this extreme humiliation. Mainly the ministers were prepared to play this grotesque role—and they remained loyal to Trujillo even after his death." [26] Trujillo's sexual conquests and public humiliations of his enemies also serve to affirm his political power and machismo. In Neissa's words, "The implication is that maximum virility equals political dominance." [29] Or many in the many countries of the contemporary world living under regimes that are an affront to humanity.

Many of the assassins had belonged to Trujillo's regime or had at one point been his staunch supporters, only to find their support for him eroded by the state's crimes against its own citizens. [24] Imbert, one of the assassins, sums up this realization in a comment prompted by the murder of the Mirabal sisters: "They kill our fathers, our brothers, our friends. And now they're killing our women. And here we sit, resigned, waiting our turn." [25] In an interview, Vargas Llosa describes the corruption and brutality of Trujillo's regime: "He had more or less all the common traits of a Latin American dictator, but pushed to the extreme. In cruelty, I think he went far far away from the rest—and in corruption, too." [26] Machismo [ edit ] In her treatment of the novel, María Regina Ruiz claims that " power gives its wielder the ability to make prohibitions; prohibitions that are reflected in history, the study of which reveals what is and what is not told." [37] The government's actions in The Feast of the Goat demonstrate the discourse of prohibition: foreign newspapers and magazines were prohibited from entering Trujillo's country as they were seen as a threat to the government's ideas. Mario Vargas Llosa takes part in this discourse by recounting what was prohibited. [38] I often wonder if these Spanish cultures of Latin Ameria do not understand how government by the people, of the people and for the people functions. What is frightening is that the overwhelming majority of the Dominican people worshiped and blindly loved the brutal dictator Rafael Trujillo. When he was assassinated, hundreds of thousands of Dominican people mourned and wept because of his death. Only a few knew or wanted to believe that he was the devil reincarnated. Only a very few Dominicans were joyful about his death.

Tropes present in the book:

According Spanish newspaper el mundo the shooting began in Santo Domingo in the first weeks of October of 2004. After several weeks of productions continue in Spain. Several locations using for shooting are located in La Romana and Jarabacoa ( North of Capital) The Executive production was in Charge of Andres Vicente Gomez, Chairman of Lola Films [3] Vargas Llosa describes Trujillo’s absolute control over the lives of his cabinet members and his demand for their constant loyalty. He routinely tests his officials’ loyalty by marginalizing them with no explanation. One such test causes the permanent dismissal of Urania’s father, who fails to reclaim his post despite his numerous pleas, attempts, and offers. In this section, Vargas Llosa additionally transitions to the metanarratives of Trujillo’s assassins as they wait to shoot him along a dark ocean highway. The longest of these stories is that of José René “Pupo” Roman, the deposed secretary of the armed forces. His hope of killing Trujillo and precipitating a coup fails when Roman is unable to bring himself to take over the military. Instead of wresting the country from Trujillo’s brothers and sons, Roman is captured and ruthlessly tortured by Trujillo’s son Ramfis for many months before his merciful death. The Generalissimo: Trujillo is not only a prime example of a caudillo , but one of the nastiest ones and widely despised throughout Latin America for his countless crimes against humanity. Diederich acusa de plagio al escritor Mario Vargas Llosa" (in Spanish). Listindiario. February 11, 2011 . Retrieved August 27, 2012.

But for a narrative brimming with horrors, the novel as a whole is oddly inert. It reads more like a history of the Dominican Republic than a fully achieved work of fiction. (...) This could have been -- and was obviously intended to be -- a major work. It does not read like one." - David Robson, Sunday TelegraphTrujillo's attempted sexual conquest of Urania is an example of both political manipulation of Agustín Cabral and sexual power over young women. However, as Trujillo's penis remains flaccid throughout the encounter and he is humiliated in front of the young girl, the encounter fails to satisfy his requirements for machismo. [30] Memory [ edit ] For Amadito: Being forced to abandon his fiancée and later being forced to execute a man that turns out to be his ex-fiancée's brother Urania's story frames the book: the novel begins with her arrival in Santo Domingo (which was still Ciudad Trujillo when she left), and ends with her departure. An English-language film adaptation of the novel was made in 2005, directed by Luis Llosa, Mario Vargas Llosa's cousin. It stars Isabella Rossellini as Urania Cabral, Paul Freeman as her father Agustin, Stephanie Leonidas as Uranita and Tomas Milian as Rafael Leonidas Trujillo. It was filmed in both the Dominican Republic and in Spain. [53] Reviewing the film for the trade paper Variety, critic Jonathan Holland called it "less a feast than a somewhat rushed, but thoroughly enjoyable, three-course meal", commenting that the main difference from the source novel was the sacrifice of psychological nuance. [54]