Kitchen Toto to Ambassador by Philip Gichuru Gitonga ― Book review
Kitchen Toto to Ambassador is a biography by Amb. Philip G. Gitonga. The book is about his journey from a humble cook in a Whiteman’s home during the pre-colonial era to a senior government official after Kenya’s independence. From a humble teacher, he rose through the ranks of government after attending university in The USA (1959-1963) to become a District Officer, then a District Commissioner, then as an officer in the Ministry of Defense. After President Kenyatta’s death, the incumbent Moi appointed him as Kenya’s envoy to India and Sri Lanka. Then West Germany. Then Japan. He then retired, and like all retirees, he entered politics as the Member of Parliament for Lari constituency.
If I were to rate it, I’ll give it one and a half stars out of five. One would be for writing a story and half is the use of vernacular once in a while as a stylistic device, and exploring some Kikuyu cultural dynamics in the first two chapters or so. That’s all.
Otherwise, the rest of it was flat and it’s needless to say that I really struggled to finish it.
I came to the book big expectations, waiting for the next big thing to drop. Something interesting! No, it didn’t. And this comes from a person who consumes equal quantities of fiction and non-fiction.
I also encountered glaring grammatical errors every once in a while and I seriously wondered whether the book passed through the hands of an editor. The story was shallow and uninteresting except for the first two chapters, where the heart and soul of our hero was revealed a little. But true personality and character missing in the adult chapters (our personalities are revealed in our adulthood). The adult life was all about events, events and more events. I kept waiting a sign of personality, just anything. But woe unto me, it would never be!
The Story
I was a little aghast with the flow of the story. I expected emotional depth; not just a historical account of a hero detached from the real events. The plot was shallow and the thoughts of the hero were clearly missing. As I moved deeper into it, I realized that our hero’s personal details ―especially in his days in power― were scanty or missing altogether. It would all end up as a brief summary at the end of the book in the chapter called Memoirs. I’d have loved to see how those two; the public life and the private life would have interwoven, as the story unfolded to make the hero who he is.
The events were also poorly narrated and time and again I felt like the writer was either rushing, with a predetermined number of words in mind, careful enough not to exceed them, so much so, that even the landmark historical events were barely talked about. I failed to see the opinion of our hero in what was going on in the post-independence Kenya. There were so many failures in Moi and Kenyatta’s governments and I was hoping, that the hero, by claiming to be a change agent, would reveal to us things the mistakes that those two gentlemen could have averted. He was playing it way too safe, deliberately avoiding to tell us all the ‘behind the scene tales’ and I just couldn’t understand why.
There were moments when I wanted to shout “spill it!” to the pages, only to be utterly disappointed with very page I turned.
Thematic concerns
First of all, he talks about religion. Here, he explores the similarities between Kikuyu religious beliefs and Christianity. He points out the fact that they are similar in many ways; especially on God and the devil. Our hero ought to know that all African tribes have God and the devil. Good and bad; and they always elevated good/God over evil. Is there a single African tribe that elevates evil?
Secondly, he talks about The Mau Mau movement; again, scantily and in a patchwork fashion. He takes an unusual position of detachment to the whole situation. It seems to me that he was torn between sympathizing with his masters (the people who were feeding him) and the Mau Mau freedom fighters. I would have loved to hear about the plight of the Mau Mau at length, not the brief one page narration by his sister, which again, lacked depth. I would have loved to know if he genuinely cared about what was going on, or not. He was not pro or against the Mau Mau per se; a little disappointing for a man who witnessed his people suffer in the hands of colonialists. Again, he blames Christian missionaries for colonialism but then goes ahead to profess the same religion and praise it throughout the book. I found it a bit hypocritical and too much fence-sitting.
In the beginning of the book, he showers President Moi with praise in regard to governance and his unwavering Christian faith, before later castigating him when he ceased working for him. I failed to understand if by our hero praising Moi’s strong Christian faith, he intended it as a complement considering how he would later come to bash him in the book. There was a pattern; when Moi was his boss, Moi was good; when he was no longer his boss, he became a villain. Again, he was all too economical with details. By and large, he gave me an impression of a selfish man, only looking out for himself.
Later upon losing his parliamentary seat, he and his cronies met President Kibaki in an attempt to be part of the Narc government. He claims that they couldn’t bear to be in the opposition for an extra five years. What a startling revelation! I gather that being in the opposition means that one is disenfranchised from his basic constitutional rights by the government?
Character development.
One, I couldn’t emotionally connect with the protagonist or any other characters featured in the book who were like drops in the sea of a civics/history textbook.
Being at the helm of power and interacting with some of the most powerful individuals in government, I expected him to be generous with the truth inside the corridors of power.
I understand the dilemma that most memoirists/ biographers have; a balance between what to reveal and what not to because of the many people and interests at stake. This is because no one wants to risk misrepresenting facts or projecting certain people in bad light, but surely you can reveal it if it’s in the interest of the public! Surely you can talk about your own shortcomings as a person, because hey, everyone is flawed. ‘A perfect hero’ is a wonderful description of NOBODY….ever!
So, as a reader, I felt robbed; robbed of the hero’s mind, heart and soul and with that, I found myself staring at a lifeless shell, and consequently looking for flaws in all the wrong places! All the greatest people who’ve ever existed on this planet were flawed. Jesus had a temper that led him to beat up people in the Synagogue and turn tables! He once lost his faith during prayer and asked God why he was forsaking Him! Clinton couldn’t agree to be subjected to anesthesia and give up his presidential power to al Gore for just several hours, so he was operated on without anesthesia! (According to the US constitution, if a president is incapacitated or dead ―which is what anesthesia does to a person― the vice president takes over the leadership of the country for that period.) Clinton couldn’t risk al Gore being acting president, what does that mean? Clinton had/has trust issues? He also cheated on his wife and did other bad things and recorded them in his biography.
I don’t mean that the bad stuff should overshadow the good stuff, but it shouldn’t completely be eliminated! It makes a story plastic and incomplete. There has to be something about the protagonist that makes them human; and that’s usually the intersecting point between the writer and the reader.
This book was mostly inspired by the external influences (factors) that made the hero who he is rather than the internal ones. What are his values? What does he stand for? And what are his shortcomings? And if any, how does he deal with them? I wanted to know that.
I came to the book with so many expectations and honestly, I was disappointed. The book is simply brushing on facts here and there like a newspaper piece without truly giving issues the kind of emotional depth they deserve.
All in all it was a shallow book, a thoughtless book, un-entertaining, un-educating and a book eager to be too politically correct; certainly not the kind of book I'd re-read.
Someone once said this “there is a story in each one of us, and most of the time, that is where it should remain.”
I concur.
Catherine Amayi is a Scientist and an Author
Email: ccamayi@yahoo.com
Twitter: @Catherine_amayi