It is indeed a sad truth that the Cuban state repressed gays for many years. And it is also true that that same state has repressed writers. But to make a movie about a gay writer in Cuba that focuses on the repression he has suffered at the hands of the state leads to a very distorted view of the reality of Cuban life and to a kind of cinema of martyrdom. This movie presents as "biographical fact" many things that are questionable, but since the film lurches between sudden splashes of wild fantasy followed by scenes of gritty Cuban state oppression, we are led to accept the latter as the "truth" and the former as just the creative whim of a gay writer. It's just as likely that Arenas was a mediocre talent who used every unpleasant encounter with the Cuban state to promote his work and his own self-apotheosis. What's true, as well as the harsh treatment Arenas received at the hands of the Cuban state, is that that country has been living in a state of siege for more than 40 years at the hands of the most powerful country on earth; that the state has responded in a heavy-handed way to perceived threats of subversion coming from outside but using local malcontents; and that Cuba is the only country in Latin America to have anything resembling a full-employment economy, universal health care, universal access to housing and free education for all at all levels, and universal literacy. (True, there's no repression of writers in Guatemala, but, hell, 50% of the population can't even read; and in the States there's no need to repress writers since it's a foregone conclusion from the outset that their ideas will have no significant impact on the course of events.)