Howard Fast was one of the most prolific American writers of the twentieth century. He was a bestselling author of more than eighty works of fiction, nonfiction, poetry, and screenplays. The son of immigrants, Fast grew up in New York City and published his first novel upon finishing high school in 1933. In 1950, his refusal to provide the United States Congress with a list of possible Communist associates earned him a three-month prison sentence. During his incarceration, Fast wrote one of his best-known novels, Spartacus (1951). Throughout his long career, Fast matched his commitment to championing social justice in his writing with a deft, lively storytelling style.
Spartacus is a 1951 historical novel by American writer Howard Fast. It is about the historic slave revolt led by Spartacus around 71 BCE. The book inspired the 1960 film directed by Stanley Kubrick and the 2004 TV adaptation by Robert Dornhelm.
Spartacus begins with three young Roman patricians - Caius, his sister Helena and her friend Claudia, beginning a journey from Rome to Capua along the Via Appia a few weeks after the final suppression of the slave revolt.
The road is lined by "tokens of punishment" - slaves crucified in the immediate aftermath of the revolt.
During the first day of their travel the party encounter several representative individuals; a minor politician, a prosperous businessman of the equestrian class, an eastern trader and a young officer of the legions; all of whom give their respective perspectives on the rising.
On arrival at a palatial country villa where they are to spend the night, the trio meet with other guests, both historical and fictional, who either played key roles in the events just finished or who have sufficient perception to analyze the significance of slavery as an institution within the Roman Republic. ...
鈥淪o the pair did their homage and the Romans sipped wine and nibbled sweets. Then came the weapon bearer. For Spartacus, the knife. For the black man, the long, heavy, three-pronged fish fork and the fish net. They were both clowns in their shame and bloody degradation. The whole world had been enslaved so that these Romans could sit here and nibble sweets and sip wine in the shady comfort of their box. The pair took the weapons. And then, as Caius saw it, the black man went mad鈥hey saw him cast his net aside and shout a wild warcry. And then they saw him hurtle toward the grandstand. A trainer with a bared sword tried to stop him, and then the trainer was squirming on the three-pronged fork like a pricked fish, and then hurled into the air like a fish, turning over and over and screaming in the air before he struck the ground. Now a six-foot fence barred the path鈥ut he tore the boards from it as if they were paper. He was transformed in his strength; his strength made him like a weapon driving toward the box where the party sat鈥︹€� - Howard Fast, Spartacus
There is an entire shelf on one of my many sagging, near-to-collapsing Ikea bookshelves devoted to books I鈥檝e purchased after drinking wine and watching Turner Classic Movies. It usually goes something like this: I鈥檒l be sipping wine on the couch, the channel tuned to TCM, when I discover the movie I鈥檝e been enjoying is based on a book. At that point, with all my financial inhibitions floating away on a tide of iced chardonnay, I鈥檒l buy the title without a second thought. A few days later, it will arrive in the mail, and I鈥檒l remind myself once again not to shop with a wine glass in hand.
That鈥檚 pretty much the story of how I came to own Howard Fast鈥檚 Spartacus. After catching Stanley Kubrick鈥檚 sword-and-sandals epic over the recent holidays, I decided it was time to check out the source material.
Though Kubrick later disowned it, his film is a minor masterpiece in the style of Old Hollywood. It is stocked with inimitable actors, has big set pieces, and has just enough of a weird edge 鈥� the snails and oysters conversation between Laurence Olivier and Tony Curtis springs to mind 鈥� to keep it from being totally square.
The book is a very different animal. While good, it plays out on a much smaller stage, unfolding more as a series of one-on-one conversations than a sprawling adventure.
***
The story 鈥� or legend 鈥� of Spartacus is well known. He was a Thracian slave turned gladiator, who was part of a revolt that broke out in Capua in 73 BCE. He rose to lead an army of slaves against Rome, winning a stunning series of victories before being defeated at the Battle of the Silarius River by the legions of Marcus Licinius Crassus. It is believed Spartacus died in battle. Roughly six-thousand prisoners from the failed insurrection were crucified along the Appian Way.
Of course, hard facts about Spartacus鈥檚 revolt are scarce. As far as I can tell, there are no contemporary eyewitness accounts. The best sources were written over a century following the events they describe.
While this is tough on the historian, it is wonderful for the artist, who is free to take the bones of the tale and make it into a symbol of whatever he or she wants. Indeed, aside from Kubrick鈥檚 movie and Fast鈥檚 novel, there are numerous other television shows, movies, novels, plays, and even videogames with Spartacus at the center.
The interesting thing about Fast鈥檚 take is that Spartacus is barely a character.
***
It鈥檚 worth spending some time talking about the structure of Spartacus. It is not necessarily complicated, but it is certainly not linear. Fast opens with three highborn Romans traveling to Capua. The road is marked by 鈥渢okens of punishment,鈥� the aforementioned six-thousand slaves who had been crucified, their bodies left to rot. Along the way, the three travelers meet characters representing different classes of Rome, and from them, different views on Spartacus鈥檚 war, which is already over.
This slow-moving sequence unfolds almost like a play, and culminates with the travelers鈥� arrival at Villa Salaria, a wealthy estate. They are greeted by the men who are resting there, including General Crassus, who defeated Spartacus; Marcus Tullius Cicero, a writer and philosopher; and Gaius Gracchus, a politician. It is a testament to the loose historicity of Fast鈥檚 work that Gracchus, a real-life figure, died in 121 BCE, well before Spartacus鈥檚 crusade began.
In any event, it is at this point that the talking begins in earnest, centering on the aftermath of the Servile War, which has forced Romans to confront the foundations of their civilization, based in part on enslaving men, women, and children for the profit of others. These conversations segue into flashbacks that provide fragmentary glimpses of Spartacus and his rebellion, introducing us to the elusive central figure for the first time. Later in Spartacus, a few more gaps are filled in by the remembrances of a Jewish fighter who is dying on the cross, as well as by the memories of Varinia, a former slave who became Spartacus鈥檚 wife.
It is not hard to follow the shifts in time. Everything is told in the third-person, with a selectively omniscient narrator, shifting between the past tense in the present, and the present tense in the past. Still, there are times when the framework seems unnecessarily convoluted, to the point of parody. For instance, one flashback begins with Crassus telling of how he met Lentulus Batiatus, Spartacus鈥檚 onetime master. When Crassus meets Batiatus, he asks about Spartacus, and Batiatus obliges with a story of his own. So we have flashbacks within flashbacks, which borders on the lightly absurd.
Fortunately, as I mentioned above, these lookbacks are presented in their own sections. This avoids an issue prevalent in the nested narratives of Joseph Conrad, where backstories are presented within dialogue, which in turn has its own imbedded dialogue, turning the page into a nightmare of quotation marks.
***
The upshot of Fast鈥檚 infrastructure is that we spend very little time during the actual Servile War, instead following characters as they ruminate on the consequences. There is a lot of chatting in Spartacus, expounding on themes of oppression and freedom. By the end, the pedantry had become a little tedious, the dialectics starting to merge into each other.
That said, Spartacus has a lot to offer. Fast is an evocative writer, and he makes the various locations come alive. Italy is always worth a visit, even if it鈥檚 only in a book.
The prose walks a fine line between being readable to modern eyes 鈥� Fast does not try to channel Tacitus, for instance 鈥� without becoming hopelessly anachronistic. He utilizes a particular idiom and sticks with it.
In terms of action, unlike the movie, there aren鈥檛 any real big battle scenes. Nevertheless, the incidents of combat that do exist are well executed, pun entirely and shamelessly intended. The characters are also well-drawn, especially the figure of Crassus, who is rich, cruel, and conflicted.
The ending is extremely well done, managing to be both incredibly depressing and mildly hopeful, which is the kind of ambiguity that sticks with you. However much Spartacus sagged in the middle, the final sprint made it worthwhile.
***
The motivations of the true Spartacus can never be known. Whether he wanted to destroy Rome, end slavery, or simply escape is all conjecture. Fast does not attempt to heap pathologies on him, but instead defines him in terms of simplicity. He just wants to be free.
At first blush, this seems kind of reductive. 鈥淔reedom鈥� and 鈥渓iberty鈥� have become political buzzwords and intellectual shortcuts. Fast, though, wrote this after being imprisoned during the McCarthy era for refusing to name names. When he left prison, he had to self-publish Spartacus, because no one else would touch it. Seen in this light, the disquisitions which his characters engage come across as deeply felt.
Freedom is just a word until it鈥檚 gone, and then it becomes far more meaningful and profound. Whatever the realities of the historical Spartacus, that is the message ably delivered by the fictional one.
"El joven pastor Espartaco se convierte en un militar del poderoso ej茅rcito romano, pero el contacto con la locura de las batallas y la injusticia le llevan a desertar. Sin embardo, es paresado como esclavo y convertido en un c茅lebre gladiador para acabar convirti茅ndose en el l铆der de la rebeli贸n de los gladidores del a帽o 73 a.C.
Comprometido con la sociedad de su tiempo y con los derechos de las minor铆as, Howard Fast fue perseguido durante el macarthismo y pas贸 meses en prisi贸n por desacato, aprovech贸 para iniciar esta novela.
Stanley Kubrick, se bas贸 en esta novela para la pel铆cula "Espartaco", protagonizada por Kirk Douglas"
Considero y espero que esta rese帽a firmada y sellada con mi humilde opini贸n impresa en ella pueda servir y ayudar a la banda de hist贸rica que quiera leer este libro. O le interese y as铆 tenga ciertas cosas en cuenta.
Tiene un par de aspectos que le restan mucho, uno especialmente. Fue demasiado un mensaje "pol铆tico" sobre la libertad y los derechos.
Se nota que fue escrito en el per铆odo de su vida que fue perseguido y encarcelado.
Muy importante, por supuesto, y valioso, pero mucho menos Spartacus, el hombre. Y m谩s otras cosas.
Demasiado. No fue lo que esperaba para nada y le pas贸 factura. Con cada p谩gina iba perdiendo estrellas.
Para mi este libro, cuyo t铆tulo es el nombre de su supuesto protagonista, no se siente como un libro sobre Espartaco. Eso lastr贸 su lectura.
Tenemos cap铆tulos contados desde su punto de vista. Sin embargo, muchos se cuentan despu茅s de su muerte y sus compa帽eros.
Su estilo de narraci贸n le da un objetivo y meta al libro. Y es que ayuda a retratar a Espartaco como algo concreto que buscaba el autor. Pero para mi este fue su mayor fallo queriendo leer algo sobre Espartaco. Y con cierto conocimiento ya previo sobre dicho personaje hist贸rico.
Hace que se sienta menos como una historia sobre el hombre y m谩s como un "ensayo pol铆tico disfrazado".
El di谩logo, las reflexiones internas, todo se suma a esta imagen. No es algo malo, por supuesto, y le gustar谩 a muchos. Pero no era para nada lo que me esperaba cuando lo empec茅.
No fue hasta el final del libro que la acci贸n hizo su aparici贸n. Moral y pol铆tica que lo entiendo es parte de Espartaco y su rebeli贸n pero todo con su dosis controlada, sino deja de ser una cosa y pasa a ser otra. Y que encaje, eso ya lo explico abajo.
Podr铆a haber sido una estupenda lectura, muy interesante, pero adem谩s del mensaje y ese "Espartaco", contiene descripciones de sitios u otras cosas de varias p谩ginas, y descripciones de la relaci贸n amorosa del personaje que se me hizo muy aburrida. Un poco demasiado para mi gusto.
Demasiado mensaje, descripciones y dem谩s en torno a una figura hist贸rica que est谩 llevada de manera buscada por el autor hacia una especie de "Mes铆as con grandes ideas sobre los derechos y libertades".
No lo disfrute. Y no me enganch贸. Se me hizo bola su lectura convirti茅ndose finalmente en una avalancha.
Lo que he le铆do sobre este famoso personaje hist贸rico no hay datos muy concretos, como casi todo en la historia antigua de nuestro mundo, lamentablemente, y menos sobre sus intenciones, ni siquiera en la revuelta que lider贸. Creo adem谩s que su autor pone sus propias palabras e ideas en boca de Espartaco.
Libre es de hacerlo, por supuesto. Pero no me gust贸 el rumbo que tom贸 ni ciertas cosas.
Claro que esperas en Espartaco la lucha por la libertad contra la esclavitud, y no dejan de ser cosas que ayudan a reflexionar. Etc茅tera.
Pero primero hacerlo en dosis que no cubran por completo la historia y segundo su autor mete demasiadas cosas adem谩s de la libertad en la figura de Espartaco, en su demanda de que se derrumbe la vieja sociedad y se construya una nueva sociedad en la que no haya propiedades privadas, resolviendo los problemas del amo y el esclavo hacia un para铆so justo. Y dem谩s cosillas.
Tampoco muestra c贸mo Espartaco, el hombre, lleg贸 a estas ideas, m谩s complejas de lo que yo pobremente explico para no caer en spoiler.
Fue esto lo que me choc贸, que poner en boca de alguien que fue una figura hist贸rica real que vivi贸 en las condiciones en las que hombres y mujeres como Espartaco padecieron. No me encaj贸 en ciertos niveles de filosof铆a, ideas y palabras. Me ha chocado y entorpecido.
Cada autor es libre de crear lo que quiera. Y para gustos, colores. Pero si vais a leerlo tener en cuenta estas cosas que me han pasado.
Considero que si quer茅is leer algo de esta eterna figura hist贸rica busqu茅is otros antes de leerlo. Finaliza aqu铆 mi humilde testimonio donde dejo constancia de lo acontecido con esta lectura..鉁嶏笍
I have watched the movie and even though it was three hours long I really enjoyed, and I admit that a salty flood occupied my visionary organs quite a few times; maybe it's because I finished reading the book less than twenty four hours before. I reviewed the book but it's in Greek; Google Translate it and you might get the gist. And not get fooled by people saying it's a Marxist propaganda. It's a tale about how it is to be free. Is the right to be free a Marxist propaganda or is it a privilege of all humans? If you possess a good amount of brains you'll know the answer.
I had to stop reading it half way through. While reasonably well written from a purely stylistic standpoint, sadly it does reflect an ideologically driven, deeply disingenuous and almost comically anti-historical approach to the period, where the Roman Republic and its main representatives are monochromatically depicted as unfailingly corrupt, ruthless, sexual degenerate and cruel, while Spartacus is represented almost as the roman-period translation of some kind of highly idealized, pure-hearted Che Guevara hero of a not so subtly-concealed Marxist tinge. I do not have time for this kind of propaganda disguised as historical fiction.
Howard Fast鈥檚 SPARTACUS, which he self-published in 1951, is one of my favorite novels. It was later adapted into a terrific film directed by Stanley Kubrick and starring Kirk Douglas, Tony Curtis, Jean Simmons, Laurence Olivier, Charles Laughton and Peter Ustinov. Both are worth enjoying as the same but distinctly separate stories of Spartacus鈥� life.
Fast wrote SPARTACUS in response to the three months in prison he spent during the McCarthy Era, and self-published it because no publisher would touch it. Now it鈥檚 a classic.
SPARTACUS tells the story of the slave uprising against Rome during the Third Servile War (73-71 BC), led by Spartacus, a Thracian gladiator. Fast鈥檚 novelization of his life differs in some key respects from the life of the historical Spartacus so as to tell the story he wanted, which is an interpretation of Spartacus. The novel expresses the theme that life, love and freedom are paramount human values, and that oppression and slavery debase humanity.
The theme is evidenced in the story structure, which is split between two narratives. In one, a group of Roman nobles travel Italy touring the 鈥渢okens of punishment鈥� (crucified slaves), the other flashbacks and stories describing Spartacus and his fight to end slavery. The Romans have the best of everything, a rich life built on the labor and suffering of millions of slaves. They don鈥檛 particularly enjoy it, though. Wealth and idleness have corrupted the virtues that build their republic, enabled by slavery. They hate and fear the slaves they exploit, going so far as to call them 鈥渋nstrumentum vocale,鈥� or tools with a voice.
In the other narrative, we see Spartacus struggling to survive as a slave working in a marble mine and then as a gladiator in the arena. It disgusts him that people could be used up and thrown away to thrill jaded Romans. Gladiatorial combat isn鈥檛 gloried as it in films like GLADIATOR or the TV series SPARTACUS. Men don鈥檛 slaughter each other just to hear crowds cheer. The novel is closer to real life, which is the gladiators were fed and adored and pampered but only for their ability to kill other men until they themselves were finally killed. They hated it.
Spartacus leads the gladiators in a revolt and begins building a slave army that intends to overthrow Rome and begin a new golden age reminiscent of idealized simpler times. He smashes army after army sent against him until finally the Romans destroy him. But have they destroyed what Spartacus represents, the human spirit?
SPARTACUS is beautifully written and stirring. If you haven鈥檛 read it, I highly recommend picking it up.
Que enorme surpresa me guardava este livro. Simplesmente fant谩stico. Adorei!
Muito mais que uma hist贸ria de escravos, gladiadores, aventura, coragem e her贸is, esta 茅 uma hist贸ria pol铆tica, uma vis茫o da Rep煤blica e da democracia.
Para que se mantenha o poder estabelecido a receita ser谩 simples: manter os pobres ignorantes e submissos e os "remediados" satisfeitos e iludidos com a sensa莽茫o de deterem algum poder (pelo voto). Enquanto satisfeitos, os remediados nunca abandonar茫o o seu conforto, nunca se juntar茫o aos pobres em revolta, nunca se colocar茫o em risco de perder o que t锚m, ainda que pouco seja. Com esta f贸rmula, o poder estabelecido nunca estar谩 amea莽ado.
Spartacus teria tido escravos em n煤mero suficiente para enfrentar Roma, n茫o fossem aqueles que "n茫o estavam assim t茫o mal", simplesmente n茫o o terem seguido, n茫o se terem querido arriscar, n茫o se terem juntado 脿 luta que era tamb茅m sua.
Esta hist贸ria mostra-nos a podrid茫o do poder j谩 nesse tempo, as manipula莽玫es dos votos e os jogos pol铆ticos. Mostra-nos a crueldade humana, o ego铆smo e a 芒nsia de poder. Mostra-nos o valor do dinheiro e da posi莽茫o social enquanto medidas do sucesso dos indiv铆duos.
Ao descobrirmos esta Roma de Howard Fast e de Spartacus, 茅 t茫o f谩cil vermo-nos ali espelhados. Os paralelismos s茫o t茫o evidentes! 脡-nos tamb茅m relvelada pelo autor a alternativa...contudo essa continua ainda hoje a n茫o passar de uma utopia.
this is my absolute favourite novel and i am going to be bold enough to say that this is the best among all the books that i have read till now. this is perfect amalgamation of desire for a new world, a desire for freedom, humanistic agenda, war, gladiator fights, true love, friendship, enmity, insights on human behaviour, philosophical undertones throughout, strong and weak characters, optimism, tragedy, hope, a true great hero, and what not. it is a story which inspires one to do something, which fills you with a yearning, a restlessness. goodness, sometimes i feel that novels of such calibre are hard to be found these days (i know that i am wrong but this is what one feels after reading this) this is a simple story of slave revolt. a revolt in which thousands of slaves rose under the leadership of spartacus against the mighty Rome. Rome which ruled the world for centuries found its very foundations shaken by this uprising. it is a story of how if the weak unite and organise can do wonders. it is a story of power of masses. it is a story of survival. this novel takes you on journey of spartacus from the being simple slave in mines to being a gladiator to being a leader of a mass revolt. this story interweaves all that one can think of. perfect description of gladiatorial milieu and thinking marks a highpoint but the highest point is the revolt itself. highest level of penmanship sees all the human emotions flow through out the novel at the right time and in right amount. no wonder this story has been adapted into movie and so many tv series in the west. but none has been true to the spirit of the spartacus. the soul of spartacus resides in this novel. i would recommend this book to all my friends strongly.
-De rebeliones contra el poder establecido y sus reglas injustas.-
G茅nero. Novela hist贸rica (aunque s贸lo tangencialmente si nos ponemos estrictos).
Lo que nos cuenta. Tras la derrota de los esclavos rebeldes liderados por Espartaco y crucificar a buena parte de ellos a lo largo de la V铆a Apia, vamos conociendo m谩s datos de la rebeli贸n y sus protagonistas mediante las conversaciones y recuerdos de algunos personajes.
驴Quiere saber m谩s de este libro, sin spoilers? Visite:
Absurdly awful. Bland prose and Marxist rhetoric combine to make an insipid story with two dimensional characters. Do yourself a favor and pass on this.
Not at all what I was expecting - but I loved it. Told from multiple, predominantly Roman points of view, this is as much about the idea of Spartacus and his impact on the characters in the novel (including those who led to his demise) as it is about the man himself. In fact, Spartacus's own point of view takes up very little space. When it does, it's extremely powerful: his experiences at the Nubian mines, his realisation of the need to break free from Roman oppression, these are engrossing, emotional moments, among some of the finest in the book. Despite the lack of involvement with the main character, it's interesting to see how much sympathy Howard Fast eventually brings to the Romans who reflect and speculate on who Spartacus was and what he means to them. Most of these characters have in some way been changed by him, even if they had never met him. The book feels well researched, and the fact that Fast wrote this while a political prisoner in the United States says much about his sympathies for Spartacus's cause. Unfortunately the last two sections of the novel seem a bit weak and labored compared with what had come before. If you're looking for a straight narrative about Spartacus and his campaign against Rome, you should look elsewhere. But this is an engrossing novel in its own way, with much to say about the nature of life, love, slavery, cruelty and human identity. This isn't the best-written historical fiction of all time, but it was a worthy read.
Tal vez no sea un libro de 5 estrellas, pero hac铆a a帽os que un libro no me despertaba tantas ganas de seguir ley茅ndolo. Lo que m谩s me gust贸 de la historia de Espartaco es que tiene aspectos sorprendentemente actuales, como que la sociedad se sustenta por el trabajo de una mayor铆a desfavorecida.
En el pr贸logo del libro, el autor explica que al principio no pudo sacarlo ya que nadie en su pa铆s, Estados Unidos, se lo publicaba. Una vez termin茅 el libro entend铆 por qu茅: es Marxista a m谩s no poder. Tras leer historias como esta parece que el fil贸sofo s铆 que ten铆a raz贸n cuando dijo que la historia de la humanidad es la historia de la lucha de clases.
Przyznam, 偶e nie wiem, o czym jest ta ksi膮偶ka. Narracja jest nudna, jak flaki z olejem. Akcja dzieje si臋 wsz臋dzie, ale Spartakusa tam niewiele. A nawet je艣li ju偶 jest, to opisuje wszystko wok贸艂 niego, a nie jego samego. Wydarzenia opisane tak, jakby dzia艂y si臋 w zwolnionym tempie. Szczerze, to nie wynios艂am z niej nic. Druga gwiazdka za to, 偶e jednak jest tam troch臋 opis贸w staro偶ytnego 艣wiata.
芦La primera vez que estuve en sus brazos, tuve miedo. Entonces se apoder贸 de m铆 un sentimiento maravilloso. Supe que nunca morir铆a. Mi amor era inmortal. Nada pod铆a volver a da帽arme. Pas茅 a ser como 茅l y supongo que 茅l pas贸 a ser un poco como yo. No ten铆amos secretos entre nosotros. Primero tuve miedo de que pudiera ver las imperfecciones de mi cuerpo. Pero entonces comprend铆 que esas imperfecciones eran tan puras como la piel misma. Me amaba tanto. 驴Pero qu茅 puedo contarle de 茅l? Quieren hacerlo parecer un gigante, pero no era un gigante. Era un hombre corriente. Era amable y bueno y lleno de amor禄.
Es Varinia cantando las alabanzas de su amor Espartaco. Todos tenemos en nuestra memoria asociada el bello rostro de Jean Simmons en la famosa pel铆cula del director Stanley Kubrick, pero en el libro Varinia no es morena; es rubia, germana, alta, hermosa y guerrera, se acerca en destellos听al mito de las听amazonas; por lo tanto, no cubre con el capote los hombros de su pareja听ni se听queda cuidando la tienda del guerrero mientras este va a batirse con las cohortes romanas, sino que empu帽a tambi茅n un arma de igual a igual听y lucha y trata de conseguir su libertad. Y como ella todas las mujeres que formaron parte en el ej茅rcito de esclavos y que durante unos cuantos a帽os se rebelaron y lucharon contra la poderosa Roma.听
Muchas preguntas. Qui茅n fue Howard Fast y por qu茅 escribi贸 esta novela. Qui茅n fue en realidad Espartaco. Entendemos que en el libro su lucha est谩 magnificada y embellecida porque lo que se pretende es se帽alar la esclavitud y la necesidad de la lucha entre el oprimido y el opresor. Es decir, aunque sea una novela hist贸rica y basada en hechos hist贸ricos, Espartaco es una obra del siglo XX, y nace como consecuencia de la caza de brujas impuesta por el gobierno estadounidense contra sus propios ciudadanos.听
De hecho, este libro fue pensado mientras el escritor听se encontraba preso. Y en mi Primera edici贸n de Edhasa, 2003, (este libro es relectura) el propio Howard lo explica as铆 en el pre谩mbulo:听
芦Cuando me sent茅 a iniciar la larga y dura tarea de escribir la primera versi贸n de Espartaco 鈥攈ace de eso ya cuarenta a帽os鈥� acababa de salir de prisi贸n. Hab铆a estado trabajando mentalmente en algunos aspectos de la novela mientras me hallaba en la c谩rcel, que fue un escenario id贸neo para tal labor. Mi delito hab铆a sido negarme a entregar al Comit茅 de Actividades Antiamericanas una lista de los miembros de la organizaci贸n denominada Joint Antifascist Refugee Comittee (Comit茅 de Ayuda a los Refugiados Antifascistas)禄.
B谩sicamente lo que hizo esta asociaci贸n fue reunir dinero para ayudar a los republicanos espa帽oles que enfermos y heridos se hab铆an refugiado en Toulouse. Compraron con el dinero reunido un antiguo convento y consiguieron que los cu谩queros aceptasen cuidar y alimentar a los huidos.听
芦En esa 茅poca (nos cuenta Howard Fast) hab铆a un impresionante apoyo a la causa de la Espa帽a republicana entre la gente de buena voluntad, y entre la que se contaba muchos ciudadanos conocidos. Fue la lista de estas personas la que nosotros no negamos a entregar al Comit茅, y en consecuencia todos los miembros de nuestro grupo fueron considerados culpables de desacato y enviados a prisi贸n禄.
Pero los problemas para Fast no har铆an sino multiplicarse.听Tras salir de prisi贸n escribe la novela y la env铆a a su editor (en realidad ser铆a a lo que hoy llamar铆amos agente literario), y este tras leerla le contesta que para 茅l ser铆a un orgullo, pero acto seguido la editorial recibe amenazas para que no se edite.听Esto se repite en cada editorial en la que Howard Fast trata de publicar su novela. Hasta siete conocidos editores se negaron a publicarla por las repercusiones que pudiese acarrear.听
芦El 煤ltimo de estos siete fue Doubleday, y tras una reuni贸n del comit茅 editorial, George Hecht, jefe de la cadena de librer铆as de Doubleday, sali贸 de la sala enfadado y disgustado, me llam贸 por tel茅fono y me dijo que nunca hasta entonces hab铆a asistido a un acto de cobard铆a tal en Doubleday, y me asegur贸 que si publicaba el libro por mi cuenta me har铆a un pedido de seiscientos ejemplares. Yo nunca hab铆a publicado un libro por mi cuenta禄.
As铆 fue el azaroso nacimiento de este libro. La verdad es que lo que sucedi贸 fue todav铆a mucho peor a lo que cuenta el escritor en el pre谩mbulo. Se le neg贸 incluso la posibilidad de tener una cuenta bancaria, por lo cual en un pa铆s como Estados Unidos es pr谩cticamente situarte sin la posibilidad de acceder a ning煤n cr茅dito y hallarte a los pies听de la indigencia.听
Y ahora vamos a lo hist贸rico. Qui茅n fue en realidad Espartaco. Todas las fuentes hist贸ricas que he le铆do sobre este individuo est谩n tamizadas por proceder de fuentes romanas, por lo tanto no son fiables en este asunto.听Lo 煤nico que tenemos claro es que era tracio, no muy alto, que al parecer vivi贸 esclavizado en las minas de Nubia y que acab贸 siendo un gladiador en Capua, justo en听la escuela de gladiadores de L茅ntulo Baciato, que es donde se va a iniciar la rebeli贸n. Pero una rebeli贸n no muy grande, la verdad; de esa escuela todo parece indicar que solo escaparon alrededor de setenta gladiadores, puede que algunos m谩s contando mujeres y personal de la propia escuela. No m谩s de noventa. C贸mo es posible que una insurrecci贸n听iniciada con tan escaso n煤mero de integrantes pudiese crecer hasta formar un ej茅rcito de听m谩s de cien mil individuos y derrotar en numerosas ocasiones a fuerzas profesionales y bien pertrechadas. Hace falta verdadera capacidad de organizaci贸n y un aurea de pureza y mucha desesperaci贸n y opresi贸n para que tantos esclavos te sigan y luchen hasta la muerte. En una causa que, seamos sinceros, si no encontraba el paso de los Alpes a trav茅s de la Galia Cisalpina, estaba condenada al fracaso, puesto que la enorme capacidad de movilizar soldados de Roma fue la que consigui贸 derrotar muchos a帽os atr谩s听al correoso An铆bal, y el ej茅rcito de An铆bal era uno muy experimentado, lleno de heridas y bien pertrechado, acostumbrado a la guerra y a las grandes marchas desde los a帽os que su padre听Am铆lcar, el Le贸n de Cartago, desembarc贸 en lo que ahora llamamos Espa帽a; qu茅 podr铆a hacer un ej茅rcito de esclavos sin apenas armas, escudos, y con una peque帽o grueso de gladiadores que no llegaba ni a la centuria. Se tardaban unos cuantos a帽os en formar a cada听soldado romano. 听
芦El sencillo hecho era que Espartaco se negaba a ser un animal, y por tal raz贸n se lo consideraba peligroso禄.听
Fue en la escuela de gladiadores de L茅ntulo Baciato en la que se inicia todo. Unos nobles romanos llegan hasta esa escuela, situada en las afueras de Capua, y compran una lucha a muerte entre gladiadores. Aqu铆 hay que hace un inciso y declarar que la lucha a muerte entre gladiadores no era algo com煤n. Olvidaos de pel铆culas como Gladiator I y Gladiator II y series de televisi贸n, ninguna de ellas tiene nada que ver con la realidad; por lo general, los gladiadores conservaban la vida y las heridas que se produc铆an en los combates no eran mortales. Pero aqu铆 en el libro y en la verdadera historia de Espartaco si ocurri贸 as铆, y a la ma帽ana siguiente y durante el rancho todo se precipita y se inicia la rebeli贸n.听
Primero derrotan a la propia guarnici贸n de la escuela; luego a la media cohorte que apresurada acude desde Capua; luego, m谩s tarde, a las seis cohortes que mandan desde Roma; y aunque en el libro solo salga por encima tambi茅n derrotan a las legiones de L茅ntulo y Gelio, los esclavos las masacran; por causas que desconocemos (seguramente disensiones en el ej茅rcito de esclavos) Crixo, que era un galo pelirrojo, marcha con miles de esclavos hacia el norte. Es derrotado y muere. Espartaco con su ej茅rcito en los Apeninos va derrotando uno tras otro los ej茅rcitos que Roma env铆a contra ellos,听e incluso hay un momento en que podr铆a haber cruzado hacia la Galia Cisalpina y alcanzar la libertad. 驴Por qu茅 no lo hizo? No lo sabemos. Incomprensiblemente da marcha hacia atr谩s y vuelve al sur. 驴Quer铆a abandonar por mar听la pen铆nsula it谩lica comprando el pasaje听de los barcos piratas? Me inclino m谩s por creer que deseaba听provocar un levantamiento general de los esclavos en la propia Roma; o igual se vio obligado por causas log铆sticas; o quiz谩 su ej茅rcito tras tantos combates estaba muy diezmado y hambriento. An铆bal tambi茅n se encontr贸 con estos inconvenientes y era preciso y vital asegurarse la provisi贸n de grano. Sin grano ning煤n paso por los Alpes pod铆a ser superado en invierno sin morir de inanici贸n.听La verdad es que听no sabemos los detalles concretos y solo podemos especular.听 Lo cierto es que la novela (aunque pase por encima de estos combates) resulta fiel a la historia; es verdad que tiene momentos de gran exaltaci贸n y que esconde una historia de amor maravillosa entre Varinia y Espartaco. Pero hay detallitos como el explicar que la crucifixi贸n no era cosa propia de Roma sino de cartagineses (verdadero) que manifiestan que el escritor se document贸 bastante bien sobre el tema.听
芦Ahora todo su ser, la vida que la animaba en su interior, su ser y su existir, su vivir y su funcionar, el torrente de su sangre y el latir de su coraz贸n estaban fundidos en el amor hacia aquel esclavo tracio. Comprobaba ahora que las experiencias de los hombres y mujeres de su tribu eran muy ciertas y muy antiguas y muy sabias. Ya no tem铆a a nada en el mundo. Cre铆a en la magia y la magia y la magia de su amor era real y demostrable. Al mismo tiempo comprend铆a que era f谩cil amar a un hombre como el suyo. 脡l era uno de esos raros ejemplares humanos tallados de una sola pieza. Lo primero que se ve铆a en Espartaco era su integridad. Era singular. Estaba satisfecho, no de lo que era, sino de lo que significaba como ser humano. Aun en aquella madriguera de hombres terribles, desesperados y condenados, en la escuela del crimen de asesinos condenados, de desertores del ej茅rcito, de almas perdidas y de mineros a los que las minas no hab铆an podido destruir, a Espartaco se le quer铆a y se le respetaba禄.听
A destacar tambi茅n la estructura de la obra. A trav茅s de saltos en el tiempo, de di谩logos y de distintos personajes, tanto de la parte romana como de los esclavos, vamos perfilando el verdadero rostro de ese individuo que no acept贸 la humillaci贸n y la esclavitud y que luch贸 hasta el final. Espartaco no es visto desde dentro, sino desde el prisma de sus amigos y enemigos.听 Quiz谩 los momentos m谩s brillantes de esta obra (que es muy entretenida y que est谩 bien escrita) se escriben a trav茅s de David el jud铆o, de Varinia y de Cicer贸n; este 煤ltimo sirve para ejemplificar muy bien la corrupci贸n moral de Roma que se serv铆a de un estado esclavista para que su 茅lite pudiese听prosperar. Cicer贸n es el 煤nico que sabe y reconoce que la idea de justicia se aposenta en una completa falsedad. Los que se vanaglorian de las virtudes del derecho romano tendr铆an que detenerse a pensar sobre esto:听
芦Hac铆a mucho tiempo que Cicer贸n hab铆a descubierto la profunda diferencia que exist铆a entre justicia y moralidad. La justicia era el instrumento del fuerte, concebida para ser usada a voluntad del fuerte; la moralidad, como los dioses, era la ilusi贸n de los d茅biles禄.
Todos sabemos que los seis mil esclavos supervivientes de las batallas fueron crucificados a trav茅s de la V铆a Apia. Fue Marco Licino Craso (el que por cierto con su generosa fortuna aval贸 a帽os despu茅s las enormes deudas de Cayo Julio C茅sar) el que venci贸 definitivamente a los insurrectos que le quedaban a Espartaco. Roma no solo quer铆a regodearse en su victoria sino imponer el temor a futuros rebeldes.听
听La muerte de David, el jud铆o, es uno de esos momentos que convierten esta aparente novela hist贸rica en algo con mucho m谩s calado. Sin embargo, no terminaremos esta rese帽a con ese ensa帽amiento, sino con uno de esos p谩rrafos de emoci贸n l铆rica que tambi茅n impregnan la novela y que resultan efectivos y muy emocionales.听
芦Era una edad dorada la de ahora, con el sol brillante en lo alto de la campi帽a y los fieros hombres del circo, los hombres de la arena, apretujados en torno a 茅l y a la muchacha germana, con sus mentes plenas de interrogantes. El c茅sped era suave y verde en la pradera donde estaban reunidos. Flores amarillas como mantequilla lo coronaban, y por todas pares hab铆a mariposas y abejas y el aire se llenaba con sus canciones. Lo llamaban padre, a la manera de los tracios禄. 听 Hasta otra.听 听 听
This historical novel by Howard Fast is clearly the source of the Kirk Douglas movie, filmed around ten years later, and directed by Stanley Kubrick. The novel couldn鈥檛 find a major publishing house to publish it, and was sponsored by people buying a copy in advance. It鈥檚 a great novel, though not what I expected. It鈥檚 frame story is told after the rebellion, and mostly through the point of view of the Romans who opposed and eventually destroyed Spartacus鈥� rebellion. Crassus, the bisexual general (Laurence Olivier in the movie I think) who destroyed him, is one character. So is the old senator Gracchus (Charles Laughton in the movie I think.) There is a very vivid scene early in the book where some young privileged Romans are riding up a road lined with crucified slaves. The brutality and the 鈥渉ighly civilized鈥� nature of ancient Rome are constantly juxtaposed. The rebellion itself is never featured the way it is in the film, but that鈥檚 a different medium. This novel is driven largely by talk, in the tradition of Plato and Socrates and Aristotle, and that sort of makes sense. The bits and pieces of the rebellion are filled in, with some attention to tactics, but in general this novel is much talkier than I expected. And yet it works. The main plot taking place within the frame story is the fight between Crassus and Gracchus to own Varinia, Spartacus鈥檚 widow. She is a beautiful, large breasted Teutonic woman who charges naked into battle like a berserker warrior. It鈥檚 hard to imagine enough people ever reading this novel for it to be a threat, but its tale of a corrupt empire that would always inevitably have to face rebellion was clearly one that touched a nerve for America in the fifties. There are a number of political speeches (or monologues or whatever you want to call them) by Gracchus that are thinly veiled shots at our own Republic. Good stuff.
A word of caution 鈥� the minutia concerning gladiatorial combat and crucifixion is so repulsive that the reader is justifiably horrified and that brings home the terror of Rome.
In 1943, Fast joined the Communist Party. In 1950, he was called before the House Committee on Un-American Activities during the Red Scare and was imprisoned for refusing to disclose names of sympathizers. He served three months for contempt of Congress and during this time, he began writing this work. He was subsequently blacklisted. His political sentiments scream throughout Spartacus and, had you not been aware of Fast鈥檚 convictions, you would be induced into accepting his conclusions: the poor are virtuous, the rich are corrupt, private property is immoral and once there was a Golden Age where all men loved one-another, shared everything equally and weren鈥檛 constrained by any god. Had Fast confined himself to telling a story instead of pontificating, I would have appreciated the read much more.
鈥漁ch s氓 l盲nge m盲nniskan arbetar och andra m盲nniskor tar frukterna av deras arbete, skall namnet Spartakus h枚ras, 盲n som en l氓g viskning, 盲n som h枚ga och klara rop鈥� S氓 sant som det 盲r sagt!
I recently completed Dan Carlin's Death of the Republic series as a part of his Hardcore History podcast. I decided to check out some fiction written about the period. This book popped up and I listened to it on audible. I would not recommend it. For context, I have read various writing by authors from the Roman period including Virgil, Lucian, Apuleius, Cicero, and Caesar's Commentaries. So I was looking for a re-imagining of the Roman world by an author with modern research at his finger tips so that I might be taken there to enjoy an immersive, rich narrative.
There is little detail of Roman life included in the descriptive passages of the novel, with rare exception. It reads more like an epistolary novel, and a poor one at that, since as far as I can tell literally nothing happens throughout the entire book. We hear conversations in baths, conversations in wagons, conversations in houses, conversations about things that actually happened, but we do not get to see what actually happened or be with Spartacus and his followers. It is a hearsay novel in which the primary characters basically do nothing. This is very convenient device when your goal is not to honestly portray a human experience, but to manipulate your readers, telling them only what you want them to hear. This novel is really a piece of political propaganda, and it is not even good political propaganda.
Fast commits a major historical fiction sin, in my opinion, by putting his own words and intent into the mouth of Spartacus. There is no historical evidence as far as I have read that indicates why Spartacus led the revolt or what was his intent was other than what one might imagine as a desire to be free from slavery. It would have been an excellent subject for a book to meditate upon that and attempt to honestly reconstruct what could have been using research and context, but this is not Fast's intent. Personally, I find it highly unlikely that Spartacus anticipated Marx by more than a thousand years in his demand that a new society be constructed without private property, resolving the Hegelian Master Slave dichotomy in a proletarian paradise on earth. If he did come to such a view, we are not allowed to see how he arrived at it. Of course, Fast doesn't seem to think this is important as he doesn't care how he arrived at it, only that the audience unconsciously adopted the ideas.
Fast even puts in Spartacus' mouth (well not actually his mouth since it is described by someone else who wasn't there when he supposedly said it) a reference to an ahistorical Rousseau-inspired past in which all people were equal and shared everything and there was peace and love and harmony. If this is one's view, that is fine, but to stick it into the mouth of someone who was a real person living under the conditions that a man like Spartacus must suffered under is incredibly disrespectful to the subject of the novel. One might say it is a rather "tyrannical" thing to manipulate the audience by subverting the actual experiences of a historical character for propaganda purposes, especially considering that this is purportedly a novel of critical of tyranny.
I say more, but there isn't much else to add. If I were to sum up my reaction, my hat is off to Fast for somehow finding a way to make Spartacus boring.