Spartacus

by Howard Fast

Book Overview

"Spartacus" is a fictionalization of a slave revolt in Rome in 71 BC, well known today because of the 1960 film version. It was originally published by Fast after being turned down by every mainstream... This description may be from another edition of this product.

• Format: Mass Market Paperback
• ISBN: B005F63NPI
• Release Date: January 1960
• Publisher: Bantam Books Sixth Printing edition
• Weight: 0.39 lbs.

Customer Reviews

A "novel" bit of propaganda

"Spartacus" gives the lie to the scientific law that two bodies cannot occupy the same space: it exists simultaneously as an epic piece of historical fiction and as powerful (if less-than-subtle) bit of Leftist propaganda. The fact that most people know the story of Spartacus from the Kirk Douglas movie is a shame, because while the movie remains a classic, the book does the story far more justice. Everyone knows the basic story of Spartacus, the anonymous third-generation slave sold to a gladiator school to fight for the amusement of decadent Romans, and how he ended up leading a gigantic slave rebellion that nearly destroyed the Republic. What Fast explores in the novel is how and why this rebellion came about, and what effect it had on the psychology of the Romans, whose culture even during the years of the Republic was enormously dependent on slavery. Most importantly, Fast explores the moral climate of Rome by following around the "victors" of the Servile War as they reminisce about Spartacus and how he was defeated. It is in this backward-looking manner that "Spartacus" unfolds. Fast draws his characters, most of whom are real-life figures, with wonderful clarity: Crassus, the general who crushed Spartacus' rebellion, is shown as "the bronze hawk of the Republic" -- ruthless, sensual, grasping, yet ultimately hollow; Cicero, the historian-philsopher, as a scheming opportunist of the worst sort; Gracchus as a basically decent man turned cynical and decayed by the evils of his society. The lesser Roman characters are much worse: empty-headed, venal, vain, cruel, parastic, sexually depraved, almost unspeakably vicious and treacherous, all holding onto illicit fortunes wrung from the sweat and labor of slaves, and all desperate to increase their wealth, power and position relative to each other. Nor are the common folk of the cities and towns spared: Fast depicts them in passing as a lazy, bloodthirsty, amoral mob who live for cheap wine and the grain dole and the games, who "strangle their children at birth" and whore themselves on the streets for pennies. In contrast, Fast holds the slaves as being rendered pure and noble by virtue of their suffering. Spartacus is depicted as almost Jesus-like in his simplistic divinity; Varinia (his lover) as a pillar of wifely and motherly virtue; David (the Jewish gladiator) as a hate-filled soul brough to love and redemption through his apprenticeship at Spartacus' side. Once freed, the slaves live in perfect socialistic harmony, sharing their property, keeping no more than they need, living as equals and brothers, and -- inflamed by their passion for freedom -- fighting like lions against the numercially superior and better-equipped Roman legions. If all of this seems rather heavy-handed to you, it is. Fast's Rome is metaphoric. The Romans are modern-day capatalists, the slaves the modern-day working class; and in attacking capitalism and imperialism he is suggesting, as most Marxists did, that the

Like good wine: better with age.

Not including the mandatory classics like Moby Dick that we were required to read in school growing up in the 50's and 60's, I recall that Spartacus was one of the first 'adult' books I voluntarily read. I enjoyed it as a 14-year-old kid, but I'm certain I waded through the book from action scene to action scene. What motivated me to read it again nearly 40 years later, I don't know. Nonetheless, I picked it up a month ago and did it again. The changes in my perceptions were startingly. Frankly, there are not many action scenes, and it amazed me that I was able to hang in there as a boy reading a man's book. More importantly, this is a book about people and great concepts and controversies that have been a part of mankind since the beginning. As an adult knowing about Howard Fast's background when he wrote the book, I could read his own struggles in the 50's portrayed through the lives of the 'greatest' generation of its time, the people of the Roman Empire. This is as stunning a book about freedom as you will ever read. Early on when a crucified gladiator tells onlookers, "I will return, and I will be millions," you can easily see the connection between what happened in this little documented yet important episode in history and what has occurred in the subsequent 2,000 years. The story of Spartacus is not finished; mankind has miles to go before it sleeps. Still, the tale of rebellious gladiators who unite the slave population of Rome through four tumultuous years is an excellent base from which to consider other chapters in the story through 20 centuries. An excellent book that will hook you through character and conceptual development.

enriched with typical Fastian twistedness :)

Spartacus is a beautiful and romantic novel, with some parts very typical Fastian twistedness and humor, that makes it especially enjoyable. The ending is moving and if I were smaller, I'd probably close the book with tears in my eyes (both ordinary tears and tears of joy) Personally I think this is one of the strongest parts, that makes you, if nothing else, think a lot for days. One thing that might make it hard to enter the Roman world is that it's a bit weird to find Roman characters with American attitudes. But I dont feel good when writing any sort of critic on such a vast work of art, because thats what it really is. Harsh and humane. Poetic and thrilling. Modern and classic. A novel you fall in love with.

Probably Fast's best book. And a great book.

Howard Fast's novelization of the slave revolt in Italy between 73-71 BC is both a work of left wing advocacy and a tremendously well done novel. I read it first when I was 14. Now, a long time later, once a year or so I re-read the copy I still have - for the enjoyment, for the character development, for the history, and for the political agenda. You could read it for any one or any combination of those features, and still get something out of this book. For those who don't know, Howard Fast was a member of the Communist Party of the United States from the 1930s on up to the early 1950s, a committed, though thinking member. And one who was willing to go to jail ~1951 rather than testify about others in the CPUSA. (For more about this aspect of his life, buy his biography, Being Red.) So, Spartacus is a novel with an agenda. For "Rome," read western capitalism run wild. For "slaves" read the lower class, peasants, serfs or workers. And for Spartacus himself, read anyone you want to as a modern day revolutionary who is forced by history, and his own humanity, to attempt changing the world. Is this a problem? Absolutely not! When I read this book at 14, I knew that when I read something along the lines of "Rome is the whole world," that that could be taken as the Classical Mediterranean world, or as the whole capitalist world of the 20th century. If, like me, you don't worry too much about the evils of modern capitalism, you can read the book as pure historical fiction. And, like me, if you want to, you can catch Fast's criticism of capitalism without diminishing your enjoyment of the novel. How good is Spartacus as historical fiction? I am not a classical historian, but I read a lot, including those Roman detective novels, and all five of McCullough's Roman series starting with The First Man in Rome. I would guess that Fast is doing as good a job as McCullough. Does Fast account for every last Roman legion, including the date it was raised, where it was stationed, and the historically correct name of its legate in a certain year, etc? No, but given the relatively small amount of information available about Spartacus, Fast manages to make a historically valid interpretation. What Fast really does well is characters: Spartacus himself, introduced as a slave, and then as a gladiator, working his way towards open revolt, a human being who others might follow in a desperate bid for freedom. Crassus, the rich Roman general - rich enough to pay for his own army - who ultimately defeats Spartacus, but himself has doubts about how his own Roman morality compares with what he can understand of the goals and ethics of the Spartacus and his slave army. And Gracchus, the Roman senator who does appear to fully understand the morality superiority of Spartacus, but at the same time is so much a Roman that he must help destroy Spartacus. Throw in Cicero, and a number of other characters who may or may not be historical, inclu

If you liked the movie, prepare for something different..

Even though I probably would have bought this book anyway (I enjoy historical fiction and Roman history), the main reason I bought this book was because I loved the movie. But I was unprepared for what was ultimately a finely crafted novel.For the most part, it takes place after the revolt: as a few of Rome's most important politicians (including Crassus and Cicero), discuss, and consider, the significance of the revolt. Also, through flashbacks, it covers part of Spartacus' life--the horrible conditions in the african mines, life as a gladiator, the revolt, and death.Basically, this book tells a better story, and tells it better, than the movie which claims to be based on it.