{"title":"The Evolution of a Gladiator: History, Representation, and Revision in Spartacus","authors":"Carla Hoffman","doi":"10.1111/J.1537-4726.2000.2301_63.X","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The revolt led by the gladiator Spartacus (73-71 B.C.) mushroomed into the largest slave insurrection in western history and shook the Roman Republic. But, almost as remarkably, more than 2000 years later, it stormed the popular culture of the Cold War United States with a pair of contrasting representations which recast the uprising in terms of twentieth-century politics. Howard Fast's 1951 novel Spartacus imagined the rebellion as a Marxist war of oppressed proletarians against their decadent overlords. Kirk Douglas's1 1960 film, based on the novel, aimed for a mass audience by portraying the insurrection as a populist episode in the struggle for human freedom. The contrast between these two versions of Spartacus, emphasizing as they do different aspects of the historical record, exemplifies the way that popular interpretations of history change according to their cultural context. The following pages detail the ways that the novel and the film served different thematic purposes in the Cold War United States.2 Spartacus the book, contrasted with Spartacus the movie, reveals the evolution of a gladiator. History into Fiction, Fiction into Myth Howard Fast, bestselling author and self-proclaimed \"card-carrying member of the Communist Party\" (Fast, Being Red 1) wrote the novel Spartacus following a three-month stint in a federal prison camp in 1950. The charge was contempt of Congress, based on his refusal to testify before the House Un-- American Activities Committee. Viewing himself as the victim of an anti-red witch hunt during an era he later dubbed the \"small terror\" (Fast, Being Red 156) because of its obsessive anti-Communism, Fast inscribed his novel for the purpose of inspiring leftists like himself during times of persecution. His dedication of the book records that he wishes \"those who read [Spartacus], my children and others, [to] take strength for our troubled future . . . that they may struggle against oppression and wrong-so that the dream of Spartacus may come to be in our own time\" (Spartacus v).3 To inspire modern readers, Fast employs two strategies. One comes from his awareness that Spartacus's story had been largely forgotten in the United States of the early 1950s. His first strategy, therefore, involves simply telling the tale of the gladiator and his uprising in a readable, exciting fashion which will gain large numbers of readers from across the political spectrum, and \"educate the masses\" about this forgotten historical event. The fact that Spartacus has proven an international bestseller for almost a half-century shows that Fast succeeded wildly in this important goal. Fast's second strategy reaffirmed a longstanding Communist tradition of viewing Spartacus as an early leftist. This second strategy takes \"educating the masses\" one step further, into leftist mythmaking. Several times in the course of its 360+ pages, Spartacus refers to a past golden age, \"where all men and women too had been equals and there was neither master nor slave and all things had been held in common. That long ago was obscured by a haze of time; it was the golden age\" (164). The rebellion as portrayed in the novel is an attempt to restore this golden age in the midst of the Roman Republic. In Fast's Spartacus, a multicultural proletariat unites in communistic equality under the leadership of a Thracian gladiator of near-divine heroism and gentleness. Inspired by their leader's example, the slaves pit themselves against an overbearing tyranny whose greatest leaders are cruel and relentless villains, and pay a terrible price. But their struggle is never forgotten. Analysis of Fast's use of historical documents demonstrates the ways he constructs this myth. Large portions of Spartacus-for instance its description of the conditions of life for gladiators (endorsed by classical historian Keith Bradley), and its recreation of the aftermath of the rebellion (recorded by the ancient historian Appian)-are well-grounded in history and faithful to the ancient sources. …","PeriodicalId":134380,"journal":{"name":"Journal of American & Comparative Cultures","volume":"50 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2000-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of American & Comparative Cultures","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1537-4726.2000.2301_63.X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5
Abstract
The revolt led by the gladiator Spartacus (73-71 B.C.) mushroomed into the largest slave insurrection in western history and shook the Roman Republic. But, almost as remarkably, more than 2000 years later, it stormed the popular culture of the Cold War United States with a pair of contrasting representations which recast the uprising in terms of twentieth-century politics. Howard Fast's 1951 novel Spartacus imagined the rebellion as a Marxist war of oppressed proletarians against their decadent overlords. Kirk Douglas's1 1960 film, based on the novel, aimed for a mass audience by portraying the insurrection as a populist episode in the struggle for human freedom. The contrast between these two versions of Spartacus, emphasizing as they do different aspects of the historical record, exemplifies the way that popular interpretations of history change according to their cultural context. The following pages detail the ways that the novel and the film served different thematic purposes in the Cold War United States.2 Spartacus the book, contrasted with Spartacus the movie, reveals the evolution of a gladiator. History into Fiction, Fiction into Myth Howard Fast, bestselling author and self-proclaimed "card-carrying member of the Communist Party" (Fast, Being Red 1) wrote the novel Spartacus following a three-month stint in a federal prison camp in 1950. The charge was contempt of Congress, based on his refusal to testify before the House Un-- American Activities Committee. Viewing himself as the victim of an anti-red witch hunt during an era he later dubbed the "small terror" (Fast, Being Red 156) because of its obsessive anti-Communism, Fast inscribed his novel for the purpose of inspiring leftists like himself during times of persecution. His dedication of the book records that he wishes "those who read [Spartacus], my children and others, [to] take strength for our troubled future . . . that they may struggle against oppression and wrong-so that the dream of Spartacus may come to be in our own time" (Spartacus v).3 To inspire modern readers, Fast employs two strategies. One comes from his awareness that Spartacus's story had been largely forgotten in the United States of the early 1950s. His first strategy, therefore, involves simply telling the tale of the gladiator and his uprising in a readable, exciting fashion which will gain large numbers of readers from across the political spectrum, and "educate the masses" about this forgotten historical event. The fact that Spartacus has proven an international bestseller for almost a half-century shows that Fast succeeded wildly in this important goal. Fast's second strategy reaffirmed a longstanding Communist tradition of viewing Spartacus as an early leftist. This second strategy takes "educating the masses" one step further, into leftist mythmaking. Several times in the course of its 360+ pages, Spartacus refers to a past golden age, "where all men and women too had been equals and there was neither master nor slave and all things had been held in common. That long ago was obscured by a haze of time; it was the golden age" (164). The rebellion as portrayed in the novel is an attempt to restore this golden age in the midst of the Roman Republic. In Fast's Spartacus, a multicultural proletariat unites in communistic equality under the leadership of a Thracian gladiator of near-divine heroism and gentleness. Inspired by their leader's example, the slaves pit themselves against an overbearing tyranny whose greatest leaders are cruel and relentless villains, and pay a terrible price. But their struggle is never forgotten. Analysis of Fast's use of historical documents demonstrates the ways he constructs this myth. Large portions of Spartacus-for instance its description of the conditions of life for gladiators (endorsed by classical historian Keith Bradley), and its recreation of the aftermath of the rebellion (recorded by the ancient historian Appian)-are well-grounded in history and faithful to the ancient sources. …
由角斗士斯巴达克斯(公元前73-71年)领导的起义迅速发展成为西方历史上最大的奴隶起义,动摇了罗马共和国。但同样引人注目的是,2000多年后,它以两种截然不同的表现形式冲击了冷战时期美国的流行文化,从20世纪的政治角度重塑了这场起义。霍华德·法斯特1951年的小说《斯巴达克斯》将起义想象成被压迫的无产者反抗腐朽统治者的马克思主义战争。柯克·道格拉斯(Kirk Douglas)根据这部小说于1960年拍摄的电影,将这场起义描绘成争取人类自由的平民主义事件,以吸引大众观众。这两个版本《斯巴达克斯》的对比,强调了历史记录的不同方面,说明了大众对历史的解释会随着文化背景的变化而变化。以下几页详细介绍了小说和电影在冷战时期为不同的主题目的服务的方式。2《斯巴达克斯》一书与《斯巴达克斯》电影对比,揭示了一个角斗士的演变。霍华德·法斯特,畅销书作家,自称“正式共产党员”(《Fast, Being Red 1》),于1950年在联邦监狱集中营服刑三个月后写下了小说《斯巴达克斯》。对他的指控是藐视国会,因为他拒绝在众议院美国人活动委员会作证。法斯特认为自己是一场反红色政治迫害的受害者,在那个被他称为“小恐怖”的时代(Fast, Being Red 156),因为那个时代对共产主义的痴迷。法斯特把他的小说题名是为了在迫害时期激励像他一样的左翼人士。他对这本书的奉献记录了他希望“那些读过[斯巴达克斯]的人,我的孩子和其他人,为我们混乱的未来汲取力量……”使他们能够与压迫和错误作斗争——使斯巴达克斯的梦想能够在我们自己的时代实现”(《斯巴达克斯5》)为了激励现代读者,《Fast》采用了两种策略。一个是他意识到,在20世纪50年代初的美国,斯巴达克斯的故事在很大程度上被遗忘了。因此,他的第一个策略就是简单地讲述角斗士和他的起义的故事,以一种可读、令人兴奋的方式,将获得大量来自不同政治派别的读者,并“教育大众”这个被遗忘的历史事件。《斯巴达克斯》在近半个世纪的时间里成为国际畅销书,这一事实表明,法斯特在这一重要目标上取得了巨大成功。法斯特的第二个策略重申了共产主义长期以来将斯巴达克斯视为早期左派的传统。第二种策略将“教育大众”推进了一步,进入了左派制造神话的阶段。在这本360多页的书中,《斯巴达克斯》多次提到了过去的黄金时代,“在那个时代,所有的男人和女人都是平等的,没有主人和奴隶,所有的东西都是共同的。”那久远的往事已被时间的阴霾所遮蔽;那是黄金时代”(164页)。小说中描写的叛乱是为了恢复罗马共和国时期的黄金时代。在法斯特的《斯巴达克斯》中,一个多元文化的无产阶级在一个近乎神圣的英雄主义和温柔的色雷斯角斗士的领导下,在共产主义的平等中团结起来。在他们领袖榜样的鼓舞下,奴隶们奋起反抗一个专横的暴政,这个暴政最伟大的领袖是残忍无情的恶棍,并付出了可怕的代价。但他们的斗争永远不会被遗忘。分析法斯特对历史文献的使用,可以看出他构建这个神话的方式。《斯巴达克斯》的大部分内容——比如它对角斗士生活条件的描述(得到了古典历史学家基思·布拉德利的认可),以及它对叛乱后果的再现(由古代历史学家阿皮安记录)——都有充分的历史依据,忠实于古代史料。…