Just Finished Reading: Amistad by David Pesci (FP: 1992) [344pp] 

Connecticut, 1839. They knew they had a case as soon as they saw them. The so-called ‘pirates’, towed into port from the Spanish ship Amistad, were the blackest ‘slaves’ they’d seen. With the trans-Atlantic slave trade now illegal they could not have come, as the surviving crew said, from Cuba. For one thing, not a single one of them spoke a word of Spanish. But could they win in court, that was the thing. They had powerful, well-connected, forces against them. With a presidential election next year, the last thing the Whitehouse wanted was a slavery debate in the press. Likewise, those of the abolitionist persuasion saw the arrival of the Amistad slaves as a gift from God himself. This case, if handled properly, could blow apart the administration's weak policy on the slave issue and bring it front and center in the upcoming debates. There was everything to play for. The slaves themselves wanted only one thing – they wanted to go home to their lands, their families and their way of life. But it was going to be a long road, in a cold and hostile country. They needed to survive and, above all else, win their case in court. 

My knowledge of the Amistad case, prior to reading this excellent novel, was mostly based on the 1997 movie of the same name directed by Stephen Spielberg (not based on this book), so I was eager to know more even in fictional form. The novel is essentially split into two parts with the first 130 pages (or so) covering the abduction, sale & transportation of African captives across the Atlantic to Cuba. As you might imagine this was from time-to-time rather brutal (though nothing like as brutal as reality) and with a sprinkling of the inevitable N-word in order to give the reader at least some impression of the illegal slave trade at that time. The second section, which took up most of the book, I found much more interesting – the three court cases which went all the way to the Supreme Court progressively arguing that the ‘pirates’ or revolting ‘slaves’ were nothing of the sort. I was impressed. It was all very, very clever and, as in most court proceedings it seems, included a few laugh-out-loud moments. The Abolitionist lawyers in general – all existed in real-life – were very good but I couldn’t help but be impressed (as no doubt we were expected to be) by one John Quincy Adams who argued the case before the Supreme Court. I think I’ll have to read up a bit more about him. 

Overall, I thought this to be a very satisfying read (and a little emotional at times). You get to know the captive slaves as people and not just as property and you really get to know the law, culture and attitudes of the time with some serious foreshadowing for the upcoming Civil War that even people in the 1830’s thought might be a real possibility over the slavery issue. Definitely recommended for anyone interested in the issues surrounding the reality of slavery or for those who enjoy a well-structured court case.  

[Labels Added: 0, Labels Total: 44]