HOWARD JONES is the university research professor and chairperson of the University of Alabama's College of Arts and Sciences (Department of History) at the Tuscaloosa campus. He is author of Mutiny on the Amistad: The Saga of a Slave Revolt and its Impact on American Abolition, Law and Diplomacy (Oxford University Press). He was interviewed by mail by BRANDON ASTOR JONES about his book and its role in the making of the Steven Spielberg film Amistad.
Question: Unfortunately, most people in the United States know very little about the events that inspired Amistad. I think Spielberg is demonstrating a good deal of courage — considering the present political and racial climate — in presenting it. It's my understanding that most of Amistad's historical content was gleaned from your book. Can you describe your collaboration on this project?
Although DreamWorks studio in Hollywood did not officially option my book, it was one of two books used by David Franzoni in writing the screenplay. In addition, DreamWorks' special team of researchers called me numerous times, asking about various aspects of the story. The answers I returned on a pro bono basis.
Then, in March 1997, my wife and I received a phone call from DreamWorks, informing us that Steven Spielberg had invited us to the set in Hollywood, to meet him and watch him shoot the mutiny scene. This we did in April.
It was at this time that we met Debbie Allen, producer of the movie, who invited me to advise and participate in the making of two television specials promoting Amistad: an Arts and Entertainment "biography" of Joseph Cinqué, and a History Channel special on the "middle passage" of the African slave trade. Both programs aired several times in December.
A by-product of the movie and my involvement has been the decision of Oxford University Press to allow me to revise and reissue Mutiny on the Amistad. The book has received several fine assessments, including one by Gore Vidal in the New Yorker and one by Alfred Rosen in Commentary.
Question: Those who are close to me who have seen the film have said that it moved them deeply. Why do you think that people owe it to themselves to see Amistad?
Amistad is much more than the story of a mutiny in 1839; it is a story of the triumph of freedom in the widest sense. This is the first civil rights case in US history.
It is astounding to think that in 1841, 20 years before the Civil War, a group of blacks testified in US courts and won their freedom on the basis of their being "kidnapped Africans" who had the inherent right of self-defence in breaking away from their captors — even to the point of killing them to achieve their objective. The story demonstrates what a people will do to win their freedom.
Spielberg's contribution is to make this grand story known — and put it into mainstream US history. This is not a black history story and movie, nor a white history story and movie. Rather, it is an American history story and movie. One cannot read this story or watch the movie without experiencing a range of deep emotions.
Question: Since so many people in the United States seem unwilling to talk to one another, there could hardly be a better symbolic discussion on race in the US than the viewing of Amistad.
President Clinton has recently tried to create a "dialogue" over race in an effort to force people to come to grips with the issue and, perhaps in doing so, recognise that many fears and misunderstandings are groundless. Spielberg's movie can have the same effect.
The issues raised by the incident are timeless in importance and relevance: human rights vs property rights; the huge chasm between morality and the law — between the natural rights principles underlying the Declaration of Independence and the property guarantees (even slaves) in the Constitution. How can a republic support both liberty and slavery? How can it today support both liberty and racial discrimination?
In the face of so many emotional issues, blacks and whites worked together to achieve a triumph of freedom within the system. The story and the movie have the potential of stimulating a wide-ranging discussion on race that might encourage improved relations.