On the night of May 4, 1886, during a peaceful demonstration of labor activists in Haymarket Square in Chicago, a dynamite bomb was thrown into the ranks of police -trying to disperse the crowd. The officers immediately opened fire, killing a number of protestors and wounding some two hundred others.
Albert Parsons was the best-known of those hanged; Haymarket is his story. Parsons, humanist and autodidact, was an ex-Confederate soldier who grew up in Texas in the 1870s, and fell in love with Lucy Gonzalez, a vibrant, outspoken black woman who preferred to describe herself as of Spanish and Creole descent. The novel tells the story of their lives together, of their growing political involvement, of the formation of a colorful circle of "co-conspirators"-immigrants, radical intellectuals, journalists, advocates of the working class-and of the events culminating in bloodshed.
More than just a moving story of love and human struggle, more than a faithful account of a watershed event in United States history, Haymarket presents a layered and dynamic revelation of late nineteenth-century Chicago, and of the lives of a handful of remarkable individuals who were willing to risk their lives for the promise of social change.
Martin Bauml Duberman is a scholar and playwright. He graduated from Yale in 1952 and earned a Ph.D. in American history from Harvard in 1957. Duberman left his tenured position at Princeton University in 1971 to become Distinguished Professor of History at Lehman College in New York City.
Duberman is a renowned historian, and a very fluent writer to boot. I wanted to see how he used this historic event, and the real people involved in it -- including the two central characters, Lucy and Albert Parsons, as a novel. He used lots of archival material, newspaper accounts and even biographies of the principals -- and yet this is fiction. Can you tell a deeper truth that way? Can we learn more about what was on their minds? At first, I didn't think he got the right balance -- too much exposition, which detracted from the reader (well, me) getting intimate with the characters. But when he got into the trial, and the clemency appeal, and the drama of the story matched the heightened emotions of the characters, I was completely drawn in.
It took me a long time to get hold of this book and it was worth it. Of the big three of Liberal History (Howard Zinn, Staughton Lynd and Duberman) he has produced an effective novelization of an historical event that I, and I think most people, are aware of only in the most basic sense.
I knew going in that his politics - which have often found their way into his works of history ... to their detriment, would be a central figure in this a fictionalized account of reality. It works. If I were sending my child off to college and they came home having read this, I would not object.
It is a thoughtful, well written piece of advocacy for a political perspective I don't share. It caused me to re-examine some of my own arguments. As a piece of literature it was far less ham handed than other pieces of historically based fiction (like the Watchmen) and the use of discretion is effective.
The best book I've read thus far in this very young year and the best piece of fiction I've read in a long time.
Literally one of the most terrible pieces of historical-fiction I have every had the displeasure of reading. Absolutely heinous. Do not treat this as an academic text!
This is historical fiction; the book is divided into 8 parts. The author had to choose this genre, because there is so little primary record/surviving evidence about the lives of the main characters. This book did not draw me in until the latter portion. The first part is highly fictionalized whereas the last parts can rely on court records, newspapers, and other official documents---making it more interesting and real for me.
I did, however, learn a lot from this book: #1 The freedoms, rights, and protections that I enjoy today come from the blood, sweat, tears and too often death of early working men, women and children. #2Chicago politics, police, courts, and yellow journalism, etc. have a long and disgraceful history of corruption. #3The death penalty is not a good thing.
I read this book for one of my grad classes. It does start off slow, but builds up speed. Albert and Lucy Parsons along with a handful of friends they meet along the way are speaking out against the harsh labor conditions of the Chicago working class in the late 1800s. Much of the novel centers around the events leading up to the Haymarket bombing and massacre. To avoid spoilers, I won't go into detail of who is accused of the bombing and what becomes of them. There are journal entries and letters between Albert and Lucy throughout the book regarding events and happenings of the the times. This piece of historical fiction is interesting, but does have plodding moments. Push through them.
This was an excellent historical fiction book. I had never heard of the Haymarket riots before. It's very interesting how corrupt Chicago (and IL) politics were in the 1880's, and how things haven't changed a whole lot. I was very sad at the end of the book, mainly because this really happened, and I can see similar situations happening today. The main characters were fighting for employee workplace rights and the 8 hour workday, and it took until 1937 for this law to be passed.
Not what I expected. I had thought this would be more of a historical piece of fiction but it was a historical novel about the lives of Albert and Lucy Parsons and how they were involved in the labor movement.
A good story which documents the labor movement in Chicago in the latter stages of the 19th and provides a good perspective on the background/life of many of the major characters who played lead roles in the struggle between labor and management.
Was looking for a history of the Haymarket, but it's a novel. It's a good story, a good insight into the social situation and personalities of the time.
In 1886 in Chicago, arrogant wealth equaled corrupt power equaled self-righteous, statist violence equaled law as another marketable commodity. Sound familiar?