The Last Supper -- The Story of Condoning Slavery
By Charlene Aquilina and Marissa Williams, with comments by Elena Zubenko, Ed Tabor, and Krystal Kaai
The Support of Slavery in the Bible
[1] The Last Supper condones slavery through the use of the Bible. The whole movie is the relation of a religious event that took place in the time of Christ to a period in the history of the Americas when slavery was commonplace. The Last Supper scene at the core of the film is an exact replication of Leonardo DaVinci's painting of the actual Last Supper, which consisted of Christ and his twelve disciples sitting at a table for the last time together. (Click here for images and audio.) Christ knew that it would be The Last Supper because one of them would betray him. The Count acts as Christ had and brings twelve slaves to sit with him at his table. This reenactment of a religious event was to persuade the twelve black men, through Christianity, that their positions as slaves were God's wish. As the Bible states in Ephesians 6:5-8:
Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but like slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not men, because you know that the Lord will reward everyone for whatever good he does, whether he is slave or free.This part of the Bible is the basis for all of the Count's actions during the movie. While at the table the Count informs the slaves that "Christ called together 'the saints, his disciples, who were his slaves,'" referring to the Bible and the reasons for calling the plantation workers to his dinner table (Davis 58).
[2] The film takes place during the five days of Holy Week. It begins on Holy Wednesday and lasts till Easter Sunday. The Last Supper meal occurs on Holy Thursday in concordance with the Bible (Davis 57-58). When the Count speaks with the Priest about the preparations for the supper, he says how difficult it is to teach Christian truth to the blacks. They attempt to teach the Christian doctrine by reenacting several religious practices. The scene in heaven is described to the slaves in preparation for their upcoming meal with their master. The Priest reminds them, however, "that here they must serve and love the Master" (Davis 58). The Count then washes and kisses the slaves' feet in the Church before they sit at his table. He acts as Christ in every aspect throughout the meal by constantly making references to the Bible.
[3] The Count religiously refers to the Bible during dinner to show the slaves how relevant Christianity is to their lives. During dinner the Count asks Sebastian, the runaway slave, "Who am I. . . . I ask you in the name of Christ, who am I?" Sebastian refuses to answer, his only response being to spit in the Count's face. "The Count wipes his face and says that, like Christ, who was spat at and stoned, he can humble himself before his slaves" (Davis 59). His false humility is becoming to the slaves. He furthers his good standing by telling them they don't have to work on Good Friday. However, this is just a ploy to get them to appreciate and follow Christian laws. He has no intention of interfering in the Overseer's job. The Count acted in such ways because the New Testament "acknowledged slavery's existence, instructing both Christian masters and slaves in the way they should behave" (gospelcom.net).
[4] Statements recorded in the Bible perfectly depict the actions taken against black people in early American history. The Bible states, "If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property" (Exodus 20: 20-21). This directly corresponds with the treatment of Sebastian. After retrieving him from his attempted escape, Don Manuel continuously beats Sebastian, but Sebastian always recovers. Therefore, under the rules of the Bible, Don Manuel's treatment of him is acceptable. The Count acknowledges Don Manuel's ferocious actions towards the slaves but accepts them because it is allowed in the Bible. This is an extreme example of how the Bible was interpreted in the Americas at that time.
[5] Noah's proclamation, "Cursed be Canaan! The lowest of slaves will he be to his brothers" was the first mention of slavery in the Bible (Genesis 9:25). "[Noah] said this after waking up from a naked, drunken stupor and learning that he had been mocked by his son Ham" (gospelcom.net). The Count experienced the same type of treatment after getting intoxicated at dinner with the slaves. While he was sleeping, the slaves talked about him and the promises he had made. The next day, disregarding his promise of no work on Good Friday, the Count left the plantation. When he heard of the upheaval, he got mad and took the side of the Overseer. He said, "the Overseer commits necessary sins and he will be punished by Someone higher than I" (Downing 293). The Bible was used to justify slavery and its economic benefits. Having slaves created easy labor for the Masters and lessened their responsibility on the plantation. It was easier for them to command workers than to do the slave labor themselves. That is why the Master didn't have to work on a Holy Day but the slaves did.
The Count's Betrayal
[6] During The Last Supper meal the Count tells the slaves that they don't have to work on Good Friday. He says under God's rule there should be no work on a holy day and all shall rest. The Count wants to portray the importance and significance of religion; however, this proves to be hypocritical as a result of his actions the next day. When the Count is making promises to the slaves, he does so to form temporary harmony with them. This harmony is superficial because the Count doesn't respect any of the slaves' feelings. If he had any respect for them, he would have told the Overseer that they didn't have to work the next day. The Count obviously did not feel committed to the words he spoke the night before. On Good Friday the Overseer went to wake up all the slaves for work, but those who were at dinner with the Count contested that they were given permission to rest. The Overseer was furious and threatened them to get up immediately, yet the slaves would not obey. They were convinced that the Count was on their side and genuine in his words.
[7] To their dismay the slaves soon found out that the Count had broken his promises and lied to them the night before. When asked if the slaves could take the day off, the Count leaves the decision to the Overseer, knowing full well that they would have to work. He does not recognize his inconsistencies in treatment of the slaves. In his drunken stupor the Count tries to appease the slaves, but when he awakens he disregards what he previously said. The Count is caught up in his role of Christ during dinner, causing him to do and say anything to create a friendship, but this turned out to be a farce. His true identity is seen on Good Friday when he revokes all that he said. (see comment by Ed Tabor)
The Pious Priest
[8] The closest figure to God on the plantation is the priest. "He complains about the overseer's brutality, and his refusal to allow proper religious rights to the slaves. This complaint reflects the long battle for control between the clergy and the plantation owners in this period" (Downing 289). The Count and the priest both use the Bible to condone slavery, but they do it in different ways. The Count lets the Overseer use brutality knowing that he will be punished by God later, whereas the priest isn't against slavery -- he just wants the slaves to have more rights when it comes to religious practices. The priest thinks slavery is acceptable, but he doesn't think that unnecessary brutality is right. He also thinks that, if the slaves are to follow the Christian teachings, they should be allowed to follow them fully. Meaning, they should be able to take off on holy days that every white Christian would take off. He thinks that these practices are vital to the growth of Christianity within the black community. The Count, however, uses the Christian teachings for a different reason. He thinks that it should be used to his advantage and according to his rules on the plantation. Christianity to the Count means keeping his slaves in control, and Christianity to the priest is acknowledging the benefits of following the religion wholeheartedly. There is a major difference in the two teachings, but both are still condoning slavery through the use of the Bible.
[9] The most religious action of the priest was when he tried to stop Don Manuel from making the slaves work on Good Friday. He thought that it was immoral and that it hindered their religious learning and their respect for Christianity. He tried "to persuade the Count to limit the overseer's violence and to allow the slaves their holy days for prayers" (Davis 63). Don Manuel didn't consider the priest's appeal to allow the slaves a day off. Here the priest decided to go to the Count for support, and the Count turned him away, claiming that "the mill is the 'overseer's world'" (Davis 61). The priest is very agitated but doesn't have the power to stop the Overseer. His religious beliefs do not get in the way of the Count's control over the plantation. (comment by Elena Zubenko)
The Revolt
[10] Because of the Count's betrayal, the slaves are forced to revolt. They fight for what the Count told them was their right. The slaves at The Last Supper meal believe the Count and are angered when they find out he lied. The transition from slave-owner in control to slaves in control shows the power of Christianity and the Count's teachings of the night before. This revolt never would have happened had the Count not informed them that one shouldn't work on a holy day. The slaves learned about the religion and therefore had enough knowledge to use it against the Count and the Overseer. This showed the Count to be even more contradictory because he was stopping them from practicing religion as he taught them to do. He told them during the meal that they should obey their master in the eyes of God in order to get into heaven. This was exactly what they were doing the next day, and the Count now said their actions were wrong. The contradictory actions of the Count caused the slaves to be enraged, and they lost even a remote interest in Christianity.
[11] As a result of this extreme fury, "Sebastian . . . led the slaves in an uprising, killing one of the overseer's men and putting Don Manuel in the same wooden stocks in which he punishes slaves" (Davis 61). The slaves run about with torches burning all parts of the sugarmill; they are determined to express their anger to the Count. Sebastian wants revenge on Don Manuel for the cruel treatment he suffered. He treats Don Manuel as Don Manuel would have treated a slave, beating him and confining him in the stocks. Sebastian then kills the Overseer on Good Friday, at the very hour Christ had died. This is significant because the religious Last Supper led to the crucifixion of Christ. This relates to the revolt scene, because Don Manuel is put into a Christ-like position when he is killed. The Count had not wanted this to happen, which is why he reenacted The Last Supper scene to begin with. Just like Christ was betrayed by one of his disciples, the slaves he invited to his table betray the Count. The difference here is that the Count lied to the slaves in the first place, whereas Christ never lied to his disciples.
[12] When the Count hears of the revolt and sees the death of Don Manuel, "He orders his men to seek out the treacherous twelve slaves who had supped with him and to mount their heads on posts" (Davis 61). On Easter Sunday the heads of the slaves are placed on the sticks, but there is one missing, that of Sebastian. He was the strongest slave and the only one who escaped. These heads were displayed just as Christ's body was on the cross. He kills his slaves for setting his plantation on fire and killing Don Manuel. The Count will not accept upheaval from people he owns. There has to be an example set for the rest of the slaves. There are to be no further upheavals within the plantation. It seems as if the Count completely forgot what he talked about with the slaves at dinner the night before. He saw his economic value drop as a result of the revolt, and that is what is most important to him. (comment by Krystal Kaai)
Conclusion
[13] The Last Supper, by Tomas Gutierrez Alea, depicts a religious take on slavery. The Counts actions are "all in the name of Christ" (Downing 295). He uses the Bible to condone slavery and specifically The Last Supper scene to convince the slaves to follow Christian rule. This movie can be used as a source for the study of slavery in the Americas at the end of the eighteenth century. There were many arguments over the Bible's role in slavery, and for many years plantation owners and many other people thought it was alright. This movie shows the Bible as condoning slavery and its significant role in the master's control of the slaves. Alea represents the struggle that slaves had with trusting their overseers and masters, basically that they couldn't be trusted. The Count tries to teach the slaves the Bible but fails because he is too caught up in the economics of his plantation.
Comments
The point that I would like to make is that Catholic practice of following all the prescribed holidays can be rather destructive for business. As far as I know, one of the reasons for the Reformation and emergence of Protestant religions was the fact that people had too many holidays when they were not allowed to work. Those were free people, mostly peasants, whose income depended on good harvests that were very sensitive to weather conditions that do not follow religious schedules. Speaking of slaves, an extra day off would really bring them some relief but not with that half-hearted attitude of the priest who insisted on observing the holiday merely for the sake of the doctrine. In this case, the overseer seems much more devoted to his job. His duty is to ensure that the production does not stop because of some unreasonable requests, and so he does with the support of the Count. It can be seen that economics won over religion. However, this very conflict heated by the inconsistent behavior of the Count caused the revolt of the slaves infuriated by the broken promises. That is why, despite the proclaimed good intentions, I would place the priest as well as the Count as the main persons responsible for the upheaval.
Although I agree with you that the Count’s vengeful punishment to kill the twelve slaves who were present at the last supper reflects his inability to remember (or perhaps, his unwillingness to acknowledge) what he had told the slaves at dinner, I do not think that the Count’s desire to kill the rebellious slaves was based solely on his economic concerns for his plantation. As you state earlier in your essay, both the priest and the Count use Biblical justifications to support their respective views of slavery. The only person who does not seem to particularly care about religious and moral justifications regarding slavery is Don Manuel, who views slavery as an economically necessary and justifiable institution. Unlike Don Manuel, the Count is torn between his desire to be a religiously and morally righteous man and his responsibility to promote economic prosperity on his plantation. Therefore, he finds a way to fuse these opposing views by justifying the economic promotion of slavery through religious texts, thus absolving himself from living with the contradiction of maintaining his Christian piety under an economically exploitive system. Rather than punish the twelve slaves for the economic and social threat they pose to the plantation, I believe the Count ultimately targets them because their rebellion represents a threat, not simply to his economic prosperity, but to his moral wellbeing. The fact that the slaves reject his religious justification of their oppressive treatment and, instead, use his religious teaching to justify their own rebellion, literally threatens the very foundation of the Count’s moral understanding and justification of slavery. The only way to resolve the discrepancy between his moral and economic beliefs, then, is to vilify the slaves and to eradicate the threat they pose to him, which is exactly what the Count does.
If we look at this in true religious terms, we must view the film as John Downing advises us to see it “almost like a rose, its elements overlapping each other†(290.) If Downing is right, there is a bit of Dante in this film, and the characters take on roles that are larger than themselves. The Count takes on the role of Christ at the Last Supper, where he instructs his “apostles†on the right manners of living and meaning of slavery. He often speaks in symbolic and coded language, sometimes to deceive but always to control. He grants them freedom from work on Good Friday, but it may only be a kind of symbolic freedom offered by the Church. Perhaps he may be saying work is freedom or work will set you free. He also instructs them that they need to follow the orders of the Don Manuel (even though he later calls him a bastard). This kind of double-voiced narrative may have been confusing to the more trusting slaves (The perceptive ones see through it immediately). When the Count leaves the plantation, he also leaves his role of Christ to the next in command. If the symbolism follows through, Don Manuel becomes the Count-incarnate on the plantation. Just as a priest or the Pope becomes Christ, Don Manuel has the power to change and interpret the doctrine of the Count. Hence the Count can see no wrong in Don Manuel’s action, for he has given him the keys to his kingdom.
Davis, Natalie Zemon. "Ceremony and Revolt: Burn! and The Last Supper." Slaves on Screen: Film and Historical Vision. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 2000. 41-68.
Downing, John. "Four Films of Tomas Gutierrez Alea." Film and Politics in the Third World. New York: Praeger, 1988. 279-301.
The Christian ThinkTank http://www.christian-thinktank.com/qnoslave.html
