Quite simply, any writer, historian or reader with an
interest in ‘black history’ needs to own a copy of this book. Since its publication
in 1984 Fryer’s near masterpiece has become the standard text on black British
history, and it remains a model of concision, elegance and historical analysis.
Many would argue that ‘black history’ is still a neglected
area of study, both within academic circles and also within the mainstream,
however when this book first appeared the paucity of
books on the subject was even more pronounced than it is today. Nevertheless, although many worthy books have
appeared since examining the hitherto shamefully hidden and neglected histories of
‘minority’ groups in Britain, it remains disappointing that no
‘overview’ of black British history since Fryer’s work has come close to
matching its comprehensive sweep.
(As an aside, the edition I own of the book is the sixth impression from 1992 and I’d be interested to know if the book has been
updated at all since then or, indeed, since Fryer’s death in 2006 – I suspect
not, which is a shame as it certainly warrants regular updating, even though
Fryer is sadly not alive to perform the task himself).
Fryer himself was a fascinating figure. Born in Hull
in 1927, he later became a Communist Party member and wrote for the Yorkshire
Post and Daily Worker. However he was apparently expelled from the party after
dissatisfaction was expressed with his accounts of the 1956 Hungarian
uprising and its suppression by the Soviets – events which Fryer, to his credit, condemned having observed them first-hand.
While working as a journalist, Fryer had also witnessed the
arrival of the MV Empire Windrush in England in 1948, an ocean liner which
brought with it many West Indian immigrants. This event ignited in him an
interest in black British history, which he researched for many years before
writing Staying Power.
Chief among Staying Power’s many virtues is its
ability to puncture the many myths and untruths surrounding black history in
Britain. Laudably, Fryer does this is a calm, measured way which avoids
needless pontification or ideological grandstanding; witness for example, the
masterful first sentence of the book - “There were Africans in Britain before
the English came here” - which instantly undercuts the lazy assumptions often
made by the ignorant or the bigoted. (Nigel Farage, for one, might do well to
read Fryer's book!)
Despite Fryer’s Marxist / Communist leanings, the book never
veers into didacticism and retains a simplicity of approach which is refreshing.
It is at once academically rigorous and also accessible. Fryer’s own political
sympathies are clear, and naturally influence his viewpoints but, to this
reader at least, they are logically and reasonably outlined, without needless
rhetorical flourishes that lesser writers might rely on to paper over gaps in
their arguments or research. The book is all the more convincing as a result;
for example, Fryer’s analysis of the link between slavery and the development
of the British economy is extremely well explained.
During the first two or three months when I was researching
Bill Richmond’s life (way back in 2003) I devoured Fryer’s book in about two
days. I found it hugely valuable in enabling someone such as myself with a
decent grasp of ‘black history’ - albeit one lacking in detail and refinement - to understand the social and cultural context of the times in which Bill
Richmond lived, as well as the times which preceded and followed him. For
example, references within Fryer’s book to Malachy Postlethwayt and Ukawsaw
Gronniosaw opened up fruitful research avenues for me that have found their
way, in one form or another, into the texture of Richmond Unchained,
particularly the chapter where I take a brief detour myself into the history of
black people’s presence in Britain.
Amid my otherwise fulsome praise, though, I do have one
caveat.
I described the book earlier as a ‘near masterpiece’ and I
use this phrase deliberately so, for the simple reason that I found Fryer’s
work on Bill Richmond himself, and his protégé Tom Molineaux, somewhat sloppy
and over-reliant on second-hand rather than primary sources. Several of the ‘facts’ Fryer recounts about Richmond are, to
be blunt, not accurate, or at any rate cannot be proved correct beyond reasonable doubt based on existing sources or the sources which Fryer cites. To give
one such example, Fryer states that Richmond’s parents were “Georgia-born
slaves”, which has never actually been proven. He also accepts too readily (and
over-relies on) Pierce Egan’s accounts of Richmond’s boxing career, with
seemingly no consideration for the dramatic licence Egan may have employed, or
the errors he may have made. Other factual errors also creep in; for example,
Fryer states that Richmond fought Jack Carter in 1808 – which is incorrect. In
common with many other writers, Fryer also claims that it was Richmond’s wife’s
wealth that enabled him to come landlord of the Horse and Dolphin pub – a myth that I believe I
pretty definitively debunk in Richmond Unchained. Fryer also makes a
major error of omission by not mentioning Richmond’s role at George IV’s
coronation celebrations, which it seems to me are a crucial symbol for the lofty status he managed to achieve – through boxing – within Georgian society.
Perhaps, given that his accounts of Richmond and Molineaux’s
lives appear in an appendix, rather than the main body of his narrative, Fryer
did not feel the need to research them as meticulously as the rest of the book.
This is a rare miscalculation on his part, as is his decision to relegate these
two crucial historical figures to an appendix in the first place, rather than
the book’s main narrative, where they really belong.
I could go on in terms of the shortcomings of Fryer’s
accounts of Richmond and Molineaux’s careers, but it would probably be churlish
to do so; especially when, in the final analysis, Staying Power is a
work of rare integrity and significance as well as lasting historical value.
