Harriet Jacobs and Booker T. Washingtons Conflicting Views on Slavery - Connor Guarnieri
The biggest difference between Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl by Harriet Jacobs and Up from Slavery by Booker T. Washington is the author's portrayal of slavery. Harriet Jacobs writes about her sexual abuse as a slave under Dr. Flint, how similar things happened to other slave girls, and paints a picture of slavery being a system built on abuse of African-Americans that should be stopped. Washington on the other hand, doesn’t exactly applaud slavery, but has a more liberal approach, he said that it built resilience in African Americans, and almost downplays the effects of slavery. Harriet herself admits that she didn’t feel that she was enslaved in the beginning as a child. She frequently played with other white children, and lived a “carefree” childhood according to her, before everything went wrong. After her previous, more generous master passed away, she was sold to Dr. Flint, an evil and selfish man who had a certain affinity for Linda, the name she goes by in the story. She focuses on her trouble of being sexually harassed by Flint, how she escaped and hid in a roof of a shed for seven years, and how she eventually escaped to the north. She depicts slavery as an ever-present force, a fear that hung over her head for years, embodied by the evil Dr. Flint. Harriet, or Linda, mentions that she got away “easy” compared to other slaves that were tortured, beaten or abused in other ways. Of course, she is downplaying her own abuse, but we as the readers get the idea that slavery is despicable, and nothing good came from it, emotionally scarring Linda forever. Washington, on the other hand, neglects most of the facts of abuse in his writings. In fact, his depiction of slavery was very tame. He did mention some beatings offhandedly, but it wasn’t the main focus of the story. He mentioned how some slaves took care of their previous masters after the Emancipation Proclamation, and harbored no feelings of anger towards them. Nowhere did he mention resentment towards white people for what they did to the previous slaves. Another thing that the writing makes quite clear was that slavery had some upsides for the slaves, according to Booker T. Washington. He talks about how slavery built character and discipline in African Americans, leading to their rise in power and respect.“When persons ask me in these days how, in the midst of what sometimes seem hopelessly discouraging conditions, I can have such faith in the future of my race in this country…” I don’t think he means that slavery was good for some, I think he means that it was a boost, a wake up call to African Americans to work hard, to step up and uplift their race from previous lows. The depictions of slavery across these two texts differ in many ways. Harriet Jacobs' writing describes the moral evil of the system, one that abuses African Americans, destroys families and dignity, almost a plea to the North to stop this. Booker T. Washington, post emancipation, reflects on how slavery, while evil, provided a motivator for racial uplift in times of hardship. Personally, I agree more with Harriet Jacobs, I find it a little hard to say that slavery was beneficial for any black person, no matter how gently Booker T. Washington says it. These two depictions of slavery are far from the only ones in Black literature, and each have their own motive. BTW almost wanted to gain the respect of white people, playing down the horrors of slavery, but Harriet Jacobs wanted to show the white people the horrors of slavery, pleading for change.
Hi Connor,
ReplyDeleteI agree with you main idea that Booker T. Washington refused to acknowledge the existence of institutionalized slavery, while Jacobs made sure to blame the system that created slavery. You didn't explicitly say this, but hinted at the fact that Jacobs wanted to illicit sympathy from her audience, while Washington argued that, if anything, people gave too many excuses for former slaves. I think another big difference between the two texts is the audiences they were meant for. Jacobs writes directly to white Northern Christian women, while Washington has a broader audience. I think these differences affected the ways they choose to frame their stories.
-Sasha
Hey Conner,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed your insightful analysis of these two contrasting depictions of slavery. While reading how you expressed that Washington didn't depict slavery as bad, I started to wonder, "Did he actually see slavery as not that bad, or was he sugarcoating it?" Some people are more optimistic about things, which is what Washington could be doing, but it seems hard to be optimistic about something like slavery. Your in-depth analysis really got me thinking about how Washington actually viewed slavery.
Hi Connor, I definitely agree that their depictions of slavery are quite different when considering their overall tone. When I read them, I found it interesting how, while their messages differ, Jacobs' story isn't entirely pessimistic and often uses a mood similar to Washington's to accomplish the opposite goal. I also agree that most readers will find it easier to resonate with Jacobs' message, especially since few ex-slaves would have had the positive experiences that Washington did.
ReplyDeleteHi Connor,
ReplyDeleteI like how in the second paragraph you mention that Harriet Jacobs downplays her own experience in slavery. I think that point really interested me as a reader because it made me wonder how much worse the experience of slavery despite the story she tells being already horrifying. Like you, I also agree more with Harriet Jacobs, and I agree that BTW's depiction was likely heavily affected by the perception of other white people.
Hi Connor,
ReplyDeleteYou mentioned that Jacobs spent time downplaying her own experience. Do you think that Washington underwent similar revisions of his experience in slavery so as to further his message about self-help? I agree that both Washington and Jacobs wrote with messages in mind, but I never thought about Washington's as writing for the purpose of gaining respect from white people. Still, I agree that their stories of slavery were heavily affected by their underlying purposes.
Emma
Dear Connor,
ReplyDeleteI really like how you showed the contrast between the two sources. I wonder if, placed side by side, which one would seem more realistic? While I do think that they were both altered to better fit the target audience, I think your analysis does a good job of extracting the true meaning and bringing out a lot of good points in both of these testimonies. I like how you talk about their motives as well. Overall, great job! Which one of these is your favorite????
Lmkkkkk!
Hello Connor! This was a concise description of the main ways in which Harriet Jacobs and Booker T. Washington. The way you focused on Harriet Jacobs' description of her experience as a slave (and her mentioning several times that she did not describe the true horrors) versus Washington's argument that Black people should not be moping around about the horrors of slavery put the two writers into perspective. This contrast is especially interesting when we consider that both Jacobs and Washington were born into slavery.
ReplyDeleteHi Connor,
ReplyDeleteI think looking at the audience is key when comparing these two stories. One of them is tailored to southern white people that don't want to hear about the negative aspects of slavery and the other is tailored to sympathetic white northern women. I also wonder if Washington's story would have been more negative twoards slavery if he had been older by the time he was released since he was never subject to the worst conditions as a slave.
Hey Connor, I really liked your comparison of Life of a Slave Girl and Up from Slavery, and I definitely agree with your interpretations. The difference in the portrayal of slavery, and, to a certain extent, the "argument" of each story, is quite drastic. Jacob, wanting to unveil the horrors of slavery, writes a much more violent depiction of it, while Washington wants white people to see how "useful" Black people can be, so depicts slavery as "impactful". Although I agree with you that Jacobs makes more sense in modern day, do you think Washington's potrayal makes sense for what he is trying to accomplish with his novel?
ReplyDelete