Just wanted to share a brief overview of “local color” writing and its relationship to the South: I think it helps grasp the broader context Chesnutt was writing his “conjure tales” within.
I’d also like to direct you to the site we’ll use to host our “game” of Chesnutt’s writing. Feel free to peruse the site: you can see some old games from last year, a list of possible characters to play, and more.
“The Garrison party, to which he still adhered, did not want a colored newspaper—there was an odor of caste about it” (Douglass).
“And when he adopted the pronoun we—an echo of “We the people,” transcribed from the Constitution’s first line to the top of his own blank page—he engaged in an act of political representation: he defined a community and dared to speak on its behalf” (Hager).
“Identity definitely is important, but it’s also not the only thing that matters […], pronouns belong to the social world of language, not to individual psychology” (ContraPoints).
Hager’s introduction to the early writings of African American concerns the anecdote of an unnamed man engaging in what is described as an “act of protest” (Hager 1). What Hager notes is so powerful about this is not only the way in which the author actively criticizes the hypocrisy of the Constitution’s alleged inclusion, but that it is done so through the “[adoption of] the pronoun we” (Hager) This kind of language allows the author to inscribe his identity and the identity of countless African slaves who had suffered, died and survived under slavery onto the page in a way that hijacks the power of the Constitution and turns its words on itself.
Our contemporary discussions about pronouns often circle issues of representation for transgender and non-binary peoples. Such discussion has been fraught with controversy as the very demand of a people to be represented by a pronoun which they believe is most representative and respectful of their identity and their place is society is something which challenges the very harmful, gendered structures that are demanding silence in the first place. The struggle for representation in the transgender and non-binary communities concerns gendered pronouns which, as ContraPoints argues, plays a significant role in the sociopolitical nature of language—how we relate to and signify each other. Though her argument is distinctively focused on issues of gender, I believe it intersectionally translates to the concept of racial identity in a way that echoes the need for a minority subject people to adopt a pronoun which situates them in society and challenges who the pronoun represents in the first place. As ContraPoints often argues in her videos, her adoption of the “she” pronoun represents the fact that she lives her life as a woman, that she experiences life as a woman. Therefore, “she” becomes the necessary way for her to inscribe herself through language. Similarly, the unnamed author in Hager’s example argues that if he is to live his life as a free person, then the act of adopting the pronoun “we” is in fact necessary and revolutionary.
We see a similar demand amplified in the actions of Frederick Douglass as he fights for the establishment of a “colored newspaper” which would not merely “represent” the issues of African Americans, but would become the published voice for them, the defining published voice which careers the same audacity as the adoption of a collective pronoun so that at once a people can be included in the language of the Constitution (Douglass). And though we can be open to a conversation concerning any fractures or rifts brewing among a revolutionary movement, the resistance against Douglass starting an African American paper is, almost directly, a refusal to allow the pronoun “we” to be transferred from whites to blacks. To establish the North Star is to open “the social world of language” and allow the “we” to be redefined (ContraPoints). It is an effort to move beyond an individual, psychologically-based feeling of freedom; it’s to march toward a linguistically and politically free existence as “we.”
I am including ContraPoints’ video which I quote from and reference here. Though her topic exclusively concerns gender and a different contemporary issue, I believe the arguments translate well, offer great insight on the function of language and unpack a somewhat difficult-to-understand concept in a thorough—if not eccentric—fashion.
As I read the selected passages from Hager’s Word by Word: Emancipation and the Act of Writing, I found myself thinking about about the purpose of writing and Audience more deeply. In his own words the narratives that are centered in this text “turn our attention to the manuscript writings of marginally literate African Americans who were enslaved, not because such texts are less mediated or somehow more authentic than published works but because their authors had different, hitherto unaccounted experiences of both emancipation and the act of writing.”(23-24). It lead me to consider what exactly marked these accounts as ignorable, less digestible, and different than the popular narratives in the past .
The two writers that are encountered in chapter 3 are Adam Plummer and John Gordon. Both men are involved in the exploritive process of narrative writing and inscription. They both center romantic love in a way that depicts how the dictates of antebellum society and later the dynamic shift of these rules with emancipation, inscibe themselves in their writing and motivation to write.This is done through processes of writing and rewriting accounts of the past that reveal something about the experience of living through the transition to emancipation.
In the Case of Adam Plummer he revolves his short and crude narratives around the love and separation between him and his wife. Of the 4 events that Hager informs us create the account that is supposed to be an autobiography , 3 events involve Emily.”Four events make up Plummer’s brief life- narrative: his birth in 1819, his marriage to Emily in 1841, his separation from her in 1855, and his receipt of her first letter.”(pg 83) In this way Adam exposes the dictates of antebellum society that are inscribed on his life and uses his own method of inscription and writing as a way to asert his humanity and make sense of the inscription that has been placed upon him. Enslavement has broken his family apart and left written word as his only way of upkeeping his marriage. After the dynamic shift with emancipation the autobiography is discontinued. something that Hager suggests might be due to a possible reunion with his wife. This calls in to question the purpose and motivation for beginning the narrative at all. It is at this point that Hager question whether a slave can even write a narrative while enslaved.(82) In the case of Adam plummer his attempt at narrative is never finished and his authority over his self identity and family does not seem fully realized. Although it is a reconstruction through memory it is still happening and not fully refelective. In this way there is a difference from popular slave narratives. However whats most striking about the unfinished account is how it captures the suffering and mundane experience of enslaved life without the distance that most narratives carry. Plummer is not writing his narrative for an audience woth a white sponsor to filther the crude writing and polish the experiences through and in this way Plummers narrative might be the truer narrative of life, un-polished, honest and crude. Although it cannot be confirmed why he decided to write the narrative it is clear that it was not something he wrote with the thought it would ever be read.
John Gordon’s account provokes simular questions however in his case, Gordon mives beyond his crude diary and begins to recreate a narrative with an audience in mind. The contrast between his crude diary in slavery and the more final version he makes after freedom seems to reflect the change in dynamic from pre- to post emancipation. His crude diary barely mentions Slavery and does not seem to make any statement on his condition. It captured his mundane life and quest for love without highlighting the major factor of his enslavement. It is only in the recreation process that Washington changes parts of his history to better use romance as an allegory for his quest to freedom and speaks about freedom in any way. This signifys a shift in motivation or intended audience. Although the account was not published it is clear that the diarys purpose was different than the narrative version by looking at the way he decided to write and inscribe them. The narrative version is even written with more care to form and better paper.
Wondering about audience and purpose also lead me to considering the way epistolary is used in the acquisition of literacy. aletter writing is a major part of the want to write for both writers It begins with a literal want to communicate to others and then turns into a communication and negotiation with the self.
While reading Christopher Hager Word by word Emancipation and the act of writing there were a lot of key tools that help exposes the unsettling truth that the master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house.. This rule is not only enforced by tools like reading and writing but it also steams down to the family tree. Slave masters did not want there slaves being able to read or write because of then they will have the realization of what was truly going on “If African American slaves acquired literacy they could be required to use it more or less than white people . They especially would use it southerners feared to rebel or escape”(pg31)”. Also their family history was non and void because the more of a chance their “property” would run away.
Not only is this an oppression on black people who are enslaved but also an issue middle class people and Christians, Religion was a big part of the argument of letting slaves read and write . On one hand Slaves should not be able to do so because that is not what they were put on the plantation to do and are worth property , on the hand Christianity was a big part of the slave owners life and if you were able to introduce a “inhuman” person to god and civilization it would seem like the most Christian thing to do and you would be doing a good deed. Also the economic gap between southerners and northerners were big northerners were not only against slavery because of their morals but because southerners were make so much of a profit off of slaves that northers saw a problem because they were not making the same amount of money.
Many slaves started to think about that their life would look like without slavery and would it be without white people? As the civil war came around many black people wanted to fight and let the presence be known but the lack of integrity and ignorance did not want black people to fight. However the civil war did not lead to social/racial justice like everyone thought. The civil war did in fact bring awareness all over the United States and binds people together to fight slavery. After the civil war was over slaves were very confused on what to do next some slaves didn’t even want to be free because they were scared of what was going to happen and had no guidance on how to survive.
For those who miss class today (Thursday) or just want to look back…
I found many of Hager’s inclusions to be arresting and impactful. In my opinion, the accounts included by Hager provide some of the most valuable insights I’ve come across on the topic thus far. To me, there is a rawness and an immediacy within these passages, as well as a unique sense of unmediated dialogue between the reader and writer. The diary of Adam Plummer, for example, affords us clear and fleeting glimpses into his individual trauma, and into the collective trauma of all enslaved peoples. Alongside the mundane scribbles of day-to-day life, Plummer reacts to what is undoubtedly one of his most painful experiences; his separation from his wife and children.
“March 24— 1849 Emily plummer and four Child wose fore sale but She being Sick at the time she wouse not. . . . Emily plummer and four Childrens on November 25, 1851 Sold at publice sale. The said woman was bought by Mrs M A Thomson in the Washington City 16 street North to the plac Meaderen Hill. there she loeh for a short time. a bout four years and banished form my Eyes. 1855. of thn wote shorte letters to See or hear forme her. but I hear form not.”
This small, ephemeral window into Plummer’s life is heartrending. Reading this for the first time, I was struck by the immediacy of Plummer’s words. In a few short breaths, Plummer encapsulates the cruelty of forced separation. The pace of Plummer’s narrative is indicative of a painful reality; that the bonds between slaves, no matter how strong, could be severed in a moment at the will of the slaveholder. For Plummer, and indeed for all slaves, there was no opportunity to interject or protest. Separation was a fact, as plain and immediate as Plummer’s words.
Hager’s inclusions from John Washington’s narrative are also incredibly valuable. I was particularly grateful to see scanned images of some of Washington’s original handwritten text. This is a uniquely intimate experience, and one that is almost completely unmediated (save for the computer screen I am viewing it on). I was especially intrigued by page 91 of “Memories of the Past”, which appears on page 98 of Hager. As Hager notes, the words “This was the First Night of my Freedom” appear in a more decorative (and slightly larger) script than the words on the rest of the page. The sentence is also underlined. Seeing this sentiment as it was written was a unique experience for me as a reader, and one that I am grateful for.
William Gould’s diary held one of the most striking collections of writings I noticed in the text. His writing was incredibly straightforward and can perhaps seem even boring to someone who did not know who was writing and during what time; however, it shocked me because I was expecting to find texts more similar to Thomas Ducket’s letter in 1850. For instance, that letter was very important because he had lost his family and was writing a plea to a white abolitionist. There, you can sense the level of urgency in his words. There are also a lot of spelling and grammatical mistakes since slaves did not receive a proper education.
One of the reasons that they were not taught to read was mentioned early in chapter one, when a slave owner states “Why, don’t you see? You begin teaching niggers, and having reading and writing, and all these things, going on, and they begin to open their eyes, and look around and think; and they are having opinions of their own, they won’t take yours; and they want to rise directly.” (32) This part directly correlated to the moment in Frederick Douglass’ narrative when he overhears his slave master tell his mistress that Douglass could not learn because it was too powerful. Writing was seen as a very inspiring and liberating force which brings me back to why I liked William Gould’s diary entries a lot.
The diary entry states:
“Sun. Sept. 27th
At Beaufort, N.C. We coald ship all night and until ten O clock. we then up anchor. hauld alongside of the store ship (Wm. Badger.) for the purpose of takeing more Coal. and stores on board.
Mon. Sept. 28th At Beaufort. finishd Coaling to day. took in stores. fine day.” (110)
This was the first moment I saw writing being simple and not being used in a very serious or inspiration way in the text. This seemed even more important because it depicted a Black man becoming comfortable enough with the writing to use it on a regular basis and get into the habit of writing every day. It looked like it was normal to just write down those events even though it’s clear more was happening in his life than those mere events. He was a slave who had just escaped yet was writing in a mundane way. It was also very easy to understand what he was describing. It sounded like he had a lot of practice writing and normalized the experience of an escaped slave writing for both him and the reader.
Christopher Hager proposes a study of marginal literature not for historical proof but for individual truths about emancipation. In this way, he puts the value of a work on neither its literary nor historical merit, focusing instead on its evidence of individual experience. John Washington’s autobiography is a particularly suitable work for this purpose because it shows the ways in which the changing meaning to him of both emancipation and writing developed his image of himself and his history. Specifically, through both imagining, recording and revising his history through writing, Washington negotiates himself as a newly free man. While Hager acknowledges that the remaining pieces of writing are only traces of this continual development, the writings underscore the role of history and memory in Washington’s image of himself. Specifically, the materials and vocabulary that he uses reflect the legislative changes that slavery went through in the public sphere, as well as Washington’s changing understanding of these issues on the individual level. In addition, Washington refines his image of himself by revising his diary, or negotiating his history and memory. Hager thus also argues for the possibility in reshaping memory for a different self. This is significant because without the means of writing, slaves could not easily record their pasts and base their identity on it. Like the double consciousness, the liminal space between fact and experience, between history and memory thus becomes a space for negotiating identity.
A Colored Man’s deconstruction of the constitution to find his language is paralleled by the way that Washington negotiates the day that Annie rejects him. The second version shows vocabulary similar to anti slavery rhetoric, and places the rejection at the beginning of the summer. Hager highlights the importance of this rearrangement to Washington’s understanding of himself. While the text does not have any unpredictable literary innovation or show historical consistency, the it is thus central to the self that Washington imagines based on his memory. More than law or literacy, Hager points to this reliance on memory as evidenced by writing as central to emancipation, in that it allowed slaves to envision themselves as free individuals who had a past. Hager acknowledges the ability of writing to extend and standardize memory, but emphasizes the fact that it is a reflection of a thought progress, which is never stable or finished. Because Washington’s initial inscription was traces of this malleable process, his second manuscript provides the perspective of one who has since then been freed. The two obviously differ, but are true to the experience of the writer in the moment of inscription. This, to Hager, is the most true thing that remain in slave narratives.
When reading excerpts of Christopher Hager’s book Word by Word: Emancipation and the Act of Writing, I found that I got caught on one line in particular. “Autobiography is the dominant form of antebellum African American literature.” (Hager, 81) At first glance, the reason for this is fairly obvious. The individuals writing their autobiographies had gone through an incredibly difficult time, and they wanted to tell America and the world about slavery from their point of view. However, when examining the authors that Hager writes about, one can conclude that this may not be the case. The authors discussed are not Fredrick Douglass– they didn’t write as eloquently, nor as grammatically correct as he. Additionally, most of them did not even attempt to publish their narratives. Why then, would they have written an autobiography? When thinking about this line a bit more, and considering Flusser’s arguments in Does Writing Have a Future? I wonder if perhaps they wrote their narratives for themselves, as a way to process the horrors of slavery that they had witnessed and were subject to.
As Flusser explains, “writing is a gesture that aligns and arranges ideas.” (6) That is, writing takes thoughts that run rampant within one’s mind, and arranges them neatly. Takes them out of a chaotic brain, stops them from running in circles, and makes them linear, on the pages. In doing this, one can process and understand their thoughts in a more cohesive way than before.
This could explain why African Americans mostly wrote autobiographies after emancipation. In order to move forward in life and to understand what the next chapter can hold, one must understand what occurred in the past. Newly emancipated slaves, most of whom were barely literate, needed to go through this process. They didn’t necessarily write their autobiographies for other people to read, but rather, for themselves, so that they could process what they had been through. Hager touches on this when he mentions that in writing autobiographies, the authors were brought both “closer to selfhood,” and “further from an authentic view of slavery.” (82) These autobiographies reconstructed their painful past, and allowed them to understand their own personal story, and what they themselves had been through.
John Washington, for example, kept a diary through much of his life as a slave, yet he neglected to mention his enslavement and mostly wrote about those around him and the woman he loved. However, after he was emancipated, Washington rewrote his diary, changing only a few small details to allude to his life as a slave, and to his freedom. Perhaps he did this to process; if Washington never planned to publish his diary, why else would he have rewritten it? Why else would he have written over his diary, only changing a few words and sentences to make analogies about his life as a slave? Why would he do this, if not to process what he had been through?
I feel as though it is narratives like this which are perhaps even more important than narratives like Fredrick Douglass’. Although Douglass wrote eloquent and important work, his writing was for the public. His writing was for people to read, and for them to be changed. However, it was not necessarily as personal as the narratives discussed in Hager’s book. These stories, written in mostly broken English, portray a side to slavery that is difficult to see when it’s written about with clear literacy. It tells the story not only of the struggle for literacy and freedom, but of the need to put words on paper, despite the limitations set before them. It tells the story of the need to process slavery, despite never being given the tools to do so.
One of the most significant ideas I drew from Word by Word, was the neglect and dismissal almost all of the pieces of text received, in comparison to the writings of prominent black intellectuals like Frederick Douglass and Phyllis Wheatley. The power of the relationship between freedom and literacy, and the fact that most people have never read or even known about the large amount of writing produced by current and former slaves shows how the history of black people has been controlled and policed. The assumption that only a very select group of slaves were able to use their literacy and knowledge to actually produce pieces of writing, rather than a large number, shows that the history of slaves and black people in this country has been erased and manipulated. The decision of historians to only study people like Frederick Douglass means that an entire group of other slaves are ignored, either by choice or by lack of ample material to study. Which brings up another point related to the erasure of slave expression and history.
In chapter 1, Hager writes, “Some of the sources included in this study were held privately, passed down through generations of black families, but most were preserved by white people or institutions run by them— which is to say, most of them exist today because they were addressed to white audiences or otherwise fell into their hands” (Hager 6). This fact, which seems simple at first, only further proves how the narratives and expressions of slaves were only maintained if they pertained to white people or authority figures. The fact that there are very few preserved letters between slaves demonstrates that the literacy and writings of slaves were ignored and cast aside. Not only did slaves have to risk their lives to learn to read and write, but their writing, no matter how ordinary or prolific, would almost never be remembered or read by anyone else in the future. Despite the ability for some slaves to express the struggles, pain, and hardships they experienced, their writing was left in the shadows of easily accessible, easily taught writing of more intellectual slave writers. If these letters and journal entries were preserved until today, people’s education on slavery would be a much more engaging and diverse learning experience. Rather than hearing about the conditions from historians, we could, no matter how poorly spelled or written a letter, learn about the lives and struggles of slaves and former slaves from their own words.
