I would like to talk about the beginning of “The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass. I feel that the start of this story perfectly lays out the rest of this novel. The main concepts laid out in the first couple of chapters include: Family corruption, women, and poverty.

Douglass first shares with us that the children don’t even know their own ages, or even there own parents. The slave families are torn apart before the child even knows his own mother or father. Just thinking of not knowing my own age or real parents would be very scary. I feel like I wouldn’t be true to myself nor would I be myself. Douglass started the novel this way in order to show you the corrupt life of a slave. And how the slaves’ life isn’t really their life at all it is their owners. This simple example shows the corruption of slavery, slave-owners, and the way slavery was kept in tact. Slave-owners would even rape the women slave in order to produce new slaves for them. It is a disgusting and brutal circle of events that the slaves go through nearly everyday of their never-ending life.

Women do have an important but small role in the first section of Douglass’s life. Most almost all slaves do not know their mother, but in Douglass’s case it is a little different. Although they were split at birth Douglass and his mother are able to meet. On certain nights Douglass’s mother walks 10 miles in the middle of the night in order to hold her son in her arms while he sleeps. She then wakes up early in order to walk home. It is a sad a devastating story and nothing close to a real family bond. This is why when Douglass hears about his mother’s death it does not severely affect him. Yes, he is saddened for a minute but not for more than a minute.

Douglass’s life starts out with his identity and family being torn apart from him. But throughout the novel he gains back both of these things in order to live a healthy life.

First Read of Frederick Douglass

I have finished the novel and am still contemplating the many ironies and elucidations of the text. As we discussed in the previous class period, Colonel Lloyd and the overseers see any reason applicable to punish the slaves severely. Brutal punishments were incurred by trivial actions, such as feeding the horses food that was too wet or too dry. This by the way would be entirely impossible to tell by Lloyd unless he physically handled the food before the animals consumed it. This illusion of law, of crime and punishment, is much like the greater illusion of law in the Nation. The Fugitive Slave Act was an unjust law, the legality of slavery was unconstitutional, and the slave trade went against the ideals of the American Revolution. The corruption of the “law” on the plantations was equally as brutal as the corruption of law in Washington. While the congressmen of Washington may not have physically assaulted slaves, the allowance of slave states in the union was extremely detrimental to the American Values they so valued, not mentioning the quality of life for the entire slave population, and African-American freedmen as well. No Caucasian person would testify against another Caucasian who killed a slave; they valued the lives of slaves as equal to a horse, cow, or pig, literally. Slaves were seen as inhuman, as merely valuable property to be exchanged as easily as money may be transferred from one hand to another.

This is what is really ironic, those viewed as inhuman, the slaves, are not the one who act inhumanely. The slave drivers and overseers act with the viciousness and disregard as a common animal, with no empathy for another human being. Empathy is one of the main distinctions between our species and that of other animals, at least in my opinion. The reversal of roles is quite evident in the many gruesome examples provided by Douglass, such as when a white woman, Mrs. Giles Hicks, beats a 15-year-old slave to death for falling asleep while in the room with her during her watch over the baby. Mr. Gore was easy to kill a slave without remorse, to set an example for the others.

Well I will return to this blog after the next class discussion to further my illustrations of irony and role-switching as employed by Douglass.

Benito Cereno and Justice in a Segregated America

In Benito Cereno, by Herman Melville, it immediately becomes obvious that the “villain” Babo is not given the equality or just right to have a voice. He must use actions to voice his opinions and ideals, and must strive for freedom silently. The practicality of his silence connects to the charade he and the crew must keep up to trick Delano they have not revolted, and to manipulate the predispositions of Delano, who is ambivalent on the issue of slavery and expects subservience from the Africans. The character of Delano in this regard is an allusion to the American public as a whole; American society believed in the ideals of liberty and freedom in a post-civil war society, yet were bound to the fugitive slave act. Northerners who were abolitionists or merely sympathizers were also threatened with persecution and legal prosecution, while any African or African-American was susceptible to capture and questioning by any White citizen, whether fugitive or freedman.

In this time in history maroon societies existed in the Caribbean with their own sense of independence and freedom, yet also had the constant threat of capture in the background. Much like the ship, the Africans led their own community without the influence of White leadership or society, yet they were also very susceptible to attack. By the time Benito Cereno was written, maroon societies dwindled in the Caribbean, but some remained on the larger islands. Much like the Africans surrounded by hostile nations in the open waters, so did maroon societies exist in isolated locations surrounded by plantations off the mountains. In this sense, Melville is very critical of the American ideals versus the harsh realities the world was living in. The United States was living in a state of extreme hypocrisy, at the expense of many lives.

Going back to Babo as a character however, as a singular person he is equally stranded amongst characters with negative predispositions towards him. He is still a slave, no matter how loyal or competent he may appear to Delano. This confusion of Delano mirrors the process of pulling prejudices from the reader; is he a super villain with exceptional cunning, or an equal to the White captains, just reacting to his position with intelligent decision-making? His educational background is unclear, which leaves the readers with a gray area to decipher as to whether or not Babo is extremely intelligent, more so than his Captain, or an equal in learning. I prefer to think it is the former, as Babo seems to be not only cunning and calculative, but intelligent in a less vicious sense, and is merely reacting to the horrible condition fate, and man, has placed him in, in the unjust role of a slave.

Birthmark

The Birthmark

I thought this short story was very interesting to read especially the male dominance that is not really talked about much. It is slight actions that I think make the wife Georgina die.

In the beginning of the short story Aylmer describes to Georgina his wife that the birthmark on the side of her face is removable and he wants to do surgery on it. Georgina is furious, sad, and upset all at the same time. She responds to his comment by saying, “ shocks you my husband! Then why did you take me from mother’s side? You cannot love what shocks you”(85) She is completely against the action of surgery and hates even thinking about it. But as the story continues Aylmer’s hate for the birthmark overturns Georgina’s furious rage and she decides to get surgery. This was very upsetting for me to read because I thought that Georgina had a right to be angry with her husband who called something on her face an imperfection. But she lets her husband get the best of her.

Georgina gives into her husbands temptation and tells him “ If there be the remotest possibility of it let the attempt be made at whatever risk. Danger is nothing to me ; for life, while this hateful mark makes me the object of your horror or disgust ,-life is a burden which I would fling down with joy. Either remove this dreadful hand, or take my wretched life!”(88). I believe this to be the mot powerful quote in the whole story. It is Georgina giving into Aylmer’s demand at any risk just so he doesn’t have to look at the mark on her face, which most people think is beautiful. She is willing to give up her life for her husband at the cost of a beauty mark, which is ridiculous. Georgina basically gives her life away at the cost of her husbands ignorant happiness.