Michelle Romero
English 48A
Dr. Scott Lankford
Author: Frederick Douglass
"This battle with Mr. Covey was the turning-point in my career as a slave. It rekindled the few expiring embers of freedom, and revived within me a sense of my own manhood. It recalled the departed self-confidence, and inspired me again with a determination to be free" (2104).
Douglass describes his state of mind after his argument with Mr. Covey that changed his thinking.
This passage reveals the inside nature of freedom. I think actually that Douglass is depicting freedom as a personal trait, not a physical one. It is not about being legally free or not free. It is about being free as a person. It is about holding on to who you are and being sure of yourself.
This passage is so powerful because of this revelation. Douglass understands something about freedom that I think would have helped countless other slaves facing similar situations. He emphasizes the need to hold on to hope, to keep your spirit. I love how he shows the embers of freedom as inside of him, and as reviving in him a sense of his manhood.
This passage is powerful because it shows (through the imagery) the small burning embers rising to overtake Douglass and restore his freedom. It is a subtle image of picking yourself up from the lowest place you have been and growing stronger. It is an empowering message that is full of hope and strength.
At the same time, Douglass' statement acknowledges how a man's self-confidence can be taken away. He in no way suggests that freedom is easy, but rather that it is an internal struggle that even he deals with and that has been very difficult for him to struggle with at times, but I think he would emphasize that it is about having the courage to overcome that is important.
Friday, November 23, 2007
Journal #15
Michelle Romero
English 48A
Dr. Scott Lankford
Author: Frederick Douglass
"Slavery proved as injurious to [Mrs. Auld] as it did to me. When I went there, she was a pious, warm, and tender-hearted woman....Slavery soon proved its ability to divest her of these heavenly qualities" (2088).
Another observation Douglass makes is of the change in Mrs. Auld. As he describes, when he first arrived at the house of Mr. and Mrs. Auld, Mrs. Auld seemed to mother him a bit, trying to teach him to read and so forth. However, shortly after, Douglass describes her as angered and being anxious to mistreat him. His conclusion is that slavery changes people, both the slave and the slave-owner.
So much of what I read from Douglass' narrative seemed to mimic what I have noticed as a pattern in the Holocaust. Both slavery and the holocaust, to me seem to be psychological wars. In this case, we see Mrs. Auld hardening herself and working through the initial shock of having to be mean to the slaves. Likewise, there are several examples of German soldiers who found themselves having to harden their hearts as well in order to carry out the brutality of mass murder. Both Mrs. Auld and some of the German soldiers (at lower ranks) found themselves to be victims of their circumstances just as the victims had been. This is what Douglass is pointing out.
In addition, Douglass shows how Mrs. Auld lost her "heavenly" qualities. In a less direct way, he is pointing to the un-Christian nature of slavery, which contradicts perhaps what the Christian southerners believed about slavery. Douglass suggests that slavery degrades even a Christian's good character and causes them to lower themselves to the savage cruelty of animals.
I also think, as I said in class, that part of what might have turned Mrs. Auld against the slaves was her own pent-up frustrations toward her husband. Since rape was such a common act for a slave-owner to participate in with his slaves, I think that his wife would have definitely been angry and resentful had she known. I also think that many of the women of this time, did know, not matter how much they wished they didn't. I also think that it was not appropriate for them to challenge their husbands, so instead many of them hardened themselves the way Mrs. Auld is seen doing here and turned the hate toward the slaves as the cause. I would be interested in reading from the white woman's perspective during this time.
English 48A
Dr. Scott Lankford
Author: Frederick Douglass
"Slavery proved as injurious to [Mrs. Auld] as it did to me. When I went there, she was a pious, warm, and tender-hearted woman....Slavery soon proved its ability to divest her of these heavenly qualities" (2088).
Another observation Douglass makes is of the change in Mrs. Auld. As he describes, when he first arrived at the house of Mr. and Mrs. Auld, Mrs. Auld seemed to mother him a bit, trying to teach him to read and so forth. However, shortly after, Douglass describes her as angered and being anxious to mistreat him. His conclusion is that slavery changes people, both the slave and the slave-owner.
So much of what I read from Douglass' narrative seemed to mimic what I have noticed as a pattern in the Holocaust. Both slavery and the holocaust, to me seem to be psychological wars. In this case, we see Mrs. Auld hardening herself and working through the initial shock of having to be mean to the slaves. Likewise, there are several examples of German soldiers who found themselves having to harden their hearts as well in order to carry out the brutality of mass murder. Both Mrs. Auld and some of the German soldiers (at lower ranks) found themselves to be victims of their circumstances just as the victims had been. This is what Douglass is pointing out.
In addition, Douglass shows how Mrs. Auld lost her "heavenly" qualities. In a less direct way, he is pointing to the un-Christian nature of slavery, which contradicts perhaps what the Christian southerners believed about slavery. Douglass suggests that slavery degrades even a Christian's good character and causes them to lower themselves to the savage cruelty of animals.
I also think, as I said in class, that part of what might have turned Mrs. Auld against the slaves was her own pent-up frustrations toward her husband. Since rape was such a common act for a slave-owner to participate in with his slaves, I think that his wife would have definitely been angry and resentful had she known. I also think that many of the women of this time, did know, not matter how much they wished they didn't. I also think that it was not appropriate for them to challenge their husbands, so instead many of them hardened themselves the way Mrs. Auld is seen doing here and turned the hate toward the slaves as the cause. I would be interested in reading from the white woman's perspective during this time.
Journal #14
Michelle Romero
English 48A
Dr. Scott Lankford
Author: Frederick Douglass
"I now understood what had been to me the most perplexing difficulty--to wit, the white man's power to enslave the black man. It was a grand achievement, and I prized it highly. From that moment, I understood the pathway from slavery to freedom" (2086).
Douglass makes this realization after one of his slave-owners, Mr. Auld, snatches away a newspaper he was trying to read. It was acts like these that brought Douglass to his conclusion, that reading, that education must be the answer.
Douglass was great at observing things. To come to the conclusion he comes to in this passage, he observed how threatened Mr. Auld seemed to be by his reading. Using his common sense, Douglass then began to think that reading must be something to make him less of a slave and more like a man.
I find it so powerful that reading had that much power. I also find it quite revealing of the white man's thinking. White slave-owners seemed to hide behind the idea that slaves were property and not men. However, property can't read, so why would Mr. Auld think that Douglass was actually reading and not just trying to be silly or entertain him. The fact that Mr. Auld does not, intuitively, that Douglass would begin seeing the world differently by reading, shows that he does know Douglass is a man and would react in the same was as any other man by gaining knowledge.
I once read a quote from someone that said "Only the educated are free..." and I wonder if that is really true. It seems odd to think that reading would either free or enslave a person. I suppose, this ability on the other hand, does separate us from other animals.
Therefore, by taking away the ability or privilege to read from Douglass, the white man is making him more of an animal. Ironically, white man thought that blacks were animals, savages, but Douglass suggests that white man was making black men in to animals without the abilities to distinguish themselves as men.
English 48A
Dr. Scott Lankford
Author: Frederick Douglass
"I now understood what had been to me the most perplexing difficulty--to wit, the white man's power to enslave the black man. It was a grand achievement, and I prized it highly. From that moment, I understood the pathway from slavery to freedom" (2086).
Douglass makes this realization after one of his slave-owners, Mr. Auld, snatches away a newspaper he was trying to read. It was acts like these that brought Douglass to his conclusion, that reading, that education must be the answer.
Douglass was great at observing things. To come to the conclusion he comes to in this passage, he observed how threatened Mr. Auld seemed to be by his reading. Using his common sense, Douglass then began to think that reading must be something to make him less of a slave and more like a man.
I find it so powerful that reading had that much power. I also find it quite revealing of the white man's thinking. White slave-owners seemed to hide behind the idea that slaves were property and not men. However, property can't read, so why would Mr. Auld think that Douglass was actually reading and not just trying to be silly or entertain him. The fact that Mr. Auld does not, intuitively, that Douglass would begin seeing the world differently by reading, shows that he does know Douglass is a man and would react in the same was as any other man by gaining knowledge.
I once read a quote from someone that said "Only the educated are free..." and I wonder if that is really true. It seems odd to think that reading would either free or enslave a person. I suppose, this ability on the other hand, does separate us from other animals.
Therefore, by taking away the ability or privilege to read from Douglass, the white man is making him more of an animal. Ironically, white man thought that blacks were animals, savages, but Douglass suggests that white man was making black men in to animals without the abilities to distinguish themselves as men.
Journal #13
Michelle Romero
Eng. 48
Dr. Scott Lankford
Author: Frederick Douglass
"No words, no tears, no prayers, from his gory victim, seemed to move his iron heart from its bloody purpose. The louder she screamed, the harder he whipped; and where the blood ran fastest, there he whipped longest....and not until overcome by fatigue, would he cease to swing the blood-cotted cowskin" (2074).
This passage describes the brutality and horror of slavery. It describes more specifically, the way Mr. Plummer beat Douglass' aunt Hester, a slave. And as you can see, Douglass describes this fact in great detail.
It is important to know that Douglass' audience was made up of white people. Then we can understand why he writes the way he does. In the quote above, he repeats the word bloody and blood several times. In parts of the paragraph not quoted, he repeats this word a few more times. This repetition emphasizes the red, bloody goriness of slavery and paints a picture of hell for his audience. The significance of this act is to begin to change the minds of his audience to acknowledge the horrors of slavery.
Douglass uses sensory imagery to describe the fullness of the horror in a way that the audience will sympathize. For example, he says "the louder she screamed, the harder he whipped." In this line alone, the audience or reader can HEAR her screaming and HEAR the whip snapping. Essentially, they can HEAR her desperation.
Douglass also says that Mr. Plummer would whip even harder and longer right where the blood was running. This illustration is so real that as a reader, I can feel the pain of that. I can feel the sting it must leave on her skin when the open wound is beat over and over and over.
It is these sensory images that the makes the audience's heart jump in their throat. It is the raw exposer of these horrible truths that makes them hard to bear.
Eng. 48
Dr. Scott Lankford
Author: Frederick Douglass
"No words, no tears, no prayers, from his gory victim, seemed to move his iron heart from its bloody purpose. The louder she screamed, the harder he whipped; and where the blood ran fastest, there he whipped longest....and not until overcome by fatigue, would he cease to swing the blood-cotted cowskin" (2074).
This passage describes the brutality and horror of slavery. It describes more specifically, the way Mr. Plummer beat Douglass' aunt Hester, a slave. And as you can see, Douglass describes this fact in great detail.
It is important to know that Douglass' audience was made up of white people. Then we can understand why he writes the way he does. In the quote above, he repeats the word bloody and blood several times. In parts of the paragraph not quoted, he repeats this word a few more times. This repetition emphasizes the red, bloody goriness of slavery and paints a picture of hell for his audience. The significance of this act is to begin to change the minds of his audience to acknowledge the horrors of slavery.
Douglass uses sensory imagery to describe the fullness of the horror in a way that the audience will sympathize. For example, he says "the louder she screamed, the harder he whipped." In this line alone, the audience or reader can HEAR her screaming and HEAR the whip snapping. Essentially, they can HEAR her desperation.
Douglass also says that Mr. Plummer would whip even harder and longer right where the blood was running. This illustration is so real that as a reader, I can feel the pain of that. I can feel the sting it must leave on her skin when the open wound is beat over and over and over.
It is these sensory images that the makes the audience's heart jump in their throat. It is the raw exposer of these horrible truths that makes them hard to bear.
Journal #12
Michelle Romero
English 48A
Dr. Scott Lankford
Author: Frederick Douglass
"Before he commenced whipping Aunt Hester, he took her into the kitchen, and stripped her from neck to waist, leaving her neck, shoulders, and back, entirely naked" (2074).
This passage describes Douglass' slave owner Mr. Plummer, undressing his aunt before he beats her.
This scene is so horrific, not only because the woman’s is being beaten and whipped and lashed like an animal, but more so because she has been stripped naked. I always find it so twisted that with violence comes sex. In this particular scene, because Aunt Hester's neck, shoulders, and back are completely naked as she hangs from the door while she is beaten, she is helpless in many ways. First, she is helpless to defend herself against Mr. Plummer's brutal attack, but also she is helpless in covering herself from him. She can not hide from him. She can not keep her feminine innocence. HE takes everything from her.
I imagine that she must have felt so exposed, both inside and out, and so embarrassed. I imagine that she did feel helpless, and shamed. I imagine that he felt more like a man. He felt in control beating on her helpless corpse. I wonder what it is about male aggression and dominance, what binds sex and violence together so much. I asked myself the same question when I read about the Jewish massacres and how the Germans commanded the Jews to take off all their clothes before they were executed. What is so sacred about clothing that makes it so threatening?
I think clothes are so personal. They hang closer to the body than anything else so that they are a part of a person's identity. I think that by taking the clothes away it is a symbol of stolen identity and true nakedness. It is a way of being totally exposed and helpless with absolutely no small comfort to hide behind. It is truly a cruel, cruel act.
English 48A
Dr. Scott Lankford
Author: Frederick Douglass
"Before he commenced whipping Aunt Hester, he took her into the kitchen, and stripped her from neck to waist, leaving her neck, shoulders, and back, entirely naked" (2074).
This passage describes Douglass' slave owner Mr. Plummer, undressing his aunt before he beats her.
This scene is so horrific, not only because the woman’s is being beaten and whipped and lashed like an animal, but more so because she has been stripped naked. I always find it so twisted that with violence comes sex. In this particular scene, because Aunt Hester's neck, shoulders, and back are completely naked as she hangs from the door while she is beaten, she is helpless in many ways. First, she is helpless to defend herself against Mr. Plummer's brutal attack, but also she is helpless in covering herself from him. She can not hide from him. She can not keep her feminine innocence. HE takes everything from her.
I imagine that she must have felt so exposed, both inside and out, and so embarrassed. I imagine that she did feel helpless, and shamed. I imagine that he felt more like a man. He felt in control beating on her helpless corpse. I wonder what it is about male aggression and dominance, what binds sex and violence together so much. I asked myself the same question when I read about the Jewish massacres and how the Germans commanded the Jews to take off all their clothes before they were executed. What is so sacred about clothing that makes it so threatening?
I think clothes are so personal. They hang closer to the body than anything else so that they are a part of a person's identity. I think that by taking the clothes away it is a symbol of stolen identity and true nakedness. It is a way of being totally exposed and helpless with absolutely no small comfort to hide behind. It is truly a cruel, cruel act.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
