IIRC, and I have to look this up again for my ownself when I teach it in...three weeks, the controversy is generally that people in the 18th-century were reluctant to believe that the slave narratives were written by the slaves. On accounta they couldn't possibly be capable of reading and writing, don'tcha know.
Which is why so much of the slave narrative rhetoric is similar to the feminist rhetoric, in that "Oh, yeah? I can SO, and here's WHY" kind of way. Very politely, of course.
Now, I've taught the Romantic Lit. class more recently than the 18th-c., and I may be confusing a couple of the slave narratives in that collection w/ Equiano. But I believe it's Equiano who would lecture audiences, and the first part of the evening would consist in his proving he could read and write?
I'm functioning on app. 3 hrs. of sleep, so feel free to take me to task if I'm off in the weeds, gang.
Hee. Thank coquette_not, who is at present saving both our asses!
I love this--I'm so glad you asked, because I can see that this discussion is really going to open up avenues of thought.
Yes, it is disconcerting and disappointing that it's not "true." But I think there's a lot to be said about the passion of the abolitionist movement, the uphill battle they were fighting, and the notion of oral history. In light of the recent scandal about "truth" as it relates to "memoir", we've got a lot to think about, here. How many 18th-c novels can you think of, just real quick, whose authors claim to be editors? (That's a semi-rhetorical question, because an actual list might amuse.)
There occurs to me a number of reasons why there might be false documentation of an American birth.... AND as I just replied to Coquette Not I"m not at all convinced that it matters... is Pamela a less interesting or thought-provoking study of a young woman's inner struggle to find authority withinherself just because it was written by a stupid man? (well, ok.. maybe but there are better examples) Clara Wieland is a fabulous female character-feminist before there was such a thing... but she was created from the mind of a male writer... if gender can be "assumed" by a fiction writer... why not race... or class... I think the question is more.. did he do it EFFECTIVELY? ok... I'm so glad I have such intelligent friends!!!
O.k. I have had no sleep, have been worrying how I am going to get copies made since I have already used up the generous 100 copy allowance my department gives me (and I am teaching 90 students how to write thank you, and think I will use their own writing as a text in class) and I want to cry in five different ways.
HOWEVER, you made my day with your quick thinking self. You turned it back around on the students with a question! You are a GODDESS to me right now.
Or it could be the massive amounts of caffiene talking. But in that case, you are the patron preistess of the caffinated.
sad to say but I don't have a smart classroom -- newest and lowest man on the totem pole and all that . My classrooms are the reagular dumb ones. And, they are not cleaned on a regular basis. And you can see my footprints from the chalkdust as I leave the classroom and go back to my office. And the chalkboard in one room is hanging by a thread, moving back and forth as you write. My office neighbor bought his own lap top projector so that he can show the classes the artwork they discuss. And he actually teaches art in the art department. so why should I think that I will get any demands met?
Vincent Caretta uncovered documents (baptismal records, navy records) that indicate that Equiano was born in North Carolina, not Africa.
Now, you could argue that Equiano lied on these documents. But Caretta argues that the burden of proof really lies with those who want to argue that he was African born. And most scholars, I think, are coming around to his point of view. Kalypso is working on this, I think, and probably knows still more.
Caretta, in his bio of Equiano, says that he wishes that he had never found this info. He also says that it does make E a liar, rather a very savvy writer, who cannily recreates himself in life, and in the text in advantageous ways. He has also found other things that cast doubt on Equiano's sole authorship, but that's still really up in the air.
For a quick primer for your class, check out this website:
Re: I am an idiotimahobbit2October 6 2006, 14:14:04 UTC
THank you == Immensely helpful... especially as this little toasterette wants to write her paper on the "controversy" at least now I can discuss this psuedo-intelligently.... If things had gone better I would have been using the Carretta text to teach the entire Equiano narrative and, so, might have been up on this... but I wussed out with the anthology and Perkins just didn't feel the need to bring it up. Go figure. I still say I think it doesn't matter.... we just finished reading Wieland and so they are all knowledgeable about unreliable narrators.... and we were talking about Thomas Paine and the authority of kings to grant and take away identity at a whim and they made the connection of how hypocritical it was for early americans to question this power coming from a monarch but not as it flowed from white master to black slave. After Princess Cupcake made her little bombshell announcement and I unswallowed my tongue I think I might have pulled it off by turning the discussion back to that issue of identity and questioning
( ... )
Good stuff to know! And see, I should have known better to post on the fly. ;-) This is fascinating, since we just talked about verisimilitude in my class--in terms of -Pamela-, but I'm trying to bring in some narrative theory. This will be a great topic of discussion, and I think I'll spring it on them AFTER we've read the narrative.
A major question: why would you say you were a slave, if you weren't? (I can think of several things here, but I'm curious what y'all think.)
Shamela, you're right of course, on the doubt about slave writing. Which is why this revelation kind of sucks. If he made part of his narrative up, what else did he fabricate? And Equiano's writing was long considered the most detailed first-hand account of the middle passage. Now, not so much. So what do we actually know about the middle passage from people who survived it? Well, arguably, that much less
( ... )
Yeah--I've got to see that show too. What the DNA person said at that conference was that it doesn't really work that way. There are certain genotypes that are concentrated in certain parts of the world, but there's no way to "prove" that you are a Zulu.
Interestingly, someone in my disability studies seminar talked about an African American activist who engaged in a DNA test to trace his roots--to find out that--oops--there was no evidence of African ancestry at all. Instead, he was likely Filipino.
His response? Fuck that. I feel black, so I am black.
Comments 20
Which is why so much of the slave narrative rhetoric is similar to the feminist rhetoric, in that "Oh, yeah? I can SO, and here's WHY" kind of way. Very politely, of course.
Now, I've taught the Romantic Lit. class more recently than the 18th-c., and I may be confusing a couple of the slave narratives in that collection w/ Equiano. But I believe it's Equiano who would lecture audiences, and the first part of the evening would consist in his proving he could read and write?
I'm functioning on app. 3 hrs. of sleep, so feel free to take me to task if I'm off in the weeds, gang.
Reply
Reply
I love this--I'm so glad you asked, because I can see that this discussion is really going to open up avenues of thought.
Yes, it is disconcerting and disappointing that it's not "true." But I think there's a lot to be said about the passion of the abolitionist movement, the uphill battle they were fighting, and the notion of oral history. In light of the recent scandal about "truth" as it relates to "memoir", we've got a lot to think about, here. How many 18th-c novels can you think of, just real quick, whose authors claim to be editors? (That's a semi-rhetorical question, because an actual list might amuse.)
Reply
Reply
HOWEVER, you made my day with your quick thinking self. You turned it back around on the students with a question! You are a GODDESS to me right now.
Or it could be the massive amounts of caffiene talking. But in that case, you are the patron preistess of the caffinated.
--K
Reply
Reply
And yes, Miss Hobbit, that was a stellar example of thinking on your feet (raising my doubleshot in tribute).
Reply
My office neighbor bought his own lap top projector so that he can show the classes the artwork they discuss. And he actually teaches art in the art department. so why should I think that I will get any demands met?
I need some voodoo for that .
--K
Reply
Now, you could argue that Equiano lied on these documents. But Caretta argues that the burden of proof really lies with those who want to argue that he was African born. And most scholars, I think, are coming around to his point of view. Kalypso is working on this, I think, and probably knows still more.
Caretta, in his bio of Equiano, says that he wishes that he had never found this info. He also says that it does make E a liar, rather a very savvy writer, who cannily recreates himself in life, and in the text in advantageous ways. He has also found other things that cast doubt on Equiano's sole authorship, but that's still really up in the air.
For a quick primer for your class, check out this website:
http://www.brycchancarey.com/equiano/nativity.htm
Reply
Reply
Reply
A major question: why would you say you were a slave, if you weren't? (I can think of several things here, but I'm curious what y'all think.)
Reply
Reply
Reply
Interestingly, someone in my disability studies seminar talked about an African American activist who engaged in a DNA test to trace his roots--to find out that--oops--there was no evidence of African ancestry at all. Instead, he was likely Filipino.
His response? Fuck that. I feel black, so I am black.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment