I would like to try and touch on an interpretive problem that was brought up in class that may cause some controversy. In class we talked about how in the  “Narrative of the Life of Fredrick Douglas”, Fredrick portrays a lot of physical violence against slave women and leaves out any real detail when there is a man being beaten. On pg. 51 he vividly describes his aunt being whipped until he entire back was gashed and bloody. He says as well that “it the first of a long series of such outrages, of which I was doomed to be a witness and a participant.” (pg. 51). And he does tell us about how he witnesses many more but fails to tell us in detail of his moments of weakness (except for once briefly). Why is Douglas hiding this from the reader? It is not until the tides turn on the “slave breaker” Mr. Covey that he goes into detail about his experience.

            We also see this this same literally problem when we read Harriet Jacobs. She failed to show any violence against women in her story. This brought up the question for me that maybe both Fredrick, and Harriet is trying to keep their genders dignity. I believe this because they both are hiding one genders hardship from the reader and almost refusing to show the other side. Is this an attempt to try and give strength to one gender over the other?

           

In the “Narrative of the Life of Fredrick Douglas” I believe that he might be trying to play himself up for this big finale where he kicks the shit out of the “slave breaker” so it may or may not be an attempt to set the reader up for this. That way he is portrayed as more of a hero to all of the slaves, especially all of these women that have been beaten so badly.

I also wanted to play around with the quote, “I now resolved that, however long I might remain a slave in form, the day has passed forever when I could be a slave in fact.” (pg. 113). This quote took place after he had beaten up Mr. Covey and I believe that this is completely linked to literacy and Fredrick’s ability to read. Earlier in the book Mrs. Auld began teaching Fredrick the A, B, Cs until Mr. Auld found out and said: “if you teach that nigger how to read there would be no keeping him. It would forever unfit him to be a slave.” (pg.78). So this physical interaction with Mr. Covey was sparked by Fredrick’s knowledge of literacy and how it is the only thing that gave the white man the power to enslave the Blackman. And because Fredrick understands that he is able to overcome his fears and stand up for his freedom.

Ignorance Is Bliss

A large section dealing with Douglass’ transition to being able to read really stood out to me, specifically what he experienced. It begins with “The reading of these documents” then ends at “and moved in every storm”. (Douglass 84-85) I broke down the passage into five sections: 1) his understanding of slavery; 2) his newfound anger from this understanding; 3) the understanding of Master Hugh’s (ironic) words and the hatred of knowing; 4) the envy of what he was before; 5) his new general view of the world from this knowledge.

From this, what really stood out to me were sections 2 and 3. I found it quite tragic that this gift he was fortunate enough to receive caused him so much pain at first. He writes “that very discontentment whish Master Hugh had predicted would follow my learning to read had already come, to torment and sting my soul to unutterable anguish” (84). When we as children learn something as simple as how to read, I think Douglass’ description is the last thing to come to our minds. Of course, he was a part of a completely different time. But words like “torment” and “anguish” just struck me (no doubt well-thought out to make the reader feel exactly this). This passage not only highlights the things we take for granted, but also the incredible struggle Douglass went through, as well as perhaps other slaves. It seems that no matter what happened to them, they never seemed to get a break. It’s truly heartbreaking, seeing the world as they knew it to be through their eyes.

He continues with “As I writhed under it, I would at times feel that learning to read had been a curse rather than a blessing” (84). Upon reading this and the lines that follow I thought of Adam and Eve once they ate the forbidden fruit; they understood everything, and ended up suffering for it. “It had given me a view of my wretched condition, without the remedy. It opened my eyes to the horrible pit, but to no ladder upon which to get out.” (84) He has this knowledge; great, now what? He can’t do anything with it, not yet at least, and all it has left him is seeing his situation with more clarity and the ability to express his feelings. I’m sure that when Master Hugh said “As to himself, it could do him no good, but a great deal of harm. It would make him discontented and happy” he wasn’t completely referring to what Douglass ended up going through, but it’s sad how he ended up being right.

Then Douglass points out the frustration of being able to think for him. “It was this everlasting thinking of my condition that tormented me.” (84) Knowing nothing but how to be a slave (which for him was just knowing how to live), and then all of a sudden being able to understand not only what but also that he didn’t understand. Douglass then writes “In moments of agony, I envied my fellow slaves for their stupidity.” (84) However, with the saying “ignorance is bliss” in mind, he wasn’t even happy when he was ignorant. This passage really shows how miserable life was for slaves; for Douglass it’s a lose-lose situation, which works to highlight even more the terrible experience he went through.

Douglass, Frederick. Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, An American Slave. 1845.             New York: Penguin Group, 1986. Print.

Commentary of The Narrative of Frederick Douglass

            Within the context of the reading the topic and interpretation of sexual overtones cannot be missed. On page 49, “…administer their own lusts, and make a gratification of their wicked desires profitable as well as pleasurable.” The idea of these slave owners gaining a sense of sexual satisfaction as they deliver punishment to the slaves in question is something that Douglass witnesses and can comment on. The act itself seems to be some kind of sexual release for the owners and the only way to gain this is to in fact punish the slaves. The act of whipping is indeed something that we can view as horror but to Douglass it seems that he recognizes the slave owners’ true intentions behind it. Whether or not being able to look back and analyze the situation gave Douglass the gift of hindsight is unsaid, yet looking through some kind of Freudian lens before the id even was clearly described, he could see the true meaning behind these kinds of beatings.

            During discussion last week the topic was brought up that the inevitability of owning a slave was going to be cruelty. Within the Narrative, the readers do have examples of this but I wasn’t completely sold on taking the idea as all or nothing. There has to be some kind of grey when it comes to the topic of the treatment of a slave. The reader is given examples of two women in a few rapid pages (78-81). Within the text itself Mrs. Auld may represent the good and the bad represented by Mrs. Hamilton. Now if the evolution of a slave owner were to hold true, Auld would indeed become Hamilton at some point of ownership of a slave. Now, it could be my tendency to look at a glass as half full, but I believe that humans themselves have the capacity to be the better person in any situation and not fall into the “normality” of the time. Not every person who owned a slave would eventually become violent towards him or her. I understand that this is a topic that is full of cultural influence and also geographical location, but the decent treatment of one human to another is something I still hold on to. This is not to say or be blind to that owning a slave could be justified, because the very definition of slavery is something that sickens me. However, what is the true difference between a butler in this day and age versus a slave. It is still establishing a hierarchy within a house where one person is clearly identified as being “better” than another. Although someone could easily argue that pay is the difference, the morality of each scenario is the point I would attempt to argue.

            At the end of class last week, Professor Oster recommended that we do a Google search for the “Cult of True Womanhood.” The idea of the cult was a simple one, that a woman should possess four cardinal virtues; piety, purity, domesticity and submissiveness. The problem with this idea of womanhood is that it only applied to women in a certain class and location, a woman would normally have to be white, Protestant and live in the New England area. My confusion of the topic came about how we were applying these to slavery in general or was it just to the idea of womanhood? If indeed we were applying the Cult to women in general, then the amount of females that would not be considered is a staggering amount. Working class, immigrant women and black women all would fall outside the category of true womanhood. If a majority of women were also to invest into this kind of cult, it would cripple women’s ability to find or even look for work thus preventing a footing in any kind of labor industry. I’m sure that the Cult of True Womanhood saw themselves as ways to identify what it means to be a real woman, yet in fact all the group accomplished was to hold the female gender back.

In this entry I wanted to play around with the idea of the slaves constant presentation of power over Don Benito. Also How Delano id so oblivious to the idea that slaves could have overtaken the Spanish and how that might correlate to stereotypes and or racism.

            One encounter we have with this that we discussed in class is the significance of Atufal, a mountainous man brought out every two hours or so to beg for pardon. However, Atufal just remains silent in the scene and is then dismissed. What is most intriguing about this scene is Don Benito’s body language and tone of voice. When Atufal begins approaching Don Benito, “At the first glimpse of his approach, Don Benito had started, a resentful shadow swept over his face; and, as with the sudden memory of bootless rage, his white lips glued together.” (pg. 182).  When I read this it came off as completely submissive almost like a puppy that knows it did something wrong. Not till his servant in my eyes almost cued Don Bonito to say his line as if they were scripted. This seemed even more evident when Delano tells the reader, “Thus reminded, Don Benito, nervously adverting his response, in a disconcerted voice” (pg. 182). When Delano tells us that Don Benito was “thus reminded” it displayed for me how Don Benito is almost completely under the “servants” control. Atufal is brought out as a reminder to Don Benito to submissively tell him that if he gives word that the slaves have taken over, then they will release this monstrous man on him. Another major scene where I believe the slave’s power is physically displayed in the story is when Don Benito is telling “his story

            Even though this seems obvious to the reader, Delano refuses to believe any notion of slaves taking over a Spanish ship. Whenever he sees any sort of sign that there may be a shift in power he almost immediately brushes it off and just assumes that that is how things are run on this ship. After all it is not his ship and who is he to step in and tell another person of the same rank that he is doing everything wrong. Or could it be his assumption that blacks are always inferior to the white man? So Melville begins to play with this idea on an anti-slavery theme in the story. Where the black slave is overpowering the white man in many ways however Delano (society) doesn’t always see it or just blows it off. So is this Melville’s attempt to rectify this problem in society? Personally I believe it is and he does a great job at it through the interactions between characters in the story.

Location and Maritime Law?

The physical locations and the state that these locations are in is something to examine more deeply within the context of Benito Cereno. As Captain Cereno tells the initial story of what had happened as he rounded Cape Horn, one thing is for certain, this path is one of the most dangerous the ocean has to offer. It is a passage of blistering winds, the roughest of waves and a general danger set forth by its physical impediments. This was an area where ships were known to have accidents and be lost as a common occurrence. Even so, when Cereno is discussing the length of his journey around the Cape, the amount of time it takes to make the trip doesn’t add up to what would be the “normal” amount. This being one of the many factors contributing to the sense that not every aboard the San Dominick.

            As a reader we also have to realize that nearly the entirety of the story happens on two ships completely off shore. The kinds of laws that the crews would have on land, don’t apply here. Does that leave the sense that anything could go? Or as we discussed in class, a sense of gray to the entire idea of “law” on the ocean. If that were the case, would the captains of the Bachelor’s Delight and the San Dominick be the actual lawmakers and enforcers of what would be described as a moral code rather than a strict set of laws. We briefly touched upon this on class this last Tuesday, but is it the responsibility of a captain to make sure that all order is in accordance to these codes or is the crew capable of self governing themselves and it’s only when things get out of hand that the a leader must step forward. The hierarchy of a ship can be closest compared to that one of a military structure, which furthers the question, how bad would things have to get aboard a ship in order for the captain to come in. Now as the story progresses we learn that the slaves overthrow the white crewmembers but keep Cereno and a few crewmembers alive. Should Cereno have been informed of a rising tide of discourse before the actual overthrow occurred?

            On a different topic altogether, Captain Delano was given more than enough signs to stay away from the San Dominic, yet his character was unable to leave the ship alone, his more code could not let another vessel sit idly if he thought assistance would be welcome. The initial warning that the ship was “on the verge of the leaded-hued swells, with the shreds of fog here and there raggedly furring her,” paints the picture of something completely ominous and not worth inquiring about. The idea that something is not completely shown to a character marks that a sense of warning should be under consideration. Upon boarding the San Dominick still, the description of something horrifying is given to the ship itself, “The spars, ropes and great part of the bulwarks, looked wooly, from long acquaintance with the scraper, tar and the brush. Her keep seemed laid, her ribs put together, and she launched, from Ezekiel’s Valley of Dry Bones.” The imagery of a skeleton and death itself hangs about all aspects of the ship, foreshadowing the things to come in the rest of the story. Also another example of death being the comparison to a “hearse-like roll of the hull,” of page 165. Another question I have though is a historical context issue; did a hearse represent the same thing in 1855 as it does to modern readers?