In reading the work of Frederick Douglass I feel that I am starting to see the distinction between the Enlightenment and Romantic periods much more strongly, and getting a better grasp on what that distinction means. Whether by design or accident, I actually see a lot of those same differences in Douglass’s work as he describes his own education, and eventual acquisition of identity as a person. During the early parts of Douglass’s story he shows us how the slave masters did everything in their power to deprive their slaves of a personal identity, and Douglass writes that “I do not remember to have ever met a slave who could tell of his birthday” (Douglass 923). In a lot of ways this reminds me of the Enlightenment view of society vs. individual, as the slave masters tried to suppress personal concerns in the slaves, in an attempt to govern them as a group. As Douglass progressed in educating himself he gains awareness of both himself and his surroundings, and begins to understand both why the slave masters suppressed their individuality, and the horrific nature of their scheme. When Douglass becomes aware of just how cruel his own circumstances were, he writes, “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” (Douglass 941). I think that as Douglass learned more about himself, he realized that being a slave was a state of being, not a personal identity.
There seems to be a strong relationship between Douglass’s early state of being a slave and the Enlightenment system of dealing with society rather than individuals, further, Douglass’s discovery that he was a person and not some meaningless part of a societal caste of slaves, fits very well with the idea of Romanticism.
I think it is incredible the cruelty that black slaves went through just a couple of decades ago, for example what happened to Demby, the way he was killed because he “had become unmanageable.” (Douglass 933). I like to tie to today’s society to the readings of this class, I don’t think that now days, killing a person because they are not doing their job like they are supposed to or because they refuse for their bosses to whip them anymore, will be a valid reason in front of a jury. I find very interesting what one of the guys said in class the other day about why didn’t the hundreds of black slaves turned on their few white masters, killed them and gained their freedom… to me this would make a lot of sense. However, legal racism, or better said the government backed the white masters. The slaves knew that even if they did gain their freedom like that, it wouldn’t take long before the government got to them. Poof of this is that slavery ended when the government backed the black slaves.
ReplyDeleteOps! I misspelled some words and i wasn't able to edit the other comment.
ReplyDeleteI think it is incredible the cruelty that black slaves went through just a couple of decades ago, for example what happened to Demby. The way he was killed because he “had become unmanageable.” (Douglass 933). I like to tie to today’s society to the readings of this class, I don’t think that now days, killing a person because they are not doing their job like they are supposed to or because they refuse for their bosses to whip them anymore, will be a valid reason for killing another human being in front of a jury. I find very interesting what one of the guys said in class the other day about why didn’t the hundreds of black slaves turned on their few white masters, killed them and gained their freedom… to me this would make a lot of sense. However, legal racism, or better said, the government backing up the white masters, empowered them to do such horrid things to the black slaves. The slaves knew that even if they did gain their freedom killing their masters, it wouldn’t take long before the government got to them. What slaves needed was the protection of the government. Proof of this is the fact that slavery ended when the government backed the black slaves.