What is the purpose of an autobiography? Yes, it's a personal narrative of someone's life, but it's also a deliberative self-reflection for an audience. An autobiography is written for the intention of being published: Not only does it point out important milestones of an individual's life, but also their own emotional analysis of the world around them. In the case of black autobiographies—particularly those stemming from the African American experience—many illustrate a black person's journey as they struggle against racial oppression and eventually pursue liberation. The two black autobiographies we've discussed in class, "Up from Slavery" by Booker T. Washington, and "Incidents in the life of a Slave Girl", by Harriet Jacobs both portray this upward journey. However, the differing historical context and intent of these memoirs provide distinct insights about slavery.
Even the titles of each individual narrative presents a different tale: one, a girl presents her life as a slave, particularly emphasizing the cruelties of slavery in order to "arouse the women of the North to a realizing sense of the condition to millions of women at the South, still in bondage, suffering what I suffered, and most of them far worse" (Jacobs 5). Jacobs focuses on the horrors of bondage, specifically as a female slave, in order to garner sympathy and advocate for abolition. A large portion of the story focuses on the physical and psychological consequences of slavery on her body and psyche. She delves into the moral and ethical impact of being owned by somebody and dealing with a loss in agency. Eventually, she becomes a free woman—not without sacrificing her bodily autonomy and "purity", living in hiding in a crawlspace for 7 years, and surviving years of abuse from her master.
Washington's story is different. He starts off as a slave and eventually reaches freedom, just like Jacobs. However, most of his autobiography is devoted to his life after slavery, as he was freed during a young age and lived the majority of his life during post-Reconstructionist America. His story isn't a long, arduous struggle to freedom—moreover, it focuses on the bittersweet question of: What's next? Rather than focusing on the brutal impact of slavery, Washington writes a narrative of self-improvement through adversity, focusing on uplifting himself particularly through education. Part of Washington as a prominent figure in America at this time, wanted to inspire African Americans to achieve economic independence and social advancement: "Up from Slavery" is reminiscent of these motives. In a seemingly hopeless time period where black people suffered under Jim Crow doctrine and horrific racial violence, Washington's autobiography promotes a journey of optimism.
While both authors acknowledge the ghastly reality of slavery, Washington presents the aftermaths of slavery in a more ambivalent and optimistic light, claiming that "the black man got nearly as much out of slavery as the white man did" (Washington Chapter I), as slavery provided African Americans with skills and opportunities for advancements. As his intent in his narrative is to emphasize racial progress through "casting down your bucket where you are", Washington looks at slavery as a form of resilience that has been overcome. He focuses on the positives of the circumstances around him and doing the best he can do instead of dwelling on the negatives. Jacobs is much more pointed about the viciousness and inhumanity of slavery than Washington. Her intent is to expose slavery's horrors, and as someone living directly in the antebellum era, can't just brush over slavery as an unfortunate history. She can't focus on improving herself by looking at the positives of slavery—instead, she focuses on the negatives to inspire action.
Looking at an autobiography through the lens of a supposed audience self-reflection is a very interesting perspective! I think it's a very fair assumption that their differing depictions of slavery were based on their differing backstories and journeys out of slavery as well. The perspective of the audience and self-reflection does also bring some sort of clarity to the way the author’s craft their autobiographies: Jacobs with her plea to the women of the north and Washington with his bittersweet “success story”.
ReplyDeleteI liked your comparison of the authors and their respective ideals, and I definitely agree with your interpretations. However, I think that looking at the readings from a modern perspective complicates things. Nowadays, Washington's idea seem almost wrong to us, but back then, they were far more realistic than what Jacobs was advocating for.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed how you showed that the differences between Washington's and Jacob's autobiographies connected to what time of the slave experience they focused on. I also think it is interesting to compare the fact that while they both faced horrible experiences and were mistreated, Washington was probably given better opportunities due to the fact that he was a man. I wonder how their stories would compare and contrast differently if Washington was a woman and/or focused more on his time as a slave rather than the aftermath.
ReplyDeleteI think you did a nice job analyzing the true meaning and interpretation behind each writer's slave narrative. I also liked how you did this through differentiating the different readers and how they ultimately portrayed their past. In all what the authors choose to convey as true messages to their readers is of utmost importance so I think it was right to prioritize this aspect of these two texts. Nice job
ReplyDeleteHey Stepheny, I thought this blog did a really good job of pointing out the important differences in their perspectives. I think Jacobs's writing at a time when slavery was not yet abolished pushed her to be less optimistic, more pleading, and delving more into her past trauma as a slave to illuminate the horrors of the system. With Washington writing at a time when slavery was already abolished, he was more interested in encouraging his readers not to dwell on these hardships, and rather use them to lift themselves up.
ReplyDeleteYou did a nice job at comparing and contrasting the two narratives. I also find Booker T. Washington's story to be more uplifting and optimistic compared to Harriet Jacobs' story, which was more depressing and unhopeful. The Harriet Jacobs story definitely seemed to have taken place entirely in the times of slavery, which was probably the main reason why it's not very uplifting.
ReplyDeleteI really like the way you compare and contrast this aspect of the two texts; I think it's very relevant when you think about the reasons behind their differences. Since Jacobs' autobiography was published during slavery, it is natural that she would focus on her horrific experiences in slavery to advocate for abolition. On the other hand, since Washington is dealing with the question of what black people should do now that slavery is over, he focuses more on his experiences of lifting himself up post-slavery as an example of what other former slaves should do. Nice job!
ReplyDeleteI think what you said early on about the two titles of the books is really key to understanding the context and goals of the two different authors. Jacobs is very much in the present of slavery and is writing an autobiography with the goal of putting an end to the institution. By contrast Washington writes with slavery as something in the best, something that he has to move on from. The difference between their ideas is so fundamental in can even be seen in the titles, as you pointed out.
ReplyDeleteYour analysis of the different approaches to autobiography in the context of black narratives is insightful. By examining the distinct intentions behind Jacobs' and Washington's autobiographies, you shed light on their varied experiences and historical contexts. The comparison highlights the nuances in their storytelling and reveals how they navigated oppression and resilience in post-slavery America.
ReplyDeleteI think it's interesting that you discuss how Jacobs was unable to see any world besides slavery. Indeed, during her time, slavery extended itself throughout the country in the form of the Fugitive Slave Act. In contrast, Booker T. Washington is able to actually imagine a future. Perhaps that gives credence to the notion that he had internalized some of his beliefs.
ReplyDelete