Raza 1

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1. Thesis Statement

The present study aims to explore and analyse the use of counter-discursive

practices and strategies employed by Frederick Douglass in his Narrative of the Life of

Frederick Douglass, an American Slave, Written by Himself. It will try to evaluate that

Douglass‘s use of these strategies exposes and questions the belief of the white race‘s

superiority over African-Americans, and acts as a medium of anti-colonial and anti-

slavery resistance. It takes as fact the presence of a colonial discourse that operated as

an instrument of power in order to suppress and subdue the representation of the

viewpoint of the African-Americans with regard to their physical and mental potential.

The dominant or colonial discourse of the white Americans, especially that of the

slaveholders of the South, presented the African-Americans as sub-human and

incapable of independent thinking and action and projected the white man‘s role as

benefactor and patron, entrusted with the divine responsibility of the improvement and

elevation of the black slaves. The counter-discourse employed by Frederick Douglass

presents the reverse view to that of the white race by challenging the vision of the

whites on the one hand and subverting the same by offering a correspondingly

opposite assessment, bringing forth the black slaves‘ humanity and their qualities of

head and heart.

My study, therefore, aims at discovering and analysing the employment of

counter-discourse techniques and approaches in the Narrative of the Life of Frederick

Douglass, an American Slave, whereby he has challenged the idea of the superiority of

the white Americans over the African-Americans in interpreting the latter as

 Raza 2

intellectually and socially inferior to the former. I will also endeavour to establish that

Douglass makes effective use of a counter-discourse in his Narrative, which he uses as

a medium for anti-colonial and anti-slavery struggle.

Frederick Douglass was born in Talbot County, Eastern Shore, in the state of

Maryland in February 1818. Born in slavery, Douglass educated himself, escaped and

became one of the greatest abolitionist leaders in American history. His brilliant anti-

slavery speeches were so intelligent and eloquent that many people did not believe that

he had been a slave. His most vociferous critic was A.C.C. Thompson, a friend of

Thomas Auld (Douglass‘s former white master) who wrote an article denouncing

the Narrative as false.1 To prove his critics wrong, Douglass decided to write his own

story. His autobiographical narratives stunned the people, and have shocked and

inspired the readers throughout the world. Not only are they a first-hand account of

slavery and abolition, they are the inspiring story of a self-made American. A former

slave, Frederick Douglass became advisor to Presidents Abraham Lincoln and

Benjamin Harrison, minister to Haiti, and the most influential African-American of the

19th century.

Frederick Douglass wrote his Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, An

American Slave, in 1845. My Bondage and My Freedom (1855) and The Life and

Times of Frederick Douglass (1881, revised in 1895) followed in later years. The

Narrative is an eye-catching description of Douglass‘s life as slave and his eventual

escape to freedom. It is a detailed, first-hand account of slave life and the process of

self-discovery by which Douglass recognized the evils of slavery as an institution.

1
Shortly after the appearance of A. C. C. Thompson‘s critique of the Narrative, Douglass replied in the
Liberator which was published on February 27, 1846.
 Raza 3

Douglass‘s Narrative begins with the few facts he knew about his birth and

parentage; his father was a slave owner and his mother was a slave named Harriet

Bailey. Douglass highlights the common practice of white slave owners raping slave

women, both to satisfy their sexual hunger and to expand their slave populations.

Douglass also makes mention of the hypocrisy of Christian slave owners who used

religious teachings to justify their abhorrent treatment of slaves. He also describes the

conditions in which he and other slaves live. As a slave of Captain Anthony and

Colonel Lloyd, Douglass survived on meagre rations and was often cold. He witnessed

brutal beatings and the murder of a slave, which went unnoticed by the law or the

community at large. Douglass draws attention to the false system of values created by

slavery, in which faithfulness to the slave master is far stronger than loyalty to other

slaves.

When he was seven or eight years old, Douglass was sent to Baltimore to live

with the Auld family and care for their son, Thomas. Mrs Auld gave Douglass reading

lessons until her husband forbade her to do so. Douglass continued his lessons by

exchanging bread for lessons with poor neighbourhood white boys and by using

Thomas‘ books. Soon, Douglass discovered abolitionist movements in the North,

including those by Irish Catholics.

After some years when his original owner died, Douglass was given to the

charge of a poor farmer named Edward Covey, with a reputation for ―breaking‖ slaves.

Douglass spent a year with Covey, who cruelly and brutally whipped the slave until

Douglass finally fought him. From that day on, Covey left Douglass alone.

Douglass lived for some time with William Freeland who was a kind master,

and Douglass found a family among the other slaves there. He became a Sunday

school teacher to other slaves and enjoyed teaching them. Although that situation was
 Raza 4

better than any he had experienced previously, he found no way to his cherished goal

of freedom. Therefore, he made an attempt to escape but his plan was betrayed. He

was caught and had to work again for Hugh Auld in Baltimore. First, he ran errands

for shipyard workers, but after some of the workers struck Douglass, he fought back

and was nearly beaten to death. He started work at a different shipyard and became

proficient at ship caulking, but was forced to give all his wages to Auld. Douglass

soon made an arrangement with Auld to hire himself out and gave Auld a set amount

of wages each week. He was allowed to keep the remaining amount, thus saving

enough for his escape to New York.

After his escape, Douglass was advised to move to New Bedford,

Massachusetts, and he settled there with his new wife, Anna Murray. Douglass made a

living doing odd jobs; he was unable to find work as a caulker, however, because the

white caulkers refused to work with blacks, fearing the former slaves would take over

their jobs. Although he still feared being caught and returned to the South, Douglass

attended an anti-slavery convention, where he was encouraged to speak. That is how

he commenced his public life, speaking and writing in favour of the abolition of

slavery.

Douglass‘s Narrative can be seen as a response to the opposition he faced from

the white slave-owners, especially of the South. The Narrative vigorously states that

Douglass is its exclusive author, and it contains two prefaces from William Lloyd

Garrison and another abolitionist, Wendell Phillips, to attest to this fact. Douglass‘s

use of the true names of people and places further silenced his critics who questioned

the authenticity of his story and status as a former slave. In addition, the Narrative not

only served as a personal account of Douglass‘s experiences as a slave, but also as an

 Raza 5

inspiring antislavery document. With the Narrative, Douglass demonstrated his ability

as the narrator as well as interpreter of his story.

There have been a number of investigations into the desperate predicament of

the African-Americans in the light of the impact of slavery on African-American life

in the U.S. Within the context of postcolonial literary theory, these studies have been

undertaken through the medium of counter-discourse. This term was coined by

Richard Terdiman to characterise the theory and practice of symbolic resistance.

Terdiman examines the means of producing genuine change against the ―capacity of

established discourses to ignore or absorb would be subversion‖ by analysing

nineteenth-century French writing. He identifies the ―confrontation between

constituted reality and its subversion‖ as ―the very locus at which cultural and

historical change occurred‖ (13).

Terdiman‘s work focused exclusively on French literature, but his term has

been adopted by post-colonial critics to describe the complex ways in which

challenges to a dominant or established discourse (specifically that of the imperial

centre) might be mounted from the periphery, always recognizing the powerful

‗absorptive capacity‘ of imperial and neo-imperial discourses. As a practice within

post-colonialism, counter-discourse has been theorized mainly through challenges

posed to particular texts, and thus to imperial ideologies which were inculcated

through texts that were employed in colonialist education systems.

Counter-discourse is itself employed in response to or in reaction against an

already prevalent discourse (in our case colonial discourse). According to Ashcroft,

Griffiths and Tiffin, Foucault considers discourse as the system by which dominant

groups in society constitute the field of truth by imposing specific knowledges,

disciplines and values upon dominated groups (Key Concepts 42). Colonial discourse,
 Raza 6

a term that was popularised by Edward Said‘s Orientalism, is greatly concerned with

the centrality of Europe (41). Seen in this perspective, it is a system of statements that

can be made about colonies and colonial peoples, about colonising powers and about

the relationship between these two. It is the system of knowledge and beliefs about the

world within which acts of colonisation take place. Said‘s book examined the ways in

which colonial discourse operated as an instrument of power and initiated what came

to be known as colonial discourse theory (41-42).

Different critics have highlighted different aspects of Douglass‘s Narrative. I

will present those comments that throw light on the resistance struggle and counter-

discourse of Douglass and certain other attributes that contribute to this end. At the

height of the Civil Rights Movement during the 1960s, renowned scholar Benjamin

Quarles in his introduction to the 1960 edition of the Narrative, highlights the

importance of the Narrative’s symbolic role in the African-Americans‘ struggle for

equal status in the U.S. society.

Besides its literary merit, Douglass‘s autobiography was in many respects

symbolic of the Negro‘s role in American life. Its central theme is struggle. The

Narrative is a clear and passionate utterance both of the Negro‘s protest and of his

aspiration. The book was written, as Douglass states in the closing sentence, in the

hope that it would do something toward ―hastening the glad day of deliverance to the

millions of my brethren in bonds (xviii).

Quarles goes on to stress the fact that Douglass was not at all racist and he did

not attempt to glorify all things black. He did not hesitate to highlight the frailties and

shortcomings of the blacks in his Narrative when he noticed them. Moreover,

―Douglass addressed his appeal less to Negroes than to whites—it was the latter he

sought to influence. He did not propose to speak to Negroes exclusively; he wanted all
 Raza 7

America, if not all the world, for his sounding board‖ (xix). In other words, Douglass‘s

discourse was aimed at converting the hearts of his white readers in order to gain their

support in his drive against slavery.

Andrews remarks that when Douglass wrote the Narrative, he made a serious

effort to appeal to the white middle-class readers of the North by fashioning his

autobiography into a kind of American Jeremiad. (123). A jeremiad is a long literary

work, usually in prose, but sometimes in verse, in which the author bitterly laments the

state of society and its morals in a serious tone of sustained invective, and always

contains a prophecy of society‘s imminent downfall. Generally, the term jeremiad is

applied to moralistic texts that denounce a society for its wickedness, and prophesize

its downfall. The jeremiad was a favorite literary device of the Puritans especially in

sermons like ―Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God‖ by Jonathan Edwards. Douglass

extended that tradition in a reflective vein in his Narrative, and lamented the moral

corruption that slavery wrought on America. However, Douglass‘s was a jeremiad of

revolution rather than rebellion. Although as a fugitive slave orator in the early 1840s,

Douglass denounced the institutionalised racism that pervaded America and perverted

its much-heralded blend of liberty, democracy, and Christianity, his Narrative does not

go to such political or religious extremes. In his Narrative, Douglass deploys the

rhetoric of the jeremiad to distinguish between true and false Americanism and

Christianity. In Andrews‘ estimation, Douglass, in the role of a Jeremiah, deconstructs

the fundamental binary opposition between white people and black African Americans

(who were considered as mere animals and brutes) on which much of the rationale for

slavery was based.

Levine does not limit Douglass‘s contribution in the Narrative to the mere

depiction of the atrocities perpetrated by the white slaveholders (32). According to

 Raza 8

him, ―Douglass does much more than narrate wrongs. He also displays his ability to

analyse the events he describes, presenting slavery in the United States as a powerful

cultural force that makes resistance on the part of the slaves an overwhelming if not

impossible prospect‖ (32). Levine thus focuses on the ‗interpreter‘ role of Douglass,

which presents him as thinking individual, thereby serving Douglass‘s purpose of the

employment of a strategy to prove the white man‘s contention wrong. And the strategy

that Douglass employs in his Narrative is the use of counter-discourse by which he

questions the validity of the white man‘s stance on slavery as something benign and

beneficial.

Waldo E. Martin Jr. highlights Douglass‘s anti-slavery struggle in an

appropriate manner by referring to the instance of his process of learning at the Auld‘s

household. When he asked Sophia Auld to teach him how to read, she gladly assented.

Thrilled by his rapid progress, she shared her joy with her husband. To her surprise

though, Master Hugh was appalled by her statement and demanded that she desist at

once from her unlawful efforts to teach Frederick how to read. ―If you give a nigger an

inch,‖ he further explained to his wife, ―he will take an ell. Learning will spoil the best

nigger in the world. If he learns to read the Bible it will forever unfit him to be a slave.

He should know nothing but the will of his master, and learn to obey it . . . If you teach

him how to read, he‘ll want to know how to write, and this accomplished, he‘ll be

running away with himself‖ (7). Frederick recollected that Master Hugh‘s ―discourse

was the first decidedly anti-slavery lecture to which it had been my lot to listen‖ (7).

Waldo further opines that the more Frederick learned, the more resentful he became of

his enslavement. Reflecting upon Master Hugh‘s argument that ―knowledge unfits a

child to be a slave,‖ young Frederick agreed. ―From that moment,‖ he recalled, ―I

understood the direct pathway from slavery to freedom.‖ Only enforced ignorance, he
 Raza 9

came to see, could darken the human spirit to the point where it willingly

accommodated its enslavement (8).

O‘Meally considers Douglass‘s struggle for freedom as an effort at establishing

and authenticating his own identity. He Praises Douglass‘s heroic struggle for freedom

from the yoke of slavery and believes that through his Narrative, Douglass succeeded

in offering his readers as well as historians of American life, an unassailably reliable

record of slavery from the viewpoint of one who had been enslaved. He further

observes that the book also brilliantly performed the aesthetic task of depicting how it

feels to be a human locked in a struggle against tyrannical odds for freedom and

culture; a man seeking a place in a world where no place looks like home (iii). At the

same time, O‘Meally goes a step further to applaud Douglass‘s ubiquitous altruism

even in his quest for individuality by observing that ―[Douglass‘s] identity… is not

that of the bourgeois individual who puts himself first; instead it depends deeply on his

providential fellowship with an activist community that gives his own being its almost

most profound meaning‖. From the first ―I was born…‖ to the final ringing words

addressed to ―the millions of my brothers in bonds,‖ Douglass speaks for that

community and for a sense of ideal community that has implications for the nation

(iv).

From the postcolonial inter-race relations‘ perspective, Robert B. Stepto makes

a pertinent reference to O‘Meally‘s observation who, after clarifying the use of the

technique of Chiasmus (a verbal crisscrossing in which the order of words in the first

clause of a sentence is inverted in the second) by Douglass pronounces: ―…this figure

of speech, this verbal reversal, is important to the structure and meaning of Douglass‘s

whole book… For Douglass‘s mission was not merely to write a nicely balanced set of

sentences but to undermine and reverse a system of power relations.‖ (xii). Stepto
 Raza 10

further adds, ―Douglass‘s book is also an example of the great American tradition of

the cause narrative. The cause in Douglass‘s written story is the abolition of slavery‖

(x). Moreover, in congruence with O‘Meally‘s observation, Stepto (xii) affirms that

Douglass seeks to undermine a system of power when he pursues one of the primary

objectives of the 1845 Narrative, i.e. naming the places and personages of his

enslavement. Stepto believes that there is power in naming, especially when a name

appears in print to be forever associated with some atrocity. Thus we know … that

Captain Anthony relished whipping slaves, notably the comely Aunt Hester, and that

overseer Mr Gore shot and killed a slave (xii).

Nyla Ali Khan has made an excellent analysis of the counter-discourse

technique employed by Douglass. She supports Douglass‘s stance of destabilizing the

dominant assumptions that are the foundation of binary construction, which, according

to her, is the basis of the pattern of post-Enlightenment conquest and domination in

human history. She opines, ―The narrator employs a counter-discourse to effect a

displacement of oppositional terms (1)‖. However, she argues that although the

narrator subverts binaries on which the dominant discourse and practices of American

slaveholders rely to validate its power, he does not create an inverse valorisation of

colonized over colonizer. As a ―Black‖ slave Douglass does not reductively internalize

the tenets of ―White‖ American culture but endeavours to give U.S. slaves a voice

which is affiliated with American culture but is not imagined from within the interests

of the American slaveholding community (3). She further contends that, ―…Frederick

Douglass breaks the shackles of a traditional discourse that was used and disseminated

by the colonizer, and thereby articulates a submerged voice. The narrator‘s assertion of

identity is motivated by the development of a collective and individual subjectivity‖

(3).
 Raza 11

Referring to Douglass‘s comments on the deep-seated meanings of the slave-

songs in chapter II of the Narrative, Ms Khan comments thus:

This explicit expression of Douglass‘s sense of community enables him

to render individual assertion as well as cultural resilience as acts of

resistance to the dehumanizing aspects of slavery, through which he

achieves self-definition in an imperial world order. The narrator‘s

strategic employment of the collective resilience of the ―Black‖ voice is

an attempt to buttress his ―negotiation‖ with entrenched ideological

structures. (4)

The acquisition of literacy and knowledge were the means to articulate his

thoughts for Douglass. Douglass did not pick up the courage to escape until he was

mentally convinced of the abusive nature of slavery; he was convinced only when he

came to possess the skills of reading and writing which gave him both a clear vision of

the reality of slavery and the corresponding courage to speak his mind and act

accordingly. Stalder is of the view that Douglass‘s quest for literacy was in effect, a

quest for articulation, physical as well as intellectual (n. pag.). His physical prowess

was a consequence of the enhanced realisation of his bonded state, which in itself was

a consequence of his ability to read and write, thereby voicing his disapproval of it.

Literacy gave him the confidence that ignorance deprived him of. ―The pathway, that

of learning to read and write,‖ according to Stalder, ―is paved with the ability to

address through the written medium, the potential to gain vast stores of knowledge and

ideas, the opportunity to clarify thought and reflect, the possibility of forging one‘s

own free pass, and other wonderful prospects‖ (n. pag.).

 Raza 12

1.2. Postcolonial Studies

Postcolonial studies are a vast and interdisciplinary field that critically

examines the tensions between a metropolitan centre and its former dependents. In

other words, Postcolonialism deals with the (evil) effects of colonization on cultures

and societies. As originally used by historians after the Second World War, the word

‗postcolonial‘ (with or without hyphen) had a clearly chronological meaning, which

dealt with the post-independence period. However, from the late 1970s, literary critics

have been using the term to discuss the various cultural effects of colonization. At its

very root it carries out a forceful critique of the Eurocentric ideology and the effects of

hegemonic rule on the culture, politics, morals, and values of the victims of

colonialism (Bertens 159-160). As far as literature is concerned, postcolonial studies

focuses attention on the ideological foundations of European hegemonic thinking

which is characteristic of the recognised English writings. At the same time,

postcolonial literary criticism studies the cultural effects of displacement resulting

from colonial conquests, and also the instances of resistance that the displaced,

victimised, and marginalised peoples have performed in various ways (Bertens 160).

However, it may be noted that the case of the U.S. is different from the

generally understood concept of colonisation in that the white Americans did not

colonise the Africans in the latter‘s land, but rather carried out ‗internal colonisation‘

of the African-Americans who were brought as slaves to replace the white indentured

labourers and servants. This was primarily the case in the south where there was great

demand for field hands on the vast cotton and tobacco plantations.

Postcolonial approach to the study of texts is an approach that deals with

literary writings that were produced during the period of colonization or as a response

to it. African-American slave narrative forms an integral part of Postcolonial African-

 Raza 13

American writings. Dealing with such writings from the postcolonial critical

perspective enables us to understand the social, political, cultural, and economic life,

and race relations between the whites and African-American slaves. This approach

also shows the impact of colonisation on the colonised people in general and on

individuals in particular. Issues like imperialism, race and racism, class discrimination

(binarism), hegemony, dislocation, slavery, marginality, counter-discourse, and

resistance, etc., are the central concerns of postcolonial studies. Therefore, Frederick

Douglass‘s Narrative would be analysed in the light of Postcolonial and African-

American studies, their methods and insights. Douglass has principally dealt with the

afore-mentioned topics in his Narrative. His Narrative is full of descriptions and

portrayals that throw light on inter-racial, master-slave relationship whereby the white

masters not only cruelly subjugated the African-American slaves but portrayed them

as biologically and intellectually inferior. I will make an effort to highlight how

Douglass counters the arguments, behaviour, and attitudes of the white slaveholders,

and presents an opposing view of the life of the African-American slave community.

1.3. Structure of the Study

I will draw my theoretical framework from the post-colonial theory since

counter-discourse with regard to colonial resistance has been dealt with primarily in

the postcolonial literary studies. Moreover, since the counter-discourse in the African-

American autobiographical slave narratives in the American setting pivots around the

struggle of the black African slaves, I will discuss the postcolonial counter-discourse

in the context of African-American studies.

The theory part of my thesis will be divided into two sub-chapters. The first

sub-chapter will introduce the theoretical aspect of postcolonial studies. Definition of

 Raza 14

some key terms (i.e. colonialism, postcolonialism, imperialism, neo-colonialism, etc.)

and postcolonial studies in the context of America will also form part of this sub-

chapter. In the second sub-chapter, I will discuss what counter-discourse is and also

deliberate upon the development of African-American slave narrative tradition as a

specific genre of black resistance in the U.S.

In the chapter on analysis, I will discuss how Douglass represents the

dehumanised state of the African-Americans through the white masters‘ resorting to

different forms of physical violence. I will cite instances from Douglass‘s Narrative

that present his counter argument of revealing the humane side of the black slaves as

opposed to the brutal nature of the white slaveholders. I will also attempt to shed some

light on the nature and form of two different types of resistance—individual as well as

political—, which Douglass mentions in his autobiography. Moreover, I will try to

show how this resistance led Douglass to the path of self-development and his

eventual liberation.

1.4. Research Methodology

Deductive and qualitative approach will be employed to discuss Douglass‘s

Narrative. My preference for this model is on account of its suitability for the in-depth

investigation of my primary objective of the use of counter-discourse by the author in

his Narrative. Drawing upon the Postcolonial Theory and African-American literature,

I will carry out an in-depth analysis of the text of Narrative of the Life of Frederick

Douglass, an American Slave, for bringing to light the counter-discourse employed by

Frederick Douglass. I will use MLA style of citation for my thesis.

The field of postcolonial studies will be explored in order to draw out the

postcolonial textual resistance. Simultaneously, the African-American slave narrative

 Raza 15

will be studied in the context of African-American studies, thus bringing out their

dominant themes and concepts. The two fields of postcolonial studies and African-

American studies will not be theoretically focused upon as separate entities but rather

an attempt will be made to draw out their primary themes, concepts, and ideologies

which can assist in supporting each other. Since both these fields hold common ground

with regard to the colonial experiences, anti-colonial and anti-slavery resistance of the

enslaved African-Americans, and race and racism issues, all these aspects will form

the broad basis of this study.

The research will involve an analysis of Douglass‘s Narrative in order to draw

out his use of counter-discursive techniques and strategies. The text of Narrative will

be used as the primary source for analysis. Besides, other writings and commentaries

on the subject text by critics will be used as secondary sources, along with source

material available on the Internet, journals, and different books written on Frederick

Douglass. For the compilation of this research, sources for collection of research data

have been obtained through Books, Articles, Journals, Periodicals, and Internet.

1.5. Significance of the Study

As literature is the representation of real life, the characters depict the

behaviour and patterns of common man. One can understand these real life issues

through literature. However, despite the literary merit of Douglass‘s Narrative, its

unique status lies in the real depiction of actual sufferings and misfortunes, which the

author underwent. The research is significant in that it will endeavour to highlight as

to how Douglass‘s Narrative serves as a counter-discourse to the traditional white

man‘s partisan depiction of African-Americans‘ resistance since the white race

historically oppressed and discriminated them owing to their colour, and relegated
 Raza 16

them to an inferior position in a white-dominated culture. Moreover, this research will

attempt to highlight the importance of resistance struggle in order to bring to light such

resistance narratives in the larger struggle for human freedom from bondage.
 Raza 17

CHAPTER TWO

POSTCOLONIAL THEORY, COUNTER-DISCOURSE, AND THE AFRICAN-

AMERICAN SLAVE NARRATIVE TRADITION

In this chapter, it is my aim to provide the theoretical tools necessary for

discussing and analysing the counter-discourse strategies that the former American

slave Frederick Douglass employs in his Narrative. Since counter-discourse is a

concept that has played an important role in anti-colonial resistance struggles in the

formerly colonised societies, I will try exploring the vast field of postcolonial studies,

focussing on postcolonial textual resistance. Another field of study that will provide

me with proper tools for studying an African-American slave narrative is African-

American studies. I will not discuss these two fields as separate areas of study.

Instead, I will try to address those aspects of postcolonial and African-American

studies, which can offer insights to each other from thematic, ideological, and

conceptual points of view. I have opted to do this because the strengths and

peculiarities of both fields are mutually helpful to each other from the point of view of

colonial experiences of the colonised people, their anti-colonial and anti-slavery

struggles and issues on race and racism, all of which will be essential constituents of

my thesis.

2.1. Nexus between Postcolonial Studies and Postcolonial America

In this chapter, I will provide an overview of the field of postcolonial studies,

define some key concepts, and direct my discussion towards postcolonialism in the

American context. The purpose of this discussion is to rationalise why it is appropriate to

 Raza 18

study an African-American slave narrative from a postcolonial point of view and why it

is possible to discuss America as a postcolonial nation. Postcolonialism is a vast and

interdisciplinary field, which often critically examines the tensions between a

metropolitan centre and its former dependents. Although the study of the effects of

colonial representation were central to the work of such critics as Spivak and Bhabha, the

term ‗post-colonial‘ per se was first used to refer to cultural interactions within colonial

societies in literary circles. The term has subsequently been widely used to signify the

political, linguistic and cultural experience of societies that were former European

colonies (Ashcroft et al. Key Concepts, 186). The main emphasis of postcolonial studies

lies in a forceful critique of Eurocentric ideology and the effects of hegemonic rule on the

culture, politics, morals, and values of the victims of colonialism (Bertens 159-160;

McLeod 32). If we cast a critical glance at the literature produced in Europe and America,

it will be found that postcolonial studies have directed critical interest towards the

ideological foundations of European hegemonic thinking which is integral to established

English writings. At the same time, as Bertens states, postcolonial literary criticism

studies the cultural effects of displacement resulting from colonial conquests, and also

instances of resistance that the displaced, victimised and marginalised peoples have

performed in various ways (160).

Before I discuss and attempt to analyse different forms of postcolonial

resistance in specific literary contexts, it is both essential and advantageous to make

theoretical, and to some extent, etymological distinctions between certain terms. To do

so is necessary because a large number of postcolonial critics often use these terms

indiscriminately which makes their boundaries hazy. Since the boundaries between

terms such as ‗imperialism‘, ‗colonialism‘, ‗neocolonialism, ‗post-colonialism‘, and

‗postcolonialism‘ have often been blurred, there is need to establish what these terms
 Raza 19

actually refer to. The terms ‗imperialism‘ and ‗colonialism‘ are sometimes used

interchangeably in critical discussion, which would suggest as if there is a

synonymous relationship between them. Imperialism and colonialism cannot be fully

separated from each other since both can, in broad terms, be understood as involving

subordinating and oppressive practices on behalf of a dominating power upon an often

indigenous people.

In its most general sense, imperialism refers to the formation of an empire, and,

as such, has been an aspect of all periods of history in which one nation has extended

its domination over one or several neighbouring nations. Edward Said uses

imperialism in this general sense to mean ―the practice, theory, and the attitudes of a

dominating metropolitan centre ruling a distant territory,‖ a process distinct from

colonialism, which is ―the implanting of settlements on a distant territory‖ (8).

However, imperialism and colonialism can perhaps be best understood in

consideration of their different functions, to which Young offers a systematic

explanation by defining imperialism as a structure where empire is ―bureaucratically

controlled by a government from the centre, and which [is] developed for ideological

as well as financial reasons‖ (16-17). Thus colonialism, from Young‘s perspective,

refers to a structure where an empire is ―developed for settlement by individual

communities or for commercial purposes by a trading company.‖ Young further goes

on to explain that imperialism employs the spread of ideology and political power of

the metropolitan centre, whereas colonialism should be seen more as the practice of

imperialism away from the centre in the margins.

In the same manner, Ania Loomba elaborates on ‗imperialism‘ and

‗colonialism‘ in Colonialism/Postcolonialism by arguing that imperialism cannot

merely be defined ―as a political system in which an imperial centre governs colonised
 Raza 20

countries‖ but rather as a global ―economic system of penetration and control of

markets‖ (8). This very fact in turn explains why we may consider America as a

modern imperial nation since its position as a global superpower both in economic and

military spheres provides us with a befitting example of the functioning of an imperial

power without involving any form of colonisation. ―Colonialism‖, in Loomba‘s

estimation, therefore refers to ―the conquest and control of other people‘s lands and

goods‖, and one of the overreaching characteristics of colonialism contains

―unforming or re-forming the communities that existed [in the colonised regions]

already, and involved a wide range of practices including trade, plunder, negotiation,

warfare, genocide, enslavement, and rebellions‖ (2). Although such simplistic

definitions of colonialism are not in the least adequate in conveying the concept in all

its complexity, Loomba‘s definition at least makes it clear that the distinction between

imperialism and colonialism lies in the fact that imperialism can survive even after the

period of colonialism has officially ended and, therefore, imperialism does not require

any colonies for it to exist.

The prevalent use of the term ‗imperialism‘ also leads us to think about the

term ‗neo-colonialism‘. Since, as is pointed out by Loomba, direct rule over colonies

is not required for imperialism, the term ‗neo-colonialism‘ or ‗neo-imperialism‘ can be

used to refer to the situation where an economic and social relationship of unequal

dependency and control remains even after formal decolonisation (5-6). Thus, as

Mcleod puts it, the newly formed administration continues to exploit the people by

making ―the new nation economically subservient to the old Western power by

allowing big foreign companies to establish themselves in the new nation, by

continuing to send raw materials abroad for profit rather than feeding the people, by

making the nation into a tourist centre for wealthy Westerners (89).‖ In other words,
 Raza 21

Imperialism might exist even without territorial control. In case the empire used to

occupy foreign areas, the controlling influence of the empire prevails even after the

empire has lost its colonies.

Returning to the elaboration of imperialism and colonialism, it is safe to

assume that neither can be defined in such a simplistic and homogeneous manner as

has been discussed earlier. As Young notes, historically viewed, both imperialism and

colonialism have constituted various conceptions throughout history depending upon

different needs and agendas of the empires (17). For example, he establishes how

varied the colonial practices were in those colonies which were primarily established

as settlements such as the United States and Australia, compared to colonies such as

American Puerto Rico or British India, which served purely as targets of economic

exploitation without permanent settlements. In addition, if we consider the colonial

practices in the strategically and militaristically significant colonies such as

Guantanamo, Gibraltar or Cyprus, it can be said with a reasonable degree of

confidence that by referring to imperialism and colonialism, we can understand several

instances and different kinds of prevalent practices.

Now that some of the key concepts in the field of postcolonialism have been

defined and discussed, it is all the more relevant and possible to move on to consider

the complex and by no means unified concept of postcolonialism. At the very outset, if

we choose to take a straightforward and comprehensible approach to the concept, we

have to look at it from two perspectives—the historical and the intellectual. As the

prefix post in ‗postcolonialism‘ suggests, postcolonialism is in one sense a

chronological entity that is indistinguishably linked to historical situations. Post-

colonialism in this sense is seen as a period coming after colonialism, which also

suggests a connection to the historical events nowadays referred to as ‗decolonisation‘.

 Raza 22

Mcleod divides the process of decolonisation of the British Empire into three major

phases, which mark the end of the British Empire (9). The first phase starts with the

declaration of American Independence in 1776, when Britain lost its colonies in

America. The second stage in the process took place around the end of the 19th and the

beginning of the 20th centuries when the white settler nations comprising Australia,

New Zealand, Canada, and South Africa became dominions, i.e. practicing their own

form of self-government, still recognising Britain as the ruling ‗mother country‘. The

last phase in the process of decolonisation began at the end of the Second World War

that consisted of a number of struggles for national independence in the British

colonies in South Asia, Africa, and the Caribbean.

Although the process of decolonisation is often represented along such

historical lines as was provided in the discussion above, decolonisation does not occur

only as a series of events that take place in a specific period of history – this is what

some critics, as Loomba, call ‗formal decolonisation‘ (7). However, the process of

decolonisation must also be understood as a process of complex social, political, and

cultural developments, which have far-reaching repercussions for matters like reading,

writing, thinking, and representing the national and ethnic identity. It is even relevant

to argue that decolonisation, as well as colonialism in the form of neo-colonialism, as

was discussed above, has not been completed at all in some parts of the world. For

instance, Mcleod reminds us of the contradictions involving the use of the term ‗post-

colonial‘ as many of the once-colonised people, such as African-Americans and

Australian Aborigines, are still living in colonial relations to their former colonisers

(32-33). In addition, Loomba suggests an approach towards colonialism,

decolonisation, and postcolonialism according to which:

 Raza 23

[U]nequal relations of colonial rule are reinscribed in the contemporary

imbalances between ‗first‘ and ‗third‘ world nations. The new global

order does not depend upon direct rule. However, it does allow the

economic, cultural and…political penetration of some countries by

others. This makes it debatable whether once-colonised countries can

be properly seen as properly ‗postcolonial‘. (7)

This multifaceted definition of postcolonialism by Loomba is useful in

consideration of the different and disputed opinions, which often avoid any single-

sentence definitions about what is meant by postcolonialism. As a matter of fact, many

critics (Gandhi viii; Loomba xi) point out that the heterogeneity of the concept is in

many ways responsible for its ―diffused and nebulous‖ nature, which contributes to the

difficulty of providing its coherent description.

Perhaps it would be pertinent to discuss postcolonial studies in reference to the

analysis of the cultural and political factors that are the consequence of imperialism

and various colonial practices. Thus postcolonial studies is an interdisciplinary field

which offers tools for criticism on a wide range of fields such as anthropology,

sociology, political science, history, cultural studies, and literature. In addition,

postcolonial studies have been strongly influenced by other theoretical fields such as

poststructuralism, feminism, and Marxism. According to Williams and Chrisman,

Marxist thinking on postcolonialism contributed most profoundly to the ―distinctions

between colonialism and imperialism, which is now best understood as the

globalisation of the capitalist mode of production, its penetration of the previously

non-capitalist regions of the world, and destruction of pre- or non-capitalist forms of

social organisation‖ (2). Hence, Marxists were responsible for the expansion that took

place in the field of postcolonial studies that started to consider the West‘s economic,
 Raza 24

political and military influence over the rest of the world, which is basically the

situation that was discussed above under the term ‗neo-colonialism‘.

Postcolonial literary theory provides a very relevant example of the versatility

of postcolonial studies. It shows how multifaceted a field it is, since various academic

fields have been influenced by it and new critical ways of thinking have sprung from

it, postcolonial literary theory as one of them. Prior to the emergence of postcolonial

literary theory, there was a rising tendency of literary activity in the once-colonised

countries. One approach to the emergence of the study of literature produced in the

British Empire is offered by Mcleod (10-11). He points out the emergence of what was

in the 1950s known as ‗commonwealth literature‘ as the ancestor of British

postcolonial literature, and it was used to describe the literatures produced in English

in the former British colonies or in the countries where formal decolonisation was still

in progress. It is important to note that according to this definition, ‗Commonwealth

literature‘, as its name suggests, was limited to referring only to those nations, which

belonged to the British Commonwealth of Nations. This meant that, as Mcleod states:

―neither American nor Irish literature was included in early formulations of the field.

‗Commonwealth literature‘, then, was associated exclusively with selected countries

with a history of colonialism‖ (11).

The early productions of Commonwealth literature were mostly concerned

with shaping the interpretations of national and cultural identity of those living in

postcolonial societies. However, Commonwealth literature is said to have dealt with

rather universal themes concerning ―the same occupations with the human condition

as did Jane Austen and George Eliot,‖ (Mcleod 15) resembling liberal humanist

approaches. Respectively, the early study of Commonwealth literature, i.e.

Commonwealth literary criticism, according to Bertens, mainly focuses on character

 Raza 25

development and mostly ignores the historical and cultural context within which they

are placed by their creators‖ (156-159). A transformation with regard to this critical

approach took place because of the influence of the expanding field of postcolonial

studies and colonial discourse analysis. Critics such as Frantz Fanon, Edward Said,

Ngugi wa Thiong‘o, Homi Bhaba, and Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak are generally

viewed as key figures in the emergence of postcolonial criticism. The publication of

their works mainly took place during the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s, with the exception

of the publication of Fanon‘s The Wretched of the Earth in 1961.

Edward Said was one of the most influential postcolonial theorists and critics.

He shed light upon the dichotomy of the world into two unequal halves, the West and

the East, or the Occident and the Orient, when he in his Orientalism (1978) made

visible how the West‘s domination over the East is based on certain discursive

practices which allow the West to express the racially and culturally defined ―truths‖

concerning the East. Whereas professional Orientalists included scholars from

different disciplines including languages, history, and philology (the study of literary

texts and the determination of their meaning), Said discusses Orientalism as the

corporate institution for dealing with the Orient, ―dealing with it by making statements

about it, authorizing views of it, describing it, by teaching it, settling it, ruling over it:

in short, Orientalism as a Western style for dominating, restructuring, and having

authority over the Orient‖ (3).

The significance of Orientalism is that as a mode of knowing the ‗Other‘ it was

a supreme example of the construction of the other, a form of authority. The Orient is

not an inert fact of nature, but a phenomenon constructed by generations of

intellectuals, artists, commentators, writers, politicians, and, more importantly,

constructed by naturalizing a wide range of Orientalist assumptions and stereotypes.

 Raza 26

The relationship between the Occident and the Orient is a relationship of power, of

domination, of varying degrees of a complex hegemony. Consequently, Orientalist

discourse, for Said, is more valuable as a sign of the power exerted by the West over

the Orient than a ‗true‘ discourse about the Orient (Ashcroft et al. Key Concepts, 168).

Along Said‘s insight began a new chapter in colonial and postcolonial thinking,

and as Loomba states, ―Orientalism uses the concept of discourse to re-order the study

of colonialism. It examines how the formal study of the ‗Orient‘… along with key

literary and cultural texts, consolidated certain ways of seeing and thinking which in

turn contributed to the functioning of colonial power (43)‖. Thus, Said‘s Orientalism

analyses Western modes of representation and perceptions about the Orient and also

how discursive practices are used to maintain and reinforce the West‘s power over the

East. At the same time that the West creates an illusion of the ‗exotic‘, ‗uncivilised‘,

‗wild‘, and ‗peculiar‘ Orient, the West simultaneously, through Orientalist discourse,

reconstructs its own image as the fountain of knowledge and culture, the polar

opposite of the East. Thus we see that Said‘s most noted argument presented in

Orientalism, which describes the imbalanced nature of global state of affairs, points

out that the Orient, its nature, culture, customs, people and ways of life, is very much a

creation of the Occident. In other words, the West‘s power and influence over the rest

of the world allows it to produce (Western) knowledge about the East, which is neatly

cut out for justifying and legitimising Western domination. Although Said‘s work

concentrates on the Middle East, his thinking is, however, adapted and applied far

beyond the scope of that part of the world.

As I have discussed above, political societies and the experiences of various

colonised peoples differ from one another depending on the needs and agendas of the

colonising power. For the purposes of this thesis, I will now take a closer look at the
 Raza 27

characteristics of the white settler nations. Some critics, McClintock being one of

them, although referring to the white settler nations as ―break-away settler colonies‖,

also include the United States (295-296). As Ashcroft et al. point out, ―[t]he

development of national literatures and criticism is fundamental to the whole

enterprise of post-colonial studies‖ (The Empire 16), and since the writers of The

Empire Writes Back acknowledge that ―the American experience and its attempt to

produce a new kind of literature can be seen to be the model for all later post-colonial

writing‖ (The Empire 16), it is worth elaborating on the different aspects of the

postcolonial in the American context.

History tells us that the colonies of the United States, Canada, Australia, New

Zealand, and South Africa were established as settlements to which people of British

descent were sent basically to acquire more living space for the Empire. Those white

settler societies differ from those which were established in order to extract riches and

which were mostly situated in tropical regions. The latter ones always involve taking

over the lands and goods of the people who were already there, which inevitably

involves ethical and moral problems. The settlements, on the other hand, were

supposedly established on ―untouched soil‖, which, however, quickly turned out not to

be the case. According to Young, settlers found themselves in an ambivalent situation

where there was confusion about whether they themselves were colonisers or

colonised, or both at the same time. Young notes that, as the history of the United

States shows, it is a common trait of settler nations first to be placed in the position of

the colonised but then quickly to become colonisers themselves (19-20). Settlers from

Great Britain were one of the largest groups of Europeans to settle in America. This

British population was under the rule and influence of the mother country, but fought

for their freedom and were ever since engaged in a quest for national self-
 Raza 28

consciousness and self-assertion. Simultaneously, the settlers became the oppressors

of the indigenous peoples of the land and, as Young observes, instead of seeking for a

form of co-existence with the natives or rule them, which would have resulted in

mixed or creole societies, the settlers tried to exterminate the original inhabitants (20).

Moreover, the settlers faced a need for slaves or indentured labour to cultivate the

lands, and since the indigenous people were both insufficient and unsuitable, the

problem was solved by importing people mostly from West Africa since the 1650s,

around the time when plantation slavery is said to have emerged (Jarrett 26). These

black Africans became yet another colonised group on the American soil and were

―allowed almost no rights, whose forms of social and political organisation were

removed, and who were therefore comparatively easy to control and to keep separate‖

(Young 20).

Much attention in the field of postcolonial studies has been devoted to the

legacy of British imperialism, and some critics, including Alabi, even disapprove of

the generally held view of post-colonial literature ―as an attempt to grapple with the

literatures of societies previously colonised by Britain … excluding the United States‖

(37). Along the same lines follows King when he argues that ―[un]fortunately,

postcolonial studies has rapidly established a fairly stable canon, one anchored within

select thinkers and texts, devoted to Europe and its former colonies, delimited by

decolonisation, and overly committed to literary and historical perspectives‖ (3).

However, since the end of the 1990s and the beginning of the 21st century, several

studies on U.S. imperialism have been carried out and done so mainly by scholars of

American Studies. One such study by John Carlos Rowe focuses on American cultural

narratives, which demonstrate the role of cultural works both in the development and

critique of U.S. imperial practices outside the borders of the nation and of internal
 Raza 29

colonisation, among which Rowe includes, for instance, ―slavery, criminalization, and

racism as modes of colonizing African Americans‖ (5).

Although reading and analysing American cultural works within the

framework of postcolonial theory represents a rather modern approach within the field,

Richard C. King notes that:

[p]opular readings of American history have suggested that formative

features of the American character and of the United States as a unique

nation-state derive from the colonies‘ struggle for independence from

Great Britain and the subsequent establishment of a sovereign republic.

Numerous myths and monuments attest to the significance of

decolonisation and postcoloniality to American identities and

institutions. (4)

Having discussed postcolonialism in the American context, King arrives at a threefold

interpretation of postcolonial America in which he applies postcolonial theory to draw

attention to the peculiarities of American culture, locates postcolonial practices and

norms within the United States and elaborates how, for example, imbalanced relations

inherent to postcolonialism have influenced American identities and institutions.

These relations are especially significant with regard to Native Americans and the

African-American slaves.

Since the focus of this thesis is to study the literature produced by one of the

minority groups internally colonised by the white population of the United States, the

African-Americans, it is worth pointing out that already Ashcroft et al. note that the

‗Black writing‘ models differ from one another depending on the surrounding culture.

They state that there are ―very great cultural differences between literatures which are
 Raza 30

produced by a black minority in a rich and powerful white country and those produced

by the Black majority population of an independent nation‖ (The Empire 21).

Basically Ashcroft et al. exclude African-American writing from other

postcolonial black writing based on different kinds of experience. This is what

Gruesser readily criticises as he states that ―people of African descent, whose presence

in the English colonies of North America dates at least as far back as 1619, were

certainly colonized and, in the process, spatially, linguistically, and culturally

dislocated‖ (10). Gruesser‘s study makes clear the connection between

postcolonialism and African-American literary studies through overlapping and

intersecting key elements in both fields. Gruesser notes that the history and birth of

black presence in the United States should not be regarded as insignificant to the

formation of a national identity and culture, since it certainly involves issues such as

internal colonisation, domination, oppression, displacement, enslavement,

marginalisation, and colonial resistance. Such a scenario allows for an

interdisciplinary reading of African-American studies and postcolonial theory, both of

which have already been identified as interdisciplinary fields. Therefore, it intends,

according to Gruesser ―to highlight the movement of ideas and influences through

space and over time, a process comparable to the joining of two or more streams to

form a powerful current‖ (5). The effort to combine similar elements and areas of

concern in, and also to bring down some boundaries between the two fields is, in the

light of what was discussed above, beneficial for a deeper understanding of how the

relevant issues can be discussed and analysed. Thus, it is my intention in the following

subchapter to discuss how postcolonial counter-discourse has functioned as a form of

anti-colonial resistance struggle in the African-American slave narrative tradition.

 Raza 31

2.2. Counter-Discourse and the African-American Slave Narrative Tradition

In this section, I will first of all explain as to what is meant by the concept of

counter-discourse in general terms and in a broader perspective. Subsequently, I will

further explore how the concept of counter-discourse is connected to postcolonial

studies, which will be dealt with in a discussion on postcolonial counter-discourse as a

form of anti-colonial resistance. The latter part of the chapter is dedicated to a

discussion on African-American studies, and in particular to the slave narrative

tradition, which was partly developed for the purposes of anti-colonial resistance

among the oppressed and colonised group of African-American slaves.

In very general terms, counter-discourse can be defined as a challenging or

contesting discourse to an often politically truth-claim. Richard Terdiman‘s study

Discourse/Counter-Discourse: The Theory and Practice of Symbolic Resistance in

Nineteenth-Century France of the ―techniques and practices by which nineteenth-

century intellectuals and artists contested the dominant habits of mind and expression

of their contemporaries‖ (12) sheds more light on the concept of counter-discourse.

Terdiman defines counter-discourse in relation to a dominant discourse by simply

referring to it as a passion ―to displace and annihilate a dominant depiction of the

world‖. He continues by discussing ―[t]he power of discourses – of a culture‘s

determined and determining structures of representation and practice‖. Although

Terdiman‘s analysis of discursive and counter-discursive practices in the context of

nineteenth-century France is not much relevant to the postcolonial context, yet it has

proved useful for post-colonial discourse theory. Slemon notes that ―a discourse like

post-colonialism, which runs ‗counter‘ to the established canon …can very readily

appropriate from Terdiman the idea that the sign obtains its meaning in conflict and
 Raza 32

contradiction and apply it to post-colonial texts and societies‖ (Slemon qtd in Ashcroft

et al. The Empire 167). Terdiman‘s analysis also proves the validity and utility of

counter-discourse as a resistance and challenge to all hegemonic representations and

dominant master discourses. Likewise, Bamberg and Andrews study the workings of

counter-narratives in very broad cultural contexts in relation to cultural master

narratives (1-19). They illustrate how the idea of a counter-narrative or counter-

discourse can be extended to refer to fairly general acts of resistance against a

dominant cultural narrative or modes of culturally formed themes, which for some

reason or the other, do not seem to fit with one‘s experiences within the culture. As an

example they discuss the myth of mothering as one of the most powerful and

pertaining master narratives in the African-American culture. Thus, counter-narratives

are always created or acted out in relation to the master narratives, and Bamberg and

Andrews explain further the dynamics of counter-narratives by asking ―[h]ow can we

make sense of ourselves, and our lives, if the shape of our life story looks deviant

compared to the regular lines of dominant stories? The challenge then becomes one of

finding meaning out of the emplotments, which are ordinarily available. We become

aware of new possibilities‖ (11). Master narratives and their counter-discourse

ultimately become important factors when individuals identify themselves as either

members of an ―in-group‖ or an ―out-group‖, whether their life experiences displace

them in the margins or in the centre of society. Counter-discourse thus stands for

defining an individual, his personality, and his position in relation to others. Naturally,

this does not apply only to the level of the individual. National and communal

resistance struggles against dominant master narratives can become defining and

characterising traits of entire communities and nations.

 Raza 33

Before discussing counter-discourse in relation to postcolonial resistance, it is

relevant to refer once more to Said‘s Orientalism. The foundation of Said‘s argument

of the Western supremacy over the Eastern part of the world rests fundamentally upon

the notion of representation. Orientalism manifests itself in a manner an imperial

power, the coloniser, uses the counter-discourse in its representation of the colonised,

its racial ‗Other‘. The representation in the form of colonial discourse acts as the

medium through which the marginalised, silenced, and oppressed voices of the

colonised subjects are mastered by the dominant discourse. In order to emphasise the

central role of textuality in maintaining colonial authority and discourse, it is worth

noting that some critics, such as Gandhi, claim that ―[t]exts, more than any other social

and political product, it is argued, are the most significant instigators and purveyors of

colonial power … [and therefore] it follows that the textual offensiveness of colonial

authority was met and challenged, on its own terms, by a radical and dissenting anti-

colonial counter-textuality‖ (142).

Resistance against colonial authority and colonialist representations has

throughout history taken several forms, ranging from violent rebellions to various

national movements, especially among black societies around the world. One form of

opposition is resistance against the dominant discourse of a hegemonic culture.

Societies with a colonial past have throughout the history of imperialism suffered from

cultural and literary marginalisation, which means that the literary productions of the

writers from the colonised countries have been treated as marginal, ‗on the periphery‘,

in relation to Western canonical literature. Studying and teaching canonical literature

in the colonised countries can be regarded as a strategy to impose and maintain

cultural and moral values of the superior Western powers, while at the same time it

diminishes the value of indigenous cultural productions.

 Raza 34

As one response to the marginalisation and devaluation of literatures of ‗the

periphery‘, postcolonial writers adopted strategies which Mcleod addresses as

contrapuntal re-reading and re-writing classic texts (145-147). Essentially,

contrapuntal approaches to literary texts mean the adoption of new ways to interpret

canonical texts by revealing and unravelling colonial discourse, of which the purpose

is to reinforce and implement imperialist values and moral codes. ―The term suggests a

responsive reading that provides a counterpoint to the text, thus enabling the

emergence of colonial implications that might otherwise remain hidden‖ (Ashcroft et

al. Key Concepts 55-56). Different critics use different concepts in their references to

instances of colonial resistance, but ‗anti-colonial resistance‘, ‗counter-textuality‘,

‗contrapuntal‘ and ‗counter-hegemonic‘ approaches and postcolonial ‗counter-

discourse‘ all, in essence, amount to what Loomba refers to as struggles ―to create new

and powerful identities for colonised peoples and to challenge colonialism not only at

a political or intellectual level, but also on an emotional plane‖ (185).

In addition to Loomba‘s notion on postcolonial counter-discourse, Helen Tiffin

argues that processes of decolonisation in the shape of textual dismantling of Western

and hegemonic discourse are necessarily ‗hybridised‘ in nature (95). Here Tiffin

means that since no pre-colonial condition is recoverable, the formation of national

and regional identities in postcolonial societies must be understood as ―a dialectical

relationship between European ontology and epistemology and the impulse to create

or recreate independent local identity‖ (95). Thus, counter-discursive texts cannot

simply replace Western canonical discourse, since it is impossible to escape its

influence and legacy, which will always be inextricably present there. The task then is

to discover the underlying assumptions of colonial discourse, expose its operations in

 Raza 35

maintaining cultural hegemony and bring these assumptions down by revealing

inherent cultural and racial structures.

Tiffin also argues that basically all postcolonial writing is engaged in counter-

discursive strategies, since ―it has been the project of post-colonial writing to

interrogate European discourses and discursive strategies from a privileged position …

to investigate the means by which Europe imposed and maintained its codes in the

colonial domination of so much of the rest of the world‖ (95). According to Tiffin,

counter-discursiveness, i.e. ―subversive manoeuvres‖, is characteristic of postcolonial

texts, and she identifies two types of counter-discourse: one which re-reads and re-

writes canonical texts and one which responds to colonialism in general terms‖ (97).

Some fairly known examples of ―canonical counter-discourse‖ involve texts such as

Jean Rhys‘s Wide Sargasso Sea, which revisions Charlotte Bronte‘s Jane Eyre and

William Shakespeare‘s Othello, and V. S. Naipaul‘s A bend in the River responding to

Joseph Conrad‘s Heart of Darkness (Gruesser 24). Similar readings have also been

devoted to some early black autobiographies. Alibi, for instance, studies the slave

narratives of Oulaudah Equiano, Mary Prince, and Frederick Douglass as counter-

discourse to William Shakespeare‘s The Tempest (49). This thesis, however, offers an

interpretation of Douglass‘s counter-discourse, which regards it as a general response

to the discourse of colonialism.

As briefly discussed above, counter-discourse can be understood as a flexible

and far-reaching concept, which stretches far beyond the practises of rewriting English

classic texts from a specific postcolonial point of view. Counter-discourse contests,

challenges and speaks against the hegemonic representations realised by colonial

discourse. This is why the term ‗counter-discourse‘ is adapted here, since its purpose

is specifically to ‗counter‘ colonial discourse in order to give voice to the margins and
 Raza 36

to validate the existence of the colonised subjects. The example of slave narrative

tradition can be advanced in this respect as it developed particularly for this purpose—

to let the human voices of black slaves speak so that the appeals against inhuman

treatment of slaves could be heard.

Anti-colonial resistance struggles, which make use of counter-discourse as a

means to express their dissent are typically associated with the nationalist stirrings of

the twentieth century throughout the black colonised societies in the field of

postcolonial studies. Strivings towards cultural and national self-determination

expanded into national black resistance movements, which, as Boehmer states, took up

the task of ―[m]ixing, upturning, and dismantling negative representations …‖ in order

to ―turn the identities ascribed [to colonised Africans] into positive self-images (101)‖.

This is what the national liberation movement, the French Negritude, formulated by

the intellectual pioneers Aime Cesaire and Leopold Senghor, represented in its essence

in the 1930s; to unite the dislocated and scattered black peoples around the world by

celebrating their shared ancestry and common African origins. Negritude basically

emphasised and rejoiced African culture, lifestyle, art, languages and peoples while

contesting colonial discourse that repeatedly represented blackness as savage and

inferior. Basically Negritude responded to the discriminating tendency employed by

the white Western world, which had principally permanently polluted the word ‗black‘

with all its implications. Perhaps one of the most insightful remarks on this

phenomenon was uttered in 1960 by Frantz Fanon in his Black Skin, White Masks

when he discovered the fact of blackness being ―deafened by cannibalism,

backwardness, fetishism, racial stigmas, [and] slave traders‖ (92).

Apart from nationalist movements across colonised black societies, such as

Negritude in the 1930s, textual resistance to colonialism, colonialist discourse, racism

 Raza 37

and oppression constitutes a large volume of postcolonial writing, as was discussed

above. Likewise, internal colonisation, which was performed on U.S. blacks since the

beginning of the Atlantic slave trade, had a profound influence on the development of

the tradition of African-American autobiographical writing in the United States. It

could also be argued that resistance to colonialism and its by-products, such as racism

and representations of race, form a common topic for the writings of all black

communities in once colonised societies. In fact, Alabi argues that ―Black

autobiographies [from Africa, the Caribbean, and the United States] share major

continuities like the focus on community and resistance,‖ (1) and also that ―[a]s on the

African continent, in the African diaspora, autobiographies have been used as a form

of counter-discourse to the dominant discourses of slavery, racism, colonialism,

sexism, and classism‖ (2).

Before entering into a discussion on the peculiarities of the literary tradition of

African-American autobiographical writing, I will now give an overview of the critical

field of African-American studies, within the scope of which studies on African-

American literature is included. African-American or Black studies emerged in the 1960s,

when a lifelong tradition of black people dealing with social struggles such as

enslavement, abolition, emancipation, and several civil rights activities culminated in the

Civil Rights Movement. According to Andrews and Steward, the philosophical legacy

created by black abolitionists of the 18th and 19th centuries provided the social and

political foundations for African-American studies (13-14). In its essence, the field

critically examines the experiences, achievements, issues, and problems of black citizens

of the United States, taking into account their ancestral roots of African heritage and also

the interrelationship to and co-existence with the white population of the United States

and other racial-ethnic groups. ―African American studies are also concerned much more
 Raza 38

directly with the history and continuing effects of specific processes of race-based

discrimination within US society‖ (Ashcroft et al. Key Concepts 7). Andrews and

Steward emphasise the importance of considering the African heritage whenever studying

and analysing black people in America. In fact, they state that ―[a]ny academically

legitimate or valid study of Black people in America must include, to some extent, a

study of the customs, characteristics, traditions, languages, and mannerisms of the

peoples native to the continent of Africa,‖ (5) because those traits are visible in Black

Americans even today.

Although mostly referred to as African-American studies, other references

such as black Studies, African Diaspora Studies, Africans Studies, and Africology

(Asante and Karenga ix), point out the vast scope of the field and, depending on the

geographical focus, to an examination of people of African ancestry wherever they

may be located in the world. In addition, as Harris notes, ―[M]any of the themes of

Africana studies are derived from the historical position of African peoples in relation

to the Western societies and in the dynamics of slavery, oppression, colonisation,

imperialism, emancipation, self-determination, liberation, and socioeconomic and

political development‖ (150). The issues that Black Studies engage themselves with

correspond largely to the themes of African-American literature. As Bertens notes,

racial discrimination and self-definition are recurring themes in African-American

writings and ―that process of self-definition involves a critique of Western

representations of Africans and African-Americans, representations that usually repeat

the stereotypes that have for instance legitimised colonisation‖ (81-82).

It is an acknowledged fact that no experience of enslavement has been as fully

recorded as that of African Americans in the United States in the eighteenth and

nineteenth centuries. Despite the large numbers of first-person accounts of slavery in

 Raza 39

the United States, these resources were commonly dismissed as merely abolitionist

propaganda until the 2nd half of the twentieth century. Over the past sixty five years or

so, however, the slave narrative in its various manifestations has helped reshape our

understanding not just of slavery in the U.S. but of American culture and American

literature more broadly. At the same time these narratives are significant not only for

the picture they paint of African-American life and culture, but also of American life

and culture. They repeatedly emphasise the importance of the individual former slave

and their struggles against a system that would deny their individuality as a human—

man or woman.

When considering the early beginnings of black autobiographical writings in

the United States, Jarrett traces the beginning to the publication of spiritual

autobiographies in the mid-eighteenth century, which were closely connected to anti-

colonial resistance struggles. Jarrett claims that:

[w]hite as well as black spiritual autobiographies commonly contrasted

some form of physical captivity with spiritual freedom. Because

evangelicalism was often perceived as critical of, if not hostile to,

slavery, the longstanding belief that conversion to Christianity merited

emancipation from slavery frequently underlies the emphasis on

religion in the inspired black-authored religious narratives. (13)

The first slave narratives tended to be short and often focused more on the

writer‘s conversion to Christianity and acceptance of God‘s grace over the horrors

experienced in slavery. Although the earliest black-authored narratives addressed the

issue of slavery at some level, it is surprising that, according to Jarrett, some of the

authors fail to mention the transatlantic slave trade or ―slavery is treated from an

ameliorationist perspective‖ (16). However, Olaudah Equiano‘s The Interesting

 Raza 40

Narrative of the Life of Olaudah Equiano, or Gustavus Vassa, the African. Written by

Himself (1789), which became an international bestseller in the pre-1800 era, greatly

influenced the development of the slave narrative tradition, because it ―offered the first

account from the victim‘s point of view of slavery in Africa, the West Indies, North

America, and Britain, as well as of the Middle Passage‖ (Jarrett 18). Jarrett notes that

―[e]xplicitly an attack on the transatlantic slave trade, The Interesting Narrative is also

implicitly an assault on slavery. Equiano constructs his argument so as to compel his

readers to conclude that slavery must be ended‖ (17). In addition, Equiano‘s narrative

is exceptional in the sense that it offered a counter-discursive stance toward the

dominant discourse of slavery which, according to Jarrett, before the 19th century was

a commonly accepted institution with a long history as a part of the social and

economic hierarchy (13). Thus, Equiano led the way of the slave narrative tradition

towards its later focus of interest in contesting the generally accepted discourse of

slavery.

Over the course of the first decades of the nineteenth century, numerous former

slaves produced published accounts of their lives, sometimes through the help of a

white amanuensis, but frequently on their own. As anti-slavery sentiment began to

become both more widespread and more radical in the 1830s, black and white activists

began to look for more first-hand accounts of slavery‘s cruelties. Accounts written by

the former slaves themselves served an important second purpose, that of providing

evidence of the intellectual capacity of African Americans and thus countering claims

of their mental inferiority. These dual purposes came together most forcefully,

famously, and influentially in Frederick Douglass‘s The Narrative of the Life of

Frederick Douglass, An American Slave, Written by Himself (1845).

 Raza 41

During the development of African-American literary tradition in the 19th

century, the slave‘s quest for freedom and the abolition of slavery became defining

characteristics of slave narrative writing. In fact, Andrews states, ―the import of the

autobiographies of black people during the first century of the genre‘s existence in the

United States is that they ‗tell a free story‘ as well as talk about freedom as a theme

and goal of life‖ (xi). Likewise, Stepto claims that the ―primary pre-generic myth for

Afro-America is the quest for freedom and literacy‖ (ix). Spirituality inherent in the

earliest slave autobiographies is closely linked to the slave narrative‘s quest for

freedom, as Andrews explains: ―Before the fugitive slave narrator could have success

in restoring political and economic freedom to Afro-Americans, the black spiritual

autobiographer had to lay the necessary intellectual groundwork by providing that

black people were as much chosen by God for eternal salvation as whites‖ (7).

Andrews continues that had the black spiritual autobiography not claimed the spiritual

rights of African-Americans, the influence of the fugitive slave narrative in the

struggle for black civil rights around the 1950s would not have been as successful as it

eventually tuned out to be.

The act of writing one‘s own autobiography developed into a symbolic

representation of the quest for freedom for the black slave. The reason why literacy

and learning to read are such important images in basically all slave narratives, is that

besides it being forbidden, literacy, for the enslaved black person, meant an upliftment

from ignorance to wisdom, and a pathway from slavery to freedom, since ―literacy was

to be found the sole sign of difference that separated chattel property from human

being‖ (Gates 165). In addition, the mastery of letters enabled the black slave to justify

his existence and prove his value as a human being in the white dominated society.

Thus, self-definition and self-representation in the form of writing became immensely

 Raza 42

important and recurring themes in early African-American literary tradition.

According to Gates, for blacks, the act of writing itself functioned as a signifier against

the common representation of the blacks ―as the lowest of the human races or as first

cousin to the ape‖ (167). Writing in the beginning of the 19th century was regarded as

a sign of difference between animals and humans and, as Gates states, the publication

of black autobiographies ―constituted a motivated, and political, engagement with and

condemnation of Europe‘s fundamental figure of domination‖ (167).

During the first century of African-American slave narrative writing, from

around 1760 to 1865, the primary aims of the genre were to prove to the often

suspicious, racist, and even hostile white audience that the slave was an equal peer to

the white readers of the slave narratives, and secondly, that the black writer was a

reliable truth-teller of the experiences of black people and of the peculiarities of the

institution of slavery. Thus, self-affirmation and authenticity became defining

characteristics, which directed the formation of the genre for a long period of time.

Many black narrators realised that they would have to develop specific literary

strategies in order to convince the white readers of his or her sincerity, credibility, and

moral and intellectual equality. One such strategy involved the inclusion of

introductory comments by a white amanuensis on the integrity of the black narrator

and on the truthfulness of the author‘s status as a slave (Jarrett 15). In other cases the

actual writer of the slave‘s tale was not necessarily the real author of the narrative, but

again a white amanuensis, who ―transcribed and edited the author’s oral account, and

published it as an as-told-to tale‖ (Jarrett 11; emphasis in original). The first recorded

slave narrative to introduce the enclosing comments of a white amanuensis, was the

narrative of James Albert Ukawsaw Gronniosaw (1772) (Jarrett 14). According to

Jarrett, the slightly differing agendas of the white writer may help explain why some
 Raza 43

of the earliest slave narratives were curiously reticent about the transatlantic slave

trade and about the institution of slavery itself (11).

For the first century of African-American slave narrative writing the records of

the experiences of slaves and their eyewitness accounts of slavery were mostly

constructed by simply listing the events of the slave‘s life in a what-where-when

manner in order to satisfy the curiosity of the white audience about the institution of

slavery and of the soul of the black slave. According to Andrews, black

autobiographies such as A Narrative of the Most Important Particulars of in the Life of

James Albert Ukawsaw Gronniosaw, An African Prince (1772) and the Narrative of

the life and Adventures of the Lord’s Wonderful Dealings with John Marrant, A Black

(1785) are representative of the early forms of slave narrative writing (33). It was

assumed that ―the black first-person narrator was a shallow intellectual vessel whose

capacity would be strained by more than the oral narration of simple facts about life,‖

and that the slave‘s narration always needed to be completed by the white reader‘s

ability to create meaning on the basis of the mere facts (Andrews 33).

However, a notable change in the literary pursuits of black autobiography

occurred in the 1840s and the 1850s along with the publication of the prominent

fugitive slave narratives of Henry Watson, Lewis and Milton Clarke, William Wells

Brown, Josiah Henson, and Frederick Douglass (Andrews 97). The narratives of these

fugitive slaves expressed, in a manner never before seen in earlier slave narratives,

―individual authorial personality‖ and ―a distinctive authorising voice‖ (Andrews 98-

99). Authors like Douglass and Brown no longer assumed mere second-hand roles in

the formulation of their life stories, but announced individualism and self-sufficiency

in a manner that fitted quite well in the transcendentalist atmosphere of pronounced

individualism. As a matter of fact, according to Andrews, the transcendentalist

 Raza 44

activists, including Theodore Parker and Margaret Fuller, ―embraced and celebrated

the fugitive slave as a kind of culture-hero who exemplified the American romance of

the unconquerable ‗individual mind,‘ steadily advancing toward freedom and

independence‖ (98). The reasons behind the development and the transformation of

the slave narrative tradition are not obvious, but Jarrett suggests that African-

American writers gained increasing political, economic and artistic support from the

anti-slavery circles because of a growing conflict on the issue of slavery throughout

the United States (103). Moreover, as Jarrett states, besides the support of the anti-

slavery movement, advances in literacy, print technology, and distribution made it

easier for the black narrators to publish their stories. Another important factor

contributing to the steady development of the tradition involved an increased literary

and ideological activity between the African-American writers and white authors of

the 1850s (104).

Not only were the slave narratives such as Douglass‘s Narrative of the Life of

Frederick Douglass, an American Slave (1845) ideologically appealing to white

Americans, the transforming genre of the slave narrative gained acknowledgment and

attention also due to its developed rhetorical and narrative skills. Douglass‘s Narrative

helped to consolidate the slave narrative as a form, bringing together some of the key

thematic and structural elements of earlier narratives into a more unified form, and it

thus often serves as representative of the form as a whole. Andrews suggests that the

reason for the development was based on the fugitive slaves‘ active participation in the

abolitionist lecture circuit (99). Frederick Douglass, for example, gave public anti-

slavery speeches and lectures for four years under the guidance of the leader of the

American Anti-Slavery Society, William Lloyd Garrison, before the publication of the

Narrative (Andrews 100). The experience gave Douglass the opportunity to refine his
 Raza 45

ways of self-representation, modes of address, uses of idiomatic language and

expressive style which would be most appealing to white audience for the cause of

abolition. However, despite the success and support of Douglass‘s narratives and

character, even the most skilled slave narrators had to face the American reality of

racism and scepticism, because, according to Andrews, none of them might ever have

been able to share their stories in such a grand scale without the ―moral rationale‖ and

―international audience‖ provided by the white anti-slavery movement (99). According

to Martin ―[the] ostensible concern [of Douglass‘s abolitionist mentors] was that if he

continued to do more than narrate and denounce the evil of slavery, his authenticity, as

a former-slave-turned-abolitionist would be undermined and eventually destroyed‖

(23). The prevailing race prejudice even among the abolitionist circles eventually led

to a break between Douglass and the Garrisonians. In fact, as Martin notes, one of the

most troubling dilemmas of black intellectuals of the 19th century like Douglass was

―how to square America‘s rhetoric of freedom, equality, and justice with the reality of

slavery, inequality, and injustice‖ (x).

 Raza 46

CHAPTER THREE

DEHUMANISATION OF AFRICAN-AMERICAN SLAVES AND

DESCRIPTION OF PHYSICAL VIOLENCE

3.1. Douglass’s Representation of the Life of the Slaves

This research will analyse Douglass‘s Narrative in two chapters. The first

chapter carries out the analysis of the representation of the everyday life of the slaves

living on the same plantation with Frederick Douglass. This chapter is further divided

into two subchapters; the first will dilate upon the dehumanising treatment of the

slaves, whereas the second will focus on the descriptions of physical violence on the

plantation. According to the primary argument of this thesis, Douglass‘s depiction of

the inhuman treatment of slaves, the dehumanised status of African-Americans in a

white dominated society, and physical violence towards the African-American slaves

function as counter-discourse in Douglass‘s anti-slavery efforts and in his struggle

against black oppression in 19th-century America. Therefore these issues in Douglass‘s

Narrative are considered as of primary importance for the purposes of this thesis.

In his general observations about the conditions, rules, routines and incidents

that were the main ingredients of Douglass‘s childhood experiences on the plantation,

roughly from 1824 to 1836, Douglass succeeds in relating his thoughts in a way which

would arouse the sympathies of the contemporary white readers and raise troubling

questions about the morality and integrity of the slave system. The plain truths which

are told about the downgraded condition of the African-American slaves in addition to

the intimate reactions of young Douglass to the cruelties that he must witness and by

Douglass‘s deep understanding of the order of the slave system provide strong
 Raza 47

arguments against slavery and the oppression of African-Americans in 19th-century

America.

3.2. Humanising and Dehumanising the African-American Slaves

This chapter discusses the ways in which Douglass describes his experiences in

slavery both as an eyewitness and a victim of the cruelties that the slaves were exposed

to on the plantation of Colonel Lloyd. The experiences which Douglass narrates, deal

with the issues of family and the slaves‘ origin, and the everyday living conditions of

the slaves. These issues signify those things in slaves‘ lives which they were

repeatedly deprived of or which helped establish the slaves‘ inferior status in white

dominated society. Douglass‘s experience of these issues demonstrates that the system

of slavery operated in such a manner so as to deprive the slaves of their humanity and

to reduce them to mere commodities. I mentioned in the chapter on theory that

postcolonial studies carries out a forceful critique of the impact of hegemonic rule of

the white race on the culture, politics, morals, and values of the victims of colonialism.

Similarly, Douglass also remarks on the highhandedness of the white race in their

relationship with the African-American slaves. Douglass also emphasises the

humanity of the slaves, such as motherly affection and their extreme suffering, in order

to resist white domination.

Frederick Douglass acts as both the protagonist as well as the narrator of his

Narrative. Roughly one third of Douglass‘s African-American slave narrative is

dedicated to the account of Douglass‘s early childhood experiences in slavery and to a

comprehensive description of his awakened curiosity towards learning to read and write

with the consequence of becoming aware of the injustices of the slave system. The
 Raza 48

Narrative begins with Douglass‘s conjecture about the date of his birth, or more

precisely, about the lack of its certainty. Thus, at the very outset, Douglass indirectly

introduces the theme of keeping the slaves wilfully ignorant by the white slaveholders. In

other words, a minor yet important detail about the lack of knowledge of a slave‘s own

identity is introduced to the reader at the very beginning which constitutes one of the

many deprivations concerning slaves. Beginning to read Douglass‘s narrative, we are

introduced to Frederick Douglass (1818-1895) and are informed of his background. We

learn that he was the son of an African-American woman named Harriet Bailey and a

white man, a slaveholder who he never knew. He was an African American born into a

life of bondage, who did not know how to read or write. Reading more into the narrative

and gaining more information on Douglass, we come across his personal feelings and

thoughts. As Douglass goes into detail in his narrative, we are able to see how he feels

toward the fact of being an African American and begins to compare himself to white

children. The very fact of not having any accurate knowledge of his age accentuates his

realisation of discrimination since he had never seen any authentic record containing his

date of birth (23). It was as if their white masters considered the African-American slaves

no better than chattel and ―it is the wish of most masters within my knowledge to keep

their slaves thus ignorant‖ (23). In my discussion on slavery in the theory portion, I

mentioned that the post-Renaissance development of an intense ideology of racism

produced a peculiarly destructive modern form of commercial, chattel slavery in Europe

and the Americas in which all rights and all human values were set aside, and from which

only a few could ever hope to achieve full legal freedom. Keeping slaves ignorant of their

origins was part of the white man‘s hegemonic hold over these unfortunate dependants,

which Douglass also corroborates in his Narrative. He informs us that he did not

remember to have ever met a slave who could tell of his birthday. He bemoans the fact
 Raza 49

that ―a want of information concerning [his] own was a source of unhappiness to [him]

even during childhood‖. He also felt ill at ease over the white children‘s ability to tell

their ages and regretted being deprived of the same privilege as a black slave, and also for

not being ―allowed to make any inquiries of my master concerning it‖ (23).

After reading Douglass‘s words, we are able to get a sense of how he feels.

First, the tone of the passage seems pessimistic. Douglass sounds heartbroken and in a

state of confusion. He starts off by contrasting African Americans to white

individuals. We get a clear understanding of how he sees and thinks of himself and

other African American slaves in contrast to white individuals. Second, with such a

comparison we are able to see how confused he is with the fact of African Americans

not being granted the same privileges as whites, and his desire to seek the answer to

such questions. He questions himself as to why his rights and civil liberties are taken

away and why his slaveholder treats him differently from white children, especially

when they are all human. Douglass informs us that it was highly uncommon for a

slave to have the exact knowledge of his or her date of birth, or even the identity of

one‘s father: ―My father was a white man. He was admitted to be such by all I ever

heard speak of my parentage. The opinion was also whispered that my master was my

father; but of the correctness of this opinion, I know nothing; the means of knowing

was withheld from me‖ (24).

The question of identity is an essential theme of all autobiographical texts,

since the narratives tend to focus on the individual itself. Similarly, the speculation

about identity is a common feature of the slave narrative tradition. This feature holds

common ground with the earlier argument of the postcolonial theory which presents

the struggle for freedom on the part of the subjugated people, whether as individuals

or as groups, as an effort at establishing and authenticating their own cultural or racial

 Raza 50

identity. It may however, be borne in mind that the lack of knowledge concerning the

biological origin or kinship of the slaves is not surprising, if one carefully considers

the functioning of the system of slavery. It was a usual practice in many slave

communities to separate slave children from their mothers in order to break all family

ties. The same treatment was meted out to Douglass as well. Casting a critical glance

at Douglass‘s Narrative, we come to know that one of the major themes in Douglass‘s

Narrative is to reveal how slavery destroys families, and Douglass accomplishes this

by announcing that he never knew his father and barely knew his mother. In addition,

Douglass‘s reasoning behind the general course of action executed by the white

slaveholders both questions their moral integrity and also emphasises the importance

of family ties to the slaves. He makes a mention in his Narrative of the general

practice whereby a child was separated from his mother before it reached the age of

one year and was ―hired out on some farm a considerable distance off‖ (24), where he

was placed under the care of an old woman who had become incapable of performing

field work any longer. Douglass is at a loss to comprehend the logic behind this

separation but speculates that it was perhaps done to ―hinder the development of the

child‘s affection toward its mother, and to blunt and destroy the natural affection of

the mother for the child,‖ (24) which he concludes to be the inevitable result. Douglass

further reinforces the same notion in Life and Times in the following manner:

The practice of separating mothers from their children and hiring them

out at distances too great to admit of their meeting, save at long

intervals, was a marked feature of the cruelty and barbarity of the slave

system; but it was in harmony with the grand aim of that system, which

always and everywhere sought to reduce man to a level with the brute.
 Raza 51

It had no interest in recognising or preserving any of the ties that bind

families together or to their homes. (12)

In other words, Douglass condemns the way in which slaveholders had the right and

the power to break up families and deprive children of their mothers. He is critical of

the callousness of the slaveholders whereby they were bereft of all human feelings and

tenderness of heart towards the slaves. Inevitably, revelations such as these would

raise the sympathies of many, especially those of Christian readers, for whom the idea

of family would be both intimate as well as sacred.

At the same time that Douglass discusses the general uncertainty of parentage

and the implied deprivation of and longing for motherly affection, he follows it up

with a description of his mother. Douglass had only few early recollections of his

mother, which he presents in such a manner that they indicate reciprocal reverence and

affection between the two:

I never saw my mother, to know her as such, more than four or five

times in my life; and each of these times was very short in duration, and

at night … She made her journeys to see me in the night, travelling the

whole distance on foot, after the performance of her day‘s work … I do

not recollect of ever seeing my mother by the light of day. She was

with me in the night. She would lie down with me, and get me to sleep,

but long before I waked she was gone. (24-25)

The fact that Douglass‘s mother, Harriet Bailey, worked on another plantation,

which was located at a considerable distance (12 miles) from where Douglass himself

grew up, describes quite well the situation of the slave community. The short

descriptions of the efforts and sacrifices that were required of Douglass‘s mother to

see her child even occasionally, speaks on behalf of the slave woman‘s commitment to
 Raza 52

and affection for her offspring. In other words, Douglass stresses the meaning of the

connection between a mother and a child in his Narrative. In the same strain, Douglass

goes on to comment on another evil associated with the abominable practice of

separation, viz. the cooling off of filial sentiments as a consequence of prolonged

separation. Since he had hardly any prolonged interaction with his mother, there was

very little communication between them. Douglass‘s mother died when he was still a

child, so that it ―soon ended what little [association] we could have while she lived,

and with it her hardships and suffering‖ (25). As Douglass himself mentions that his

mother died when he was about seven years old, on one of his master‘s farms, near

Lee‘s Mill. He was not allowed to be present during her illness, at her death, or burial.

He was not even aware of her death till after quite a long time. He himself opines that

since he had never enjoyed the soothing presence or the tender and watchful care of

his mother to any considerable extent, he received the news of her death with much the

same feeling, as he should have probably felt at the death of a stranger (25).

The point that Douglass wants to make here is that the abominable customs

and practices of slavery cast a dark shadow upon both the victims as well as the

perpetrators; on the former by making numb their feelings of love and affection

towards their near and dear and on the latter by divesting them of any warm emotion

or tenderness towards their own fellow human beings, though of a darker complexion.

This very fact makes a strong case for his later abolitionist discourse on racial equality

and the elevation of the black people. From this perspective it is important to note how

Douglass writes about the relationship between slavery and fatherhood, consequently

referring to his own solution as well:

Called thus suddenly away, she left me without the slightest intimation

of who my father was. The whisper that my master was my father, may
 Raza 53

or may not be true; and, true or false, it is of but little consequence to

my purpose whilst the fact remains, in all its glaring odiousness, that

slaveholders have ordained, and by law established, that the children of

slave women shall in all cases follow the condition of their mothers;

and this is done too obviously to administer to their own lusts, and

make a gratification of their wicked desires profitable as well as

pleasurable; for by this cunning arrangement, the slaveholder, in cases

not a few, sustains to his slaves the double relation of master and father.

(25-26)

What Douglass is trying to bring home to the readers is the fact that the workings of

the ‗peculiar institution‘ are such that one type of wrong leads to the other with the

inevitable consequence of making the whole look all the more loathsome. Seeing the

above circumstance in the social backdrop makes it evident that by unlawfully, albeit

legally, declaring the offspring to be slaves just like their mothers, the slaveholders

indulge in legal, moral, and social misconduct and that too with total impunity.

Since Douglass indirectly hinted at the possibility of his father being his

master, he thereby indicated his being a mulatto child. Furthering his arguments

against the wrongs of slavery, Douglass says that the fate of the countless number of

mulatto children, who come into the world as a consequence of the unlawful

gratification of the lust of the white masters, is even worse than that of the African-

American slaves. In his view such slaves customarily suffer greater hardships, and

they have to endure more bitterness in life than others (26). He expresses his

compassion for the dire straits of these children, as he himself is one of them,

commenting that:
 Raza 54

The mulatto children are a cause of constant offence to their mistress

and she is always on the lookout to find fault with them. Even if they

try their best, they are looked down upon with contempt and never

seem to please their mistress in the least. Nothing satisfies her more

than the practice of whipping them, especially when she suspects her

husband of showing to his children favours which he withholds from

his black slaves. The inevitable result of all this is that in most of the

cases, the master is frequently compelled to sell this class of his slaves,

out of deference to the feelings of his white wife. (26)

Although Douglass considers the practice of selling one‘s own children to human

flesh-mongers as cruel, yet it is often condoned by the society at large because unless

the master does so, the only alternative left for him is to either whip them himself, or

watch one of his white sons tie up his mulatto brother and lash his naked back; and ―if

he lisps one word of disapproval, it is set down to his parental partiality, and only

makes a bad matter worse, both for himself and the slave whom he would protect and

defend‖ (26-27).

Relating these incidents of suffering of slave children provides strong

arguments against the slave system. In addition, Douglass uses emotional language

and concentrates on emphasising sentimental experiences such as motherly love,

childhood starvation and deprivation of origin. The emotional recollections of few

moments of affectionate motherly love that Douglass experienced are also in harmony

with the often used strategy of the abolitionists, who ―claimed the institution of the

family as its guiding ideal and the protection of the domestic wellbeing of black slaves

as one of its chief reasons for existence (Andrews 242). Thus, Douglass seeks to show

to the white readers the deeply humane feelings, emotions and desires of blacks. He
 Raza 55

demonstrates that black slaves, just as the white members of the slaveholding

community, experience love, hate, sorrow, and pain. Such highly intimate and humane

experiences of slavery were specially carved for the purpose of revealing the

depressing conditions that slaves had to endure in slavery. Employing such mannerism

was of paramount importance for the cause of abolition because in accordance with

what Douglass himself observed as well, the harsh reality of slavery was kept hidden

from outsiders and instead, an image of general wellbeing was readily displayed to the

public eye. It also follows, in line with the overriding concern of the Postcolonial

Theory, that by doing so, Douglass was employing the technique of textual resistance

against the dominant discourse of the white race. Further proof is provided by

Douglass in conclusion to his Narrative where he mentions that his chief purpose in

penning down his Narrative was to ―do something toward throwing light on the

American slave system, and hastening the glad day of deliverance to the millions of

my brethren in bonds‖ (162).

Douglass reports that it was a custom among slaves not to make any

complaints to outsiders of the slave community about their conditions or the conduct

of the master, for such remarks would most likely be met with heavy punishment.

During the course of the Narrative, Douglass recounts an incident wherein his master

Colonel Lloyd meets a slave travelling on the road. Lloyd, without revealing his

identity, asks the slave about his owner and how well he is treated. The slave responds

that his owner is Colonel Lloyd, and that he is not treated well. We are informed that

several weeks later, the unfortunate slave is bound in chains and sold to a Georgia

slave trader for the offence he committed to Colonel Lloyd. In such situations, the

slaves deem it appropriate to resort to false praise of their master in order to ward off

severe punishment that awaits those slaves who tell the truth. Thus Douglass
 Raza 56

comments that it was as a result partly of such facts that when the slaves were inquired

about how their masters treated them, they almost universally said that they were

treated with kindness by them and that they were contented with their lot (42-43).

Moreover, it was precisely due to such conditions that it had become a common

maxim among the slaves that ―a still tongue makes a wise head‖ (43). Thus, there was

an increasing tendency among the slaves to ―suppress the truth rather than take the

consequences of telling it‖ (43), and they habitually spoke well of their masters to

keep out of harm‘s way, especially when they encountered a stranger.

In the concluding paragraph of Chapter Three, Douglass makes a very poignant

and pertinent remark when he says: ―…I always measured the kindness of my master

by the standard of kindness set up among slaveholders around us‖ (43). That is to say,

in other words, that the standard was not genuinely humane but shrewdly ―set up‖, to

act as a façade and smokescreen with the dual purpose of concealing the cruelty of the

slave system on the one hand and to give a false impression of the kindness of the

slave-owners. Moreover, this comment suggests the sheer helplessness of the enslaved

to bring to light the reality of the treatment meted out to them. The fact of this

―kindness‖ of the slave-owners is further substantiated by the description of Colonel

Lloyd‘s orchard, whose yield was jealously kept guarded from the hands of the slaves,

though it was the result of their hard work. If we consider the inestimable wealth of

Colonel Lloyd, which, in the words of Douglass, was ―equal to describing the riches of

Job‖ (41), we can only marvel at the duplicity of the slave owning community when it

boasted of the care it took of its slaves and painted a rosy picture of life at the

plantations. Douglass expressed the same idea ironically in his later autobiography

thus: ―Viewed from Col. Lloyd‘s table, who could have said that his slaves were not

well clad and well cared for? Who would have said that they did not glory in being the
 Raza 57

slaves of such a master? Who but a fanatic could have seen any cause for sympathy for

either master or slave?‖ (Life and Times 36).

In the Narrative, Douglass describes at length the general living conditions and

the daily routine on Colonel Lloyd‘s plantation. The description enables the reader to

get acquainted with the reality of slave life and also provides a glimpse into the

interior of one of the largest slave plantations in the state of Maryland at the time. He

places his home plantation among the notorious slave plantations of the southern

states, where slavery was known to exist in its cruellest form. It is thus that Douglass

points out the despicable condition of chattel slavery:

We were all ranked together at the valuation. Men and women, old and

young, married and single, were ranked with horses, sheep, and swine.

There were horses and men, cattle and women, pigs and children, all

holding the same rank in the scale of being, and were all subjected to

the same narrow examination. Silvery-headed age and sprightly youth,

maids and matrons, had to undergo the same indelicate inspection. At

this moment, I saw more clearly than ever the brutalizing effects of

slavery upon both slave and slaveholder. (74)

Reading through the Narrative, we find that Douglass gives a thorough and

exhaustive account of the actual living conditions of the slaves on Colonel Lloyd‘s

plantation. His experiences are contradicted by the general boastings of the

slaveholders that the slaves were well taken care of and that they had access to more

physical comforts of life than the peasants of any other country of the world. The

monthly allowance of food admitted to the slaves is clearly related, as well as the

quality of it. It was not only insufficient compared to the gruelling labour that the

slaves are subjected to but was also sadly wanting in its nutritious value. To top it all,
 Raza 58

the slaves were not provided with any bedding to enjoy a comfortable sleep. At the

end of it however, it wasn‘t so much for want of food or beds that the labouring slaves

felt a greater discomfort than for not finding enough time to get sleep. Douglass

continues the overall description of their misery with a depiction of the sleeping

conditions of the slaves and the general hardship of their day‘s work by telling us that

although the sleeping arrangements were far from comfortable, the slaves ―find less

difficulty from the want of beds, than from the want of time to sleep‖ (33). The slaves

had absolutely no time for performing their personal chores as long as they were in the

fields. It was only when they returned to their humble abodes at the end of an

excruciating day‘s labour that they found some time for their washing, mending, and

cooking, which they had to perform all in the dark. As Douglass mentions, since ―they

had few or none of the ordinary facilities for doing either of these, very many of their

sleeping hours were consumed in preparing for the field the coming day‖ (33). At the

end of it all, says Douglass, ―… old and young, male and female, married and single,

drop down side by side, on one common bed—the cold, damp floor,—each covering

himself or herself with their miserable blankets‖ (33).

Just as the food provided to the slaves was meagre, so was their clothing bare

minimum. Douglass accentuates this aspect of the slaveholders‘ so called concern

towards their subjugated slaves by the careful enumeration of the slaves‘ outfit.

Their yearly clothing consisted of two coarse linen shirts, one pair of

linen trousers, like the shirts, one jacket, one pair of trousers for winter,

made of coarse Negro cloth, one pair of stockings, and one pair of

shoes; the whole of which could not have cost more than seven

dollars…The children unable to work in the field had neither shoes,

stockings, jackets, nor trousers, given to them; their clothing consisted

 Raza 59

of two coarse linen shirts per year. When these failed them, they went

naked until the next allowance-day. Children from seven to ten years

old, of both sexes, almost naked, might be seen at all seasons of the

year. (32-33)

Douglass remembers how he himself, as a small boy, suffered as a result of

being deprived of food and clothing. He attributes his misery more to the cold he

suffered than to the hunger he endured. He feels the sense of loss when he was kept

almost naked in the hottest summer and the coldest winter with no shoes, stockings,

jacket, or trousers. He had nothing to put on except a coarse tow linen shirt that

reached only to his knees. His situation was so trying that he might have perished with

cold, but that he was compelled to a use a stolen bag for sleeping during the coldest

nights which was used for carrying corn to the mill. Douglass would crawl into this

bag, and there sleep on the cold, damp, clay floor, with his head in and feet out.

Pointing to his wretched condition, Douglass remarks that: ―My feet have been so

cracked with the frost, that the pen with which I am writing might be laid in the

gashes‖ (51-52).

Relating in such a manner the miserable, yet, actual living conditions of the

slaves, Douglass reveals his deep passion for humanity. In his descriptions slaves are

often reduced to the level of the brute, and comparisons are drawn between slaves and

animals in remarks such as ―chattel‖, ―cattle‖ or ―pig‖. The reason behind these

descriptions is to establish the state of affairs on the slave plantations, reveal the

inhuman treatment and conditions of the slaves and point out the immorality and

injustice of the entire slave system. By illustrating the dehumanisation of the slaves,

caused and carried out by the white slaveholding community, Douglass emphasises the

very humanity of the slaves. In reporting of the hardships, sufferings and inhuman
 Raza 60

conditions and by appealing to humane sentiments, Douglass provides counter-

discourse against the institution of slavery that made such treatment permissible in

America.

Douglass remarks that even the slaveholders‘ granting of Christmas and New

Year holidays to the slaves and letting them dance and carouse was anything but a sign

of kindness towards the slaves. It was a clever ploy to put into oblivion any desire of

freedom on the part of the slaves. The holidays were meant to numb the feelings of

freedom or of possible escape by the slaves to such an extent that they would remain

docile and peaceful during the following year and go about their daily business as

usual. As Douglass puts it, ―From what I know of the effect of these holidays upon the

slave, I believe them to be among the most effective means in the hands of the

slaveholder in keeping down the spirit of insurrection … These holidays serve as

conductors, or safety-valves, to carry off the rebellious spirit of enslaved humanity‖

(106-107).

In the above discussion, I have endeavoured to determine that in his narrative

Douglass points out the conditions in which the African-American slaves lived during

American slavery. Douglass‘s detailed description of these conditions emphasises the

dehumanised status of the slaves in a white dominated society. At the same time,

Douglass draws attention to emotional suffering in slavery, and stresses sentimental

issues such as motherly love and the importance of family. Moreover, he exposes the

enormously tedious conditions under which the slaves had to survive. The issues

Douglass has focused upon emphasise the human value of the slaves, and stand in

sharp opposition to the dehumanised treatment and status of the slaves. By doing so,

Douglass has provided counter-discursive arguments against the practices of the white

slaveholding community. These counter arguments also serve as a manifestation of

 Raza 61

textual resistance that was exercised by Douglass and other architects of slave

narratives, which is one of the central tenets of the Postcolonial Theory.

3.3. Physical Violence

This subchapter deals with the issue of physical violence to which Douglass

and his fellow slaves were regularly exposed while in slavery. At the same time, the

subchapter discusses the description of violence as a counter-discursive strategy in

Douglass‘s text, because it offers an argument against the slave system and its

conventional practices in 19th- century America. As Joshua C. Feblowitz states: ―In the

world of the American slave, violence and control were intimately connected‖ (1). He

goes on to say that, ―The ubiquity and severity of violence in slavery is something that

is represented in a great variety of slave narratives‖ (1). However, its depiction gained

significant importance during the antebellum period when Douglass‘s first published

his Narrative, because the abolitionists of the north evinced heightened interest in

propagating it. As a matter of fact, as Clark registers, the depiction of violence and

suffering undergone by the slaves became a common device for the anti-slavery cause;

the northern abolitionists openly embraced the narration of such occurrences and they

lost no time in making them public (465). At the same time, as time passed, the

attitude to the depiction of violence in slave narratives became more complex

especially after the Civil War and the emancipation in the 1860s. According to

Schwalm, there has been a largely held view that during the years after the

emancipation and in the following decades, the steadily rising black middle class

insisted on distancing themselves from the humiliating and downgrading history of

slavery, whereas the other sections of the society demanded the slave memories and
 Raza 62

experiences to be sustained (298-290). The primary reason behind this insistence of

the black middle class to get away from the inheritance of slavery is the idea of black

elevation or black advancement, which aimed at providing the African-Americans

with access to economic success through higher education. When we read Douglass‘s

Narrative, it gives us the impression that it takes into account both the harsh memories

of the slave experience with its humiliation and oppression and the promotion of the

intellectual abilities of the blacks. Such an understanding about the social condition of

the African-American population in the 19th-century evolved with Douglass‘s writing

of the Narrative in the antebellum period and got further intensified in the decades

after emancipation, the evidence of which can be found in Douglass‘s third narrative,

The Life and Times of Frederick Douglass.

In addition to the detailed description of the living conditions of the slaves on

the home plantation of Colonel Lloyd revealing the dehumanised status and treatment

of black slaves, Douglass‘s Narrative also gives an account of the slaves‘ exposure to

physical violence on a regular basis. Numerous eyewitness accounts of floggings,

beatings, and whippings of the slaves executed by masters and overseers, sparing

neither women nor children, and his personal experiences of violent attacks illustrate

the cruelty of the slave system and the violent character of the slaveholding

community of the South. They also allow the reader to feel the atmosphere of fear that

was constantly present within the slave community on the plantation.

It may be mentioned that during that time in the 19th-century, Maryland was

not the most notorious slave state in the country, and there the public opinion was

considered to be more pleasant towards the black slaves than in the states of the Deep

South. Still we find that Colonel Lloyd‘s plantation was not much different from

others in treating the slaves as one may tend to suppose. Douglass himself states that:
 Raza 63

―It was here that I witnessed the bloody transaction‖ (31), by which he means the gory

incident of his aunt Hester‘s brutal whipping. Douglass makes it quite clear that no

slave, including himself, was secure against the outrages of slavery and that whatever

he experienced, resembled to a large degree, with the suffering of those enslaved on

the southern plantations.

Whenever Douglass criticises the violent and ruthless behaviour of the

slaveholders, masters and overseers, he attacks, first and foremost, the system of

slavery, and not directly the individual executors of violent deeds. Douglass often

writes about the evils of slavery and the victims of the slave system. Such discourse is

part of Douglass‘s abolitionist propaganda. He clearly understood that blaming the

slaveholding community of the horrible treatment of slaves would not bring an end to

slavery, since replacing one set of immoral individuals with another solves no

problems. However, revealing the shameful nature of the system can make people

understand the necessity of abolishing slavery if they see slavery as harmful to their

own integrity and morality.

Douglass makes an excellent point about the harmfulness and degrading nature

of slavery in his recollections in Baltimore, where he was sent to live under the

household of Mr and Mrs Auld at the age of eight to run errands and to take care of

their son. At the beginning of his servitude, Douglass describes his new mistress when

he reached his new destination, saying, ―…here I saw what I had never seen before; it

was a white face beaming with the most kindly emotions; it was the face of my new

mistress, Sophia Auld‖ (55). Never having entertained the possibility of receiving a

humane treatment at the hands of his masters, Douglass couldn‘t help express his

praise: ―My new mistress proved to be all she appeared when I first met her at the

door—a woman of the kindest heart and finest feelings‖ (57). Douglass considers the
 Raza 64

fact that Mrs Auld had never before been a slaveholder the reason for her good-

natured character: ―She had never had a slave under her control previously to myself‖

therefore, ―she had been in a good degree preserved from the blighting and

dehumanizing effects of slavery‖ (57). For Douglass, who had been totally

unaccustomed to the sort of benign attitude that Mrs Auld exhibited towards him, such

treatment was almost unbelievable. Likewise, Douglass opines that he was at a loss to

respond to her good-natured behaviour since he hadn‘t experienced anything of such

kind in his life before: ―I was utterly astonished at her goodness. I scarcely knew how

to behave towards her. She was entirely unlike any other white woman I had ever

seen‖ (57). However, according to Douglass, the behaviour of Mrs Auld changed

towards him when she learned to be a proper slaveholder:

But, alas! this kind heart had but a short time to remain such. The fatal

poison of irresponsible power was already in her hands, and soon

commenced its infernal work. That cheerful eye, under the influence of

slavery, soon became red with rage; that voice, made all of sweet

accord, changed to one of harsh and horrid discord; and that angelic

face gave place to that of a demon. (57-58)

The argument that Douglass tenders here is that slavery has a demeaning impact on

anyone who comes under its influence. He also underscores his personal vision of

people as naturally kind and good, and he sees mutual respect and the equal treatment

of others as something normal and desirable. We can interpret Douglass‘s opinion to

mean that slavery has distorted that situation. Taking up the same argument at another

place, Douglass states that ―nature never intended that men and women should be

either slaves or slaveholders, and nothing but rigid training long persisted in, can

perfect the character of the one or the other‖ (Life and Times 51). Presenting slavery in
 Raza 65

such a dangerous and unnatural light, Douglass is more likely to gain sympathy and

understanding from his white readers than if he had openly accused the white

slaveholders of cruelty and immorality. Presenting slavery in the way Douglass does

could have the effect of making the slaveholding community regard slavery as harmful

to them.

In Douglass‘s Narrative, there are several detailed descriptions about the

beatings and whippings of slaves, and likewise, many of those recollections are told in

such a manner as to establish the institution of slavery as the root cause and raison

d‘être of wicked and violent actions. Perhaps the most notorious and the most studied

event of slave beating in Douglass‘s text is the scene in which Douglass, as a young

child, witnesses the brutal whipping of his aunt Hester, by their common master,

Captain Anthony. Before he narrates the details of the actual whipping, Douglass

provides some background information into the situation, we are informed that

Douglass‘s slave aunt Hester had a relationship with another slave, Ned Roberts, but

Captain Anthony did not approve of their courtship. Whereas Douglass comments in

an ironic way upon the morality of Captain Anthony in safeguarding the innocence of

his aunt, his speculation about the negative attitude of captain Anthony towards the

couple again implies that his actions are actually caused by the evil of slavery, and that

is what has made him the sort of man he appears to be: ―Had he been a man of pure

morals himself, he might have been thought interested in protecting the innocence of

my aunt; but those who knew him will not suspect him of any such virtue‖ (29). He

throws further light on this vicious aspect of slavery thus:

It was one of the damning characteristics of slavery that it robbed its

victims of every incentive to a holy life. The fear of God and the hope

of heaven were sufficient to sustain many black women amidst the

 Raza 66

snares and dangers of their strange lot, but they were ever at the mercy

of the power, passion, and caprice of their owners. Slavery provided no

means for the honest perpetuation of the race. (Life and Times 27)

At the outset, we are slightly perplexed as to who the ―victims‖ of slavery are

who are ―robbed‖ of the possibility to lead respectable lives. But if we carefully

consider Douglass‘s remark, it becomes evident that he is referring to both the

participants to this relationship, viz. the female slave Hester, and her master, Captain

Anthony. Once that is established, we could then interpret the remark by saying that

Hester‘s role is to submit to the mercy of her master, and it is her chance to have an

honourable relationship with her loved one that is denied or ―robbed‖ of her.

Similarly, it could be commented that Captain Anthony becomes a victim of the slave

system that provides him the power to exercise his malevolence and act upon his

primitive instincts, and that it is his opportunity to retain his integrity as an honourable

man that is ―robbed‖ of him by the system of slavery. Apart from this, Douglass‘s

remarks about the victims of slavery are also directed to involve all the people, slaves

as well as masters, who are both adversely affected by the menace of slavery, and

Douglass‘s argument is that slavery makes everyone a victim, no matter what his or

her social position is.

Owing to the intensity and force of argument and emotion that Douglass put

into the incident, the actual violent scene of Hester‘s whipping, as described by

Douglass, deserves a separate analysis. Despite Captain Anthony‘s demand to quit the

relationship, Hester and Ned continued to meet, and young Douglass describes

Captain Anthony‘s revenge on the disobedience of Hester in the following manner:

Before he commenced whipping Aunt Hester, he took her into the

kitchen, and stripped her from neck to waist, leaving her neck,
 Raza 67

shoulders, and back, entirely naked. He then told her to cross her hands,

calling her at the same time a d—d b—h. After crossing her hands, he

tied them with a strong rope, and led her to a stool under a large hook

in the joist, put in for the purpose. He made her get upon the stool, and

tied her hands to the hook. She now stood fair for his infernal purpose.

Her arms were stretched up at their full length, so that she stood upon

the ends of her toes. He then said to her, ―Now, you d—d b—h, I‘ll

learn you how to disobey my orders!‖ and after rolling up his sleeves,

he commenced to lay on the heavy cow-skin, and soon the warm, red

blood (amid heart-rending shrieks from her, and horrid oaths from him)

came dripping to the floor. (29-30)

The incident reported here by Douglass, who, at the time, was hiding in a

closet in the kitchen where the incident took place, is told in great detail. Douglass‘s

careful examination of Captain Anthony‘s violent act leaves no room for the

speculation or doubt about the inhuman and horrible treatment meted out to black

slaves. Through Douglass‘s narration it becomes clear that violence was used to fully

subjugate and physically and mentally oppress the slaves and to degrade the humanity

of the slaves. The reader also finds out that such incidents of brutal whippings in

which a slave is absolutely subdued by the adopted superiority of the whites, were

quite common on the plantations, especially in the south, and the executor of the

punishments was deliberate and systematic in his actions.

The beating narrated above, had its effect on young Douglass. According to his

narration, the scene left him ―so terrified and horror-stricken at the sight,‖ that ―[he]

hid [him]self in a closet, and dared not venture out till long after the bloody transaction

was over‖ (30) (parentheses mine). By witnessing such a horrid scene at his tender
 Raza 68

age, he came to realise the crude and more repulsive features of slavery. Elsewhere,

Douglass mentions that witnessing this whipping of his aunt made him start to wonder

why some people are slaves and others are masters (Life and Times 28). Pondering

upon this speculation on the part of Douglass, we can discern the first signs of

awakening in Douglass of racial awareness. He remembers having been told that God

had made ―black people to be slaves and white people to be masters‖ (Life and Times

28). Thus, Douglass was already very early introduced to the idea that skin colour was

a determining factor in the social order of his community. However, after the

whipping of Aunt Hester, he started to question the supremacy and inferiority of

people based on racial characteristics. Douglass‘s first argument into the matter was

his awareness of some black people who were not slaves, but in fact, they were free

and lived in the Free states. Moreover, he mentions hearing about some slaves who

had been either brought or stolen from Africa.

It has been mentioned earlier that witnessing Aunt Hester‘s whipping opened

Douglass‘s eyes to the violent character of slavery. Subsequently, Douglass carefully

narrates other similar incidents of floggings and beatings that occurred on Colonel

Lloyd‘s plantation. Although physical violence on the plantations was regular,

Douglass makes some deliberate choices when he describes the beatings of few

selected slaves in a detailed manner.

As stated in her work, ‘Eye-Witness to the Cruelty’: Southern Violence and

Northern Testimony in Frederick Douglas’s 1845 Narrative, Jeannine DeLombard

mentions, ―like the naked, scarred backs his fellow fugitives exposed to horrified,

Douglass‘s Narrative marshals the visual power of the injured black body to convey

the brutality of the South‘s peculiar institution‖ (245). We can see this is true when

examining different incidents that appear within the narrative. We come across one of
 Raza 69

the numerous times, in which Douglass witnessed an act of cruelty performed by his

Mr Severe, the overseer:

I have seen him whip a woman, causing the blood to run half an hour at

the time; and this, too, in the midst of her crying children, pleading for

their mother‘s release. He seemed to take pleasure in manifesting his

fiendish barbarity. Added to his cruelty, he was a profane swearer. It

was enough to chill the blood and stiffen the hair of an ordinary man to

hear him talk. Scarce a sentence escaped him but that was commenced

or concluded by some horrid oath. The field was the place to witness

his cruelty and profanity. His presence made it both the field of blood

and of blasphemy. From the rising till the going down of the sun, he

was cursing, raving, cutting, and slashing among the slaves of the field,

in the most frightful manner. (34)

By reading this, we are able to see how slaveholders treated their slaves and what little

power slaves held. We can see how African American slaves were treated with great

cruelty. By treating their slaves with cruelty and violence, masters maintained power.

We can understand and see how these actions led to the development of White

supremacy and ethnic power and how it was produced during the years of slavery. Not

only that, but with this we are now able to further recognize the issue of slavery.

Along with that, we are also able to examine how ethnicity, sex, class, and power all

relate to the ways in which African American slaves were treated by their

slaveholders, and what little authority they held under their power. When Douglass

adds, ―He seemed desirous of getting the poor girl out of existence‖ (86), it is clear

that many African Americans were often seen as insignificant and worthless.
 Raza 70

In addition to the incidents of cruel treatment of the female slaves, Douglass

also narrates the incidences of physical torture committed against the male members of

the African-American community. One such incident relates to old Barney, who along

with his son, was deputed with the responsibility of taking care of the wellbeing of

Colonel Lloyd‘s horses. The scene depicts the whipping of old Barney, and according

to Douglass, ―it was painful to stand near the stable-door, and hear the various

[although petty] complaints against the keepers when a horse was taken out for use

(40). This scene amply clarifies the harsh approach of the slaveholders and makes the

comparison of white supremacy and black inferiority even more prominent: ―I have

seen Colonel Lloyd make old Barney, a man between fifty and sixty years of age,

uncover his bald head, kneel down upon the cold, damp ground, and receive upon his

naked and toil-worn shoulders more than thirty lashes at the time‖ (41). Douglass

further accentuates the misery of the slaves and by implication, his disgust of the

institution of slavery, by observing that, ―To all these complaints, no matter how

unjust, the slave must answer never a word. Colonel Lloyd could not brook any

contradiction from a slave. When he spoke, a slave must stand, listen, and tremble; and

such was literally the case‖ (41).

The readers are strongly and clearly made conscious of the dichotomy of the

white and black races through the combination of white superiority and black

inferiority, and white power and black helplessness. Douglass narrates the scene

carefully and succeeds in pointing out the unjust nature of the power relations between

the two men. Thus, Douglass‘s aim is to illustrate the fundamental sameness of these

two individuals, the only difference being their complexion. We can therefore infer

that Douglass is criticising the racial inequality that manifests itself in the scene of old

Barney‘s whipping. Douglass wrote the scene in a very apt and forceful manner with
 Raza 71

the sole purpose of attracting compassion for the miserable condition of old Barney by

portraying the scene in a visually effective manner; the inferior and humiliated Barney

on the ground on his knees, and, above him, the superior white master standing strong

and powerful. In addition, the scene can be interpreted in terms of the binary

opposition between the black and white races where the former always stands on the

negative side of the scale as colonised, primitive, and evil, as opposed to the white

man being coloniser, civilised, and good.

Apart from mentioning the whippings and floggings of the slaves by their

masters, Douglass also records incidents of coldblooded murder that were committed

at the slightest provocation and exhibit the heartless nonchalance of the slaveholders.

The first of such incidents relates to a slave named Demby who was being whipped by

the overseer Gore when he escaped into the river and refused to come out. Gore said

that he would count to three and if Demby did not come out, he would shoot him.

After Gore reached three, he calmly and coolly shot Demby dead without the slightest

misgiving. When asked by Colonel Lloyd as to the motive of his action, Gore replied

with cool unction that Demby had become unmanageable. His argument was that

Demby‘s insubordination would incite others to similar acts of disobedience. Colonel

Lloyd considered it a satisfactory explanation and did not feel the need for any judicial

inquiry into the matter. Moreover, Gore continued in his service as overseer as before,

unsuspected and unchallenged. Douglass appears to be speechless with amazement

over such heartless unconcern on the part of Col. Lloyd: ―It was committed in the

presence of slaves, and they of course could neither institute a suit, nor testify against

him; and thus the guilty perpetrator of one of the bloodiest and most foul murders goes

unwhipped of justice, and uncensured by the community in which he lives‖ (48).

 Raza 72

Douglass next mentions about how the wife of Mr Giles Hicks murdered her

serving-girl, who was Douglass‘s wife‘s cousin. Mrs Hicks had repeatedly beaten and

mangled the young girl‘s body savagely, but one day when her baby started crying and

the slave girl was asleep and did not hear the baby‘s cries, she beat the slave girl so

fiercely with a stick that it broke her nose and breastbone. The injuries were so severe

that the poor girl expired in a few hours afterward.

Douglass also relates how one day, when Colonel Lloyd‘s slaves were fishing

for oysters in the nearby river, an elderly slave crossed into the adjoining property of

Mr Beal Bondly without being aware of it. Mr Bondly got furious and shot and killed

the old man. He came over to Lloyd‘s home; ―whether to pay him for his property, or

to justify himself in what he had done, I know not,‖ Douglass wrote, and ―at any rate,

this whole fiendish transaction was soon hushed up. There was very little said about it

at all and nothing done. It was a common saying, even among little white boys, that it

was worth a half-cent to kill a ―nigger,‖ and a half-cent to bury one‖ (50). Clearly,

killing a slave was no problem whatsoever and it was not a criminal offence in the

estimation of the courts or the community either.

Lastly, it would not be out of place here to shed some light on the manner in

which Douglass highlights the real merit of the slave songs. According to him, these

songs are erroneously interpreted to mean the expression of a state of mirth and joy of

the slaves, whereas, in effect, they express the ―deepest sadness‖ of the slaves.

Douglass confesses his inability to appreciate the real import of these songs as long as

he was himself ―within the circle‖, but now that he can hear them as a detached

onlooker from a distance, he realises that they are not merely ―rude and apparently

incoherent‖ compositions devoid of meaning. Instead: ―They told a tale of woe which

was then altogether beyond my feeble comprehension; they were tones loud, long, and
 Raza 73

deep; they breathed the prayer and complaint of souls boiling over with the bitterest

anguish. Every tone was a testimony against slavery, and a prayer to God for

deliverance from chains‖ (37). Douglass firmly believed that ―[T]he mere hearing of

those songs would do more to impress some minds with the horrible character of

slavery, than the reading of whole volumes of philosophy on the subject could do‖

(37).

In other words, the songs themselves were a kind of anti-slavery discourse against the

hegemony and highhandedness of the slaveholding community, as Douglass himself

remarks: ―To those songs I trace my first glimmering conception of the dehumanizing

character of slavery‖. So overpowering is the impact of these songs on Douglass that

he invites the readers to feel for themselves the effect they produce:

If any one wishes to be impressed with the soul-killing effects of

slavery, let him go to Colonel Lloyd‘s plantation, and, on allowance-

day, place himself in the deep pine woods, and there let him, in silence,

analyse the sounds that shall pass through the chambers of his soul—

and if he is not thus impressed, it will only be because ―there is no flesh

in his obdurate heart‖. (37-38)

With the descriptions of the helpless slave men, women and the terrified

children at the mercy of the devilish overseers and masters, Douglass continues his

narrative tendency of putting together absolute power and aggression of white

superiority with the powerlessness and inferiority of the black race. According to

Martin, Douglass‘s recurrent use of white power and black powerlessness serves the

function of examining the relations between the blacks and whites. Simultaneously, it

also aims at criticising those members of the white community who had a vested

interest in the continuation of the uneven power relationship, basically meaning the
 Raza 74

white slaveholding community of the South (24). In addition to criticism on the

southern slaveholding community, according to Jeannine DeLombard (246), with the

eyewitness accounts of slave beatings and floggings, Douglass creates a vision of ―the

injured black body to convey the brutality of the South‘s peculiar institution‖. It

becomes quite clear that by thus commenting, Douglass was targeting the audience in

the North where such depiction of the violent South would find favourable recipients

in those in opposition to slavery. Such mannerism as was adopted by Douglass would

serve the purpose of pure antislavery propaganda and help incite the feelings of the

northerners against the brutalities of slavery. Besides the aims proclaimed by

DeLombard and Martin, Douglass‘s narrative style, which tends to illustrate violent

and brutal execution of white power and superiority over the oppressed and subjugated

black race, also functions as counter-discourse against the alleged and assumed black

inferiority. Thus it can be safely surmised that when Douglass narrates his personal

experiences of suffering and torture of blacks, even though from the point of view of

an eyewitness, he challenges the ideology of white supremacy by criticising the

inhuman and brutal treatment of black slaves.

It may be noticed that the incidents of violence and descriptions of oppression

and suffering described above and narrated by Douglass have so far been eyewitness

accounts, and Douglass considered himself to be in an advantageous position in that he

managed to avoid severe physical punishments during his childhood and early teenage

years, except for the occasional whipping from his master. However, the situation got

diametrically reversed, when Douglass was hired out by his master to a notorious

―nigger-breaker‖, Edward Covey, in 1834, ―to be broken‖ (87). On his way to the farm

of the new master, who was known for his fierce and savage disposition, Douglass

comments upon his first interaction with Edward Covey by informing us that (having
 Raza 75

grown to be sixteen years of age) he was considered a field hand for the first time in

his life and treated at par with the adults. But since he had been employed on

household jobs till then, he felt his condition to be ―more awkward than a country boy

appeared to be in a large city‖ (89). During the very first week of his stay with Edward

Covey, he was given a ―very severe whipping, cutting [his] back, causing the blood to

run, and raising ridges on [his] flesh as large as [his] little finger‖ (89). The reason for

this ―humane‖ treatment was that Douglass failed to rein in an unbroken pair of oxen

as ordered by Covey. Consequently, it was his turn instead to be reined in by the artful

Covey. After having cut and trimmed three switches from a gum tree, Covey:

… ordered me to take off my clothes. I made him no answer, but stood

with my clothes on. He repeated his order. I still made him no answer,

nor did I move to strip myself. Upon this he rushed at me with the

fierceness of a tiger, tore off my clothes, and lashed me till he had worn

out his switches, cutting me so savagely as to leave the marks visible

for a long time after. This whipping was the first of a number just like

it, and for similar offences. (90-91)

We see that Douglass goes to great lengths to describe his experiences under

the overseership of Covey. Douglass‘s recounting of the incident, which caused this

inaugural whipping of his at the hands of Covey reflects upon the deviousness of

Covey who was very shrewd in employing his cruel tactics in breaking the slaves. At

the same time, Douglass compliments Covey in an ironic fashion by referring to his

ferociousness as ―natural good qualities‖. He goes on to bring to light the real self of

Mr Covey by informing us that his personality was home to heterogeneous

characteristics; in contrast to being exceptional in his cruelty, he was also ―a professor

of religion—a pious soul—a member and a class-leader in the Methodist church‖ (87-
 Raza 76

88). All of this added weight to his reputation as a ―nigger-breaker.‖ This notorious

Negro breaker is presented and introduced to the reader as an animal-like beast, and

Douglass‘s description of him is structured in the manner to provoke antipathy and

loathing towards the master and towards his conduct. As Douglass relates, Mr Covey‘s

method of Negro breaking consisted of regular beatings and of hard labour. Covey‘s

motto was ―Work, work, work‖ (94), and he applied it relentlessly during all hours of

the day and night. Douglass apprises us that he was somewhat unmanageable in the

beginning, but within a few months, he was tamed by the hard discipline of Covey.

Mr Covey succeeded in breaking me. I was broken in body, soul, and

spirit. My natural elasticity was crushed, my intellect languished, the

disposition to read departed, and the cheerful spark that lingered about

my eye died; the dark night of slavery closed in upon me; and behold a

man transformed into a brute! (94-95)

In Mr Covey, Douglass found all the monstrous characteristics of slaveholders,

and in describing the details of his behaviour, Douglass strongly objects to such cruel

treatment of the slaves. He made a special mention of the deviousness and cunning of

Mr Covey in his management of the slaves and referred to him as ―a snake‖, which, in

Christian terms, is in downright opposition to his professed religiosity. Douglass

sarcastically comments that, ―Everything he possessed in the shape of learning or

religion, he made conform to his disposition to deceive. He seemed to think himself

equal to deceiving the Almighty‖ (93). Later, Douglass reinforces this comment with

another remark: ―Poor man! Such was his disposition, and success at deceiving, I do

verily believe that he sometimes deceived himself into the solemn belief, that he was a

sincere worshipper of the most high God‖ (93). In other words, it can be said that

Douglass presents the slave-master as ―slave-monster‖.

 Raza 77

In addition to the vicious and cruel nature of Mr Covey, Douglass reveals

another repulsive side of the master. He informs the readers that Mr Covey was a poor

man and being unable to buy more than one slave, he bought a young female slave

named Caroline ―for a breeder‖ (94). The woman slave was, thus, forced to reproduce

more slaves to Mr Covey. Douglass reacts to this fact again in the following manner:

[N]o better illustration of the unchaste, demoralising, and debasing

character of slavery can be found than is furnished in the fact that this

professedly Christian slaveholder, amidst all his prayers and hymns,

was shamelessly and boastfully encouraging and actually compelling,

in his own house, undisguised and unmitigated fornication, as a means

of increasing his stock. (Life and Times 82)

If, with the previous remark, Douglass condemns the conduct of one

slaveholder, the following offers a condemnation of the entire slave system: ―it was

the system of slavery which made this [slave breeding] allowable, and which no more

condemned the slaveholder for buying a slave woman and devoting her to his life, than

for buying a cow and raising stock from her‖ (Life and Times 82).

It has been mentioned earlier that prior to being accosted by the ruthless Mr

Covey, young Douglass had not been under any threat of severe physical violence. He

was yet to be initiated into the world of corporal torture. Mr Covey‘s first flogging was

issued to Douglass in the woods where Douglass was ordered to remove his clothes in

order to be whipped more efficiently. To give the reader a general picture of the

conditions at Covey‘s plantation, Douglass says: ―I lived with Mr Covey one year.

During the first six months of that year, scarce a week passed without his whipping

me. I was seldom free from a sore back. My awkwardness was almost always his

excuse for whipping me‖ (91). Through such description Douglass wishes to provoke
 Raza 78

the reader to imagine the physical suffering that another man made him endure. He

intends to shake the consciousness of the reading populace by offering criticism

against the cruel treatment of slaves. Douglass‘s personal sufferings of physical abuse

are also in accordance with his idea of the ―injured black body‖, which he later

propounded during his political struggle. This idea helps to reinforce the image of the

violent South.

While reading his Narrative, we come to realise that Douglass does not go into

the details of his own personal sufferings when he was himself endangered by the

violent floggings. However, Douglass narrates the scene of his last whipping in great

detail because it was after this final lashing that Douglass took up the courage to resist

the tyrannical arm of oppression. He masterfully expressed his change of fortunes in

his memorable words: ―You have seen how a man was made a slave; you shall see

how a slave was made a man‖ (97). He rightly considered ―The circumstances leading

to the change in Mr Covey‘s course toward me form an epoch in my humble history‖

(97). Indeed, the occasion came when Douglass resorted to fighting, and after the fight

was over and Douglass came out of the fight as a winner, Mr Covey never laid his

hand on Douglass again. This is an important development in Douglass‘s pathway

from slavery to freedom, for, as Kohn notes, the fight represented a psychological

emancipation to Douglass and it secured his manhood (500). From the moment

Douglass decided to stand up for himself against physical oppression, he realised both

his full potential as an individual, and that an open rebellion against slavery would

provide him the way to freedom and the key to the liberation of his people:

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-

 Raza 79

confidence, and inspired me again with a determination to be free. The

gratification afforded by the triumph was a full compensation for

whatever else might follow, even death itself. He only can understand

the deep satisfaction, which I experienced, who has himself repelled by

force the bloody arm of slavery. I felt as I never felt before. It was a

glorious resurrection, from the tomb of slavery, to the heaven of

freedom. My long-crushed spirit rose, cowardice departed, bold

defiance took its place; and I now resolved that, however long I might

remain a slave in form, the day had passed forever when I could be a

slave in fact. I did not hesitate to let it be known of me, that the white

man who expected to succeed in whipping, must also succeed in killing

me. (104-105)

In this remark, Douglass announces perhaps the essence of his future vision of the

elevation of the black man from bondage to freedom and to self-sufficiency. Here,

Douglass‘s vision represents the opposite of white ideology, which regarded the black

man as intellectually inferior to rise to social and economic success. Douglass here

stands as a fully conscious and confident individual who is fully convinced of the need

of taking a decisive action in the face of brutalities perpetrated against him. He is no

longer willing to endure the cruelties silently and is ready to redress his loss through

violent action. Referring to the above quoted passage, Cynthia R. Neilson comments:

It seems that something beyond intellectual freedom (i.e. literacy and

what I‘ve called ―inner freedom‖) was required for Douglass‘s

―resurrection.‖ As an embodied, political being, Douglass‘s experience

of freedom was necessarily limited so long as Covey and the socio-

political slavery apparatus had dominion over his body. According to

 Raza 80

Douglass‘s account, some kind of physical resistance or force was

needed not only for his own sense of freedom but also so that Covey

might recognize him as an Other with volitional and rational faculties

capable of producing deliberate and purposeful acts of resistance. (1)

It is clear from Douglass‘s account of his struggle with Covey that the desire

for manhood and subject-hood justifies necessary violence against oppressors, and so

the fight with Covey also registers tensions within abolitionist debate. Douglass‘s text,

then, is not only a struggle for freedom but also, at times, a struggle against the limits

of dominant abolitionist discourse (Sinanan 69).

Another point worth considering here is that Covey chooses not to turn

Douglass in for a public ―whipping.‖ The explanation Douglass offers for Covey‘s

seemingly incomprehensible decision is that Covey‘s reputation as a slave-breaker was

at stake. Since he failed to break Douglass, to turn him in would be synonymous with

admitting that failure and losing his reputation. Therefore, we see that Douglass

worked within the power mechanisms of an oppressive slave society, and his

resistance proved successful on multiple counts.

Douglass‘s tirade against the hypocritical display and profession of

Christianity is yet another manifestation of the counter-discourse against the dominant

discourse which was employed by the white slaveholding class, aimed at coercing the

black slaves into obedience. On a number of occasions during the Narrative, Douglass

voices his strong disapproval of the religious sanction, which the slaveholders gave to

themselves, for their brutal actions against the hapless slaves. He mentions about his

master Thomas Auld‘s conversion to the Methodist Church‘s teachings, surmising that

it should have made him ―more kind and humane‖ (84). However, ―[he] was
 Raza 81

disappointed in both these respects. It neither made him to be humane to his slaves,

nor to emancipate them‖ (84). On the contrary:

If it had any effect on his character, it made him more cruel and hateful

in all his ways; for I believe him to have been a much worse man after

his conversion than before. Prior to his conversion, he relied upon his

own depravity to shield and sustain him in his savage barbarity; but

after his conversion, he found religious sanction and support for his

slaveholding cruelty. (84)

He goes on to describe at length the false display of religious piety by his master and

his coinciding relentless cruelty to his slaves:

As an example, I will state one of many facts going to prove the charge.

I have seen him tie up a lame young woman, and whip her with a heavy

cow-skin upon her naked shoulders, causing the warm red blood to

drip; and, in justification of the bloody deed, he would quote this

passage of Scripture—―He that knoweth his master‘s will, and doeth it

not, shall be beaten with many stripes‖. (85-86)

In her very incisive article, Nyla Ali Khan observes that the ideology that was

propounded by the American slaveholders reflected and produced its interests. The

slaveholder couched the debased language of exploitation in the language of culture

and religion, which led to a relegation of the perspective, historical sense, and

traditions of the subjugated populace. She goes on to add that, ―the representatives of

Christianity in the Americas did not negate the exploitative methods of the colonial

power‖ (n. pag.). In other words, the drumbeating of religion by the slaveholders was

nothing but a hoax to shield their reprehensible practices which continued unabated.
 Raza 82

After citing different instances of the religious double-facedness of his masters

and overseers, Douglass sums up his revulsion to the false proponents of Christianity

thus:

Were I to be again reduced to the chains of slavery, next to that

enslavement, I should regard being the slave of a religious master the

greatest calamity that could befall me. For of all slaveholders with

whom I have ever met, religious slaveholders are the worst. I have ever

found them the meanest and basest, the most cruel and cowardly, of all

others. (110)

In other words, Douglass‘s remarks function as counter-discourse to the dominant

discourse of white intellectual power. Along with the newly gained self-confidence

and self-reliance, Douglass becomes in his Narrative increasingly committed to

articulating his opposition. In fact, the individual and communal resistance that

Douglass practices in his Narrative is the subject of the following chapter.

To sum up, the chapter introduced Douglass‘s portrayal of everyday life of the

slaves on the plantations and in different forms of enslavement. As we have seen, the

everyday experiences of slaves included inhuman treatment in the form of poor living

conditions, breaking up of family ties and exposures to physical violence. These issues

were equivalent to the dehumanising of black slaves, i.e., reducing the slaves to the

level of chattel and regarding and treating them as merchandise. At the same time, the

use of violence illustrated the humiliating nature of slavery both to the slaves and the

slaveholding community. As Douglass revealed the harsh nature of slavery, he also

resisted the slave practices which made the inhuman treatment of slaves possible.

Douglass‘s revelations functioned as a counter-discourse to the dominant discourse of

 Raza 83

the white slaveholding community which regarded the inhuman treatment of slaves as

acceptable.
 Raza 84

CHAPTER FOUR

PERSONAL AND POLITICAL RESISTANCE OF FREDERICK DOUGLASS

The previous chapter was dedicated to the analysis of Douglass‘s

representations of the degraded and miserable conditions of the black slaves in the

19th-century America. Douglass illustrated these wretched conditions by narrating in

great detail the everyday life of the enslaved blacks, which was marked by the

presence of different forms of physical violence. In the present chapter, my aim is to

discuss Douglass‘s role and influence as a prominent figure of black resistance in the

19th century America, with the primary focus on the pre- and post-Civil War eras.

Douglass‘s intellectual thinking on the issue of race and the social position of his

people developed and shaped its course as his own social standing in society changed

over a period of time. The differences in his perception are visible during the different

stages of his life, and that is why it is necessary to examine how Douglass offers

counter-discursive resistance against white superiority during the early years of his

intellectual awakening, when the resistance is particularly individual, and later in his

life, when his resistance becomes increasingly political and widespread. Therefore, my

purpose in this chapter is to focus on different forms of black resistance, which I have

divided into two subchapters, Individual Resistance and Political Resistance.

4.1. Individual Resistance

During the first half of the Narrative, Douglass‘s resistance to white

domination and to the enslavement of his race appears to function mainly at the level

of the individual, i.e. how Douglass personally challenged white superiority and the

oppression of blacks, and how he reacted to his enslavement as an individual.

 Raza 85

Therefore, the present chapter introduces this critical stage in Douglass‘s life when he

begins to become more and more vocal in his resistance to the enslavement of blacks

and to white domination. Since literacy was a major issue at this stage in Douglass‘s

life, it is also a central theme in this subchapter. Literacy played a crucial role in

Douglass‘s intellectual awakening and resulted in a change in Douglass‘s mode of

resistance. This transformation was an extraordinary factor in the formation of his

identity. Thus, the subchapter concentrates on the issue of literacy and its influence on

Douglass‘s individual resistance.

If we cast a critical glance at the conventions of African-American slave narrative

tradition, we realise that literacy plays an important role in most slave narratives because

learning to read symbolised for the black slaves, the way from ignorance to wisdom and

from slavery to freedom. In the Introduction to The Slave’s Narrative, editors Charles T.

Davis and Henry Louis Gates, Jr. have mentioned that in the 18th Century America,

learning to read and write was not only difficult, it was a violation of law… Frederick

Douglass, Thomas Smallwood, William Wells Brown, Moses Grandy, James Pennington,

and John Thompson, among numerous others, all made statements about the direct

relationship between freedom and discourse [in their narratives] (xxv). They go on to

comment that:

[T]he recording of an authentic black voice, a voice of deliverance from

the deafening discursive silence which an ―enlightened‖ Europe cited as

proof of the absence of the African's humanity, was the millennial

instrument of transformation through which the African would become the

European, the slave become the ex-slave, the brute animal become the

human being. So central was this idea to the birth of the black literary

tradition in the eighteenth century that four of the first five eighteenth
 Raza 86

century slave narratives drew upon the figure of the voice in the text as

crucial ―scenes of instruction‖ in the development of the slave on his road

to freedom. James Gronniosaw in 1770, John Marrant in 1785, Ottobah

Cugoano in 1787, Olaudah Equiano in 1789, and John Jea in 1815, all

draw upon the figure of the voice in the text (xxvii).

The slaveholders rightly believed the effect of knowledge gained by slaves would

cause the slaves to seek freedom, which was contrary to their vested interests. The

Western culture and society prized literacy as one of the markers of intelligence and

within an intellectual tradition ranked non-literate, non-European cultures as

fundamentally inferior. In a major essay, ―Of National Characters‖ (1748), David Hume

discusses the characteristics of the major divisions of people in the world. In a footnote

added to his original text in 1753, Hume asserted with all of the authority of philosophy,

the fundamental relationship among complexion, character, and intellectual capacity: ―I

am apt to suspect the negroes, and in general all the other species of men (for there are

four or five different kinds) to be naturally inferior to the whites. There never was a

civilized nation of any other complexion than white, nor even any individual eminent

either in action or speculation‖ (n. pag.). In such a scenario, African-American literary

production could provide strong evidence of black intelligence, thus rebutting pro-slavery

arguments that Africans were intellectually incapable of freedom.

Fugitive slaves like Douglass who were literate, were eager to emphasise their

ability to read as literacy provided a justification for their existence in the white

dominated society, and the ability to read was regarded as an indicator to distinguish

animals from human beings. Through his powerful discourse in the Narrative in

favour of the ability to read and write, Douglass seems to suggest that literacy helps to

consolidate an innate desire for freedom that slavery and enforced ignorance darkens
 Raza 87

but cannot destroy. In addition, Nelson argues that the African-American slave

narratives were ―carefully crafted instruments of resistance‖ (xiv), because they

allowed the fugitive slaves the means to expose various practices of oppression,

enforced ignorance being one of them. Therefore, learning to read proved to be a vital

asset in the ex-slave‘s resistance struggle against white hegemony, as was the case

with Douglass. As it was mentioned in the introduction to the thesis, at the age of

eight, in 1826, Douglass was sent to Baltimore to serve in the family of Mr and Mrs

Hugh Auld. The experience at the household of Mr and Mrs Auld turned out to be a

turning point in Douglass‘s life as a slave. Soon after he started living with the Aulds,

Douglass became regularly exposed to learning under the tutorship of Mrs Auld who

―… very kindly commenced to teach me the A, B, C.‖ (58). On account of his

heightened desire and keen interest, Douglass learned the alphabet in a relatively short

time and enhanced his ability to ―spell words of three or four letters‖ (58).

At first, learning to read and write served Douglass the function of satisfying

his natural curiosity to learn and to acquire new skills. Soon, however, Douglass came

to understand the value of reading and writing for a slave, and it turned out to be his

master, Hugh Auld, who was responsible for providing Douglass with his first

arguments against slavery in his future struggle as an antislavery spokesman. After

discovering that his wife, Sofia had taught Douglass how to read, Mr Auld

peremptorily forbade her to continue with the matter on the grounds that:

If you give a nigger an inch, he will take an ell. A nigger should know

nothing but to obey his master—to do as he is told to do. Learning

would spoil the best nigger in the world. ―Now,‖ said he, ―if you teach

that nigger (speaking of myself) how to read, there would be no

keeping him. It would forever unfit him to be a slave. He would at once

 Raza 88

become unmanageable, and of no value to his master. As to himself, it

could do him no good, but a great deal of harm. It would make him

discontented and unhappy‖. (58)

From this revelation, Douglass quickly understood the anxiety of Mr Auld, and

the latter‘s speech became a great advantage to Douglass‘s intellectual development.

According to him, the words had a profoundly influenced him with the result that he

was shocked out of his slumber and his very thinking underwent a dramatic change.

Douglass mentions: ―I now understood what had been to me a 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‖ (58-59).

Douglass firmly believed that mental emancipation was the only means to

physical liberation, and the former could not be attained without education. The desire

to learn to read and write thus got deep-seated into Douglass‘s mind to the extent that,

as he expresses it: ―Though conscious of the difficulty of learning without a teacher, I

set out with high hope, and a fixed purpose, at whatever cost of trouble, to learn how

to read‖ (59). This focus on learning on the part of Douglass was precisely due to the

fact that he had become convinced after hearing Hugh Auld telling his wife what

learning could do to a slave, that it was the only potent weapon in his hand which

could deliver him from the shackles of bondage.

Thus far, Douglass had been told that the division of men into masters and

slaves was based on the will of God, and that this was the natural state of affairs,

which neither masters nor slaves could have an effect on. Mr Auld‘s revelation,

however, proved it otherwise. Douglass discovered that the division into masters and

slaves was, in fact, based on the white man‘s power and effort to keep the slaves
 Raza 89

ignorant and to prevent them from gaining access to knowledge. Therefore, it was

nothing but ignorance that prevented the slave from providing arguments against his

enslavement and to challenge the white man‘s ideology of racial supremacy.

The instances referred to in the foregoing paragraphs can clearly be termed as

the initial steps in Douglass‘s individual resistance to slavery, and as he gradually

acquired the skills to read and write, Douglass became progressively target-oriented

and independent in his thinking and actions. The ability to read quickly provided

Douglass concrete value in his search for the ―pathway from slavery to freedom‖ (59).

In his desire to learn to read, Douglass managed to lay his hands on a popular

schoolbook, The Columbian Orator, where he found a dialogue between a master and

a slave engaged in an argument for and against slavery. The dialogue proved to be a

great advantage for Douglass, and besides the above-mentioned master-slave

discussion, The Columbian Orator provided him with other influential writings on the

subject of slavery:

These were choice documents to me. I read them over and over again

with unabated interest. They gave tongue to interesting thoughts of my

own soul, which had frequently flashed through my mind, and died

away for want of utterance…The moral which I gained from the

dialogue was the power of truth over the conscience of even a

slaveholder. What I got from Sheridan was a bold denunciation of

slavery, and a powerful vindication of human rights. (66-67)

These remarks illustrate how Douglass discovered, with the help of the newly acquired

skill of reading, his own potential in the struggle against slavery and towards freedom.

From then on, his aim and journey was from ignorance to wakefulness and from
 Raza 90

oppression to freedom. Douglass‘s determination in this respect comes out as an

increased directness and even aggressive resistance:

The reading of these documents enabled me to utter my thoughts and to

meet the arguments brought forward to sustain slavery; but while they

relieved me of one difficulty, they brought on another even more

painful than the one of which I was relieved. The more I read, the more

I was led to abhor and detest my enslavers. I could regard them in no

other light than a band of successful robbers, who had left their homes,

and gone to Africa, and stolen us from our homes, and in a strange land

reduced us to slavery. (67)

The change in Douglass‘s resistance to slavery, from a silent sufferer to a vocal

opponent, is now visible. Before acquiring the ability to read, Douglass focussed in his

narration on giving voice to the inhuman treatment and suffering of the slaves. After

gaining in knowledge, his resistance became outspoken, bold, and critical in tone.

Moreover, as a result of gaining in knowledge, Douglass positioned himself at a

distance from the ignorant slaves who had not learned what he came to know as a

result of his self-education. But this enhanced knowledge set his mind thinking which,

in turn, made him more sensitive to his bonded state and caused him intense torment.

At the same time, however, ―The silver trump of freedom had roused my soul to

eternal wakefulness. Freedom now appeared, to disappear no more forever‖ (67-68).

Another example of the pronunciation of Douglass‘s increased independence and

directness is the instance he mentions about the stealing of food by him and his fellow

slaves because his master did not feed them well:

We were allowed less than a half of a bushel of corn-meal per week,

and very little else, either in the shape of meat or vegetables. It was not
 Raza 91

enough for us to subsist upon. We were therefore reduced to the

wretched necessity of living at the expense of our neighbours. This we

did by begging and stealing, whichever came handy in the time of need,

the one being considered as legitimate as the other. A great many times

have we poor creatures been nearly perishing with hunger, when food

in abundance lay mouldering in the safe and smoke-house, and our

pious mistress was aware of the fact; and yet that mistress and her

husband would kneel every morning, and pray that God would bless

them in basket and store! (82)

Douglass offers the same justification for the act of stealing food from the

neighbouring houses in a different manner when he mentions in his later Narrative that

by being compelled by Master Thomas and his wife to beg and steal food from the

neighbours, he has become a slave of the society in addition to being the slave of

Master Thomas. Therefore, when that society restricts itself to serve only Master

Thomas and people of his race by robbing Douglass of his rightful liberty and the just

reward of his labour, he is justified in robbing the society at large. (Life and Times

68).

Such incidents illustrate Douglass‘s personal sense of justice and his realisation

of his own value as an individual. It also shows his awareness of how the slave system

functions and what his role is in it. We find Douglass to be openly defiant against his

enslavement and oppression, which is the consequence of his newly gained

understanding of the injustice of the slave system against the blacks.

By closely examining the chronological narration of events by Douglass in the

Narrative, we can discern a visible change in his manner, based on where his interests

from then on lay. For example, at the beginning of his service at the household of Mr
 Raza 92

and Mrs Auld at Baltimore, a large part of Douglass‘s narration, related to the time

spent there, was dedicated to describing the characteristics and personalities of the

Auld family, and, in particular, what their attitude towards Douglass was. This was the

situation before Douglass learned how to read and before he started to think of himself

as unjustly slaved. Later on, however, during the process of his intellectual awakening

and his growing in knowledge, his focus turned away from the Auld family. Other

commitments and attachments took up his time and attention, which included teaching

other young blacks in his neighbourhood how to read, and the company of some white

boys from whom Douglass, in turn, received instruction. Thus, we can see through

these examples how Douglass‘s social position in his present community in Baltimore

changed and how, as a consequence of this, the focus in the Narrative shifts from the

earlier victim position to a situation where Douglass becomes an active agent of

resistance.

Douglass‘s rebellion against his enslavement was recognised in the beginning

in the shape of his intellectual awakening, of which the first signs were his private

thoughts about the white man‘s unjust power to enslave the blacks. However, not

much time passed before Douglass‘s understanding about the white man‘s effort to

keep slaves in ignorance and about the God-given division of men into masters and

slaves according to skin colour, became, eventually, announced in public. In 1836,

Douglass had yet another master, Mr Freeland, at whose ownership Douglass worked

regularly as a field hand. At the plantation of Mr Freeland, Douglass had developed

close connections to his fellow slaves, and in the company of these slaves, for the first

time, Douglass publically verbalised his thoughts and made his first public declaration

of resistance:
 Raza 93

I was anxious to have them participate with me in this, my life-giving

determination. I therefore, though with great prudence, commenced

early to ascertain their views and feelings in regard to their condition,

and to imbue their minds with thoughts of freedom. I bent myself to

devising ways and means for our escape, and meanwhile strove, on all

fitting occasions, to impress them with the gross fraud and inhumanity

of slavery…They were ready to hear, and ready to act when a feasible

plan should be proposed. This was what I wanted. I talked to them of

our want of manhood, if we submitted to our enslavement without at

least one noble effort to be free. (116-117)

One clearly notices that here Douglass addresses directly his fellow slaves about the

injustice of their enslavement. Douglass wants to make them understand what he has

come to understand by learning to read, that it is possible to question and to resist the

dominant discourse, which renders the white race superior to the blacks. The passage

is meaningful also because Douglass both recognises the white ideology and denies its

accuracy. In addition, he invites his fellow slaves to do likewise. As it was mentioned

earlier, besides Douglass‘s intellectual awakening, which resulted from his acquired

skill to read and write, he became increasingly bolder and outspoken in his resistance.

As his boldness in the matter grew, likewise did his self-esteem, of which the last

sentence in the quote provides evidence. In fact, although the passage above was

meant for his fellow slaves, Douglass‘s individual resistance seems to be directed, in

particular, towards the enslavement of Douglass himself.

In his Narrative, Douglass provides several instances of open rebellion against

slave law and slave conventions, for he reveals having committed such offences as

stealing food, teaching other slaves to read, and defending himself against his master,
 Raza 94

Mr Covey. Similarly, after the encounter between Douglass and Mr Covey, Douglass

reports having become bold and confident in his undertakings and though he remained

under the supervision of Mr Covey for another six months, according to him, ―From

this time I was never again what might be called fairly whipped, though I remained a

slave four years afterwards. I had several fights, but was never whipped‖ (105).

In my discussion on the affinities between Postcolonial Theory and African-

American Studies, it was implied that economic control was of significant, if not of

primary importance in imperialism, and that economic control involved a

reconstruction of the economic and social resources of colonized societies. Seen in this

backdrop, Douglass‘s dissatisfaction over handing over all his daily earnings of his

caulking job to his master Thomas Auld is proof, on the one hand, of the economic

potential of the Black race and on the other, of his readiness to challenge the unlawful

hold of his white master, assert his right, and gain independent control of his means of

livelihood.

These instances serve the purpose of challenging the entire slave system of

19th-century America. Gibson, for instance, even argues that:

Douglass strikes at the heart of slave society, at its very center which

…requires white-male dominance. The system requires not only that

slaves be obedient to their masters but that women and all other related

to a particular household should exist in subservient relation to the

patriarch‘s authority. To challenge that center is to challenge the whole

structure of antebellum Southern society. (591)

Gibson‘s suggestion here is actually equivalent to the definition of postcolonial

counter-discourse, which was discussed in the theory section of this thesis, and which

is the primary focus of the whole argument. The ‗centre‘ applies to white society and
 Raza 95

white ideology, which then situates the blacks on the ‗periphery‘. As a continuation,

the dominant discourse is the one supported by the centre, i.e. the white slaveholding

community, and anything in opposition to that discourse, and anything that rejects and

challenges that discourse can be interpreted as counter-discourse. Therefore,

Douglass‘s resistance to slave law is a counter-discourse to the dominant discourse.

Douglass‘s individual resistance can also be seen as an instance of his personal

struggle to shake off his slave identity and to adopt a new identity as a self-made man

and a self-reliant hero. Douglass was relatively eager to emphasise this aspect of his

character, which made him stand out among the rest of the slaves as someone who was

intellectually superior or advanced. For example, when Douglass, along with a few

close slave friends, finally starts to make concrete plans for their escape from slavery,

he feels the need to emphasise his personal importance in the matter. If we carefully

read the paragraph which gives the details of this plan, we notice the iteration of ―I‖ a

number of times, and on no less than 9 occasions, we find expressions like, ―I began to

prepare myself for a final struggle,‖ ―I … commenced … to imbue their minds with

thoughts of freedom,‖ ―I bent myself to devising ways and means for our escape,‖ ―[I]

strove, on all fitting occasions, to impress them with the gross fraud and inhumanity of

slavery,‖ and ―I talked to them of our want of manhood, if we submitted to our

enslavement without at least one noble effort to be free‖ (116-117). This persistent

emphasis on his own self does not point to Douglass‘s narcissistic self-praise but

rather speaks of his clear understanding of his role in the struggle for liberation, not

only for his own self, but also for his brethren-in-bonds.

Seen from a particular perspective, it could be argued that Douglass‘s

resistance to white hegemony and white domination functions in two opposite

directions. On the one hand, Douglass‘s aim is to challenge the legitimacy of the white
 Raza 96

man‘s right to oppress and enslave the blacks. Douglass sought to achieve this goal,

firstly, by behaving disobedient and reckless towards his masters and violating the

slave law, and secondly, by spreading the idea, through his Narrative, that

compromising the slave system is possible. On the other hand, in order to spread the

idea of resistance and to reach the white audience, Douglass had to acquire the

necessary tools of reading and writing. Douglass learned those skills by the guidance

of his white masters, and since then, each piece of information that Douglass gained

from newspapers and articles was related to white ideology and white culture. He

clearly realised that in order to counter the discourse and strategy employed by the

white slaveholders, he would have to utilise similar tactics and instruments. Therefore,

Douglass‘s process of intellectual awakening meant the acquisition of the dominant

way of thinking. White influence on Douglass‘s thought is a matter, which has been

studied extensively. For instance, Drake argues that there is a common pattern in slave

narratives, which can be detected, and according to which the ex-slave‘s attempts to

create a new identity for him- or herself which would fit the dominant culture‘s norms

(91). The same applies to Douglass as well. While trying to find a way from slavery to

freedom and from oppression to independence, Douglass rose from ignorance to

knowledge. But at the same time he acquired for himself an identity, which resembled

more that of the white Americans than that of the African-Americans. Drake argues

that (this identity was) what many of the African-American slave narrators assumed

was, specifically, an American identity (91). Many critics, such as Blight, however, in

relation to Douglass, write about the African-American dilemma of being both

American and black, which is in accordance with what was stated above about

Douglass‘s challenge of opposing the culture of white domination and, at the same

time, adopting the conventions of that culture in order to spread his ideas (301). All in
 Raza 97

all, the influence of strong white figures in Douglass‘s life, figures such as the white

masters and, later in his life, the white abolitionists, especially William Lloyd

Garrison, from whom Douglass acquired a large part of his antislavery propaganda,

cannot be overlooked in consideration of Douglass‘s identity formation. At the same

time, we must consider the fact that Douglass was prudently seeking to influence the

white population of the north, and it was important for him to secure their sympathies

in order to make potent his demand for the emancipation of the blacks.

However, it may be pointed out that Douglass‘s criticism of slavery is not

downright cynical, though it is in essence revolutionary. Notwithstanding the fact that

he ―himself repelled by force the bloody arm of slavery‖ (105), yet his crusade was

launched against the institution and not against the individual practitioners of

atrocities. We notice that when it comes to his criticism of the slaveholders and

overseers, Douglass does not fail to highlight the positive attributes of their

personality, even if they are otherwise insensitive and heartless in their treatment of

the slaves.

In short, it was learning to read that proved a turning point for Douglass in his

resistance to the oppression of black slaves and to white domination. Literacy

provided him with the means to gain access to information regarding the institution of

slavery and its power structures, and the skill of reading increased his vocabulary,

which allowed him to express his thoughts in words of resistance. During these early

years of intellectual awakening, Douglass‘s resistance to slavery and to white ideology

was mainly individual, although early signs of wanting to spread counter-discursive

thinking became visible at times. Later on, however, after his escape from slavery and

along his participation in antislavery struggles, his resistance becomes increasingly

political and widespread, which is the topic of the following subchapter.

 Raza 98

4.2. Political Resistance

The final subchapter of this thesis focuses on Douglass‘s resistance struggle

during the antebellum and post-Civil War era in the United States. During this period,

Douglass‘s resistance became increasingly political and widespread which is to be

seen in his active participation in the white abolitionist circuits soon after his escape to

freedom in 1838. Another feature that arises in Douglass‘s thinking after the abolition

of slavery is his promotion of the intellectual and social elevation of the American

blacks. These are, thus, the issues that will be discussed in the following subchapter.

Frederick Douglass managed to escape from slavery in Baltimore to New

Bedford, Massachusetts in September 1838. For the first few years Douglass learned

how to live as a free man and to lead an independent life. In 1840, about twenty years

before the Civil War and the abolition of slavery in the United States, Douglass was

introduced to the abolitionist circuit of Massachusetts where he was asked to address

the audience in an antislavery convention. This convention was led by William Lloyd

Garrison who was at that time, one of the leading abolitionists in the North. From here

on began Douglass‘s public career as an antislavery speaker and as time passed, he

developed more in the direction of a race leader. His first two autobiographies, the

Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave, and My Bondage and

my Freedom, were published in 1845 and 1855, at the time of vast political tensions

between the slaveholders of the South and those in opposition of slavery in the North.

Douglass‘s early autobiographies, thus, fit in the political atmosphere of the time and

concentrate mostly on spreading antislavery propaganda. The third autobiography, The

Life and Times of Frederick Douglass, Written by Himself, which was first published
 Raza 99

almost twenty years after the abolition of slavery in 1881, also contains the thoughts of

a race leader and a civil rights activist. Therefore, the last subchapter of this thesis

concentrates on some of the differences in Douglas‘s thoughts and writings before and

after emancipation, and proceeds further to discover what kind of counter-discourse

Douglass provided against racial discrimination which, like the slave system, was

based on white domination and black oppression.

When Douglass penned the Narrative, it was a time of the birth of his political

consciousness and he was not yet fully initiated into the intricacies of the social,

political, and ethical issues related to the fate of the African-Americans. However, by

the time when Douglass wrote The Life and Times of Frederick Douglass in 1881, he

was not only fully conversant with the above-mentioned issues but had been an

integral part in offering solutions to the same. His political ideology having matured

alongside his written expression, he gave voice to his goals and aspirations that he

wanted to realise for the sake of his subjugated black community. Thus we find that

Douglass‘s political resistance finds its major expression in Life and Times and it is

there that he extends his counter-discourse against slavery, which he initiated with his

Narrative.

During his early years as a political figure in the American antislavery

movement, Douglass was greatly influenced by white abolitionist philosophy of the

Garrisonians, who were led by William Lloyd Garrison. Douglass noted that the

Garrisonians found an important advocate of antislavery sentiment in Douglass, whose

recollections of his sufferings in slavery proved valuable for the cause of abolition.

But Douglass was soon to find this arrangement insufficient for his growing needs in

the struggle for the abolition of slavery and against black oppression. Douglass was ill-

at-ease over the fact that he was merely being used as a narrator of his experiences in
 Raza 100

slavery and was not encouraged—rather dissuaded—to participate in actively in

abolitionist movement. He was told to let the white abolitionists take care of the

antislavery politics. Douglass, however, intended to do quite the opposite. As the

Garrisonians promoted moral suasion as the best means to abolish slavery (Martin

195), Douglass became increasingly eager to favour political action on behalf of the

free blacks in the country. Thus, Douglass was an avid supporter of radical abolition

and advocated the engagement of blacks themselves in the struggle for emancipation.

With regard to Douglass‘s personal vision concerning the means of abolishing slavery,

an example is given in Douglass‘s reaction to the radical abolitionist John Brown‘s

plans to organise an armed slave revolt at Harpers Ferry, Virginia, in 1859, in order to

abolish slavery at once. Brown ―did not believe that moral suasion would ever liberate

the slave, or that political action would abolish the system‖ and that ―[n]o people …

could have self-respect, or be respected, who would not fight for their freedom‖ (Life

and Times 195). Although Douglass did not join Harpers Ferry Raid, John Brown‘s

ideology had a quite marked impression on Douglass‘s thought also. A little while

after the conversation with Mr Brown, Douglass expressed similar thoughts at an

antislavery convention at Ohio when he announced, ―slavery could only be destroyed

by bloodshed‖ (Life and Times 197).

Thus we see that Douglass was eagerly desirous of letting the blacks have the

option of handling the slavery issue themselves and become active members of the

American society. He firmly believed, as opposed to the whites, that the African-

American slaves had the requisite talent and potential to manage their affairs just as

the whites did. Douglass felt aggrieved by the fact that the national debate that was

generated over slavery and the fate of the American slaves was not associated with the

struggle of the African-Americans but was believed to be the white man‘s concern.
 Raza 101

When the Civil War broke out in 1861, Douglass welcomed the war as he assumed

that it would end slavery. At the same time, however, he disapproved of the policy of

the Union Army of the North, as did many radical abolitionists, for not permitting the

free African-Americans to join the armed forces:

I reproached the North that they fought the rebels with only one hand,

when they might strike effectively with two – that they fought with

their soft white hand, while they kept their black iron hand chained and

helpless behind them – that they fought the effect, while they protected

the cause, and that the Union cause would never prosper till the war

assumed an antislavery attitude, and the Negro was enlisted on the loyal

side. (Life and Times 242)

Once the blacks were eventually allowed to join the Union Army, Douglass, in

turn, made vigorous pleas for the black people of the North to grasp arms and to

―smite with death the power that would bury the government and your liberty in the

same helpless grave‖ (Life and Times 245). Thus, on the one hand, Douglass tried to

convince his white readers that, if given a chance, blacks would prove valuable and

enterprising members of American society. On the other hand, Douglass was reaching

for the free blacks of the North to take part in the conflict at hand and prove that they

themselves were the primary cause of the war.

Douglass‘s remarks on the active engagement of the blacks, whether in the

battles of the Civil War or in active participation of societal life, are in concordance

with his ideal of the self-made man. In his Narrative, Douglass is eager to emphasise

those aspects in his own character and actions which allow him to be regarded as a

self-sufficient man, who accomplished literacy almost on his own, who gained his own

freedom and who became a respectable political person and a social reformer. Even
 Raza 102

Douglass‘s critics, often refer to him as self-taught, self-sufficient, and the

personification of the American ideal of the self-made man. Martin for example,

characterises Douglass in the following manner:

First, he, like the American nation itself and its most enduring folk

heroes, rose above seemingly overwhelming odds to achieve historical

distinction. Second, he represents a model self-made man: an

exemplary black version of uncommon achievement primarily through

the agency of a resolute will and hard toil aided by moral law and

divine providence. (253)

If Douglass is to be seen as a model of self-made man, self-reliance was his

vision and goal also for the American blacks. While the political and racial atmosphere

of the antebellum America was far from granting the blacks the opportunity of racial

elevation, Douglass was active in his pursuit of countering white ideology, which held

the blacks, slaves and free, as incapable of self-sufficiency and economic success:

I assert … that poverty, ignorance, and degradation are the combined

evils, or in other words, these constitute the social disease of the freed

colored people of the United States. To deliver them from this triple

malady is to improve and elevate them, by which I mean simply to put

them on an equal footing with their fellow countrymen in the sacred

right to ―Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness‖. (Life and Times

204)

As we can see, Douglas‘s political resistance to white domination, to white

power and to black inferiority, before and during the American Civil War, was marked

by eager promotion of the potential of the American blacks to rise to intellectual,

economic, and societal success if given the opportunity.

 Raza 103

After the American Civil War, and after the black population of the United

States was eventually freed by the emancipation proclamation in 1863 and during the

consecutive years, Douglass found himself in a situation where his cause of resistance

could no longer be directed towards the abolition of slavery. Therefore, a shift in

Douglass‘s political agenda can be detected, for his thoughts and efforts were, from

then on, basically until his death in 1895, dedicated to the promotion of civil rights of

the American blacks and against the continued oppression of his race. The abolition of

slavery granted the blacks their freedom, but it did not make them citizens of the

United States. Therefore, Douglass‘s agenda after the emancipation became more and

more racial and political. It can be argued that, even after the abolition of slavery,

Douglass continued to provide counter-discursive arguments in his appeals against the

inferior status of the blacks in the white dominated society:

Though slavery was abolished, the wrongs of my people were not

ended. Though they were not slaves, they were not yet quite free …

[T]he Negro, after his emancipation, was precisely in his state of

destitution … He was free from the individual master, but the slave of

society. He had neither money, property, nor friends. He was free from

the old plantation, but he had nothing but the road under his dusty feet

… He was, in a word, literally, turned loose, naked, hungry, and

destitute, to the open sky. (Life and Times 274)

Thus Douglass‘s cause, during the latter part of his life, concentrated on

speaking for the civil rights of the American blacks and for the social and intellectual

elevation of his race. Likewise, the later part of his Narrative is dedicated to the

promotion of the civil rights‘ cause and the elevation of the blacks. Therefore, it could

be assumed that the need to republish a third version of his autobiography, The Life
 Raza 104

and Times of Frederick Douglass, Written by Himself, in 1881, was due to a need to

continue on speaking for his people.

Vast changes in society, concerning the African-American population, took

place in the years after the American Civil War. These changes between 1865 and

1895 were followed and commented on in Douglass‘s Narrative from his point of

view as political race leader and ―a major black Republican party stalwart‖ (Martin

16). Some critics consider The Life and Times of Frederick Douglass considerably less

fascinating and stylistically less intriguing than his earlier Narratives, The Narrative of

the Life of Frederick Douglass in particular and My Bondage and My Freedom, which

is widely held to be a mere successor to the first (Andrews 267). Douglass‘s original

Narrative was a trailblazer in the field of autobiography, setting the standard for many

subsequent slave narratives in its eloquent articulation of a man‘s achievement of

selfhood. Douglass powerfully adopts the language and conventions of white middle-

class American culture to condemn slavery and racism. Drawing on foundational

republican ideals of human freedom and equality, he denounces the cruel

contradictions and hypocrisies in American culture at the same time that he affirms his

hope for its future.

On the other hand, The Life and Times of Fredrick Douglass offers a wide

perspective on slavery and the socio-historical circumstances of 19th-century America,

since the narrative covers nearly a decade of political stirring in the country. In

addition, as far as Douglass‘s readers at the end of the 19thcentury were concerned,

Douglass‘s experiences in slavery provided them with a reminder of the original

reasons behind political upheaval in the United States after the Civil War and during

the early years of the 20th-century, when the country was heading towards Civil Rights

Movement of the 1950s.

 Raza 105

In short, the chapter discussed how Douglass resisted slavery and the

oppression of slaves in his Narrative. Learning to read played a crucial role in his

early resistance, for it allowed him to give voice to the ideas that had occurred to him

before, but which he had not been able to pronounce properly. A difference in his

resistance can be detected between the early stages of his intellectual awakening and

later in his life when he became a public figure and a race leader. In the beginning, his

resistance can be interpreted as individual, for he defied his oppression by learning to

read and write, by teaching other slaves to read and by defending himself against his

violent masters. Once a fugitive slave, Douglass‘s resistance became increasingly

political and he started to spread antislavery propaganda together with the white

abolitionists. His resistance politics included the radical abolition of slavery and the

promotion of the American blacks to become active members of the society and take

part in their own elevation from ignorance and degradation to intellectual and

economic success.
 Raza 106

CHAPTER FIVE

CONCLUSION

Language has no purpose in writings of social interactions if it is assumed

neutral. Language cannot be neutral in its social use and this may be the reason why

the social use of language gives it its real significance. Language mainly draws on

conversation, discussion and dialogue, and therefore theorizes the interactive use of

language. Discourse exists in the interactions of persons in a particular context, which

gives meaning to a writing or conversation. Language becomes a site of struggle

between people and their endeavours to put it in a particular perspective. That is to say

that conversation and social events make language a discursive practice.

Counter-discourse is a reactionary or retaliatory discourse of a subjugated

community, which comes into being when the dominant discourse of a hegemonic,

imperial or colonial power attempts to determine its status and value. In the present

study, I have attempted to establish as to how Frederick Douglass has employed this

counter-discourse as a means of anti-colonial resistance from the standpoint of his

victimised African-American community that was socially and intellectually

dehumanised, suppressed, and marginalised by the dominant white slaveholding

community. For the purpose of my research, I have chosen the first of Frederick

Douglass‘s three autobiographies, The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an

American Slave, which is the most widely studied of his works, to illustrate various

counter-discursive practices that challenge and resist white hegemony during the time

of slavery in the United States. My study specifically aimed at discovering and

analysing the employment of counter-discourse techniques and approaches in the

Narrative by the help of which Douglass has challenged the idea of the superiority of

the white Americans over the African-Americans in interpreting the latter as

 Raza 107

intellectually and socially inferior to the former. I have also attempted to establish that

Douglass makes effective use of a counter-discourse in his Narrative, which he uses as

a medium for anti-colonial and anti-slavery struggle.

I drew my theoretical framework from the post-colonial theory as counter-

discourse in response to colonial resistance has been dealt with predominantly in the

postcolonial literary studies. Postcolonial studies being a vast and interdisciplinary

field, which critically examines the tensions between a metropolitan centre and its

former dependents, provided me with the political and social framework in which to

analyse Douglass‘s Narrative. Since Postcolonialism deals with the evil effects of

colonization on cultures and societies, it provided me with useful insights to examine

the situation in 19th century slaveholding America, as portrayed by Frederick

Douglass. Moreover, since the counter-discourse in the African-American

autobiographical slave narratives in the American setting pivots around the struggle of

the African American slaves, I have discussed the postcolonial counter-discourse in

the context of African-American studies. The text of Douglass‘s Narrative has been

taken to act as a discourse of resistance by the black African-American community

against the dominant discourse of the white slaveholders during the antebellum 19th

century America. Different passages from the text have been selected and critically

analysed and interpreted in view of their possible contexts to highlight the counter-

discursive strategies employed by Douglass.

According to the ideology of supremacy propagated by the white population of

the United States, the American black population was considered intellectually and

socially inferior, and it allowed the treatment of slaves as chattel commodity. This

ideological thinking, which represented the dominant discourse of its time, was what

Douglass wanted to challenge by revealing the truth about slavery; its dehumanising
 Raza 108

effect and its debasing nature on every individual that it touched upon, whether slave

or the slaveholder.

Throughout this study I have tried to show that Douglass‘s Narrative can be

read from a postcolonial point of view and placed in a postcolonial context, because it

describes the situation in which a superior power captures or enslaves a people,

prevents their rights, suppresses their culture and forces them under oppression. In

addition, the Narrative illustrates the struggle against that oppression and for the

individual rights of the enslaved people. The concept of counter-discourse plays a

crucial role in that struggle, and the stylistic choices that Douglass made in his

Narrative, function as counter-discourse to the dominant discourse to the dominant

discourse of slavery and oppression. By stylistic choices I mean the manner in which

Douglass chose to narrate his experiences in slavery and what he decided to include in

his Narrative. Douglass chose to include detailed descriptions of his early childhood

experiences in slavery, when he, together with other young slaves, suffered from the

depravity of food, clothing, and personal development. Similarly, he included careful

depiction of violence and intense physical suffering, and claimed the ‗evil of slavery‘

as the instigator of physical and mental corruption. As Douglass pointed out the

dehumanising treatment of slaves, at the same time, he emphasised the humanity of

the slaves, for example, by narrating in detail the fleeting moments of motherly love

that Douglass experienced in his early childhood.

As counter-discourse to white hegemonic thinking, according to which blacks

were considered intellectually inferior to the whites, Douglass stressed the importance

of literacy, which he gained mostly by himself. Acquiring the ability to read is a

recurring theme in most slave narratives, because it seems to provide a justification to

the slave‘s existence in white dominated society, in which literacy was considered a
 Raza 109

distinguishing factor between animals and human beings. Literacy also played an

important part in Douglass‘s intellectual awakening because this skill provided

Douglass with the means to give voice to his antislavery thoughts.

Individual and political resistance came to characterise Douglass‘s life during

and after his escape from slavery, respectively. He became a prominent figure in the

antislavery movement during the antebellum era, and he was considered a race leader

among the African-American blacks after the emancipation when he struggled for

equal rights for his people. Douglass firmly established the value of the fundamentally

American ideal of the self-made man who was enterprising, self-sufficient, and self-

taught. This was his future vision for the blacks, which would lead to the social and

economic elevation of the black race.

Douglass‘s autobiographies have long since established a permanent and

prominent status in the chronicles of African-American literature, and they are also

considered an integral part of the history of American literature as a whole. The first

version of Douglass‘s slave narratives, The Narrative of the Life of Frederick

Douglass, an American Slave (1845), is the most studied version, and it has gathered

profound critical interest because of its influence in the development of the slave

narrative tradition and because of its contribution to the documentation of the black

experience in America. This study has, therefore, endeavoured to touch upon this

inspiring version of Frederick Douglass‘s experiences in slavery by taking into

account the postcolonial aspect of the black experience, and bringing to light the

employment of counter-discursive strategies by Douglass as a means of antislavery

resistance.
 Raza 110

Works Cited

Alabi, Adetayo. Telling Our Stories: Continuities and Divergences in Black

Autobiographies. New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2005. Print.

Anderson T. and J. Stewart. Introduction to African American Studies:

Transdisciplinary Approaches and Implications. Baltimore: Imprint Editions,

2007. Print.

Andrews, William L. To Tell a Free Story: The First Century of Afro-American

Autobiography, 1760-1865. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press,

1986. Print.

Asante, Molefi K. and Maulana Karenga. Handbook of Black Studies. California:

Sage, 2006. Print.

Ashcroft, Bill, Gareth Griffiths and Helen Tiffin. Key Concepts in Post-Colonial

Studies. New York: Routledge, 1989. Print.

---. The Empire Writes Back: Theory and Practice in Post-colonial Literatures. New

York: Routledge, 1989. Print.

Bamberg, Michael, and Molly Andrews. Considering Counter-Narratives: Narrating,

Resisting, Making Sense. Amsterdam: John Benjamin‘s, 2004. Print.

Bertens, Hans. Literary Theory The Basics. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge, 2008. Print.

Blight, David W. ―Up from ‗Twoness‘: Frederick Douglass and the Meaning of

W.E.B. Du Bois‘s Concept of Double Consciousness‖. Canadian Review of

American Studies, 21, 3. 1990: 301-310. Print.

Bobo, Jacquelin, Cynthia Hudley and Claudine Michel, eds. The Black Studies Reader.

New York: Routledge, 2004. Print.

Boehmer, Elleke. Colonial and Postcolonial Literature: Migrant Metaphors. 2nd

edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005. Print.

 Raza 111

Chander, Harish. ―Frederick Douglass‖. African American Autobiographers: A

Sourcebook. Ed Nelson Emanuel S. 2002: 95-109. Print.

Childs, Peter and R. J. Patrick Williams. An Introduction to Post-Colonial Theory.

London: Prentice Hall, 1997. Print.

Clark, Elizabeth B. ―The Sacred Rights of the Weak: Pain, Sympathy and the Culture

of Individual Rights in Antebellum America‖. Journal of American History,

82, 2. 1995: 463-493. Print.

Davis, Charles T. and Henry Louis Gates, Jr. eds. ―The Language of Slavery.‖

Introduction. The Slave’s Narrative. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985.

Print.

DeLombard, Jeannine. ―Eye-Witness to the Cruelty: Frederick Douglass‘s 1945

Narrative‖. Slavery on Trial: Law, Abolitionism and Print Culture. Chapel

Hill: U of North Carolina P, 2007. Print.

Douglass, Frederick. Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass: An American Slave.

Ed. Benjamin Quarles. Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard UP, 1960.

Print.

---. The Life and Times of Frederick Douglass, Written by Himself: His Early Life as a

Slave, His Escape from Bondage, and His complete History. New York: Dover,

2003. Print.

Drake, Kimberley. ―Rewriting the American Self: Race, Gender, and Identity in the

Autobiographies of Frederick Douglass and Harriet Jacobs‖. Melus, 22, 4.

1997: 91-109. Print.

Fanon, Frantz. Black Skin, White Masks. London: Pluto Press, 2008. Print.

Feblowitz, Joshua C. ―Breaking the Cycle: Violence, Control & Resistance in

American Slave Narratives‖. Student Pulse, Vol. 2, No. 01. 2010: 1-2. Web.
 Raza 112

http://www.studentpulse.com/articles/126/2/breaking-the-cycle-violence-

control-resistance-in-american-slave-narratives Accessed 14 May 2014.

Gandhi, Leela. Postcolonial Theory: A Critical Introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh

University Press, 1998. Print.

Gates, Henry Louis, Jr. The Signifying Monkey: A Theory of Afro-American Literary

Criticism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988. Print.

Gibson, Donald B. ―Christianity and Individualism: (Re-)creation and Reality in

Frederick Douglass‘s Representation of Self‖. African American Review, 26, 4.

1992: 591-599. Print.

Gruesser, John Cullen. Confluences: Postcolonialism, African American Literary

Studies, and the Black Atlantic. Georgia: The University of Georgia Press,

2005. Print.

Harris, Robert L. Jr. ―The Intellectual and Institutional Development of Africana

Studies‖. The Black Studies Reader. Ed. Bobo et al. 15-20. New York:

Routledge, 1990. Print.

Hume, David. ―Of National Characters.‖ The Philosophical Works of David Hume. Ed.

Green, T. H. and T. H. Grose. London: Longmans, Green and Co., 1882. Print.

Janet Gabler-Hover and Robert Sattelmeyer, eds. ―Narrative of the Life of Frederick

Douglass‖. American History Through Literature. Vol. 2. Gale Cengage

2006 eNotes.com 14 Apr, 2014. Web. http://www.enotes.com/topics/narrative-

life/reference#reference-narrative-life-frederick-douglass Accessed 14 April

2014.

Jarrett, Gene Andrew. Ed. A Companion to African American Literature. West Sussex:

Wiley-Blackwell, 2010. Print.

 Raza 113

Johnson, Guion Griffis. Ante-bellum North Carolina: A Social History: Electronic

Edition. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 2002. Web.

Khan, Nyla Ali. ―Frederick Douglass: A Reinscriptive Discourse.‖ World Literature

Today 2: A Student Publication. Vol. 3. Ed. Nathan Brown and Diana Prado.

Autumn 2001: N.p. Web. http://www.slideshare.net/nylaalikhan/frederick-

douglass-a-reinscriptive-discourse-4952142. Accessed 11 April 2014.

King, Richard C. Ed. Postcolonial America. Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 2000.

Print.

Kohn, Margaret. ―Frederick Douglass‘s Master-Slave Dialectics‖. Journal of Politics,

67, 2. 2005: 497-514. Print.

Kolchin, Peter. ―Standing Up to the Lash‖. New York Times Book Review, 2, 13.1994:

25. Print.

Levine, Robert S. ―Identity in the Autobiographies‖. The Cambridge Companion to

Frederick Douglass. Lee, Maurice S. ed. New York; Cambridge University

Press, 2009. Print.

Loomba, Ania. Colonialism/ Postcolonialism. USA and Canada: Routledge, 1998.

Print.

Martin, Waldo E. Jr. The Mind of Frederick Douglass. Chapel Hill: The University of

North Carolina Press, 1984. Print.

McClintock, Anne. ―The Angel of Progress: Pitfalls of the Term ―Post-colonialism‖.

Colonial Discourse and Post-Colonial Theory, a Reader. Williams P. and L.

Chrisman, eds. Hertfordshire: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1992: 291-304. Print.

Mcleod, John. Beginning Postcolonialism. Manchester: Manchester University Press,

2000. Print.
 Raza 114

Nelson, Emannuel S. Ed. African American Autobiographers: A Sourcebook.

Westport, USA: Greenwood Press, 2002. Print.

Nielson, Cynthia R. Frederick Douglass and the Master/Slave Dialectic. Web.

http://percaritatem.com/2010/02/17/frederick-douglass-and-the-masterslave

dialectic/# sthash.g 5uJROOd. dpuf Accessed 24 May 2014.

O‘Meally, Robert. ―Introduction‖. Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass: An

American Slave. New York: Barnes & Noble Classics, 2003. Print.

Rowe, John Carlos. Literary Culture and U.S. Imperialism. New York: Oxford

University Press, 2000. Print.

Said, Edward. Orientalism. London: Penguin Books, 2003. Print.

Schwalm, Leslie A. ―‗Agonizing Groans of Mothers‘ and ‗Slave-Scarred Veterans‘:

The Commemoration of Slavery and Emancipation‖. American Nineteenth

Century History, 9, 3. 2008: 289-304. Print.

Sinanan, Kerry. ―The Slave Narrative and the Literature of Abolition‖. The Cambridge

Companion to the African American Slave Narrative. Audrey Fisch ed. New

York: Cambridge University Press, 2007. Print.

Stalder, David. Life of the Narrative of Frederick Douglass, an American Man. (sic)

English 341: Nation & Narration. May 6, 1997. Web.

http://academic.reed.edu/english/courses/english341nn/studpages/david/index.html

Accessed 20 May 2014.

Stepto, Robert B. From Behind the Veil: A Study of Afro-American Narrative. Illinois:

University of Illinois Press, 1979. Print.

Stepto, Robert B. ―Introduction‖. Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass: An

American Slave. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2009. Print.

 Raza 115

Terdiman, Richard. Discourse/Counter-Discourse: The Theory and Practice of

Symbolic Resistance in Nineteenth-Century France. New York: Cornell

University Press, 1985. Print.

Tiffin, Helen. ―Post-colonial Literature and Counter-discourse‖. The Post-colonial

Studies Reader. Ashcroft at al. eds. London: Routledge, 1987. Print.

Williams, Patrick and Laura Chrisman, eds. Colonial Discourse and Post-Colonial

Theory, a Reader. Hertfordshire: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1993. Print.

Young, Robert J. C. Postcolonialism: An Historical Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell,

2001. Print.