Monday, September 29, 2014

Reaction Paper #1- Schaefer-Flake

Kelly Schaefer-Flake
Reaction Paper #1
9/29/14
History 205- Slavery in the United States

            How is it that a human being can be systematically reduced to an object? An answer to that question is offered by a mere glimpse into the history of colonization. Although different in the way that they approach African slavery, Stephanie Smallwood’s “Saltwater Slavery,” Peter Kolchin’s “American Slavery,” and the essays within “Major Problems in African-American History” all point to the idea that African slaves were, at least in the minds of European colonists, nothing more than disposable objects. However, that logic was not necessarily innate to the European mindset. The Europeans’ clearly recognized that there was a process involved in turning African slaves into a transportable commodity. Had the slaves been considered nothing more than objects inherently, the Europeans would not have had to forcibly transform them through a process as harsh as the middle passage. The means through which slaves were strategically removed from their families and placed in unbearable conditions supports an initial acknowledgement of Africans as human beings. It was as it the Europeans understood the slave humanity as an infection that had to be extracted.
Keeping the European mindset in mind, it is important to question how the process of human commidification was possible. Chains, starvation, and unimaginable isolation were just a few of the methods that European slave traders employed when transporting Africans slaves to the Americas[1]. Smallwood discusses the operation of commodification as partially a scientific feat. She says that,
The economic enterprise of human trafficking marked a watershed in what would become an enduring project in the modern Western word: probing the limits up to which it is possible to discipline the body without extinguishing life within[2].
But, human commodification was not merely a physical pursuit. To fully understand the means through which Europeans attempted to strip the slaves of their humanity, one must consider the physical as well as the metaphysical experiences. The emotional abuses that the slaves endured were numerous. It was the procedure of being shipped across the ocean that was perhaps some of the worst torture that Africans experienced. As Smallwood notes, the epistemologies of the African people had countless negative associations to water. Water, was bad, water was where life was not[3]. Additionally, the Africans were, to their knowledge, on a journey that would never end. Time had no meaning for the African slaves at sea[4]. They were trapped for a time period that had no end. With the endless torture, the Africans must have been left with endless fear. For Africans attempting to make sense of it all, their identity was completely changed. Life as they knew it was over. Their families and their communities were either left behind or starkly divided. The European slave traders actively sought to push the human capacity to its limits, to find the place between having a usable human body and maintaining humanity. For the individuals directly involved in buying and selling the slaves, the unfortunate process was seen as a necessary evil to facilitate their economic interests.
One important aspect of slavery that Smallwood describes well is the execution of slavery as an aggregate of competing economic preferences. Smallwood details this best when she describes slave-ship captains attempting to meet capacity. She says, “only when the human cargo was thought to be large enough to raise the probability of death and the attendant loss of property could the slave ship be deemed ‘full,’ its complement of captives ‘complete’”[5]. Most often, the slave ship captains were not independent entrepreneurs[6]. They were employees of large European companies dependent upon the sale of slaves. Similarly, the African merchants selling the slaves to the Europeans were not necessarily aware of the long-term implications of their actions. Although slavery was in existence years before European contact with Africa, the Atlantic Slave Trade marked the birth of an entirely new kind of slavery, a kind of harsh slavery that would pervade the norms of future American societies.
In “American Slavery” Peter Kolchin describes the evolution of slavery once it reached colonial America. Regarding slavery Kolchin says, “It grew like a cancer, at first slowly, almost imperceptibly, then inexorably, as colonists eager for material gain imported hundreds of thousands of Africans to toil in their fields”[7]. Worth noting is the fact that slavery, as it existed in Africa prior to European influence, was not the captive, total institution that colonial and American slavery came to be. One of the greatest distinguishing factors between the type of slavery exercised in Africa and the type of slavery that was exercised in the Americas is the Americas’ dependence on agriculture. Especially in colonial North America, agriculture was the driving force behind their economic success. According to Edmund Morgan in his essay “the Paradox of Slavery and Freedom”, it’s not inconceivable that the colonists, quite literally, purchased their independence from the British with products made by colonial slaves[8].  For colonists then, American slavery was seen as necessary for America’s success as an independent nation. Without slavery, there was no possibility of a successful independent American nation.
So, was slavery intrinsically a discriminatory practice based on the color of one’s skin? Winthrop Jordan suggests that racism and slavery grew together[9]. But, an argument can also be made for racism growing out of the colonial economic need to justify slavery as a social imperative. In fact, according to Peter Kolchin, “the initial demand for labor [in colonial America] was precisely that – for labor—and was largely color blind”[10]. It was simply practical for slaves to be easily identifiable as slaves; African slaves played directly into that need. As the entire nation began to depend on the economics of slavery so completely, there had to be some way to justify the horrific institution. It’s as if the early Americans believed that a nation founded on freedom could never willingly enslave other human beings so, as the Europeans had done before them, they relegated the slaves to objects. Race turned into a practical way to differentiate “objects” from humans.




[1] Charles McKinney, “The Terrible Transformation” (lecture, Rhodes College, Memphis, TN, September 9, 2014).
[2] Stephanie E. Smallwood, Saltwater Slavery a Middle Passage from Africa to American Diaspora. (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2008), 36.
[3] Ibid., 125
[4] Ibid., 135
[5] Stephanie E. Smallwood, Saltwater Slavery a Middle Passage from Africa to American Diaspora. (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2008), 36.
[6] Charles McKinney, “The Terrible Transformation” (lecture, Rhodes College, Memphis, TN, September 9, 2014).
[7] Peter Kolchin. American Slavery, 1619-1877. (New York: Hill and Wang, 1993), 4.
[8] Thomas C. Holt "The Origins of North American Slavery and Racism." In Major Problems in African-American History: Documents and Essays, 84-108. Vol. 1. (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2000), 100.
[9] Ibid., 98
[10] Peter Kolchin. American Slavery, 1619-1877. (New York: Hill and Wang, 1993), 7.

No comments:

Post a Comment