Here are the blog questions for the reading for next week. Don't forget you're welcome to create your own question or respond to other students' responses.
Please also remember that I do take attendance in section. There were a number of absences on Thursday, only one of which I had cleared.
Enjoy your weekend,
Tracie
Gates and Douglass:
- Gates, Jr, argues that race is a trope, i.e., a word/concept that is used figuratively, what does he mean by this?
- Contiguously, is there a problem with the metaphor that he offers? More specifically, does Gates, Jr., by relegating race to an abstract concept, a metaphor, fail to account for the real, material effects fomented by race?
- Gates writes that (pp.591 of the original text) many Western writers and (pseudo)scientists have sought to reify race by arguing that it is inherently biological, i.e., on page 595 of the original reading, that it is “natural, essential, and absolute.” What, in your opinion, would prompt these writers and scientist to espouse this particular stance, and, whose interests does it serve (explain)?
- Likewise, Gates argues that there has been and continues to be an (erroneous) conflation between “race” and intelligence that permeates and pervades western thinking regarding innate ability/intelligence; who are the beneficiaries of this line of thinking?
Fredrick Douglass, Narrative life of Fredrick Douglass, An American Slave
- On page 53 of the original text, Douglass recounts the vicissitudes of his own literate awakening. What does his account speak to regarding the internalization of negative, oppressive reinforcement?
- What caused Douglass’ aversion to thinking? Why did it quickly become the bane of his existence?
Question 4 (Gates):
ReplyDeleteBecause Gates explains that there is a correlation between race and intelligence, it serves to point out that people of color, because they are considered of a lower status, are less intelligence than those who are not of color (white). This way of thought benefits anyone who is not of color. Slave owners were against teaching slaves how to read and write because it would be a threat to their control over their slaves, meaning that it kept them in a higher power level compared to their slaves. Literacy was, and is, a form of control that benefits the status quo, those that already know how to read and write (not that literacy is only defined as knowing how to read and write).
Question 6 (Douglass):
Douglass became avert to his own thinking because after learning how to read he was able to understand his life as a slave and what it meant to be a slave. He writes “The more I read, the more I was led to abhor and detest my enslavers.” It was like the more he learned about his own history and who was he was at that point in time, the more he disliked where and with whom he was with. At times he wished that he hadn’t learned to read and be more like “fellow-slaves” who were “stupid”. Knowing how to read he was able to learn what abolition meant, he wanted it more and more every day that it became the only thing he thought about, smelled, and saw. The presence of the urge to be freedom was so alive that it tormented him to the point that he wished he didn’t know anything about it.
Gates writes that (pp.591 of the original text) many Western writers and (pseudo) scientists have sought to reify race by arguing that it is inherently biological, i.e., on page 595 of the original reading, that it is “natural, essential, and absolute.” What, in your opinion, would prompt these writers and scientist to espouse this particular stance, and, whose interests does it serve (explain)?
ReplyDeleteWriters and scientist sought to reify race by arguing that it is inherently biological in order to justify white supremacy and further rationalize the subordination of all other “races” that were not of white European dissent. By claiming that African Americans were not biologically as intelligent or as capable to live independently, the subordinators, Caucasians, ultimately felt that enslaving African Americans was ok. Further they felt that subordination was of natural order, because African Americans were “not capable “ of doing anything more than serve their white “superiors”. By making this rationalization “scientific”, it becomes more indisputable. Even today, something that has scientific backing is more trusted. For example, if cellular phones were “proven” to one hundred percent cause cancer, then most likely a large portion of users would stop using them even if this claim was not one-hundred percent accurate. Thus, this myth of “race” as a biological distinction amongst human beings serves in the interest of white people, to make them feel better about the fact that they imperialized the United States of America while subordinating almost every other person of differing origin.
What caused Douglass’ aversion to thinking? Why did it quickly become the bane of his existence?
Douglass’ aversion to thinking was due to his new ability to read and comprehend. When Douglas was illiterate he did not understand how bad his situation as a slave was. He explains that the more he read the more he grew to hate his slave masters, and the more he read the more he abhorred the thought of “being a slave for life”. He explains that the ability to read and think critically “had given [him] a view of [his] wretched condition, without the remedy” (53). This quickly became the bane of his existence because he had no foreseeable way to change his fate as a slave. He came to learn how unfortunate his life in fact was, but this knowledge only caused pain. For a period of time, he found himself “wishing [himself] dead” and contemplating killing himself. He envied the ignorance of those who didn’t know the severity of the unfairness of the life that they were handed, due to the color of their skin.
1. Henry Louis Gates, Jr. urges that race is a trope in a metaphorical sense as opposed to the literal sense because race should not be a distinguishing factor among the human population. As he states, “Who has seen a black or red person, a white, yellow, or brown? These terms are arbitrary constructs, not reports of reality.” (Gates, Jr. 591-592). In other words, humans have come up with these classifications to segregate society into different categories based on race. For instance, it is, mostly, impossible to distinguish an individual’s religion based on their appearance, although the lord that is referred to in the essay might disagree (Gates, Jr. 591); yet there continues to be a division of the human species into specific races based on their religious beliefs. While I do concede that there are obvious phenotypical variations amongst human beings that provide opportunities to make distinctions between African Americans and people of other origins, it is evident that race is a man-made tool that was produced to transform abstract definitions into classifications that entities utilized as divisions of the population.
ReplyDelete2. Although I believe that Gates, Jr. makes a compelling debate claiming that race is an abstract idea, I do admit that there are problems with this assumption because he does not account for some of the premises of race that are founded on the differences in the physical attributes of human beings. For example, African Americans usually have noticeably darker skin than the majority of the human population, and individuals of Asian origin mostly have smaller and more slanted eyes. In essence, there are many physical components of race that Gates, Jr. fails to recognize, and it is wrong to be blind to physical differences and histories and pretend as if they do not exist. As John Cheng, an Assistant Professor at George Mason University, declares, “wanting to be ‘blind’ to color or race seems to mean wanting to ignore race or pretend its social and historical effects don't exist…we have to be mindful of the historical and social complexities of race, not willfully ignore them.” (PBS.org).
Question 4
ReplyDeleteThe beneficiaries of the idea about race correlating to intelligence are the people who are part of the dominant race, the White race in our country. The problem is that many times there are correlations between two variables, but that does not mean that one directly causes the other. Often times, there are confounding variables that are ignored. In our case here, the confounding variable is that people of other races were/are not afforded the same educational opportunities that Whites are. Gates uses the example of the question of Africans’ literacy as a measure of their ability to reason. Europeans during the Enlightenment questioned the intelligence of “The African ‘species of men’” (p.593) because most of the slaves owned at that time could not read or write; however, their inability to read and write had nothing to do with their intelligence, only that they had not been taught to read and write. While there was a correlation between being Black and not being able to write, it had nothing to do with being Black! Yet this view has been perpetuated until current times, as it serves the interest of the dominant culture, which is largely Euro-centric.
Question 6
Douglass’ aversion to thinking became the bane of his existence because when he finally understood his predicament, it became nearly intolerable. He says, “It had given me a view of my wretched condition, without the remedy.” (p. 53). It was almost as if the idea of freedom taunted him daily, while he lived as a slave and could do nothing about it but contemplate.
Q: - Likewise, Gates argues that there has been and continues to be an (erroneous) conflation between “race” and intelligence that permeates and pervades western thinking regarding innate ability/intelligence; who are the beneficiaries of this line of thinking?
ReplyDeleteA: The beneficiaries in the aforementioned argument are the races that are seen on the “higher tier” of the ability/intelligence spectrum. Races that are, presumably, on the “lower tier” of this spectrum are the ones that end up losing out. Some of these supposed - I would almost like to say stereotypes - of intelligence and ability attributed to these races are still evident statistically today. Whites consistently hold top positions of the work force (if you would even classify them as part of the work force at that point, since they are essentially just a figure of power) regardless of any merit or qualifications that other races (or even gender, in some cases) may have. Affirmative action was put in place to stop this very way of thinking, and still there are many cases of the intellectual stereotypes attributed to race regardless of a persons actual merit. This ties in with what Tracie was discussing with us at the end of our last section about how we really don’t live in a meritocracy, although we might be led to believe we do.
Q: On page 53 of the original text, Douglass recounts the vicissitudes of his own literate awakening. What does his account speak to regarding the internalization of negative, oppressive reinforcement?
A: While Douglass shares his account of the negative and oppressive reinforcement he received from his mistress and her husband, he soon realized that this oppression helped drive him to become literate (as far as reading and writing is concerned). He states that “the very decided manner with which he spoke, and strove to impress his wife with the evil consequences of giving me instruction, served to convince me that he was deeply sensible of the truths he was uttering. It gave me the best assurance that I might rely with the utmost confidence on the results which, he said, would flow from teaching ,e to read. What he most dreaded, that I most desired” (47-8). He follows this paragraph with similar messages: “In learning to read, I owe almost as much to the bitter oppostiton of my master, as to the kindly aid of my mistress” (48). Clearly the oppression (while, clearly intended to demotivate him) ended up being a primary reason for Douglass’s persistence for literacy.
While this bad thing seems to have turned out to be quite favorable for Douglass, toward the end of the passage he states how becoming literate is both a blessing and a disease. While he can now have the power to understand the things around him, he does not like seeing the way things are.
Lorna Porter
ReplyDelete3. Writers and scientists have sought to reify race by arguing that race as a concept is actually biological. I feel that this is prompted by a desire to justify the status quo, and to alleviate the pressure brought upon by guilt. By arguing that race is biological, scientists and writers are providing an outlet as to not accept responsibility for the social hierarchy the white man has created based upon race. The claim that intelligence and capability are effected by race allows the writers and scientists to convince themselves that they are not responsible, and therefore do not need to accept responsibility to change the way things are or rectify the mistakes made by white oppression. The caucasian race as a whole has their interests served by this pseudo science, and it allows the social norm of oppression to perpetuate generationally, maintaining a system of power dominated by those with white skin. This science is completely unfounded in truth, and is an example of correlation, not causation, yet has eased the minds of many ignorant people willing to accept things at face value because it serves their needs.
6. Douglass’ aversion to thinking emerged as a product of his ability to read and therefore better understand the world around him and his role in it. As Fiere has shown what a true education can mean, an understanding of one’s active place in the world and society, Douglass realized through his education and exposure to a world beyond the uneducated role he was cast in as a slave was a terrible one. By thinking about it critically it brought him pain, no longer was he living in the “ignorance is bliss” sphere he had been in, and for a while, felt his position permanent, and therefore thinking about it without an end in sight was too hard to bear.
3. The beneficiaries of this line of thinking are those that are deemed a part of the superior “race”, which are Caucasians. Those that are not colored are seen as inferior, which makes them seem less intelligent and lacking abilities. By keeping this idea alive, it is easy for those of the superior “race” to see themselves as more inept and capable of achieving more than those that are a part of “inferior” races. Colored people always have to prove their intelligence and show that they have a “mastery of arts and science.” The lack of representation of colored people in Academia, makes it easier for this type of thinking to still continue even now.
ReplyDelete6. Douglass’ aversion to thinking was caused by him learning how to read. He finally understood his surroundings and questioned them. He felt a new sense of knowledge and it took over his life. He mentions that “the more I read, the more I was led to abhor and detest my enslavers.”(53) Douglass was angry at the fact that he was a slave. He finally understood what type of institution slavery was and “envied” his fellow slaves for their “stupidity,” because they weren’t aware of how the slavery system worked, why it was in place, and how they were not given the opportunity to read. Douglass felt that reading opened his mind to “thinking.” His being able to question the world he lived in drove him to want to have a different life then the one he was living.
5) The negative, oppressive reinforcement for Fredrick Douglass definitely came from the cruelty of his master. His mistress, Mrs. Auld, taught him the alphabet and how to spell short words. When Mr. Auld found out, he was furious and demanded that the lessons stop. He foolishly explained that, “Learning would spoil the best nigger in the world. Now, if you teach that nigger how to read, there would be no keeping him. It would forever unfit him to be a slave” (47). What Mr. Auld means is that once a slave such as Mr. Douglass gains the understanding of his situation, he would then have the power of knowledge. He would then know how unfair and wrong the situation he is in is. He could understand how the “white mans power to enslave the black man” came to be and possibly overthrow it. Douglass swore he would keep learning until he found a way to leave his position as a slave. Mr. Douglass forever kept Mr. Auld’s words in his mind. He internalized these valuable statements because he understood his ticket to freedom. His ticket was learning to read and write. But, he would have to do this quietly to ensure his safety.
ReplyDelete6) Douglass continued to learn to read and write with help from various jobs and neighborhood kids. His aversion to thinking stemmed from the knowledge that he was being held captive by “successful robbers, who had left their homes, and gone to Africa, and stolen [them] from [their] homes, and in a strange land reduced [them] to slavery” (53). Douglass had the knowledge that this was an excruciatingly unfair situation, but he did not have the means to do anything about it. He even began to envy his fellow slaves for their stupidity (53). What you don’t know can’t hurt you, but Douglass already knew too much thanks to Mr. Auld and now couldn’t stop until he was a free man.
Thomas Cycyota
ReplyDelete3. In every society, there are those with power that use their authority to maintain an elevated social position. The methods with which they do this, however, are socially brutal and highly political. By developing and advocating a concept of race and thereby racial supremacy, these writers and scientists were able to create within other people a innate belief that they were supreme or inferior because of this perverted concept of “race.” Race, as these authoritative figures presented, was the number one indicator of mental capacity, athletic ability, and comprehension of human emotion. This stance became imbedded in American policy and culture, allowing the scientists and writers who originally proffered the seed for this idea to remain at the apex of the social system in which they functioned. They knew that there was, in fact, no cumulative proof of a biological meaning of race, yet suggested that race is inherited instead of lived and “done” through daily cultural preferences and personal history. Skin color plays a very small part in somebody’s “race,” yet it was convenient at the time for these people in power to promote this idea to further their own means and authority.
5. Quite clearly Douglass has found meaning to the cliché phrase: “Ignorance is bliss.” He has, at the point in his life he describes here, realized the true enormity of injustice that is inherent in slavery. After obtaining education and literacy, he states, “The silver trump of freedom had roused my soul to eternal wakefulness.” He has been shaken from the institution of slavery, realizing that while he was part of it he was at the same time furthering it with his ignorance. Douglass knows now that the only reason slavery is allowed to exist by those oppressed is because of the negative reinforcement by those who benefit from the system. He even claims that he is so appalled by this realization that he wants to go back to ignorance and “envied my fellow-slaves for their stupidity.” Not only has he realized that slaves are ignorant to the knowledge of the injustice of slavery, but also that by keeping knowledge from them, slave owners are able to perpetuate the system.
- Gates, Jr, argues that race is a trope, i.e., a word/concept that is used figuratively, what does he mean by this?
ReplyDeleteGates is referring to the fact race is used as a means of judging people because it is believed it is a concrete thing that definably differentiates people. He is saying it is a trope because this belief is untrue; race is not scientifically true. He says, “When we speak of the ‘the white race’ or ‘the black race’ or ‘the Jewish race’or ‘the Aryan race’, we speak in biological misnomers and, more generally, in metaphors.” The use of the word “race”, to Gates, is a way to hold some people down.
Contiguously, is there a problem with the metaphor that he offers? More specifically, does Gates, Jr., by relegating race to an abstract concept, a metaphor, fail to account for the real, material effects fomented by race?
There is a very real problem with this explanation of “race” just as words. Just because you make race into an abstract concept it does not get rid of racism or bigotry. Also it ignores the fact that people from different countries look and act differently. Whether you hold any prejudices or not you notice that people from Japan speak Japanese, are culturally different, and have different physical features than a white American. “Race” as a word does have a negative past but elimination of the word does not eliminate why it is part of our language. Gates makes reference to how “Iran and Iraq each feel justified in murdering the other’s citizens because of their ‘race’”. This statement makes it seem that if stopped referring to each other as being of different races our different cultures would now live harmoniously. This is completely untrue.
Question 1 (Gates)
ReplyDeleteWhen Gates defines race as a trope, he regards the term race as a figurative concept of people, not an objective term used for the biological classification of people. He argues that the term race as a trope in its popular usages both describes and inscribes "differences of language, belief system, artistic tradition, and gene pool"(590). In this sense, race is metaphorical, not biological. The problem of the trope is, he goes on to argue, that "race is the ultimate trope of difference because it is so very arbitrary in its application"(591). This arbitrariness in the trope comes from dominating countries' cultural and racial prejudices. Throughout human history, dominated people have been sacrificed as victims to this trope of differences used by dominating people. As the story of the African slave girl Phillis Wheatley shows, even the Africans' ability to write was suspected. Reading and writing was prohibited to African slaves, while their ability to do it was suspected and denied.
Question 6 (Douglass)
It was Douglass's awakening of his inescapable condition under slavery that caused him to hate thinking itself. As he began to learn how to read by the help of his kind mistress, he realized that learning to read is a way to freedom. In "The Columbian Orator," he finally found an utterance of "a powerful vindication of human rights"(53). But his reading gave him even more painful experience rather than a hopeful message: "It had given me a view of my wretched condition, without the remedy. It opened my eyes to the horrible pit, but to no ladder upon which to get out."(53) He felt uncontrollable hatred and anguish toward slave owners, which tormented him ever more. If he could have escaped from this predicament, this thinking would not have tormented him. But he only felt that he was imprisoned by the inescapable wall of slavery. It was the endless thinking of his condition that tormented him. His aversion to this thinking became harmful to his existence, because it caused him to refuse and negate his own life in this condition.
- Likewise, Gates argues that there has been and continues to be an (erroneous) conflation between “race” and intelligence that permeates and pervades western thinking regarding innate ability/intelligence; who are the beneficiaries of this line of thinking?
ReplyDeleteThe correlation between race and intelligence is unfortunately still a prevalent misconception in our society and in the world. It’s an idea that’d been passed down through white-dominant societies, and despite the progress that most people have made in recognizing all humans as being equals, there are tones of this conflation prevalent in the everyday. It shouldn’t benefit anyone, but it does. Whites are often assumed to be the more intelligent race. In the media, for example, blacks and Hispanics are frequently stereotyped. As a Caucasian, I’ve never been judged racially. Literally, whites are the only people who avoid the harm of this line of thinking. And as Gates argues, race itself is a conceived notion; it’s not a biological truth. White is the dominant “race” because of an idea created by whites to maintain the position of power.
- What caused Douglass’ aversion to thinking? Why did it quickly become the bane of his existence?
For Douglass, thinking made his life harder to accept. It was exactly what his master had predicted, and warned his mistress of; as soon as he thought about it, about slavery and the injustice that was being done to him, he hated his life. To describe his mistress’s reactions to him trying to read after the master’s warning, Douglass used “ danger” and “apprehension.” And it’s so true that slaves being forced to live without education was a device of control. And Douglass’ knowledge of that I think just added to his hatred of his own thoughts. It had been confirmed (indirectly) to him, that by thinking, he wouldn’t be a good slave anymore, that he would grow resentful, and feel cheated and robbed. It’s tragic that he wished to go back to when he wasn’t thinking about it; he notes that he was jealous of other slaves who just accepted their lives without really considering it. Thinking, simply, made Douglass’ enslavement feel worse.
1.
ReplyDeleteGates, Jr. defines a trope to be a word that is used in a non-literal sense, and sees race as the ultimate trope because of its arbitrariness. While race has been defined and used under the guise that it is completely objective and biologically natural, it is not. Race is just a human invention, and he argues that it is a dangerous trope because it is a loaded word filled with a complex history and has been used as a tool in establishing dominance over different groups of people. Upon uttering the word ‘race’ one is creating meaning behind this concept and developing the sense of difference between “cultures and their possession of power, spelling out the distance between subordinate and superordinate” (534). The term race was so embedded in the dominant Western discourse and was especially used by white people to identify African Americans as being the “lowest of the human races” and to secure their power over them.
6.
Douglass developed an aversion to thinking after secretly learning how to read. The more he read the more he became aware of his dismal conditions and the “more [he] was led to abhor and detest [his] enslavers” (53). With reading he gained invaluable knowledge; however, his knowledge quickly became the bane of his existence because he did not the power to change his situation. At times he even envied the ignorance of his fellow slaves and wished that he were dead. Reading opened a gate to knowledge and ideas, but as a result he only felt pain and a constant yearning for freedom.
#2
ReplyDeleteBy “relegating race to an abstract concept” Gates Jr. describes race as a metaphor for difference, a description that some object reduces the intricacy involved in race; this thus fails to account for the consequences brought about by race. However, considering what is lost in describing race as a trope, the stakes of the discussion lie not with whether a description of race loses explanatory strength; rather, it lies with whether the components lost are crucial to the discussion of race.
In this light, granting that Gates’ description loses “material effects fomented by race,” the question is first whether these effects are necessary in our understanding, and second whether they are truly lost.
Regarding the first, I interpret material effects of race as some of what Gates describes: the South Carolina statute that prevents blacks from acquiring literacy or Phillis Wheatley’s failed attempt in 1770 to publish her poetry because it was assumed that she could not write such poetry. Such cases like preventing access to books or publishing talented poetry based on racist reasons seem to be defining of the consequences of racism.
Regarding the second, Gates’ metaphor description seems to explain and include such material cases of racism. If anything, describing race as a metaphor of cultural, linguistic, or ideological differences better accounts for material cases like the above than describing race from a biological or social/political perspective.
Thus, at first examination, Gates’ metaphor is not debilitated by such an objection.
#3
Many of these writers like Hume and Kant write from the historical/social/philosophical context such that their views are easy to misjudge. With this in mind, it is not completely accurate to say that they hold their particular stance for their own interests as writers because it is so contextual; however, I argue their own interest for success are nonetheless significant motivations.
More deeply, their motivation to write as such can be described with some understanding. Philosophers often do one of two things: they can explain the way people think or provide the basis for an alternative view. Applied to race, it was the indoctrinating (yet wrong) view that blacks were inferior to whites, and the philosopher can attempt to provide a revolutionary alternative to the predominant view, or he can take for granted the predominant view and give philosophical explanation to why people think as such.
And although it was the wrong view at the time, it is just as wrong as any contemporary view today is, which is to say that it is a little harsh to judge a past philosopher for not always advocating the view that we today consider correct. It does not make the figures any less incorrect, but minimally it puts a grain of salt into consideration.
Question #1
ReplyDeleteGates, Jr. argues that race has become a trope of ultimate difference in cultures, linguistic groups, or adherents of specific belief system, and also opposing economic interests (Gates, Jr.: 591). Race is not only about difference in skin color anymore, but it becomes a tool that is used to differentiate people who have different cultures or belief systems. He also argued that biological criteria used to differentiate sex could not be applied in languages, and yet people still have the will to use this as a natural differentiation. Race is a term used to segregate people who have different beliefs, e.g. the differentiation between Irish Protestants and Catholics mentioned in the readings. On the surface, it may look like that race is only a term to differentiate people biologically, but it was used to put people into certain groups based on different criteria. Race is used to assign a place for a certain group in the society, which would make it possible for one group of people to be dominant over others.
Question #4
The beneficiary of this line of thinking will be the race who holds dominant power (highest place at the chain of being), the Europeans. During that time, intelligence was measured basically through the ability of a person to read and write, which most of Europeans were acquired to; the Europeans then became the “intelligent” race who could assign black people to a lower place in the great chain of being (Gates, Jr.: 593) because they could not write or read. Since most of blacks were slaves, they were prohibited from learning how to read or write by the laws; therefore, they could never become the “intelligent race” according to the society. The blacks would always be at a lower position than the Europeans, which gave Europeans the rights to have them as slaves. Also, if blacks were to learn how to read and learn, they would be able to jump up through the chain of being and question their positions as slaves. They would think of themselves as human being, and they would refuse to be enslaved by the Europeans.
- #4
ReplyDeleteThe fallacious correlation between "race" and intelligence provides a convenient rationalization of slavery. According to the western concepts of natural hierarchy outlined in the article, the distinction between animals and humans is intelligence; Gates states in the article how western thinkers adhered to the "chain" model of the animal kingdom, where animals are organized into an ordered hierarchy based on exhibited features. Together these criteria placed humans firmly on the top of the chain, establishing a superior-subordinate relationship between humans and less intelligent creatures. It naturally follows from the model that the lesser animals are to be taken care of by and used by their superiors to further their own ends, in the same way that the horse is used by man. With this in mind it is clear that to ascribe the black "race" to the lowest rung of the human latter legitimizes the practice of slavery for westerners. The people who have most to gain from applying "stupid" to the black "race" are those who precede them in this western model of hierarchy, namely the whites on the top of the chain who gain economically from the usage of slaves. (It is interesting to note that this archaic model is an artifact of medieval thinking, drawn from analogy of the "natural" medieval hierarchy of god -> angels -> humans -> animals.)
- #6
Before Douglass could read he was unable to see the extent of insidiousness that was present in the form of slavery he was subject to. He also was unable to appreciate what freedom really offered him. His master put it best when he impressed upon his wife that to teach a slave to read was to make him not a slave; the very act of teaching the slave made him unfit for the purpose. Once he could read, Douglass now saw how the slaveholders conspired to keep the slaves as slaves. Also, Now that he could read he had a slight taste of what it was like to be free, and from then on all he thought about was about was attaining total freedom.
1. Gates uses the term trope to signify that race is an arbitrary concept. In other words , race was purely shaped by individual preference. Gates demonstrates how race became a trope by linking writing and literacy to racial identity. Humans, predominantly whites and Europeans, started this “invention” of race in the 18th century by drawing distinct lines between the subordinate and superordinate based on their capability of publishing literature. Race wasn’t supposed to categorize people based on their measure of literacy or knowledge, but rather serve as a representation of people with common characteristics and beliefs. Gates further incorporates the idea of race being a trope by asking “who has seen a black or red person, a white or brown?” all these words are just adjectives in which man kind has chosen to coincide with peoples skin color. For example, African Americans aren’t the color “black”—as they have been referred as through the decades. As humans we have taken a literal meaning of race and turned it into a figurative concept.
ReplyDelete3. I think these western writers and pseudo scientists say that it is natural, essential and absolute to reify race because at some point power wont be distributed equally and there will have to be a dominant population-- which of course is their own. To some extent, I can agree as to why they would say this because I do believe that it is apart of our human nature to strive for success and that at some point we wont all be equal. However, I strongly believe that these western writers took this stance and used the idea of “reifying race” as an excuse for them to abuse their power of dominance towards other races( i.e Africans and slavery). Ultimately reifying race only serves an interest to those in the superior race because they are the ones who have power over subordinate populations.
1) Race as a trope is an elucidation to the idea that “cultures, linguistic groups, or adherents of specific belief systems” are dissociated from reason and sensibility. That is to say, race, as a metaphor, breeds the trivialization of racial character because it is “so very arbitrary in its application.” Gates calls into question the biology of determining inherent difference of individual sex in opposition to “race;” the summation thereof is careless use of language and a miss-classification of physical being: “Who has seen a black or red person, a white, yellow, or brown?” Moreover, the author surmounts this trope with the inclusion of an anecdote from 1772, which exposes the focal of his thesis and fleshes out a clandestine exchange pertinent to the “Western culture’s use of writing as a commodity to confine and delimit a culture of color.” Harrowing, Phillis Wheatley’s scenario reinforces the notion that race was never supposed to be fiction, was never meant to become a trope.
ReplyDelete2) The metaphors presented by Gates are efficacious. He construes an inference to the possibility of a problem by writing in a style implicit of the difficulty in conveying the real, material effects fomented by race: “We know reason by its writing, by its representations.” Gates peppers his essay with italicize and supplements his argument by enveloping himself in his closing remarks which I found to be quite powerful. I’ve seen and felt the brunt of race almost to the point where it has become an afterthought. Gates offered some telling examples of how the powers that be cultivated a dichotomy from something that could have an inimical effect on society.
Question 1
ReplyDeleteGates argument that race is a trope comes from his belief that all humans are fundamentally similar. Gates believes that race is a contrived distinction between men that doesn’t exist. It’s simply a notion which we painted into our society. Race is used in “such a way as to will this sense of natural difference into our formulations.” This natural difference doesn’t exist according to Gates. He argues that the African American literary movement supplied proof to the fact that all humans are more similar than they are different. The emergence of African American poetry and literature humanized that race of man. The enlightenment period had cultivated a deep seated belief that the ability to read, write, and reason was a uniquely defining human trait. As a result, the emergence of African American literature provided loud and visible reason to believe slaves were humans. Before that, race had constructed an ideology that rationalized dehumanizing African Americans. Without educating the slaves, the system never had to be questioned and the contrived “natural difference” we call race became engraved into the lives of men.
Question 6
Douglass’ aversion to thinking comes from his ability to perceive his situation. Douglass’ ability to read and write allowed him to become a human. He started thinking. As a result, he slowly became aware of the evils of the world around him. As a slave before his education, Douglass didn’t understand the world around him. With the ability to read Douglass started to view the world through the lens of truth. He no longer lived with the false perceptions and lies told to him by everyone around him. The sweet taste of education sent Douglass on a search for truth. He grows to hate this education simply because the truth he finds is the fact that the institution is flawed and he is essentially powerless to change it. Douglass puts it beautifully when he says, “It [knowledge] had given me a view of my wretched condition, without the remedy. It opened my eyes to the horrible pit, but to no ladder upon which to get out.”
1: Gates argues that race is a trope because he believes that humans are essentially the same. He says that race doesn't really exist and that it is a social construct. In order to help prove his argument, he brought up the claim about African American literature. According to the beliefs made in the Enlightenment era, humans were defined as beings who could read, write, and reason; therefore, African American literature was clear proof that African Americans were human. The concept of race came with the dehumanization of African Americans was due to the idea that they were illiterate; however, the production of African American literature proved that they were human. Therefore, racial difference, according to Gates, should even exist.
ReplyDelete6: Douglass's aversion to thinking came from his gain of knowledge. Because he had learned to read and write, he became aware of the truth in the world around him. He learned about the reason why slavery existed and why his people were oppressed. As he grew in his knowledge of the world around him, he became increasingly pained and said, “The more I read, the more I was led to abhor and detest my enslavers.” It came to the point where he wished that he had never learned so that he could remain ignorant like the other slaves.