When reading the narratives of formerly enslaved people, there are distinct differences in both the form of their narrative styles and the content of their narratives depending on their gender. The term ‘gender’ here is used very cautiously as it must be recognised that enslaved people were not considered to possess any gender as they were simply units of production (except for the ability to reproduce which was based entirely on one’s sex organs, not their socialisation). However, while this is the case in the narrative of the European enslavers and society of the time, we cannot deny the humanness and the difference in experiences between enslaved men and women. In their narratives alone, we see key differences in what they choose to focus on and what they choose to centre their narratives around. We will start by exploring these themes and if they are consistent through different narratives within genders. Next, we will probe as to why the narratives are different in their themes, placing them within their wider contemporary societies. Lastly, we will analyse the content of the narratives, the fundamental differences in the typical lives of enslaved males and females and how they are imperative to our understanding of the differences in their lives and experiences. Through the exploration of the narratives of Mary Prince, Oladuah Equiano and other important slave narratives, we will see how experiences of work, relationships and difficulties were different across the genders and how they influenced their narrative voices.
The themes in the narratives are starkly contrasted by the gender of their author. While there are many differences in narratives between genders, Winifred Morgan argues that the principal difference is that each gender places greatest importance on different aspects; while male slave narratives place great importance on literacy and the independence that comes with it, female slave narratives tend to centre around their relationships and how they were the key influence of their decisions and actions. On the subject of male slave narratives, Morgan reflects on how ‘Oladuah Equiano, James Pennington and William Craft stress how illiteracy disabled them while they were slaves, to satisfy as soon as possible, their hunger for education.’ [1]Morgan’s analysis holds probity as this theme is consistent within Equiano’s narrative as well as that of Frederick Douglass. While Equiano notes repeatedly how he “had long wished to be able to read and write,’[2]and later, ‘I always had a great desire to be able to at least read and write,’[3] Douglass also states how he ‘set out with high hope, and a fixed purpose, at whatever cost of trouble, to learn how to read.’[4] Both male narratives show an importance in their literacy, which is further cemented by the fact that both authors in this circumstance were able to compose their own narratives in the written word, as opposed to most of the female narratives which were transcribed (typically by white abolitionists) even if they did have the capacity to write, such as Mary Prince.
Female narratives, in contrast, centred themselves around the relationships in their life and the decisions they made as a result. In Mary Prince’s narrative, she speaks greatly of her mother, siblings and later her husband. On the second page of the narrative, she recalls ‘when I kissed my mother and brothers and sisters, I thought my young heart would break,’[5] highlighting the highly emotional aspect of being sold away from her loved ones. Rachel Banner notes how ‘after the sale, the Mary of the text compulsively circles the memory of her family’s separation,’[6] and this can be seen where Prince states “my thoughts went back continually to those from whom I had been so suddenly parted.’[7] Later in the narrative, her primary goal is to return to her husband: “I still live in the hope that God will find a way to give me my liberty, and give me back to my husband.” Where her early life saw the continual remembrance of her family, her later life sees her longing to be with her husband. This emotional tie to the relationships of the enslaved women is also visible in Scenes in the Life of Harriet Tubman: “my home, after all was down in Maryland; because my father, my mother, my brother, and sisters, and friends were there. But I was free, and they should be free.”[8] Tubman’s narrative, although centring around her own story and her quest to free others, returns to the memory of her family and friends and her desire to free them also. We see this also through the quotation from Prince in the title as she claims to ‘know what other slaves feel,’ tying herself to the suffering of her counterparts. Although Morgan argues that female slave narratives take on more of a familial centrality and males tended to focus on individuality,[9] this is not necessarily exclusive to the enslaved females. In Frederick Douglass’ narrative about the desire for freedom, he states ‘I was not willing to cherish this determination alone. My fellow-slaves were dear to me.’[10] Contrary to Morgan’s argument, although Douglass holds a great importance on literacy as previously stated, he also holds his counterparts in high regard and, in this circumstance, did not wish to endeavour for freedom alone, suggesting that the importance of relationships is not exclusive to a gender but rather an important feature of the narratives of the enslaved. Yet, Morgan contests this and allows for some flexibility in her argument as she states that ‘part of the appeal of the Narrative is Douglass’s invocation of the twin but opposing American themes of individualism and community.’[11] Douglass uses the two contrasting notions to place himself in this classic ‘American’ struggle. Jennifer Morgan suggests that Americanism was intrinsically linked to the idea of individualism and that it was ‘enmeshed in the intersectionality of discourses about race and gender. As an individuated “American” self came into being, key notions of master over property were mobilized that defined both whiteness and masculinity.’ [12] By cleverly placing himself in the struggle between individuality and community, Douglass challenges the norms of ‘whiteness’ and ‘masculinity’, attempting to claim a place in free society.
As we investigate further, it becomes clear that a reason for the decision for the use of the themes of individualism and community is to appeal to the predominantly white audience at the time of the narratives’ writing. Narratives such as those of Mary Prince and Oladuah Equiano hold fast to their narratives in achieving their purpose of narrating the horrors they faced and to establish respect within free society. Between genders, there were differences in social convention that their white audiences required from them in order to empathise with them. Morgan asserts that ‘both male and female fugitives and ex-slaves strove to counter the racial stereotypes that bound them even in ‘free societies.’ [13] While formerly enslaved men attempted to combat the stereotype of being uncivilised and unlearned, formerly enslaved women resisted the stereotype of being victims or sexual deviants. For this reason, male narratives such as Equiano’s and Douglass’ focus on their desire for and then, acquisition of literacy as it places them among educated male society. On Equiano, Carretta notes that ‘any autobiography is designed to influence the reader’s impression of the author, and often, as in the case of the Interesting Narrative, to affect the reader’s beliefs or actions as well.’ [14] Carretta’s view supports the notion that the narratives are written with intent to make the white society, who were possibly ignorant to the true nature of enslavement, aware and sympathetic to the trials of the enslaved, which they are more likely to be if they have any amount of respect for the person in which the narrative has come from; as Carretta further adds, ‘manumission necessitated redefinition.’ Similarly, female narratives were also dictated by social convention in that respectable women were to be pure, maternal and feminine. However, it was almost impossible for an enslaved woman to have any of these characteristics as the system built around enslavement prevented them from doing so; sexual violence was commonplace against enslaved women, babies were taken from mothers very early on to prevent maternal ties and female field workers were expected to do the same work as men. As a result, the narratives of enslaved women endeavour to demonstrate their womanhood through other means such as their care for others. For example, Prince’s adoration of both her mother and even her early mistress, Miss Betsey demonstrates her familial ties to those around her. This is also the case in Sojourner Truth’s narrative which describes her as a mother of five children, but also that ‘she rejoiced in being permitted to be the instrument of increasing the property of her oppressors!’ [15] The authors of Truth’s narrative here attempt to show both her maternal womanhood and, simultaneously, the bleakness of her state of bondage.
This description is an impeccable representation of the debate between critics as to the authenticity and voices of slave narratives, particularly female narratives. We can question the true source of the quote as, even though the narrative claims to have been dictated from Truth, it is written in the third person when speaking of Truth’s life and in the first person when giving opinions and criticisms, suggesting that there is more than just an account of Truth’s life in the narrative. Similarly, in The History of Mary Prince, there exists a debate amongst historians as to the excessiveness of the involvement of Thomas Pringle, the editor. Pringle’s preface states how the narrative was ‘pruned into its present shape; retaining, as far as was practicable, Mary’s exact expression and peculiar phraseology.’[16] Despite this claim, Allen suggests that ‘Pringle’s preface reveals the ways in which racism and imperialism influenced the narrative and how the narrative, in turn, reflects these social realities.’[17] While Pringle assures the reader of his limited alteration of the narrative, one is forced to question his use of words such as ‘peculiar’ to describe the phraseology of how it was dictated from the supposed true author. When considering the target audience to be the white English society of the early to mid 1830s, and the printing of the narrative in an anti-slavery pamphlet alongside the narrative of Asa-Asa, one can denote that the narrative’s purpose was to aid the abolitionist movement in enlightening the likely otherwise uninformed, white non-abolitionists. This begs the question as to what was changed to fit the purpose from Prince’s initial narration. While this could also be the case with male slave narratives, there is a differentiation as many of the male narratives such as Equiano, Douglass and Northup were written with their own hand and not dictated, thereby eliminating a voice of the transcriber that the female narratives had to abide by.
Lastly, aside from the form and voices of the narratives, it is important to analyse the differences in their content as the experiences of enslaved men and women were inherently different. While both groups experienced the horror of the draconian practices involved in enslavement, enslaved women had the added brutality of sexual violence. As Davis and Gates suggest, ‘she suffers all that the male suffers, and in addition miseries peculiar to herself.’[18] In Harriet Jacobs’ narrative, she says, ‘my master met me at every turn, reminding me that I belonged to him.’[19] Likewise, Mary Prince describes how her master ‘had an ugly fashion of stripping himself quite naked, and ordering me then to wash him in a tub of water. This was worse to me than all the licks.’ [20] Neither of these accounts are explicit in nature yet still demonstrate the trauma that these experiences gave to the enslaved women. On this, Altink notes how American feminist scholars from the 1980s determined that ‘sexual exploitation of bondswomen was as much a means of control as the whip and it made female bondage worse than male bondage.’ [21] One can ascertain that the reason for the lack of explicit detail relates back to the objective to be respected in a society that only regards ‘pure’ women as respectable. Aside from sexual violence, enslaved women were also valued lower than their male counterparts despite possessing the ability to reproduce, which became vital in the early nineteenth century after the influx of enslaved peoples was ceased. Berry comments on how ‘women were valued for their fecundity, and traders made projections based on their “future increase,”’[22] and how ‘women’s capacity to bear children, their labor skills, and, in some cases, their (perceived) physical attractiveness remained their primary factors in their inspections, valuations, and sales.’ [23] The differences in the valuation of enslaved males to females shows us how, despite theoretically not belonging to specific binary genders, the attributes that an enslaved person had ultimately determined their value to an enslaver: certain attributes that can only be possessed by a female. In turn, this impacted their experiences as enslaved people which was reflected in their narratives.
In conclusion, narratives from formerly enslaved men and women differ in their themes, content and authenticity. Themes in male slave narratives tend to focus on the power of literacy and the individuality that comes from it, while female narratives concentrate more heavily on familial relationships. There are some exceptions to this binary distinction, however such as Douglass and his desire to obtain liberty with his ‘fellow slaves.’ A significant reason for these choices of predominant themes was to appeal to their white audiences in terms of respectability and empathy. Their stories were more likely to be appreciated and accepted if they had elements that the white audiences could relate to and respect. For males, this came in the form of demonstrating their literacy and displaying the classic struggle for individualism versus community, especially in the case of North America. For females, there was a greater importance on their roles as mothers, wives and daughters and, where this was not possible due to the institution of enslavement, their ties and care for those around them. The existing debate amongst critics is that of the narrative voices present and how much comes from the authors themselves and how much is added by transcribers and editors. While both male and female slave narratives go through a process of editing which is altered by discretion of the editor, many of the female slave narratives must have an added silent voice of the transcriber. Finally, a principal difference in the narratives between enslaved men and women is that content itself. While both groups experienced horrors, the added trauma of sexual violence and being used as units of reproduction is present throughout the female slave narratives, proving themselves to be quite different from those of the males.
Japneet Hayer is currently doing a BA in History and Hispanic Studies at the University of Nottingham (3rd year).
Full question when assigned: How does the personal 'slave narrative' of an African woman such as Mary Prince differ from that of Oladuah Equiano, etc.?
Notes: [1] W. Morgan, ‘Gender-Related Difference in the Slave Narratives of Harriet Jacobs and Frederick Douglass’, American Studies, 35/2,(1994), p. 76 [2] The Interesting Narrative of the Life of Oladuah Equiano, Oladuah Equiano, (London, 1789), p. 133 [3] Ibid. p. 171 [4] Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave, Frederick Douglass, (Boston, 1845), p. 34 [5] The History of Mary Prince a West Indian Slave, Strickland, S., dict. M. Prince, ed. T. Pringle (London, 1831), p. 2 [6] R. Banner, SURFACE AND STASIS: Re-reading Slave Narrative via “The History of Mary Prince, in Callaloo, 36/2, 2013, p. 306 [7] Strickland, S., The History of Mary Prince: A West Indian Slave, pg. 5 [8] Bradford, S.H., Scenes in the Life of Harriet Tubman, dict. H. Tubman, (New York, 1869), p. 20 [9] Morgan, Gender-Related Difference in the Slave Narratives of Harriet Jacobs and Frederick Douglass, p. 83 [10] Frederick Douglass, Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave, p. 83 [11] Morgan, Gender-Related Difference in the Slave Narratives of Harriet Jacobs and Frederick Douglass, p. 80 [12] J.L., Morgan, Labouring Women: Reproduction and Gender in New World Slavery, (Philadelphia, 2004), p. 73 [13] Morgan, Gender-Related Difference in the Slave Narratives of Harriet Jacobs and Frederick Douglass, p. 76 [14] V. Carretta, ‘Oladuah Equiano: African British abolitionist and founder of the African American slave narrative’, ed. Audrey Fisch, The Cambridge Companion to the African American Slave Narrative, (Cambridge, 2007), p. 46 [15] O. Gilbert, Narrative of Sojourner Truth, A Northern Slave, Emancipated from Bodily Servitude by the State of New York, in 1828, dict. S. Truth, (Boston, 1850), p. 37 [16] Strickland, S., The History of Mary Prince: A West Indian Slave (1831), p. i [17] J.L., Allen, ‘PRINGLE’S PRUNING OF PRINCE: The History of Mary Prince and the Question of Reputation’, Callaloo, 35/2, 2012, p. 510 [18] C.T. Davis & H.L. Gates, The Slave’s Narrative, (Oxford, 1985), p. 22 [19] H. Jacobs, Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl, ed. Lydia Maria Francis Child, (Boston, 1861), p. 46 [20] Strickland. S, The History of Mary Prince: A West Indian Slave (1831), p. 13 [21] H. Altink, Deviant and dangerous: Pro-slavery representations of Jamaican slave women’ sexuality, c. 1780-1834, 2005, p. 271 [22]D.R. Berry, The Price for Their Pound of Flesh: The Value of the Enslaved, from Womb to Grave, in the Building of a Nation, (Boston, 2017), p. 23 [23] Ibid. p. 25
Comments