The BN Village - View Single Post

Gmahogany777 · (#7 (**permalink**))

If you want to get an idea of what the AA response to the novel was, at the time it was first published, about 1852 or so(which one would think would be where people would start, rather than assuming that AA's just pulled the Uncle Tom perjorative/insult concept out of their asses without putting any thought into it), there is plenty of documentation. There is a book called "Uncle Tom's Cabin A Black Antebellum Response, by Marva Banks. You could also check out the writings of people like Frederick Douglas and Martin Delaney, and others. Most of these people were former slaves, themselves.

Most AA's at the time, thought the book was positive, because they felt it aided their anti-slavery struggle, but even at that, you can hardly find any Black people at the time, who thought that the "Tom" character was positive. Real hardcore dudes, like Martin Delaney and others felt that "the Tom character needs to be killed", and stated that in their writings. They felt that the Tom character was not something Black folks should be emulating in their freedom struggle. Delaney and others, felt that the underlying message of the novel was that, for Black folks, SUBSERVIENCE was the way to overcome TYRANNY AND OPPRESSION(that is indeed what the underlying message of the novel was,btw) , and they weren't having that sh*t.

Beyond that, most Blacks at the time, had enough intelligence to pick up on the PRO-COLONIZATION theme that ran through the novel. That was the movement that sought to round AA's up and send us back to Africa or to Haiti, so white folks wouldn't have to deal with us in a FREE condition, and even in 1852 a FREE condition is where AA's were headed towards and most Crackers KNEW this, thus the popularity of the colonization movement. When prominent Blacks of the time like Fredecrick Douglass wrote to Harriet Beecher Stowe to get her to clarify her position on the matter, and denounce colonization, she denied that she was pro colonization, but then proceeded a few years later to write another novel, promoting that "solution". Additionally, stories circulated among prominent Blacks at the time, that Ms. Stowe treated Blacks very condescendingly,patronizingly, and generally not good, whenever she came into contact with actual Black people This just confirmed to many AA's at the time that the uneasy vibe they had about the book and the main character, AND the true intentions of the author, were on the money.

Stowe, like most white abolitionists, objected to slavery on a religious or moral basis, but DID NOT view Blacks as their equals, and DID NOT have any desire to be around Blacks in any thing approximating equality. In other words, her objection to slavery, or even the mistreatment of Blacks, HAD NOTHING TO DO with liking Black folks or even viewing them as equals. That is a lesson that some modern day Black folks have yet to learn,btw....

So, you had Blacks who were former slaves, who were intelligent and insightful enough to pick up on the: inconsistencies, condescension,patronizing tone, and less than pure "good intentions" in both the novel and the author, yet you have modern day Negroes,(like the moron who wrote the article featured at the beginning of this thread,if he is indeed Black), who SWEAR they are SO smart, but couldn't peep the things that supposedly uneducated, dumb slaves(in the minds of some of these modern day Negroes who think they are so smart and actually look down on their enslaved ancestors), fresh off the plantation were able to peep......Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm..........