Casey Petett
Project Synopsis
Commerce and the Slave Trade:
An Analysis of David Livingstone
This paper examines David Livingstone’s role in British imperialism in the nineteenth century. Livingstone is a complex person in history and is portrayed in a number of different ways. Some historians believe that Livingstone was a paternalist and colonist, which was consistent with Britain’s approach to imperialism. This group does not believe that Livingstone was motivated by any real desire to help free Africans from the bondage of slavery. He was determined to introduce commerce to Africa in order to open the country to Europe. This group uses Livingstone’s views on the advancements of Africans as proof that he felt that they could not save themselves. The advanced nations of Europe must take an active role in the advancement of Africa in order for the continent to become civilized. Contemporary historians view Livingstone’s actions were motivated by his beliefs in commerce and Christianity. This group believes that the language used by Livingstone to describe Africa was popular at the time in Europe and the United States. They point to excerpts in Livingstone’s journals and letters as proof that he actually cared about the advancement of Africa. They also use his background in Scotland as evidence that he believed in the power of commerce to advance a group of people. The most powerful parts of Livingstone’s journal are his description of the impact of slavery on Africa. Livingstone gives many examples where the markets in Africa would be better suited for other modes of industry than the slave trade. For example, he suggests that the production of cotton in Africa would stop the slave trade in Africa and in the United States. These examples help prove that Livingstone was staunch anti-slavery advocate.
Livingstone’s journals and letters can be interpreted a number of different ways, which has contributed to the various representations of the man. The primary documents often present Livingstone in contradictory ways. Some excerpts present Livingstone as a staunch colonist who believes that Europe needs to take an active role in the development of Africa. While other excerpts make Livingstone seem that he feels that Africans have the power to bring about their own prosperity. It is clear that he does not support the slave trade in any capacity. The documents also emphasize the use of commerce as away to civilize Africa. The primary documents need to be read in the context of the time. The comments made by Livingstone would now be considered racist, but at the time the terms he used was popular. The primary documents will be used to support the views of contemporary scholars. Livingstone’s journals and letters will be used to present the complete and accurate representation of the man. The documents will reveal the true nature of the man, which was that he believed that commerce would allow Africans to free themselves from slavery. This in turn will prove that the beliefs of Livingstone differed greatly from the popular ideas of imperialism in Great Britain at the time.
Livingstone’s journal, Narrative of an Expedition to the Zambesi and its Tributaries, reflect his racial beliefs. He did not adhere to any fixed racial scale, but he did feel that the European was vastly superior to other cultures. Livingstone said that “the African as by no means the lowest of the human family. He is nearly as strong physically as the European, and, as a race, is wonderfully persistent among the nations of the earth” (625). His statement supports the idea that Livingstone truly believed that Africans were capable of advancing themselves. Early Livingstone wrote, “we have seen nothing to justify the notion that they are of a different “breed” or “species” from the most civilized” (625). This proves that Livingstone actually believed that Africans could advance themselves with only minor assistance from Europe. The role of Europe was vital in order to introduce commerce into Africa, but once it was there Africans could be just as capable as any other nation. Livingstone believed that the problems in Africa could be attributed to the slave trade, which was an industry that could be connected to Europe and the Americas. Great Britain and other countries needed to take an active role in Africa in order to undo the damage that was created by the economies of Europe. This document will best support contemporary historical thought. George Shepperson’s believes that Livingstone was aware of the connection of the slave trade to Europe and the Americas, which motivated his attempts to change the relationship between the continents (215). It will show the complexity of Livingstone, but more importantly it will prove that his racist comments were consistent with the time. It will disprove ideas advanced by historians that suggest Livingstone did not fight for the black man’s rights in isolation form the white man (Northcott, 74). Livingstone intended to improve the rights of Africans in order to change their relationship with the white man. Overall, this journal will be used to support the idea that Livingstone’s views on race and Africa were progressive for the time and that they differed greatly from his contemporaries.
In Livingstone’s, Private Journals (1851-1853), he describes the benefits of commerce over the slave trade. He wrote, “that agents or commissioners situated in different parts in the region would in the course of ten years extirpate the slave trade” (44). He later describes all the industries that would be profitable for the Africans, which include ivory and beeswax. The introduction of commerce would allow the Africans to civilize themselves. He wrote, “give a people the opportunity they will civilize themselves, and that too more effectually than can be done by missionary societies” (44). This passage reveals how commerce would benefit Africa over any other country. This supports the school of thought that believes Livingstone wanted to open up Africa in order to improve the problems related to the slave trade. Andrew Ross asserted that Livingstone believed that commerce would uplift the standards in Africa and end the slave trade (25). At the same time, this sentence contradicts the school of thought that believes that Livingstone was motivated by the needs of Europe. Cecil Northcott wrote, “Livingstone was a colonist and was not ashamed of it.” Northcott then describes how Livingstone was not motivated by beliefs of freedom for the Africans (74). In this journal Livingstone does discuss the role that Europe would have in improving Africa, which does lend itself to the paternalistic approach that he often took. Europe had to take an active approach to the rehabilitation of Africa, but it was only for the benefit of the continent. Once the commerce was in place Africans could civilize themselves, which would not require European intervention.
In Missionary Travels and Researches in South Africa Livingstone outlines how Africa can be saved. He believes that commerce and Christianity are necessary in order for Africans to become fully civilized. Livingstone believed that “neither civilization nor Christianity can be promoted alone. In fact, they are inseparable” (25). The civilization that he mentions is related to Africa’s need to change the economy from one that is supported by the slave trade to one that focuses on free markets. Livingstone acknowledged how Africans operated were different, but not necessarily wrong. He used his encounter with a Kwena rain-maker as evidence of the knowledge that the Africans possessed. The rain-maker used his tribe’s way of reasoning to debunk Livingstone’s notion of nature and science (24). Livingstone recognized the capabilities of the Africans although they differed from those of Europeans. This proved that the Africans were component enough to be involved in advanced systems of commerce. Christian missions were also necessary in order to preach the gospel and develop schools, which would help with the improvement of Africa. Livingstone believed what was taught through Christianity would translate to commerce because both forces the Africans to be “mutually dependent on each other” (24). Christianity brings about civilization, which is required in order to produce a profitable system of commerce. Christianity is needed to civilize the Africans and allow them to understand European ideas.
Andrew Ross recognized the influence of missionary circles on Livingstone’s ideas on Africa. Missionary circles have debated the use of Christianity and commerce in Africa since the 1790s onwards. Livingstone was influenced by these groups and used their ideas to help improve Africa and end the slave trade. Christianity was needed in order to teach the Africans and promote commerce throughout the continent. Ross adheres to the school of thought that believes Livingstone truly intended to civilize Africa through commerce and Christianity. Dorothy O. Helly wrote, “Livingstone believed in the material and spiritual superiority of British Christians but he also insisted that preeminence was a privilege that brought responsibilities to aid others less favored” (247). This is more in line with the group of historians who believe that Livingstone influenced by the popular ideas of imperialism. His actions are interpreted as being consistent with Kipling’s ‘Take up the whiteman’s burden.’ That it was his duty being a Christian in Europe to pass on his civilization to other countries, such as Africa.
In Private Journals (1851) Livingstone acknowledged the European contributions to the slave trade. He described the slave traders as “clothed in gaudy coloured apparel, and had a large assortment of English manufactured goods in their possession” (42). Slave traders had grown accustomed to English manufactured goods. They would buy these items with money they earned through the slave trade. Livingstone believed that Christianity and commerce would establish a healthy relationship between Europe and Africa and eliminate the slave trade. Ross asserted that this was the reason why Livingstone wanted to institute another form of commerce in Africa (25). Europe and Africa would both benefit from the relationship since the trade would benefit both continents. Shepperson people Livingstone’s use of commerce and Christianity was influenced by the Industrial Revolution. He believed that the prospect of every-expanding trade and a better standard of living should be available to everyone, black or white (215). Northcott takes to task Livingstone’s missionary work in Africa. Northcott wrote, “there have been other successful travelers in Africa, and a host of more successful missionaries” (130). This represents the group of historians who believe that Livingstone really did not accomplish anything in Africa. Livingstone was never to actually implement his vision of commerce and Christianity in Africa.
In the Last Journals of David Livingstone he recognized the potential of the Africans through their work with iron. He recounted an incident when he questioned the use of stone tools. He said that their method “showed sounder sense than if they had been burdened with the great weights we use” (89). Livingstone compared the methods in Africa to those used in Europe in order to justify his intentions to introduce commerce to the Africans. The iron works in African appealed to Livingstone because of his industrial background. Shepperson wrote believed that “Livingstone, indeed, was born into a typically Scottish world of ‘Self-help’” (209). These historians believe his background influence his ideas of commerce in Africa. Industry would raise the standard of living and end the slave trade. The foundation was already laid in Africa through the inhabitants’ knowledge of iron. This showed that he believed that commerce could be successful because the Africans were capable of working in some sort of industry. Other historians, such as Timothy Holmes believes that Livingstone did not help the African advance (191). Instead, Livingstone’s missions only opened up Africa for further European expansion. This perspective emphasizes Livingstone’s role as an explorer and not a missionary. The assertion of these historians is further supported by the Scramble for Africa that preceded Livingstone’s death. European leaders, such as King Leopold of Belgium used Livingstone’s ideas of a prosperous Africa as an excuse to carve out his own kingdom (241). It is difficult to determine if how much Livingstone contributed to the Scramble for Africa, however.
Reading through the primary documents it is easy to see how complex Livingstone was. Some of the excerpts do portray Livingstone as a colonist and paternalistic in the popular British sense. In others it does seem like Livingstone actually does care about the advancement of Africa. The research project will primarily use Livingstone’s Narrative of an Expedition to the Zambesi and its Tributaries. This primary document gives the most thorough account of Livingstone’s actions. It also deals in depth with commerce and Christianity as well as his views on race and slavery.
The primary documents reveal how difficult it is to analysis Livingstone’s actions in Africa. The documents can be read many different ways, which can make it difficult to determine what motivated Livingstone. It is clear that Livingstone wanted to implement commerce and Christianity in Africa, but his reasons for this is contested by historians. The documents reveal the broad range of ideas that Livingstone had of the people of Africa. His journals and letter help prove that he actually cared about the conditions in Africa, especially the ones that pertained to the slave trade. He was motivated by his disgust for the slave trade and its effects on the Africa. He did feel that the European was superior, but he also believed that the Africans were capable of improvement. The documents will be examined in the context of their time, which reveal that Livingstone was progressive on his ideas of Africa. He was able to accomplish much in combating the slave trade. The documents will support contemporary scholars who recognize the importance that Livingstone on the slave trade. The documents will also be used to disprove historians who believe Livingstone’s actions were consistent with other imperialists of the time.
The work of historians that assert Livingstone was an imperialist is old. Contemporary scholars view Livingstone more as an advocate for the improvement of Africa. The perspective of contemporary scholars is much more reliable than past historians because they study Livingstone more in depth. Past scholars tend to focus on specific aspects of Livingstone’s life, which can be problematic. His life must be studied in depth in order to find the exact nature of Livingstone. The best perspective of Livingstone was that first he was a missionary and second he was an explorer. His journals deal more with aspects of African culture and the slave trade than his exploration successes. Livingstone filled many roles, but he best served as missionary who was concerned with the standard of living in Africa. There are many examples in Livingstone’s journals that will dispute the previously mentioned assertion. He can easily be viewed as a racist who had imperialist ambitions during his travels in Africa. These views will be refuted by placing his comments in the context of the language of the time. It will prove that Livingstone may have had racist views by today’s standards, but his ideas were consistent with the time. The historians that say Livingstone opened up African to further European expansion will countered by examples that prove he actually cared more about improving Africa. Livingstone can be seen as an anomaly in the context of imperialism of the time. He believed in commerce and Christianity, which would allow for the Africans to gain some sort of independence from the problems associated with the slave trade. This deviates from other imperialist because he d\
id not believe Europe had a right to conquer Africa. His use of the white man’s way of doing things can be view as paternalistic, but it was only intended to help Africa. Commerce and Christianity would accomplish two goals, which were to eliminate the slave trade and improve the standards in Africa. These would allow the Africans to have an active hand in their own rehabilitation.
References
Buxton, Meriel. 2001. David livingstone. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire; New York: Palgrave.
Helly, Dorothy O. Livingstone's legacy :Horace waller and victorian mythmaking. Athens, Ohio: Ohio University Press.
Livingstone, David. 1960. Private journals, 1851-1853. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Livingstone, David, and Fred S. Arnot. 1912. Missionary travels and researches in south africa. London: J. Murray.
Livingstone, David, and Charles Livingstone. 1866. Narrative of an expendition to the zambesi and its tributaries;and of the discovery of the lakes shirwa and nyassa. 1858-1864. New York: Harper & brothers.
Livingstone, David, and Horace Waller. 1971; 1875. The last journals of david livingstone in central africa. from 1865 to his death. continued by a narrative of his last moments and sufferings, obtained from his faithful servants chuma and susi. Detroit: Negro History Press.
Nicholls, C. S. 1998. David livingstone. Pocket biographies. Stroud, Gloucestershire: Sutton.
Northcott, Cecil. 1973. David livingstone--his triumph, decline and fall. Guildford: Lutterworth.
Porter, Andrew. 1988. The balance sheet of empire, 1850-1914. The Historical Journal 31, (3) (Sep.): 685-99.
———. 1985. 'Commerce and christianity': The rise and fall of a nineteenth-century missionary slogan. The Historical Journal 28, (3) (Sep.): 597-621.
Ross, Andrew. 2002. David livingstone :Mission and empire. London; New York: Hambledon and London.
Shepperson, George. 1973. David livingstone 1813-1873: A centenary assessment. The Geographical Journal 139, (2) (Jun.): 205-19.
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Monday, April 6, 2009
Project Proposal
This paper examines David Livingstone’s role in British imperialism in the nineteenth century. Some historians have portrayed Livingstone as a major cause of European expansion into Africa. This group tends to view Livingstone as paternalistic and colonialist, which was consistent with Europe’s approach to Africa. Current historians have suggested that Livingstone was different from other explorers and missionaries. They cite many examples where Livingstone has sided with the native Africans. These arguments will be studied using Livingstone’s published journals and letters. The primary documents reveal Livingstone’s thoughts on aspects of African life, such as the slave trade and its affects on the people. These documents can be studied to determine what role Livingstone played in Britain’s expansion into Africa. The primary sources will help determine the accuracy of the current perspective of Livingstone. The representation of Livingstone in literature can complex due to the dynamic character of the man. Many books have a difficult time presenting Livingstone with a unified set of characteristics. The intention of this paper is to use Livingstone’s letters and journals to better understand how he felt about issues in Africa, specifically the slave trade. The essay will also examine how he would deal with the problems in Africa, as opposed to the British.
Historians argue that Livingstone wanted to extend white men’s benefits to the Africans, but he did not intend on granting them actual freedom. Northcott has argued that Livingstone was “no crusader, or freedom fighter for the black man’s rights in isolation from the white man (74). Northcott’s account portrays Livingstone as a paternalist due to his treatment of the Africans. Her argument suggests Livingstone took on the role of a mentor to the black population due to the fact that they could not govern themselves.
Historians have suggested that Livingstone’s intention to introduce commerce to Africa was motivated by his imperial ambitions. The industry in Africa would be closely tied to the economy of Great Britain. The new economy would bring the end to the slave trade, but it would also open markets in Africa to Great Britain (Helly, 15). This interpretation creates doubt about Livingstone’s spiritual reasons for introducing commerce and ending the slave trade. These portrayals of his actions are more consistent with the popular ideas of imperialism of the time. British imperialism was motivated by certain individual’s desire to wealth and Livingstone was not an exception.
Modern historians have accused of Livingstone being a spy for the British government. Timothy Holmes falls in this camp and believes that Livingstone helped open Africa up to British involvement (191). This is supported by the rapid expansion of Europe into Africa after the explorations of Livingstone. This account emphasizes Livingstone’s role as an explorer and not a missionary. This supports the idea that he was a colonist due to his desire for exploration and discovery. The British Empire would not have made such great gains without the discoveries of Livingstone.
Livingstone’s discoveries have been debated by many modern historians due to the presence of other explorers. Other European powers, such as Portugal had already explored areas where Livingstone traveled. Buxton believes that Lake Bangweolo was Livingstone’s only “undisputed discoveries.” Other historians concede that “he was probably the first to complete the crossing of the continent” (191). This helps establish Livingstone’s role of missionary over his role of explorer. This changes his motivation for his encounters with the African population. Livingstone intended to introduce commerce as a way to civilize the Africans and not to make them vulnerable to foreign intervention.
Contemporary historians have pointed to his attempt to introduce cotton in Africa as proof that he intended to end the slave trade. Nichols writes that Livingstone’s recognition of the importance of cotton “encouraged him to view the planting of cotton on highlands in Africa as a prerequisite for the establishment of legitimate trade” (97). The introduction of cotton would disrupt the slave trade in Africa as well as the United States. The tribes that depended on the slave trade for money would have a more legitimate industry to profit from. The value of cotton on the world market would place Africa on the international stage. This would make the cotton industry more profitable than the slave trade. The growth of cotton would take away the need for cotton grown by slaves in the United States (97). This helps support the assertion that Livingstone’s policies in Africa were intended to help Africans more than the Europeans.
Contemporary scholars have created a broader portrayal of Livingstone and his actions in Africa. Livingston had many successes and failures in Africa, which gives an uneven impression of his work. Ross writes Livingstone’s ultimate goal was to bring Christianity and commerce to African for their own development (243). The past portrayals of Livingstone are distorted due to their use for justification of European expansion. European powers seized upon Livingstone’s ideas of civilization to penetrate deeper into Africa (241). Their actions could always be dismissed as attempts to make the African into the image of a white man, which was legitimate at the time. This essay will mostly focus on Ross’ description of Livingstone due to the thorough nature of the book. It gives a complete account of his time in African and it also discusses the misconceptions of the man.
This paper will primarily focus on Livingstone journals, specifically the ones that dealt with ending the slave trade and introduction of commerce. In a collection of his journals Livingstone discusses his desire to introduce trade in order to end the slave trade. During his travels in Zambesi he observes the importance of the slave trade on the local economy. He suggests that slave traders deal in materials native to Africa to improve trade with European merchants (43-44). This shows his intentions of improving the lives of Africans through different methods of commerce. He does not make any references to Great Britain in this passage, which suggests that his actions were to only benefit the Africans.
Another journal entry describes the horrors perpetrated by the slave trade that Livingstone encountered. He describes seeing dead individuals who were tied up and either shot or stabbed. He then suggests to a local man that they switch to a more agricultural based system (64). This ensures that the local communities are profiting from a legitimate industry. The new industries would civilize the African people, which would prevent further murdered slaves. Livingstone does not mention the benefits that commerce would bring to Europe, instead he focused on the local community.
The primary sources have revealed that Livingstone genuinely believed that Christianity and commerce would help with the problems associated with slavery in Africa. Some of his ideas were consistent with the imperial attitudes, such as the need to open Africa to European markets. However, commerce was mostly to benefit the Africans through its ability to civilize people. Africans would finally evolve beyond their primitive actions, which were usually sexual in nature. The findings are more consistent with the position of contemporary scholars. This helps enforce the assertion that Livingstone was a great humanitarian and not a colonist or paternalist. Livingstone’s actions do closely resemble that of other imperialists, which makes it difficult to distinguish him from others. Livingstone can be seemed to have encompassed many roles, however, his role of missionary stands out the most. The criticism of the man is justified, but it is not always accurate. His actions need to be viewed through his own written perspective and not through the popular thought of the time. I also want to understand why Livingstone deviate some much from the established policy in Africa.
Historians argue that Livingstone wanted to extend white men’s benefits to the Africans, but he did not intend on granting them actual freedom. Northcott has argued that Livingstone was “no crusader, or freedom fighter for the black man’s rights in isolation from the white man (74). Northcott’s account portrays Livingstone as a paternalist due to his treatment of the Africans. Her argument suggests Livingstone took on the role of a mentor to the black population due to the fact that they could not govern themselves.
Historians have suggested that Livingstone’s intention to introduce commerce to Africa was motivated by his imperial ambitions. The industry in Africa would be closely tied to the economy of Great Britain. The new economy would bring the end to the slave trade, but it would also open markets in Africa to Great Britain (Helly, 15). This interpretation creates doubt about Livingstone’s spiritual reasons for introducing commerce and ending the slave trade. These portrayals of his actions are more consistent with the popular ideas of imperialism of the time. British imperialism was motivated by certain individual’s desire to wealth and Livingstone was not an exception.
Modern historians have accused of Livingstone being a spy for the British government. Timothy Holmes falls in this camp and believes that Livingstone helped open Africa up to British involvement (191). This is supported by the rapid expansion of Europe into Africa after the explorations of Livingstone. This account emphasizes Livingstone’s role as an explorer and not a missionary. This supports the idea that he was a colonist due to his desire for exploration and discovery. The British Empire would not have made such great gains without the discoveries of Livingstone.
Livingstone’s discoveries have been debated by many modern historians due to the presence of other explorers. Other European powers, such as Portugal had already explored areas where Livingstone traveled. Buxton believes that Lake Bangweolo was Livingstone’s only “undisputed discoveries.” Other historians concede that “he was probably the first to complete the crossing of the continent” (191). This helps establish Livingstone’s role of missionary over his role of explorer. This changes his motivation for his encounters with the African population. Livingstone intended to introduce commerce as a way to civilize the Africans and not to make them vulnerable to foreign intervention.
Contemporary historians have pointed to his attempt to introduce cotton in Africa as proof that he intended to end the slave trade. Nichols writes that Livingstone’s recognition of the importance of cotton “encouraged him to view the planting of cotton on highlands in Africa as a prerequisite for the establishment of legitimate trade” (97). The introduction of cotton would disrupt the slave trade in Africa as well as the United States. The tribes that depended on the slave trade for money would have a more legitimate industry to profit from. The value of cotton on the world market would place Africa on the international stage. This would make the cotton industry more profitable than the slave trade. The growth of cotton would take away the need for cotton grown by slaves in the United States (97). This helps support the assertion that Livingstone’s policies in Africa were intended to help Africans more than the Europeans.
Contemporary scholars have created a broader portrayal of Livingstone and his actions in Africa. Livingston had many successes and failures in Africa, which gives an uneven impression of his work. Ross writes Livingstone’s ultimate goal was to bring Christianity and commerce to African for their own development (243). The past portrayals of Livingstone are distorted due to their use for justification of European expansion. European powers seized upon Livingstone’s ideas of civilization to penetrate deeper into Africa (241). Their actions could always be dismissed as attempts to make the African into the image of a white man, which was legitimate at the time. This essay will mostly focus on Ross’ description of Livingstone due to the thorough nature of the book. It gives a complete account of his time in African and it also discusses the misconceptions of the man.
This paper will primarily focus on Livingstone journals, specifically the ones that dealt with ending the slave trade and introduction of commerce. In a collection of his journals Livingstone discusses his desire to introduce trade in order to end the slave trade. During his travels in Zambesi he observes the importance of the slave trade on the local economy. He suggests that slave traders deal in materials native to Africa to improve trade with European merchants (43-44). This shows his intentions of improving the lives of Africans through different methods of commerce. He does not make any references to Great Britain in this passage, which suggests that his actions were to only benefit the Africans.
Another journal entry describes the horrors perpetrated by the slave trade that Livingstone encountered. He describes seeing dead individuals who were tied up and either shot or stabbed. He then suggests to a local man that they switch to a more agricultural based system (64). This ensures that the local communities are profiting from a legitimate industry. The new industries would civilize the African people, which would prevent further murdered slaves. Livingstone does not mention the benefits that commerce would bring to Europe, instead he focused on the local community.
The primary sources have revealed that Livingstone genuinely believed that Christianity and commerce would help with the problems associated with slavery in Africa. Some of his ideas were consistent with the imperial attitudes, such as the need to open Africa to European markets. However, commerce was mostly to benefit the Africans through its ability to civilize people. Africans would finally evolve beyond their primitive actions, which were usually sexual in nature. The findings are more consistent with the position of contemporary scholars. This helps enforce the assertion that Livingstone was a great humanitarian and not a colonist or paternalist. Livingstone’s actions do closely resemble that of other imperialists, which makes it difficult to distinguish him from others. Livingstone can be seemed to have encompassed many roles, however, his role of missionary stands out the most. The criticism of the man is justified, but it is not always accurate. His actions need to be viewed through his own written perspective and not through the popular thought of the time. I also want to understand why Livingstone deviate some much from the established policy in Africa.
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Essay 8
Casey Petett
Essay 8
African migrants during the interwar period used French culture to reject colonialism and to create a positive black identity. Early African migrants would use the educational opportunities in France to assimilate into the culture. These students made modest demands for colonial or political reform in Africa. Three students, Léopold Sédar Senghor, Aimé Césaire, and Léon-Gontran Damas broke with this tradition and used their time in French educational institutions to reflect on their membership in an imperial nation-state. Other African immigrants used French ideas on politics and citizenship to resist assimilation and shape African identity in metropolitan France. The African migrants mixed French culture with African culture in order to form relationships with their colonial past, their current situation in France, and the African nations that they identified with.
Senghor, Césaire, and Damas started a movement in 1930’s France called Negritude. This movement was spontaneously started by the three while they were attending school in France. The three rejected the assimilation that the schools taught the colonial elite, but they did embrace large segments of French culture. They constantly engaged in metropolitan public life, which included “visits to theaters, museums, concert halls, and art galleries” (Wilder, 155). The educational system offered the students a connection to French culture, but it also allowed them to form relationships with other likeminded Africans. These relationships allowed the movement to challenge ideas of assimilation and gave Africans a sense of worth under the colonial system and racist attitudes in France (Wilder, 156). Africans could take their experiences in education to challenge and even change the perception of black culture in French society.
Senghor, Césaire, and Damas were not the only African migrants that altered black culture in France. A diverse group of people used many different mediums to communicate their message of black equality in France. This group was able to use French ideas of citizenship to mobilize large segments of the African population against policies in France and the colonies. The French form of republicanism was based on the idea that a community of people was “expected to practice civic virtue by participating in public life and devoting themselves to a common good” (Wilder, 159). Africans used the French ideas of citizenship to gather people in order to demand for reform in the colonies (Wilder, 159). Africans were “subject-citizens”, which prevented them from participating in self-government. (Wilder 160). Although, the African migrants did not have the same legal status as French citizens they were able to use certain rights that guaranteed political participation.
The opportunities granted to African migrants allowed them to consolidate their status as colonial subjects with their status as free people in France. The freedoms granted to them gave the African a way to agitate for reform in France and the colonies. Ideas of citizenship and freedom in France were intended for the white native population, but were used by the African migrants to create a positive identity.
Essay 8
African migrants during the interwar period used French culture to reject colonialism and to create a positive black identity. Early African migrants would use the educational opportunities in France to assimilate into the culture. These students made modest demands for colonial or political reform in Africa. Three students, Léopold Sédar Senghor, Aimé Césaire, and Léon-Gontran Damas broke with this tradition and used their time in French educational institutions to reflect on their membership in an imperial nation-state. Other African immigrants used French ideas on politics and citizenship to resist assimilation and shape African identity in metropolitan France. The African migrants mixed French culture with African culture in order to form relationships with their colonial past, their current situation in France, and the African nations that they identified with.
Senghor, Césaire, and Damas started a movement in 1930’s France called Negritude. This movement was spontaneously started by the three while they were attending school in France. The three rejected the assimilation that the schools taught the colonial elite, but they did embrace large segments of French culture. They constantly engaged in metropolitan public life, which included “visits to theaters, museums, concert halls, and art galleries” (Wilder, 155). The educational system offered the students a connection to French culture, but it also allowed them to form relationships with other likeminded Africans. These relationships allowed the movement to challenge ideas of assimilation and gave Africans a sense of worth under the colonial system and racist attitudes in France (Wilder, 156). Africans could take their experiences in education to challenge and even change the perception of black culture in French society.
Senghor, Césaire, and Damas were not the only African migrants that altered black culture in France. A diverse group of people used many different mediums to communicate their message of black equality in France. This group was able to use French ideas of citizenship to mobilize large segments of the African population against policies in France and the colonies. The French form of republicanism was based on the idea that a community of people was “expected to practice civic virtue by participating in public life and devoting themselves to a common good” (Wilder, 159). Africans used the French ideas of citizenship to gather people in order to demand for reform in the colonies (Wilder, 159). Africans were “subject-citizens”, which prevented them from participating in self-government. (Wilder 160). Although, the African migrants did not have the same legal status as French citizens they were able to use certain rights that guaranteed political participation.
The opportunities granted to African migrants allowed them to consolidate their status as colonial subjects with their status as free people in France. The freedoms granted to them gave the African a way to agitate for reform in France and the colonies. Ideas of citizenship and freedom in France were intended for the white native population, but were used by the African migrants to create a positive identity.
Essay 7
Casey Petett
Essay 7
During the 1920’s, Europe was fascinated by aspects of black culture like music, dance, and athletics. France, in particular, embraced black culture from Africa, the Caribbean, and the United States. Dance and music was especially exotic for the bourgeoisie in France during this time. The French were able to escape from the social constraints of their class through their experiences with black culture. The celebrated trends of black culture were created using accepted racial stereotypes. Popular images helped reinforced longstanding myths held by the Europeans of their supremacy over all other races. Black culture thus served two purposes for the French—to provide an outlet from their lives and proof of their race’s status in the established racial hierarchy.
The Paris clubs that featured Antillais music allowed the French to escape their bourgeois world and experience something more primal. The music clubs created an exotic environment where many of society’s taboos could be challenged. The white European could even interact with black people from foreign countries. The dancing allowed the French to “transcend the bourgeois world and enter a fantastic Edenic paradise of primal enjoyments and sexual delights” (Archer-Straw). The French used the primitive stereotype of the African to escape to a less constricting time. These ideas of race contributed to the European perception that Western culture was advanced, while other cultures were primal.
The representation of Africans allowed the French to engage black culture without being “intimate with it.” Popular entertainment, such as minstrelsy, gave an inaccurate portrayal of African Americans in order to reinforce black caricatures of the time (Berliner). Minstrelsy allowed Europeans and Americans to view black culture on their own terms. Europe used minstrelsy as a way to help define the perception of black culture on the continent. The portrayal of Africans in minstrelsy was already familiar to the French, which allowed the medium to be more accessible to a larger audience. Minstrelsy allowed the French to escape their societal norms, but did not accurately represent black culture.
The popular images of Africans in Europe catered to racial attitudes of the time. The French were able to experience the black culture that they constructed. Black people were often portrayed through racist terms, which helped support the superiority of white culture. The French could engage Africans and imitate their behavior, but still hold on to their status in Europe and the world.
Essay 7
During the 1920’s, Europe was fascinated by aspects of black culture like music, dance, and athletics. France, in particular, embraced black culture from Africa, the Caribbean, and the United States. Dance and music was especially exotic for the bourgeoisie in France during this time. The French were able to escape from the social constraints of their class through their experiences with black culture. The celebrated trends of black culture were created using accepted racial stereotypes. Popular images helped reinforced longstanding myths held by the Europeans of their supremacy over all other races. Black culture thus served two purposes for the French—to provide an outlet from their lives and proof of their race’s status in the established racial hierarchy.
The Paris clubs that featured Antillais music allowed the French to escape their bourgeois world and experience something more primal. The music clubs created an exotic environment where many of society’s taboos could be challenged. The white European could even interact with black people from foreign countries. The dancing allowed the French to “transcend the bourgeois world and enter a fantastic Edenic paradise of primal enjoyments and sexual delights” (Archer-Straw). The French used the primitive stereotype of the African to escape to a less constricting time. These ideas of race contributed to the European perception that Western culture was advanced, while other cultures were primal.
The representation of Africans allowed the French to engage black culture without being “intimate with it.” Popular entertainment, such as minstrelsy, gave an inaccurate portrayal of African Americans in order to reinforce black caricatures of the time (Berliner). Minstrelsy allowed Europeans and Americans to view black culture on their own terms. Europe used minstrelsy as a way to help define the perception of black culture on the continent. The portrayal of Africans in minstrelsy was already familiar to the French, which allowed the medium to be more accessible to a larger audience. Minstrelsy allowed the French to escape their societal norms, but did not accurately represent black culture.
The popular images of Africans in Europe catered to racial attitudes of the time. The French were able to experience the black culture that they constructed. Black people were often portrayed through racist terms, which helped support the superiority of white culture. The French could engage Africans and imitate their behavior, but still hold on to their status in Europe and the world.
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Essay Six
Casey Petett
Assignment 6
The Europe portrayed Africans as sub-human races that were uncultured and primitive. Europeans, however, viewed themselves as being more advanced than other cultures. The media would present stories that portrayed Africans as violent sexual predators through stories of alleged rape. Scientists also would reinforce these stereotypes using science that proved the European as superior and any other people as being less. Europeans used these portrayals of Africans to ensure the preservation of the purity of their culture, which also made certain that their power would be intact.
The occupation of the Rhineland by African soldiers elicited a strong response from Europeans. Newspaper articles written in various cities criticized the actions of France. White Europeans were civilized, while blacks characterized by “savagery and unbridled passions, appetites, and instincts” (Campt, 52). The articles further warned against miscegenation because Europeans would not simply become uncivilized, but their entire genetic stock would be polluted (Campt, 52). The end of WWI already threatened the status of Germany in Europe, but the use of African soldier further threatened Germany’s power. Germany felt that their position made them the nation that would preserve culture in Europe.
Eugenics and other sciences that were popular in Europe discouraged the intermingling of the different races and encouraged the purity of the white race. These scientists placed Europeans at the top of the racial hierarchy and Africans at the bottom. Africa look uncivilized and primitive compared to Europe (Stone, 95). Europeans from different political parties adhered to Eugenics, which shows how influential the science was (100). In Great Britain, the middle-class especially used eugenics to express their concerns about their own power. The middle-class used eugenics to further distinguish themselves from the lower-class (94). Eugenics was used to reinforce racial stereotypes in order to preserve Europe’s power and purity.
Overall, Europe felt that the presence of Africans would deteriorate the white race. The primitive aspects of the African race would cause the genetic stock of the Europeans to go down. Europeans felt that the stereotypes of the sexually aggressive African would pollute the white culture. Africans were the opposite of how Europeans viewed themselves, which caused fear of miscegenation. Newspapers and science reinforced these views and swayed public opinion against the introduction of foreigners into Europe. Boundaries needed to be established between the two races in order preserve the established racial hierarchy.
Assignment 6
The Europe portrayed Africans as sub-human races that were uncultured and primitive. Europeans, however, viewed themselves as being more advanced than other cultures. The media would present stories that portrayed Africans as violent sexual predators through stories of alleged rape. Scientists also would reinforce these stereotypes using science that proved the European as superior and any other people as being less. Europeans used these portrayals of Africans to ensure the preservation of the purity of their culture, which also made certain that their power would be intact.
The occupation of the Rhineland by African soldiers elicited a strong response from Europeans. Newspaper articles written in various cities criticized the actions of France. White Europeans were civilized, while blacks characterized by “savagery and unbridled passions, appetites, and instincts” (Campt, 52). The articles further warned against miscegenation because Europeans would not simply become uncivilized, but their entire genetic stock would be polluted (Campt, 52). The end of WWI already threatened the status of Germany in Europe, but the use of African soldier further threatened Germany’s power. Germany felt that their position made them the nation that would preserve culture in Europe.
Eugenics and other sciences that were popular in Europe discouraged the intermingling of the different races and encouraged the purity of the white race. These scientists placed Europeans at the top of the racial hierarchy and Africans at the bottom. Africa look uncivilized and primitive compared to Europe (Stone, 95). Europeans from different political parties adhered to Eugenics, which shows how influential the science was (100). In Great Britain, the middle-class especially used eugenics to express their concerns about their own power. The middle-class used eugenics to further distinguish themselves from the lower-class (94). Eugenics was used to reinforce racial stereotypes in order to preserve Europe’s power and purity.
Overall, Europe felt that the presence of Africans would deteriorate the white race. The primitive aspects of the African race would cause the genetic stock of the Europeans to go down. Europeans felt that the stereotypes of the sexually aggressive African would pollute the white culture. Africans were the opposite of how Europeans viewed themselves, which caused fear of miscegenation. Newspapers and science reinforced these views and swayed public opinion against the introduction of foreigners into Europe. Boundaries needed to be established between the two races in order preserve the established racial hierarchy.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Essay 5
The partition of
African resistance also contributed to
The capabilities of Europe had to catch up with their ambitions before they could finish the partition of
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Essay 4
Although total freedom for slaves in Olaudah Equiano’s time was not a possibility, slaves did hope and strive for better living conditions, treatment, and even wages. Some slaves living in
Slaves in
Ouladah Equiano recalled that people who did not own a plantation would loan out their slaves in exchange for money. The money would then be used to provide the slaves with extra subsistence. The food would allow a better standard of living for the slave (Equiano, 91). The money would go directly to the master and not the slave, but it still provided the slave with a sense of self-worth. If the slave did receive some sort of compensation they could buy objects that contributed to their autonomy. Equiano wrote about a man who was able to buy a boat unbeknownst to his master (92). The money earned by slaves represented some autonomy, if not freedom.
Equiano went in depth about the plantations that gave better treatment to the slaves. The slaves still had to work under a master and were not free, but they were able to work and live under better conditions. The plantations perceived as “better” also did not abuse their slaves (97). Equiano would work harder under his master who was kind in order to not be sold to other individuals who were cruel (94). Slaves would be more willing to comply with the orders of their masters if they did not risk being physically punished.
The improvements the slaves received may have been a small victory, but it impacted English society on many levels. Slave owners could not longer view their slaves as property that had absolutely no rights. English society had to accept the domestic status of the slave, which allowed for fewer restrictions, but it still allowed the slave to be freer.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)