Page 1 2
|
Go
|
New
|
Find
|
Notify
|
Tools
|
Reply
|
|
Founder |
Malcolm X established the current mythology around 'self-hating Negroes' when he discussed the dichotomy between House Slaves and Field Slaves in a famous speech in 1963. Unfortunately, I think he got the analogy wrong and in so doing, needlessly fomented class tension within African America in ways that have not been productive.
Malcolm was right, of course, when he talked about House Slaves living in the big house and having proximity to master. While Malcolm characterized this as some sort of benefit to the slaves, the reality is that this was far crueler than the relative anonymity of working in the fields. The very intimacy with which House Slaves lived with their white master created insults and indignities that their field kin never had to suffer. There's a reason why the children of House Slaves were 'au lait'; it's because their mothers were raped by their masters and their sons, friends, etc. for generations and generations. The broad range of hues evident within African America today is a testament to the fundamental pervasiveness of this crime. Beyond that, slave women were also frequently forced to act as 'wet nurses' to the master's children. The notion of baring your breast and sharing milk created for your child - with the child of your master - seems horrible. These affronts to personal dignity are hugely consequential; House Slaves may not have picked cotton but I am guessing that most surely wished they could! What House Slave - particularly female - wouldn't have jumped at the chance to switch places with their kin in the fields? No, I think Malcolm got the analogy wrong. If he needed to resort to a slave analogy to characterize contemporary behavior within our community he should have talked about the overseers on the plantations - those slaves who were tapped by master to keep the rest of the slaves 'in line'. Overseers were given benefits and advantages to represent the master's interests. They betrayed their fellow slaves to enjoy the fruit of their master's favor. To me, this is a far more appropriate target for Malcolm to have gone after than the men and particularly women who suffered personal indignities serving master. At the end of the day, all slaves were subject to the cruelties and injustices of slavery. To be sure, class conflict within African America is something that is nonsensical and counterproductive under any circumstance. It has always served our enemy more than it has served us. But - if fingers must be pointed, the House Slaves probably weren't generally the doting sycophants that Malcolm described. In truth, many of the slave revolts and rebellions that occurred arose from the ranks of this group who plotted and poisoned and strategized to defeat master. Malcolm probably couldn't have imagined folks like Ward Connerly and Clarence Thomas. I can only imagine what he would have said about these brothers who do so much to deny their own identity to serve their contemporary (white) masters. To be sure, all of the the women raped and used over the generations who were domestics, at the very least, don't deserve to be lumped in with these "brothers" who are defined by their willingness to sell out those who look like them. It's not fair (much less productive) and - if he could reevaluate his characterization - I'm sure Malcolm would reconsider.  |
||
|
A1 |
This critique by way of analogy really isn't about class so much as it is about the difference in worldview -- a difference in ideology with the prevailing non-violent approach and curious goal of integration as the principle points of contention not class per se.
Funny, I've never heard the critiques of the plantation rhetoric Black conservatives use as indicative of or fomenting class divide. No, by and large, those ideas, that rhetoric is taken for what it is: representative of ideological attacks/differences. The irony is thick once we note how Malcolm X makes the same kind of critique of who funded/promoted the BIG SIX which we make concerning those who promote today's Black political conservatives.
|
|||
|
A1 |
I am descendant of field slaves...both my mother and my father.
I am hard pressed to offer an argument as to which kind of slave had it better. The consensus of conversatons I heard in my house was that the 'house slave' thought he/she was better. My grandmother was a mulatto. My great-grandfather, clearly, was not her biological father. She was raised in his household...and that of her mother. How that went down, I have no idea. It seems that the discussion is more about those doing the analyzing, e.g. Malcolm and others. For the things endured by the 'house slave', my information boils down to them being a threat...them being ones to 'set themselves apart'...them sustaining the 'color-culture' that plagued African America...to this day. Yet...many of that heritage have risen to lead our people in critical situations, e.g. Frederick Douglass, W.E.B. DuBois, James Farmer, Stokely Carmichael..,and many others. It is very hard to find an 'upside' to such a downer as chattel slavery. No to say I don't see the point of the discussion. PEACE Jim Chester African Americans for African America http://iaanh2.org African American Pledge of Unity We stand, Together, after left alone in a land we never knew. We Bind ourselves, Together, with the blood and will of Those who have gone before. From the Bodies of our Ancestors thrown away, from the Pieces of Ourselves left to perish, We rise as One, a New Body in a New Land, a New People in a New Nation. Of Common Mind, Body, and Spirit, By Declaration of our Amalgamated Individual and Personal Authorities, We Are African America. © James Wesley Chester 2004; 2008 You are who you say you are. Your children are who you say you are. |
|||
|
|
A1 |
Interesting and solid point, however, it's clear you're being needlessly anal with not only taking the analogy out of context (see above) but also taking it so literal as if the analogy even tried to speak beyond the specific generalities Malcolm X attempted to address via the idea of those with both a closeness AND affinity with the slave master. As far as nuance goes, it's interesting to note how one of the Sons/Daughters of Malcolm (aka The Black Panthers) covered all the bases including Overseers. Google Books excerpt from: The Condemnation of Little B (page 210) By Elaine Brown There, Brown mentions how "the House Slave might... poison the Master's Food" and while she didn't say explicitly that Nat Turner's mother was a House Slave, she made the clear connection to the prevail sentiment, if not truism, that House Slaves often were the betrayers of the revolts of Turner-Vesey-Prosser. But one thing that's missing from your observation is the African-born mothers of Turner and Prosser, e.g., when instilled in them their disdain for slavery, etc. Certainly, it's not hard to conceive of how there were Field Slaves who either didn't want to be free (i.e. take the risk; SEE THE UNDERGROUND RAILROAD) and may have been inclined to betray other slaves but the mere existence of some people who would do that is not the point. The point can (or should) also be made that the relative freedom House Slaves had along with skilled craftsmen like Vesey made them the natural class for organizing rebellion. But, again, Malcolm X's analogy was actually made in a different context than the class context you tried to put it in whether that's the it's mostly used now or not. And we can certainly point out how House Slaves, particularly the "mulatto" children of the slave master, went on to form a class of elites of property owning elites. |
|||
|
|
Founder |
Nmaginate, you make good points. My piece was primarily meant to critique Malcolm's characterization of house slaves by pointing out, first, that most of them were women and that, second, as a result, they suffered a degree of personal indignity (defined by rape etc.) that was uniquely barbaric. To me, it seems wholly inappropriate to lump those women in with folks within our community - like Clarence T - who sell us out for personal gain etc. To compare women who were raped and abused in the most profound of ways - true victims - with someone like Ward Connerly seems foolish.
Moreover, whatever Malcolm's intentions, African America has adopted the field versus house analogy to define class differences as well. In addition to using it to characterize ones "blackness", some of us also use it as weapon in our class arsenal as well. While in general, I believe that class conflict most benefits those who gain from our internal discord, again - I believe that overseers on the plantation represent a far better target, for a variety of reasons. |
|||
|
A4 |
I think Malcolm would readily admit that it was simply an analogy for the current condition, and not an research driven analysis on slavery.
|
|||
|
|
A1 |
You can't do that without staying true to the context and the point was rhetoric. Never meant to be an exact, literal, all-inclusive...
No one is making that comparison but you. Malcolm X sure didn't. The only comparison he made was the one I feel is characterized by those House Slaves, in this case, who not only were close to the master in terms of their work station but also had an affinity with the master. That's the main idea regardless of the categories.
Certainly, some have and, in that respect, your observations are legitimate. But, ironically, when you highlight persons like Connerly and Thomas then the House Negro designation closely resembles the exact way Malcolm X used the term: in reference to those who have close proximity AND an affinity with the master. I understand your point but since you've chosen to quibble over details then you can't legitimately dismiss the details I've presented. On the "needless" classism idea of yours, I would just play Devil's Advocate by comparing that to the sentiments Whites generally have when we "bring" up race/racism in ways that make them particularly uncomfortable. It would seem to me that, just like the race/racism, the classism is already there. So even with those who bastardized Malcolm's intent with the House Negro vs. Field Negro analogy (if Malcolm never used the analogy with a more explicit class-centered focus, which he may have... just not in the Message To The Grass Roots speech above) we can't really say that they are making things (class conflict/animosity) worse, per se. They are just giving voice to what is already there, even if below the surface. Black conservatives like Connerly, Thomas, etc. and those who have latched onto their themes -- Cosby, Juan Williams, Whitlock -- sow class discord with or without the plantation rhetoric. And maybe that's it: maybe your point would be more clear if you pointed out the people who have been wrongly accused to be House Negroes today merely because of class. You and I both know Malcolm wasn't referencing the women you speak of with the analogy and you would be hard pressed to establish that Malcolm's analogy is mostly used by one class against another vs. against Connerly, Thomas, etc. -- i.e. those who, accurately or not, fit the idea of someone having some kind of misplaced affinity with the master. The class thing may be incidental. |
|||
|
|
A1 |
That's exactly what I tried to say, more or less. Thanks. Regarding this comment...
Not only was Malcolm X on panels with George Schuyler but it was the very context of his analogy -- i.e. "brothers" serving their contemporary masters and doing a disservice to the masses. I think I ran across an old video of one of the panels/interviews with Schuyler and Malcolm X a while back but can't find it. It would be interesting to see how he regarded Schuyler but it's rather ironic that MBM basically says the House Negro vs. Field Negro is okay when it's applied to people like Connerly who, no doubt, are people in the upper classes in our community who arguably have the ideological positions they do as a way to pursue, secure and maintain their class interests.
|
|||
|
|
Founder |
And thats precisely the notion that I reject. How on Earth would a woman, subject to the personal indignities that she would, establish an "affinity" with the master? It's completely nonsensical. Master rapes woman. Master forces woman to wet nurse his children. Master forces woman to clean up his slop/shit etc. Woman establishes affinity for master. 
And the overseer is a much better metaphor IMO.
No - Ive said if these kinds of metaphors must be made, that characterizing house slaves makes no sense and that overseers better fit the bill. |
|||
|
|
A4 |
One of the things (sort of off topic) that I find so amazing about Connerly and his type is their vitrolic attitude towards blacks in general. It is one thing to simply say I they are against affirmative action. I mean I have heard some extremely pro-black brothers argue against affirmative action. What I find disturbing is the wound up anger behind their pursuit of such things...not as an effort of upliftment but almost as a self-emasculation for penance of being black.
I think in reflection on Malcolm's analogy he would argue the same way. Maybe the overseer would have been more historically accurate but the intent behind it remains the same. Some folks are so aligned with policies that burden the majority of blacks and favor the 'accepted' minority of blacks that they can only be classified as "house" from Malcolm's analogy. |
|||
|
A1 |
  Egungun, Egungun ni t'aiye ati jo! Ancestos, Ancestors come to earth and dance! "I'm sick of the war and the civilization that created it. Let's look to our dreams, and the magical; to the creations of the so-called primitive peoples for new inspirations." - Jaques Vache and Andre Breton "Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone." -John Maynard "You know that in our country there were even matriarchal societies where women were the most important element. On the Bijagos islands they had queens. They were not queens because they were the daughters of kings. They had queens succeeding queens. The religious leaders were women too..." -- Amilcar Cabral, Return to the Source, 1973    |
|||
|
|
A1 |
Whose talking about that woman, MBM? Were women the only House Slaves? Certainly, not. But keep swinging, wildly at your own straw-woman. Until you point to people today who have been wrongly accused of being House Negroes in ways that sow class discord then your point suffers due to a lack of relevance. In fact, I never got the image of a woman whenever the analogy has been used. Take a look at the context again. Malcolm X never referred to a woman among any of his contemporaries he attacked using the metaphor. Jerk on those emotions all you want but you still have to make whatever you "reject" relevant to the "needlessly fomented class tension" idea of yours that's supposed to be the aim of those who have adopted (and bastardized) the idea Malcolm X "established." I don't have a problem with the idea of attacking those who have misappropriated the idea to make unfounded remarks castigating someone because of their class origin or position. On that point, I completely understand and support your observation.
No. Your anal and just down right odd fixation on women House Slaves to the exclusion of male House Slaves doesn't make sense and no matter how much "better" the overseer metaphor is (hmmm.... metaphor) none of that says that the House Slave metaphor doesn't fit at all. Certainly based on what's been suggested as far as who betrayed the slave revolt Denmark Vesey planned, the House Negro idea holds true. And that's all it has to do for an analogy. Certainly your Overseer idea wouldn't be 100% correct - 100% applicable in terms of the situation and attitudes of Black/African overseers. Regardless, your whole argument falls flat when the inherent, though implicit, contradiction of yours whereby you feel like the characterization is fitting for Connerly & Co. is considered. Besides that, nothing stopped the slave-master from raping women who were Field Slaves. Besides that, slaves used as Overseers were victims right along with the House and Field Slaves, if you really want to go there. It's conceivable (and true) that there were people chosen for the position who only did it because they were forced to and then only performed their jobs reluctantly. So we can conceivable create an emotional argument that advises against castigating Overseers, too. But what does any of that have to do with how the analogy is used today - i.e. what you really call yourself objecting to. This was your thesis statement: I think he got the analogy wrong and in so doing, needlessly fomented class tension within African America in ways that have not been productive. Please make your point relevant. The very fact that you mention the likes of Thomas and Connerly makes Malcolm's analogy accurate and on point. Of course, you acknowledge that, even as it cuts against your emotional, straw-woman based objection-rejection. Anyway... who are the people who have been wrongly accused of being House Negroes today based on class.
|
|||
|
|
A1 |
Also, as I ramble to make points Urb-sun makes more short and to the point... Your point, MBM, is like that of those who make the anal factoid observation that the real life Uncle Tom was not like the caricature that's often used for people like Clarence Thomas and Ward Connerly. Simply, the literal facts about the real Uncle Tom and, in this case, ANY & EVERY HOUSE SLAVE are beside the point. And, as Urb notes when it comes to the Overseer idea:
the intent behind it [the idea/meaning being conveyed] remains the same So how does the Overseer substitution satisfy the "class discord" issue you raised? Simply, your objection makes no sense when taken as a whole because you never established how Malcolm's analogy was about class (instead of ideology) and you fail to sustain your own objection when a certain group of African Americans -- Blacks conservatives, e.g. -- are attacked with the House Negro idea no matter how much people in that group are a part of the upper-classes in African America. |
|||
|
|
Founder |
Well, you tell me what men were doing up in the big house? We're talking about domestics remember.
You miss the point. I could care less about folks today being mischaracterized. My point is about maligning a group of people in slavery who don't deserve to be so.
And therein lies the problem and why I stress the gender angle of this thing. Malcolm may not have intended to characterize women, but it doesn't take a history degree to realize that the vast majority of house slaves - domestics - were in fact women.
OK Nmag - other than a gardener or butler here and there - how would slave masters maximize the utility of a male slave - as a domestic or out in the fields? The point of a house slave is that they work . . . in the house. What are all of these male slaves doing - in the house?
I'm interested your interpretation here. By definition- an overseer accepts the benefits of the master to keep the rest of the slaves in check. How does that analogy not work?
Agree - but the roles and relationships still apply.
'I'll try once more. Of course you know that Connerly et al deserve the castigation they get, I just think it is inappropriate to label the house slaves with the actions of contemporary traitors. My problem is not with calling out those who would sell us out. It is with attempting to do so via a group that does not deserve that label.
Plenty of middle class black folks are routinely called 'house niggas' for doing things like moving to the suburbs so their kids can go to better schools. The term is used to paint folks who, somehow, aren't black enough for the person using the epithet. |
|||
|
|
A1 |
MBM, you sink your own argument about "many of the slave revolts and rebellions that occurred arose from the ranks of this group" (I believe you included men in that group) let alone this statement of yours:
Also, I don't have to tell you anything. I'll just present the information that undercuts your curious rationale here: Slave Narratives from HOUSE SLAVES including: (1) Lewis Clarke (3) Austin Steward (4) William Wells Brown That's 3 out of 6 entries on that website - 3 slave narratives from men, 2 from women and the last one from another occasion when Malcolm X used the House Negro analogy. An analogy, again, that was more about a critique of the ideological differences between Malcolm X and his contemporaries and/or people who presumably sought close proximity to Whites (INTEGRATION) and had some kind of AFFINITY for Whites. So, please... INSTEAD OF ALL THIS NONSENSE... please make your point relevant and point out those people living today who have been falsely accused of being House Negroes or otherwise attacked as being House Negroes based on their economic class. That was your thesis statement and the apparent point of contention. The they about House Slaves and the indignities you noted that those MEN and WOMEN suffered were akin to the indignities suffered by all slaves up to and including black slave overseers, some of whom did not fit the caricature (yours) of willful betrayers of their people. Follow the link (as also placed via edit in my post above) >>> "they were forced... and then only performed their jobs reluctantly." |
|||
|