Rice University logo
 
Top blue bar image The Other Group
A group blog for students in HIST 159
 

Singing ‘John Henry’

October 19th, 2011 by jrh5

Prompt 5. Nelson argues that different groups of people–miners, prison convicts, railroad workers, twentieth-century “folk” musicians, and white Southern mill workers–all developed their own distinctive versions of the John Henry story and song. What were the key differences between the versions of these different groups? Can their versions of the song shed light on the way these various groups viewed the world?

Not long after his death, railroad workers took songs about John Henry, and they used them for working, but they also used them as a warning. The rhythm not only slowed down the working pace of the men, it warned them to slow their whole pace down, for their own sakes. Especially when they were working with sandstone and silica, this warning extended the men’s lives, and in the case of the Big Bend Tunnel, allowed them to stop in time to strike and avoid a death from the silica in the air. And especially when the black men were predisposed to have heart problems that might end their life, the warnings of John Henry’s story to slow down were especially pertinent to the African American convicts  working on the railroad. This version of the song as compared to the others shows how rough the men on the railroad had it. The song was not a joyous thing. It was a slow dirge, a warning, a sad ballad. Not anything like what it eventually became.

Miners treated the song in much the same way. John Henry fit really well into the mining ballads of the time, and so miners used it to keep time between hammer beats, and to keep themselves from staying in the mine too long.

Prisoners “kept the song alive and spread it far beyond the world of tunnels and mines” by picking it up and then using it as their own personal reminder of the shortness of life, as well as “the danger of dying unremembered”. So Henry’s story became a warning, and then once they passed, an “emblem” of their unmourned death.

The “folk” musicians of the twentieth century took on these songs and instead used them as a symbolic descriptor of the common laboring man, one they might not have known anything about. Carl Sandburg, at least, knew what he was talking about when he pulled out his guitar that first day.

White Southern mill workers used John Henry songs to mirror their own struggles against the machines of the developing cities of America. “John Henry’s fateful battle with a steam-powered machine would seem quaint, but hauntingly familiar” to these people, as well as the soldiers Nelson originally uses this sentence to describe. As machines became more and more prominent in the mills, the workers had to race to keep up with them, working faster and faster in their attempts. And, much like silica to John Henry, microscopic cotton fibers were breathed in and eventually “gummed up” the lungs. So, once it became a country song, John Henry’s tale became a hit amongst them.

The different groups of people that created song from John Henry’s tale had differing musics and motives behind their usages, but they all somehow saw John Henry in themselves.

Posted in Jessica | No Comments »

John Henry in Song (Prompt #1)

October 19th, 2011 by lft2

I found that John Henry: Steel Drivin Man was the most engaging of our assigned readings thus far.  I enjoyed the chance to read about Nelson’s actual investigative history, since this is most likely what we would do if we continued into the historical field.  I enjoyed his ability to uncover, through extensive examination, the details of “the real John Henry’s” life, including the innovative (at least in the field of the books we’ve read) use of songs as a source.

When I first saw that Nelson would make such frequent use of the songs, I doubted their usefulness as a source.  The name ‘John Henry’ seems common enough that it could be a generic, folk-legend name, with little to no actual backing.  The songs were also questionable because most composers would trade historical accuracy for other factors such as rhythm, rhyme, and tone.  When recorded in writing, much of the songs’ meaning (as contained in the melodies and inflections) can be lost or misinterpreted.  For example, Nelson asserts that modern historians wrongly view Henry as a hero due to contemporary versions of the song‘s “fast and chirpy country” tune, which distorted its substance. (30) In part, these concerns were valid: the songs’ content did become “mangled and transformed” (95) based on the situation.  Hunting for historical fact is proved risky by these many distortions.  Early miners’ chants were meant to keep rhythm, and involved an awareness of death and tragic fate to fit the mold of the miner’s ballad.  Later, when convicts sang of John Henry, they sang of distant lovers to reflect their own situations. (106) He then became a working class hero in the chants of railroad workers. (111) This transformation of Henry’s portrayal from a man who cried when he saw the size of the mountain to a macho, triumphant figure echoes the fallibility of the songs as a source of fact.

While these points are true, I initially failed by mistaking the value of a source for the possible accuracy of a source despite our frequent discussion of the principle in class.  Like the factually dubious work of Weems and Bradford, distortions and exaggerations reveal precious fragments about those who “recycled old songs for new purposes.” (95) As Nelson stated, language has the ability to “go underground…from code to jargon back to code again.” (95) We can learn about the lifestyles, fears, and dreams of the miners, railroad workers, and convicts from the versions of John Henry songs that they sang.  Even apart from this, the songs are not necessarily less factually accurate than other primary sources, as I had assumed.  All sources are flawed, and even well preserved documents may contain errors due to data miscalculations, personal filters, and mis-remembrances.  Additionally, archives can be easily suppressed by those in power, while widespread civic texts like the songs are harder to silence.

Posted in Laura | No Comments »

End of the World?

October 18th, 2011 by pjy1

One of the greatest accomplishments many attribute to Kennedy is the Cuban Missile Crises. But although many historians have tracked down the movements and thoughts of the leaders during that tense time, there haven’t been much detailing the thoughts of the American citizens that is until now. An online excerpt by Tom Smith discuses the impact of the Cuban Missile Crises on the people during the time it has occurred. It shows that many citizens didn’t fear an upcoming nuclear war as much as we thought and alsothat the importance of foreign diplomacy rose in the eyes of Americans.

When one hears of the Cuban Missile Crises, they imagine that the US citizens were leaving in constant fear of a nuclear war at the time. But is this really the case? A poll shows that in the September of 1962, 24 percent considered Cuba our top national threat. But even after Kennedy’s public national address, the concern only rose to 25%. Concern of Cuba would later peak at 31% and remain above 20% through Mach of 1963, but by September of 1963, the results would have dropped to 3%!(Smith, 266-267) So did the people really fear the threat of a nuclear war? And if they did, why were they so close to be unconcerned about the nation that nearly started it? In fact in April of 1963,” only 5% expected a world war within the next year”, the lowest number in the last two decades.(Smith,268) Another impact on Americans was their views on foreign affairs. Their view of foreign affairs as a concern to the US rose from 35% to 72% from August to November of 1962. That is only second to Pearl Harbor’s impact (81%).(Smith, 267)

Another view of the Cuban Missile Crises was that America had “won” it. (In actuality, we compromised with the removal of our missiles in Turkey.) In a survey of December 1962, 45% of the poll reported that expected to see a decrease in Soviet power the next year. Maybe it was this boost in national image that helped Kennedy’s image also. The Cuban Missile Crises pushed Kennedy’s approval rating from 61% to 74% between mid-October and November. Foreign affairs also shifted in the Cuban Missile Crises. “In the summer of 1962, few people mentioned good or bad things they had heard people saying about President Kennedy.” Only 9 percent saw him successful in foreign diplomacy while 8 percent disapproved in his actions. When the Cuban Missile Crises was going on, 59 percent of pollster mentioned Kennedy’s success in foreign actions while 14 percent disapproved.(Smith, 269-270) We can see how the Cuban Missile Crises set foreign policies as such a high standard to judge Presidents.

The Cuban Missile Crises is, according to a poll, the most remembered fact about Kennedy’s term and was thought in 1988 to be in the top 6 uses of America’s military might.(Smith, 275) This source reveals that the fear of nuclear war may have been overstated for dramatic purposes. This online article contains the results of the original polls in the appendix and polls themselves which is arguably the best way to get the public’s opinion on something.

 This blog talked about the general view of the public over the course of years 1962-1963 in general this week. Next week it may go into even more detail about the weeks during the Missile crises and the daily lives of citizens then. Or, it may investigate the sources the article used to dig deeper into the subject. Either way, this source is a very valuable resource and is recommendable it for reading s of Kennedy. It closely examines a legendary event in his term and is terse with lots of cited information and statistical proof in the appendix.

Works Cited

Smith, Tom. Public Quarterly. 67. Oxford University Press, 2004. 265-275. Web. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/3521635?seq=1>.

Posted in Peter | No Comments »

The Ugly Truth (2)

October 18th, 2011 by pjy1

Disney is a company who creates films and movies targeted to children. Therefore, most of the settings are fictional such as Sleeping Beauty or Cinderella. Even their historical films are based on warped realities. Such examples are seen in Pocahontas and Davy Crockett. Does the setting in the film of John Henry also fit into this category?  Unfortunately, the freedom portrayed in the film was non-existent. All was not well for the freedmen even after the Emancipation Proclamation. The life of a freedman in the South was harsh in work, society and in the courts as well.

The people of Disney seem to have made the same mindsets as most of the academic song collectors. Their movie promoted and celebrated the life and work of John Henry. They incorporated an upbeat song in time to the hammering, supposedly to inspire the other workers.  But in reality, Nelson notes that the true meanings of the folk songs of John Henry were depressing and bitter. “They cursed hard work, bosses, and unfaithful women. They predicted pain and death.” (Nelson, 30) Disney also warped the working conditions of the railroad by portraying a sort of idyllic, peaceful occupation free from danger.  Henry Grady, a former worker of the railroad, recalls” mangled bodies…and the use of state convicts to raise the road beds” and all for the lowest paying job of railroad work! (Nelson, 25-26)

 If the movie could reverse our view of folk songs and of the working conditions, then what does that say of their portrayal of Post-Civil War South?  We can first examine the interactions between the whites and blacks of society during this time. Many local whites resented the influx of blacks moving in. In City Point, an editor of the “Petersburg Daily Index” expresses anger of the locals along with a derogatory name of “Cuffee” for the newcomers (Nelson,44).  In Prince George County, tensions would sometimes come to a peak and a drunken brawl would break out in Wiseman’s grocery (Nelson,46). But in the larger scope, the newly freedman were in a precarious position. In 1865, “Virginia legislature….defined crime somewhat differently than what we do today. Among the objectionable crimes were ‘vagrancy’ and ‘air of satisfaction’.” Though, the laws were written as race neutral, the enforcement only seemed to follow the freedman. And society slowly regressed back a state similar to slavery. “Men and women without labor contracts could be… auctioned off to the highest bidder for three months of labor. Those who tried to escape….could be bound with a ball and chain.” Virginia also formed a “special” police that had the power to go around and arrest “rouges”, as the Petersburg paper called them. These laws would be called “black codes” by critics (Nelson, 52-53).  Adding uncertainty to an arrested black person was the courts. In 1866, the case Ex Parte Milligan ruled that no military courts could operate when civil courts also operated. This brought many blacks out of the jurisdiction of the Freedmen’s Bureau and into the mercy of the black codes. However, 6 days later, the Civil Rights Act of 1866 made it a crime for a person to receive different penalties for a crime based on race. Bureau officials could protest the ruling of the civil courts and bring it to the district courts (Nelson, 54-55). Freedmen in the South were not in a good situation. If they abided by the law, they would certainly be abused by it. But if they broke it, they would have to gamble their fates to how much the court thought it could get away with along the Bureau official’s disposition.

From a life of constant slavery to a life of uncertainty, the freedman were not truly free with the rights of citizen was supposed to be. Disney’s John Henry may have said “never again” to slavery  but it seems he wouldn’t have had a choice at the time. It might be said that Disney did not mean to convey historical accuracy but rather the moral of determination and hard work. But in order to acknowledge how far the country has come and to preserve the knowledge of the past to be used in the future, we must acknowledge history in truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Certainly, the Emancipation Proclamation officially ended the institution of slavery in the South but it can not be said that it freed the slaves.

Posted in Peter | No Comments »

The First Assassination

October 12th, 2011 by jrh5

President Abraham Lincoln’s assassination occurred at a delicate time in American history. The war had just ended, the plight of African Americans was up in the air, and Reconstruction was falling into place. The end of the President’s life threw the country into even more of an upheaval. The introduction to the book The Lincoln Assassination discusses how the assassination is treated by historians as a sequel to the war, seen as an epilogue that few have sought to explain or understand.

So this is, in two ways, very like and unlike the death of John F. Kennedy. In one way, Kennedy’s assassination occurred at a delicate time in history, what with the civil rights movement, the Cold War, and immigration reform occurring. Lincoln’s death bewildered America, and Kennedy’s broke the American public’s heart. The country mourned Kennedy as though he had been a member of their own families, but as a chapter title in The Lincoln Assassination says: “Not Everybody Mourned Lincoln’s Death”.

The chapter describes how soldiers in the North as well as the South were noted to have “exclaimed” upon hearing of Lincoln’s assassination. The men in the North were usually punished for such talk, which ranged from hate comments about Lincoln’s politics to absurd and inappropriate outbursts, such as when “bosun’s mate Thomas Smith was… ungenerous: ‘If I could find his grave, I’d shit on it.’ Smith went to prison for one year.”

There are dozens of examples of such talk in this chapter. The men were disenchanted by the war and upset with where the country was going, and enough so that they were a vocal enough minority to be noticed.

I have seen none such reactions in reading about what occurred after JFK’s death. Was JFK a better President, or was the nation simply more attached to the charismatic man who had saved them from nuclear war? Was his image at the time of his death just so much better than Lincoln’s at the time of his, that it created this disparity between the reactions of the two assassinations?

 

Holzer, Harold, Craig L. Symonds, and Frank J. Williams. The Lincoln Assassination: Crime and Punishment, Myth and Memory. New York: Fordham UP, 2010. Print.

Posted in Jessica | No Comments »

Moses

October 12th, 2011 by jrh5

Prompt 1: The “Moses” image of Tubman has appealed to many Americans over the years partly because of its biblical and religious overtones; even today, Christian education companies like Nest produce videos that depict Tubman as a Christian. (Notice that in this video Tubman drops to her knees and prays when she arrives in the North. It’s also another interesting example of the mythic UGRR.) You could use your post to discuss the various images of Tubman as a “saint” or a “seer.” For example, using evidence provided in the book, compare Tubman’s piety and religious beliefs to the Christianity practiced by many of her early admirers like Bradford. Was Tubman’s Christianity like Bradford’s?

 

Tubman is presented as a “saint” to even modern day admirers when looking back at the materials that the 18- and 1900s have left America, due to the sheer amount of Christian values associated with her as well as her stories about her talks with God.

Bradford helped with this saintly image when she described Tubman: “she had never known the time, I imagine, when she did not trust Him, and cling to Him, with an all-abiding confidence. She seemed ever to feel the Divine Presence near”. Tubman’s Christianity was different from Bradford’s Christianity, and she acknowledges this when she said “Hers was not the religion of a morning and evening prayer at stated times, but when she felt a need, she simply told God of it, and trusted him to set the matter right”. So Tubman followed the ways of the south when it came to style of worship, which the strictly Protestant Bradford struggled to understand, but she was a Christian through and through and Bradford did her best to present her as such.

It seems Bradford also had a hard time with the idea of Tubman speaking directly to God and Him replying to her, but she did not omit it from her book, and thus it remains in American memory as a part of who Tubman is. Sernett even describes Bradford as “show[ing] both admiration and suspicion” when it came to Tubman’s “chats with the Lord”, but she so admired Tubman and her works that she allowed it to be part of the published work about her.

“These…uniquely personal experiences of the inner self” that Tubman had were passed on by both Bradford and those ex-fugitives that told others about the “charm” that Tubman had. The idea of this “charm”, that kept “de whites” from catching Moses when she was bringing slaves up to the North leans more toward the image of ‘seer’ than ‘saint’ but I think there is still a religious quality to the idea of it. God was the one protecting Moses, and so she felt that He would keep her from being found, so to her, it was still a religious thing, rather  than some supernatural protection or ability that she had.

Harriet Tubman was a saint to those in her time, with visions from God and saintly actions. Today we still remember her as so because of Bradford’s inability to leave those crucial descriptions from her novel.

Posted in Jessica | No Comments »

Academic or Not: Prompt 4

October 12th, 2011 by lft2

Based on my personal views and my reading of Sernett, I do not believe that there is a distinct difference between academic and non-academic history.  I think the congruency of the two, whether intentional or not, is unavoidable, regardless of the medium used to portray the history.  Regardless of their degree of difference, I believe both (if we can, in fact, refer to them as two forms) have a place in society and fill beneficial role in its progression.

I believe that the difference between academic and non-academic history, if it exists, exists only in the intentions and perhaps methodologies behind a particular piece of writing.  An academic historian sets out in search of truth, as Conrad did, because he found previous writings (in this case the Bradford books) “inadequate”  (210).  Non-academic writers, filmmakers, and artists, such as Anne Parrish, “make no claim to historical accuracy” (230), and instead strive for other goals, such as financial profit, moral education, artistic beauty, etc.  By extension, the methodologies behind academic and non-academic writing can be used to define the two: while Conrad “cast a wide net in an effort to gather as much information about Tubman as he could” and took care “to cross-check stories told him” (214), non-academic creators are likely to rely on a more limited range of sources.  For example, Parrish’s focus was literary rather than historical, and as such A Clouded Star perpetrated the flawed  and inaccurate suggestions that slavery was a benign institution, as stated by Ulrich B Philips.  Thus, I do believe that there is a difference between the motives and methods of academic and non-academic history, I do not believe that there is a fundamental difference between the actual products.  It is easy to extrapolate “academic” as meaning “truthful” and “non-academic” as “false,” but this is not necessarily true.  As Sutcliffe indicates, Conrad had significant problems finding reliable information of Tubman despite his best investigative efforts, to the point that two of his sources (Brickler and Northrup) were actively contradicting and accusing each other of lying.  Given that these types of inaccuracies can clearly exist even with the most academic methods and intentions, I believe that there is no guarantee that an “academic” text will differ in truth from a “non-academic” one.  This is especially true in art and film history.  An artist is required, by the nature of the medium, to embellish and edit aspects of reality from her work—especially since Tubman lived long enough ago that we have no photographic evidence of her escapades.  Therefore, any artistic portrayal of her life must be largely interpretive, whether it is intended to resemble reality or not.  Similarly, even documentaries striving for academic accuracy must be filtered through the director and actors who have their own nuanced views of how Tubman’s life would have looked, sounded, and occurred.  For instance, Cecily Tyson “did not remind one viewer of Harriet Tubman” (234), and while this is only a modern spectator’s opinion, it demonstrates how no actress could perfectly embody the actual spirit of a long-deceased person, whether she was trying to for academic purposes or not.  While an academic documentary may therefore have a greater chance of accuracy than a film made largely for dramatic effect, there is no guarantee that they will differ.  Therefore, I believe that there is no “sharp, generalizable difference” between the two types of history—only a spectrum of likelihood of resemblance to reality, which it is impossible for us to truly evaluate anyway.

Even though I would argue that academic and non-academic histories are different degrees on a spectrum, both do have a worthwhile function.  Academic histories exist as a public record, so that some form of truth can be found in the past.  They allow as to view events accurately, so that we can correctly apply the information to modern day life and research.  Non-academic histories, in contrast, can be more inspirational and impactful, as its details can be altered to crete the strongest effect.  Less academic history, such as children’s literature, also generates interest in true history and thus encourages more study in the field.  When I was young, I enjoyed history class because I the non-academic texts I was given were like stories that I could enjoy just like any fiction, yet the implication that the stories had been real gave them more importance, and made me stop and consider them more deeply.  Similarly, my dad once tried to show his favorite movie (about soccer games during World War II) and tried to convince me by repeating that “it’s all true!”  The movie turned out to be very non-academic and fictionalized, but the notion that it might have been historically accurate inspired my dad to be interested in WWII sports, at which point he could progress to academic histories.  Additionally, non-academic texts can fill the same role as fiction, and provide morality tales.  This principle can be seen in the non-academic Disney movie about Davy Crockett, which could teach children how to stand up for their beliefs and be honest without weighing the story down with infinite asterisks and footnotes and various interpretations that academic texts often require.

Posted in Laura | No Comments »

Kennedy via a Children’s Book

October 12th, 2011 by lft2

This week I found a children’s book entitled John F. Kennedy, by Jane Sutcliffe, to add a different perspective to our group project.  I would guess the book is aimed at about 2nd-3rd graders, judging by the simplicity of the language.   Many of the details of JFK’s life are glossed over and idealized to avoid overcomplicating things for kids,  as I expected.  For example, the book gives him primary credit for the civil rights movement by citing one unnamed civil rights leader as saying that “[he] made the difference.  [He] gave us [his] blessing.”  Similarly, the final epilogue lists his accomplishments and ignores his failings–he “made the country safer,” “set the nation on a new road to equal rights,” and “encouraged Americans to aim for the Moon.”  Despite these exaggerations, there are, I was surprised to find, facets that weren’t idealized: the book acknowledged that he was a poor student, was never meant to be a politician in his parents’ eyes, and admitted that “not everyone was happy with the job that Jack was doing.”  I found this more revisionist than other examples of children’s literature, such as Weems’s products.  Most of the information I have found on JFK, in fact, has been fairly well rounded.  It made me wonder if historical literature can be be so one-sided in the modern world, with such a wealth of information and a PC culture of immediate, worldwide critique.  How will this affect the way we view recent heroes, like JFK, versus older heroes, like Washington?

I also noticed a surprisingly  coincidental parallel between the Washington legends and the JFK legends as portrayed in the book.  Sutcliffe tells how Kennedy, in his rascally younger days, planned to prank his school’s dance dance by putting horse manure on the dancefloor.  The principal caught wind of the plan and contacted Kennedy’s father, but rather than reprimand his son for the mischief, Joseph Kennedy Sr commended him for his leadership and ingenuity in masterminding the prank.  Obviously, this corresponds to the cherry tree story, in which a young Washington commits a reprehensible act yet even so displays enough good qualities to be let off the hook.  I think this type of story reoccurs because it allows the legend-makers to present a hero who is relatably, seemingly  imperfect yet still a thoroughly good person.

Apart from the book, this yesterday I also saw part of the local news discussing the upcoming presidential elections while at my grandparents’ house.   The clip caught my eye because it showed a Southern religious official (whose name I didn’t catch) telling his congregation not to vote for Republican candidate Mitt Romney because he is a Mormon, and “Mormonism is a cult.”  This immediately reminded me of the anti-Catholic fears that preceded JFK’s election.  For next week I want to look deeper into these parallels and what they say about how our national views have shifted (or not) over time.

Posted in Laura | No Comments »

Kennedy- Eventual Fates of His Story?

October 11th, 2011 by pjy1

As strange as it is to think about a children’s book discussing the topic of an assassination, I have found a book that does just that. Granted, this book is not for kindergarten children (it seems to be 4th or 5th grade level) but it still discusses the day of Kennedy’s assasination and the conspiracy behind it.

I think this book would be a good suggested reading for the class during our discussion of JFK. This book is a good demonstration of how even civil texts can mold the young public’s opinion even on a mystery of Kennedy’s death. After reading the book directed for children, the widest audience for legends, we can compare the contents to our notes on Kennedy’s impact and image today.

The book is fairly informative, going step by step of the day Kennedy was shot to the death of his supposed killer. It then explains the case of the Warren Commission which determined that Oswald worked alone. Afterwards, it goes over the conspiracy theories along with the motivation and circumstantial evidence  behind them. Among the cases were: Castro-supporters, Anti-Castro rebels, the Mafia and even an agency in our own government, the CIA. It discusses the mysterious evidence from the “magic” bullet that supposedly zig-zagged through two bodies only to come out pristine to the dissapearance of another bullet from the scene. It also talks about the mysterious dissaperances and deaths of key witnesses. I would say that this is pretty heavy topics for children.

One thing that can be noted is that this book is at a higher level than the usual books about famous Americans like George Washington or Abraham Lincoln. That means that John Kennedy would be taught at a later time than some other historical figuers. But why? Why do we always teach the children the heroes that come first? Is it out of respect for the chronological history of America? Or is it because it is out of convinience? As time goes on, stories become myths which become legends of exaggerated and questionable proportions. Do we pick the oldest legends in order to inspire awe into the minds at young age? We discussed in class earlier why children were taught of Harriet’s nineteen trips and 300 freed slaves when the evidence show owtherwise. And the legend of Harriet Tubman spent decades in anonymity before fame brought her back into public attention. Similarly, the story of Davy Crockett’s death at the Alamo went uncontested for much longer before it was brought back to stardom. Many stories we have studied have gone into “hibernation” before emerging as fully formed legens. Some others like Washington began as legends and have continued on to be so. Is that to say that as time goes on, even the JFK conspiracy theories (which are extensive enough as they are now) will one day be even more exaggerated and famous than it is now?

Works cited

Landsman, Susan. A History Mystery Who Shot JFK?. 1. New York: Avon Books, 1992. 1-90. Print

Posted in Peter | No Comments »

Harriet’s own Christianity

October 10th, 2011 by pjy1

In many heroes and legendary Americans, many seek to acquire a complete knowledge over him or her. They seek the characteristics of their greatness. One side they try to see them is their own religion because it highlights their belief in worldly and spiritual matters along with an outline of their morals. Unlike famous Americans like George Washington for which there is little information on his religious belief, Harriet Tubman’s spirituality is a huge core of her actions and reputation. But how does Harriet’s belief compare to that of her admirers’ like Bradford’s Protestantism belief?(Sernett, 132) Jean Humez observes : “The surviving sources suggest that Tubman’s view of relationship of human beings to God was very different from Bradford’s” (Sernett, 138). Harriet’s belief seems to be a mixture of  Christianity and that of African traditions.

Harriet’s belief is similar to that of her admirers’ Christianity. She believes in God and the power of prayers. However, her “God” is a very personal entity and her prayers were a way to communicate directly with him.(Sernett, 138) One demonstration of this personal conversation is seen in her recollections: ‘O,Lord, I can’t-don’t ask me- take somebody else.’ To which He replies: ‘It is you I want, Harriet Tubman’ (Sernett, 137)  It is worth noting that this view of God was common among ex-slaves and “have been associated with black revolutionaries such as Nat Turner and Gabriel Prosser”. Many other Christians saw God in the nineteenth century “as being relatively remote and possessing two faces….:the kind savior…..and the stern, intimidating judge.” They certainly didn’t claim that prayer allowed them to converse directly with God. (Sernett,137-138)

Many native African religious traditions were transferred to America and preserved in the South. One of the beliefs that survived was the belief of supernatural powers. It suggested that some individuals were born with unusual seer-like powers. One example is Nat Turner who was reported to have unnatural abilities due to him being born with a caul.(Sernett, 144) Harriet Tubman was also famous for her visions which foretold the Civil War, her own freedom (Sernett, 135) and the Emancipation Proclamation (Sernett, 145).  Other ex-slaves believed that some led a “charmed” life which gave them the power to avoid capture. Harriet was suggested to have thought she had these powers courtesy of the Lord.  One man is reported to have said ‘Moses is got de charm…..De whites can’t catch Moses, kase you see she’s born with de charm. De Lord has given Moses de power.” (Sernett, 134) Another link to Harriet’s tie with native African traditions was her openness to them. Many northerners were mystified by the mysterious dancing and singing of the southern slaves. However, Harriet participated in these traditions with these slaves during the civil War and was able to recall those years afterwards. (Sernett, 139) 

But if there are some who believed in Harriet’s divine sight, there were others who tried to find other causes of it. Earl Conrad, Tubman’s second major biographer, attributed the cause of her visions to her blow to the head along with her erratic sleep pattern. However, Conrad was inclined not to believe in the spirituality of Harriet’s vision. He was a believer of Marxist policies and described God as “a piece of heavy artillery, employed by the rich to keep the poor content.” (Sernet, 145) On the other hand, Dr. Riley of Battle Creek Sanitarium disagreed and hypothesized that her visions came from trauma and the brutality of the slave life, giving her a mental disease. Whichever the case, the lack of data has not been able to prove either argument. (Sernett, 141)

It is difficult to explain the source of Tubman’s visions without going into personal beliefs. However, there is little doubt that Tubman thought of herself as a Christian and a servant of God even if her view was different than that of other believers. It is interesting to note how the views of Tubman’s religion change over the years though. Sernett notes “many nineteenth-century Americans trafficked in spiritualism, including Harriet Beecher Stowe and Abraham Lincoln.” It is probably at that time period that the largest amount of people saw her as a true Moses.(Sernett, 145) But as time went on, Marxist  Earl Conrad tried to explain her visions and belief in an atheistic sense through the science of her injuries. Even Dr. Riley attributed her belief to another abstract field of knowledge: psychology and mental disease. (Sernett, 140-141) So what does this pattern tell us? It reveals that sometimes history can be bent by the historians who write it. They may not silence it but they might twist or manipulate the words to fit the social values or personal beliefs at that time. It is a caution of how easily it is to believe the history that is told over the “true” history.

 

Posted in Peter | No Comments »

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »