Ever since fifth grade, we have all been and continue
to be educated about slavery. We have all seen the gruesome pictures in the
history books and have read some upsettingly true literature. I would say that
I have a reasonable amount of knowledge about slavery. However, it never really
thought about how some slaves are only a small parentage of African American. I
always assumed that slaves look and acted as they are portrayed in textbooks
but it wasn't until reading Pudd’nhead Wilson I realized that some slaves don’t
look, act and hardly even are of African dissent. After reading Pudd’nhead Wilson
and engaging in the stories of Roxy and ‘Tom’ a new conflict of slavery was
brought to my attention. Both Roxy and ‘Tom’ were only a small fraction of African
dissent. “From Roxy’s manner of speech a stranger would have expected her to be
black, but she was not. Only one sixteenth of her was black, and that sixteenth
did not show” (63). Even though Roxy was only one sixteenth black, making Tom
her son only one part black and thirty-one parts white. The fact that they were
hardly even black did not matter and were treated no differently than the other
slaves (Twain).
This tiny part of ancestry that haunts these slaves
sparked my interest. I decided to look up the One Drop Rule which it an only
term which later became a law that was used to classify anyone with African
ancestry as a Negro. The idea behind this saying is that if you have a drop of
African ancestor in your blood than that’s the only blood that counts. This
idea created a concept called “invisible blackness” (One-drop Rule). If I child was born to parents of different
races then the child would still be seen as black. This is shown in Pudd’nhead
though Tom’s character. This One Drop Rule law reinforced racial ideology and was
used mostly in the court system when arguing racial identity and legal rights.
The idea of “invisible blackness” stems from the language used within the
courts (One ‘speck’). This idea proposes
the idea that being black is so much more than just skin color but a never
ending trace of ancestry.
In Twain’s novel The Tragedy
of Pudd’nhead Wilson he shows that this One drop rule was not only know and
accepted by white people but also by the black population. An example of this
in the text is when Roxy shouts at Tom saying “It makes me sick! It’s de nigger
in you, dat’s what it is. Thirty-one parts o’ you is white, en on’y one part
nigger, en dat po’ little one part is yo’ soul.” (157). This quote is evidence that
the One Drop Rule was accepted and actually how people would define each other
(Twain).
Citations:
"One-drop Rule." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 05 May 2014. Web. 14 May 2014.
"One 'speck' of Imperfection---Invisible Blackness and the One-drop Rule: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Examining Plessy v. Ferguson and Jane Doe v. State of Louisiana. Paperback – September 2, 2011." One 'speck' of Imperfection---Invisible Blackness and the One-drop Rule: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Examining Plessy v. Ferguson and Jane Doe v. State of Louisiana.: Erica Faye Cooper: 9781243518378: Amazon.com: Books. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 May 2014.
Twain, Mark. The Tragedy of Pudd'nhead Wilson. New York: New American Library, 1964. Print.
http://mulattodiaries.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/black-by-association.jpg
On Tuesday, we came up with a list of characteristics that make up "race". These characteristics included skin color, class, speech, legal status, dress, ancestry (blood), property, etc. It's crazy to think that back then, they based EVERYTHING solely on "one drop" of blood. For example, Roxy appears to be white, and carries many of these "characteristics" that would point to her being white... however, based on her blood alone, she is classified as a slave. It's absurd, and whose job is it to keep track of everyone's, including slave's, lineage anyway?!
ReplyDeleteIt's also interesting to see the use of fractions to relate to how much ancestor's blood is in them. It seems like fractions were applied to slaves often; for example, The Three-Fifths Compromise, where slaves were counted as 3/5 of a person for representation.
Violent, it's terrific that you looked this up, and exciting to see it open your eyes to a new aspect of the institution of slavery. Of course, if one were very black, or of total African ancestry, it shouldn't justify the institution any more, but certainly the white-skinned slaves trouble what W.E.B. DuBois would later call "the color line," because they illustrate the common association between skin color and social status. But as you note, slavery was based on private property. As you put it, "this idea [of the one-drop rule] proposes the idea that being black is so much more than just skin color but a never ending trace of ancestry." But it's important to remember that "being black" was something defined from without, by the oppressors (Kaley, it was the job of slaveowners and their supporters to keep track of others' lineage, because it was in their interest to do so). Even though "blackness" was reclaimed in the 1960s as a source of pride, and is now something people of all skin tones may claim as their identity based on pride in their parentage or ancestry, in Twain's era, this identity was imposed upon those who could then be subjugated on that basis. I hope this makes sense...
ReplyDeleteI agree that it was difficult for slaves to find their identity when it was forced upon them by slaveowners. I think this is half the reason "Tom" is so panicked when he learns he is "black". He has been a horrible master to any slave or black person he comes across and to learn he is the one who should be in that same position is horrifying to him. This potential learning moment for "Tom" is completely squashed here when he begins to question his own character upon finding out he is "black" rather than question the institution of slavery.
ReplyDelete