Advertisement of the Slaves

Earlier this week in class, we talked about three different images in class, one portraying three white men attacking a black man/slave, one of the "armed slave", and the other of the non-work movement for the black man.  I want to talk to you about the version of the Irishman from New York, the banker from New York, and the founder of the KKK Nathan Bedford Forest.  Specifically, I would like to talk about the way that the artist portrayed the Irishman.  He was portrayed to have animal like characteristics, and I was wondering if you think that this image of the Irishman could also be a sign of how the black men/slaves were thought of.  Do you think that slaves could be thought of as people with very animalistic characteristics and actions.  This seems very possible to me, because if a person like an Irishman could be so terribly portrayed when he was a member of the white society/Europeans.  Further more, I was wondering how large of an impact you think that such a method of characterization would impact the view point on the slaves.  Do you think that this could have made the view on the slaves any worse?  I personally believe that even though they were very victimized, they still could have been hurt by this method of advertisement would hurt them because it would lower them even more from just unequal people, to animals.

In the documentary that we watched in World Studies, it tells about how slaves we're mistreated and then eventually, the whites/the court determined that the slaves would no longer be considered people in the court system.  Bit if you turn to all of the other documents that we have read in class, we also know that the slaves were very poorly treated.  The slaves already had very slim chances of finding freedom with the court system, and many of them even if they tried to seek freedom through the court system, they would commonly find discrimination which would prohibit their freedom.

Do you think that the declaration that people were not to be treated as people in the court system really affected the chances of a black slave to find freedom?  Do you think that this act surprised the slaves, or do you think that it didn’t really impact their thoughts of the our system?

In our test for American Studies, you probably all remember the source about the slave who was cleaning out his master's stables when his master attacked him.  Also if you will recall the section of the documentary that talked about how slave. Repulsive be tied up, and then their "masters" would pour salt water on their wounds.

My question is do you think that all slaves could have fought back against their holders and gained a confidence over the white people like the man from the source in our test?  And also, if you do not think that at least many of them could stand up against their captors, then can you think of another way that the slaves could have boosted their confidence and intimidated their "masters".

Nicholas Cvercko

We can actually compare some of the topics that Lincoln discussed in his document that we read in class, to Puratin views, and also the views of Jefferson that we have found from reading one of his documents.  We will not only find a common topic shared throughout the years, but we will also find similar view points/perspectives.


The common topic that is found in all three texts, all during a different period in history, is the topic of not just blacks as slaves, but also the reasoning behind any slaves.  Lincoln talks about how the blacks are being held as slaves, and then he states that they shouldn't, but he also wants to appeal to the other voters who would elect him, and states that there is some reasoning behind the enslavement of the blacks.  Jefferson states that the blacks are inferior to the whites/Europeans, and are very different.  This is the reasoning that Jefferson uses as his validation towards the purpose of slavery.  Then in several Puritan texts, the Puritans state how they are better than the, "other"s, or the Indians, and they label them as savages.  The Puritans, Lincoln, and Jefferson all utilize the same reason to justify their actions of slaver, or just taking land.  They all say that they were/are more superior than the race/people they enslaved or moved out.

Thomas Jefferson

           In the text we read that was written about Jefferson, we were shown Jefferson's viewpoints on the thought process and actions of the Blacks, and also if he thought that they were inferior to the whites/Europeans in any way.  Jefferson also shared with us the common beliefs of that time reflecting how the Blacks should be treated and why they were thought to be inferior to the whites/Europeans.

           Jefferson says that the there are studies that prove that the Blacks think more for pleasure of the senses rather than what's right.  He also says that the blacks think more about short term goals than long term goals.  Jefferson also states that the Blacks are generally larger and have a different scent to themselves than the Europeans do.  The scent and height of the Blacks seem to be just a general observation, where as the inferiority and the thought process of the Blacks seems to be from studies and the common viewpoint of the Europeans in America.

           My question is whether you think that the majority of the article we read is based off of common belief during Jefferson's time, statistics and studies, Jefferson's personal opinions, or a combination of the three. I was also wondering on what your thoughts are on Jefferson's personal opinion, and if they present any form of bias towards the purpose and content in the text.