George P. Rawick in 1972 published his first nineteen volumes of the FWP (Federal Writer’s Project) slave narrative collection under the title “The American Slave: A Composite Autobiography”. The interview with Frank L. Adams is narrated on page 1 of Volume 2 of the series. Frank L. Adams, familiarly known as “Uncle Bud” is an intelligent and interesting character who is 84 years of age. During the years of slavery he was one of Abel Adams’s slaves. In the interview he talks kindly about his master who he says had about fifty to seventy-five slaves. Donna J. Spindel in her article titled “Assessing Memory: Twentieth-Century Slave Narrative Reconsidered” includes the ideas from many historians and psychologists to convey the fact that slave narratives are not always authentic and their limitations should be kept in mind. Woodward agrees with her and John Blassingame, Henige, and Starling have warned historians to “recognize the elements of untrustworthiness inherent in human testimony”. Further, Spindel makes it clear that memory deteriorates with age whereas intellectual ability may not. And recall of events may be different depending on the health and age of the slave. She also points to the fact that the interviews of the slaves were taken out of context and hence may not truly reflect the past. In the case of the interview of Uncle Bud, it is true that he is aged and is 84 years old. Moreover in the introductory section to the interview it is said that his mind is not stable and keeps wandering when he is tired. Thus it is true that the historical value of the interview is diminished by his age and health. But the interview is held very much in context at Jasper, where Uncle Bud was born and where his master lived. This is likely to aid his memory recall and this fact adds some authenticity to the interview as a historical source document. Thus, according to Spindel’s article, the interview with Uncle Bud can be considered a historical resource to a moderate extent. The interview may be used to extract details of the life of a slave under a loving master, how religion played a huge role in keeping them motivated and how some slaves suffered under brutal masters. It also serves to highlight the fact that slaves were not just passive objects as generally portrayed in slave accounts, but individuals with feelings, family, religion, loyalty, patriotism and self-esteem.
Comparison of two different book reviews of the same book
George Reid Andrews and R. F. Colson have reviewed the book “Children of God’s Fire: A Documentary History of Black Slavery in Brazil” by Robert Edgar Conrad. According to Andrews, Conrad has made an excellent research book on slavery in Brazil and he has also made it highly readable. Thus Andrews reviews the book from a general reader viewpoint whereas R. F. Colson in his review of Conrad’s book takes a historian’s perspective and appreciates Conrad for presenting documents on a wide range of themes drawn from a wide array of sources. He cites the variety of sources used by Conrad that give the book historical value: judicial records, the national and provincial press, travelogues, British diplomatic papers, speeches made in the Imperial legislature, official correspondence of the general government, in addition to private correspondence and plantation records.
Andrews, as a reviewer reads between the lines. He says that the book through its accounts unwittingly reveals certain historical but horrific truths. For example, he says that one senator from Minas Gerais, in his eagerness to prove that conditions for children of slaves have improved recently, says that before 1850, only five percent of slave children survived to adulthood. Moreover, the book according to Andrews covers all aspects of the slave’s life from physical conditions to legal status, religion, rebellion and struggle for freedom. He also points to the fact that the book reveals both sides of the slave regime – there were both brutal masters and kind considerate ones. He highlights that one of the most compelling themes of the book is the effort taken by conscience-stricken Brazilians to find some way to reconcile the cruelty of slavery with the Christian doctrine on which their civilization was based. Thus Andrews focus is on the theme of religion whereas Colson focuses more on the legal and historical aspects. Colson about how well Conrad has juxtaposed well-known historical sources and focuses on the ‘exceptional law’ of 10 June 1835. Moreover, Colson, contrary to Andrews, is highly critical of Conrad. He criticizes Conrad for not setting his document in context and also for assuming too much of the reader. He even makes suggestions that there must be more emphasis on the pervasiveness of slavery that Conrad must have included newspapers materials of the late 1880s and there must have been the more in-depth treatment of the issues. Both Colson and Andrews however agree that Conrad’s book is a valuable resource for the study of slavery in Brazil.
Bibliography
- Andrews, George Reid (1989). Review of Children of God’s Fire. A Documentary History of Black Slavery in Brazil by Robert Edgar Conrad. The American Historical Review. 1989, 94 (3). 909-910.
- Colson, R. F. (1985). Review of Children of God’s Fire. A Documentary History of Black Slavery in Brazil by Robert Edgar Conrad. Journal of Latin American Studies. 1985, 17 (1), 235-237
- Rawick, P. George (1979). The American Slave: A Composite Autobiography – Volume: 2. Greenwood Press, Westport, CT, 1979.
- Spindel, J. Donna (1996). Assessing Memory: Twentieth-Century Slave Narratives Reconsidered. Journal of Interdisciplinary History. 1996, 27 (2), 247-261.