The Slave Trade

Past and present. You can't make this stuff up.
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: The Slave Trade

Post by Mr. Perfect »

The slave trade here though is largely a European nimby phenomenon though right? European colonizers dumped slaves in their colonies and reaped the benefit of cheap tobacco and whatnot, safely on the other side of the ocean, then when these colonies gained independence they had to deal with the aftermath. Right?
Censorship isn't necessary
Ibrahim
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 2:06 am

Re: The Slave Trade

Post by Ibrahim »

Nonc Hilaire wrote:
Ibrahim wrote:
Nonc Hilaire wrote:
Ibrahim wrote: It also just occurred to be that Caribbean pirates are charming rogues, beloved of cinema, amusement park rides, and children's Halloween costumes, but their North African equivalents are not.
An artifact of the days when all US children read Stevenson's Treasure Island. The ghastly pirates have been culturally sanitized just like cowboys and indians. North African pirates never had a place in children's literature to begin with.
True. An enterprising hipster kid could be the first to dress up as a Malay pirate for Halloween, Lots of stylish sashes and so forth.
We still have a huge fish 'n chips chain called Long John Silver's. I bet I could survey the company headquarters for a week before I found one person who could relate the narrative of Long John Silver and how the character was directly related to food service.
In the name of ecumenism: invest with me in a chain of Malay pirate-themed restaurants selling extremely hot fish curries.
User avatar
Nonc Hilaire
Posts: 6168
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am

Re: The Slave Trade

Post by Nonc Hilaire »

Ibrahim wrote:
Nonc Hilaire wrote:
Ibrahim wrote:
Nonc Hilaire wrote:
Ibrahim wrote: It also just occurred to be that Caribbean pirates are charming rogues, beloved of cinema, amusement park rides, and children's Halloween costumes, but their North African equivalents are not.
An artifact of the days when all US children read Stevenson's Treasure Island. The ghastly pirates have been culturally sanitized just like cowboys and indians. North African pirates never had a place in children's literature to begin with.
True. An enterprising hipster kid could be the first to dress up as a Malay pirate for Halloween, Lots of stylish sashes and so forth.
We still have a huge fish 'n chips chain called Long John Silver's. I bet I could survey the company headquarters for a week before I found one person who could relate the narrative of Long John Silver and how the character was directly related to food service.
In the name of ecumenism: invest with me in a chain of Malay pirate-themed restaurants selling extremely hot fish curries.
Deal! Our slogan can be, "It's Hotter 'n Halal" :twisted: !
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”

Teresa of Ávila
User avatar
Apollonius
Posts: 1065
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 5:32 pm

Re: The Slave Trade

Post by Apollonius »

Slavery on film: What is Hollywood's problem? - Tom Brook, BBC News, 15 October 2013
http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/201310 ... of-slavery

Slavery is a dark chapter in US history. And surprisingly few Americans seem to know the full horror of what the country’s slave population had to endure. Over the years Hollywood has been reluctant when it comes to filling in the details. But is this down to audience disinterest – or is there a deeper issue? “There still are a lot of Americans in the marketplace who don’t really want to see the reality of slavery − and Hollywood being a business may be wary about showing too much of that,” says Screen International film critic David D’Arcy.

But now a forthcoming picture, the highly-praised 12 Years a Slave from British filmmaker Steve McQueen, is about to bring Americans what many view as the most realistic and bold portrayal of slavery ever seen on the big screen. It opens next week in US cinemas and it’s a film that could both educate and inspire − as well as alienate. ...


Isn't the real problem with Hollywood's portrayal of slavery the same as its problem generally? Slavery is universal in extent, yet the focus of American films is entirely on the American experience, and in this case specifically, the experience the slave environment of the antebellum South.

Further, the subject of the film featured in this article is even more extraordinary. People who were kidnapped in the North and then forced to work as slaves in the South represent a radically unusual situation, nothing at all like the experience of the vast majority of American slaves.


So whether the film is "realistic" or not barely matters. It misrepresents slavery, it misrepresents the slavery of colonialism, and it misrepresents slavery in America.



A resopondent:

"But, it will accomplish what it sets out do do, which is to foment resentment, victimhood, and hatred in people who are 150 years removed from slavery."
Ibrahim
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 2:06 am

Re: The Slave Trade

Post by Ibrahim »

Insofar as pop culture influences people's perceptions of and opinions about the world, more films that detail America's (among others) sordid history of crimes against humanity would be a good corrective to the prevailing attitudes of American exceptionalism and white supremacy.

But that's only insofar as the politics of a film about slavery are questionable at all. If people are asking "why all these movies about American slavery?" the best response is "why not?" I don't think we need any more movies about WW2 or the police searching for an elusive serial killer who taunts them with cryptic letters.
User avatar
Apollonius
Posts: 1065
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 5:32 pm

Re: The Slave Trade

Post by Apollonius »

Your villains are white people. Mine are Muslims.


Another film about a black man being whipped by a cruel master? <snore>


I watched the 'Roots' series when it first came out. Laughable. Everything about that book / movie was a joke. One expects TV to be rotten, but that show reached brand new lows in historical misrepresenation.



I'd rather see a reconstruction of Moulay Ismail's fabulous palace, adventure on the high seas, a harem full of slave girls, and a realistic demonstration of the inventiveness of Islamic torture techniques.
Ibrahim
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 2:06 am

Re: The Slave Trade

Post by Ibrahim »

Apollonius wrote:Your villains are white people. Mine are Muslims.
No, plenty of white people abhor the racism and bigotry that is experiencing something of a resurgence today but remains a minority opinion. Moreover its not a matter of villains, just facts and history. Your hate campaigns against Muslims and First Nations people aren't justified by any facts or reality, and when facts are presented to you you have typically responded with irrational anger and slurs. In this case you apparently object to movies being made about an issue that is inconvenient to your own supremacist world view, but there is no rational reason for this objection whatsoever. Its just a kneejerk response to something that challenges your preconceptions.


Another film about black people being whipped by a cruel master? <snore>


I watched the 'Roots' series when it first came out. Laughable. Everything about that book / movie was a joke. One expects TV to be rotten, but that show reached brand new lows in historical misrepresenation.
Who cares what you think about some movie? There is nothing inherently problematic about making them, and I don't think they were banking on doing big numbers in the white supremacist demographic.

Accuracy is a good thing in historical films, but the overall record for Hollywood is pretty dismal, and you weren't doing all of this whining about other movies with historical inaccuracies.



I'd rather see a reconstruction of Moulay Ismail's fabulous palace, adventure on the high seas, a harem full of slave girls, and a realistic demonstration of the inventiveness of Islamic torture techniques.
Naturally. Because this promotes, rather than challenges, your prejudices. Its also another example of the inherent irrationality of bigotry that you conflate an isolated example with widespread practices. My already-made point that this was equivalent to contemporary white Christian practices across the straight of Gibraltar was apparently lost on you, but in any case I think they already made a movie about Torquemada.
User avatar
Nonc Hilaire
Posts: 6168
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am

Re: The Slave Trade

Post by Nonc Hilaire »

Hollywood. No production without an assurance of international profit, and prospects for a series of sequels.

I think Hollywood's problem is caused by picking inappropriate genres. Costume dramas and heroic adventure epics don't quite fit the historical narrative, and there is little market for dating couples wishing to spend a Friday evening being repulsed and disgusted. Nobody's getting laid after that.

A slavery themed horror genre movie might do it, though. Maybe get Clive Barker to write the script.
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”

Teresa of Ávila
User avatar
Apollonius
Posts: 1065
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 5:32 pm

Re: The Slave Trade

Post by Apollonius »

Ibrahim wrote:[Your hate campaigns against Muslims and First Nations people aren't justified by any facts or reality, and when facts are presented to you you have typically responded with irrational anger and slurs.

I'm extremely interested in the Native peoples of the Americas and have spent a lot of time interacting with them and studying their cultures.


The only people I have real contempt for are those who claim to know something about history and then turn out to be illiterates.




ibrahim wrote:Accuracy is a good thing in historical films, but the overall record for Hollywood is pretty dismal, and you weren't doing all of this whining about other movies with historical inaccuracies.


Wrong. I was whining about it only a few days ago:

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2247



Apollonius wrote:I'd rather see a reconstruction of Moulay Ismail's fabulous palace, adventure on the high seas, a harem full of slave girls, and a realistic demonstration of the inventiveness of Islamic torture techniques.
Ibrahim wrote:Naturally. Because this promotes, rather than challenges, your prejudices. Its also another example of the inherent irrationality of bigotry that you conflate an isolated example with widespread practices. My already-made point that this was equivalent to contemporary white Christian practices across the straight of Gibraltar was apparently lost on you, but in any case I think they already made a movie about Torquemada.


There have been numerous films that covered the story of Torquemada. Everybody knows about him, even people who don't read. A movie about Thomas Pellow's captivity in Morocco would be something no one has seen yet, and frankly, is likely something that no one will see anytime soon, since it is bound to be offensive to people who are keen to shout down parts of history that make them uncomfortable.
Ibrahim
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 2:06 am

Re: The Slave Trade

Post by Ibrahim »

Apollonius wrote:
Ibrahim wrote:[Your hate campaigns against Muslims and First Nations people aren't justified by any facts or reality, and when facts are presented to you you have typically responded with irrational anger and slurs.

I'm extremely interested in the Native peoples of the Americas and have spent a lot of time interacting with them and studying their cultures.


The only people I have real contempt for are those who claim to know something about history and then turn out to be illiterates.

Your only contribution on the subject of First Nations has been to quote an encyclopedia, mock their dead, and tell anecdotes about meeting one drunk on a bus. We've had this debate repeatedly, but you've never substantiated either your false claims on the subject, or your false claims about First Nations people. Never once.

Your most memorable contribution to the forum was when I posted a link to a CBC news story about new research into residential school records, and you wanted to know why I was bringing up old news, and who cared how many died because they would have frozen to death anyway? That certainly sounds like somebody with an excellent grasp of history and no contempt or hatred in their heart.




ibrahim wrote:Accuracy is a good thing in historical films, but the overall record for Hollywood is pretty dismal, and you weren't doing all of this whining about other movies with historical inaccuracies.
Wrong. I was whining about it only a few days ago:

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2247
Nothing in that post is relevant to this discussion, which is why you linked to the topic without actually quoting yourself.



Apollonius wrote:I'd rather see a reconstruction of Moulay Ismail's fabulous palace, adventure on the high seas, a harem full of slave girls, and a realistic demonstration of the inventiveness of Islamic torture techniques.
Ibrahim wrote:Naturally. Because this promotes, rather than challenges, your prejudices. Its also another example of the inherent irrationality of bigotry that you conflate an isolated example with widespread practices. My already-made point that this was equivalent to contemporary white Christian practices across the straight of Gibraltar was apparently lost on you, but in any case I think they already made a movie about Torquemada.


There have been numerous films that covered the story of Torquemada. Everybody knows about him, even people who don't read. A movie about Thomas Pellow's captivity in Morocco would be something no one has seen yet, and frankly, is likely something that no one will see anytime soon, since it is bound to be offensive to people who are keen to shout down parts of history that make them uncomfortable.
I actually don't think that would be a bad subject for a movie, but you'd probably want more of an exploitation-genre torture-porn film that I would. Even if a totally accurate version were made, you would only use it as an opportunity to reinforce your own prejudices even if that wasn't the point of the film, like you did with Black Robe.

The very fact that you think one exploitation movie about captivity and torture is a great idea and another one is a terrible idea, based entirely on who the perpetrators and victims are, only reinforces my argument that you are entirely politically motivated. "We don't need more torture porn that makes whites look bad, we need some torture porn that makes Muslims look bad!" So much for your boast that you didn't like movies with a "message."
User avatar
Apollonius
Posts: 1065
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 5:32 pm

Re: The Slave Trade

Post by Apollonius »

Ibrahim wrote:
Apollonius wrote:
Ibrahim wrote:[Your hate campaigns against Muslims and First Nations people aren't justified by any facts or reality, and when facts are presented to you you have typically responded with irrational anger and slurs.

I'm extremely interested in the Native peoples of the Americas and have spent a lot of time interacting with them and studying their cultures.


The only people I have real contempt for are those who claim to know something about history and then turn out to be illiterates.

Your only contribution on the subject of First Nations has been to quote an encyclopedia, mock their dead, and tell anecdotes about meeting one drunk on a bus. We've had this debate repeatedly, but you've never substantiated either your false claims on the subject, or your false claims about First Nations people. Never once.

Your most memorable contribution to the forum was when I posted a link to a CBC news story about new research into residential school records, and you wanted to know why I was bringing up old news, and who cared how many died because they would have frozen to death anyway? That certainly sounds like somebody with an excellent grasp of history and no contempt or hatred in their heart.


Maybe you should look through the relevant threads. This time, I suggest you try reading them before you start typing.




Ibrahim wrote:
Apollonius wrote:
ibrahim wrote:Accuracy is a good thing in historical films, but the overall record for Hollywood is pretty dismal, and you weren't doing all of this whining about other movies with historical inaccuracies.
Wrong. I was whining about it only a few days ago:

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2247
Nothing in that post is relevant to this discussion, which is why you linked to the topic without actually quoting yourself.


From my post there:
Apollonius wrote: I also like historical epics, even if almost all of them are no more true to life than baroque opera.


True to form, you can't read a sentence that might be long enough to contain a dependent clause.
Ibrahim
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 2:06 am

Re: The Slave Trade

Post by Ibrahim »

Apollonius wrote:
Ibrahim wrote:
Apollonius wrote:
Ibrahim wrote:[Your hate campaigns against Muslims and First Nations people aren't justified by any facts or reality, and when facts are presented to you you have typically responded with irrational anger and slurs.

I'm extremely interested in the Native peoples of the Americas and have spent a lot of time interacting with them and studying their cultures.


The only people I have real contempt for are those who claim to know something about history and then turn out to be illiterates.

Your only contribution on the subject of First Nations has been to quote an encyclopedia, mock their dead, and tell anecdotes about meeting one drunk on a bus. We've had this debate repeatedly, but you've never substantiated either your false claims on the subject, or your false claims about First Nations people. Never once.

Your most memorable contribution to the forum was when I posted a link to a CBC news story about new research into residential school records, and you wanted to know why I was bringing up old news, and who cared how many died because they would have frozen to death anyway? That certainly sounds like somebody with an excellent grasp of history and no contempt or hatred in their heart.


Maybe you should look through the relevant threads. This time, I suggest you try reading them before you start typing.
An empty boast because you know I am entirely correct and you have nothing to say for yourself.




Ibrahim wrote:
Apollonius wrote:
ibrahim wrote:Accuracy is a good thing in historical films, but the overall record for Hollywood is pretty dismal, and you weren't doing all of this whining about other movies with historical inaccuracies.
Wrong. I was whining about it only a few days ago:

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2247
Nothing in that post is relevant to this discussion, which is why you linked to the topic without actually quoting yourself.


From my post there:
Apollonius wrote: I also like historical epics, even if almost all of them are no more true to life than baroque opera.


True to form, you can't read a sentence that might be long enough to contain a dependent clause.
The sentence is clear, but insofar at its relevant at all it only reinforces my characterization of you. You like historical movies, even if they are inaccurate, but only if they aren't about American slavery for.... some reason. What could it be?
User avatar
Apollonius
Posts: 1065
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 5:32 pm

Re: The Slave Trade

Post by Apollonius »

Ibrahim wrote:The sentence is clear, but insofar at its relevant at all it only reinforces my characterization of you. You like historical movies, even if they are inaccurate, but only if they aren't about American slavery for.... some reason. What could it be?


Because of what I wrote following that sentence:
Apollonius wrote:Tend to really dislike films with a "message", particularly a political one.
Ibrahim
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 2:06 am

Re: The Slave Trade

Post by Ibrahim »

Apollonius wrote:
Ibrahim wrote:The sentence is clear, but insofar at its relevant at all it only reinforces my characterization of you. You like historical movies, even if they are inaccurate, but only if they aren't about American slavery for.... some reason. What could it be?
Because of what I wrote following that sentence:
Apollonius wrote:Tend to really dislike films with a "message", particularly a political one.

Except that you keep contradicting yourself:
Appo wrote:M[y villains] are Muslims.
...
I'd rather see a reconstruction of Moulay Ismail's fabulous palace, adventure on the high seas, a harem full of slave girls, and a realistic demonstration of the inventiveness of Islamic torture techniques.
You do want films with a "message," you just want it to be a certain message. Hence the whining about films about American slavery, and the desire to see films like you describe here. By your own admission.
User avatar
Typhoon
Posts: 27267
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm
Location: 関西

Re: The Slave Trade

Post by Typhoon »

Nonc Hilaire wrote:
Ibrahim wrote:
Nonc Hilaire wrote:
Ibrahim wrote:
Nonc Hilaire wrote:
Ibrahim wrote: It also just occurred to be that Caribbean pirates are charming rogues, beloved of cinema, amusement park rides, and children's Halloween costumes, but their North African equivalents are not.
An artifact of the days when all US children read Stevenson's Treasure Island. The ghastly pirates have been culturally sanitized just like cowboys and indians. North African pirates never had a place in children's literature to begin with.
True. An enterprising hipster kid could be the first to dress up as a Malay pirate for Halloween, Lots of stylish sashes and so forth.
We still have a huge fish 'n chips chain called Long John Silver's. I bet I could survey the company headquarters for a week before I found one person who could relate the narrative of Long John Silver and how the character was directly related to food service.
In the name of ecumenism: invest with me in a chain of Malay pirate-themed restaurants selling extremely hot fish curries.
Deal! Our slogan can be, "It's Hotter 'n Halal" :twisted: !
Very good.
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
User avatar
Typhoon
Posts: 27267
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm
Location: 関西

Re: The Slave Trade

Post by Typhoon »

As for the rest of the posters, cool it or risk waking the Demon of Deletion.
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
Ibrahim
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 2:06 am

Re: The Slave Trade

Post by Ibrahim »

The lead actor for 12 Years a Slave was promoting his film on in an interview, and I actually hadn't heard anything about the movie prior to this thread. I must say it sounds interesting.
12 Years a Slave is a 2013 British-American historical drama film, an adaptation of the 1853 autobiography Twelve Years a Slave by Solomon Northup, a free black man who was kidnapped in Washington, D.C. in 1841 and sold into slavery. He worked on plantations in the state of Louisiana for 12 years before his release.[3] The first scholarly edition of Northup's memoir, co-edited by Sue Eakin and Joseph Logsdon[4] in 1968,[5] carefully retraced and validated his account, finding it to be remarkably accurate.[6] The film is directed by Steve McQueen and written by John Ridley. Chiwetel Ejiofor stars as Solomon Northup. 12 Years a Slave premiered at the Telluride Film Festival on August 30, 2013. The film was given a limited release in the United States on October 18, 2013, with a nationwide release scheduled for November 1, 2013.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/12_Years_a_Slave_(film)

More on Solomon Northrup:
After selling the farm in 1834, the Northups moved 20 miles to Saratoga Springs, New York for its employment opportunities. Northup played his violin at several well-known hotels in Saratoga Springs, though he found its seasonal cycles of employment difficult. He was very busy during the summer, but work was scarce at other times. He worked at an assortment of jobs – constructing the Champlain Canal and the railroad, as a carpenter, and playing the violin. Anne worked from time to time as a cook at the United States Hotel and other public houses, as she was known for her culinary skills. During court sessions in the county seat of Fort Edward, she returned to Sherrill's Coffee House in Sandy Hill (now Hudson Falls) to earn extra money.[9][10]

In 1841, Northup met two men, who introduced themselves as Merrill Brown and Abram Hamilton. Saying they were entertainers, they offered him a job as a fiddler for some of their performances in New York City. Expecting the trip to be brief, Northup left without notifying his wife about his trip.[11] When they reached New York, the men persuaded him to go with them to the circus in Washington, D.C., offering him a generous wage and the cost of his return trip home. They stopped so that he could get a copy of his "free papers," to prove his status as a free man. His status was a concern as he was traveling to Washington, where slavery was still legal; the city was one of the nation's largest slave markets, and slave catchers were not above kidnapping free blacks.[12] Because of the high demand for slaves in the Deep South, free blacks were at risk of kidnapping, particularly in the border states of Pennsylvania, Maryland and Delaware. Kidnappers used a variety of means, from forced abduction to deceit, and frequently abducted children.[13]

Brown and Hamilton sold Northup to James H. Birch (spelled as Burch in Northup's book), a slave trader in Washington, claiming that he was a fugitive. Birch and Ebenezer Radburn, his turnkey, severely beat Northup to stop him from saying he was a free man. Birch wrongfully claimed that Northup was a runaway slave from Georgia.[14] Birch shipped Northup and other slaves by sea to New Orleans, for his partner Theophilus Freeman to sell. During the voyage, Northup and another slave, Robert, caught smallpox, and Robert died en route.

Northup persuaded John Manning, an English sailor, to send a letter to Henry B. Northup telling of his kidnapping and illegal enslavement. Northup was a lawyer, a member of the family who had once held Solomon's father as a slave, and a childhood friend of Solomon Northup. Henry Northup was willing to help, but could not act without knowing where Solomon was held. The New York legislature had passed a law in 1840 to protect its African-American residents, by providing a mechanism for recovering any who were kidnapped and taken out of state.[15]

At the New Orleans slave market, Birch's partner Theophilus Freeman sold Northup (who had been renamed Platt) to William Ford, a planter on Bayou Boeuf of the Red River in Louisiana. Ford was a Baptist preacher. In his memoir, Northup characterized Ford as a good man, considerate of his slaves. At Ford's place in Pine Woods, Northup proposed making log rafts to move lumber down the narrow Indian Creek, to get logs to market less expensively. He was familiar with this procedure from his previous work, and his project was a success. He also built textile looms, copying from one nearby, so that Ford could set up mills on the creek. With Ford, Northup found his efforts appreciated. The planter came into financial difficulties, and had to sell 18 slaves to settle his debts.

In the winter of 1842, Ford sold Northup to John M. Tibaut (the name is given as Tibeats in Northup's book), a carpenter who had been working for him on the mills, as well as at a weaving-house and corn mill on Ford's Bayou Boeuf plantation. Tibaut did not have the entire purchase price, however, so Ford held a chattel mortgage on Northup.[16] Under Tibaut, Northup suffered cruel treatment. Tibaut took him back to Ford's plantation, where there was more construction to complete. They were supervised by Ford's overseer Chapin, who saved Northup from a lynching after he fought with Tibaut. Chapin reminded Tibaut of his debt to Ford of $400 for the purchase of Northup.[17] This debt saved Northup's life, for Tibaut did not want to have to pay Ford the money still outstanding on his purchase. After another fight with Tibaut, Northup defended himself from attack with an axe. He ran away, escaping into a swamp and making his way back to Ford. The planter convinced Tibaut to hire out Northup to limit their conflict. Northup was hired out to Mr. Eldret, who lived about 38 miles south on the Red River. At what he called "The Big Cane Brake," Eldret had Northup and other slaves do the heavy work of clearing cane, trees and undergrowth in order to develop cotton fields for cultivation.[18] With the work unfinished, after about five weeks Tibaut sold Northup to Edwin Epps.

While held by Epps, in 1852 Northup secretly befriended Samuel Bass, an itinerant Canadian carpenter working for Epps. Bass wrote to Northup's family with details of his location at Bayou Boeuf in hopes of gaining his rescue. Bass did this at great personal risk; in the bayou country, he likely would have been killed had the secret become known before the intervention of authorities.[10] Several letters were written, and one that was sent to Cephas Parker and William Perry, storekeepers in Saratoga, was referred to Henry B. Northup. He contacted New York Governor Washington Hunt, who took up the case, appointing Henry Northup as his legal agent. In cooperation with U.S. Senator Pierre Soule and local authorities of Louisiana, Henry Northup located Solomon Northup. Finally on January 4, 1853, Northup was free again.[19] When confronted with the evidence that Northup was a free man, and told that he had a wife and children, Epps cursed the man (unknown to him) who had helped Northup and threatened to kill him if he discovered his identity. Northup later wrote, "He thought of nothing but his loss, and cursed me for having been born free."[20]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon_No ... nd_freedom


I'm going to have to pick up a copy of Northrup's memoir. Certainly a rich tale, more fit for the screen than much of what gets made these days.
User avatar
Apollonius
Posts: 1065
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 5:32 pm

Re: The Slave Trade

Post by Apollonius »

Why I won't bother seeing "The Butler" or "12 Years a Slave" - Orville Lloyd Douglas, Alternet, 12 September 2013
http://www.alternet.org/culture/why-i-w ... ears-slave


As a Black person, I'm bored and exhausted by this genre of dramatic 'race' film.

Lee Daniel's new film The Butler is a box office success, already generating Oscar buzz, but I am not interested in seeing it. I'm also skipping British filmmaker Steve McQueen's 12 Years a Slave, another movie about black people dealing with slavery.

I'm convinced these black race films are created for a white, liberal film audience to engender white guilt and make them feel bad about themselves. Regardless of your race, these films are unlikely to teach you anything you don't already know. Frankly, why can't black people get over slavery? Or, at least, why doesn't anyone want to see more contemporary portrayals of black lives?

The narrow range of films about the black life experience being produced by Hollywood is actually dangerous because it limits the imagination, it doesn't allow real progress to take place. Yet, sadly, these roles are some of the only ones open to black talent. People want us to cheer that black actors from The Butler and 12 Years a Slave are likely to be up for best actor and actress awards, yet it feels like a throwback, almost to the Gone with the Wind era.

I am not against revisiting the past, but there are already numerous black films that have covered the civil rights era and slavery. The quandary with black movies is they are overly fixated on the past, only depicting black suffering in relation to race, which is bizarre and peculiar.

Can a black film be created about black people not focusing on race? Is race the only central conflict the lives of people of colour?

I don't know about other black people, but I don't sit around all day thinking only about the fact I am black. I think about the problems in my life: the struggles, the joys, the happiness, most of which don't involve the issue of race. As a black person, I can honestly say I am exhausted and bored with these kinds of "dramatic race" films.

I might have to turn in my black card, because I don't care much about slavery. I've already watched the television series Roots, which I feel covered the subject matter extremely well. Of course, I understand slavery is an important part of any black person's history, but dwelling on slavery is pathetic. It ended in North America over 100 years ago, yet since Django Unchained made over $400m last year, more slavery movies emerge.

These movies present a false narrative that life is so much better for black people now. It is true that progress has indeed taken place. Black people don't have to sit at the back of the bus and are no longer slaves. However, there are so many stories that need to be told about the black life experience beyond two specific eras in black history.

Another film I won't be seeing in the fall is the biopic about Nelson Mandela starring Idris Elba. How many biopics can be made about Nelson Mandela and the Apartheid era in South Africa? Honestly, I have lost count. I'm not saying there aren't reasons to celebrate Mandela, but surely having just about every black actor of note play him isn't the way to do it.

Another problem with these race movies is they also focus exclusively on the lives of black heterosexuals. The vast majority of Hollywood movies released are about straight black folks, not black LGBT people. Why aren't there more movies about the struggle of black gays and lesbians in the western world or in the Caribbean or Africa?

Rodney Evans, a gay African-American filmmaker, does have an indie film out called The Happy Sad about a young black, gay couple. How many people have heard about this film?

I'll celebrate when Hollywood starts telling the stories about people of colour that have yet to be told. Now that would be Oscar worthy.


I notice that boredom with this special pleading and dwelling on events from 150 years ago and more is starting to affect even the audience of the Alternet (and the Guardian, where this was also published), which is beginning share my opinion.
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: The Slave Trade

Post by Mr. Perfect »

Ibrahim wrote:Insofar as pop culture influences people's perceptions of and opinions about the world, more films that detail America's (among others) sordid history of crimes against humanity would be a good corrective to the prevailing attitudes of American exceptionalism and white supremacy.
I'm pretty sure that is the only movies they make any more.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Apollonius
Posts: 1065
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 5:32 pm

Re: The Slave Trade

Post by Apollonius »

Slavery in Africa


Slavery in Africa took many forms, depending on the needs and occupations of the slave owners, and often the work of slaves was hardly distinguishable from that of free Africans in the society -- those who were serfs, those who labored for wages, or those working on traditional communal lands or pastures. Yet all of these workers had, theoretically, the freedom to walk away, a choice that the slave did not possess except to flee, aware of the retribution that would follow recapture. Slave owners controlled the sexual and reproductive capacities as well as the physical and mental lives of their slaves. Demand, largely regulated by the marketplace, determined the price of slaves. Women and young girls commanded higher prices than men and boys of similar age. The master's right to sexual access drove up the price of female slaves to twice that of males of comparable age. Moreover, a female slave had to have the consent of her master to have a relationship with another, and her children became his property. Bonds of affection could develop between owners and their slaves, but in the end, the master controlled the reward system. In Africa as in the Americas and Asia, the short life span of a slave, largely from overwork, and low birth rate among slave women, who did not wish to bear children that were not to be thier own, constituted the driving force to seek new sources of slaves by warfare, razzia, or trade to replace losses and to increase the slave population.


Of all African slaves, the eunuch was the most highly prized and the most expensive. The demand for eunuchs always exceeded the supply, and consequently their price in the African slave markets could often be ten times that of a female slave. The making of a eunuch by castration has historically been extremely hazardous, with an estimated mortality of 70 to 90 percent, depending on who was doing the operation. In the literature and mythology of the West, the eunuch was the guardian of the ruler's harem, but in fact the primary role of the eunuch was not protecting the concubines but as political advisor to the ruler, whether in the African kingdoms of Asante, Oyo, Dahomey, Bagirimi; the Arab, Turkish, and Persian empires of the Middle East; or the Tang and Ming dynasties of China. The eunuch was the quintessencial slave: He could not pass on life, goods, titles, or functions. He was beholden to no clan, chief, or noble. He remained aloof from the intrigues of imperial courtesans and was not dependent on the supplications of the king's own family and kin.


After eunuchs, women were the most valued slaves, for they could perform more functions than any male. They could cook at the hearth, cultivate and carry, act as concubines and bear children, conduct business, and themselves often dealt in slaves. The average estimated demand for women to men slaves over time and place in Africa was usually tow to one, and that was reflected in numbers and price. Female slaves were often purchased for their ability to reproduce, but it could be a bad investment because, as noted earlier, female slaves had few children. In eighteenth-century Cape Town, slave women had only one or at most two children, whereas free women had three or more. In the nineteenth-century Congo and West Africa, slave women had on average less than one child. These examples reflect the sad fact that motherhood was not desirable to female slaves because they knew that their children would be born into a life of slavery.


It was not through procreation but in their agricultural labor that female slaves made their most important contribution to African economies. Women in Africa traditionally perform 60 to 70 percent of the agricultural labor and virtually all the housekeeping, but none of the pastoral work. Women have been not just the laborers in the field but also the artisans in intensive crafts such as weaving. The men did the heavy work of clearing and planting, but it was women's work to cultivate the crop, weed, and prepare for harvest. Because women did the agricultural fieldwork in free African socieites, they were expected to do the same as slaves and consequently were worth twice the price in the marketplace. Young girls were frequently used in the form of slavery known as pawning in whch a slave a slave was pawned by a parent or seller to a creditors in return for cash, to be recovered on repayment; this was widely practiced throughout Africa. Young girls were also given to reward soldiers or as booty, payment of fines, and bride-wealth. In some African socieites women were also warriors. There are romantic descriptions of the corps of three thousand Amazons in Dahomey during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries who were celibate female slaves and the loyal bodyguards of the king.


The export trade in slaves was Africa's most dependable commodity, but within the markets of the continent, the slave was the most convertible of all currencies - more so than gold or cowries - and became the essential medium in the transactions of the internal trade. The buying and selling of slaves was not a male monopoly: female owners and traders in slaves were not uncommon. They were were free women who kept their property separate from that of their men, according to local custom and traditions. The female head of the house dominated and controlled the household slaves. She did not hesitate to exploit female African slaves in pursuit of commercial profit in the marketplace. In many African socieites, particularily in West Africa, there was a long and respected tradition of female mercantile enterprise.


[...]


Ironically, the abolition of the Atlantic slave trade in the nineteenth century produced a dramatic increase in slavery within Africa. When slaves could no longer be exported, the trade expanded into the interior regions of the continent where slaving and slavery had hitherto be of little importance. The Mossi on the Upper Volta River and Luba and the Ovambo in the interior of Angola were now enslaved by African slave trades. No longer exportable, the number of slaves increased, and their masters now feared that the concentration of slaves in their territory, most of whom were men, would overwhelm them in times of trouble. There were slave rebellions in the Futa Jalon, the Niger delta, and among the Yoruba, the suppression of which was perfunctory, but usually attached to a festival, funeral, or a religious rite. The asantehente Kwaku Dua I (1835-67) justified the practice to a missionary: "If I were to abolish human sacrifices, I should deprive myself of one of the most effectual means of keeping the people in subjugation."


Slavery in Africa was a historic and accepted institution, and the number of slaves throughout the millennia undoubtedly surpassed the estimated 16.5 million slaves who were forcefully exported out of Africa between the seventeenth and twentieth centuries to the Americas and Asia.

-- Robert O. Collins, James M. Burns, A History of Sub-Saharan Africa, 2nd ed. (Cambridge University Press, 2014)
Last edited by Apollonius on Thu Oct 02, 2014 8:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Apollonius
Posts: 1065
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 5:32 pm

Re: The Slave Trade

Post by Apollonius »

This recently published work actually contains three separate chapters on the slave trade: Slavery in Africa, The Atlantic Slave Trade, and The Asian Slave Trade, each with tables reproduced from Paul E. Lovejoy's Transformations in Slavery: A History of Slavery in Africa, 2nd ed. (Cambridge University Press, 2000). Each is broken down into regions and time periods. Lovejoy's grand totals are: 11,313,000 for the Atlantic trade; 12,580,000 for the "Asian" trade, which includes the Saharan trade, the trade across the Red Sea, and the East African and Indian Ocean trade. No absolute figures are given for the intra-African trade but it is assumed that it was greater than the export trade.


The authors confirm that slave ship voyages were dangerous, even more dangerous for the crew than for their cargo:

Slave ships were short-lived: no owner expected his ship to be seaworthy for more than ten years, and few European ships made more than six trans-Atlantic voyages. The number of officers and crew varied throughout the century, averaging about thirty officers and sailors in their twenties, often recruited while drunk in the local taverns of European ports that catered to the trade. There was harsh discipline in the violent world of a slave ship, where 20 percent of the crew died on an average voyage, but the survivors were well paid, with bonuses related to the number of slaves delivered alive. Freed African slaves were often sailors, and sometimes slaves were rented out by their owners as crew.


The slaves were terrified of the vast, mysterious sea, and many--especially those from the interior -- believed that the crew were cannibals whose red wine was African blood and gunpowder crushed African bones. Once underway and with a steady flow from the southeast trade winds and high pressure in the mid-Atlantic, the average time in the eighteenth century to cross the Middle Passage was thirty days. In 1754, the Saint-Philippe of Nantes carrying 460 Africans from Whydah established a record of twenty-five days. In 1727, the Sainte-Anne, also from Nantes, established a less enviable record of nine months from Whydah to Saint-Domingue, during which fifty-five slaves perished. Below decks each slave was tightly packed into a space normally five feet high and four feet wide, with the sexes separated. The quantity was limited, for the space given to supplies of food and water reduced that available for slaves. The eatables varied with the nationality of the ship. On Portuguese slavers, manioc (cassava) was the staple food. British ships carried maize (corn) and the French ones oats. The daily ration averaged about three pounds, accompanied by a few ounces of flour, beans, and salted beef. A greater problem was space for drinking water. Water is heavy, cumbersome, and requires a lot of room, yet water more than food determined the success of a slave voyage -- success being measured by the number of slaves who survived. Slave voyages were hot and crowded, and many slaves suffered from dysentery, called the "flux", and its dehydration, which claimed a third of the dead from disease on any voyage. Smallpox, scurvy, and a variety of other tropical diseases accounted for the remainder. Losses from sickness were usually recorded in the ship's ledgers of expendidure, and diminished during the centuries of the trade because of better food, water, and innovations such as limes to combat scurvy. In the sixteenth century, the loss of slaves during the passage was as high as 20 percent; in the nineteenth, 10 percent. During the eighteenth century, deaths steadily declined from a high (32 percent) in 1732 to a low (5.6 percent) in 1800. A century average (12.5 percent) was considered normal.


-- Robert O. Collins, James M. Burns, A History of Sub-Saharan Africa, 2nd ed. (Cambridge University Press, 2014)
Post Reply