Qlaudah Equiano-Chapter 2

The account of Qlaudah Equiano is so many things, but particularly sorrowful, eye-opening and unfathomable. Prior to the reading, I was unaware how children were often kidnapped into slavery by neighboring African groups. Indeed, this is dreadful and so difficult to imagine how a youngster, like Qlaudah, must have felt growing up. It’s as if living in a constant state of fear was a normal part of life. Then when he was ripped from his family first, then of course later from his sister that state of fear seemed be a perpetual theme and thread of his experiences/existence. When he describes being torn from his sister “while we clasped in each other’s arms” was nothing short of heart-wrenching. Because they were children makes this scenario even sadder.

It is interesting to note the difference in the treatment he received from the African slave owners versus the European white counterparts. Indeed he suffered through some terrorizing experiences from the former, I definitely wouldn’t want to negate or minimize those experiences, yet overall it appears that he was treated considerably better by the African slave masters than when he later became a slave of the European whites. Qlaudah even mentions at one point how the African slave owners generally didn’t inflict harm upon slaves, other than tying those down who made efforts to escape (but also they did separate him from his sister and he refers to them as “destroyers of human rights).  Here is one example that illustrates the treatment provided by the African slave owners: after the inadvertent killing of the chicken incident, Qlaudah thought he would be severely punished, but instead was “slightly reprimanded “and was cared for without being flogged. Had this been a white European slave master, his punishment would have been decidedly much more grim/brutal. Another example of the kind of treatment he received from the African slave masters pertained to his experience working for the wealthy widow. There he was permitted to not only eat with her and her son, but the son, out of respect, wouldn’t eat until young Qlaudah had eaten first. He also played games with the widow’s son, making it sound as if he was almost treated like an equal. He even referred to what sounded like other slaves who served him and the other boy.  

It is incredible to learn about all of the different cultural groups and environments that Qlaudah was exposed to. Even within his own country he describes many different areas and groups of people. I love how he relates his initial reactions when encountering these groups and settings. When he was at the widow’s home he was exposed to a seemingly picturesque part of Africa; where he got to taste coconuts and sugarcane for the first time. He seemed to have been in such awe of his surroundings there; it sounds like it was lovely. Then later he describes the very different group of people who appeared rather shocking to him. They used iron pots, had different weapons than he’s seen, had different social mores. They had a distinct way of embellishing themselves that Qlaudah felt was disfiguring. When you consider his whole experience it is just so unimaginable—not only the constant fear I mentioned before but also the continual changes that had to be so stressful. And the culture shock!

On a final thought, his account of his entering the European slave-owners’ ships is so horrific and sickening (and a bunch of other things that are indescribable). One of the most hideous was how slaves were deprived of their own right to even kill themselves. Slave owners would watch to ensure that slaves wouldn’t attempt to willingly drown themselves. And if they even tried such an action, they’d be severely beaten.    

  

      

The Cajuns and Huguenots

One part of chapter 4 that grabbed my attention and that I found interesting pertains to the contrast in cultural retention of the (Arcadian) Cajun culture and that of their French Huguenot counterparts. The two groups juxtaposed are incredible in their differences. The first, the Cajuns, were largely farmers and most did not seem to acquire much wealth or power in Louisiana/America. Yet they developed a very distinct culture, something I find completely fascinating. They did not uphold education, they remained true to their Catholic faith, they developed their own dialect/language and they had very large families—many children.  The book doesn’t delve deep into other aspects of their culture, but the Cajuns had/have their own music traditions, folklore, and of course, cuisine. Also interesting is how their culture persevered; it was not lost due to acculturation. I think there were a variety of reasons why their culture endured. For one, their culture was distinct and couldn’t be confused or easily fused with another. Secondly, they seem to have worked hard to retain their culture; it seems it was probably rather important to them. And in a way they inadvertently were likened to sort of “outcasts”, especially when considering that education wasn’t a focus of theirs and many were not literate. In the 20^th century, the dominant culture in America aimed to wipe out the Cajun culture (e.g. Cajun French was forbidden in Louisiana schools).  On the other hand, I find it pretty interesting how they fought the American dominant culture, too. I think that’s helped contribute to the retention of their unique culture.

Many of the elements demonstrated within the Cajun culture/group differed from that of the Huguenots. it appears that after their assimilation (and they did assimilate), they were practically indistinguishable from “American” society. And there didn’t seem to be a definitive motivation for them to remain intact as a group. Perhaps this was due in part to their being largely successful in North America.  Many of them had skills to begin with, became eventually wealthy after their entry, and were seemingly well-liked. They were perceived with much more positivity than the Cajuns were. Hence, being as successful and prosperous as they were, there didn’t seem to perhaps be as much of a motivation for them to try to retain their group of origin (just a guess). Yet it’s also true that they really didn’t seem to have as much cultural “glue” as the Cajuns either. Based on the reading, their main source of solidarity seemed to be based on their religion—being Protestant. Because there were so many other similar Protestant groups, their particular churches didn’t survive. So, they “melted” into the stew…    

West African Societies and Women

I really enjoyed reading/learning about West African society in chapter 3. It’s not surprising that the Europeans often justified their actions/mentality of the African slave trade by adhering to the misconception that Africans didn’t have a “real” or somehow valid culture. To them the Africans were considered “primitive”, backward, non-advanced societally. Hence, through European eyes at the time, stripping Africans from their land and roots was deemed perfectly acceptable. Yet what’s so interesting is how alive and complex many West African cultures actually were. The book examines collectively a handful of the larger groups: the Ashanti, Dahomeans, Mossi, and the Yoruba (although there were clearly many, many other cultures as well, each with their own unique characteristics and signatures). Of particular interest to me was the level of political power women had in some of these African societies. The book describes how the position of “mothers” was used as the male official’s sidekick and in some societies; the queen mother was responsible for nominating the king. This type of power, although women didn’t have the highest positions of power, they, none the less, possessed a remarkable level of influence on political activity. For being a perceived “primitive” society, many African cultures seem to have been considerably ahead of their time. And certainly ahead of European culture’s treatment/allowance of women as political figures or having political roles of any sort. A woman in Europe at this time would likely not have had the same rights afforded to her as a woman from Africa in this context.    

It’s interesting as much as it is infuriating to note the emerged Eurocentric view during the Age of Discovery. The book mentions how the European attitude (and perceived truth for that matter) of White superiority prevailed when European voyages encountered native peoples. The treatment, the degradation, inflicted upon these conquered groups makes my stomach just turn. I can’t imagine having my cultural identity, language, land and freedom so shamelessly stripped from me and my family. Nor can I fathom having a religion imposed upon me. I think it’s fascinating how, prior to the big explosion of New World voyages, Europeans did not seem to assume the superior self-righteous entitlement that was showcased later. The book mentions how there are a variety of reasons for this change, most notably, Christianity, technology, and a drive for increased wealth, which seemed to result in a significant shift in the European culture itself. To me it seems to be a case of the Europeans being power-hungry. And unfortunately, when they started to succeed in such things as ship-building and technology pursuits, it fed their ego and sense of entitlement. I find it equally appalling how the Europeans found their own creative and convenient ways of using Christianity to falsely justify their ill actions and ideas. The tenets of Christianity do not support entitlement, selfishness, greed, superiority, or the forcing of the religion upon subjected others. The Europeans hid their true motives partly under the guise of showing (converting, imposing) natives the “true” way of life—as if they were supporting God. Yet belief and faith cannot be forced to be truly authentic, obviously. Conversely, their behavior was actually very un-Christian in my opinion. The Europeans’ thought processes during this time are clearly ignorant in the highest degree, while their actions are downright embarrassing. They missed what could have been an opportunity to learn and appreciate the beauty and value of the conquered native groups. Shameful, indeed.

It’s also shameful how history textbooks, at least at the time when I was growing up, focused almost exclusively on the European version of the “discovery” of America. As a kid I remember when teachers asked the class what Christopher Columbus did, students would respond by saying that he discovered America. And that notion was generally accepted as truth. There was very little acknowledgement of the native groups, no real analysis of who they were and what their experience could have been like. The unspoken assumption was that the Europeans practically did the natives a favor by showing them the Christian life and exposing and morphing them to a more “advanced” society. It’s remarkable how the Eurocentric view has continued to leave its thumbprint in society today via racism and its (still) high prevalence. Additionally, I don’t believe that the experience of native peoples is discussed adequately and/or enough.    

 

 

Although I know very little about the Olmec civilization, based on the little I do know, I’ve always found them to be a rather interesting group. Their highly distinct/characteristic head monuments are probably one of the first things that come to mind when I think about the Olmecs. While I find the heads to be sort of ugly, they are equally intriguing. Think about how labor-intensive they were to create—and how difficult it must have been to adhere to a particular style repeatedly. It’s quite impressive. These heads were also gigantic (the reading mentions how each head weighed some 40 tons) and the Olmec moved the beastly works for long distances. It makes you wonder things like: how long did it take to create just one head? Where did the idea come from? How exactly did they move them and how many men worked on any one head? It really seems like the Olmec’s signature heads are a key reason why the civilization was deemed so advanced…the “mother civilization” of Mesoamerica at the time. However, the reading mentions how numerous other civilizations were blossoming at the time as well, many from far away locales, so perhaps it isn’t really fair to classify the Olmecs under this somewhat narrow-minded (ignorant?) title. I looked up this “mother civilization” concept, and apparently archeologists have differing opinions surrounding the Olmecs being the sort of central or more advanced civilization of the time. Alternatively, some have likened the Olmecs more to a “sister civilization”—meaning that they, along with a variety of other equally dynamic civilizations, were progressed and noteworthy for that matter as well. I tend to like the sister civilization notion much better because it takes into account other peoples and their unique contributions to civilization. It seems like the whole “mother civilization” theory is influenced by the amount of knowledge that we have about the Olmecs—maybe we don’t have enough archeology or knowledge about the details of these other civilizations, so it is simpler to just designate the Olmecs as the “hub” of human civilization? And it also helps that elements of the Olmec culture seeped into the well-known Mayan culture/civilization.

Of course, the Olmecs very much were advanced, interesting, and complex. I found it particularly interesting how the Olmecs built pyramid-like structures (which sound pretty elaborate!) and how the rulers sported disguises, disguises that they were buried in as well. And rulers would engage in sacrificing their blood to the gods, as the Mayans later did as well.       

Speaking of the Mayans, I found them to be also very interesting. Major foci were war and otherworldly beings, the gods. Apparently rulers were rulers partly because they were thought to have some divine connection to the gods. This is interesting in that, even way back then, as many civilizations are today, politics (including war) and religion (or belief systems) were prevailing factors in what dominated their culture or “government”.  Their war-driven ways could be rather brutal too when it came to captives; the reading talks about how they would dismember people alive….that seems so extreme.  

Yet the Mayans were brilliant and their civilization seemed to really flourish. They not only developed their own comprehensive writing system (the most complex system before the Europeans arrived), but the aim of it was not to spread it. Instead it was meant to be a secret language of sorts—although it wasn’t exactly accessible to most Mayans; only educated types could comprehend it and pass it along to the rest of society. Definitely reminds me of other European civilizations where reading/writing were reserved for wealthy, educated types. Yet I find it very cool and unique how the Mayans kept a secret language.