Up From Slavery - Context

Context

The America of the 1880s and 1890s was one of white hostility toward African Americans. There was also the belief that the African American race would not be able to even survive without the institution of slavery. Popular culture played in to the ideas of “black criminality and moral decline” as can be seen in the characters Jim Crow and Zip Coon. When Washington began his writing and public speaking, he was fighting the notion that African Americans were inherently stupid and incapable of civilization. Washington’s primary goal was to impress upon the audience the possibility of progress. Furthermore, living in the Black Belt, Booker T. Washington was vulnerable to mob violence and was, therefore, always mindful not to provoke the mob. As would be expected for a man in such precarious position, when violence erupted, he tried to stem his talk of equality and progress so as not to exacerbate the situation.

Lynching in the South at this time was incredibly prevalent as mobs of heated and barbaric white southerners would take the law into their own hands and would participate in the torture and murder of dozens of men and women, even white men. The offenses of the victims included: “for being victor over what man in fight;” “protecting fugitive from posse;” “stealing seventy-five cents;” “expressing sympathy for mob’s victim;” “for being father of boy who jostled white women.” It is clear that any white person to show sympathy or offer protection for African American victims would be labeled a criminal himself and leave him vulnerable to violence by the mob. In 1901, Reverend Quincy Ewing of Mississippi charged the press and pulpit with uniting public sentiment against lynching. Unfortunately, lynching would continue well into the 1950s and 1960s.

It is easy to blame Washington’s comparatively sheepish message on a lack of desire for true African-American uplift, but, if one takes into account the environment in which he was delivering his message, it is much more appropriate and empathetic to instead applaud Washington for making any public stance at all. His strategy of garnering sympathy and speaking realistically, encouraged many in staunch opposition to consider the possibility of civil rights and liberties.

April 1, 1901, The Washington Post describes Up From Slavery quite plainly: book is full of practical wisdom and sound common sense. It may be read with profit by white and black alike." This assessment of the book makes Washington accessible to both white and black audiences.

Nearly 100 years after the publication of Up from Slavery, some critics refuse to see this text as anything more than egotism:

“An autobiography necessarily involves egotism, even if only slightly. The writer feels that his life has such instructive value that it ought to be told of, written about, so that other people can benefit from life well led--at least, ultimately. In the past, only ‘heroes’ or other persons of great stature qualified for such distinction. Personally, I believe that no one under the age of 35 should write an autobiography unless he or she has had extensive therapy. Before that age, people haven't had enough time to get a perspective on their lives. In the 19th century there were many slave narratives (autobiographies) fostered by abolitionists who used them as political fodder in advancing their cause. I imagine there was titillation involved, too: ‘Tell us what it's like to be a slave.’ The same continued into the 20th century: ‘Tell us what it's like to be a Negro.’ ‘Up From Slavery,’ by Booker T. Washington, arrived on the scene, but Richard Wright's "Black Boy" really did the trick. By the time Claude Brown, a manchild who reached the promised land, arrived on the scene, ‘they’ wanted to know what it was like to be black: ‘Tell us about the essential bleakness of black life in America.’ A host of other writers obliged. As this millennium stumbles toward its close, that demand still resonates. In response, what I term ‘new slave narratives’ flood the market place telling us what it's like to be black and formerly criminal on the new plantation.”

This inflammatory language and disregard for the importance of Washington’s life and message was part of the motive for other advocates of civil rights to utilize a more direct and abrasive approach. They began to demand, rather than request, the respect and dignity they deserved from southern whites. Unfortunately, it seems these messages have not quite stuck with the entirety of the population.