When examing the story about Hendrik Albertus and Mey, the relationship between master and slaves is evidently unique. In the beginning of the story, one can find an expected relationship where the slave does something that the master does not like causing the master to therefore punish the slave. This was seen in the story when Mey and some other slaves “dawdled and resturned to their jobs a half-hour late.” Hendrik is upset by the disrespect from his slaves and has his son punish them to the extreme. Because the slaves disobeyed his master, this form of punihsment was not unconventional. Five days later, Mey was whipped again. This time, he was whipped by Hendrik himself for not working fast enough. The reason he was not working fast enough was due to the fact that the whipping from the first punishment had not healed. Mey was clearly offended and wronged. He acted on these feelings by going to the Protectors of Slaves in order to seek help for the way his master violated him. …show more content…
Mason has speaks about how “this story is so interesting because it is so incomplete.” This story is rare because of Mey’s role and the outcome. Slaves often do not know about the Protector and his role, but Mey did because he has heard Hendrik speak about him when petitioning against him. Mason “suggest[s] that Mey did what he did because he had a well-developed sense of just and unjust punishment.” Slaves in the Cape are given the opportunity to go to the Protector if they feel wronged just as Mey did. Within slavery in the Cape, there is a “moral economy of the lash” where basic rules are understood about fair or unfair punishment. “Hendrik Albertus had violated the moral code which the slaves applied to the administration of the lash, and Mey was determined that he should answer for it.” Slaves do not have many rights, but given this ability Mey acted on the way he was treated and went to the
There is a very general similarity in this however; in both sides, slaves were not free and they had to obey their masters and work. Document 9 outlines observations by Hans Sloan concerning punishment of slaves on the island of Barbados. The punishments were very cruel, ranging from whippings for the smallest offenses to burning alive for
Frederick Douglass published two similar versions of his fight with the ‘slave-breaker’ Edward Covey in the tenth chapter of his The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass: An American Slave, and in the seventeenth chapter of My Bondage and My Freedom. By comparing the two accounts it is possible to see an evolution of his thoughts on abolishing slavery and person hood which occurred in the years which transpired between the two works, 1845 and 1855. In the first account which Douglass wrote at around the age of 27 he narrates a physical confrontation where he refuses to allow himself to be whipped. Douglass struggles for two hours with Covey and also fights off Covey’s cousin at the same time.
His year with Covey was a life changing experience. Under Covey, Douglass worked the land day and night in all weathers. For the first six months he was constantly beaten and severely punished to increase his productivity. He was whipped with sticks or cow skin. Douglass experienced an “epoch in my humble history,” and explains to readers that “You have seen how a man was made a slave; you shall see how a slave was made a man.”
Douglass uses paradox to demonstrate that slavery degragrates the slaverholder. When Douglass under Mr. Sever’s care he described that: “He was less cruel, less profane… He whipped, but seemed to take no pleasure in it. ”(Douglass 24). Most slaveholders are characterized to be cruel and inhuman because of the whipping and the way they treated the slaves.
‘’ They were frequently whipped when least deserving, and escaped whipping when most deserving it.’’ (page 18). Douglass captures the audience by using parallelism to explain how the slaves was regularly whipped. Douglass use of parallelism displayed how slavery was inhuman. Douglass again uses parallelism to show how slavery was heartbroken by describing how the overseers didn’t care.
When somebody doesn 't do the right they get hit with a whip till they do what is told. Slavery is nothing like doing chores for your parents it 's worse you can 't take a break until you are done you have to keep working until they tell you when your done, and you barely get paid for it. • B. Background information: There has been a lot of injustice in society in slavery like beating up up someone when they don 't do the right thing for the job. slavery isn 't there choice they have to do it for them not for
The Narrative of the life of Frederick Douglass shows the imbalance of power between slaves and their masters. In his book, Douglass proves that slavery is a destructive force not only to the slaves, but also for the slaveholders. “Poison of the irresponsible power” that masters have upon their slaves that are dehumanizing and shameless, have changed the masters themselves and their morality(Douglass 39). This amount of power and control in contact with one man breaks the kindest heart and the purest thoughts turning the person evil and corrupt. Douglass uses flashbacks that illustrate the emotions that declare the negative effects of slavery.
She'll get it whether I give it to her or not.” This shows his obvious disregard to see her as a human being. To him, she's hardly even human and doesn’t even deserve a second thought. Another example of a slave being treated inhumanely would be in the part of the story describing a slave, “Weylin called her a good breeder, and he never whipped her.
Dehumanization of both slaves and slave owners must occur for slavery to exist. Slavery harms everyone involved, including the slaveholders who superficially seem to profit from the arrangement. Douglass’s narrative acknowledges the damage inflicted on both sides of the institution of slavery, emphasizing that a human being’s personality and disposition form per the laws and socially acceptable practices exhibited within the society. Douglass has an excellent example how he seen with his own eyes how his mistress became demonized when she became an owner of a slave. Douglass became Mrs. Auld's first salve owner and at the begging when they first met “she [was] of the kindest heart and finest feelings” (38).
This way in the end the slaves gets a little bit of happiness and the master still has control over the slave, but in all reality the slave same in the cruel position they
PAGE 2 In the Narrative Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass by Frederick Douglass, he uses this text to explain his purpose in “throwing light on the American slave system”, or show it for what it really is, as well as show his position on how he strongly believes slavery is an issue that needs to be addressed and how it differs from those who defended slavery, with experiences from his own life to support his argument. Douglass uses experience from his early days as a young slave to throw light on the aspect of physical abuse. According to his narrative, Douglass states, “Master, however, was not a humane slaveholder.
Christianity was, to the slaves of America, (something with a double meaning). In the Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass an American Slave, Frederick Douglass, the author, argues about how Christianity can mean one thing to a free white man and something completely different to a black slave. The slave owners follow the ‘Christianity of the Land’ while the slaves follow the ‘Christianity of Christ.’ Frederick begins to build his credibility to a, white, northern, audience by including documents from trustworthy writers and by getting into personal experiences through his writing. Throughout the narrative, he is articulate in how he writes, and it shows the reader that he is well educated.
Frederick Douglass’s narrative provides a first hand experience into the imbalance of power between a slave and a slaveholder and the negative effects it has on them both. Douglass proves that slavery destroys not only the slave, but the slaveholder as well by saying that this “poison of irresponsible power” has a dehumanizing effect on the slaveholder’s morals and beliefs (Douglass 40). This intense amount of power breaks the kindest heart and changes the slaveholder into a heartless demon (Douglass 40). Yet these are not the only ways that Douglass proves what ill effect slavery has on the slaveholder. Douglass also uses deep characterization, emotional appeal, and religion to present the negative effects of slavery.
But sometimes he likes to take the whip and this time he whipped her until her back was all ripped and bleeding. We had to watch”(43-44). This represents pathos to create the subject of freedom by way of showing simply come cruel they may be treated. Mothers are used for breeding but, don't even get to keep their children in the end. It’s even worst to think that Sarny as a child doesn’t realize what she has lost and thinks it not only normal but okay from children to be taken away from their parent and passed on for someone to take come on till they themselves are old enough to work and to create the theme of freedom by showing how old hearted the ‘master’ is that it is clear he enjoys the pain he causes and that he makes the other slaves watch in a way of a silent threat or promise that this could and will happen to them if they too step out of line.
In Vince Brewton's article "'Bold defiance took its place': 'Respect' and Self-Making in Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave," it argues Douglass status as a slave. Brewton feels that the whipping of Hester made Douglass open his eyes about his slave status and wanting to change it. The article in some type of way is really about superiority, many of the slave owners wanted the slaves to know that they didn’t have any power and that the owners were superior. The worthiness of a slave and respect was crucial. This article spoke highly on culture, respect and opinions from the scenes in the narrative.