Friday, February 15, 2013
Methods and Themes
Having read Part 1, there are some basics I want other people's opinion on before I make up my mind. One is structure, which appears decidedly thematic in nature. Having the initial chapters set up the themes which defined the master/slave relationship (paternalism, hegemony, etc.), it is clear that, in so far as the first part, Genovese's intent is not to provide a traditional narrative but a thematic approach to prove his point. Am I off the mark here? This brings me to my second question, which is method. This feels like a classic Marxist text here. The themes themselves imply a power structure which provide "class exploitation that had to depend on the willing reproduction and productivity of its victims." Does his apparently controversial thesis imply a shockingly accepted, however manipulated, subjugation on the part of the slaves? If so, is he saying this could only be achieved through culture, not just force?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
"Genovese's intent is not to provide a traditional narrative but a thematic approach to prove his point. Am I off the mark here?"
ReplyDeleteNot at all. This is one of the more enjoyable aspects of this work. My 2¢ worth of inference is that Genovese created a thorough and sifting piece of history here. Despite my dislike of a Marxist filter on the significance of events, his presentation style leaves room to explore beyond the confines of "bourgeois capitalism" that Genovese imposes upon the work.