Final Chapter of Kerber 's Book

I found some chapters of the book to be a bit more engaging than others, particularly the final chapter that dealt with the draft/selective service. The part of this chapter that interested me the most and got me thinking was the idea that feminist groups by and large opposed the draft as part of a larger left leaning agenda, but if a draft were necessary or enforced women should be a part of it. I enjoyed the complexity of the situation.

Section IV No Constitutional Right to be Ladies: Women and the Obligations of Citizenship

Hello,

"Women Is The Center of Home and Family Life" and the Gwendolyn Hoyt case is explored in section IV of Kerber's No Constitutional Right to be Ladies: Women and the Obligations of Citizenship.  The fourth section of this book is an interesting selection of commentary on this statement and the Gwendolyn Rogers Hoyt case because the statement mentioned abuse and the Hoyt case seem to overlap into a strong feminist critique of history.  I did not realize that women could not serve on juries until the 1960's in Florida.  Kerber uses this fact to support her argument for the passage of an Equal Rights Amendment in later decades by Congress.  Just what remains in the obligations of citizenship in the U.S. remains a debatable question in present times as well.

Thank you

Section III No Constitutional Right to be Ladies: Women and the Obligations of Citizenship

Hello,

An interesting chapter in Section III of Linda K. Kerber's book is "Taxation Without Representation Is Wrong." A fundamental question explained in this chapter is "Is it any more just to take a women's property without her consent, than it is to take a man's property without his consent?" This question has been asked for centuries but Abby Hadassah Smith and her sister Julia Eveling's battle against Connecticut authorities over taxation without representation for women owning land remains poignant today.  Standing up for one's principals may be difficult even in historical times, but it is necessary for a healthy democratic nation.

Thanks

What's the solution to coverture and hierarchy?

To which solution would Kerber and Wood subscribe? (Please forgive the false dichotomy for the sake of stirring the pot a little.)

1)      When taking Wood’s discussion of hierarchy (and how it was undermined) together Kerber’s discussion of  coverture, one realizes that the solution to the oppression of minorities and women is not to change the republican political philosophy from which women and minorities were excluded, but to stop excluding them.

2)      When looking at America’s foundation on hierarchy and coverture, one realizes that the only solution is to eradicate the entire social, economic, and political structure upon which America was built and start from scratch.

Coverture

The idea of coverture made it so that women were protected by their husbands. Women had no rights and men would often be responsible for the crimes of their wives. I found it ironic how during the mid-1700's the colonists were fighting against a patriarchal society, yet in certain aspects they continued to reinforce paternalistic ideas, such as in slavery and women's rights.

Initial Thoughts on "No Constitutional Right to be Ladies"

Hello Fellow Classmates!

I have just started reading “No Constitutional Right to be Ladies” and here are some of my thoughts so far.

1.     Linda Kerber sets up her argument and purpose for writing the book right from the start in the preface, which I find extremely helpful as I keep this information in mind throughout the remainder of the book.

a.     There are 5 obligations to the nation that she structures her argument around.

b.     These obligations, she argues “appears at first glance to weigh on all individuals equally,” but “turns out in practice to have been experienced differently, over the years, by men and by women” (xxiii).

2.     When I read or research history, I enjoy finding a relation between the subject and myself.  For this reason, I have never connected with U.S. history on the same level as I do with European or British History, but I am finding that this book is quite interesting for me, a fact that I can owe to my womanhood.

3.     I think that because Kerber is building her thesis on stories of legal cases, that it will not only be a more interesting read, but will also hopefully present multiple viewpoints so that we can establish a well-rounded perspective on the issues she brings up. 

Section I No Constitutional Right to be Ladies: Women and the Obligations of Citizenship

Hello,

Linda K. Kerber's No Constitutional Right to be Ladies: Women and the Obligations of Citizenship makes several historical arguments that could be related to modern times.  In section one, Rights and Obligations of women are detailed and special interest is paid to the Revolutionary time period in America were a struggle was being paid to women's interest. The question "Did women remain in a patriarchal society order in which their only free chosen was to their husbands." is a question that remains open for interpretation to this day.  To a large extent the question remained unanswered in Revolutionary America, but recent court decisions and modern social change has made this question almost seem to take a different context.
Thanks

Part III Roll, Jordan, Roll: The World the Slaves Made

Hello,

Book three, part one of Roll, Jordan, Roll has a chapter that is titled The Language of Class and Nation.  One quote by Genovese that caught my attention was describing the urban ghetto of present times.  "Even today in the black urban ghettos verbal ability  contributes at least as much as physical strentgh to individual prestige." Speech or the ability to make one's point is apart of many languages throughout the United States and the world.  The slaves of eighteenth century America did set the pace for a certain verbal style of the English language, but Genovese's historical argument my be to vague in nature.  Communication was key to slave survival but it is also important to realize in twenty-first century America that the pace of communication is always changing as well.

Part II Roll, Jordan, Roll: The World The Slaves Made

Hello Again,

In part two of the 1972 book Roll, Jordan, Roll by Eugene D. Genovese, sensitive issues such as The Black Work Ethic are explored in an outward manner.  Genovese uses the argument by Dr. W.E.B. Du Bois that "The black slaves brought into common labor certain new spirtual values not yet fully realized." Working is explained as a neccessary evil throughout this book.  This argument that work is a neccessary evil is an indication of the forward thinking Genovese but there is still room for scholarly discussion in this particular field of historical study.

Thanks

Genovese

Interestingly enough this is my favorite book so far, but also the one I least understand.  I really enjoyed the thorough description and analysis of slave life in the antebellum period.  It gave me a much better understanding of the complexities of the variety of relationships that were formed during this era.  Having said that, I am really having a hard time pin pointing Genovese's central argument.  I believe that he is arguing that paternalism was successful in keeping slaves in a system of servitude, but also recognized their humanity and provided fuel to for them to change their situation.  Similarly, I think he argues that religion also acted as mechanism to continue the slaveholders hegemony, but also provided a support system for slaves that factored into a yearning for freedom.  Hopefully these hypotheses are not completely wrong!

C.C jones

There is another book focusing on Reverend CC Jones and his plantation in Georgia that Dr. Rolinson uses in her Georgia History course. In case one were more interested in the morality/spiritual aspects of slave life on the plantation. I will try to find the name of the book.

Sources

It is interesting that even though we are reading a book from the slaves perspective we are still using sources from white masters. Is there not more slave narratives to draw from? Are we forever doomed to hear about the morality of the masters while ignoring the voice of slaves. I am only through book 1, but from what I can tell the rest of the book draws from white master diaries. 

When analyzing diaries, we need to remember that one self censors to keep the light side of truth visible for children or future publications. 

Question?

I would like to know whether there is a greater point that Genovese is making when he describes the culture of the south and the slaves in such great detail.  Besides his point on the structure of society and paternalism, I feel like I am missing the connection between that and the culture that the slaves and masters created.  My question is, how do the many details in the book connect and support Genovese’s ideas on paternalism?  Although I enjoyed reading the stories and details of the book, I am having trouble piecing it together.

slave religion

I enjoyed reading about the religion of slaves and how the white slave owners tried to control it to avoid rebellion. The beliefs that the slave owners tried to impose on the slaves was often ineffective. I was left unsure why slaves didn't use religion to unite and try to rebel against the system. Did anyone catch what Genovese says about this? 

"The Godfather" and "Radicalism of the American Revolution"

Sorry about this flashback to "Radicalism of the American Revolution," but I just had to ask.  Does anyone else see a parallel between the Godfather's system of loyalty and the hierarchy that Wood described?

The opening scene sounded it like it was straight out of Wood.  The Godfather doesn't want money from the man who comes to him for protection but seeks to draw him into his web of patronage.  In the future, his client might owe him a favor in return.  It was that system of patronage and loyalty that held the clan together.  Or maybe my daughters are right, and I should stop looking for historical connections and just watch the movie.

Using Roll Jordan Roll in education?

For those of you who work in education or will be (hopefully) working in education soon I would like to hear your thoughts on using a book like Roll Jordan Roll as part of a class lesson. After reading some of the responses about how this book can be best understood by viewing it in the context of when it was researched and published I personally think it could useful to use in a lesson on how some books and ideas are a product of the times, and have students compare the ideas put forth to some more modern research in a higher level American History course. Any thoughts?

Genovese's sometimes "loose liberty"

At the risk of being overly critical and in even a well-researched work at that, yet in order to raise an instance where Genovese seems to take “loose liberty” in support of his overall thesis without providing a minimum amount of direct evidence, or, without making a direct connection between sources and his conclusion in a certain instance, I refer to the section, “All Negroes Are Fatalists” (pp. 637-648). Genovese says on p.641: “In other respects, too, the slaves’ fatalism and apathy became weapons of resistance embodying the opposite of that loss of will which so many have read into them.” Question: what weapon of resistance as a result of the slaves’ fatalism is he referring to? A turn away from medical care?” (637-638) A lack of suicides among the slaves? (p. 639)  A rejection of self-pity? (p. 640) I don’t see how he asserts that fatalism and apathy were weapons of resistance by the slaves unless, per his thesis, the slaves’ fatalism and apathy were instrumental in establishing and resulting in some paternalistic reciprocities. What reciprocities were being established? Am I missing something?

Genovese's audience?

Anybody want to weigh in on who they think Genovese was writing Roll Jordan Roll for? Throughout the book I couldn't help but wonder who the intended audience was when describing the scenery of a present day (at the time) black church, telling the story of being given poor directions by a black person in the south in the past and relating the morality that slaves had to adopt to the current "black community."

Genovese's "balanced thoroughness"

One of the strengths of Genovese’s book is his “balanced thoroughness” in which he analyzes some fairly hefty themes as contexts. I find that some of his sections (chapters?) are used to “step back” in order to give a broader sense of context to his overall argument which he then follows with historical examples in the sections following. For example, his section on “The Christian Tradition” in Book Two, Part 1, incorporates no less than at least five 18^th, 19^th , and 20^th century philosophers and theologians into the text, and he utilizes them by critiquing their thinking – e.g., Nietzsche – when it conflicts with his thesis, and by showing how their thinking confirms his thesis – e.g., Gramsci and Troeltsch. I re-read that section carefully to see if I would disagree with how he presented Christianity, and I was surprised by his balanced but mature treatment of how he saw Christianity as operative in giving affirmation to both the slaveholders and the slaves – without comprising Christianity’s significant meanings. Do you agree? Do you find instances where you would disagree?     

Slaves agianst Paternalism or Slavery?

In this class during week 2 we asked the question, did slavery create racism or did racism create slavery? After reading this book it is clear that Genovese believes that racism occured due to slavery. Slaves were vital for the south economically and slaveowners knew that they needed to keep strict control of the slaves. They justified what they were doing through the idea of paternalism, but this idea of controlling the slaves reinforced racism.

I believe that more so then slavery, paternalism led to racism. The churches that the slaves attended did not ask the slaves to rebel against the system of slavery, but rather justified rebelling against slaveowners who were not carrying out their benevolent duties.

Paternalism - Genovese/Wood

Genovese seems to believe that the relationship that slave holders have to slaves is similar to how Wood describes the relationship between the monarchy in England to the colonists. The former sees themselves as benevolent paternalists who knows what is best for the latter. Even though Wood argued how paternalism kind of died out after the revolution, Genovese depicts how the system was still present. 

Genovese's Arguments

While the book is a relatively quick read for the length and has some interesting stories and ideas, I am having a hard time with the arguments that Genovese is trying to make. I understand that he is trying to place slavery into a Paternalistic state where hegemony keeps the slaves subordinates to the whites but I just can't get on board with his arguments against anything but full scale revolt being a political action or reaction against slavery. Risking your life to escape to freedom simply as a reaction to and individual event, such as a particular whipping, rather then the assertion that slavery is wrong and freedom is right does not add up to a decent argument to me. Anyone else have thoughts on this?

Eugene D. Genovese

I like to research authors a little bit while I'm reading. For those of you who want to finish the book first before getting background, you can stop reading (sorry, Richard - ha!). Learning about Eugene D. Genovese was helpful in understanding the first half of Roll Jordan, Roll and gave me some questions about where the book will go as I finish.

Genovese was an Italian born in Brooklyn, which struck me because he had a profound interest in writing about the American South and slavery, but I later learned that he moved to the South and had a brief stint teaching at Georgia State University! Controversy seemed to follow him wherever he went and he had no problem stating his opinion. He was a member of the Communist party as a young man, identified as a Marxist, and later in life converted to Catholicism and called himself a "traditionalist."

With about half of the book read so far, I've found Roll Jordan, Roll to be easier to comprehend than the last two we've read. Maybe the content is more interesting to me, which helps! I've learned some new information and enjoy that Genovese tries to bring in many different sources into his book (slaves, planters, legal rulings, plantation records, etc.).

In Part One, Genovese emphasizes the paternalistic relationship between slaves and their masters in the U.S., which we discussed in class after Morgan's book. After thinking about this since week one, I find myself questioning the word paternalism. While I agree with Genovese that there were many aspects of paternalism happening in American slavery (such as giving slaves special rights and punishments to reward/discourage behaviors)...what about the buying and selling of slaves? Parents don't sell their kids for money. If paternalism defined the master-slave relationship...why did the slave trade make so many Southern planters so wealthy? Why were so many slaves bought and sold? Then again, slavery is so twisted, who truly understands the master-slave relationship? After some research, I find that other historians have criticized Genovese's viewpoint on slavery and paternalism as well. HOWEVER, I am hesitant to read many critiques of this book from the 1970s and 80s because Genovese was such a controversial character and many disagreed with him personally (and perhaps may have taken it out on his book). I'll try to stick to my own observations as I finish this weekend.

Genovese's structure and style

I have not done any outside research on Roll, Jordan, Roll yet (i'm trying to save that for after I have read the book and made up some of my own opinions...) so I was wandering if someone could help me understand his structure. The biblical quotations are lost on me (my sunday-school teacher would be ashamed) and while I think the book is incredibly well-researched and thick with description, analysis, and examples, and can't help but feel that this comprehensive coverage of Slavery is jumping around all over the place.Then again i'm only 430 pages in..... Did I miss something somewhere in my rush to get cracking?

Part 2 Roll ,Jordan, Roll

Hello Again,

In the 1972 book, Roll, Jordan, Roll by Eugene D. Genovese, sensitive issues such as "The Black Work Ethic" are explored in an outward manner.  Genovese uses the argument put forth by Dr. W.E.B. Dubois that "The black slaves brought into common labor certain new spiritual values not yet fully realized."  "Working hard" is a necessary evil, according to Genovese's former slave sources.  The argument that work is a necessary evil is a loaded statement put forth by the author.  More factual information is needed on these historical statements before racial inferences can be drawn.

Thank You

Part 1 Roll, Jordan, Roll: The World The Slaves Made

Welcome,

Eugene D. Genovese's Roll, Jordan, Roll: The World The Slaves Made begins with book one and the title of "God Is Not Mocked."  In part one, of book one, the issue of paternalism in the nineteenth century American South is detailed.  In the book, Genovese explains, "American slavery subordinated one race to another and thereby rendered its fundamental class relationships more complex and ambiguous; but they remained class relationships."  Class power and defining paternalism in the nineteenth seem to be the core of Roll, Jordan, Roll and Genovesse's arguments seem to need further historical explanation in the upcoming chapters.

Thanks

Section 3 The Radicalism of the American Revolution

Hello,

In the third section of Gordon S. Wood's book The Radicalism of the American Revolution a chapter titled "The Assault on Aristocracy" explores a re-occurring theme in Wood's work.  This theme is the erosion of aristocratic authority in America and the start of a strong middle class.  The quote "With the weakening and disappearance of older forms of patronage, with the expansion of commerce and the fluctuating redistribution's of wealth, with the spread of paper money and the widening commercial opportunities for plain and "middling" men everywhere, the gentry's position in northern society became more and more anachronistic." is an indication that the author believes in a weakening aristocracy and an emerging of a middle class American society.  "The Assault on Aristocracy" in eighteenth century America would certainly have a long lasting historical impact.

Thanks

Slavery

I am having difficulties with reading the two books. Not because of the language, but because of their approach. In both books we have a narrow top-down history. I understand the sources of the area are from the elite class, however, there is little attempt by Morgan or Wood to reconcile the issues of the oppressed. I understand we need both sides, but the other side has not been discussed. Morgan discussed Bacon's rebellion without discussing how the Native Americans viewed it. Morgan and Wood discuss the paradox of slavery and freedom from the point of view of the master rather than the slave.

If we are to believe Woods that this is the most radical revolution in all of history, what must ask for whom. The thesis could be revived that in his opinion this is the most radical revolution for middle to upper-class whites. Ask a slave who worked before the revolution, during the revolution for American freedom, and after the revolution, if this was the most socially radical revolution in history. Ask women if their life was changed, if they were part of "universal suffrage."

We cannot ignore the voices of the oppressed. The questions must be raised.

Section II The Radicalism of the American Revolution

Hi, Everybody

The word " republicanism" is a title used by Gordon S. Wood in the second section of his book The Radicalism of the American Revolution.  It is important to remember in eighteenth-century America that Wood's truncated society of social unequals did exist.  Social equality for the masses is a very distinctive argument that has origins in the enlightenment ideas of eighteenth-century American society.  Republicanism and its ties to enlightenment are certainly two values of the radical acceptance of the distinctly formative American Revolution. These two values should not be overlooked in a historical context.

Thanks

Section 1 The Radicalism of the American Revolution

Hello Again,

"Monarchy" is the title of section one of Gordon S. Wood's The Radicalism of the American Revolution.  In the introduction to the book, Wood contends that the "American Revolution was as radical and social as any revolution in history, but it was radical and social in a very special eighteenth-century sense." This quote seems to be the basis of Wood's core argument throughout the book.  I believe the American Revolution of the eighteenth-century was a radical and social event at the same time.  The American Revolution was certainly a first in human kind.  The radical and social ideas of this revolution would lead to many other revolutions around the world, in the future, but the American Revolution against British monarchical authority was certainly unique from the start.

World History Document Based Question for Future High School Teachers

I mentioned using AP Document Based Questions (DBQ) for an activity to examine a book.

If you're interested, here are the websites for previous exams for World History and U.S. History:
 
World: http://apcentral.collegeboard.com/apc/members/exam/exam_information/2090.html

U.S.: http://apcentral.collegeboard.com/apc/members/exam/exam_information/2089.html

To get to the Document Based Questions, click on "Free Response Questions" for a given year and scroll down to the DBQ.  You could take several documents used in the book you're looking at and turn them into a DBQ.  If you really want to be high-speed, you could also create a "Scoring Guideline" with "Potential Outside Information" (it would not have to be as long as the one on the website--they only expect students to use a couple of those in their responses) and "Document Inferences."  Click on "Scoring Guidelines" for the year of the question you are investigating.  (Unfortunately, World History is not as cool as U.S., so they lack the outside info. list and document inferences).

I'm more familiar with the U.S. exam, but if anyone would like to ask me about DBQs, my e-mail is krhoads@dominionmail.org

By the way, teaching AP helps you stand out as a job candidate.  We just hired a teacher last year, and candidates with AP experience had a definite advantage.  If your students' scores are good, keep track of them and cite them on your resume.  Also, once you've been teaching AP for 3 years, you can apply to be an exam reader.  Not only do they pay well ($1750 for 1 week of work--but it's grading essays from 8:00 to 5:30 Sat.-Fri. w/ some time off for lunch and breaks), but it is also one of the best things you can do to become a better AP teacher.

Thanks,
Kevin