Political cartoon from 1839 satirizing the 'gag rule' in Congress which prohibited discussion of slavery and abolition. Obviously that didn't quite pan out in the end, but here John Quincy Adams is shown cowering at the frown of a Whig supporter of slavery. Adams is shown with abolitionist newspapers and a resolution to recognize Haiti.See, Haiti appears in US political culture throughout the 19th century. Note to self, read more about Adams and his support for abolitionist causes and recognition of Haiti.
"Horizontal print caricaturing the self-made emperor of Haiti and his court. Soulouque wears an elaborate military uniform and a crown. He holds a sword in his right hand and beckons to another man with his left, saying, "Come along niggar, come along, dont be affraid, we's flesh & blood like youself ... now den, I Soloque emqeror [sic] ob Hayti by de autoity in my west do create de, grand duke ob de emqire [sic]." The future grand duke, also in elaborate uniform with large plumes, bows before him as a member of the audience encourages him to bow lower. At right, three figures identified below the image as resident English, American, and French men complain of the smell, the Englishman holding a scent bottle to his nose and the Frenchman retching, and discuss the preference of "colored people" for "monarchial forms & ceremony." At right, a woman identified as the empress slouches low on her throne. A young man in cap and gown is identified as the prime minister."
American caricature of Soulouque and his nobility. In truth, Soulouque's nobility was preposterous, but the racist discourse attributed to Soulouque's faction (which seems to draw on stereotypes of African-American vernacular english in 1849 or 1850) clearly reveals how, to US whites, all blacks are the same: equally inferior. Blacks, according to the English, French, and American at the right in the image smell bad and prefer a monarchical form of government, presumably due to some racist myths about blacks being too dumb or savage to understand democracy and restraint. See, part of the reason I am fascinated by Haitian history is how well it parallels 20th and 21st century Western discourse on post-colonial Africa. Much like Mobutu's Congo/Zaire or more recently, Mugabe's Zimbabwe, whites in Europe and North America use their media (which of course includes political cartoons) to ridicule and perpetuate racist exaggerations and beliefs about the incapacity for blacks to, for instance, build democratic states, or a play on the ludicrous monarchical or imperial titles of ex-slaves and their descendants. You know, things haven't changed much since the mid-19th century, Western discourse and media coverage on Africa or predominantly black countries continues to rely on similar tactics and stereotypes.
French caricaturist Daumier loved to insult Soulouque, comparing him quite obviously to apes in the timeless white tradition of anti-black racism for the last few centuries. Like my post on orangutans, black women, and Bushmen explains, the growing influence of scientific racism and other pseudoscience helped promote such vile and offensive portrayals of we people who are darker than blue.
Another Daumier piece from the same site as the above image. Self-explanatory and clearly satirical, since Soulouque would likely never have gotten away with or dared try to force a European journalist into a cauldron. This image is from 1850 while the above is from 1856, which, if I remember correctly, was one year after Soulouque's failed second invasion of the Dominican Republic.
If we people who are darker than blue had built our state racism would still have existed as nothing more than the stupid rantings of idiots. Your posts emphasizing race, color, etc. keep missing that obvious point.
ReplyDeleteYes, I know, but these visuals are interesting nonetheless, despite being the rantings of idiotic racists from the US and France. I wish there were more from the pre-Soulouque period, but so far I haven't come across any (except that one of the Haitian ambassador).
DeleteNo, I'm not a collector. I like some of the political cartoons for historical purposes. Political cartoons in general were one of the more interesting aspects of the imposed US history courses I took in middle school and high school. As someone with an interest in black history, the ones about slavery, abolition, etc. appeal to me, whether from pro or anti-slavery sides.
DeleteWell, they are visual text/document sources that help reveal the thoughts of the society they were produced in. Isn't that enough to make them worthwhile of study? Also, when talking about African-American or Haitian history, exposure and engagement with white supremacist sources is inevitable, don't you think? And I have never made such racist caricatures and political cartoons the emphasis of my blog or academic pursuits.
DeleteAll right, you don't want to delve deeper into what it is you've 'learned' from such documents. I jumped through the hoops to comment on your blog because I saw that you took seriously the nonsense in Alejo Carpentier's novel as historical facts. You weren't the only one. I asked you a simple question, your answer that this isn't the emphasis of your blog and that this material has intrinsic value is an evasion because I told you what can be learned from such stuff according to my perspective. I'd like you to tell me, from your point of view, what you've learned from that stuff that's not obvious, and how that acquired knowledge will help your further inquiries into the subject of African-American or Haitian history. If you can't, that makes you a collector, not a historian.
DeleteWell, for one, it shows how Haiti was not rendered invisible in the West after the Haitian Revolution. Those events and what proceeded afterwards were closely followed and part of a broader circulation of ideas and people around the world. Sure, a lot of it is rather obvious (or seems that way now), but that does not discount the importance of non-textual sources in constructing historical narratives of finding additional evidence to support or gauge, for instance, the growth of the anti-slavery movement in the antebellum US (and the response of the slaveholders and their allies). You are too dismissive, political cartoons can be quite useful in elucidating or adding further layers of detail to history. People continue to debate over 'obvious' matters and note how quickly we have shifted our narratives on Haitian-US relations in the last 10-20 years, for instance.
DeleteI respect your opinion about how these visuals are not too mind-blowing for showing how white racism has not changed too much over the last few centuries, but to exaggerate my interest in such things and adopt such a dismissive posture is not wise. In my opinion they are one of a plethora of different types of sources available, and, as I said, my appreciation for political cartoons and other visual sources really part of broader US history, not just white supremacist jokes and fantasies in 19th century newspapers. You make it sound like I'm obsessed with these things and that I secretly enjoy or laugh at them. I find these sources interesting for my further interests in culture studies, the salience of race and slavery in US political culture/discourse, and for simply the 'wonder' of observing certain records of widely consumed cultural artifacts.
Don't you find something magical, in just reading or seeing objects from the past? Seeing how people constructed their reality in art, writing, or some other form? Sure, 1850 was not too long ago, but there's something to be said about just seeing common or seemingly bland aspects of the past today. That certainly is a factor in my interest in history, or those old photographs of deceased relatives my mother found in her aunt's old suitcase.
Delete"Don't you find something magical, in just reading or seeing objects from the past? Seeing how people constructed their reality in art, writing, or some other form?" Yes, I do. That's the reason I said you were a collector. They remind me of those illustrated books of my childhood in Haiti, depicting 'puss in boots' and other children's tales. I recall that velvet and other material was used in these books. To a certain extent, I share your fascination with that old stuff. We part company on the usefulness of these things. You insist on claiming that new insights can be gained from them. I'm all ears. I haven't accused you of enjoying anything, I don't go for amateur psychology. I do insist that you are wasting time on this rubbish. You disagree, very well, that's all I've got to say on the subject.
ReplyDeletePart of the reason for the criticism of Faustin Soulouque at the hand of Honoré Daumier is a sign of the times in France. In satirising a man who had seized power in a coup d'état, and transformed a Republic into an Empire (in addition to adopting some of Napoleon I sartorial tastes), Daumier was able to present a veiled critique of the political regime in France. The President of the 2nd Republic, Louis-Napoleon, had orchestrated his coup and re-imposed strict press censorship (hence the parallel purging of journalists). So there is an ironic dimension to these images that isn't mentioned in your commentary above and whilst I don't doubt the existence of some xenophobic sentiment in France during this period, there are other aspects to be considered too.
ReplyDelete