In the novel Jane Eyre, by Charlotte Brontë, Jane asserts that, “If people were always kind and obedient to those who are cruel and unjust…wicked people would have it all their own way…so they would never alter” (50). Jane strikes on a fundamental mode of ensuring social change through resistance or opposition to tyranny. Resistance has been presented in many different forms throughout history, such as revolutions and works of art. Resistance is key to the continual elevation of the human race and much can be learned from observing acts of resistance from the past. Both resistance and opposition to tyranny are found in the poetry of Phillis Wheatley as well as the novel Our Nig: or, Sketches from the Life of a Free Black, by Harriet E. Wilson; yet, the styles through which this topic are addressed differ radically, due to the breadth of time between publications.
Throughout the reign of slavery in America, Africans were labeled as sub-human and animal-like to justify to the “Christian” population that they were suitable and even specifically created for slavery. One characteristic that was associated with this sub-human label was their inability to create works of art, as art was viewed as an expression of human emotion. If Africans were not human then they could not create anything that expressed human emotion. Phillis Wheatley became the first African-American to publish a book, causing much controversy in the American colonies and upsetting the colonists’ notions of the “sub-human” slaves they possessed. Wheatley’s book of poetry, entitled Poems on Various Subjects, Religious and Moral, caused so much controversy in Boston when her owners first attempted to have it published that they were soon forced to go to London to find a compliant publisher.
Reactions from the population after Wheatley’s book was published varied from astonishment to scorn. Many could not believe that a “barbaric” African slave would be able to produce such a work as had been published, regardless of the lengthy disclaimer asserting its validity that was published along with the poems. As this ability was not expected at all of African-Americans, let alone poetry of the caliber that Wheatley had written, she was given much praise. On the other hand, many wanted to discredit the young poet and criticized her harshly. Thomas Jefferson stated that Wheatley’s poetry was “below the dignity of criticism” (Writings 246-47). Another critic stated that Wheatley’s poetry “attracted for a time considerably curiosity…not at all, however, because the verses were good, but because they were written by one from whom even bad verses were too good to be expected” (Literary 186-87). Regardless of those statements, Wheatley still became a published poet.
Wheatley, being the first published writer, did not have an established canon on which to build from. She used the standards of the day, Greco/Roman classical. Modern criticism concerning Wheatley’s poetry tends to label it as sounding subjugated or submissive to her enslavers. Wheatley’s poetry is often contrasted with later pieces by African Americans. Comparatively, the resistance depicted in other works in relation to Wheatley’s is drastic in that Wheatley appears to show no resistance whatsoever to her enslaved position. However, the lack of canonical reference and Wheatley’s difficulty in being published must be considered when assessing the apparent lack of resistance. She was not a free woman when her works were published, as many later African-American authors were and therefore she also had the added obstacle of achieving her goal at the will of her masters.
Regardless of these obstacles, Wheatley managed to inject her poetry with a surprising amount of resistance that at first glance is not apparent and therefore was overlooked by the common reader of the time. She accomplished this goal by employing sarcasm frequently in her writing, often giving her words two meanings. As she was not expected to be able to produce such works, few if any, readers would expect her capable of expressing anything more than the literal. If in fact they did suspect her of doing such protest, she would have never been published. Therefore, the fact that she was published is evidence that they were not aware of this subtlety.
Wheatley’s poem entitled On Being Brought from Africa to America, discusses, on a literal level, the benefits that most white Christians in America believed the Africans were acquiring by being brought to the colony in their servitude. However, this notion is disregarded by later readers as not the true meaning at all. Wheatley chose to italicize several words in this poem, including Pagan, Savior, Christians, Negroes and Cain. When the poem is read through, understanding that there is a hint of sarcasm at each of these words, the meaning of the poem changes. Wheatley is figuratively rolling her eyes at the beliefs of her white masters and their colleagues.
Another aspect of this poem that may go unnoticed upon a first reading appears in the lines “Some view our sable race with scornful eye,/’Their colour is a diabolic die'” (Shields 18). On one hand, Wheatley seems to say ‘their colour is a diabolic die’, however, she adds the quotation marks around this statement, making it clear that it is the ‘some’ that are mentioned in the previous line. This inspection asserts that she does not agree with ‘some’ people’s sentiments against her race. In other words, she does not accept the common white beliefs that she has been taught. More simply, she does not believe her blackness represents evil.
Lastly, Wheatley challenges Christian beliefs that have been thrust upon her. Christianity teaches that anyone may repent and go to heaven. Yet, Christians excluded blacks from this salvation at the same time that they were teaching them other Christian beliefs. Wheatley points out to those Christians that they are contradicting their own doctrine by excluding the African race and calling them diabolic.
Looking at another of Wheatley’s poems entitled, To the King’s Most Excellent Majesty, 1768, Wheatley again seems to display a double meaning in her words. The poem is dated just a few years prior to the American Revolutionary War with Great Britain, as many of Wheatley’s works were. The atmosphere that Wheatley was writing in allowed her to speak frequently of freedom. She is implying the desired freedom of enslaved African Americans while her readers are assuming she is referring to the “freedom” of the American nation from the British rule. In the poem Wheatley says, “And may each clime with equal gladness see!/A monarch’s smile can set his subjects free!” (Shields 17). The common reader of the time period would read these lines and assume she was referring to their revolutionary cause. There seems today to be no question that Wheatley is instead referring to the freeing of slaves. She says, “and may each clime with gladness see,” meaning that this freedom that she wants to occur should not just be confined to the colonies in what is now the United States, but to the entire British Empire. She is advocating the freeing of the slaves not only in America, but in the West Indies as well and anywhere else that King George currently had dominion over. She, an enslaved, black female is addressing directly the ruler of the most powerful empire in the world at the time and making him aware that he alone has the power to free her people, as well as others worldwide.
Harriet E. Wilson, an African-American author, writing almost ninety years after Wheatley, had a larger range of acceptable writing styles or modes for an African-American female through which she could achieve her goal. She not only had the benefits of being a “free” woman when she was writing her novel but also, she had an established African-American writing canon on which she could base her work. It is no wonder then that Wilson’s fictional narrative addresses much more openly the evils of slavery and demonstrates more clearly one female’s resistance to the tyranny she was forced to endure. Many modern critics would make the claim that Wilson; because of the more honest, open piece of work she produced, did more in advancing the abolitionist movement in the United States then did Wheatley. Although doing so would neglect considering the time periods in which each woman wrote. While Wilson is able to be more openly resentful towards the effects of slavery or indentured servitude, one sees that once the historical context and its restraints are considered, both Wilson and Wheatley demonstrated equitable attempts at resistance in their respective pieces of art.
Wilson’s protagonist Frado or “Nig,” is not born a slave, but is born in the North, the daughter of a disgraced white woman who married a black man. Her white mother then handed Frado into an indentured slavery. The situation then that facilitates Frado’s introduction to enslavement allows Wilson to explore sentiments that revolved around the institution of slavery that were not normally addressed by African-American writers, such as the sentiments of Northern non-slaveholding white families. In many other narratives and writings the North is depicted often as the embodiment of freedom or as the place where all of the abolitionists come from. Yet, as Wilson so clearly demonstrates, many Northerners were racist. Racism was not confined to the South. Frado’s own mother refers to her daughters as “black devils” (16). Frado, however, shows resistance immediately in the first scene simply by yelling “No,” when told she is to be given away, then running out the door.
As Frado’s indentured service to Mrs. Bellmont becomes more and more like slavery, she frequently shows small signs of resistance by her actions at school and the confidence with which she talks to her dog, Fido. Although Mrs. Bellmont is able to take away one of them by taking Frado out of school, her attempt at disposing of Fido is thwarted by Mr. Bellmont. Also, after Frado is removed from school she begins to adamantly study the Bible, as well as attend church meetings with Aunt Abby, thereby giving herself another outlet from her servitude. One willful, open act of resistance that Frado demonstrates occurs when she is eating dinner at the table after the rest have finished, a privilege she had not been allowed until James Bellmont insisted upon it. Rather then eat off a plate that Mrs. Bellmont has just used, Frado instead gets Fido to lick the plate clean. Frado is making the statement that she would rather eat off of a plate that had just been licked clean by a dog then eat after Mrs. Bellmont.
The climax of Frado’s resistance comes when Mr. Bellmont tells her if, “she was sure she did not deserve a whipping, to avoid it if she could” (104). The next time Frado is about to be unjustly beaten, she yells for Mrs. Bellmont to “Stop,” saying, “Strike me, and I’ll never work a mite more for you” (105). Frado’s resistance here brings about a change, albeit a small one, in Mrs. Bellmont. She does not strike Frado this time and in the future seems more hesitant to do so after being so confronted. Frado’s final act of resistance towards Mrs. Bellmont’s tyranny is in her refusal to stay on and work after her indentureship is completed.
Both Phillis Wheatley and Harriet E. Wilson have been shown to demonstrate resistance and opposition to tyranny in their respective works. The efforts of these two women both succeeded in propelling the anti-slavery movement of their times and in some way helped in enabling the eventual abolition of slavery. Therefore, their efforts played a part in the United States’ greatest social change to date and their example should be noted and followed in the future.
Brontë, Charlotte. Jane Eyre. Smith, Cornhill: Bantam Classic Edition, 1981.
Literary History of the American Revolution, The. 1703-1783: 1763-1776, Vol. I, G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1897, pp. 184-222.
Shields, John C. The Collected Works of Phillis Wheatley. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988.
Wilson, Harriet E. Our Nig; or, Sketches from the Life of a Free Black. New York: Vintage Books, 2002.
