Sojourner Truth’s “Ain’t I a Woman” is considered one of the fundamental models of suffrage-era speechmaking. Featuring themes and phrases that continue to resonate powerfully with modern women, “Ain’t I a Woman” has found its place in the collective consciousness of America for over 150 years. Although various versions of the speech exist, Truth’s main thematic concerns prevail no matter what the transcription. Regardless of the varied transliterations, Truth’s essential ideas have inspired audiences across the world.
Born in upstate New York in 1797, the first 30 years of Sojourner Truth’s life were lived as a slave named Isabella Baumfree. The second youngest of either 12 or 13 children, Truth lived in the damp mud-soaked cellar of her master. As a result of the smaller northern landholdings, houses in the north needed fewer slaves than those in the south. Eventually Truth became a mother to numerous children, most of whom were sold as slaves to various families. In 1826, when her master refused to honor his offer of freedom in exchange for her hard work, Truth took her youngest child and fled. In 1827, she attained legal freedom pursuant to a New York statute. Truth moved to New York City and became involved in organizations assisting in the attainment of rights for both blacks and women.
Though it was well known that Truth could neither read nor write, she overcame such limitations by becoming a powerfully adept activist fighting racial discrimination, and persuasively championing for blacks’ rights to vote. Additionally, being a fervent Christian, Truth gained oration experience through her predilection for preaching. Combined with her imposing, nearly Amazonian frame, melodious voice and notorious love for singing, Truth was often seen by white reformers as being “natural, uncorrupted and exotic”, though initially they thought her to be little more than an intriguing entertainer (Johnson, 2004).
Additionally, although Truth became famous for her blunt, succinct proclamations comprised of “wit and wisdom”(Painter, 1996), her ethos may have initially been damaged by her known illiteracy and by the mere fact that Truth was black. Unfortunately, 19 th century audiences tended to take less seriously the words of a black woman. Consequently, some convention founders were wary of putting the controversial Truth on stage, stating “Don’t let her speak…it will ruin us” (Gage, 1863). Yet by the end of her speech, Truth has surmounted the obstacles of her “questionable” circumstances, as she delivered a powerfully rousing performance that left the audience roaring with applause. It has since been said of Truth that “ignorance has been the shield to guard her from rare intuitions, her great pure heart and strong individuality from any worldly taint” (Lukins/Wortham, 2000). Though previously some in the audience may have been skeptical of Truth’s ethos, her stirring “Ain’t I a Woman” served to positively sway many opinions of Truth’s capabilities.
No speech given by Truth was ever recorded by her hand, as her illiteracy prevented her from doing so. Thus transcripts of her speeches rely on the memories and faithfulness of spectators observing her orations, making it “impossible to recover exactly what Truth said” (Painter, 1996). Assorted reports of her words were published in contemporary newspapers and magazines, although the speech transcriptions often varied substantially between publications. Indeed, the text of “Ain’t I a Woman” was a prime victim of such subjectivity in transliteration. Three conflicting versions of the speech exist, including the famously read “classic” edition, a lesser known 1851 transcription, and the former written in a traditional “plantation” vernacular. In recent years, it has been agued that the genuinely accurate account is that of Maurice Robinson which was printed in the anti-slavery periodical “the Bugle” in 1851. However, the said transcription does not feature a single utterance of the titular phrase “Ain’t I a Woman”. Instead, Robison recalls Truth as stating “I am a woman’s rights” (Zackodnik, 2004).
The quintessentially recognized version was first printed in 1863 in Frances Dana Gage’s “Reminiscences”. Utilizing a “plantation-style dialect” (Zackodnik, 2004), Gage’s interpretation of the speech boasts Truth repeatedly and forcefully articulating the famed question “Ain’t I a Woman?” Gage, who presided over the Akron convention, is said to have fabricated a more sensational account of Truth’s performance out of a desire to promote the convention. Gage presented her audience with an extraordinary woman who inextricably linked the overlooked woman’s rights movement with “one much more visible in 1863, the emancipation of enslaved blacks” (Zackodnik, 2004). Further proving how various interpretations of Truth and her words served the interests of women’s rights activists, a plain-English version of Gage’s “Ain’t I a Woman” was later published in “The History of Women’s Rights”. Consequently, as the most lauded transcription of Truth’s speech may have been result of purposeful alteration, one must contend with a possible “distorted, anti-historical image of Truth” (Painter, 1996). However, even if Robinson’s somewhat disparate version is more accurate, the basis of Truth’s argument remains fundamentally similar in both interpretations. The suggestion of an insertion of ethnicity into suffrage, and gender into abolition resonates in every version of Truth’s speech.
As mentioned, the setting for “Ain’t I a Woman” was the 1851 Women’s rights convention in Akron, Ohio. Conferences held amidst this time period were considered to be of particular importance and urgency, as tensions that would ultimately lead to the Civil War were quelling interest in the women’s rights movement. Even in the north, neither abolitionism nor feminism attracted much support, particularly with white males. Certain members of the audience attended for the sole purpose of heckling and provoking the speakers. In particular, groups of men at Akron continuously made disparaging remarks about the frailty and vulnerability of women. Many 19 th century men were opponents of women as orators, as they viewed female discourse as “a disorderly act that exposed the female body to public scrutiny” (Painter, 1996). As a result, black feminists such as Truth were often subject to extreme scrutiny while on the podium, as they had to contend not only with disapproval of their gender, but of their race as well.
Of the occasion, Gage writes that upon the sight of Truth, “a buzz of disapprobation was hears all over the house” (1863). A group of ministers convened in the audience and sermonized about the supposed immoralities taking place at the event. Just as the crowd was reaching the pinnacle of commotion, the organizers were at their most apprehensive about Truth. Yet despite the disquieting atmosphere, Truth reportedly stood up and politely asked if she might “say a few words” (Zackodnik, 2004). In this moment, Truth shifted the balance of power and took the situation into her own hands, thereby “fashioning” the occasion of her speech. The speech itself reads as a near discourse between Truth and the audience, as she utilizes the comments of her onlookers to create fodder for her own arguments. Truth “pointed her significant finger” (Gage, 1863) directly at audience members, and specifically referred to one “little man back there” (Gage, 1863) while formulating her thesis. Just as Truth helped to “create” the occasion for her speech, the audience somehow assisted in the formulation of the speech itself.
The general purpose of Truth’s speech is a deliberative one- she wished to persuade her audience to a belief that women, particularly black women, were deserving of the same rights as men. More specifically, Truth was simultaneously arguing to separate sections of her audience. To the women, Truth stated that if Eve was powerful enough to “turn the world upside down all alone, these women together ought to be able to…get it right side up again!” (Truth, 1851). With this proclamation, Truth attempts to rouse the passions of her female onlookers, instilling in them the knowledge that if women work vigilantly and collectively, anything is possible. Through this implication, Truth urged women to take charge of their lives, and to win back their proper place in society. Conversely, Truth attempts to dissuade the men in the audience from maintaining stereotypical opinions that women should be coddled by their being “helped into carriages and lifted over ditches” (Truth, 1851). When Truth questions what “intellect” has to do with the rights of women and minorities, she implies that the timeworn justifications for denying people’s rights have become stale. The idea that lack of intellect, or proper education, should preclude one’s right to vote was nothing but an insubstantial excuse. Throughout “Ain’t I a Woman”, Truth Urges men to dismiss their traditional values, while she pushes women to assume responsibility.
The main issues of “Ain’t I a Woman” involve utilizing Sojourner Truth herself as an example of the manner in which controversial notions of women are misguided. Truth addresses the belief that women should be cosseted, stating “nobody ever helps me into carriages or over mud puddles” (Truth, 1851). With this line, Truth asserted that although she was a woman, her race precludes society from treating her in such an indulgent manner. Not only was Truth a woman, she was also a black woman, who had endured hardships and gained strength as result of her race. Such circumstances fashioned her into an example to all women, as she proved that one can be powerful and durable as a man without compromising one’s womanhood.
Within “Ain’t I a Woman”, Truth fully utilized the Aristotelian modes of proof. Her logos, or logical argument, centered around her personal experiences and readings from the bible. Truth fashioned a fully coherent, sensible argument around the biblical figures of Christ and Eve. Firstly, Truth contends that as Christ was born of the union of God and a woman, men have no right claiming that “women can’t have as many rights as men because Christ wasn’t a woman”. Secondly, Truth argued that Eve was a woman of immense power- a force that still existed in modern women, but remained to be released. Much of the ethos of “Ain’t I a Woman” results from Truth’s ability to skillfully and cleverly fashion lines of reasoning based in biblical iconography. As the speech was presented to an audience comprised of many ministers, Truth’s invocation of biblical stories was sure to lend her a degree of credibility. Similarly, Truth’s persistent referencing of biblical figures exhibits her use of pathos, or emotional appeals. Religion is often an extremely personal, potent subject that possesses the ability to arouse powerful reactions. Additionally, when Truth cited that instances of her anguish, when she “cried out with [her] mother’s grief” (Truth, 1951), she sharply, and purposefully appealed to the audience’s sense of sympathy.
“Ain’t I a Woman” presented a slight variation on the traditional, four-part method of speech organization. It featured a short intro, in which Truth asks “What’s all this here talking about” (Truth, 1851), followed by the famous passage in which Truth demands “ain’t I a woman?” (Truth, 1851). While not particularly conventional, this section can be read as Truth briefly stating her case. In a single sentence, she explicated the typical viewpoint of males who believed that women should be pampered. She then proceeded to utilize her artistic proof to refute such falsified notions of “vulnerable femininity”. In the core of her speech, Truth went on to use both personal and biblical proof to supplement her argument. Finally, “Ain’t I a Woman” climaxed with the discussion of Eve, culminating in a rousing call to arms for modern women. Truth concluded her speech by ascertaining that “old Sojourner ain’t got nothing more to say” (Truth, 1851).
It was said that when delivering “Ain’t I a Woman”, Truth “spoke in deep tomes which…reached every ear in the house” (Gage, 1863). Her presence was forceful, as she stood “head erect” (Gage, 1863) with proper posture. Additionally, Truth exhibited expressive body language while delivering the speech, forcefully pointing her finger at audience members, and even baring her arm to display her physical prowess. Stylistically, the speech is realistic, natural and fiery in its language, while still managing to appeal to the cultural values of its time. Though not traditionally considered eloquent, Truth’s words are powerful, passionate and pointed. The speech was spoken plainly and simply, lacking any superfluous language.
The immediate effects of “Ain’t I a Woman” exhibit both timelessness and effectiveness. When Truth finished speaking, her once antagonistic audience “long continued cheering” (Gage, 1863). Reportedly there were roars of applause, and many were eager to shake her hand by the day’s fruition. Truth had brilliantly succeeded in her efforts to persuade the listeners, many of whom wished her “God-speed on her mission” (gage, 1863). The speech resonated with individuals in the 1850’s because it aptly conveyed the unevenness of the social and political landscapes of the time. With “Ain’t I a Woman”, Truth fashioned a truly exemplary paradigm of speechmaking that both criticized and inspired a particular historical culture. Furthermore, her speech rapidly burgeoned the intersection between women’s and black rights.
Moreover, the long range effects of “Ain’t I a Woman” began in 1863, when Gage reprinted her transcription of Truth’s speech, at a crucial moment when women’s rights demonstrations were being suspended due to the Civil War. Truth’s speech was regarded as a true asset, and perhaps the singular document that could help to revive passions for suffrage. As the speech became increasingly “iconic” (Painter, 1996), it was also extensively utilized by other famous suffragettes.
In addition, “Ain’t I a Woman” created a heroic image of Truth that still inspires modern day feminists, both black and white. It has been said that the speech has “circulated in the histories of women’s rights and feminism that we have inherited, and continue to perpetuate” (Painter, 1996). Indeed, the speech as well as Sojourner Truth have remained in the collective consciousness of America far longer than most work of her contemporaries. Today, “magnets and other paraphernalia” (Zackodnik, 2000) feature Truth’s image and the titular phrase “Ain’t I a Woman?”, proving how deeply her words have affected American culture. Both Truth and her speech are considered iconic sources of encouragement to modern women- a true testament to the timelessness of her oration.
In summation, Truth’s “Ain’t I a Woman” is a prime example of the art of speechmaking. As discussed, the eloquent, piercing style of her arguments allowed her to express various values of the culture in which she lived. Truth attempted to refute the stereotypical ideals of her time, and urged others to break free of such traditional societal notions. Thereby, Truth’s speech exhibited a profound sense of timelessness. Additionally, the effectiveness of “Ain’t I a Woman” can be measured by the reportedly overwhelmingly positive responses from the spectators, whom she effectively persuaded with her arguments. Indeed, the messages inherent in “Ain’t I a Woman” still resonate clearly with modern audiences. Subsequently, it has taken its place in history as one of the most beloved speeches of all time- a speech that, at one point, even the famed suffragettes believed to be their only hope for persuasion.
Sources:
Delk, Yvonne, “Soul on Fire”, 2001, Sojourners.
Gage, Dana, “Ain’t I a Woman? Enhanced Version”, May 2, 1863, The Anti-Slavery Standard.
Hurley, Jennifer A, Women’s Rights, Greenhaven Press, 2002.
Johnson, Michael P. “On Sojourner Truth: A Life in Symbol”, Nov. 4, 1996 The New Republic (p37).
Painter, Nell Irvin, Sojourner Truth: A Life, A Symbol, Norton, 1996.
Zackodnik, Theresa C, “Radical Difference, Women’s Rights and Sojourner Truth”, Spring 2004, Feminist Studies (P49, 25pp).
