Monday, October 5, 2009

First Question From Boston

Let's have a discussion over time and space, shall we? Two questions are burning through my brain as I try to navigate Boston (and BTW, a 350-year-old city and cars are a bad mix. I'm so glad we didn't try to rent one, but it does leave us at the mercy of cabdrivers. I digress.)

My first question occurs as I look at the neighborhood where Phillis Wheatley grew up, and where her statue is. (This is NOT my photo. Yet.) Was it exploitative of her "family" to give her a classical education and then publish her poetry as an African muse? True, they didn't make money from the transaction, but does that make it okay? If it is, why? If it's not, why?

28 comments:

  1. I don't believe that a classical education is exploitative when given to anyway. I much rather look at it as a gift. Maybe their intentions were a bit more to kind of show her off... Either way, once you are educated, I believe that you can pretty much have the freedom of though to think on whatever you like. Especially writers- they are feisty like that. I think there was an important precedent in educating her, because it is such a gift to learn. Certainly during that time, it was unusual to have that viewpoint in literature. I would much rather have it, than for it to fall out of the cultural ear rim.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Perhaps they felt obligated to publish her works, seeing as they educated her and nurtured the talent. She received the credit and in literature, that is sometimes more important than money. I also don't think that publishing her poems was a bad thing. I mean, she was, after all, working on a new collection to be published at a later time. Maybe that was the push she needed to become the figure she is today.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Remember her personal biography -- any fame she enjoyed from her poetry was extremely short-lived, and she died at only 31, in appallingly reduced circumstances. It doesn't negate what you're saying at all, but it's important to realize that she wasn't conventionally famous in her own lifetime.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Her "family" has given her an education, that does not justify them publishing her poems. Was this her plan to become an African muse or the Wheatly's? However, it would NOT have been exploitative to give her an education and let her do with it what she pleased. No one should be forced to publish or lead a life someone else has mapped out for them, slave or not. Yes, she was extremely well educated and treated very well by the Wheatly family. But let's not forget that this was a "white" education. She never wrote about her real home, family or heritage. Of all that she was robbed of in her life at least she was given a proper education.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I believe that they weren't exploiting her. As the notes suggested they treated her as one of the family rather than a slave. Plus, it was her choice to write the material. As educated individuals it is our duty to express how we interpret life. Her "family" most likely didn't expect her to write something that would be remembered for years to come. Simply publishing her work may have been a way to show how proud they were of her hard work.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I think that she did what she loved to do and her family gave her the chance. It would be nice if she would of made some money, that would oh helped her out alot and possiblly if she had had a better husband. I think that her family published her work beacuse they cared about her and felt she had something important to say not to expolit her. They didn't even amke any money. Fact is she was a black writer. she could of been the Mark Twain of black writers and still not of been as popular.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Corey Hedge

    I don't think they expoited her because everyone deserves an education. The treated her more like one of their childeren than a slave. i don't think they were forcing her to write.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Heather Hedge
    I think that it was a good thing that they gave he the education that they did. It gave her oppertunities that she would have never had. I don't think that her "family" was trying to exploit her. It says that she was treated like she was their own daughter so they probably published her works so that they would be out there for someone to see because they were proud of her.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Dig a little deeper here -- humor me, I've got a pulled hip muscle -- what makes education a good thing, and what did it do to or for Phillis?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Corbin Mack

    Her "family" didn't exploit her, if they wanted to use her for money than they wouldn't have treated her so fairly.I think her family encouraged her to write knowing that she would feel the better end of it when she is free and reading her own dairy or letters.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I think it is a little exploitative. As much as they treated her as "one of the family", she was still a servant. And I believe she was treated so. Maybe not treated like most slaves in that time, but I don't believe she was treated as a COMPLETE equal either. I think it's great that they gave her an education and of course that helped Phillis in her writing, but I think the Wheatley's may have been hoping for some credit. Maybe not completely, but it's human nature to be a little greedy.

    I do think it is okay that she is published as an African muse. She was seven when she came over to America, which means she still remembers where she came from and still has those roots. She was offered an education that blacks just did not get in the 1700s. So yes, she was much more educated and had a couple steps up from other Africans. But does this mean she shouldn't be noticed as a great African writer? I think Phillis Wheatley's works showed that Africans were capable of the same intellect as whites.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Emily Dean


    I think when her family started with her education they had no intention of exploiting her, but as her work progressed and seemed to have something they probably saw it as a quick why to write a book. Or maybe it was like the case of Anne Bradstreet they did it as sort of a gift in the being. And it esculated from that a gift into a mass produed work?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Ashlyn DiCiero


    Phyllis Wheatley received that best education that many people of that time would have yearned for. I do not believe her family did this is in any malicious manner to exploit her; I believe they did this out of love for her. The major tragedy apparent in Wheatlys life would be how she married the wrong man who did try to exploit her even after her death. What I found curious was why her "family" did not push her enough to continue her writing more feverishly as they did when she was younger.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I think perhaps "exploit" is the wrong word; I should have chosen another one. Wheatley's education was absolutely a gift, and a dangerous one. People weren't supposed to teach slaves to read and write, since that would upset the "they're slaves because they're inferior" applecart. But once you've given someone like Phillis a fantastic education, and awakened in her a gift for using words, what can she do with it? Society isn't exactly open to an African woman setting up shop as a writer, and she will not find, among black men, someone equal to her in learning and accomplishments. I don't think the Wheatleys intended to harm her -- quite the opposite -- but I wonder what kind of position they put her in when it came to fitting into American society, where she was, at best, an anomaly.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I don't think her family used her for her work, it sort of just happened. Sometimes everyone see's potential in a family member or close friend and sort of nudges them along in the right way. This could have all been a misunderstanding. And why would it be wrong for her family to provide her the best education they could?

    ReplyDelete
  16. In response to what Ms Hanks just said... perhaps Phillis wrote the way she did - in a very derivitive and almost copycat way - in an attempt to fit in more to society? Perhaps she did have her own style, but never developed it because she already was out of place enough? She had the same education as the whites, with the same lierary and classical knowledge, and she had a wealth of information inside her head, so she would have fit right in in Boston. Well, except that she was black, which really messed everything up for her. She had to really feel lost at times, and she must have wondered what she was supposed to do with her awesome education.
    I don't think that the Wheatley family had any ill intentions. Its seems that, alone with the rest of Boston, they just REALLY valued education. They gave Phillis the same education that they gave their own children, and from what I know, they didn't single her out and give her anything special once they discovered her talent for writing.
    However, I'm not sure it would be fair to publish her works as "African," since really her poetry was classical. She was African by heritage, but, that its not where her writing comes from.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I think that they Wheatley's treated Phillis very well for a slave. I don't think that they exploited her writing, but encourage her. They taught her to read and write. Also it wasn't a bad idea to publish her poetry. Maybe she wanted it done and maybe she didn't, but today her works are being looked at by many other people.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I believe that the Wheatleys had the best of intentions when they taught her to read and write and further educated her. However, this could have crippled her because of the society she was in, especially the publishing of her works. After she gained her freedom the chances of her being married to a white educated man were very low.She, in turn, married a former slave who had a much lower education than her and therefore a very different mindset. Was she truly happy in this marriage? It was probably difficult for her to respect her husband as the leader of the family (like it was set up in those days) when she was far more intelligent. I believe, even though she may not have been as happy after the Wheatleys passed away, they did give her a gift and she was better with it than she would have been without.Maybe she just shouldn't have married. :)

    ReplyDelete
  19. I feel like it was kind of exploitive of her family to give her a high class education and then when she put it to use, publish it. True, almost all blacks back then weren't educated at all, and she was very fortunate to have had an awesome education, and I feel like her owners were more like a family that actually cared about her, but it seems like they still attempted to make a profit off of her. What if she didn't want her poetry published? Isn't that a violation of her rights as a poet? Did she even have rights as a poet because she was black? Too many questions for me to ponder.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Adam says...

    Maybe it was some what for the fame, but maybe they felt it was right to publish it. Why does one write? In my eyes, to so it can be read at one time or another. Maybe thats crazy, but i'm sure that i will only write something if someone is going to read it.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Genny:
    Okay so this is attempt two for posting my comment. I dont think that her family was trying to exploit her because they didnt get much of anything from her writings. After reading her writings myself I feel that it would have been selfish to not let everyone else enjoy them, especially during the time period.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I would love to say that I could really understand what the Wheatleys or Phillis were thinking, but who could really know. I think that Phillis got an opportunity that I am sure other slave could only dream about and was lucky to have been educated. I don’t think it was a horrible thing for them to publish her work. If the Wheatleys hadn’t given her an education or published her work, none of us would be having this discussion. We would not know of Phillis or her poems and she would not be remembered. She had a short life, but thanks to the Wheatleys she is remembered.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I think that is was a wonderful thing that the Wheatley's treated Phillis as though she was one of their own, given the circumstances of her situation. They gave her an education that many slaves never could of imagined getting. Knowing that the Wheatley's did care about her so much that they published her poetry because they were proud of her accomplishments just the same as when your mom used to put your A+ tests on the fridge. That's the way I look at it. Phillis Wheatley was a muse in that she was given the gift of an education which molded her to become a woman who overcame circumstance.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Maybe they felt like that by publishing her works they could make a better image of a slave and Phillis. Maybe they were helping to give people a different view point of a slave, not just something that was owned to do work, but someone who was intelligent and could influence other people. They did treat her as one of their own children. They gave her an education and sent her to England to meet the Countess of Huntingdon.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Cari Wolfe

    I think Philis Wheatly enjoyed writing and her family wanted to educate her because they valued education and wanted to educate everyone even slaves. I don't think her family was trying to exploit her but help her. I think they wanted to see Philis' writings become popular. I have a friend who is a writer and she likes to share them with people because she is proud of her hard work. What good is it to write something and no one ever reads it?

    ReplyDelete
  26. I think it's pretty much been established that (except in rare cases) that if the slaves weren't being treated bad, or like mistresses(mostly treated bad in that example also), that they were being treated fondly like a pet. Also, it seems to me that some people have a harder time making clear distinctions about slave children; its harder to find them as dumb work horses, when they resemble your own children in their actions and needs. So I think when they noticed that Phillis Wheatley showed potential, it was only natural that they (more caring than some other slave owners) were going to teach her to read and write. At first it was just something that was pretty cool, and they wanted to show others their handiwork, so they were like "Hey guys, look what she can do!! I taught her that!! Isn't that nifty?", sort of like teaching a puppy dog new tricks. Then after so many people see and like it, the natural thing is to show more people what you did.
    Plus, if they were looking out for her best intentions in the beginning, it probably wasn't a bad idea to publish it, and if they didn't get anything out of it, it probably wasn't purposefully exploitation. It showed that Africans could be taught, and that this particular one was quite educated and talented in the derivative poetry area. Although, with this viewpoint being taken, I'm not quite positive of what happened to their caring nature once it came to marrying her off. They didn't seem to pay attention to the fact that he was a money grubbing doof who wouldn't look out for HER well being. I mean, I guess they could have just figured that as long as they married her off, that they weren't completely deserting her as she got older. We're back to the puppy dog (pet) analogy we were on earlier....when pets grow up, they're not as cool or cute anymore because they've gotten smarter and the tricks they do aren't as impressive after everyone has seen it. After they had married her off though, she didn't exactly belong to them anymore, am I correct? So they really didn't have any right to decide what went with her skill anyway.
    I don't think we can ever truly understand the motivations behind the Wheatley family, because none of us have a direct link.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Melinda Trask

    I don't believe it was because I don't believe that was their intention when they educated her. Philis Wheatly enjoyed what she did and I think was very grateful for the education she recieved. Plus, if they did not try to get money from it then I believe they just wanted others to enjoy her work and witness her talent. The Wheatly treated her as a daughter rather than a slave so I highly doubt they would try to use Philis's talents for themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  28. I truly believe that their intent wasnt to exploit her or tarnish her in any way, shape or form. They loved and respected her as one of their own. During that time, giving the wonderful gift of a great education wasnt done with malevolent intent. I mean why build the house if your just going to let it fall down? (haha). Honestly I think they did cripple her a wee bit by educating her so well, but better to know what to do in life and how to live it than not know nor care.

    ReplyDelete