塑造马克:解读美国早期宣传页中的非洲主义存在

IF 0.3 3区 文学 0 LITERATURE, AMERICAN EARLY AMERICAN LITERATURE Pub Date : 2024-08-07 DOI:10.1353/eal.2024.a934208
Rebecca M. Rosen
{"title":"塑造马克:解读美国早期宣传页中的非洲主义存在","authors":"Rebecca M. Rosen","doi":"10.1353/eal.2024.a934208","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<span><span>In lieu of</span> an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:</span>\n<p> <ul> <li><!-- html_title --> Framing Mark<span>Reading the Africanist Presence in Early American Broadsides</span> <!-- /html_title --></li> <li> Rebecca M. Rosen (bio) </li> </ul> <p>As formal, occasional documents that attempt to contain acts of racialized legal violence, early American texts produced—and in a sense demanded—by carceral systems and their literary adherents present challenges to modern scholars. Whether created or distributed by ministers, jurists, newspaper editors, or printers, such documents often provide proof of resistance by their subjects to spoken and embodied co-option while they also, paradoxically, hold up these subjects as mouthpieces for salvific surrender. This essay examines two such texts, the broadsides produced in conjunction with the executions of two African American people, Mark and Phillis, for poisoning and killing their notoriously cruel enslaver, Captain John Codman, in September 1755: namely, a poem, <em>A Few lines on occasion of the untimely end of Mark and Phillis</em>, and an execution narrative, <em>The Last &amp; Dying Words of <small>mark</small>, Aged about 30 Years</em>.<sup>1</sup> While they take different forms—one, a work of memorial poetry that excoriates Mark and Phillis as representative symbols of African American revolt and punitive anatomy (the practice of anatomizing the bodies of the condemned as an extra layer of punishment); the other, a mediated autobiographical document that represents Mark's life as one of public utility and exemplarity—both broadsides attempt to reduce acts of self-liberation to punitive object lessons. In an effort to recover the voices of self-liberating subjects, how are we to approach such documents?</p> <p>This essay applies two of Toni Morrison's key concepts from <em>Playing in the Dark</em> (1992) that distill the concomitant development of racial slavery and racialized tropes in American fiction—<em>American Africanism</em> and the <em>Africanist presence</em>—to grapple with that question. Morrison presents the two concepts as interlocking and overlapping. The first of these concepts provides a means of examining the ways that, as Morrison puts it, <strong>[End Page 419]</strong> \"American Africanism makes it possible to say and not say, to inscribe and erase, to escape and engage, to act out and act on, to historicize and render timeless\" (7). That is, American Africanism is a way of presenting Black subjects that precludes their specificity and agency, rendering them background characters and yet essential to white plots, metaphorical and literal. Morrison goes on to define the \"Africanist presence\" as representing, for white writers, what is always there and never acknowledged. That is, \"Africanist presence\" is denoted by white writers' stunted and self-negating efforts to acknowledge the existence of Black subjects and interlocutors, an endeavor Morrison frames as confounding to them. This is part of a literary landscape in which \"Africans and their descendants were not, in any sense that matters, <em>there</em>; and when they were there, they were decorative—displays of the agile writer's expertise\" (Morrison 16). But at the same time, \"the fabrication of an Africanist persona is reflexive; an extraordinary meditation on the self; a powerful exploration of … fears and desires … [and] is an astonishing revelation of longing, of terror, of perplexity, of shame, of magnanimity\" (17). Taken together, Morrison's ideas capture the literary expression of this country's slave system and its aftermath, an embedded and yet always self-conscious project that highlights Black subjectivity while its writerly output simultaneously \"argues <em>against noticing</em>,\" a mode ideally suited to frame Black subjects as culpable or palpable, but not as truly legible interlocutors (Morrison 10).</p> <p>Morrison's concepts, though originally applied to fiction, have particular utility when applied to two eighteenth-century broadsides that center Mark. This is particularly true of the poetic broadside, which, with its formulaic language of blood guilt and graphic woodcut, mutes Mark and Phillis through its commonplace constructions of guilt and visual dismissal. Its graphic depictions of their two bodies—the former gibbeted and hyper-visible, the latter erased in a cloud of smoke—relies on the construction of each subject as an Africanist presence to deflect attention from Codman's acts as a violent enslaver. By contrast, Mark's dying speech, in its narrative progression and clarity, dissolves the pretense that his death is symbolic of spiritual or civic justice.<sup>2</sup></p> <p>Notably, although four people were tried in the case and we have extensive testimony...</p> </p>","PeriodicalId":44043,"journal":{"name":"EARLY AMERICAN LITERATURE","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Framing Mark: Reading the Africanist Presence in Early American Broadsides\",\"authors\":\"Rebecca M. Rosen\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/eal.2024.a934208\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<span><span>In lieu of</span> an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:</span>\\n<p> <ul> <li><!-- html_title --> Framing Mark<span>Reading the Africanist Presence in Early American Broadsides</span> <!-- /html_title --></li> <li> Rebecca M. Rosen (bio) </li> </ul> <p>As formal, occasional documents that attempt to contain acts of racialized legal violence, early American texts produced—and in a sense demanded—by carceral systems and their literary adherents present challenges to modern scholars. Whether created or distributed by ministers, jurists, newspaper editors, or printers, such documents often provide proof of resistance by their subjects to spoken and embodied co-option while they also, paradoxically, hold up these subjects as mouthpieces for salvific surrender. This essay examines two such texts, the broadsides produced in conjunction with the executions of two African American people, Mark and Phillis, for poisoning and killing their notoriously cruel enslaver, Captain John Codman, in September 1755: namely, a poem, <em>A Few lines on occasion of the untimely end of Mark and Phillis</em>, and an execution narrative, <em>The Last &amp; Dying Words of <small>mark</small>, Aged about 30 Years</em>.<sup>1</sup> While they take different forms—one, a work of memorial poetry that excoriates Mark and Phillis as representative symbols of African American revolt and punitive anatomy (the practice of anatomizing the bodies of the condemned as an extra layer of punishment); the other, a mediated autobiographical document that represents Mark's life as one of public utility and exemplarity—both broadsides attempt to reduce acts of self-liberation to punitive object lessons. In an effort to recover the voices of self-liberating subjects, how are we to approach such documents?</p> <p>This essay applies two of Toni Morrison's key concepts from <em>Playing in the Dark</em> (1992) that distill the concomitant development of racial slavery and racialized tropes in American fiction—<em>American Africanism</em> and the <em>Africanist presence</em>—to grapple with that question. Morrison presents the two concepts as interlocking and overlapping. The first of these concepts provides a means of examining the ways that, as Morrison puts it, <strong>[End Page 419]</strong> \\\"American Africanism makes it possible to say and not say, to inscribe and erase, to escape and engage, to act out and act on, to historicize and render timeless\\\" (7). That is, American Africanism is a way of presenting Black subjects that precludes their specificity and agency, rendering them background characters and yet essential to white plots, metaphorical and literal. Morrison goes on to define the \\\"Africanist presence\\\" as representing, for white writers, what is always there and never acknowledged. That is, \\\"Africanist presence\\\" is denoted by white writers' stunted and self-negating efforts to acknowledge the existence of Black subjects and interlocutors, an endeavor Morrison frames as confounding to them. This is part of a literary landscape in which \\\"Africans and their descendants were not, in any sense that matters, <em>there</em>; and when they were there, they were decorative—displays of the agile writer's expertise\\\" (Morrison 16). But at the same time, \\\"the fabrication of an Africanist persona is reflexive; an extraordinary meditation on the self; a powerful exploration of … fears and desires … [and] is an astonishing revelation of longing, of terror, of perplexity, of shame, of magnanimity\\\" (17). Taken together, Morrison's ideas capture the literary expression of this country's slave system and its aftermath, an embedded and yet always self-conscious project that highlights Black subjectivity while its writerly output simultaneously \\\"argues <em>against noticing</em>,\\\" a mode ideally suited to frame Black subjects as culpable or palpable, but not as truly legible interlocutors (Morrison 10).</p> <p>Morrison's concepts, though originally applied to fiction, have particular utility when applied to two eighteenth-century broadsides that center Mark. This is particularly true of the poetic broadside, which, with its formulaic language of blood guilt and graphic woodcut, mutes Mark and Phillis through its commonplace constructions of guilt and visual dismissal. Its graphic depictions of their two bodies—the former gibbeted and hyper-visible, the latter erased in a cloud of smoke—relies on the construction of each subject as an Africanist presence to deflect attention from Codman's acts as a violent enslaver. By contrast, Mark's dying speech, in its narrative progression and clarity, dissolves the pretense that his death is symbolic of spiritual or civic justice.<sup>2</sup></p> <p>Notably, although four people were tried in the case and we have extensive testimony...</p> </p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44043,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"EARLY AMERICAN LITERATURE\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"EARLY AMERICAN LITERATURE\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/eal.2024.a934208\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LITERATURE, AMERICAN\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EARLY AMERICAN LITERATURE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/eal.2024.a934208","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERATURE, AMERICAN","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

以下是内容的简要摘录,以代替摘要: 作为试图遏制种族化法律暴力行为的正式、偶然性文件,早期美国文本由监禁制度及其文学追随者制作--从某种意义上说也是他们所要求的--给现代学者带来了挑战。无论是由牧师、法学家、报纸编辑还是印刷商创作或发行,这些文件通常都证明了其主体对口头和肉体共同占有的反抗,同时,矛盾的是,它们也将这些主体捧为拯救投降的传声筒。这篇文章研究了两个这样的文本,即 1755 年 9 月处决两名非裔美国人马克和菲利斯时制作的大字报,他们毒杀了声名狼藉的残酷奴役者约翰-科德曼上尉:即一首诗《马克和菲利斯英年早逝之际的几行诗》和一篇行刑叙事《最后的印章;马克的临终遗言,年约 30 岁》1。这两张大字报的形式各不相同,一张是纪念性诗歌作品,将马克和菲利斯斥责为非裔美国人反抗和惩罚性解剖(对死刑犯的尸体进行解剖作为额外惩罚的一种做法)的代表符号;另一张是经过调解的自传性文件,将马克的一生表现为公共事业和楷模的一生--两张大字报都试图将自我解放的行为简化为惩罚性的实物教学。在努力恢复自我解放主体的声音时,我们该如何处理这类文件?本文运用托妮-莫里森(Toni Morrison)在《在黑暗中游戏》(1992)中提出的两个关键概念来探讨这个问题,这两个概念提炼了美国小说中种族奴役和种族化传统的同步发展--美国非洲主义和非洲主义的存在。莫里森提出的这两个概念是相互交错和重叠的。正如莫里森所说,"美国黑人主义使说与不说成为可能,使刻画与抹去成为可能,使逃避与参与成为可能,使行为与行动成为可能,使历史化与永恒化成为可能"(7)。也就是说,"美国非洲主义 "是呈现黑人主体的一种方式,它排除了黑人的特殊性和能动性,使他们成为背景人物,但又是白人情节中不可或缺的隐喻和字面意义上的人物。莫里森接着将 "非洲主义的存在 "定义为,对于白人作家而言,它代表了一直存在但从未被承认的东西。也就是说,"非洲主义的存在 "体现在白人作家在承认黑人主体和对话者的存在方面所做的迟滞和自我否定的努力,莫里森将这一努力归结为他们的困惑。这是文学景观的一部分,在这一景观中,"非洲人及其后裔在任何意义上都不存在;即使存在,也是装饰性的,是敏捷的作家专业知识的展示"(莫里森 16)。但与此同时,"非洲人形象的塑造是反思性的;是对自我的非凡沉思;是对......恐惧和欲望的有力探索......[并且]是对渴望、恐怖、困惑、羞耻和宽宏大量的惊人揭示"(17)。综合来看,莫里森的观点捕捉到了这个国家奴隶制度及其后果的文学表现形式,这是一个内含的、但始终具有自我意识的项目,它突出了黑人的主体性,同时其作家的作品又 "反对注意",这种模式非常适合将黑人主体定格为应受谴责的或可感知的,但不是真正可读的对话者(莫里森 10)。莫里森的概念虽然最初应用于小说,但在应用于以马克为中心的两部十八世纪大字报时,却具有特别的实用性。诗歌大字报尤其如此,其公式化的血腥罪责语言和图形化的木刻,通过对罪责和视觉否定的通俗构建,使马克和菲利斯哑口无言。诗歌对他们两人的尸体进行了生动的描绘--前者被绑在绞刑架上,超乎寻常地清晰可见,后者则被抹去在一团烟雾中--这一切都依赖于将每个主体都构建成非洲人的存在,以转移人们对科德曼作为暴力奴役者的行为的关注。相比之下,马克的临终遗言以其叙事的渐进性和清晰性,消解了他的死亡象征着精神正义或公民正义的伪装。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Framing Mark: Reading the Africanist Presence in Early American Broadsides
In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

  • Framing MarkReading the Africanist Presence in Early American Broadsides
  • Rebecca M. Rosen (bio)

As formal, occasional documents that attempt to contain acts of racialized legal violence, early American texts produced—and in a sense demanded—by carceral systems and their literary adherents present challenges to modern scholars. Whether created or distributed by ministers, jurists, newspaper editors, or printers, such documents often provide proof of resistance by their subjects to spoken and embodied co-option while they also, paradoxically, hold up these subjects as mouthpieces for salvific surrender. This essay examines two such texts, the broadsides produced in conjunction with the executions of two African American people, Mark and Phillis, for poisoning and killing their notoriously cruel enslaver, Captain John Codman, in September 1755: namely, a poem, A Few lines on occasion of the untimely end of Mark and Phillis, and an execution narrative, The Last & Dying Words of mark, Aged about 30 Years.1 While they take different forms—one, a work of memorial poetry that excoriates Mark and Phillis as representative symbols of African American revolt and punitive anatomy (the practice of anatomizing the bodies of the condemned as an extra layer of punishment); the other, a mediated autobiographical document that represents Mark's life as one of public utility and exemplarity—both broadsides attempt to reduce acts of self-liberation to punitive object lessons. In an effort to recover the voices of self-liberating subjects, how are we to approach such documents?

This essay applies two of Toni Morrison's key concepts from Playing in the Dark (1992) that distill the concomitant development of racial slavery and racialized tropes in American fiction—American Africanism and the Africanist presence—to grapple with that question. Morrison presents the two concepts as interlocking and overlapping. The first of these concepts provides a means of examining the ways that, as Morrison puts it, [End Page 419] "American Africanism makes it possible to say and not say, to inscribe and erase, to escape and engage, to act out and act on, to historicize and render timeless" (7). That is, American Africanism is a way of presenting Black subjects that precludes their specificity and agency, rendering them background characters and yet essential to white plots, metaphorical and literal. Morrison goes on to define the "Africanist presence" as representing, for white writers, what is always there and never acknowledged. That is, "Africanist presence" is denoted by white writers' stunted and self-negating efforts to acknowledge the existence of Black subjects and interlocutors, an endeavor Morrison frames as confounding to them. This is part of a literary landscape in which "Africans and their descendants were not, in any sense that matters, there; and when they were there, they were decorative—displays of the agile writer's expertise" (Morrison 16). But at the same time, "the fabrication of an Africanist persona is reflexive; an extraordinary meditation on the self; a powerful exploration of … fears and desires … [and] is an astonishing revelation of longing, of terror, of perplexity, of shame, of magnanimity" (17). Taken together, Morrison's ideas capture the literary expression of this country's slave system and its aftermath, an embedded and yet always self-conscious project that highlights Black subjectivity while its writerly output simultaneously "argues against noticing," a mode ideally suited to frame Black subjects as culpable or palpable, but not as truly legible interlocutors (Morrison 10).

Morrison's concepts, though originally applied to fiction, have particular utility when applied to two eighteenth-century broadsides that center Mark. This is particularly true of the poetic broadside, which, with its formulaic language of blood guilt and graphic woodcut, mutes Mark and Phillis through its commonplace constructions of guilt and visual dismissal. Its graphic depictions of their two bodies—the former gibbeted and hyper-visible, the latter erased in a cloud of smoke—relies on the construction of each subject as an Africanist presence to deflect attention from Codman's acts as a violent enslaver. By contrast, Mark's dying speech, in its narrative progression and clarity, dissolves the pretense that his death is symbolic of spiritual or civic justice.2

Notably, although four people were tried in the case and we have extensive testimony...

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
EARLY AMERICAN LITERATURE
EARLY AMERICAN LITERATURE LITERATURE, AMERICAN-
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
33.30%
发文量
62
期刊最新文献
Black Enlightenment by Surya Parekh (review) Editors' Note Reconciliation in John Winthrop's History of New England Early American Literature Book Prize for 2023 John Marrant's Nova Scotia Journal Writes Displaced Communities
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1