eugene genovese slavery essay

eugene genovese slavery essay

The Legacy of Slavery in Eugene Genovese’s Essay

1. Introduction

This collection of essays on southern slavery deals with the ways that the system affected both masters and slaves. Eugene D. Genovese takes his readers on a detailed tour of the Old South. His conclusions are far from what his readers might expect, and in the end, his consternation rises out of his confrontation with a paradox that was rooted so deeply in the values and world views of master and slave that it could not be conjured away, leaving the most radical differentiator of slave systems at issue, race a discordance so powerful, flawed, and destructive, that all other aspects of the bondage and the master’s authority could not overcome it and establish the minimum level of unity necessary for a common identity of interests between the classes and a violation of what is for Genovese the most vital condition of an exploitation that works to better the lot of the exploited. Coming from various disciplines law, political theory, social psychology, and sociology Genovese’s collection presents a variety of conclusions, but concentrated around a central line of inquiry and an emphasis on political power, all of the essays explore ways that the structure of the peculiar institution shaped the world it bequeathed to its descendants. By emphasizing that “A system of production must not only generate a surplus and put the exploited surplus to work, but also divert enough of that surplus to the ruling stratum to render it dependent upon the rulers” Genovese unites his themes under a common question. How did a specific class of pre-Civil War southern society, theorized as the “planter class”, secure an unassailable hegemony that it retained in one form or another until the death of the Old South, and more controversially, how did the black slave, as a member of an lowest stratum of a society, contribute to actions and conditions that would ultimately be more detrimental to his own class?

2. Understanding Slavery: Historical Context

Although there was a new government and social class forming in the South that was not dependent on slavery, the South became more defensive of slavery and it spread to the Western states at the same time that it was being attacked. This was due to the potential threat that the Northern states would seek to abolish or were prohibiting slavery in the new Western states as a means to dismantle the power of an emerging Southern independence.

Genovese has taken notice of a change in the way the slaves were viewed and changes in public opinion towards slavery. This coincides with an overall change in societal structure in America. Slavery came to be viewed as the South’s peculiar institution, as it was becoming the cornerstone of Southern finance and American industrialization was causing a white society to emerge in the South. Genovese identifies a change in the master-slave relationship at this time, stating that the slaves’ living conditions initially worsened as they were left out of the progress that their masters began to enjoy. Yet, this progress created a more abundant life for the slave in the long run, causing the widening of the gap in the standard of living between the white and black classes.

For much of slavery’s existence in America, it was not considered to be the moral atrocity that it is now viewed as. Southerners could justify it because of its necessity to the economy, and the patriarchal societal structure ensured that slaves were treated “humanely” in a sense, as their well-being was the responsibility of their owner who had a large investment in his slaves. All of this was rationalized by the fact that slaves were not considered to be people, but rather a commodity and a set of skills.

Now, to understand the meaning of slavery and why it is of such importance to American history, we should turn to Eugene Genovese in his essay. He begins this essay on a political note. Slavery in the United States is the mark of a nation founded on political freedom. Genovese is making the statement that it was because America was founded on the principle of freedom that slavery became such an issue.

3. Genovese’s Analysis of Slavery

Genovese then went on to discuss the concept of paternalism in regards to the plantocracy. This is a complex term in which there is no one definition, and it is seen differently by both Marxist and Southern historians. The Marxist viewpoint suggests that the idea of paternalism was simply a ploy by the slave-owning class to further oppress the slave, but Genovese refuted this. He clearly looked at the term from a Gramscian perspective and was in agreement with what Eugene D. While there was indeed an aspect of paternalism which suggested that the slave was a part of the family, this was simply an ideological weapon used by the bourgeoisie to keep the proletariat in line and under false consciousness. What Genovese observed, however, was an aspect of true paternalism and a sense of quasi-freedom. He stated that this was possible in areas where the ratio of slaves to their masters was high and the slavery was less exploitative in nature. This point leads to Genovese’s most important discovery: the idea of the slave’s acceptance of his civil inferiority, which was a further argument against the Marxist historians.

In the previous sections, we have taken a look at capitalism, Marxism, and the concept of class. Genovese’s next move is to apply these terms to his study of slavery. Perhaps the first thing that Genovese highlights is the paradox that is slavery: a system which is analogous to feudalism and could be seen as a predecessor to capitalism. This fact is one which both historians and Marxists have found repugnant to their theories. For historians, it does not seem right that a system of such brutality can lead to progress and modernity. For Marxists, who are essentially economic determinists and claim that the economic base forms the superstructure, it is contradictory that a system which closely resembles capitalism in terms of its contractual labor, wage incentives, and successful entrepreneurs could be outdated by another economic system. This dichotomy is crucial in further understanding the nature of slavery.

4. Critiques and Controversies Surrounding Genovese’s Essay

Many historians have criticized Eugene Genovese’s essay “Roll, Jordan, Roll” for the same reason that others have praised it. Genovese’s essay is an unconventional telling of the story of American slavery and the antebellum South. It is a departure from traditional history in that it does not focus on events in the chronological order of their occurrence, and it does not focus on events in the manner in which they affected the general populace. Genovese’s work is a study of the effects of slavery on the individual and the master-slave relationship. This factor has led to many historians disregarding Genovese’s essay as a work of history on American slavery. This is perhaps a matter of confusing a work that has been written by a historian with a work of history. The fact that it is a bit of a departure from the norm does not mean that this work adds nothing to the discussion of American slavery. Furthermore, Genovese is a historian, and his essay is one of historical analysis, even if it fails to be a traditional history. This critique of the work is not entirely a negative one, as some have criticized it on the basis of viewing it as a purely literary work and Genovese as a public intellectual rather than a historian.

5. Conclusion: The Lasting Impact of Genovese’s Work

Many of Eugene Genovese’s contributions to the historiography of slavery are widely disputed and impossible to condense given the enormous scope of his work. His numerous books and articles on the subject have inspired debates and inspired new ideas since the 1960s. Between Marxist scholars, revisionists, and neo-abolitionists, few modern historians can ignore Genovese’s work. Critics appreciate his challenging of the Gibbon and Phillips schools of thought and for his introduction of new ideas into the historical discussion of slavery. Furthermore, Marxist and class perspective historians have used his work as a jump-off point for their own research. Although their conclusions may differ, no one can ignore that Genovese’s work has a profound impact on how we view the “Peculiar Institution”. Genovese’s research is also marked with an admiration for Southern culture and an ability to understand the mind of the master. This often led to accusations of racism and caused his Southern sympathies to overshadow his Marxism. Despite these personal prejudices, there is no doubt that Genovese has contributed a wealth of knowledge to the field of slavery research and his influence is likely to persist into the foreseeable future.