|
|
The study of American slavery,
frequently consisting of a heated debate concerning the
institution's merits, has, in recent years, branched into new
directions. Scholars have become engaged in the comparative
examination of differing slave systems such as those of North
and South America. More recently, Stanley M. Elkins has begun an
inquiry into the impact of a slave system in forming the
individual character of the slaves within that system. In his
provocative study, Slavery: A Problem in American Institutional
and Intellectual Life, he has made some interesting comparisons
between the American slave system and the German concentration
camps and has endeavored to account for their respective impacts
on character formation through the social- psychological
theories of personality formation.
In Elkins's thinking, the
concentration camps were a modern example of a rigid system
controlling mass behavior. Because some of those who experienced
them were social scientists trained in the skills of observation
and analysis, they provide a basis for insights into the way in
which a particular social system can influence mass character.
While there is also much literature about American slavery
written both by slaves and masters, none of it was written from
the viewpoint of modern social sciences. However, Elkins
postulates that a slave type must have existed as the result of
the attempt to control mass behavior, and he believes that this
type probably bore a marked resemblance to the literary
stereotype of "Sambo." Studying concentration camps and their
impact on personality provides a tool for new insights into the
working of slavery, but, warns Elkins, the comparison can only
be used for limited purposes. Although slavery was not unlike
the concentration camp in many respects, the concentration camp
can be viewed as a highly perverted form of slavery, and both
systems were ways of controlling mass behavior
The "Sambo" of American slave
literature was portrayed as being docile but irresponsible,
loyal but lazy, humble but chronically given to lying and
stealing. He was a child figure, often demonstrating infantile
silliness and exaggeration, exasperating but lovable and, above
all, utterly dependent on and attached to his master. The master
explained this behavior as the result of the slave's race or of
his primitive African culture.
While assuming that many slaves
did approximate the character of "Sambo," Elkins absolutely
rejects any racial or cultural explanation. Modern African
studies have not led to any evidence of a "Sambo" type in
Africa. Similarly, the literature of South America does not
contain any figure comparable to him. Apparently, "Sambo" was
not merely the result of slavery, but he was the result of the
unique form of slavery which developed in North America.
Unrestricted in his powers by institutions such as the crown and
the Church, the American slave master had gained total control
of his slave property. In a desire to maximize the profits of
his investment, he strove to develop the perfect slave. Although
the slave might endeavor to conform externally while maintaining
his inner integrity, eventually his performance as an ideal
slave must have affected the shape of his personality. Modern
existentialism has argued that how we behave determines what we
are, and it is in this sense that the controlled behavior in the
concentration camp and its impact on personality formation
provide an illuminating parallel to the study of American
slavery.
The experienced gained in the
German concentration camps during the Second World War showed
that it was possible to induce widespread infantile behavior in
masses of adults. Childlike action extended beyond obedience to
the guards and showed that a basic character transformation had
occurred. Previous social-psychological theory stressed the ways
in which an individual's personality was shaped during his
earliest childhood years and emphasized the tenacity with which
these early traits resisted attempt at alteration. Personality
theory was not adequate to what occurred in the camps.
The concentration camp
experience began with what has become labeled as shock
procurement. As terror was one of the many tools of the system,
surprise late-night arrests were the favorite technique. Camp
inmates generally agreed that the train ride to the camp was the
point at which they experienced the first brutal torture. Herded
together into cattle cars, without adequate space, ventilation,
or sanitary conditions, they had to endure the horrible crowding
and the harassment of the guards. When they reached the camp,
they had to stand naked in line and undergo a detailed
examination by the camp physician. Then, each was given a tag
and a number. These two events were calculated to strip away
one's identity and to reduce the individual to an item within an
impersonal system.
One's sense of personhood was
further undermined by the fact that there was never any privacy.
The individual had lost both his identity and his power.
Everything was done to him or for him, but nothing was ever done
by him. The guards had the power to dispense food, clothing,
shelter, punishment, and even death Prisoners had to request
permission to use the sanitary facilities, and permission was
not always forthcoming. As the inmates were not sentenced for
specified periods of time, they tended to view camp life as
having a limitless future.
In a relatively short time, this
experience of total dependence developed characteristics of
infantile behavior in those prisoners who managed to avoid the
extermination chambers. A childish humor and infantile giggling
were common. Boasting and lying were widely practiced. Patterns
of hero worship emerged, and the guards became the heroes. The
prisoners came to accept their values including their German
nationalism and anti-Semitism. Some even altered their uniforms
to resemble those of the guards, and they slavishly followed
orders beyond necessity. Attempts at resistance were very rare,
and, when the liberating American forces arrived at the end of
the war, they were surprised that there was not some attempt at
mass revenge.
In comparison, the African who
became an American slave underwent an experience which had some
marked similarities to those of the German concentration camp.
He too underwent a kind of shock procurement. Although millions
of men became slaves, the event was unique to each man. Usually,
he had been captured in the course of warfare which, in itself,
was a humiliation. After being chained together and marched to
the coast, his horror must have increased when he realized that
he was being sold to Europeans. It was widely believed by
Africans that white men were cannibals. At the coastal station,
he also had to endure the humiliation of a naked inspection by a
physician. This was followed by a lengthy transoceanic trip
which must have exceeded the horrors of the train ride to the
concentration camp. The crowded unsanitary conditions in the
slave ships were at least as bad as those in the cattle cars,
and the Africans also were beaten and harassed to keep them
docile.
Moreover, the trip itself was
much rougher and longer. After undergoing another inspection,
the African was purchased and had to face lifetime of bondage in
an alien environment. He was stripped of identity, given a new
name, and he was taught to envision himself and his African
heritage as inferior and barbaric. The White master insisted on
total obedience and created a situation of utter dependence. He
supplied food, clothing, shelter, discipline, and he was in a
position to control the slave's friends and mating. The "Sambo"
of literature mirrored reality, this life of dependency created
infantile characteristics in many of the slaves and taught them
to reject their past while adopting the values of their masters.
The American slave system, besides exploiting the Africans
labor, possessed and violated his person.
Three schools of mass behavior
have been suggested as explanations: Freudian psychology, the
interpersonal theories of Henry Stack Sullivan, and role
psychology. Freudian psychology has put total emphases on early
childhood experiences and is the least suited for this purpose.
It could be argued that the shock procurement and the total
detachment from previous life which it achieved both in the
concentration camps and in American slavery emptied the
super-ego or conscience of its contents. Then, the creation of
total dependence which followed could have resulted in infantile
regression. This would account for the childlike behavior of
both "Sambo" and the camp inmates. The slave master the camp
guard, each in his own way, became a father figure, and the
respective victims internalized the value system of this
symbolic father.
The interpersonal school of
psychology states that the determining factor in influencing
personality development can be found in the estimation and
expectation of "significant others." Those responsible for the
physical and emotional security of an individual are his
"significant others." For a child these are his parents. As he
matures, the number of "significant others" in one's experience
increases. This permits one to make decisions of one's own and
to develop some individuality.
However, the child has already
internalized the estimations and expectations of his parents,
and this tends to shape his personality for rest of his life.
Still, acquiring new "significant others" as adult can be
important in reshaping the adult personality. Both the American
slaves and the camp prisoners were thrust into situations in
which they had a new single "significant other." This was a
situation similar to that of childhood, and it could have had
the same impact in shaping personality. All previous
"significant others" had been made insignificant, and, in each
case, the estimations and expectations of this new -'significant
other" became internalized into the personality of the victims.
Role psychology holds the most
promise for explaining the impact of a social situation in
determining the development of individual personality. In role
psychology the individual and society can be compared to the
actor and the theater. Society provides the individual with a
number of roles, and the individual's behavior is his
performance, the way in which he plays them.
Normally, each individual plays
a number of roles simultaneously. While some are pervasive and
extensive in scope, others are limited and transitory, The role
of man or woman is extensive, but that of customer or student is
transitory. Society also endows some roles with considerable
clarity, while leaving others open to individual interpretation,
The roles people play and the way in which they play them
determine personality. Within American slavery as well as within
the German concentration camps, the number of roles available
were severely limited, and both the slave master and the camp
guard defined them very clearly. Both demanded a precise and
careful performance. There were those whose performance was
faultless in playing their roles. While the concentration camp
guard guaranteed its performance through terror and torture, the
slave master usually used more subtle means. Besides punishment
for missed cues, masters displayed considerable fondness for
slaves who played their part well. By restricting role
availability and by carefully defining the performance, society
could create a group personality type, and, through changing
roles, society could change personality.
Although the innovative use of
personality types has further illuminated the nature of the
American slave system, it has tended to blur the individual
experiences and contributions of millions of Africans into a
vague amorphous abstraction. The technique has provided
important insights into the plight of the slave as the victim of
a dehumanizing system, but it tends to obscure the active
participation of Africans in American life. Further, it is a
crude generalization which, in fact, included many types within
it. While most slaves were plantation field hands, there were
many whose lives followed different lines and for whom slavery
was a very different experience. Some slaves departed sharply
enough from the "Sambo" image to become leaders in
insurrections. These men were usually urban slaves possessing
unusual talents, and thereby escaping much of the emasculation
which the typical slave had to endure.
Emphasizing the slave as the
victim of the slave system further reduces him to a passive
object by insisting that the slave was effectively detached from
his African heritage. Many scholars, including Elkins, believe
that the attempt to discover Africanisms in America by
researchers such as Melville J. Herskovits has led to trivial
and insignificant results. This belief is reinforced by the
example of the German concentration camps. There, people from
wide variety of social and educational backgrounds reacted in
highly similar ways. Apparently the individual had been detached
from his prior life, and his reactions to the camp were shaped
in standardized manner. Similarly, it is argued, the slave was
stripped of his heritage, so that none of his African background
could influence his life in America. His personality and
behavior were shaped exclusively by the unique form of American
slavery.
However, if we apply the
experiences gained in the Chinese prisoner-of-war camps during
the Korean War, some doubts on this point can be raised. While
Americans from a wide variety of social and educational
backgrounds behaved with a marked similarity to each other,
thereby appearing to prove that their previous experiences were
irrelevant to their reactions to the camp, there was, to the
contrary, a significant difference between the behavior the
American and Turkish prisoners who had both been fighting the
Korean War. The morale of the American prisoners was easily
broken, and each one strove to look out for himself even at
expense of his comrade's life. In contrast, the Turks maintained
military discipline and group solidarity. This evidence would
seem indicate that, while individual differences were
insignificant, cultural differences did influence adjustment to
the camp situation.
There are also grounds to
believe that different value systems influenced the way in which
contrasting cultures adjusted to slavery. While the African made
the adjustment successfully, the American Indian, when he was
enslaved, did not. The African's agricultural labor had
contained many similarities to the work required on the
plantation, but the Indian, accustomed to a migratory hunting
existence, was totally unprepared for plantation slavery. He
found nothing in it to sustain his values or his will to live,
and he was unable to make the adjustment.
If the African's agricultural
background helped his adaptation to American slavery, then we
must assume that his detachment from his heritage was not
complete. Perhaps, besides influencing his life as a slave, his
African background may have found its way into other aspects of
American society. However, it would seem that because the
African came to believe in his own inferiority, there must have
been very little conscious attempt to keep his culture alive.
Certainly, the recent Black Power movement, which intended to
revive pride in race and in the past, bears eloquent testimony
to the degree to which any conscious link with the African past
had been suppressed. Nevertheless, mental and emotional habit
can continue without any conscious intention, and habits of this
kind are important for the formation of personality, Moreover,
it is possible that the image of "Sambo" as an exasperating
child may tell as much about the mentality of the white master
who perpetuated the picture as it does about the slave whom it
depicted. Perhaps the picture of the childlike slave is also a
reverse image of the sober, patronizing white master whose life
was rooted in austerity. To such a man spontaneity and
exuberance might well have seemed infantile.
The life of a slave did not give
him much opportunity to create artifacts which could later be
catalogued as evidence of African influence. However, he did
create a unique music. While Negro spirituals were not imported
directly from Africa, they were more than an attempt to copy the
master's music. They represent highly complex fusion of African
and European music, of African and European religion, and of
African and European emotion. Blues and jazz, which emerged at a
later date, represent a similar creative tension. They clearly
evolve from the experience of the African in America and include
in them elements which can be traced directly to Africa. Jazz is
now viewed throughout the world as American music. It
demonstrates the fact that the African immigrant was not totally
detached from his heritage and that he has made significant
contributions to American culture. While American slavery did
violate the person of the slave, some Africans, in the face of
it all, managed to maintain some sense of individuality and
manhood.
|
|
