******************** POSTING RULES & NOTES ******************** #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. *****************************************************************
Best regards, Andrew Stewart - - - Subscribe to the Washington Babylon newsletter via https://washingtonbabylon.com/newsletter/ Begin forwarded message: > From: H-Net Staff via H-REVIEW <h-rev...@lists.h-net.org> > Date: July 15, 2020 at 12:11:06 PM EDT > To: h-rev...@lists.h-net.org > Cc: H-Net Staff <revh...@mail.h-net.org> > Subject: H-Net Review [H-Albion]: Mistry on Ogborn, 'The Freedom of Speech: > Talk and Slavery in the Anglo-Caribbean World' > Reply-To: h-rev...@lists.h-net.org > > Miles Ogborn. The Freedom of Speech: Talk and Slavery in the > Anglo-Caribbean World. Chicago University of Chicago Press, 2019. > x + 309 pp. $35.00 (paper), ISBN 978-0-226-65768-4; $105.00 (cloth), > ISBN 978-0-226-65592-5. > > Reviewed by Heena Mistry (Queen's University at Kingston) > Published on H-Albion (July, 2020) > Commissioned by Patrick J. Corbeil > > Miles Ogborn's new book highlights the importance of speech and > speech practices in broadening our understanding of slavery in the > Anglo-Caribbean and the Atlantic World. By examining how speech in > sugar islands like Barbados and Jamaica was policed, attributed > force, diminished, held accountable, and discredited, Ogborn > delineates the oral cultures that made empire and slavery. By > centering speech, he offers new ways of understanding legal cultures > of empire, metropolitan and colonial politics, imperial knowledge > networks, the negotiation of religion at imperial frontiers, and the > abolition of slavery. Ogborn offers scholars an example of how to > deliberately consider speech and its meaning in historical context, > making the book useful as a methodological intervention. He > highlights the ubiquity of words spoken in resistance to or in direct > disregard of the power hierarchies of slavery despite repercussions. > However, his argument that certain kinds of speech contested > boundaries and restrictions in the sugar islands leaves readers > wondering whether the measures planters employed when acting on their > fears of this speech can really help us move away from accounts of > slavery that center power. > > _Freedom of Speech_ argues that "who can speak and what they might > say" are central questions for understanding the violent struggle > between humanity and freedom that characterized transatlantic slavery > (p. 34). By examining traces of speech and silencing in the archives > of plantation slavery, Ogborn argues that speech was an "asymmetrical > common ground" upon which slavery worked. He claims that his > methodology helps tie together "separate accounts" of power and > resistance that "emphasize either the extraordinary apparatus of > domination brought to bear on the enslaved population or the manifold > forms of resistance that those same populations deployed" (p. 17). It > remains unclear what specific literature he is responding to, as he > does not name any specific works that allegedly build separate > accounts of power and resistance. More convincing is his claim that > his book moves beyond understanding the Caribbean as "either the > silence of slavery or the astonishing and inventive proliferation of > creolized sonic forms" (p. 28). > > Ogborn reveals the inseparability of British, Caribbean, and West > African histories. Ephemeral and mobile speech accompanied by printed > materials created conversations that threaded together all sides of > the Atlantic. Readers are thus left with the impression that it is > impossible to fully understand British legal history, abolition, > planter politics, missionary work, or histories of colonial botany > without understanding the important ways different forms of speech > and silencing were integral to these connections. > > This book's strength and primary appeal is its insistence that > historians move away from the divide between orality and literacy, as > power was transmitted through forms of speech as well as forms of > writing. Ogborn builds a compelling case for why orality and literacy > are entwined. He argues that an understanding of empire as the > triumph of writing over speaking is inaccurate, as empires are oral > cultures too. The oral cultures of both slaves and colonists crossed > the Atlantic through networks of slavery and empire. Imperial power > was invested in speech practices, which can be recovered by reading > for "the uses of orality" and "instances where speech was required or > chosen" in printed materials (p. 28). Instead of "hoping to hear what > was really said in the past," he considers the forms of talk that > appear in traces or the "contours of suppressed and unheard modes of > speech" (p. 29). What results is an account of both speech practices > and their suppression that extends existing scholarship on speech > practices in the Black Atlantic. > > Ogborn draws from an impressive variety of archival sources, > including planter diaries; records from assemblies, laws, and > statutes in Jamaica and Barbados; documents from the Royal Society > Archive, Edinburgh Botanical Hardens, and London Debating Societies; > and missionary records. His understanding of catechisms, imperial > botany, and abolition draws from a variety of published works > including instruction manuals and pamphlets. This approach offers an > intriguing avenue for addressing the importance and place of orality > in settler colonialism studies, in which expropriation is perhaps > less a product of a clash between literacy and orality and more so a > process in which different parties exploited, navigated, and > negotiated differences between settler and indigenous oral cultures > of law and politics. > > The book opens with two chapters detailing the relationship between > speech and the deliberation and execution of planter law and > politics. The first chapter argues that oath taking and evidence > giving were forms of talk that underpinned systems of law and > violence in slave societies, thereby making and unmaking the > radically unequal social relations of slavery. Oath taking bound > judges and juries to the English legal systems that upheld planter > rights in the Caribbean. Ogborn uses this analysis of formalized > legal speech to build an account of when exactly slaves, people of > color, and women were excluded from oath taking and evidence giving, > and how the legal sanctioning of difference within Anglo-Caribbean > colonies was displayed through these exclusions. This chapter models > for legal historians, especially British legal historians, an > approach that moves beyond the assumption of a false divide between > oral and written legal cultures. Ogborn demonstrates how important it > is to go beyond this divide by delineating how written legal cultures > involve orality in important ways. He demonstrates that written legal > cultures involve orality in important ways. The second chapter > reveals how slavery and freedom were constituted as political > conditions through forms of speech. White colonists contested the > imposition of metropolitan authority that enacted law in the > colonies, such as royal proclamations, and insisted on the necessity > of colonial legislative assemblies as spaces where, as free White > men, they could deliberate on the application of imperial law. At the > same time, colonial legislative assemblies excluded women, people of > color, and slaves, while planters policed and suppressed forms of > political speech among slaves. Ultimately, Ogborn argues that modes > of political speech among the enslaved need to be placed in dialogue > with Enlightenment discussions of liberty and arguments made by > colonial assemblies over their freedom of speech. > > The forms of speech that reinforced difference in the Anglo-Caribbean > were shifting and frequently contested. Although people of color were > excluded from oath taking, oath swearing was used to make peace > between colonial governments and the Maroons. Ogborn points to an > 1803 treaty agreed between Maroon Captain Cudjoe and Colonel John > Guthrie, both of whom swore oaths to establish a form of restricted > sovereignty for the Maroons. In demonstrating the contested > boundaries surrounding evidence giving, Ogborn details the > fascinating case of Francis Williams, a free Black Jamaican lawyer, > mathematician, poet, and plantation owner. Williams, who was proposed > as a fellow of the Royal Society when Isaac Newton was its president, > was insistent on his status as a propertied man of refinement whose > property rights surrounding slave ownership should be as secure as > those of White planters. He fought against the permission of his > slaves to give testimony against him in court, defining himself as a > "white man acting under a black skin" (p. 62). Unlike White planters, > the testimony of slaves could be used against Black planters in > court. Williams's father pushed to rule out slave testimonies from > being used against anyone except other slaves. > > Although colonial laws excluded, suppressed, and harshly punished > slaves who engaged in the "political talk" that proliferated and > circulated within inter-island and transatlantic rumor and news > networks, the talk continued. Building on scholarship tracing speech > in the Black Atlantic, Ogborn argues that these communication > networks were polities, spaces in which slaves sought out and engaged > in political talk, and that planters were aware of and feared these > networks. Planters feared what slaves might overhear and talk about > among themselves. While slaves were excluded from evidence giving > against Whites, their testimonies were taken into account during > conspiracy trials, where they could then be used to legitimate the > "deployment of deadly violence" to suppress resistance against > slavery (p. 99). > > Ogborn's arguments about speech, power, and slavery are clearest in > chapter 3. By examining talk about plants, particularly discussion > about their medical properties, scientific conversation, and the > formation of botanical gardens as public spaces, Ogborn demonstrates > how networks of knowledge and the power structures that defined > inclusion and exclusion from these networks depended on talk as much > as text. He argues that knowledge and communication in the sugar > islands lay at the intersection of appropriation and exchange between > slaves and those enforcing slavery. White islanders relied on > conversation with slaves and indigenous peoples to learn the medical > properties of plants but silenced or diminished the contributions of > people of color to their knowledge networks. This chapter is > especially helpful in laying out how epistemological and physical > violence took shape through talk and silencing via the deliberate > misattribution of botanical knowledge away from people of color. > Violence or the threat of it also produced the botanical gardens of > White islanders. Slave knowledge about plants as well as their labor > maintained Caribbean botanical gardens, even though slaveholders who > owned the gardens took credit for knowing how to care for and > cultivate the plants it contained and rarely did the work needed to > upkeep them. Ogborn draws attention to the centrality of both > gentlemanly botanical conversation and written correspondence within > imperial knowledge networks, in which White correspondents attributed > no credit to their conversations with slaves and indigenous > communities on the islands which allowed them to uncover scientific > truths about plants in the first place. > > Ogborn's argument that his methodology ties together "separate > accounts" of power and resistance is most convincingly demonstrated > in the final two chapters, both of which elaborate more extensively > on what happened when slaves spoke. Chapter 4 argues that forms of > spiritual speech differentiated between slaves and non-slaves while > also pushing the boundaries between them. Nonconformist missionaries > who mobilized emotional sermons and intimate talk that resembled > equality were better able to connect with slaves and people of color > than missionaries from the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel > (SPG), who relied on dispassionate catechisms in their services. > Planters saw the words of Obeah men and women, who administered oaths > and invoked gods and ancestors to bind people to their word or > attribute illness or misfortune to people, as a dangerous, enduring, > and powerful force. "Obeah" was the term used in the Anglo-Caribbean > to refer to spiritual practices like Vodun or candomblé, which often > mobilized speech to challenge plantation slavery and colonial > authority. Although planters dismissed Obeah as people who merely > professed to have magical or spiritual powers, they were wary of the > hold that they had over their audiences. The word of Obeah could > clash with the authority of planters. Obeah speech continued to utter > what was unutterable in the sugar islands, even though planters tried > to violently repress it. Planters frequently attributed Obeah men and > women as the instigators of slave uprisings yet, when convicting > Obeah, struggled to discount it as simply a belief with no > supernatural cause. Obeah could also incorporate Christianity. Slaves > who converted did not always jettison Obeah practices and beliefs, > which raised concern among missionaries about what exactly it meant > when slaves said they were Christian but continued with syncretic > religious practices. > > The final chapter, which argues for the centrality of speech to the > abolition of slavery in the British Empire, argues that slave revolts > and conspiracies in the Caribbean involved forms of speech that need > to be understood as part of the politics of transatlantic slavery. > Ogborn argues that slave uprisings themselves need to be seen as part > of a "reciprocal relationship" in which metropolitan abolitionist > activism and conversations about abolition among slaves, which > circulated between the islands and across the Atlantic, shaped each > other (p. 221). He highlights the ubiquity of discussion between > slaves about abolition. Some of this talk translated into action, but > slaves also regularly talked about their situation--talk that was not > necessarily tied to conspiracy or uprisings of any kind. Imperial and > colonial authorities tried to manage this talk, persecuting those > engaging in "conspiratorial talk" even in cases where slaves were > expressing hopes and fears among themselves or discussing rumors with > no intention to organize or act. Slaveholders sought to shift the > blame for slave uprisings to metropolitan abolitionists and > nonconformist missionaries, who they cast as engaging in "dangerous > talk." Ogborn argues that talk among slaves about abolition was part > of the oral culture of abolition within Britain, in which figures > like Olaudah Equiano, Ottobah Cugoano, Granville Sharp, an "unnamed > lady," Thomas Clarkson and his wife, Margaret Middleton, and others > accompanied abolitionist print materials with abolitionist > conversation. They spoke to private and public audiences ranging from > tea-tables, bookshops, public lectures, and debating societies, to > Parliament. > > The irony of the title is revealing, as it was mainly White > propertied men who had their freedom to speak guaranteed in law. > Slaves, maroons, free people of color, and women were technically > free to say what they wanted to say, but this rarely came without > consequences. Ogborn argues that the ubiquity of speech and the > facility with which slaves could simply choose to utter the > unutterable helps move beyond studies of slavery that focus on either > violence or resistance. He emphasizes that slaves always had the > option to resist planter rule by saying subversive things, even if > doing so frequently brought consequences. The entire book works > toward demonstrating that some speech could inspire action while > others could be ignored or discounted, depending on who spoke and in > what context, but that these boundaries and restrictions could be > contested. Ogborn's point that scholars must simultaneously consider > both the systematic oppression of slavery and varied forms of > resistance to it is an important reminder. However, in the end, the > subversive speech of slaves that instilled fear among White people in > the Caribbean was always met with violent consequences. Likewise, the > speech of White slaveholders always enacted power. Ogborn pushes > readers to move away from understanding speech and slavery as a story > that is either overwhelmingly about power or overwhelmingly about > resistance. However, even his illuminating examples of slave > resistance through speech could not avoid the looming question of > power and its importance in the backdrop. > > This book demonstrates the necessity of understanding what > curtailing, policing, suppressing, legalizing, and encouraging speech > meant for those enforcing and resisting slavery in the > Anglo-Caribbean. Although Ogborn does not make any claim to the > particularity of speech in this particular context, he does not spend > any time considering how his methodology for interpreting traces of > speech in textual archives, or of reading speech differently from > text, may apply to contexts beyond slavery in the British Atlantic > World. The book would have benefited from some treatment of the wider > application of its methodology. For example, how exactly might the > relationship between orality and power feature in the colonial legal > landscapes in North America or India? Were the gendered and racial > exclusions that characterized oath taking, evidence giving, and > proclamation announcing in the Caribbean much different from other > colonies or in Britain itself? How might Ogborn's investigation of > slave political talk enlighten us about working-class oral political > cultures in Britain? What legacies did the relationship between oral > and written abolitionist conversation and exchange leave for later > anticolonial activism? I am most curious about how Ogborn's > methodology would change when applied to later historical contexts, > in which telegraph, audio recordings, telephone, and other less > ephemeral forms of speech and written communication took hold toward > the end of the nineteenth century. Despite these gaps, this book > remains a necessary tool in the arsenal of historians considering the > relationship between speech, law, knowledge, religion, empire, and > resistance. > > Citation: Heena Mistry. Review of Ogborn, Miles, _The Freedom of > Speech: Talk and Slavery in the Anglo-Caribbean World_. H-Albion, > H-Net Reviews. July, 2020. > URL: https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=55061 > > This work is licensed under a Creative Commons > Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States > License. > > _________________________________________________________ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
