Charles Chesnutt
Superstitions and Folk-Lore of the South
Summary: Charles Chesnutt wrote a response to his own writing to give more context of its motivations. He explains that the conjure stories he writes in The Conjure Woman are merely myth and are a way of showing African American folklore. While these stories are not proven true they were passed down through oral traditions. He mentions several stories that he has heard such as a conjure man hurting a girl that steps upon the ground he walked on. He quickly refutes the validity, giving the explanation that she was so overtaken, and afraid that she twisted her ankle as she stared. He says that ignorance was the best tool for the “trickster”, without it superstitions would not have been believed. Not …show more content…
to say that the slaves lacked in wit but to say their imagination was a beautiful thing and a way to deal with everyday life. Slaves needed answers and definitely were not going to listen to their masters, thus they listen to other slaves. They tried to explain the unexplainable through knowledge of Christianity and conjure. They felt they could cope with the wrongs and even the rights in their life through the folklore explanations. Through imagination, witchcraft, and Indian influence conjure became a major part of African American folklore.
Main Points:
Chesnutt highlights that the concept of conjure originates through the intertwining of African beliefs, Indian culture and even whites beliefs.
Imagination and Ignorance are key aspects that aided in the growth, and belief in conjuration and other superstitions.
Chessnut is able to show how conjuring was used and explained through oral storytelling but also is able to give rational explanations as to why they are falic but also why they were told.
Questions:
How do the traditions and superstitions of slaves still affect African American culture today? And how do you think sociologists would explain this culture?
What are somethings that both Chesnutt and W.E.B. DuBois would most likely agree on?
Brooke Smith
Reasons Property and Modern Metamorphoses
Summary:
Werner Sollors's critique on The Conjure Woman highlights ideas such as motives, deceptions, and slavery.
He questions Chesnutt’s motive in making Julius the trickster, while it seems that John is narrating Julius takes over most of the narration in the framed plot. In doing this it shows the power Julius holds and the power superstition can hold. In the stories written Julius often gains something from his story telling he is clever enough to make stories or retell stories that would at least effect Annie, John’s wife, enough to guide John in the direction Julius wansts. Sollors brings out the idea that the evil that African Americans thought of, within conjuring, could also represent the turmoil of slavery. The belief in conjure was a way to focus on other “evils” that would not come close to the effects of slavery. In The Conjure Woman the conjuring may seem terrible but was a way to be removed from slavery. This critic also analyzes other characters such as John, his disbelief parallel to his stubborn attitude towards racism. Chesnutt was able to use conjure stories and subtle references to the Bible to show a deeper meaning to his characters and to the setting. Sollors compares John with the Pharisees and Julius to the true Christians who are not able to convert the Pharisees. He also shows the connection between the grapevine in the story and the vine used countless times in the Bible. Through this critique he brings out possible hidden meanings and also questions
regarding Chesnutt’s intentions of certain literary devices.
Main Points:
Werner Sollors shows that Chesnutt had the ability to bridge the gap between conjure stories, and reality by showing the relationship they have and that one without the other can create a closed minded person or society.
The notion of the trickster and the motives behind it
The relationship between John’s narration and Julius’s narration can show the evils and mindset of slavery and race relations.
Questions:
Does the ability to believe, or at least entertain both rationality and irrationality give an individual more power over the strictly rational or strictly irrational individual?
Do you think one of the many motives of Chesnutt’s writing was to show that Africans Americans could outsmart whites, contrary to common belief at the time?
Summary: Charles Chesnutt wrote a response to his own writing to give more context of its motivations. He explains that the conjure stories he writes in The Conjure Woman are merely myth and are a way of showing African American folklore. While these stories are not proven true they were passed down through oral traditions. He mentions several stories that he has heard such as a conjure man hurting a girl that steps upon the ground he walked on. He quickly refutes the validity, giving the explanation that she was so overtaken, and afraid that she twisted her ankle as she stared. He says that ignorance was the best tool for the “trickster”, without it superstitions would not have been believed. Not …show more content…
to say that the slaves lacked in wit but to say their imagination was a beautiful thing and a way to deal with everyday life. Slaves needed answers and definitely were not going to listen to their masters, thus they listen to other slaves. They tried to explain the unexplainable through knowledge of Christianity and conjure. They felt they could cope with the wrongs and even the rights in their life through the folklore explanations. Through imagination, witchcraft, and Indian influence conjure became a major part of African American folklore.
Main Points:
Chesnutt highlights that the concept of conjure originates through the intertwining of African beliefs, Indian culture and even whites beliefs.
Imagination and Ignorance are key aspects that aided in the growth, and belief in conjuration and other superstitions.
Chessnut is able to show how conjuring was used and explained through oral storytelling but also is able to give rational explanations as to why they are falic but also why they were told.
Questions:
How do the traditions and superstitions of slaves still affect African American culture today? And how do you think sociologists would explain this culture?
What are somethings that both Chesnutt and W.E.B. DuBois would most likely agree on?
Brooke Smith
Reasons Property and Modern Metamorphoses
Summary:
Werner Sollors's critique on The Conjure Woman highlights ideas such as motives, deceptions, and slavery.
He questions Chesnutt’s motive in making Julius the trickster, while it seems that John is narrating Julius takes over most of the narration in the framed plot. In doing this it shows the power Julius holds and the power superstition can hold. In the stories written Julius often gains something from his story telling he is clever enough to make stories or retell stories that would at least effect Annie, John’s wife, enough to guide John in the direction Julius wansts. Sollors brings out the idea that the evil that African Americans thought of, within conjuring, could also represent the turmoil of slavery. The belief in conjure was a way to focus on other “evils” that would not come close to the effects of slavery. In The Conjure Woman the conjuring may seem terrible but was a way to be removed from slavery. This critic also analyzes other characters such as John, his disbelief parallel to his stubborn attitude towards racism. Chesnutt was able to use conjure stories and subtle references to the Bible to show a deeper meaning to his characters and to the setting. Sollors compares John with the Pharisees and Julius to the true Christians who are not able to convert the Pharisees. He also shows the connection between the grapevine in the story and the vine used countless times in the Bible. Through this critique he brings out possible hidden meanings and also questions
regarding Chesnutt’s intentions of certain literary devices.
Main Points:
Werner Sollors shows that Chesnutt had the ability to bridge the gap between conjure stories, and reality by showing the relationship they have and that one without the other can create a closed minded person or society.
The notion of the trickster and the motives behind it
The relationship between John’s narration and Julius’s narration can show the evils and mindset of slavery and race relations.
Questions:
Does the ability to believe, or at least entertain both rationality and irrationality give an individual more power over the strictly rational or strictly irrational individual?
Do you think one of the many motives of Chesnutt’s writing was to show that Africans Americans could outsmart whites, contrary to common belief at the time?