Saturday, October 14, 2017

I slept till 7 this morning, which is blissfully late for me, and now I am quietly sitting at the kitchen table, drinking coffee and thinking about John Brown. There is so much moral ambiguity in his story . . . not just within the man himself but also within his detractors and supporters--for instance, the Concord cadre, as Thomas Wentworth Higginson (himself a fervent abolitionist) recalled:
Higginson saw that, despite their different temperaments, [Thoreau and Bronson Alcott] took self-reliant action when it came to protesting against slavery. For them as for others, Transcendentalism bred not complacency but courage. Higginson enjoyed describing Alcott's intrepedity during the Anthony Burns affair [involving a fugitive slave being recaptured in a free state] and again after the Harpers Ferry raid, when Alcott offered to help go rescue John Brown from the Charles Town jail. Thoreau, too, combined quietism and pluck. As Higginson noted, "In a similar way Thoreau, after all his seeming theories of self-absorption, ranged himself on the side of John Brown as placidly as if he were going for huckleberries.". . . 
. . . Transcendentalism went hand in hand with a militant reform stance. Like Higginson, [Reverend Theodore] Parker was deeply involved in several movements, including women's rights, temperance, and prison reform. His Abolitionism started mildly, as indicated by his rational "Letter to a Slave-Holder" (1848), but flamed into rage with the passage of the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850. Even as he kept up his pursuits as a multilingual scholar and minister, he took part in attempted rescues of fugitive blacks and endorsed slave rebellions. Praising John Brown's effort to spark an insurrection by blacks at Harpers Ferry, he wrote, capitalizing his words for emphasis: "ONE HELD AGAINST HIS WILL AS A SLAVE HAS A NATURAL RIGHT TO KILL EVERY ONE WHO SEEKS TO PREVENT HIS ENJOYMENT OF LIBERTY." 
[from David S. Reynolds, John Brown, Abolitionist]
Higginson is most famous today as Emily Dickinson's mentor and editor, but he also "command[ed] the first African American regiment during the Civil War," and, as I discovered when I was compiling my anthology A Poet's Sourcebook, he was one of the first people to write down the lyrics of the spirituals he heard his soldiers singing. The ways in which these nineteenth-century figures intertwine are fascinating--almost as if the century were a small town. But I digress, for my central concern this morning circles around these quotations from Reynolds's biography, which are morally startling yet also inarguable. As someone who was raised in the Society of Friends, I tend to instantly fall toward pacificism. Still, as the institution of slavery has shown, peace-mongering may also be an easy way to avoid taking a stand against evil. It seems that pacificism, too, can be cowardice and selfishness--the opposite of righteousness.

4 comments:

Carlene said...

I watched a TED talk interview with Christiane Amanpour this week, and she was speaking about the issue of false equivalencies (among other things). I think this connects in a way with your statement of "hiding" in pacifism; she says that she thinks that people put forth false equivalencies in order to avoid actually doing something about a problem. Not choosing the moral rightness and seeking to blame both sides in an issue equally is a really easy way out of being committed to doing the right thing.

Thanks for the deep thoughts this morning!

Christopher Woodman said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Christopher Woodman said...

Sorry about the deletion. I was just trying to say how sad I was to hear about Richard Wilbur's passing, and remembered that you had been working with some of his letters.

In an obituary in the NY Times that you have probably read too, Daniel Lewis quotes Richard Wilbur from an interview in The Paris Review: “I feel that the universe is full of glorious energy, that the energy tends to take pattern and shape, and that the ultimate character of things is comely and good. I am perfectly aware that I say this in the teeth of all sorts of contrary evidence, and that I must be basing it partly on temperament and partly on faith, but that’s my attitude.”

Poets make it all up yet the better poets they are the more truth they speak -- as Richard Wilbur certainly did in almost everything he wrote.

And Emily Dickinson even more so. Indeed, little, ineffectual homebody that she was, she stood head and shoulders above all the men around her. She did much less in the outside world than Thomas Wentworth Higginson, for example, but nobody has ever been more committed to doing the right thing, or given more of her person.

Hope that's o.k. now.

Christopher

Dawn Potter said...

Yes, I edited Wilbur's bio a couple of years ago. It was a strange experience: the authors kept falling into the past tense when talking about him, though he was still alive and in fact had authorized them to write the book.

How odd to read about oneself as a past entity: here but not here.

But 96 is a long run.