Through his experiences, Equiano is able to provide a unique perspective on the issue of slavery. Obviously, as a slave, Equiano understands the deep immorality of slavery and the atrocities it caused and perpetuated. Despite facing numerous hardships and abuses during his time as a slave, he never lost hope and continued to fight for his freedom.
One of the most interesting things about the book is that Equiano seems to have conflicting views on slavery. At times, it seems as though he is making an argument to abolish slavery altogether. He writes about the horrific conditions that slaves had to endure and how it was an affront to humanity. Notwithstading, there are also moments where Equiano seems to be making an argument for making slavery more humane, without actually abolishing it. I think the best argument for this stance is a practical one—that abolishing slavery was unlikely and seemingly impossible at the time. So, fighting for better conditions and treatment was a practically accessible option.
So, what were Equiano's goals? Was he advocating for the abolition of slavery or was he advocating for the improvement of the conditions of slaves without abolishing it? In my opinion, Equiano's goals were a combination of both. He was a man who had lived through the horrors of slavery and knew what it was like to be treated as less than human. But he was also a smart man of compassion, who knew the reality of the situation and wanted to see the conditions of slaves improve. He understood that the very foundation of slavery was wrong and needed to be abolished, but that was a seemingly impossible task.
Hi Noah, I love your ideas. A large part of why Equiano makes arguments for the improvement of the treatment of slaves (in addition to arguments for abolition) is because he is acutely aware of the climate in America and Europe and knew that while complete abolition was unlikely in his time change could be made.
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree that he took the practical route. The introduction letter at the start of the book shows us how carefully he addresses his mostly English audience who are likely prejudice against black people. It would be asking too much of them to make economical sacrifices in the name of human rights, so better slavery conditions were the best thing he could reasonably ask for. Otherwise, I'm certain he would go all in on abolishing slavery.
ReplyDelete