Here is a review from someone who actually watched all four parts of “Roots” (2016): me:
As slave films go, it is one of the better ones, even compared to the old “Roots” of 1977:
- It is less sugar-coated. (Notice the word “less”. It was still sugar-coated, just less so.)
- It is better at showing how terrible it was, so much so it was hard to watch at times.
- It is less Whitecentric, easily passing the Bechdel Test for Race. Whites were supporting characters, unlike in, say, “Amistad” (1997) or even “12 Years a Slave” (2013). If anything, the White characters were too flat, lacking moral complexity.
- It showed more of Africa (though not as much as the book).
Because of advances in film-making and scholarship since 1977, the remake was more true to life than the old “Roots” and better made.
But in some ways it was worse than the old “Roots”:
- It was shorter and felt rushed. To do “Roots” properly, you need 12 hours. The old Roots was 9.5 hours. The remake was only about 6 hours, not counting the ads.
- It was not as well acted. Kunta Kinte was good, but the 2016 Kizzy and Chicken George were cardboard compared to Leslie Uggams’s Kizzy and Ben Vereen’s Chicken George.
- It was less faithful to the book. In the book, Chicken George was not at the Fort Pillow Massacre. Nor was Kunta Kinte on his way to study at Timbuktu. Etc. It seems they were using the “Roots” name to stuff in as much Black History as possible. The book is already fictionalized enough as it is.
The beauty of “Roots”, the book by Alex Haley, is that it takes one family and follows it through history, a history that is undertold and mistold because many Blacks and many Whites find much of it painful (though not for the same reasons).
On the other hand, Haley’s family had it better than most: it was not split up as much, and, after they were freed, they had land of their own. But it was just those qualities that allowed Haley to become a writer in the first place and to follow his family line all the way back to Africa.
Slave films can be way better than books: they can reach more people and can affect them more deeply. For example, it is one thing to read about an injustice, quite another to see it play out before your eyes.
But Hollywood is controlled by Whites. The “Roots” remake did not escape that fact: David Wolper, who is White, was in charge. Only half the writers and half the directors were Black.
The remake was hardly an ode to White paternalism, but most Whites are presented as helpless rather than personally evil. They were not even the ones who sold Kunta Kinte into slavery (another thing they changed from the book). And slaves times were presented as Teflon History: the Bad Old Days that have little to do with the present.
– Abagond, 2016.
See also:
- slave films
- The Roots remake – written after seeing the first night.
- Amistad – super Whitecentric
- 12 Years a Slave – sanitized for White viewers
- White paternalism
- “Africans sold their own people into slavery”
- Teflon History
- Bechdel Test for Race
541
Reblogged this on The Militant Negro™.
LikeLike
A. It got on tv.
B. It really can open a dialog.
C. Obviously i did not watch it with my wife but like i said to her it definitely is a teaching instrument vis a vis the diaspora and western africa.
D. Chicken george? A bit minstrely perhaps.
E. And yes it is a certain degree of plot manipulation to fit that all in the little box in the time alloted but i was deeply moved by it.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Will this show outside the US?
LikeLike
“The one duty we owe to history is to rewrite it.” – Oscar Wilde, Playwright, Poet and Essayist
These days, the duty to sanitize history, to decrease the moral turpitude of whites and increase the supposed immorality of other groups, to distort history through the lens of a select few, to blame the victims and defend the perpetrators of violence through the manipulation of cinematic symbolism, is in fact the nature and ultimate obligation of Hollywood.
LikeLiked by 3 people
A fair review. The original “Roots” was required viewing in my High School History class–this was a few years ago.
LikeLike
Good review. But my question would be: Was this remake even necessary? I mean … if it’s not really going to tell the true story “better” then why bother with a remake at all?
I ask this question but in a sense I have already borrowed the answer from something I heard Denzel Washington say in a interview. (Paraphrasing.) “Hollywood (or the entertainment business) isn’t about black and white. It’s about green.”
The first TV series was really inspired by a man who wrote a book telling history or “his story”. What say you? Do you think that in the end, the Roots remake is really , as Denzel Washington would put it, ONLY about how much money it could make.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Here is an interesting conversation between W. Kamau Bell and Levar Burton on why Roots was remade.
http://www.motherjones.com/media/2016/04/history-roots-2016-remake-levar-burton-kamau-bell
LikeLiked by 2 people
@cmoneyspinner
Excellent question…and you provided an excellent answer!
I’m annoyed with these endless remakes of films and tv shows. Hollywood has gotten so greedy, lazy and boring.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Afrofem ~ Thank you. Have experienced many years of asking questions and never getting any answers. So it’s seems asking and answering my own questions is the ONLY way. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
@cmoneyspinner
em(Hearty chuckle) Yes, I really understand your dilemma and your solution. Sometimes it is the ONLY way. It is also the sign of a questioning mind which is a powerful asset.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I was reading John Amos who played the adult Kunta Kinte and he remarked that Hollywood has just run out of creative originality. That is one of my big gripes about all these reboots. That is why i refuse to see Ghostbusters the original was fun and this stupid reboot with all females is just pathetic. I guess for the younger generation this is needed but for me the original will suffice. But then again this isn’t about me.
LikeLike
@ Mary Burrell
Yes, slap a familar name on a mediocre piece of work and watch the money flow in. That seems to be the business model these days in Hollywood.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Haitian Revolution- Ignored
John Brown- Ignored
John Horse-Ignored
Louisiana Slave Revolt- Ignored
Why make reboots when you haven’t covered the gamut of events from this era?
LikeLiked by 2 people
I watched The remake of “Roots” but not the live broadcast. I refuse to support holly wood in any shape or form. I binge watched it straight through.
My assessment is this….Holly wood is still up to its dirty tricks.
I expected nothing less from white people trying to be slick with our history as slaves in America.
Did anyone notice the slight of hand with the narrative that whites pushed in the 1st episode with the African tribe that was selling their rival tribes to the British?
Notice that this is what they always push, when talking about slavery with black people? ” Black people sold their own into slavery”
They make it a point to omit, white people’s role in forcing those tribes against one another.
They had only two choices…capture their rivals and in return, get guns, goods and services or be taken as slaves themselves or worse, BE KILLED!
Now, with that said…the series did show more of the naked wickedness and evilness of white people than the original Roots.
The white folks were down right despicable in this remake of roots!
From little miss, that acted as if she loved kizzy like a little sister, then turned on her like she was a dog in the streets, to Tom Lea, treating his own son like pure trash!
Did anyone else notice the homosexual element with Little Miss, trying to look under kizzy’s dress to see her chochy? Then she said in a joking manner,, “its my right”. -_-
If this doesn’t make a white person turn red with shame and anger…
I also liked the fact that their was only ONE WHITE SYMPATHIZER!
I hate it with a passion, when every slave movie has more white people that are against slavery, than those who are for it.
This is a false narrative that white people love to push as to ease the feelings of white people, so they feel somewhat good about themselves and their ancestors…”WELL, NOT ALL WHITE PEOPLE WERE SLAVE OWNERS AND FOR SLAVERY!
With a straight face, ignoring that 9999999999999999999.9% were for slavery!! Lets point out that 0000000000000000.1% that were not for slavery and didn’t own slaves! bull-spit! -_-
LikeLiked by 4 people
I would love to see a movie about the Black Wall Street and The Tulsa Riots.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I started out being very happy about this remake for many reasons, and reviewed the first two episodes together on my blog before the 3rd and 4th aired. The second half was somewhat disjointed and too obviously written by many competing interests. I will probably get to reviewing that second half eventually, but I wanted to re-watch the 1977 version and re-read certain parts of Haley’s book before doing so.
It’s important to re-introduce the story to new generations, as the 1977 production was so white-washed and “all-star” that it was hard to get involved in the story at times. It’s laughable to think of casting TV dads like Robert Reed and Lorne Green in serious roles, and those casting decisions undermined the message of the original. I was glad that most of the cast this time around was relatively unknown but highly skilled actors, and that did great credit to the production.
More caveats in my blog but I, too, found it troubling that there was such emphasis on the idea of rivalries and the worn out, bs theme of “selling their own” as if all Africans were some kind of monolithic entity. At the same time, however, the time spent exploring the Kinte family and their community and their environment went a long way to humanizing the story and impressing upon us that these are all dynamic individuals. The warrior training and ritual sequences gave us a strong sense of Kunta’s identity and solidified why we should care about him as a specific person while also reminding us that he was grossly dehumanized from the age of 16 until his eventual disappearance from history.
Ultimately, I felt that the first episode was the best of the four, and I was impressed with most of the lead actors. The parts of Binta, Omoro, and Belle did not receive nearly enough attention for such superb acting. Malachi Kirby’s Kunta was outstanding, as was Forest Whitaker’s Fiddler. The teenaged Kizzy was good, especially in scenes where Kunta is training her to become a warrior. Mature Kizzy was strong and steady much the way Binta was, and so was Matilda. I felt those roles were very well done. Chicken George was quite good, and Tom Lea was just so damn despicable it was terrifying. George’s wife son Tom was excellent, too. There were moments, however, when the story was far too male-centric. When Tom witnesses Irene being gang raped, the next scene shows his anger inciting him to help the less-than-convincing spy played by Anna Paquin. But what about Irene? Could we have a moment to acknowledge that her marriage and children aren’t enough to remind her captors/”masters” that she is a human????? She is never safe; Tom can’t protect her. She can’t protect herself. Ever. Not even the way Kizzy protected herself (to a degree), because Irene’s status as “mixed” with Cherokee presumably puts her even lower in the great chain of being.
I just needed to say that.
Anyway, for many reasons, the final episode was hugely disappointing. It felt rushed and phony and overall poorly written. Indeed, the entire series was obviously written in segments, with each episode having a different team, and the production suffered greatly for it. A few of the scenes had some glaring inaccuracies and outright anachronisms, and the deviation from the book (as well as from historical fact) was disturbing. Pick one: either follow the book and/or correct the mistakes, but tell real history. Don’t make up new storylines that have nothing to do with the original and which did not happen in this family (or perhaps anywhere).
One last thought: I observed many people online reacting to my posts on Twitter, fb, and my blog and stating that ROOTS was too violent. Granted, many of us struggle with depictions of violence. But I took SO MUCH GRIEF when I pointed out that some of the same people who objected to the violence in Roots are fans of shows like Game of Thrones, which capitalizes on gratuitous violence and practically celebrates rape. Anyone who can commit to consuming that level of gratuitous violence in anfanrasy story as if it is normal, but who cannot stomach realistic and unflinching depictions of DOCUMENTED HISTORICAL EVENTS and routine “discipline,” legally-sanctioned punishments, and known crimes against humanity committed by thousands of slaveholders, “businessmen,” and “authorities” is a hypocrite and a racist ass. Several people practically demanded to know how the two were relevant. Seems pretty clear to me…
LikeLiked by 1 person
*”George’s wife son Tom” should read:
“George and Matilda’s son Tom.”
LikeLike
@Melanie
Loved that observation about gratuitous (pornographic) violence. I’m glad you pointed that out.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Gratuitous violence? The violence was probably tamped down, as the reality was much more horrific. Read the slave narrative which can be downloaded for free at Project Gutenberg, or can be purchased for a nominal fee from Kobo or Amazon. It’s like Lorenzo Ivy said; “The half has never been told’.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Read the book many years ago and saw original when it first came on tv. Found first version more authentic, remake more polished, less authentic. Prefer first version……
LikeLike
Herneith, that’s what I was trying to get across. The gratuitous violence I’m talking about is in the Game of Thrones type stuff. But some of the people who read my review and other posts on Twitter etc got angry with me for pointing out the hypocrisy of being a GoT fan (thus excusing gratuitous violence) while simultaneously rejecting the realistic depictions in ROOTS as “too graphic.”
I dare say we can actually LEARN something from the depictions of slavery when they are done in an accurate manner. All we “learn” from GoT and its ilk is how to numb ourselves to the sufferings of others…something many adults are already quite good at. ROOTS can help develop compassion for others. GoT does the opposite.
I’ve read numerous slave narratives over the years, as well as monographs exploring specific slaveholding families which go into detail about the assessed condition and “value” of each enslaved person as documented in plantation “business” records. I have no doubt that Lorenzo Ivy himself understated it in that quote. Likely we only know a tiny percentage of what horrors really happened.
I am regularly astounded at how some people will claim that violence in a production like ROOTS is more than they can bear, yet they will happily watch season after season of pointless gratuitous violence in shows like GoT, and/or spend countless hours glued to video games that butcher everyone in sight. It seems to me the unspoken and underlying reason they object is because they *know* that the brutality of slavery is real, and still exists today all over the world (but is now known as human trafficking). They cling to their fantasy stories and justify the violence because it’s different when it’s fantasy. But the truth is, the consumption of that kind of fantasy violence numbs us to the utter brutality that millions have suffered. They don’t want to see the real thing because it might force them to confront the truth about the world we live in and the despicable deeds of our forebears as well as the despicable deeds which go on in our own neighborhoods. They want to pretend that it is all imaginary, because then they don’t have to worry about taking responsibility for it and they don’t have to make any effort to put an end to human suffering as it continues today.
To me, watching it and reading about it in historical documents or realistic historical portrayals helps put a human face on the people whose voices have been ignored, silenced, shouted over for millennia. I want to understand how it happens that one person can dehumanize another; how one group of people can exterminate millions of other people. It’s a gruesome journey but vital to understanding how to untangle the mess we’re in and work toward preventing it. Because that dehumanizing process is the key to it all. We have to retrain ourselves and we have to raise our kids to never, ever allow that “us” and “them” mentality to have any power.
Sorry to ramble. I am struggling with muddled brain today and am afraid I’m not stating my case clearly. Thanks for bearing with me if you can stand it.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Reblogged this on League of Bloggers For a Better World.
LikeLike
@ Melanie
That was a pretty sharp analysis for a “muddled brain”.
I like how you tie together historical slavery with modern day slavery…and the mental processes that enable them.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Has anyone noticed that Roots 2016 was broadcast on THREE different networks?
Can anyone recall a series or TV show shown (aside from the news) shown on different channels at or around the same time?
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Afrofem, thanks!
@Fan… Not only was it shown on three channels simultaneously, but also repeatedly. The each of the four nights, the new episode was played 3 times in a row, on a loop. On the early evening of the second day, episode one was shown immediately before the debut of episode two (which then was shown 3 times in a row). The next day, episode one and two were shown in sequence beginning in the afternoon, then episode three ran 3 times in a row. The fourth day, episodes one, two, three, and the debut of episode four. They were also shown overnight, and then a documentary on the fifth night which features several scholars of high esteem, most of whom were also scholars of color (though there was one white male and one white female). Then on Saturday the entire series was shown again in marathon. That level of airing/viewing opportunity greatly increased the likelihood that people could view the entire series, and in order, and possibly several times. I watched each episode all three times in a row on each night they were debuted, and the documentary twice on Friday. Had the series been run one-and-done, it wouldn’t have been nearly as effective and many people would have missed out, given how many hundreds of thousands of people have second/third shift jobs in our crappy “service economy.” I’m glad they did it this way. It also facilitated being able to analyze each episode in more detail…
LikeLike
“Then on Saturday the entire series was shown again in marathon. That level of airing/viewing opportunity greatly increased the likelihood that people could view the entire series, and in order, and possibly several times.”
@Melanie
Hmm… I’m wondering where/why this extraordinary MOTIVATION to “increase the likelihood that people could view the entire series” is coming from??
Unless I recently woke up in an alternate universe, this dimension is STILL very much dominated by a juggernaut racist global white supremacist system. I smell an agenda, but not the type of which smells like someone(s) is trying to deconstruct racism/white supremacy brick by brick. There’s been a steady number of productions about Black Slavery of late.
Why?????
Is the racist system attempting to maintain a certain mind control?
If they want me to see something here, what are they trying to hide from me there??
Aren’t there other *things/topics* people ought to know about – historically or currently – that should rival or surpass this inordinate amount of over-saturation?
http://stewartsynopsis.com/
LikeLike
@Melanie: Your post are insightful and have given me much to consider. I may have to reconsider and watch the series.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Fan: I listened to a podcast on last week and the host and the guest were discussing the Roots remake and the discussion mirrored your post. They felt it was a white supremacist agenda to keep black people cognizant of the fact that the white man is still the master and you n-words are the slaves and don’t you forget it. I listened to this turned it off because they were shouting and it was hard to listen because they were talking over each other. But as I read your post they were saying pretty much what you were saying. It was Professor Griff and it’s on YouTube.
LikeLike
“They felt it was a white supremacist agenda to keep black people cognizant of the fact that the white man is still the master and you n-words are the slaves and don’t you forget it. ”
@ Mary
Not sure if I’ve seen that particular video-blog.. That’s not what I’m quite trying to say, though they may be correct.
What I’m suggesting here is that there may be an even deeper agenda and deliberate misdirection going on here. Of course, I could be wrong.
What if the history we know regarding who African Americans are a revisionist history? Why does Amerikan Black history always begin with Slavery? Surely, Black people existed before then! Why are slavery movies so prominent.. even over prominent?
What if Black people (in numbers greater than we thought we knew) were in Amerika before we were told, before the so-called transatlantic slave trade happened?
LikeLike
@Fan: I just thought I would put that perspective out there I wanted to know if what I heard was the same thing you were talking about. I see there are so many diverse perspectives about why many Black people feel there needs to be more slave movies made versus why there doesn’t need to be any more films, television shows made about this subject. Thank you for responding to me and your post gives me food for thought as do all your post.
LikeLike
The quotes “Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it.” Or “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” My question are these quotes relevant to the ambivalence of people like myself and others who reject the making of these television shows and films. Maybe it’s ignorance on my part for choosing not to view these type of films after all it is part of my history as a Black-American.
LikeLike
“Maybe it’s ignorance on my part for choosing not to view these type of films after all it is part of my history as a Black-American.”
.
And maybe it’s not ignorance at all.
I’m just highly suspicious as to WHY any apparatus would push so hard to broadcast the slave meme as if it is so terribly important that it needs to be shown on three different networks – simultaneously and continuously.
This (Roots 2016) broadcast template is a precedent, as far as I can tell.
Something SMELLS FOUL here.
The open question remains: Can anyone recall a series or TV show (aside from the news) shown on THREE different channels at the same time showing the same thing?
George Orwell may well be spinning (at hyper-speed) in his resting place.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@ Fan, you’re asking a legitimate question that needs more exploration. I don’t know the answer. However, here are two possibilities: One, running it that often saves the networks a lot of money and acts as a vehicle to get more people watching their networks in an age of netflix, hulu, and various other enormous competitors in a market (cable) that is suffering a self-perpetuating downward spiral due to exorbitantly high prices and an outdated business model that no longer appeals to young consumers.
Two: LeVar Burton was co-executive producer, and numerous distinguished scholars of color participated in the documentary portion. Perhaps the repeated airings were part of the contract negotiation? Perhaps Burton stipulated these terms? After all, he has been committed to educational media for most of his career. (Reading Rainbow, original and rebooted versions, are his babies.)
As for the question about Black people in American history–we occasionally hear about non-slave “free” Blacks in America, but they were such a tiny proportion of the overall population that they are generally left as just a blip in telling American history, much like Jewish people in America prior to about 1850. They were here, but marginalized and not documented very well by the “authorities.” But the Atlantic slave trade began in the 15th century, so it would be a challenge to dig up much of anything document-wise from that far back. Of course it is possible that explorers from Africa may have come to what is now North and South America before whites from Northern Europe did. Cabeza de Vaca’s exploration and long-distance wander around what is now known as the American Southwest was infamous for it apparent implausibility, but it is well documented, and only four of the landing party survived the 7+ years wandering by the time they were found. DeVaca was one of them, another was a young black slave. It seems the adage of “history being written by the victors” leans heavily in the direction of whites making the rules and writing the stories while squeezing out everyone else. Maybe there really is good intent behind the ROOTS reboot? I don’t know. I’d like to think that it isn’t some nefarious plot to further exploit or beat down African American viewers as some kind of threat. But I don’t want to be naive, either.
LikeLike
@ Mary Burrell
“The quotes “Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it.” Or “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” My question are these quotes relevant to the ambivalence of people like myself and others who reject the making of these television shows and films. Maybe it’s ignorance on my part for choosing not to view these type of films after all it is part of my history as a Black-American.”
I think the key thing is whether someone’s delving into the history elsewhere — and it is very clear that you are. You’ve been reading and commenting thoughtfully here for a long time, and the links and information that you share make it obvious that you also are seeking out knowledge from a wide variety of sources. So if I may express my opinion, I believe that if you personally choose to pass on certain movies and tv shows, it is not at all from ignorance. Maybe it’s even because you already have learned in such depth from better material that you grow frustrated with these Hollywood productions. It isn’t necessary to watch or read every last thing about a subject to gain a comprehensive understanding. There’s nothing wrong with narrowing your research to exclude material you find shallow or questionable. If you’ve grown beyond such material, that’s not ignorance but the exact opposite.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“As for the question about Black people in American history–we occasionally hear about non-slave “free” Blacks in America, but they were such a tiny proportion of the overall population that they are generally left as just a blip in telling American history”
. @ Melanie
Facts, like
LeVar Burton could be more loyal to Hollywood (and his pockets) than Black people. But I could be wrong.
1. “Sundown Towns” got covered over and buried in the sands of time – and in the minds of the people who wanted it buried and hidden. Had JW Loewen not written this book (and Lies My Teacher Told Me) a very large segment of people would still be ignorant of parts of ignoble Amerika’s UGLY past.
Amerika lives chest high in Revisionist History! It’s how she tries to keep from looking like the Beast she is. The more time that goes by, the more exposed she becomes. You’re probably aware that eventually, everything enters into the Light of Truth.
2. Douglas Blackmon exposed the lie of Slavery’s official ending date Slavery By Another Name, which points out that Slavery didn’t quite stop at the end of the Civil War. Or that when Slavery supposedly officially ended, it morphed into other types of Slavery, as bad as the one that just ended. It didn’t stop. It was revised. And it’s still being revised!
3. High School history texts are still being rewritten to advantage white-supremacy, in an attempt to bury or nullify shameful acts that still have not been reconciled or apologized/paid for.
4. Reparations for Black victims for wrongs (hard-core systemic racism) that extended well beyond slavery and still lives on is fought against by newly perceived victims of racism, WHITE people.
So when you state that “free” Blacks in Amerika were just a tiny segment of the overall population, (CONVENTIONAL WISDOM) please remind me exactly how we/you know that this is absolutely true. Forgive me if I’m slow to take the word of some white person with a PhD behind their name.
How do we know that there weren’t MUCH MORE than what we’ve been told of these “free” Blacks already in Amerika prior to the early 1600s?
If I learned anything about this country over my lifetime (besides writing revisionist history) it’s that she is good at committing gross crimes, and always attempting to cover them up.
LikeLike
@Fan… I was responding directly to the question about the era prior to the Atlantic slave trade. I don’t discount your questions. And I am acutely aware of all the references you make in your point-by-point accounts. I’ve been studying these topics for about 20 years, and there is a lot more to learn, always, but I am not at all ignorant on the matter of people of color being erased from history in many ways. I was referencing the idea that what we have for documentation *seems to indicate* that few black people came to America without being on the enslaved end of the slave trade. We have a ton of documentation about the people who were in-between: the indentured servants, because their indentures were documented in much the same way as bills of sale for enslaved people. And town records in the earliest settlements tend to make frequent and very pointed distinctions among people who are of different nationalities or ethnicities or religions (the leaders of dominant religions were the leaders of government in almost all cases during the Colonial Era), so we have a lot of historical documentation that has been broken down by origin of inhabitants. And there is a vigorous scholarship in history that includes a growing body of scholars who are persons of color with PhDs who have devoted their careers to seeking out persons of color who have been hidden within the record.
Those government leaders of the Colonial Era–in New England, government is and aways has begun at the town level, so the records are extremely specific by locale–were very clear about every individual man’s status. They were very careful to identify people by origin and religious denomination and legal status, including servants, slaves, singletons (yes, really, being “single” was a category and frowned upon and regulated–single people were often legally compelled by certain laws to live in a household, not alone, or else were subject to steep penalties). In fact, “freemanship,” (that is, the legal permission to cast a vote and participate in government on any level other than paying taxes) was so strict that large numbers of citizens were restricted from voting at all regardless of their ethnicity, origin, or religion. Groups of people who were the “wrong” denomination of Christian were not included in government affairs but were noted in the records. When a person was granted “freemanship,” the status change was noted in minutes of town meetings. To be clear, a granting of “freemanship” in the Colonial Era did not indicate a former slave or indentured status. Unless or until Freemanship was conveyed, that person held a status non-voting/non-participant in government dealings. Those who were not considered freemen included all young white men who didn’t own sufficient property or weren’t otherwise eligible to vote by reason of age, lack of assets, refusal to participate in the established Church of the community, and sometimes lack of education of marital status. This is heavily documented in town records all over the Northeast, where free blacks existed alongside enslaved during the colonial era.
Something else that’s heavily documented: there was a lot of activity to *convert* the Indigenous population from the earliest European settlement in America, so my question would be: Why wouldn’t *all* “non-whites” be documented? The white “authorities” in Colonial America documented the crap out of everything, and had a vested interest in doing so, being compelled to report back to the Crown and the business interests they represented. America was founded as largely an enormous series of business ventures, undertaken by sanction from various Kings who sponsored companies to send parties here to exploit the “new” world of all its resources–including its people. These businesses documented and BRAGGED about the people they overtook in their encounters. So I have a hard time believing that any groups of people who arrived here prior to white Europeans wouldn’t be in the record. White Europeans recorded all kinds of atrocities as well as everyday stuff. The information is there, it just needs to be sussed out by people who are looking for it and know how to find it.
I don’t need to tell anyone here that we continue to have major problems with voter suppression and gerrymandering; the difference is that today these problems are blatant violations of citizens’ rights under the Constitution. In the Colonial Era, large portions of the population were barred from voting but it was perfectly legal because it was sanctioned by the laws imposed at that time. And I don’t need to tell anyone here that issues like Sundown Towns still exist. I’ve found some myself by accident while doing my own research (hello, *particular portion of Western New York where ancestors of my research subject are buried,* you scare the p^ss out of me). I don’t think the problem is so much that the information doesn’t exist, so much as little or no light has been shown upon it, so the general population is blissfully unaware of much of it, and some are willfully ignorant of it.
I will say I hate the term “Revisionist History” because it had been co-opted long ago by people who don’t understand the scientific method as it applies to the study of history, and those people use it to declare that historians are “making things up” or “altering the truth” or “manipulating the data.” The people who use the term today are generally the ones who want to keep US History textbooks whitewashed and in denial of the atrocities which social historians of the last 50 years have been pushing to include. The people who say “Revisionist History” say so with derision because they don’t want their happy little Leavittown disturbed by the truth and they sure as hell don’t want to listen to anything that doesn’t ring of flag-waving propaganda. So to me, if we can make even one or two of those dbags think for five seconds about one of the most pervasive and blatant horror stories of our history, and at least momentarily consider how that legacy informs our society today, then a reboot of ROOTS is a wonderful thing.
Sorry to be all over the map on this. I’m not defending any suppression of information nor am I justifying it happening, ever. I hope that is clear. I just mean that if your theory is correct, then the evidence will show up when the right scholars who know how to dig deeper happen to intersect with the right documents. But unless billions of hand-written documents from centuries ago were all either heavily edited and recreated to hide the evidence, or all of them were destroyed wholesale, then the evidence of people who were here in America, regardless of origin, religion, ethnicity, etc is mostly rotting in archives, waiting to be discovered.
LikeLike
@ Fan… I’m not sure who you were referring to about taking the word of some white person with a PhD behind their name. I don’t have a PhD, but maybe someday, so I’m assuming you mean other historians. But you don’t have to take the word of any white PhD. There are a lot of PhD Historians of color who specialize in American Social and Cultural History and that number is growing all the time. And there are more than a few white US historians who are very interested in/spent a good deal of their careers examining the marginalized people of our country. Historians and their work in general are ignored or dismissed by the public but that hardly means that no one is studying these topics on a deeper level and employing scientific method to do so.
LikeLike
@Solitare: Wow! Thank you so much I really appreciate that it’s just that some part of me feels conflicted and I have a ton of books on my bookshelf I feel like I have information overload. You are a great commenter as well.
LikeLike
@Fan : I have the JW Lowen Lies My Teacher Told Me in my Amazon cart. I also am enjoying Howard Zinn A Young People’s History of The United States. It’s for middle schoolers but it’s easy to read and I plan to read his other books about History. I also have The Birth of Black America The First Americans and the Pursuit of Freedom at Jamestown by Tim Hashaw.
LikeLike
@Fan
You made good points with your examples.
I would probably characterize this country as a “he” or an “it”.
LikeLike
@Melanie
I enjoyed and appreciated your detailed response to Fan.
I was particularly drawn to you comments about Sundown Towns. Some people tend to think of them as historical artifacts, but they still exist. They don’t post signage like they did a century ago, but the residents really let you know that lingering in “their” town for more than an hour or two may not be good for your health.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Mary Burrell
That is quite a reading list!
Reading history really gives you an appreciation of the cycles of ideas and events. You also realize the sameness of human nature through the ages.
Happy reading!
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Melanie: I appreciate your thoughtful comments I know you have commented quite a few times I enjoyed reading you I enjoyed you from the Laura Ingles Wilder Little House On The Prairie thread. What do you think of Howard Zinn?
LikeLike
@Afrofem: Hey Afro I am an autodidact I am trying to read a great number of things.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@ Mary Burrell
Being an autodidact is a sign of an intelligent and independent mind.
I applaud you!
LikeLiked by 3 people
@Afrofem: That means a lot coming from you I admire how well you write. I wondered if you were in education?
LikeLike
@ Melanie,
No offense was meant toward you on the PhD thing. I probably should have specified “whites who are *biased* or lean towards the race realist school of thought.
Concerning Record Keeping and Black People
There are no records of the African captives who were chained onto slave ships. Not their names, their country of origin or even the original bill of sale.
As far as records go, most folks seem to believe today’s FBI crime data/stats are factual. Even when stats are shown to be laced with misleading entries due to a high malfeasance of racist criminal court system disparities wrought by its corrupt personnel – judges, prosecutors and cops. Whites tend to get the benefit of doubt and receive second and third chances. Blacks (relatively speaking) do not.
Cognitive Dissonance, and Confirmation Bias are strong at work in crime stats and other data that pertains to Black people. Blacks are full of pathologies…
Racism has taught me that white people OFTEN have forked tongues when it comes to Black people. Whites as group, imo,should not be given the benefit of the doubt.
Have white “historians” adequately explained why an inordinate number of Egyptian artifacts have missing noses, or why Egyptian artwork has been effectively whitewashed?
“then a reboot of ROOTS is a wonderful thing.”
I want to be clear. I’m not against the airing of Roots (yet). I’m just wondering why this slave story is airing in a way that is unprecedented in the entire history of tell-lie-vision?
BTW, some folks have seriously questioned the math regarding the number of estimated slaves kidnapped and supposedly brought to Amerika via supposed transatlantic voyages according to supposed slave ships capacities, times the number of trips, the time each trip took, and the number of ships/fleets available, rough seas, loss of life, etc, etc, and seen that these numbers do not add up – in a spectacular fashion!
So again, if they’re trying to show me Roots (and reinforcing all these depictions of slave stories) in an unprecedented manner, I’m wondering what exactly is it that they don’t want me to see.
I’m not stating anything as factual. Just asking questions, and doubting some things, based upon my knowledge and understanding of how a racist/white-supremacist world system works.
LikeLiked by 3 people
@Fan: Your post is giving me a lot to ponder this afternoon.
LikeLike
@Fan …
*Applause*
LikeLike
@Mary Burrell
My brush with education only included a few years of pre-school teaching and tutoring. That was years ago.
Now I’m immersed in learning about website development and maintenance.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“I would probably characterize this country as a “he” or an “it”.”
@Afrofem
Coming from you, why am I not surprised by that announcement?? 🙂
I’ll see if might change that next time! lol
Also, like Mary, I’ve wondered if you were involved in learning/teaching/tutoring/training/encouraging/mediating/embracing others for a living? You may have missed your calling as you seem to do these things naturally and often. Don’t stop…
@Sharina
Thank you, though my hat tips frequently to YOU! I normally don’t have a lot to say when I post. But I just can’t seem to shake this *what’s wrong with this picture* re over-saturation of the slave days depiction thing – for now.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@Fan I didn’t take offense. 😉 I just want to make sure I don’t misrepresent myself as more educated than I am! And I am SO glad to hear you and so many other people asking these questions. They need to be asked, and the more they are asked, the more impetus there is for interested scholars to do the digging. I’m of the opinion (but cannot back it up, this is just my hunch) that the number of captives who were taken and transported at least part of the way on the middle passage is grossly (no pun intended) underreported, in the same way that many other horrific crimes are.
Ugh, Sundown Towns. There’s one that has information I need and I am loathe to ever return. I went there (hamlet in Western NY)a few years ago and happened to call a friend who lived over the border in Pennsylvania, asking if he wanted to meet somewhere for dinner while I was local. When I told him where I was researching, he made an audible gasp and told me to avoid it entirely if I could, and if not, to make sure I got in and got out asap. He wasn’t kidding. There was a row of about a mile long where one house after the other had full-size “Confederate” flags draped across the roadside wall of each house, along with threatening “We don’t believe in 911” and “Tresspassers shot on sight.” I hope to never return.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Fan
When I think of our country, I think of a wild, out of control nineteen year old boy/man. Old enough to have brawn, but severely lacking in brains.
I don’t mean a lack of education or animal cunning. I mean a lack of wisdom. A lack of understanding or experience with consequences. It’s kind of sad to see your own country go through this crazy phase, but people, organizations and countries all have to experience hitting a brick wall, breaking something and then trying to pick up the pieces later.
Some are able to pick up those pieces, limping for a while, older and wiser. Some never survive the crash with the brick wall.
What makes this moment in US history so scary, exciting and full of opportunity is none of us knows how (or if) our country will survive that encounter with the wall that it is barrelling toward at full speed.
Those of us who survive to mid-century will have some pretty wild tales to tell our descendants.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ Melanie
That is a classic “Sundown Town”, with signage, Confederate flags and everything!
Whoa!
(Shiver down the spine)
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Afrocem Yes, absolutely! My initiation to Sundown Towns came when my closest friend, who is a biologist, moved to Hawk Mountain in PA for her first job after college. Her dad is Chinese and grew up in Guyana, her Mom is French Canadian. When she moved in, her Dad brought her down; he went straight home, luckily. But within days she found her car vandalized and other obvious signs that she was not welcome…and within a few weeks a cross burning happened in the street where she lived. Needless to say she moved out within a year. It’s horrifying how many of these towns still exist.
LikeLike
“What makes this moment in US history so scary, exciting and full f opportunity is none of us knows how (or if) our country will survive that encounter with the wall that it is barrelling toward at full speed.”
.
“It’s horrifying how many of these towns still exist.”
@ Afrofem & Melanie
Remember Obomber’s former pastor, Jeremiah Wright’s, prophetic words that caused white Amerika much consternation and upset? Malcolm X said the very same things.
Wrights private, turned public, sermon may have been Amerika’s last chance to wake up, smell the coffee and change its course.
Amerika can’t claim that it was never warned, or it didn’t know. Those first waves of pigeons are already home. The rest of the birds are arriving at an alarming rate.
It has occurred to me also that all these new series, TV shows, movies about slavery may be an attempt by the elite to make Black people angry, agitated and primed for a possible open and all out race war.
Just about anything is possible with these elites that hold control of 99.9% of the money and power over a divided and unorganized people which are made as such so that while we are fighting each another, the guilty (elites) are getting away with their crimes, scot-free.
LikeLike
@Fan
It is a strategy that has worked like charm since Bacon’s Rebellion in 1676.
An unnamed writer from the W.E.B. DuBois Learning Center describes one result of Bacon’s Rebellion in an article entitled The Birth of Slavery:
http://www.duboislc.net/read/BirthOfSlavery.html
Why would they stop now?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Late to the conversation but it is not unprecedented that Roots aired on 3 channels simultaneously. Most recently, A&E, the History Channel, and Lifetime did this for the War and Peace series back in January. I believe it was also done for some bible story show (maybe not the same channels) and most definitely was done for recent live charity concerts.
There’s no ulterior motive. It is due to the realization that there are so many channels with so many shows (not to mention online content series) simultaneously competing for viewer attention. They just want the ratings esp. if they shelled out a lot of money to produce the series. I doubt this will be the last time those three networks engage in a similar arrangement.
Compare the ratings for Roots 2016 to original Roots and it is almost laughable to suggest that the airings are part of some conspiracy theory. Original Roots has the 4th highest ratings in the history of TV – at least 130 million viewers or 85% of ALL households in the US watched it. If there was going to be race wars, it should have happened then. Instead there were just nightly riots in black neighborhoods after each episode.
LikeLike
@JMac
“there were just nightly riots in black neighborhoods after each episode.”
Source?
LikeLike
“It is a strategy that has worked like charm since Bacon’s Rebellion in 1676.”
@Afrofem
Yes, it has worked too well. Make it about color and then race and then superiority … and next a four hundred year plus addiction to BS is entrenched!
There’s ANOTHER SLAVE ERA movie (besides NEW TV shows like “Underground” and “Mercy Street”) coming from Hollywood about to be released on the big screen – called: Free State of Jones. Supposedly about a poor farmer from Mississippi leading a group of rebels against the Confederate army. Kind of like another Bacon’s Rebellion. I’m not buying that white people are all hyped to see their historical racism plastered everywhere virtually 24/7.
@ JMac
I’m soooo happy that you showed up here in the nick of time to put my poor rabid mind at ease with your voice of authoritative reasoning!
Just imagine where my mind might have drifted next, if not for your folly (conspiracy theory) killing ways. You should stick around here more often, just in case I should dare to think outside of YOUR “almost laughable” box.
But since you’re here:
“There’s no ulterior motive. It is due to the realization that there are so many channels with so many shows (not to mention online content series) simultaneously competing for viewer attention.”
Is this your opinion? Or is it a fact? If it’s a fact, may I please have a link?
“Compare the ratings for Roots 2016 to original Roots and it is almost laughable to suggest that the airings are part of some conspiracy theory.”
There’s quite a long list of stuff in Amerika’s sad history that was “laughable” at first thought, except it turned out to be true. Right?
🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Fan …
Thank you, but some of the most profound speakers are ones that don’t say much. You, like many I admire, say little but when they do it speaks volumes.
LikeLike
I watched all four episodes of the Roots remake. I thought La Var Burton’s Kunte Kinte was the best. The young actor who portrayed Kunta in the remake wasn’t bad. He was adequate. I don’t remember Fiddler Lou Gossett in the original being knifed to death like they did to Forrest Whitaker. If my memory serves me right I thought Fiddler just died from old age. I don’t love Anika Noni Rose I liked her Kizzy she had fire and Kunta Kinte in the remake taught young Kizzy to be a warrior and and a spartan. Leslie Uggams was delicate and childlike. They added to and subtracted a lot in the remake. I liked the young actor who portrayed Chicken George in the remake he was “swoon worthy 😍 Very handsome. The actor portraying Marcellus Kizzy’s lover was tall and dark skinned handsome.😍 “Swoon.
There were some beautiful moments the African dances and the African custom of remembering the ancestors was touching. I was sad that Kizzy and Marcellous couldn’t be together. The typical evil white racists I expected that. I was disturbed by how much the black women were sexually molested by the slave master that bothered me and the rooster fight was savage. They really went for rawness in this new remake and the characters were more defiant they were not passive.
I liked how they had discussions by the historians after each episode. All in all it wasn’t bad. I learned about the civil war and the scene with the black soliders being gunned down and the white soldiers left alive after they surrendered. All in all it was enlightening and it had beautiful cinematography and was well acted.
LikeLiked by 1 person
*I love Annika Noni Rose I thought she was wonderful as Kizzy *^^^typo.
LikeLike
@Abagnd: I watched the Roots Remake I forgot to add that I learned about the Battle at Fort Pillow that was especially tragic when the Black solders surrendered and they were shot down like dogs. That hurt me watching that scene.
LikeLike
“… that was especially tragic when the Black solders surrendered and they were shot down like dogs. That hurt me watching that scene.”
.
White people always seemed to love and value their own livestock more than they did their Black slaves. Even the ones they fathered (bred). They still like their dogs and lions more than BLACK PEOPLE.
I can’t begin to imagine the rage a man would surely feel when knowing/watching “the massuh” come a callin’ to have his way with his daughter or wife. I wonder how many male slaves killed the massa, his wife, and then himself to end that vicious cycle?
Or the horror of knowing that a SOLD son, daughter, wife, etc would in all likelihood never be seen again.
It’s not hard to see why focusing on (reliving) this so-called beginning of Black history in Amerika would make so many people angry and numb.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Fan: Yes watching the savage slave master have his way with the black slave women hurt my soul. And the black man have to way his wife or mother or sisters violated by those beast was gut wrenching. The white master was a sociopath in regards to the black slave. But one thing i liked was this remake showed how some of the slaves after they were captured put in inhumane conditions still were resilient. This remake showed a defiant Kunta Kinte who was a true warrior and convinced his brethren to take the ship and not just lay down and except their fate. They didn’t go down without a fight. This Kunta was a Mandinka warrior to the death.
LikeLiked by 1 person
*The black man had to watch his wife defiled* Typo *^^^
LikeLike
@Fan: Yes that’s true and we would like to see that movie made. In this remake it shows how many of the slaves when they were captured were so despondent that many wouldn’t eat and just wanted to starve to death or some even jumped overboard into the sea rather than submit to a life of misery. They did throw in reference to Nat Turner’s insurrection.
LikeLike
Just started watching this during my Hulu free trial. I have not seen the original, nor have I read the book yet. So far, I feel it was well done and is a worthwhile addition that can hold the attention of modern young people. I think that’s a good thing…
I can’t help but have a similar nagging “But, what’s the catch?” feeling like Fan was expressing up-thread. With the African slave traders and some of the slave characters that appear to work against escape attempts, it can project a “It was a bad time with blame to go around on both sides” kind of vibe. Taken in the context of so many “Black people suffering under White rule” movies and TV shows, I can see how it could foster paternal racism or savior complexes or whatever by Whites that actively feel some shame and/or guilt but also see Black people as inferior.
There was a Snoop Dog quote in another thread on this series where he was refusing to see it. In the quote he also said, “Let’s create our own shit based on today, how we live and how we inspire people today. ” I had that same thought as I watched Roots. The African American story doesn’t begin and end with slavery. There’s so many more stories that have never been told through a Black lens except in museums or what I call “academic” books that are boring for young people. We need so much more than a handful of TV series and a couple of movies. It’s a start, for sure. Hollywood smells money and things are shifting. I suppose, who cares about their motives if it means young people get to see themselves, their heroes, etc… as the main characters in stories that ring true with their lived experience.
In the end, we cannot control how people will perceive or react to Roots or 12 Years and the like. But the stories still need to be told. We need to continually accept that part of our history. Denying it or continuing to downplay it does us no good. I also think textbooks and teachers need to do a much better job of teaching “US History”… even the uncomfortable parts.
LikeLike