Emotions were central to the ways that slaveholders perpetuated slavery, as well as to the ways that enslaved people survived and challenged bondage and experienced freedom. Mastering Emotions examines the interactions between slaveholders and enslaved people, and between White people and free Black people, to expose how emotions such as love, terror, happiness, and trust functioned as social and economic capital for slaveholders and enslaved people alike.The daily interactions that occurred between slaveholders and enslaved people around emotions, in conjunction with larger debates about race and freedom, form the backbone of what Erin Austin Dwyer calls the emotional politics of slavery. Race and status determined which emotions were permissible or punishable, which should be restrained, and by whom. As a result, mastering emotions, one's ability to control one's own feelings and those of others, was paramount for slaveholders and enslaved. The emotional politics of slavery were thus fashioned by enslaved people and slaveholders together through the crucible of slavery.Emancipation was a seismic shift in the affective landscape of the antebellum South. Though the end of the Civil War rendered moot the debate over how to emotionally maintain slavery, the lingering conflict over whether the emotional strictures governing the South would be based on race or free status had serious repercussions, particularly for free Black people. The postwar rise of legal and extralegal attempts to affectively control free Black people underscored the commitment of elite White Southerners to preserving the power dynamics of the emotional politics of slavery, by any means necessary. Mastering Emotions concludes by detailing how the long-term legacy of those emotional politics reverberated through Reconstruction and the Jim Crow eras.
Frequently asked questions
How do I cancel my subscription?
Simply head over to the account section in settings and click on âCancel Subscriptionâ - itâs as simple as that. After you cancel, your membership will stay active for the remainder of the time youâve paid for. Learn more here.
Can/how do I download books?
At the moment all of our mobile-responsive ePub books are available to download via the app. Most of our PDFs are also available to download and we're working on making the final remaining ones downloadable now. Learn more here.
What is the difference between the pricing plans?
Both plans give you full access to the library and all of Perlegoâs features. The only differences are the price and subscription period: With the annual plan youâll save around 30% compared to 12 months on the monthly plan.
What is Perlego?
We are an online textbook subscription service, where you can get access to an entire online library for less than the price of a single book per month. With over 1 million books across 1000+ topics, weâve got you covered! Learn more here.
Do you support text-to-speech?
Look out for the read-aloud symbol on your next book to see if you can listen to it. The read-aloud tool reads text aloud for you, highlighting the text as it is being read. You can pause it, speed it up and slow it down. Learn more here.
Is Mastering Emotions an online PDF/ePUB?
Yes, you can access Mastering Emotions by Erin Austin Dwyer in PDF and/or ePUB format, as well as other popular books in Geschichte & Geschichte des 19. Jahrhunderts. We have over one million books available in our catalogue for you to explore.
In his epistolary proslavery book-cum-memoir, Black Diamonds, Edward Pollard interwove the personal and the polemical in order to defend the institution of slavery. Pollard described traveling the world as a young man, writing effusively about encountering an enslaved man again upon returning to the South. Pollard did not know the enslaved man but recalled that the man âlooked like home.â He described it as follows: âI looked at him with my face aglow, and my eyelids touched with tears. How he reminded me of my homeâof days gone by ⌠âwhen I was a boyâ.â1 For Pollard the mere sight of an enslaved person, even a complete stranger, inundated him with simultaneous feelings of joy and homesickness. Throughout Pollardâs work, it is evident that enslaved people were the building blocks of Pollardâs emotional life, as they shaped his understanding of happiness, love, and sorrow and formed the scaffolding of his memories and very identity. No doubt trying to prove that slavery was rooted in mutual affection and paternalism, Pollard also revealed that enslaved people were so important to his emotional sense of self that the simple act of seeing an enslaved man again transported him to his own childhood.2 This scene of an enslaved man unleashing a flood of nostalgia for a planter highlights the extent to which slaveholdersâ emotions were created by and through enslaved people.
Many historians of emotions as well as psychologists have argued that emotions are not just individually felt but are collectively constructed and historically contingent.3 Yet all too often historians of emotion, in particular those who attribute collective emotions to cultural and social influences, focus solely on how elites shape affective norms, without attention to the ways that dispossessed people and subcultures contribute to or construct those feelings and emotional practices. Even historians who study the lives of slaveholders have downplayed the role of enslaved people in the affective lives of the planter class, contending that physical proximity did not breed intimacy or shared emotional rituals between slaveholders and enslaved people.4 But sources from formerly enslaved authors and slaveholders offer insights into the variety of ways that enslaved women and men were central to the feelings and emotional practices of the people who owned them.
Slave narratives reveal that enslaved people were acutely aware of the effect they could have on slaveholdersâ emotions, whether they were intentionally trying to evoke certain feelings or not. One of Elizabeth Keckleyâs owners was married to a woman whom Keckley described as being of âhumbleâ origins. Because of that class background, Keckley believed the woman to be âmorbidly sensitiveâ about the enslaved woman, convinced that Keckley âregarded her with contemptuous feelings because she was of poor parentage.â Keckley does not say if she possessed âcontemptuous feelingsâ for the woman, but it did not matter. Despite doing âthe work of three servantsâ Keckley was constantly criticized and âregarded with distrust.â5 Whether Keckley was disdainful of her mistress or not, Keckleyâs very existence made her mistress feel shame and class anxiety. Keckley was also forced to endure the ramifications of her unintentional emotional influence, as she was viewed as untrustworthy and was heaped with scorn and skepticism.
Some enslaved people deliberately tried to influence their ownersâ feelings. Henry Bibb explained that in his enslaved community it was commonly believed that if one chewed on a âbitter root ⌠and spit towards their masters when they are angry with their slavesâ it would dispel their ownerâs anger at the expectorating enslaved person. After an escape attempt Bibb feared that a whipping was imminent, so a friend advised Bibb to visit a âconjurerâ who would sell him a charm that could stave off beatings. The conjurer sold him a powder, instructing Bibb that if his owner threatened to whip him he should âsprinkle it about [the] masterâ to âprevent him.â The apotropaic concoction worked so well that Bibb returned for more and began scattering the enchanted âdustâ in his ownersâ bedroom so they had more exposure to it. Bibb intended it to function as a âlove powder, to change their sentiments of anger, to those of love,â toward him. Despite these plans, Bibbâs conjuring campaign ended prematurely after the substance reduced his owners to coughing and sneezing, leading Bibb to worry that they would discover his âdangerous experiments upon them.â6 If they thought Bibb was trying to poison them that would surely warrant an even more severe sentence, so he gave up his attempts to bewitch his owners.
In his narrative Bibb seemed abashed about this anecdote, dismissing his actions as superstitious, but the passage reveals a great deal about how enslaved people viewed the emotional politics of slavery. Like Keckley, Bibb both feared his ownersâ anger and recognized the power he had to impact how slaveholders felt. Even if only briefly, Bibb believed that he had âchange[d] their sentimentsâ through the aid of conjuring and had transformed their anger into affection to avert a beating. Of course, this fleeting moment of affective victory was swiftly replaced by fear of an even harsher punishment than the one he originally hoped to avoid. The incident hints both at how much enslaved people were willing to risk in order to influence their ownersâ emotions and at how much power slaveholdersâ feelings had over enslaved peopleâs fates.
While slaveholders like Pollard did not always explicitly acknowledge the ways that their closest relationships and feelings were based on enslaved people, documents written by enslaved people and slaveholders tell another story. As Presbyterian minister Benjamin Palmer observed in a sermon just weeks after the 1860 election, âNeed I pause to show how this system of servitude ⌠is interwoven with our entire social fabric? ⌠Must I pause to show how it has fashioned our modes of life, and determined all our habits of thought and feeling?â7
When writing letters, wills, slave sale documents, or diaries, slaveholders demonstrated that the emotions and affective practices of the antebellum South were fundamentally conditioned upon and constructed by enslaved people. From the ways that slaveholding families bonded and fought, to how they marked occasions from marriage to death, enslaved people had a profound effect on slaveholdersâ relationships and feelings, creating sentiments like jealousy, pride, shame, and, in particular, fear. At times this was an unintentional process, as enslaved people were unwillingly incorporated into the lives of the people that owned them. At other times enslaved people deliberately made and unmade relationships, influencing the emotions of slaveholders as a form of self-defense or resistance. This chapter details how enslaved people forged the bonds between slaveholding spouses, lovers, siblings, parents, and children, and how enslaved people unmade these bonds, knowingly mining veins of family tension in order to obtain benefits, avoid punishments, or escape slavery. Finally, the chapter outlines the role of enslaved people in provoking specific feelings like envy, pride, and dread, and how gossip was used to teach and enforce the boundaries of appropriate emotions.
Making Family Ties
One important way that enslaved people constructed slaveholdersâ emotions was by forging the intergenerational affective relations that knit planter families together. In an article from DeBowâs Review, an agricultural journal popular among Southern planters, the author, Dr. McTyeire, elucidated how enslaved people helped form those bonds, claiming that older enslaved people were âheirloom[s]â to be âcherishedâ with âtendernessâ because they may have âlaid the foundations of the familiesâ wealth ⌠bore your father in his arms, and went afield with your grandfather when he was starting in life.â8 The implication was that enslaved people not only produced heritable âwealthâ but also generated family ties and could even embody the memory of beloved ancestors. Oneâs father or grandfather might be dead, but that intimate relationship was preserved, made manifest through an enslaved person who had cared for that grandfather, father, and son, and might wait on future generations. James Henry Hammond used similar language when describing a thoroughly romanticized and supposedly reciprocal affective relationship between master and slave, reminiscing about enslaved people âwho served his father, and rocked his cradle,â shared in their ownerâs âgriefsâ as well as the celebration of holidays, and âwhose hearty and affectionate greetings never fail to welcomeâ their owner.9 Like Dr. McTyeire, Hammond blurred the lines between emotions about enslaved people and sentiments about family, revealing in the process the extent to which enslaved people shaped how he felt. Writing in proslavery journals and books, authors like McTyeire and Hammond claimed paternalism in order to defend the institution against its critics, but they also proved how thoroughly planters wove enslaved people into their own emotional lives and their feelings about home and family.10
Slaveholders did more than idealize the enslaved people who cared for their families for generations; members of the planter class also used enslaved people to cement intergenerational bonds by gifting enslaved people to relatives, typically when celebrating a specific rite of passage.11 In an 1816 Virginia court case over a contested will that included gifting enslaved people, one lawyer observed that âthe advancement of children is most frequently in negroes; and a bequest or gift of negroes is generally made as an advancement for the better establishing the child in life.â12 This suggests that the true affective power of an enslaved person lay not in how they tied a slaveholder to their ancestors, but in the promise of financial security and âadvancementâ that the enslaved person represented for subsequent generations of slaveowners. As a result, members of the planter class often gave enslaved people to slaveholding children to provide economic and emotional succor on the path to adulthood.
In 1819 John Perkins contracted a slave sale as a present to his sisterâs children. The bill of sale noted that âin consideration of his natural love and affection which the said John Perkins hath and bearthâ for the four children, he sold them six enslaved people for the modest sum of five dollars. If it was not already clear from this dramatically low price and the language of âlove and affectionâ that this was a gift, the bill went on to say that the sale of the slaves was intended to help fund the childrenâs âschooling and support.â13 This was no mere economic transaction spelled out in boilerplate wording: this was a slave sale couched as an uncleâs act of love for his nieces and nephews. Perkinsâs hopes for the childrenâs stable financial future and education were embodied as six people, six individuals who harbored their own hopes and dreams of a different future.14
Because gifting an enslaved person to a child was more than a commercial calculation, sale documents provide a glimpse of the nostalgia, love, pride, and loss that slaveholding parents experienced when commemorating a momentous event in a childâs life. A slave sale from November 1, 1837, announced, âMy son Doct. W. Thomas Brent being on the eve of leaving meâ in order to move to Louisiana, âI have this day given to him ⌠two boys named Aaron aged about 22 years and William aged about 16 years,â signed by George Brent.15 George Brent might be comforted to know that his son Thomas would be tended to as he established a medical practice in Louisiana, but George still expressed his anguish in the document by dramatically describing his sonâs move as âleavingâ him. While George Brent conveyed that he was taking his sonâs choice to move personally, there are no records showing how Aaron and William felt about this major change in their own young lives.
Marriages were another rite of passage of the slaveholding family marked by gifts of enslaved people. Documents from the antebellum South frequently reference slaveholding parents giving enslaved people as wedding presents, typically as part of the brideâs dowry.16 As William Craft explained in his narrative of his escape with his wife, Ellen, such a gift could be a loaded one for a young couple, larded with ulterior motives and meanings. Craft noted that Ellenâs father was her White owner, a fact so evident that the slaveholderâs wife was âannoyedâ at how often Ellen was âmistaken for a child of the family,â leading the slave mistress to give one of her daughters the eleven-year-old Ellen âas a wedding present.â17 The gift of an enslaved young woman in particular was a promise of financial security for newlyweds, since any children Ellen had in the future would multiply their estate and wealth. Giving a daughter an enslaved person from the family plantation also ensured that the new bride would have at least one familiar face in her new household. But making a present of the brideâs own half-sister could also be construed as a none-too-subtle warning about the infidelity and heartache that awaited many slaveholding wives.
Perhaps because of enslaved peopleâs prominence in constructing slaveholdersâ rituals and familial ties, as children of the planter class grew up, enslaved people continued to shape their relationships with their parents, even after those parents had passed. For many slaveholders, enslaved people served as a vehicle for remembering the dearly departed. In 1847 Louisiana slaveowner Phillip Moore petitioned to free a woman named Henrietta who had belonged to his late mother. Moore was explicit in court documents that manumitting Henrietta was his motherâs âdying wish,â evidently convinced that no contract or law could be more legally binding than a deathbed request. Carrying out her supposed âwishâ was a way to honor his mother, and invoking her last words in court helped see her desires to fruition.18 Rather than being manumitted, other enslaved people became a living memorial to a slaveholderâs dead parents. Before Henry Box Brownâs owner died, the slaveholder gave his son William âa special charge ⌠to take good care of [Brown].â William demonstrated the extent to which he sought to respect his fatherâs wishes when Brown âoverheard him telling the overseer that his father had raised meâthat I was a smart boy and that he must never whip me.â19 This shows how the philosophy of paternalism was learned: Williamâs father conceived of himself as a kind slaveholder who âhad raisedâ Brown like he was family. Through his deathbed request the slaveholder passed on to his son the gauzy fantasy that he had been a benevolent slaveowner and that William would be too. Unlike Phillip Mooreâs mother, Brownâs owner had left no explicit instructions about manumitting him. Quite the contrary, âtak[ing] good careâ of an enslaved person could be broadly interpreted. It is notable that William not only tried to mitigate punishment for Brown, but also invoked his fatherâs affections for Brown in order to do so. Brown thus served as a dead fatherâs best intentions incarnate, and any time William went out of his way to help Brown, the slaveholder would be reminded of his father and of the promise he was keeping.
For Pollard, memories of and feelings for enslaved people were ineluctably intertwined with those he had for his dead parents. After an enslaved woman named Marie passed away he claimed that she ânumbered ⌠among those whom, with love-lit eyes, I can so often see beckoning to me from Heaven,â in a celestial entourage that included his âbeloved parents,â several siblings, and many of the other âdear, old, familiar blacks of my boyâs home.â His dream of a welcoming, integrated afterlife could be read as platitudes about enslaved people being viewed as family, nothing more than a performance of paternalism, were it not for how often he blended his affection for enslaved people with the memory of his departed parents. In another nostalgic passage Pollard re...