The Issue of Slavery in Historical Novel Writing
By Guest | November 24, 2021 |
Please welcome author Annette Nauraine (she/her) to WU today! Annette reached out to us recently after learning more about slavery in the 1700-1800s in Great Britain. It made her wonder about the responsibility that a historical author has to depict those times authentically. From her bio:
Annette’s latest book is Kissing the Kavalier. She is a wife, recovering opera singer, mom of two, Doodle mom. She loves classical music, gardening and gardens, writing, reading, history, opera and dogs. When she has a spare minute, she enjoys period movies and TV series like Versailles and Crown. She spends her time trying to keep ahead of everything life has to offer and enjoying love and laughter.
Learn more about Annette on her website, and follow her on Facebook at annettenauraineauthor.
The Issue of Slavery in Historical Novel Writing
A New Yorker article (Home Truth, by Sam Knight, New Yorker, August 23, 2021) detailed how many of the great English country estates were created by the use of slaves in the West Indian colonies. I was horrified that I never knew this.
As an American, I’m well aware of the history of slavery in the US, but it never occurred to me that all estates for movies and TV shows based on Jane Austen novels, Bridgerton, Brideshead Revisited and stories set in the Georgian and Regency periods, were built and supported by slavery.
In 1807, parliament passed the Abolition of the Slave Trade Act, effective throughout the British empire, but it wasn’t until 1833 that slavery was abolished in British colonies through the Slavery Abolition Act and West Indian slaves obtained their freedom.
About 12.5 million people were transported as slaves from Africa to the Americas and the Caribbean between the 16th century and 1807. When the Slavery Abolition Act was passed, there were 46,000 slave owners in Britain, according to the Slave Compensation Commission, the government body established to evaluate the claims of the slave owners.
Slavery wasn’t on the doorstep of the British because it was kept at a great distance in the West Indies, where slaves were used to harvest staple crops such as indigo, rice, coffee, but most importantly, sugar which was used to make rum. Slave owners were euphemistically called, “West India Merchants,” which disguised their ownership of slaves.
The Slavery Abolition Act of 1833 freed 800,000 Africans who were the legal property of Britain’s slave owners. Contained in the act was a provision of £20m of taxpayer funds to bail out the owners for the loss of their “property.” That sum was 40% of the total government expenditures for 1834. It is the modern equivalent of between £16bn and £17bn. The slaves received nothing, and worse, were compelled to provide 45 hours of unpaid labor each week for their former masters, for a further four years after their supposed liberation, forcing the slaves to buy their own freedom.
Except for books written by few writers of color, these facts, or even characters of color, rarely appear in historical novels. Romances, in particular, involve relationships meant to meet reader expectations. Admittedly, the ugly facts of slavery do little to enhance the fantasy of a plain Jane being plucked from ignominy and rising to the status of a Lady.
However, if writers want to accurately depict history, characters, and a social milieu, it is incumbent upon us to mix in a bit of realism. Using the struggle against slavery in English could add great depth to characters, provide a whole new line of stories, and draw in new and diverse readers. Including the presence of slaves and acknowledging the income source of hundreds of British families, can also bring a wider awareness of history that many would prefer to sweep under the proverbial Persian rug.
Is it appropriate for white writers to write about slavery or should it remain the province of POC? Slavery is history; real, hard, painful, and dreadful. Weaving in characters of color takes guts, research and awareness, and sensitivity readers. We might get slapped down for getting it wrong or lose readers who don’t like that slice of history included in their books. Entertainment, not education, is what draws many readers to books, no matter a book’s setting. But leaving slavery, or enslaved persons out of our narratives is like wiping out the fact of slavery and the individuals who suffered under its injustice. We can’t ignore the fact that the blood of thousands of slaves built many of the great, beautiful English estates and, probably, the estates of many other countries who engaged in slavery.
People of color and their history have been made invisible for too long. As writers, no matter our race, we can choose to illuminate that with the mightiest tool we have: words of truth.
All respectful comments are welcome!
Many thanks to today’s guest.
You can read more WU guest posts by visiting this link.
I agree! Thanks for this post. I have been working on a MG HF that takes place in 1950 in Charlotte, NC. Like myself, the protagonist is white, but the most important secondary character is Black. I have researched, talked to Blacks, and employed sensitivity readers. These are important stories…we must write them with care, diligence, and respect.
I’ve been writing and publishing stories about the multi-cultural 18th century North American frontier for nearly a decade. My latest series explores this painful part of our world’s history, slavery. The third and last in the series released yesterday (the Kindred series). But for another look at the subject, and a glimpse of how it could have been, I recommend a recent nonfiction read, The First Emancipator, The Forgotten Story of Robert Carter, the Founding Father Who Freed His Slaves, by Andrew Levy. How is it that it took me nearly twenty years of researching slavery in the British colonies and United States to even discover this book, published in 2005, a year after I started my research, which I had thought was thorough?
I think that since good writing is honest, anyone writing about that period should present slavery as it existed for their characters.
Hello! The title of this post intrigued. I completely agree that accuracy is important in writing, especially in the context is the sensitive topic of slavery.
I was born and raised in Jamaica, and I learned much about history and the role England played in the development of the land of my birth. In school we learned about the length of Britain’s arm in the involvement of slavery, as well as much about what was going on in the colonies.
Depicting their role in the enslavement of Africans Jn the West Indies for economic gain is definitely necessary for writing a novel that is historically accurate. I think reading a novel is not just purely for entertainment but also for educating others. A lot of Victorian literature talk a bit about what was going on during that time period.
Also, check out Wide Sargasso Sea by Jean Rhyss. It does a good job of giving you a peek into the lives of the slaves during that time as well.
Even most recently, Jamaica has been fighting with the British government for full independence as after the Slavery Abolition Act, many islands in the West Indies did not obtain full freedom. Jamaica finally obtained independence in August 1962. Jamaica is considered a British Commonwealth now, but the island wants to be under its own governance.
The following cite can be useful in learning a little more about Caribbean islands as they are today, and some history: http://www.cia.gov. To learn more about slavery, try and read books written by people who grew up in those places. Also, Britain has a well-preserved record of their own history, which can be quite helpful.
I just wanted to chime in as I have some knowledge about the role slavery and England played in my island home.
Peace and love,
Paula R.
A truer light is shining on our history and what we see is painful. Our literature has too much looked the other way and can no longer.
That awareness comes with a dilemma, though. It’s the story of all of us but we are warned, properly, not to write the part of it that is not strictly ours. How, then, is one to authentically tell a story of former times so that we can see how we arrived at our current times, and the legacy, parallels, echoes of our history?
Historical stories are first of all about people: individuals, not cardboard props, and the more individual they are the more real they become. Also, the less falsely appropriating.
I do believe that now is not the time, if we are white, to own stories that are not ours. It is the time, however, to tell the stories that we can about the people we can honestly know.
Where it is needed and necessary characters of different experiences have to be there, true and real, researched and respected, and if that is so then a story has integrity even if it cannot and should not pretend to fully represent experience that is not ours.
Some day I would love to see historical fiction written in collaboration. I think that would be cool. All fiction, though, can be written with honesty, heart and originality and that, at least, is better than the polite ignorance and shameful dishonesty sometimes evident in former literary eras.
History may have been written to conceal terrible truths but people are known to us because we are people too. Write the stories of people as they are, as they fail, as the aspire to be, and as they change and our literature will get to a truer place, and so will we. I believe that.
Stories are for a purpose. Let’s not shut them down but tell them better. We will all be better for it.
You’ve described the paradox quite well. Janet Harvey of Invite Change wrote of this in The Role of Paradox in Teamwork, with excerpts from Paradoxes in Group Life written by Kenwyn Smith and David Berg; pgs. 207-230. Harvey states “As with any paradox, the intention for effective teamwork is to release the ‘either/or’ experience.” The paradox is stuckness versus movement. She quotes Smith and Berg as saying, “‘Stuckness’ refers to the “repetitive, often unconscious tensions that prevent a group from even doing the work of problem solving or compromising about conflicting needs.” The answer lies in accepting the paradox exists and moving through it anyway–not by force but with both sides granting the paradox its existence. Therein participants can create and develop meaning. Smith and Berg again refer to this as “The discovery, emotional and intellectual, of the link provides the release essential for group movement.”
These are not easy waters, and they will be waded clumsily no matter the preparation, but preparing acknowledges the paradox. The collaboration you opine could surely be not only healing but also formulate the release from the paradox itself. The opportunity for the next renaissance, a human one, lies within.
Thanks for your comments; they were insightful. As Annette stated, Sensitivity Readers can be used by people who are trying to tell the stories of others that are not of their race, color, gender, etc. I am a new writer (currently writing a historical romance novel and my protaganist is an African American woman slave). Sometimes I feel overwhelmed in my research process because there is so little information out in the world that tells the real, detailed story of the slaves’ lives. But, I’m trying my best!! I think that some writers feel as though their stories have been told enough but in actuality, there are so many things that only come out when you happen to catch a break (by visiting a museum or hearing an older relative stating something that their grandmother or great-grandfather mentioned). It can be very upsetting and weary for someone like me who really wants to get those stories out. Now…. regarding your statement about collaboration: thankfully, that has begun. I just finished reading a FANTASTIC book called “The Personal Librarian”, written by an African American and Caucasian woman duo. The story discusses some hard facts regarding the issue of “passing” (i.e., when African Americans used the “lightness” of their skin to “pass” as Caucasians for safety, economic empowerment, education, and other reasons). But even this collaboration came together because the Caucasian woman’s editor brought up writing the story with the African American woman’s editor. Otherwise, it may never have been written. Trying to find writers of a different race, ethnicity, culture, etc. to collaborate with will be even harder for new/unknown authors. I believe THAT is the real issue: How to collaborate? (when you don’t even know who’s writing)! I believe if more writers would state that they are willing to collaborate with each other on their websites, blogs and writing communities, then the real stories of ALL of us can be shared with the world. Truth is truth. I appreciate your comments immensely and I hope to one day collaborate with you (or someone like you) to get these stories OUT. Caucasian writers need to state the truths In their works (no matter how harsh those truths may be) but they must also have their facts straight (or there will be no mercy from African American readers and possibly other readers as well). ALL writers can be great speakers for voices no longer able to speak for themselves; THAT is what matters. Thank you again!!
Thank you, Annette, for the timely and important post. It is hard to understate the levels of denial, self-congratulation, and outright bigotry that can lie embedded in as seemingly innocent a phrase as “reader expectations.” Those expectations do not come from nowhere, and they are not genetically encoded as “loves a ripping yarn.”
An ancillary topic is the increasingly frequent appearance of actors of color in historical dramas in which they play roles their forebears would seldom if ever have been permitted to play in real life–members of European courts, nobles, parliamentarians, generals, etc. I’m currently watching The Great and enjoying it very much, and am grateful so many actors of color get to play parts previously denied them. So much talent wasted for so many decades! And yet I wonder as well if it doesn’t create the unhistorical and potentially pernicious impression (for those insufficiently read) that things were racially hunky-dory all along, that it really was a case of free individuals doing their thing all that time, a prejudice underlying much of the subtler difficulties and misunderstandings in the Enlightenment view of universal individual rights. “All Lives Matter” seems egalitarian until one understands the context.
All of which merely underscores that one of the principle virtues requires of writers is honesty, as well as the courage not to shrink from its demands. Thanks for the reminder.
Wishing you and your loved ones a very happy Thanksgiving.
I think your sensitivity to the truth you’ve learned does you great credit. I hope it won’t affect your writing in a negative way.
Novelist or historian? Advocate for human rights or storyteller?
If the plague is relevant, I think you should include it; if slavery is relevant, include it.
As a wannabe novelist I feel my first obligation is to myself: to tell my story in my voice. My next obligation is to my craft: Make it the best story I can. My next obligation is to my reader: Make my story rewarding to read. I leave out what I don’t think is relevant, and include what I think is; I don’t find that these three obligations are in conflict. They support one another.
I’ve written a novel set in 1500 BC. The servants I describe are slaves, but I don’t describe the horrors of slavery; it would do nothing for the story, and would distract my reader. I don’t accurately portray the treatment of women, who were virtually slaves and worse, or a lot of the other attitudes and practices that we work today to rise above. I don’t hide them, but I don’t present them as the brutality I believe many were. That wouldn’t contribute to the story.
I support the struggle to eliminate racial and other forms of unjust discrimination. I find our treatment of women, especially BIPOC women especially offensive and heinous. But I don’t allow it to affect the novel.
I wish you the best in the finding of your way between being the novelist you want to be and portraying history with absolute accuracy. I think it is a tortuous road.
I have found myself turned off to historical romance novels where the younger aristocratic but poor son goes off to make his fortune and makes it in China shipping opium or exploiting India with the East India Company or by owning their Caribbean plantations. I’m sure there was plenty of image control going on back home in London then despite their empire driven sense of entitlement.
I read “A Strange Uncertain Light” by G V Anderson two days ago. It’s an historical ghost story. This paragraph about a mansion stood out:
It had been built, he recalled, in the mid-eighteenth century by the Sixth Earl of Hythe who, like so many nobles with interests in the Caribbean, could think of nothing better to do than squander his wealth on a show home. The family estates in Barbados and Grenada, the dark bent backs of slaves, the foreman’s whip–all were well taxed to fund this venture. One by one, the red bricks settled into their mortar. Until the flow of money stopped.
Thanks for your comment. Can you explain to me why the paragraph stood out for you? I don’t want to assume. Thank you!