Rating: 
Summary: Required reading
Review: A deserved winner of several prizes, this book should be required reading for every high school senior in America. I think it needs a fair amount of sophistication to read -- it's written by an academic, and he uses big words generously. One thing that occasionally irritated me was a tendency to write a polemic. These are small flaws, however, in a book that will lead all readers to appreciate the history of slavery in this country as they never have before. Johnson reveals the psychological ground of slavery and what an all-encompassing and pernicious system it was.
Rating: 
Summary: Not what you might think
Review: In a book that argues that the slave trade itself fundamentally defines American slavery as a whole, a focus on the brutality and inhumanity of slavery would be expected. The tragedy of individuals torn from their families, kept in inhumane conditions in the slave markets, and sold to strangers who likely would physically abuse them is certainly one focus of Soul By Soul. However, Walter Johnson has gone much further than that in defining the slave markets as central to our understanding of slavery. Through creative interpretation of numerous personal and business documents drawn from slave dealers and owners, the court transcripts produced when their bargains went awry, and the haunting memoirs of slaves who either came through the markets themselves or had relatives who did, Johnson shows that the act of buying a human being was profoundly important to the Southern mind in ways that transcend economics or dynamics of power. It is thus not possible to dismiss Johnson�s interpretation with the argument that the majority of slaves never passed through the traders� hands, so their experience with the market was negligible and therefore of less importance than Johnson would suggest. This is a book less about the experience of black slaves in the market than about the effect those markets had on the white psyche.Johnson sees southern whites as consumers, ready to be marketed to in the modern sense. Traders knew this and were prepared to advertise their wares in ways that would allow those consumerist impulses to be satisfied. The purchase of a first slave for a man just starting to build his fortune was an act of hope; the buyer�s dreams of prosperity rested upon the slave whom he had chosen, in a sense transferring dependence from the slave to the paternalist himself. Wealthier buyers could impose their own fantasies upon their purchases; domestic slaves could bring respectability to a household by relieving the master�s wife from physical labor. Slaves could also establish a master�s reputation among his peers by being �stubborn� or �unruly� slaves whom the master could break, establishing his power. They could also embody sexual fantasies, allow a white man to create a role for himself as a paternalist, or simply reflect well on their owner by being �good purchases.� Much as a man may express his desired appearance to others by purchasing a certain model of car, and judges others buy what they drive, so did slaveholders define and judge themselves according to the quality of slaves they owned. Similarly, just as slaveowners defined themselves according to their actions in the market, they also defined slaves� humanity according to their market value, using racial and physical markers to determine the abilities of their purchases. However, the human nature of their property inevitably led to slave owners being dissatisfied with their purchases; slaves seldom fulfilled the materialist fantasies of their buyers. Violence was the surest response, as slave owners expressed their disappointment with �faulty products.� Slaves could be returned for failing to perform as the traders had promised, but more often they were simply whipped. Presumably, slaves� common experiences drew them closer to one another, as Johnson argues. However, his sources show that slaves frequently judged each other in ways reminiscent of the slaveholders� own criteria, that is upon skin color, intelligence, attitude, etc. Arguing that they automatically united against whites is perhaps sensible, but not supported by Johnson�s sources. This however, is one of the few flaws in Johnson�s otherwise insightful analysis.
Rating:
Summary: tabsaw writes fiction about history
Review: In his review of Soul By Soul, tabsaw compares Johnson's book about the slave market unfavorably with the WPA interviews taken with former slaves themselves, and claims that Johnson, a skilled and careful historian, presents no documentation for his claims. In fact, a quick examination of a few of the many hundreds of footnotes in Soul By Soul illustrates that Johnson's work is well-grounded in the documentary evidence--much of it from court records and newspapers in which the slaveholders themselves described their world. For example, advertisements for runaway slaves routinely describe the markings on their bodies--ears cut off, whip scars, and the like.
The WPA slave narratives are good, but they need to be read (like all historical sources) carefully. For example, the interviewers are all middle class and white, the interviewees are all black and aged, and the interviews take place in the 1930s Jim Crow South, where several African Americans were burned alive, lynched, or tortured to death in public every single week, year in and year out. The interviews take place in a situation where whites own almost all the property and make all the laws and where any white man can kill any black person without fear of prosecution. Does this sound like an environment likely to produce candid information about race relations? I don't mean to say we disregard the slave narratives, but obviously they cannot simply be taken at face value. Walter Johnson is a real historian, while tabsaw is just a neo-Confederate propagandist, searching for something to defend his fantasy of the Old South. As a Southerner myself, I don't find that either shocking or admirable, but Soul by Soul is a great book, and cannot fairly be faulted for such a misuse of evidence.
Rating:
Summary: Slavery upclose
Review: In response to Tabsaw's "brilliant" book review, I would offer a more balanced perspective. Yes, the slave narratives provide interesting reading, but what evidence is there that these are historically accurrate? In fact, a quick review of how the WPA collected these narratives should give an clue as to their reliability. Most were done by whites looking to support their perception of slavery in the 1930's. The people interviewed were elderly and their stories written down by their white interviewers. Gee...no chance for embellishment or mistakes in that process!! And Tabsaw just assumes that the white recorders were able to keep their bias out of the narratives as they transcribed them!! Hey..show me a single interviewer who is able to do that!!
Johnson's book, on the other hand, is an excellent work of scholarship. He does cite his sources (that is what those numbers mean at the end of sentenses or paragraphs, genius!!), and had Tabsaw taken the time to look in the section called "Notes", he would have discovered that Johnson is relying upon a wide range of primary and secondary sources to tell his tale. The picture he paints is one of horror and dehumanization. Slaves were treated like animals with little regard given to their well-being. Johnson takes the reader inside the slave market where the smells, sounds and conditions of slavery cannot be ignored. It is a compelling and disturbing read.
In a larger sense, Johnson's work is also a commentary on Southern life as a whole during the 1800's. The enslavement of fellow humans required a new and different social structure. The patriarchial society that ensued brought with it profound implications for relations with women, property rights and behavior. Johnson makes it plain that the slave culture came to dominate Southern life.
I recommend this work highly!! For anyone interested in what the process of slavery was like, this is the place to start. Once finished with the book (which I doubt Tabsaw actually read cover to cover because of the simple-mindness of his review), one will have a clear picture indeed of what life was like for slaves awaiting their purchase and the interactions that occurred with the white owners. The slave narratives are interesting reading, but background knowledge is necessary for an informed arguement. Johnson's book provides the needed background and helps put those narratives in context. READ THIS BOOK and see what life was like in an antibellum slave market.
Rating:
Summary: hard evidence that cuts to the heart of slavery
Review: Kent Brook's review, as it attempts to describe Walter Johnson's Soul By Soul, comes closer to describing itself. It is Johnson's masterpiece, in fact, that hews to the facts and bristles with documentation, and Brook's tendentious review that comes off as a politically-driven tirade. What Brooks derides as "gossip" are the court records, themselves assembled by slaveowners, not abolitionists. Johnson presents a very well-grounded look at the slave market, rooting his assertions in the documentary record. It is true that he does not write a local history of slave life in New Orleans, but that is because Soul By Soul is a far larger, more ambitious and profound than any such local history could be; this is appropriate, since New Orleans was not a local but a regional slave market, and its tenacles reached far into the Southern upcountry. Soul By Soul won the Frederick Jackson Turner Award from the Organization of American Historians--an organization that knows something about documentation--which is one of the most prestigious awards a work of history can attain. The reason: it's a terrific work of scholarship, and, beyond that, Soul By Soul is an extraordinary piece of literary craft, a gripping read. Maybe that is why it is being picked up by history book clubs across the country. Read it and judge for yourself.
Rating:
Summary: tabsaw writes fiction about history
Review: Rather than try to describe this book over again (others have already done so), I shall pose a question? Why do we take the word of an author who writes as if 'he was there' and cites no historical research for his depiction of the Antebellum South, when I dare say very few of you have read 'The Slave Narratives'. Don't know what the 'Slave Narratives' are you say? Shame on you. If you are a historian, you should know. The slave narratives are compiled interviews, state by state, of over 2500 former slaves who were still living in the mid-thirties. These intereviews were done under ths auspices of the WPA during the depression. So why not read about how it was from the mouths of the people how were ACTUALLY THERE instead of someone who wasn't and is also trying to sell books with sensationalism. Why aren't the Slave Narratives more widely known? Well, probably because many of the slaves interviewed (although certainly not all) didn't have bad enough things to say about life in the 'old South' to be considered politically correct (history wise) in today's times, that's why. Some of them are available here on Amazon, and I can guarantee you that reading them will be the next best thing to getting in a time machine. I promise. Anyone know what 'roas'n ears' are? Or how to 'roast a sweet potato'? Or want to read how the 'Yankees threw all our food away. What did dey think weas goin to eat?'. Yep, you can read all the about it in these interviews.
Rating: 
Summary: Disappointing Read
Review: Slavery in our country's history was grievously wrong, wrong, wrong...but this book was dry, dry, dry. It left out very basic details and was bogged down in the author's repetitive, plodding musings. My mind would drift trying to get through one paragraph (and the paragraphs are quite wordy.) I wanted to soak up this book and its information. Unfortunately, it was just too dull and overwrought, and I came away knowing merely a bit more about the New Orleans slave market than I did going in.
Rating:
Summary: Disappointing Read
Review: Slavery in our country's history was grievously wrong, wrong, wrong...but this book was dry, dry, dry. It left out very basic details and was bogged down in the author's repetitive, plodding musings. My mind would drift trying to get through one paragraph (and the paragraphs are quite wordy.) I wanted to soak up this book and its information. Unfortunately, it was just too dull and overwrought, and I came away knowing merely a bit more about the New Orleans slave market than I did going in.
Rating: 
Summary: Soul by Soul by Walter Johnson
Review: The principle question that arises from a reading of "Soul by Soul" by Walter Johnson is why was this book written? It is touted as history, yet not only does it lack any original historical material, it also lacks any discernable historical facts. Rather than history, "Soul by Soul" seems to be a mean-spirited, emotional tract designed to promote two fundamental ideas: 1. that white people living in the antebellum South were universally loathsome, brutish and cruel and 2. that black people living in the antebellum South were universally noble, good and abused. To support his views, Professor Johnson strings together a loose collection of repetitious snippets from antebellum abolitionist literature and excerpts from gossipy litigation proceedings. His personal contribution is represented by his miraculous ability to enter the psyche of the book's long deceased characters and divine their true, but unspoken, motives and thoughts. Quite a feat for any historian! One loses count of the number of times that the reader is treated to white people using their "probing fingers" in this book. Fortunately, in between probes, the reader can be shocked by the "killing fields of the lower South," the "historical sexualization of black bodies," the "slaveholders' inevitable failure to live through the stolen bodies of their slaves," and the "brutish perogatives of whiteness." This is heavy, hate-filled stuff worthy of a TV mini-series but it is out of place in a supposedly serious history text. I live in a former slave quarter in New Orleans. In the antebellum period, this building and its resident slaves were, interestingly enough, owned by a free black who was financially ruined in 1863 by the Emancipation Proclamation. As an amateur historian, I would have thought that a book about the New Orleans slave market would contain some pertinent historical facts about these markets. What were their addresses? What percentage of their customers were black? What percentage were white? How many slaves did the typical New Orleans household have? How were they fed and clothed? What were their working hours? These are basic questions that should have been addressed but instead, the reader is given an emotionally charged, repetitious, boring rehash of tired, previously published material. In short, this book, for the most part, reads like a rambling, overly long sermon. Anyone seeking serious scholarship on the subject of slavery would do well to look elsewhere and should consider reading the "Slave Narratives" compiled by the Federal Writers Project, "Time on the Cross" by Robert Fogel and Stanley Engerman and "The Slave Trade" by Hugh Thomas. The first of these is a collection of interviews of former slaves performed by the W.P.A. in the 1930's. The latter two works contain original historical research and both deal with the facts of slavery, not the emotions.
Rating:
Summary: very informative and specific
Review: this book was assigned to me as a summer reading book for my advanced placement american history course... after reading the first chapter, i was automatically interested. i wouldn't exactly say i couldn't put the book down, but having to read it was more like an interesting leisure activity instead of a boring read. johnson's use of citing people who reappear throughout the book was very useful because it was more obvious that the horrors of the slave market were true statements from real slaves instead of a general statement without a citation. i strongly recommend this book to people of all ages!!!
|
