Transforming Knowledge through Language in Blake

This week I want to discuss how Delany uses language, specifically writing, in Blake to shift paradigms, in light of Dr. Doolen’s piece on transnational history.

In Blake, Henry and a few of his fellow revolutionaries are eloquent speakers––it becomes clear that literacy is important for breaking out of slavery on an individual and a institutional level. Henry is described as “the intelligent slave” throughout the text, designating him as being exceptional and qualified to lead the movement. He takes ownership of his use of the English language, even though it is the language of his enslavers and has been greatly used to justify his subjection. This appropriation (and also reconstruction) of white tools occurs not only with language but with religion and with money as well. Henry rejects the religion of the whites, but then he reconstructs it for his own use and it becomes another fuel for his revolution; he is also able to use this new religious rhetoric when encouraging fellow slaves to rise up. Similarly, Henry emphasizes the importance of having money––the same money that was used to “purchase” them––for breaking away from slavery. Though the whites would call it theft, Henry takes what is owed to him, again reversing the rhetoric to serve his purpose, so that he may begin sowing seeds of revolution.

I think all of these things are examples of what Doolen said concerning Delany: “Delany and his antebellum black contemporaries believed that by transforming the production of knowledge, they could help topple the slavery regime” (154). Delany’s characters are doing just that––they are changing the way language is used, resulting in a new rhetoric that fuels revolution instead of pacifying or simply erasing black existence. Discussing the novel, Doolen notes that “while whites tell stories that rationalize their power and justify the institutions of slavery, slaves repeatedly infiltrate the production of knowledge and exert control over narration” (156). I want to discuss the following passage from Blake (a conversation between Henry and Placido) in light of these thoughts. Henry begins:

“But I read across the water, in a Cuba journal at New Orleans, a lyric from your pen, in which the fire of liberty blazed as from the altar of a freeman’s heart. I therefore make no hazard when I this to you impart: I have come to Cuba to help to free my race; and that which I desire here to do, I’ve done in another place.”

“Amen!” exclaimed Placido. “Heaven certainly designed it, and directed you here at this most auspicious moment, that the oppressed of Cuba also may ‘declare the glory of God!’”

“Have you thought much in that direction, Placido?”

“I have, though I’ve done but little, and had just finished the last word of the last stanza of a short poem intended to be read at a social gathering to be held at the house of a friend one evening this week, which meets for the express purpose of maturing some plan of action” (195).

I think this passage is fascinating because it is an example of language (through writing) as a tool for revolution, but it highlights the transnational capabilities of writing. Protest writing, of which we might consider this novel an example, is a powerful tool for changing the production of knowledge, reconstructing the borders and limits of institutions and individuals. I think it’s significant that Henry specifies that he read Placido’s work in a “Cuba journal at New Orleans,” because that city is already constructed as a hybrid space, and the transnational nature of the journal helps to constitute Cuba as the fertile land for revolution. This is an example of how language can spark action, both in Henry’s movement to Cuba and in Placido’s “gathering” where his poem will function as a fire iron to stir up the flames. The use of writing in this passage is an example of what the novel accomplishes as a whole––a reconstruction of boundaries and limits of nations, identity, and rhetoric so that revolution becomes possible, where it was “unthinkable” before.