The things Douglass didn’t reveal
The three narratives are infinitely rich as sources of Douglass’s public life and his heroic rise to liberty, activism and fame. But they leave a great deal unsaid, consciously or unconsciously hidden from his readers and from us biographers. Douglass invited us into his life over and over; but he seems to slip out of the room right when we want to push him to elaborate about his wives (the first black, second white), his five children and his complex and troubled extended family. He remains silent about his likely German lover, Ottilie Assing, of perhaps two decades and his crucial friendship with Julia Griffiths, an English woman who helped him survive professionally and emotionally in the early 1850s. He keeps close to the vest his many leadership rivalries with other black men and what he really thought of William Lloyd Garrison or Abraham Lincoln. And he leaves readers wondering what it had really felt like on emancipation night in 1863, along with his thoughts and feelings about any one of dozens of crossroads in an epic public life.
I want to ask: Mr. Douglass, what did you really read before crafting that rhetorical masterpiece of abolitionism, the 4 of July speech of 1852 that questioned what “independence” meant to America’s slaves, or the Freedmen’s Memorial address of 1876? Why did you keep an interpreter’s guide to the Bible almost always on or next your desk? Tell us, sir, the depth with which you read the book of Isaiah, Robert Burns and your favorite, Shakespeare. What was your writing process when you escaped into your little stone hut that you called your “growlery,” back behind your big house in the 1880s? How did you really, deep down, process that rage and hatred you forever seemed to harbor for slaveholders and their protectors? What did you actually say to your two young sons, Lewis and Charles, when you recruited them to go risk their lives for freedom in the Union army in 1863? What was it really like in your household when all your famous literary-intellectual friends came to visit and your illiterate wife left the room? What did you go through when five of your six grandchildren died so suddenly in 1886-87, most from typhoid fever? And how, sir, did you sustain hope in the 1880s and ’90s when black folk were being terrorized with lynchings and the triumphs of your life were so endangered as you reached the end of your mortal journey?
Alas, we cannot do that. We are left with the dilemma that in this self-made hero’s autobiographical life, the story of becoming free is better or more dramatic than being free.
Crafting his life’s narrative arc—and historical reputation
At the end of Douglass’s third autobiography, he declares that he had “lived several lives in one: first, the life of slavery; secondly, the life of a fugitive from slavery; thirdly, the life of comparative freedom; fourthly, the life of conflict and battle; and fifthly, the life of victory, if not complete, at least assured.” With a memoirist’s concentration on the self, Douglass wanted to demonstrate the struggle and achievement in his life. He has suffered and overcome, we are told. He had persevered through hopelessness, led his people through the fiery trial, and in the end reached at least a personal triumph. These are the images of an aging man summing up his life and attempting to control his historical reputation.
In Douglass’s categories, we see his self-image as a fugitive slave risen to racial and national leader, the person and the nation regenerated and redeemed. Like all talented autobiographers, Douglass was trying to order, even control, the passage of time, and thereby make sense of his own past. In 1884, Douglass, this man who never seemed to stop probing into his past to tell his story, wrote this revealing line about memory: “Memory was given to man for some wise purpose. The past is…the mirror in which we may discern the dim outlines of the future and by which we may make it more symmetrical.” Oh, how dearly we wish for that, but almost always meet defeat.
American culture has always had a fascination for autobiography, especially in the service of the idea, or at least our need to believe in the idea, that we can recreate ourselves, that we can make and re-make our lives, that our futures are not wholly determined. How precious was that faith to an American slave in the 1830s and 1840s? In a passage in Bondage and Freedom, Douglass said as much poignantly:
As a source of historical truth, of course, autobiography must be interpreted with caution. No simple chronology can convey the deeper meanings in such an eventful life. Douglass the autobiographer endures for many reasons, but not least because his writing represents both the brilliant complaint and the audacious hope of the slave who stole the master’s language and reimagined himself in prose poetry. We should read Douglass’s autobiographies not for their “accuracy,” but for their truths.
David Blight is a teacher, scholar and public historian. A professor of American history at Yale University and director of the school's Gilder Lehrman Center for the Study of Slavery, Resistance and Abolition, he is author of many books including American Oracle: The Civil War in the Civil Rights Era and the New York Times-bestselling biography Frederick Douglass: Prophet of Freedom. He has worked on Douglass much of his professional life and been awarded the Bancroft Prize, the Abraham Lincoln Prize and the Frederick Douglass Prize, among others.
History Reads features the work of prominent authors and historians.