Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Disclaimer
This blog is intended to provide students with a forum to discuss questions assigned for class and to be used as a tool to provide students with a daily summary of class and homework assignments. It is not intended to be a communication tool to correspond with students, parents, or the public at large. To contact me, Mr. Fuller, the teacher of this class, please e-mail me at my school address or call me at the school telephone number. NO STUDENT MAY POST INFORMATION ABOUT THEMSELVES OTHER THAN THEIR OWN FIRST NAMES ON THIS BLOG. Thanks for helping to make this powerful tool all it can be!
Blog Archive
-
▼
2007
(75)
-
▼
April
(26)
- Need a Myth Permission Slip? Print one out.
- EVEN DAY Homework 4/30
- Absent 4/30?
- Some More Civil War Photos
- Homework 4/27
- Absent 4/27?
- Final Conference Rubric
- Absent 4/26?
- EVEN DAY Homework 4/26
- EVERYONE REMEMBER YOUR JOHN BROWN ASSIGNMENTS TOMO...
- ODD DAY Homework 2/25
- Absent 4/25?
- EVERYBODY GET YOUR MYTH PERMISSION SLIPS SIGNED --...
- EVEN DAY Homework 4/24
- Absent 4/24?
- Homework 4/23
- Absent 4/23?
- Blog Posting Due 4/24
- To Pack or Not to Pack
- Civil War Trip Itinerary
- Absent April 12 or 13?
- ODD Day Homework 4/11
- Absent 4/11?
- ALL - Respond by 4/16
- Even Day Homework 4/10
- Absent 4/10?
-
▼
April
(26)
82 comments:
I think the treatment of slaves under Shelby is a lot better than treatments of "harsher" masters. For example, on page 11, Haley explains how a master named Tom (George's master) treats his slaves so badly,and how inhumane he is. George also describes the treatment he gets from his master, on page 21. He says, "I begged him again, and then he turned on me, and began striking me." However, Shelby and his wife treat their slaves like humans should be treated. For example, on page 40, Mrs. Shelby says, "I thought, by kindness, and care, and instruction, I could make the condition of mine better than freedom-fool that I was!" So this shows that Mrs. Shelby treats her slaves kindly, and believes they deserve to be free.
I agree with Sharon that Shelby treats the slaves better than other masters. Many other slave masters, such as George's master, are inhumane. They do not regard their slaves as actual people. In chapter two, George's master makes George quit his job and do hard manual labor. This crushed George's dreams and spirit. But, Haley and his wife treat their slaves with dignity and respect. In chapter 5, Mrs. Shelby talks about how she taught religion to the slaves and cared for them. On page 42, she says, "I was a fool to think I could make anything good out of such a deadly evil. It is a sin to hold a slave under laws like ours." Mrs. Shelby treats her slaves so well because she does not actually believe in slavery. Haley does not feel as strongly as his wife, but he is a kind, fair man, so he does not treat his slaves badly either. Also, Tom has a cabin on the property. Most other slave owners do not give their slaves actual houses to live in. This further illustrates the Shelby's kindness. So, the treatment of slaves under Shelby is better treatment than under other, crueler slave owners.
I agree with both Sharon and Laura when they say that the treatment of slaves under Shelby much better than the treatment of slaves under a "harsher" master. Throughout the first five chapters we get to know Mr.Shelby and the other slave master Mr.Haley. Mr.Shelby actually treats his slaves as human beings and his wife does also. He even promised Uncle Tom freedom. Mrs.Shelby even thinks that slavery is a sin. "It is a sin to hold slaves under laws like ours..." (Pg.42) On page 43 both Mr.Shelby describes Haley, "... a man alive to nothing but trade and profit- cool, and unhesitating, and unrelenting, as death and the grave." Even Mr.Shelby a slave owner describes him as this which shows how cruel this man is. Later on in the chapter after Eliza overhears them she says, "Master don't want to sell; and Missis- she's always good." (Pg.46) Even this slave thinks kindly of her master and mistress and she knew they had a hard decision to make. However, with many other slave masters their slaves wouldn't feel bad for running away. That is why I think that the treatment of slaves is much better under Mr.Shelby.
I must disagree with Sharon, Laura and Taylor in their opinons. I think that Stowe is trying to make the point that no matter how benevolent or kind a master may be, slavery is still abhorrent and evil, and leads to the same end. As she herself puts it, "So long as the law considers all these human beings, with beating hearts and living affections, only as so many things belonging to the master, -so long as the failure, or misfortune, or imprudence, or death of the kinbdest master may cause them any day to exchange a life of kind protection for one of hopeless misery and toil, - solong it is impossible to make anything beautiul or desirable in the best-regulated administration of slvery" (Stowe 13). Also, while Mr. Shelby may be a kind master, he still has to sell his "best hand" (Stowe 26) down the river, and rip a mother's only child from her very arms. In selling faithful Tom, he forces Tom to ""sobs, heavy, hoarse, and loud, [which] shook the chair... great tears [that] fell throiugh his fingers; just such tears" (Stowe 45) Stowe describes, as the ones shed by a father for his dead first-born, or a a mother for her dying child. This in spite of his being "a fair average kind of man, good natured and indly, and disposed to easy indulgence of those around him". I beloeve Stowe is saying that no matter how good a master, only pain can come of slavery.
I fall somewhere in between Spencer and Sharon, Laura, and Taylor on this. I think that the treatment of the slaves under Shelby is definitely better than under other masters (especially George's). The compassion of the Shelbys is displayed through Master Shelby's reluctance to part with any of his slaves, Mistress Shelby's anger at the thought of parting Eliza and Harry, and Master George's happiness and closeness to the slaves in the cabin. I believe that one of Stowe's goals in writing UTC was to show how slavery could force good people to do evil things, and the audience is meant to understand that the Shelbys are relatively good slave owners.
However, Spencer is completely correct when he points out that Stowe's main focus is showing how slavery is horrible in all its manifestations. Creating a sense of warmth towards the slaves and the slave owners only makes the evils of slavery even clearer and harsher when these likable characters are turned into enemies or monsters. Going back to the original question, though, the literal answer would have to be that one system of slavery is better than another.
I think that everyone so far has made a good point. I agree with Spencer that no matter how kind the master, slavery will lead to the same end. However, I do believe that there is such a thing as “better” treatment. For example the conversation between Mr. Shelby and Haley from pages 13-19, conveyed right away the difference between the thoughts and values of slave masters. On page 16, Mr. Shelby expresses his feelings about the separation of mother and son, by saying, “I’m a humane man, and I would hate to take the boy away from his mother.” Although later on he does the opposite, the first thought on his mind was what the reaction of his slaves would be as human beings. Meanwhile, we see that Haley sees slaves as no more than property. He remarks, “Niggers, you know, that's fetched up properly, ha'n't no kind of 'spectations of no kind; so all these things comes easier” (Stowe 18). Another distinct contrast between the two slave owners was there dialect. We could see from the way that Haley spoke, he was uneducated, ill-mannered, and aggressive, whereas Mr. Shelby spoke in complete sentences, and readers got a feeling that he was well brought up and courteous. Later on in the novel when Eliza is talking to her husband, we see another striking difference in the treatment of slaves (Stowe 26-29). Eliza’s husband, George Harris talks about how his master-- afraid of being inferior to his slave-- whips, beats, cuffs, and verbally humiliates George whenever he gets the chance (Stowe 26-26). He gives George the hardest work there is and uses the power he has over George to his advantage (Stowe 23). On the other side of the spectrum there is Eliza who’s master and mistress Mr. and Mrs. Shelby have, as George says, “brought you up like a child, fed you, clothed you, indulged you, and taught you, so that you have a good education; that is some reason why they should claim you” (Stowe 27). I think that this proves how there is such a thing as “better” treatment.
I think that people here may lose sight of the fact that the question at hand is really whether treatment can differ in quality between plantations - are the slaves worked too hard, or beaten? Are the masters kindly, or cruel in tongue? "Civilized slavery" is an oxymoron, no doubt there, but can slavery be more civilized in some places than others? I think so. On the plantation where George works, he sees a young boy torment him with actions designed just to antagonize (21), and has his beloved companion drowned because he is an extra mouth to feed (22). His master took him back to the plantation, at a loss of profit, because he felt that he was becoming too human and achieving too much (16-17). this master, and the one like him, Tom Loker, given on page 11 as "the very devil with niggers", is simply as a fact less humane than Mr. and Mrs. Shelby. We hear not one word of a flogging that they have given, though we do hear Chloe talk about how she didn't give her a smack when she thought she might have earned one (30). On page 14, we hear Mrs. Shelby comfort Eliza in a quite friendly manner. While I respect the argument made by Spencer on this one, I note that he may have took his substantial quote on page 13 out of context; in fact, Stowe's ringing denounciation is preceeded by reverent mentions of the gentleness of Kentucky slaveowners. But how does such civilized slavery turn into the barbarity we all know and hold true of the practice? I think Eli got it exactly right: "...Stowe's main focus is showing how slavery is horrible in all its manifestations. Creating a sense of warmth towards the slaves and the slave owners only makes the evils of slavery even clearer and harsher when these likable characters are turned into enemies or monsters." Spencer and Eli reminded me in particular of the old principle that slavery makes far worse a man of the slaveowner than the slave. However, Stowe's principle should not persuade us to believe that some slaveowners, given their personalities and the lucky imperfections of the institution, cannot bestow a great deal better treatment than others. I'd remember that Frederick Douglass commented on how kindly he was treated by his Maryland owner, compared to the savage brutality of the breaking camp.
Unlike what Spencer has claimed, I believe that there really is a difference in slavery depending on "how benevolent or kind a master may be" and that it is shown in the text of "Uncle Tom's Cabin" by Harriet Beecher Stowe. Stowe clearly distinguishes Mr. Shelby's "better" treatment from the "harsher" treatment from Mr. Haley and Mr. Harris. Mr. Haley sees Mr. Shelby's slaves merely as an opputunity to gain riches by selling them. To support this, Mr. Haley says, "Fancy articles entirely--sell for waiters...to rich 'uns, that can pay for handsome 'uns" (Stowe 16). Mr. Harris seems to do whatever he can to make a slave's life miserable. He is constantly mistreating his slave, George, and making sure that he is always busy with menial work. George complains, "...He says he'll bring me down and humble me, and he puts me to just the hardest, meanest and dirtiest work, on purpose!" (Stowe 26). On the other hand, Mr. Shelby claims that he is a "humane man" and that he would "...hate to take the boy [Harry] away from his mother [Eliza]..." when he is considering selling Harry (Stowe 16). Obviously, he is much more considerate of how his slaves feel and treats them more like humans than the other masters. Through her writing, it can be seen that Stowe is expressing that "humane" Mr. Shelby has a "better" treatment of his slaves than the other masters do.
I agree with Eli, and fall in between the two extremes. Slavery in any sense is horrible, and Stowe does prove that. However, accepting the fact that slavery is accepted in this area, and if one was a supporter of slavery, they would probably say that Shelby's slaves are better treated, at least from the view point of the slaves. While I do not support slavery, this is what I think. This is shown in many ways. For example, Haley tells Shelby as they are drafting a trade that "you Kentucky folks [spoil your slaves." (Pg. 11). What Haley means by this is that masters such as Shelby are kind to their slaves, although some think they are too kind. Haley also mentions the harsher treatment of slaves owned by other men. "Fact is, I never could do things up the way some fellers manage the business." (Pg. 10). Haley is saying that some other men treat their slaves harshly, and he believes that he is not one of them. The kind treatment of slaves under Shelby is also shown in their son, George. George visits Uncle Tom's cabin, and instead of ordering the slaves around, he helps them. George teaches how to write (Pg 26). This shows the kindness of Shelby, as he allows his slaves to learn how to read and write. George also helps the slaves practice their religion, by reading to them out of the Bible (Pg 35). George was willing to pray and sing with the slaves, rather than act as their superior. In my opinion, a child acts as his parents do, and this shows that Shelby is also kind to his slaves. Based on all of this, Shelby is a kinder master from the view point of a slave.
I disagree with Chris A. and his comment about what the question is really intending. Yes, the question is asking if the slaves' lifestyles differ between plantations. But I do believe that saying that the quality of treatment cannot be judged because slavery is unquestionably evil is a valid response. In other words, the concept of slavery itself is an immoral atrocity. Owning a person kindly is no different than owning a person cruely, because as Spencer said, both persons have the same inevitable end of death and misery. I would like to point out that Mr. Shelby, the supposed "kind master", is quite simlar to a shrewder and meaner Haley. During Shelby and Haley's conversation in the beginning of the book, Haley negotiates shrewdly to try to get the best slaves Shelby owns. That is his only purpose: to gain more hard working slaves so essentially he can make more money. For example, when Haley sees little Harry he says, "Hurrah! bravo! what a young 'un!...that chap's a case, I'll promise. Tell you what...fling in that chap, and I'll settle the business---Come, now, if that ain't doing the thing up about the rightest!" Later, when Shelby discusses his negotations with his wife, he tells her that he has to sell Jim and Harry "because they will bring the highest sum of any,---that's why." This proves that all masters, despite their personalities, trade the slaves because of money. Since all slaveowners rely on the industry of owning and trading slaves to gain profits, the way they treat their slaves should be disregarded. Both the kind and mean masters in this book commit the same offense of participating in the ownership of slaves.
I agree with everyone else that slavery is wrong, but, I disagree with Kristy that all masters were in it for the money. As Mr. Shelby said "Either they must go or the all must. Haley has come into possecion of a mortgage, which, if I don't clear off with him directly, will take away everything... If you feel so to have them sold, would it be any better to have them all sold?" (Stowe, 39). So, when Mr. Shelby sold Tom and Harry, he didn't do it for the money, he did it to save all of the other slaves. He realized that if you wanted to save the group, you would have to sacrifice a few. Now, he should of asked Tom and Harry beforehand if tey were willing to sacrifice themselves, but at the time that wasn't the custom and it was normal to sell slaves. So not all slaveowners were evil. Although they had slaves, it was the custom back then, and although we all feel it's wrong now, we must realize that it was the norm back then.
I agree with Sharon that it is clear that Mr. Shelby treats his slaves better than most slave owners. He threw a festive wedding for Eliza, one of his slaves (Stowe 18), and allowed his wife to shower her with comforts, as opposed to the hard labor that most slaves were put to (Stowe 15). This treatment contrasts sharply with the way in which George's master interactes with George. He would not let George do the work that it was in George's best interest to do, because he "began to feel an uneasy conciousness of inferiority." (Stowe 16). The reason why George's master put him through this indignity is clear, though the purpose for the unfair treatment of the vast majority of slaves in the country is not addresssed. Sill, it is obvious that Harriet Beecher Stowe's opinion is the same as that of Mrs. Shelby. Mrs. Shelby argues that she cared for her slaves because that was her duty as a Christian woman, and because she never believed in slavery anyway, and had hoped to treat her slaves in a way that was better than freedom (Stowe 39). Being a kind man, Mr. Shelby agrees with his wife, even if he does not fully subscribe to her beliefs. The Christian values of morality are used here to make the reader realize that no good Christian would treat slaves as horribly as most masters in that time did. As an abolitionist, Harriet Beecher Stowe presents the case that the Shelbys' kind treatment of their slaves is better than the harsh, cruel lifestly of Mr. Haley or Mr. Harris' slaves.
I think Joyce makes a good point about the existence of "better" treatment. While she and Spencer are correct that all slavery is unquestionably immoral and wrong, and any slave owner is at fault, the novel identifies a difference in the treatment of slaves depending on their master(s). I have to disagree with Sharon, however, when she says "Shelby and his wife treat their slaves like humans should be treated." I can see that the Shelby and his wife provide their slaves with a better life than some other masters, but owning a slave at all is dehumanizing to that individual. Sharon also mentions that she believes Mrs. Shelby "believes [her slaves] deserve to be free," but if she and her husband truly felt this way, they would not own slaves at all.
I disagree with those who said that Shelby’s treatment of slaves is better than that of harsher masters. George’s master purposely tries to dehumanize George. On page 17, the master stops George from working at the factory because the master has begun to feel inferior to his slave. The master gives George “the meanest drudgery of the farm” in an attempt to take away is humanity, but “the man could not become a thing” (p.17).
Mr. Shelby dehumanizes his slaves, too, but not on purpose. Even though Shelby likes to think of himself as a humane man, he dehumanizes his slaves simply by owning them. By owning them, he is treating them as property. Also, on pages 7-8, Shelby acts very cruel to the little boy Harry. On page 7, Stowe writes, "'Hulloa, Jim Crow!' said Mr. Shelby, whistling, and snapping a bunch of raisins towards him, 'pick that up, now!'" He is treating Harry the way most people treat dogs. He gets Harry's attention by whistling and throwing food. By doing this, he is stripping the little boy of his humanity. While to some degree, it is better to have food thrown at you than it is to be whipped, both forms of dehumanization are cruel and outrageous.
Going along with what Grace said, There is no doubt that slavery was immoral and cruelly wrong, and I think that the character of Mrs. Shelby has a slight undertone of hippocracy. During chapter 5, she tries to persuade Mr. Shelby not to sell Uncle Tom or the others for she believes that slavery is wrong, and yet she owns many. I believe that the concept of slaves in their househole is a "discomfort" that they are not willing to give up entirely.
I believe that any slave owner is an immoral person. Therefore, both Mr. Shelby and Mr. Haley treat their slaves unfairly at one point or another. Mr. Shelby may treat the slaves more fairly and less harshly compared to Mr. Haley; however, there are times when he mistreats his slaves. For example, he mistreats Eliza by selling her only child, Harry. After eavesdropping on their conversation, Eliza goes home, "Pale, shivering, with rigid features and compressed lips, she looked an entirely altered being from the soft and timid creature she had been hitherto" (Stowe 42). From this description, Eliza is fearful and seems sick, fearing the loss of her child. Although Mr. Shelby is not aware of this, he has hurt her emotionally. Mr. Shelby also hurts Tom. Even though Tom is Mr. Shelby's most trustworthy slave, Mr. Shelby sells him too. Mr. Sheby described Tom as, "... a good, steady, sensible, pious fellow" (Stowe 6). Yet by selling his most trusted and dependable slave, he continues his pattern of harsh treatment. Hearing that he is going to be sold, Tom reacts as any slave would, "Sobs, heavy, hoarse, and loud, shook the chair, and great tears fell through his fingers on the floor..." (Stowe 45). By selling two slaves, Mr. Shelby cannot be considered a "better" slave owner than George's master or Mr. Haley.
I agree with those who have said that slavery, in any way, shape or form, is wrong. However, I do not agree that all forms of slavery are equal cruelty-wise. In the book, both Mr. Shelby and Haley argue in favor of their treatment of their slaves. I believe that Shelby, though still inhumane, is a “better” master than Haley. While Haley is fine with breaking up family ties, simply preferring not to be present when he process of separation is occurring, Shelby would rather not break up people at all. And while Haley seems to be under the impression that because slaves do not speak out against him, they are fine having their children taken away from them, Shelby is under the influence of his wife, who knows how much a child means to their mother. Though slave owners are not humane no matter how they treat their slaves, some masters are far better than others.
We all believe slavery is inhumane and unjust, but in certain situations, slavery can be bearable. Shelby is an example of that, he treats the slaves in a caring fashion, but also has his own level of cruelness. When Shelby desperately needs money, he decides to sell a couple of slaves. The trader wanted a certain slave, Eliza. Shelby refuses to sell her because Mrs. Shelby is attached to her and favors her. By not selling Eliza to a harsh master, Shelby treats Eliza with “kind” treatment. This example of gentle treatment is, according to Haley, an example of “Kentucky folks [spoiling their] niggers” (Stowe 11). Haley is talking about Kentucky’s thoughtful treatment of the slaves. Since Shelby does not sell Eliza, he is treating her with more humanity than someone like Haley would have. Haley goes on to talk about hitting slaves for a small interruption, like crying, just to get them to quiet down. While Shelby is kind to Eliza, he is cruel at the same time. In his final decision, Shelby decides to sell Eliza’s child, a heartbreaking action for any mother to endure. Shelby does feel bad about his decision “I am sorry about it… Indeed I am” (Stowe 39). Feeling regretful about the decision, no matter if the decision is cruel, also shows empathy. Haley tells Shelby stories about how brutal other masters were, “I’ve seen ‘em as would pull a woman’s child out of her arms and set him up to sell, as she sceechin’ like mad all the time” (Stowe 10). Shelby’s small amount of compassion separates him from the cruel hand of Haley.
I'd like to agree with all of the posts so far, but seeing as I can't, I'm going to side with Spencer. The main difference between Shelby and Haley/George's master is that Shelby treats his slaves more like human beings. Haley and George's master treat their slaves more like machines, or real estate. They don't consider that slaves actually do have feelings, too. On page 24, George's hopes of freedoms were crushed by his cruel master. Shelby, on the contrary, shows great respect for Tom. On page 14, he says of Tom, "I've trusted him...with everything I have...and I always found him true and square in everything." Clearly, the difference between treatment of the slaves is large. However, as Spencer says, Stowe uses this to make a point. Slavery is never good, no matter the circumstances. It always leads to the same thing, in this case, Shelby selling his slaves. In conclusion, while the difference in treatment is great, the outcome is still the same.
In Uncle Tom’s Cabin, Mr. Shelby is a better master than Mr. Haley. Mr. Shelby treats his slaves better then Mr. Haley, and is more humane. For example, when the two masters are talking about separating mothers and babies, they obviously have different view on the matter.
“You see, when I any ways can, I takes a leetle care about the onpleasant parts, like selling young uns and that, -- get the gals out of the way -- out of sight, out of mind, you know, -- and when it's clean done, and can't be helped, they naturally gets used to it. 'Tan't, you know, as if it was white folks, that's brought up in the way of 'spectin' to keep their children and wives, and all that. Niggers, you know, that's fetched up properly, ha'n't no kind of 'spectations of no kind; so all these things comes easier."
"I'm afraid mine are not properly brought up, then," said Mr. Shelby (page 9).
The fact that Mr. Selby doesn’t tear families apart proves that he is kinder and cares more about his slaves than Haley does. Even Shelby’s slaves acknowledge the fact that they are lucky to have kind masters: “She oughter cracked me over de head for bein' so sarcy!” (page 26). In this quote, Aunt Chloe (the best cook at the Shelby estate) is telling George (the Shelby’s son) about a time that she and Mrs. Shelby got into an argument. Even Aunt Chloe realizes that she should’ve been punished for her language; however her mistress was kind and walked away without so much as laying a finger on the cook.
A slave in the book named George decides to run away because of his harsh treatment that he cannot stand anymore, however it is clear that on the Shelby estate the slaves are happy with their masters. “I’m a wicked girl to leave her so” (page 39). In this quote Eliza, a slave on the Shelby estate, chooses to escape and head for Canada to save her only child from being sold. She expresses remorse at leaving her mistress, who she is obviously fond of.
Thought I think that the Shelbys are kind masters, I believe they are kind only to an extent. The fact that the family owns slaves puts them almost on the same level as masters such as Mr. Haley. Stowe is trying to make a point similar to one made in a slave story we read: slavery can turn even the nicest people into cruel masters (also, absolute power corrupts absolutely). By selling his slaves, Shelby becomes just as low as Haley; Shelby even admits to stooping to Haley’s level: “I have agreed to sell Tom and Harry both; and I don't know why I am to be rated, as if I were a monster, for doing what every one does every day" (page 33). In this quote Shelby professes that he should not be judged as a villain or monster, because “everyone” sells or trades their slaves. Stowe makes it evident that no matter how kind or humane you are to your slaves, the fact is, you still own slaves, just like “everyone” else.
I agree with Divya and Eli that Shelby treats his slaves better than others yet still must sell them away and seperate them. Though Shelby sells of his slaves and seperates a family, he has no choice and tries to prevent the other slaves from succoming to a similar fate. Shelby does what he can for his slaves, "they have brought you up as a child, fed you, clothed you, indulged you,and taught you, so that you have a good education" according to George on page 21. Shelby protected his slaves as best as he could, as he would his child. when you campare Shelby to other slave owners such as Tom, George's master who is jealous and greedy and kills George's dog for no reason on page 22, or Haley, an inhumane and abusive slavetrader who splits up families, page 9, and believe that slaves need to be beaten in order to be of any use, page 12, you can see just how well Shelby treated his slaves. What makes Shelby a better person is how he does what he can for his slaves as long as he can, not abusing, overworking, or seperating them until he must do so for a few or for all. Though in the end Shelby did need to sell a few slaves, what I think maters more is how he protected and nurished them before. shelby treats his slave as people with feelings and beliefs of their own, making him a "better" person.
I agree that different masters treat their slaves differently, and some ways may seem better. However, no matter how kindly a master believes they treat their slaves, slavery is still an extremely immoral practice, so it is hard to think of masters treating their slaves "better" than others. Either way, the masters are still denying other humans of the joys of freedom. On page 40, Mrs. Shelby admits that her treatment of the slaves is not better than that of others. She says, "it is a sin to hold a slave under laws like ours," and, "I thought I could gild it over,--I thought, by kindness, and care, and instruction, I could make the condition of mine better than freedom,--fool that I was!" Although Mrs. Shelby recognizes the evils of slavery and that she is a participant in them, she still owns slaves and has them work for her, thus being no better than the other cruel masters. On the surface it appears that some masters, such as Mr. and Mrs. Shelby treat their slaves better than others and make their lives more bearable, however, the underlying truth is that all forms of slavery deny human beings of the basic right of liberty.
I agree with Kristina in saying that although all forms of slavery are cruel and horrible, there are differing degrees of it, and I believe that there is a difference between Mr. Shelby and Haley's ideas and actions concerning slavery. While I do think that any form of slave holding is wrong, Shelby is a much more humane and considerate person. Mr. Shelby treats all his slaves much better than Haley talks of treating his slaves, and on page 6 he says, "I've trusted him, since then, with everything I have,- money, house, horses,- and let him come and go round the country; and I always found him true and square in everything." This shows how Mr. Shleby trusts his slaves and thinks of them as real people. Haley, on the other hand, opposes bad treatment of slaves, but for another reason, as he says on page 10, "I've seen 'em as would pull a woman's child out of her arms, and set him up to sell, and she's screechin' like madall the time;- very bad policy,- damages teh article,- and makes 'em quite unfit for service sometimes." Haley doesn't believe in treating his slaves badly only because they won't sell as well later. There is a clear difference in the ways Haley and Mr. Shelby treat their slaves, although I think all slaveholding in general is wrong.
I agree with most people that Shelby's treatment of slaves is better than that of Haley or George's master. For example, when George is describing how Shelby and his wife treat Eliza, he says, "...they have brought you up like a child, fed you, clothed you, indulged you, and taught you, so that you have a good education..." (Stowe 21). George, however, when talking about his master, says, "he puts me to just the hardest, meanest, and dirtiest work, on purpose!" (Stowe 20). He also says that "the more he sees I can do, the more he loads on" (Stowe 21). George is also tied to a tree and whipped (Stowe 21). Haley is also a "harsh" master. For example, when discussing with Shelby about separating women slaves from their children, he says, "These critters an't like white folks, you know; they gets over things, only manage right" (Stowe 9). Shelby, however, says that he considers himself "a humane man" and would "hate to take the boy from its mother" (Stowe 9). However, even though Shelby treats his slaves "better" that Haley or George's master, that doesn't make him a good person. For example, in chapter four, Shelby trades Harry, the son of his slave Eliza, and another faithful slave, Tom (Stowe 36). In chapter five, Shelby says, "I have agreed to sell Tom and Harry both; and I don't know why I am to be rated, as if I were a monster, for doing what every one does every day" (Stowe 38). I think that Stowe is trying to say that as good as a person can treat his slaves, just the fact that he owns slaves makes him immoral. I think that Shelby does treat his slaves better compared to "harsher" masters such as Haley, but that does not make him a good person because he still owns slaves.
I agree with Joyce who was among many who said that Mr. Shelby treated his slaves better than most slave owners, compared to Mr. Loker (Mr. Haley's old partner), who beat his slaves in order to make them become obedient (Stowe 10-11). Sharon said, "Mr. Shelby and his wife treat their slaves like humans should be treated", but I disagree with that. Slavery is so wrong and degrading and if you own slaves, there is no way to treat them like humans because they are still considered property, not human beings. I think Mr. Shelby's methods of treating his slaves is definitely the preferred treatment. Owning slaves is bad enough, but treating them harshly and cruelly just makes it so much worse. Sharon said that Mrs. Shelby "believes [her slaves] deserve to be free", but if she really believed that, she could easily make them all free people. Instead she chooses to treat them fairly which is better than treating them harshly, but they are still slaves, considered property and believed to be inferior to white people.
The question asks whether slaves under certain masters are treated better than slaves under other masters, not whether slavery itself is an evil thing. I believe that everyone who has responded believes that slavery is an evil thing, and that to be a slave is a terrible tragedy, no matter how they are treated. However, since the question asks how slaves are treated, I think the answer is that certain slaves are clearly treated better than other slaves. The difference is clear: on page 21, the unfair and brutal treatment of George at the hands of his master is in sharp contrast to the description on page 13, where the book says that Mr. Shelby had provided his slaves with as much comfort as possible. Just ask yourself which way you would like to be treated? Obviously, given the choice anybody would rather not be a slave at all. However, given the circumstances, I think that the treatment by Mr. Shelby has to be considered the lesser of two evils.
Despite what others have said previously and what appears to be obvious from the text I do not think that Mr. Shelby is superior to Mr. Haley. They are both equally bad slave owners and equally immoral men. Mr. Haley believes that he treats his slaves “well,” which is to say that he does not damage their effectiveness as pieces of machinery, saying of a woman who had died of grief over the sale of her infant child, “Clear waste, sir, of a thousand dollars, jest for want of management...” ( Stowe P.10) and “A little humanity thrown in along...pays better” (Stowe P.11). Mr. Shelby is less business-like in this respect, but he also has few notions of the humanity of his slaves. Mr. Shelby has mere pretentions to humane treatment, and “there had never been a lack of anything which might contribute to the physical comforts of the [slaves] on his estate” (P.13). While his wife truly treats the slaves as people, making “benevolent efforts for the comfort, instruction and improvements of her servants...he never took any decided part in them himself” (P.15). His only real scruples in selling Tom, who he describes as “good, steady, sensible, pious fellow” is in how it will affect his wife. When she tells him, “he would lay down his life for you,” Shelby responds with “I know it-I dare say;-but whats the use of all this?- I can’t help myself” (P. 39). If Shelby regarded Tom as another human being he would return the sentiment, but he regards Tom merely as a loyal pet. Both of these men, in the end, use slaves merely as a practical institution, turning a blindsight to their moral inhibitions. As Mr. Shleby says, “We men of the world must wink pretty hard at various things, and get used to a deal that isn’t the exact thing.” (p. 40). What both of these men don’t realize is that in denying the humanity of their slaves, they undermine their own.
I agree with what others have said before me. I don’t think that a human can be morally right when they hold another human under bondage. But, I would consider Mr. Shelby a better master than Haley or George‘s master. Shelby is described as a “fair average kind of man, good natured and kindly” (13). On the other hand, Haley treats the slaves like animals, throwing them scraps of food when they do something good. George’s master manipulates George and forces him to runaway to Canada after he tells him he has to marry another woman or be sold down south. The Shelby’s treat their slaves like family and Mr. Shelby states, “ ’I am a humane man, and I hate to take the boy from his mother, sir’ ”(9). The treatment of the slaves is vastly different for Eliza to her husband, George. Eliza is well fed and even has her own living quarters that she shares with her son. Although Shelby is considered a better master, I believe he can not be considered a “good” person when he still owns slaves.
I agree with others who asserted that Stowe emphasizes the fact that "slavery is horrible in all its manifestations." The question asks whether Shelby's brand of slavery is "better" than that of Haley and George's master. I think that Stowe's goal is to show that no type of slavery is any better than another. She does, however, make the distinction between good and bad treatment. There is no denying that Shelby's slaves receive better treatment than George. George claims that his master gives him "the hardest, meanest and dirtiest work, on purpose!" (26). Stowe also includes Haley's tale of Tom Loker who whipped and beat his slaves, and hit them when they cried. Stowe includes Loker and George's master so that the reader can compare this treatment to what Shelby's slaves receive. Stowe uses this as part of her overall message that no matter the treatment, all slavery is a sin. On page 42, Mrs. Shelby calls slavery "a bitter, bitter, most cursed thing," and exclaims "I was a fool to think I could make anything good out of such a deadly evil." When Stowe combines this message with her demonstration of different treatments, she effectively portrays to her readers that all slavery is evil.
The question that we are responding to asks if kinder masters, like Shelby, are “better” than their crueler counterparts. I believe that the answer to this question is based entirely on who is experiencing the slavery. As it is made clear in Uncle Tom’s Cabin slavery is inherently evil, yet the living conditions for Shelby’s slaves are immeasurably “better” than those endured by slaves with masters like George’s. For example, as George says to Eliza, “There is some sense in it, in your case; they have brought you up like a child, fed you, clothed you, indulged you, and taught you, so that you have a good education; that is some reason why they should claim you. But I have been kicked and cuffed and sworn at, and at the best only let alone.” This quote shows how much “better” treatment Eliza receives from Shelby compared how George is treated by his master. Though Shelby’s mild form of slavery is definitely “better” for his slaves, it is equally destructive to the country. This is because by owning slaves at all Shelby is reinforcing the belief that slaves are property, even if he does not believe it should be so. Lastly, I think Shelby’s type of slavery is also no “better” for the master than the type of slavery practiced by George’s master, because even gentle slavery can lead masters to do evil things they would never consider doing if they were not slave masters. For example, Shelby ends up selling Tom and Harry, even though he really does not desire to do so. Shelby says so himself, “The fact is that this goes rather hard with me; it’s a thing I hate to think of.”
Even though the slaves under all masters are still treated as inferiors, and neither party is fully happy, Shelby's slaves are treated better than most. Eliza's husband, George, shows an aptitude for inventing, and enjoys it, too. When George's master learns of this, he removes George from the factory out of his own jealousy (Stowe 16.) While Shelby has never faced such a scenario, he is very approving of the talents of Eliza's son, Harry (Stowe 7-8) and is reluctant to sell Tom and Harry to where he suspects they will be unhappy. Of course, the superior treatment of Shelby's slaves is partially due to his wife, who is nearly an abolitionist, as he himself says (Stowe 40), and has a minor influence over him (Stowe 9). The author also goes on to say that Mrs. Shelby raised Eliza, and was always kind to her (Stowe 42.)
There is no such thing as a “moral” or “humane” slaveholder. In Uncle Tom’s Cabin, all of the slaveholders are cruel to their slaves, only some are more openly wicked than others. Mr. Harris, for example, is one of the most evil slaveholders described so far in the book. When he caught George feeding his dog and only companion with kitchen scraps he accused him of wasting his money, and ordered George to “tie a stone to his neck and throw him in the pond” (pg 16). George refused, and so he was whipped and then forced to watch as Mr. Harris stoned the already drowning animal. Mr. Shelby is portrayed as “good-natured and kindly… and there had never been a lack of anything which might contribute to the physical comfort of the Negroes on his estate” (pg. 8). There is no doubt that treatment of slaves from Shelby was far better than Mr. Harris. Nonetheless, the fact that he was willing to sell Tom, whom he had promised freedom many times, and Harry, who would have to leave his devoted mother, and be convinced that “These critters ain’t like white folks,” and they can get over things much easier, makes him cruel like the other masters.
I believe that Harriet Beecher Stowe believes that calling someone a "humane" or "good" slave owner is an oxymoron or hypocritical. After Shelby signs the transaction and sentences Tom and Harry to be sold after he promised Tom freedom, and after his wife told Eliza, Harry's mother, that he would not be sold, he smokes a cigar to comfort himself, disregarding the two families that will be ripped apart unjustly by his actions. During chapter four, when Stowe describes the signing of the transacton directly after the joyful night in Uncle Tom's cbin, i believe she is using the contrast in te situations to accent or point out how awful slavery truly is. Stowe shows how easily a slave's life can change from a compartively decent one, to a horrible one, meaning that even a "humane" slaveholder is cruel nad immoral under the impact of the institution of slavery. I believe that while one life could be comparatively better, neither is good, as expressed by the above sentence, and that when Stowe refers to Shelby as a "man of humanity" she was using sarcasm.
Although, in many respects, the treatment of slaves under Shelby was superior to that of harsher masters, in some ways, the Shelby family degraded slaves as much as any harsher master would have.The Shelby's openly acknowledge that they are better than their slaves and have trained their slaves to believe this as well. At one point, when Uncle Tom makes a mistake forming letters and Master George corrects him, Tom exclaims, "How easy white folks al'us does things!" This shows that Tom considers white men smarter than blacks. Later, when Aunt Chloe describes making pies with Mrs. Shelby, she says that she "got kinder saurcy" and told her mistress what nice white hands she had while describing her own hands as "black stumpin' hands". This comparison illustrates the how the Shelby slaves' have been brainwashed into believing white people's elevated status over black people.
I completely agree with Masha in saying that there is no such thing as a good slaveholder. All of the slaveholders depicted in the book, so far, have done a cruel deed. Although Mr. Shelby has treated the slaves more humanely compared to George’s master, he was still cruel in selling Tom and Harry, even after, as Masha said, “[Mr. Shelby has] promised [Tom] his freedom” (page 38).
Other slaveholders are considerably harsher compared to the Shelby’s. George’s master, in particular is cruel, physically and emotionally to his slaves, as George explains on page 21, about an occurrence when “[his master] came in a rage, and said he’d teach me who was my master; and he tied me to a tree, and cut switches for young master, and told him that he might whip me till he was tired; -and he did do it!” Although Mr. Shelby isn’t cruel in this way, he was cruel in betraying his promises to Tom, and his wife. Mr. Shelby’s biggest goal isn’t to treat the slaves kindly, but to get by, while owning them. He merely doesn’t want to have to sell them because he likes having the slaves around. So really, he saw a bigger pain in seeing two of his slaves go, rather than seeing pain in the possibility of them having a darker future. Mrs. Shelby is the one that actually cares about the well being of the slaves. Even Mrs. Shelby realized how cruel Mr. Shelby has been when she exclaims about slavery, on page 40, “I was a fool to think I could make anything good out of such a deadly evil,” showing how the powers of slavery have taken over her husband, and that avoiding this is close to impossible for them.
I agree with everyone who has made the point that although slavery is wrong altogether, it is still possible to have "better" treatment. This treatment is shown to exsist with Shelby rather then the other masters such as Tom. In the beginning of the book, we can see how Shelby is as a master, and although it is still not the best treatment ever, it is pretty good compared to other masters of the time. When Shelby and Haley are having their conversation at the beginning, they mention Tom, when Shelby says " 'Tom is an uncommon fellow; he is certainly worth that sum anywhere,- steady, honest, capable, manages my whole farm like a clock.' " Shelby is a kind enough man to admit how well the people do the work while Haley is still meaner towards them. " 'You mean as honest as niggers go.' " He shows that he does not treat them as well as Shelby does. I also agree with Britton (and anyone else who may have said this) that Haley tends to treat his slaves more like property and less like people. He says " 'Well, I've got just as much a conscience as any man in busineess can afford to keep,- kust a little, you know, to swear by as 'twere,' " He is saying that he does not need to treat slaves like people becuase he does not believe that they are people at all, but only things that are bought and sold. This kind of treatment is seemingly worse than how Shelby treats slaves. Seemingly worse becuase (I just read this comment in the middle of writing) of what jenny had said earlier about how Shelby strips his slaves of their dignity as he does with Harry on page 7 when the book says " 'Huolla, Jim Crow!' said Mr. Shelby, whistling , and snapping a bunch of raising towards him, 'pick that up, now!' The child scampered with all his little strength, after the prize, while his master laughed." Being treated like an animal is just as dehumanizing as being treated like property to sell. So although there is possibly better treatment of slaves, these masters are all equaly bad in their own ways.
I believe that both arguments about the treatment of the slaves are correct. The question can be interpreted in two ways based on how you survive treatment. To treat is defined by Merriam-Webster as "to regard and deal with in a specified manner." Using this definition, you can separate the treatment into official treatment (i.e. being considered "property") and their physical treatment (the amount of food, their well-being, how they are cared for, etc).
Based on the official treatment, Spencer's argument is right. Neither master is "treating" their slaves any better than the other, because they are both cruelly defining them as property. Even Mr. Shelby, who cares for his slaves, still treats them on paper as property, because he sells them to the trader for money. Unlike his wife, who treats these slaves the same as white people (she believes them to be free, because she hates slavery and thinks "it is a sin to hold a slave under laws like ours," on page 33), Mr. Shelby, while regretting that he has to sell them and claims that he did it to protect all of his slaves, still treats (regards and deals with) the slaves as property, because he does sell them to a trader. In this way-- in the official, documented, treatment of the slaves--Mr. Shelby is the same as George's master or Haley. Harriet Beecher Stowe supports this argument when she says, on page 8, "Whoever visits some estates there, and witnesses the good humored indulgence of some masters and mistresses, and the affectionate loyalty of some slaves, might be tempted to dream the oft-fabled poetic legend of a patriarchal institution, and all that; but over and above the scene there broods a portentous shadow--the shadow of law.
However, many other people, beginning with Sharon, have said that Mr. Shelby was a better master than the other two. This is also correct, because Mr. (and Mrs.) Shelby deals with, regards, and cares for these slaves better than the other slaveowners. Mr. Shelby is a kind enough master to understand the feelings of the slaves, care for them, give them plenty of food and drink, allow them to almost act as free people, to hold meetings, to be married to a person of their choice, to not whip slaves, and to give his slaves many other indulgences. On page 8, Stowe said, "Mr. Shelby was a fair average kind of man, good-natured and kindly, and disposed to easy indulgence of those around him, and there had never been a lack of anything which might contribute to the physical comfort of the negroes on his estate." So, in this interpretation of "treatment", Sharon's argument is right.
Based on these interpretations, all slaveholders are cruel men, and none are better than the other in their official treatment and classification of slaves, but there can be better caring of slaves that they own, as shown by the kind ownership of Mr. and Mrs. Shelby.
I think that Shelby treats his slaves much better than the other slave owners mentioned. In a way it seems like he thinks of them more than just property. He describes Tom on page one as a,"...good, steady, sensible, pious fellow." and that, "I'have trusted him, since then, with everything I have, money, house horses, and let him come and go round the country; and I always found him true and square in everything." Shelby can see all of these traits in Tom that other slave owners probably wouldn't even notice or care about. He doesn't want to sell Tom because he is one of him best slaves, but also because he can see him as a good person. Someone like Haley wouldn't notice that. He would sell Tom down South faster than ever. He also tells Haley that he should sell Eliza or Harry. He wouldn't even concider that they were mother and child. Just the fact that they would get a good price and bring back a lot of money were all that mattered. Shelby didn't want to split them up because he knew that they both would suffer. He would feel bad about something like that.Still, in the end I think that Shelby is no better than Haley. He eventually decides to sell Tom and Harry, going against what he was saying earlier. Shelby states, "I have agreed to sell Tom and Harry both; and I don't know why I am to be rated, as if I were a monster, for doing what every one does every day." He tries to make it look okay by saying everyone else does it. His wife even tries to explain how they are their best slaves and how Tom would lay down his life for his master. In this way I think that Shelby may treat him slaves better, but he still is the same as the other slave owners.
I agree with most of the comments before me that although Shelby does treat his slaves in a more humane manner than Haley, they are both fellow slave owners who unjustly own human beings and force them to perform labor. Shelby at least maintains the decency to acknowledge the human traits in his slaves. For example, on page 5 as Haley lobbies Shelby for Eliza's son, Shelby merely replies: "I would rather not sell him...the fact is, sir, I'm a humane man, and I hate to take the boy from his mother, sir." Although this statement is not entirely valid (as Shelby cannot be humane if he holds human beings in bondage), Shelby admits that his slave Eliza would become devastated if her only son was stripped from her. Haley's morals and opinions on slavery are not entirely in tandem with Shelby's, but nevertheless attempts to exaggerate his humanity to impress Mr. Shelby so he can "elbow his way upward in the world" (Stowe 1). It is apparent that Haley's "humanity" is artificial, and his morals are not quite as pure as Mr. Shelby, the opulent, upper class slave owner whom he wishes to trade with to further his own status in the universe of Southern white men. For example, on page 5, as Haley tries to mirror Shelby's views on separating slave families says, "I've seen 'em as would pull a woman's child out her arms, and set him up to sell, and she screechin' like mad all the time;--very bad policy--damages the article--makes 'em quite unfit for service sometimes." This statement of Haley's does not recognize the emotions of slaves whatsoever, but instead puts a work value on the slave and makes the point that stealing a child from its mother puts her in such emotional distress that is impossible for her to be productive. Therefore due to the above reasons, Shelby is a relatively more humane master than Haley.
The treatment of slaves under Shelby is close to the way that Shelby treats other white people, especially when compared to Haley and George's master. Shelby wants his slaves to succeed and treats them humanely. For example, while talking with Haley, Shelby praises Tom, calling him "true and square" and tells Haley how he trusts Tom. He even once allowed Tom to do business away from "the house" in Cincinatti and bring back a great sum of money (Chapter 1). Tom also has a pass which allows him to leave home freely, a privledge not given to many slaves. Contrary to Shelby, George's master fears inferiority to his slaves. Upon learning that his slave George had invented a machine at the factory where he worked, George's master "demanded George's wages and announced his intention of taking him home" (Chapter 2). While George's master tries to squash personality and talent, Shelby encourages it. Harry, the son of Eliza and George, is a talented young boy, and Shelby tells him to "show [Haley] how you can dance and sing" (Chapter 1). Haley believes that slaves don't have feelings, and says, "these critters an't like white folks, you know, they gets over things..." (Chapter 1).
I believe that Shelby is better than the other two because he treats his slaves more like equals than "critters" of a lower class. A slave belonging to Shelby was treated better and had more privledges, such as the ability to hold meetings (Uncle Tom and Aunt Chloe) and have a "real" wedding (Eliza and George), than slaves belonging to Haley or George's master. However, if Shelby was "better" he wouldn't keep any slaves at all, and follow his wife's advice, that "it is a sin to hold a slave..." (Chapter 5).
At first, I saw this question, and I was a little confused. after reading the first five chapters, the answer seemed so obvious. Of course Shelby is a better slave master. George's master whips him, which is shown on page 21 when George says, "... he might whip me till he was tired;—and he did do it!" there is no mention of Shelby whiping his slaves. one of his slaves, Eliza, even says, "Oh, but master [Shelby] is so kind!"
However, I began to think that maybe this was a more in-depth question than I had thought. Why would there be such an obvious question for us to answer? I tried to think of other reasons why Shebly and other masters are equally harsh, but all I could think of is that they are both slave masters, which is evil.
That being said, if I was a slave at the time, I would much rather live witohut the physical abuse. therefore, i think that treatment under Shelby is a lot better, just by using common sense.
I think that while all forms of slavery are cruel and all slaveowners are cuel because of the very fact that they are slaveowners, I do feel that Mr. Shelby and his wife treat their slaves more kindly than Tom (George's master). On page 15, Eliza starts to talk about how she was brouhgt up by her Mistress, Mrs. Shelby, as if she was her own child. "Eliza had been brought up by her mistress, from girlhood, as a petted and induldged favorite" (page 15). This shows that the Shelbys didn't mistreat Eliza, if she was induldged as a child slave. Compare that to how George descrives his master, Tom, on page 21 "He came in a rage, and said he'd teach me who was my master; and he tied me to a tree, and cut switches for young master,a dn told him that he might whip me till he was tired;- and he did do it! Who made this man my master? That's what I want to know!" George is obviously angered by how his master treats him, yet Eliza doesn't have a complaint about hers. This shows that while no slaveowner is "better" than another, the treatment given to slaves of the Shelbys' is better than the treatment of slaves of Tom and other masters.
I believe that the treatment under Shelby is superior to the treatment under other "harsher" masters such as Haley and George's master. However, the treatment under Shelby although more pampered, is still somewhat degrading. For example, Shelby calls in Harry and treats him like a pet, patting him on the head and making him perform for Mr. Shelby (Page 7). But overall, the treatment given to the slaves with Shelby is far preferable to the cruel treatment under "harsher" masters like George's master. In one instance, George's master tries to make George kill Little Carlo, his dog and "about all the comfort that [he has] had." George refuses, and not only does George's master whip George for this disobedience, but he kills Carlo anyway (Page 21). In this way, although the treatment that Shelby offers is degrading it also allows the slaves some joys. George puts it well when he says, "they have brought you up like a child, fed you, clothed you, indulged you, and taught you, so that you have a good education...but I've been kicked and cuffed and sworn at, and at the best only let alone." In this sense, the treatment that Shelby gives is more desirable to that of George's master and Haley.
Clearly, everyone responding to the question thinks slavery is wrong, and automatically thinks Shelby, Haley, and George’s master are wrong for being slave owners. In that respect, they are all “bad”; although, in terms of physical treatment, Shelby treats his slaves as humans, as opposed to just property. In the beginning of the book, Shelby is portrayed in a much more positive light than Haley or George’s master. But as the story progresses, we learn that Shelby still views his slaves as property. As justification for selling Tom and Harry, he says, “They will bring the highest sum of money,- that’s why.” (Stowe 32). Even though he treats his slaves better than other slave owners do, the fact that he is a slave owner, and thinks that selling people is morally okay, and justification for selling one person as opposed to another is that there would be more profit in it, makes him just as “bad” as Haley, or George’s master.
I think the treatment of blacks by Mr. Shelby is better than treatment under more harsh masters. Mr. Shelby, while still understanding slaves as a business, wouldn't seperate a mother and son because he is a humane person. This makes the treatment under Shelby better even just becuase of the humane way he treats them unlike the other masters. He thinks that it is a bad thing to whip slaves whenever they do bad or seperate families because he thinks that slaves are humans and you shouldn't be inhumane to them. Also, it helps that his wife is attached to the slaves because he takes his wife's opinion seriously and since she wouldn't want him to do cruel things to the slaves, it would help him not do it. But even in the Shelby housse, slaves aren't treated as equal to whites. They are expected to do everything their master tells them to do such as when Eliza's son was expected to do every funny impression that his master told him to.
I believe that there is a distinctive difference between the treatment of slaves, under certain masters. It is clear that there are slave owners, that treat their slaves more like actual humans than other masters may.Master Shelby says, "I would rather not sell him, the fact is, sir, I'm a humane man, and I hate to take the boy away from his mother." This statement is ironic. Shelby calls himself a humane man, yet he owns people, and sells them as if they are cattle. Whether he may regret the selling of his slaves, he still sells them, claiming he had "no choice." Ownership of slaves is a horrible act, and any man willing to own someone is not humane. Whether they treat their slave better, compared to owners such as George's master. To describe his master George writes, "He came in a rage, and said he'd teach me who was my master, and he tied me to a tree, and cut switches for young master, and told him that he might whip me till he was tired." This statement shows that some slave owners were ill-tempered. Although it is apparent, there are some masters that treat their slaves "better", slavery is still a horrible act, and a man willing to own another man is not a "better" person.
I agree with Joyce that Mrs. Shelby definetly contributes to the relatively kind treatement of slaves at the Shelby's home. Mrs. Shelby treats her slaves almost as if they are her own children, as she acts as a superior but she is still kind and nurturing to them. For example, Mrs. Shelby allowed Eliza to marry and gave her a wedding ceremony. I think that even without his wife, Mr. Shelby is still a "good", in terms of slave owners. For example, he fought very hard to find a way to not have to sell Tom and Eliza's son. Even though the Shelby family treats their slaves better that many other harsher slave owners, I agree with my peers that there is still not really such thing as a "good slave owner". All slave owners force African-Americans to have no rights, and therefore are not good.
I don’t necessarily think that you can compare slave masters by the terms “better or worse” since either way, they treated slaves unlike human beings. However, Shelby did have a greater sense of morality than Haley, or George’s master. I believe that Shelby doesn’t exactly want to participate in slavery but is influenced by everyone around him to participate. For example, when Shelby justified his reasons behind selling Tom and Eliza’s son Harry, he stated, “I don’t know why I am to be rated, as if I were a monster, for doing what every one does these days” (Stowe 41). Since everyone treats slaves as domestic animals, it’ll make him loose a great amount of respect compared to other white slave masters, if he chose not behave that way. Later, we find the actual reason for selling the slaves, which was beyond Shelby’s control, “Haley has come into possession of a mortgage, which, if I don’t clear off with him directly, will take everything before it…and the price of these two was needed to make up the balance, and I had to give them up.” (Stowe 42). We see that this man does not treat slaves badly for the sake of it, he does because he has no other way out of the situation, the slave trader had the power, so therefore, he must obey his orders. When George confronted Eliza about his idea to run away to Canada, Eliza didn’t understand why, he explained that she doesn’t know what suffering was because she had fair masters, "they have brought you up as a child, fed you, clothed you, indulged you, and taught you, so that you have a good education" (Stowe 26). In that time, harsh slave treatment was seen as the usual, however Shelby treated his slaves as humanely as possible, and that shows his morality. George described his treatment as harsh, “every chance he [his slave master] can get to insult me and torment me, he takes. He says that though I don’t say anything, he sees I’ve got the devil in me, and he’s means to bring it out” (Stowe 26). Clearly there is a difference between Shelby and George’s slave master. Even though Shelby is not completely moral, he is more moral compared to the moralities of other slave masters of the time.
I agree with everyone before who said that Shelby treats his slaves much better than Haley or George's master. Unlike many slave owners, Shelby allowed his slaves to learn to read and write, such as in the beginning of chapter 4. Also, George's master took George away from the factory just because he was beginning to feel "an uneasy consciousness of inferiority" In chapter 2, he thinks, "What business had his slave to be marching round the country, inventing machines, and holding up his head among gentlemen? He'd soon put a stop to it. He'd take him back, and put him to hoeing and digging, and 'see if he'd step about so smart.'" Also, George's master also beat his slaves, but Shelby did not.
The treatment of the slaves under Shelby in my opinion is much more humane and at a more of an assistant/helper relationship compared to the treatment under the masters such as Haley or George's master who do what they can to put their slaves in misery. This is displayed on page 39 when Chloe tells George that his mother (her master) only shrugged when she became saucy with her. This treatment is quite different and much more humane than George’s master when on page 21 he begged the master’s son to not whip a horse as much, but the boy became angry at his remark. So, George’s master let him whip George as much as he wanted to. The treatment under Shelby is obviously much better than the treatment under the harsher masters because Shelby actually tries to be decent while the harsher masters try to put their slaves in pain.
In an effort to not be repetitive, I will just say that I seem to be split somewhere in the middle of everybody. I do believe that the institution of slavery is wrong as spencer has stated. HOWEVER, I also clearly recognize the difference among slave owners, just as Chris A. does. I agree with Eli that it is obvious that the way Shelby treats his slaves is considerably better than the way George’s master, Haley, and other masters treat their slaves. Shelby doesn’t believe in separating slave families, while Haley does (so long as it is done quietly). Ms. Shelby is so against cruelty towards slaves that she is called an abolitionist by her husband. Georges master, when seeing that George has pride and skills in his work, makes a point to cut him down and torment him at every opportunity. Shelby, on the other hand, embraces Tom’s good qualities and sent him to Cincinnati on a business trip, and has trusted him with money and property (pg. 6). I do agree with those, like Spencer, who have said that slavery is GENERALLY dehumanizing. However, I disagree with Kristy when she says that all slave owners are mean and evil JUST FOR OWNING SLAVES. The Shelbys treat their slaves more like indentures servants than property. Ms. Shelby says that selling Eliza’s child would be like selling one of her own (pg. 14). Once you own the slaves, you can treat them any way you want. This includes treating as well as you would your own, not selling them, trusting them, giving them passes to come and go as they pleased, pampering them, or even SETTING THEM FREE. These are all thing that the Shelbys did or intended to do. The only reason why Mr. Shelby sold Tom and Harry is because, as alec said, because he had to in order to save the rest of his slaves. It was only out of bare necessity, out of debt, did Shelby sell his slaves (something he never wanted to do). He said himself that it was those two slaves or everything, so he had virtually no choice.
I disagree with Kemi with what she said about any slave owner being inhumane, regardless as to who is kinder. For example, all of the slaves under Mrs. Shelby's care have only positive things to say about her, even though she is a slave owner. Even as Eliza shows up at Uncle Tom's cabin with her son to run away, she emphasis how good of a person her master is, saying that "you ought to have heard [Mrs.Shelby] talk! If she an't a Christian and an angel, there never was one. I'm a wicked girl to leave her so; but, then, I can't help it. She said, herself, one soul was worth more than the world..." (pg. 44). Even though Mr. and Mrs. Shelby legally own slaves, Mrs. Shelby doesn't agree with the idea of slavery and would rather not own slaves. In fact,on page 40, she says that "it is a sin to hold a slave under laws like ours,- I always felt it was,- I always thought so when I was a girl...I thought by kindness, and care, and instruction, I could make the condition of mine better than freedom,- fool that I was!" These thoughts show that on her part, she has always viewed slavery as a sinful action since she was a girl, but still thought that by treating her slaves kindly and humanely, would be able to surpass the ill associations of owning another human. I think that this positive image of Mrs. Shelby proves that not all slave owners are inhumane, and that there is most definitely a difference in the quality of care amongst various masters.
The question at hand is asking do you think that there is a significant difference in the way that the three masters treat their slaves. And, if so do you think one is “better” than the other. I think that there are definite differences between the master’s treatments of their slaves, Stowe tell us of Mr. Shelby’s treatment as, “there had never been a lack of anything which might contribute to the physical comfort of the Negroes of his estate.”(13). Mr. Shelby provided for his slaves in a way that Haley did not. Haley looked at that treatment, “Indulging in physical comfort” (by his standards at least) as in-correct, he thought that “tan’t no kindness to be givin’ on him notions and expectations, and bringin’ him up too well…” (12). George’s master abuses him in every way possible as to make George’s description of his life so far as thus, “I have been kicked and cuffed and sworn at, and at the best only let alone…”. So yes, there is a difference in the way the master’s treated their slaves. But, as to the question, “is one “better” than the other” I have to say, who’s asking? When I ask myself that question, I can only agree with previous students who note that although one slave master may be more physically comforting than another it does not change the fact, that they are still slaves, always subject to the most harshest and inhumane circumstances. We saw that a slave such as Tom, who is trusted and living a physically comforted life can go so quickly into being sold to, who knows where. It doesn’t matter if you are not whipped on a daily basis or not as slave, because your situation can change instantly anyway. For me I do not think that one master is “better” than the other, we are not talking about puppies, we are talking about humans, and as Stowe put it on page 13, “So long as the law considers all these human beings, with beating hearts and living affections, only as so many things belonging to a master, --so long as the failure, or misfortune, or imprudence, or death of the kindest owner may cause them any day exchange a life of protection and indulgence for one of hopeless misery and toil, --so long it is impossible to make anything beautiful or desirable in the best-regulated administration of slavery.”
I left my book in my locker, so I am using the online version of Uncle Tom’s Cabin. The online version only includes chapters, so I apologize for the vague citations.
I agree with Spencer. Spencer has stated that only pain can come of slavery, no matter how “benevolent or kind a master may be.” In chapter 2, while being hired out to a factory, George has invented an ingenious machine, which makes his master “feel an uneasy consciousness of inferiority.” Thus, his master decides to take George back to his home to work in the “meanest drudgery of the farm” (Stowe ch. 2). He reasons that George invented the machine because he didn’t want to work, so, if George is not working to his best ability, he should be disciplined at his home. His master says, “O yes! a machine for saving work, is it? He'd invent that, I'll be bound; let a nigger alone for that, any time. They are all labor-saving machines themselves, every one of 'em. No, he shall tramp” (Stowe ch. 2). George, who is hoping to be freed, has his chances crushed. Stowe has characterized George’s master as one of the “cruel” masters because of destroying George’s hopes, but, in fact, Shelby has done the same. In chapter 1, Shelby is in debt, and he agrees to sell his slaves to another master named Haley. Shelby would rather sell his slave than his land, which is one example of his cruelty. They decide on a slave named Uncle Tom and a slave named Harry, the son of Eliza, who is Mrs. Shelby’s maid and wife of George. Harry is the only child of George and Eliza, and, considering their other two infant children passed away, they are very attached to Harry. Nonetheless, Shelby still sells Harry to Haley. It is beside the point that Shelby feels guilty; he did nothing to stop the transaction. Shelby has also hurt Eliza and Harry by separating them, similar to how George’s master hurt George. Although George’s master is considered the crueler master, Shelby is just as cruel.
I agree with everyone who has posted so far. I think that Stowe wants the readers to understand that all slavery is bad, but some treatment is definately "better" than others, like the treatment of Shelby's slaves. Stowe says that although "so long as the law considers all these human beings, with beating hearts and living affections, only as so many things belonging to a master... so long it is impossible to make anything beautiful or desirable in the best-regulated administration of slavery." She goes on to give examples of the two ends of the slavery spectrum. On the harshest end is the treatment of George, a young slave, by his master. George was "put... to work that any horse can do," and whipped "till [his master] was tired." On the other hand, Eliza, George's wife, "had been brought up by her mistress, from girl-hood, as a petted and indulged favorite." I think that Stowe is definitely attempting to explain that some types of slavery are indeed "better" than others, but none are okay, and none should be legal. I agree with her. The treatment of Shelby's slaves, like Eliza, is much preferred to the cruel treatment of George and his fellow slaves. However, being free is preferred above all; which is what Stowe is trying to say.
I agree with everyone who has said that Shelby treated his slaves better than the other slave owners. One of the main things that the Shelbys did differently from other slave owners is that the they treated their slaves like actual people, almost equal to whites except for the fact that they owned them and forced the slaves to serve them. For example, on page 38 Mrs. Shelby says, "...I knew you never meant to sell any of our people..." She calls her slaves "people" instead of "n----" as Haley does on page 11. As others have pointed out, slavery in any form is wrong, but I believe that treating slaves as well as the Shelbys did is a small improvement from the way that the other slave owners treated them. We have already established that the slaves who belonged to the Shelbys appreciated the good treatment, and since the slaves were the ones who had to endure the worst parts of slavery, I think we should trust their judgment.
I agree with many people in that no matter how kind a master is, slavery is still very cruel and very unjust. However, the treatment of slaves can still be measured. In the first few pages of chapter one, you can easily tell that Shelby is much kinder than most slave-owners of the time. Even though he is a master, he feels for his slaves and tries not to cause them undue pain (both mentally and physically). He puts trust in his slaves and makes them feel important, especially Tom, “Why, last fall, I let him [Tom] go to Cincinnati alone, to do business for me, and bring home five hundred dollars.” George’s master, on the other hand, is the typical, abusive slave-owner. He enjoys whipping his slaves and causing them as much pain as possible. In conclusion, Shelby is a much kinder and better person than George’s master.
At first, I agreed with Eli's idea: Shelby is by far a "better" slave master than Haley or George's master, but Stowe makes this distinction to show us that slavery can bring out the evils in every man, even the most kind, religious, and well-meaning.
However, Jenny also brings up a good point. While Mr. Shelby may treat his slaves better by trusting them and never whipping them, he still dehumanizes his slaves, and he seems unaware of it.
If we wish to compare the treatment of two slave masters, I think we should look at intentions. It is clear that Shelby has never intended to hurt his slaves, although he may have treated Harry as a dog, petting him, throwing him treats, and making him do tricks. If we compare this to how George's master treats dogs, (tying them up and drowning them in lakes,) it is almost immediate to conclude that Shelby is by far a "better" slave master. Shelby may have sold Tom and Harry, yet he explains clearly that he did so only so that he would not have to sell all the other slaves. The family does their best to humanize the slaves, teaching them to read and write, and giving what they can in the hope that slavery can become a kinder situation, even kinder than freedom itself. But when the slaves come to trust their masters, they are instead sold. It is Mrs. Shelby who best sums up the family's failure: "I thought, by kindness, and care, and instruction, I could make the condition of mine better than freedom-fool that I was!"
For a moment, however, I wish to step back from comparing and contrasting, and take Spencer's viewpoint. If all of the slave owners in the entire world were like Mr. Shelby, would slavery be a good practice? No: dehumanization is still just as cruel and unjust, and a slave is still denied his freedom to change his own future. Stowe has used the contrasts between Haley and Shelby to show us that slavery is terrible, and will ruin even the best intentions. Shelby may be a "better" master than other slave masters, but in my view, he will never be a "good" master, no matter how hard he tries.
While Shelby's slaves are treated more kindly than slaves of say, George's master, it is hard to morally say that it is better treatment. Towards the of chapter one, Mr. Shelby is critisized because he spoils his slaves. "They have brought you up like a child, fed you, clothed you, indulged you, and taught you, so that you have a good education," George reminds Eliza, showing her the kindness and benefits she has recieved from her kind "masters". "But I have been kicked and cuffed and sworn at, and at the best left alone," George continues comparing their treatment. In addition, George speaks of his treatment saying, " he says he'll bring me down and humble me, and he puts me to just the hardest, meanest, and dirty work, on purpose." Even though, Eliza is treated kinder than her husband by the "masters", she is still a slave. Any treatment during which one human is considered lower and treated unequally is wrong. Isn't that part of Mrs. Stowe's message? "So long as the law considers all these human beings...only as so many [i]things[i] belonging to a master...it is impossible to make anything beautiful or desirable in the best-regulated administration of slavery."
Although Mr. Shelby's slaves are treated much as family, when it comes down to it they are still slaves, able to be sold. Eliza is like a child to Mrs. Shelby, but this does not stop Mr. Shelby from ignoring Eliza's possible feelings and selling her child.
I agree with pretty much everyone who has commented so far. Shelby is not a better person than the other masters. They all own slaves, a clearly awful and dehumanizing practice, and I do not feel that one person who allows himself to own another human is any better than another person who does the same thing. However, it is clear from the first few chapters that one master can treat his slaves better than another master, and I do believe that compared to other masters, George’s for example, Shelby does treat his slaves considerably better. As it says on page 27, George’s master beats and whips him, and is extremely cruel to him for no reason. He even kills George’s dog just for the purpose of “showing him who’s boss.” Shelby would never do something like this. Yes, it is true that he sells Tom, who was so loyal to him he didn’t even runaway when given the chance (page 14) and Harry too, but he does this out of desperation, as he explains to his wife on page 42, not to fuel some sort of inferiority complex he has developed, as is the reason for George’s master’s cruelty.
Though Shelby has a much more positive attitude than Haley, he is not a better master. For example, on pages five and six, Shelby throws some raisins on the floor for Harry, and then has him dance and do imitations to impress Haley. This is exactly the same as giving a dog a treat for doing a trick. On page 11, the author says that, "So long as the law considers all these human beings, with beating hearts and living affections, only as so many things belonging to a master...so long it is impossible to make anything beautiful or desirable in the best regulated administration of slavery." In other words, even if a master treats his slaves much better than most masters, he is still just as bad as the other masters because he considers living people property.
I agree with Kristy and Spence's view, that it doesn't matter how well you treat a slave, but by owning a human being and treating them as property you are still immoral. Even though Shelby claims that he is a "humane man", he still owns many slaves. No matter how much respect and trust is given to a slave, they are still dehumanized, and are still treated as people of a lower status.
In terms of Stowes views, she potrays Shelby as a lot less harsh than other owners, but I disagree with Sharon's belief that Shelby and his wife treat their slaves like humans should be treated. No one should be owned by anyone, but due to the circumstances of that time, Shelby does trust his slaves a lot more then others, such as Tom (George's master) might. For example, on page 33, the meeting at Uncle Tom's cabin is described. At that time not many masters allowed their slaves to gather and hold meetings and allow other slaves from different farms to come too. The meeting is one privilege that Shelby's slaves had, that other slaves such as George did not. On page 16, the reaction George got from his master at the factory is described. Then, on page 17 Stowe discusses how, "The tyrant observed the whisper, and conjectured its import though he could not hear what was said; and he inwardly strengthened himself in his determination to keep the power he possessed over his victim." This shows how Tom was so outraged by the intelligence of his slave that he had to remove George from the factory immediately, so that he could put George down. Overall the Shelby's tried to show their slaves respect and give them some praise, while other "harsher" masters kept their slaves down.
I will define "better" as someone who treats their slaves really well. In that respect, Shelby is the "better" slave owner. Shelby doesn't treat slaves as property, he treats them as actual people. He gets to trust his slaves and trusts them to go outside of state to do something for him. On the second page of Uncled Tom's Cabin, Mr. Shelby talks about how honest and square Tom is and goes on to say how he sent him to Cincinnati to do business and that he came back with the job done when he could have run away up to Canada. Haley, however does believe that slaves are property and not realy people. On page two, he talks about a slave that he bought that was really good and called hima nd referred to him as an "article". Haley also buys slaves for entertainment, such as Eliza's son. George's master was worse in treating his slaves than Haley was. On page 13, it shows that George had invented a machine for the cleaning of the hemp. His master, seeing how he presented the machine and spoke smoothly and smartly, his master got jealous and decided to show his slave his place. So he took George out of where he previously worked and put him to doing the worst type of chores until George could stand it no more. He decided to run away up to Canada because he had had enough of the bad treatment. So, Shelby is better than Haley who is better than George's master.
Mr. Shelby may treat his slaves better, but that does not make him better than Mr. Haley, or George’s master. Mr. Shelby still does not consider his slaves to be wholly human. He made promises to his most trusted slave, Tom, “promising him his freedom” (pg. 43). He is also a supporter of slavery. Mr. Shelby told his wife that her abolitionist thoughts “differ from many wise and pious men” (pg. 45). These same men, such as Mr. B, preached for slavery.
George’s master, with his cruelty, drove George to run away. Whatever kindness Mr. Shelby has shown his slaves, he still drove Eliza and her child away.
I think the treatment of slaves under Shelby is better than treatments of "harsher" masters. On page 9, Shelby is talking with the trader about selling Harry. Shelby says "I'm a humane man, and I hate to take the boy from his mother." The trader doesn't really care and said to make up for it with a dress or something like that. Shelby wants to keep the families together like any other white family.
Yes I think that Shelby does and is a better master towards his slaves compared to George's master and Haley. For example, on pages 16 and 17 just because George was succeding he decided to shot him down, and was continously violent towards compared to some of his other slaves. Haley is not a unkind to his slaves as George's master is, but he isn't as nice as Shelby and his wife. They are incredivly kind to their slaves,"... they have brought you up like a child, fed you, clothed you, indulged you, and tought you..." (p.21). Here George is telling why Eliza has reasons to be faithful to Mr. Shelby, because he is kind to her and other slaves.
I agree with Lisha, and that although Mr. Shlby may seem to be protrayed as a more humane slave holder at first glance, Stowe later shows in a couple of different ways how this is still not entirely true. On page 7, Mr. Shelby tossed some raisons on the ground for Jim to pick up, and "patted the curly head, and chucked him under the chin. 'Now, Jim, show this gentleman how you can dance and sing.'" Although the act seems almost harmless, Shelby was exploiting Jim for his own entertainment. This was disrespetful, and used Jim's culutral background as a means for humor.
I disagree with Alex (rules) because I do not believe Harriet Beecher Stowe is actually using sarcasm when she calls Shelby "humane." I believe that Shelby was rather trying to portay how the souls of the slaves were crushed so that they themselves thought that Shelby was nice- Stowe was representing the view of slaves, who had no higher expectations, and found Shelby to be a fine owner, as comparable to other much crueler owners such as Haley.
I think that neither treatment is really better and that both of them have their flaws. At a glance, the nicer form of treatment definitely seems to be the better. Even Haley agrees that if masters are so harsh and use no humanity in their dealing with their slaves it ruins them. On page 11 Haley refers to a slave owner that he knew that beat his slaves a lot. Haley says that he tried to persuade him to treat his slaves with a little bit of humanity, and Haley then says "But tom couldn't get the hang on 't; and he spiled so many for me, that I had to break off with him," So the harsher form of treatment is definitely not better. However, though the "softer" form of treatment may seem better, in the long run it can be very bad. For example, on pages 16-18, the husband of Eliza, George's problems are described. He is employed, by his master, to work in a factory where they treat him very well, and is very happy. However, when his master sees how happy he is, he takes him back to work on his plantation.The work on the plantation is very bad for George and he has "nothing before him but a life of toil and drudgery." So after being employed by a good master, when a slave is sold to a more common, harsh master, the contrast is very harsh for the slave, probably worse than if a harsh life was what they were used to. Therefore, in the long run, neither kind of treatment is better, as all forms of slavery are bad.
I believe that no slave owner, weather it is Shelby, or one of the "harsher" slave owners such as Haley or George's master, is better than any other. Weather one is nice or mean to their slaves, being a slave owner is evil, and demonstrates that you have a twisted sense of morality. In "Uncle Tom's Cabin", it appears that Shelby is nicer to his slaves than some of the other slave owners. He compliments his slaves (Stowe 6), asks how his slaves are doing when they seem sad (Stowe 14), and prefers not to whip or hit his slaves (Stowe 11). Although all of these are nice things to do, none of them can hide the fact that he owns people. No matter the circumstance, owning a human being takes away the rights that make them their own person, and in the end, can never make one satisified when they can not choose their own actions. Even though at times he (and his wife) seems to be a nice person, such as when Mrs. Shelby has a real wedding prepared for Eliza (Stowe 16), or how they have educated their slaves (Stowe 21), the Shelby's have done some not very nice things also. On page 14, Mrs. Shelby insults Eliza's son by stating she is too proud of him (Stowe 14), Mr. Shelby throws things as Jim and orders him to pick them up (Stowe 7), and sells Tom down the river, forcing him to part from everything he knows (Stowe 26). If Shelby really was a moral person as he says he is (Stowe 9), he would not own slaves what so ever.
I think that a master like Shelby is better than the others because treatment always matters, but the institution of slavery is horrible in any circumstance. No matter who you are, and no matter what society says and does and thinks, people have always been able to look inside themselves and really evaluate what they are doing, and the enslaving and dehumanizing of blacks is and was NEVER right. People could see that and they chose to be ignorant.
There are a variety of ways of looking at this prompt. Inside the more narrow scope of the question, the argument could be made that Shelby is a better slave master, as slave masters go. Shelby treats his slaves with kindness and respect and provides well for them (page 13). Other slave masters, however, were not so kind to their slaves, as is exhibited on page 21 ("I begged him again, then he turned on me and began striking me."
In the larger scope of the question, however, I think that there is no way to say that one slave master is better than another. Slavery is still slavery, no matter how kindly the slaves are treated; they are still considered property. Even Mrs. Shelby, considered to be one of the kindest women (even by Eliza), uses a condescending tone when speaking to her slaves (page 14) by calling them foolish and "goosie."
What's more, this slavery is not only physical but psychological. Just before she runs away, Eliza pronounces that Mrs. Shelby is a good woman and that she feels terrible for escaping. Uncle Tom, also, feels that running away is wrong because Shelby has placed his trust in him and is a good man. Tom, however, takes it one step further in that he willingly will be sold to Haley. The kindness of the Shelbys inspired Tom to sell himself into even more brutal slavery, and there is nothing "better" about willingly giving up one's life for one's master. Shelby's kindness has, in essence, become evil because it is preventing Tom from being free. Just because a slave master is respectful and trusting towards his slaves does not make him a better slave master, because who would inspire loyalty more than a kind man?
Even though, in a general sense, Shelby could be considered a better slave master than others, it is his kindness that is truly psychologically and emotionally enslaving Tom, which means that he is no better a master than anyone else.
I do not think that either slave owner is more human or kind than the other. Aside from the institution of slavery being horrible in itself, although Shelby and his wife’s treatment of their slaves seems to come off as nicer than Haley’s in the novel, by paying careful attention to how they communicate with their slaves and provide for them, they are not actually being kind. For example, both Mr. and Mrs. Shelby are patronizing towards their slaves and treat them like their pets. For example, on page 3, there is a very long passage about a conversation between Mr. Shelby and one of his favorite slaves. Mr. Shelby throws food to the boy and demands the boy to fetch it, he “pats” and “chucks the boy under [the boy’s] chin”, and he asks the boy to do “tricks”. Not only is he treating the poor boy like his favorite pet, but he is also showing the boy off to Haley, like he would with a show-dog or race horse. In addition, on page 9, in a conversation between Eliza and Mrs. Shelby, Mrs. Shelby is not kind towards the girl with her language. She is patronizing because she calls the young woman a “goosie”. The behaviors of both Mr. Shelby and Mrs. Shelby are dehumanizing. There is a difference between how one is supposed to treat people, and how one is supposed to treat one’s pets. As Mr. and Mrs. Shelby treat the slaves, actual people, as their pets, there is obviously something wrong in their behavior towards them, so neither is actually kind. Finally, the way in which the owners provide for their slaves is dehumanizing. On page 19, I read that “the cabin of Uncle Tom was a small log building, close adjoining to “the house”, as the negro par excellence designates his master’s dwelling”. Obviously, Mr. Shelby and Mrs. Shelby aren’t entirely fair or believe that they have the same status as their slaves if they are separating their slaves from them. Also, if the slaves call the Shelby’s home a “house”, what is their house in comparison? Where are they living in, a hovel? Again, Mr. and Mrs. Shelby are not treating their slaves as their equals, which is dehumanizing and not kind as well. Therefore, both the Shelbys and Haley are cruel, even if they are mean or dehumanize their slaves in different ways.
Note: Although the response is technically due today, as everybody posted before then…Sorry for the late(ish) post: neither of the blogs were working on my computer this weekend, so I brought a hard copy of my response to class. Now that it’s back, I thought I should put my response up to make grading less confusing…
I agree with Eli. Although it's clear that any slave would prefer belonging to Shelby over Haley, Stowe's point is that no matter how nice a slave owner seems, owning slaves immediately makes him immoral. For example, when bankrupt, he sells Harry and Tom, two slaves that were more than just property to him suddenly become object that he's forced to use to stay in business. As much as he cares about them and treats them like family, at the end of the day they are just another belonging that can be sold or pawned, like a watch. However, Shelby's treatment is a lot better than Haley's, who doesn't even considered slaves to be human, thinking that when a child is ripped away from it's mother that they would be able to handle better than a white family could (Signet Classic 11). All in all, Shelby would be preferrable to Haley or others, but both are very far from good.
[Sorry that the post is late, I forgot that today was an English day and so I didn't check my english homework, so I didn't notice the big HW DUE MONDAY written there.]
I agree with Sharon that Shelby's treatment of his slaves is better than that of "harsher" masters and that it certainly makes him a "better" one. When he describes that he "[had] raked, and scraped, and borrowed" money so that he would be able to pay off his mortgage, he shows how much he did to avoid selling George and Harry. If he went to these lengths, he had done everything he can, and is therefore forced into selling them. Selling the two is the only deliberate harm he has caused them, which clearly makes him "better" than the masters who beat their slaves.
While I think there is definately merit in Spencer's comment that Stowe's objective is to show the inhumanity in all slaveholders, I think it important that we take note of the obvious difference between Shelby and other masters. Whereas Shelby notably would not stand for cruel or perverse treatment of his slaves, as he illustrates early on (at the end of page eight in the Signet Classic copy) when he says to Haley, "I don't want to make my fortune on her," of Harry's mother. Also noted is the fact that, from the second paragraph of the first chapter, Haley is portrayed as a kind of cruel monster who tries (and fails) to appear gentlemanly. This obvious difference must be remembered, as must the difference between Shelby and George's cruel master, who is portrayed to have beaten George for attempting to stop him frightening the horses (pg 21). So while Shelby and his wife are still cruel for holding slaves, if we hold them in a fair perspective we see that they were good, kind people.
ps: i apologize for the late post-- i lost my book on friday and needed to borrow a new one from Mr. F today so as to read the assigned chapters and put the above post.
A lot seems to have been said about how Shelby treats his slaves more like huimans than George's master or Haley. I do not think either Shelby does this, and is about as inhumane as the others. The two often speak of how they do not wish harm to their slaves, yet ironically they never actually act on their words and infact do the opposite.This is especially true on page 11, when the young Harry come in on Haley and Shelby's conversation. Throughout the period , Shelby treats Harry like a dog, tossing raisins to him, calling him to do various imitations to the two mens' enjoyment, and even patting him on the head and chucking him under the chin. It seems ironic that Shelby is viewed as a humane slave holder, yet completely dehumanizes Harry in this scene, and further demonstrates doing so by going ahead and selling Harry and Tom, probably now to a harsher master.
I certainly concur with Laura and Sharon, in that Shelby himself does not treat the slaves as inhumanely directly as someone like George. In that the Shelby’s do not want to sell their slaves, but they need the money. Sacrificing someone’s soul, and giving it to another while you know that even while they will no longer be yours anymore, they will be beaten merely for your wealth is no better than performing the beatings with your own two hands. Even though the Shelby slaves may not receive whippings on a daily basis when on Shelby property, that does not make those particular slaves dehumanized any less than all other slaves. This is especially illustrated on page seven when Jim can be seen performing “tricks” to impress a potential “customer.” From the mocking of Uncle Cudjoe, to doing a dance and song he knows that a reward is coming the same way a dog does after he does something that his master likes. If you are going to classify any slavery as wrong, and the owning of a person’s life unjust then no one slave owner can be classified as any better than the next, because, anyone who owned a slave was taking away another’s liberty and no matter what their intentions as can be seen in the Shelby incident, if sold, horrors awaited any slave who’s owner needed money.
I think Stowe is making the point that being part of the institution of slavery, even if you are a "kind" slaver owner is evil. Shelby and is wife are basicly good people. On page 16, Shelby says, "I’m a humane man, and I would hate to take the boy away from his mother." and on page 40, Mrs. Shelby says, "I thought, by kindness, and care, and instruction, I could make the condition of mine better than freedom." However, through owning slaves these good people are pushed to do bad things. To pay back debts to Mr. Haley, Shelby and his wife have to sell Tom and Eliza's son Jim. No matter how reluctant they are, they are still taking part in the buying and selling of other people. So while George's master may whip his slaves while Shelby does not, the shadow of institution of slavery is cast equally on them both.
I agree with others that point out there is no such thing as a "good" slave owner. Both Mr. Shelby and and George's Master treat their slaves inhumanely, so even if Mr. Shelby is a "better" slave owner, it is only because, in comparison, the way he treats his slaves causes less pyhsical and emotional damage then George's Master. Let's say the institution of slavery is black. Then the ideals of liberation and freedom would be white, correct? Slave owners then come in spectrums of gray. Mr. Shelby could be a lighter shade of gray then Haley, who would be a lighter shade of gray then George's Master. But they would each be tainted by the darkness of slavery.
I agree with everyone who has said that there is no such thing as a “good” slave master, because slavery was such an evil thing. However, I do think that the issue of relativity in the context of the time period has to be taken into account. Like others have said, it was commonly accepted for people to own other people at that time. The question is not asking whether Stowe portrayed owning slaves as a good thing, but rather if some masters treated their slaves more kindly than others. I think that the way Shelby treats his slaves, especially Eliza, is better than the way other masters treat their slaves. Shelby and his wife are very adamant about teaching religion to their slaves, especially Eliza, which they view as a service to the slaves. Also, Shelby’s wife chose a husband and prepared a marriage ceremony for Eliza. Shelby only considers selling Eliza’s son and Tom because by not doing so, he would lose all of his slaves; I agree with Eli that this is one of the instances where slavery makes otherwise kind people do horrible things.
Post a Comment