Looking locally at the Underground Railroad

February 28, 2015

It seems like we’re under­go­ing some reassess­ment in terms of the Under­ground Rail­road. A piece appear­ing in yesterday’s New York Times, “Myth, Real­i­ty and the Under­ground Rail­road” by Ethan J Kytle and Carl Geis­sert, tell one nar­ra­tive tells the sto­ry of one of the pri­ma­ry myth-makers of the 1890s:

Although Siebert tem­pered some of his con­tem­po­raries’ hyper­bole, he nonethe­less took many Under­ground Rail­road sto­ries at face val­ue. Undaunt­ed by a dearth of ante­bel­lum doc­u­men­ta­tion — most rail­road activists had not kept records in order to pro­tect run­aways and them­selves — Siebert relied on the rem­i­nis­cences of “‘old time’ abo­li­tion­ists” to fill “the gaps in the real his­to­ry of the Under­ground Railroad.”

An arti­cle in last month’s Times explains that this sto­ry got the revi­sion­ist treat­ment in the 1960s:

That view large­ly held among schol­ars until 1961, when the his­to­ri­an Lar­ry Gara pub­lished “The Lib­er­ty Line,” a slash­ing revi­sion­ist study that dis­missed the Under­ground Rail­road as a myth and argued that most fugi­tive slaves escaped at their own ini­tia­tive, with lit­tle help from orga­nized abo­li­tion­ists. Schol­ar­ship on the top­ic all but dried up, as his­to­ri­ans more gen­er­al­ly empha­sized the agency of African-Americans in claim­ing their own freedom.

That arti­cle focus­es on Eric Fon­er, who’s just come out with a book that you might call a post-revisionist his­to­ry, based on some recently-uncovered doc­u­ments by little-known 19th-century abo­li­tion­ist edi­tor named Syd­ney Howard Gay. It’s on my to-read list. It’s nice to have some new doc­u­men­tary evi­dence, as it some­times seems the Under­ground Rail­road is the prover­bial blank slate upon which we project our con­tem­po­rary politics.

I’m cur­rent­ly read­ing “Philadel­phia Quak­ers and the Anti­slav­ery Move­ment” by Bri­an Tem­ple, an ama­teur South Jer­sey his­to­ri­an. It’s a use­ful lens. There are a hand­ful of crazy cool sto­ries of white Quak­ers, but it’s clear that much of the Quak­er involve­ment is point­ing run­aways to the near­est African Amer­i­can town. But that’s where it gets inter­est­ing for me. So many of these towns seem to be on land sold them by a white Quak­er farmer; they’re just a mile or two from a Quak­er town, down a qui­et sec­ondary road where you can see any­one com­ing, along­side deep woods or marsh­es into which run­aways can eas­i­ly disappear.

It seems like one of the most impor­tant Quak­er con­tri­bu­tion to the Under­ground Rail­road in South Jer­sey was par­tic­i­pat­ing in the found­ing of these towns: places where man­u­mit­ted and self-freed African Amer­i­cans could live in a self-governing and self-defensible community.

This rais­es lots of ques­tions. There was one promi­nent South Jer­sey African Amer­i­can Quak­er but he was the excep­tion. And it’s often for­got­ten, but much of the source of Quak­ers’ wealth (the land they had to sell) was war and pre­vi­ous enslave­ment. But still, it seems like there might have been some­thing resem­bling repa­ra­tions going on here: forty acres and a mule and giv­ing the freed Africans the space to min­is­ter their own church­es and gov­ern their own town. The his­toric black towns of South Jer­sey would make a great the­sis for some hard­work­ing grad student.

The racial pol­i­tics of the twen­ti­eth cen­tu­ry have not been kind to these towns (Ta-Nehisi Coates could write a new chap­ter of Case for Repa­ra­tions based on them). High­ways plan­ners look­ing for routes close to the now-historic Quak­er towns drew their lines right through the towns. Since most were nev­er for­mal­ly incor­po­rat­ed, zon­ing and school board bat­tles with their sur­round­ing town­ship have tak­en away much of their auton­o­my. Many have been swal­lowed whole by mid-century sprawl and towns in more rur­al areas have depop­u­lat­ed. An old church is often the only vis­i­ble rem­nant and some­times there’s not even that.

My read­ing has stalled three-quarters of the way through Temple’s book and I’ve missed a few oppor­tu­ni­ties to see him present it local­ly. But I’ll try to fin­ish and give a more com­pre­hen­sive review in the near future.

Have Friends lost their cultural memory?

July 12, 2012

In Amer­i­ca today our sense of spir­i­tu­al fel­low­ship in Lib­er­al meet­ings, the feel­ing of belong­ing to the same tribe, is dimin­ish­ing. We no longer live in the same com­mu­ni­ties, and we come from diverse faith tra­di­tions. Our cul­tur­al val­ues are no longer entwined at the roots, as were those of our founders. As a body we share less genet­ic and cul­tur­al mem­o­ry of what it means to be Quak­ers. Dif­fer­ent view­points often pre­vent us from look­ing in the same direc­tion to find a point of con­ver­gence. We hold beliefs rang­ing from Bud­dhism to non-theism to Chris­tian­i­ty, or we may sim­ply be eth­i­cal human­ists. Just imag­ine a mix­ture of wild seeds cast into a sin­gle plot of land, pro­duc­ing a pro­fu­sion of col­or. A wide vari­ety of plants all bloom­ing togeth­er sym­bol­ize our present con­di­tion in the Reli­gious Soci­ety of Friends. Dis­cern­ing which is a wild­flower and which is a weed is not easy. We are liv­ing a great exper­i­ment of reli­gious diversity.

    <p><strong>Tags:</strong>

        <a href=\"http://www.diigo.com/user/martinkelley/quaker\" rel=\"tag\">quaker</a>

Vision and leadership: keeping the long view

February 20, 2012

In her lat­est post at http://​robin​msf​.blogspot​.com/​2​0​1​2​/​0​2​/​v​i​s​i​o​n​.​h​tml, +Robin Mohr asks for “sto­ries of Quak­er lead­ers and committees/organizations that have func­tioned well together.”

It was in col­lege that I first heard Max Weber’s idea that bureau­cra­cies grow to even­tu­al­ly see their own main­te­nance as their prime objec­tive (Wikipedia has a sec­tion on Weber­ian bureau­cra­cy http://​en​.wikipedia​.org/​w​i​k​i​/​B​u​r​e​a​u​c​r​a​c​y​#​W​e​b​e​r​i​a​n​_​b​u​r​e​a​u​c​r​acy). At the time I assumed we were talk­ing about gov­ern­ments but it did­n’t take long in the non­prof­it world to see the phe­nom­e­non alive there as well. Resources go to the pro­grams that can attract the biggest donor atten­tion. Com­mit­tee dis­cern­ment gets short-circuited. Inter­nal bench­marks become the mea­sure even if the are dis­con­nect­ed from actu­al effect or mis­sion. If a need aris­es from out­side of the bound­aries of the inter­nal struc­tures, it is ignores: there’s lit­tle incen­tive to address it.

The only real solu­tion is to keep remem­ber­ing why we’re doing what we’re doing. It’s the prac­tice of self-reflection, it’s the exer­cise of ask­ing what we might be called to. Per­haps this is a lead­er’s real job description.

I’ve been think­ing again late­ly of the way the Soci­ety of Friends respond­ed to the Tom Fox kid­nap­ping, a sto­ry I recount­ed in “Why Would a Quak­er Do a Crazy Thing Like That”(https://​www​.quak​er​ran​ter​.org/​2​0​0​6​/​0​6​/​w​h​y​_​w​o​u​l​d​_​a​_​q​u​a​k​e​r​_​d​o​_​a​_​c​r​a​zy/). I think the under­whelm­ing response was most­ly a fail­ure of imag­i­na­tion. Too many of the orga­ni­za­tions in ques­tion had set­tled them­selves into narrowly-defined mis­sion silos of their own mak­ing. They did­n’t know what to make of the sit­u­a­tion. I’d like to hope that a Rufus Jones or Howard Brin­ton would have cut through the slack, and I am encour­aged at some recent con­ver­sa­tions I’ve had with some emerg­ing lead­ers, but as a stu­dent of his­to­ry I know these are eter­nal prob­lems that are always ready to return.

My the­o­ry of media and social change is that 90% of the time we’re talk­ing amongst our­selves, invit­ing peo­ple in to the con­ver­sa­tion and build­ing an infra­struc­ture of com­mu­ni­ty. It’s one-on-one work, slow, peo­ple inten­sive (but then that’s what makes it enjoy­able, right?). The fruits of this labor become vis­i­ble with unex­pect­ed oppor­tu­ni­ties – those times when we’re called on by a larg­er pub­lic to explain our­selves or describe the world as we see it. If we’ve been doing our back­ground work – plant­i­ng the seeds that is the peo­ple of our com­mu­ni­ty – then we will be ready to step up to the chal­lenge. If we’re not, oppor­tu­ni­ty slips away. 

The his­to­ry of Friends – maybe the his­to­ry of the church uni­ver­sal – is one of missed oppor­tu­ni­ties; the mir­a­cle of faith is that some­times we con­nect with one anoth­er in the love that is God and lay some more bricks and mor­tar for God’s king­dom on Earth.

Embed­ded Link

What Canst Thou Say?: Vision
With­out vision, the peo­ple per­ish. Most­ly because they get eat­en by tigers they did­n’t see com­ing. Isn’t that a joke from Calvin & Hobbes? I’ve been think­ing a lot about vision lately.… 

Another slice of lost Philadelphia profiled on HiddenCity, this time my grandmother’s…

November 14, 2011

Anoth­er slice of lost Philadel­phia pro­filed on Hid­denCi­ty, this time my grand­moth­er’s child­hood neighborhood.

Embed­ded Link

Flash of Dis­cov­ery | Hid­den City Philadelphia
The first Eng­lish speak­ing Luther­an church in the world, locat­ed on Philadel­phi­a’s Franklin Square, was part of an entire neigh­bor­hood demol­ished to make way for the Ben­jamin Franklin Bridge. 

Google+: View post on Google+

As I’ve used G+ more the last week, I’ve realized the service that feels…

November 12, 2011

As I’ve used G+ more the last week, I’ve real­ized the ser­vice that feels the most redun­dant is my Tum­blr account (on the cus­tom domain http://​www​.quack​quack​.org). I start­ed the Tum­blr because I want­ed some­thing more “mine” than Face­book, a place where my pho­tos and links would live inde­pen­dent­ly. But how sil­ly – Tum­blr is just a host­ed ser­vice that I ulti­mate­ly have no con­trol over.

So what’s dif­fer­ent with G+ and Face­book? I think it’s the sense that Google will archive things. It feels like every­thing dis­ap­pears after it ages off of the FB feed.

Embed­ded Link

quack­quack
Mis­cel­lanea from Mar­tin Kelley 

Google+: View post on Google+