The Agency and Legitimacy of the Southern Black Dialect

I really wanted to address the question I felt that wasn't fully answered at the end of class today, which was essentially "Why keep Sojourner Truth's speech in the Southern dialect which was not her own?"

Campbell answers this question in part when she says near the end of the article, "Ironically, I have come to believe that what began as degrading dialect had and continues to have the agency to transform itself into the silenced voices of Truth's most despised sisters" (14). Truth may not have spoken in the dialect that Gage had transcribed her speech in, and it's irrelevant (at least in this specific context) why Gage decided to write it as such. What results from it is that her message is put in the dialect of those who were most ignored and discriminated against in the time-- uneducated African Americans in the South. It somewhat disappointed me to read in Campbell's article that Douglass described Truth as, "'a genuine specimen of the uncultured negro... [who] cared little for elegance of speech or refinement of manners... [and who] seemed to feel it her duty... to ridicule my efforts to speak and act like a person of cultivation and refinement'" (14). I can understand why he would make such a criticism, for how were whites supposed to take an uncultured black woman seriously? This dialect was seen as inferior and easily dismissible by whites.

It reminds me, in a certain sense, of Gilbert and Gubar and their description of "anxiety of authorship" in the feminine literary tradition. Truth's speech as transcribed seems to reject the stylistic tendencies of white male authors and orators, for if written or spoken in this form, it does not nearly have the same impact. The transcription does not conform to the language of those in power, the white male literary precursors. It instead builds upon a different tradition of language, the dialect of the powerless, the group which is most deeply impacted by the issues brought up in the speech. As Campbell points out, "the women [Truth] most represented... are rendered more perfectly in language that expresses so painfully the terrible costs of slavery-- the loss of literacy, the loss of education, the loss of access to public dialogue that, even when overcome, is constrained by being rendered in language that ridicules and demeans" (14).

The message, even if written in a different dialect, would not change, but its emotional impact of it certainly does. The fact that this dialect is seen as inferior is exactly what gives it its unique power. Certainly the arguments made hold water regardless of the dialect, but using this dialect gives voice to those women who are most silenced, showing that they too have a voice and legitimate points to bring to the discourse about race and gender.

This may be a bit of a tangent (so feel free to overlook this!), but this characterization of power really reminded me of a song by Bob Dylan called "The Lonesome Death of Hattie Carroll". It describes the murder of Hattie Carroll, a black kitchen maid who worked in a hotel, at the hands of a young, white tobacco farm owner while he was staying at the hotel. Dylan beautifully characterizes the station of her and her children by saying they, "carried the dishes and hauled out the garbage/ and never sat once at the head of the table/ and didn't even speak to the people at the table".

(If you care to listen: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7h6xAxe_aY)

The table can be seen as a metaphor for society at large, in that African Americans were routinely excluded from the national discourse and were certainly not allowed to be in any position of power. It is analogous to the placement of the Southern black dialect in conjunction to the "white" dialect (is that even the right word for it?) This dialect seems to be excluded from what some would call the "legitimate" literary discourse, as it, at least in the specific dialect of Gage's transcription of Truth's speech, "[includes] extreme indicators of lack of education or mastery of standard English" (9). I cringe at the phrase "standard English". Perhaps that's what the "white" dialect (god, another cringe) really is at heart. It is simply how language is used by the majority (aka those in power) and in this sense is seen as most correct or valuable.

When Campbell rewrites the original transcription in standard English, her intentions are noble. Understandably, Campbell originally wanted to remain true to how Truth really spoke and move away from the racialized dialect her speech is transcribed in. She then realizes the power of Gage's transcription, saying, "the speech recreates participation in public discourse that is constrained by debased language, but that finds another kind of agency in vernacular speech" (13). I understand that the dialect the speech is written in can be seen as inferior or debased, but is that really an inherent quality? After all, is it just not the product of our society's values? We see speaking using standard English to be an indicator of being educated, which is certainly valued. But are there not educated people who speak in the common vernacular? Must they put on the mask of standard English to be taken seriously?

I suppose the best way I can sum this all up is by the conclusion of Dylan's song. Throughout, he after he continues to narrate the tragedy of Carroll's murder, he repeats, "take the rag away from your face/ now ain't the time for your tears". This changes at the closing of the song, and I wouldn't really be doing it justice by simply quoting a few lines. He sings:

"In the courtroom of honor, the judge pounded his gavel
To show that all’s equal and that the courts are on the level
And that the strings in the books ain’t pulled and persuaded
And that even the nobles get properly handled
Once that the cops have chased after and caught ’em
And that the ladder of law has no top and no bottom
Stared at the person who killed for no reason
Who just happened to be feelin’ that way without warnin’
And he spoke through his cloak, most deep and distinguished
And handed out strongly, for penalty and repentance
William Zanzinger with a six-month sentence
Oh, but you who philosophize disgrace and criticize all fears
Bury the rag deep in your face
For now’s the time for your tears"

The real tragedy of the story is that the murder of Hattie Carroll was not ultimately judged by the act in it of itself, but by the context and manipulation of the situation. Although it's important to acknowledge context in law or in literature, we should always pay mind to what has shaped the context, especially when looking at what is deemed to be the norm and why it has importance in comparison to what is deemed as inferior.

(I'm not quite sure if I've answered any questions, or I've just brought up a whole bunch of them. Regardless, hopefully I've given some food for thought.)