Andrew Rothschild, Mackenzie De La Cruz, Randall Ainsworth

1. Andrew Rothschild, MackenzieDe La Cruz, Randall Ainsworth

2. Passage Chapter: 9 Page: 68 Bad as all slaveholders are, we seldom meet one destitute of every element of character commanding respect. My master was one of this rare sort.1 I do not know of one single noble act ever performed by him. The leading trait in his character was meanness; and if there were any other element in his nature, it was made subject to this. He was mean; and, like most other mean men, he lacked the ability to conceal his meanness. Captain Auld was not born a slaveholder. He had been a poor man, master only of a Bay craft. He came into possession of all his slaves by marriage; and of all men, adopted slaveholders are the worst. He was cruel, but cowardly. He commanded without firmness. In the enforcement of his rules, he was at times rigid, and at times lax. At times, he spoke to his slaves with the firmness of Napoleon and the fury of a demon; at other times, he might well be mistaken for an inquirer who had lost his way. He did nothing of himself. He might have passed for a lion, but for his ears. In all things noble which he attempted, his own meanness shone most conspicuous. His airs, words, and actions, were the airs, words, and actions of born slaveholders, and, being assumed, were awkward enough. He was not even a good imitator. He possessed all the disposition to deceive, but wanted the power. Having no resources within himself, he was compelled to be the copyist of many, and being such, he was forever the victim of inconsistency; and of consequence he was an object of contempt, and was held as such even by his slaves. The luxury of having slaves of his own to wait upon him was something new and unprepared for. He was a slaveholder without the ability to hold slaves. He found himself incapable of managing his slaves either by force, fear, or fraud . We seldom called him "master;" we generally called him "Captain Auld," and were hardly disposed to title him at all. I doubt not that our conduct had much to do with making him appear awkward, and of consequence fretful. Our want of reverence for him must have perplexed him greatly. He wished to have us call him master, but lacked the firmness necessary to command us to do so.

3. Annotation 1 My master was one of this rare sort. • Fredrick Douglass uses chremamorphism to dehumanize his master. By omitting the word human or person, Douglass emphasizes his master’s lack of human qualities such as compassion and character. By showing slave masters as animals, Douglass highlights the inhumane nature of slavery and prevents the reader from sympathizing with the slave masters. Return to passage

4. Chremamorphism • The opposite of personification. Gives non-human qualities to a human. Return to Passage

5. Annotation 2 He was at times rigid, and at times lax. • Fredrick Douglass uses antithesis to demonstrate his master’s lack of authority. His master is inconsistent in his orders which causes his slaves not to respect his authority. The contrast between rigid and lax shows a drastic change in the masters personality and actions. This contrast also compares the master’s mood to the life of the slave; the master has random inconsistencies in the same way that a slaves life is subject to change at any time without warning. Return to passage

6. Antithesis • Establishing a clear, contrasting relationship by joining them together, often in parallel structure. Return to Passage

7. Annotation 3 and of all men, adopted slaveholders are the worst. • Fredrick Douglass uses inverted structure to emphasize the cruel nature of all human beings. Using a non inverted structure, the sentence would read Adopted slaveholders are the worst of all men. This phrase has a different meaning because it assumes that most men are benevolent and isolates slaveholders as malicious people. The inverted structure causes slaveholders to be viewed as the most malevolent in a group of evil people. This adds even more negative connotation to slaveholders and makes their actions seem like the worst possible thing that a human being can do. Return to passage

8. Annotation 4 He might have passed for a lion, but for his ears. • Fredrick Douglass compares his master to a lion while qualifying the statement. Through the use of the phrase “might have”, he stresses the fact that the master does not have the power or authority of a lion but attempts to create the illusion that he is in control of his slaves. By using the word “but”, Douglass shows that the master is not successful in creating an illusion of being a powerful and confident slavemaster because but overrides the meaning of his previous phrase. When Douglass talks about his masters ears, he uses the ears as a metaphor for his master’s influences as well as his personality. The master constantly attempts to imitate those around them, he listens to their opinions and changes his actions accordingly. Also, the use of the word ears may also be a colloquialism which compares the master to a jackass which are distinguished by their ears. Return to passage

9. Colloquialism • Slang or informal language Back to passage

10. Metaphor • Comparing two things without using like or as Back to passage

11. Annotation 5 He was mean; and, like most other mean men, he lacked the ability to conceal his meanness. • Douglass uses epistrophe to emphasize the cruel nature of his master. Through repetition of the word mean, Douglass shows that mean behavior of the master is his most noticeable quality. The mean behavior of the master is constantly in the minds of his slaves in the same way that the word mean is constantly seen in the sentence. Also, the use of the phrase “like other mean men” shows that Douglass’s master has typical behavior of a slavemaster. Other implies that the men have something in common with the master and shows that all slavemasters are cruel which dismisses the idea that some masters are good people who treat their slaves well. Return to passage

12. Annotation 6 He was a slaveholder without the ability to hold slaves. • Douglass’s use of paradox emphasizes the lack of authority that all slave masters have over their slaves, especially “Captain Auld”. The phrase at the end, “hold slaves” and in the beginning, “slaveholder” are inverses of each other, which further strengthens the aforementioned statement Douglass is trying to make. While slave masters try to assert dominance over there slaves by creating the illusion that they as masters are superior, this only serves to make slaves rebel. Return to passage

13. Annotation 7 His airs, words, and actions, were the airs, words, and actions of born slaveholders, and, being assumed, were awkward enough. • Fredrick Douglass uses epistrophe to emphasize the lack of originality in his master’s actions and convey the awkwardness of his master’s personality. By repeating the phrase words airs and actions, Douglass makes the sentence awkward to read and understand. The sentence becomes jumbled and awkward due to the unfamiliar sentence structure in the same way that the master’s actions are uncoordinated due to his inexperience as a slaveholder. Return to passage

14. Annotation 8 Copy and paste portion of passage discussed in this slide here Return to passage

15. Rhetorical Term Epistrophe: Repetition of the same word or words at the end of successive phrases. Return to passage

16. Rhetorical Term Term and definition Return to passage

17. Rhetorical Term Term and definition Return to passage

18. Rhetorical Term Term and definition Return to passage

19. Vocabulary Term and definition Return to passage

20. Vocabulary Term and definition Return to passage

21. Vocabulary Term and definition Return to passage