What do you think?
Climbing Jacob's Ladder: The Enduring Legacy of African-American Families
Traces black family history from ancient Africa, through slavery and Reconstruction, to today, examining the effects of technology, war, education, and the economy on black families across five social classes. 30,000 first printing. Tour.
444 pages, Hardcover
First published February 1, 1993
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
June 7, 2026
A SOCIOLOGIST REVIEWS HIS 1968 FINDINGS WITH MORE RECENT DATA
Andrew Billingley (b. 1926) is an American sociologist who taught African-American Studies and sociology at a variety of institutions, including Morgan State University (1975-1984; of which he was its 8th president), Howard University, UC Berkeley, the University of Maryland, and the University of South Carolina.
He wrote in the Introduction to this 1992 book, “The African-American family is neither dead nor dying, nor vanishing. Instead, the family remains a resilient and adaptive institution reflecting the most basic values, hopes, and aspirations of the descendants of African people in America. But to say that black families are alive is not to say that they are all faring well. It would be naive in the extreme to ignore that many pressures bearing down and compromising the ability of many to meet the basic needs of their members. But there is another side to the story. And we argue in this book that this other side---enduring, positive, and powerful---is more important because it is more generative. It can continually renew and sustain this vital sector of American society in the years ahead. Many scholars have argued that African-American family structure is weak. We have argued that African-American family structure is strong. In this regard, [this book] is both a sequel and a companion to ‘Black Families in White America,’ first published in 1968… In this new work, we argue that African-American families are by far more powerful and contain the seeds of their survival and rejuvenation.’ (Pg. 17)
Later, he adds, “We take sharp issue with those who hold that the underclass is permanent or self-perpetuating; or that nothing can be done to rescue families caught in its web; or that racism only affects poor people; or that only government can make a difference. We do not accept the conventional view that the spectacular rise of the black middle-class accompanied by the even more spectacular rise of the underclass, is a puzzling paradox. As we reflect on history and contemplate the future, nothing could be further from the truth.” (Pg. 20)
He continues, “There are more than three times as many nonpoor blacks as there are poor blacks. Every black community is peopled with them. The underclass is only half of that poor third. A majority of black working-class and middle-class individuals live in the inner cities of the nation and not in the white suburbs. There are more black adults who have graduated from high school … than there are high school dropouts. There are three times as many black youths who have managed to stay out of the criminal justice system than the celebrated 25% who have become engulfed in it. There are far more black persons who grew up in viable, stable, upward-striving black families than otherwise… they have millions of achieving, successful role models.” (Pg. 21)
He asserts, “the single-parent family is not generated from within African-American culture or values but from forces in the wider society, largely beyond their immediate control. This research enables us to see that the structure of African-American family life is purposive… not accidental, haphazard, it is an adaptive strategy for meeting the needs of its members given the situation they face in contemporary society. In short, the common misconception that African-American families are characterized by single-parent, female-headed structures is as misleading as is the widespread assumption that they got that way because of factors internal to their culture.” (Pg. 35)
He notes, “The traditional two-parent… nuclear family which arose at the height of the industrial era has given way dramatically in relative terms to various alternative family structures. Among the most prominent alternative living arrangements… are single-person households, cohabiting couples, married couples without children, unmarried persons with children and grandparents rearing grandchildren without the children’s parents.” (Pg. 44)
He reports, “We argued, along with others, that [Daniel P.] Moynihan [in ‘The Negro Family’] had it all backward. We argued that society makes families and that it was the difficulties experienced by African-Americans in the wider society (their economic, political, and educational deprivation) which caused the patterns of instability within families that Moynihan identified. Consequently we argued that by changing the structure of social institutions so that they would function as well for blacks as they do for whites, and as well for female-headed families as they do for male-headed families, and as well for poor families as they do for more privileged families, both family stability and more effective family functioning would follow.” (Pg. 78-79)
He continues, “we would now state our position somewhat differently… we propose that families make society and society makes families… however… society has the advantage… The so-called black family crisis is not of their own making; nor is it the worst crisis they ever faced and survived. We will show that within the range of family structures, within the range of community institutions and initiatives, and within the larger society, there are enormous pressures making it difficult for families to be strong. Just as important, however, we will identify a set of strengths and resources in family, community, and society, with the potential for generating policies, programs, and practices which can help families meet their responsibilities.” (Pg. 79)
He suggests, “the African-American slave family was re-created and reconstructed during slavery. It was not the African family, nor the European family, nor the American family. It was and is a more distinctive aggregation, an African-American family. It is characterized now as then by its matricentrism, its extended families, and its remarkable flexibility, adaptability, and resilience.” (Pg. 107)
He states, “African-American families are altered by technological changes earlier, more extensively, and in a more negative way than families of other groups.” (Pg. 130)
Is it better to be separated, or divorced, than married? He explains, “while about one-half of the formerly married people found their new status to be better than marriage, only one-quarter found it to be worse. There is, however, a pronounced difference between men and women on this matter. Women, by a significant margin, believe that their current separated or divorced is preferable to marriage… By contrast, men are nearly twice as likely as women to judge their current separated or divorced status as worse than marriage.” (Pg. 242)
Racial intermarriage? “Why… do more black men cross this racial line than black women? These scholars suggest that black girls may be socialized by their mothers differently than black boys. They may be instilled with a stronger respect for the ways of life of their parents and less likely to renounce them… Moreover, these scholars point to the differential bases on which men and women select their mates. Women give greater weight to such factors as earning capacity and ambition. Men, on the other hand, are more likely to choose their mates on the basis of physical attraction. This suggests that … white women are more likely to find black men who meet their potential earning criteria than white men are to find black women who meet their European conception of physical attractiveness. Conversely, black men, many of whom have internalized the same European conceptions of physical attractiveness, are more likely to find white women who meet their criteria. It is difficult to avoid the suggestions that white men are the major obstacles to intermarriage.” (Pg. 254-255)
This book will be of keen interest to those studying (and/or concerned about) the contemporary black family.
Andrew Billingley (b. 1926) is an American sociologist who taught African-American Studies and sociology at a variety of institutions, including Morgan State University (1975-1984; of which he was its 8th president), Howard University, UC Berkeley, the University of Maryland, and the University of South Carolina.
He wrote in the Introduction to this 1992 book, “The African-American family is neither dead nor dying, nor vanishing. Instead, the family remains a resilient and adaptive institution reflecting the most basic values, hopes, and aspirations of the descendants of African people in America. But to say that black families are alive is not to say that they are all faring well. It would be naive in the extreme to ignore that many pressures bearing down and compromising the ability of many to meet the basic needs of their members. But there is another side to the story. And we argue in this book that this other side---enduring, positive, and powerful---is more important because it is more generative. It can continually renew and sustain this vital sector of American society in the years ahead. Many scholars have argued that African-American family structure is weak. We have argued that African-American family structure is strong. In this regard, [this book] is both a sequel and a companion to ‘Black Families in White America,’ first published in 1968… In this new work, we argue that African-American families are by far more powerful and contain the seeds of their survival and rejuvenation.’ (Pg. 17)
Later, he adds, “We take sharp issue with those who hold that the underclass is permanent or self-perpetuating; or that nothing can be done to rescue families caught in its web; or that racism only affects poor people; or that only government can make a difference. We do not accept the conventional view that the spectacular rise of the black middle-class accompanied by the even more spectacular rise of the underclass, is a puzzling paradox. As we reflect on history and contemplate the future, nothing could be further from the truth.” (Pg. 20)
He continues, “There are more than three times as many nonpoor blacks as there are poor blacks. Every black community is peopled with them. The underclass is only half of that poor third. A majority of black working-class and middle-class individuals live in the inner cities of the nation and not in the white suburbs. There are more black adults who have graduated from high school … than there are high school dropouts. There are three times as many black youths who have managed to stay out of the criminal justice system than the celebrated 25% who have become engulfed in it. There are far more black persons who grew up in viable, stable, upward-striving black families than otherwise… they have millions of achieving, successful role models.” (Pg. 21)
He asserts, “the single-parent family is not generated from within African-American culture or values but from forces in the wider society, largely beyond their immediate control. This research enables us to see that the structure of African-American family life is purposive… not accidental, haphazard, it is an adaptive strategy for meeting the needs of its members given the situation they face in contemporary society. In short, the common misconception that African-American families are characterized by single-parent, female-headed structures is as misleading as is the widespread assumption that they got that way because of factors internal to their culture.” (Pg. 35)
He notes, “The traditional two-parent… nuclear family which arose at the height of the industrial era has given way dramatically in relative terms to various alternative family structures. Among the most prominent alternative living arrangements… are single-person households, cohabiting couples, married couples without children, unmarried persons with children and grandparents rearing grandchildren without the children’s parents.” (Pg. 44)
He reports, “We argued, along with others, that [Daniel P.] Moynihan [in ‘The Negro Family’] had it all backward. We argued that society makes families and that it was the difficulties experienced by African-Americans in the wider society (their economic, political, and educational deprivation) which caused the patterns of instability within families that Moynihan identified. Consequently we argued that by changing the structure of social institutions so that they would function as well for blacks as they do for whites, and as well for female-headed families as they do for male-headed families, and as well for poor families as they do for more privileged families, both family stability and more effective family functioning would follow.” (Pg. 78-79)
He continues, “we would now state our position somewhat differently… we propose that families make society and society makes families… however… society has the advantage… The so-called black family crisis is not of their own making; nor is it the worst crisis they ever faced and survived. We will show that within the range of family structures, within the range of community institutions and initiatives, and within the larger society, there are enormous pressures making it difficult for families to be strong. Just as important, however, we will identify a set of strengths and resources in family, community, and society, with the potential for generating policies, programs, and practices which can help families meet their responsibilities.” (Pg. 79)
He suggests, “the African-American slave family was re-created and reconstructed during slavery. It was not the African family, nor the European family, nor the American family. It was and is a more distinctive aggregation, an African-American family. It is characterized now as then by its matricentrism, its extended families, and its remarkable flexibility, adaptability, and resilience.” (Pg. 107)
He states, “African-American families are altered by technological changes earlier, more extensively, and in a more negative way than families of other groups.” (Pg. 130)
Is it better to be separated, or divorced, than married? He explains, “while about one-half of the formerly married people found their new status to be better than marriage, only one-quarter found it to be worse. There is, however, a pronounced difference between men and women on this matter. Women, by a significant margin, believe that their current separated or divorced is preferable to marriage… By contrast, men are nearly twice as likely as women to judge their current separated or divorced status as worse than marriage.” (Pg. 242)
Racial intermarriage? “Why… do more black men cross this racial line than black women? These scholars suggest that black girls may be socialized by their mothers differently than black boys. They may be instilled with a stronger respect for the ways of life of their parents and less likely to renounce them… Moreover, these scholars point to the differential bases on which men and women select their mates. Women give greater weight to such factors as earning capacity and ambition. Men, on the other hand, are more likely to choose their mates on the basis of physical attraction. This suggests that … white women are more likely to find black men who meet their potential earning criteria than white men are to find black women who meet their European conception of physical attractiveness. Conversely, black men, many of whom have internalized the same European conceptions of physical attractiveness, are more likely to find white women who meet their criteria. It is difficult to avoid the suggestions that white men are the major obstacles to intermarriage.” (Pg. 254-255)
This book will be of keen interest to those studying (and/or concerned about) the contemporary black family.
April 28, 2020
Heavy on the facts and figures and surveys - overall not quite what I needed for my research, and most people would probably think it even drier than I did.
Published in 1992, its concluding sections are very much out of date. For one, it was far too optimistic about USAns' ability to escape the tightening noose of neoliberal economics. For another, in discussing the question of whether the government should be "done" with trying to achieve racial justice, it completely overlooked the government's role in establishing racial injustice in the first place. I mean, this morning I woke up to the news that Georgia is allowing two white men to get away with the cold-blooded murder of a black man. NO, WE ARE NOT FUCKING DONE.
Published in 1992, its concluding sections are very much out of date. For one, it was far too optimistic about USAns' ability to escape the tightening noose of neoliberal economics. For another, in discussing the question of whether the government should be "done" with trying to achieve racial justice, it completely overlooked the government's role in establishing racial injustice in the first place. I mean, this morning I woke up to the news that Georgia is allowing two white men to get away with the cold-blooded murder of a black man. NO, WE ARE NOT FUCKING DONE.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews