Alyce
asked:
I have not finished the book, but wonder if a large segment of people would feel excluded reading a book in which slaves are property and Indians are a danger... I understand it's historical in the sense that slavery is a part of the American cultural fabric, but I feel like people of color might have little interest in this book. Which is sad. Can any people of color comment on this issue if they have read it?
To answer questions about
The Indigo Girl,
please sign up.
Lois
I am the direct descendant of Enslaved West Africans. I have not read this but it is on my to read list.
I know I won't like it.
Not because chattel slavery isn't a part of history or that it needs to be left out of fiction.
I get the feeling that Eliza is portrayed as a heroine and well, she's not.
She was an oppressor much like George Washington.
She absolutely unequivocally knew that Enslaved West Africans were human beings.
Still she stole from them and held them in captivity.
She stole so much from them for so long that her descendants are still wealthy today off the backs of the labor she and her descendants stole for centuries.
Her 'legacy' can never be removed from that.
White women were horribly abusive to enslaved peoples.
That's historical fact.
They were heavily involved in physical punishment-hanging kids by their thumbs. They were involved in raping children as well as adults.
They were not innocent and if she's not presented with those historical facts in mind then this is slavery apologist in nature.
No one that held human beings in bondage was a good person.
Same with colonists.
There were good Europeans that existed at that time period I'm sure but we don't know about them because they stayed in the country of their ancestors and weren't involved in the displacement and genocide of the Indigenous Peoples of the Americas.
So yes this book is both offensive and not historically accurate.
This story has to include the perspective of those peoples or it's just a white supremacist myth.
Like gone with the wind.
I know I won't like it.
Not because chattel slavery isn't a part of history or that it needs to be left out of fiction.
I get the feeling that Eliza is portrayed as a heroine and well, she's not.
She was an oppressor much like George Washington.
She absolutely unequivocally knew that Enslaved West Africans were human beings.
Still she stole from them and held them in captivity.
She stole so much from them for so long that her descendants are still wealthy today off the backs of the labor she and her descendants stole for centuries.
Her 'legacy' can never be removed from that.
White women were horribly abusive to enslaved peoples.
That's historical fact.
They were heavily involved in physical punishment-hanging kids by their thumbs. They were involved in raping children as well as adults.
They were not innocent and if she's not presented with those historical facts in mind then this is slavery apologist in nature.
No one that held human beings in bondage was a good person.
Same with colonists.
There were good Europeans that existed at that time period I'm sure but we don't know about them because they stayed in the country of their ancestors and weren't involved in the displacement and genocide of the Indigenous Peoples of the Americas.
So yes this book is both offensive and not historically accurate.
This story has to include the perspective of those peoples or it's just a white supremacist myth.
Like gone with the wind.
Kristie
I'm not a person of color, but Alyce, your concerns are the reason I had trouble with the book. Yes, Eliza was a strong woman who should be credited for her bravery. Yes, she brought wealth to South Carolina and America due to her indigo, but on the backs of slavery. Africa should be wealthier today because the secrets were theirs, not ours, to profit from. Yes, she freed one slave (according the historical notes at the end of the book), but what about the others? Yes, she sought to be a kind and gentle slave-owner who taught slaves to read, but could she have done more to defy the institution of slavery?
On one hand, clearly she's a product of her time and place in history. I don't doubt that had she been born in another time or place, she would have been an abolitionist. But she was lived in the American South in the mid-1700s, where slavery was the norm for everyone she came into contact with. So it's hard to wonder whether she could have or should have done more. And she was a woman, not a man, which begs the question of how much power women actually had.
My biggest problem with this book is the voice. Why do we only hear from Eliza? If the story had been told with multiple points of view, including those of the slaves on her plantation, then at least it would be more balanced. As it is, we only hear Eliza's point of view, and clearly the author hopes we revere and sympathize with her. If we could hear multiple points of view, then we could wrestle with the questions above.
The South wants to commend its heroes, which I can understand. But we need to be careful about who our heroes are, especially when writing about a plantation in the 1700s American South.
On one hand, clearly she's a product of her time and place in history. I don't doubt that had she been born in another time or place, she would have been an abolitionist. But she was lived in the American South in the mid-1700s, where slavery was the norm for everyone she came into contact with. So it's hard to wonder whether she could have or should have done more. And she was a woman, not a man, which begs the question of how much power women actually had.
My biggest problem with this book is the voice. Why do we only hear from Eliza? If the story had been told with multiple points of view, including those of the slaves on her plantation, then at least it would be more balanced. As it is, we only hear Eliza's point of view, and clearly the author hopes we revere and sympathize with her. If we could hear multiple points of view, then we could wrestle with the questions above.
The South wants to commend its heroes, which I can understand. But we need to be careful about who our heroes are, especially when writing about a plantation in the 1700s American South.
Rebecca
You cannot candy-coat or change history.
L.
I am bi-racial and I didn't take offense with the book.
1. I would recommend reading it before criticizing it.
2. It is history, something we can't change.
3. Please learn to stop criticizing so much and learn to appreciate the writing of factual information that brings knowledge to us all.
What happened to Blacks, Indians, and other indigenous peoples (and is still happening) is appalling but it is also a part of a history that we can't and shouldn't re-write. Let the stories be told, let the truth come out for all to see and read then perhaps people will act to make changes today.
If we worry about not causing others offense nothing would be said, written, or even accomplished
1. I would recommend reading it before criticizing it.
2. It is history, something we can't change.
3. Please learn to stop criticizing so much and learn to appreciate the writing of factual information that brings knowledge to us all.
What happened to Blacks, Indians, and other indigenous peoples (and is still happening) is appalling but it is also a part of a history that we can't and shouldn't re-write. Let the stories be told, let the truth come out for all to see and read then perhaps people will act to make changes today.
If we worry about not causing others offense nothing would be said, written, or even accomplished
Lisa
I am not a person of color, but I think it is important that we talk about what really happened, not ignore it or gloss over it. Some people were treated very badly. Let us not forget so we do not repeat these horrific actions.
V Smith
For God's sake if you can't read History and accept history and live in the now, then you never learned history.
Bridget
I am listening to the book while doing my chores. I am not comfortable with a book that leads people to believe in a romantic relationship between a male slave and white woman. That would have meant all kinds of death to him. And to lead us to believe she would have taught him to read or HE THE SLAVE would not have given her THE OWNER the secret she needed. Do you any white people understand the importance of that money? A rich owner is less likely to sale away your family. If held a secret that would keep your loved ones from being sold away wouldnt you share it regardless if you taught to read or not?
Suzette
I have just finished the book. I am a proud biracial daughter from a mother whose family survived the Nazi death camps & father whose roots stem from the enslaved south so I love historical books that live in the truth of how our nation was created. I found this book portrayed Eliza as a savior but those were the times for the women to defer authority slaves to the men that ran their plantations. I did like the truth the book laid out that the expertise came from Ben: growing & harvesting indigo.
I felt the book rushed through Eliza's life at the end but the picture it painted of the complexities of indigo was rich.
I felt the book rushed through Eliza's life at the end but the picture it painted of the complexities of indigo was rich.
Elberta Geib
Don't forget this book is part of history. There really was an Eliza Lucas and she really did all this. George Washington came to her funeral when she died an old woman. This was written by her letters she kept copies of. Remember in the book she referred to copying the letters and filing away.
Amaya M.
Personally I do not care at all. I don't need to be sensitive about something that happened ages before me, won't stop me from enjoying things in **the now.**
Julieb
Focus on the relationships among the main characters. Value is given where value is due. I was particularly interested in the complicated process of developing the indigo dye and its importance to the economy at that time.
Amanda
the threat of indians is only mentioned briefly and the story is from the perspective of white settlers, the book doesn't glorify the white people's fear of the indians. One scene does not an entire plot, make. The story itself isn't ABOUT that, per se. Its historical, factual context. I think the bigger question is why aren't there more stories from the perspectives of the slaves or indians.
Herman
Rebecca is right, besides while it's not a perspective of the oppressed it is a valid viewpoint from someone who didn't want to be an oppressor, and certainly a clear characterization of how the role of women in early antebellum society was constructed and 18th century was brutal and oppressive in nature women could be view just as much as a man's property as any slave.
Lorie
Eliza was a compassionate girl in an uncompassionate and oppressive society, not just to blacks and indians, but, as a main theme of this book, to women in general.
I felt this was a novel well worth 5 stars, not just for good writing, but for the telling of a real story of a real young woman of 1739 who was centuries before her time in intelligence, ambition, daring and courage. For who and when she lived, she was a daVinci or an Edison, though held back by her age (16) and her gender (female) during a time when a female must turn all decisions and actions over to the man who owned her, whether father or husband.
What an amazing story! I was filled with joy at the end.
I felt this was a novel well worth 5 stars, not just for good writing, but for the telling of a real story of a real young woman of 1739 who was centuries before her time in intelligence, ambition, daring and courage. For who and when she lived, she was a daVinci or an Edison, though held back by her age (16) and her gender (female) during a time when a female must turn all decisions and actions over to the man who owned her, whether father or husband.
What an amazing story! I was filled with joy at the end.
Nicole Witen
I purposely chose to avoid answering this exact question in my review because at the end of the day, I disliked the novel for other (literary) reasons, but I'm glad to address it now, even if it was asked some time ago. I agree with some answers below - the romance between a white woman and slave? Unthinkable and entirely unnecessary to the story. Eliza is portrayed as someone who sees the humanity in her slaves, but still keeps slaves? - the old conundrum. Owning slaves doesn't take away from the fact that she helped build the economy of South Carolina by introducing indigo to it. Boyd also does not shirk from the idea that indigo was successful because of the slaves. The disconnect is the portrayal of Eliza herself, I think. By trying to make it sound like she was nice to her slaves, it tries to soften the image of a slave owner. Personally, I would have preferred the bare truth, and I think that that tact would have been more palatable to POCs.
Ann Longfellow
I hate asking a question too, but my question is: if you disagree with how slavery is treated in this novel, how would you have addressed it in a more acceptable manner while still telling the story?
Linda Hansen
I just finished reading it. Although I find slavery appalling, I think we have to look at the times. Slavery of one group by another has been happening since dawn of time and is still happening. USA history is just a small sliver of time of our universe. I wish there would be more emphasis on stopping the sex slave trade (children being sold by the hour and raped is still a form of slavery) that is happening world wide. I wonder if their stories are written 200 years from now if people will look at our generation and find us as despicable as some find the colonist and slave holders of the 1500-1900s. I am not endorsing it, just saying we live in our times and it is up to us to be righteous
Terry
I am a white woman of European descent. I agree that history cannot be changed. Things happened hundreds of years ago. What often shocks me is the lack of empathy for those living today who descended from the enslaved people. While I don't feel responsible per se for what was done I recognize that it was a crime against humanity. The remnants of attitudes toward African Americans, people of color, and indigenous people are still with us. The remnants of the economic injustice is still with us. We CAN do something about that. A defensive response of " I didn't do it. It's just history and has nothing to do with me." helps maintain the status quo and does not help us heal the harm that has been done.
About Goodreads Q&A
Ask and answer questions about books!
You can pose questions to the Goodreads community with Reader Q&A, or ask your favorite author a question with Ask the Author.
See Featured Authors Answering Questions
Learn more
Nov 12, 2020 09:20AM · flag
Oct 20, 2022 09:32PM · flag