Glad to have had a chance to read this book, written in the 19th century. Written by a leading African American suffragette, it tells the story of Iola Leroy, raised in privilege, but sold into slavery after her father died. How she became a leader in her community after the Civil War.

2/5stars

did i hate this book? Or do i just hate this class with the burning passion of a thousand suns?

probably just hate the class but it makes me hate everything we talk about or read oops

This book vacillates between brilliant observation and lackluster storytelling. On one hand, there are some great parts of the story that open a window into just how ignorant white people were (and are) to the struggles of people outside of their race. Those parts are extremely well written and I appreciate finding that truth in literature.
For the most part the characters feel a bit one dimensional. Almost everyone appears so painfully optimistic and cheerful that it feels jarring. Characters may say that they are sad, but you don’t feel that sadness. Especially since one or two pages later the conflict is resolved and their hearts are full of gratitude and wonder.
Also a little heavy-handed on the temperance movement sensibilities. The author definitely had an agenda and she made that quite clear.
Overall not my favorite. I’m grateful for the parts that spoke to me and am happy to leave the rest behind.

Read this as a book to teach for a 12th grade African American literature class. I think it is highly informative about the history of the time, but the writing is dry and matter-of-fact, which doesn't make for an easy read for most students. Harper, through her characters, develops many troubling yet thought-provoking ideas that must be discussed, but can be deeply uncomfortable.

This was not the easiest book to read. I think some old books are still good reads today. I did not feel that way about this book. It was probably great in the time frame in which it was written. The enslaved speak in this book, often had me stumped.

This book starts so strongly. Harper is pulling no punches, not only condemning slave owners but the white liberals who enable them. She even has heat for slaves who aren't committed enough to freedom. Freedom is the key word of the first third of the book, and there are many great quotes and rhetorical flourishes around the idea of Black freedom. The other thing that emerges strongly is the commentary on how race gets constructed. By making Ioal so light skinned, it has the effect of demonstrating how the anti-Blackness that white people think is just for other people can amd will eventually come around to get them (Iola and everyone around her thinks she's white until suddenly she's kidnapped and forced into slavery because of some supposed paperwork errors. Just think how many white people today support the idea of prisons and punishing "criminals" until suddenly they are accused of a crime).

And then the Civil War ends and the book goes off the rails. Without the Civil War as the backdrop (btw, protip, don't use "war" as a dialect of "was" in a book where people are constantly talking about the war), the book devolves into this basic 1800s romance plot. But the real sin is, now that Black people are free, all Harper can think to say is that Black people can use their freedom to become more like white people. Now, I don't really blame her. Saying that back in the 1890s was probably pretty radical. But today you can see how such a line of argument is quite literally arguing for white supremacy (there are multiple moments where a "anti-racist" character will assure a racist character that it's okay that Black people are free because white people are still the superior race). Then there's the pro-prohibition stuff and the implication that the country doesn't need to do any sort of reparations but instead just embrace Christianity.

I would still recommend reading this book and would even go so far as to say this would be a good candidate for required reading in school, but the second half unfortunately falls off a cliff.

***
Upon, second reading, the book is not as bad in the 2nd half. Maybe I'm just feeling more charitable, but the bad parts in the 2nd half are still mixed in with good parts. While Harper's capacity to imagine radical thought is certainly limited, I think you could even make the case that her purpose is more using racist people's own logic against them as opposed to actually endorsing them (not the most effective tactic, I think, but I'm giving the generous reading here). The main sin of the second half is that Harper is basically just repeating ideas from the first half. Iola's life mirrors her mother's, except she makes different decisions. But more egregiously, there's just too many white passing characters here. Just condense all those characters into like two and explore anything you want to about passing with just that (that's why Larsen is a better writer since that's what she did with Passing like 40 years later). Also, yes, too many romance/marriage plotlines. But I'm upgrading to 4 stars v. 3 stars before.

I specs we kin take keer ob ourselves as well as we take keer ob dem.