20th-century slavery scholars examine both the effects of slavery on slave mentalities and the development of culture (or lack thereof) and the existence of paternalism within the slave class. However, authors such as Ulrich Phillips, Kenneth Stammp, and Eugene Genovese all approach the subject broadly and holistically, paying little or no attention to the individual. Dunsiberre, in his three-part book, Them Dark Days, attempts to approach the situation from an opposite angle, hoping to uncover the greater truths behind slave life not in a broad conceptual analysis, but in the individual. He gives names and faces to slaves and their masters. In doing so, he presents a grim picture of slave life under this particular institution: an institution that was neither paternalistic nor civilizing. The central theme of his work, as stated in the preface, is that slavery was even more horrible than previously thought. Paternalism, which he carefully qualifies, existed only to increase the wealth of the masters thanks to the newly developed capitalist mentality. Hate and insubordination lurked in the minds of even the most privileged slaves. By examining detailed plantation records, travel journals, and interviews with the WPA, Dusinberre paints a very personal picture of slavery in the South. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”?Get the original essay Dealing exclusively with the rice plantation regions of Georgia and South Carolina, the author claims that slaves were not not passive, even if their rebellion had limited success, and indeed no chance of real success. As the Yankee armies marched south and rice gave way to cotton and tobacco, the fortunes of the rice planting class declined until the crop disappeared completely. Among the many caricatures painted by Dusinberre are those of the slave class itself. Charles Manigault, his son Louis, and South Carolinian planter and later Governor Robert Allston, to whom Dusinberre loosely applies the term "Gentlemen Capitalists", established the Gowrie Rice Plantation just outside Savannah, Georgia and its northern contemporaries Pee Dee and Chicora Wood, respectively. These ventures were risky at best, as unpredictable forces such as disease, flood, and civil war all determined the profitability of each year's harvest. However, these gentlemen planters managed to make a profit. In the case of the Manigaults, an initial investment of $49,500 gradually grew into a respectable sum of $266,300 – a figure that Dusinberre characterizes as including land and slave holdings. In addition, the sum represents more than double that of the fixed interest rate of 3% offered by the fragile American bonds of the time. On the other hand, the cost of acquiring such a fortune was high, as $67,200 of Gowrie's slaves were lost to disease and overwork, while the birth rate remained significantly lower . As a “gentleman capitalist,” Charles Manigault instilled a gentile education. with his wife and children. Travel, he believed, was essential to the development of the individual, and he applied this theory by spending several years with his family in France. He also made business and leisure trips to Wales, Egypt and the Orient. As a wedding gift for his second son, Louis, he gave the couple $10,000 to spend on a trip through Europe. Dusinberre also focuses onRobert Allston's Pee Dee and Chicora Wood plantations. Although somewhat lenient toward his slaves in some respects, Allston's employment of harsh overseers and emphasis on iron discipline created animosity among the slaves working for him. Unlike Charles Maginault, Allston despised absenteeism and set up a residence near the plantation so that he could closely monitor its activities. Although cruelty prevailed among the slaveholding classes of the cotton-producing Southwest, it was not expected of the wealthy. highThe rice farmers of the Atlantic coast. This was not the case, however, as Manigault's insensitivity was well documented by frightening slave mortality rates. From 1833 to 1861, the death rate for slaves was almost double the birth rate, while the infant mortality rate reached a staggering 90 percent – ​​not including miscarriages and stillbirths. Pregnant women were privileged to receive medical care from a trusted attendant, whose lack of expertise undoubtedly contributed to the deaths of 97 of the 109 children born in Gowrie between 1855 and 1855. In just one year , the birth rate exceeded the death rate, as lack of medical care, cholera, measles, dysentery and malaria decimated the capital of Carolinian gentlemen. Other problems included childbearing risks and drowning. Whites were not immune to the forces of nature, as evidenced by Gowrie's loss of four overseers during these same years, but an analysis of statistics reveals a profound difference in mortality rates among whites and black people. question: why would a businessman, or more accurately a paternalistic businessman, allow his capital to die so frequently? The answer, he says, lies in the nature of the system itself. First, the overarching goal of maintaining slave order and discipline undermined economic concerns, or, at the very least, evolved from them. An escaped slave who dies from the perils inherent in hiding in a swamp sets an example for other slaves and is therefore more valuable dead than alive and free. Absenteeism and cost reduction are also important factors. As for the families, they find themselves in a very precarious situation in Gowrie and inevitably fail. In the chapter “Unhappy Families,” the author tirelessly reconstructs the family histories of the inhabitants of the Georgia plantation. The perils these families faced were innumerable. If by chance a slave couple reached adulthood, they could expect any form of separation, including death, deportation, and voluntary separation. Moreover, if they were lucky enough to have surviving offspring, their children would probably not survive the tribulations specific to the rice-growing region or their master's distaste for slave unions. Dusinberre highlights recent efforts by scholars to emphasize slave morality and family values ​​in the face of an institution that clearly made every effort against them, but warns: "there may be a danger of exaggerating what slaves were able to do." to accomplish against slavery. chances” (p. 121). Much has been made of the slave's propensity for insubordination, ranging from simple malingering to full-scale rebellions. Dusinberre, for his part, maintains that a rebellion in the rice-growing regions was impossible. A slave owner like Charles Maginault, his sons or the overseer could confidently walk into a field of a hundred slaves without fear. A series of three distinct but cruel threats kept his slaves in fear of their master's hand.First, he would have the slave whipped, which he often referred to as "just punishment," either by the overseer or, preferably, by another slave. Second, a trip to Savannah Prison, where the slave would be whipped several times during his stay. The advantage of this was that the slave was whipped by a complete stranger, directing his anger at someone other than the owner or overseer; moreover, his detention meant that he could not escape at night. The third and most feared form of punishment was being sold to New Orleans, which was more than an empty threat. Beyond that, there was always a looming reminder of the white military prowess that kept slaves from insurrection—or simply the fear of being reduced to labor for privileged slaves. In Gowrie, slaves found milder forms of subversion, such as inefficiency or theft. Regarding the simulation, Dusinberre argues that although slaves were often "inefficient" in their work, they were nevertheless quite "productive", and that the slave/profit ratio was high until after emancipation. On the other hand, thefts or unauthorized stays affected the entire slave population. Over the course of a decade, two dozen fugitives were listed in Gowrie's archives. Citing Eugene Genovese and Kenneth Stammp, among others, as perpetuators of the traditional classification of slaves, Dusinberre seeks to shatter long-standing myths about slave mentality by giving names and faces. to his six rankings. Somewhere between Nat Turner's tooth-and-nail rebellion and the bumbling innocence of "Sambo" lies plantation slave Gowrie. Citing examples of each, the author details the personality and treatment of the “determined” slave, the “trucuous” slave, the “cunning” slave, the “honest conformist,” the “opportunist demoralized” and the “proud” slave. Each varies in their level of leniency towards their master, but the common undercurrent is both the impossibility of achieving their goals in such an oppressive institution and a cognitive understanding of the causes and effects of their actions. A good example of this might be the "cunning" boatman Hector, who, after inheriting an old coat from Charles, simply puffs himself up to indulge in the master's laughter. “Hector,” writes Dusinberre, “was ready to play the role required to make his masters feel good” (p. 173). Hector was Louis's playmate and a popular slave on the Gowrie plantation, and therefore enjoyed privileges. Privileges came in two forms: those extended to the entire gang and those extended to selected individuals. The latter case resulted in the formation of what Dusinberre calls a "slave elite" in Gowrie. Privileges such as meat, special medical care, vacations, clothing rations, and shoes were distributed on certain occasions to make slaves believe that they were favored by the master. Sometimes, Charles Maginault deprived slaves of these amenities just to make them feel happy upon their return. When the plantation was between two overseers, Charles and his family relied heavily on privileged slaves such as Driver George or Charles the Trunk Minder. “Without the help of the main slaves, the plantation operations could not have taken place” (p. 194), writes Dunsiberre. Beyond the material benefits of skilled and privileged slaves, they gave their owners the belief that they were elevating their slaves by granting them such responsibilities. In Allston's case, the slave's "fidelity" was the most sought-after characteristic. However, this privilege has always been undermined by."