Thomas Jefferson spent years raping his slave Sally Hemings...

christiefan915

Catalyst
... and a new novel treats their relationship as a love story." (Was Jefferson a child molester? a rapist? both? My comment.)

A new historical novel about Thomas Jefferson is raising eyebrows.

Stephen O’Connor’s Thomas Jefferson Dreams of Sally Hemings, which came out on Tuesday, is about our third president’s relationship with Sally Hemings, his slave. DNA evidence has proved that Jefferson and Hemings had six children together while Jefferson kept Hemings enslaved — and Jefferson also enslaved their children, freeing them one by one as they came of age. To further complicate matters, Sally Hemings was a half-sister to Jefferson’s late wife, the product of a relationship between Jefferson's father-in-law and one of his slaves.

By all accounts, Jefferson’s sexual relationship with Hemings spanned several decades, beginning when Hemings was a teenager and Jefferson was in his 40s. It was not, in any sense of the word, consensual: Hemings was a child, and Jefferson literally owned her; she was not in any position to give or withhold consent. What Jefferson did to Hemings was rape.

But Thomas Jefferson Dreams of Sally Hemings, judging from early reviews, is most interested in exploring potential ambiguities of their relationship. The book wonders: Did Hemings perhaps enjoy it? To what extent was she complicit?

According to Kirkus, in this novel Hemings enthusiastically consents to the relationship: "And so, when some half hour after Sally Hemings arrives late at the upstairs parlor, and Thomas Jefferson confesses breathlessly that he would very much like to lie with her as a man lies with his wife … she whispers that she would like that, too. …"

NPR quotes a passage in which she whispers ecstatically to Jefferson, "I want us always to be as we are here … where we are only our eyes, our hands, those parts of us made for each other by nature, where our only words are the ones we whisper in the little caves we make between pillow, cheek and lips."
The Washington Post cites O’Connor’s assertion in the afterword that "Hemings’s feelings for Jefferson might well have fallen somewhere along the spectrum between love and Stockholm syndrome..."

...These early reviews are, by and large, positive. The book shows "The agonizing crashing together of love and slavery," writes NPR, observing that "O'Connor has the insight to put them side by side, and the result is searing and even sometimes beautiful." The Washington Post, which acknowledges that the book’s treatment of Hemings leads to its "most troubled and troubling chapters," concludes that "O'Connor's deeply humane treatment of Sally, whose actual thoughts will never be known to us, is the novel's most haunting accomplishment..."

(Continued)

http://www.vox.com/2016/4/8/11389556/thomas-jefferson-sally-hemings-book
 
... and a new novel treats their relationship as a love story." (Was Jefferson a child molester? a rapist? both? My comment.)

A new historical novel about Thomas Jefferson is raising eyebrows.

Stephen O’Connor’s Thomas Jefferson Dreams of Sally Hemings, which came out on Tuesday, is about our third president’s relationship with Sally Hemings, his slave. DNA evidence has proved that Jefferson and Hemings had six children together while Jefferson kept Hemings enslaved — and Jefferson also enslaved their children, freeing them one by one as they came of age. To further complicate matters, Sally Hemings was a half-sister to Jefferson’s late wife, the product of a relationship between Jefferson's father-in-law and one of his slaves.

By all accounts, Jefferson’s sexual relationship with Hemings spanned several decades, beginning when Hemings was a teenager and Jefferson was in his 40s. It was not, in any sense of the word, consensual: Hemings was a child, and Jefferson literally owned her; she was not in any position to give or withhold consent. What Jefferson did to Hemings was rape.

But Thomas Jefferson Dreams of Sally Hemings, judging from early reviews, is most interested in exploring potential ambiguities of their relationship. The book wonders: Did Hemings perhaps enjoy it? To what extent was she complicit?

According to Kirkus, in this novel Hemings enthusiastically consents to the relationship: "And so, when some half hour after Sally Hemings arrives late at the upstairs parlor, and Thomas Jefferson confesses breathlessly that he would very much like to lie with her as a man lies with his wife … she whispers that she would like that, too. …"

NPR quotes a passage in which she whispers ecstatically to Jefferson, "I want us always to be as we are here … where we are only our eyes, our hands, those parts of us made for each other by nature, where our only words are the ones we whisper in the little caves we make between pillow, cheek and lips."
The Washington Post cites O’Connor’s assertion in the afterword that "Hemings’s feelings for Jefferson might well have fallen somewhere along the spectrum between love and Stockholm syndrome..."

...These early reviews are, by and large, positive. The book shows "The agonizing crashing together of love and slavery," writes NPR, observing that "O'Connor has the insight to put them side by side, and the result is searing and even sometimes beautiful." The Washington Post, which acknowledges that the book’s treatment of Hemings leads to its "most troubled and troubling chapters," concludes that "O'Connor's deeply humane treatment of Sally, whose actual thoughts will never be known to us, is the novel's most haunting accomplishment..."

(Continued)

http://www.vox.com/2016/4/8/11389556/thomas-jefferson-sally-hemings-book

Our Founding Fathers men with a great many flaws, but they did come up with the Constitution which is the thing they should be admired for doing.

Jefferson and his relationship with Hemings truly sickens me because he was supposedly conflicted about owning slaves but not enough to keep him from bedding one and maybe, she did comply, but really, did she ever feel she had a choice?
 
Our Founding Fathers men with a great many flaws, but they did come up with the Constitution which is the thing they should be admired for doing.

Jefferson and his relationship with Hemings truly sickens me because he was supposedly conflicted about owning slaves but not enough to keep him from bedding one and maybe, she did comply, but really, did she ever feel she had a choice?

I agree. Praise where it's due but don't turn a blind eye to their flaws.

I don't think wives had much say so about what the men did in those days. Mrs. Jefferson probably looked the other way.
 
I agree. Praise where it's due but don't turn a blind eye to their flaws.

I don't think wives had much say so about what the men did in those days. Mrs. Jefferson probably looked the other way.

This is a classic example of what is termed presentism,

In literary and historical analysis, presentism is the anachronistic introduction of present-day ideas and perspectives into depictions or interpretations of the past. Some modern historians seek to avoid presentism in their work because they consider it a form of cultural bias, and believe it creates a distorted understanding of their subject matter.[SUP][1][/SUP] The practice of presentism is regarded by some as a common fallacy in historical writing.[SUP]
[/SUP]...
Presentism is also a factor in the problematic question of history and moral judgments. Among historians, the orthodox view may be that reading modern notions of morality into the past is to commit the error of presentism. To avoid this, historians restrict themselves to describing what happened and attempt to refrain from using language that passes judgment. For example, when writing history about slavery in an era when the practice was widely accepted, letting that fact influence judgment about a group or individual would be presentist and thus should be avoided.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presentism_(literary_and_historical_analysis)
 
Yes, it is. The left has a hard time comprehending that people didn't always think as they do. They would never imagine that it's more the case that no one has ever had this odd PC view they have now.

Yet Muslim haters are always sneering about Muhammad having sex with Aisha when she was 14 or 15.
 
Doesn't a large portion of the right want to "make America great again"?

Maybe they long for the days when a "patriot" could do as he liked with women of color.


Stay on topic, or this thread will be moved to the war zone, where you will find all threads that devolve to back and forth insults.
 
Yet Muslim haters are always sneering about Muhammad having sex with Aisha when she was 14 or 15.

Remind me, how old was the supposedly-virgin Mary when she was pupped?


Stay on topic, or this thread will be moved to the war zone, where you will find all threads that devolve to back and forth insults.
 
That sounds right regarding the times. I use this when arguing about Muslims and women back in Muhammad's day.

Jefferson was a slave holder though, and it's not like Sally could politely refuse the advances of her 30-years older owner.

The origins of the Democratic Party - Aaron Burr & Tammany Hall, and Thomas Jefferson & race relations.
 
... and a new novel treats their relationship as a love story." (Was Jefferson a child molester? a rapist? both? My comment.)

A new historical novel about Thomas Jefferson is raising eyebrows.

Stephen O’Connor’s Thomas Jefferson Dreams of Sally Hemings, which came out on Tuesday, is about our third president’s relationship with Sally Hemings, his slave. DNA evidence has proved that Jefferson and Hemings had six children together while Jefferson kept Hemings enslaved — and Jefferson also enslaved their children, freeing them one by one as they came of age. To further complicate matters, Sally Hemings was a half-sister to Jefferson’s late wife, the product of a relationship between Jefferson's father-in-law and one of his slaves.

By all accounts, Jefferson’s sexual relationship with Hemings spanned several decades, beginning when Hemings was a teenager and Jefferson was in his 40s. It was not, in any sense of the word, consensual: Hemings was a child, and Jefferson literally owned her; she was not in any position to give or withhold consent. What Jefferson did to Hemings was rape.

But Thomas Jefferson Dreams of Sally Hemings, judging from early reviews, is most interested in exploring potential ambiguities of their relationship. The book wonders: Did Hemings perhaps enjoy it? To what extent was she complicit?

According to Kirkus, in this novel Hemings enthusiastically consents to the relationship: "And so, when some half hour after Sally Hemings arrives late at the upstairs parlor, and Thomas Jefferson confesses breathlessly that he would very much like to lie with her as a man lies with his wife … she whispers that she would like that, too. …"

NPR quotes a passage in which she whispers ecstatically to Jefferson, "I want us always to be as we are here … where we are only our eyes, our hands, those parts of us made for each other by nature, where our only words are the ones we whisper in the little caves we make between pillow, cheek and lips."
The Washington Post cites O’Connor’s assertion in the afterword that "Hemings’s feelings for Jefferson might well have fallen somewhere along the spectrum between love and Stockholm syndrome..."

...These early reviews are, by and large, positive. The book shows "The agonizing crashing together of love and slavery," writes NPR, observing that "O'Connor has the insight to put them side by side, and the result is searing and even sometimes beautiful." The Washington Post, which acknowledges that the book’s treatment of Hemings leads to its "most troubled and troubling chapters," concludes that "O'Connor's deeply humane treatment of Sally, whose actual thoughts will never be known to us, is the novel's most haunting accomplishment..."

(Continued)

http://www.vox.com/2016/4/8/11389556/thomas-jefferson-sally-hemings-book
Not impressed Christie. Though you'll get no argument from me about the evil of slavery and it's utterly degenerate and corrupting influence calling Jefferson a rapist is anachronistic as hell and thus intellectually dishonest.
 
Back
Top