As Grandin argues slavery was both a specific economic, legal, and political institution in which people were captured from Africa and brought to the new world as property to work, but it is also a general problem of our dependence on each other, nature, and the universe. As Grandin argues, Melville struggled with both of these aspects, seeing everyone as both a fast fish and a free fish. How does Grandin book give context to this struggle, and how does it try to think through the fundamental ambiguity of slavery. Or, as Grandin puts it, “That is the thing about American slavery: it was never just about slavery.” In other words how does Grandin both give context to this ambiguity and work through the ambiguity of the very nature of slavery, its ability to extend beyond the economy to affect politics, culture and society?
1292050
an hour ago
Using the textbook “The Empire of Necessity” by Greg Grandin: As Grandin argues slavery was both a specific economic, legal and political insitution in which people were captured from Africa and brought to the new world as property to work, but is is also a general problem of our dependence on each other, nature, and the universe. As Grandin argues, Melville struggled with both of these aspects, seeing everyone as both a fast fish and a free fish. How does Grandin’s book give context to this struggle, and how does it try to think through the fundamental ambiguity of slavery. Or, as Grandin puts it, “that is the thing about American slavery: it was never just about slavery.” In other words how does Grandin btoh give context to this ambiguity and work through the ambiguity of the very nature of slavery, its ability to extend beyond the economy to affect politics, culture, and society?
