How is Washington providing an answer to the ‘go North’ or ‘stay South’ debate we looked at in Frederick Douglass’s Life and Times?

To begin with, Booker T Washington expressed his intense belief in communal cooporation among blacks and whites. Just from this we can see similarities between Washington and Frederick Douglass's Life and Times. They agreed on a few levels. Douglass believed that the blacks should not be afraid to stay in the South and to not migrate north. They could just stay where they were and find jobs which were almost guaranteed. Sure their bosses would most likely be those whom enslaved their friends and families, but this is where cooporation comes in. Douglass believed in communal cooporation between the two races. They may not like each other- in fact they hated each other- but the blacks could help the whites and vice versa. The whites needed workers to work their lands and the blacks needed jobs. Through cooporation they could have struck a deal with each in which they both benefited. Kind of like how I said i would work for Keaton in order to obtain some gold fish opposed to migrating to the desk where there may or may not be a few gold fish.

Washington uses a great metaphor to show this phenomenon- the water in the bucket. There are two ships- one is pleading to other saying to give to them some water when they themselves are on a body of water. The other replies to cast your bucket down where you are. Again the boat pleads twice more until they do cast there bucket down and are rewarded with a bucket of water. Washington wanted the blacks to stay where they are because there was opportunity in the South. There was basically a guarantee for success, but they associated the South with slavery causing them to migrate North.

Booker T Washington also believed in morality and there was no morality on this issue. All of the states were free but still the blacks moved to the North. There is no morality in moving North if you can't be equal in the South

Compare Equiano to Venture Smith. Both are Africans brought over to America to be slaves. Do they share the same views? How do they differ?

Equiano's life story is vastly different from Venture's for many reasons. Their views of life and slavery differed the most. Venture focused his story on capitalism. He got sucked in to the typical American Dream that comes up a lot throughout America's history. He centered his decisions around money while Equiano's decisions were about moral growth. Equiano used feeling and emotion in his writing instead of cold hard facts as Venture did.

I could tell from the very beginning that the stories would be greatly different. To begin with, Venture told his story to a white man who then published it into writing. By doing so, we most likely lost a lot of detail and things which the white man would have taken out just because he didn't like it. It was censored. His story starts off with Venture being referred to in third person and says that this is an account of hist story. Equiano's beginning was much different. It contained emotion and opinion right from the very start. Through Equiano's words, we are able to get a sense of his vernacular rather than a censorship.

Their takes on slavery differed greatly as well. Venture just said this happened, then this occurred, bam bam bam, these are the facts. He simply stated what took place without detail. Equiano went deep into detail. He showed the horrors of slavery saying what he smelled, felt, and saw. his explanation of the ship ride over almost made you feel what he felt.

On a side not, Equiano talked a lot more about his tribe. He explained the tribe's culture and rituals. He did this to show us that they were human too just as the white men were. It showed a contrast between his old lifestyle and his new life where he isn't treated as a human.