Home | Business News | Browse by Publication | T | The Horn Book Magazine

Letters to the editor.

Article Excerpt
November/December 2002 Horn Book

After reading Russell Freedman's comments ("An Interview with Russell Freedman") in regard to Abraham Lincoln, I was reminded of Napoleon Bonaparte's famous quote that "history is a set of lies agreed upon." In the interview with Roger Sutton, Freedman stated, "By today's standards, Abraham Lincoln might [my italics] be called a racist. He supported a plan to colonize African Americans outside the country."

I found Freedman's statement troubling for several reasons. First of all, I would argue that Abraham Lincoln was a racist by any standard just as I would argue that John Brown (a man of his times who lived during Lincoln's era) was an anti-racist by any standard. Why should time change the scale of values? In all honesty, I don't believe that there is much difference between the Abraham Lincoln of the nineteenth century and ultraconservative Republicans of the twenty-first century in terms of the policies they support and the effects of those policies on African Americans and other people of color.

The second thing that I found troubling was the fact that Freedman's statement proved he was indeed well aware that Lincoln worked feverishly for many years to deport blacks, yet he failed to mention this fact (among many others) in his 100-plus-page photobiography of Abraham Lincoln. For example, in his book Freedman writes, "Most Yankee states had enacted strict `black laws.' In Illinois, Lincoln's home state, blacks paid taxes but could not vote, hold political office, serve on juries, testify in court, or attend schools," but Freedman neglected to mention that Abraham Lincoln supported the Illinois Black Laws as well as the notorious Fugitive Slave Act. Freedman also writes that Lincoln was considered by his friends to be the "riskiest of storytellers," yet Freedman failed to mention Lincoln's love for "darky jokes" and his habitual use of the "n-word" in public and in private. Freedman also writes that Abraham Lincoln enjoyed the theater and opera, but again he failed to mention the fact that he also enjoyed blackface minstrel shows. The failure of Freedman to mention facts such as these indicates that feminist scholar Adrienne Rich is correct in saying, "Lying is done with words, and also with silence."

Freedman stated that he didn't think it was fair to "use our standards and values to judge what someone did long ago," although he thinks "it's fair to interpret." But I don't believe people can accurately interpret a person or an event when presented with only half-truths. Freedman is certainly entitled to his personal opinions and interpretations about Abraham Lincoln, but as a nonfiction or "factual" author (as he prefers to be called) whose books are read by thousands of children and adults, doesn't he have a responsibility to present a well-balanced selection of facts, even if some of them are unpleasant? In the meantime, I would like to see Freedman write a book about John Brown or William Lloyd Garrison, men of their times...

View this article FREE - Now for a Limited Time, try Goliath Business News
Free for 3 Days!