“The 1619 Project is a major initiative from The New York Times observing the 400th anniversary of the beginning of American slavery. It aims to reframe the country’s history, understanding 1619 as our true founding, and placing the consequences of slavery and the contributions of black Americans at the very center of the story we tell ourselves about who we are.”
Those words, and the stories that follow them, have unleashed an intense reaction across America from readers, writers, educators, politicians, and pundits.
After writing an enthusiastic recommendation last Sunday about The 1619 Project, I realized that I should probably cover the reactions, both positive and negative. I’ll start with “the good” and combine “bad and ugly” takes in one section.
The Good
One of the first responses I read was from Alexandria Neason at Columbia Journalism Review (CJR). The article is titled “The 1619 Project and the stories we tell about slavery”:
“Like most Americans, slavery was largely taught to me as something that was marginal to the American story,” Hannah-Jones said in the program’s opening remarks. “Slavery had to be mentioned in our history books because we had to talk about the Civil War, but outside of that, it was just a brief discussion that relegated slavery largely to the backwards South, and assured us as a nation that slavery had little to do with how our country developed.”
For the media to tell the truth about the US, it must commit to both a reeducation of its readers and of its workers. Efforts like The 1619 Project look backwards to inform a path forward. But to really reach the truth, journalists must make a sincere effort to interrogate our daily performance such that, some day, we won’t need to correct the record, because the record will have been accurate the first time.
“How are we replicating these dehumanizing narratives every single day?” Eve L. Ewing, a sociologist and writer asked the crowd at the launch event. “How are we, in fact, at risk of undermining this kind of great work if it sits in parallel to rhetoric that continues to demonize and dehumananize Black people, Black trans people, Black undocumented people, Black disabled people, Black queer people, Black people with HIV, Black poor people, and so on?” Ewing, who contributed a poem to the magazine about Phillis Wheatley, the first African-American woman to publish a book of poetry, went on: “That’s the kind of questioning that we have to take into all of these institutions. It’s not just learning lots of facts, but learning modes of questioning that we need to be constantly interrogating in a time when we’re facing the rise of authoritarianism, which rests upon regular people doing nothing and asking nothing.”
Ewing raises an important point. Examining the roots of the racism that permeates our society requires that we follow through, up into the branches, and ultimately to the fruit—both the bitter and the sweet.
Ibram X. Kendi, author and director of the Antiracist Research and Policy Center at American University, wrote “The Hopefulness and Hopelessness of 1619” for The Atlantic:
Her name was Angela, one of the first known Africans in British North America.
His name was John, the first known antiblack racist in colonial America.
In 1619, this black woman and white man—what they embody—arrived months apart in 12-year-old Virginia, the first of the 13 British colonies that became the United States. Angela was the original embodiment of enslavement, of survival, of the 400-year African American struggle to survive, to be free of racism. John was the original embodiment of elite white male power, of the democracy of racists, of its 400-year struggle to survive, to be free of anti-racism.
Instead of David and Goliath, African America is the story of the petite Angela hopefully and hopelessly fighting off the giant John from 1619 to 2019 for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. She was, perhaps, the beginning of hope, the North Star essential to anti-racism. He was, definitely, the beginning of all that makes her hopeless, the eclipse essential to racism. African Americans have every reason to be hopeful and every reason to be hopeless on this 400th anniversary of our birth in this land.
Maya Contreras, co-founder of All Women’s Progress Think Tank, writes:
Those who retaliate against projects like 1619 and How to Be an Antiracist may not be as threatened by the truths the projects expose as they are by the empowerment given to those marginalized. Each calls out a damaging myth that White America has clung to like the American Eagle clings to its olive branch, “We are the world’s greatest democracy,” as former Speaker Paul Ryan and countless others have said and believed. Nikole Hannah-Jones dispels this negligent myth by arguing, “We were founded not as a democracy, but as a slaveocracy. A country run and ruled by slave owners.”
Slavery and its repercussions have never truly ended in America. The racist policy of slavery financed our independence from England, built our economy, and metastasized through the Civil War. When the 13th Amendment was ratified in 1865 it seemed that triage had finally been administered now that it was unconstitutional to enslave anyone on this soil.
Instead, the 13th Amendment had a massive loophole in its text: “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.”
This loophole gave rise to racist ideas that would attempt to justify the mass incarceration of African Americans. The Nixon Administration’s Southern Strategy and ‘Law and Order’ rhetoric planted the seeds of mass incarceration by unjustifiably demonizing Black Americans as lawless. Reagan’s ‘War on Drugs’ would double the Black population in state and federal prisons. This population would skyrocket into the stratosphere under George Bush, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush’s administration.
Darcel Rockett at the Chicago Tribune offered said The New York Times’ series on slavery should become required reading:
It’s been awhile since I can recall adults in a frenzy to purchase something not centered around technology (iPhone XS) or a hot Christmas toy (Hatchimals). Something that compels you to break through a digital paywall without hesitation — to brave the elements, checking store after store to get a copy of something printed and tangible.
The New York Times created that frenzy Sunday with “The 1619 Project” — a collection of essays and poems about the aftermath of slavery in America. It spans the 400 years that have passed since a ship arrived at Point Comfort in the British colony of Virginia in late August 1619 with enslaved Africans.
As local Chicago author and activist Charlene Carruthers tweeted: “Baaaaabay. The #1619project got people out here going from store to store trying to find the NYT like it’s the 2019 Tickle Me Elmo!”…
I pored over every word, every example of how this country wouldn’t exist without my people. I read it like a dissertation I’d have to present, looking for details yet uncovered in stories that I know all too well.
I read and reread phrases, thinking how much the macro (the continual change of subject when slavery is talked about on a national stage) is still impacting the micro (black lives today from health care to housing).
I chuckled when I read her opening sentence, since I was one of those people searching local newsstands for a hard copy, and coming home empty-handed.
I count this public reaction as “good.” This is the first time I’ve ever seen an endless sea of tweets and Facebook posts with people talking about their quests to get a hold of a copy.
Tweets like these:
The project crew has been scrambling to fill the requests:
They have shipped out copies to libraries like New York Public Library’s Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture to be distributed free.
This made me smile:
You can do the same. Here’s a link to The 1619 Project Curriculum.
There was quite a bit of initial television media coverage.
From PBS:
Four hundred years ago this month, the first enslaved people from Africa arrived in the Virginia colony. To observe the anniversary of American slavery, The New York Times Magazine launched The 1619 Project to reframe America’s history through the lens of slavery. The project lead, reporter Nikole Hannah-Jones, joins Hari Sreenivasan to discuss.
MSNBC:
CBS:
The New York Times' "1619 Project" marks 400 years since the first African slaves were brought to the U.S. and explores the continuing impact on the nation today. City College of New York professor Linda Villarosa contributed to that report and explained how enslaved people were physically tortured in the name of science and medicine.
The Bad and the Ugly
There was (of course) and still is some fallout. Some of it is coming from right-leaning academics, and other denizens of denialism.
I was particularly pleased to see Bernice King’s response to those people who drag out quotes from her father, the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., to weaponize their critiques.
Push-back against the attacks was also shade and snark. From one of my favorite Wonketteers:
Speaking of Newt Gingrich’s frenzied fury about the project (some of his mess posted below), in “Conservatives Terrified New York Times 1619 Project Will Remind Black People Slavery Existed,” Stephen Robinson is in top form:
The author of To Save America: Stopping Obama's Secular-Socialist Machine won't tolerate obvious propaganda. He's horrified that the Times would openly try to brainwash its readers into believing slavery both existed and sucked ass. "Propaganda" more accurately reflects how white Americans have controlled the narrative of slavery. We were born in 1970s South Carolina, and we recall learning about the "lost cause" and benevolent slave masters. Actual quote from a teacher: "Slave owners rarely beat their slaves. Slaves were valuable. Would you beat your car?" Comparing humans to automobiles is the sort of depersonalization that was a key element to propaganda. White children were conditioned to feel no shame for their cultural inheritance and black children were conditioned to respect and admire our oppressors -- not just the founding fathers but the Confederate generals our schools and roads were named after.
Conservatives claim to love history. It's why they object to removing the memorial to Confederate General Negroasskickerson. You'd think they'd appreciate the 1619 Project -- or you would if you were incredibly naive and thought conservatives were capable of intellectual honesty. Conservatives appreciate "history" that makes the world simple not complex. "Slavery is bad" seems like a simple message to digest, but it has complex implications. It means America was not always a wonderful place, especially for minorities. It was a white supremacist nightmare state until ... well, we're hopeful we'll turn a corner very soon. When white people write dystopian novels such as 1984 and The Handmaid's Tale, they imagine a totalitarian society devoid of freedom and hope. Their dread future is our recent past.
Media Matters took up Newt Gingrich’s spews and views.
The Washington Post’s Wesley Lowery weighed in:
As did former Daily Kos contributing editor Armando Llorens, who was, as usual, short and sweet:
Some of the replies to Gingrich have been brutally on-target:
Others used gifs to make their point:
Slate has a pretty comprehensive review of the reactions from reactionaries.
“I didn’t read it, but...”
I’m fond of saying that anything after ‘but’ is bullshit.
And of course, the Orange Occupant waded into the fray.
It was no surprise to hear from Ted Cruz.
I hope those of you who haven’t read it yet, do so. As a side note, I discussed an attempt by CBS News to address this subject a little over 50 years ago, in Black Kos.
The closing words of my commentary were, “Here we are, more than 50 years later — trying again.”
How many more years will we have pass before black Americans can take our proper place in the history of this nation?
I don’t know—and it isn’t up to just us.