AFRICAN-AMERICAN HISTORY, H335, SPRING 2015
THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA, DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY
FINAL WRITTEN ASSIGNMENT
Prof. Paul Krause, 1122 Buchanan Tower
Due: Friday, April 24, noon
Late papers cannot be accepted or marked. Please refer to the detailed discussions regarding personal
exigency, and the submission of papers in general, in the syllabus. Recall that all work must be
submitted in hard copy; e-mail attachments, etc., cannot be marked.
In preparing your answers, above all take care to read the questions carefully and to focus on
how your responses explore the inter-related realms of U.S. society that we have investigated: politics
and political culture, race, gender, and economics. Aim for tightly argued, well-written essays of no
more than 10 pages each – which means a total maximum of 20 pages. Each of your essays should put
forward an interpretation in your own voice. While invoking critical authorities might seem helpful, this
exercise is really about how well you produce arguments of your own. Feel free to discuss these
questions with your colleagues and with me, but take care to ensure that your final submission is your
own work and conforms to UBC standards of personal and professional integrity.
Hand in your work to me or deposit it my departmental mailbox. I will be in my office on April 24
to receive papers; after the deadline, UBC’s Kreider Wastebasket Rule1 will become operational.
Be mindful that this assignment has two parts, and that each part must be completed.
Some final words of advice about writing: Instead of making facile dismissals or points, look to
real people – real historical actors, groups and individuals – to make your case for you. To be sure, it
should be your case, but your argument will be much more convincing if you anchor your analysis in the
lived experience of the groups and individuals you are considering. Do not write off human striving by
invoking normative analytical terms. If you pass judgment, try to summon all of the humility and
empathy that you can.
PART ONE. ANSWER ONE OF THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS:
1.) “I don’t see any American dream,” Malcolm X said, “I see an American nightmare.” In
surveying the course of African-American History from Reconstruction to the present day, do you see a
dream or a nightmare for Americans of African ancestry? Base your answer, which should take the form
of an interpretive narrative, on concrete evidence – evidence that demonstrates a decade-by-decade
grasp of African-American History.
2.) By examining the lives of selected individuals and groups, H335 has asked you to
explore the meaning of democracy in the United States, and, in particular, to investigate the
relationship of democracy to the question of race and the problem of racism. Taking into account
eight of the following persons, and with an eye aimed at offering your definition of American
democracy, assess the evolving relationship of democracy and race from 1865 to the present
day. Your answer should take the form of an interpretive narrative. Two hints: First, in
formulating your answer, remember that individuals alone do not make history: their lives
1
This rule, named after Prof. Evan Kreider, a former associate dean of the Faculty of Arts, will be explained in class.
invariably point to larger forces and questions. It is these forces and questions that ought to be
of paramount concern to you. Second, in responding, avoid the temptation simply to string
together a series of sketches. The key is to put forward a coherent analysis that uses evidence
gleaned from the work, thought, and experience of the individuals listed below.
Abraham Lincoln or Andrew Johnson
Richard Wright
Ida B. Wells
Nate Shaw/Ned Cobb
Zora Neale Hurston
Emmett Till
Martin Luther King, Jr., or Malcolm X
Tunis Campbell or Garrison Frazier
Ella Baker or Jo Ann Robinson
Toni Morrison
Stan, the protagonist of “Killer of Sheep”
Thaddeus Stevens or Lyndon Johnson
3.) From the time of Frederick Douglass to that of Martin Luther King, Jr., some African
Americans have argued that the racism and injustice they have encountered is an aberration of “the
American Creed,” while others have argued that racism and injustice themselves constitute this creed.
King, in his famous speech at the Lincoln Memorial in 1963, called the promises of the Declaration of
Independence “a sacred obligation” which, until that time, had proved to be a bad check for blacks, “a
check which has come back marked ‘insufficient funds’.” But, King continued, “We refuse to believe that
the bank of justice is bankrupt.” In light of your understanding of African-American History up to the
March on Washington, was King justified in believing in his “dream” – a dream, he said, which was
“deeply rooted in the American dream?” In light of the evidence presented in “The Two Nations of Black
America,” and in other sources you have engaged, have developments since 1963 confirmed or refuted
King’s abiding faith in the promise of America?
PART TWO. ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTION:
Ralph Ellison, the novelist and literary critic who was a close friend of Richard Wright, wrote that
great fiction must “recognize the interconnections between” lived experience and national ideals. In an
essay called “The Novel as a Function of American Democracy,” Ellison went on to argue that the best
fiction “has always been tied up with the idea of nationhood.” All great novels, he wrote, ask the
following questions: “What are we? Who are we? What has the experience of the particular group
been? How did it become this way? What is it that stopped us from attaining the ideal?” The obligation
of the novelist, Ellison contended, is “to describe, with eloquence and imagination, life as it appears
from wherever he finds his being” – an obligation that is difficult to fulfill in the United States because of
its “tradition of forgetfulness…, of denying the past, of converting the tragic realities of ourselves but
most often of others, even if those others are of our own group, into comedy.” To what extent do Black
Boy/American Hunger, Their Eyes Were Watching God, Beloved, and the film, “Killer of Sheep” measure
up to Ellison’s criteria and thereby challenge the American “tradition of forgetfulness?”
Please be certain to ground your assessments in the texts – and in the concrete evidence of the
historical record that we have encountered in our readings, films, discussions, and lectures over the
course of the year. In other words, your essay cannot succeed unless you engage the work of Wright,
Hurston, Morrison, and Burnett, and then evaluate it precisely as Ellison suggests, that is, not merely on
the basis of aesthetics, but also, and perhaps more importantly, by way of politics and history. The
criticism of Benjamin DeMott ought to be of some help in formulating your response.
EVALUATIONS OF FINAL ESSAYS
Essays will be evaluated on the basis of three broad categories:
1. Argument and structure – 50%: Essays should present an argument, and they should be
structured in a way that allows the reader to follow the developing lines of the argument.
Therefore, essays should have an introduction, body, and conclusion. The introduction should
be concise and should put forth a thesis statement. An important part of the assignment is to
define a question or problem and try to answer it. The answer effectively constitutes the
argument, and it forms the body. The body should be well-organized and built upon logically
connected paragraphs, each of which has a topic sentence and a “punch line.” The conclusion
should recapitulate the thesis statement or main point, and make it clear to the reader why
what you have written is important.
2. Content and Evidence – 25%: The best essays utilize evidence in creative ways and integrate the
evidence into the logical presentation of the argument. And the best essays demonstrate
original and critical thinking. Your main points should be supported by direct reference to a text,
and evidence always is required to corroborate the main points of your argument. Simple
assertions of your opinions will not do. Sometimes you will need to paraphrase a text. Why?
Because you are writing for an audience which is as clever as you but which has no knowledge of
the texts you are engaging. (Writing in such a way ensures that you will not overlook logical and
evidentiary connections.)
3. Style, presentation, and use of language – 25%: Is your writing precise and engaging? Is it
grammatical? Inappropriate usage, awkward syntax, and wordiness can hurt. Remember what
Abraham Lincoln wrote about the connections between clear writing and clear thinking:
weakness in writing typically indicates feebleness in thought. (Here, Lincoln was not criticizing
another person; rather he was commenting on his own rhetorical struggles.)