| Episodes |
Annette Gordon-Reed: Impersonal Observer or Personal Missionary? [AGR 120-22]
Kristina Gonzalez
[1] Annette Gordon-Reed, a distinguished African-American scholar, published her book Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings: An American Controversy with the intent of closely analyzing the historiography of the scandal. Although her investigation and criticism of arguments previously presented by historians is said to be impartial, is Gordon-Reed truly unbiased in her study, or does she have another underlying agenda?
[2] After perusing the Author's Note, one would assume Gordon-Reed's sole intent with the publication of her book is to convince the reader not only that the relationship between Jefferson and Hemings holds some veracity but that it is also evidence of a continued racism among white historians. She rages about the portrayal of black-white relationships throughout the Jefferson-Hemings debate: "The treatment of the story well into modern times is evidence of the continuing grip that the doctrine of white supremacy has on American society" (viii). If the aim of a historian like Gordon-Reed is to be as objective as humanly possible, why is it important to be concerned with the way blacks are portrayed in Jefferson scholarship? To avoid subjectivity, would it not be fair to consider the way whites are perceived as well? According to Gordon-Reed in her interview at Monticello, she wanted to make it easier to see the Hemingses as "human beings, not as slaves," despite all records proving the enslavement of this family. In order to be impartial, this detail must be taken into account; otherwise the evidence is manipulated subjectively, and the argument is void of any credibility.
[3] It is curious, however, that when writing only about Thomas Jefferson's character, Gordon-Reed's arguments seem sensible and unprejudiced. In "Jefferson and His ‘Very Snow-Broth' Blood," she speaks about Jefferson's sexuality and how it relates to the idea of an affair with Sally Hemings (120-22). The argument presented in this chapter by Jefferson defenders is that Jefferson's character and "personal eccentricities" would have made any sexual relationship with Sally "if not impossible, at least improbable." Apparently this idea has been the most often cited explanation for the invalidity of the Jefferson-Hemings controversy. The first reaction Gordon-Reed has to such a claim is to discredit the source of the accusation. One of the first times this argument ever appeared was when the Sally Hemings story initially broke, and a writer of a Federalist newspaper enthusiastically published it. Gordon-Reed explains how "one would not expect much depth of insight from that quarter" because, of course, it would be easy for an enemy of Jefferson to write such articles at the president's expense (120).
[4] Gordon-Reed proceeds to criticize the legitimacy of the argument by responding to a series of ridiculous claims made by scholars who blame Jefferson's "fastidiousness, attachment to reason and rationality, and . . . obsession with orderliness" for his incapacity to participate in "romantic involvement or sexual passion" (120). To generalize the defense, Gordon-Reed writes: "People who are compulsive about making lists have no interests in sex or romance. People who hold their emotions severely in check have no interest in sex or romance. People who are extremely clean have no interest in sex or romance" (121). When approaching this material and refuting it, Gordon-Reed is fair. She shows Jefferson as a sensual and physical man who rode horses for several miles each day and participated in competitions with younger men to test strength. She also supports her idea with that of another American historian, Dumas Malone, who describes Jefferson as "a half dozen men rolled into one" to prove that he also had a "stated appreciation for beauty, women, music, and art" (121). If it is sufficient to draw conclusions about a lack of sexual activity from list-making and cleanliness, then it is also appropriate to make inferences about his sexual drive from such appreciations and his demonstrations of masculinity through competitions, therefore making the original argument completely worthless.
[5] The second defense regarding Jefferson's inability to participate in a sexual relationship pertains to his alleged awkwardness with women after being rejected by his first "crush," Rebecca Burwell. Jefferson supposedly longed to be with Burwell who decided to marry another, leaving an aberration in his emotional and sexual development. Jefferson responded to his misfortune with Burwell in a letter to a friend, which has rarely been considered but is said to be "one of Jefferson's few references to his attitude about sex." In this letter, he refers to St. Paul and the idea of having "other means of extinguishing the fire than those of matrimony." This implies Jefferson's complacency with the ability to have sex without being married. Had Jefferson been serious in his letter as opposed to acting out of defense, Gordon-Reed argues, "this would indicate that Jefferson considered sex with females to be a natural part of life, his life in particular." Furthermore, it is absurd to assume one failed attempt at romance would scar a man's ability to interact with women for the rest of his life. Even if this scenario is likely, which it most certainly is not, Gordon-Reed explains that many other women adored him. She says, "The correspondence of Eliza House Trist and the memoirs of Margaret Bayard Smith demonstrate that both were smitten with Jefferson," proving he "knew very well how to make himself attractive to women and that the desire to do so was a basic feature of his personality" (122).
[6] It would seem that regarding her work as a whole, Annette Gordon Reed wishes her readers to gain more than just an objective view of historian's comments pertaining to the Jefferson-Hemings Controversy. At certain points in her book she is bitter about the way her race has been treated in this affair, which is something to take into account when gauging the credibility of her arguments. Her arguments in "Jefferson and His ‘Very Snow-Broth' Blood," however, show that she possesses the capability to create sound reasoning despite any personal agenda she may have. The arguments she presents and the manner in which she does so is logical and appropriate when refuting the ideas of other historians and scholars.
