Jane/Alexina Morrison was fifteen years old when she ran away from slave trader J. G. Haliburton and filed her freedom suit. Since she was of “fair complexion, blue eyes, and flaxen hair”, she claimed that she could not be enslaved because she is white and born of white parents with the name “Alexina”. She did not only demand her freedom but also asked for protection from the parish jailer and $10,000 in damages. She won the case on the grounds of her appearance. We are familiar with this kind of story, such as the Rhinelander case, but what is striking is the language used to define Morrison as white:
“Morrison and her attorneys relied on what they saw as a fundamental truth: she was white because she looked and acted white.”
Encyclopedia of Arkansas
To say “acted” white implies that there is a performative element to the definition of race; that race is not only what one is, but what one does as well. Since performances are socially constructed, so are our understandings of what it means to “act” a race. With this in mind, perhaps we should be doubtful of our senses not only because we cannot trust the physical world around us and our senses’ ability to perceive it, but because we cannot trust ourselves to see things as they are without socially constructed definitions clouding our perception.
This deception is demonstrated in the novel when Westfield says he cannot distinguish between who is and who is not passing (78). It is not only because of how they look, but because of how they act and how specifically Westfield thinks it means to “act” as white or black while Irene can tell the difference because she knows it differently.
The conman, then, preys on people’s expectations by performing in ways that are defined and people have a predictable understanding of. If the conman exploits this farce, then is he really a trickster? Or do people allow themselves to be conned by conning themselves?
An excellent opening to this post — grabs attention and takes us (like Suha’s post) into the mystifying and contradictory legalities of race in the early 20th century. How did you discover this case?
Your post asks us to take a closer look at the dynamics of racial definition and forms of recognition in Irene and *Wentworth’s conversation at the gala. IN this scene, how does Irene describe how she knows who is or is not passing? What is her claim to this knowledge?
The answer deepens and complicates how race is defined within Irene’s black community.
You mention that the ability to perceive things as they are is clouded with socially constructed definitions, and I feel like this sets up a false dichotomy between “things as they are” and “social definitions” because almost everything around us is made of social definitions. And instead of aspiring for a higher truth to the true nature of things (that, ‘things as they are’) we should examine the problematics that appear as a result of the “socially constructed definitions” of race and the multiple layers of color. Also, in your post, you pointed out that one cannot “distinguish between who is and who is not passing,” which I think is a significant aspect of the novel that reveals the need to find out the ‘truth’ of things when, in fact, there is no truth; only socially constructed definitions of the truth.
It is interesting to see how the use of the term ‘race’ has significantly changed within a decade. This is in the sense that its meaning has shifted from being defined as a solely ‘tangible’ physical attribute, to being looked at as a social construct that is more related to one’s behavior than to his/her ethnic descent.
I really liked what you said about the deceptive aspect of ‘passing’ or performing ‘race’.This made me think of how Clare is not only ‘passing’ in a racial sense but is also passing in her marriage to jack and her motherhood to her daughter Margery.
However, it’s also important not to label Clare as a passing African American only, since this implies that her whole identity is only built on her ‘whiteness’ or the lack of it, which seems ironic because the whole novel questions what race is!. This also goes back to Shamma’s comment on how the search of Clare’s authentic self is futile. Simply because there is not ‘authentic’ identity which a she can go back to.
Your post ties in with a question I’ve been having since we started this novel: is Black an identity or an experience?
Obviously, it’s an interplay between the two as it is a bit of a false dichotomy, but your response got me thinking, if someone looks white, “acts white” and experiences society as a white person, what makes them black?
On one hand, most of the aspects that shape black narratives in American literature revolve around experience — how somebody experiences America in a black body. These experiences of profiling, discrimination, and societal perceptions are what shape the genre, and if one passes through the world as a white person, it can be argued that black is a marker of identity they should not claim.
On the other hand, one’s identity is not something to be left to others to determine. Even if no one else knows Clara is black or treats her as such, she knows, and that is an aspect of her identity she reconciles with throughout the novel. No one has the authority to become a gate-keeper for racial identity because ultimately it is not about anyone else, only what one authentically believes herself to be.