The subject of slavery became a hot topic on the forum for a few days in June and July. It began with a forum user’s quandary:
On one hand us modern folk consider slavery abhorrent, but on the other I’m not aware of a single ancient society that didn’t practice it. So in any semi-realistic setting, leaving slavery as something only villains do might be a bit naïve.
Take Sanderson’s The Way of Kings, one of the main characters, Kaladin, is a slave forced to work on a bridge crew. Life is difficult and many of those on the bridge crew are killed, either in battle or sent on dangerous errands. Yet, there is an acceptance that this is the way of the world, slavery exists as part of the social order. The character may not accept his place in the world, may fight against it, but there is an acknowledgement of its existence.
Joel Rosenberg’s Guardians of the Flame series, which I looked at a month or two ago, takes slavery as the driving force behind the story. The characters, transported from modern day earth (well, modern for the 1980s) begin a crusade against the institution of slavery and the slave guilds themselves.
When you look at the more modern history of slavery, the abolitionists, the enactment of laws, the wars, it is sometimes a shock to realise just how recent that history is. Take my home country, the United Kingdom. In 1772, the courts ruled that there was no law that permitted slavery within the borders of the UK, therefore no one could lawfully claim to have authority over a slave – in effect there were no slaves on British or Scottish soil. That did not mean that slavery did not exist.
The 1807 Slave Trade act (35 years later) was passed which forbid the trading in slaves, but not slavery itself. In 1833, the Slavery Abolition Act was passed which freed all slaves within the Empire, though it contained a staged system of freedom. Did it end slavery? No, further acts were passed in 1843 and 1873 to further suppress the trade in slaves. Other countries passed similar laws at other times, but slavery still exists. This article from the Washington Post makes interesting reading.
So, slavery was a ‘normal’ part of many cultures and one forum user makes an interesting point, “having a protagonist in a reality where slavery exists doesn’t mean that he/she should be opposed to it. Yes, slavery is bad, but only from today’s perspective. In the past it was normal and there were plenty of good, nice people who weren’t strongly opposed to it.” In effect, it is entirely possible for a hero NOT to be opposed to slavery in their culture. When you think about it, could all those people who engaged in slavery, owning slaves, trading in slaves, or just living in a culture/country that had slavery be considered to be evil because they did not oppose it?
Perhaps, just perhaps, the problem with tackling the topic of slavery in fantasy is cultural and one of definitions. One forum user posed this idea, “Slavery exists in many forms and not all are called slavery.” The UK educational curriculum expects children, from age 11 to 14, to be taught about the British role in the Slave Trade and life for slaves on plantations. Bearing in mind the young age of those being taught it remains a powerful unit which tackles the horror of slavery. I am willing to bet that other countries teach similar units, and relate to their own cultural experience and histories.
But in fantasy, in books, how much of the honest, brutal reality of slavery are we willing to confront on the name of entertainment? I’d suspect, even given the rise of grimdark, that as a plot device the concept of slavery, either a character forced into slavery and/or fighting their way out of it would be interesting. A slave rising to power, from the lowest strata of society perhaps to the highest, would be a life affirming story, one that would capture the reader though it has probably been done before (cough *Conan* cough). There are books, stories and films that deal with the reality of slavery in a more realistic manner.
We all agree, slavery is wrong, a great evil, but in fantasy books and films do we want our protagonists to debate it or to work to end it? To hate it or be unconcerned by it? Do we want them to reflect our morals and culture or be true to their own?
Richard Marpole
Jennie Ivins
In my fantasy series, I have a race of people who are enslaved. They actually somewhat enslaved themselves.
In book 2, I get to explore the race a little closer and Im using a story from my family (I’m African American) that actually occurred as the basis of that side story.
What’s terrifying is that I barely had to embellish it to make it work in the story.
Debate it? End it? Accept it?
Good questions. I think it all depends on the world and the focus of the story. Popping an anti-slavery crusader into a ancient Greek/Egyptian or medieval Europe society would (in my eyes) feel awkward and forced, and would distract from the story. Dealing with it in a more recent Victorian setting, however, could feel entirely natural.
Even within those societies, where slavery is accepted, you can still distinguish a hero by having them treat slaves with respect and compassion. They don’t need to debate it or crusade to free all the slaves, but treating them more like servants than property is a significant distinction.
Excellent point re settings and plausibility. I know I’m annoyed when an author PC’s a character entirely out of nowhere. “Yes, my father just woke up one morning and freed all the slaves, without any outside influence or discussion, and he sent me off to be educated at university somehow convincing them to accept a female as a special favor, and then I helped him invent new farming techniques which don’t damage the land, and now I’m a liberated educated white-guilt-free environmentalist attractive romantic interest.”
If someone runs counter to their predominant culture, there needs to be a cause. Yes, people can change, but not overnight and without reason. And that reason can make a much better story than a conveniently-perfect prop.
Great topic. I’ve spent more than a decade writing in a world which includes slavery, and it’s something I’ve really struggled to balance, The modern reader has so many different conceptions of slavery, especially the American reader who is almost certain to think of slavery as racially-based, when that wasn’t the norm for much of history.
It’s tough to have a sympathetic slave-owning protagonist without appearing to argue that slavery is a good thing, but I think it’s possible. If we’re honest, we all function in flawed societies without realizing or fighting all their flaws.
But we don’t have to approve. Last year I released SO TO HONOR HIM which has a slave protagonist, and 100% of the first sales (including a pay-what-you-want period, where people could donate even over the suggested price) went directly to International Justice Mission to fight modern slavery. Even fiction can be an educational and beneficial tool!
An article about slavery without mention of William Wilberforce?? For shame! And you from the UK!!
Just kidding. Eric Metaxas’ brilliant biography of Wilberforce points out that one key result of his work (and the work of the Clapham Sect and other abolitionists, largely led by Wilberforce) is that slavery, for the first time in history, became morally abhorrent. Up until the British abolition movement, that idea really hadn’t taken hold. There were abolitionists in the fledgling US, but none had the influence of a Wilberforce.
I do think, however, that chattel slavery is different than some other ancient forms of slavery. Some of the ancient Near East slavery models were more about indentured servitude or even just servanthood. Some slaves were paid, and many were well cared for. Also, slavery was not always attached to race or ethnicity. There is a moral difference between, say, someone who works as a “slave” (read: servant who is paid little or nothing except decent room and board) to repay a debt and is well cared for in the process and someone who is ripped from his home to be sold, beaten, starved, and abused in the process of work because he is perceived as less human than his “owner.”
Interesting article and good food for thought. Thanks.
Amy
Wilberforce… I know. Only so much room in an article 🙂
I am glad you enjoyed the article!
I agree with much of what is said here, except the idea that it would be strange for a protagonist to have a problem with slavery. There have been slave rebellions since ancient times. While it’s impossible to know what every non-enslaved Greek, Roman, etc. etc. thought about it, it is quite believable to me that some might have had second thoughts. Obviously, evidence shows many slaves had a problem with slavery. While the institution of slavery differed over time and from land to land, the basic concept of servitude was always untenable for some.
Out of curiosity I googled Hammurabi’s Code and in it are provisions, seemingly, for what to do if someone is caught helping a slave to escape. I suppose it is up to interpretation, but I figure if they addressed it with a law, that means it was happening.
So as they say, the past is another country, but at the same time, we have always been human. Yes, people of the past were fundamentally different from us but at the same time, also similar. As humans we are born with empathy which I sometimes think is our salvation.
Full disclosure: the culture in my series, and specifically the palace, uses slaves.
It depends what sort of story you’re telling, I suppose. HBO’s Rome was an interesting handling of the issue of slavery because it did so in a matter of fact manner but, in it’s own way, used humor and oddity to underscore that, even if it’s common, slavery is always EVIL.
Titus Pullo gets extremely mad at a slave and beats him to death in front of her lover….and it’s treated as the equivalent of trashing the dead man’s owner’s car–destroying expensive property but nothing actually “human.” Likewise, causal sexual abuse is always an ongoing theme (which also got picked up in Spartacus).
Normalizing slavery is fine in the background but I think it’s also good to remember as far back as Aristotle, there were people who thought it was a terrible institution. It’s just people’s opposition to slavery tended to begin and end at their own people being enslaved.
Well slavery wasn’t abolished but rather reformed. It’s still acceptable as punishment for a crime according to the 13th amendment here in the US and many other countries today. Slavery for most of history was penal enslavement for criminals and war captives. The race-based slavery only lasted for a few hundred years and that is what abolitionist wanted abolished.