Reading for the Cynics

I love how interconnected my classes become. Over the summer, I read Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep and got uber excited because Philip K. Dick named his freaking mood organ after Mr. W. Penfield. (Oh, MCB 61, I miss you.) And just yesterday, I was going to interject on the subject of the (in)significance of Equiano lying about his "identity" because we talked about reliable sources in my history class. The general consensus in America is that museums are the most reliable source when it comes to history, followed by a grandparent or relative who was there. Rounding out the bottom of the totem pole are someone/anyone who was there, a high school teacher, college professor, and movies! Except for movies, Americans' opinion on who to trust is utterly incredible. While I can see why museums would be thought of as more reliable since they seem to be unbiased, many artifacts can be omitted or left out of displays; evidence can easily be hidden. As for professors and high school teachers, they rely on multiple sources and their research must at least try to be trustworthy to gain support in the academic world. As for first-person narratives, people must be very wary. When it comes to one person's memory, there's inherent fallibility on the narrator's part. So my first thought on the matter of Equiano's identity was that his origin made no difference to the story since his narration should be read with a bit of skepticism because of the innately false recollections of incidences, no matter how soon after the event is written about. Plus, his ultimate goal was to abolish slavery. Then, I thought about whether or not the text would be read differently if he said he was born in Africa versus America. In my opinion, the text would still retain most of the meat of what people in England would take away from it. Really, would anyone think Equiano any less black if he were born in South Carolina? We established that his "African" identity was born in America, not Africa. And if he had never landed in America, than he wouldn't be qualified as "African." In Africa he was not categorized as such, so in any matter, he would have had to be connected to the United States somehow. In this twisted mess, Africanism depends on American labels. Consequently, Equiano could have been born anywhere without affecting his "identity."