on Migration Patterns Continued
[Male voice] I just finished re-looking at "Roots[?],"
you know the series that was on TV. You know, it made me angry
twenty-five years ago and it made me angry when I looked at it
last week. I sat and watched-I looked at one episode-there were
six episodes and I sat and watched one episode every night. And,
in a way it's sort of dated, but there was so much stuff that
I would move to the North for pennies, you know, the kinds of
things that were depicted and this was a TV program so it's probably
five times, ten times worse. But the first chance they got they
were out. Even if you worked in the stockyards cleaning up it
was still better; you could walk out, walk down the street and
go home. Even if it was a hovel, rather than asking permission
for everything, possibly getting strung-up just for the hell of
it, somebody's fun. You know it's pretty simple, actually pretty
simple when you look at it from that certain viewpoint.
Well that's why in some ways, one of the interesting things about
the Second Great Migration, is to ask first of all why didn't
it happen so much in the sixties, ___ the role of jobs, until
those jobs were ______________ and then second of all why did
only a small number of people go, why didn't more people go.
And it's partly, partly that there were still many people who
saw land ownership as something that was possible. And the dream
of land ownership was a very powerful, powerful factor.
It's also tells you that in large parts of the black South,
there was a certain amount of autonomy, that a lot of the stuff
affect people in many ways, that they were able to live their
lives in peace and quiet by not dealing with white people.
One of the things that's interesting again about how you think
about southern history is the questions of what the influence
of lynching was on migration patterns. And one guy, said OK,
I can do this, I'm a sociologist, I can do this. He came up
with a model
and an equation and did a really good job. And he
was going to figure out which counties had lynchings and when
then study how many people left each county after it had a lynching;
figure out how much lynching affected migration. It makes a
lot of sense. The problem was that he didn't have The Defender,
and one of things that we know, is--because of Charles Johnson,
who was a very good observer, is that when there was
a lynching described in The Defender, migration increased from
different parts of the South. So, it wasn't necessarily the fact
that a lynching had to happen in your county, but if you had
to The Defender and you would get the description of one of these
lynchings, and when you talk about television what's interesting
is The Defender was like television which is that the description
of lynchings tended to be very sensationalist. They were exaggerated
so that when you would read an article in The Defender, as bad
as it was, The Defender made it sound much, much worse. The
would be multiplied by ten. If you really had a feel for how
you get people to read newspapers similar to Hurst and Pulitzer.
was the style at the time, yellow journalism. And so, you would
have a lynching in Texas and people from Alabama would start
[Female voice] One of the things, those of you _________, those
of you who took the course last summer, tracking of the migration.
And also if you think about the _____ changing in that sense its
______, its ________, omnipresent danger and in some ways it's
more omnipresent because there isn't any specific figure. It's
just the sense of omnipresent violence. You can start to see the
ways in that it doesn't have to be specific instance; it's the
whole ideology that is surrounding it.
Oh yeah, go ahead.