It certainly is. I read several different reviews, in newspapers, blogs, etc., and tried to pay close attention to the black critics, whose responses from ranged from anti…
…to pro, with reservations:
Shifting back to The Underground Railroad:
I had a feeling that Mabel’s escape would not turn out to be a success story, but of course I hoped for a different outcome (even if it meant she had abandoned Cora). I wanted the legend to be true. I was consoled by the fact that Ridgeway and Randall always believed that Mabel had escaped and that they had failed in their attempt to track her down.
I knew before reading The Underground Railroad that Whitehead depicts it as real. I hit my speed bump in South Carolina, recognizing inaccuracies immediately. Inaccuracies, yes, but intentional inaccuracies. (Is that something like alternative facts? But I digress.) Whitehead’s prose is exquisite but I found myself fact-checking when I should have been immersed in the story. Sort of “Hey - untreated syphilis experiment - 1930s, not 1850s. I knew that.” I’m the least fact-checking reader ever, so it has to be overt to get me to the point of doing so. I understand the “why” and actually enjoyed the book better once I viewed each state as a microcosm of black history with Whitehead making a point - or rather pointing something out.
I found it easier to escape into Underground Airlines just because the alternate history allowed me to do so.
Winters’ protagonist is male; Whitehead’s is female. Whitehead chose for us to see through Cora’s eyes. She’s female and he’s not. I actually wondered why Whitehead chose Cora as protagonist rather than Caesar. Does he feel a female is more sympathetic? At least, that’s my guess.
By the way, I always figured Cora’s mother didn’t make it and wondered why all just assumed she did.
I never guess important plot points such as the fact that Cora’s mother didn’t actually make it. What was important was that people (both the slaves and those who chased them) believed it was true. Randall wasted time and effort looking for her and she gave hope to those she left behind.
I hadn’t really thought of each stage of Cora’s journey as a microcosm of black history. That really does make sense.
The raid at Valentine’s farm upset me so much that I had to put the book aside for a while and not even try to read the ending. I couldn’t imagine that Cora was going to survive being captured by Ridgeway again, even through the Randalls weren’t around anymore.
The sense of fear engendered by the repeated tragic episodes made me understand that there were very few safe havens for escaped slaves, or even freed persons.
At the end of the book, the author did imply that Cora might end up in California, a place that, like Canada, perhaps afforded better sanctuary.
Thanks, that helps. I was having trouble with the “why.”
I think The Underground Railroad is a richer book if you already know your history. Then it becomes possible to understand and appreciate how Whitehead manipulates it. Browsing through comments from readers online, I saw that a teacher wrote that she assigned the book to her high school students, but regretted it because they lacked the proper historical background, and thus the book became a source of misinformation. Of course, that’s actually one reason why it would be a great book to teach–provide the history, then examine the context in which Whitehead shapes and adapts it–but I can see that might be quite a project.
@NJTheatreMOM Re: the raid at Valentine’s farm. Agreed. All that build-up, describing the farm, the library with all those books (!!!), the peaceful lives they were living…and ugh. It really drives home the message NOT SAFE ANYWHERE.
Yes, that was true until slavery was truly abolished. That’s why slaves were only safe if they got themselves to Canada. Both books make that point - the north wasn’t really a safe haven for blacks.
Remember when Cora works at the museum, rotating between sets. Whitehead provides the reader with much the same experience: Cora travels on the RR to “states” that depict aspects of black history. To me, Whitehead “stages” South Carolina and uses Cora’s living history work in the museum as a harbinger of what he means to do in the novel. (And it amused me that Whitehead does so.) I figured I got it right when Cora hits N.C. and Whitehead does it again. Cora’s underground railroad stops in microcosms meant to depict black history. The museum in S.C. plays fast and loose with accuracy - probably unintentionally. Whitehead does the same, though intentionally. The museum glosses over facts while Whitehead reveals them. Both set a stage in order to do so.
I’m not saying I’m right but rather that’s how I read the book after S.C. When Cora leaves one (fictional) state and heads on that UGR and lands in another, Whitehead manipulates history to make his point. In one way, Whitehead’s creativity awes me but, in another, annoys me. I think misinformation misleads, with readers thinking life in S.C. at the time looked as it does in the book. Not that the history’s not accurate for some point in time and in some place but not for Cora in S.C., N.C. and so on - Whitehead’s own version of misrepresentation. It pulled me away from Cora’s experience even though I understand I’m meant to look beyond.
I agree that the book should probably not be assigned to students whose knowledge of history is shaky, but I would hope that most adult readers would realize that the SC and NC sections could not have been literally true. The very fact that trains ran underground in the book was a hint that other things were distorted or metaphorical.
When I was reading certain sections, I thought, “Uh, nope” about things like the miles and miles of NC road with people hanging from trees, but I did wonder about things like to what extent white indentured immigrants were ever hired to pick cotton.
^ I agree. She didn’t really seem instrumental to the plot; I thought her story was worked in rather awkwardly. It could be that Winters felt the need for a female character to mitigate the testosterone. I was glad, though, that there was no attempt to manufacture some sort of romance between Victor and Martha.
Another I agree - but, like Mary, I respect Winters for not manufacturing a romance - same for Whitehead not manufacturing romance between Cora and Caesar.
The novel is making much more sense to me now – in that what at first seemed (historically) nonsensical was in fact a careful choice. From the NPR interview:
I was surprised that a romance wasn’t cooked up for Martha. I agree she somehow went from being waiflike incompetent to superwoman. For some reason I felt her name was all wrong for her character. It’s not often that I hate a character’s name, but for some reason it just didn’t work for me.
Naaa, I think it was quite intentional. They knew they were presenting alternate facts. Maybe not the people Cora directly dealt with, but the ones in charge? Absolutely.
I just finished Underground Railroad for my book club and found it very interesting. Graphic and horrifying yet, but resilient and intelligent too. I was most struck by the discussion of needing “black schools” and “black doctors”. They couldn’t imagine being desegregated even though there was an interracial marriage - fascinating to pull back the curtain, so to speak
This discussion about Whiteheads intentions with The Underground Railroad is really helpful! Thank you.
One thing I’ve wondered about Whitehead’s railroad though, is given that slaves had almost no control in their fates, what was the purpose of giving Cora and Caesar the choice in which route they could select? When they were given the option, Lumbly told them,
Maybe what he’s trying to tell them is that no place is safe?
I meant to add that I agree, too, with Midwest about Martha being a weak character and my appreciation that Winters didn’t write a romantic relationship for her with Victor. I had fully expected that to happen.