Asher Sisneros

After finishing Solomon Northup’s autobiography, Twelve Years a Slave, I must say it’s not bad. Throughout the entire book, Solomon’s words paint vivid pictures. Those pictures can be visualized when he describes his violin carrying sounds across the house, the distress on Mrs. Epps’ face when her husband rapes their slave, and whippings at the hands of his merciless masters. He also describes losing hope after a failed attempt to gain his freedom. After that event, his entire heart sank, and he lost hope. The miraculous thing is that he earns empathy from the reader through his writing. However, these pictures—the ones that burn into your memory—aren’t the only benefit of Solomon’s writing style. He also possesses an element of contrast. My English teacher, Dr. Gary North, has always been a raving fan of this. While I agree that this autobiography is exemplary in that respect, the contrasts go deeper than Dr. North realizes. That is the topic of this essay. 

It’s impossible to ignore the stark differences between the Christian plantation owner Ford, and his antithetical counterpart, Edwin Epps. Ford was a loving master who used the whip sparingly. He even tried to purchase an extra slave—that he didn’t need—to satisfy the grief of a loving mother. Eliza was driven to misery when slavery separated her from her daughter. Ford was moved by this and offered to purchase the daughter and Eliza so they could stay together. This generous gesture  made an impression on Solomon; throughout chapter 6, he addressed Ford as “the gentleman.” The same couldn’t be said of Edwin Epps. Solomon presented him as an unrefined man who went about uttering loathsome curses. He also talked peculiarly. Here are some quotes from Epps: “You would like to change your master, eh? —Enterprising n—er!”, “Dance, you d—d n—ers!” or “You lie, you black wench!” The accused slave replied, “I don’t lie, massa. If you kill me,  I’ll stick to that.” Epps’ response was, “Oh! I’ll fetch you down… I’ll take the starch out of ye.” By comparison, Ford had a reputation for reading scripture to his slaves. Solomon says it best, “From descriptions of such men as Burch and Freeman, and others hereinafter mentioned, they are led to despise and execrate the whole class of slaveholders, indiscriminately. But I was his slave and had an opportunity of learning well his character and disposition, and it’s but simple justice to him when I say, in my opinion, there never was a more kind, noble, candid, Christian man than William Ford.” ¹Meanwhile, he says nothing praise-worthy of Edwin Epps: “He is a man in whose heart the quality of kindness or justice is not found… He could have stood unmoved and seen the tongues of his poor slaves torn out by the roots—he could have seen them burned to ashes over a slow fire or gnawed to death by dogs if it only brought him profit. Such a hard, cruel, unjust man is Edwin Epps.” ²

Another contrast can be made between Mr. Chapin and Mr. Tibeats. Similar to Epps, Tibeats was rash. Mr. Chapin was Ford’s overseer. On one occasion, Chapin gave Solomon some nails. When Tibeats saw the nails, they weren’t the size he wanted, and he exclaimed, “God d—n you!” Tibeats attempted to whip Solomon. Eventually, Mr. Chapin interceded for Solomon. This wouldn’t be the only occasion. Another time, Mr. Tibeats tried hanging Solomon. Once again, Mr. Chapin was forced to intervene. I must say, Tibeat’s actions confuse me. Why would he try to destroy his property? Slaves were very expensive. If he was dissatisfied with one of them, wouldn’t it make more sense to sell that slave? But I digress. The point is Chapin and Tibeats were the antitheses of each other. Solomon described Mr. Chapin as a “kindly-disposed man”³ and Tibeats as “quick-tempered and spiteful.”⁴ 

The last character contrast I would like to touch on is that of the slave traders Theophilus Freeman, his partner James H. Burch, and their counterpart, Mr. Bass. Freeman and Burch were slave traders. They were the ones responsible for putting Solomon into slavery. While it’s unclear if they were involved in his kidnapping, when Solomon argued that he was a freeman, Burch ignored him. He accused Solomon of lying, scourged him, and threatened to kill Solomon if he suggested that he was a freeman again. Bass was a man from Canada who had controversial opinions. On multiple occasions, he debated with plantation owners about slavery. Bass was the only abolitionist in the area. While he didn’t make efforts to help slaves obtain liberty, he believed that slavery was wrong. I take that back. It’s not entirely true that he didn’t help slaves gain their liberty. He helped one: Solomon Northup. It was Mr. Bass that sent a letter on behalf of Solomon. This letter relayed the entire account of how Solomon was kidnapped and eventually led to Solomon’s freedom. If Bass was caught before the letter made it to the North, it could’ve meant prosecution. Through the neglect to listen and a desire for profit, Burch sold Solomon into slavery. However, by selflessness and love, he was delivered by Bass. There isn’t a greater character contrast in the book than this one. 

Before concluding this essay, I’ll point out one more contrast. It’s not about a character; it’s about the entire story. At the beginning of the book, Solomon is separated from his family. He is kidnapped and sold into slavery. The end of the book is concluded with that family being reunited. He meets his daughter, who is an adult and married. He learns about his son’s wishes to save enough money to buy his freedom, and Solomon embraces his wife again. This contrast is even stronger than the Chapin-Tibeats contrast, Ford-Epps contrast, and even the Bass-Burch contrast. This one supersedes all of them. The ending contrasts with the beginning, and that’s what makes the book’s conclusion so moving. It starts with an injustice, but in the end, justice prevails.

---

(1) Twelve Years a Slave, pg. 45, (2) Twelve Years a Slave, pg. 100, (3) Twelve Years a Slave, pg. 55, Twelve Years a Slave, pg. 53.