Mandingo
This is a scene from the 1975 movie, Mandingo which shows the slave, Mede played by Ken Norton, being sold at auction.
Frankly, I thought this was a 'goddamn' awful movie and I have only ever viewed is once or twice. Universally condemned by critics at the time, it nevertheless, proved popular with movie goers possibly because of its prurient content and the breaking of some of the social taboos of 1975.
And yet, it did serve a useful purpose in that it showed the worst aspects of chattel slavery which up until then, had been glossed over and largely overlooked by many people - that is, if they ever thought about slavery in the first place.
I can't help but compare Mandingo with earlier interpretations of black slaves in movies and novels who were portrayed as happy, cheerful, loyal and obedient in their service to their white owners. Who remembers the candy-floss portrayal of black slaves in "Gone with the Wind?"
Whilst I have seldom viewed the movie, I read Kyle Onstott's book, Mandingo - on which the movie is based - with interest and though it isn't a literary masterpiece, I believe it had a seminal influence on future writers by revealing the true nature of slavery and the attitudes of slave-holders towards their victims.
The thing I remember most about the movie is the slave-auction as shown in the attached picture. The first time I viewed this, I was impressed by the physical presence of the near naked slave, Mede - who wouldn't be - and equally unimpressed by the poor acting skills of the main players in this scene.
That is until, the lustful German widow mounted the platform and placed her hand under Mede's loincloth to feel his cock and balls. Her actions were unexpected and took me by surprise. And I always remember her heavily accented words as she manipulated the slave's genitals
"I never buy der pig in der poke!"
Her actions aroused me and I understood the shame, humiliation and degradation all slaves must have endured as they were sold at public auction.
Picture is a still from the movie, Mandingo. The text is mine.
Chris,
ReplyDeleteI like both you general judgments on the movie MANDINGO as well as your interesting observations about the different “perspectives” by which, through the years, black slaves in the Americas have been represented in literature and movies.
However I’d like to focus my comment on your last point, i.e. the episode of the German widow brutally manipulating and feeling the cock and balls of the hapless (and helpless !) Mede …… and more in general on the almost ALWAYS PRESENT (apart from rare exceptions) THOROUGH INSPECTION of the slave’s genitals, during slave-auctions.
When I discovered this “habit” that really happened in most cases of slaves’ sales in most Slave Markets …… and that is a well documented historical fact, and not just an “erotic fantasy” of some “sexual debauchee” ……. I was much younger, well before than I watched the movie “Mandingo”. And, like it happened to you with the episode of the German widow in Mandingo, this very brutal and extremely degrading act not only aroused me very much with its outstanding cruelty and sadism, but also, like for you, made me understand –even beyond any other possible episodes of cruelty and degradation in the life of a slave - all the boundless and inconceivable “shame, humiliation and degradation that all slaves must have been obliged to endure as they were sold at public auctions” (but, let me say, also in private sales).
The public feeling and inspection by perspective buyers of the slave’s genitals was really the climax of his (or her) abjection and shame ….. the loss of even the lowest and last trace of “human dignity” and the slave’s degradation to a level of an animal or even below !
(because as a Latin writer observed, neither a donkey or a horse and even less a bull would have ever passively suffered the manual inspection of their genitals without the most violent reaction and rebellion, like, on the contrary, slaves were obliged to passively suffer in the most absolute immobility !).
When I read that e.g. , in the Slave Markets of ancient Rome, the thorough inspection of the auctioned slave’s genitals by all buyers was absolutely “normal” and extremely frequent / practically always practiced, not only when the slave was openly sold for “sexual services” and as a “sex-toy” to some lascivious Master or Mistress …. which fact is, in a certain sense, fully obvious and somehow “understandable” and expected ……. but that this type of extremely brutal and degrading inspection was also NORMALLY and practically ALWAYS practiced even when the slave was primarily sold for other scopes, e.g. as a robust “burden-beast” for farm labors, or as a gladiator or as a litter-bearer etc.etc. ……. I remember that I felt somehow even more “shocked” and aroused by the unexpectedly boundless cruelty and humiliation this extremely brutal act.
Karel
(CONTINUES BELOW)
(CONTINUES FROM ABOVE)
ReplyDeleteOn the contrary, in the perspective of buyers and possible future Masters, the complete examination of the WHOLE body of the slave was obviously indispensable for checking the absence of diseases and of physical “defects”. And the thorough checking of the absence of diseases and “defects” also in the genital apparatus of the slave was one of the most essential and important, even when the slave was not sold and bought for a sexual scope. To prove the practical essential importance of such check in a slave-based society, even when a young slave was not primarily bought as a “sex-toy“, it would be sufficient to mention for example the fundamental economic and social weight that e.g. in ancient Rome had the breeding of slaves …… the forced generation of many new little slaves of “high quality” by the coerced mating (exactly like for cattle !) of the strongest and cutest males with the most beautiful and healthiest females, a breeding activity that was the source of huge profits for many big Roman owners of slaves.
Therefore the most accurate and intimate inspection of the slave’s genitals was in the great majority of cases, not only fully “normal” but even more indispensable.
These extremely degrading and brutal examinations were done both on male and female slaves. But, for obvious reasons, the ones on males were even more “invasive” and “aggressive”, even more deeply humiliating and shameful.
If we trust e.g. Roman satiric poets, such degrading inspections on the genital apparatuses of young male slaves displayed on auction-blocks, were done – with their own hands, without any “modesty”, embarrassment or shame- not only by male buyers but also by most Roman Matrons and Ladies … and in many cases they were not limited to the feeling and inspection of the penis’ dimensions and look or to the checking and hefting of the mass, size and weight of the slave’s testicles.
In various cases, it seems that some perspective buyers demanded that the male slave was aroused to a full and hard erection, for checking (at least this was the “justification”) that he was sexually potent; and this arousal to a full erection was done by another young slave of the merchant, or in some cases, the client himself (or herself) demanded to do this personally with his (or her) own hands.
And, at least if we believe a passage of the Latin poet Persius, in a few cases some particularly lewd clients even demanded that the slave was masturbated in front of them until a full ejaculation ……. a practice that was of course disliked and opposed (when possible) by slave-traders for obvious reasons …… with the excuse of “checking” the “sperm’s quality” of the slave and his ability to mate and generate.
Yes, Chris, nothing was more shameful, humiliating and degrading than this ….. and nothing was more sadistic that these moments in the auction of all slaves !
Karel