Reflections on the class: Listening to Say It Plain

The “Say it Plain” presentation was interesting… I had never listened to an “audio documentary” before and, initially, I didn’t know how to respond to its format. I’m used to hearing a particular speech with a back drop of visuals or video footage of the speaker presenting his/her speech. So, “Say it Plain” forced me to really listen without (visual)distraction to what Fannie Lou Hammer was saying as she spoke before the Credentials Committee (DNC) or what Booker T. Washington was saying in his “Atlanta Exposition,” amongst a crowd of predominately white farmers and businessmen . I was only given the magnanimity of the words in which they spoke, the powerful tone of their voices, and the audience’s impassioned response(s).
Professor and historian Barbara Savage brought up an excellent point that I had never considered: the presentation of the speech itself (not just the content of the speech but how it is performed) was a way to disprove the argument of black intellectual inferiority and, thus, “every speech [was] an opportunity to counter that argument” (Savage). I’ve always analyzed and focused on the words or message of the speech and neglected the way in which a speaker physically performs the speech and never thought about how the act of giving a speech, aside from the message, is in itself an act of resistance and agency.
I was familiar with most of the speakers, activists and leaders mentioned in the documentary and though I was familiar with them, I’m always fascinated and a bit surprised by the means in which “everyday people” challenge and resist oppressive structures of power not just to gain freedom and legal recognition for themselves but for their communities as well. I was (and still am) inspired by the voices and activism of African American women (Hammer, Bethune, and Chisholm). Chisholm’s speeches, for me, are undeniably bold and moving. She used her voice and her position of power (as an elected official) not just to challenge the white power structure and racism, but she also challenged patriarchy in all forms and criticized the black male hierarchy in the Civil Rights Movement which was a courageous act. Definitely check out, if you haven’t already, the documentary Chisholm '72: Unbossed and Unbought—it’s great!-by Mary Green

The "Say It Plain" presentation was very informative and inspiring. I already had knowledge of many of the names mentioned, but this presentation gave me a better insight on them and their speeches. In school, when learning black history, I have read books and seen movies, but I cannot honestly say that I have had the opportunity to sit and listen to many speeches. Introducing everyone with a speech was a very good tactic to give the reader a better understanding of whom and what they are listening to. Listening to their speeches and actually getting to hear their voice made the presentation more realistic and intriguing. I feel as if I now have a better understanding of their message and feeling of their emotions. I have always had a great deal of respect for those who participated in the civil rights movement, but I think that I now have even more respect for them--especially the women.
I learned a few new things. I now have knowledge of James Horton, Fannie Lou Hamer, the "Fields of the Deep South" movement, Dick Gregory, Stokely Carmichael, and Barbara Jordan, all of which I previously did not have knowledge of. I find it very cool how people such as Dick Gregory, found ways of indirectly protesting oppression. Making a joke of it brings attention to it and really demonstrates the severity of the issue with a twist of sarcasm. I really respect Fannie Lou Hamer because being an uneducated woman of Mississippi during that time and demanding rights for blacks was a very courageous and dangeorus thing. She is a very strong and brave woman. Furthermore, although her initial attempt to receive recognition as a delegate was unsuccessful, it set the precedence for her future successful recognition as a delegate. Moving along, I really liked how Booker T. Washington's 1895 speech received positive feedback and reactions from the crowd. Furthermore, I really like how he spoke. He spoke very eloquently and intelligently. I respect MArcus Garvey and his approach to the movement as well. I compare Booker T. Washington to Marcus Garvey in the same manner that I compare Martin Luther King and Malcolm X: they both shared the same positive message, just in different ways. I respect both of their approaches and positions though. I hate that Garvey had to be deported, but his voice marked his name before he left. I also hate that people such as Stokely Carmichael and others lost faith in the fight for equality. It did take quite some time, but the time was well worth it.
I don't disagree with anything from this presentation. In my opinion, there is nothing to disagree with. This presentation stated facts, and the evidence was there for us to interpret ourselves. Overall, I think that this presentation was very good and enlightening. I am now very eager to see what the rest of this course has in store for us.-by Nadalyn Criner