Analysis Of Greg Grandin's The Empire Of Necessity

1185 Words3 Pages

In 1805, seal hunter Amasa Delano came across a ship call the Tryal that he mistook for a slave ship. Unknown to Delano, The slaves aboard the ship had already risen up and taken over the ship, killing the captain and most of the crew, and simply feigned slavery so as not to get caught. In author and historian Greg Grandin’s The Empire of Necessity, the slaves aboard the Tryal took part in a new era where for the first time, the tables turned, and the oppressed became the oppressors. Throughout his novel, Grandin argues that among men, there will always exist oppressors and oppressed. According to the author, every human has potential to become a slave in some way, as slavery is a necessary evil of mankind.

To write a book about history …show more content…

In The Empire of Necessity, the author takes a complicated tone that becomes all at once academic, candid, and direct. He appears to remain distant from his readers as if he simply wishes to state his business, yet occasionally he diverges into little stories or descriptions that do not follow the plot. Throughout the majority of the novel, Grandin remains factual, simply stating the background information that makes up most of the book. The main plot takes about two chapters to occur, while the rest of the book slowly builds up to the plot. In the only obvious bias of the entire book, found in the epilogue, Grandin states, “Instead, [Melville] ended his novella with Amasa consoling a dying Benito, a conclusion that I don’t think was meant to cast the American captain in a better light. I think it was Melville’s way of saying that he no longer believed that his country would, or should even try to, escape history: ‘But the past is passed; why moralize upon it?’” (272). The bias does not affect the theme of the novel, as the theme easily appears in the early chapters before reaching the author’s opinion. This bias in particular strikes me as odd considering most historical novelists do not come out and explicitly say what they think due to the interpretive nature of history. As for the readability of this book, the complexity of ideas and formal sentence structure makes it a challenging read for most students. It takes a lot of effort to keep reading because of the author’s factual tone and the slow plot

Open Document