Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.14 AVERAGE
4.14 AVERAGE
Rounded down from 3.5
His voice is as powerful, clear, and passionate as everyone says it is. There are many nuggets that either felt incredibly accurate or constituted good food for thought. His commitment to education and liberation is phenomenally impressive. However, at least half of the book is lost between his intense misogyny and apparent dislike of his family, especially his parents. He focuses more on the real stuff, his extensive critique of capitalism and nods toward prison abolition rhetoric, in the second half of the book as he starts writing his lawyer and other women that surprise him as being "intelligent," including Angela Davis. I'm sure there's a persuasive hot take out there about how focusing on the rampant sexism and intellectual elitism in his letters is reductionist, shallow feminism, etc., but I've unfortunately yet to come across it.
"...too many times, too many of us choose to live the crippled existence of the near-man, the half-man. Well, I don't care how long I live. Over this, I have no control, but I do care about what kind of life I live, and I can control this. I may not live but another five minutes, but it will be five minutes definitely on my terms."
His voice is as powerful, clear, and passionate as everyone says it is. There are many nuggets that either felt incredibly accurate or constituted good food for thought. His commitment to education and liberation is phenomenally impressive. However, at least half of the book is lost between his intense misogyny and apparent dislike of his family, especially his parents. He focuses more on the real stuff, his extensive critique of capitalism and nods toward prison abolition rhetoric, in the second half of the book as he starts writing his lawyer and other women that surprise him as being "intelligent," including Angela Davis. I'm sure there's a persuasive hot take out there about how focusing on the rampant sexism and intellectual elitism in his letters is reductionist, shallow feminism, etc., but I've unfortunately yet to come across it.
"...too many times, too many of us choose to live the crippled existence of the near-man, the half-man. Well, I don't care how long I live. Over this, I have no control, but I do care about what kind of life I live, and I can control this. I may not live but another five minutes, but it will be five minutes definitely on my terms."
George Jackson, a political prisoner, visionary, revolutionary, was focused and disciplined on self-determination. His prison letters from 1964-1970 was persistent in understanding and uncovering Amerika as a fascist, colonial state. Living in 2020 has direct parallels to the time he was writing. “No amount of action, preaching, or teaching will spark revolution if social conditions do not warrant it.” May he Rest in Power.
I think some people will read this and judge Jackson for his ‘failings’ but consider what the hell happened to him you nerds
"We die too easily. We forgive and forget too easily." - George Jackson
There are sublime moments in this book. Jackson's terse and compelling autobiography at the beginning, or his letter two days after his little brother is shot and killed. Masterpieces. Jean Genet's introduction to the original edition, placed at the end of this edition, is also compelling to read.
And the general tone of a person locked up on an indefinite sentence and constantly at the mercy of guards and parole boards -- it clarifies how hateful and racist prisons are.
Another compelling aspect was to see Jackson struggle with the conventionalities of his parents -- the cruelty of his letters to "you people" who keep sending those goddamned Christmas cards to a rebel maltheist; the tender hope that at some moments the people who have known you the longest finally understand you. The dream that your family could be your comrades (he calls his father Robert, or he calls him his brother). And then they say Be a good boy or they send him a book on St. Augustine, and Jackson is plain angry again, saying he doesn't see any use in communicating. This fraught bond with his family across politics is beautiful and awful.
But the book is impossible to read if you have the faintest trace of feminism in you. A stupid and embarrassing misogyny pervades the letters. He meets Angela Davis, and you think he's learned his lesson now, but he ruins it by sexualizing her, fantasizing about protecting her, and pontificating to her with his political analysis.
Pontification, in general, is a draw-back of the book. Jackson has had time to think and books to read. But though his analysis of the world is surely more accurate than the average persons' on the right side of the bars, he's hard to trust. Wide-ranging comments, whether about the lack of hunger in China or the herd behavior of buffalo, and are simply incorrect, grate on me.
There are sublime moments in this book. Jackson's terse and compelling autobiography at the beginning, or his letter two days after his little brother is shot and killed. Masterpieces. Jean Genet's introduction to the original edition, placed at the end of this edition, is also compelling to read.
And the general tone of a person locked up on an indefinite sentence and constantly at the mercy of guards and parole boards -- it clarifies how hateful and racist prisons are.
Another compelling aspect was to see Jackson struggle with the conventionalities of his parents -- the cruelty of his letters to "you people" who keep sending those goddamned Christmas cards to a rebel maltheist; the tender hope that at some moments the people who have known you the longest finally understand you. The dream that your family could be your comrades (he calls his father Robert, or he calls him his brother). And then they say Be a good boy or they send him a book on St. Augustine, and Jackson is plain angry again, saying he doesn't see any use in communicating. This fraught bond with his family across politics is beautiful and awful.
But the book is impossible to read if you have the faintest trace of feminism in you. A stupid and embarrassing misogyny pervades the letters. He meets Angela Davis, and you think he's learned his lesson now, but he ruins it by sexualizing her, fantasizing about protecting her, and pontificating to her with his political analysis.
Pontification, in general, is a draw-back of the book. Jackson has had time to think and books to read. But though his analysis of the world is surely more accurate than the average persons' on the right side of the bars, he's hard to trust. Wide-ranging comments, whether about the lack of hunger in China or the herd behavior of buffalo, and are simply incorrect, grate on me.
My thoughts and feelings about this book are a bit complex, and spent a while trying to think through it both to write a review and for my actual rating (3 ? 4 ?) . At the end of the day, I do think this is a very important book and that a lot of people, especially white people, who want to be more involved with and informed about prison abolition & racism in the US criminal justice system need to read this book. But at the same time, this is definitely not a starter book. It's great for an understanding of the movement(s) throughout history and to understand truly what life in a prison is a like. These letters span from 1964 to 1970, but I feel like a lot of the actual description of prison life hasn't really changed.
So why all the deliberating? As others have noted, Jackson does perpetuate a lot of heavily misogynistic concepts, particularly in the first half of the book. Also the occasional homophobic comment. In certain parts it was quite off-putting and I toyed with the idea of picking up a different book on racial justice/prison abolition instead. Now I'm actually glad that I did read through it, because the second half really shows how Jackson matured over those years and refined his ideology, and the overt misogyny was greatly reduced, especially since he began speaking with different women in the same political movements including Angela Y. Davis (wow!). It made me aware of how elongated prison sentences with individuals of a young age (he was 18 when he was originally sentenced to 1 year-life in 1960) halts their emotional understanding and growth. Especially for men already living in a patriarchal society with socialized misogynistic ideologies, not being able to interact with women except in very limited capacities and largely only that of their own families can really hinder their ability to grow as people especially those like George Jackson who was incredibly intelligent and sensitive and may have otherwise forgone the misogyny in his theories with a full life experience. (Obviously misogyny still exists in men who interact with women every day, so I hope this isn't misunderstood. But this is worsened still with men who have been incarcerated at a young age and is probably one of the many, many issues that those who do make parole have when it comes to re-entry.)
All of this however is not very straight forward and I feel like unless a person is already inclined to be thinking critically with regards to these systems of oppression, that might not be understood. Which I think is also kind of critical in just "enjoying" or perhaps, feeling as though they got something from reading this book.
However one feels about this book and George Jackson, it will give you a lot of things to think about and hopefully lead to further readings and action to fight racial injustice in your own communities.
So why all the deliberating? As others have noted, Jackson does perpetuate a lot of heavily misogynistic concepts, particularly in the first half of the book. Also the occasional homophobic comment. In certain parts it was quite off-putting and I toyed with the idea of picking up a different book on racial justice/prison abolition instead. Now I'm actually glad that I did read through it, because the second half really shows how Jackson matured over those years and refined his ideology, and the overt misogyny was greatly reduced, especially since he began speaking with different women in the same political movements including Angela Y. Davis (wow!). It made me aware of how elongated prison sentences with individuals of a young age (he was 18 when he was originally sentenced to 1 year-life in 1960) halts their emotional understanding and growth. Especially for men already living in a patriarchal society with socialized misogynistic ideologies, not being able to interact with women except in very limited capacities and largely only that of their own families can really hinder their ability to grow as people especially those like George Jackson who was incredibly intelligent and sensitive and may have otherwise forgone the misogyny in his theories with a full life experience. (Obviously misogyny still exists in men who interact with women every day, so I hope this isn't misunderstood. But this is worsened still with men who have been incarcerated at a young age and is probably one of the many, many issues that those who do make parole have when it comes to re-entry.)
All of this however is not very straight forward and I feel like unless a person is already inclined to be thinking critically with regards to these systems of oppression, that might not be understood. Which I think is also kind of critical in just "enjoying" or perhaps, feeling as though they got something from reading this book.
However one feels about this book and George Jackson, it will give you a lot of things to think about and hopefully lead to further readings and action to fight racial injustice in your own communities.