Brazilian and North American Slavery Propagandas: Some Thoughts on Difference

Marcus Wood. The Oxford Handbook of Propaganda Studies. Editor: Jonathan Auerbach & Russ Castronovo. December 2013.

In 1886, the height of the popular abolitionist movement in São Paulo, Brazil, the sufferings of the slave were articulated in the form of a complicated popular improvised ritual. Antonio Bento, a solipsistic abolitionist propagandist of genius, a mystic, and the self-styled “fantasm of abolition,” combined the objects of slave torture, the representation of the crucifixion, the religious enthusiasm and sentimentality of the Paulista crowd, and more than a hint of Afro-Brazilian syncretism to produce a propagandistic gallimaufry that highlights exactly how different Brazilian slavery propaganda could be from that of the Anglo-American tradition. A slave, who had recently been tortured almost to death, wrapped in chains, and wearing a punishment collar, staggered at the head of a mass procession through the center of the then-expanding but still relatively small coffee town of São Paulo. The chained slave moved forward before a vast and peculiarly decorated chariot on which stood Bento in the religious costume he had designed for himself. The scene was witnessed by the abolitionist Antônio Manoel Bueno de Andrade, who left the following account:

Between the platforms of the saints, suspended on long staffs, appeared instruments of torture; iron collars, chains, yokes, whips, etc. In front, beneath the livid image of Christ crucified, walked the unfortunate slave, numb and tottering. Never have I attended such a sad and suggestive ceremony. The impression on the city was profound! The police did not dare to impede the march of the popular mass. The multitude followed silently. All felt deeply moved except the unfortunate martyred black man, who was maddened by his pain.

There could be no more explicit propagandistic fusion of the suffering of the slave, with the suffering of Christ and his martyrlogical followers. The integration is spatially precise: between each statue of a saint, an object that has been used to torture a slave, is suspended. Directly in front of the crucified Christ walks a living, suffering slave. Bento’s process is locked within a variety of performative codes that include the Catholic Church’s ritual, the street theater of carnival, and the complicated symbolic fusions that energize Afro-Brazilian syncretic cults. Supposedly the exhibition “cooled the moral  force of the angriest slave holders” and led people to open their homes en masse to the fugitive slaves fleeing the coffee plantations.

Why this performance might have had such power relates to a number of issues,  some of them peculiar to Brazil, but some of them with wider implications for the propagandistic appropriation of slavery. Brazilian abolition drew, in unexampled ways, on  the performative and exhibitionistic elements within Brazilian culture. Religion, theater, and carnival formed the ritualistic focae of Bento’s procession because they formed  the ritualistic focae of the people; in Brazil propaganda emerges as the bedfellow of  fetishism. The intensely fetishistic relationship between Catholic martyrological art,  and the suffering of the slave, had been spectacularly exploited in the sadomasochistic  religious art of the Luso Brazilian Baroque, and in the work of the black slave sculptors Aleijadihho and Francisco Xavier Chagas in particular. The fetishistic focus on the  physical brutalization of the slave body continued to saturate the popular processions  and performances of the abolitionists. Not only Bento but other abolitionist showmen,  most notably Jose do Patrocinio, developed a theater of fetishistic cruelty around the  celebration of the abused slave body. These focae also provide a Brazilian solution to the  problem of how to humanize the objects of torture, the tools of the torturers. For Bento,  the Church was central to this process; he hung the sacristy of the Church of his order,  the Igreja do Nostra Senhora de los Remedios, with objects of slave torture brought in  from the plantations. Yet his religious organization and his procession are also developed out of the sorts of narrative and symbolic elisions, which the Catholic Church had  been working with for centuries. Bento’s essentially Brazilian fusion of objects, artistic  representations of victims, and exhibition of living slave victims came out of a culture  that combined performance, exhibitionism, parody, and sincerity in a manner that was  not echoed in either English or North American abolition propaganda. The historiography of Brazilian abolition has habitually attempted to read Brazilian slavery propaganda in terms of how it mirrors the basic structures of preceding Anglo American  traditions. Frequently, revisionist approaches have had a distorting effect on the construction of Brazilian propaganda techniques. The role of printed texts in particular has  been overplayed at the expense of a serious confrontation with the role of popular performative elements and the development of an explicitly Brazilian cultural symbology  and mythography.

It is important to stress how different the organizational and symbolic operations of  Brazilian abolition propaganda were, particularly in their preparedness to draw on Afro  Brazilian cultural narratives and syncretic religions and on the extreme emotionalism  of a variety of performative elements within Brazilian popular cultures. Above all, the energized unrespectability of much Brazilian abolition propaganda performance possesses a very different timbre from any Anglo American precursors. Brazilian abolition also embraced a variegated social mix, which, in its range, differed from that of  American abolition in that abolitionist leaders, most spectacularly Bento, Gama and  Patrocinio, drew their supporters from every level of society. These men were prepared  to use the skills of miracle painters, votive sculptors, balladeers, and various types of  merchant and street salesmen to get their message across. Bento famously converted a  leading tobacco merchant to his Caiphazes order, who then marketed his cigars in abolitionist packaging. Whereas North American abolitionist societies were carefully policed  and obsessed particularly that slaves and ex-slaves did not puncture their respectable  public façade, Brazilian abolitionists of Bento’s ilk operated chaotically and even hysterically, drawing on popular superstition, fiction, and religion for their symbols and performance styles. The spectacular performative antics of Henry Box Brown, which raised  so many eyebrows in East Coast America, and caused so much consternation within  abolition circles in England, would not have appeared extreme in São Paulo in the 1870s  or 1880s and would have been enthusiastically embraced by Bento or Patrocinio.

Brazil/America/Slavery/Propaganda

Brazil and North America constituted the two biggest, most powerful, and most  long-lived Atlantic slave systems. Both systems generated extensive and powerful bodies of propaganda, some of it defending slavery, most of it attacking the institutions of  Atlantic slavery from a variety of abolitionist perspectives. These archives of visual propaganda have, on the one hand, a lot in common, but on the other they have a good deal  that is completely distinctive. The following discussion attempts to think through some  of the things that separate Brazilian slavery propagandas from the related propagandas  of North America, by focusing on the most significant of the mass disseminated visual  propaganda of the period, namely nineteenth-century graphic satire.

There are, of course, fundamental social and cultural differences in the way slavery  and abolition operated in Brazil and North America, and these might be seen to account  for many aspects of the very different slavery propagandas that emerged. Although, as  will become apparent, I am not trying to provide a historical survey of the American  and Brazilian slavery propagandas, it may be useful at the outset to block in some of  the most significant differences between the two inheritances in order to explain why  Brazilian propagandistic responses to slavery are in so many ways unique. First, there  was no North/South slavery divide in Brazil, let alone the kind of colossal separation  of slaveholders from non-slaveholders that occurred in America over the course of the  eighteenth century. The intense and conflicting responses to key slavery legislation, and  the propagandas they generated in the run-up to the Civil War, emphasize the stark  divisions that had developed in North America between slave and nonslave states by  the mid-nineteenth century. No such clean divide existed within the Brazilian slave diaspora. The debates and explosive visual propaganda generated in the North over  the Kansas-Nebraska act, the Dred Scott decision, and, finally and most violently, the  Fugitive Slave Law find no equivalent in Brazil at any time. Brazil introduced successive waves of legislation (most significantly the “Law of the Free Womb” in 1871 and  the “Law of the Sixty-Five Year Olds,” 1885) that were theoretically supposed to inaugurate nationwide moves toward emancipation. Yet response to these limited and compromised legal maneuvers was never geographically polarized between free and slave  states. In Brazil, all states were slave states and Brazilian slavery was not based on a color  line. The long-established and thorough sexual miscibility of the Brazilian population,  which from the earliest times had involved the interbreeding of Portuguese with blacks  and with indigenous Indians, and the existence of slave systems across every area of the  country, and through virtually every form of labor, meant that Brazil was fundamentally,  and one might even say conceptually, different from America in its slavery inheritance.

Second, essential differences between the Brazilian and American slave legacies,  which directly inflected how and why visual propaganda was produced, relate, as the  opening example powerfully indicates, to religion. Religion was of course a vital force  in both slave systems in terms of establishing the form and content of much of the visual  arts of slavery, yet it functioned very differently within the two societies. There was, for  a start, no mainstream connection between abolition and the Church in Brazil. Brazil  had no significant evangelical abolitionists; it was a Catholic nation and, as was demonstrated so furiously in the political writings of such abolition luminaries as Joaquim  Nabuco, Andre Rebouças, and Antonio Bento, and, as we shall see in the print satires of  Angelo Agostini, the Catholic Church was not merely complicit in slavery but was completely embedded in the formation and continuation of the authority of the slave power.  Also Brazil had no tradition of literate runaway slaves who could contribute narratives,  lecture and perform on the abolition circuit, or indeed produce any mainstream propaganda materials that helped the cause of abolition. There are some spectacular exceptions to this generalization; Luis Gama is probably the most notable. He was, in formal  terms, an intensely experimental propagandist, and in his Primeiras Trovas Burlescas  used popular verse forms and the rhetoric of the law to devastating effect. Certainly the  physical manifestations of slave resistance finally embodied in mass exodus from the  coffee plantations became increasingly significant in hastening the official abolition of  slavery. Yet Brazilian slavery, when compared to North America, did not generate a slave  narrative tradition, and I shall be discussing some of the propagandistic implications of  this fact later on.

Third—and most crucially—Brazil did not have the same broad-based propagandistic dependency on the printed word, whether in the form of newspapers, satiric prints,  novels, or poetry, that North America did. This priority of the visual over the printed  word was partly owing to the technological lack of development and the low levels of literacy in Brazil in the second half of the nineteenth century. Yet it was also a result of the  endemic popularity of distinctive oral, politico-religious, and performative traditions.  Popular print culture in Brazil had an intensely visual base. Even in the late nineteenth  century, there was still a vibrant tradition of illustrated ballad and broadside literature, forms that had long died out in Europe and North America. The mass-produced “cordel”  literature that was endemic in urban centers of the North East constituted what was  basically the survival of a chapbook tradition that had always been intensely politicized.  The small primitive pamphlets, folded out of a single large sheet, crudely sewn up with  a single string, and carrying striking and often hand-colored woodcut illustrations and  texts composed in popular ballad forms, had been a staple of entertainment for the poor  since the early eighteenth century. Cordel literature, which remains popular to this day  in Bahia and Pernambuco, recycled ancient folk tales, tales of miracles and martyrdom,  sex scandals, and murders and celebrated contemporary criminals, especially famous  bandits and malandros. Abolitionists saw the potential of the cordel form and harnessed  this vibrant visual medium to bring notorious cases of slave abuse before the public in  the 1870s and 1880s, and to advertise as latter-day saints abolition celebrities including  Castro Alves, Andre Rebouças, and Joaquim Nabuco. Indeed abolition leaders had their  images marketed in various ingenious ways, which incorporated propaganda and emergent cutting-edge forms of product advertising. Nabuco was featured on the packaging of numerous brands of beer and cigars that had been named after him.  Here, for example, he appears, advertising a new brand of cigar, the ingeniously coined  “Nabuquistas,” and flanked and simultaneously displayed by two sexy topless blonds, on  a Fabrica Susana cigar packet sold in Pernambuco in the 1870s. The back of the pack carried a rampant lion symbolizing “Liberdade” or “Liberty” for the slaves. An enormous  variety and volume of such abolition product advertising has survived in the Fundação Joaquim Nabuco, and it testifies to the fact that this was a carefully orchestrated and  genuinely popular wing of abolition publicity in the North East of Brazil.

Brazilian illustrated periodical literature, as will become apparent in the following discussion of the print milieu in which Angelo Agostini operated, also allowed woodcut and  lithographic imagery to dominate in a manner that clearly indicated that it could cater to  a semiliterate or even illiterate audience. The richly illustrated periodical literature that  came out in the provincial areas of Recife and Bahia incorporated remarkably crude yet  polemically forceful lithographic prints. The radical Bahian abolition periodical A Faisca (The Spark) contained spectacular whole-sheet prints that frequently required no accompanying text in order to be understood and that often drew on local flora, fauna, and social  customs to make their satiric points. A typical example would be the following: a fantastic  assault on the literal slothfulness of Brazilian abolition legislation. This untitled front-page lithograph from 1886 showed a giant three-toed sloth, with a white man’s  face, awkwardly signing the “Cartas de Liberdade,” or emancipation papers, of Brazil’s  slaves. The satiric argument is made with striking economy by incorporating a particularly  symbolically charged creature from Brazil’s rain forests and jungle. Brazil possessed musical and theatrical popular cultures that allowed political messages to be spread among the  people without the aid of the printing press. Castro Alves first reached a mass audience  as “the poet of the slaves” not through printed editions of his work but through recitals to  mass crowds in theaters in Salvador and Rio de Janeiro. Theater, carnival, and the survival  and development of communal African-evolved religious, ceremonial, and dance forms  led to a plethora of performance environments that allowed the cultural inheritance of  slavery to be explored in unique ways. Conversely, Brazilian abolition publication was  primarily a white patriarchal affair, and, compared to North America, had virtually no  textual input from slaves and ex-slaves. Closely related to the issue of patriarchal dominance, women did not constitute a major element within the slavery debates of Brazil  as they did in the Northern states of America. Again there are some minor exceptions,  but it is fair to say that Brazil generated no female propagandistic phenomena equivalent  to Harriet Beecher Stowe, Lydia Maria Child, or the Grimké sisters, let alone Sojourner  Truth, Harriet Tubman, or Ellen Watkins Harper. A radical but small-scale female literary movement did develop around abolition at a relatively late stage up in Pernambuco, centerd on Recife. There was also the ecstatic eulogizing of Princess Isabel as the female  “saviour of the slaves” when she signed the Golden Law in 1888. In reality, Isabel was a  magnificent propagandistic icon, a bejeweled smoke screen that finally served to cover up  the otherwise almost-wholesale exclusion of Brazilian women from the abolition movement. There was in truth no mainstream or lasting contribution by women across Brazil’s  urban centers to the propagandas of antislavery. The reason for this lack can be debated,  but it basically came out of the manner in which a remarkably dominant patriarchy saw  to it that, even in the higher classes, Brazilian women were kept uneducated, passive, and  subservient. Clearly when a slave system and the oppositional cultures it generates are so  fundamentally different from those of Europe and North America, as were those of Brazil,  then the form and content of the slavery propagandas that were generated are bound to be  substantially different as well.

When thinking about what separates both the archives and the legacies of visual slavery propagandas in Brazil and North America, the importance of graphic print satire  holds a central place. What concerns me in the remainder of this meditation is the extent  to which the bodies of material to come out of North America and Brazil give insights  into the distinctive manner in which each of the great surviving slave powers of the second half of the nineteenth century saw themselves through the ironic and violent lenses of satiric graphic propagandas. Each slave power imaginatively engaged through prints  with the slave body, slave abuse, slave masters, and abolition, but their modes of engagement differed in many vital essentials. The United States and Brazil both generated a  mass of printed material, in the form of engravings on copper and wood, etchings, and,  from the 1840s onward, lithographs and photographs that confronted slavery and abolition from many unpredictable positions. The two bodies of work, although they share  some common elements, sources, and devices, particularly when they take the form of  abolition propaganda, finally emerge as quite radically incomparable with each other.  Whereas American and Brazilian prints are both ultimately developed out of European,  and particularly British, graphic, iconographic, and linguistic models, which go back a  very long way, what they do with their shared inheritance is strikingly individual. Both  the substance and the implications of these differences form the central theme in the  remainder of this analysis. As I will be arguing, it was the ability of the Brazilian prints to  get under the skin of slavery and to explore the intimate sides of the social life of slaves  and masters, and their preparedness to incorporate aesthetic qualities drawn from the  new reproductive technologies of photography, which made their work new.

Within Britain, the basic languages of mass-produced graphic satire, rooted in caricature, parody, animalization, infantilization, sexuality, and scatology, had been developed with unique energy and imagination during what is referred to by art historians as  “the Golden age of print satire.” This “age” came to maturity during the American War  of Independence and ended in the early 1820s. The etchings of James Gillray, Thomas  Rowlandson, Robert Newton, and the three Cruikshanks, Isaac, Robert and George,  were mass produced, avidly consumed across a surprisingly wide social range, and  exerted a lasting impact on how processes of empire and enslavement would be popularly imagined, first in Europe and then in the Americas. These artists and their followers developed methods of social commentary and critique, and evolved graphic devices  to encode gender, nation, race, and violence, which had lasting implications and practical effects on how slavery was to be imagined in the print propagandas of the Americas.  Neither North America nor Brazil had really developed a domestic visual print market by the time the work of the English masters had come and gone. Yet in the ensuing  decades of the nineteenth century, as the production of pro- and antislavery propagandas in both countries became an increasingly big issue, when slavery and slaves were  taken up in political prints, they were subjects that had already been experimented  with, in mass-produced and highly complicated visual propagandas, since the 1780s in  Britain, and to a lesser extent in France. Whereas North American nineteenth-century  satiric visual propaganda looked to the formal functionalism and imaginative surreal  extremity of the British single-sheet etching tradition, Brazilian print satire and the  work of Angelo Agostini in particular looked also to France. The pervading influence  of French culture and art on the intellectual elite of Brazil, especially in the wake of the  Francophilia exhibited by the emigrant court of the Portuguese king Dom João VI in  the early nineteenth century, led to caricature in Brazil from the 1830–1860 period  being increasingly inflected by French models and, in the area of stone lithography, by  Daumier in particular. Because of the intimate links between Britain and the emerging American nation, the impact of English styles of print satire had been strong at the time of the Revolutionary War and it endured. In fact, British print propagandas during  the Revolutionary War were largely sympathetic to the grievances and activities of the  colonists; the Americans were seen as bullied victims, if not persecuted martyrs. British  graphic satire had a tradition of defending the underdog and ridiculing authority, and,  as the War developed, the hypocrisies and confusion of British politicians, and the blundering of the military in an unpopular and badly managed colonial war, became familiar  subjects. It was at this point also that African Americans first tentatively entered the  graphic satire of the Americas. As abolition became an established political subject from  the 1830s onward, American print satirists increasingly conducted a dialogue with earlier English prints focused on the representation of liberty and of the black slave body.  Although the prints produced in the last two decades of American slavery, and generated mainly out of the North, were produced in the new reproductive form of lithographs, they looked back in their content and methods to this Old World body of work.

Unlike Brazil, North America did not throw up any prolific graphic or social satirists of genius. North America harbored and nurtured no equivalent to either Angelo  Agostini or Jean Baptiste Debret. There is no body of focused high-quality graphics by  outstanding visual artists, anchored in the subtle analysis of the political architectures  or the social intimacies, generated under the slavery systems of the United States. In  place of such a tradition, North America features a technically shifting and formally  unstable propagandistic archive. The vast majority of the prints were produced in the  Northern states and stretch over a period of almost exactly a century, although it is not  until the second decade of the nineteenth century that a large volume of prints devoted  exclusively to the subject of blacks, enslavement, and liberty starts to appear. All this  work comes at the subject of slavery through a set of political agendas and ideological  filters that reflect political and social biases, which are inflected primarily by the relation of the North to the South. Almost always, the slave appears as a stereotypical and  frequently as an abstracted entity, as a political ingredient within the larger mix of the  metaphorics of political dispute created by the increasingly divided antebellum Union.  Viewed as a whole, American graphic satire up to 1865 treats the black body according to a set of rather brutal and coarse codes. As an entity within these visual propagandas, black males and females emerge as inevitably ideologically passive, physically  comic and grotesque, sexually libidinous, and as not only problematic but as basically  a problem or conundrum, to which the hard-put North must evolve solutions. These  slaves exist in an imagined world of exaggerated Southern bestiality and barbarism.  For the most part, the slave body seems to be envisioned merely as a catalyst to enable  Northern fantasies, which demonize the Southern slave power, in all its depravity and  aristocratic pretension.

Diminution and marginalization are the typical elements used to encode the slave  body in the majority of slave satires, where the “peculiar institution” appears as a phenomenon that the Northern free states must be forced to absorb. There are countless  examples that approach the slave body in this context, and there is only space here to  give one detailed example. The idea that the slaves, as a physical reality, constituted  an unwelcome food source that must be forcibly consumed by the North, became a popular metaphor. The concept was taken to its propagandistic limit in the violent and  disturbing extremity of Forcing Slavery Down the Throat of a Freesoiler. Here, it is the debates over the Kansas-Nebraska Act that provide the basis for the satire.  The leading Democrats, President Franklin Pierce and Senator Stephen Douglas, are  presented as tiny figures who attempt to ram an equally diminutive black slave into the  open mouth of the giant head of a “Freesoiler” (the term used to describe settlers in the  new territories who opposed slavery’s extension). As is usual in the American political prints concerning slavery, caricature is not egalitarian but operates selectively. The  white politicians are all recognizable representations of leading Democrats, whereas the  “Freesoiler” and the slave are anonymous stereotypes. The scene of force feeding has a  horrifying realism about it, which is paradoxically emphasized by the way it draws in  destabilizing fantastic elements.

The dramatic situation alludes directly back to that urtext of propagandistic infantilization, the first book of Gulliver’s Travels. When Gulliver first washes up on the beach  in Lilliput, he awakes to find himself bound down, top to toe, by the Lilliputians. Even  his hair has been fastened down, and as he lies prone, the little people lade food and  drink into his colossal maw. Here the giant Gulliver/Freesoiler has his head violently  held back by Lewis Cass and James Buchanan, each tugging down on two thick locks  of the giant’s hair. The back of his head rests against raised wooden planks labeled  “Democratic Platform,” while each plank carries an inscription of a new territory that the Democrats supposedly have their eye on for extending American slavery. Not content with “Kansas” they appear intent on moving into Spanish “Cuba,” and in the wake  of the Mexican War the whole of “Central America.” The narrative and emotional crux  of the print centers on the equally horrified and agonized responses of the black slave and the Freesoiler to the process of oral rape in which they are mutually involved. A brilliantly ambiguous speech bubble is placed at the center of the print. It is impossible to  tell whether the speech emanates from the mouth of the Freesoiler or from the slave who  is about to dive down his throat. The bubble reads “MURDER!!! Help—neighbors help.  O my poor Wife and Children.” The implication is that the process of forcing the black  slaves into the free territories is going to be ruinous for both the new settlers and the  slaves alike and that it will result in the destruction of both parties and by implication the  slave power as well. The violence of the scene metaphorically essentializes the very real  atrocities carried out in Kansas by proslavery factions, although, in fairness, antislavery  activists, most famously John Brown and his followers, also notoriously contributed to  the barbarism. As far as the representation of the slave body is concerned, however, this  print manages to combine just about every element that typifies the propagandistic construction of blackness. The slave is disempowered, passive, consumable, undesirable,  and irreducibly comic in its suffering. Black agency is utterly absent. Yet this brutal construction of the slave body as a useful ingredient within an objectifying body of political  satires should be set off against other elements within the American graphic archive of  slavery. The visual propaganda created in and around the slave narratives treat the black  body in more complex and sympathetic ways, which find no echo in Brazil.

The most spectacular chasm that differentiates the American and Brazilian slavery  propaganda archives is the visual content of the slave narratives, and their accompanying marketing materials within newspapers and emergent print cultures generally. It  is almost unbelievable, but true, that Brazil produced absolutely no slave narratives as  such. There is only one surviving published text that has a claim, and not a very good  claim, to be considered a Brazilian slave narrative, namely the Biography of Mahommah  G. Baquaqua, a Native of Zoogoo, in the Interior of Africa, printed in Detroit, Michigan, in 1854. The slave narratives not only constituted a textual space that allowed the slave  a unique opportunity for testimony, confession, and self-expression, but the narratives as a whole also developed an equally charged and varied set of propagandistic  graphic modes for celebrating the individuality and imaginative life of escaped slaves. Although there is not space to look at the sophisticated operations of visual propaganda  within the American slave narratives here, they should be registered as important in  the present context because of the manner in which they incorporated a great variety of  graphic elements that exist in contrast to, and in dialogue with, graphic satire focused  on the slave body. In other words, U.S. slave narratives generated a largely positive and  unironic visual propaganda celebrating black agency and self-empowerment. Crucially,  the ex-slave authors themselves often became centrally involved in their own imagistic marketing. Frederick Douglass and Sojourner Truth are probably the most remarkable operators in this context, yet numerous other ex-slaves including William Wells  Brown, Henry “Box” Brown, and William and Ellen Craft also used visual propaganda to construct sophisticated and evolving self images. Brazil possessed no equivalent to  the body of visual material generated in and around the slave narratives. It will, however, be argued below that the development of antislavery satire within the sophisticated  medium of the emergent illustrated periodical market of the late nineteenth century  provided another set of options. Brazilian mass-produced graphic imagery and visual  propaganda, in fact, managed to humanize the slave body in unprecedented ways. The later works of Agostini in particular show how lithography was capable of melding  the new realist visual codes emanating from photography into the older conventions of  graphic print satire. The result was a wholly new kind of print, which achieved the seemingly impossible by throwing pure old-fashioned symbolism up against the unflinching  and unblinking gaze of the camera lens. In the late work of Agostini, action photography  and the emblem book are brought into a remarkable visual intercourse, and the result is  one of the most forceful manifestations of visual satiric propaganda ever to have come  out of Atlantic slavery.

The graphic culture of Brazil is substantially different in many vital ways from that of  the American traditions, which were briefly summarized in the first part of this discussion. It is a generalization, but a true one, to assert that both the English and American  abolition audiences and the graphic propagandists who serviced them did not look too  closely into the intimate domestic existence that slavery enforced on everyone living  within the system. Angelo Agostini was centrally engaged with finding ways of articulating intimate relationships. Consequently, he and the print satirists working around  him in Rio often made work that stands in stark relation to the Anglo-American tradition of graphic satires on slavery. As we have seen, the American prints were increasingly inflected by a tendency to abstraction and by a crude Negrophobia that has few  visual analogues in Brazil. In short, the Anglo-American graphic traditions have  notable limitations when set against the graphic propagandas coming out of Brazil from  1860 to 1888. English and North American print satires on slavery right through the  period 1807–1865 remained largely closed to the domestic world of psycho-sexual turmoil generated in the human interchanges initiated by slavery. It was as if this space  was too dark, too conflicted, and just too hard to take into the realm of popular propaganda. Brazilian graphic propaganda did not sheer away from confronting the knowing  racial propinquities generated by Brazilian slavery systems, and these intimate elements  are most fully anatomized in the work of Agostini. Gilberto Freyre, when surveying the  eroticized power politics of Brazilian slavery, famously asserted that “there is no slavery  without sexual depravity.”

I want to end this discussion by thinking about the complexities of Brazilian visual  propaganda focused on the slave body when violence and depravity are the main subjects. Angelo Agostini is the most crucial of propagandists in this context. He saw slavery  as generating a language of sexual and sadistic compromise. What is fascinating about  Agostini’s work is that, although it flooded the drawing rooms, taverns, market squares,  and coffee houses of nineteenth-century Rio, it demands that the viewer go beyond the  facile and commonly Manichean extremities on which Anglo-American liberation fantasies are based. At his best, Agostini produces a subtle sociopolitical propaganda that is locked into a critique that suggests that freedom may not be easily expressed or attained  within slave societies by anyone either before or after legally encoded acts of liberation.  Agostini’s work shares with Joaquim Nabuco’s Abolicionism (the most influential and  brilliant propaganda tract generated by Brazilian abolition) a central concern with the  possibility that the effects of slavery may be something that perpetually contaminate  the societies and populations they dominated and saturated.16 Emancipation proclamations do not destroy underlying social patterns that continue to condition the outlook  of ex-slaves and ex-slaveholders alike. With Agostini, we are taken back to Joaquim  Nabuco’s terrible formulation that under slavery: “nada é prohibito,” that is, nothing is  prohibited … As a rule the master can do anything.”

Angelo Agostini—the Brazilian Daumier: Print Satire as a Propaganda on the Peripheries of Photorealism

Agostini was the preeminent visual propagandist working in Brazil during the latter  stages of Brazilian slavery. I take a deep breath before writing this, but I think he was  arguably the greatest visual propagandist in the world in the second half of the nineteenth century. Born in Italy in 1843, a Piedmontese, and educated significantly in  France, which was producing the most extreme graphic satire in Europe from the 1840s  through to the period of the Paris Commune, Agostini arrived in Brazil in 1859. By this  period, Rio had a flourishing lithographic print trade; there were no fewer than thirty  registered lithographic presses in the capital in 1855. Lithographers were producing  illustrated technical manuals, prints for the burgeoning foreign tourist market, and  illustrated periodicals of different sorts, although, unlike North America, there was a  restricted market for political satire until the 1870s. With political caricature still very  much in its infancy, Agostini started out in the then quite provincial setting of São Paulo,  working on a variety of journals including Diabo Coxo and O Cabrião. The work he did  at this time was rather whimsical light-weight social satire, and he had not developed  the fierce commitment to black rights and the plight of the Indians that is so evident in  the later work. He moved to Rio in the late 1860s and reached his mature style during the  Great War with Paraguay in 1870. Rio in the 1870s saw political satire come alive in the  illustrated periodical journals. Agostini suddenly found himself surrounded by a host of  other graphic propagandists, including Candido Aragonez de Faria, Ernesto Augusto de  Souza e Silva e Rio (who fortunately worked under the sobriquet of Flumen Junius), João  Pinheiro Guimarães, Pereira Netto, and the Portuguese Pinheiro Bordello, a remarkably assured draftsman. A host of more hard-hitting politically satiric journals sprang  up of which the most significant were Mephistopheles, O Mequetrefe, and O Mosquito.  It was also during this period that Agostini began to produce powerful prints attacking  the slave power and the Monarchy’s and the Church’s role in supporting slavery, while defending the slaves from physical abuses. Yet not all Agostini’s prints approach slavery  in a direct political manner. One of the distinguishing features of Agostini as a satirist  of the Brazilian slave systems lies in the subtlety and range of the social analysis. He  is prepared to get into unsettling situations and into strangely suspended areas where  sexuality, authority, the family, and the power relations of slavery within urban domestic  settings are interrogated at many levels.

Agostini could do things with slavery, memory, and intimacy that are, quite simply,  unexampled within the visual archive of Atlantic slavery. Agostini’s experimentation  comes across as all the more astonishing when it is remembered that he was working  within an environment for the visual arts that was stiflingly conservative and politically  unadventurous. Outside the crude lithographic albums of slave types popularized by the  tourist print trade, and dominated by the productions of Frederico Guilherme Briggs  and his imitators, there was very little interest in producing art focused on slavery. With  regard to printmaking, the popular market was dominated by formally conservative and  technically backward-looking wood engravers. In the area of academic oil painting,  all the major figures were extreme Europhiles producing dull and derivative narrative  history paintings. The two most influential painters in the grand tradition Vito Mireiles  and Pedro Américo spent long spells during the 1850–1870 period in Paris, and were  desperate to be exhibited at the Salon. They both produced work aimed fawningly at  the Parisian cultural elite, histrionic neoclassical narrative paintings romanticizing the  myths of emergent nationhood. This stuff is indisputably visual propaganda, but it is  also watered-down nationalistic pap. The most popular and widely disseminated of  the late nineteenth-century academic painters was José Ferraz de Almeida Júnior, yet,  although he incorporated the black body into his work as an element of exotic primitivism, his subjects were constructed as nostalgic and picturesque props.

Agostini worked in a place and at a time riven with contradictions that resulted from  the manner in which incipient urban capitalism was thrown up against the survival of  a slavery system with veritably medieval social structures. Agostini produced thousands of lithographs on stone for mainstream illustrated periodicals creating social and  political satiric art across a wide range of issues. Throughout the 1870s and 1880s the  abuses of slavery and its abolition became subjects he increasingly concentrated on.  Agostini was living in a metropolitan center full of English engineers, designers, and  businessmen intent on profiting from Brazil’s sudden incorporation into the industrialized world. It was an environment in which slave labor existed hand in hand with the  development of new technologies including gas light and steam power. At this time Rio had more operative photographic studios than any city in the world with the exception  of London. Although Agostini incorporated the modern developments into the subject  matter of his work, he was also trying to produce print satires in a traditional medium  that dealt with ancient social abuses. To further complicate his satiric purposes, this  Italian émigré was producing large whole- and double-page ambitious political satires  at a time when the print satire of Europe had entered a period of decline if not decrepitude. Serious political satire and allegory had long since given way to the whimsy and  trivial cartoons of the bourgeois illustrated periodicals typified by Punch and Charivari, a kind of art that had foregone any serious claim to be deemed political propaganda. In  their compositional complexity and metaphorical ambitions, many of Agostini’s prints,  in fact, resonate with much earlier forms of powerful political graphic propaganda. His  most successful prints are best compared with the work produced by James Gillray and  Francisco Goya at the height of the great period of Romantic print satire in England and  Spain, well over a half-century earlier.

Agostini’s final reputation as a visual propagandist rests on the work he did for two  journals, O Mequetrefe [The Good for Nothing] and the more dominant and widely circulated Revista Illustrada [The Illustrated Journal]. The latter was the flagship for visual  arts satire attacking social abuses, but what was quite new and brilliant about Agostini’s  work was the manner in which he could take what looked like whimsical social satire into dynamic and terrifying new propagandistic terrain. I have only space for two  examples and will start off with a brief consideration of the terrific print S. Sebastião de  Actualidade Quantas Facidinhas! Pobres Papais! (St. Sebastian in Reality. What a lot of  little spongers! Poor fathers!). This is an explosive example of how an apparently apolitical, seasonal, and social satire could operate as a mask for something much  more unsettling, and I would argue quintessentially Brazilian.

The print shows a thick-set, middle-aged, smiling, affluent white father, standing in  a smoking cap and jacket, with his hands tied behind his back, in front of the family Christmas tree. He bends at the knees, slouching, his stomach is pushed out and he  grins, his expression contains both inanity and unease. Before him the assembled family, consisting of four house slaves, seven white children, and a white wife, launch an  assortment of lethal long knives at his body, converting him into the ironic parodic  Saint of the title. He has already been penetrated by nine blades, which are stuck into his  abdomen from just above his thighs to just below his rib cage, forming an arc. The scene  takes place in a disconcertingly modern domestic space, a spacious drawing room with  a mirror and paintings on the walls, illuminated by elaborate gas lamps. The immediate satiric message is clear, the father is being financially bled dry by his wife, children,  and dependent slaves, all of whom expect Christmas presents. The print in one sense  is simply an elaboration of a pun within the printed title. In Brazilian Portuguese, the  word facadista is slang for a sponger, hence facadinhas is “little spongers,” but facada is  a stab and colloquially is a touch, a gift, or a loan of money. Hence the caricature takes  the analogy between spending money and being stabbed and literalizes it. And yet the  more one considers it, this print is anything but semiotically stable or narratively cut  and dried; it contains secondary and tertiary elements that critique both slavery and  patriarchy. The activities and spatial arrangement of the figures is not arbitrary but ruthlessly hierarchical and operates in ways that not only question the power dynamics of  slavery but that introduce a fundamental taboo of abolition rhetoric, namely slave violence against the master within a domestic setting. The great Joaquim Nabuco, the most  perceptive and profound commentator on the peculiarities of Brazilian slavery and of  Brazilian abolition, stated emphatically that Agostini’s Revista Illustrada was “a Biblía da  Abolição para os que não sabem ler” [“the Bible of Abolition for those who do not know  how to read”], and in Brazil at this time that was statistically pretty much everyone.23  This print is a triumphant demonstration of how Agostini could use the new, illustrated  nineteenth-century bourgeois periodical to produce savage political propaganda that  got under the skin of the abuses of domestic slavery. Agostini, like Nabuco, was also  aware that his prints could be seen and interpreted by the house slaves who serviced  every household that bought his journal. What did the house slaves of Rio think when  they saw that sly old black slave lurking at the back of this print casually holding a knife?  What would a slave child think, looking at the confused and agonized face of the little  child at the back of the room, wanting to become part of the violent attack on the slave  patriarch, but simultaneously terrified of doing so? How quickly would the eyes of slaves  have connected the slouched puppet-like posture of the master and seen that it precisely  mimicked the figure of the male marionette perched in the Christmas tree?

In the work Agostini produced for O Mequetrefe, a less celebrated journal than  Revista Illustrada but a more politically confrontational one, Agostini developed a number of quite distinct approaches to graphic slavery propaganda. Agostini appears somehow creatively and technically more untrammeled in many of the large, double-page  horizontal format prints he produced as centerpieces for O Mequetrefe. The sparseness  and uncluttered formal arrangements of these prints should not be mistaken for simplicity or crudity. Rather, Agostini seems to have entered a satiric world closer to the pared-down, amplified, and monumental choices of Goya’s late etchings, and of the  parable-like Disparates in particular.

In the best of the work he did for O Mequetrefe, Agostini takes the political lithograph into new satiric and descriptive territories, and his innovations seem to grow out  of his ability to embrace elements that photography had introduced into visual culture.  Photography had injected new and unsettling elements of realism into the conventions of many extant visual genres including portraiture, landscape, and the tableau  vivant. In the following print he fuses all three of these areas to create what remains  a genuinely unnerving interrogation of slavery and ignorance, an image that has a  claim to be a new kind of graphic propaganda. The centerpiece print for  the issue of O Mequetrefe for May of 1887 simply carried the title “The Entreaty of the  Slave Bernardo.” The reader is directed to the long accompanying article that takes  up two preceding pages of the issue. Under the stark headline “Um Crime Impune”  [“An Unpunished Crime”] the text provides a melodramatic account of the circumstances leading up to the death of Bernardo as a result of his prolonged torture and  abuse at the hands of a gentleman, one Antonio de Atahyde e Souza, described as “a  widower, farmer and native of Portugal.” Bernardo, who had been given his emancipation papers a year earlier, on March 4, 1886, was still being kept as a slave by Atahyde.  The “slave” had gone to the authorities to state that he was free and to complain of  his abuse at the hands of Atahyde, only to be returned to the now-irritated “master.”  Bernardo was put in the stocks, then repeatedly whipped and beaten, the abuse leading  to terrible wounding of his back and buttocks. He finally died when subsequently kept in the stocks. He lay on a cold brick floor for fifty-two hours without food or water, and  continually aggravated his wounds by rubbing them against the floor. The article ends  with outraged condemnation not only of all who participated in the atrocity, but with  the statement that if such things can happen in this nation, then Brazil itself is “a land  of barbarians.”

Agostini’s task was to create, within a single visual narrative, a commentary on this  all-too-typical set of circumstances. The choice of subject and the descriptive method  are quite different from anything that had appeared in earlier print propaganda dealing with slave trauma in Europe and North America. The approach Agostini adopts is  also dramatically different, in rhetorical terms, from that of the written text. He opts for  a strategy of severe restraint and narrative understatement. The time and the event he  chooses to describe are carefully choreographed. The viewer is placed inside the outhouse in which the atrocity occurs. We stand on the same brick floor on which Bernardo  is tortured, and witness the beginning of his ordeal, knowing that the violence we witness will damage his body in ways that then cause his lonely and extended death during  the ensuing night. The design ironically exploits its landscape format. The middle and  background of the print consist of a view of the farmhouse and outbuildings poking up  from a sloping field. It is the sort of outside view that people never bothered to paint,  but which the camera frequently would record, because, quite simply, it is there. The  ordinary, open, calm, uninhabited, agricultural yet neo-suburban land is monumentally  banal. The foreground, on the other hand, is formally dramatic and occurs, like so many  narrative studio photographs of the period, within a narrow stagelike foreground, complete with proscenium-style frame and props. Part of the propaganda’s power comes  from the manner in which it suggests frozen action on a stage, in other words, a tableau  vivant. The composition is set up through a series of strict rectilinear forms and spaces.  The outhouse architecture sternly encases the human action, a large horizontal beam  runs across the top, and two vertical beams point down, like mighty arrows into the  composition. Set at a slightly oblique angle against this stark frame are two rectangular  box forms: the first is the massive stocks, the second the packing case on which Atahyde  sits. The stocks itself is drawn with great accuracy and precisely conforms to the typical structure of the communal tronco that occupied such a central and self-consciously  dramatic symbolic space in the fazendas and town squares of nineteenth-century Brazil.  Made of hardwood, these vast structures, with their geometric holes, still stand in public spaces and museums across the North East of Brazil. Agostini insists that the tronco  is not a theatrical monument to the memory of slavery, but merely a useful part of the  furniture of the farm outhouse. It thrusts dramatically into the composition from the  left. The far end remains invisible, shooting out of the picture frame and suggesting that  there is no end to this terrible set of parallel lines.

In Barthesian terms, the punctum of this design, the most charged space of visual/  emotional punctuation, are the sets of black holes into and out of which the slave limbs  penetrate. The great planks are periodically cut through by these ghastly orifices, perfect  circles that are obscenely polished pebble, smoothed by the twisting limbs of innumerable victims over immemorial time. The manner in which Agostini inhabits these holes is inspired. On the left of the design, the further set are filled by two anonymous legs, the  body tumbling back and out of the left margin of the design. This faceless disembodied  victim is challenging us, as witnesses to give him, or her, an identity, to make the suffering  mean something. One detail is terrific: pushed up above the horizon line of the tronco we  see four toes. These pitiful digits are the only part of any body that reaches though a hole  and becomes visible out beyond the stocks, inhabiting the free space of the landscape.

The ultimate terror that the narrative embodies relates to the fact that the only white  witness, the torturer himself, seems completely oblivious or, to use the vernacular  phrase, “out of it.” The vertical support beam creates a separate performative space for  Atahyde; he is set up in his own little compartment on the right-hand margin, almost  as if he is posing in a studio for his portrait. Agostini has given the slave power a new  kind of face, that of a modern man, an urban gent, a man who could step straight into  a Machado de Assis dinner party. He has a manicured beard and elegant brushed back  grey hair. He is dressed in a city suit, with white wing collar and bow tie, and he is holding a large cigar with casual ease in his right hand, his left hand resting on the box top.  He doesn’t look particularly good or bad, he doesn’t look handsome or ugly, he doesn’t  look at all. There is no moral decay or inhuman barbarity written into this face, there is  no emotional engagement of any sort. The crucial thing is the detachment, a psychological detachment to match the spatial one. What defines both this man’s evil and the  social tragedy his actions create is the fact that there is no sadistic engagement in what  he has instigated, and no interest in what is happening or will happen. Agostini has  risen above the melodrama and monstrousness with which the Anglo-American abolition propaganda archive had so energetically and easily demonized the slave power.  Rejecting the easy and pornographic spectacle of grinning planters bathed in the blood  of writhing mulattas or of slaves foundering in boiling vats of sugar cane juice, Agostini  has given us something far more terrifying and of infinitely greater moral worth. His Atahyde represents an unexpected kind of demon who is uninterested, uninteresting,  and one of us. Agostini demonstrates how a supposedly benign capitalism can ruthlessly enable and indeed succor bonded labor systems. He has created a new spirit in the  propagandas of slavery.