Blood Done Sign My Name: A True Story (2005) - Plot & Excerpts
Censorship by Goodreads?: I joined Goodreads over two years ago with the purpose of committing to “the cloud” a paper list (along with supplementary Post-It Notes and cocktail napkins) of books, including this one, that I intended to read someday. After doing so, the first comment that I ever received on Goodreads directed me to a web site that denounced this book. The web site is the laughably ineffective work of an angry semi-literate: difficult to navigate, ill-punctuated, logically inconsistent. If you doubted that the race-related unpleasantness related in this book is still alive and kicking today, Tyson's detractors should convince you otherwise.I saw at the time that all who had listed the book as “to-read” had received the same comment. Later, the comment disappeared from my review. The same seemed to happen to comments by the same poster on other people's reviews. What happened? Assuming that the original poster did not voluntarily withdraw the posting, it seems like censorship. Was it?Opinion about book: I enjoyed this book and recommend it, but my comment here will not be completely complimentary. It seems like the author wants to have it both ways about the role of story-telling in history. I mean to say: he wants to tell a story of a single incident here and have us believe that it stands, at least in part, for a larger struggle and a larger problem. He makes his case convincingly. Why does he need to do this? Because history, in the raw, is a confusing, often contradictory, series of events, with seeming dead ends, inexplicable mysteries, misleading contemporary accounts, and inconclusive data. Historians and fiction writers often arrive on the scene afterward and shape a narrative that they hope will be clear, accurate, and useful for the rest of us. When done well, it helps us to remember things we might otherwise wish to forget, like lynchings, and motivate us to be better than we might be otherwise.So, while telling his own story, Tyson objects to what he sees as the “Disneyfied” story of the life and works of Dr. Martin Luther King, and, by extension, the entire African-American experience. There can be no arguing with the fact that King is now viewed differently in popular culture. Further evidence of this was provided by the recent release of decades-old interviews with the recently-widowed Jacqueline Kennedy denouncing Dr. King, which hit the mainstream press like the voice of a ghost from the past, reminding us of how Dr. King appeared to many contemporaries. As Tyson accurately summarizes it, the current popular myth is that King came along with a philosophy of non-violence, and, as an almost immediate result, opposition to racism in the U.S. suddenly melted away, except for a few cardboard villains. While this is clearly not true, I'd like to take the morally wicked position that such lies should at least be tolerated, if not encouraged.Where I live now (Bulgaria), the popular narrative (or “myth”, if you wish to be uncharitable) is that this country is a tolerant one. As evidence, Bulgarians can point out that the country managed to save most of its indigenous Jews from extinction during WWII without any apparently self-interested motive. Of course, there are other moments in local history when toleration was not in evidence, but the popular narrative remains a useful one. In this case, there were recently anti-Roma (a.k.a. Gypsy) violence sparked by the killing of an ethnic Bulgarian by an ethnic Roma crime lord. Leading political figures from both the left and the right appeared together in public and declared that toleration was a national characteristic and to be intolerant was to be unpatriotic. Since a sense of patriotism is often a more effective motivator than a sense of righting a past wrong, this was a wise rhetorical move and helped to partially dampen inflamed spirits, probably saving property and lives.Similarly, in the U.S.A., thanks to the posthumous conversion of Dr. King from dangerous radical to great American, it is possible to publicly invoke him when wishing to maintain that toleration and non-violence are the traditional qualities of patriotic citizens. While it is reasonable to question whether such a tradition exists, it seems inarguable that things would be better if such a tradition existed. Its widespread acceptance in the national mythology makes it more difficult to claim that the inherent superiority of one group is actually what the country is all about.Certain lies, like certain idiots, can be useful. This contention rests on the unprovable assertion that, while most people will not respond to a call to remedy wrongs they perceive as done long ago by strangers long dead, many will respond to a call to behave in the perceived great traditions of their nation, wherever the nation is. People who are ready for the more complicated truth can go to writers like Tyson. In this case, they will discover a truth that is deeper, sadder, more enraging, more complex, usually more tragic, occasionally more heroic.
I apologize in advance if this becomes something other than a book review.I live about two hours away from Oxford, North Carolina where fourty years ago Henry Marrow was beaten and murdered in the street for no reason other than the fact that he was black man who talked to a white woman. So it is a bit of an understatement to say that this book hit close to home.Tim Tyson and I grew up in small southern tobacco towns, where friendly folk sitting on their front porches would welcome you with a tall glass of iced tea, sit you down, and tell you with a smile that, well, Segregation never really got a fair shake.I have never seen a burning cross, but I have seen them charred and smoking in fields, the morning after a rally. The town in which I live was featured in a History Channel documentary about the Klan. Footage is shown of Klan members in their robes on the steps of our court house, which was just a block away from my church and the house where I grew up. Kids I ended up going to high school with were shown on national television holding ropes that were tied like nooses around the necks of black baby dolls. They shook them around like they were yo-yos or deflated balloons.There is a well-known restaurant nearby that people come from miles away to eat at that does not serve anyone who isn't white. A Jordanian acquaintance was turned away because of "inappropriate attire" although the establishment has no dress code. A Mexican friend worked there as a dish washer. When I asked him how the job was he said, "Its fine, as long as I don't try to walk in through the front door."This is still going on in 2010, and I've been around it all my life, and now I teach students who say these gut-churningly awful things about race and I work to repair something that gets broken again as soon as they go home to their families that are fueling these prejudices.I didn't really want to read this book. My father was crazy about it and basically told me I had to read it or he would disown me. I'm glad I caved, because Blood Done Sign My Name is amazing. It is both historically informative and a brutally open way for Tyson to work through issues that have defined his life.Though he recounts torturous circumstances, Tyson writes like a southern-fried Garrison Keillor. His charming tone allows him to cut deep, and while he examines himself the reader can't help but put their own thoughts under the microscope.If you haven't yet, you should read this book and then give it to other people to read.
What do You think about Blood Done Sign My Name: A True Story (2005)?
I really don't know a lot about the civil rights movement. All I know is that some nonviolent black guy named Martin Luther King, Jr. marched around and got attacked by cops. And black people wanted to stop discrimination (i.e. the inability to drink out of whichever water fountain you want), which somehow, someday, just stopped. POOF!Looking back at my description, though, I can see all the holes in my knowledge. I know that just one guy couldn't have changed the country so drastically. I know that discrimination has to be more than just dividing water fountains, buses, and schools by color or it wouldn't have been such a big problem. I know that we didn't all just decide to hold hands and sing "Kumbaya" one afternoon, and suddenly discrimination disappeared. I have heard obscure names like Malcolm X and the Black Panthers tossed around a few times, but I have no idea what they mean. All I've learned about the civil rights movement is the child's sanitized version of history, just the information that you find in a children's book about MLK and no more.And chances are, if you're young, like me, and white, like me, that's all you've ever learned, too.That's where this book comes in. Set in Oxford, North Carolina during an especially turbulent period of the civil rights movement, Blood Done Sign My Name recounts the story of a white family killing a black man, and the racial tension that resulted. I never knew that there was rioting and firebombing all over that small country town, or even anywhere in the country, and especially that it was done by the black community. I never really knew what the Black Panthers stood for, or why people were so upset when those two black Olympic medalists gave the "black power" salute during the national anthem. I still don't know what Malcolm X stood for, but now I have to know. This book has opened my eyes on the civil rights issue so much, and I can't hardly believe that our country was once like that. This makes Occupy Wall Street and all the backlash there seem like kindergarten, and Middle Eastern terrorists seem like background noise.What has our country been hiding from us? Obviously, more than I thought. I knew history textbooks couldn't be entirely trusted, but I didn't know to what extent. Now I feel I have to go researching everything supposedly important in history that I don't know hardly anything about--Vietnam, Nixon, the Persian Gulf, Cuba--and see what exactly was going on, and what we're too ashamed to teach our children. As Tyson explains in the book, we can't move forward until we acknowledge where we've been. And from what I see, we're just trying to hide that information.
—Irene
An interesting history/memoir. I have lived in SE North Carolina for 35 years, including during the riots of the early 70's in Wilmington. Tyson's book was very disturbing; I keep hoping that we have moved beyond our racist past and no longer need reminding of those horrors. o When I heard Tyson speak at UNC-Wilmington, he seemed arrogant and aloof... not really interested in engaging with the locals unless they had purchased one of his books to sign. I would recommend this book to anyone not familiar with our regional racial history.
—Liz
This book haunts me. Being that I was not raised in North Carolina and have only lived hear for a few years, this book was difficult for me to read because it was so disturbing. It showed me what evil looks like, and I didn't like that image. It is a story about the racism of this area during the Civil Rights movement. Needless to say, I learned a great deal about the historical events of that time. The story took me to UNC, Duke, and other local areas, and allowed me to experience the anger and fear of that time. It also tells about the racial divide that took place in a small Methodist church. It was incredibly eye-opening to me. I actually cried reading this story. It is not a story to read if you are looking for a quick, easy read. It is a story to read as if you were learning about deep, dark secrets that you don't want to know about, but you know you need to hear.
—Stephanie Johnson
