Overview

Drawing on a wealth of oral interviews, Conversations on Black Leadership uses the lives of prominent African Americans to trace the contours of Black leadership in America. Included here are fascinating accounts from a wide variety of figures such as John Lewis, Clarence Thomas, Eleanor Holmes Norton, Angela Davis, Amiri Baraka, and many more.

Full Product Details

9781137342492

Table of Contents

Reviews

'This book is unique: it reads equally well as a compelling narrative and as an authoritative reference work-a rare feat indeed.' - Michael A. Mallory, Executive Director, Ron Brown Scholar Program Leffler and Bond have put together a book of vital importance to the critical work of developing and fostering Black leadership in America-it also happens to be a remarkably comprehensive account of the greatest movement for justice in American history. Like the Federal Writers' Project to compile slave narratives, Black Leaders on Leadership provides first-hand accounts of the valiant struggles of some of the most important activists America has ever produced. It should be required reading in the curriculum of every high school in America. - Wade Henderson, President & CEO of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, The Leadership Conference Education Fund 'Black Leaders on Leadership is indeed a remarkable work. The diverse experiences and perspectives of the men and women chronicled in these pages (and available through digitized videos) make this book essential reading for all who wish to understand the history of the United States in the Twentieth and Twenty-First centuries.' - Annette Gordon-Reed, Charles Warren Professor of American Legal History, Professor of History, and Carol K. Pforzheimer Professor at the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study, Harvard University, USA

REVIEW #1: Leslie Brown, Williams College Broad Outline of the Project: And Other Important Qualities Grounded in oral history, Conversations in Black Leadership provides a fresh and much needed analysis of how historically African American families, communities, and institutions shape the ambitions, lives, and projects of black leaders. The analysis of the text is draw from interview conducted with notable black American leaders in a range of fields, including education, law, arts and letters, and politics. In telling about themselves, the interviewees collectively reveal the historical underpinnings of black freedom struggles: mentoring messages that link race consciousness with race pride and personal/community accountability. The manuscript explores the factors that go into the making of black leaders and further crafts black leadership theory out of experience. From the stories relayed and personal reflections shared, the reader gleans much about the strong values of African Americans (a facet of black life which in and of itself needs to be told), about the critical roles of institutions, communities, and networks play in individual and collective black lives and about the importance of black identity. The first two chapters take up the 'theoretical' issues of leadership. Chapter 1 argues that in a society where 'race matters,' black leadership is a critical tradition that must continue. Here the authors take up specific elements of leadership and discuss the common qualities and characteristics of black leaders. More importantly, the chapter turns to the particular circumstances of African American history and to the distinct orientation of black leadership given that history, its 'humanistic philosophy,' for instance, and its 'emphasis on the power of relationships,' as well as the 'incongruence' between white and black 'cultural structures' that inform organizing and leadership strategies. Chapter 2 details how, through oral history, theories of black leadership emerge. In the stories that people tell about their lives and in the ways that they recall their personal and professional development these leaders provide analyses that present a guide for future leaders. Collectively, then, the oral histories upon which the manuscript draws provide a new way for readers to access the philosophies and motivations that black leaders share. The next four chapters are organized by common affective elements that emerged from the interviews-family, education, networks and connections, and law and social change-and then each chapter describes the impact of those elements on black leadership exemplars. Chapter 7, rightly, focuses on the 'Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s,' to detail the ideologies and actions of a compelling coterie of activists who decided to challenge American apartheid directly and in very specifically ways. Each biographical section explores how a given individual fits into a particular interpretative framework or philosophy of black leadership. Here interviewees illustrate how they moved from ideology to action and from ideas to tactics, in the moment. Moreover, each explains how 'the movement' fashioned the later directions of their activist lives. The last chapter, 'Leadership Lessons,' draws out of the interviews to proffer a specific set of instructions or lessons that can guide leadership development and community engagement. I can easily envision a Part II to accompany this manuscript comprised of edited oral history interview crafted into narratives. Also, if the authors can address the is/was quandary described below, the book's shelf-life will be very long. I imagine it would be as long as African American history and black politics courses will be taught. Strengthened-as per notes below-it could be a classic of black history. There is really nothing else like it available for classroom use: it is not too long, its language is accessible, the life histories are interesting. Not only can I image it being utilized as a secondary source at the college level African American history, studies, and politics courses at the introductory level (it would generate great research projects), but also I think it is attractive for use in high schools civics-based social studies classes. Public and academic libraries certainly would purchase and highlight it. It also would attract a public readership, so I can envision it on the book shelf of Barnes and Noble or featured on Amazon.com. Critical Analysis: Strengths and Weaknesses Strengths: This is a forceful work. Its conversational tone draws in the reader and provides a welcome respite from the theoretical, jargon-heavy work of most scholarship on the topic of leadership. It is also a more engaging work than might be done by journalists who often proffer critiques of black leadership rather than engage with its design. I particularly appreciate how the manuscript summarizes but did not necessarily follow sets of principles of leadership that have been set out by sociologists or political scientists. Rather, this work is organic in both its analysis and its evidence. And it is rich with quotes and biographical information. Short, sharp, and succinct sentences cut through to the point. In this way, the manuscript is accessible to those who need to read it most, not only young people, but also parents, educators, church- and lay-persons, mentors and those being mentored. Weaknesses: For all of its potential, the manuscript has a few glaring weaknesses. On the minor side, it needs close editing at the sentence/word level. Little errors (Du Bois instead of DuBois; or references to separatism rather than segregation; and poorly identified antecedents for 'this' and 'they' and 'it') prove distracting. I have a personal peeve about active voice vs. passive voice, and the authors use the verb 'to be' way too often for my taste. 'Was' and 'were' work sometimes in terms of the conversational tone (and this seems to be the authors' goal), but not always in terms of writing, which becomes important when the book gets used in classes that emphasize writing. Place date references throughout so as to ground the reader in the chronology of individuals' lives. Also, the authors need to make some decisions about consistencies in usage (e.g.: who is the 'they', the 'you', and the 'we' of different sections; when will they use Black vs. black; why do they use our' black leaders'? The term seems possessive, as opposed to 'the black leaders we interviewed' or 'the informants'). Secondly, I think the title does not quite fit the production. The manuscript is not 'conversations,' but excerpts from interviews surrounded by a lot of text. Perhaps 'Contemplating Leadership' works better, or 'Reflecting on Leadership.' More critically, there are sections in the manuscript where background histories need to be re-crafted, where historical circumstances require clarification, where comparisons should reflect nuances rather than stark differences. These problems are critical especially in Chapter 4, where authors need to be careful to clarify and distinguish racial perspectives for the readers; that is, note specifically when they are referring to whites and when to blacks (this is a passive voice problem, to not assign actions to the actors), especially with reference to racial politics and power. In addition, some re-organization is required. There are sections, mostly brief, where one topic does not follow another or where paragraphs or sentences seem out of place, or an idea lies buried too deep in the text to be useful. I've designated in the notes below where sections and sentences might move up or down to improve the connections the authors attempt to make. The manuscript would be improved also when statements about a particular person cited as an exemplar can be followed by quotes as evidence of the point. I think the manuscript can always use more quotes from the interviews to reiterate and emphasize the oral history aspects of its analyses. Recommendation: This manuscript has the makings of a very successful book that will be well received and heavily used. None of suggestions or recommendations that I make should require the authors to significantly re-think or re-work the manuscript. For these reasons, I generally recommend the manuscript for publication, with the changes and edits described above and specified below. REVIEW #2: Emilye Crosby, SUNY Geneseo When I was asked to review this manuscript, I had already listened via podcast to a few of the interviews it is based on. As a result, I began reading with considerable interest and appreciation for the project's value and potential, a view that was reinforced by my reading. The interviews at the heart of the manuscript were conducted with an wide-ranging, impressive cross-section of African American leaders representing multiple generations and much of the diversity present in Black America. The interviews are compelling, thoughtful, and lively. Moreover, as interviewer Julian Bond asserts in the preface, the personal stories at the heart of each interview, make them wonderfully accessible and provide an effective entre for students (and others). And, as author Phyllis Leffler notes, the interviews speak individually and collectively to crucial historic and contemporary issues; they are relevant to a number of academic fields and engage with many important topics, including leadership (generally and within the African American community); the Civil Rights Movement (and other social justice work); school desegregation, equity, and access; the role of family and mentoring in supporting young people; generational change and continuity; and the role of arts and artists in society. At their best, Bond's interviews and Leffler's analysis bring to life the diverse experiences and perspectives found in the African American community, while also illustrating important touchstones, trends, common experiences, and how all of these have evolved over time. They have great potential for engaging and informing scholarly and popular audiences. As this suggests, I believe the project has considerable potential and could be could be a very strong addition to the Palgrave Macmillan list. However, I do have some critiques and related suggestions for re-organization. I think the biggest weakness is the relationship between the scholarship Leffler draws on and the interviews at the heart of the book/ project. In general, my sense is that the scholarship could be used effectively and appropriately in several different ways. For example, it could be used in a very limited fashion, primarily to provide context for the interviews. Another approach would be to use analysis of the interviews to directly engage with and speak to scholarly debates. Leffler doesn't exactly use either approach. Instead, the scholarship tends to overwhelm the interviews. I thought at times that she might be trying too hard to make a case for the significance of the interviews, when they are clearly strong enough to speak for themselves. In the preface, after emphasizing the power of personal accounts for communicating history, Julian Bond writes, The portfolio of stories highlights people whose voices are too often marginalized in our public discourse. By using their own words as much as possible, we share with our readers their passion, their pain, and their power. Later, he asserts, This is ultimately an exploration of Black leadership in America through the eyes and words of those leaders themselves. (Bond, iii) I agree, that this is the strength or, rather, the potential of this project/ manuscript. But as it currently stands, the personal, the voices of the leaders, and what they have to say about their lives, their histories, and our society are too often obscured and buried in scholarship that is itself used in ways that are too random and superficial. I think for the book to be effective, the interviews must be much more central and the scholarship must be used more carefully and purposefully. The book must be more focused, more coherent, and above all, more driven by the interviews themselves. For example, the chapter on the Civil Rights Movement is organized around John Lewis, Julian Bond, and Angela Davis, with the suggestion that these three people represent/ reflect three distinct styles of leadership - prophetic, consensual (consensus?), and militant. However, the interviews with Lewis, Bond, and Davis are used only sparingly in this chapter. They are quoted or referenced on 21 of 47 pages and many of those instances are short quotes or even footnotes. The chapter opens with quotes from two others from the interview project, but Leffler brings very little from the other interviews into this chapter. Instead, she draws very heavily on other sources, including John Lewis's memoir and Andrew Lewis's recent book on seven SNCC leaders (including Bond and Lewis). My sense is that the chapter ends up offering a fairly superficial and somewhat problematic history of the Civil Rights Movement, along with a similarly limited analysis of several of the different leadership styles found in the movement. Moreover, I do not think Leffler's framework - using these three people to represent three distinct forms of leadership - works well or adds much to our understanding. (For a discussion of Civil Rights Movement leadership, it would make sense to draw more effectively on work by Charles Payne, Barbara Ransby, and Clayborne Carson, among others.) In this chapter, Leffler seems too willing to accept superficial portrayals of the Civil Rights Movement as becoming more militant as it moves to Black Power in the late 1960s. (For an example, see p. 260n108.) I wouldn't argue with the characterization of Angela Davis as militant, but I do not think it is the most effective way to compare her to Lewis, Bond, and others in SNCC. In fact, both John Lewis and Julian Bond have been insistent that SNCC was militant from its founding, before the move to Black Power, something I think it accurate and important. At one point Leffler writes, As SNCC evolved and became more militant in the mid to late 1960s, Julian found that he could not support an organization that rejected inter-racialism in favor of Black Power. Like others who left SNCC, including John Lewis, Julian still wanted to reshape American society. (p. 250-51) There is no citation for this, so I am not sure if it comes from an interview with Bond or another source. Regardless, this articulation reinforces a somewhat superficial characterization of the movement. I think it would be far more helpful and effective to hear this in Bond's own words. After reading this chapter, I had no sense of how the interviews with Bond, Lewis, and Davis contribute to our understanding of leadership or the Civil Rights Movement. In fact, I got very little sense of their interviews. And I did not find Leffler's profiles of the three people, which drew heavily from other sources, to be particularly compelling or informative. If the Civil Rights Movement was so central and transformative (which I accept), I would imagine that many of the others interviewed in the project would speak to the Civil Rights Movement. How did the movement influence others? How did they interact with it - either at the time or as history ? Were others inspired by what they saw of leadership in the movement? There are snippets of this in other chapters, but little or none in the chapter on the movement. (There are minor references in the Angela Davis section to the interviews with Freeman Hrabowski and Nikki Giovanni. I think it would be extremely interesting and helpful to have their voices and others included in far more substantial ways.) This leads to my suggestions for reorganization, which I believe would resolve these problems and greatly strengthen the manuscript, including its scholarly contributions and its broad appeal. As it stands currently, there are two introductory chapters and then a series of thematic chapters, each of which is ostensibly organized around a few key interviews. The major topics are families, education, networks and connections, the law and social change, and the Civil Rights Movement, and leadership lessons. I would suggest starting with a similar approach, but including much more extensive sections from the interviews of each of the people highlighted in a chapter. (So, for the chapter on the Civil Rights Movement, begin with significant excerpts of the interviews with Julian Bond, John Lewis, and Angela Davis.) Then, I would suggest supplementing and building on these extended interview sections with analysis of the full body of interviews in the project to illustrate any number of things, including important trends and commonalities; generational change or cross-generational influences; the nature of internal community diversity, etc. Finally, I would suggest using scholarly work much more sparingly within each chapter. For example, I think it would make sense to include scholarly references only where necessary for clarity/ context and where it can be used purposefully to illustrate specific ways the collective body of interviews informs (reinforces, supplements, and/ or contradicts) accepted scholarship. The bulk of the relevant scholarship could be addressed at the end of each chapter in a short bibliographic essay. In fact, this might be a good place for making an argument about how the interviews speak to the current state of scholarship. In the Introduction, Leffler identifies a series of questions related to Black leadership. (p. 12-13) It might be helpful to think about these, as well as the discussion in the second and third paragraphs of the Abstract, as a way to more consistently analyze and frame the interviews. (Abstract, p. 1) I think part of what I'm suggesting is that I believe that the author/ editor already has much of what she needs for an excellent book in place, but it is actually overwhelmed by an attempt to connect excerpts of interviews and ideas related to interviews with wide ranging and not particularly distilled scholarship. If she could pull out the key issues/ framework and use it not to connect interviews (almost randomly) to scholarship, but as the content and analytical basis driving the narrative, I think she would have an excellent book. On the surface, my suggestions for revision/ reorganization may seem to require considerable work, but I believe this approach has many advantages and the revisions might not be too time consuming. Ultimately, I believe this approach would effectively highlight the project's strengths and provide a straightforward way to clarify the relationship between the interviews and the relevant scholarship. Leffler has already organized most chapters around a few key people and in some cases already supplements those interviews with material from others. Moreover, the strongest sections of the manuscript are the ones where Leffler focuses most explicitly on the interviews, presenting and analyzing them individually and collectively. In chapter six, for example, Leffler's use of interviews to discuss Black reactions to Brown is quite strong and engaging. And I found it much more effective than her general historical commentary on Brown. Similarly, the final chapter on leadership lessons was heavily grounded in Leffler's analysis of a broad range of interviews. I think it was easily one of the strongest sections of the manuscript and her use/ analysis of interviews in that chapter could be an excellent model/ starting point for revisions centered more explicitly around the interviews.

Author Information

Phyllis Leffler is the Director of the Institute for Public History and Professor at the University of Virginia. She is the co-author of Public and Academic History: A Philosophy and Paradigm (1991) and Public History Readings (1990) and has published award-winning articles in The Public Historian and the Virginia Magazine of History and Biography. She is the co-director of the Explorations in Black Leadership project at UVA (www.blackleadership.virginia.edu). Julian Bond is a prominent African American activist, politician, and teacher who served from 1998 to 2010 as the chairman of the National Association for the Advancement for Colored People and the co-director of the Explorations in Black Leadership project at UVA. He was also the first president of the Southern Poverty Law Center and served a combined twenty terms in both houses of the Georgia Legislature. Among his books are Gonna Sit at the Welcome Table: A Documentary History ofthe Civil Rights Movement (1995) and Lift Every Voice and Sing: A Celebration of the Negro National Anthem, 100 Years, 100 Voices (2000).

Tab Content 6

Customer Reviews

Recent Reviews

Countries Available