Both the reading and the website are presenting the same subject which is slavery. They are explaining the slaves’ life, how they were treated, what they had to do to obtain their freedom and the challenges they had to face to remain free. In the website, some slaves’ lives are highlighted because these slaves one way or another contributed to the freedom.“Slavery was a part of every American colony until outlawed in the first Vermont constitution of 1777” (www.slaveryinnewyork.org). Even if some slaves were free they had to pay an annual tax, and on top of that their sons were still going to be slaves (half freedom). By 1813, the slaves whom were free manage to find a job of their own and they were able to work. On July 5th 1827 Slavery was abolished in New York; now it was time to abolish slavery in the South.
While the website and Chudacoff give information about the condition in which the slaves were living, Chudacoff also focuses on what happened after the slaves’ freedom. They were new to urban life; they had to move to the city primarily to find jobs and to have a better life. Later on, a group of black emerged, and as they were wealthy and educated, the white people manage to block them from growing economically.
Ad for a run-away slave (google images)
I think both the website and the author are plausible sources; however the website makes it more interesting by presenting some slaves stories. But in term of information Chudacoff is the most reliable source.
i Completely agree with the author with the fact that the website makes learning about slavery a lot more fun than reading a textbook. Although a textbook may be filled with more information i would rather visit the website in order to learn.
I agree with most of what your saying, but in my opinion, I think that the website was more against slavery.