Corey K. Creekmur’s chapter “Telling White Lies: Oscar Micheaux Charles W. Chestnutt” in the book “Oscar Micheaux and his Circle” discusses how director and author Oscar Micheaux’s (1884-1951) novels and movies hold similarities to novelist Charles W. Chestnutt (1858-1932) works, but never cites him as an influence, leading some to believe Micheaux “stole” Chestnutt’s ideas.
The chapter starts out by declaring that the relationship between Chestnutt and Micheaux’s works are complicated, and that while Micheaux has always been praised for his original works, they are very “unoriginal.” Creekmur goes on to justify this claim by declaring “As an African American, whose predecessors could not own property…Micheaux may have felt righteous justification in playing fast and loose with ‘laws’ of ‘copyright'”(644). Creekmur goes on to write how Micheaux’s works in general are mysterious as there are no definitive evidence that what is claimed to be his is in fact his own work. This is in part due to the lack of “evidence” and records of these early African American film.
Creekmur argues that, whether directly or indirectly, that Micheaux was influenced by Chestnutt is some way, stating “we can securely rely on straightforward evidence that Micheaux had read the novels of Charles W. Chestnutt, whose importance within African American literature has long been acknowledged” (650). Another claim by Creekmur is that Micheaux may have had an interest in “light skinned” African Americans due to Chestnutt’s own interest because Chestnutt himself was a “white passing” African American. This interest was used in both the authors works, further linking Micheaux’s works to Chestnutt’s works.
Chestnutt’s “The Marrow of Tradition” and Micheaux’s “Within Our Gates” are compared to further associate the two creators. Chestnutt’s novel and Micheaux’s film have very similar plots and events “intertwining historical and political material with domestic and personal tragedies” (659). Creekmur goes on to describe the novel and film in detail, pointing out their evident similarities. He also mentions how these two works relate to Frances Harper’s Iola Leroy, written in 1892, which Creekmur believed Micheaux and Chestnutt had surely read.
The chapter ends with Creekmur reaffirming his argument that Micheaux was more influenced in Chestnutt’s “form rather than content” (679) and to recognize Micheaux as someone who “transgressed” rather than simply “translated” works that preceded himself. He ends by challenging the reader to focus less on praising Micheaux’s original works and to look into the “more adventurous and revealing” works that he adapted from other sources.
My reading was on a similar topic, and I find it amazing that Micheaux was able to express himself in his interpretations of other works and show himself as an artist. Thank you for your writing!
I find it very interesting that due to the lack of protection African American writers had they were often exploited and not credited for their work or contributions. One could really question how much African Americans really contributed to the industry without rightfully being given credit. It is sad that the lack of existing records of African American films further adds to the mystery of whether or not their work was stolen.