John Barbot confirmed that kidnappers gathered children from the villages of Guinea but, recent findings show that Olaudah was in fact born in South Carolina as a slave. This is a considerably large plot twist because if he was born in South Carolina, whose childhood did he really write about and what was his real story? Was it even his story? Vincent Carretta, a professor challenged Olaudah’s birthplace origins by releasing his baptismal records that say he was officially born in South Carolina. However, the narrative was not written to raise questions and debates about where someone was born but to open the eyes of people against the abolitionist movement. Maybe not all of Olaudah’s experiences happened to Olaudah but they did happen to someone. To conclude, regardless of where he was born or not born, every single thing written in the narrative was …show more content…
“People generally think those memoirs only worthy to be read or remembered which abound in great or striking events, those, in short, which in a high degree excite either admiration or pity.”, he states in the first chapter. Despite the fact that the narrative was quite stimulating, It was not published for entertainment. He wrote about who he was, what he went through, how he felt, and what was going on around him. To add on, this was not only a slave narrative helping to push the abolitionist movement but, we have to remember that most slaves could not read or write and this significant piece of African American literature helped Africans remember their roots. History would be incredibly biased if only slave owners were literate and African American literature aids us in differing facts from fiction. In short, the narrative can not skip significant historical events because the narrative was a chronicle of Olaudah and it was essential to understand everything African Americans went