Some Fact, Mostly Fiction: How Black People Invented America… or Something
Before we begin comparing the two assigned readings, the chapter Black People Invented America; Like Seriously, All of It deserves a proper mention. The goal of the chapter is, undoubtedly, noble and righteous: give credit to a historically oppressed people and right the ship of history. The execution, however, fails due to a disregard of legitimate evidence, overt sensationalism, and a deep-seated anti-white sentiment that ultimately undermines the exact principles they are preaching. Just to name a few, here are some inventions credited to African Americans in the chapter: the elevator, the typewriter, fire extinguisher, the 1st traffic light, the fountain pen, etc.
Let’s start with the elevator. The chapter states “There are no cities with tall skyscrapers because Alexander Mills, a Black man, invented the elevator, and without it, one finds great difficulty reaching higher floors.” This is factually incorrect. First, his name was Alexander Miles. Alexander Miles was the inventor of electric elevator doors in 1887. The elevator was conceived in Rome by Archimedes in 236BC, and the modern-day elevator was invented in 1883 by Schuyler Wheeler.
Next, the typewriter. The chapter states “and Lee Barrage invented the Type Writing Machine”. First, Lee Barrage does not exist. His name was Lee Burridge. Secondly, he did not invent the typewriting machine/typewriter. The first iconic typewriter was invented in Italy in 1803 by Pellegrino Turri (the idea was first conceived in 1714 by Henry Mill). Lee Burridge made modifications/improvements to the typewriter in the mid 1880’s. He did not invent the typewriter.
The fire extinguisher. In attached picture on page 6, the chapter reads “The Black Man Invented the Following: … The Fire Extinguisher”. This is, again, not true. The first fire extinguisher ever was invented in 1723 by Ambrose Godfrey. The modern-day fire extinguisher was invented by George William Manby in 1818. Thomas J. Martin, to whom the image of the chapter refers, invented and patented a version of the fire extinguisher in 1872. The fire extinguisher, as a concept, was not his invention.
The 1st traffic light. In the same attached picture from above (page 6), the chapter states “The Black Man Invented the Following: … The 1st Traffic Light”. This is incorrect. I’m sure you’re seeing a trend here. The 1st traffic light was conceived and made in London in 1868 by railway engineer J.P. Knight of Nottingham. It was non-electric, so I could understand the confusion. However, the first electric traffic light was invented in 1912 by policeman Lester Wire in Salt Lake City. Garret Morgan, the African American inventor referenced by the chapter, did not invent the 1st traffic light. Garret Morgan filed a patent for a 3rd light on traffic lights to provide warning, but even he wasn’t the first to do so. From Garret Morgan’s wiki: “Morgan had witnessed a serious accident at an intersection, and he filed a patent for a traffic control device having a third “warning” position in 1922. The patent was granted in 1923, though this was not the first system with a warning, a three-light system being invented in 1920 by William Potts, and previous systems having audible warnings.” Garret Morgan did not invent the traffic light.
The fountain pen. (At this point, this exercise is getting exhausting, but a point needs to be made) The chapter states “William Purveys invented the fountain pen”. Unfortunately, incorrect. One, his name was William Purvis. Sidebar — It’s inconceivable to me that an article which aims to highlight black inventors has not once, not twice, but at least thrice misspelled the name of the inventor they wish to credit. Anyway, the fountain pen was not invented by William Purvis. The first notable fountain pen reminiscent of modern design came in 1809 by Frederick Folsh, but there is evidence that the idea of a fountain pen had been around since Fatimid caliph Al-Mu’izz li-Din Allah in Arab Egypt requested an item that describes a fountain pen in 974. William Purvis made improvements to an already well-iterated upon fountain design in 1890.
You might be thinking I’ve scraped through this entire article and could only pull 5 incorrect assertions. I wish that were true. Unfortunately, the chapter miscredits multiple other inventors as well: John Lee Love and The first pencil sharpener, Phillip Downing and the letter drop mailbox, W.A. Love and the printing press, William Barry and the first postmarking/cancelling machine, Frederick McKinley Jones and Lewis Latimer and the air conditioner, Alice Parker and the first furnace, Lloyd P. Ray and the dust pan, Richard Spikes and the first automatic gear shaft, and the list goes on (I’m not kidding, there’s more than just that list).
What makes this even richer is the chapter asks us to keep track of a list of inventions and check off each one that they say a black person invented. Ultimately, the final checked off list that results from this activity is almost 30% incorrect. The chapter makes massive claims like “Even Memorial Day was started by Black people, yet this history was literally rewritten!”(page 3) and “likely the [same] case with Colonel Sanders and the true chef behind his famous fried chicken!”(page 7). There is no evidence to support this. Regarding Memorial Day, here’s the (likely) real info: “The history of Memorial Day in the United States is complex. The U.S. Department of Veterans’ Affairs recognizes that approximately 25 places claim to have originated the holiday. At Columbus [Georgia] State University there is a Center for Memorial Day Research, and the University of Mississippi incorporates a Center for Civil War Research that has also led research into Memorial Day’s origins. The practice of decorating soldiers’ graves with flowers is an ancient custom. Soldiers’ graves were decorated in the U.S. before and during the American Civil War. Many of the origination claims are myths, unsupported by evidence while others are one-time cemetery dedications or funeral tributes” (Wikipedia — not exactly the most reliable, but the whole point is wash because nothing here indicates any real origin).
To respect the assignment, I’ll answer some of the questions I was meant to, but I have to say, if we are assigned a reading to be read seriously, please, verify it.
Who is the target audience: For the O’Reilly piece the target audience is likely designers/interested parties looking for a general history of design. For the Black People Made America chapter, I imagine the audience is those looking for the untold history of design and inventions — likely those who feel their ancestors have been oppressed.
What values are embodied in the text: For the O’Reilly piece, it seems they’re promoting iteration and progress in their explanation of design history, as they focus on how designs have evolved over time and interwoven themselves. The Black People Made America chapter’s core value is truth (the irony is not lost on me). They aim to dispel traditional-ized history and uncover the real inventors who have been oppressed.
How does the “voice” differ between the two? The O’Reilly chapter has an educational tone, focusing on design attributes and inventors’ discoveries. The Black People Made America chapter has a charged tone — almost like a “gotcha!” attitude — aimed at upending the reader’s previous understanding of history in attempt to enlighten.
Ultimately, neither piece is perfect. The O’Reilly piece, while mentioning some very important designers, didn’t show much (or any to my knowledge) history of design from other cultures or other races. This is unfortunate and takes away from the credibility and value of the piece. The Black People Made America strives for an admirable goal and one that should be accomplished; people who have been oppressed should be credited for their work and it’s terrible that they haven’t been. Unfortunately, the chapter lies and twists truths to achieve its agenda, which eventually undermines its entire premise.
History is difficult to tell, and complete fairness is something we can only strive for, so I don’t blame either article entirely for their flaws. But, please, if you’re going to tell history, use the facts.
