The new literary developments of the late 19th century brought with them the expansion of African-American literature, giving voice to a hitherto unknown people. The opinions and ideals expressed by these writers were multifaceted because they came from a diverse and rapidly growing population that was just beginning to realize the intensity and magnitude of its own needs as a community. Each of these writers naturally had their own perspectives, agendas, and primary interests. For example, Charles Chesnutt seemed more intent on convincing his black and white audiences that perceived differences become increasingly slight and less visible as new identities develop and potentials emerge. Pauline Hopkins, on the other hand, seemed more fascinated by the plight of women in general, but particularly by the phenomenon of the African American woman's experience. These two writers respectively have individual motivations and vigorously defend these beliefs, through their writings, their education and their speeches. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay The concepts conveyed by these authors were part of their attempts to give voice and create space in society, without discrimination, for the development of the rapidly changing African American population. Chesnutt and Hopkins achieved these goals through the use of their literature, speaking about their issues directly to their audience. In his writings, Charles Chesnutt addresses the notion of racial identity and meticulously deconstructs the concept by shattering previously standardized beliefs about the capabilities of African Americans in a post-Civil War era. Chesnutt was very interested in discourse on topics such as racial superiority, breaking stereotypes, and the psychology behind racism. Yet despite the attention paid to these topics, Chesnutt was also particularly concerned about the conflict faced by mixed-race people, like himself. Since miscegenation was a very complex concept, experienced by a relatively small portion of the African American community at the time, Chesnutt seemed dedicated to creating a space for people of mixed blood. He sought to eliminate the theory of the “one drop rule,” a widely held belief based on the belief that a single drop of African-American blood was a kind of pollution. Chesnutt strove to build a place of acceptance for those who were multiracial, those who filled the gray area between black and white. He created this in-between space in “The Wife of His Youth,” through the Blue Vein Society, with “individuals who were, generally speaking, whiter than black.” (464) The Blue Veins were the physical representation of a bridge between the races, a creation whose mission was to unite one with the other in the higher goal of a harmonious society, free from racial intolerance. Chesnutt strove to normalize both African-American and mixed-race to his white readers, attempting to convince them of the overwhelming weight of their similarities over their differences. In fact, in “The Passing of Grandison,” Chesnutt seems to suggest, in his own sly, subversive way, that African Americans were not only smarter than whites believed, but also smarter than whites. The end of the story carries a sardonic note, which alludes to the author's air of vague superiority. Chesnutt created a narrative in which the African-American character ultimately ends up taking the lead.on it after Grandison had so prodigiously outstripped his slave master, the former waving “his hand in derision” while “the latter clenched his fist helplessly.” (483) The story almost seems to fit into the relatively modern idea of ​​reverse racism, but does not go far enough into Grandison's success to produce a sense of racial domination. Chesnutt's intention is rather to balance the scales. It seeks to create balance in the social and racial sphere, not to deprive or give power to one race over another. Chesnutt succeeds, for the most part, because his stories end with a picture of an idyllic world of educated, liberated African Americans alongside open-minded, unprejudiced whites. His stories leave black readers with the not-so-subtle encouragement that they, too, can be like – if not better than – white people, and let white people realize that in reality, black people are not as different from them as they are. had thought so. Charles Chesnutt ultimately attempted, and mostly succeeded, to convey the ideal of unity between the races. Although she addressed the subject of race and slavery as a whole, Pauline Hopkins was particularly interested in the struggles faced by women – and not necessarily African American women, as shown in her novel Contending Forces . The one drop rule makes an appearance in her story, usually being used to accuse and make a woman feel guilty. The indicated horror is almost palpable when Montfort asks, “Have you heard the rumors that my wife is of African descent?” (497) He fears the implications that could arise if speculation were to develop. These implications lead to serious consequences for the Montforts, based on rumors about Mrs. Montfort's inheritance, as well as Mr. Montfort's freeing of her slaves. However, the circumstances could have been very different if rumors had circulated that Mr. Montfort was of mixed race rather than his wife. The outcry over the freeing of her slaves could have been amplified, or perhaps the rumors would have been completely ignored due to her gender and social position. Hopkins intentionally makes Mrs. Montfort a sympathetic character—when she vehemently refuses Anson Pollock's advances out of respect for her husband—so that when he suspects her of African taint, readers automatically see her as the victim of a racist masculine society. . This society is personified by the character of Anson Pollock, who is the physical representation of patriarchy and bigotry. Hopkins uses Pollock to describe the dominant and widely accepted male idea of ​​women as objects and possessions, when "the two children and their mother fell into the hands of Anson Pollock, as his share of the spoils." (499) African Americans, as well as women, were considered the property of the male owner, who could be tossed around as he pleased. The children had to suffer under Pollock's thumb because, according to the one-drop rule, if their mother was of mixed blood, then they were African by default. Pollock's fellow lynchers were an example of the racist mentality that enveloped the South as a whole. The majority of their vindictive tortures were aimed at Madame Montfort, rather than her husband who had met a quick death. A member of the public safety committee took out the intensity of his anger on a woman and he only stopped when he “satisfied his thirst for revenge” for blood. (499) It seemed that these men were demanding retaliation for a perceived slight, whether it was Ms. Montfort's gender or the alleged race—or both—that had infuriated them so much. Or.