Slavery as the antagonist

I believe that part of what makes a work of writing "literary" is the development of a conflict between a protagonist and antagonist. This is a simple aspect of plot structure that we find in most works of literature. In Douglass's autobiographical work, he more obviously depicts himself as the protagonist of the narrative by detailing his journey to freedom. What's more interesting is how he portrays slavery as the primary antagonist of the narrative rather than one particular master or whites as a whole. There is no clear and distinct villainous enemy that Douglass chooses to focus his attention on. Instead, Douglass is skillful in depicting the concept of slavery as the force of evil in his narrative. In particular, when Douglass describes the breaking up of his family, he does not blame the masters, but rather slavery itself as the cause. He notes in regard to the distance between him and his family that "slavery made us strangers... slavery had robbed [the words brother and sisters] of their true meaning" (1246) to emphasize the emotional separation over simply just the physical separation. At the end of"My Bondage and My Freedom," Douglass concludes by explaining, "there is not, beneath the sky, an enemy to filial affection so destructive as slavery," (1251). With this, Douglass is successful in depicting the concept of slavery as the primary antagonist, making his work more "literary" as his later freedom demonstrates how he overcomes his enemy. In other memoirs or autobiographical works, it is often the case that there is not a clear, singled enemy, but rather a series of anecdotes featuring various obstacles or antagonists. What sets Douglass's narrative apart from others and what makes his work more "literary" is his portrayal of slavery as the primary antagonist throughout, making the structure of his work follow more closely to what we often consider to be literature.