

It earths society, it has always been the case that texts written or spoke are influenced hugely by the happenings, time period, and locations in which they were created. When reading an article, it cannot be fully appreciated or deducted without the required background knowledge of the texts origin. This is especially the case in Frederick Douglas´ speech “What to the slave is the fourth of July” which was spoken on the 5th July 1852. During this time slavery and inequality was rife in the southern states of the US. In the speech Douglas speaks about freedom but not in the way expected by the audience. On a day in which Americas freedom from Britain is celebrated, Douglas diverts his attention to what he feels is a more important ongoing battle at the time. He states that in this moment of supposed independence for all, that the black population was still suffering from slavery, being controlled under the ownership of the white population and landowners. His speech along with others such as Martin Luther Kings “I have a dream” attempted to create realization of the problem that Americas society contained to push for change through movements and pressure on the government. With a full understanding of the time period Douglas´ speech becomes even more significant. The historical period and context had an influence on his language which is used to force the across the irony in Americas Independence Day consists of. Both the outside articles allow the reader to be aware of the bravery and total belief that Douglas has to present this speech at such a prestigious event, through their analysis and background knowledge of the time period at hand.

A full understanding of the time period is needed to realize the full magnitude of the issue. The First Outside Article “When radicals beat the two-party system: How the abolitionists won” by Mark A gives the reader a substantial amount of knowledge on the time period. The article speaks of the Abolitionist antislavery group in America during the 18th and 19th centuries, pre-American civil war. It discusses the movement’s history with the US political government and the effects that the movement had on their structure and ultimately decisions and changes made by the government. 

A key point it identifies is that antislavery was a long process that had only just begun when Douglas presented his speech, which helps the reader understand Douglas´ saying, “The Republic of American is now 76 years old. I am glad, fellow citizens, that your nation is so young.”  This quote is highly important as it shows many things. He describes the audience as “fellow citizens” and the commas surrounding this single it out as if it is being emphasized. The reason for this is really that Douglas is portraying the fact that he doesn’t believe he is really a fellow citizen of theirs, as for one reason, the fourth of July doesn’t mean almost anything to him as nothing has changed for him and the other African Americans since the day of independence. This is also shown when he uses “your nation” to describe America as if he isn’t proud of the way it is, taking no responsibility.  The idea that he is happy that America is so young also links into the first Article, as it states at this point in time it is only the start of this movement pushing for black rights. Douglas describes himself as being happy because he believes it is still early days in in the push for total equality and the abolishment of slavery. This young nation is open to development and change, which he believes, will take time and occur once the nation matures. The understanding of the reader is helped by Mark A´s article by successfully giving the reader an understanding of the context this was presented under through his following of the Abolitionist antislavery group. The fact that in Mark A’s piece he glorifies the antislavery group for their bravery to stand up to the white powers in the country has an extremely significant on the reader when reading Douglas’ speech. As he presents this as an individual it makes the reader understand his bravery for the cause, as unlike the antislavery group, he has nobody at that moment of time to share the belief with or to give him strength. Not only is it presented as an individual, Douglas is also presenting it in front of a crowd that he doesn’t feel are even fellow citizens of his, he is being judged as a foreigner, which overall shows the sheer strong willed individuality of Douglas, as he presents the speech under these circumstances even with the possibilities of harsh consequences.

Holidays, are breaks that allow time to reflect on significant past events, and their effect that they have had on today’s society. One of these holidays in America is Independence Day, where the country is supposed to unite as one to celebrate their independence as a nation. Leonard Sweets´ article, “The Fourth of July and Black Americans in the Nineteenth Century” talks about the way that these holidays, in particular Independence Day, are really and were really celebrated. In the 19th century Independence Day was celebrated in a way, which completely conflicts the original reasons for holidays as said above. Sweets describes how the Fourth of July did the opposite of unifying America in the 19th century but rather divided the country into multiple sections. This was a result of the white population celebrating their independence rather than focusing on the unity it should bring. Whites ended up celebrating what the black population didn’t have, which was the main cause of this segregation and the height of hypocrisy in 19th century America. This is similar to Douglas´ speech “What to a slave is the Fourth of July?” as it also shows the divide in the American population through the way that Douglas doesn’t feel at one with the audience he is presenting to describing them as sarcastic “fellow citizens”. Although the two articles are very similar in their ideas of what Independence Day caused during the 19th century they both do it in different ways. Sweets’ writing was full of historical evidence and examples of other similar occurrences, outlining them whilst also annotating the effect they had on the way holidays are celebrated even in modern society. Whereas in Douglas´ speech historical evidence wasn’t present very much, he focused on personal experience and thoughts of others to explain his points. This was effective, as Douglas had experienced the conditions and treatments of being a slave and also knew others in the same situation. Sweets’ writing helps the reader of Douglas´ speech to understand the points Douglas is making. Sweets’ article makes the divide between the blacks and the rest of America significant during this time. He does this through the description of the whites celebration of independence rather than the unity it should bring the whole country, including the black population during the 4th of July celebrations. This extreme divide described and presented by Sweets again adds to the strong-willed personality of Douglas. This is the case as he manages to speak in front of an audience who are selfish and only care about their independence rather than the countries unity. He not only has the bravery and strength to stand and present in front of them but also the skill and emotion to make them listen and contemplate their celebrations. This ultimately shows the extreme belief Douglas has for the movement as he is willing to risk it all, including his life to put things right.

Overall Douglas´ speech can be read without too much background knowledge or support from similar articles but the strength of Douglas will be made a lot more significant if the necessary knowledge is obtained. Mark A´s article gives this extensive knowledge of the time period surrounding his speech, making his push at equality even more admirable. Whereas Sweets´ piece allows for the reader to make comparisons to modern society about the way in which Independence Day caused division rather than unity in 19th century America. These articles, both through their representations of the division in America, make out Douglas to be an even stronger individual than if his speech was read without any additional knowledge into the situation.
