COMPARE AND CONTRAST

Compare and Contrast

Compare and Contrast

Introduction

Jefferson's The Declaration of Independence speech was a powerful speech and was a welcome opportunity, as it is today, to set out the incomer's stall. Jefferson establishes how he means to govern. And at the close of the address, he admits softly to human frailty, but he puts this in a way that actually makes him seem strong and, more pertinently, reasonable. Also Douglass spoke well and had a great delivery in What to a slave is the fourth of July. On this occasion, it was reported that the applause at the end (and often throughout) was tremendous. This paper compares and contrasts “The Declaration of Independence” by Thomas Jefferson and “What to a slave is the fourth of July” by Frederic Douglass in terms of Ethos, Logos and Pathos.

Discussion

Ethos

The credibility of Thomas Jefferson is undoubtedly great. His written Declaration of Independence of 1776 was both the culmination of a decade of protests against what the colonists saw as arbitrary British policies and a statement of political principles that shaped public life in the United States long after its adoption. In order to understand the Declaration, then, one must know both the past conditions that produced it with the power it has since independence. (Bernstein, 2005)

On the other side born into slavery, Frederick Douglass was to liberate his mind and body to become one of the pre-eminent Americans of the 19th century. A journalist, editor, lecturer, and tireless apostle of human freedom, he recorded the extraordinary events of his life in three autobiographies. Douglass described the Declaration of Independence as the “ringbolt” of the nation's fate and recommended the audiences to “cling to this day and to its philosophy, with the grab of a storm-tossed mariner to a spar at midnight”. (Douglass, 1994)

Logos

Jefferson used logic to support his claim in the Declaration. He included a bill of particulars: a list of reasons justifying the break with England. He condemned King George III, to whom the colonists had previously expressed loyalty, for dissolving the colonial legislatures, obstructing justice by making the length of judges' terms dependent on his will, denying trial by jury, quartering troops in colonists' homes without consent, and imposing taxation without representation, to name a few. Beyond their immediate impact, the most important result of listing the grievances was that they could serve as a model for future ...