Frederick Douglass - from "The Meaning of July Fourth for the Negro"

Frederick Douglass was a very powerful speaker before, during, and after the Civil War, and many people used what he said in many different ways. He showed the North that the slaves were being ruthlessly beaten and killed (Wilhelm). He also showed the North that the South had been lying when they said that they were kind to their slaves (Wilhelm). He showed Americans that the Fourth of July had a completely different meaning for the African Americans as slaves than it did to the freed Americans (Wilhelm). He described the hypocrisy that the slaves felt on that day (Wilhelm). He showed that while Americans were celebrating freedom and justice for all, the slaves were still forced to do things against their will (Wilhelm). They were not free, and there was no justice for them. Even after the Civil War, the white people still did not give blacks all of the rights that they deserved to have as human beings living in America. There was still a ton of racism and injustice against the black people, and many people just overlooked it. Douglass was not afraid to speak up against the injustice, and he continually showed people how hypocritical they were and still are today (Wilhelm). Douglass's speech from "The Meaning of July Fourth for the Negro" was definitely a speech that belonged in the Realism time period. It shows the perspective of people that were not in the highest, richest class. From "The Meaning of July Fourth for the Negro" is very about the here and now, and how the Negros felt at that moment in time (Wilhelm). It was not about the past or what had happened on July Fourth when America won its independence, it was about how the Negros were outraged by the injustice that they were receiving and the hypocrisy of the rest of America. This work definitely reflects society of the time period, because the speech was given a few years before the Civil War. It shows that the Northerners had no idea what was going on, and it shows how unhappy the African Americans were (Wilhelm). It shows that tension was growing immensely, and that it would only be a short amount of time before all of the tension finally burst out and caused something enormous to happen (Wilhelm). This work does not talk about religion or nature, but it can be tied in to government and human nature. Douglass could have been talking to the government, as government officials may have been there listening to his speech. He could have been trying to stress how much of a change really needed to take place. He was trying to show how awful it really was for the slaves that had to do so much physical work out in the fields all day long. It can also be tied to human nature, with all of the hypocrisy that had been happening. Americans had been so cruel to all of the African Americans, but they seemed to overlook it all of the time. They turned away, so they could pretend that had not seen it and would not do anything about it. They celebrated freedom for all, while they had slaves working out in their fields and serving them their drinks every single day. They were very hypocritical, on that day most of all, and Douglass really wanted to bring it to their attention. There was not a hero in this piece, but Douglass also talks about the American Dream of African Americans: being freed (Wilhelm). That is central to his speech, and his speech would have had no effect if African Americans had not wanted freedom so badly. Douglass was an amazing orator, and his impact is still seen today.

Wilhelm, Jeffrey D., Douglas Fisher, Beverly Ann. Chin, and Jacqueline Jones. Royster. Glencoe Literature. New York, NY: Glencoe/McGraw-Hill, 2009. Print.

Regionalism

Regionalism is quite a bit different than Realism. While it does involve Realism, it also involves quite a bit of Romanticism (Campbell). It involves quite a bit of reminiscing about the "golden age", and that in and of itself has a lot to do with Romanticism (Campbell). At the same time, there are always many small details about the region that prove that it was also influenced by Realism (Campbell). Regionalism became very popular after the Civil War, and it was often written by people that had little to no power, including those in the Midwest, women, African Americans, or immigrants (Campbell). The narrator is often a storyteller that has seen the story and is now here to tell it to the rest of the world, which was often the urban, white males who had all the power (Campbell). While there was not normally a real plot in the modern sense, the narrator told of things that had happened in the region they were writing about, and they told of little things that only come from that area (Campbell). Regionalism showed a lot more the of traditions of an area and its history, so these stories often fit quite well into history (Campbell). This was good for the United States, since it was right after the Civil War, because this helped unify the North and the South again (Campbell). It showed that there were many different things that were important to many different people, and that they can all work together to save these traditions and dialect. Regionalism was very important to many people, and each different region had their own way to portray things. Often there were different heroes, because each group had a different ideal. Women would often pick young girls or unmarried women, while African Americans that had been newly freed might pick another African American that had gone through many hardships, but had succeeded and was now looking to start a new life (Campbell). Regionalism was very important to our nation's history, and its function was very important.

Campbell, Donna M. "Regionalism and Local Color Fiction, 1865-1895." Literary Movements. Dept. of English, Washington State University. 20 Jan 2011. Web. 26 Jan 2011.

Naturalism

Naturalism is often categorized as the same thing as Realism. While they are similar, they are also different in a number of ways (Campbell). They both came about around the same time, and they both involved science (Campbell). Naturalism, however, involved a lot more science than Realism ever did. Naturalism was all about science, and how it affected man. Naturalism involved the lower middle class and the lower class, and the novels were often about struggles within man (Campbell). Naturalists portrayed free will and choice as a complete illusion, so the struggles that were so often seen made a much bigger impact when coupled with the futility of trying to change things (Campbell). Naturalism involved more basic things, and the basic wants of man. Often the works were concentrated on survival and being determined to have things the way that the main character wanted (Campbell). Naturalists portrayed man in urban environments, and often discussed many things such as sex and violent crimes (Campbell). They discussed such passionate or violent things because they thought man struggled the most with keeping that part of himself hidden in a society that would completely disapprove (Campbell). Often the theme involved despair, as man finally realizes that his attempts at individuality actually do nothing for him, and everything that he has tried and will ever try will completely let him down (Campbell). The authors thought that by making man just another object to be studied, they would be able to figure out the unwritten rules that govern the world and mankind (Campbell). They thought that by showing the beast that man could be, they would figure out what must happen in every situation. They assumed that every man would react the same way, and did not take into account how different people can be in the reactions and in their decision making. They did not think about the fact that we are all different, and not just another animal species to study. While Naturalists may seem a little twisted, they still wrote some intriguing works that are still relevant today.

Campbell, Donna M. "Naturalism in American Literature. " Literary Movements. Dept. of English, Washington State University. 27 July 2010. Web. 24 Jan 2011.

Realism

Realism can be defined many different ways. Many people do not really know how to define it, and it is tied very closely to Naturalism (Campbell). In fact, a majority of people do not know how to tell the difference between the two eras, so it is hard to try to explain the differences (Campbell). Realism started rising because people were getting sick of Romanticism, and they wanted more of science that had also been on the rise (Campbell). People had started working with science and the scientific a lot more (Campbell). They had started philosophizing, but not in ideals like Romanticists (Campbell). They philosophized quite rationally, and also started studying how previous documents had been written (Campbell). They wanted to know more about what was happening right in that day, and they focused a lot more on the here and now then about ideals or nature's influence on things (Campbell). They often told stories that did not have an obvious moral to them, because they would write of the everyday and try to draw their morals from that (Campbell). The Hero to them was a normal person that could draw morals from everything and knew how to grow from past experiences. The American Dream was to learn from every experience that they had, and to always be morally improving. They wrote more from the viewpoint of the middle class, so they could see society from a different perspective than they had in the past (Campbell). They could see how the higher class could flaunt their wealth and could be so mean, but they also saw how poor the lower classes were, and they may have felt pity. Realists concentrated a lot on ethical choices; sometimes ethical choices were what the whole plot was based off of (Campbell). The events could have really happened, and they wrote in the same style that they spoke, unlike previous authors who had written more poetically (Campbell). Realists were very different than Romanticists, because they were not concerned with ideals, but they were very similar to Naturalists, and it is often extremely hard to tell the difference between the two.

Campbell, Donna M. "Realism in American Literature, 1860-1890." Literary Movements. Dept. of English, Washington State University. 21 Mar. 2010. Web. 24 Jan. 2011.

Journal #34

ACT essays are very important. They are necessary to get a good ACT score, and can be kind of confusing. ACT essays need to have good introductions and conclusions, that are very clear and well-developed. Sentences must vary, and word choice must be effective. There should be few to no spelling or grammar errors, and they must not impede understanding. Paragraphs should show the point of view chosen to represent, and it is necessary to have a counterargument as well. It is easier to show counterarguments in the same spot as the argument that is being presented. On the prompt, while you may believe one thing, you should pick whatever argument you have more evidence for. If you do that, you will be able to write a better essay, because it will be easier to elaborate and give good support and evidence, which is very important. Without good evidence, it is impossible to get a good score, so elaboration and in depth support is vital. It is also necessary to stay on task and focus on the prompt, because going off topic will also do nothing but harm the score and impede the possibility of getting a 6. The grading scale for the writing portion is a six-point holistic grading rubric. Without everything for one score, it is impossible to go any higher, so try to cover all of the bases. It is important to get everything, or a good score is impossible. It is also very important to proofread your essay before you turn it in, because without proofreading, some of the language used could impede understanding and comprehension, which could cause a worse score. Proofreading is important in everyday life, but it is especially important in the ACT argumentative essay, because it can only help your score. It is possible to get a good grade on the ACT argumentative essay, it is just important to cover all of the bases and write well.

Journal #33

There are many things that are particular to this area. Horseshoes are the greatest example, because they are only in Central Illinois. A horseshoe is a food item that would be considered an open faced sandwich. It consists of a piece of bread on the bottom, a hamburger on top of that, french fries on the burger, and cheese drizzled over the whole top. If one does not like hamburgers, one can substitute a different kind of meat, and one can put any different kind of cheese in the sauce, or they can use a mixture. Another thing that originated in Springfield is Charlie Parker's, which is another restaurant. I have never been to Charlie Parker's, but my father has, and he says it is delicious. Charlie Parker's has also been on the Food Network Channel on Diners, Drive-Ins, and Dives with Guy Fieri. That shows that it is incredibly delicious, plus it also has huge pancakes. I am pretty sure that their pancakes are the size of a small pizza, and they will serve four at a time. They have contests, and if one person can eat all four pancakes, they get their meal for free. I think it would be extremely hard to eat all four pancakes, especially in one sitting, but apparently some people manage to do it. If I ever got an order of those pancakes, I would bring along my father, my mother, my two brothers, and my boyfriend, and I would make them all help me eat it. I would probably drown it in syrup, but since there is such a vast quantity of pancakes, there would probably be gallons of syrup that I would have to use. I would have to cut it into about a billion different pieces, just so it would be bite-size and I would be able to eat it. I like Springfield, and many great things have come from here, most of them being food or food-related.

Journal #32

A memoir can be a number of things, and while they normally come about later in life, I am being asked to write one today about what I did over my winter break. While winter break was very fun, I did not do very much except for basketball. I could probably pull a memoir from one of our practices, because our coach, Paul Kastner, is very philosophical. He always manages to come up with new sayings and ties normal life into basketball. However, I will be writing a memoir of one of our games.We played a number of games over break because we had a tournament in Beardstown. We were playing decently well, and we had worked very hard throughout the game. The other team was definitely better than us, and while we were doing our very best, it seemed like none of our shots would go through the hoop. We had good shots and we passed the ball very well. We worked hard to get open, had very few turnovers, and we were talking to each other well, but it seemed like nothing would fall for us. We were also playing very good defense, staying low and not getting beat, but it seemed like they would shoot anyway, and no matter how awful the shot, it would go in. Coach Kastner understood that we were trying our best. He always found something to yell at us about, because that is his job, but he also yelled at the referees quite often. He knew that they were not helping our cause with their calls, and he was not about to let them forget it. This was it. The last few minutes of the game. We were down by quite a few, but if we made a run for it, we had a chance. We played our hearts out and were all over the floor going for loose balls, but alas, we lost. I realized, soon after our game was over, that while sometimes one's best is not enough, it will always be satisfying to do one's best, because that way the person knows that the other team was just better and there was nothing else they could do.