The structure and rhetorical strategies of The Souls of Black Folk are markedly different from those favored by Washington in Up from Slavery. Describe some of these differences and consider the relationship of these strategies to the intentions of each author
I have taken a few American Literature courses myself to have studied these two authors and their works. In all the American Literature classes I took, I have been directed to locate the following websites for references to these works that you are requesting assistance from. At this stage in your academics, you are probably not aware that there are many brief journal articles written by literary scholars (those who had higher degrees in academics and are working vigorously in the field of English) who have written journal articles that are directly related to these questions you have posted. In fact, I have helped you narrow down the assignment that all you need to do is reading a few pages of each story to verify any or all the following secondary sources that you might need to use for this assignment. A secondary source is extremely relative for any academic writing because often, students are required to quote from secondary sources in their future essays.) Without any further "lecturing", I will begin helping you out in the next section of passages.
First of all, if this assignment was for a longer and future essay, I would quote properly from the following literary website which I have been taught to use myself for your convenience but to reference only, here it is~
This literary scholar clearly stated that,
"The historic differences that would later arise between Washington and the more militant W. E. B. Du Bois were differences of emphasis and priorities, not differences of fundamental principles. Du Bois was in fact among those who sent messages of congratulation to Washington on his Atlanta Exposition speech.
As one of the founders and longtime pillars of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), Du Bois concentrated on the restoration and advancement of political rights for blacks and focused his public attacks on the system of racial segregation and discrimination known as Jim Crow in the South. With eloquent bitterness, he indicted whites for racism. Booker T. Washington took no such public stance and instead directed his efforts toward the internal self-development of blacks in things ranging from personal hygiene to saving, farm management and the establishment of businesses. The whites he spoke of and to was those whites willing to support such activities, especially those willing to help financially.
The net result was that Washington was often praising whites of good will, while Du Bois was attacking whites of ill will. Washington was promoting a kind of vocational education with a heavy moral and self-disciplinary component at Tuskegee Institute, while Du Bois promoted academic education designed to produce militant fighters for their rights against oppressors. However, this historic dichotomy was less sharp at the time than it later became in retrospect, after a new generation of more militant black intellectuals condemned Washington as an Uncle Tom.
At the time, during the early years of the 20th century, Du Bois was, like Washington, also painfully aware not only of the external dangers from white racists but also of the internal problems of a recently freed people, among whom illiteracy was widespread and experience in the ordinary business of life was still new, uncertain and errant. Du Bois, during this stage of his own development, spoke of "the Great Lack which faces our race in the modern world, lack of Energy," which he ...
Du Bois and Washington are examined. References are also provided to justify the assertions.