Review Of Martin Luther King's Speech Beyond Vietnam: A Time To Break Silence
Katie Neuner
English 102
October 21, 2014
Dringenberg
King’s Bold Message On April 4th 1967, Martin Luther King Jr. stepped foot into Riverside Church in New York City, New York to deliver a speech concerning the current situation and the Vietnam War.
From the first sentence of the speech it is evident why Martin Luther King Jr. is there, and what side he is on. In Kings’ speech Beyond Vietnam: A Time to Break Silence, while King used terms and phrases that were appropriate and understood by the audience present that day, but for the ears of the general public the speech may have been too bold to be accepted. After reading through and listening to this speech it is very clear that Martin Luther King Jr. was very passionate about peace …show more content…
and was completely antiviolence, which is not a bad message to send. He starts of the introduction by telling the audience he is there giving them the speech because his “conscience leaves him no other choice” (King 19). Throughout the entire speech he mentions his views on violence, and even states “I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today: my own government. For the sake of those boys, for the sake of this government, for the sake of the hundreds of thousands trembling under our violence, I cannot be silent” (King 21). The things he says during this memorable speech proves that he cares and can help persuade all audiences that they should care more to. Someone being so passionate about peace is inspiring to just about everybody, but the way the speech voiced his passion is flawed, making this speech much less effective. This speech could have been a step in the right direction, but instead caused out roar due to the bold statements, that were borderline attacks on the government at the time. It is important to remember that everyone who was present at the church that day had the same opinion on the war as King did.
But then the question arises: was that the only audience that was going to hear Martin Luther King Jr.’s speech? The answer to that question is obviously a no; the speech at the church that day was highly publicized. People everywhere, all over the world were going to hear his voice through TV, radio, Newspaper, etc. The words of his speech could have been much more powerful if some of the statements were a little less harsh. For example, he says “we have corrupted their women and children and killed their men. What liberators” (King 23)? This could be taken the wrong way. The United States is widely known for its liberty and its equality and this could be analyzed as an attack on the soul of America. Another example would be when he says “the world now demands a maturity of America that we may not be able to achieve” (King 26). Someone could take this as an attack on every citizen and every leader of America as immature. Another example is when he says “I am convinced that if we are to get on the right side of the world revolution, we as a nation must undergo a revolution of values” (King 27). This could be seen as an attack on the core values of America. Not some of the values, he is saying all of the values need a revolutions, many people who care deeply about America could evaluate this statement and deem it offensive. It is statements like the
given examples about that make King’s speech less effective. In conclusion we can see that for the specific audience there on the many things that Martin Luther King Jr. said work, due to the fact that for the most part the people present were on the same side of the fence as King. They thought the government was “sinning” by doing what they were doing in Vietnam and to innocent civilians. So, generally we can agree that King’s speech had valid points, and he was coming from a place of passion it simply fails to appeal to all audiences due to that fact that many people had a different opinion on the war.
Work Cited
King, Martin Luther. “Beyond Vietnam: A Time to Break Silence.” New York. 4 Apr. 1967. World History Archives. N.p., 1999. Web. 8 Nov. 2010. Rpt. in Dringenberg’s ENG 102 Coursepack. By Stephanie Dringenberg. Fall 2014 ed. Ellensburg: Central WA U, 2014. 19-30. Print.
English 102
October 21, 2014
Dringenberg
King’s Bold Message On April 4th 1967, Martin Luther King Jr. stepped foot into Riverside Church in New York City, New York to deliver a speech concerning the current situation and the Vietnam War.
From the first sentence of the speech it is evident why Martin Luther King Jr. is there, and what side he is on. In Kings’ speech Beyond Vietnam: A Time to Break Silence, while King used terms and phrases that were appropriate and understood by the audience present that day, but for the ears of the general public the speech may have been too bold to be accepted. After reading through and listening to this speech it is very clear that Martin Luther King Jr. was very passionate about peace …show more content…
and was completely antiviolence, which is not a bad message to send. He starts of the introduction by telling the audience he is there giving them the speech because his “conscience leaves him no other choice” (King 19). Throughout the entire speech he mentions his views on violence, and even states “I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today: my own government. For the sake of those boys, for the sake of this government, for the sake of the hundreds of thousands trembling under our violence, I cannot be silent” (King 21). The things he says during this memorable speech proves that he cares and can help persuade all audiences that they should care more to. Someone being so passionate about peace is inspiring to just about everybody, but the way the speech voiced his passion is flawed, making this speech much less effective. This speech could have been a step in the right direction, but instead caused out roar due to the bold statements, that were borderline attacks on the government at the time. It is important to remember that everyone who was present at the church that day had the same opinion on the war as King did.
But then the question arises: was that the only audience that was going to hear Martin Luther King Jr.’s speech? The answer to that question is obviously a no; the speech at the church that day was highly publicized. People everywhere, all over the world were going to hear his voice through TV, radio, Newspaper, etc. The words of his speech could have been much more powerful if some of the statements were a little less harsh. For example, he says “we have corrupted their women and children and killed their men. What liberators” (King 23)? This could be taken the wrong way. The United States is widely known for its liberty and its equality and this could be analyzed as an attack on the soul of America. Another example would be when he says “the world now demands a maturity of America that we may not be able to achieve” (King 26). Someone could take this as an attack on every citizen and every leader of America as immature. Another example is when he says “I am convinced that if we are to get on the right side of the world revolution, we as a nation must undergo a revolution of values” (King 27). This could be seen as an attack on the core values of America. Not some of the values, he is saying all of the values need a revolutions, many people who care deeply about America could evaluate this statement and deem it offensive. It is statements like the
given examples about that make King’s speech less effective. In conclusion we can see that for the specific audience there on the many things that Martin Luther King Jr. said work, due to the fact that for the most part the people present were on the same side of the fence as King. They thought the government was “sinning” by doing what they were doing in Vietnam and to innocent civilians. So, generally we can agree that King’s speech had valid points, and he was coming from a place of passion it simply fails to appeal to all audiences due to that fact that many people had a different opinion on the war.
Work Cited
King, Martin Luther. “Beyond Vietnam: A Time to Break Silence.” New York. 4 Apr. 1967. World History Archives. N.p., 1999. Web. 8 Nov. 2010. Rpt. in Dringenberg’s ENG 102 Coursepack. By Stephanie Dringenberg. Fall 2014 ed. Ellensburg: Central WA U, 2014. 19-30. Print.