Talk:I Have a Dream
<templatestyles src="Module:Message box/tmbox.css"/><templatestyles src="Talk header/styles.css" />
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the I Have a Dream Template:Pagetype. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Template:Find general sources |
| Archives: Template:Comma separated entries<templatestyles src="Template:Tooltip/styles.css" />Auto-archiving periodScript error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".: Template:Human readable duration File:Information icon4.svg |
Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".Script error: No such module "Check for deprecated parameters".
Script error: No such module "English variant notice". Script error: No such module "Message box". Script error: No such module "Banner shell". Template:Top 25 Report Template:Annual readership
Dr. King's later thoughts on the speech
Having quickly glanced through the article, I've noticed that there is an absence regarding Dr. King's later thoughts on the speech (particularly those he reiterated in his 1967 interview with Sander Vanocur). To summarize, he said that his 'dream' has "...at many points turned into a nightmare..." and regarded the speech as overly optimistic, in light of the resistances to further civil rights advancements and the Vietnam War, both of which he viewed as parts of or results of the evils (his 'Triple Evils' as he called them) he thought the USA was complicit in. All in all, he had essentially disavowed his speech - prior to directly commenting on the speech, he mentioned that integration as a sole focus of the Civil Rights movement wasn't enough without a "revolution of values" and quoted James Baldwin, saying "What advantage is there in being integrated into a burning house?" The interview can be found here. With all of that said - considering this interview, as well as Dr. King's later stances prior to the end of his life, I believe this should be noted in the article under the 'Legacy' section. Also something of note is how it is often misconstrued by modern-day conservatives as an advocacy of solving racism via a 'colorblind' approach to society (rather than seeing 'colorblindness' as an end goal to strive towards). I can understand the latter not being included but I think it is important for the article to include King's own later thoughts on the speech as a good way to show what he thought about the progress made during that time. Kyle Tatum (talk) 05:27, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
The sentence "Taylor Branch writes that King later said he grasped at the "first run of oratory" that came to him, not knowing if Jackson's words ever reached him.[7]" is used twice in completely different parts of the document.
someone should probably fix that 65.199.249.162 (talk) 00:07, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
Speech sound recording missing
The link is broken. Wallby (talk) 10:21, 18 May 2025 (UTC)