Frederick Douglass Critical Intro

It is interesting to me that the critical introduction to Frederick Douglass' autobiography is pretty much just a summary of the book and therefore a summary of his life. It doesn't provide any kind of analysis of the subject matter, only a re-counting of it. There is no talk of Douglass' language or rhetorical strategies and almost no discussion of how he interacts with the reader. For an autobiography it makes sense that most of the information in the intro is historical background, but I feel like the writer could have included some other information. In the intro to Harper's, which I have to admit I haven't finished reading yet, they also provide a good amount of historical context, but they also include other information about the magazine itself and the articles within it.

The tone of the writing in the intro to this autobiography is sympathetic and praising, but not overly. It seemed that in the Harper's intro the writers were really pushing the founders of the magazine up on a kind of pedestal. Well, it wasn't that severe, but they were praised a lot. The writer of the Douglass intro is appreciative and respecting of everything that Douglass accomplished and seems to have a lot of respect for him and is trying to convince the reader that they should too.