1. What is the author arguing?
The author is Henry L. Mencken, a controversial journalist and author whose personal views lay in science, modernity, and urban sophistication of the 1920s. The excerpt entitled "To Expose a Fool" is the obituary Mencken wrote in honor of late William Jennings Bryan, an outspoken Southern fundamentalist. In this obituary Mencken not only slanders Bryan's person by making fun of Bryan's rural-class clothing, speech, intellectual and spiritual beliefs, but Mencken also attacks the memory and fire that Bryan's legacy may have placed in other fundamentalists:
"The evil that men do lives after them. Bryan, in his malice, started something that it will not be easy to stop." (167).
2. How does the author appeal to logos (logic), pathos (emotional quality), and ethos (the writer's perceived character) with their argument?
After analyzing Mencken's writing, it was interesting to try and pinpoint where each of these strategies were used, because initially, Mencken's words seem to be simply a way of poking fun at a victory against a long-standing enemy; his words are full of sarcasm, superiority, and disdain.
After further review, however, I believe Mencken's words appeal to the logos in a manipulative way; Mencken labels Bryan as a crazy, dirty, countryman who lacked the worldliness to join civilization. By labeling Bryan in this way, Mencken manipulates his readers so that they will not want to be categorized with Bryan.
I believe both the emotional quality and character of Mencken are best seen in the hatred he speaks of Bryan's life-meaning: "...the ambition of a common man to get his hand upon the collar of his superiors, or, failing that, to get his thumb into their eyes." (166). Through Mencken's use of Christian fables, he shows the reader he is knowledgeable of the fundamentalist religion, and may even be seen as more legitimate by his counterparts for this reason. Mencken's attack of Bryan can be justified through his hatred of the Klan, and his passion for Americans to unite as a knowledgeable and civilized people.
3. What is the historical significance/relevance of this document?
Prior to Bryan's death, he had hopes of political glory. After failing to become President, Bryan took it upon himself to raise fundamentalist support in the South. The weeks leading up to Bryan's death, he participated in a trial to fight evolutionary teaching from being used in Southern schools, and the judge did grant Bryan's wish in the end. Mencken believes, however, that the trial set the stage for Bryan's death because of the humiliation Bryan experienced while being questioned as to his reasoning for disagreeing with evolution:
"Upon that hook, in truth, Bryan committed suicide, as a legend as well as in the body. He staggered from the rustic court ready to die..." (166).
Mencken's use of the word "suicide" is ironic as suicide is considered to be one of the worst sins to commit by Christian beliefs.
4. Do you find the author's argument convincing? Why or why not?
I find Mencken's writing extremely amusing, and more shocking, than convincing. I naturally agree with Mencken's standpoint on fundamentalists, however, I don't think he portrayed this message in the most tactful of ways. I hesitate to say that today, this would never have been printed. I believe the personal attack on Bryan took away from the legitimate points Mencken made, and he would have produced a stronger argument had he left his personal feelings towards Bryan out of the equation.
Hi Maggie, thank your for sharing your analysis of the text.
ReplyDeleteH. L. Mencken focuses his attention on the life of the late William Jennings Bryans. More specifically, Mencken scrutinizes Bryan's dealings in fundamentalism and the potential damage he left behind in his absence.
Mencken had a tendency to not put his statements lightly, but he had a persuasive tone in his writing that would appeal to the logic of fellow evolutionists or to those at least questioning religion and/or evolution. His message was to not take the death of Bryan lightly or more specifically as a sign of the end of fundamentalism. In particular, his message is stated clearly in the statement "Bryan lived too long, and descended too deeply into the mud, to be taken seriously hereafter by fully literate men, even of the kind who write school-books." Demonstrating the significance of the role Bryan played in fundamentalism and how fellow evolutionists or those opposing fundamentalism should avoid ignorance just because Bryan had passed on.
The historical significance that I noticed, lay in the fact that Mencken played a large role in persuading Clarence Darrow to enter the Scopes trial. Mencken made a point to tell Darrow to avoid the case between the courts and the schoolteacher, but to instead "...make a fool out of Bryan." over the case between evolution and religion.
I have a hard time finding Mencken's argument convincing enough. I agree with Mencken's view toward fundamentalism, but he seemed to focus highly on incorporating his own personal feelings toward Bryan and failed to produce any hard facts or logic to help make his argument less insulting and more convincing. His argument however, seemed mostly directed at those with similar points of view and hardily seemed to be a convincing argument to someone who may have followed Bryan's ideology or more specifically the ideals of fundamentalism.
Thanks Maggie for you TA today. I enjoyed your writing. Mencken's words towards Bryan where cruel and wrong. Who was he to judge someone and write about someone in such a negative light. Though Mencken does have me agreeing on his view towards fundamentalism he did not need to concentrate so highly on his feelings towards Bryan. I do not think that putting someone down will get you to the top.
ReplyDelete