Comparison Of A Hanging By George Orwell And The Death Penalty By H. L. Mencken
Could you imagine what it would be like to watch the body of a person you once knew, swinging by their neck from the gallows? Perhaps, you were the one who was appointed to hang him, or the man awaiting to be hung? Would watching the daily routine of one who has committed a crime, while having to care for him every day until his execution, make you grow a bitter hatred towards him for still being alive or a sad feeling of empathy for the walking corpse? Authors H. L Mencken and George Orwell write about their first-hand experiences with dealing with such extreme situations, as well as the abundance of emotions that come with them.
Author George Orwell seeks to inform his readers of the conditions, both mentally and physically challenging obstacles, as well as the hardships and ease of following through with such gruesome forms of executions. Author George Orwell and Author H. L. Mencken engage in the art of persuasion on the topic of the penalty of death, and I find myself persuaded by their appeals because I share many of their audiences' characteristics; such as the belief of the inhumanity of the mental fear the victims and criminals are presented with. I agree in such ways because the thought of having to live consciously with the knowledge of when you are to die a gruesome, painful death is rather frightening. Author George Orwell and Author H. L. Mencken both tackle the issue of the death penalty; however, they do so using different appeals from very different perspectives, and as a result they are both very similar, as well as very different. The article 'A Hanging' by Author George Orwell takes place at a prison in Burma. The author writes from the persepctive of a prison guard, guarding the men who are to be condemned to the gallows. George Orwell writes his article as an informative story on one of his past experiences. Author Orwell speaks on his thoughts as he watched a man walking to his death be all but ready to die. He felt some remorse for the loss of one’s self and dreams, but that remorse quickly faded along with the distance of the gallows. The completion of the task was almost rewarding for the warder author, George Orwell.
Author H. L. Mencken writes his article in response to the statements that argue the point of the death penalty being a dreadful task to complete and witness, as well as being that it is a useless punishment. Author H. L. Mencken is not in full disagree with the act of the penalty, but simply does not see the purpose other than to extinguish the emotional distraught of another man for one other actions. He feels as if there is a lot of emotional distraught brought onto those who are granted the death penalty. Although there is a lot of distraught brought amongst the men that are placed under this death day spell, H. L. Mencken feels that ultimately, the only purpose intended for such a punishment is revenge. 'The Penalty of Death' written by Mr. Mencken is trying to persuade the American government system to change their ways of law, as if the ones they have in place are too inhumane. These two authors both explain the emotional turmoil that one must go through, from different sources of origin throughout the process of an execution. Does taking away a life change the world we know today? Orwell states in the article 'A Hanging' that the men sit in silence, with their blankets wrapped over them. He wonders why they sit in silence, for they only have two weeks left of life.
Orwell also describes as he watched a Hindu prisoner be taken from his cell and prepared for the gallows itself; and surprisingly, he did not feel remorse, watching this man stand as if nothing was happening to him, unbothered, and seeming almost unaware, whilst he was being chained up in order to be escorted to his death. He saw a standing corpse, with no conscious soul, allowing the warders to do to him as they pleased, moving puppet like. Author George Orwell felt remotely well while having to watch the prisoners mentally prepare themselves for their deaths, while other Author H. L. Mencken struggled most during this time of his article.
If the Hindu prisoner was written in the perception of H. L. Mencken, the prisoner would have been viewed with such sadness; for he would have been understood for his lack of care and resistance. Author H. L. Mencken would have understood that the Hindu man was tired and full of lost hope from living every day knowing that he was going to accomplish no more than to die a gruesome, painful death. He spent a matter of time locked in a cell knowing his fate, unable to do anything about it. However, the original author of the article 'A Hanging, George Orwell, felt no remorse at the thought of the Hindu prisoner awaiting his death, even informed that he had the knowledge of it. It was when Orwell noticed the consciousness of the Hindu prisoner that he felt a spark of compassion for the man. The different views between the two authors Orwell and Mencken are very important when it comes to the message of the articles. The emotional outlook that the authors have on the prisoners changes the mood and sets the tones of the two articles. Author George Orwell did not feel much of anything for the Hindu prisoner up until the point in his journey in which he was able to relate he and the prisoner together. 'It is curious,' said George Orwell, 'but till that moment I had never realized what it means to destroy a healthy, conscious man. When I saw the prisoner step aside to avoid the puddle, I saw the mystery, the unspeakable wrongness, of cutting a life short when it is in full tide. This man was not dying, he was alive just as we were alive. ' To George's astonishment he continued to himself, 'all the organs of his body were working, bowels digesting food, skin renewing itself, nails growing, tissues forming. His nails would still be growing when he stood on the drop, when he was falling through the air with a tenth of a second to live. His eyes saw the yellow gravel and the grey walls, and his brain still remembered, foresaw, reasoned, even about puddles. He and we were a party of men walking together, seeing, hearing, feeling, understanding the same world; and in two minutes, with a sudden snap, one of us would be gone. ' These thoughts George Orwell thought of the Hindu prisoner were private thoughts that he keeps to his own mind through the journey to the gallows. He finds much sadness in the man as he is on the way to hang, but not much before this time, for it is as if he has not seen the man act as a man before now.
In contrary to Mr. Orwell, the other author H. L. Mencken saw life before him very differently. He was able to empathize with his audience at such conditions. He saw that the men that were awaiting to be sent to the gallows, or even the electric chair, lived nothing but a saddened, prolonged life that has lost all meaning other than death. He saw that the true intention behind the death penalty was not to stop other prisoners from doing similar crimes, or not to even punish the crime committed by a now criminal, but that the punishment altogether was solely out of revenge. H. L. Mencken's article 'The Death Penalty' really helps give a clearer perspective on Mr. Orwell in his article. Even though he is in agreeance with the act, it is still normal for a man to feel for the man who is about to die even if later, he is quickly filled with a feeling of excited production for the morning after the event took place.
The two articles 'A Hanging' and 'The Death Penalty' take two separate approaches to inform their audiences. Because the two authors wrote in such different ways, perhaps the audiences of the two articles are different too. It seems as if George Orwell is an elder man looking back, reminiscing about his past experiences. As if he is almost talking to anyone who will listen, he explains his thoughts as if it were out of a diary. An informative perhaps, to inform his readers of the Hindu man who was not yet ready to die. He informed his audiences that the loss of a well man's life does not only kill him, but the dreams and world that he has created for himself. Being a mother of four, I can agree and concur that the littlest voice or act can make a huge difference. The taking of one man out of this world can be changing it in more ways than one has considered, in the eyes of George Orwell. Whereas if we transition into the eyes of Mr. Mencken, one can see that he is writing a persuasive argument against the prolonged wait of the death penalty. If the penalty is not able to be distributed at the time of the crime, then what is truly the point of controlling another man’s life, so that he lives in mental agony until his day of death. H. L. Mencken tries to argue that the punishment is far too inhumane considered the prolonged waiting time for the prisoners. He feels as if no man should have to live his life with so little purpose, and in that way, I do agree with Mr. Mencken. I feel as if he is writing to maybe people of a highter ranking, who he can persuade to make a difference in how to law is made and how the consequences are carried out. He in trying to explain to his readers that there is no true punishment in the process of the gallows, only jealous revenge.
Author George Orwell and Author H. L. Mencken engage in the art of persuasion on the topic of the penalty of death, and I find myself persuaded by their appeals because I share many of their audiences' characteristics; such as the belief of the inhumanity of the mental fear the victims and criminals are presented with. The two authors write about their first-hand experiences with dealing with such extreme situations, as well as the abundance of emotions that come with them. I believe the message the two authors are trying to get their audiences to understand is that there is more to life than to waste it in an act of revenge. That taking the life of a man who is not yet ready to die is wrong so and does not make the victim any greater than the criminal, for it makes them one in the same.
