Thursday, April 8, 2010

King of Hyperbole

Someone (me) once wrote that H. L. Mencken believed that "Nothing succeeds like excess." Identify a passage in "Deep in the Coca-Cola Belt" that supports this statement. Does Mencken's penchant for hyperbole and exaggeration detract from or enhance his standing as a "factual" journalist in your eyes? How does his style relate to Thompson's? Respond prior to class, Monday.

23 comments:

Suzann Caputo said...

Nothing succeeds like excess,” is supported by the first two paragraphs of “Deep in the Coca- Cola Belt.” The first sentence of the story explains that a Unitarian clergyman from New York is in Tennessee “to horn into the trial and execution of the infidel Scopes.” This sentence sets the tone of the piece which is actually sort of humorous. Mencken exaggerates by pairing trial with execution as if to say, if found guilty, Scopes would actually be put to death. “If Darrow ventured to put him on the stand the whole audience, led by the jury, would leap out of the courthouse windows and take to the hills.” This statement is obviously exaggerated, but it reflects the people of the area and their ways of thinking. Basically, it gets the point across, which good journalism should do. He just goes about it in an unconventional way.

Mencken uses allusions to the bible, I believe, on purpose too sort of mock these people for relying so heavily upon it. He says, they believed “a bolt from heaven will fetch him in the end,” referring to Darrow, which is a classical fundamentalist bible belief that God will strike down the sinner with a bolt of lighting from heaven. He also says, “The night [Darrow] arrived there was a violent storm, the town water turned brown, and horned cattle in the lowlands were afloat for hours.” This to me was reminiscent of the Old Testament plagues that overran Egypt when the pharaoh wouldn’t free the Hebrews, the cattle dying, the Nile drying up, etc.

Mencken says that the people of Dayton believe “Darwin is the devil with seven tails and nine horns,” and Scopes is the “harlot of Babylon”. Even thought Mencken is excessive, his descriptions are striking and surprisingly clear. He enhances the facts, but doesn’t distort them.

Mencken and Thompson have similar styles in the sense that they both exaggerate and editorialize, in the first person. However, Mencken took on this southern sermon-like tone throughout his piece, almost like the town of Dayton rubbed off of him. He even says, “If I have made the tale too long, than blame the spirit of garrulity that is in the local air.” Thompson on the other hand, is, well, Thompson…He is not passive in journalism by any means because he actively takes part in what is going on, but his writing voice remains the same.

Andrew Carden said...

There is a good deal of hyperbole and caricature to be found in Mencken's "Deep in the Coca-Cola Belt," and it's a writing style which largely confirms the author's colorful portrayal in "Inherit the Wind." For my money, however, it's a penchant which doesn't detract from presenting a news-worthy story.

For this response, though, a comparison between he and Thompson, I'm reminded of drawing contrasts between Davis and Herr a few weeks back. That is, both authors share much of the same sentiment for a theme at hand (with Mencken/Thompson, we see varying observations of the clash between narrow-minded fundamentalism/conservatism and more open-minded liberalism), but the earlier work is a bit more nuanced in getting its' points across.

I think the closest Mencken comes to reaching Thompson-calibur heights of "excess" is in the final paragraph. His observing of William Jennings Bryan having been looked upon as "the greatest man since Abraham" by fundamentalists is awfully reminiscent of Thompson's writings on Richard Nixon and his admirers of the so-called "silent majority." Also, Mencken concludes that he has done his best to "show what the great heritage of mankind comes to in regions where the Bible is the beginning and end of wisdom." I could surely see Thompson expressing similar thoughts, although he'd probably go the extra mile and call this region a "shithole."

Jenn Von Willer said...

Maybe it was just me, but “Deep in the Coca-Cola Belt” seemed more the bible-thumpers in one section, so much so that I almost forgot the story was about Scopes until I reread a few pages over again. But the "excess" succeeded, with lines about those against Snopes and the townspeople of Dayton, Tenn.

“The craving is satisfied brilliantly by the gaudy practices of the Holy Rollers, and so the mountaineers are gradually gravitating toward the Holy Roller communion, or, as they prefer to call it, the Church of God.”

I understood his point, but swaying about from the factual for ‘shocking’ hyperbole's isn’t working for me as a reader. It was still witty and well-written, of course. H.L. Mencken seemed to try to pull a Thompson with religious witticisms and both mockery of the actual Snopes trial and pious hypocrites, though it wasn’t really close to entertaining. I still find it news worthy, much more than “When a Man Falls, a Crowd Gathers” by Crane, however, Mencken wrote a great deal about Dayton, Tennessee in a similar style as Thompson and still represented both sides of the Snopes trial.

Howie Good said...

Mencken hated reformers and proselytizers of all stripes. He thought the average American was an idiot. His contempt for those trying to outlaw the teaching of evolution is boundless. He makes no attempt to be fair or balanced, detached or objective. His pen has been dipped in vitriol as he describes the what he considers to be the moronic beliefs and behavior of the Holy Rollers and other fanatics.

Samantha Minasi said...

In order to fully convey the level of rampant ignorance and ridiculousness in Dayton, H.L. Mencken often adapts a sort of warped, exaggerated version of the local vernacular, and pushes it to its limits. This passage is a prime example; “Gaunt Gothic Americans flocked to the scene from the surrounding mountains, eager to learn about this high-falutin’ talk of monkeys and even more determined to defend their way of life against the outlanders.” Mencken uses the people’s own ignorance against them in a very successful way. This style is very similar to Thompson. Certain words and passages like; “The infidel Scopes” and “All the local sorcerers predict that a bolt from heaven will fetch him in the end.” wreaked of Thompson to me, Mencken is disgusted with his subject in the same way Thompson often seems to be, they both seem to share the frustration of being surrounded by mass stupidity and excess.

Mencken’s use of hyperbole and exaggeration does not detract from his journalistic standing as far as I’m concerned. I think if he were to have gone to Dayton, and covered the event with the crusty constraints of traditional journalism; the true image might not have been shown. This story is far more than a trail, far more than who is right and who is wrong. It is a reflection on America, and religion, education and the breeding of ignorance. I enjoyed how Mencken tied in that theme, of the spreading and breeding of ignorance in the town by mentioning that young woman who was "suckling" her baby that night. “Divine inspiration is as common as the hookworm. I have done my best to show you what the great heritage of mankind comes to regions where the Bible is the beginning and end of wisdom, and the mountebank Bryan, parading the streets in a seersucker coat, is pointed out to the sucklings as the greatest man since Abraham.”

Sarah Fine said...

As you stated in the blog, it became very clear to me when I first started to read this piece that Mencken made no attempt to be unbiased within his writing. It was immediately visible with each word on the paper that he viewed the American population as a group full of ignorant individuals, unaware of the true meaning of life.

His writing within the piece makes no attempt to curb his vicious beliefs about those who preach the bible and follow its text throughout their life practices. To Mencken, these people believe that, “Darwin is the devil with seven tails and nine horns.” Here is referencing the strong faith that they have in the after worlds of heaven and hell, and that everything will fall into one of those two categories. To them, it is all black and white. The words of “The Book of Revelation” are the cure for all of their problems whether they are spiritual or secular. Even his re-naming of this text inconspicuously states his beliefs to the reader.

Mencken uses deliberate statements within this piece to show his judgments about those consumed by the words of the bible. When Mencken writes, “Even the Baptist no longer brew a medicine that is strong enough for the mountaineers. The sacrament of Baptism by total immersion is over too quickly for them, follows offers nothing that they can get their teeth into.” Here Mencken is suggesting that those who follow the words of the holy text follow it so closely that they have nothing but their religion to propel them forward in their lives. When their holy rituals are over, they have nothing left. They don’t know how to live without something being written word for word telling them their next move to make.

Mencken also uses extreme exaggeration in his writing to almost turn a situation that infuriates him into a parody for his readers. “I have done my best to show you what the great heritage of mankind comes to in regions where the Bible is the beginning and the end of wisdom, and the mountebank Bryan, parading the streets in his seersucker coat, is pointed out to sucklings as the greatest man since Abraham.” In this passage, Mencken compares what he has observed about William Jennings Bryan, a man wearing a “seersucker coat” to lure in those suckling individuals who will suck the “teat” of the one-sided knowledge that he believes to be true.

This piece of writing was riddled with little words and hints that reminded me of Thompson’s style. Although both of these authors are deliberately pushing the realm of reality, Thompson when he literally fabricates parts of his stories, and Mencken with his radical use of descriptive language, they both use these styles to boldly uncover their views on the American society and events of their time.

Brian Coleman said...

In "Deep in the Coca-Cola Belt", Mencken uses a lot of hyperboles and almost barrages the reader with language. He starts this off right from the beginning by immediately saying that the clergyman from New York will fail. Right off the bat we can tell what type of writer Mencken is, as he is very biased in terms of the trial.

One of the most intriguing uses of hyperbole Mencken incorporates is that the Dayton people view Darwin as "the devil with seven tails and nine horns". This caught my eye because it is an example of where Mencken uses exaggeration to express factual information. I still believe that he can be considered a "factual" journalist because of this. Darwin's ideas were considered blasphemy by many of these people, and Mencken informs the reader of this and gets his point across.

Overall, comparisons can be drawn between Mencken and Thompson. Through both of their writings we can tell that they are both passionate, and have no problem expressing their own opinions. Both of which are qualities that make them great writers and journalists, in my opinion.

Meg Zanetich said...

There is a great deal of excess in "Deep in the Coca-Cola Belt," by H.L. Mencken. One line that really stuck out to me was, " Scopes, though he is disguised by flannel pantaloons and a Beta Theta Pi haircut, is the harlot of Babylon. Darrow is Beelzebub in person, and Malone is the Crown Prince Friedrich Wilhelm." He makes references to biblical terms when describing the people involved with the court case. The harlot of Babylon is a Christian allegorical figure of evil associated with the Antichrist and Beelzebub is a name given to one of the seven prince's of hell. There is complete excess in this description. He describes them with the way the people of Dayton see them. Scopes, to the locals, is an evil man dressed up as a normal guy. Mencken is making fun of the people of Dayton without actually saying it.

I don't think it necessarily detracts from his stance as a "factual" journalist because I do think he is bringing a new perspective to the story. His facts are straight and he is allowing the audience to understand what it really is like down there. This isn't just any normal court case. It goes a lot deeper than that. This is a way of life for these people, most of whom have been raised this way. Mencken is opening the eyes of viewers to understand the absurdity of this culture. "...but once one steps off the state roads the howl of holiness is heard in the woods, and the yokels carry on an almost continuous orgy." I really enjoy this line because he uses his words to describe these people. Yokels is a stereotype for unsophisticated country people and I think his description of them really allow the reader to step into this crazed world.

I think his style does relate to Thompson's although I think Mencken has a bit more refined with his writing. Thompson says what he wants and it is very blatant but I don't think Mencken's writing style is as blatant. They are similar because Mencken brings you into an unknown world and uses a ton of hyperbole much like Thompson. Neither of them want their readers to think so black and white, they both want them to read between the lines.

Kim Plummer said...

I noticed two pages (430-431) were missing from my handout. I happened to find the reading online here:

http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/menck02.htm

It's the second of the two readings on the website.

Just figured I'd post it in case anyone else is missing these pages from the packet!

Howie Good said...

thanks, kim. you're a life saver!

Kim Plummer said...

Mencken’s piece was a really interesting read and the descriptions were pretty entertaining. I think in the eyes of “traditional journalism” most would say that his subjective and hyperbolic perspective detract from his writing as factual, but I think, in most ways, they make his experience more accurate.

In one passage, Mencken says, “The leader kneeled, facing us, his head alternately thrown back dramatically or buried in his hands. Words spouted from his lips like bullets from a machine gun -- appeals to God to pull the penitent back out of hell, defiances of the powers and principalities of the air, a vast impassioned jargon of apocalyptic texts. Suddenly he rose to his feet, threw back his head and began to speak in tongues -- blub-blub-blub, gurgle-gurgle-gurgle. His voice rose to a higher register. The climax was a shrill, inarticulate squawk, like that of a man throttled. He fell headlong across the pyramid of supplicants.”

Mencken observes these people in what he describes to be “barbaric grotesquerie:” convulsing, “leaping and roaring,” speaking in tongues, unable to communicate. He describes one woman flattened, praying and squawking and squealing like a cat in heat. I think while his writing is subjective, it’s truthful and honest in regards to the fact that the people who are arguing we didn’t evolve from animals are behaving like them. When you put this kind of subjective, but honest, perspective on this kind of spiritual gathering in context to what was happening with the trial it brings up an interesting dilemma: how can these people say evolution doesn’t exist?

I think that Mencken’s style related to Thompson’s in the idea that rather than going to the courthouse and covering “the happenings” of the trial, Mencken chooses to immerse himself in the subject and watches and experiences the culture of the people and the Church that denounces evolution. In a way, the truth is revealed more honestly, and in an otherwise unseen way, through Mencken’s coverage.

Maria Jayne said...

Mencken shows his viewpoint though exaggeration and hyperbole in “Deep in the Coca-Cola Belt” by exaggerating the characteristics and motives of the religious crowd in Dayton. He shows as relentless and conniving and pokes fun at them throughout the whole piece.

In the passage where he says: “The Prophet Bryan, exhausted by his day's work for Revelations, was snoring in his bed up the road, but enough volunteers were still on watch to keep the battlements manned." Mencken is insulting William Jennings Bryan with his sarcastic overtone. He is calling him a Prophet and saying that he doesn’t really care about the trial because he can go home and sleep soundly in his bed.
I think his use of hyperbole and exaggeration makes him seem less like a factual journalist because everything is skewed towards his perspective rather than making it informative for both sides.
Mencken is similar to Thompson in that he is giving a commentary on American society at the time. Thompson was commenting on the people in Kentucky and Menken is in Tennessee. They both share their distaste with the reader. However Thompson is seemingly more up front about it because he is insulting everyone the entire time and calling them beasts.

Unknown said...

Mencken’s excess thought the piece, “Deep in the Coca-Cola belt,” is made apparent through how he describes some of the people in his story. “Scopes, though he is disguised by flannel pantaloons and a Beta Theta Pi haircut, is the harlot of Babylon. Darrow is Beelzebub in person and Malone is the Crown Prince Friedrich Wilhelm.” By comparing Darrow to the devil himself, Mencken is able to show just how hatefully he was regarded by the creationist supporters of the time.

Mencken’s tendency for extreme exaggeration adds to his standing as a factual journalist. His descriptions enhance my mental picture and overall understanding of the people and situations he describes much more than if he plainly stated what was going on.

The style relates to Thompson’s through the over the top and epic depictions of the happenings in his story. Seeing events through their eyes is very much like seeing them through tinted glass, everything looks slightly different and more interesting, but is not changed into something else entirely. Unlike Thompson, Mencken does not insert himself into the story as much as, he remains the observer and does not write of his interaction with his subjects only his reactions.

JulieMansmann said...

“They are actually going in by whole villages and townships. At last count of noses there were 20,000 Holy Rollers in there hills. The next census, no doubt…once one steps off the state roads, the howl of holiness is heard in the woods, and they yokels carry on an almost continuous orgy.”

H.L. Mencken certainly knows how to lay out sets of gross overstatements oozing with bitterness skillfully, to the point that those being trained under the standards of “conventional” journalism may find it hard to believe that his work was printed in a newspaper. Descriptions like those in the passage about read more like the back of a book jacket or video case, teasing the reader or viewer by intensifying the drama to amplify our gross human tendency to be interested in controversy. This sort of sensational summarizing can be found throughout his article, especially when he introduces people into the story or is describing the trial as a battle of sorts. In this case, he even went as far as coming up with ridiculous statistical figures, presenting them in short sentences only to break into long sentences broken into clauses, clauses that act as blocks building one after another to form an intensely dramatic picture. Of course, the outlandishly strong diction that drives his writing makes up the backbone of his work. A “howl of holiness” eliciting “an almost continuous orgy” amongst the ambiguously dubbed Holy Rollers? These kinds of phrases, exhibiting strong verbs and excellent choice of adjectives, make Mencken’s writing seem so emotionally charged that this article becomes poetic.

While his skill as a writer, passion for what he believes in and his intellectual prowess cannot be denied, I must admit that I am a bit torn when thinking about where Mencken and his writing fit in the context of the journalism world and its history. Like Hunter S. Thompson did after him, he went beyond an assignment, almost scrapping what he was supposed to write about all together. These writers opt to let an event or the people they meet dictate what they write about, which would make them good journalists in my view since real news happens in an instant and cannot be so planned for, In both of the pieces we have seen and most others by these two writers, such methodology seems to lend itself to writing that aims to elicit cultural and societal reflection. Yet both have their own agenda, whether it be against the wealthy or the religiously ignorant, which sets the tone for the cultural reflection and therefore prevents readers from disagreeing with their analysis. This of course would make them successful in terms of getting a point across and articulating it through clearly masterful writing. Yet in stories like the two stories we read about the boxing bouts or even Breslin’s JFK piece, readers have more of a chance to come to certain realizations about the people in the stories, America, what have you; then, they are presented with a gross amount of detail for them to come to their own conclusions about. I suppose because Thompson and Mencken are more a part of their stories than any of the other writers we have read, in my opinion, their work seems less and less like an article. I can’t decide if that’s a good thing or a bad thing.

Sarah Boalt said...

The statement "Nothing succeeds like excess" is supported when he says "Dayton was enjoying itself. All the usual rules were suspended and the curfew bell was locked up. The prophet Bryan, exhausted by his day's work for Revelations, was snoring in his bed up the road, but enough volunteers were still on the watch to keep the battlements manned." The personification of Dayton enjoying itself paired with "the curfew bell" being locked up is condescending towards Dayton. It shows the city's conservative ideals in a demeaning manor. This carries the undertone of the opinion of the author, which is something Thompson would do.

The exaggeration of the scene is also something that is similar to Thompson's writing style. Thompson usually depicted a scene how he saw it in some dramatic fashion that was played up in his own head. There was no battle and Bryan was certainly no prophet, but it shows the extreme conflict between the two sides of the issue. It is made to seem like a war of biblical proportions even though it is just a trial. However, this correlation shows how these people felt about the issue of evolution. It is almost as if they would have gone to war for what they believed in. While many may find this style of writing to be not journalism at all, it enhances for the reader what is truly going on. Anyone can read a story about a trial and know why the trial is happening, but his exaggeration is what makes the reader know the tension and the dedication these people have to fighting the teaching of evolution, which is what enhances Mencken's standing as a factual journalist.

Allison Sofer Says said...

Mencken's alleged belief that "nothing succeeds like excess" is supported throughout "Deep in the Coca-Cola Belt." One example (that doesn't seem to have been brought up) is the passage:
Even the Baptists no longer brew a medicine that is strong enough for the mountaineers. The sacrament of baptism by total immersion is over too quickly for them, and what follows offers nothing that they can get their teeth into. What they crave is a continuous experience of the divine power, an endless series of evidence that the true believer is a marked man, ever under the eye of God. It is not enough to go to a revival once a year or twice a year; there must be a revival every night.

Like many have said already (I know, awful words,) the first few sentences set the tone of the piece, which is rife with rich descriptions and colorful images. I do not believe that Mencken's style detracts from telling the story. It still reads as a piece of journalism, but it's not as dry as journalism can be. I still feel like I walk away knowing something I didn't know before.

I think Mencken and Thompson have many similarities, including their liberal lean, and their first-person narrative. They both have a penchant for exaggeration, and their level of omniscience. I think that their style differs in terms of the language - Thompson doesn't give a fuck if he offends or shocks or pisses people off. I feel like Mencken's diction is a little more on the tame side.

Jaime Prisco said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jaime Prisco said...

I think H.L. Menckens entire piece speaks to theory that "nothing succeeds like excess." As a society, we are more attracted (whether is be in a positive or negative way) to stories of extreme exaggeration or ones which are overtly overemphasized. A passage the really stuck out to me is when he said, "The night he arrive there was a violent storm, the town water turned brown and horned cattle in the lowlands were afloat for hours. A woman back in the mountains gave birth to a child with hair four inches long, curiously bobbed in scallops." This play on plague references is interesting because it's like a modern day disaster. Darrow could almost be seen as a modern day Moses, coming into the town, trying to free the innocent.

I actually really enjoyed Mencken piece because his style is so apparent,which is sometimes lacking when it comes to what people consider to be "news" stories.I definitely think that this is journalism. It still holds so much information and i think it is a shame if one cannot convey that information in an entertaining or specialized style. Yes, there is a lot of opinion in the story but it makes a really interesting read.
I do think that Mencken and Thompson are similar because they are both pretty abrasive in there writing style, however they do differ. Though Mencken is opinionated, his article is much more organized and structurally sound then Thompsons. Thompsons articles tend to be a lot more intangible, often letting his pen wander with his mind, no matter what the tangent may be.

Kellie Nosh said...

Though Mencken's piece "Deep in the Coca-Cola Belt" is very excessive, it gets a lot of points across, so I think the claim that nothing succeeds like excess is correct.

This passage clearly represents that: "If a text were found in it denouncing the Anti-Evolution law, then the Anti-Evolution law would become infamous overnight. But so far the exegetes who roar and snuffle in the town have found no such text. Instead they have found only blazing ratifications and reinforcements of Genesis. Darwin is the devil with seven tails and nine horns. Scopes, though he is disguised by flannel pantaloons and a Beta Theta Pi haircut, is the harlot of Babylon. Darrow is Beelzebub in person and Malone is the Crown Prince Friedrich Wilhelm."

None of the aforementioned is entirely true, and by speaking in hyperbole, Mencken humorously alludes to the Bible by comparing the most important characters in the Scopes Trial to those who are commonly associated with Hell. I think this enhances his style more than hinders it, but it is very bold language. His sardonic style is easily captivating and not too much.

This relates to Thompson in a sense that they are both very open with their style. They say what they want to say and it works. Thompson was very sardonic in his passage about the Kentucky Derby and Mencken is similar in his writing as well.

JustinMcCarthy said...

It isn’t hard to find a passage that supports the idea, “Nothing succeeds like excess.”
Mencken exposes the craziness of the beliefs people in the Coca-Cola belt have throughout the entire piece and even adopts biblical and religious language in order to convey that.
The one that stuck out the most to me (mostly because I’ve actually heard Christians say this) is in the beginning: “The other day a newspaperwoman was warned by her landlady to keep out of the courtroom when he was on his legs. All the local sorcerers predict that a bolt from heaven will fetch him in the end.”
While Mencken did succeed in making me laugh, I can’t say I think he was a good news reporter. Because he uses language that mocks the people and reflects his bias, I certainly think this detracts from his image as a “factual” journalist. I could say the same thing about Thompson, although I find a little more credibility in Mencken’s piece than I do from Thompson, who made up the name of a restaurant and was completely drugged out when he was reporting.

JoshWhite said...

My copy was missing the pages too, thanks Kim. Unfortunately, I didn't read her comment until just now so I'll have to go back and reread the full version after class, so I'll be commenting on what I know thus far without the full piece.

Mencken's use of hyperbole does detract from his standing as a "factual" journalist, but I don't care. I doubt any of us do. He's a good writer and it's enjoyable to read his thoughts. I think the whole "What is journalism? Is this journalism?" debate is somewhat odd because there is no clear definition of what journalism is. If you ask, however, about this story's "factual" integrity, I have to say that it does not hold water as a completely factual piece of reporting because of the exaggeration.

To anyone who knows writing, it is clear that all the excessive hyperbole is just that and that it is used to illustrate a point, but to the average American reading this in a newspaper....

I wonder how we would all feel if we were reading something like this from a writer who's ideals and values are the opposite of ours'. We all seem to be on similar planes when it comes to our leanings. I wonder how we'd like a piece written by an anti-Thompson or someone writing on the other side of the Scopes trial. Is good writing subject to the validity of the thoughts expressed?

I think Thompson comes off as much less of a traditional reporter than Mencken does. Mencken still writes with a lot of journalistic flare, despite his penchant for exaggerating facts and overtly pointing out the silliness of the people in Tennessee. Both write with an agenda though, and that is clear. What you have told us about the timeline of literary journalism stands here I think. This was before Thompson so it still holds on to more of the roots, whereas Thompson is off chart.

Pamela said...

Frustration, annoyance, and disbelief are some of the emotions that H.L Mencken conveys through detailed imagery of the trial. Throughout the piece, he mocks the people Dayton, criticizing their way of thinking, their close-mindedness and exaggerated dedication to the Bible. He sarcastically describes the scenes and the reader can really feel his disagreement with the people’s reaction to Scope.
He said, “What they crave is a continuous experience of the divine power, an endless series of evidence that the true believer is a marked man, ever under the eye of God. It is not enough to go to a revival once a year or twice a year; there must be a revival every night. And it is not enough to accept the truth as a mere statement of indisputable and awful fact: it must be embraced ecstatically and orgiastically, to the accompaniment of loud shouts, dreadful heavings and gurglings, and dancing with arms and legs.” In this passage, Mencken does provide the reader with information and news, but his tone is opinionated and judgmental.
This passage also reminded of Thompson’s voice. Thompson and Mencken both communicate their frustration or opinion with a particular group of people, person, a subject. Unlike Mencken’s piece though, Thompson’s stories are a lot more detailed and contain dialogue that makes it feel real.

Anonymous said...

“Nothing succeeds like excess” is definitely exposed in the Coca-Cola belt. Mencken exposes the beliefs people have in the Coca-Cola belt throughout the entire piece and uses biblical and religious language to expose that to the reader.

I think Mencken was a good news reporter because of the language he uses and because it made him different. He used extreme exaggeration in his writing to make an infuriating situation into a parody-style piece for his readers. Rather than keeping it an angry piece, he made it fun to read and probably easier to understand.

This piece also reminded me of Thompson’s style. Although both of these authors aren't fully factual, they both use their styles to reveal their views on the events from their time.