Death Penalty Essays

I believe that Kroll's essay was much more persuasive, mostly due to the fact that it hits the reader with the pathos appeal like a sledgehammer. If the reader is already susceptible to this kind of appeal, they'll be drawn in hook, line, and sinker. Even if the reader isn't particularly susceptible to pathos, they'll still be able to feel sympathy towards Kroll's explanation and perspective on the events, as compared to Mencken's essay, which does not come off as a raw, emotional reading experience, but instead seems much more self-centered and dismissive. Kroll appears to be writing not only to appeal to the average person's sympathies, but also to those who have undergone the same experiences as him. With Mencken, he writes as though he's the only right one and everybody else is wrong. This is rather unpleasant to read, especially given the fact that he insults the intelligence of those against the death penalty in the first paragraph. Kroll caters more towards his reader's emotions and experiences, while Mencken just seems to be catering to his own opinions.