All The King's Men Analysis

Words: 476
Pages: 2

Life in Louisiana during the early 1900’s was plagued with degradation, poverty, and hopelessness. In the novel All the King’s Men by Robert Penn Warren, Willie stark is a driven educated man who uses his convincing nature and powerful sense of authority to become the governor of Louisiana. During his term as governor, Stark gets in some legal trouble with the state due to his extensive push to try and get more funding for the multiple projects he wanted to pursue to make life better for the less privileged people of Louisiana. The government of Louisiana filed for an impeachment of Governor Willie Stark due to his unprecedented financial processes. Robert Penn Warren includes this entire debate to demonstrate an example of principles versus values.
Louisiana's legislation accused Governor Stark of taking away their authority in the state and having intent “to corrupt, coerce, and blackmail”( Warren 207). The legislative assembly used lawful authority to convince the people that Willie Stark should no longer be holding office as
…show more content…
Stark was using his morals to try and do what was good for the citizens who voted him into office. During one of Stark’s speeches, he questioned the people and asked “have I disappointed you? [...] Don’t answer until you look into the depth of your heart to see the truth. For there is where the truth is. Not in a book. Not in a lawyer's book. Not on any scrap of paper. In your heart” (Warren 208). The governor was trying to use the people's honorable judgement as a target point by using demonstrative rhetoric. A demonstrative rhetoric is a argumentative method that “focuses on the present tense, delineating what’s good and bad, right and wrong “ (Heinrichs 297). This form of persuasion is used to encourage people to vote in favor of their own values in