"Civil Disobedience" by Henry David Thoreau and "Letter from Birmingham Jail" by Martin Luther King, Jr.

"Civil Disobedience" by Henry David Thoreau and "Letter from Birmingham Jail" by Martin Luther King, Jr. are both powerful, effective essays that adeptly convey their messages. However, I not only loved reading MLK’s essay much more, I find his way of presenting his argument much more effective as opposed to Thoreau. Both authors call the reader to help join in on marking an end to slavery—take immediate action. The message in both texts is the same in that they both call people to use their conscience to see the evils of slavery. For me, Thoreau was too wordy. Moreover, it was complicated—I had to read most sentences twice to understand what he was saying.
MLK’s form of writing is by far one of the best ones I’ve read. He has a unique way of reaching out to the reader. Throughout the letter, he is calm, friendly, and peaceful. He addresses his audience as “friends, brothers” many times. I found this very effective because it made me feel directly attached to him, pulled me right into his ideas. His writing flows and he makes his argument in an extremely orderly, logical way. Response and attribution are evident throughout the entire letter, making his argument credible. Anything that may raise an eyebrow or create any confusion on the reader’s behalf, he acknowledges immediately and provides clarification. For example, he starts the letter off by talking directly to the reader, “I want to try to answer your statements in what I hope will be patient and reasonable terms.”
He further goes on to analyze each of his point, citing any questions the reader may have. This is demonstrated in, “You may well ask: "Why direct action? Why sit-ins, marches and so forth? Isn't negotiation a better path?" You are quite right in calling, for negotiation. Indeed, this is the very purpose of direct action.” I found this technique extremely effective for I felt that King was answering really any opposing argument and clearing up any confusion. It is truly marvelous.
Another literary device widely employed by King is the usage of allusion. He alludes to many great leaders, intellects, such as Socrates. He does this adeptly, smoothly putting their beliefs to support his argument. This is seen in his citation of the history of nonviolent action, “To a degree, academic freedom is a reality today because Socrates practiced civil disobedience. In our own nation, the Boston Tea Party represented a massive act of civil disobedience.”
In the incredibly long paragraph where King is citing the myriad ways blacks faced prejudice, he achieves tremendous sympathy, understanding from the reader. He puts in his own personal experience of his daughter and how the harsh truth bit her so badly. I found that one paragraph so poignant, and crucial to his argument as it tells of people’s stories.
While I enjoyed both texts, MLK’s was by far more effective and is now one of my favorite readings of all time.