A Rhetorical Analysis of Darrin McMahon’s “In Pursuit of Unhappiness”

Happiness seems to be something that can be defined by anyone, even little children, but does this state of well-being characterized by emotions of contentment and intense joy have a history? Maybe it does because it is associated with human beings, as Mansfield (2006, p. 30) states. If there is human nature, then there is human happiness, seemingly available to all humans at all times and places. Thus, if happiness has a history, then it does not lack some scope for change. There should be some doubt in understanding or defining it as every individual wants to be happy and gratify his/her temporary pleasures. However, happiness is ironic because most individuals do not know how to define it.

Darrin McMahon has extensively discussed the issue of happiness in his work “In Pursuit of Unhappiness”. Happiness has been interpreted modernly in this description, and the writer tells how to attain and approach this mirth. This essay makes a rhetorical analysis as it demonstrates how the author uses all three elements of the rhetorical appeals: ethos, logos, and pathos. He uses pathos to appeal to his audience about the beliefs towards happiness; he uses logos as his text is based on logic, reasoning, and evidence to effectively appeal to his audience. Ethos is seen in the text as his character and expertise as a historian pleases his audience and makes them think critically about happiness. The author wrote this text to change the traditional norm about happiness as he tries to persuade his audience that happiness is achieved when one gives his/her attention to others.

Author

The writer of the text “In Pursuit of Unhappiness” is a historian, Darrin McMahon. McMahon (2005) describes himself as a college professor of History at Dartmouth College, a scholar, and a public speaker. Apart from this text, he has also written other books. His experience, knowledge, and wit as a historian, professor, researcher, and scholar bring out the element of ethos in the text as his credibility convinces his audience of his beliefs about happiness. When McMahon wrote this text, his purpose was to give a different perception of happiness from the usual traditional norm. Mansfield (2006, p. 30) argues that McMahon believes in the Aristotle's Greek definition of happiness that says happiness is attained in death but excludes Aristotle's conclusion of happiness where he thinks happiness is about having a noble birth, having excellent and many friends, having a lot of wealth, having luck, good old age, beauty, good health, honor, virtues, etc. This demonstrates logos, as his reasoning is not an imagination but a conclusion from the researched works of Aristotle. Mansfield (2006, p. 31) states that McMahon needed to write this text to divert Americans from the classical idea of happiness. He wanted people to change their perceptions by making his audience more concerned about others. McMahon claims that to pursue his/her happiness, he/she will have no choice other than to see outside himself/herself and make efforts to make others happy first. This way, he/she will achieve happiness that will be long-lasting.

Audience

McMahon's “In Pursuit of Unhappiness” has no specific audience. The text was addressed to Americans and people from the rest of the world. According to Lanchester (2006, p. 79), this text was written and published on December 25, 2005, in the Atlantic Monthly Press in America when McMahon was a historian at Florida State University. The factors that surrounded the events of the text are the belief in the American dream. as According to McMahon (2005), after the declaration of independence Americans were urged to pursue happiness and they were made to believe that if one wants to be happy, he/she must do everything in his/her power to make life perfect to achieve happiness. It is unattainable that life is full of ups and downs; it comes with negativity and positivity, eventually bringing heartbreaks and traumas. McMahon wanted to show his audience that happiness can only be achieved after one experiences heartbreak. This way, life will be appreciated more, and people will be able to grow from the negative experience and accept that there is no such a perfect thing as a happy life. Pathos is openly portrayed here as this statement is an emotional appeal; it makes the audience feel pity for themselves.

Voice

McMahon’s overall tone of the text is ironic, pragmatic, and pensive. His use of words and writing style to convey his attitude towards happiness is ironic. Here, the element of logos is evident as he uses logical reasoning to discuss happiness and makes it appear to be the opposite of what it means. It is also pragmatic, and his writing depicts him as realistic and a man of sensible character, which brings out ethos. McMahon (2005) says he has explored philosophical and economic ideas across-the-board, and he points out the strong continuities in his text. Ethos also occurs as the author researched this topic before writing and wrote the text based on introspective and philosophical grounds, quoting economists Richard Layard and Daniel Kahneman and philosophers Carlyle and John Mill.

Genre

The genre employed in this kind of literature is rhetoric because McMahon’s writing is nonfiction, and he uses a language that effectively persuades his audience. His language displays pathos as it makes the audience feel compassion for themselves. The strategy McMahon employs is a short work of related theories and a tone of sincerity. He does not follow a prescribed methodology. Lanchester (2006, p. 80) points out that McMahon used sources from the founding fathers of happiness to convey his passion and authority on the same subject. His deviation from the norm of pursuing happiness brings out the element of ethos as the text depicts the understanding of happiness in the 18th century, which was misunderstood at the time of the American Declaration of Independence.

Effectiveness

McMahon is rhetorically effective as his emotional language pleases the audience, and this displays pathos. He clearly defines and discusses what he thinks happiness is. McMahon (2005) uses John Mill's description of happiness as his own. This text moves me as the author strongly trusts that happiness is not about oneself but for those whose minds are fixed on some object apart from their happiness for the sake of others. The text also makes me think critically and differently about happiness, as McMahon also convinces me that the only way I can be happy is by making others happy.

To conclude, this work demonstrates that McMahon utilizes ethos, pathos, and logos elements of the rhetorical appeals. McMahon uses pathos in an emotional tone to invoke sympathy and make his audience feel the importance of being concerned about others to attain happiness. His sensible character, rational thinking bring ethos, which makes the audience feel what McMahon feels himself and draws pity from the audience. Lastly, McMahon uses logos to cite scholars. He logically and passionately expresses his thoughts concerning happiness and successfully appeals to his audience to meditate analytically. Using pathos, ethos and logos, the subject of happiness is perceived differently than the way it used to be.

Finally, everyone wishes to be happy. It does not depend on the situation one is in, whether one is doing something he/she loves or is with a person he/she loves. Whether one is enjoying peacefulness and the comfort of his/her home or playing in the fields. What matters the most is to sit down and think about life, how beneficial it would be if every person respected others, enjoyed others’ company, and gave material and emotional support. This will make people happy and the world a bit better.