Phil Final Essay

Phil Final Paper Ana Sharma
May 8th 2021

Can a wrong be undone? Pick one work that we have read and use it to explain your position.
Abstract
We naturally think ourselves – “normal” adult human beings as – “free”. Free to define,
segregate and differentiate the two: wrong and right. In this paper, I will explain the relationship
between free will and the various notions that fall under the rubric of morality unfolding whether
or not a wrong can be undone. All the Kings Men, will be a guideline to sketch out the
development of theories that dealt with the maturity of an individual aiding in the classification
of the “right” and “wrong”. With the extensive political learnings that Warren leans towards,
Jack Burden, on the other hand, seems to have portrayed an entire philosophical transformation:
a change from a carefree idealist to a man of moral responsibility. This character growth, rather
struggle for self-definition, the underlying mythical movement of flight from reality and eventual
and painful return to acceptance and responsibility embodies the interesting concept of gaining
moral rights through acting wrongly. The difficult times that Jack Burden has gone through
causes his awakening at the end of the novel, ushering his maturation justifying that wrongs can
be bettered but never undone. Acts of duplicity and doubleness as political experiences structure
the novel and formulate a helpful outline that imitates configurations of what we call ‘correct’.
This paper will shed light upon the “Great Twitch” theory of Jack Burden that encourages
distancing himself from responsibility, and rebuff as all human actions are random phenomena. I
will attempt to explain the pragmatic, scientific, spiritual and ethical principles tied along with
All the Kings Men’s examples to unfold if one’s wrongs can be entirely undone.
Exposition/Introduction
What is correct or not delivers a meaning that is branched from collective opinions, but how can
one evaluate an action and identify it to be a wrong-doing that must be undone? Can it be
undone? Warren creates fictional characters in All the Kings Men to reveal the populist rhetoric
rise in power of Willie Stark through the lens of journalist Jack Burden. On a basic level, it can
be seen as a roman à clef —a novel in which real persons appear as fictional characters.1 Most
critics suggest that the novel recites a saddened commentary about the truth of Louisiana’s
politics, recognizing demagogic Willie Stark similar to Huey Long, the former governor of
Louisiana. Jack Burden, on the other hand, is operating under the burden of learning how to
come to grips with his present life in light of his knowledge of past reality. He is seen as a
character that hunts for a realistic experience despite rendering in imagination. To become the
artificer of Willie Stark’s meteoric rise and tragic fall, Jack Burden campaigns in secret,
conducting political blackmails against individual legislators and falsely ensuring that Stark can
remain in office. With this secondary story of Burden about his quest to understand the world
around him and by “changing the picture of the world in his head”, the story becomes more of a
1. All the King's Men | Encyclopedia.com. (2021). Retrieved 8 May 2021, from https://www.encyclopedia.com/arts/educational-magazines/all-kings-men
All the King's Men | Encyclopedia.com. (2021). Retrieved 8 May 2021, from https://www.encyclopedia.com/arts/educational-magazines/all-kings-men
2. Hein, D., & Hein, D. (2020). Robert Penn Warren’s "All the King’s Men": The Agony of Will ~ The Imaginative Conservative. Retrieved 8 May 2021, from
https://theimaginativeconservative.org/2020/04/robert-penn-warren-all-the-kings-men-david-hein.html
3. (2021). Retrieved 8 May 2021, from https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdf/10.1086/intejethi.21.2.2377032
4. Willie Stark as Political Leader: Perspectives on Political Science: Vol 37, No 2. (2021). Perspectives On Political Science. Retrieved from
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.3200/PPSC.37.2.91-98
May 8th 2021
source revealing the human conditions in the context of politics. His character development from
a failed historian who eventually recovers his profession by making an authentic accommodation
to the past, is a process that painfully reconciles historical techniques with historical meaning.
I argue that thinking of Stark’s politics in the broad sense, as a formative regime that
shapes individual characters, may explain why Burden’s private struggles take on their particular
character. Furthermore, as my analysis progresses, I aim to discuss how Burden’s moral and
intellectual crises are intimately related to the character of Stark’s politics. Being the mastermind
behind Stark’s “dirty political work”, Burden most likely developed an inferiority complex
whilst gradually revealing that he hid from the present most of his life; shameful of his own
history. Most importantly though, are the deeper meanings to Jack’s diggings and how he wants
to use history and the past to generate a positive change in the present. From his perspective, as
he calls himself, “a brass-bound idealist”2, idealism was very simple: the unknown was unreal.
Similar to this thought is the Great Twitch theory which most will overlook as just another
coping mechanism for pain. For the case of Jack, he is in pain after his disconnection with Anne
and senses a feeling of abandonment from his father too. By the end of the novel, Jack’s
character trades his strong idealism in for humanism and that is when he releases that wrongs can
be forgiven and that the grass could be greener elsewhere.
These difficulties under the light of philosophical idealism, are those which surround the
conception of forgiveness. Similar to Burden’s conceptions of simply dodging problems, people
and predicaments from the past, the general notion that forgiveness of sin is possible or there is
such a thing as genuine acquittal for wrong, plays a huge role in understanding whether or not
wrongs can be fully undone. These failures are our pasts, the duties we failed to fulfill and the
performances that have been fallen short of what was required of us.3 As these failures are pasts,
they are facts, fixed and totally immovable. Forgiving these so-called “wrongs” does not mean
they are erased, completely undone and changed. Rather, it is to be compassed and to forbear
nihilist reactions wherein forgetting follows naturally. Jack, however, notices that he is unable to
curtail his anguish by this ignorance, by escaping from the truth and so, he admits responsibility.
His penance takes the form of seeking reconciliation with people for whom he once felt a deep
contempt—and when he forgives their frailty, he experiences forgiveness for his frailty.
Throughout the narration, Jack manages to be the foreground of the novel whilst speaking
Willie’s story too and attempts to retain a convincing façade of detachment. His involvement in
the story as much as it is leads his façade to vanish, revealing his thoughts belie his feelings.
Thus, this stance of detachment is a masterwork of paradox: loaded with Burden’s cynicism
translating into a demeanor of apathy. The unfolding of Burden’s character shows his maturity
and expresses what he learns about human condition: the reasoning behind committing evil or
illegal acts. His first reason simply being human tendency and nature making use of theological
concepts of original sin suggesting that humans have an innate bent towards evil or selfish acts.
Secondly, he focuses on the issue more narrowly or rather, superficially, than solely questioning
human nature. This attempt of his uncovers the specific triggers that lead to this behavior
May 8th 2021
classified as “improper”. He denotes them under the main four temptations: love, ambition, fear
and money.4
Characters in All the Kings Men reflect each of those temptations to commit evil in some form or
the other which is one of the main reasons I chose it to unwind the particular question of if a
wrong can be undone. Examples would include the desire to acquire money motivating Judge
Irwin and Byram White whilst Ann Stanton and Sadie Burke act on love but more specifically,
desire. Even son, Tom Stark, appears as the epitome of self-absorption, representing the original
sin displaying arrogance. Willie Stark, however, does not fit easily into any of these categories.4
With his endless attempts to maintain an admirable persona: a self-made, committed man, the
politician inclinations of fearing blackmail and being driven by ambition, runs in his blood
regardless. Despite that, Stark lives up to his ‘corrupt politician’ imagery wherein he continually
pretends, manipulates and gains casual rhetorical fluff to garner public attention. It is the
ambition that drives him to practice anything, even if it were to be drenched in dishonesty and
deceit, to attain success. From his colloquial diction and insults to his collegial banter amongst
his very own supporters, if Stark is looked upon as a bad representative is an unencumbered
opinion revolving around perception. Similarly is the freedom of identifying the dichotomy
between right and wrong that allows audiences: either supporters or rivals to categorize
themselves as one out of those two. His invocation of corruptly using the money attained from
taxes to preserve the ‘sacredness of the ballot’(JSTOR)* are common misdemeanors Stark indulged
in. Despite being involved in these acts of duplicity, Stark identified himself as one of ‘the
people’. Evidently, his idealism grows into strategic pragmatism as he fails to win this support
that keeps him going through competence and righteousness. His strategic pragmatist views
involved making false promising, lying, manipulating and fabricating stories.
“Make ‘em think you’re God-Almighty. Make ‘em mad. Just stir ‘em up, it doesn’t matter
how or why, and they’ll love you and come back for more. Maybe you try to tell ’em too much. It
breaks down their brain cells.”(JSTOR)* Burden’s suggestions of befriending audiences solidifies
Stark’s outsider status and provokes him to ‘entertain’. His methods and styles of bribery and
intimidation were highly influenced by his poor background but these schemes brainwashed and
hold account for his power and what at the same time are responsible for his downfall. These
wrongful doings, although being done to result in good deeds such as the rebuilding of rural
roads and hospitals to increase the access to care in the region, are unchangeably still, wrongful
doings. Critically looked upon as fraudulence and deceptiveness; these outlooks do not change
regardless of the reason behind doing something wrong. Lying for a purpose and fabrication of
some futuristic situations may create an optimistic approach in the present but will always come
with baggage so are these acts of ambiguity acceptable?
In context of All the Kings Men, the question above is elaborately looked upon as Stark
noticeably exercises his political muscle by attempting to deliver the most effective speeches
wherein he could glorify and concoct situations to gain the audiences’ listening ears. This
May 8th 2021
continuous tactic of “telling ‘em too much” is actually an unhealthy strategy of emotional
manipulation. This is because it is an intentional psychological tactic used by political leaders to
engage, control or influence the set desires. It is an unknowing practice gradually leading to the
assault of the mind. If these acts are perceived the way as explained previously, they are acts that
can be bettered or modified but never undone. The attainment of social, authoritative power is
grasped once and used forever. The other side of the coin however, will acknowledge this tactic
of manipulation as the most important factor in leadership allowing these potential ‘wrong-
doings’ to surpass freely without backlash. Stark’s continuous manipulative techniques are
noticed and are the reasons behind his detrimental repute but are also the claps and votes he
receives each time. Despite the ingenuity of his words, Stark manages to create a platform to
articulate a controlled campaign receiving desired reactions from his audiences. Perhaps doing
the socially classified “wrong things” for the right reasons isn’t blameworthy. At one end, these
things may be impermissible; offending against the dictates of morality and at another, it may be
delinquent; licensing criticism of the agent. The intensity of moral theories varies and makes the
identification of a wrongful act difficult to interpret as there are endless preferred frameworks.
Hence, the question of if they can be undone remains unanswered and depends on person to
person. Similarly, it is a tough job to prove either the free will or the determinist position.
Free will, as my umbrella term, opens views to the way the world labels “the right
doings”. Some philosophers, more specifically determinists, like Descartes, argue that the idea of
free will is simply a myth or an illusion; a figment of our imaginative mind wherein we are the
more conscious witnesses of discussion that deep in our brain have already been determined. On
the other hand, philosophers such as Tolstoy cling to the views that “if every man could act as he
chose, the whole of history would be a tissue of disconnected accidents”(Digital Comm*) , meaning
that if one law controls all action of man, there is no such existence of free will and instead, we
are just subjects to that law. Politics, in connection to this, exhibits tests that either seem
pragmatic and sometimes actually are. An embodiment of this simple test is illustrated through
Burden’s life: if a man attempts to operate ethically from the premise, the experience is so
reducible that he immediately arrives at the dead end of alienation.
Stark’s political rise, however, shifts his behavior to a morally suspected kind towards the end of
the novel. There is an evident yet slight desire for revenge and a validation-seeking nature that is
generally overlooked as a narcissistic personality, propelling the rise of Stark as a corrupt
governor. He says “this time I am going to fool somebody”, “When I come back to run for
Governor again, I’m coming on my own and I’m coming for blood.” Additionally, to rationalize
his terrorizing statements and to vindicate the intentional rousing towards the crowd’s anger by
addressing them as “friends, red-necks, suckers and fellow hicks”, Willie immediately identifies
himself with the crowd: “And me—I’m one, too.” These leaps between insulting but then
comforting is another example of his manipulative techniques that if critically analyzed, would
be classified as a wrongful duty that can be forgiven but not undone.
May 8th 2021
The reason All the King’s Men remains relevant isn’t primarily because we always have
politicians who act like Willie Stark, it’s that Willie Stark might be right: that if you want
goodness you really do have “to make it out of badness.” No other politicians mentioned in the
novel escapes corruption whilst Stark probably does more good for the region than any of them.
More modestly, what readers can say is that Willie Stark—like the U.S. political system in which
he participates—is complex and flawed, clearly in need of reform, but recognizably and
desperately human that is always capable of doing good even if too often only with dirtied hands.
Burden’s understanding of human existence as a collection of blind electrical impulses is an
ideology that dovetails with his rejection of idealism, opens him up to life and its reality with all
the pleasure and pain. All the Kings Men begins this spiritual pilgrimage for Burden, a
flamboyance experience for Willie and a better understanding of the dichotomy of right and
wrong for readers.
Additional Citations:
*(JSTOR)
: The Stark Regime and American Democracy: A Political Interpretation of Robert Penn Warren's "All the King's Men" on JSTOR .
(2021). Retrieved 8 May 2021, from https://www.jstor.org/stable/3117715?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents

*(Digital Comm.)
: (2021). Retrieved 8 May 2021, from https://digitalcommons.wku.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1033&context=rpwstudies
Others:
1. Men, R., & University, L. (2001). Robert Penn Warren's <em>All the King's Men</em>. Retrieved 8 May 2021, from https://www.c-
span.org/video/?167453-1/robert-penn-warrens-all-kings-menhttps://www.c-span.org/video/?167453-1/robert-penn-warrens-all-
kings-men
2. Descartes, Rene | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. (2021). Retrieved 8 May 2021, from https://iep.utm.edu/descarte/
3. (2021). Retrieved 8 May 2021, from https://kas.berkeley.edu/documents/Issue_101/8-Romano.pdf

Phil Final Essay

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Phil Final Essay

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Phil Final Paper Ana Sharma

May 8th 2021

3. (2021). Retrieved 8 May 2021, from https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdf/10.1086/intejethi.21.2.2377032

3. (2021). Retrieved 8 May 2021, from https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdf/10.1086/intejethi.21.2.2377032

3. (2021). Retrieved 8 May 2021, from https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdf/10.1086/intejethi.21.2.2377032

3. (2021). Retrieved 8 May 2021, from https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdf/10.1086/intejethi.21.2.2377032

(2021). Retrieved 8 May 2021, from https://www.jstor.org/stable/3117715?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents

3. (2021). Retrieved 8 May 2021, from https://kas.berkeley.edu/documents/Issue_101/8-Romano.pdf

3. (2021). Retrieved 8 May 2021, from https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdf/10.1086/intejethi.21.2.2377032

You might also like