The Cursed Human Race – A Critical Analysis

Mark Twain’s ‘The Damned Human Race’ is a satire on humanity reflecting on how it has ended up worse off than the animals. The writer intends to highlight the darkest side of the corner of morality that according to him, like any other virtue, carries its own vices. He uses argumentative, cynical and indignant tones throughout his essay and shows an admirable coherence in it. The language is kept moderately easy with fairly long sentences and very little slang. His audience is the entire human race who are expected to reconsider and reflect on his actions. The essay has successfully drawn its readers to the purpose and is very thought provoking.

The writer tells how his studies on the behavior of animals and humans have led him to conclude that humans descend from higher animals. The use of irony during the comparison, in the introductory paragraph, draws readers in quite effectively. The writer then clearly describes how his conclusions are not based on mere assumptions or guesswork, but are in fact the results of the scientific method. He then specifies the human race into a distinct group of species and continues his experiments.

The writer then argues how an earl killed seventy-two buffalo just for his pleasure, in contrast to the anacondas who did not attack the calves in excess of their requirements. He then uses deductive reasoning to determine that not the anaconda but man himself has descended from these animals, which is ironic in nature and directly contradicts Darwinian theory. The reader may find himself opposed to the writer’s stance initially, but the writer does his best not to leave room for the reader to be unconvinced in later paragraphs.

Connect the conduct of this earl with the common behavior of the human race whose ‘craving for more’ has no end. The efficient use of descriptive tools by the writer has added beauty to the essay and made it more captivating. He claims that his experiments with squirrels and bees have given quite amazing results and have shown that the animals do not hoard extra food even when persuaded to do so. The man alone finds himself accumulating millions of money that he doesn’t even need.

In addition, he maintains that only man keeps hate alive in his heart and keeps the coldness inside. Only he can impose himself on the other fellow members and chain them for his own benefit. Vulgarity and insult are also man’s inventions. The writer gives examples from history around the world to prove the misuse of power by man himself. The way he cites all the incidents is very persuasive and the rhetoric is well maintained.

Unfortunately, man is also the only animal that attacks in groups and wages war on his fellows. The writer gives examples from Hessians and Napoleon to support this argument and shows how man is involved in robberies and other crimes that animals cannot commit. Man is also the only religious animal. The writer again uses satire and symbolism to explain man’s status in the world. He credits her with killing his brothers in the name of religion with incredible ease and refers to the cases of the Caesars, the French Revolution and Mary’s day in England.

The writer shows cynicism by calling man a fool for not being able to learn the tolerance that animals would have when they were domesticated. He compares the two groups as control groups in a scientific experiment and logically proves how his results show that men cannot learn acceptance like animals. The symbolic use of people from different regions in the issue evokes an emotional response in the reader and creates contemporary relevance for them.

Twain then concludes that the real reason behind this behavior of humans is their morality. If man had never known evil from good, he would never have leaned towards it. The writer makes use of the logos appeal in the essay and his own understanding of the idea is unquestioned even though the issue remains debatable. He is seen maintaining a liberal and unbiased point of view throughout the essay with a tone that also turns bitterly true at various points. My personal views agree with those of the writer and it would not be wrong to say that the writer has not only fairly judged human behaviors but has also done them justice in explaining him.