MENCKEN SUPPORTED IN LANDSLIDE VOTE

By an overwhelming vote of the audience the negative of the question, Resolved: That the school of thought represented by H. L. Mencken is inimical to American Culture, was defended at a meeting of the Debating Union last night.

The first speaker for the affirmative, D. W. Chapman '27, scored Mr. Mencken's writing as useless and his critical invective as ineffective in reaching the marks it is aimed at. Chapman said that Mencken attacks the obviously commonplace, the Babbitts, the Dayton ministers, Rotarians and others who do not hear him because they do not buy the Mercury. Chapman likewise attacked the criticism of Mencken's school as consisting largely of exaggeration. He also pointed out his fallacious one-sided interest in life--he sees only the perverted, ignorant side. Chapman's conclusion was that it might be better to ignore Mencken than to oppose him since by opposing we are likely to give him undue popularity and emphasis.

F. S. Gupper '26 upheld Mencken on the ground that his chief efforts have been to create a new and distinctive American art.

Barrett Williams '28 emphasised in essence of the fact that Mr. Mencken has considerable capability, but he merely wastes his time in poking fun at people, which people never read what he says.

The final speaker of the meeting was K. F. White '27, who supported the negative on the basis that Mencken being primarily a humorist, should not be taken seriously enough to be thought to have any effect at all on American culture. He further stated that Mencken represented no real school of thought, and since there was no American culture Mencken could not be said to be inimical to it even if we are inclined to take his writings seriously.

The debate was waged with considerable flippancy and sarcasm by both sides, and laughter was much provoked.