In a letter written by Samuel Johnson during the year 1762, he skillfully addresses the

appeal of a mother inquiring about a favor for her son. The intended purpose of the letter is to
deny the original request of the mother without placing blame on Johnson himself. The womans
request was for Johnson to obtain the archbishop of Canterburys patronage in order to help her
son gain access into university. The author of the letter, Samuel Johnson, is able to skillfully craft
his denial of the womens request by lengthening the explanation of his rejection, using tonal
shift, and utilizing the rhetorical appeal of logos.
One strategy the author uses in order to shape his denial of the womens request is to
elongate his response of no. The author uses 39 lines, and three paragraphs in order to soften his
immediate answer to the woman. For example, he writes in depth about the meaning of hope and
why sometimes too much can lead to generous disappointment. The author explains how hope is
related to being happy, and might be the greatest way people seek joy in this world; however, a
large amount of hope must be compensated by pain. Johnson ends by stating how high
expectations too thoroughly yearned for, must eventually end in disappointment. What the author
really intended to say was that maintaining false hope he would follow through with the
womans request, was ridiculous and naive on her part. The author hopes that the woman will
think about whether the request was legitimized, and understand why he was so prolonged in
writing the response and explaining his answer. In this way, the author intends that the mother
will see his point of view, and take responsibility for his denial.
Another strategy employed by Sam Johnson, in order to skillfully craft his denial letter, is
the use of a tonal shift. Leading up until the second paragraph, the writers tone had remained
soft and regretful, as shown in the amount of writing he uses to address hope in relation to the
situation. However, as one moves deeper into the letter, Johnsons change in demeanor is

noticeably obvious. The audience has now been presented with a tonal shift. In this area of the
letter, Johnson begins to address the mother directly, and has harsher tonality. In one example of
a change, Johnson refers to the women directly and repeatedly as madam and you. In
another example, he states how the proposal is remote and straying from usual methods, and
that an answer of yes to her request would lead to suspicions that would be inconsiderate of
her to make him go through. In this way, Johnson has begun to deflect blame onto the woman
for his own denial. He communicates that if her son does not make it to university, it will not be
due to his denial, but rather the mothers lack of reasoning. Johnsons use of a tonal shift, allows
him to state his right to deny, and also allows him to deflect any outcome of his denial onto the
woman.
Johnsons use of logos appeal is another strategy applied in the context of the denial
letter. The writer begins to reason with the mother, in order to justify his reason for his denial of
her request. This is also a change from the use of deeper thinking by explaining the meaning of
hope and expectation, to just simply stating his main argument. For example, Johnson states how
he has never met or spoken to either the archbishop of Canterbury or the womans son. He
continues on to explain to the woman, that because he has never been in contact with her son
before, he would therefore be unable to determine the truth of the young mans character.
Johnson also questions why out of all the other young men in the land hoping to begin university,
that the Archbishop would select her son. In this way, Johnson is secretly imploring the woman
to stop and consider the sense behind her request. Johnson is communicating that the woman
should have stopped and asked herself these questions, and then realizing the extent of her
request, refrained herself from sending the offer. The writer continues to reason by stating why
he compared to any another man should help with the request. He implies that there is no logic

anywhere in her request. Johnson skillfully uses rationale and deduction, to create guilt on the
womans behalf, which in turn helps to skilfully craft his denial of the womens request.