I wrote this up before looking at the other essays. Thanks x10 to whoever corrects my essay!!!
Charles Slack argues that despite the publication of To set a watchman, Harper Lee’s legacy still remains preserved. Slack claims that Lee “continues to move millions of new readers each year”, suggesting that her popularity is unwavering. By mentioning that “Hollywood… translat[ed] the book into one of the greatest movies of all time”, slack invites the readers to measure the success of Harper Lee’s novels to be so extensive that Hollywood, a distinguished movie capital, has produced a successful movie about it. As such, bringing the novels into context with Hollywood and movie production, the readership is positioned to perceive the novel as significantly influential. Furthermore, Slack exaggerates the extent of Lee’s legacy by describing her literature to be “beloved by readers”, “move millions of new readers”,”shatter[ing] sales records” and is “one of the most beloved works of American literature”. This constant emphasis on her success establishes an admirable, appreciative tone that evokes awe in readers for the success of Harper Lee. Also, the fact that Lee allegedly still has such a profound influence on the literature world “more than half a half-century after publication” demonstrates to the audience that the success of Harper Lee is unquavering, thus lingering to be a legacy. Slack then reinforces his argument by suggesting to readers with opposing views to consider why other “writers [are] hoping to experience the same tragedy”. Tragedy is satirically labled in this article to denote success, and Slack manipulates this in a humorous manner to position the audience to view that Lee’s literature success is long lived and her influence is not a tragedy, but an ambition.