A Letter to You on Vulgar Opinions

Benjamin Franklin’s Manual

Benjamin Franklin owned a manual titled The Art of Letter-Writing written by “A Gentleman of Fortune.” I imagine he referred to it often. Remember, he basically founded the USPS as we know it today. Serving as the first Postmaster General (which is THE coolest title a person can hold) he established regular mail routes and implemented standard rates using weight and distance. So he was basically an expert at mail.

I’ve been to several Ben Franklin museums in my time and this is just one of his most brilliant accomplishments. If I perchance to go to Boston, Philadelphia, or my local post office, I am sure to give reverence in some capacity. I might pay homage by casually telling the person in line behind me, “Lost time is never found again, eh?” or whispering to the person in front of me, “Three may keep a secret, if two of them are dead!” to speed things along, or when I get to the front, by laying down a penny and telling the clerk,

“A penny saved is a penny earned!”
Clerk: “Stamps are seventy-three cents, m’am.”

(73 cents. What would my BFF BF say to that!)

OR, to really do something good and profitable, by learning about and implementing the Benjamin Franklin Effect which feels particularly useful and apropos in this current climate.

Today I’m going to attempt to either “Write something worth reading or do something worth writing.” Time will tell.

According to Wikipedia, Franklin held the title of "‘The First American’ for his early and indefatigable campaigning for colonial unity.”

As the “Father of the USPS” or “OG American Penpal” as I’d like to call him, it makes perfect sense that Ben Franklin would own a book with instructions on how to write a letter. And it makes perfect sense that I would be drawn to such a document. We are kind of soul friends, after all.

I found a scan of the manual online and it’s split up into sections of general instructions and examples of types of letters, ranging from simple to quite specific:

Letters of Thanks
Letters of Compliment
Letters of Request
Letters of Congratulations
Answers to Letters of Congratulations (Ha. Is there a “Reply to Answers to Letters of Congratulations?” Probably)
Letters complaining of a long Silence (There are seven different sections for this topic alone. Probably because the author was waiting a really long time for someone to write back. “How to write your seventh letter to someone who has ghosted you or possibly died but I-i mean-you won’t know for three more months.”)

Here are some more:

Letter from a Lady to her Husband at the Army in Germany
Letter from a Brother to a Sister, with a Present sent to her (I like this)
Letter to a virtuous Lady, on her ill State of Health (I don’t know why her virtue is relevant, given that her illness seems the more pressing thing)
Letter of Consolation to a Friend, on his Disgrace
Letter on the absurd and ridiculous indulgence of fond mothers to their children (well that’s your opinion)
Letter from a young gentleman, reflecting on the absurd and unmanly education given him by his mother (What is WITH all the mom hate??)
To a great man on his being re-instated in favour at court (classic. Also, does this refer to tip #4? Twist!)
Letter on marriage
Letter to dissuade a friend from thinking of marrying
Letter on riches
Letter on folly (excellent)
On avaricious gluttony (imaging writing such a letter to someone. “Dear ____, it is incumbent on me to tell you…”)
On the education of daughters (hopefully in the affirmative)
On death and eternity (keeping it light)

A few of my particular favorites:

To dissuade a friend from living in celibacy
Letter of expostulation
Letter to divert a sick friend from his impatient and peevish temper
Letter to Mr. ________ on vulgar opinions

In summary: what I wouldn’t give to get my hands on a copy of this manual.

---

Critical Reading

In attempting to read this manual, not only was I required to teach myself how to read f’s as s’s, which took a good minute, but I was also reminded—per usual by centuries-old documents—of how we as a species have dumbed ourselves down. While I can easily depress myself by my juxtaposed dull-wittedness, instead I will focus on using this old way of writing to elevate my own ability by making my brain actually work for a change and get perhaps a degree smarter by mere exposure. It hurts but I know it also works, and it’s quite rewarding, so let’s give it a try.

To give you a taste, here is the opening line, complete with arbitrary capitalization and f’s to give an air of the time period. (Also, you really should scroll up and click on the link of the scan. It’s magnificent.)

Nothing is fo common as to write Letters: But it is not a common Thing to indite them well. The Neceffities of Life oblige almoft all Manner of Perfons to have Recourfe to an Epiftolary Correfpondence: For the Ignorant as well as the Learned have often an Occafion to correfpond by Letter with their abfent Friends.

I just experienced a momentary brain death not only from having to do that translation, but the transcription as well. My fingers fought me so hard. But.. no…Jen… why?? Perfons? Recourfe??.. Neceffities.?… I can’t…dooothiiiiisssss..

Stupidity notwithstanding, I am already in love. I can just imagine the author feeling really frustrated with careless penpeople writing tedious, unintelligible letters.

“Come on, Perfons! Put at leaft an infinitefimal amount of Care into your mufings. Learn your letterf! Ufe your Wordf.”

In stupider words, basically he’s like, This is the only way we can correspond with one another so let’s do it well, idiots. These days, that’s not exactly true. I mean, i try to take care in all manner of communiqué, but hardly anyone writes actual letters. Why would we? We have texting or email or phones or Marco Polo. We even have robots to write our words for us.

Still, I’m with GoF (Gentlemen of fortune). In The Art of Letter-Writing, GoF has a million tips. Here’s one, and I will take it upon myself to translate the f’s & s’s, so you don’t have to:

Let nothing be affected in your letters, nor any thing foreign to what you intend to treat of. Write as you speak; that is, without art, without study, and without making a show of your wit. Guard against a rock, which pedants and the unjudicious generally split upon: This is, by either seeking after great and founding words, or a swell of pompous thought, and both very often on frivolous occasions. Such a style and manner will never pass for natural; at least, they will meet with the approbation of none but those who have set aside the decorum of common sense.

It is true, the method of writing as we speak, which is undoubtedly the better because more natural, was not formerly in vogue; but now, few choose to put their mind on the rack to discover the false lustre of a thought: We are pleased to see every thing displayed in natural colours; and, when these colours neither strike the eye nor mind, we are disguised at the difficulties the writer puts us to, as if he designed not to be understood.

First of all: Mind on the Rack, which he capitalized thus, meaning to put your mind under great stress, aka “racking my mind,” is wonderful. Maybe this is what we’re doing trying to read this old text. That’s a good practice, it seems to me.

But have you ever read something that was overly complicated? Maybe you thought, Wow, this is cool. I can’t understand it so it must be good. They must be really smart. They’re better than me because their writing is cluttered and indecipherable. False! Say we. Keep it simple. Keep it clear.

This is not to say the author eschews good, beautiful writing. He just doesn’t want it to cloud the point and purpose, befuddling not only the recipient, but likely the sender as well, revealing whatever it is they’re so desperate to hide. Examine in his own beautiful words:

If his thoughts are confused, if his phrases are unnatural and destitute of that beautiful simplicity, the distinguishing characteristic of the epistolary style; we may, with good reason, conclude that he is a man of scanty knowledge and of a very ill taste.

(I just need to mention here that it was written “diftinguifhing Characteriftic of the Epiftolary Style.” Diftinguifhing?! Brain has now officially passed. RIP)

Ben Franklin apparently felt like his writing was lacking so he worked and worked and worked at it. How did he work at it? In his words:

I took some of the papers, and, making short hints of the sentiment in each sentence, laid them by a few days, and then, without looking at the book, try’d to compleat the papers again, by expressing each hinted sentiment at length, and as fully as it had been expressed before, in any suitable words that should come to hand.

He tried to recreate sentences from memory, perhaps line by line. This sounds so laborious, but also just the kind of bizarre thing with which I might task myself. The only thing I have to compare to is when I was in college and wrote a poem line by line, stanza by stanza, mirroring The Raven. Mine was called The Nazi, a title I somewhat regret, about enforcers of nonsensical rules at BYU pushed by hapless student employees who weren’t any closer to a comprehension of their own. What a treasure. Of all my writings I might leave behind, I pray that that is the one that stays.

As you may know, Ben Franklin further developed his writing skills by writing letters using the pen name Silence Dogood, which he sent to the New-England Courant, a newspaper in Boston and the closest thing to a blog available at the time. He’d tried and failed to get letters published under his own name and under “Mrs. Silence Dogood,” he found success. I find that interesting. Also it might be important to note his brother James founded the newspaper so maybe he’s the one who gave Ben the idea.
“Bro, listen… this is my newspaper…”

I’ve been perusing the letters and here’s one that is just so enrichingly intelligent, relevant, and full of thoughtfully constructed words to the wise, I must include it here, to close out this essay. The letter is borrowed from this site and includes links to other sources which I will also include.

The Challenge

Since we have practiced our reading comprehension, now’s your chance to put your critical reading and critical thinking skills to the test.

First, you must decipher. There are no f’s as s’s here, but there is random capitalization and k’s Noah Webster since took off (thanks again). So take your time. Read slowly and don’t move on until you feel you understand what he’s saying, even if you’re not sure.

Second, reflect. Let it sink in. Ponder. Consider the recipient for whom these letters were intended. At a time when many of us would rather be told what to think, let’s take back that power. What do you think Franklin is trying to say? What resonates? What feels true? Can you draw some parallels to you in your modern life? Do you agree with Franklin?

Ok, let’s give it a try. I have included the letter in its entirety, because if I can do it, so can you.

Just tell your brain, “Tho t’is three hundred and two years hence, I am a being of remarkable intellect and capacity. I possess the fortitude to undertake arduous endeavors; I am adept in the perusal of antiquated tomes."

Aka, we can do hard things; we can read old things.

---

Published 23 July 1722.

Sir,

It has been for some Time a Question with me, Whether a Commonwealth suffers more by hypocritical Pretenders to Religion, or by the openly Profane? But some late Thoughts of this Nature, have inclined me to think, that the Hypocrite is the most dangerous Person of the Two, especially if he sustains a Post in the Government, and we consider his Conduct as it regards the Publick. The first Artifice of a State Hypocrite is, by a few savoury Expressions which cost him Nothing, to betray the best Men in his Country into an Opinion of his Goodness; and if the Country wherein he lives is noted for the Purity of Religion, he the more easily gains his End, and consequently may more justly be expos'd and detested. A notoriously profane Person in a private Capacity, ruins himself, and perhaps forwards the Destruction of a few of his Equals; but a publick Hypocrite every day deceives his betters, and makes them the Ignorant Trumpeters of his supposed Godliness: They take him for a Saint, and pass him for one, without considering that they are (as it were) the Instruments of publick Mischief out of Conscience, and ruin their Country for God's sake.

This Political Description of a Hypocrite, may (for ought I know) be taken for a new Doctrine by some of your Readers; but let them consider, that a little Religion, and a little Honesty, goes a great way in Courts. 'Tis not inconsistent with Charity to distrust a Religious Man in Power, tho' he may be a good Man; he has many Temptations "to propagate publick Destruction for Personal Advantages and Security": And if his Natural Temper be covetous, and his Actions often contradict his pious Discourse, we may with great Reason conclude, that he has some other Design in his Religion besides barely getting to Heaven. But the most dangerous Hypocrite in a Common-Wealth, is one who leaves the Gospel for the sake of the Law: A Man compounded of Law and Gospel, is able to cheat a whole Country with his Religion, and then destroy them under Colour of Law: And here the Clergy are in great Danger of being deceiv'd, and the People of being deceiv'd by the Clergy, until the Monster arrives to such Power and Wealth, that he is out of the reach of both, and can oppress the People without their own blind Assistance. And it is a sad Observation, that when the People too late see their Error, yet the Clergy still persist in their Encomiums on the Hypocrite; and when he happens to die for the Good of his Country, without leaving behind him the Memory of one good Action, he shall be sure to have his Funeral Sermon stuff'd with Pious Expressions which he dropt at such a Time, and at such a Place, and on such an Occasion; than which nothing can be more prejudicial to the Interest of Religion, nor indeed to the Memory of the Person deceas'd. The Reason of this Blindness in the Clergy is, because they are honourably supported (as they ought to be) by their People, and see nor feel nothing of the Oppression which is obvious and burdensome to every one else.

But this Subject raises in me an Indignation not to be born; and if we have had, or are like to have any Instances of this Nature in New England, we cannot better manifest our Love to Religion and the Country, than by setting the Deceivers in a true Light, and undeceiving the Deceived, however such Discoveries may be represented by the ignorant or designing Enemies of our Peace and Safety.

I shall conclude with a Paragraph or two from an ingenious Political Writer in the London Journal, the better to convince your Readers, that Publick Destruction may be easily carry'd on by hypocritical Pretenders to Religion.

"A raging Passion for immoderate Gain had made Men universally and intensely hard-hearted: They were every where devouring one another. And yet the Directors and their Accomplices, who were the acting Instruments of all this outrageous Madness and Mischief, set up for wonderful pious Persons, while they were defying Almighty God, and plundering Men; and they set apart a Fund of Subscriptions for charitable Uses; that is, they mercilessly made a whole People Beggars, and charitably supported a few necessitous and worthless Favourites. I doubt not, but if the Villany had gone on with Success, they would have had their Names handed down to Posterity with Encomiums; as the Names of other publick Robbers have been! We have Historians and Ode Makers now living, very proper for such a Task. It is certain, that most People did, at one Time, believe the Directors to be great and worthy Persons. And an honest Country Clergyman told me last Summer, upon the Road, that Sir John was an excellent publick-spirited Person, for that he had beautified his Chancel.

"Upon the whole we must not judge of one another by their best Actions; since the worst Men do some Good, and all Men make fine Professions: But we must judge of Men by the whole of their Conduct, and the Effects of it. Thorough Honesty requires great and long Proof, since many a Man, long thought honest, has at length proved a Knave. And it is from judging without Proof, or false Proof, that Mankind continue Unhappy." I am, Sir, Your humble Servant,

SILENCE DOGOOD.

&

---