“Love is a Fallacy” by Max Schulman

Literary Research Paper in Literary Criticism

It is in our human nature to think. From the moment we evolved as a human species,

it has been in our code to think, to ponder about the world around us. In our centuries of

philosophical thinking, from our ancient Egyptian and Greek philosophers to our modern-

day researchers and scientists, we have produced many outstanding pieces of literature. We

have used our intense mental capability to advance ourselves, to change the world around

us, and to eradicate all ignorant things in our existence. With this we are able to examine

not only the world around us, but also ourselves, how we react to the world, and how we

interact with it.

Amidst the timeline of our intellectual advancement, there have been many

inconsistencies in our logical reasoning. There have been many instances where our mind

fails to explain ourselves in arguments, and thus resort to invalid and faulty reasoning, in

order to appear better than the opposition and to win the argument. Many such examples

are prevalent in today’s world, where our disputes are cast into systemic debates, and faulty

reasoning causes an imbalance in the debates which can lead it to favoring a party with

wrong arguments.

These are collectively known as fallacies, defects in an argument that is caused by

faulty or invalid reasoning. This causes the argument to appear better than it actually is.

Fallacies are caused by an idea presented in a wrong order, an error in the premises of the

argument, or overall ignorance of the person. In some cases, the tone by which the person

uses these fallacies may impact its effect on the audience.

An example of this is George Lucas’s The Phantom Menace, in which one of the

main characters, Yoda, utters this memorable phrase as he watches a young Anakin in
training. “Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering”. This statement

is an example of the slippery slope fallacy, a fallacy that assumes that in a sequence of

events, one will undoubtedly lead to the other. There is no assurance that once Anakin

gives in to fear, he will automatically be led to anger. It may be a coincidence that Anakin

followed Yoda’s prophecy, but there is no guarantee that it could have been interrupted

somewhere along the way.

Another example is in Dan Povenmire’s Phineas and Ferb, where the main

character, Phineas, uses the following statement to refute the impossibility of making one

of his proposed creations. “The only impossible thing is impossibilty.”. Although the

statement has a deeper philosophical meaning intended, it was used in an argument and is

guilty of a fallacy. It is a self-sealing argument, meaning that no evidence can be given to

either support or refute the claim. This gives a sort of immunity to the argument and is an

unfair advantage to Phineas.

These fallacies play an important role in Max Schulman’s Love is a Fallacy. It is a

cautionary tale on the consequences of assumption. The comedic value of the story and its

anticlimactic ending both aggravate and entertain readers, proving an interesting piece to

read and analyze.

This paper will explore further the evident culture of the 1950s in the story,

including the effects and implications of the culture to the plot, through the New

Historicism theory. The portrayal of females during the period will also be reviewed in

depth by using the Feminist theory. Finally, an interminable analysis of the narrator, and

the drives that pushed him throughout the story, will be discussed using the Psychoanalytic

theory. With the help of these different schools of theory, this paper will inspect Love is a
Fallacy’s cultural relevance, ambivalence of its characters, as well as the prominent irony

of the relationships presented in the story.

2. Theories

Three theories will aid in the interpretation of the short story. These theories will

serve as devices to straightforwardly analyze Max Schulman’s Love is a Fallacy. These

are: psychoanalytic criticism, new historicism, and feminist theory.

New historicism is a literary theory based on the idea that literature should be

studied and interpreted within the context of both the history of the author and the critic,

examining both how the author’s times affected the literature, and how the literature

reflects the author, in turn recognizing that current cultural contexts of the critic taints the

conclusion. Critics view literature as part of history, and furthermore, as an expression of

forces on history. Term coined by Stephen Greenblatt, it is believed that history is as

important as the text alone. Kirszner and Mandell claim that literature cannot be interpreted

without considering the era in which it was written. New historicists take into account the

influences of political, social, and cultural societies.

Psychoanalytic criticism grew out of Freudian theories of psychology. Critics see

the text as if it was a dream which expresses the secret unconscious desires and anxieties

of the author, that a literary work is a manifestation of the author’s neuroses. One may

psychoanalyze a particular character within a literary work, but it is usually assumed that

all such characters are projections of the author’s psyche. Sigmund Freud also mentioned

in his study the models of the mind, unconscious being one of it. Unconscious can be set
side by side with a closet, but the things being stored were primitive and instinctual desires,

and anxieties in which the human mind contains using defences.

In Sigmund Freud’s study, he believed that analysing one’s dreams can give

valuable insights into the unconscious mind. He also distinguished the manifest content

(the actual dream), and the latent content (the dream’s underlying meaning). Like

psychoanalysis theory, this critical endeavour seeks evidence of unresolved emotions,

psychological conflicts, guilt, and so forth within what may well be a disunified literary

work.

Despite the importance of the author here, psychoanalytic criticism does not

concern itself with what the author intended, but what the author never intended is sought.

The unconscious material has been distorted by the censoring conscious mind.

Feminism is a one of the literary theory that uses a principle to critique language of

literature. It aims to understand the gender inequality. It is a movement that shares a

common goal: to achieve gender equality. This incorporates battling gender stereotypes

and seeking to establish an educational and skilled opportunities for women that are

adequate to those for men. Feminist theory sparkles a light on problems, trends, and issues

that are ignored by the dominant male perspective.

Many people believe that feminism is about female hating men or male bashing. It

is about equality. It is not a fight for power, but rather the fight to bring women equal to

men.

3. Summary of the Short Story

left until he would be a practicing lawyer, the time came to look for an appropriate girl for

his wife. Applying stereotypes from the scope as guidelines for his search, he opted for the

girlfriend of his friend Petey, Polly Espy. He did not feel guilty since after chatting a bit he

realized that Petey seemed to care much more about a raccoon coat than Polly Espy and

almost without doubts traded their relationship for an old piece of wardrobe.

After a few dates, the protagonist realized that Polly was not a suitable candidate to

become his wife as it initially appeared. She appeared to be ignorant, lax, and overall slow

woman, especially for such a keen, calculating, perspicacious, acute and astute future

professional. Despite this, he decided to take the challenge and shared with her a few pieces

of logic from his law studies.

The main character’s goal was to teach his chosen one fundamental aspects of

logical, analytical and critical thinking by enlightening her about common logical fallacies.

The fallacies discussed, together with their examples, are taken from the short story and

listed below:

Dicto Simpliciter: An argument based on an unqualified generalization.

Example: Exercise is good. Therefore everybody should exercise. It is false, because there

are certain types of people that are restricted from exercising, such as people with heart

disease.

Hasty Generalization: A conclusion based on the insufficient number of proofs.

I (protagonist) must therefore conclude that nobody at the University of Minnesota can

speak French. It is a fallacy because there are too few instances (only two students) to

support such a conclusion.

Post Hoc: A hypothesis based on the given dataset.

“Let’s not take Bill on our picnic. Every time we take him out with us, it rains.” This

statement is based on coincidences since Bill cannot control the weather. There is zero

evidence to support that he causes the rain, and therefore is false.

Contradictory Premises: An argument is deduced from two statements that contradict the

other.

“If God can do anything, can He make a stone so heavy that He won’t be able to lift it?”

It is false because the two premises contradict each other. If there is an irresistible force,

there can be no immovable object. If there is an immovable object, there can be no

irresistible force

Ad Misericordiam: An argument that appeals to one’s sympathy.

“A man applies for a job. When the boss asks him what his qualifications are, he replies

that he has a wife and six children at home, the wife is a helpless cripple, the children have
nothing to eat, no clothes to wear, no shoes on their feet, there are no beds in the house,

no coal in the cellar, and winter is coming.” It is a fallacy because the man never answered

the boss’s question about his qualifications, instead he appealed to the boss’s sympathy.

False Analogy: An argument based on an analogy of two different situations.

“Students should be allowed to look at their textbooks during examinations. After all,

surgeons have X-rays to guide them during an operation, lawyers have briefs to guide them

during a trial, carpenters have blueprints to guide them when they are building a house.

Why, then, shouldn’t students be allowed to look at their textbooks during an

examination?” This is false because doctors, lawyers, and carpenters are not taking a test

to see how much they have learned, but students are. The situations are altogether different,

and you cannot make an analogy between them.

Hypothesis Contrary to Fact: A conclusion that is drawn from an untrustworthy hypothesis.

“If Madame Curie had not happened to leave a photographic plate in a drawer with a

chunk of pitchblende, the world today would not know about radium.” It is a fallacy

because perhaps Madame Curie would have discovered radium at a later date. Perhaps

somebody else would have discovered it. Any number of things would have happened. You

cannot start with a hypothesis that is not true and then draw any supportable conclusions

from it.
Poisoning the Well: An argument that attacks another person before making a statement,

and makes the victim appear to be false.

“Two men are having a debate. The first one gets up and says, ‘My opponent is a notorious

liar. You can’t believe a word that he is going to say.’” This is once again false because

the second man does not have a chance to present himself for the opposition has discredited

him before even starting.

These fallacies were taught over the course of five nights, and at the end of the last

night, the protagonist was pleased. He had managed to turn Polly into a logician. He

thought of her as a fitting wife for him, a proper hostess for his many mansion, and a

suitable mother for his well-fitted children. He goes as far to compare himself to Pygmalion

who loved the perfect woman that he had fashioned. He believed it was time to change

their relationship from academic to romantic.

He was quite surprised when he confessed his feelings for Polly. Every single one

of his statements were rejected and characterized as fallacies by Polly. Enraged by his

deflated pride and rejected love, the protagonist asked why Polly would not go steady with

him. Polly replied that she promised Petey that she will go steady with him instead of the

protagonist. The protagonist was furious and demanded the answer as to why she opted for

a pathetic Petey and not for him, a brilliant man. It turned out the raccoon coat had

outweighed all his advantages.

4. Discussion

New Historicism reads the text within the historical context of the piece, taking into

account political affairs as well as the personal ones of the author.

beginning to be abolished and forgotten, and although this dawn of a new age reached its

peak during the era, there were still considerable numbers of white conservatives against

this. Racism, however, was not the only rampant problem in 1950s society.

Female oppression was evident in all aspects, the media further perpetuating the

ideal that women should stay at home, and that they are meant to become and stay home-

keepers for the rest of their lives.

Both men and women had to conform to strict gender roles. The media made

prevalent imagery of the American Dream, which found men as working and the

breadwinners of their family and women, housewives and caretakers of the family. Though

today gives more importance to the oppression of women, it is also good to note that men

suffered because these unnecessary expectations as well. Women were expected to marry

and become a housemaid, always serving their families; men, on the other hand, had to

assume a machismo pride at all times, society dictating they avoid looking ‘weak’ (i.e.,

showing emotions).

These idealizations and gender roles seem to have had a hand in shaping the way

Dobie thinks. The standard white American male ideal of the time also influences Dobie’s

perception of who he is, or rather who he should be. His dream of becoming a lawyer

encompasses being the breadwinner of his family, as well as having a wife to care for

domestic needs. His desire to achieve this dream drives him to pursue Polly, who he

believes to be an almost perfect wife, if not for her supposed lack of intelligence.
 The feminist theory looks into the representation and interpretation of women

inside pieces of literature.

Polly Espy is the only female character in the story. She is the beautiful and elegant

object of affection for roommates Dobie Gillis and Petey Bellows. Throughout the story,

readers are not given her background from an objective point of view. Readers see her only

through the eyes and interpretation of Dobie, and to some extent Petey. Due to this, her

true personality remains ambiguous. Her character is not fully fleshed out and may seem

rather unrealistic.

However, it must be noted that this is not totally a flaw. Due to the vagueness of

her character, readers may interpret who Polly may be for themselves; for example, Dobie

assumes that she is dumb because of her extensive use of slang. Such a statement is a hasty

generalization, as one cannot assume a person’s intelligence based on their conversational

vocabulary alone. Aside from this, it also brings out a negative stereotype of women: that

fun-loving, sometimes hyper-feminine ladies only have make-up and boys on their mind.

Films such as Legally Blonde tackle and turn this by its head, proving that women can both

have fun and be serious. So while we cannot assume that Polly’s character is the same, it

must be said that Gillis was perpetuating a false stereotype of women.

The story also finds Polly constantly subjected to objectification. From the

beginning of the story, Dobie sees her as nothing more than an accessory to his future

reputation as a lawyer, and Petey feels a raccoon coat is more valuable than her or her

feelings. She is passed from one man to another as if she was an inanimate object, as if this

would not hurt her emotionally.