To allow his words to be better received by his son, Lord Chesterfield entrenches his assertive instruction to his son

with a faade of good-natured guidance. Chesterfield embeds litotes, antitheses, and repetition in the passage, clearly revealing his desire to uphold the family name by being contradictorily ironic; by this, it is thoroughly evidenced that he values his arrogant pride and superiority over his sons interests. Chesterfield employs a subtly condescending tone in his blatant compliments right from the start with contradictive litotes. To prevent his sons instant rejection of reading the letter, Chesterfield feigns a position as an advisor, stating a disregard for parental authority and meaning not to dictate as a parent. Additionally, he explicitly states that he only desire[s] to be the guide, not the censor to firmly establish himself as the kindly concerned but unobtrusive figure; this is completely contradictory of what Chesterfield actually intends, to, at any expense, cause his son to turn around. By discounting the importance of his own power over his son, Chesterfield effectively makes his writing appear inoffensive and even polite to his son, even recognizing that often a young boy would not readily accept parental guidance. To further deter any sense of aggressiveness, Chesterfield emptily applauds his son for the capability to judge of, and receive plain truths, not only to contribute to the figure he had built thus far, but also to expect the son to take the advice that the father is conveying to the son. By complimenting his son, he persuades his son to follow his instruction. The majority of the letters introduction entirely is the antithesis for his true intentions, and clearly shows his disapproval for his sons direction in life. While the introduction is thick with empty compliments and safeguards, Chesterfield asserts his superiority at the same time. He repeats I know because he intends to portray a sense of broad understanding and make himself be the intelligent voice in their one-way conversation. Similarly, his address dear boy patronizes his sons position, who is a young adult, by not giving him a properly esteemed title. Furthermore, Eventually, Chesterfield begins to show his true colors when he indicates how his son is absolutely dependent upon his father. He still speaks with a falsely calm tone, but concretely portrays his son as useless without the support and suggests that he is far superior to his son. Additionally, he factors in guilt that despite all that the father does, the son still wastes the privileged opportunities. Additionally, Chesterfield employs rhetorical questions to make obvious what he want his son to do. When he asks can there be any greater pleasure than to be universally allowed to excel those of ones own age and manner of life, Chesterfield quite candidly reaffirms that his son should repair the damages of his educational choices, taking the advice and reforming his ways; this adds to the contradiction to the attitude he posed earlier on. By subtly shaming his son, Chesterfield expects that his son would be inclined to follow his advice. Chesterfield poses as the archetypal caring parent, but actually just disguises his selfish ambitions to preserve his reputation. With his contradictory behavior throughout the letter, he has made his message to his son as clear as it can be.