Assignment 3
Borupgaard Gymnasium
Julia 3.K
23/10-25
Dan Harmon’s Apology to Former ‘Community’ Writer Megan Ganz on
‘Harmontown’
Can apologies really be sincere when they are asked to be given?
This is discovered in: Dan Harmon’s Apology to Former ‘Community’ Writer Megan Ganz on
‘Harmontown’, given by the famous ‘Rick and Morty’ creator and co-writer, Dan Harmon, on his podcast
‘Harmontown’ (2018). This was specifically requested by Ganz for Harmon's unacceptable and
unprofessional behaviour towards her. The apology seems to carry some ulterior motives that may help save
Harmon, and with what he is really trying to achieve.
Dan Harmon’s main claim is that he was blinded by the attraction of his coworker. He argues that the reason
behind his mistake unfolded because he “was attracted to an employee” (p. 1, ll. 17-18). This seems to be his
poor way of justifying his bad acts. You could argue it is a form of defeasibility, because of the attraction
being out of his control. This is what started the situation; and because of his insufficiently thought-out acts,
he defends himself by taking all the guilt and becoming humble. This is seen when he rambles on about how
he “[...] continued to do the cowardly thing and [...] do the selfish thing.” (p. 2, ll. 25-26). He therefore
admits his mistakes, which shows mortification that points towards a sincere apology. On the other hand, he
tries to minimize the effect by generalizing his mistake, when he calls on other people - men specifically -
and explains how this should be put to an end. It is seen in the last paragraph with his request for men to talk
more openly about their feelings (p. 3, ll. 3-12). This leans more towards apologia in the way of trying to
shift the focus from himself to other people. Hence his request, he does also try to correct the action and
prevent similar occurrences in the future. He furtherly uses rebuttal, when counterarguing people’s
assumptions about the situation when “disclaiming” (p. 1, ll. 13-15). This enhances his argumentation
because of his contemplation of people's prejudices to the situation. His way of arguing is on that account
based on him passing himself off as a modest person, who was not fully aware of the outcome of his actions,
because of his captivation of his coworker. He orally expresses this in a podcast that affects the language.
The styles of writing in lines 16-22 on page 2 shows the formal language with hints of colloquial mistakes.
An example is seen with the missing punctuation when he says “now” (p. 2, l. 16). The language becomes
informal because of the medium being a podcast, where linguistic mistakes are present. This could occur
based on the way Harmon was saying this sentence that may have been said fast; therefore, the transcript is
missing a period. Though there are contractions like “wasn’t” and “she’d” (p. 2, ll. 17-19), they are still more
formal compared to some of the other less formal contractions in the rest of the apology, as for “gonna” (p. 2,
l. 30). On behalf of that, the style of writing in this paragraph sets apart significantly and gives the
impression of a more formal language - disregard the missing period - compared to the rest of the text. It
makes sense that the rest has incomplete sentences, repetition, informal contractions and sometimes missing
Borupgaard Gymnasium
Julia 3.K
23/10-25
Dan Harmon’s Apology to Former ‘Community’ Writer Megan Ganz on
‘Harmontown’
Can apologies really be sincere when they are asked to be given?
This is discovered in: Dan Harmon’s Apology to Former ‘Community’ Writer Megan Ganz on
‘Harmontown’, given by the famous ‘Rick and Morty’ creator and co-writer, Dan Harmon, on his podcast
‘Harmontown’ (2018). This was specifically requested by Ganz for Harmon's unacceptable and
unprofessional behaviour towards her. The apology seems to carry some ulterior motives that may help save
Harmon, and with what he is really trying to achieve.
Dan Harmon’s main claim is that he was blinded by the attraction of his coworker. He argues that the reason
behind his mistake unfolded because he “was attracted to an employee” (p. 1, ll. 17-18). This seems to be his
poor way of justifying his bad acts. You could argue it is a form of defeasibility, because of the attraction
being out of his control. This is what started the situation; and because of his insufficiently thought-out acts,
he defends himself by taking all the guilt and becoming humble. This is seen when he rambles on about how
he “[...] continued to do the cowardly thing and [...] do the selfish thing.” (p. 2, ll. 25-26). He therefore
admits his mistakes, which shows mortification that points towards a sincere apology. On the other hand, he
tries to minimize the effect by generalizing his mistake, when he calls on other people - men specifically -
and explains how this should be put to an end. It is seen in the last paragraph with his request for men to talk
more openly about their feelings (p. 3, ll. 3-12). This leans more towards apologia in the way of trying to
shift the focus from himself to other people. Hence his request, he does also try to correct the action and
prevent similar occurrences in the future. He furtherly uses rebuttal, when counterarguing people’s
assumptions about the situation when “disclaiming” (p. 1, ll. 13-15). This enhances his argumentation
because of his contemplation of people's prejudices to the situation. His way of arguing is on that account
based on him passing himself off as a modest person, who was not fully aware of the outcome of his actions,
because of his captivation of his coworker. He orally expresses this in a podcast that affects the language.
The styles of writing in lines 16-22 on page 2 shows the formal language with hints of colloquial mistakes.
An example is seen with the missing punctuation when he says “now” (p. 2, l. 16). The language becomes
informal because of the medium being a podcast, where linguistic mistakes are present. This could occur
based on the way Harmon was saying this sentence that may have been said fast; therefore, the transcript is
missing a period. Though there are contractions like “wasn’t” and “she’d” (p. 2, ll. 17-19), they are still more
formal compared to some of the other less formal contractions in the rest of the apology, as for “gonna” (p. 2,
l. 30). On behalf of that, the style of writing in this paragraph sets apart significantly and gives the
impression of a more formal language - disregard the missing period - compared to the rest of the text. It
makes sense that the rest has incomplete sentences, repetition, informal contractions and sometimes missing
