Monday, January 19, 2009
First Thoreau Question
As you read Walden for the first time, keep track of those ideas that seem most interesting or significant to you? Then post a comment response to this question which tells us which two or three of Thoreau's ideas are most compelling to you and why? Your response should be roughly 500 words in length. Due date: February 1, 2009 (2/1/09).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
One of the things I found most striking about Thoreau’s writing in Walden was his powerful descriptions, and the way that he was able to relate all things to nature and nature to human beings. Thoreau writes, “when I hear the iron horse make the hills echo with his snort like thunder, shaking the earth with his feet, and breathing fire and smoke from his nostrils”(134). These types of personified and natural descriptions raised a question in my mind of whether or not Thoreau believes, as we seem to do today, that things that man has built—such as railroads, are really not part of nature. If nothing else, Thoreau’s ability to take the un-natural and mechanical train and turn it into a powerful and mythological horse is a testament not only o his talented writing, but also to his outlook on the world. He is able to see nature in everything. Similarly he is able to see humanity in natural things. Thoreau spends three pages describing a “bellum,” or ant war that he witnessed by his cabin. He explains, “I observed two large ants, the one red, the other…black, fiercely contending with one another”(244). Then, near the end of his description, it almost seems as though both the reader and Thoreau have forgotten that the description is of ants, for Thoreau ends his narrative with, “I felt for the rest of that day as I had my feelings excited and narrowed by witnessing the struggle, the ferocity and carnage, of a human battle before my door”(247). Another less overt, but still meaningful example of Thoreau’s personification of nature is when he explains his friends in the woods. He writes, “Every little pine needle expanded and swelled with sympathy and befriended me”(150). In this case, nature is just as comforting as a person would be. In fact, the pine needles might as well be human beings, because they are his friends. By comparing the train to a horse, and the ants to humans, Thoreau demonstrates the link between nature and humans. In some ways, they are interchangeable. Perhaps Thoreau did not see humans, and man-made things as so separate from nature, or nature so different from human beings.
ReplyDeleteThis idea of the relationship between man and nature is the most striking thing I found in Walden. It would seem that Thoreau would arguer all in favor of the importance of nature. But nature is not the only thing he is concerned with. Instead, it is the relationship between man and nature that Thoreau seeks to explore. It is the similarities between a horse and a train, a warrior and an ant, a friend and a pine needle that Thoreau uses to illustrate the way the we are connected with nature. Even something as mechanical as a train has similarities to nature, and natural beauty.
A compelling theme throughout Walden is the way in which Thoreau challenges accepted American norms and values. He presents them quietly yet confidently, leaving no doubt regarding his opinions. First, he questions the capitalistic, American mentality that more is better. “Most of the luxuries, and many of the so-called comforts, of life are not only indispensable, but positive hindrances to the elevation of mankind” (34). Multiple times in the chapter “Economy,” he shows us with the actual records of all his expenses that one need not spend exorbitant or even moderately high amounts of money in order to supply themselves and their family with every material item they need. “And when the farmer has got his house, he may not be the richer but the poorer for it, and it be the house that has got him” (52). Thoreau links this idea directly to his famous statement “The mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation” (28). Men are desperate, literally without hope, partly because they allow themselves to be overrun by their drive to acquire more than they need to survive. Thoreau makes the message even stronger because he proves through his own actions how little one actually needs to live.
ReplyDeleteI think it is extremely significant that Thoreau places the chapter “Economy” at the very beginning of Walden, even before “Where I lived, and what I lived for.” He redefines “necessities,” so that even clothes become merely objects to “cover nakedness” (40). For me, it signifies that all the thoughts, reflections, and opinions that follow this first chapter originated with his economical way of living, and that this was the essence of his thinking. In order to take the rest of Walden to heart, we first need to understand thoroughly what Thoreau writes in “Economy.”
Another aspect of Walden that interested me was Thoreau’s view on spirituality. In all his writings of nature and his mode of life, he seems always very aware of a spiritual presence in his time at Walden. “Remember thy Creator in the days of thy youth. Rise free from care before the dawn, and seek adventures. Let the noon find thee by other lakes, and the night overtake thee everywhere at home. There are no larger fields than these, no worthier games than may here be played” (221). While reading his descriptions of various nature sounds and observations, I perceived a hint of pantheism in the writings of this Unitarian. “All nature is your congratulation, and you have cause momentarily to bless yourself” (231). Though Thoreau writes pessimistically about the desperate nature of man in “Economy,” here, in the chapter “Higher Laws,” he shows that he is equally capable of finding the spiritual elements not only in man, but in all the gifts he finds in nature. In this chapter, he reconciles his ideas of wildness and goodness as they relate to spirituality, writing that, “The wildest scenes had become unaccountably familiar. I found in myself, and still find, an instinct toward a higher, or as it is named, spiritual life, as do most men, and another toward a primitive rank and savage one, and I reverence them both” (225). This particular idea is compelling to me because it permeates his experiences and observations, and because it is apparent throughout Walden that he thought about his spiritual existence quite as deliberately as he lived his life at the pond.
In Henry David Thoreau’s Walden, I found his description of how space or distance between two objects should not dictate one’s loneliness to be particularly intriguing. Thoreau manages to redefine words like “solitary” and “alone” by putting his existence into a grander perspective and while ironically minimizing his own self-importance as well. Thoreau is especially effective in setting up this grand concept of minimalism when he writes, “This whole earth which we inhabit is but a point in space…Why should I feel lonely? Is not our planet in the Milky Way? ...What sort of space is that which separates a man from his fellows and makes him solitary? I have found that no exertion of the legs can bring two minds much nearer to one another” (Thoreau 151). This concept of loneliness and what does or does not qualify as companionship is what I find to be especially interesting. In class, we discussed how Thoreau places a large amount of importance on “connections” with other things, be it the sun, the minnows, the raindrops, or Walden Pond itself. As was pointed out in class, many of the objects that Thoreau has these connections with, and thus eliminates his loneliness, are inanimate. This made me question exactly what constitutes a relationship, or as we termed it, a “connection,” in the first place. I do think it is a valid point to say that since Thoreau is a living being and the raindrops, on the other hand, are not, and therefore that connection is not legitimate because it is one-sided. After all, it causes one to wonder if how effective the connection is between two things if only one side of the relationship can appreciate the relationship in the first place. However, this leads me to my next thought on what constitutes a legitimate or effective connection. Though it may seem contrived to say that raindrops are suitable companions, is that type of connection different than the one between a person and a book? Or a song? Or an instrument? The more I started thinking about it, I began to realize that people have said countless times that at a lonely time, a book or a song has provided a sense of companionship that actual animate objects could not provide for them. Furthermore, there are instances where an inanimate object has proved to be a life changing force for a person, where a poem or a sonata has been more effective on his or her life than any connection with a person ever has been. I feel that these connections, either with living or non-living objects, are equally tangible relationships. Therefore, after thinking over my previous definition of what forms this type of relationship, I have arrived at the conclusion that it does not matter what someone is connecting with, but rather just that he or she is connecting at all. No matter if it is a person, a raindrop, or a piece of music, if that effectively eliminates loneliness for someone, then that is a genuine and beneficial relationship.
ReplyDeleteOne thing from Thoreau’s Walden that I thought was interesting was the fact that he noticed things that normally we would not pay attention to. Thoreau pays attention to the small things in life because he does not have to worry about when his taxes are due, does he have enough money for rent this month, am I about to be fired from work? Thoreau is his own boss and works when he sees fit. He has a laid back life at Walden and experiences the beauties of nature that surround him. For example, “I was suddenly sensible of such sweet and beneficent society in Nature, in the very pattering of the drops, and in every sound and sight around my house… and I have never thought of them since.” (150) He then goes on to talk about the pine needles and how they befriended him and how he was “made aware of the presence of something kindred to me, even in scenes which we are accustomed to call wild and dreary…” (150) I think that Thoreau has opened many of our eyes to a new type of life, and has shown many of us in class how we take even the smallest things in life for granted sometimes.
ReplyDeleteAnother aspect of Walden that I thought was fascinating was the overall fact that Thoreau separated himself from normal human society to prove that one can live simply. We have become so wrapped up in our unnecessary luxuries that it seems that we cannot live without them. Thoreau proves anyone who believes this to be wrong. Thoreau spent $28.13 on all of the supplies used to build his ten by fifteen foot cabin at Walden Pond; he built no larger than the space that he needed. He spent roughly $14.73 on supplies for his bean field and made a good amount of profit back from them. Thoreau also had no help while planting and harvesting his crops, causing him to become “much more intimate with my beans than usual.” (173) On page 219, Thoreau is talking to an Irishman about how Thoreau does not have to pay rent money, therefore he has to work less, and because he works less he does not have to eat as much to fuel his body. He also talks about how he does not drink tea, coffee, and does not eat butter or fresh meat mainly because these are things that one can live without. It seems to me that the Irishman does not understand this way of living because he sees meat, milk, butter, etc as essentials for living. I do not think that one could understand why these are not crucial to ones survival unless they have experimented with “simple living” as Thoreau did. Thoreau had absolutely no luxuries, and called this “simple living.” Luxuries have become such a “normal” thing to have in many of our lives, that we do not even realize it. I personally did not realize the luxuries that I have until I read Walden, and it made me think twice about all that I have. One day, I tried to put myself in Thoreau’s shoes, and picture his life as mine. It is such a different way of living, and I think what Thoreau did was an amazing experiment.
“Time is but the stream I go a-fishing in. I drink at it; but while I drink I see the sandy bottom and detect how shallow it is. Its thin current slides away, but eternity remains” (115). Of the numerous of Thoreau’s oft-quoted lines from Walden, this must be in the top ten, and for good reason. One of Thoreau’s concepts that most interests me is the perception of time, in which we again see a human attempt to control nature. We have created calendars, clocks, and various other contraptions by which to gauge time, or, as Solzenhitsyn notes in One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, humans have attempted to expand their power so far as to declare that it is no longer noon when the sun reaches its highest point in the sky. However, in that one statement, Thoreau reminded the readers yet again that nature has more control than we might like to admit. As he listened to the sounds of a parade in town, Thoreau remarked “This was one of the great days; though the sky had from my clearing only the same everlastingly great look it wears daily, and I saw no difference in it” (176). Society may have established days and moments of seemingly great importance, and it may have developed ways in which it could seemingly manipulate time to suit its schedule, but ultimately it is little more than an imagined convenience, a mere human invention as we make believe that we can have some great effect on nature’s own timetable.
ReplyDeleteAnother great point of interest to me while reading Walden was not simply the concept of distancing oneself from society, but the way in which Thoreau’s description of Walden Pond was described as if it were a hermit, distancing itself from society to maintain its purity. “If by living thus reserved and austere, like a hermit in the woods, so long it has acquired such wonderful purity, who would not regret that the comparatively impure waters of Flint’s Pond should be mingled with it, or itself should ever go to waste its sweetness in the ocean wave?” (209). Walden Pond thus becomes the (literally) natural argument for displacing oneself from the contaminating ways of society; though it may not have a direct connection to other waters, it is this fact that allows it to be in its truest state. Perhaps it is this that inspires Thoreau to say “(A lake) is the earth’s eye; looking into which the beholder measures the depth of his own nature” (201). Nothing can be hidden in the clear waters of nature’s hermit, nor does it alter that which it reflects; one could not find a more meaningful or pure looking glass. Thoreau did not go so far as to totally seclude himself for any real length of time, but perhaps during his two-year “experiment” he also sought this purity found in Walden Pond; if one could just find oneself in the midst of nature, without the polluting effects of modern society, maybe that pure state – that “oneness with nature” – would truly be possible.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteBreanna Marr, which showed up as "Nicci" because she was using a friend's laptop:
ReplyDeleteAn aspect about Walden that intrigues me is Thoreau’s blatant challenges and criticisms of the largely accepted religious ideologies of his time. In the chapter entitled “Visitors,” he delivers in no uncertain terms an unflattering review of religion-based education. When describing the “unsophisticated” nature of his Canadian French friend, Thoreau reports that that man had been “instructed only in that innocent and ineffectual way in which the Catholic priests teach the aborigines, by which the pupil is never educated to the degree of consciousness, but only to the degree of trust and reverence” (164). Thoreau goes on to say that by this method, “a child is not made a man, but kept a child” (164). Here, Thoreau expresses his disapproval of such a Catholic education by essentially insinuating that the priests brainwash their students into subservience, thus preventing them from developing independent thought. As Thoreau reveals, this is exactly the fate of this bushman, for he “never tried to write thoughts,” as “it would kill him” (164-165). Although Thoreau sees promise for deep thought and intellectualism in the Canadian, it is “slumbering as in an infant” within him as a result of this Catholic background. In other words, the priests, rather than educating him, have stunted his potential.
Bringing in knowledge of Thoreau’s politics makes this passage even more interesting. An outspoken opponent of slavery, he would have known that this system of imbibing minds with reverence rather than intellectualism was also used by Antebellum southerners to control their slaves. Known as paternalism, this practice kept the slaves in a child-like dependence upon their white owners. When his knowledge of this system is considered, it stands to reason that Thoreau ultimately draws parallels between slaveholders and members of religious authority.
Another interesting – and incidentally my favourite - passage in Walden is Thoreau’s discussion on the depth of the pond, which can be found in the chapter “The pond in winter.” He gives the actual dept of the pond after explaining that some men believed it to be bottomless. Then he states, "This is a remarkable depth for so small an area; yet not an inch of it can be spared by the imagination. What if all ponds were shallow? Would it not react on the minds of men? I am thankful that this pond was made deep and pure for a symbol. While men believe in the infinite some ponds will be thought to be bottomless" (301). This excerpt illustrates the value Thoreau places in the power of imagination. Ponds become a metaphor for the human mind, and if all “ponds” were shallow, he argues, then mankind’s imagination would likewise be so limited. The idea that Thoreau is “thankful” for man’s ability to believe in the “infinite” indicates that he, at least in certain cases, values the boundlessness of the human imagination to what logic deems to be practical (301).
The ideas that Thoreau presented in Walden that has had the most impact on my thinking are the ideas of never being alone and his thoughts on the food we eat.
ReplyDeleteOn page 154 Thoreau writes “The value of man is not in his skin, that we should touch him.” In the paragraph above Thoreau describes interactions with others as being “commonly too cheap.” “We meet at very short intervals, not having enough time to acquire any new value for each other.” The quality of interaction to Thoreau is the type of bond we have with someone, not the ritual that binds us together every so often such as a dinner together. When we discussed in class whether you can be alone in the middle of Manhattan it really struck me. To Thoreau there is no difference whether he is in the middle of Manhattan or whether he is at Walden Pond besides the scenery in which he is engrossed in. “What sort of space is that which separates a man from his fellows and makes him solitary?” Thoreau believes he is equally alone in both places, . This point really stuck with me. I truly believe that it is the quality of your interactions with the world whether it is with humans, animals or with the sky itself that prevents you from feeling alone.
Another idea that stuck with me was the way Thoreau got his food and what he believed food should be. The idea that in order to eat something you must be able to look it in the eyes and kill it yourself is ambitious and made me think but ultimately I disagree. I do however agree with Thoreau’s point on page 233 about the motives behind why we eat our food. “Not that food which entereth into the mouth defileth a man, but the appetite with which it is eaten. It is neither the quality nor the quantity, but the devotion to sensual savors.” Thoreau believes that people eat food for reasons that are unnecessary. Thoreau survived on what he could find while at Walden and that suited him just fine. It is much harder for the rest of society to fathom this because we have so many more food choices presented to us but Thoreau has a good point. We do eat more then we need and we do eat foods that are unnecessary for our survival. Often as Thoreau states we do not savor the true beauty of the food we have because it becomes more about eating enough rather than being thankful for what we have. “One eats, and one does not know the savor of food. He who distinguishes the true savor of his food can never be a glutton; he who does not cannot be otherwise.” Thoreau basically states that we are greedy when it comes to the food we eat. This is very true. It becomes so easy to forget what it took for food to get into our mouths. We need to be more thankful for the beauty of what we have and not eat more than we need.
I was most impressed by Thoreau’s representation of the average individual, and his perception of ‘loneliness,’ which is interconnected with Thoreau’s thoughts on books and the immortal. Thoreau tends to group the whole of society together under one umbrella, yet does not come across as being judgmental or condescending; he is simply stating the way things are. Every ‘average individual’ falls into society as a whole, but has the potential to do just as Thoreau himself has done. He claims, “The millions are awake enough for physical labor; but only one in a million is awake enough for effective intellectual exertion, only one in a hundred millions to a poetic or divine life. To be awake is to be alive […] We must learn to reawaken and keep ourselves awake” (108). We are not born already with the ability to reach this higher level of understanding and simplicity, but it is possible for all of us when we actively seek it on our own. So though Thoreau groups individuals into society as a whole (aside from the individual characters and visitors he addresses), and though he outlines the ways in which society has essentially fallen and forgotten the truly important and simple needs we must meet to survive.
ReplyDeleteI also enjoyed Thoreau’s observations of ‘loneliness,’ in accordance with his insights on books and immortality. Thoreau tells us that when one is alone, if he or she is sad or depressed, this is not because of loneliness but because of a bit of insanity. He says that one can never truly be alone because we are all a part of space, and it is our mind which connects us to everything: “Why should I feel lonely? is our planet not in the Milky Way? […] What sort of space is that which separates a man from his fellows and makes him solitary?” (151). We consciously choose to be connected or disconnected by actively using our minds to search for ties with everything around us. Nature ties us together as we are all part of a continuing circle. What one being does affects another being, which affects another being, or even inanimate things, and so on and so forth. All of this is brought full circle when the past is immortalized and brought into the future through (one of many ways, I believe) books. I am always fascinated by the idea of the past, its effects on the present and future, and its life in the present. When Thoreau asserted that books immortalize past people and ideas, I thought that warranted attention. When he further asserted that one is never alone because he can be with whomever he reads, I was even more interested. I liked the way Thoreau connected loneliness, the present and the past, and recognized the presence of the past in our daily, ever-changing world as it tied everything together.
The purpose of Thoreau's Walden, or Life in the Woods was to create a counter hegemony. His society’s hegemony was becoming more materialistic, and Thoreau wanted to reinforce the notion that a simple life is richer than the luxuries that individuals are becoming obsessed with. "I intend to build me a house which will surpass any of the main street in Concord in grandeur and luxury, as soon as it pleases me as much will cost me no more than my present one" (Thoreau,61). Thoreau takes meticulous records on the material and effort he exerted on building his house. It cost him $2812 ½ dollars to build his house. “I thus found that the student who wishes for a shelter can obtain one for a lifetime at an expense not greater than the rent which he now pays annually”(Thoreau,61). His house is small and simple, not grand and filled with unnecessary objects. He is able to farm the land with just enough crops to last him, and he can fill the rest of his time with whatever he likes. This made me think of what I would possibly fill my time with if I was not distracted by my ‘luxury’ items. Would I be able to identify with nature as closely as Thoreau did? “It was no longer beans that I hoed, nor that I hoed beans” (175). This quote reinforces Thoreau’s bond with nature. The crops he grew and himself are one. Another question that I could not answer was if I lived a simple life like Thoreau would I be able to distinguish my animalistic side from my naturalistic side. In Brute Neighbors Thoreau discusses this notion with a hermit and a poet. Their conversation revolves around a fishing trip and how the hermit is more concerned with the techniques of fishing, whereas the poet is noticing the nature around them. “See those clouds; how they hang! That’s the greatest thing I have seen to-day. There’s nothing like it in old painting, nothing like it in foreign lands,--unless when we were off the coast of Spain” (240). The poet is appreciating the nature that surrounds the hunt for the fish. Whereas the Hermit is concentrated on the hunt, “If I should scorn bring this meditation to an end, would another so sweet occasion be likely to offer” (240). The hermit is acknowledging the counter part of the hunt to the poet. He knows that he will be scorned for hunting but does it still because there might not be another time to do so. This is a part of him. He must hunt to survive. At the end of the day the poet regrets the fact that he was unable to catch any fish. This conversation also emphasizes Thoreau’s desire to counter his society’s hegemony. While the poet is discussing nature he is distracted by it. This is a reference in an individual’s ability to be distracted by luxury items. Whereas, the hermit is simple and focuses on one task and is able to catch his fish. Since the hermit was simple he is able to enjoy the luxury of fish for dinner, where as the poet will not. This reinforces the notion that a simple life is more luxurious than that of a life filled with material objects.
ReplyDeleteOne of Thoreau’s most salient ideas is best embodied by his famous line: “The mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation.” This statement is highly compelling for several reasons. First off, “quiet desperation” is virtually synonymous with ¾ resignation. It is in these two words that Thoreau’s view on the world as a whole is encapsulated. He believes that all humans have fallen subservient to the very superstructure they created. Everybody subscribes to a lifestyle of frivolous, superfluous tasks, a scenario far from the bare-bones essentialism of Walden Pond. We work 9-5 in cubicles, filing reports for some unknown honcho way up in corporate; we fret our unpaid bills, vacillate between Abercrombie and American Eagle, and believe, however foolishly, that classy Vodka and a new popped collar will make this Friday our lucky night.
ReplyDeleteWe have created money, and with it, we have created a society that is controlled, absorbed, and inundated with both the consequents and antecedents of that money. This money has withered our relationship with our natural surroundings. We have been deluded by the follies and vices of our own social constructs. Instead of waking to see the sun rise, or noticing the natural splendor of the world, or just living plainly and inexpensively—a means to true contentment—we are obsessed with the minutia of everyday life. The problem exists in our outlook on living, in our perspectives. Convolution of morals and values leads inevitably to a jaded mentality; money complicates life, leaving “the mass of men” incapable of living deliberately. Thoreau’s time at Walden afforded him the most basic and meaningful of choices; his ability to live deliberately meant he was unimpeded by social constructs and the intrinsically valueless items humans have deemed to be ‘valuable’.
Outside of Walden Pond, however, the world is accelerative and blind to the pitter-patter of rain, to the way it creates circle after circle in the water, like concentric blips on radar. Thoreau’s understanding of the superstructure of “the mass of men” is an inversion of standard logic. Technology, and money, and resources should make our lives better and more enjoyable, but Thoreau has seen society from inside and outside the looking-glass—the complexity of modernized living is imploding and taking “the mass of men” with it. In order to free “the mass of men,” Thoreau holds faith in a second and equally compelling idea: that older generations are neither wise nor trustworthy. The reasoning behind this inversion of logic is that older people initiated and perpetuated the problems we still have today. By creating new ideas for the world and snuffing the staleness of passed generations, we attack the superstructure at its base, the source of its pervasive influence. As Thoreau puts it, “There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root.” This is an interesting idea because it completely erases the conception of older people as sage-like and quasi-omniscient. Your parents made the same mistakes as you, why should they be revered in their age? New ideas are needed. We need visionaries and revolutionaries. Without a new perspective, the majority of us can look forward to a mindless enslavement, best exemplified by Peter Gibbons in Office Space.
Sermon or Satire?
ReplyDeleteAfter reading Walden, I couldn’t recall any one or two concepts that particularly stood out to me. In fact, rather than gaining a deeper understanding of Thoreau’s ideologies, I felt as though I could never figure out exactly what his intensions were. Sometimes his prose was inspiring, sometimes it was annoying, sometimes it was comedic, and at other times it was contradictory. Ultimately, I came to the conclusion that Walden was meant to be one of two things: Either a contemporary “Sermon on the Mount, according to the Gospel of Henry David”, or a “Monty –Python” for the masses of Concord. I suppose the idea that intrigued me the most was which one Thoreau had intended it to be.
In much of the book, Thoreau acts as a preacher. He lectures on the virtues of deprivation, swears by the teachings of the ancient Masters and devotes every moment of his life at Walden Pond to achieving a higher sense of being. His experiment of living in the woods allows him to dissect the slightest observations about nature and men, and thus hypothesize the ways to make life more meaningful, more complete. The advice he gives is usually sound and I often found myself agreeing with his idealistic thinking. However, I also noticed that the book had many of the qualities one would associate with a satire: sarcasm, irony, and an unrelenting disdain for, and mockery of, modern society. For example, although Thoreau is often praised for his anti-materialistic way of life, he chooses to title his first Chapter “Economy.” While perhaps not inherently satirical, it was an interesting choice to name an entire section of a book after a concept that is associated with money and material possession. Thoreau denounces the way that men itemize and calculate their belongings, and yet, he includes multiple lists of expenses he had with every cent he spent accounted for. Furthermore, on page 39 of the chapter, he states, “The life which men praise and regard as successful is but one kind. Why should we exaggerate any one kind at the expense of the others?” But, the entirety of Walden is Thoreau exaggerating his way of life. These kinds of statements are satirical elements, and come at the point where for every profound observation that is written, a contradiction follows. I couldn’t help but feel that Thoreau was a man who swears by his own “right” way of life, yet fails to follow it. He reminds me of a man who might run an AA group during the day, and then spend his nights knocking a few back with Mr. Daniels and Captain Morgan.
Another piece of satirical evidence is at the end of the second to last chapter. Thoreau writes, “Thus was my first year’s life in the woods completed; and the second year was similar to it” (332). In summing up an entire year’s time into one sentence, Thoreau is doing the very thing that he is urging us to avoid. There are hundreds of pages filled with minute details- a single encounter with a bird one afternoon in the middle of spring or the behavior of ice on a pond in the winter. But then, three hundred and sixty five days and nights are merely regarded as “similar.” If this isn’t satire, then maybe Thoreau is making a philosophical statement about how men consider time. On the other hand, he might just be making fun of his own experience in the woods.
Then again, could this have been his point? In the “Original Introduction,” Roberts writes that Thoreau “is not as unhuman as he likes to represent himself” (13). Moreover, in the introduction to the familiar letters/ correspondence section of the Walden Woods Project, the editor Sanborn explained, “Superiority- moral elevation without peevishness or condescension- this was Thoreau’s distinguishing quality… but he directed his satire and his censure as often against himself as against mankind” (xiv).
So perhaps Walden was Thoreau’s honest attempt to write a book on par with the works of Greek philosophers and religious leaders. Or perhaps it was a mockery of those very writers. Either way, it was Thoreau who said, “We think that that 'is' which 'appears' to be” (114). I guess whether Walden appears to be a sermon or satire isn’t what Thoreau intended; after all, it is only he who knows what it is.
Thoreau's idea of "loneliness" is, to me, his most compelling thought. Thoreau discusses his theory of loneliness as a mental error in his essay Solitude. Society tells us that people should have the desire to be constantly be stimulated. Also that, if you have the desire to be alone, to be quiet, be content, with a simple way of life, that you are strange and labeled the loner. This idea has been engrained into each brain and heart that that populates this earth. This society says that we should do things against our own will. Against even, our strongest or weakest desire.
ReplyDeleteCountry life is something I am accustomed to. To be quiet, watching the light, thinking for myself, or the seldom people I see, or the people do not. The life that includes the ability to lose yourself within the time where no one tells you how to live your life, because in the country, those people do not have to exist. I believe this is "living deliberately", as Thoreau explains it. Though in regards to the country, I was asked by my dear cousin one day. “What do you do here all day?" I could not think of anything that would suffice as a legitimate answer for her. Answers arose in my head, but they seemed only good enough for me. I horseback ride, walk, bike, write, cook, read, and sit. Take photos, watch the day, smell the ocean, feel the light travel across the sky, have thoughts that do not congest my mind, but ones that float in and out like waves upon the shore. At the time when I was asked, only this past winter, I believed that there was something wrong with the way I enjoy spending my life. This is not to say, that because my cousin asked, that she is the one with the mental error, but it is to say that I've rid the thought from my mind. I have an answer that feels right for me.
Reading Thoreau and now, Emerson, has put me into deep thought. The way we live, the way we clutter our rooms with images, people, sounds, reminders – our lives are filled with anything to distract us from the silence that so many are afraid to hear. Most live life unaware that even silence has a sound. That to be continuously stimulated is to be doing too much. Thinking too fast. Moving at a pace that cannot be maintained forever because it deteriorates the body itself. Thoreau explains the deteriorating effects of constant stimulation, either through work or socializing, "he had to work hard to pay for them, and when he had worked hard he had to eat hard again to repair the waste of his system”(219) Many people do not understand that "I" is the only thing that can fulfill one's life. The knowledge gained and people met along the way are treasures, but luxuries. A life without a sense of "I" is not worth living. "I" is the liminal space between the life we choose to live and the world that surrounds us. To have a sense of "I" is the ability to live in both places, when necessary, still knowing what is important to "I". The idea of “I” is, alone, but never lonely.
Thoreau's intentions in writing Walden seem pretty clear on the surface; he's promoting the idea of living simply (or "deliberately"), which, for him, means stripping away many of his connections with society and living minimally in the woods. He makes it clear that he's not recommending that specific course of action for everyone, but he does seem to be advocating a change in the normal lifestyle. In other words, he's telling people to find some way to distance themselves, either figuratively or literally, so that they can view life a little more objectively.
ReplyDeleteThe problem is that he's making a very basic and dangerous assumption that everyone in his audience has the mental and financial firepower to make that kind of dramatic change in their life. Thoreau himself was reasonably wealthy and very well educated, and it's not hard to see where his sensibilities lie as far as the uneducated; as he says in "Reading," "What does our Concord culture amount to? There is in this town, with a very few exceptions, no taste for the best or for very good books even in English literature, whose words all can read and spell." He assumes here that all men can benefit the same way he can by reading the same books as he does, but here he seems not to realize that there is a big difference between being able to read and absorb a newspaper and being able to read and absorb Shakespeare, or, god forbid, Homer.
Similarly, if we take his particular case as an example, he assumes that anyone can do what he does in order to build his cabin. This is a little hard to believe. Thoreau builds his tiny cabin from scratch, complete with foundation and cellar and fireplace, and then proceeds to weatherproof it. Certainly the majority of his contemporaries were probably more physically handy than the majority of current people (I certainly would have a hard time doing all that), but it doesn't seem likely that they were all well versed in carpentry and masonry (not to mention farming.)
Nor would an ordinary man have most of the insight Thoreau has when he goes out and watches the animals; he doesn't seem to realize how much of his insight is informed by his education and the literature he's read -- not many would describe the songs of screech owls as "Ben Jonsonian."
In fact, the way Thoreau implies that anyone can have this kind of epiphany that he's advertising here is actually sort of dangerous. This is not to say that the publication of Walden didn't do a lot of good, but rather that it did have a few unintended consequences. One of those inspired by Thoreau was Christopher McCandless, who really took Walden to heart and moved out into the Alaskan wilderness without so much as a map or compass. This was apparently his version of living deliberately -- which he did, until he starved to death. So maybe life in the woods, even specifically tailored to a person, is not for everybody.
Thoreau has a unique talent for changing the perspective of his arguments. Throughout the pages of Walden, Thoreau takes individual things and moments which appear insignificant and flash them into cosmic significance. By rationally reordering the universe within the pages of Walden Thoreau is changing his own perspective and therefore that of his readers’ as well. Within the context of his experiment at Walden Pond, Thoreau is able to manipulate the realities of his relationships with himself, others, and nature.
ReplyDeleteThoreau’s most consistent argument throughout Walden is his belief in the importance of the individual. Through the use of the perspective of the first person narrative, Thoreau places unprecedented importance on his individual thoughts and experience. The boldness of the first sentence of Economy, the first section of Walden, parades the importance Thoreau places on himself as an individual, “When I wrote the following pages…I lived alone…in a house I had built myself” (Walden, Economy). The seemingly simple use of the word “I” is in some ways is the root of all the varied proclamations and philosophizing throughout Walden. For as Thoreau states, “What a man thinks of himself, that it is which determines, or rather indicates, his fate” (Walden, Economy).
With the power of the individual established through the use of “I” Thoreau moves forward to explain the connections an individual can forge in both solitude and companionship. By redefining the limitations of time and space Thoreau erases the concept of solitude and makes the connection of friendship limitless. Thoreau redefines the concept of solitude by changing the perspective of the argument. Thoreau states, “Why should I feel lonely? Is not our planet in the Milky Way?” (Walden, Solitude), in this short statement Thoreau changes the perspective of the concept of solitude. Thoreau goes from speaking about the solitude of a hut on the edge of the woods to the stars in the company of the Milky Way. By elevating the solitude of the individual to the cosmic level Thoreau is changing the perspective of the reader and therefore the grounds of his argument. In the same thought Thoreau creates a limitless concept of friendship. Thoreau states, “I have found that no exertion of the legs can bring two minds much nearer to on another” (Walden, Solitude). This statement removes the pressure of physical proximity and the limitations of solitude typically placed on relationships.
Among all the relationships Thoreau defines and redefines the most celebrated is of course the individual’s relationship with nature. Again through a manipulation of perspective in the chapter titled “The Beanfield” Thoreau comes the closest to defining the “one-ness” that man can achieve with nature, “It was no longer the beans that I hoed, or that I hoed beans” (Walden, The Beanfield). This statement transforms hoeing beans from a literal activity into a figurative connection forged between man and nature.
Thoreau’s idea of solitude is very interesting to me, especially the way in which his move to Walden procured in him such a drastically different perspective in the world. As we have read, Walden did not represent solitude in the traditional sense; Thoreau was connected to civilization in many ways. He went into town every day or two, saw trains passing the pond, and was constantly talking to the people he met at the pond and in the surrounding areas. Despite all this human contact, the move to Walden allowed him to connect with and understand nature so deeply that he was able to create the most lasting piece of environmental writing in American history. Simply by moving a short distance away from the town, he was able to cultivate fresh outlooks on the seemingly mundane parts of nature, such as beans, ants, and mice. All the parts of nature he discusses were just as accessible to him from the town, he need only walk a few miles, as he did everyday, to see them, and before his move to Walden he had already had extensive experience in nature. While at Walden his life seemingly carried on in much the same way as it had before his move and he had already experienced many of the things he describes in the book. Why then did his move create such a profound effect? I think that Walden was merely a convenient setting to stage his ideas upon. Not only did Thoreau develop completely new ways of looking at ourselves and the world around us, but he was also able to seamlessly weave these ideas into his experiences, however mundane or repetitive, at Walden.
ReplyDeleteI also found Thoreau’s ideas on reading very compelling. The way he describes reading the ancients represents to me some of his best rhetoric. His idea that a book is an immortal piece of history that forever preserves the ideas that it contains is a great way of showing the importance of the written word. When he takes this idea one step further to argue that the ruins of ancient civilizations are unimportant when compared to their ideas that still survive he is able to contextualize his idea and change his reader’s perspective.
Another aspect of Walden that I found impressive and interesting was his attention to detail. We see Thoreau meticulously describe the depth of the lake, the formation of the ice, and every sound that he hears. At first I thought that his attention to detail was unnecessary and overstated, but I began to realize that every detail only served to make Walden more real to the reader or to support one of his bigger ideas. More often than not his details are not superfluous, but rather contribute to one of his bigger ideas about himself or nature. By so accurately describing all of his experiences Thoreau makes himself a more trustworthy author and a more convincing philosopher.
Thoreau’s prose is so densely packed with ideas that during the reading of Walden I often stopped entirely from my reading as my mind diverged onto lengthy tangents raised by the text. Since I feel that any one of these ideas is enough to expand on in five hundred words, I’ve chosen to stick to a single entry from my notebook:
ReplyDeleteThoreau’s text was: “Time is but the stream I go a-fishing in. I drink at it; but while I drink I see the sandy bottom and detect how shallow it is. Its thin current slides away, but eternity remains. I would drink deeper; fish in the sky, whose bottom is pebbly with stars. I cannot count one. I know not the first letter of the alphabet, I have always been regretting that I was not as wise as the day I was born” (115-116).
If the philosopher’s truest desire is to close the gap between himself and Divinity, he cannot help but to regret that he is not as wise as the day he was born. In an allegorical sense, I think the story of Adam and Eve is as close a mirror as any to the dilemma man finds himself in. The day Adam was “born,” God told him that he had everything he could ever need. Hearing the voice of Divinity, Adam could not see why this should not be true nor why he should need to eat from the Tree of Knowledge. He is perfectly wise in this sense because he trusts everything and has perfect faith. At first I assumed that God corrupted Adam by telling him about the tree, but because Adam knows the Divine Voice and trusts in it, he is not corrupted until the snake tells Eve that she could be as knowledgeable as God is by eating from the tree. The first sin then is lust, Eve desires to become Divine by knowing as much as God. This is impossible, and quests for knowledge, power, and all other material things are inherently fruitless because they do not provide the only thing the heart is overjoyed to posses – peace through wisdom.
All humans are now cursed with the knowledge that their time on earth is fleeting. The stream will dry up and we will at once see how shallow the river was. We are distracted by trivial affairs and do not see the greater purpose in life. Those who realize they are unfulfilled look for this deeper connection to God, they wonder what the Bible means when it says to pray incessantly, they meditate on the Om – the symbol of wisdom. Yet the only answer, according to Thoreau, is in one’s own mind. Why busy yourself with your hands, Thoreau asks, when the only answers are in your mind. I believe so many religions are the stem of the same question, yet with so many different minds to answer it. One must look within and find the answer himself, find his own true wisdom, rather than listening to wisdom of his peers. H should especially not listen to his elders in this quest, because as Thoreau says, “One generation abandons the enterprises of another like stranded vessels.”
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMaddie wrote:
ReplyDeleteThere are many themes in Thoreau’s Walden that are of considerable interest to me. However, his ideas of living “deliberately” and his theme about spiritual rebirth are both aspects of Walden that carry significance in my own daily life. I find that often times his sense of living every day “deliberately”, or intentionally, overlaps with his sense of spirituality. He claims, “Indeed, I worked deliberately, that though I commenced at the ground in the morning, a course of bricks raised a few inches above the floor served for my pillow at night”. Thoreau’s hard work is noted here as he then concludes later “and it did me good to see the soot form on the back of the chimney which I had built, and I poked the fire with more right and more satisfaction than usual”. Throughout his memoir, it is clear that Thoreau’s Walden has developed into somewhat of a guidebook for living life with one’s eyes open, living every moment with purpose. As he works “deliberately”, Thoreau makes it obvious that he does not underestimate the importance of hard work to the lives of men. I think this directly parallels with his famous statement, “the mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation”. If I have understood Thoreau correctly, I believe that he would argue that the mass of men value things that are not intrinsically valuable and forget that sometimes the simplest things are the most meaningful in providing purpose and satisfaction. Walden has provided numerous examples about the benefit of avoiding being consumed by the materialism of every day life and he advocates that we should live lives that embrace our own personal interests. Again, he believes that all people should challenge what is imposed upon them and discover what brings individual purpose. Thoreau encourages that we all live our lives for ourselves. In his chapter, “Where I Lived and What I Lived For, Thoreau says, “Let us spend one say as deliberately as Nature…” It is in this statement that I find the essence of his spirituality. Nature holds a considerable amount of reverence to Thoreau and he often comments on its beauty. I would like to explore his ideas on birth and rebirth within nature as well as the unification that Thoreau feels towards his surroundings. In “Reading” Thoreau also describes the importance of books for one’s spirit and mind. He regards them as “treasured wealth of the world and the fit inheritance of generations and nations” (120). If humans do not educate themselves through the words of antiquity, than the “result is dullness of sight, a stagnation of the vital circulations, and a general deliquium and sloughing off of all the intellectual faculties.” (123).This is a parallel to the way in which modern people view the value of Nature. We disregard its power and wisdom that was for centuries our resource for shelter and food. More specifically, Thoreau states that “A man, any man, will go considerably out of his way to pick up a silver dollar; but here are golden words, which the wisest men of antiquity have uttered, and whose worth the wise of every succeeding age have assured us of…” (124) The very same materialistic attitude that propels any man to reach for money over books chooses a life of “quiet desperation” and turns away from living each moment deliberately. I would like to further explore these themes.
All writers and authors have a unique ability to describe the world around them, create characters, or invent interestingly tangled plots. Thoreau however, was blessed with the ability to describe the indescribable. His descriptions and vision of the natural world are difficult if not impossible to parallel. Out of his amazing vision of the natural world sprouts his honest and practiced beliefs. Beliefs which I have since attempted to emulate. He writes “I would fain keep sober always; and there are infinite degrees of drunkenness. I, believe that water is the only drink for a wise man; wine is not so noble a liquor; and think of dashing the hopes of a morning with a cup of warm coffee, or an evening with a dish of tea!” (232) Thoreau exclaims against the modified and ‘unnatural’ drinks that alter the mind. Anything of such a caliber should be excluded willingly from the realm of human option. The time spent in the wilderness of Walden Pond’s shore enabled Thoreau to boil down his necessities. His definition of what a man needs to attain and maintain happiness is shockingly little, yet unsurprisingly believable. Happiness has existed on earth before the days of wine, coffee, and tea. Thoreau insists that these luxuries are exactly that; luxuries. True happiness and natural entertainment can be found in a place as primitive as Walden Pond. Just a page later, Thoreau continues to encourage his audience to “Listen to every zephyr for some reproof, for it is surely there, and he is unfortunate ho does not here it … many an irksome noise, go a long way off, is heard as music, a proud sweet satire on the meanness of our lives” (233). The music of Thoreau’s life exists on the Massachusetts wind. It is a stern reminder to him of the wonders of the natural world which become so easily forgotten in the convenience of society. As all philosophy does, this remains true throughout the times. In the stream of life that he references, the current is powerful. It takes some doing to remain steadfast against the waves of time, and Thoreau has managed to do so through his philosophy, his striking descriptions, and his firm moral grasp on the world. Other than this snippet of his natural philosophy, Thoreau’s ability to describe the indescribable (as aforementioned) is another anchor that remains firmly hooked into the riverbed of life. One of my personal favorite descriptions in all of Walden concerns the pond. Thoreau describes that “like the rest of our waters … it (the pond) appears at a little distance of a darker blue than the sky itself; and at such a time … I have discerned a matchless and indescribable light blue, such as watered or changeable silks and sword blades suggest, more cerulean than the sky itself, alternating with the original dark green on the opposite sides of the waves, which last appeared but muddy in comparison” (193). I find this particular excerpt most enchanting, for Thoreau succeeds in describing something he admits to being “indescribable” in the same breath. That is the true power and genius of the man’s quill. It is why he remains well-read and popular a hundred years after Walden was published.
ReplyDeleteLeonardo Urena:
ReplyDeleteAn interesting philosophy presented in Walden is the notion of minimalism and socialism. The idea of minimalism in Walden can be interpreted in a political sense as a socialist manifesto. Nonetheless, the idea of Thoreau makes a call for is socialism; more interesting in the early 19th century, before it is in fact instituted by Karl Marx in the late 19th century early 20th century. It is evident that Thoreau initiates criticisms against capitalism: an American way of life—not just an economical system, but the suggestion to, “simplify, simplify,” expresses this view that Thoreau believed that the “civilized way” of living is a misuse of incessant squandered resources. Thoreau continues and beckons us to, “Instead [have] three meals a day, if it be necessary eat but one; instead of a hundred dishes, five; and reduce other things in proportion” (109). I agree with Thoreau, our lives are filled with unnecessary possessions. Now, whether they are owned for comfort or indulgence is really up for interpretation by self. We are the only ones that could truly know whether that new coat was bought because we needed a winter jacket or because we want to look good in 30 degrees below weather, or both. What’s great about Walden is that it places the big pink elephant in the room. We know that we are being wasteful; the pink elephant is really whether or not we care? And is our comfort (or what I believe to be solace) worth the relentless squandering resources?
Our society is built and simultaneously divided by culture, class, religion, appearance, and even as something as trivial as trends. Socialism, in many ways eliminates these divisions in order to make us better comrades. However a problem I always had with socialism is the deduction of individuality. While trying to treat every human being like equals we are forgetting that not every human being is equal. In the sense that not every human is alike, and to govern in this way is unjust to each person that follows. We humans are individually unique in our own right. Whether that uniqueness is resourceful and offers significance to society is the real question. Should the uniquely useless be reward with equality? The denunciation of economic achievements, social ranks, and consumerism is distinctive of socialist ideology. Yet, Walden is about much more. To ignore the socialist undertones is a disservice to the work and yourself, but we must look pass politics and see the bigger picture here. Walden provides an understanding into the root of capitalism. If think only for the individual then we will always be divided ‘dividually as individuals. If I only care about being successful for myself, then in turn, I will be successful solitarily. While loneliness is based on perspective, then in fact, we are never truly alone. The real problem is separation from nature and everything that nature entails. When one believes that they are above nature that is actual loneliness. If our comfort is more important than the natural course of life then we are in fact losing touch with life.
Hunter Holbrook said:
ReplyDelete"An interesting component of Thoreau's experiment that we began discussing in class was just how influential and how crucial the natural environment was to his pursuit. We briefly addressed how plausible it would be for Thoreau to seek the same isolation and intimate connection with the natural world he found at Walden Pond, but in a location dense with humans and their creations. This question is one I believe to be truly significant to understanding Thoreau's stance. And though I find the large majority of Thoreau's work to be highly provocative, this is one aspect he does not seem to successfully address, and therefore weakens his general argument. I feel Thoreau spends so much time harping on how Walden Pond allowed him to appreciate the natural world, prohibiting thoughts of material goods and gains from tainting his thoughts, but forgets that humans and human society are very much elements of the natural world he expresses such appreciation for. What are the real distinctions among forests and cities? Humans are mammals just as cows are, and everything we construct is a product of our enhanced, but nonetheless natural, ingenuity and creativity. Looked at through that perspective, our skyscrapers are just as natural and purposeful as a beaver's dam or a bird's nest, both constructed with materials indigenous to this planet, both products of our respective species. So it is my opinion that Thoreau, if he desired, could have found and experienced the same emotions he found at Walden Pond anywhere in the world, as long as his resolve was strong enough to permit it. I feel Thoreau provides the human species with too much credit, and disassociates us with the rest of the world. He does this unintentionally, but regardless, seems to separate humans from the everything else. The truth remains though, that we are simply animals with highly developed and advanced cognitive capacities.
A theme that Thoreau does focus on, that I find he presents with uncanny persuasiveness, are his thought on being economical. The ease with which he denounces the unfortunate, and yet all too real human condition that celebrates material possessions, is striking. After reading and discussing his stance on this subject, I find myself compelled to take it up myself. Thoreau's view on life as so small and meaningless in the broader scheme of the universe makes material objects seem trivial and futile. Thoreau believes our highly evolved minds should be used to understand and educate ourselves about the massive space around us rather than wasting time pursuing the acquisition of essentially worthless and useless toys and possessions. But what Thoreau doesn't do is speak on what society would be like without currency, he does not offer a alternative. Every species has forms of social hierarchy, and the concept of money has been a consistent and fundamental method among humans during our short tenure on this planet. It's there for a reason, and it's hard to let go."