Our final Thoreau question will be obvious by now. Each of you is working on a research project that focuses on an important American nature writer. Your final required blog-entry should discuss the impact that Thoreau had on your author. This impact does not have to be direct--as it is in the case of Annie Dillard--who literally quotes Thoreau and discusses his influence. You may want to describe the way your author's prose style has been influenced by HDT, or you may decide to emphasize several shared topics of concern between your author and the pilgrim of Walden Pond. Even if the relationship seems nonspecific, virtually every author who has adopted the genre of nature writing from the mid-nineteenth century to the present owes a debt to the Concord hermit named Henry David. So, to our question: what influence has Henry David Thoreau had on the author who will be the subject of your final research project? You will have the rest of the semester to reflect on this question. Length: 500 words. Due date: Friday, May 1.
(P.S. In the one or two cases where your author predates Thoreau--such a William Bartram--please answer this modified version of our question: what similarities can you find between the work of your author and Thoreau?) (3/1/2009)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The relationship between John Muir and Henry David Thoreau reflects their mutual appreciation of the land and its spiritual qualities. Muir was heavily influenced by Thoreau, and his conservation efforts show how he internalized Thoreau’s beliefs that in order to truly understand and appreciate nature, a person must become one with it. Muir first read Thoreau in 1862 when he was a student at the University of Wisconsin. He agreed wholeheartedly with Thoreau’s writings, as he continued to read them over his lifetime. In fact, Muir took a copy of Thoreau’s book The Maine Woods when he journeyed to Alaska in 1879 (www.sierraclub.org). A difference between the two men, however, is their level of travel and physical integration into the landscape. Thoreau based his manifesto, Walden, around his time spent in solitude by Walden Pond. He does not leave Walden Pond except to walk into town, which was very close to where he chose to build his home. Compared to Muir and his travels, Thoreau remained relatively motionless within the world. Of course, though he did not travel in the same sense as Muir, the influence of his works are perhaps what prompted Muir to explore the wildness of nature. Both men believed in the importance of nature’s wildness, yet Muir went took his belief in the direction of conservation and preservation, through his actions as well as his own writings. Thoreau’s message about the pollution of American mentality and the necessity to appreciate one’s equality with nature is more abstract than Muir’s travels and conservation efforts. By traveling in the Sierra Nevada Mountains, Alaska, and countless other areas all over the globe, Muir’s descriptions of his experiences illustrate the need to protect such wild beauty. Articulating the difference between his and Thoreau’s views on environmentalism, Muir writes, “Even open-eyed Thoreau would perhaps have done well had he extended his walks westward to see what God had to show in the lofty sunset mountains" (www.sierraclub.org). This statement reflects the simultaneous influence and diversion between Muir and Thoreau. Muir’s environmental philosophies were put into practice: he extensively traveled the world to physically experience what he wanted to preserve. Without Thoreau’s influence, it is conceivable that Muir’s outlook on the necessity of wildness would not have been as thoroughly informed. However, drawing on the similarities between the two men is Muir’s friend Henry Fairfield Osborn, who writes, “In his attitude toward nature, as well as in his special gifts and abilities, Muir shares many qualities with Thoreau. First among these is his mechanical ability, his fondness for the handling of tools; second, his close identification with nature; third, his interpretation of the religious spirit of nature; fourth, his happiness in solitude with nature; fifth, his lack of sympathy with crowds of people; sixth, his intense love of animals” (www.sierraclub.org). Ultimately, Osborn’s observations indicate the similarities that tie the two men together through their love of wildness. In regards to place, Muir and Thoreau hold the same values, yet enact them very differently. Thoreau is more localized; he did not travel the continent and write of what he has found and how it has influenced him. Yet through Muir, his theories on nature and the human spirit are carried throughout North America, South America, Australia, Africa, Europe, China, and Japan. Therefore, it is ultimately the two men’s similarities that allow their differences to make a fundamental impact on past and present environmental efforts.
ReplyDeleteThrough my research on Edward Abbey (1927-1989), I have found many sites and reviews that compare Henry David Thoreau and Abbey, though the two authors do not have any actual direct relationship. Abbey was both a fan and critic of Thoreau and this is seen when he wrote a novel Down the River with Henry Thoreau. In this book, Abbey writes about a trip he and his friends took together in the 1980s. On this particular excursion, Abbey brought along Thoreau’s Walden and “for the next 40-odd pages, he contemplates nature, muses about politics, ridicules his vegetarian friends, and simultaneously pays homage to and pokes fun at Henry David Thoreau” (online critic). However, Abbey has tremendous respect for Thoreau and in fact, is very similar to him. Edward Abbey is notorious for his rebellious attitude and channels Thoreau who also was regarded by the public as completely radical in his time. Abbey’s mantra is actually a Walt Whitman quote: “Resist much, obey little” that I feel Thoreau himself would identify with. Essentially, both Abbey and Thoreau were genuine rebels. Thoreau emphasized the value of nature in the 1880s and Abbey also argued in the 1950s for the similar ideals: the preservation of the land. Thoreau felt that nature was at risk of being overdeveloped by consumerism just as Abbey depicted the southwest as a region threatened by corporate greed in the following years. Like Thoreau who stressed that humans should return to nature and shun the modern industrial way of life, Abbey also possessed a very similar ideology. Both Thoreau and Abbey emphasized the preservation of the wilderness, for it is in danger of being overdeveloped. Again, they both are firm believers and supporters of land ethics, which basically describes the right and wrong way to treat the natural landscape. Abbey and Thoreau would both wholeheartedly agree with fellow nature writer, Aldo Leopold, who states, “A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise” (p. 141). The wilderness can only shrink, not grow and Abbey and Thoreau both believe in its immediate preservation. The two authors believed in physical and mental immersion in their philosophies; Abbey worked as a part time ranger in the west and Thoreau lived, as we know, at Walden Pond for approximately two years. Both men loved the earth and found not only value in the wilderness, but also spirituality. Henry David Thoreau did not identify himself as a nature writer, though he later was given this title by readers and critics. Abbey also did not categorize himself as an environmental or nature writer. In terms of their prose styles, both write with conviction and wit. They are strong authors; detailed and passionate. Though I have read little of Edward Abbey’s actual work, what I have read is incredibly sarcastic and funny. Abbey wrote of the beauty and value of the west just as Thoreau depicted Walden. Though Henry David Thoreau and Edward Abbey wrote in different time periods, the two writers definitely shared similar ideologies and were prepared to fight to preserve nature.
ReplyDeleteHenry David Thoreau and Gifford Pinchot are two nature writers who differed in appreciation for land. Thoreau’s appreciation was on a more spiritual level than Pinchot’s idea of “the greatest good for the greatest number of people over the longest period of time” (online source). Gifford’s theory was basically the complete opposite from that of Thoreau. Pinchot was more interested in how nature will be useful to humans. This is not to question Pinchot’s love for nature because he loved nature and respected it just as much as Thoreau did. Pinchot’s father was in the lumber business when he was younger. When Gifford grew old enough to understand that the lumber business destroyed many hundreds of acres of trees, he realized that he wanted to do something to help nature; from this he became a forester. Like Pinchot, Thoreau loved nature from the beginning. He conducted an experiment where he ended up living at Walden for over 2 years to show his dedication and love for nature. By gathering information about both of these nature writers, I have concluded that Thoreau is more of a romantic as apposed to Pinchot who is more of a realist.
ReplyDeleteThe two nature writers also differed in the fact that Thoreau was a preservationist and Pinchot was a conservationist. While the two ideas might seem similar, preservationism is more of a spiritual in that the people who practice it believe that nature can help them to “regain some of what they have lost” (online critic.) Conservation is the management of land. While their land use beliefs differ, one main connection between Pinchot and Thoreau is John Muir. Muir worked closely with Pinchot because he was against everything that Pinchot believed. Pinchot believed in commercializing nature and making it usable to humans while Muir and Thoreau believed in preservation of land and having no human contact with this land. If Thoreau were to take a walk through the woods, he would be thankful for the nature and all the beauty in those woods. If Pinchot were to take the same walk in the he would think how is the land useful to humans. Another connection between these two nature writers is that they both believed it was important to respect wildness. By reading both of the writers texts we get a sense of their beliefs. In Thoreau’s Walden, we got a sense of how attached Thoreau became to nature. One can feel Thoreau’s passion and spirituality for nature by reading any of his texts. He personifies many of the situations that he encounters while at Walden, for example the ant battle. Pinchot does not write in the same style that Thoreau does. Pinchot takes a different approach to his writing. I think that more people would be able to relate to Pinchot’s writing because he talks about the practical use of land. As Thoreau personifies situations between animals in his book Walden, Pinchot does not do anything like this; he takes a more realistic approach to nature. He has written many books including one about his conservation efforts.
Both of these men accomplished a lot in their lifetime; from writing books about their experiences to influencing people to realize just how important nature is to our lives. While their appreciations of nature differed in that Thoreau was a preservationist and Pinchot was a conservationist, it was obvious that both of them cared about nature.
The work of John James Audubon is inspired purely by interior motivational drive. A natural and instinctive will to explore and self educate was the lifeblood behind this American frontiersman. The illegitimate son of a French sea captain and plantation owner and his French mistress, Audubon was born on a sugar plantation in modern day Haiti. His career in America began as a general store owner before he exploited his love for the wild.
ReplyDeleteAudubon maintained a close relationship with nature as an experienced hunter, trapper, fisherman, and early conservationist. When Audubon was thirty-two yeas old, Henry David Thoreau was born. In 1819, the year of Thoreau’s second birthday, Audubon had been jailed briefly due to bankruptcy, as his general store had run into hard times due to the trade embargoes in place during the Anglo-American war of 1812. With no other options, Audubon took to the open American frontier with his gun and his paintbrushes. It was that open expanse of wildness that Audubon would catalog nearly 700 species of north-American birds, becoming the world’s foremost ornithologist for nearly half a century. Audubon’s achieved nearly instant international recognition after his London exhibition of a portion of his work, Birds of America in 1826. Audubon was able to capture the world’s eye with the captivating descriptions of every bird, and his beautiful artistic renderings of their likeness in motion. The fluidity and aesthetic qualities of Audubon’s charismatic and active paintings earned him the nickname, “the American Woodsman.” By this time, Thoreau was nine years old.
Thoreau would reach his naturalistic peak in 1854 with the publishing of Walden or Life in the Woods. It was in this journal that Thoreau gradually discovered the necessity for an appreciation for the natural world. Thoreau’s philosophical reflections during his time spent at Walden reflect on a myriad of subjects including self-reliance, solitude, meditation, becoming a part of nature in finding an existence above that of the desperate and dull lives of the Concordians to whom he often compared himself. Audubon practiced nearly every one of the themes that Thoreau pondered and jotted down during his time at Walden. Audubon found his sanctuary searching for hunting and painting the animals he loved, while Thoreau maintained his haven on the wooded slopes of Walden Pond, sitting comfortably still while the developing nature revolved around him.
These two woodsmen of the nineteenth century maintained a constant love for the gifts of the natural world. Thoreau expressed concern in the development of the unnecessary in human society. In his later years, which were around when Thoreau was writing, Audubon lamented the potential loss of any of his beloved bird population due to increasing habitat damage as a result of the American Industrial Revolution. Both authors and artists greatly influenced the human perception of the natural world, and are preserved still today as icons for the conservation and preservation of our earth. It’s a shame Audubon passed away before getting a chance to read Thoreau; he would have loved it.
The relationship between Henry David Thoreau and Aldo Leopold can be observed in a variety of ways. One main similarity between Thoreau and Leopold is that they both spent significant time observing the world from a solitary space. Thoreau observed the world from his cabin at Walden Pond while Leopold observed the world from his shack in Wisconsin. The fact that Leopold chose to take a similar approach to studying and observing nature as Thoreau suggests that Thoreau had a major influence on Leopold. From inside their respective shelters both men could be close to nature while minimizing their impact on the world.
ReplyDeleteMore evidence of the relationship between Thoreau and Leopold is found in the writing styles of the two authors. In Walden Thoreau sits and simply describes what he feels, smells and hears around him in an extremely visual manner. Leopold often describes the world around him using a similar writing style as Thoreau. In one passage Leopold describes a flock of bluebills. “A flock of bluebills, pitching pondward, tears the dark silk of heaven in one long rending nose-dive” (65). The use of such vivid adjectives allows the reader to clearly visualize the scene of the bluebill descending to the pond. Since both Thoreau and Leopold were keen observers of the world around them it makes sense that Thoreau influenced the way Leopold observed things and wrote about them.
More evidence of the influence Thoreau had on Leopold comes from the fact that Leopold refers to Thoreau in his writings. At the end of his chapter “Arizona and New Mexico” in A Sand County Almanac, Leopold discusses how humans strive for safety. He then makes a connection to Thoreau. Leopold writes “Perhaps this is behind Thoreau’s dictum: In wildness is the salvation of the world. Perhaps this is the hidden meaning in the howl of the wolf, long known among mountains, but seldom perceived among men” (141). It is clear from the reference to Thoreau that his ideas were always in Leopold’s head as he observed the world around him. Another example of the respect and fascination Leopold had for Thoreau is found in one of the books for my research project titled Aldo Leopold’s Odyssey. Here the author of the book describes how Leopold used to relax in New Mexico or Arizona by reading Thoreau’s work. From this it can be concluded that Leopold actively studied Thoreau’s work and used it as a base from which his own ideas stemmed.
John Tallamadge in his essay “Anatomy of a Classic” makes the argument that “Leopold seems to have more in common with Thoreau than with any other nature writer. Both writers cared deeply about nature and about the world around them. Thoreau wished to live life as “deliberately as nature” while Leopold viewed humans as a singular part of nature. Although Thoreau was a preservationist and Leopold a conservationist they both believed in the beauty of the world and that it should be taken care of. This idea once again illustrates how big of an impact Thoreau’s work had on Leopold.
Thoreau had a profound influence on Dillard’s personal life and her development as a writer. Dillard became especially interested in Thoreau’s works in college and eventually wrote her master’s thesis on the symbolism of Walden Pond. Furthermore, she met her second husband, a Thoreau scholar, after reading one of his books on the author and deciding to write him a fan letter. The very premise of Walden was the blueprint for Pilgrim at Tinker Creek. Bodies of water served as the inspiration and titles of the books. Thoreau’s opening lines about his reason for moving into the woods became the starting point for Dillard‘s spiritual journey and literary career. After a near fatal bout of pneumonia, she decided to follow in Thoreau’s footsteps and “live deliberately, to front only the essential facts of life, and to see if I could not learn what it had to teach, and not, when I came to die, discover that I had not lived.” That statement brought Dillard into nature in a bid to live a more meaningful, spiritual life and a deeper connection to the earth. She spent an entire year of her life in a semi-hermitic state, and kept a journal of everything she saw when she sat by the creek in her backyard. She describes the notes she took as “what Thoreau called a ‘meteorological journal of the mind.” Stylistically, the prose of both the writers is both metaphysical and grounded, the combination of spiritual pursuit in a natural reality. While there is direct evidence of Thoreau’ influence in Dillard’s work, his impact is also much deeper, in both her outlook of the world and the essence of her messages. As a creator and a follower if the transcendentalist tradition, both writers sought answers for the questions about life by looking to nature. Through solitude and observation came spiritual revelation. Neither writer began by analyzing nor trying to explain what they encountered in nature, they simply recorded it. Yet from those records came wisdom and understanding. One of the common themes that Thoreau and Dillard focus on is the relationship between humans and the environment. The writers assert that thinking about ourselves cuts us off from everything else and that there has been a disconnect between people and nature. Self-consciousness is what leads to a life of material obsessions and a fear of loneliness. Yet, Thoreau is able to find companionship in isolation for he says his natural surrounds are what keep him company. While Dillard doesn’t go to exactly the same extent, she does contend that people will never be able to understand nature if they continue to keep their eyes shut to all that is around them. Thoreau’s influence on Dillard is not just in her writings, but also in her way of thinking and her point of view on life. In many ways, she is his female embodiment and Pilgrim at Tinker Creek is the reincarnation of Walden for the 20th century.
ReplyDeleteThough separated by generations Henry David Thoreau and Terry Tempest Williams share more than a love and respect for the natural world. Thoreau and Williams are connected by their emphasis on spiritual and metaphysical connections between individuals and the natural world. While many American nature writers emphasize conservation and action in their works, Thoreau and Williams both spend the majority of their focus on the “one-ness” that can be felt between each individual and nature. Both Thoreau and Williams feed the most basic human need for connection. The natural human desire to connect can best be seen in Thoreau’s literal fusion of man and nature in “The Bean-Field” and in William’s interdisciplinary approach to the overall concept of nature writing.
ReplyDelete“The Bean-Field” is no doubt one of the most celebrated chapters of Walden. The iconic quotation, “It was no longer the beans that I hoed, or that I hoed beans” (Walden, The Beanfield) is featured on everything from a plaque at Walden Pond to mementos in gift shops everywhere. This simple quotation resonates so loud and true through American culture because it emphasizes relationship and connection. Many American Nature Writers place nature and man at odd, as two forces competing for the same space on the planet. Thoreau, instead of pinning humans and nature at odds with each other, brings the man and the bean-field into one being. A being that can coexist in spiritual harmony.
While Thoreau connects man and nature in his philosophical rhetoric Williams does so through her unique stylistic choices in her writing. In her work Refuge: An Unnatural History of Family and Place Williams seamlessly connects her mother’s struggle with cancer to the flooding of a Bird Sanctuary in Bear River. By connecting her struggles with grief and loss with the grief and loss of nature and ultimately placing the refuge of both in the human ability to connect. In the final chapter of Refuge Williams states, “I am slowly, painfully discovering that my refuge is not found in my mother, my grandmother, or even the birds of Bear River. My refuge exists in my capacity to love.” This emphasis on the power of human connections is what connects Williams to Thoreau.
Williams and Thoreau share the same literary genre with countless authors, yet these two very different authors share the same respect for connection that not many others do. When faced with a struggle it is easy to place the opposing sides at odds with each other. Williams and Thoreau abandon this traditional tactic and embrace the love and respect that can be shared between man and nature.
An introduction to Henry David Thoreau and Bill McKibben feels similar: Walden’s first chapter, Economy, asks of material possessions: “Shall we always stdy to obtain more of these things, and not sometimes be content with less?” (54) In 1854, Thoreau knew as a matter of the weight unnecessary possessions put on life that these things were “the beginnings of evil” (84) and that “the evil that men do lives after them” (84). McKibben’s The End of Nature opens with that evil grown manifest. “Changes that can affect us can happen in our lifetime in our world,” (7) says McKibben – noting that mankind has effectively killed the “set of human ideas [regarding] the world and [man’s] place in it” (7) – that mankind has ended nature.
ReplyDeleteMcKibben’s work almost seems an inevitable sequel to one of the most well-known pieces of non-fiction by an American writer. Walden is, after all, one of the primary texts that defined the modern values of nature McKibben believes have died. Without Thoreau’s influence, McKibben’s powerful title might be limited to a National Geographic essay called The Change of Nature, and would be limited to the physical differences – the additional parts per million of CO2 added to the atmosphere since the onset of the industrial revolution, a small increase in temperature, the extinction from many ecosystems of predators that man had traditionally considered a threat anyway. By practical standards, and without the apocalyptic predictions McKibben made in his maiden work, these changes would seem inconsequential in the grand scheme. By practical standards, and with the apocalyptic predictions – McKibben would have likely been dismissed as a Chicken Little. The End of Nature was already met with harsh criticism in this respect, but at least McKibben had solid footing in the hearts of nostalgic environmentalists that grew up reading the ideals of Thoreau and the tradition of nature writers who followed him. Without Walden, McKibben would have needed to define these ideals of nature writing on his own, in one text, without an entire tradition backing him. His argument would fall flat and the name Bill McKibben would have faded back into the darkness.
Yet McKibben did get a start, even if a challenged one. As McKibben was met with criticism calling him overly pessimistic, McKibben looked further into the tradition of nature writing for appeal. By the time his sequel, Hope, Human and Wild hit store shelves, it was obvious that McKibben’s debt to the tradition started by Thoreau was even deeper. Hope appropriately balances the scientific approach of his first book with detailed accounts of animals and landscapes, both those affected by man’s hand, and those who persevered when man met nature halfway. In short, McKibben introduced the proper amount of hope to his call for change – a style reminiscent of Walden itself. Today, McKibben is a well-established environmentalist, following in the tradition set up by Thoreau 135 years prior to McKibben’s first work. He has published thirteen books, and countless articles for magazines like National Geographic.
Henry David Thoreau and Rick Bass’ writing are similar, due to the fact they are both social critique of their current society. Thoreau began writing Walden Pond in order to educate society the destruction the materialistic world on nature. He desired to shift society from a materialist world to a natural world. Thoreau re-immersion into the natural world brought new life to the self. He re-discovered the symbiotic relationship between nature and the self, physically and spiritually. His new perspective on the self supported his belief that the real ‘riches’ of life where found in the natural world. Though Walden, or Life in the Woods Thoreau hoped to convey the organic pleasures and riches of nature in his immersion into a simplistic natural world. Accentuating the notion that a world where the self is understood was ‘richer’ than one filled with materialism
ReplyDeleteThis is a delicious evening, when the whole body is one sense, and imbibes delight through every pore. I go and come with a strange liberty in Nature, a part of herself. As I walk along the stony shore of the pond in my shirt sleeves, though it is cool as well as cloudy and windy, and I see nothing special to attract me, all the elements are unusually congenial to me. (147)
Thoreau’s sensitivity to the natural world around him enables him to absorb the delights of the night into his pores. He has used his lessons from Emerson and opened himself up to the universe, and in return it spoke to him. “I see nothing special to attract me, all the elements are unusually congenial to me.” Although nature is communicating to Thoreau, it’s his interaction with nature that allows him to feel congenial with it. However, without the recognition that the self and nature are intertwined gave him the liberty to move between the physical and spiritual worlds.
Decades after Walden Pond was written nature writers continue to address, and stress, Thoreau’s realization. Rick Bass’ work emphasizes this notion. However, Bass uses fiction to stress his beliefs, because fiction is a literary tool that permits the writer to build an environment that becomes a cultural artifact, which is shaped by societal intentions and interventions (Rendell 1). It allows Bass to create an environment that displays our downfall, because our interaction with nature is toxic; therefore, we are poisoning ourselves since we are one. This impact of the material world in our demise can be seen in Bass’ “Pagans:”
As the egret decomposed, so too was revealed the quarry within—the last meal upon which it had gorged—and they could see within the bone basket of its rib cage all the tiny fish skeletons, with their piles of scale glitter lying around like bright sand. There were bumps and tumors, misshapen bends in the fishes’ skeletons, and as they rotted (flies feasting on them within that ventilated rib cage, as if trapped in a bottle, but free, also, to come and go) the toxic sludge of their lives melted to leave a bright metallic residue on the island, staining here and there like stripes of silver paint. (15)
Bass’ passage exemplifies how we are all one. Humans contaminated the lake with a crane machine. The contamination made the fish poisonous, which then poisoned the egret that fed off of them. Through the decomposition of the egret Bass is able to stress the affect that one has on the rest of the world. However, through the use of fiction he was able to create this scene in order to do just that.
Bass’ use of fiction allowed him to address Thoreau’s beliefs in a more effective manner because it allowed him to create a linear progression. In his short stories there was a beginning, middle, and an end result. Whereas, non-fiction limited Thoreau to only reporting what he witnessed. They both are addressing the same issues, yet Bass is able to address them in more effective manner.
Despite their drastically different writing styles, H.D. Thoreau has definitely had an impact on E.O. Wilson. One could almost argue that Wilson is a modern, more extroverted, more scientific Thoreau. First of all, they share a common passion: nature. Thoreau writes, “All nature is your congratulation, and you have cause momentarily to bless yourself. The greatest gains and values are farthest from being appreciated. We easily come to doubt if they exist. We soon forget them. They are the highest reality….The true harvest of my daily life is somewhat as intangible and indescribable as the tints of morning or evening.” (Walden 231). Nature, for Thoreau, was a place to reflect on one’s life and society. It is in wildness that he found answers to the questions of life. E.O. Wilson shows this same love of the natural world. In Biophilia, whose title itself means literally “love of life,” a recurring theme is Wilson’s unending awe and amazement for all things in nature. He writes:
ReplyDeleteNow to the very heart of wonder…the living world is the natural domain of the most restless and paradoxical part of the human spirit. Our sense of wonder grows exponentially: the greater the knowledge, the deeper the mystery and the more we seek knowledge to create new mystery. This catalytic reaction, seemingly an inborn human trait, draws us perpetually forward in a search for new places and new life. (Biophilia 10)
It is this sense of wonder and the mutual respect for nature and its importance to the individual that links H.D. Thoreau and E.O. Wilson. In chapters like “Higher Laws” in Walden, Thoreau spoke of his deep spirituality as it related to nature, wildness, and humanity. Wilson is also a deeply spiritual person, and many of his interviews and lectures center around his insistence that through science and the humanities combined, humankind can now approach philosophical, ethical, and spiritual questions in new, exciting ways. Wilson expresses endless wonder in the enormous variety of animal species and the countless biological processes that are part of the life cycle, just as Thoreau found so much to treasure and revere in his natural surroundings.
Ehrlich & Thoreau
ReplyDeleteAlthough Henry David Thoreau exclusively wrote nonfiction nature writing and Gretel Ehrlich writes novels, poetry, and nonfiction nature works, they both examine the relationships between nature and human beings. Thoreau focused more on his own experiences with nature living at Walden Pond, while Ehrlich also places fictional characters usually in rural Wyoming and the west, living and coexisting with nature on a daily bases. Ehrlich’s book of essays, The Solace of Open Spaces, probably most resembles Walden in that it details Ehrlich’s personal feelings and experiences of and with the land. While Thoreau found himself befriending the land, Ehrlich seems more like nature writer Annie Dillard, dwarfed and overwhelmed by nature. It seems as though Thoreau’s writing has had no direct impact on Ehrlich in terms of her style or way of thinking about nature, however, his mere existence and work led to the development of all nature writing, and in term Ehrlich’s own writing.
Ehrlich, unlike Thoreau, has been very early on in her career labeled a “nature writer” despite the fact that some critiques consider her novels not to be nature writing. However her essays, in The Solace of Open Spaces and Islands, the Universe, and Home (Islands), prove to be enough to solidify this label to her. In a Women’s Review article by Edith Milton of Islands, Milton writes, “It evokes Thoreau and Emerson and echoes with the Romantic precept that face to face with nature…we can reach the spiritual and moral enlightenment which nature offers.” Clearly, Ehrlich’s nature essays illustrate qualities of self revelation achieved through nature just as Thoreau’s Walden did.
Though Ehrlich does share this tendency with Thoreau, she still, in many ways, resembles Dillard in the conclusions that she comes to about nature and humanity. Milton writes later that, “In [Ehrlich’s] search for answers…she tries to enlarge the details of these very personal experiences into a cosmic, eternal ad sometimes deeply negative truth.” Ehrlich, like Dillard, and somewhat like Thoreau, uses nature to search for meaning in life through the meaning she sees in nature. However, most like Dillard, Ehrlich sees that more often than not, nature illustrates the horrible meanings in life.
Ultimately, the approach that Ehrlich takes, humans and nature coexisting and learning from each other, is much like Thoreau’s own approach, with a different spin. While Thoreau used various titles to separate the sections of his books, Economy, various visitors or neighbors, or even simply Ponds, Ehrlich often models the section so her books, for example in Heart Mountain, after the seasons or other natural divisions. This is a way that Ehrlich has taken the ideas that Thoreau had about modeling humanity after nature, and used it in her own style. While their approaches do differ, they both share the same goal to learn from and about nature. For both Thoreau and Ehrlich, living closely with nature was not a choice, but a necessity for at least part of their life—in Ehrlich’s case most of her life.
“The greater part of what my neighbors call good I believe in my soul to be bad, and if I repent of anything, it is very likely to be my good behavior”
ReplyDeleteThough stated by Henry David Thoreau, some one hundred years before Miss. Carson, this was the very struggle Rachel Carson dealt with during the writing process and publication of her book Silent Spring. Perhaps any forward thinkers would end up sounding similar in their stance against the masses, but it is that similarity between Thoreau and Carson, that made each of them so successful. Walden and Silent Spring were met with negative publicity. Many people were upset and insulted at the mere prospect of these words being said. Though for others, there was a silent agreement of the truth that these books told. Clearly Silent Spring would have not been necessary to publish when Walden was and vice versa, but each book let people question the way that the world at the time had been trucking along. During the research process for Silent Spring, Carson had later admitted that she had waited six years for someone else to write the book. None of her colleagues or had noticed, cared, or taken the initiative to see the negative things that were occurring to all of nature, including ourselves. Carson put off writing Silent Spring for so long because she knew and feared the fight she would have to put up after its publication. At the publication of Silent Spring, Carson’s fears were confirmed; people on both sides of the argument on how to deal with DDT were infuriated. Owners of DDT companies mocked her scientific credibility because they were being truthfully found out and attacked. Citizens of whose farms, or animals, or relatives were effected either with death, severe sickness, or a ruined plot of land, were equally furious that their lives and well beings had been put at stake knowingly. The DDT companies, who were much like Thoreau’s neighbors that would call what Carson believed to “in [her] soul be bad”, good. Luckily for Carson, the DDT companies were overthrown by the United States Government who also believed that this “good behavior” was not so good at all. The use of DDT was halted by the interference of the Government, which in lays a difference between Silent Spring and Walden. Thoreau’s Walden is a book suggesting a different lifestyle for pure, natural mental happiness avoiding the woes of society. Carson’s Silent Spring on the other hand is a book suggesting a different lifestyle (of sorts) for a natural, uncontaminated healthy body because of chemical products that are greater than ourselves. I cannot explain much more on this topic, other than to say that it’s interesting, how a government can be worried about physical health and not mental.
Much as Thoreau never limited himself to the boundaries of specific genres (or even literary expectations at the time, like avoiding use of the first person), Barry Lopez avoided constrictive labeling of his works or himself as a writer. “I have never seen myself in a category as a writer,” he said in an interview. “The problem with working in a category or telling someone you are a nature writer is that it precludes their understanding of what you are really up to or might predispose them to read your work in a strange way.” Thus, even the foundations of Lopez’s works are similar to Thoreau’s in the complete lack of boundary; rather than limiting himself to one genre, Lopez discussed the land and wildlife, human interaction with it, and the vital connection between man and nature.
ReplyDeleteA large part of the importance Lopez places in this connection between man and nature is not merely how it effects the environment, but how it effects humans, particularly in a more figurative and spiritual sense. Just as Thoreau redefined the meaning of solitude and stressed nature’s ability to prevent loneliness (all the way down to raindrops), Lopez determined that the loneliness apparently prevalent in today’s society is due to our detachment from nature. Such a focus on the importance of connecting with our natural surroundings is one of the most defined similarities between Thoreau and Lopez.
Corresponding with this personal connection to nature, Lopez is also reminiscent of Thoreau in his inclination to include spiritual matters with his consideration of the wilderness. With a Catholic background, Lopez doesn’t exhibit this in terms of an “Over Soul” notion, but instead sees God in nature as its creator. As he once explained, “It’s a kind of love – agape – between me and the place. I recognize God in the place and I love the place because of it.” The environment was not merely land and its worth was not merely in the material resources we take from it; rather, according to Lopez (influenced by Thoreau, to an extent), we are to be stewards of the land and find greater, spiritual value in nature.
In this “stewardship,” Lopez also echoes Thoreau’s concern about the encroachment of human development upon nature and wilderness. While Thoreau wrote about the nearby railroad and development of the telegraph, Lopez stresses the need to draw a line as to how far our domination of the land will be permitted to go. He shows particular interest in extreme environments like the Arctic, where even its geographic isolation has not shielded it from the negative impact of today’s society. Lopez’s concerns for the safeguarding and wise use of the remaining wilderness areas join those of nature writers dating back at least as far as Thoreau, and he is unquestionably influenced by the ideas of one of the founding fathers of nature writing.
From Breanna:
ReplyDeleteRobinson Jeffers was born in 1887, a quarter of a century after Thoreau’s death. Although there is little evidence that Jeffers was profoundly influenced by the famous once-hermit at Walden Pond, they do share a number of philosophical viewpoints regarding Nature, man, and the relationship between them.
To begin with, both men were in love with Nature. Thoreau described that he experienced “sometimes that the most sweet and tender, the most innocent and encouraging society may be found in any natural object” (149). He continues to illustrate this intimate relationship with Nature by detailing his friendships with the “gentle” rain and even the pine needles of the trees surrounding his cabin (149). Likewise, Jeffers described a love affair with Nature in his works. His setting – the Big Sur region of the California coast – was nowhere near as humble as Thoreau’s Connecticut Pond, but he shared Thoreau’s passion. To Jeffers, “The greatest beauty is organic wholeness, the wholeness of life and things, the divine beauty of the universe.” Jeffers’ tone, however, is usually less tender than Thoreau’s, leaning heavily toward veneration. The love Jeffers felt toward Nature was more of reverence instead of the friendship and nurturing connection Thoreau experienced.
Another commonality the two nature writers shared was their knowledge of the disconnection between humankind and the natural world. Both acknowledged in their respective works that their species had mentally isolated itself from the rest of the universe. According to Thoreau, “the mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation” (28). By this statement, he addressed the failure of mankind to realize and appreciate the force of true value in life: Nature. Instead of drawing satisfaction from the universe, humans look to flawed, unwise society. For that, they could never truly be fulfilled. Like Thoreau, Jeffers illustrates the alienation between humans and Nature. In his poem “The Purse-Seine,” he writes, “We have gathered vast populations incapable/ of free survival, insulated/ From the strong earth, each person in himself helpless, on all/ dependent.” Mankind has placed a barrier between itself and Nature. This estrangement, Jeffers prophesizes in the rest of the poem, will lead to “mass-disasters.” According to both authors, human cultures that separate us from Nature are extremely detrimental to our bodies and souls.
Further in this vein, both nature writers are highly critical of industry. In an epoch of capitalist expansion, Thoreau criticized technological progress, doubting it could yield the self-realization he sought. The railroad becomes a symbol for this false progress, and Thoreau is quick to criticize its ultimately destructive nature. “Men,” he states, “have an indistinct notion that if they keep up this activity of joint stock and spades long enough all will at length ride [the railroad] somewhere, in next to no time, and for nothing” (71). However, Thoreau reveals that due to fares, average wages, and scarcity of employment, it would be more efficient to walk to one’s desired destination than to take the train (71). By placing their faith in the false promises of convenience made by the railroad, they will eventually find themselves “run over” (71). Far from benefiting from these advancements, mankind, he warns, will be ruined. Similarly, Jeffers writes in “The Purse-Seine” that now that mankind has “geared the machines” and built “great cities,” we have doomed ourselves to destruction, for this so-called “Progress” removes us from the wisdom and peace found only in Nature.
Lewis Thomas and Henry David Thoreau
ReplyDeleteAs I read Henry David Thoreau’s Walden, or Life in the Woods, and began to study the life, research and teachings of scientist Lewis Thomas, their backgrounds and life experiences appeared to barely overlap at all. Thomas, a researcher and physician, was constantly immersed in New York City society for much of his life. He grew up in Flushing and later worked at NYU and other city university hospitals. Thoreau spent much of his time in a small town in Massachusetts, and a portion of his time secluded in the woods a few miles out of town. Thomas focused on science and Thoreau focused on the spiritual, but both were focused on our connection to the Earth and the roles that we play and nature plays in our relationship with this Earth.
One of Thoreau’s most memorable lines from Walden was “It was no longer beans that I hoed, nor I that hoed beans.” This quote exemplifies the relationship Thoreau strove to have with the environment and the world around him. Thoreau believed in being at one with the environment instead of exploiting the environment for our own needs and desires. Similarly, Thomas believed that in order for the world to function progressively, humans had to cultivate a symbiotic relationship with the earth in which both humans and the earth provided for each other. Thomas equated the earth and all it encompasses to a biological cell, simplifying the Earth’s scientific workings and relationships to make sense of it for a public audience. In a way, Thoreau did the same thing with an entirely different approach as he focused on the cultivation of his own personal connection with nature.
Thomas and Thoreau also demonstrated similar interests in literature and music, which both reflected their views of nature and humankind. Thoreau believed that books were the most important things humans produced, and were part of the force behind ideas being transformed all over the world. He considered books immortal and a key part of building connections between people. Supporting this idea, Thomas spent much of his time writing poetry and listening to music, and he often expressed how important he believed these were to education and grounded critical thinking.
The spirit of experiment is also a common thread between Thomas and Thoreau. As a scientist and researcher, much of Thomas’s education and professor was based off of experimentation and scientific theory. Thoreau’s foray in the woods for two years is often called his “experiment of simple living.” Thoreau didn’t follow the scientific method or run his “experiment” according to any scientific standards, but it was an experiment in the sense that he was testing out his own personal theories of philosophy. Thomas tested out scientific research through standard scientific methods, and applied his findings and understandings to his philosophy of natural and human relationships.
Overall, I believe that Thomas was probably influenced by Thoreau through Thoreau’s literary works and literary voice. Thomas was grounded in science, whereas Thoreau was grounded in critical philosophical thought, yet Thomas managed to pull both science and philosophy into his every day life and beliefs, bringing both of these things to the public through his writing, just like Thoreau. Both men wrote to share their own personal findings on nature and philosophy, and they remain connected through their “experimental” spirits and their motivation to share with the rest of the world their individual discoveries.
The clearest influence Thoreau had on Loren Eiseley is shown in their respective writing styles; they’re not identical, but they’re very similar. First of all, most of Walden consists of separate journal entries, or chapters, that could very easily stand alone. Eiseley wrote in a similar form; he wrote essays that would later be collected in books.
ReplyDeleteMore than that, though, the way that Thoreau and Eiseley got their respective points across was very similar. Both of them often used a short, often symbolic anecdote about some aspect of nature, to convey a larger truth about something. A good example for Thoreau would be his using his account of two colonies of ants fighting each other to talk about human war and aggression, and the reasons that war exists in the first place.
One of Eiseley’s more famous works, “The Star Thrower,” takes much the same form. He is wandering along a beach in Costabel, somewhat depressed about the state of the human race. He says, a little melodramatically perhaps, “I was the inhumanly stripped skeleton without voice, without hope, wandering alone upon the shores of the world. I was devoid of pity, because pity implies hope.” His bad mood is merely exacerbated as he walks along the beach, seeing more and more dead sea animals washed up in the tide: an octopus, a crab, and countless starfish. After a while, he stumbles upon a man who is throwing starfish that are still alive back into the ocean. Eiseley notes to himself that “the star thrower is a man, and death is running more fleet than he along every sea beach in the world.” At this point Eiseley is not convinced that the man is doing anything worthwhile with his time, much the same way an American college student wouldn’t be convinced that a vote has any kind of impact. This sets him off on a long philosophical discourse, followed by his coming to the optimistic conclusion that he could be making a difference, and this leads Eiseley to start throwing starfish himself.
So Thoreau and Eiseley both wrote nature-based anecdotes that stood for bigger human ideas. It’s hard to say at this point how much of that similarity is coincidence and how much Eiseley’s style was actually impacted specifically by Thoreau. After all, they were both college educated men of letters, so it makes sense that they had similar writing styles. However, the sheer level of similarity in their methods suggests that Thoreau definitely had some direct influence on Eiseley. The primary difference between them is that Eiseley turns out to be, in addition to being an amateur scientist, a hopeless romantic as well. He is more poet than pragmatist; a quote like “I would walk with the knowledge of the discontinuities of the unexpected universe. I would walk knowing of the rift revealed by the thrower, a hint that there looms, inexplicably, in nature something above the role men give her,” seems to go a little bit beyond (romantically or philosophically speaking,) where Thoreau would be willing to go.
. Wendell Berry has openly and admittedly been influenced by the work of Thoreau. The individualism that Thoreau shows in Walden appealed to Berry as a young writer, and the sense of community that is present in all of Berry’s fiction is an outgrowth of Thoreau’s individualism. He has said that, “Walden of course was a formative book for me”, it showed him a new way of looking at the world and forced him to reevaluate his morals, as it does for many readers. Part of this reevaluation was the individualism that the book exhibits, “I mean when I was a young man [Thoreau and Emerson] meant a lot to me because of their individualism, and that individualism appeals to me. It has a deep appeal for me, maybe too much appeal”. Berry sees this individualism as too appealing because it is desirable, but it is in direct opposition to the movement for small communities that he has spent his life trying to protect. Berry goes on to explain how his ideas about community grew out Thoreau’s individualism, “it's logical that people who try to be individuals and find pretty soon how limited that is--and how little you can do by yourself, how little you amount to by yourself--would become advocates for community life”. Solitary life and individualism are opportunities for spiritual growth but, Berry argues, although this is desirable, it only takes you so far. In order to achieve real goals and try to have a positive impact a single person can only do so much. Thus Berry progressed from Thoreau’s individualism into his trademark sense of community.
ReplyDeleteThis is not to say that Berry opposes Thoreau’s ideas, in fact it is quite the opposite. Individualism, introspection, and appreciation for the natural world are key parts of Berry’s philosophies. Berry’s ideas center on abandoning the idea of infinite progress in favor of small self-sustaining communities where inhabitants appreciate their surroundings, both natural and human, because of a shared sense of place that develops from living in one place generation after generation. Such a society can only exist if people are willing to look within themselves, as Thoreau did, and see what is important. Berry argues that a close relationship to the land and people you grow up with tops that list.
One of Berry’s novels, Jayber Crow, is about a barber who witnesses through the years the destruction of a small farming town at the hands of industry, machinery, and progress. At the end of the novel Berry pays direct homage to Thoreau, Jayber retires and moves to a small cabin in the woods without electricity to live out his days gardening and fishing. Jayber experiences the type of spiritual transformation associated with Walden, he forgives old enemies and gains perspective on his life.
Clearly Thoreau’s influence is readily evident in Berry’s work. Thoreau both aided the development of Berry as a writer and an activist and played a big part in his actual writing, both in his essays and his fiction.
Bartram and Thoreau were men of similar spirits. Bartram's sojourn to the "Cherokee Nation" reflects the very fascination with "wilderness" that characterized Thoreau's 2 years at Walden.
ReplyDeleteThoreau took to nature as not merely a means by which to escape the drudgery of the masses: he saw it as "the solution." Thoreau reckoned that most people did not have an appreciation for nature, and as such, he believed the average man to be no more than subservient slave to society's "more-is-better" philosophy.
William Bartram also recognized the almost therapeutic powers of nature, writing of the countryside, fauna, flora, and the other appealing aesthetics of his botanic world. Thoreau and Bartram both shared an undeniably distinct vision of the world, one that seemed to fuse both man and nature as symbiotic--for Thoreau, this vision manifested itself in his conception of "wildness;" for Bartram, it appeared in his highly romanticized writings, the majority of which helped to foster a Romantic awakening.
Though Thoreau clearly expressed what he believed to be inherent flaws in the fabric of society, he nonetheless did hold some hope for the betterment of "the mass of men." Bartram also exhibited confidence in the future, evidenced by his stays with, and writings of, the various Native American nations. These writings explored the Native American culture as indelibly part of the land, doting on the meticulous details of mundane interactions between man and nature—and yet, somehow, they seemed to enliven the austere minutiae of a less modernized culture, testifying to the natural beauty and power of “the simple life.” In a sense, the two of these men were humanitarians--perhaps not so much in terms of direct, explicit acts, but more so in terms of their ideologies, their introspections, and the underlying sense of unity that pervaded their interactions and observations in the natural setting.
The legacy of these two men is arguably stronger than any positive effects they had in their lifetimes. Though Thoreau is most commonly and superficially known as “the nature dude who lived in the woods and looked at ants and stuff”—(a good friend of mine)—his idiosyncrasies and inversions of logic are still widely mulled over today. He has undoubtedly inspired hosts of similar-minded naturalists and environmentalists to take to the forefront, many of whom still echo his sentiments concerning the “simpler, happier life.” It is almost impossible to assume that at least one of Thoreau’s ideas hasn’t impacted naturalists and environmentalists today. After all, virtually anybody who undertakes such a field of study will be exposed to the writings of Henry David Thoreau. Or, it is usually this exposure to Thoreau that turns them on to such a field. Like Thoreau, William Bartram also enjoys a lasting legacy long after his death. His uniquely Romantic writings have inspired many poets. In fact, many contemporaries celebrate Bartram as a major catalyst in the Romantic Movement. Many big-named poets such as Coleridge, Wordsworth, and Shelley replicated the same sense of awe with the natural world that typified Bartram’s pieces. Moreover, Bartram’s ability to reconcile his rigid adherence to human-concocted taxonomies with his awe for the less pedantic, more diffusive “wilderness,” illustrates—if nothing else—that maybe nature and man are birds of the same feather.
I recently came accross your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I dont know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.
ReplyDelete-------
___________________
christena
Best place for your complete Internet marketing