--In several passages here, Thoreau considers the situation of New England Native Americans. What is his attitude toward them? In a late passage, he compares them to the urban poor. Compare this vision to the depiction of Native Americans (whether the mound-builders or the "Red-Man") of Bryant's poem.
--This text is famous for its depiction of the sublime and we will spend a fair time in class looking at the passages when he comes to the top of Ktaadn and the next day coming down through the Burnt Lands. Consider what the sublime experience means for Thoreau here, what it suggests about the human relationship to nature and our sense of self?
--This text is very much about wilderness, a landscape in a primitive state. Compare Thoreau's vision of this landscape to that of Cole's "Savage State."
#3
ReplyDeleteThe challenges of Thoreau’s journey to Kataadn awaken him to such difficulties of maintaining life in a primitive state as Thomas Cole acknowledges in “Savage State”. Meanwhile, Thoreau’s perception of the primitive state of wilderness reflects his experience of the sublime. He is awed by nature’s power and feels “the presence of a force not bound to be kind to man”, which prompts him to recognize the flaws of a humanity-centered world-view.
Despite the physical difficulties of traveling through wilderness for an extended time, Thorough’s needs seem remarkably well cared for. When he writes about eating pork and salmon, lamenting the lack of milk and sugar for his tea, it is apparent—at least to readers—that Thorough isn’t roughing it nearly as much as he could be. Though he travels through a mostly primitive landscape—he himself does not play the role of one of the savages we see in Cole’s painting living fully off the land.
Considering the landscape, he marvels, “It was not lawn, nor pasture, nor mead, nor woodland, nor lea, nor arable, nor waste-land. It was the fresh and natural surface of the planet Earth, as it was made for ever and ever, --to be the dwelling of man, we say,--so Nature made it, and man may use it if he can. Man was not to be associated with it. It was Matter, vast, terrific,--” (Part 6, Section 1). His musings touch on the untamed quality he experiences as sublime and invoke a similar feeling to that which “Savage State” produces: one of awe and also danger and the relative youth of both earth and man. A key difference, however, is that man figures in all paintings in Cole’s series, “The Course of Empire”. The magnitude of man’s presence and control over nature is a significant part of each painting, including the last, in which his absence is just clear and causes as much impact on viewers as his presence in the other scenes. The role Thoreau sees for man is one of much lesser importance; humanity lives and dies almost as a background to the real and awe-inspiring landscape.
--Kaitlyn Dryer
In Thoreau's "Ktaadn," he is consistently portraying the Native Americans as shabby, unhappy, and unhelpful. In the first section, he describes one Native American man as a "washerwoman" and "the girl that cried for spilt milk." The man is so shabby he reminds Thoreau of an unbeautiful woman. He mentions that this man is carrying an empty keg with him as well, which highlights the use of alcohol in the Native American community. When he comes upon the Native Americans the crew asks to accompany them up the mountain, everything about them is described as old fashioned. The song that is being sung nearby was "aboriginal" and the tools were "such as they might have used before white men came." Even the dogs were more similar to their wolf ancestors than the white man's pet.
ReplyDeleteThe two Native Americans that are supposed to accompany the crew are sluggish and unhelpful. They don't invite their company into their houses, and they don't volunteer guidance. They must work out a payment plan before they agree to anything. Even after ensuring that they would be given provisions, Louis Neptune and the other Native American do not show up as promised because they were too drunk to travel. Their hospitality is contrasted with that of George McCauslin who offers his home, food, and guidance without accepting any payment and without complaint.
This contrast between McCauslin and the Native Americans makes Thoreau’s comparison of the Native Americans to the urban poor more clear. The Native Americans could have met the crew as they had planned, helped them up the mountain, and earned food as payment. Instead, they were digging for food on the side of the river, trying to find anything they could to survive their hunting trip. Thoreau sees this as similar to the urban poor who pick up whatever they can find on the streets to survive. When they finally met again, the Native Americans were sneaking around, trying to avoid the people they had broken their contract with. Thoreau believes that both the Native Americans and the urban poor are living in poor circumstances because they are unable to do what they promise and earn payments in what he considers an honorable way.
In Bryant’s “The Prairies,” the Native Americans are depicted in a similar way. The disciplined, hard-working mound-builders are replaced by fierce Native Americans (“red-man”). The Native Americans could work with the mound-builders and maintain the society they have created, but instead the mound-builders are completely replaced, and the Native Americans drive the society out the ideal agrarian stage into the downfall of their society as well. In both pieces, the Native Americans are not hard workers and they rely the resources of the others around them.
As Thoreau was coming down from the top of the Ktaadn the sublime experience is greatly described. One sentence that really stuck out was;
ReplyDelete"Nature was here something savage and awful, though beautiful. I looked with awe at the ground I trod on, to see what the Powers had made there, the form and fashion and material of their work." Here, he capitalizes "powers" because it seems to be something of a higher power or thing. Nature is described in a sublime way, it was deathly and dangerous but so beautiful at the same time. During the trip they witnessed both of the "powerful" aspects Nature possesses.
Thoreau's relationship to nature and sense of self is greatly described in chapter 6. He seems to have revelation coming down from the mountain that he realizes how powerful nature really is and how some people don't seem to see that. He says, "It was the fresh and natural surface of the planet Earth, as it was made for ever and ever, — to be the dwelling of man, we say, — so Nature made it, and man may use it if he can. Man was not to be associated with it." Here Thoreau is describing that nature is and should be considered something completley different from that of man...but just as powerful...if not more. Nature is here for us to dwell on forever, it is for our use and resources but by being associated with it...we as humans are slowly ruining it. He continues saying, "I fear not spirits, ghosts, of which I am one, — that my body might, — but I fear bodies, I tremble to meet them. What is this Titan that has possession of me? Talk of mysteries! — Think of our life in nature, — daily to be shown matter, to come in contact with it, — rocks, trees, wind on our cheeks! The solid earth! the actual world! the common sense! Contact! Contact! Who are we? where are we?". In this quote he is stating how humans are almost nothing compared to Nature. Nature is a larger than life thing and how are we to compare to ourselves to it. I get the sense that Thoreau has trouble explaining his being when compare to nature, it is so sublime that he feels maybe we should not be able to compare ourselves to nature, for it is to vast. Thoreau encourages "contact", nature is all around us, all of the time but some do not notice, he is taking the time to notice and is telling other to make "contact" as well.
-Jessica Lipp
Multiple times throughout his trip in “Ktaadn,” Thoreau mentions how pleased he is that his companions and he traded out the Indians they began the trip with for more skilled boatmen. Also, it is true that upon his return he sees them as ‘sinister and slouching,’ partaking in ‘drunken frolics.’ These appear to be negative views on Indians, as he makes them out to be useless for his purposes. But, when talking about the Maine wilderness and forest areas, he includes the Indians as an inhabitant of the area, calling it, “the home of the moose, the bear, the caribou, the wolf, the beaver, and the Indian.” For Thoreau, the Indian remains a part of nature, living on the land long before the invasion of the white man explorers and loggers that now roam that part of Maine. But, they are also corrupted in some way by the influx of these new settlers. It is hard to tell if Thoreau feels sympathetic towards them or not, as this prior quote can also be meant to mean that Thoreau sees them as animalistic. Overall, for Thoreau, the Indian has degenerated to the level of the ‘lowest classes in a great city,’ which does not romanticizing them as harmonious with nature.
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile, Bryant describes Indians in a manner more consistent with Cole’s idea of the course of nature. The “Red Man” as ‘warlike’ and ‘fierce,’ a group constantly in search for ‘wilder hunting-ground.’ He thus makes them out to be nomads and ravagers of the land in constant search for the best lands to hunt. This is a sharp contrast (as we discussed in class) to the more romantic notion of the “mound-builders,” the group destroyed by the “Red-man.” Bryant calls them a ‘disciplined and populous race’ as they were more connected with nature, building their mounds in cohabitation with nature instead of tearing up the land and leaving or transforming it as the American settlers were doing. The “mound-builders” also seem to connect with nature more so than the “Red-man,” as they farm the land and herd bison instead of destroying it and moving on.
For both of these men, it seems in some way Indians are still a romantic part of the landscape, always living on and off of the land. Eventually, though, they fall into the basic structures of humanity and become more powerful for their (and the landscape’s) own good, using it in ways that these writers feel are improper, not in a way that leaves it alone or attempts to ‘improve’ it.
As Thoreau climbs ahead and solely enters the elemental mountain landscape of Ktaadan, he experiences spiritual response to the environment, aided by the thin air, but implicitly due to the striking landscape and his halting and almost unnatural attempt to mount it. Thoreau's experience ascending the mountain spurs him to contemplate higher concerns, such as the presence of God and man's existence in relation to his environment. Nature's ability to spur these high thoughts comprises Thoreau's experience of the sublime: “It is difficult to conceive of a region uninhabited by man. We habitually presume his presence and influence everywhere. And yet we have not seen pure Nature, unless we have seen her thus vast and dread and inhuman, though in the midst of cities. Nature was here something savage and awful, though beautiful” (Section 1, Part 6). Thoreau conceives the sublime to be, in part, man’s realization that nature and all her resources were not only created for his use. While some might theorize that the existences of such useless terrain serves as evidence against the existence of God, he sees the beauty and spirituality in a land created by God for purposes unknown to man, perhaps due to their moral or spiritual superiority. After considering the existence of a desolate and seemingly purposeless land, the questioning of human and individual existence is close to follow. The sublime landscape leads Thoreau to ponder the mystery of man and his place in, and relation to, nature.
ReplyDeleteAfter their descent, Thoreau concludes his account with overarching summaries of the nature his party encountered and crossed: “the forest is uninterrupted. It is even more grim and wild than you had anticipated, a damp and intricate wilderness, in the spring everywhere wet and miry” (Section 12, Part 6). Thoreau seems to view the immensity and continuousness of the forest as a rationalization for man’s aggressive logging operations in this area. Throughout Ktaadan, Thoreau admires the natural country yet seems complacent with the logging of the trees and the inevitable and eventual settlement of the territory. While Thoreau may wonder at and appreciate the uselessness of the mountain landscape and the beauty of nature undisturbed, it appears he still views nature largely, as a thing to be utilized by man.
By: Lisa Pronove
While Thoreau’s attitude toward the Native Americans is certainly not positive, I don’t find it to be entirely negative either. When he writes “These were once a powerful tribe. Politics are all the rage with them now. I even thought that a row of wigwams, with a dance of powwows, and a prisoner tortured at the stake, would be more respectable than this,” we can see the complexity of Thoreau’s Native America portrayal (Part I). He is acknowledging the legitimate power these people once had, and to say that they no longer have power seems void of judgment. If anything, he seems to pity them. Then, by using the phrases “row of wigwams,” “dance of powwows” and “prisoner tortured on the stake,” Thoreau mocks stereotypical representations of Native Americans while at the same time arguing that these stereotypes might be more dignified than what he’s observing. So in this sense, he doesn’t seem to actively assume superiority over the Native Americans.
ReplyDeleteAnd yet, in more subtle ways, Thoreau ignores his predecessors. In his first mention of the New York and Boston poor, Thoreau wonders why all poor people don’t just move out to the fertile and open wilderness: “cannot the emigrant who can pay his fare to New York or Boston pay five dollars to get here…and be as rich as he pleases, where land virtually costs nothing, and houses only the labor of building, and he may begin life as Adam did?” (Part 1). Seemingly ignorant that this land may, in fact, “belong” to someone already, Thoreau conveniently disregards the Native Americans. Then, in the beginning of Part II, Thoreau writes, “This was what you might call bran-new country; the only roads were of Nature’s making and the few houses were camps” (Part II). If “bran-new” country means roadless country, then I cannot disagree. Yet, to me, this definition seems naively limited. Since Thoreau acknowledges “the Indian” as one of the three inhabitants of this part of the country, then how could it possibly be “bran-new” to Native Americans? Ultimately, it seems as if Thoreau is unaware of the degree to which he negatively characterizes the Native Americans in Ktaadn.
However, this characterization is far more objective than Bryant’s, in his poem “The Praries.” Unlike Bryant, Thoreau gives description and dialogue to the Native Americans whereas Bryant refers to them as a collective, homogenous people. As inaccurate as this description is, his reference to “the red man” is also severely unfavorable when he calls them “war like and fierce” and awards them only with the conquering of the Mound Builders. To me, it seems that Thoreau unknowingly values what the Native Americans knew before he: how to strike a harmony between man and nature.
[Sorry, I had to break this into two parts.]
ReplyDeletePart I
What is perhaps most interesting about Thoreau’s portrayal of New England Native Americans in “Ktaadn” is the steps he goes through to separate Maine’s white pioneers from their Native American neighbors. Thoreau makes it clear that, whatever Native American’s may have been in the past, they have now become the “degraded savage,” and in this way seemingly claims the wilderness as the domain of the white man.
Thoreau reminds his reader of the Native American’s now degraded state several times throughout his narrative. As the ferry passes by “the Indian Island,” Thoreau comments on the “shabby, forlorn, and cheerless” look of the settlement, claiming that this is enough to chronicle the “history of his [the Native American’s] extinction.” Like Bryant, Thoreau never mentions America’s involvement in this extinction, but instead seems to imply that their population decline—from 362 people in 1837 to near desertion in 1846—was due to some failure on the part of the Native Americans. This impression of the Native American’s degradation is perhaps best seen in the scene introducing Louis Neptune; a Native American Thoreau wishes to hire to guide them up the mountain. On approaching the area where Neptune lives, Thoreau passes “an Indian girl ten or twelve years old, on a rock in the water, in the sun, washing and humming or moaning a song.” The idealized image of this Native girl, singing ancient songs, with a traditional salmon-spear by her side, all suggest the Native Americans as they might have once been. Similarly, outside a house Thoreau is greeted by “a dozen wolfish-looking dogs, which may have been lineal descendants from the ancient Indian dogs,” a pack which further reminds the reader of the Native American’s history. However, the Native Americans Thoreau meets are not the traditional idea of the noble Indian, but rather “dull and greasy-looking,” or have a “puckered and wrinkled face.” When Louis Neptune fails to lead them, these physical characteristics are proven to demonstrate a morally degraded state as well.
--Nick Cobblah
Part II
ReplyDeleteIn comparing the degraded Native American’s to the urban poor, Thoreau is perhaps suggesting what he sees as the cause of the degraded state of the Native Americans, which may be that they have gotten out of touch with nature. What Thoreau seems to suggest is that the problems of the urban poor could all be alleviated if they simply came into the wilderness. As he argues, “cannot the emigrant who can pay his fare to New York or Boston pay five dollars more to get here […] and be as rich as he pleases, where land virtually costs nothing, and houses only the labor of building, and he may begin life as Adam did?” The urban poor seem somehow out of touch with nature and its varied opportunities, but the Native Americans Thoreau introduces seem similarly out of touch with nature, at least in comparison to the white pioneer. While the Native American’s of Maine do still go out to hunt, it is politics which are “all the rage with them now.” For Thoreau, Native American practices, such as canoeing, are generally considered to be of lesser quality than those of the white pioneers. Canoes are “smaller, more easily upset, and sooner worn out; and the Indian is said not to be so skilful in the management of the batteau." In addition, the Native Americans ability to explore is limited, because “simple races, as savages, do not climb mountains,” which are sacred. But perhaps most important is Thoreau’s Native American’s lack honor in an area where Thoreau has demonstrated that honor and mutual protection are often essential to surviving. As such, Thoreau argues that the Native American is “less to be relied on, and more disposed to sulks and whims.” It is perhaps for this reason that Thoreau compares the degraded Native American to the urban poor; both are failing to live up to what Thoreau seems to see as man’s true potential, which can only be realized in the outdoors. In addition, by comparing the degradation of this “still more ancient and primitive man” to the urban poor, Thoreau is perhaps suggesting that the same plagues which brought Native American’s to this degraded state could also bring America to this extinction, unless America follows the model of the white pioneers.
It is worth noting that in almost every way, Thoreau presents the white pioneer as the antithesis of the degraded Native American. He is new to the woods, but takes to it at once. His batteau is seen as being superior to the canoe even in the sound of its name, and the white pioneer is portrayed as being almost perfectly honorable. They provide guests with supplies and, in the case of McCauslin, even join Thoreau on his trip. The white pioneer is “more intelligent” than those on the cultivated edge of the wilderness, and finds himself heavily rooted in Western tradition. He reads Emerson, for instance, and Thoreau is constantly comparing the journey of these white pioneers to classical mythology. It is this group of white men who are “reputed the best boatmen on the river,” and it is white men who are willing to climb the mountains and so can commune more directly with nature. In short, by presenting the Native Americans as degraded, superstitious, dishonorable, and unfit for the wild, Thoreau is able to claim the wilderness as being the domain of the white pioneer. While Thoreau’s depiction of Native Americans is perhaps less violent than Bryant’s butchers of the Mound Builders, he does create a work which, like Bryant’s, seems interested in proving that it is the destiny of the white pioneer to explore the newly emptying lands, even though it is American expansion which is in large part the cause of the Native American’s decline.
--Nick Cobblah
Thoreau seems to be expressing some trepidation about his journey to the summit, or at the very least is offering a spiritual explanation to the ruggedness of the terrain his group has traversed. There is clearly a sense of a higher Power at work in the crafting of the “virgin forest of the New World”. These Powers are quantified by both name- “Mother Nature”, “Nature” or “Power”, “Pomola”- and a relationship that is built around boundaries (with man) possibly based on experience, or position in the lifecycle. Additionally, there is an intimation of the afterlife “why came ye here before your time?” The imagined conversation between a wanderlusting traveler and this higher Power in Part 5, section 8 explains this concept.
ReplyDeleteWhat exactly this means for Thoreau is unclear to me. While he is in tune with the spiritual aspects of his surroundings, he also gives a nod to the secular/scientific community by alluding to the work/travel log of the 1837 expedition, which included the State Geologist. Furthermore, I am not entirely clear on the intent of this writing. It could really be read 2 ways (at least). First, as a warning to foolhardy travelers, or second possibly an enticement to more rugged individuals. However, it seems unlikely that Thoreau would be trying to increase foot-traffic in the area. There is a sense of Animism in his reverence for the natural world that stops short of a pure belief in this idea.
The idea that Nature has its own agenda separate from, and possibly at the peril of man is evidenced by the toll the trip takes on the travelers, specifically the portaging and up-river travel. “There was there felt the presence of a force not to be kind to man… to be inhabited by men nearer the kin to the rocks and wild animals than we.” Again here Thoreau is showing that there were boundaries included in the construction of/by Nature, and that these boundaries have certain ethnic/societal implications. Thoreau goes even further and discards the romanticized version of Mother Nature as an obsequious provider for the inhabitants of the Earth when he writes, “we have not seen pure Nature, unless we have seen her thus vast and dread and inhuman”.
After researching information pertaining to the nineteenth century interpretation of the sublime, several key characteristics began to arise. Fundamentally, the terms seems to pertain to an alteration of perspective though an encounter with the grandeur of nature in its most terrible state. The encounter often strikes awe and / or terror into the soul of the perceiver which provides them with a “right” view of themselves and their place within the world. In Ktaadn, Thoreau seems to be on a journey to seek out this type of experience.
ReplyDeleteAs I read this, I couldn’t help but draw some parallels between Thoreau’s journey of Ktaadn, and story of Moses’s ascension up the mountain to receive the ten commandments. In the biblical narrative, God has descended upon a mountain and thus the mountain is shrouded in dark clouds. Moses is told to climb the mountain and does so. Upon reaching the top, he is told ten rules that the people must obey. These commandments ultimately provide access into the mind of God as they explicate what God expects from the people. Through the rules, one is given greater insight into the mind of God because they illustrate an aspect of His desire. However, the rules were obtained through an encounter with a sublime setting; i.e. the mountain and clouds which is especially pertinent, both to the biblical narrative as well as Thoreau's experience.
Thoreau’s quest to seek out the sublime is very similar. For example, He is drawn to a mountain that he states is, “...veiled with clouds, like a dark isthmus in that quarter, connecting the heavens with the earth.” The line, "...connecting the heavens with earth," seems to infer that the grandeur of the mountain cloaked in clouds is inherently a link between the heavenly realm, and the earthly realm below. Even from a far, the sublime characteristics of the mountain provoke thoughts of the divine. His quest continues as he seeks a closer, more revelatory encounter.
When he gets to the peak of the mountain, Thoreau, like Moses, has what appears to be a somewhat spiritual encounter. He explains that on the summit, “...Nature has got him at disadvantage, caught him alone, and pilfers him of some of his divine faculty. She does not smile on him as in the plains. She seems to say sternly, why came ye here before your time? This ground is not prepared for you.” He realizes the terrible, awesome power of the mountain and this alters his perspective. He seems to understand that he is not meant to tread there. Moreover, the phrase, “...before your time” seems to hint at the idea that he is experiencing something that is eternal or trancendent.
Thoreau’s perspective is altered as a result of the experience and he also gains entry into the mind of the divine. He finds himself a mere man in a world designed by something greater than himself. He seems to have an understanding of the awesome beauty inherent in the natural world. He states, “..but here not even the surface had been scarred by man, but it was a specimen of what God saw fit to make this world.” He now sees that something far greater than himself willed nature to appear as it does. It is the divine definition of beauty that dictates the layout of the natural world. The “Powers,” as he called them, have made the world appear the way it does in its natural state because it is beautiful to them. Human modification of the natural creates an aesthetic of symmetry and conformity which is in stark contrast to the seemingly “chaotic” appearance of nature in its unaltered state. His new understanding is a result of an experience that allowed him entry into the mind of the eternal.
Thoreau had a very different view of nature than the authors and artists we have looked at previously. Cole's essay and William Cullen Bryant's Prairies offered a more positive, awe-inspiring depiction of nature. They went on about how beautiful nature was and how lucky we are to have it. They especially disliked man cultivating nature.
ReplyDeleteThoreau, on the other hand, wrote that "Nature was here something savage and awful, though beautiful." Although he acknowledged that it was beautiful, he did not go into the great detail of it's beauty as others had. Where Cole bragged about how beautiful the trees were, Thoreau described "the primitive wood" as "always and everywhere damp and mossy, so that I travelled constantly with the impression that I was in a swamp." The eeriness of the forest continues when he said that they would imagine what wild life was stirring in the midst. Based on his word choice, that gave me the impression that there was threatening life lurking in forest.
To me, his relationship with nature was a cautious one, filled with sublime descriptions and dark overtones. Nature was "savage" and "untameable." One especially sublime description was where he mentioned that "Pomoa is always angry with those who climb to the summit of Ktaadn." At this point, it was obvious that not only did Thoreau believe that nature itself was a dangerous thing, but there was a greater power that also threatened those who traveled into the unsettled land. Even the clouds were described as "hostile."
The violent descriptions continue as he describes "the troubled and angry waters" that were "stern and savage." Again, it seems that Thoreau knew not to take nature lightly, that it could be dangerous and take lives. I'm not necessarily saying that his negativity was unjustified. If climbing a mountain, one should be realistic with the strength of nature and the dangers that are present.