--Somehow, even with the new vogue for 19th century facial hair among young men, I don't think we'll see a lot of localvore, bicycle-riding types sporting Thoreau's chin beard--But on to the questions.--Consider the contrapuntal structure of the chapters, mentioned last class. Look at one pairing ("Reading" & "Sounds," or "Solitude" & "Visitors," or "The Bean-Field" & "Visitors") and consider why he puts them together and what their being paired does to put the ideas into dialogue. What is the general effect of the contrapuntalism?
--Since I set you to look closely for figurative language in Walden, I hope you have noticed that it is more or less full of it. How do we reconcile this rich, complex and sophisticated literary language with Thoreau's call for people to "simplify" their lives?
Thoreau opens up the chapter Reading by stating that his residence is favorable to thought and reading and the explains the importance of reading well. His seclusion enables him to spend the time necessary to really read and understand the classics (at least it seems like he thinks he understands them). Through the study of the works of Greek and Roman philosophers, mankind can be ennobled and in a very Romanticist and Classicist view morally improved. However, most people, even scholar do not read epic poetry and understand it, too. Mankind could “hope to scale heaven at last.” (74) Through the classics, men can inherit the thoughts of the philosophers and scriptures, which are preserved over time through literature but understanding them is difficult and troublesome. While men are willing to “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;—and yet we learn to read only as far as Easy Reading” The reading the townspeople do is at the most superficial level possible. They read to practice their language.
ReplyDeleteIn the next chapter, Thoreau seems to criticize the knowledge gained from books as insufficient however, which sounds contradictory at first. The way I understand it, Thoreau thinks of knowledge gained from books as passive Therefore, reading should work as a three step process: Reading – understanding – internalization/ application. The last step seems to be realized through meditation, because watching nature is “worth the while.” In my opinion, nature, just like ancient scriptures, is an inheritance from antiquity. The eternal cycle of death and rebirth portrayed in nature is just as much preserved as the knowledge from the books.
Astrid
Thoreau’s chapter “Reading” seems quite demanding, directing the reader to challenge himself and read classic texts, in order to continue one’s learning process, rather than merely reading easy, unchallenging works and newspapers, to “keep himself in practice” (Thoreau 75). He then follows with the chapter “Sounds”, which celebrates the “times when I could not afford to sacrifice the bloom of the present moment to any work, whether of the head or hands” (79). These two chapters seem contrapuntal in that “Reading” urges the audience towards productivity, through active reading and the continual search for knowledge, while “Sounds” asks the reader to sit, think, and appreciate one’s surroundings and the present moment. Thoreau even says he did not do much reading while at Walden Pond.
ReplyDeleteIt appears that these two chapters are paired in order to show that there is probably no one, correct way of living, and that a good life consists of different components. Thoreau does seem to advise his readers to be thoughtful in all that they do. Be an active and engaged reader, and instead of sitting in boredom, sit in meditation, aware of your surroundings. Because Thoreau aimed to live a simple, natural life at Walden Pond, he was completely free to follow his thoughts and whims, without any obligation to societal constraints. For example, in “Sounds”, he depicts his meditation on his surroundings, and their sounds, in his description, dense in figurative language, of the train that passes his home at Walden. He then quickly goes on to contemplating commerce. It seems as though the contrapuntal structure of these paired chapter mimics the free flowing form his thoughts were able to take when living at Walden. Thoreau appears to give advice as he sees fit, without concern of any contradiction from his past thoughts.
Even though Thoreau's message is a call for simplicity, he uses rich and sophisticated literary language to appeal to his readers. Like we discussed last period, he was writing to a relatively wide audience but even so, the mere fact that certain people were willing to pay for a book and read it shows a little bit about class and social standing. He was writing for the educated individual and these people probably had certain expectations for what their literature sounded and looked like. The people who would be reading his figurative language were probably not living the most simple of lives in the first place. Perhaps he was trying to appeal to people who most needed to simplify their lives. The people who had the time to go out and read a book for pleasure were most likely city people. These were the type of people Thoreau would have liked to see "go out into the wilderness" so to speak and simplify their lives. He wanted the people reading his book to be able to relate to it and feel intellectually stimulated, but still gain a sense of peace from the actual message.
ReplyDeleteI was so hoping the beard was a writing prompt... Sigh.
ReplyDeleteIn comparing the chapters Solitude and Visitors, it seems as though Thoreau is completely contradicting himself in what he is proscribing as a fulfilling life philosophy (he often appears contradictory in this book, but I suppose we may call it an exercise in contrapuntalism, if we so wish).
After reading Solitude, I read the first line of Visitors - "I think that I may love society as much as most, and am ready enough to fasten myself like a bloodsucker for the time to any full-blooded man that comes in my way" (97) - I stopped, and I thought:
NO, Thoreau, you can't be this man. You just spent six pages expounding the moral and spiritual value of solitude; what you are saying seems to be a contradiction of your very self.
However, after reading the two chapters and looking back on them, I noticed that 1.) his ideas of Solitude mean never really being ALONE, and 2.) society for him is much less "social" than we might define it. So in that way, what he's talking about in each chapter isn't as polar as it seems. They meet in the middle.
Thoreau never feels alone with his own thoughts, or his own work - remember the examples of the student and the farmer who are employed at their tasks, and can feel no loneliness therein. Solitude does not equal loneliness. And the companionship of Nature is often what saves Thoreau from falling into the loneliness he first experienced upon moving out to the pond. But, he says he eventually realized that there was no way a man could feel alone when he is surrounded by "such sweet and beneficent society in Nature" (92). The rain, the blades of grass, the birds are his companions. He is merely improving upon the joy of his own solitary company in this environment.
Similarly, his definition of society, as demonstrated in Visitors, is to improve the quality of one's entertainments and engagements, rather than the quantity. When he moved out to the pond, fewer people bothered him with social calls on trivial business; and the people who DID make it out to see him were the type of close friends whose society is not a burden to bear. Thoreau also prefers to hold conversation with friends with great space between them, often so that they cannot actually hear each other (which I don't entirely understand - and this really might not be what he literally means).
But, again, this example emphasizes the point that Thoreau values quiet and solitude in the context of society, and a little companionship to accompany his solitude. In this way, the two seemingly opposite concepts become very nearly the same thing.
I don't think it's particularly difficult to reconcile Thoreau's push for material simplicity with his use of high, figurative language. For Thoreau to favor both material and linguistic simplicity would be to embrace a form of primitivism that I think Thoreau rejects. Thoreau's movement toward's material utilitarianism stems from a disagreement with the means by which we determine exchange value within our society. To Thoreau, sign value is useless and exchange value should be determined by use value alone (as opposed to a combination of the two). A gold house and one made of rocks are of equal value to Thoreau, provided they provide equally adequate shelter. Despite this outlook toward materialism, Thoreau isn't longing to live like a Neanderthal. Thoreau simply values the thought more than the dollar (or the metaphysical over the material). While words themselves are subject to exchange value (except, according to critical theorists like Baudrillard, when used in certain forms of poetry) the price of engaging in this exchange is much lower than that of the material world (and by extension significantly more worthwhile). If Thoreau embraced the notion of linguistic simplicity it is doubtful he would have written his book in the first place (or if he did, we likely would not be reading it). To Thoreau, simplifying your life means not getting caught up in the rat race and worrying about having a better car than your neighbor, but instead focusing on the intellectual aspects of life. This is what allows us to reconcile Thoreau's views.
ReplyDelete(I think it's worth noting that you could say, although personally I wouldn't, that when you examine the structure of Walden and see the opposing views displayed side-by-side in the book that Walden is simply a hypocrite by nature and that these opposing views are just further prof of that. I don't think that, but someone probably could make the argument.)
Daniel Miller
I think that the main connection between the chapters “Solitude” and “Visitors” is the way in which Thoreau views (and describes) company. As he builds a relationship with the natural world around him, Nature becomes a sort of company to him. Solitude isn’t necessarily the absence of company; it just invites a different type of companion, one that converses through ambient elements like light and sound. He remarks on the friendly atmosphere of his house, which soothes his infrequent bouts of loneliness. Thoreau asks: “What do we want most to dwell near to?”, a question introduced by a brief pondering of the difference between mental and physical distance. He seems to desire mental/intellectual proximity rather than physical proximity, and so if he feels loneliness it is not so much because he is isolated in the woods, but rather because he is unable to understand/know the minds of his fellow men. Solitude seems to bring you in closer companionship with yourself, if nothing else. He makes an interesting argument that the “diligent student”, or thinker, must always be solitary (even in a crowd of people). This emphasizes the importance of knowing yourself and your own company before (or possibly even instead of) venturing to seek somebody else’s. Perhaps my favorite part of the reading is when Thoreau states: “Society is commonly too cheap. We meet at very short intervals, not having had time to acquire any new value for each other,” a statement followed by an explanation of how a code of etiquette was created simply to make other people’s company tolerable. He seems to crave visitors not so much for the idea of having company, but more for the idea of experimentation. He refers to his visitors as “specimens” and “puzzles” and analyzes the character traits that make them either good or bad company. The man that seems to strike his fancy the most is a Canadian woodchopper who is brutish and animal-like in his simplicity. His over-use of hyperbole makes him seem very much like a child, yet it is this very simplicity that endows him with a unique philosophical edge. It seems that Thoreau is finding more and more that he enjoys the primitive innocence and simplicity of nature, and finds that the people who possess these qualities make for the best company.
ReplyDeleteIn Reading and Sounds, Thoreau seems to juxtapose two types of knowledge through an epistemological analysis of how people learn. In reading, Thoreau seems to find that the self is able to transcend the barriers of time and engage with times long past. Through reading the classics, the mind is expanded and transported to a more etherial realm of thought. This type of knowledge seems to represent an a priori type of learning. One is able to learn and to become enlightened devoid of sensory experience. However, in “Sounds,” the type of learning comes directly from sensory input and is then combined with prior knowledge. When Thoreau is contemplating the sounds, he is deeply immersed in the present moment. He is observing the his surroundings as they are presented to him through the act of listening. The information being processed by the mind is dependent on the experience. By placing these two sections together Thoreau is ultimately recapitulating a previous of moderation. For Thoreau, a person so entranced by literary works and academia is lacking something in the way of authenticity. These type of people would be the professors who have all the knowledge in the world pertaining to a art or a science, yet because they lack authentic experience pertaining to the subject, their knowledge is somehow lacking as well. He even cites himself as an example of this phenomena when he explains that he formally studied Navigation, but just a short time on the water would have taught him far more than he could have ever learned in school. Paradoxically the individual who is solely reared in the ways of experience lacks an understanding of the finer, or “classic” knowledge. Consequently, they are typically unable to appreciate the beauty of literature and the past. An example of this type of individual would be the Canadian that is discussed in some length in the “Visitors” section. The man was brilliant in his own right and often surprised Thoreau with what he said, yet he lacked an education and was consequently more carnally than mentally developed. For Thoreau, there seems to be a happy middle that the majority of society during his milieu was apparently unable to find.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAlthough reading and sounds are seemingly contradictory chapters, I think that Thoreau's argument that both are necessary is a just one. While Thoreau harps on the importance of serious reading throughout the chapter Reading, he went to Walden to see and do and that's what he is doing there. Thoreau starts by saying that his residence is more ideal for reading than a university (although he did not read much while he was there). There is no doubt that Thoreau values academic learning and reading, however, he realizes that that is not enough.
ReplyDeleteHe asks the audience in sounds "Will you be a reader, a student merely, or a seer? Read your fate, see what is before you and walk on into the futurity." Here, Thoreau acknowledges that although reading is important, merely reading is not enough. You must be an active learner. There are somethings you can read about in a book, but it is only be experiencing them that you will truly understand. It is the combination of both that make Thoreau "a citizen of the world."
-Emily David
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think Devon's point about Thoreau using his language to appeal to a wider, more educated audience is an important one to consider, especially when we consider the way that "Economy" starts out. Are we really supposed to believe that part of the group he tells us that he is writing for, the ones who are reading his book on stolen time, would know how to read and write? I just tried to do a quick Google search on when education because compulsory in the United States and failed to find an answer; however, I'm pretty sure that in 1854 there wasn't a national education program. I agree with Devon in thinking that Thoreau would have wanted to appeal to the widest audience possible; maybe the figurative language is another way to put "Walden" (excuse me, I can't find a way to make the italics appear in this box) in competition with other travel narratives, especially when we consider Thoreau's use of downward and upward. Rather than using his descriptions to help a reader imagine a landscape, Thoreau may use these opposing words (both of which are normally used to help describe an object’s orientation some sort of space) to help his reader imagine the physicality of his words and ideas.
ReplyDeleteI also think that Daniel’s post about Thoreau’s value of thoughts over the dollar is totally in character with what we described in class. The one thing that I would say in response to his argument is that if Thoreau does follow his own suggestions so meticulously, then his additions of figurative language should not take longer to compose than simplistic language. Otherwise, such additions would not be considered an improvement over the simplistic language, if we are to believe what Thoreau says about building a house.
My last idea is simply this: Thoreau might think himself too clever to use simplistic language. Just as men can hide themselves in fancy clothes, so, too, can they hide themselves in fancy words.
Because of Thoreau's extensive use of referring to ancient philosophers and classical literary works, I find him to be contradictory. Thoreau pushes this idea of simplicity and yet he uses such figurative literary language that only argues against this idea. I don't necessarily believe that just because a person is going to live simply that they need to speak with simplistic language, however, I do think that if Thoreau is going to sort of preach the notion that a simple life is a better life to a wide audience, then I think his use of language should be that which everyone (entire audience) can relate to and understand.
ReplyDeleteI do think that Devon makes a very good point though in that, if a person were able to buy a book such as this one, then that does, in a way, show social and class standing. However, if Thoreau was directing his views toward people of a higher social standing, then his reference to "poor students" would be irrelevant. If Thoreau was true to his teaching, then I think he directed Walden to a broad audience because he was quite adamant in that majority of people could live simpler lives.
I believe the way we reconcile with Thoreau over his abundant use of figurative language is by thinking about the word "simplify". Thoreau's idea about simplicity is letting go of materialistic things and only using the bare necessities. By living with only what you need rather than want, makes life easier. There is no better way to do this than go into nature, where there are no distractions because the things you may want you cannot get in a forest. The language that Thoreau uses is a result of reading and being immersed in what he reads. The practice of reading is important to Thoreau when it is done right. To him, it is important to be influenced by books from around the world, the "classics". To Thoreau, reading is a waste of time unless you read something meaningful and challenging and not whatever is popular at the time; but in order to have the time to read these books though, you must simplify your life.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Devon: Thoreau’s Walden is about simplifying your life by the means of what your hands and nature can do for you. However, his writing is everything but simple. He uses lavish language that is both appealing and intelligent, which targets a wide variety of readers. I find this very ironic considering Thoreau’s entire purpose is to simplify one’s life, but at the same time I understand why he wrote Walden the way he did; he needed to be lavish and intelligent in order to sell the book. I completely agree that his audience has a certain expectation of the book considering they were going to spend money on it. I also agree that “city” people were most likely to read his novel which is why I believe Thoreau’s also felt an unannounced expectation to put economics in the novel instead of merely focusing it on simplifying life, AKA life with no economics. I do think Thoreau was a meticulous writer with this particular piece because is he did not appeal to the city people, who were the people with the economic stability and intellect to read this novel, would not purchase it. I also think Thoreau wanted to stress on living the simple life because that way he was able to not only able to target another audience (the rural folk), but also because it gave the intellectuals a look inside a life they do not live.
ReplyDeleteThe chapter ‘Reading’ explains the importance of reading well and the impact words have on a generation. Books help clarify our own lives and life around us. “It is the work of art nearest to life itself” (page 73). Thoreau mentions “Books are the treasured wealth of the world and fit the inheritance of generations and nations” (page 73). Throughout the chapter Thoreau stresses reading well requires training and practice, because although a text maybe written in the readers accustomed language the meaning of words and the significances of those words changes with time (page 71). References to nature are evident within the chapter which helps amplify the connection between the world and written works. Thoreau says “There are stars and those who can may read them” (page 73). Nature like books can be read and appreciated, but a well reading and a knowledge of nature and the environment create a deeper value and understanding. The segments in ‘Reading’ involving nature carry over and is the focus in the chapter ‘Sound’. Thoreau extensively talks about nature in his surroundings and the railroad that intrudes nature. I think Thoreau in both chapters is trying to convey the importance in closely appreciating the things around us; which he demonstrates in the chapter ‘Sound’, I think Thoreau puts the two chapters together to stess taking time to pause, because humans typically get caught up in work, and society and forget to nourish their mind and appreciate the beautiful country that is being destroyed.
ReplyDelete(Jatelle LaMear)
I think that the question on figurative language provides reasoning for the first one regarding the pairing of chapters; Thoreau chose to align seemingly contradictory concepts/subjects carefully, and so he pairs figurative, expressive, and even complex language with his new, less complicated life. However, nothing except his mode of living is simple. Nature, in our readings and discussions so far, is of high importance to the Romantics, and Thoreau is no exception. I think that nature in his mind, and the minds of his contemporaries, is a sublime entity that begs to be exalted, and in writing, this becomes a partial mission. Nature to Thoreau is so much more than a place. Yes, it is a means to simplify his life and retreat from the institutions that society enforces, but it is also a companion in “Solitude,” a teacher, a work of art. In this way, he personifies it in multiple, if not all of the chapters, suggesting that while a provider and enabler of a simpler life, nature is anything but simple. Thoreau himself is the mediator of this idea through language; he is able to live simply in a complex natural world, and his language reflects both sides of this. It is a means to simplify the necessary parts of living—he can grow his own food, avoid meaningless relationships, build his own house, etc.—but nature itself is less straightforward, and therefore demands Thoreau’s figurative descriptions.
ReplyDeletePlus, if only for stylistic reasons, the reader needs a break from cut-and-dry descriptions, which include charts on the cost of farming beans. Figurative language offers a way in to something we most likely have not experienced; when he compares it to something more tangible and worldly, such as the recurring images of the railroad, the reader gains a little more understanding because it makes Thoreau’s excursion more relevant and understandable.
Although I did notice Thoreau's use of figurative language, I never thought to reconcile it with the theme of his actual writing. Walden is about the human necessity of nature and all things natural, and I can't say that I quite understand how the tone he used had too much to do with the message he was trying to perpetuate.
ReplyDeleteI do believe there is a certain image to image to uphold, however, as an author —especially one with a "message" to spread to the masses — and I thought the pragmatics of his writing were that of an author who was trying to cleverly glorify that which he was writing about.
As writers, If we want to — at the same time — appeal to our audience, and make what we have to say worth reading, we need to style our writing so that it does that. What exactly we're write about has little to nothing to do with the manner we write about it, as long as it's relevant to the topic at hand.
I agree with everybody else who said, at the end of the day, Thoreau had books to sell, and he was selling an idea that wasn't exactly the most popular, well-revered idea at the time. So if he chooses to "dress up" his words, more power to him.
Can you use figurative and rich language and still live simplistically? Sure. I think Thoreau mostly stresses a happy medium, a common ground. I agree with Courtney that his book wouldn’t have been nearly as successful if he had used simpler language; it appeals to a wider audience this way. I think Thoreau felt that the purpose of his work was to broadly encourage living a more experienced life/ acquiring an admiration for aspects of life that often go unnoticed by the average person (his example being nature). Yes, he contradicts himself regularly, but I think he was probably aware of his contradictions. From his ordering of the chapters “Solitude” and “Visitors” back-to-back, to his use of figurative language paired with his argument to live simply: I think Thoreau purposefully utilizes these examples of polarity as a way to underscore what he believes should be man’s ultimate goal: to live a well-rounded life. He uses contradiction in Walden to challenge readers and put more ideas out onto the field (…pun intended). Thoreau doesn’t suggest living in complete isolation but instead that people should attempt to lead more introspective/appreciative lives. Personally, I think his language and his simple-living philosophy mutually complement his attempt to broaden the intellectual scope of his readers’ minds.
ReplyDeleteAfter juxtaposing Visitors and The Bean-Field, I noticed both reflect a similar message of work-ethic and relationship to the land. In visitors he talks about entertaining guests and is critical of guests and people who pride themselves on throwing dinner parties until he talks about the Canadian wood-chopper. Thoreau seems to really respect and look up to this Canadian. Thoreau talks about his humility, how he is simple minded, quiet and quotes a townsperson who calls him a "prince in disguise." The part that seemed to strike a chord with Throeau was his work ethic. He makes comparisons of the Canadian,a hard worker but who's never anxious about it, to farmers who are "Restless, committed men" (106). He refers to this motive for working in The Bean-Field as well. He talks about men who he does not meet because they are busy with his beans. He also refers to his motive, as a "rare amusement" and "half-cultivated." I think the message in the connection is that the connection to the land shouldn't be out of necessity or labor, but a simple connection. This is really stated in the question he asks "How can our harvest fail?" If people or woodchucks benefit from it, it can not. Overall he is saying that daily work can be connected to virtue, if that's the motive.
ReplyDelete