Transcript Week 3, Day 2, Emerson and Thoreau

Intro to Emerson and Thoreau
American Transcendentalism
Nature:

Central question: why does NATURE exist?
What is it’s relationship to ME, if it is NOT ME?

Emerson wants an “original relation to the
universe” (27). How does the poet get this?

Insight v. tradition/ Revelation v. history

Anthropocentric with ecocentric moments?

Idea of correspondences: inner and outer, part
and whole, microcosm and macrocosm,
mind/spirit and world
The Poet’s Perception
When we speak of nature in this manner, we have
a distinct but most poetical sense in the mind. We
mean the integrity of impression made by
manifold natural objects. It is this which distinguishes
the stick of timber of the wood-cutter, from the tree
of the poet. The charming landscape which I saw this
morning, is indubitably made up of some twenty or
thirty farms. Miller owns this field, Locke that, and
Manning the woodland beyond. But none of them
owns the landscape. There is a property in the
horizon which no man has but he whose eye
can integrate all the parts, that is, the poet.
This is the best part of these men's farms, yet
to this their warranty-deeds give no title.
“Standing on the bare ground, -- my
head bathed by the blithe air, and
uplifted into infinite space, -- all mean
egotism vanishes. I become a
transparent eye-ball; I am nothing; I see
all; the currents of the Universal Being
circulate through me; I am part or
particle of God.”
Transparent eye-ball passage
1.
What is Emerson proposing happens in the woods? (try to
paraphrase as much of the passage as you can)
2.
What do you notice about the language of this passage? Is
Emerson using any poetic devices? (or in other words,
think about the style of this passage, how it is written)
3.
Based on your reading of the passage, come up with ONE
detailed question to ask about the passage.
3.
In what ways is the passage ecocentric? In what ways is it
anthropocentric?
Nature—A radical new imagination
of woods and wilderness:
Correspondences
The greatest delight which the fields and
woods minister, is the suggestion of an
occult relation between man and the
vegetable. I am not alone and
unacknowledged. They nod to me, and I to
them. The waving of the boughs in the storm,
is new to me and old. It takes me by
surprise, and yet is not unknown. Its effect is
like that of a higher thought or a better
emotion coming over me, when I deemed I
was thinking justly or doing right. (28)
Nature—A radical new imagination
of woods and wilderness:
Correspondences
Yet it is certain that the power to produce this
delight, does not reside in nature, but in man, or in a
harmony of both. It is necessary to use these
pleasures with great temperance. For, nature is not
always tricked in holiday attire, but the same scene
which yesterday breathed perfume and glittered as
for the frolic of the nymphs, is overspread with
melancholy today. Nature always wears the
colors of the spirit. To a man laboring under
calamity, the heat of his own fire hath sadness in it.
Then, there is a kind of contempt of the landscape
felt by him who has just lost by death a dear friend.
The sky is less grand as it shuts down over less worth
in the population. (29)
Nature’s Multiple Uses
1. Commodity – food, air, water, earth – physical
uses. Everything humans build comes from nature.
2. Beauty – idea of nature as cosmos. Love for
things in and of themselves.
a) Perceiving nature causes delight; we love it just
for being beautiful.
b) Nature also has spiritual beauty. Connection
between noble acts and beautiful scenery.
c)Nature has intellectual beauty – absolute order;
contemplation leads man to great creation.
3. Spirit- nature also reveals spirit, the “ineffable.”
Physical nature is compared to the shadow which
indicates the sun behind it.
Spirit in Nature:
The world proceeds from the same spirit as the body of
man. It is a remoter and inferior incarnation of God, a projection
of God in the unconscious. But it differs from the body in one
important respect. It is not, like that, now subjected to the human
will. Its serene order is inviolable by us. It is, therefore, to us, the
present expositor of the divine mind. It is a fixed point whereby
we may measure our departure. As we degenerate, the contrast
between us and our house is more evident. We are as much
strangers in nature, as we are aliens from God. We do not
understand the notes of birds. The fox and the deer run away
from us; the bear and tiger rend us. We do not know the uses of
more than a few plants, as corn and the apple, the potato and the
vine. Is not the landscape, every glimpse of which hath a grandeur,
a face of him? Yet this may show us what discord is between man
and nature, for you cannot freely admire a noble landscape,
if laborers are digging in the field hard by. The poet finds
something ridiculous in his delight, until he is out of the
sight of men. (50)
Nature—How do we know nature?
Perceive it? Study it?
“When I behold a rich landscape, it is less to my purpose to
recite correctly the order and superposition of the strata, than
to know why all thought of multitude is lost in a tranquil sense
of unity. I cannot greatly honor minuteness in details, so long as
there is no hint to explain the relation between things and
thoughts; no ray upon the metaphysics of conchology, of
botany, of the arts, to show the relation of forms of flowers,
shells, animals, architecture, to the mind, and build science upon
ideas.” (51)
“The problem of restoring the world original and eternal
beauty, is solved by the redemption of the soul… The reason
why the world lacks unity, and lies broken and in heaps, is,
because man is disunited with himself. He cannot be a
naturalist, until he satisfies all the demands of the spirit.” (54)
Nature— “Build therefore, your own
world”
“Every spirit builds itself a house; and
beyond its house a world; and beyond its
world, a heaven. Know then, that the
world exists for you.” (55)
Emerson— some big take-aways
•
How does one know nature?
•
Emerson’s view of science & relation of science to
nature.
•
What is the relationship of the poet to nature?
•
Emerson’s relation to religion; what is relation of
spirit to nature?
•
Tradition vs. insight: relation of American literature to
nature/the land.
From Emerson to Thoreau…
If Emerson is arguably the most important
19th century American literary figure,
Thoreau is arguably the most important
19th century American environmental
figure.
 What are the stereotypes we have of
Thoreau?

Thoreau: Emerson’s “Earthy
Opposite”?
Heavily influenced by Emerson
 Split visions of Thoreau: an ecological
saint? Or the wannabe who lived in
Emerson’s backyard?
 Walden never claims to be an experiment
in wilderness living….so what is it?

What is Walden?
What is Walden?
Based on the journals Thoreau kept
during his stay at Walden Pond.
 Kept a journal from 1837-1861.
 Spent 2 years in a cabin at Walden Pond
that he built himself (1845-1847).
 Walden is not published until 1854: nine
years of writing and revisions! Walden is
thus a highly constructed literary
piece – not a direct nature essay or a
simple journal.

Two big reading questions for
Tuesday:


What does Thoreau have to say about the
railroad?
Buell argues that Walden actually illustrates
the development of an ecological
perspective over the course of the book: the
later chapters show a more eco-centric
perspective than the earlier chapters. It is as
if Thoreau became more environmentally
aware while working on the text. Do you
agree with this statement? Why or why not?
What evidence (through close reading) do
you have to support your answer?