People know him as the man who rejected society and retreated to Walden Pond for over two years. But just googling the pair of words "Thoreau fake" revealed the expanse of efforts that aim to undermine Thoreau's writing and experiences. He ostensibly brought his mother his laundry and ate home cooked dinners while he was in the midst of leading a solitary lifestyle in the Adirondacks (http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/i7113.html). Thoreau was attached to his home in Concord, and even though Ralph Waldo Emerson apparently owned Walden Pond, Thoreau neglected to mention his interaction with Emerson and who owned the land in Walden.
So, even if Thoreau left out some truths, exaggerated his experiences, and wrote a mythical narrative, why shouldn't his work have value? I have become increasingly frustrated by the fact that members of both academic bodies and the public degrade writing that is purported to have a non-fiction foundation and later turns out to comprise various falsehoods. To me, if a writer did not set out what he or she intended to do or veers from the advertised subject of the work, the work deserves all the more examination. In our individualist capitalist society, it is difficult for consumers to separate what they read and own from its source. The Contemporary Fiction class I took with Prof. Widiss this past spring challenged me to think about how authors' works can possibly stand alone from their biographies. In most cases, a literary work both enhances and reflects and author's biography, and it is nearly impossible for a text to be self-evident and independent of the author's inspiration and lifestyle. As I continue to read Thoreau's work, I hope to find more value in his writing, rather than value based on the extent to which collections such as his journals and Walden accurately depict his observations, motivations, and way of life.
A man named Gary North (http://www.garynorth.com/public/12347.cfm) went so far as to debunk statements that Thoreau seems to assert in his books. While I think it is useful to know, for example, that Thoreau did not in fact live alone for 26 months without monetary support and hypocritically entered back into working for his family's pencil making company after leaving Walden for the purpose of composing a historical biography and psychological profile of the man, I do not think that the inconsistencies of Thoreau's lifestyle with his writing should devalue his work in any way.
As of yet, I do not think I have read enough of Thoreau to conclude whether Walden is an over-rated book in American Literature, but I do believe that his work has value independent of merely being a cranky commentary on commercialism and civilization in the mid-1800s. His ability to slow down time and philosophize about what is truly essential in life is a worthy undertaking considering his context. Even if he was not totally successful in living a reclusive life according to some critics (as if critics have the authority to define "success" for Thoreau, who was clearly holding the reigns of his life and had his own personal ways of measuring success and strength), his meditations on tiny details of wildlife and his reactions to being away from everyday commodities is worthy of speculation. I also do not think that it is necessary to agree with or even personally relate to much of what Thoreau describes in order to enjoy his work. I for one do not consider myself a morning person, and I was nearly offended by the way Thoreau boasted about himself for being active during what he considered the "most memorable season of the day, . . . the awakening hour", but I was inspired by the reasons for why he felt the mornings were so special, and I was able to realize how even though I use mechanical aids, -- which Thoreau despises, -- I often awaken my senses and mind during the night when I am alone and it feels like everyone else is asleep.
I do not think that it is necessary to escape modern distractions and superficial ills in order to awaken ourselves, and I do not think that we should label Thoreau as a phony because he went back home to Concord so often. Thoreau is just one example of a man who recognized that there was more to life and sought a higher existence. His crankiness, his close relationship with ants and squirrels, his two year sojourn to Walden Pond, his life free of marriage and intimate human relationships that we know of outside of fellow writers and his family... These are not necessary ingredients to a spiritual life. He never advises readers to do as he did, but he does address those who participate in civilized life in town as weaker than him. Even though this personal elevation and deliberate separation from normalcy resulted in Thoreau's personal growth and his ability to innovate and influence future generations, I do not think that we should be critical of him if he did so sway from his reclusive lifestyle, or else, shouldn't we criticize ourselves for being so immersed in society? Should we go so far as to say that everyone immersed in society is detached from their visceral being, their spirit? Of course not! So, Thoreau, I do not think any less of your life because your spent more time in Concord than you did in Walden. I do not think any less of you because you spent more time writing Walden than actually living in Walden. I shall keep reading :)
No comments:
Post a Comment