Discussion of Walden, Chapters 1-3 (9/12/02)
Group 1
Parables
Mary Essig, Sep 12, 2002 10:54 AM
Thoreau applies parables as a way to engage the readers. For example, on page, 1777 Thoreau tells a parable of an Indian and a well-known lawyer. This parable does serve to prove Thoreau's point of exaggerating a product at the expense of others.Re: Parables
Ann Woodlief, Sep 12, 2002 03:22 PM
I doubt if that is his point, to tell you the truth. It's a bit of basic economic reality, one that Thoreau well knew. When he created what he was best at doing, like the Indian, he could not find anyone to buy it. So his answer is to live in such a way that he doesn't have to sell it to survive. I don't see any "expense of others" going on here. Context is all!--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Puns
Mary Essig , Sep 12, 2002 10:47 AM
In Chapter 2, on page 1817, Thoreau puns on the word 'sleepers.'"If we do not get out sleepers..." is a pun on the word sleep but it is also wooden railroad ties. This proves that there are elements of humor.Re: Puns
Ann Woodlief, Sep 12, 2002 03:23 PM
There is MUCH humor, but it is serious humor, especially in view of all that he has to say about being awake.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Pond
Miranda Jones , Sep 12, 2002 10:32 AM
The pond was a really big deal to the narrator in "Where I Lived, What I Lived for". Here is a description of the small lake that I really liked, "A like like this is never smoother than at such a time: and the clear portion of the air above it being, shallow and darkened by clouds, the water, full of light and reflections, becomes a lower heaven itself so much the more important.Re: The Pond
Ann Woodlief, Sep 12, 2002 10:35 AM
You're right--and this will become a major symbol in the book. The pond, as you see here, reflects both heaven and earth, and is the "earth's eye," as he says later.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I went to the woods
shelly giglio, Sep 12, 2002 10:31 AM
I was really struck by the paragraph that starts "I went to the woods because I wished to live deliberately" Through this paragraph he is saying how he wants to live life to its fullest so that when it came time for him to die, he would not find out that he "had not lived" It really makes me contemplate my own lifeRe: I went to the woods
Ann Woodlief, Sep 12, 2002 10:34 AM
Many people would say that this is the greatest sentence in the book. Remember--he went to Walden two years after his brother died, and he was well aware that he had weak lungs (he would die of tuberculosis at the age of 45). Using time wisely is an important theme of this work, and he felt some urgency. Funny how we need to see our own mortality before we can wake up and determine to live as fully as we can.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Awake
Jennifer Cosby, Sep 12, 2002 10:31 AM
"To be awake it to be alive." This is one of the strongest lines in chapter 2 I believe. Its simple and powerful and says hey you're not dead. Theres life that is waiting to be lived. It's the greatest thing and you always have to keep your mind and spirit awake because everyday is new.Re: Awake
Laura b, Sep 12, 2002 10:37 AM
Yeah, I think it ties in with 1775, "In any weather, at any hour of the day or night, I have been anxious to improve the nick of time, and notch it on my stick too; to stand on the meeting of two eternities, the past and the future, which is precisely the present moment; to toe that line." The thing I wonder about this line is how do you improve the nick of time?Re: Re: Awake
Shelly g, Sep 12, 2002 10:43 AM
to live each moment "deliberately"Re: Re: Awake
Ann Woodlief, Sep 12, 2002 10:41 AM
That's a good question, and I think the answer is very personal and changes constantly. Only you know how to make the most of the moment. And that is what he went to Walden to learn for himself.Re: Re: Awake
Jennifer C., Sep 12, 2002 10:39 AM
By not waisting any of it. I think.Re: Awake
laura Fortier, Sep 12, 2002 10:33 AM
This goes back to the thought of living for the present because dwelling on the past and trying to predict the future will get you nowhere right now.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Where I lived...
Jennifer Cosby, Sep 12, 2002 10:25 AM
"a man is rich in proportion to the number of things which he can afford to let alone." In the first paragraph of the this, Thoreau explains the things he wants, where he wants to live, what he can do and it's all in his imagination. At first I thought him to be conceded and greedy, then I thought no he's just like the rest of us just dreaming of the things we want that's all, then after reading this last line I saw him to be compassionate. Because it's true if maybe for a second in our lives we want what someone else possesses something they have and can't afford to keep and we see an oportunity to possess it ourselves, but then we realize that the "thing" wouldn't never really be ours and wouldn't be worth as much to us if we possesed it. i don't know how clear I got this one down but I hope you get it.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Magnificent imagery In "Where I Lived,..."
Miranda Jones , Sep 12, 2002 10:23 AM
After I got past my confusion I found the writing of this piece to be very beautiful. I could especially appreciate the narator's magnificent discription of his first house. He describes the house as being half finished, but very tranquill and comfortable to him. I loved the way he describes how the "freshly paned door and window castings gave the house a clean and airy look", that he describes as an auroral characteristic. He constantly comments on how the house gives him all the fresh air as the outdoors can give him. By this house being unfinished, I think he feels as if he has all of nature right in his home.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Heroic Ages
David Hopkins, Sep 12, 2002 10:19 AM
I like his sentence in Chapter II - "Morning brings back the heroic ages." Again, he goes back to his very important theme of morning. The dawn of a new day awakens the spirit as well as the body. I like the idea of bringing back the "heroic age" because morning gives us a fresh start - a chance to be heroic like those of ages past, if we so desire. I myself am in "mourning" for the old heroic ages.Re: Heroic Ages
Miranda Jones , Sep 12, 2002 10:39 AM
I agree, His thematic use of Morning does seem to signify or symbolize enlightenment and awakening, even a sense of re-awakening.Re: Heroic Ages
laura B, Sep 12, 2002 10:34 AM
What is meant by Heroic ages?Re: Heroic Ages
Laura Fortier, Sep 12, 2002 10:29 AM
I love his use of metaphors. To think of the morning as heroic ages would make anyone want to get out of bed. It makes you believe that every mornign has the ability of being a day you will never forget.Re: Re: Heroic Ages
Ann Woodlief, Sep 12, 2002 10:37 AM
It reminds me of the five year old who lived next door, who would burst out of his back door early every morning, with the screen door banging, saying "Today is the best day of all!" Somehow we lose that--but Thoreau is determined to keep it, and encourages us to do the same.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
farms
shelly giglio, Sep 12, 2002 10:14 AM
I found it really interesting how Thoreau described the young men who inherited farms.He called them "serfs of the soil" and that they would have been better off being "born in a pasture and suckled by a wolf", I think he was saying that these men did not get to live life to its fullest because they were slaves to their landRe: farms
Alana Smalls, Sep 12, 2002 10:27 AM
I agree with you all the way. I think what he said was a great explanation for those young men who inherited farms.Re: farms
Laura Fortier, Sep 12, 2002 10:26 AM
This can only be seen as a personal opinion. Not every farmer feels like a slave of ther land, some love their work and do it for the pleasure and not just because they have to.Re: farms
Laura B, Sep 12, 2002 10:21 AM
Great point. It made me think of the more "romantic" notion Emerson proposed that farmers were like poets writing their words inthe land. In my opinion there could be more than one type of farmer. One whose identity is is the land he owns ( like the poem) or another whose work in itself is mystified/appreciate of the beauty of nature. I thought he was harsh here.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Can we read...
Jennifer Cosby, Sep 12, 2002 10:13 AM
"The works of great poets have never yet been read by mankind, for only great poets can read them." Is it not so much that we can't read poetry or that we can't interpret it or understand it in the same way as poets themselves? For surely we can read poetry, but could we and see it in the same way if we were on the same level as the poet himself?Re: Can we read...
Laura B, Sep 12, 2002 10:22 AM
mankind is a broad term, I wonder is he refering to those who literally can't read. what is his definition of a poet? It is similiar to Emerson's?--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Confusion in "Where I Lived,..."
Miranda Jones, Sep 12, 2002 10:12 AM
In the piece entitled, "Where I Lived, and What I lived for, seemed kind of confusing at first. In the first few pages the narrator is speaking of how he has bought all these farms and how he has become somewhat of a real- estate agent type, but he also says these things were done in his own imagination. Then later he speaks of how he bought a house, but immediatly sold it back, because the owner's wife had changed her mind. Then finally he tells us about his first house ever, that was the unfinished cabin by the lake. It was a little difficult at first to distingush between what he did in reality, and what was done only in his imagination. Any thoughts on that???--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trade
Laura B, Sep 12, 2002 10:12 AM
"You will pardon some obscurties, for there are more secrets in my trade than in most men's, and yet not voluntarily kept, but inseparable from its very nature." I was taken to this passage from an earlier comment. And remember when reading curious as to what exactly he meant by this. Is his "trade" (writer?) secretative becasue he is separated from people. I didn't take it to mean he felt his writing was difficutlt to understand as mentioned earler, but not sure? What did you all think?--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Simplicity
Kerry, Sep 12, 2002 10:09 AM
One of Thoreau's strongest points that he makes in Walden is simply put "simplicity,simplicity,simplicity!" (1816) or "simplify,simplify" (1816). He advises all of us not to let our affairs or responsibilities become a hundred. Thoreau also says that we should "reduce other things in proportion"(1816). While he was living in Walden he realized that one could live with just the necessities of life and one did not need a hundred things to do during the day nor a thousand matieral things to fill up their house. One could get by with just the essentials. This is such great advice. We spend our time, needing this or that and figuring out how we are going to pay for it and when its all said and done once we buy it ends up forgotten about. Also, we make our lifes complex. We are always running around here to there and making our lives hectic. Rather we should simplify it and enjoy it because lifes to short.Clothing
Mary Essig, Sep 12, 2002 10:08 AM
I really like Thoreau's quote "Our oustide and often thin and fanciful clothes are our epidermis or false skin.." What Thoreau is saying is that our clothes is like our false skin because they do not reflect our inner self. I believe that this quote can still be regarded today.Simplicity
Kerry, Sep 12, 2002 10:07 AM
One of Thoreau's strongest points that he makes in Walden is simply put "simplicity,simplicity,simplicity!" (1816) or "simplify,simplify" (1816). He advises all of us not to let our affairs or responsibilities become hundred. Thoreau also says that we should "reduce other things in proportion"(1816). While he was living in Walden he realized that one could live with just the necessities of life and one did not need a hundred things to do during the day nor a thousand matieral things to fill up their house. One could get by with just the essentials. This is such great advice. We spend our time, needing this or that and figuring out how we are going to pay for it when its all said in done once we buy it ends up forgotten about. Also, we make our lifes complex. We are always running around here to there and making our lives hectic. Rather we should simplify it and enjoy it because lifes to short.Re: Simplicity
Laura Fortier, Sep 12, 2002 10:17 AM
This is what everyperson really needs, SIMPLICITY! Thoreau has got it right, if we would just simplify our lifes, they would be so much easier and then we could possibily have time to enjoy our lives instead of being worry-warts all of the time.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
his humour
Elisa P, Sep 12, 2002 10:06 AM
I thoroughly enjoyed his humour, especially the fact that it begins from the start, on the first page: "I should not talk so much about myself if there were any body else whom I knew as well. Unfortunately, I am confined to this theme by the narrowness of my experience." Because he talks of serious subjects, it would overwhelm the reader with out these pauses to laugh. Also, we realize that he is like us, and not a high-falutin' philosopher, who he advises us not to listen to. So in the end, his humour serves to hammer down his point.Re: his humour
laura Fortier, Sep 12, 2002 10:15 AM
His humor is very important. Reading a philosopher who tell you what the truth is and does not allow you time to decide for yourself what the truth is does not appease his readers. Thoreau is the opposite. His use of humor allows his reader to enjoy his thoughts and most of the time agree with his thoughts as well.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
confused
Alana Smalls, Sep 12, 2002 10:01 AM
The second paragraph was a little confusing to me or maybe I read it too fast. Maybe someone could briefly tell me what he's trying to say."Re: Re: Re: confused
Laura B, Sep 12, 2002 10:28 AM
I gathered he is going to tell us some details about himself which maybe he finds are not very pertinent to his over all message, but he is going to do this in order to answer some questions he has been asked. He is being "modest' in that he saying he doesn't want to "obtrude his affairs" think his affairs are so imporant everyone wants to hear about them. Is this it? I hope that makes sense.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Houses/savages
Laura B, Sep 12, 2002 10:01 AM
"While civilization has been improving our houses, it has not equally improved the men who are to inhabit them. It has created palaces, but it was not so easy to create noblemen and kings. And if the civilized man's pursuits are no worthier than the savage's, if he is employed the greater part of his life in obtaining gross necessaries and comforts merely, why should he have a better dwelling than the former?" (1785) I found this question intersting and thought provoking, did any of you have any thought's? He is not speaking to working hard, and getting what you work hard for, he is speaking to the character of men being comprobable to their living.Re: Houses/savages
Laura Fortier, Sep 12, 2002 10:10 AM
He is right that architecture was developing at a much faster pace than our knowledge of other things but this is true in most periods of time, only a few things are being developed at a time and at that time education and the expansion of your knowledge was not one of those things at that time.Re: Houses/savages
ian, Sep 12, 2002 10:08 AM
this is a great line and I'm glad you brought it up. I think that it's a very true statement. I think we have to tight a focus on stuff in our culture. Look at what happened September 12th. All these people baought static-stick flags and flags and flag poles and bumper stickers saying they support USA. That's nice, but is glorified team spirit really the way to better ourselves? I personally just watched CNN more. Kind off the subject sorry.What we represent?
Laura B, Sep 12, 2002 10:18 AM
Wow, excellent point!!!! Gosh I would love to get on my "soap box" about what you hit upon, but won't for it is WAY off the subject. Getting back to Thoreau I would think he would ask us to ask ourselves questions to get to truth, how do we act within our world, our culture, our community. Where are our ideas grounded? Does the way we live affect others? How so? Is our character, material needs is affecting other countries. Thoreau's logic applies in all kinds of situations.Re: Houses/savages
Jennifer C., Sep 12, 2002 10:08 AM
I feel like that passage has alot to do with self worth and how men percieved themselves. If they were to better themselves then what would they do? Would anything really change at all in there minds if they made a little bit of extra money.(maybe) If a savage were to take a job and make better for himself would he still be a savage if he still desired to live on the streets or wherever even though he was working. I don't know. It's about ones self conscience and the affects that the world have on it. One can live in the world or one can be of the world and i think imitation has alot to do with that.Re: Houses/savages
J e f f B y e r s, Sep 12, 2002 10:07 AM
I took note of that line as well. It makes me think about that civilized society is really no better than what they consider "savages." I think Thoreau is asking us to redefine what we view as civilized because people can still be rotten to the core in high brow society.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One with Nature
Kerry, Sep 12, 2002 09:57 AM
When Thoreau went to Walden he learned how to become one with nature a sort of religious experience. He "got up early and bathed in the pond; that was a religious exercise"(1814-1815). He also learned how to live his life more simply. Instead of running around working and doing things with his time, bathing in the pond was enough to fill his time it was a "cheerful invitation to make my life of equal simplicity, and I may say innocence, with Nature herself"(1814). He was able to truly become one with nature, it was just him and the water.Re: One with Nature
Mary Essig, Sep 12, 2002 10:19 AM
Thoreau was one with nature. In order to become one with nature, he had to alienate himself from the rest of the world in Walden Pond. In doing so, he is able to take a new outlook on life such as the idea of Clothing and Shelter.Re: One with Nature
Alana Smalls, Sep 12, 2002 10:13 AM
Who said that getting up early and bathing in a pond was a religous exercise? Is that really the case or is that something he just said?Re: Re: One with Nature
Laura Fortier, Sep 12, 2002 10:23 AM
I agree with you Alana. Why is this being called religious? Maybe spritiual but not neccessarily religious.Re: Re: Re: One with Nature
shelly g, Sep 12, 2002 10:40 AM
I think it can be seen as both spiritual and religiousRe: Re: Re: One with Nature
Ann Woodlief, Sep 12, 2002 10:39 AM
What's the difference between "religious" and "spiritual"? Actually this is another of his words with double meaning--he does it regularly (religiously) because he feels spiritually revived. But man, it must have been cold on this winter mornings when he had to break through the ice to do it!Re: Re: Re: One with Nature
David Hopkins, Sep 12, 2002 10:31 AM
I believe you are misinterpreting the use of the word "religious". Thoreau did say it, for Kerry has the page numbers and has surrounded it in quotations, but this is another of his famous puns. I believe he meant that bathing in the pond was something he did religiously, as in he made a habit of doing it every morning and stuck to it.Re: One with Nature
laura B, Sep 12, 2002 10:04 AM
I would say the spirtual aspect came about becasue he was in the "now" he wasen't taking a bath wondering about the future or contemplating the past. I always think what an awesome think to strive for to be present in the moment you are in. Just think of all the things occuring he noticed by being "there" with nature, physically, mentally, spritually. No wonder it was a "religious experience".--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exporting ice
Laura Fortier, Sep 12, 2002 09:55 AM
Just a question. What ice is he talking about? Frozen water? If so how hard would that have been to export? Did they have ice boxes at this time? Or does he mean something else by "ice"?Re: Exporting ice
Ann Woodlief, Sep 12, 2002 09:56 AM
Reread the passage. He's talking about harvesting the ice of Walden Pond. There's much more about it in "The Pond in Winter." There was no refrigeration at the time, so ice was harvested and often taken south. (Jefferson got his ice from New England, for example)--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Old Lit.
Jennifer Cosby, Sep 12, 2002 09:52 AM
I don't like it when he says "we might as well omit to study Nature because she is old", if what he says here is true than that would make nature a classic? I don't get why thoreau would throw a curve ball statement in here like that. It seems like something emerson would have said.Re: Old Lit.
Ann Woodlief, Sep 12, 2002 09:55 AM
Why is this a "curve ball"? I don't follow your point, especially in context of the whole paragraph. He is making one of his serious jokes.Re: Re: Old Lit.
Jennifer Cosby, Sep 12, 2002 10:02 AM
I didn't see it as him making a joke there. I mean he was talking about reading classics because they are the noblest recorded thoughts of man, and then studying the classics that could be assumed as decaying pieces of literature such as Dodona or Delphi, and then saying not to study nature because it's old. I just didn't get the sarcasm there.Re: Old Lit.
ian, Sep 12, 2002 09:54 AM
Maybe is was a homage or sarcasim. interesting point--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We are sick and tired
Jeff Byers, Sep 12, 2002 09:50 AM
"The mass of men lead lives of quiet desparation." This line struck a chord in me for some reason. It has this depressing feel to that makes me think that Thoreau is not happy with the state of the world in the time in which he lived. What does everybody else feel about this line. Do you think that Thoreau would say the same in 2K2?Re: We are sick and tired
David Hopkins, Sep 12, 2002 10:08 AM
Most definitely. I shudder to think what Thoreau would think about the world today. Most everyone is quiet in a sense, but all are desperate for something. And some people have probably forgotten what nature is.Re: We are sick and tired
Laura Fortier, Sep 12, 2002 10:03 AM
Obviously Thoreau his nto happy with his times, but then agian most people are not happy with their times. Sadly everyone want things to be different but no one wants to step up to the plate and make things happen.Re: We are sick and tired
Jennifer C., Sep 12, 2002 09:57 AM
I agree, I don't think Thoreau would really know what to think or say if he were here today. Only perhaps that is ideas and premonitions went further than he expected. I don't think he was happy with the state of the world, but also I feel that from that line he's saying how mechanized men became with their lives. How they didn't live for themselves and so they went on not really living at all. Maybe I'm wrong with that one.Re: We are sick and tired
ian, Sep 12, 2002 09:53 AM
I think he would have been long commited by now, if he were alive here. You enjoy the time you live in? I always thought different. The past is always simplier (to an extent) because it's the past and the future is always scary because we don't know anything, but the present, i always feel incapable there.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Furniture's symbolism
Laura Fortier, Sep 12, 2002 09:46 AM
When I read the part, which is dedicated to furniture, I wonder if Thoreau means something else. He talks about how it is too heavy to bring along with you from one place to another. He also feels sorry for those people who have so much furniture. "I have pitied him, not because that was his all, but because he had all THAT to carry." My thought is that furniture symbolizes the past of which we are unable to let go. He feels pity for those who are not able to move on and that feel like the past is the way to build their lives on. This is another statement of Thoreau. That we need to make a way of our own and not follow what we have seen done before us. Again this goes back to letting go of the past and begin with a future.Re: Furniture's symbolism
David Hopkins, Sep 12, 2002 10:26 AM
I agree completely. Especially when a past is good, people have a hard time letting go of it. This is the nature of man. I agree that he was using furniture to symbolize that.Walden's symbolism
Jeff Byers , Sep 12, 2002 09:56 AM
That's an interesting thought. I think Thoreau plays with metaphors all throughout his book. When he is talking about heat, I was wondering if he was referring to passion inside of us all. Concerning the furniture metaphor, that is a very good one because I picture a man trying to carry a sofa on his back and I get the idea that he may have been trying to convey.Re: Furniture's symbolism
Laura B, Sep 12, 2002 09:55 AM
I took this to be a literal meaning, he thinks we have to much "junk", we are not free, but tied down to our possessions. For lots of people, like you were commenting, furniture holds history, meaning to them. I think he speaks to constantly challenging things you have become accustomed to, become your own person.Re: Furniture's symbolism: STUFF
Ann Woodlief, Sep 12, 2002 09:50 AM
I'm not sure it has so much to do with letting go of the past as with letting go of the "stuff" which weighs us down. That "stuff" requires us to work hard to earn the money to buy it--and then what do we have but "stuff" and much less time and energy to do what might make us feel really alive.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Economy
Mary Essig, Sep 12, 2002 09:46 AM
On page 1777, Thoreau puns on the word buisness because it is economics to us, but life to him. This is important in understanding the title. "My purpose in going to Walden Pond was not to live cheaply, nor to live dearly there..."Economy
Alana Smalls, Sep 12, 2002 09:44 AM
As I read the first paragraph of the first chapter I smiled a bit because not like many other authors, he cares about his readers and what they think and want to know. He actually took the time out to answer the questions people wanted to know and asked the other readers who didn't want to know to excuse that part of the reading. Do you guys think that's nice or what?Re: Economy
Mary Essig, Sep 12, 2002 09:53 AM
On page 1775, Thoreau realizes that his work is difficult to read so I do think that Thoreau is concerned about his readers. Not many authors would write that their work is difficult. "You will pardon some obcurities...I would gladly tell all that I know about it, and never paint 'No Admittance' on my gate." Thoreau is trying to reach out to his audience.Re: Re: Economy
Laura B, Sep 12, 2002 10:08 AM
I took that to mean is not isolating from people, that he is open to discussing life, his book, etc. I had not thought of it in the way you proposed. Where does he say that he knows his work is hard to read. Probably right there on 1775, I'll check that out, thanks for the new perspective.Re: Re: Re: Economy
Mary Essig, Sep 12, 2002 10:28 AM
By Thoreau opening up his ideas to his readers, he is no longer alienating himself. But, while he was living on the shores of Walden Pond, he was isolated. Thoreau's statement about his work being difficult is on page 1775, the last paragraph.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
More Reading
Jennifer Cosby, Sep 12, 2002 09:41 AM
I think that Thoreau feels that the time when being able to read and read well and when it was the common thing to do because perhaps it was a priveledge, is something that is deteriating slowly in time because we don't see it as a priveledge anymore and we take it for granted. Today there are so many ways of reading that are accessible that we don't feel the need to actually pick up a book (a good book) and be able to sit quietly amongst ourselves and read it and cherish it and WANT to finish it and understand it. There is somewhere in the reading that he says something in regards to the fact that most men say they've read the Bible and that's the only knowledge they need after that as far as classical literature. I think on some level that's very true, because there is a train of thought that says the only truth for anything can be found in the Bible and maybe that's true for somethings, but the world is forever changing and so are views. I don't know.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
where I lived and what I lived for
shelly giglio, Sep 12, 2002 09:40 AM
I was really struck by Thoreau's observation that life is America is lived to fast, he stated"men think it is essential that the Nation have commerce and export ice, and talk through a telegraph, and ride thirty miles and hour" What would Thoreau think of life today? With the internet and supersonic jets and all our technology?--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thoreau
ian holland, Sep 12, 2002 09:48 AM
Today, Thoreau would possibly be the guy who trys to organize the "Legalize It" campainges or live in a ted kozingski style shack. Good observationRe: Re: where I lived and what I lived for
Ann Woodlief, Sep 12, 2002 09:54 AM
I doubt that, Ian! But I think he would be asking the same questions--what is important for me to feel truly alive and how do I get to that point? I know quite a few modern Thoreauvians, quietly living without much "stuff" and doing what they love to do. They aren't necessarily isolated, but they rarely live in cities--and yes, they generally do have families. They are definitely not Ted Kozinskis!--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Picture Thoreau naked walking down the street...
Jeff Byers, Sep 12, 2002 09:39 AM
I thought Thoreau's critique of Clothing was very interesting and could be applied to modern day society. He reaks it down where I think he is trying to say that everyone should not be so concerned about the way that we look. This thought could be used today as society is getting more and more geared into thinking that "what we look like is what we are." I thought it was funny that Thoreau referred to men as monkeys concerning the way that Americans live.Re: Picture Thoreau naked walking down the street...
Kerry, Sep 12, 2002 10:40 AM
I think Thoreau was right. Its interesting how important clothing has become, especially with having brand names. Children in school sometimes have such pressure to have the right clothes and brand names. Thats one reason why some schools have even wanted to adapt a uniform policy because then all kids would be sort of equal and not judged by their clothing.Re: Picture Thoreau naked walking down the street...
Alana Smalls, Sep 12, 2002 10:36 AM
I think he's right; people shouldn't be so concerned with how they look. It would take away a lot of the problems we have today. Some people get robbed or banked just from the clothes they are wearing. People do judge people on what they look like and what they are wearing as who that person is. Maybe if we all wore uniforms things would go a lot smoother. What do you think.Re: Picture Thoreau naked walking down the street...
Laura Fortier, Sep 12, 2002 09:51 AM
I agree that clothing should not be what defines us. However in those days and slightly before clothes really did define people, by their classes anyways. In the Elizabethean times, you were only allowed to wear certain clothing depending on your class.Re: Picture Thoreau naked walking down the street...
Laura B, Sep 12, 2002 09:50 AM
I found this part to be really intesting also. Who we are is not what we wear, what kind of car we drive, or what kind of house we live in. His message strikes home to me. Our society seems to thrive off of material things defining who we are. I absolutely loved a line on 1781 "The childish and savage taste of men and women for new patterns keeps how many shaking and squinting through kaleidoscopes that they may discover the particular figure which this generation requires to-day." It is so ironic how our culture is consumed by exactly what he goes on to talk about in the next paragraph. I guess we haven't grown much away from material living, it is defining us (not all but alot)!Re: Picture Thoreau naked walking down the street...
Ann, Sep 12, 2002 09:45 AM
That's an eyecatching subject heading! Actually, he would be more likely to be walking in the woods, and he was known to remove his clothes (except his hat, where he kept his notes) and submerge himself in a swamp so he could be on eye-level with the frogs!Re: Picture Thoreau naked walking down the street...
Jennifer Cosby, Sep 12, 2002 09:45 AM
I strongly agree with you on this one. And I think it's only going to get worse for the generations that follow. Because young people who are fanatics and trend setters don't really have a feeling of self-worth, and where is there place in the world if they are "cloning" themselves to be like the rest? There is no real barrier because they don't know who they are and perhaps will not quite ever know.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reading
Jennifer Cosby, Sep 12, 2002 09:35 AM
I really liked it when Walden said that "adventurous students will always study classics, in whatever language they may be written and however ancient they may be. For what tare the classics but the noblest recorded thoughts of man." I found that passage inspirational for some reason or another. I don't think i can actually come to an explanation about it. It just seemed to hit me on a personal level and gave me inspiration. It's true that we often if not always refer back to classic literature for whatever purpose (research, truth, explanations, and so on) because we seem to respect those authors for what they knew then and not so much the authors of today for what they know. I don't know if this makes any sense or not, I can't really explain it. Anyone else feel the same about that?Re: Reading
Jeff BYers, Sep 12, 2002 09:44 AM
I think another passage could help out the point you are trying to make. "The symbol of an ancient's man's thought becomes modern man's speech." I thought that was a very poignant line and relate to what you are saying. I also this that line holds true especially when you look at the fact that Shakespeare changed the whole English language."adventurous students"
Elisa Palmer, Sep 12, 2002 09:43 AM
Thoreau is saying that "adventurous students" read the text in their original language, as opposed to the translation. I would be adventurous enough if I knew those languages! Do you read the classics in their original form? I know one girl in my class read the Illiad in it's original language.Re: Re: Reading
shelly giglio, Sep 12, 2002 09:52 AM
Thoreau said "Those who have not learned to read the ancient classics in the language in which they were written must have a very imperfect knowledge of the human race", isn't that interesting? I do not know anyone who can read the classics in greek or latin.In the original language
Ann W., Sep 12, 2002 09:48 AM
It's true--he knew Greek and Latin and other languages, and COULD read the works in the original. Education has changed vastly in that respect. However, I think we can push him a little on this. Reading in the "original language" can also mean trying to re-create the reality embodied by those very slippery words, paying as much attention to the words chosen as the author did. That can apply to English--and definitely to this book--as well. Note what follows this sentencen: "To read well, that is, to read true books in a true spirit, is a noble exercise, and one that will task the reader more than any exercise which the customs of the day esteem. It requires a training such as the athletes underwent, the steady intention almost of the whole life to this object. Books must be read as deliberately and reservedly as they were written. "Re: Reading
Laura B, Sep 12, 2002 09:42 AM
Yeah, that is encouraging. He is encouraging us to seach knowledge. I think it is interesting he is specific about what type of knowledge he is refering to, classic literature. During his time period do you know if there were any writers that we studied. Or was all literature being studied that of the past?
Group 2
best lines
Kelly Scott, Sep 12, 2002 01:46 PM
"Simplicity, simplicity, simplicity! I say, let your affairs be as two or three, and not a hundred or a thousand;" I love this line, and I think it really is one of the best lines to sum up Thoreau's philosophy on life. If you simplify every aspect of your life, you won't be too tied down, or a slave to your job, or unhappy. Most of our lives are anything but simple, but we are the one's to blame for that. "Public opinion is a weak tyrant compared with our own private opinion." I kind of see this as meaning two things: 1- we shouldn't care so much about what others think about us, we should care more about what we think of ourselves. 2- we are our worst critic, we should learn not to be so harsh on ourselves, and appreciate what each of us has to offer.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Slave-driver of yourself/
Caroline Macauley-Wise, Sep 12, 2002 11:32 AM
When speaking of servitude, Thoreau states that, "worst of all when you are the slave-driver of yourself". Wow! what a powerful line. It is one that truely makes one stop and asked the question, "Am I my own slave-driver?" Am I, as Thoreau advises, "the slave and prisoner of (my) own opinion of (myself)"? Because, Advises Thoreau, "What a man thinks of himself, that it is which determines, or rather indicates, his fate".--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Riding both sides
Drew Vass, Sep 12, 2002 10:42 AM
Thoreau has a way of acknowledging the necessary evils in life, that is the unavoidable responsibilities involved in sustaining one’s self, and yet stripping them down to their most basic form. His commitment to realizing a higher purpose and nature, and then committing oneself to pursuance, may be just what provoked him to search out simplicity and minimalism. I think that is one aspect of his writings that brings credibility; he is radical in his thinking and yet at the same time grounded. The average person can relate to both sides of the matter, that is, fighting to sustain one’s self and struggling to form a higher existence all at once. He doesn’t deny certain basic aspects of life and in this way doesn’t offend the person struggling to survive.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
simplistic architecture
jon mott, Sep 12, 2002 10:41 AM
In the descriptions of building his hut, Thoreau describes the simplicities of construction that give his home (and other basic/functional strutures) an aesthetic quality that artists recognize as 'picteresque':" The most interesting dwellings in this country, as the painter knows, are the most unpretending." Unpretensious design, form following function, an economy of materials and space are the elements Thoreau acknowledges as being the most useful in building. True ornamentation comes from within and serves the purpose rather than the proposal.The organic thesis
Ann Woodlief, Sep 12, 2002 02:20 PM
You will find that this principle--of form being dictated from "inside," by content--is an essential aesthetic principle for the Romantics (as opposed to form being imposed on idea). That leads to lots of stylistic experiments, of which WALDEN is a notable example. Such a book as this was never written before--not with this structure, etc. It takes its form "naturally" from what he is trying to get across.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why the Caged Bird Sings
Kia Robinson, Sep 12, 2002 10:33 AM
for I found myself suddenly neighbor to the birds;not by having imprisoned one, but having caged myself near them. I loved this imagery by Thoreau, like Emerson he makes himself humbled in the presence of nature in an admirable way. We use Birds as our pets to come closer to nature. We take them out of their environments so that we may be closer to nature. However, it only proves how disconnected from nature that we trully are. We are lacking an understanding of our place in nature, and this leads us to believe that it is something that is far from us, something that we must capture in order to claim. However, Thoreau is suggesting, as Emerson has, that nature can only be undestood or exsist in the same cosciousness with us, when we are humble enough to aspire to natures level, rather than abnormally forcing nature to ours.Re: Why the Caged Bird Sings
Michelle Yancey, Sep 12, 2002 10:37 AM
I felt like this was a role reversal, instead of the bird being caged he was, by living in his house near it and living in one place for an amount of time. The bird was in its natural environment and he was caged in his house on that land.Re: Re: Why the Caged Bird Sings
Ann Woodlief, Sep 12, 2002 10:42 AM
Except Thoreau wasn't truly "caged," not like the rest of us. His house was very airy (pretty cold in the winter, though), and he spent most of his time outside the house.Re: Re: Why the Caged Bird Sings
Melissa Robinson, Sep 12, 2002 10:40 AM
I agree. That the bird was in its natural habitat and the real animal was the human living in his home.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
walden the next
Jeremiah Winters , Sep 12, 2002 10:33 AM
When Thoreau writes about the river and how it resembles time in its current and its constance, I think he gets to the heart of what all this is really about, which is that days slip away fast and we spend most of them at work. He is wondering here in Walden how a man can learn to appreciate each day for what it is and take things more leisurely. How a man can fit cultured ideas like reading great books into a normal life. And how to find some good to things, to escape that quiet despair.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the richest people are those with nothing
chris terry, Sep 12, 2002 10:29 AM
in 'economy,' thoreau brings up the idea that the less material objects a person has tied to them, the more mental powers they posess. he relates this to philosophers who, back in the day, were respected just for thinking. a change in society is marked by the fact that there are no longer any philosophers, but there are professors of philosophy who study, interpret and share the work of the philosophers. this shows an increased dsire for utility, which in some ways, should be right up thoreau's alley; the professors are making good with what is already out there. but, thoreau is still alarmed that there are no more philosophers, and that the profs. are using old philosophy to their own benefit, without truly pushing the boundaries of thought. these philosophers often shunned material posessions, and were all the better for it. thoreau thinks that material objects tie a person to the land, to the tangible, they remove the person from their own thoughts. if you have a farming tool, you have to use it. he says that material objects are easier to get than to get rid of, meaning that once you become accustomed to a 'comfortable' lifestyle, it's very hard to abandon it. i'm sorry to be a college kid, siting around drinking coffee and quoting bob dylan, but that reminds me of the song 'like a rolling sotne,' where dylan says "when you ain't got nothing, you got nothing to lose."Re: the richest people are those with nothing
Kia Robinson, Sep 12, 2002 10:47 AM
I agree and I believe that what Thoreau was ultimately trying to posess was something that could never ovr work him, tire him out, or make him dependent on for a belief in life. In his writings he set examples for everyone, and I believe he, makes people question the hustle and bustle, just as 9/11 did, because ultimately what is it all for!--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Where's Wal-mart?
Drew Vass, Sep 12, 2002 10:29 AM
Anyone who reads Thoreau enough times will begin to question certain aspects of his writings and philosophy. Many have criticized him and challenged his credability, pointing out what they see as hypocritical holes in his writings. I enjoy Thoreau immensely and although I find most of these accusations to be true, I choose to just laugh about it. There is no doubt in my mind that he believed entirely in his words and they were original (for the most part); now as for how closely he “walked like he talked”, I don’t know. The fact that he was one of our greatest thinkers only makes me laugh a littlewhile reading all the little hypocritical parts of his writings. I think he must have realized that to get across what he was trying to say required a little embelishment, exageration or perhaps in some cases an out and out lie (some argue). The important matter is that he did get the point across and Walden is a “must read” for everyone in my opinion. Oh… so where does the whole “Wal-mart” title come in; I nearly forgot to get to it. I had to chuckle a little when I was reading about the farms he day dreamed of owning (which I think is something we can all relate to in one way or another) and he was talking about them as though they were some great, remote location (just like his remote little cabin in the woods .. cough .. cough..) he starts explain their locality: “The real attractions of the Hollowell farm, to me, were: its complete retirement, being, about two miles from the village, half a mile from the nearest neighbor, and separated from the highway by a broad field…” That doesn’t sound so remote to me. Two miles from town, half a mile to a neighbor and only a field between you and the highway? Oh well.Re: Where's Wal-mart?
Michelle Yancey, Sep 12, 2002 10:34 AM
I agree with you he did exagerate in some places, probably in order to get his point across. Walden speaks to most of us on some level but at the same time, who at that time thought it was really reasonable to live or act that way?? Mostly it was exageration in order to get the point he was trying to make across.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: Re: Where's Wal-mart?
Kelly Scott, Sep 12, 2002 01:52 PM
No, that doesn't seem too remote, but it might be for someone who is used to living in town, where places are right down the street, and there are lots of people everywhere. Plus, if you have to walk everywhere, 2 miles is a little ways, and their highways were nothing like what we have!--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
walden again
Jeremiah Winters, Sep 12, 2002 10:28 AM
"I do not wish to be anymore busy with my hands than neccesary." This line comes at the end of chapter two. While most of what Thoreau is writing here sounds good, and he was obviously a man of great intelligence and character, it's lines like this that cause the reader to wonder whether the man was insightful or just lazy.Re: walden again
Drew Vass, Sep 12, 2002 10:49 AM
Good point, it does make you wonder a bit. I think when he speaks of working with his hands he is really speaking of any of the menial labor required for sustaining himself, that in turn took him away from concentrating his energies on what he saw as more important matters. He may not of approached them begrudgingly because he was lazy, as much as he just wanted to spend his time writing, reading, thinking and enjoying nature. And he was probably a bit lazy.Re: walden again
Ann Woodlief, Sep 12, 2002 10:29 AM
Sometimes being busy with your hands is not the same as being busy with your mind. He actually liked to work with his hands, but in work that he enjoyed and that freed his mind.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
live deliberately
Kerry, Sep 12, 2002 10:23 AM
Thoreau shares with us in Walden that one reason why he went to Walden was "because I wished to live deliberately"(1816). He didn't want die knowing that he hadn't really lived. People can live, just going about their lives but not ever really living. His desire was to "live deep and suck out all the marrow of life"(1816). By doing this one needs to enjoy life and be connected to Nature because Nature is "deliberate".Re: live deliberately
Michelle Yancey, Sep 12, 2002 10:29 AM
His imagery with this is so vivid, "... suck the marrow of life". It really makes the reader aware of how much he wants to get out of life and it answers a call in the reader. Most of us want to make the most out of our lives and wish to live like that too.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And the main beneficiary is?
jon mott, Sep 12, 2002 10:16 AM
"I do not speak to those who are well employed, in whatever circumstances, and they know whether they are well employed or not; -- but mainly to the mass of men who are discontented, and idly complaining of the hardness of their lot or of the times, when they might improve them." This is a valuable point Thoreau makes. He doesn't discredit the honest and contented man of superficial and confused living, just those who complain about the conditions they're and don't take any measures for improvement. One might ask Thoreau here: "What about the mostRe: And the main beneficiary is?
Kelly Scott, Sep 12, 2002 01:56 PM
I think the main point Thoreau is thrying to get at here is, if you are unhappy with your life in anyway, change it. If work is pleasant for you, good, but if you hate everyday of your life because your work is so miserable, you don't have to keep doing it. I think people often get in a rut, and forget that there are ways to change things. Sure, you may have to take a pay cut, and give up some of your possessions, or even greater sacrifices, but if it means being happy, and enjoying life, then it is worth it.Re: And the main beneficiary is?
Ann K Voorhies, Sep 12, 2002 10:23 AM
Well I would certainly imagine that he would love to answer your query about slavery, being that he was so opposed to the point that he (as self-reliant as he was) even became somewhat social involved in the cause. I think he would consider any slave as a man or woman that should be given every right to live their lives the way they see fit.Re: And the main beneficiary is?
Jeremiah Winters, Sep 12, 2002 10:22 AM
I think Thoreau, when he writes about the discontented, is speaking to those who feel they lack something in life, that their lives aren't whole. And when he speaks to the well-employed, I think he means those boring people who are perfectly contented with what their jobs have to offer and nothing more.well employed?
Ann Woodlief, Sep 12, 2002 10:28 AM
In many ways, Thoreau was "well employed" at the pond, as he was doing what he loved and what he was good at. I would venture that there are people who are not oppressed by their work, who truly love what they do--and I know quite a few of them. It's a wonderful goal, and some people are determined to achieve it, and do. WALDEN looks a bit different when you are happy with your life and your work; the money that you may earn is much less of a cage and a burden. Thoreau was a writer, but few would pay to read what he wanted to write. So he found a way he could write and study and walk, all the things that meant the most to him, and his pay was great though intangible.Re: And the main beneficiary is?
Ann Woodlief, Sep 12, 2002 10:21 AM
Obviously one needs to be reasonably free to create this sort of life. The slave is not. But he also thought that many people had enslaved themselves voluntarily to a life that made them miserable.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
work eclipsing joy
chris terry, Sep 12, 2002 10:16 AM
"most men... through mere ignorance and mistake, are so occupied with the factitious cares and superfluously coarse labors of life that it's finer fruits can not be plucked by them." what thoreau is saying here is that time spent working for someone else, to maintain something that is not to your own direct benefit, is time that is robbed from one's own mind. if the work that you do was to your personal benefit, then you would be a happier, mentally sound person. i relate to that. i think of times when i am too tired after work to pursue my own interests; the job is so taxing that i end up wsting creative energy on a thing that does not benefit me at all, beyond paying the billsand buying groceries.Re: work eclipsing joy
Drew Vass, Sep 12, 2002 10:52 AM
I definately feel your pain. This is one of the great mysteries of life; that is, how to juggle necessary evils and higher purpose. Success seems to lie in summoning the determination to lend a little more to the later until it blossoms and flourishes. However, if you burn out or give up in the mean time, life is wasted away. Thoreau touches on this perplexing problem again and again throughout Walden.Re: work eclipsing joy
Kia Robinson, Sep 12, 2002 10:40 AM
I believe that is why Thoreau was travelng. I believe he was searching for a labor of love. A work worth being committed to, something that he could establish as s place worthy of his seeds or his life.Re: work eclipsing joy
Ann Woodlief, Sep 12, 2002 10:20 AM
I'm glad you mentioned joy, because I think THAT is the key to Thoreau's life and what he's looking for at the pond. He thoroughly enjoys the life he has made--and how few people can say that? Evidently children just loved him--he was so much fun, making jokes, enjoying learning. People who read him as a cantakerous critic of society are missing much, I think. He was a very hard worker--you wouldn't believe how much he read and wrote during those two years at the pond, as well as walking at least 4 hours a day. But he loved what he did, and so he was never tired.Slow Down
Kerry, Sep 12, 2002 10:15 AM
In Thoreau's Walden he gives us many points of advice, but one that sticks out is that we need to slow down. He asks "why should we live with such hurry and waste of life?" (1817). Granted life is short but seems as though we live our lives based on that saying. Because we know life is short we run around doing everything before it needs to be done "we are determined to be starved before we are hungry" (817). Instead we should just slow down and experience the beauty of life more.reading
Jeremiah Winters , Sep 12, 2002 10:08 AM
It's not surprising that Thoreau is so enamored of reading. The isolation and concentration required to read a good book fit in perfectly with the individualism the man purports. And besides, what else was he going to spend his time doing out on that pond?Re: reading
Michelle Yancey, Sep 12, 2002 10:15 AM
He also brings up the controversy of reading "serious" works of literature versus reading "junk" literature like popular romance and mystery books. I guess even then that was a sore point for intellectuals that the masses read popular fiction instead of more "serious" works. I myself think you can learn something from anything as long as its intelligently written. Even romance, msytery, etc. can impart something to the reader.Re: reading
Elisa P., Sep 12, 2002 10:13 AM
But wouldn't reading involve taking in others' ideas? That doesn't fit in with creating our own.Re: Re: reading
Michelle Yancey, Sep 12, 2002 10:19 AM
I do think Thoreau wants us to create our own ideas but he wants us to read too. Its a fine line that you have to walk. Between reading other people's ideas to become more educated and created your own ideas. Or maybe he means it as sort of a cycle, reading other people's work and then being inspired to create your own ideas, etc.??--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neighbor to the birds...
Michelle Yancey, Sep 12, 2002 10:06 AM
"Such was not my abode, for I found myself suddenly neighbor to the birds; not by having inprosoned one, but having caged myself near them." I really liked this quote. Instead of the bird being caged he is one caged because he is living in house (the cage) near them. This also falls in line with Thoreau's ideas on owning a house being something that ties a person down.Re: Neighbor to the birds...
Ann Woodlief, Sep 12, 2002 10:25 AM
As you'll see when you finish the book, Thoreau was particularly fond of birds--perhaps because they are nature's poets and voices. Look out for them as you go--they have conversations, sometimes. But when you are truly shut up in a house (and his was quite open), you are very caged, and hearing birds is quite difficult (especially over the traffic and air conditions today!).--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Imagery of Seeds
Kia Robinson, Sep 12, 2002 10:04 AM
"Many think that seeds improve with age." "The nearest that I came to actual possession was when I bought the Hollowell place,and had begun to sort my seeds," "sold him the farm for just what I gave for it, and, as he was not a rich man, made him a present of ten dollars, and still had my ten cents, and seeds," Walden uses many references to seeds. Seeds being for me a representation of the beginig of life, and Walden's thematic references on ways to truly live, lead me to believe that the seeds represent life for Walden, and how we have the power to sew life or seed in ways to make life the most "fruit bearing." The line many think that seeds improve with age is also a clue. Many think life improves with age or that the seeds that are planted in life grow with age. Walden writes that at the time he was closest to buying some land, he began to sort his seed. When he was closest to commiting to something he took an evaluation of his life, and began to "sort" it out. Even when he is beat out of money by a farmer for ten dollars what is important is that he still had his seeds. Therefore he knew he still had the ability to cultivate his life elsewhere. He was able to take what is valuable and worth being commited to with him!Re: Imagery of Seeds
Ann Woodlief, Sep 12, 2002 10:10 AM
How thoughtful, Kia! Did you realize that he wrote enough about seeds--which are powerful symbols, of course--for it to be a book which was compiled and published fairly recently? It's called THE DISPERSION OF SEEDS and can be found at http://www.walden.org/thoreau/default.asp--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
more walden
Jeremiah Winters, Sep 12, 2002 10:04 AM
Thoreau spends a great deal of time invoking the principles of many eastern religions. Hinduism, Confuciansism, etc. How did the man know so much about eastern religions? Religions that for the most part are more in tune with his view of the world and man's place in it.Re: more walden
Kia Robinson, Sep 12, 2002 10:17 AM
I am not sure but I believe he got the ten dollars from the farmer, and the seed imagery from christian biblical text. There is a passage, I believe but, I am not sure in the New Testament about three men, each planted seeds they received from a land owner in different locations on diferent ground. The men had to report back to the land owner on the outcome of the seeds, and each had different results based on where or how they chose to sew there seed. I believe Thoreau believes that it is important where or how seeds are grown!Re: more walden
Ann Woodlief, Sep 12, 2002 10:11 AM
He was a great reader and a linguist who even was able to translate some of the Hindu writings. Like Emerson, he recognized great ideas wherever he found them.Re: more walden
Michelle Yancey, Sep 12, 2002 10:10 AM
Good question about how did he know so much about the religions. Maybe he just knew about them from his reading??--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
walden
Jeremiah Winters, Sep 12, 2002 09:58 AM
There is a line early in Chapter two where Thoreau writes he has always cultivated a garden. This strikes me as sounding very similar to the last line in "Candide." In that book, the line is meant to imply how one must take care of their own problems in a world full of problems. Thoreau is perhaps invoking that as it seems similar to what he's writing about here.Re: walden
Ann Woodlief, Sep 12, 2002 10:12 AM
That's an interesting take on the line--and surely he did mean it both ways. But he does literally garden! His seeds are literal and symbolic (of thoughts) at the same time, like most of his writing. He sought "facts that flower into truths." And so he gardened.Re: walden
chris terry, Sep 12, 2002 10:04 AM
that was probably a way for thoreau to counter critics who attacked his lack of philanthropy.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
toilet cushions
Caroline Macauley-Wise, Sep 12, 2002 09:55 AM
Does anyone know what these things are? I could imagine I suppose but thought it would be fun to put it out there.Re: toilet cushions
Ann Woodlief, Sep 12, 2002 09:57 AM
It's just small pillows. (Toilet has many meanings--look it up)--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Economy
jon mott, Sep 12, 2002 09:54 AM
Walden's chapters titled economy begin with assurances that men are often their own slavedrivers, "so occupied with the factitious cares and superfluously coarse labors of life that its finer fruits cannot be plucked by them." In nature, animals are free to follow their instints of survival, living in a purity unavailable to the constantly toiling and deliberating townsperson. Thoreau posits that social conventions bind us to our work, which supercedes play, and that some rely heavily on the "mere smoke of opinion," as opposed to following their own latent conviction. Thoreau wants the reader to consider the various possibilities and avenues life affords us instead of following a well worn rut made by those preceding generations. Youth has but all the potential to explore; " but there are as many ways as there can be drawn radii from one centre." Originality, creativity, an economy of pure being...these are the things Thoreau wants us to consider. To pose a question about these ideas, I'll ask: to what ends and benifits was Thoreau premising such courses would bring?Re: Economy
Jeremiah Winters, Sep 12, 2002 10:19 AM
Thoreau figured that these things would make us better people. More cultured, more intelligent and more appreciative of the smaller things in life. To that end they served no real useful purpose, but they're something to aspire to personally.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Putting it into todays world
Afaf Salem, Sep 12, 2002 09:52 AM
"The mass of men led lives of quite desperation." I think that this line from economy even though it is early in the chapter helps to sum it all up. When I read that line I felt that I and many others could relate. We work we eat we sleep sometimes we play but we go through these motiuons were we just live routine daily lives. I think thatis what he challenges. When he compares the educated man to the uneducated man thoughg at sometimes it maight seem that he sees them in a different light I think he still challenges both to aspire for the same thing, especially in tis one line. He is telling the farmer and the politician to not live a mundane live to not be tedious or submissive. To think and live mentally and physically.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
economy
Ann K Voorhies, Sep 12, 2002 09:51 AM
I found Thoreau's determination to produce more than he consumed very thought provoking. Throughout "economy", he stresses the importance of his being able to support himself by his bean farming, and only consuming a very modest amount of food and other goods. He feels this is the only way to live an honest life that doesn't over indulge. He mentions the rich, and pities that they will never know what a worn in article of clothing feels like. His ability to make worn clothes sound like a reward saved for the common class is humorous. I also found his comments concerning fashion to be both funny and true. "Every generation laughs at the old fashions, but follows religiously the new." How simple and honest!Re: economy
Megan McManus, Sep 12, 2002 10:05 AM
About the fashion section, I was very impressed to read how his opinion on fashion was still relevant today. He immediately lists what the true neccessity of clothing is - vital hear and to cover nakedness - then he discusses what fashion actually stands for in that society. However, much like it is today, fashion unfortunately becomes a symbol of one's status.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So much stays the same.
Caroline Macauley-Wise, Sep 12, 2002 09:48 AM
Walden states, "always on the limits, trying to get into business and trying to get out of debt," talking of people who are poor and living off credit. Wow! things do not change much do they. He could still talk of people living this way. "It's the way it's done", A friend told me just lately. "By the time you save up for it you won't even want it anymore", no mention of need. We still live over our means because we want the material things that we think will make us happy. Perhaps it's human nature.Re: Re: So much stays the same.
Kelly Scott, Sep 12, 2002 09:43 PM
I'm just curious why you think most Europeans would rather live modestly and work less? I know many Americans who live modestly and work less so they can spend more time with their families. Not to get off topic, but I don't think it's a good idea to say an entire country is a certain way. But, on another note, it's interesting to see how modern problems are nothing new.Re: Re: So much stays the same.
Jennifer Meredith , Sep 12, 2002 10:04 AM
I would agree and it reminds me of the saying 'lying on your death bed would you like to say I wish I would have spent more time at the office to earn those bucks.' You can't take it with you and it seems, like you said, other countries can recognize that.Re: So much stays the same.
Michelle Yancey, Sep 12, 2002 09:55 AM
I agree with you on that. Things don't change. On a side note I was watching this bio on Donald Trump and he told this story of how before he married Marla Maples he was walking with her and he saw this homeless person on the street and he told her the homeless person was richer than he was and she was like how can that be? He told her because he was owed out millions of dollars while the homeless person didn't owe anyone anything. Maybe a beside the point but I think it helps to prove the point Thoreau was making about people spending so much time buying material things that they end up poorer instead of richer.Re: So much stays the same.
Mary Newcomb, Sep 12, 2002 09:53 AM
I agree with you on this point and I think that it is important to notice how so much of what Thoreau says is pertinent to our lives and society today. It says a lot about how much Thoreau is tapping into a commanilty in human nature and also about how little our social ideals have changed. Thoreau is very tapped into Americanness, don't you think?Food for the soul.
Caroline Macauley-Wise, Sep 12, 2002 10:06 AM
You guys are all being kinda hard on America. I know that in England we call a good, fun spending spree the 'American way', but we still love to spends on have-to-haves rather than just sticking to must-haves. So, give yourselves a break. I know that sometimes treating yourself to something new is really good food for the soul. I suppose we all just have to find some sort of balance in all of this.Re: Re: Re: So much stays the same.
Jennifer Meredith, Sep 12, 2002 10:14 AM
I think that is what Americans don't have is balance. We spend and spend and spend ourselves right into debt. And I think unfortunatly, more now than ever, some people are not afraid of being in debt.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Freedom
Kia Robinson, Sep 12, 2002 09:46 AM
As long as possible live free and uncommitted. It makes but little difference whether you are committed to a farm or the county jail. Walden's ideas are contrary to the American Dreams that being tied to and owning the land is a testament to one's true freedom. He brings to mind the idea that responsibilty is a choice, and being such what is worthy of being commited to and having resposibility for. I have to agree that a bit of freedom is lost when say for instance you are tied to a job that is essential for your surrival.Re: Freedom and names
Ann Woodlief, Sep 12, 2002 10:00 AM
His name is Thoreau--Walden is the name of the pond. I don't understand why people often confuse them. Thoreau is committed, to ideas, to writing, to doing what makes him feel alive. So he isn't saying not to commit yourself--just don't commit yourself to that which imprisons you in some way. For him, having a family (although he was very close to HIS family) was a responsibility he did not want to take, and most people wouldn't feel that way. His commitment was to Nature, and at the time, a wife, etc. would have restricted him a lot.Re: Re: Freedom
Kia Robinson, Sep 12, 2002 10:08 AM
That is what leads me to believe that he is perhaps making the reader question what is really worth being committed to in each individuals life. I believe many people commit themselves to things because they are expected to, and Thoreau goes against these expectations.Fighting expectations
Ann Woodlief, Sep 12, 2002 10:17 AM
Yes, one big reason he went to Walden Pond was to free himself, physically and mentally, from all the expectations and assumptions about how we should live. He wanted to live an EXAMINED life, and he is asking his readers to do the same. It's funny how we assume we have to live in certain ways that we really don't like, or that imprison us in various ways, and we never question that assumptions and ask, is this because I want or need it?Re: Freedom
Ann K Voorhies, Sep 12, 2002 09:54 AM
He took this freedom from owning land to its truest extent. The land on which he built his shack actually belonged to Emerson. I wonder if he ever formed an opinion about the fact that Emerson was a land owner?Re: Re: Freedom
Michelle Yancey, Sep 12, 2002 10:00 AM
I thought it was interesting that he kept bringing up the fact that this was the land he choose to "squat on". Usually squatters did not have the permission of the owner to use the land they were living on and they were on the land illegally. But of course Emerson knew he was staying there. Emerson even helped him at one point with building the house. He even brings up squatting when he talks about planting the garden.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Use of puns
Michelle Yancey, Sep 12, 2002 09:40 AM
I really liked Thoreau use of puns throughout the work, I felt it gave a funny kind of twist to the work and lightened the piece up in places. But you really had to look for them because it was hard to find them in some places, perhaps because we're looking at it during a different time period."For a long time I was reporter to a journal, of no very wide circulation, whose editor has never yet seen fit to print the bulk of my contributions, and, as is too common with writers, I got only my labor for my pains. However, in this case my pains were their own reward." In this pun Thoreau is using the double meaning of journal as a "diary" and a "newspaper". And Thoreau himself is the demanding editor.Re: Use of puns
Ann Woodlief, Sep 12, 2002 10:03 AM
This is a nice pun--especially the labor for his pains. But he's also talking about The Dial, a magazine for which he wrote which Emerson and then Margaret Fuller edited. He wrote quite a bit for it which was not published--but he kept his writing and it became part of his great books (and he WAS a demanding editor on himself) I especially like his extended pun on the sleepers in Chapter 2.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Misfortune or fortune
Afaf Salem, Sep 12, 2002 09:39 AM
"I see young men,young towns men whose misfortune is to have inherited farms." AGain I think that he is being very witty and clever in these statements. IMost people look at inheritence as a fortune but not him. I find that interesting how he makes it a bad thing and how he says that they are "easier aquaried than got rid of" He sees it as a burden, and even clarifies tha burden in the same paragraph saying that the farmers were bound to their land in bondage to it: "Who amde them serfs of the soil?" Like poor you. YOu are stuck to this responsiblity. Nad I guess I can see how he thinks of inheritence as a misfortune because, sometimes you get stuck woth something you don't want or can't handle.Re: Misfortune or fortune
Michelle Yancey, Sep 12, 2002 09:51 AM
I think the reason he considers it a misfortune because then they are stuck with this land and it becomes a burden and weighs them down. I remember at one point he mentioned a family who lived in the country but wanted to live in the village but the spent years trying to sell their land but could not get rid of it, so they unhappily remained where they were. When I read this it made me imagine the land as being a debt that you had inherited from someone that it was up to you to have pay back now that they were gone. In most cases the land was probably just passed on down throughout the family and nobody probably even thought about if they really wanted it or not. They were just stuck with it and I think that was what Thoreau was getting at.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"civilized life"
Elisa Palmer, Sep 12, 2002 09:36 AM
Thoreau disagrees with how the "civilized" are living. He says their priorities are mixed up, and they get caught up trying to be richer and richer. All we need, he says, are "Food, Clothing, and Shelter." It's interesting he capitalizes these words; why does he do this? So they stand out?Re:
Melissa Robinson, Sep 12, 2002 10:39 AM
I also wanted to make a comment that was in some relation to this. Throughout the readings Thoreau talks about the necessities of life which seem to be changing. At first it might be a simple house but then becomes a more elaborate one. I thought it was interesting that what people see as necessity is constantly changing.Re: Re:
Kelly Scott, Sep 12, 2002 09:50 PM
The necessities of people change, I think, because people change, and their circumstances change. The necessities for one person is different than that of 3 or 4 people. While the basics might stay the same: food, clothing, shelter, there will be an increase in the amount needed as families grow and change.Re:
Melissa Robinson, Sep 12, 2002 09:56 AM
I believe he does use caps to emphasize these words. He does say that all we need it food, clothing, and shelter...and then adds fuel. I think he is trying to say that once we get the initial necessities we start adding onto the list. Such as now, we might say we need food, shelter, fuel, and a car.Re:
Mary Newcomb, Sep 12, 2002 09:46 AM
I think he does capitalize them so that they stand out. It reminds me of the way middle-school notes appear. If you read one, the parts the writer wants to emphasize have multiple exclamations after them or question marks. Certain words are written in all caps. During this time, and before, writers seem to use capitals to emphasize certain words. At the time, writers didn't have the availability of all the fonts or of bolding as we do today. I don't think it was as easy for Thoreau to use such techniques, so he used capitals.Re:
Michelle Yancey, Sep 12, 2002 09:46 AM
I think the reason he capitalizes them is because he later expounds upon the ideas behind Food, Clothing, and Shelter and what they mean. Just a thought, but I think thats what he meant.Re: Re:
Ann Woodlief, Sep 12, 2002 10:14 AM
I agree. These are the major ideas of the first chapter, the "necessaries" of life. Besides, he is intend on redefining them.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Animals freer than Men who own Them
Michelle Yancey, Sep 12, 2002 09:35 AM
I found it really interesting and a good point when Thoreau talked about the animals kept on the farm (the oxen)being the keepers of men. "I am wont to think that men are not so much the keepers of the herds as herds are the keeper of men, the former being so much the freer." It was a very interesting idea instead of men being the one to take care of oxen, the oxen were the ones who were looking after men.Re: Animals freer than Men who own Them
Melissa Robinson, Sep 12, 2002 09:49 AM
"One farmer says to me, "You cannot live on vegetable food solely, for it furnishes nothing to make bones with"; and so he religiously devotes a part of his day to supplying his system with the raw material of bones; walking all the while he talks behind his oxen, which, with vegetable-made bones, jerk him and his lumbering plow along in spite of every obstacle." I found this may relate to what you are saying. In this the farmer is telling Thoreau not to be a vegetarian because it won't help make bones for you. Walden is standing there thinking that the farmer is telling him this when he is sitting atop a machine that is being pulled by an animal that is a vegetarian and is doing all the work. I found this to be really interesting.Re: Animals freer than Men who own Them
Mary Newcomb, Sep 12, 2002 09:39 AM
I also think this idea ties into Thoreau's belief about ownership and simplicity. I think he feels that the more things we have, the more of a slave we become to them. Those who own oxen have to worry about feeding them and keeping them on their property and the like. Wheras the oxen simply roam free all day and enjoy the services their owners provide for them. Thoreau believes that we should simplfy our lives in order to enjoy the most freedom.Re: Animals freer than Men who own Them
Caroline Macauley-Wise, Sep 12, 2002 10:26 AM
One morning I got out of my warm bed late. Not feeling very well and tired as usual I got showered and ran downstairs for a quick cup of coffee. No time for breakfast, I ran out of the door to go to a job I did not want to go to. I was hit in the face by almost gail force winds carrying with them ice and rain. I ran back in the house to grab my umbrella. I was miserable. As I ran out for the second time, I glanced over into my living room and saw my cat, Star. She was laying on my sofa and, at that time, in the middle of a long lazy stretch. I paused as I realized who had the right idea in this picture. I think they know something we don't!Re: Re: Animalsfreer than Men who own Them
Michelle Yancey, Sep 12, 2002 09:43 AM
Good point and this makes sense because throughout the piece you hear his ideas on owning slaves and extravagant houses when man does not need them. Thoreau believes man can live more freer in a hut than in a big house because the house owns him instead of him owning it. Man spends all his time working to pay for and decorate the house when he could be doing other things to enrich himself.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Economy chapter
Afaf Salem, Sep 12, 2002 09:30 AM
I find it interesting that Thoreau starts f by replying to his neighbours curiosuity. And in doing so he alsao apologizes to the readers who do not care about the reply to his neighbours, and puts it as a disclaimer to vanity. I think it is a bit witty the way he did it. Kind of like here it so stop your curiousity, I willanswer your uestions just so that I may move on in my writting, because there are others who are interested in my work and I need to get to that.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Central themes
Ann K Voorhies, Sep 12, 2002 09:01 AM
"To be awake is to be alive." This quote is buried deep in "Where I lived...", but I find it to be quite a central idea if we define "awake" as the spiritual awakenness Thoreau refers to. His definition of a man that is spiritually awake is one "whose elastic and vigorous thought keeps pace with the sun." Thoreau is almost snobby with his "us and them" theories concerning the uneducated. This doesn't stop with his own generation. Early on in "Economy" Thoreau writes, "I have yet to hear the first syllable of valuable or even earnest advice from my seniors." I personally feel this quote is more a reaction to Emerson's beliefs concerning history, rather that how Thoreau might have actually felt. He obviously gives the scholars from previous generations SOME credit, he is constantly alluding to their writings. This might be his way of separating the scholarly reader from the masses, but again, it seems snobby.Re: Central themes
Megan McManus, Sep 12, 2002 09:35 AM
I actually thought that Thoreau and Emerson agreed on their opinion concerning history. I concluded this from the "Economy" chapter where Thoreau states, "There are nowadays professors of philosophy, but not philosophers." To me, this sounded much like Emerson's introduction to "Nature" where he asks "why should we grope among the dry bones of the past." I think both of the writers are questioning why people rely on those scholars of the past and not creating our own modern philosophies.Re: Re: Central themes
Afaf Salem, Sep 12, 2002 09:44 AM
I see the point you guys are trying to make, but at the same time Thoreu (and Emerson) both write in a way that is meant to make you think, to open up a new frame of mind, and a lot of the thinhgs they ask are just questions to get people to discuss it doesn't always mean that they know the answers they are just asking.I agree
Ann K Voorhies, Sep 12, 2002 09:39 AM
...which is why I found it odd that Thoreau mentioned so many of these same older scholars in his work. He used many of their writings in his allusions and metaphors.Snobby?
Ann Woodlief, Sep 12, 2002 09:27 AM
Like with Emerson and "Self-Reliance," you need to cut Thoreau some slack when it comes to exaggerating to make a point about self-reliance.Thoreau
Ann K Voorhies, Sep 12, 2002 09:33 AM
I mean him no disrespect. I personally find Thoreau's tone to be harsh compared to Emerson's. It seems that the people around him have caused him some irritation that he is unable to conceal. Emerson might have disagreed with the way others live just as much as Thoreau did, but I feel his methods of making light of that were gentler.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Memorable Phrase
Mary Newcomb, Sep 12, 2002 08:07 AM
"Simplicity, Simplicity, Simplicity!" This phrase reminded me of the saying: "The more things you own, the more things own you." I think this is a key theme of Thoreau's philosophy.Re: Memorable Phrase
Megan McManus, Sep 12, 2002 09:47 AM
I agree. Throughout the piece Thoreau questions man's freedom, consistently refering to society's ownership of man. For example, in his commentary on shelter he asks, "And when the farmer has got his house, he may not be the richer but the poorer for it, and it be the house that has got him." He constantly discusses how most men will never actually own their own homes, rather they will rent them. However, once they finally own them, they have become a slave to the home as a result of it. Thoreau makes many other references to things that own man, such as "But lo! men have become the tools of their tools" and "I am wont to think that men are not so much the keeper of herds as herds are the keepers of men, the former are so much the freer." His comments and the repetetiveness of his comments on this subject are a major theme within the work, because Thoreau is questioning man's freedom (or lack of it) something that is very important within this country.Re: Re: Memorable Phrase
Melissa Robinson, Sep 12, 2002 10:02 AM
I was wondering why a man would be a slave to his home if he owns it. Wouldn't that be if he were just renting since he would be working to pay for something he will never own.Re: Re: Re: Memorable Phrase
Megan McManus, Sep 12, 2002 10:19 AM
Like Thoreau said, "The man who actually paid for his farm with labor on it is so rare every neighbor can point to him". Here his point is to show the reader that most people rent their homes, so yes they are a slave to them. Also, the minority of those who own a home, most likely spent their lives working for that home. Therefore their those homes, too, have eventually come to own the man. Also, the physical and economical upkeep of a home can also be an example of how one is enslaved to their home. For example, Thoreau in reference to Walden states, "A lady once offered me a mat, but as I had no room to spare within the house, nor time to spare within or without to shake it, I declined it, preferring to wipe my feet on the sod before my door. It is best to avoid the beginnings of evil." He says he had no room for the mat, but he also says he had no time to shake the mat. Basically Thoreau is showing the reader how easily one can become responsible for such things as cleaning house and can eventually becomes a slave to their homes.Re: Re: Re: Re: Memorable Phrase
Melissa Robinson, Sep 12, 2002 10:30 AM
I see what you are saying. That to maintain a house that you have worked for your whole life to own is bringing you into slavery.Re: Re: Re: Memorable Phrase
Jennifer Meredith, Sep 12, 2002 10:09 AM
Think of all the responsibility that comes with owning a home though. You no longer can just call up your landlord say "hey somethings wrong, come fix it" and they'll come and fix it, like in an apartment complex. From what I am told there is always something to do when you are a home owner - weather it be cutting the grass, the house needs painting, or the kitchen sink is leaking, etc etc. So in a sense you are a slave to all its problems - you break your back or break your wallet to fix and repair things in your home.foward thinking
Afaf Salem, Sep 12, 2002 09:59 AM
That is a good prase to quote, I think it relates to so many throughout time. I think the thing that relly interested me about this reading was how well it relates to modern day. I mean everything has a common groound. Today people are tied down to possesions, and to material thing. They hold themselves back they keep themselves tied down, and I thin thatis what he is getting at. I mean come on how much do we pay for motnhly rent? we could probably afford to put payments on a house if we wanted to but do we?Re: Re: Re: Memorable Phrase
Kerry, Sep 12, 2002 10:29 AM
That is so true, it almost shows you how much Thoreau's thinking was almost before hs time.He speaks so honestly to people that I guess it could almost fit most any generation.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Redefining AWAKE
Mary Newcomb, Sep 12, 2002 08:03 AM
Look at how Emerson defines, or qualifies rather, the act of being awake: "The millions are awake enough for physical labor; but only one in a million is awake enough for effective intellectual exertion, only one in a hundred millions to a poetic or divine life. To be awake is to be alive." I think this is an amazing qualification of "Awakeness." Thoreau finds so few that are awake to even a small degree. Of those who are truly awake he writes: "I have never yet met a man who was quite awake. How could I have looked him in the face?" I think that Thoreau may feel it only possible for some of us to reach such a state of awakening only at certain moments or points in our lives. It seems that a perpetual state of awakening as he defines it would be something like Enlightenment, in the Buddhist sense.Re: Redefining AWAKE
Drew Vass, Sep 12, 2002 11:00 AM
Both of these men push each of us to strive for constant awareness and inspire us to not consider enlightenment as an on/off faucet, but rather a constant flow. Both certainly employ this concept as the meaning of life: absolute, full and constant consciousness.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thoreau's Philosophy on the Desire of Ownership
Mary Newcomb, Sep 12, 2002 07:52 AM
One of the memorable phrases in Thoreau's Walden, in "Where I Lived, and What I Lived For" was "Wherever I sat, there might I live, and the landscape radiated from me accordingly." I thought this phrase summed up Thoreau’s philosophy in concerning ownership and desire. He believes that true satisfaction and contentment come, not through monetary ownership, but through an ownership within one's self. He didn't need to buy a farm in order to be pleased by one; he simply looked at one and enjoyed its beauty. On of my favorite passages concerning this is where he describes the poet, who "enjoys the most valuable parts of a farm, while the crusty farmer supposed that he had got a few wild apples only." He then describes how the poet is able to truly enjoy the farm, while the farmer misses all the beauty of nature--for he is concerned only with the farm's productivity. Thoreau writes that the poet had "milked it [the farm], skimmed it, and got all the cream, and left the farmer only the skimmed milk." His quote from Cowper concerning landscapes spoke of this same feeling: "I am monarch of all I survey, / My right there is none to dispute." Thoreau even goes far enough in his imagination of things to not even experience them, for he has experienced and been satisfied by his imagination. He writes: "My imagination carried me so far that I even had the refusal of several farms,---the refusal was all I wanted---" Thoreau doesn't need to own something to truly own it. He redefines satisfaction, contentment and ownership and thus illustrates the impermanenceand the unfulfilling nature of desire.Re: Thoreau's Philosophy on the Desire of Ownership
jon mott, Sep 12, 2002 10:00 AM
I think, in regards to his farming thoughts, that Thoreau is perhaps too quick to shun the daily labors of life. Certainly, he toiled in his own fashions at Walden, but when he asserts that the poet gains more from the farm than the farmer, I think he ignores the gratitude that comes from doing such work...providing for oneself and a family. There is an aesthetic quality intrinsic to the labors of farming that Thoreau ought to be acknowledging.Thoreau and farming
Ann Woodlief, Sep 12, 2002 10:06 AM
Actually Thoreau would definitely agree with you that there are pleasures to the labors of farming (all this is pre-machine farming, of course). He himself grew beans (which are seeds, just as he is sowing the seeds of thought in his writing) and has a lot to say about the pleasures of hoeing, etc. But it's a matter of value. He grew beans to get the money he needed to buy the food and books he needed; he didn't eat beans and he didn't really grow them for profit. And he was a most responsible farmer--organic, you might say. Everything he did at Walden, he did most thoughtfully.