Henry David
Thoreau and Marilynne Robinson are certainly two writers that could,
at the first glance, not be more different: Thoreau being a 19th
century transcendentalist philosopher, Robinson a Calvinist essayist
and novelist born in 1934. The fact that they lived and live
respectively in different times and therefore under very different
conditions, with different topics being important, must almost
necessarily lead to different views of things—or must it? At second
glance the parallels can be perceived: both think and write about a
society that has, on the whole, changed less than could be expected.
Thoreaus's
world-famous work “Walden” describes his experiences throughout
his 2 years of living in the woods near Walden Pond, leading an
austere and autonomous life in close communion with nature. True
happiness, he claims, cannot be found by “spending […] the
best part of one's life earning money in order to enjoy a
questionable liberty during the least valuable part of it” (Thoreau
30). This could be avoided by overcoming the common practice of
specializing on one certain business and the division of labour.
According to him, procuring for oneself is not only the cheapest way
of living but also the method by which independence, freedom and
leisure are to be effectuated in the best way. Although he
acknowledges the importance of the companionship of others, he
refuses the idea that it is necessary. His principle of self-reliance
includes not only the economical but also the social aspect.
In her essay
“Night Thoughts of a Baffled Humanist” Marylinne Robinson
succeeds in drawing a line from the ultimate question about the
meaning of human life to the political aspects of society: the
different ideologies and their success or failure, the varying roles
of America, Russia and China, the atomic bomb and the best way to
live together peacefully. She admits an abundance of grave mistakes
in the history of mankind, but does not lose her faith in humanity.
To her, Western society is characterized by the way individuals work
together, and can only prosper if this togetherness is maintained:
“Western society will bear its best fruit if we respect, educate,
inform and trust one another” (Robinson 5).
By arguing against
the division of labour Thoreau also speaks out against the dependance
on others. Instead of theoretical acquisition of knowledge he
recommends a practical, hands-on manner of learning: “[The
students] should not play life, or study it merely, while the
community supports them at this expensive game, but earnestly live it
from beginning to end.” (Thoreau 29). Marylinne Robinson, in
contrast, thinks that “educating and informing […] one another”
(Robinson 5) is an important part of Western society. Briefly
speaking: Thoreau advocates an autonomous, independent lifestyle that
does not necessarily exclude others, but is not dependent on them,
while Robinson emphasizes the necessity of social cohesion and
cooperation. In this point, therefore, the two authors differ
significantly.
The reason for this difference becomes clear when one considers the attitude towards society that these two writers have: In the first chapter of “Walden” Thoreau describes society as materialist, superficial, sometimes greedy and to a great extent unhappy—on the whole a considerably negative view of society, whereas Robinson has, on the whole, a positive image of American society and even calls herself passionately loyal (cf Robinson 7).
The reason for this difference becomes clear when one considers the attitude towards society that these two writers have: In the first chapter of “Walden” Thoreau describes society as materialist, superficial, sometimes greedy and to a great extent unhappy—on the whole a considerably negative view of society, whereas Robinson has, on the whole, a positive image of American society and even calls herself passionately loyal (cf Robinson 7).
I think that, at
the core, mankind has never changed much. Living contently and
peacefully together has always been theoretically possible but
practically never truly materialized. This fact leads Thoreau and
Robinson to different solutions: self-sufficiency versus cooperation,
independence versus reliance on others. But one thing they have in
common,and that is trust—one in nature, the other in the good in
man. And, in the end, is man not part of nature?
Works cited:
Thoreau, Henry David. Walden or Life in the Woods. USA: Popular Classics Publishing, 2012. Print.
Robinson, Marylinne. "Night Thoughts of a Baffled Humanist". In: The Nation, 2011. Web. 30 December 2013 <http://www.thenation.com/article/164466/night-thoughts-baffled-humanist>
No comments:
Post a Comment