Note: The version of Walden I have is not the one the rest of the class is using, so until I can borrow someone's, the page numbers will most likely not mean much to anyone other than myself. The Buell article paging, however, is correct.
“Why should I feel lonely?” Thoreau asks rhetorically in Walden (99). Surrounded by the natural world, Thoreau says, there is no need for the company of man. Despite the chapter’s title of “Solitude,” and the apparent focus on nature, Thoreau is actually giving a lot of societal commentary. He is being both “political,” according to Buell’s definition of the project, in his insistence on retreating from society and “romantic” in his belief that nature provides all the company we need.
The Romantic side of Thoreau appears whenever he is espousing the deep connection between the human spirit and the natural world. He glorifies nature, saying, “I was so distinctly made aware of the presence of something kindred to me, even in scenes which we are accustomed to call wild and dreary” (98). Nature is not exactly Thoreau’s best friend, but he feels an undeniable kindred connection to it. In this passage, the connection is overwhelming to the point of excluding the rest of humanity. It is a romantic notion, to take man’s connection to nature to the extreme of nature being more important than society. Later in the chapter, he talks about how he is no more lonely than the loon, the pond itself, a bee, the north star, and so on (101). He feels a connection to all of these things because they all appear to be alone, and yet are not usually considered to be lonely. Thoreau seems to be making a distinction between solitude and being alone and the feeling of loneliness. Technically he considers himself to be alone because of the lack of human company, but he is arguing that being alone, or living in solitude, does not cause loneliness because he is in tune with nature. Thoreau seems to be saying that men can get much closer to nature than other men on a spiritual level; this deeper connection with nature is lacking in human contact, causing the feeling of loneliness when we are in the company of others. It is a mental connection Thoreau seeks to prevent loneliness and he has found “no exertion of the legs can bring two minds much nearer to one another,” so he turns to “the perennial source of our life,” that is, nature, where he can get more in touch with his spiritual side.
Everything about nature is good in Thoreau’s vision. In this passage, the focus is on the rain, which may be viewed by “society” as confining and dreary, but Thoreau instead views as beneficial. The rain helps his beans to grow; it confines him to the house for the afternoon and evening “in which many thoughts had time to take root and unfold themselves” (98). He even goes so far as to say that if the rain was too much for the beans, then “it would still be good for the grass on the uplands, and, being good for the grass, it would be good for me” (97). All these descriptions and so many more throughout the book are putting nature on a pedestal, but at the same time his concern with nature is also very human-focused. The rain is good for the beans or the grass, but ultimately, it is the fact that it is good for Thoreau that matters the most. We turn to nature, he says, because humans are not good enough. Thoreau wants a better society and he hopes it will come about from a better connection to nature. His focus on humanity in relation to nature comes from the fact that “Thoreau felt society’s threat to him more than he flet humanity’s threat to nature” (Buell 542-3).
Thoreau’s insistence in this passage and throughout the chapter that men should not really be living in close proximity to other men, but closer to nature, is central to his argument for moving to and living in the wilderness. And yet, there is an obvious contradiction between the sentiments expressed here and Thoreau’s actions in much of the rest of the book. He proclaims here that solitude is not lonely and that the company of nature is better than humanity, but in the very next chapter he talks about visitors to his home at Walden, and he later tells that he goes into the village “every day or two… to hear some of the gossip” (122). Buell deals with this rather significant Thoreauean contradiction. He says that Thoreau’s vision of Walden erred on the side of idealism. According to Buell, “it was emotionally important to him to believe in Walden as a sanctuary” (531). Thoreau needed to see Walden as a perfect retreat and since solitude is an undeniable fact of living there, he would of course insist that he was not lonely at all, when his actions tell us that he might have been. He was not lonely not only because he had natural company, but also because he connected with other people on a regular basis; if he had only kept company with trees and birds, he might have ended up feeling lonesome. Additionally, it would have been impossible for Thoreau to let go of his philosophical point about the connection between nature and the human spirit, in which he did have a very strong belief.
This contradiction also helps to reveal Thoreau’s “political” project in the book. Buell explains that this is a convenient label for “Thoreau’s interest in provoking social reflection and change” (540). One of the changes he hopes to provoke is to encourage people’s re-connection to nature. He must, philosophically at least, present a fairly consistent argument for this; thus the emphasis on solitude as not being lonely. Part of his agenda to create a slower-paced, more sustainable, and natural society is described perfectly by Buell: “[Thoreau] completes the process of conversion, to which the reader was somewhat disposed anyhow, by immersing him or her so completely in the life according to nature that the reader will be incapable of re-entering civilized life again on the same terms as before” (541). Thoreau certainly immerses his readers in his non-lonely solitude with his descriptions of the rain. His enthusiasm for his subjects must influence his readers – to his point of view, he hopes. But even if he does not convince them, by the act of reading alone, readers must reflect on what he is saying and at least consider his defense of nature.
Taken on its own, this passage, with its romantic connection between humans and nature and philosophical reflections of the distance between men, might be enough to convince a reader to abandon technology and turn to the woods. Taken in the larger context of the book, Thoreau’s contradictions between his idealistic words and his actions might cause the reader to doubt the authenticity of Thoreau’s argument that living with nature is the perfect life. If we can look pat the idealism, however, I think we will find a consistency within the whole. Even Thoreau knows that living alone in the wilderness is not a perfect life. But that is not the point he really wants to make. Instead, he is hoping to change society itself somewhat. He is advocating that society operate with a greater consideration for nature, which would have the practical application of preservation of nature, sustainable farming, and the limitation of harmful technologies. He hopes that some will come to the spiritual realizations he has, but such realizations are not a pre-requisite to a more conscientious society in general. One hopes that a more natural and spiritual society, living a little closer to nature will be able to bridge that gap between humans of which Thoreau despairs so that even within the company of men there is no longer the threat of loneliness.
No comments:
Post a Comment