[Jonathan Anderson]

Louisa May Alcott’s short story takes a darkly satirical approach to hypocrisies within the transcendental movement; while, Stanton seems to respect these ideas instead using the transcental ideas of solitude and self-reliance to argue for women’s rights. Although Ms. Alcott does not refer directly to Walden or Thoreau there are thematic parallels and shared language, which is used ironically in the first work. Both authors speak about welcoming hardship, to build castles, and find new horizons. The metaphor of the dinner party is used in both pieces. After attending a dinner party Thoreau states that although “food and wine were in abundance…sincerity and truth were not; and I went away hungry” however Ms. Alcott remarks that transcendentalist will often “afflict hospitable hostesses by denouncing their food and taking away their appetites”(Alcott pg. 44, Thoreau pg. 214). The men of the story were so distracted by idealism they did not consider pragmatism “the many tasks left undone by the brethren who were so busy discussing and defining great duties that they forgot to perform the small ones” (Alcott pg. 43) Indeed by the end of the story the crop had completely failed and the commune collapsed. The speech of Ms. Stanton doesn’t mock the tenements of transcendentalism as much as exemplify it’s hypocrisies of supporting individuality, solitude and self-reliance within a society that deprives women of all of those rights. Although she doesn’t directly quote Thoreau either many of the philosophical ideas border existentialism and are obvious products of the transcendental movement. She also makes many references to classics such as Shakespeare, utilizes old Bible stories but through a new philosophical lens, and romantically demonstrates the existential state of the individual in arguing for women’s rights.

[Jonathan Anderson]

In Thoreau’s didacticism there is much hypocrisy, as he claims both the universality and exclusivity of his revelations. On one hand he upholds literature and education but then in the next broadly condemns society as having shallow obsessions. He props up the classics of Homer, Virgil, and Dante; seemingly refuses to recognize that there can be modern additions to poetic cannon. Then pleads through much poetic dialogue to be added to this category. When he analyzes the influence of Zoroastrianism on Christianity I find it ironic that he doesn’t recognize Homer’s influence on Virgil and subsequently their influence on Dante. Thoreau cannot reconcile the dichotomy that he believes knowledge has already reached its pinnacle and his desire to contribute towards its expansion.

 

Despite these contradictions Thoreau’s insights on education, labor and economics are very interesting. His commitment towards minimalism, simplicity and meditation are admirable. This as well as his metaphor of the jackknife and time as a river reveals an Eastern influence.

 

“Which would have advanced the most at the end of a month- the boy who had made his own jackknife from the ore which he had dug and smelted, reading as much as would be necessary for this- or the boy who had attended the lectures on metallurgy at the Institute in the mean while and had received a Roger’s penknife from his father” pg. 32

 

 

Thoreau argues for simplicity, avoiding luxuries, working many different jobs to get acquire a variety of skills but reserving time for education primarily through reading and an emphasis on community learning through out ones life. As far as attending Geneseo I think Thoreau would agree it offers opportunity for a broad based education that instills a passion for lifelong learning and an ability to comprehend and understand material. However not to depend on it as a means of labor; that labor offers its own education and avoiding luxurious desires and having a variety of occupations and passions is the best means to avoid debt, poverty or ennui.

[Author]

Posts