Walden

This paragraph has been one of the most captivating passages in Walden I have read yet. Thoreau takes a scene from his life that revolves around smaller red and larger black ants attacking each other. A moment/scene that readers can understand would be small and almost unnoticeable if you weren’t paying attention to the environment around you. However, using diction, allusion to Greek mythology and Thoreau’s modern political climate at the time of his writing, to blow up and escalate this fight between two very small aspects of the natural world, he ends up creating intense connections between humans own war against one another. I found this paragraph very interesting, both with how Thoreau takes such a seemingly small moment in his experience and ties so many aspects of human life to it, and how it almost contradicts the serene, calming perspective in which Thoreau has written about nature. Thoreau’s diction, using phrases like, “battle-cry”, “a war between two races of ants”, “patriotism”, “heroism”, illuminates how intense and captivating this battle between ants was for him to witness, and the ways in which ‘war’ does not exist in some aspects, on solely a humans front. This paragraph does a multitude of things and Thoreau’s writing here is some of the best in the novel so far in my opinion. I wonder how many other mall moment of experience from Walden pond created connections between mythology, books, modern politics, and other various thoughts Thoreau had running around his head as he lived disenrolled from society. I also would like to acknowledge that it is very important to realize that the thoughts and attention Thoreau creates and has toward microcosmic moments in nature is very impressive; illuminating how without Thoreau’s separation form the hustling, distracted culture of cities, and towns, and his modern communities, these thoughts might noy be possible, he might have been far too wrapped up in the fast paced society he critiques to even notice two types of ants battling on top of wood.

[The stove not only took up room and scented the house, but it concealed the fire, and I felt as if I had lost a companion.]

It is interesting how much Thoreau seems to appreciate the “less advanced” technology more throughout this section of his book, between the fire, the fact that he seemingly disliked the idea of mansion (7), and the celebration of how important wood has remained throughout the advancement of technology(14).  It seems in nature he found a beauty in simplicity.  His time out in Walden clearly gave him a deep appreciation for the world around him, especially as he personifies fire and sees it as a companion.  This was probably an extension of what he brings up in Brute Neighbors, where he seemed to celebrate animals for having a certain wisdom about them in the way they live in nature.

I love how Thoreau personifies all of the animals he talks about. By describing them with human like qualities, I think it shows just how in tune and observant he is in nature. He understands their behaviors, rhythms, and roles in their world to the point hes able to talk about animals as if he knows them personally like a close friend.

@toriwebster: Yes, Thoreau’s mock-heroic treatment of the ants’ battle in effect equates war-making humans with ants. In the background is the US war with Mexico, which, together with slavery (mentioned in the next paragraph) was the reason for Thoreau’s refusing to pay a poll tax and being put in jail, the experience that gave rise to his essay “Resistance to Civil Government“.

I agree that this is interesting, @skyriedell! Not only because, as you point out, it’s another expression of Thoreau’s preference for simplicity over unnecessary luxuries, but also because his description of this imaginary house prefigures an entire architectural movement, the evidence of which is still very much with us. In nineteenth-century England, writers like John Ruskin and, later, William Morris, compared the (in their view) over-elaborate style of much Victorian architecture to the openness, simplicity, and transparency of earlier architectural forms. In the twentieth century, probably the most famous and influential architect inspired by their writings was Frank Lloyd Wright, who designed houses that were intended to appear as though they emerged directly, naturally, and organically out of their surroundings. Compare Thoreau’s “a house as open and manifest as a bird’s nest”. When you go into a building today that has exposed beams or an open kitchen, you’re seeing the same influence. Compare Thoreau’s “where you can see so necessary a thing as a barrel or a ladder, so convenient a thing as a cupboard, and hear the pot boil, and pay your respects to the fire that cooks your dinner and the oven that bakes your bread . . .” Another mark of this architectural style is to identify beauty with utility and make “form follow function.” Compare Thoreau’s “where you can see all the treasures of the house at one view, and every thing hangs upon its peg, that a man should use.”

Terrific point, @annaenright. I suspect that Thoreau is using the word “hermit” somewhat ironically, with an awareness that some of his Concord neighbors probably see him as living a hermit-like existence in comparison with their own. In other words, he takes on the name that he supposes others are calling him by, even as he knows it’s not strictly accurate. The conversation here between “Poet” and “Hermit” is presented as a kind of two-person, one-act play, which aligns with his adopting the “character” or “persona” of hermit, knowing (as his reader has to know), that the name doesn’t truly describe him.

After all, what hermit has visits from poets? This is one of many excellent points that the writer Camille Dungy made as a keynote speaker at the Thoreau Society Annual Gathering in July, 2025. I’ve added her lecture to our Readings folder in Drive for you and anyone else in the class to read if you’re interested. The myth of Thoreau as hermit is her focus, in fact. She observes that many readers mistakenly think of Thoreau as living a hermit’s existence at Walden even though, as she puts it at the bottom of p. 6, “HDT understands himself, his place in time, his place in the world, in relation to the community of living beings, including human beings, in their bodies, around him. He makes clear in Walden that he couldn’t even have built his little house without the ax he borrowed from a friend.”

I find Thoreau’s description of himself as a “hermit” very interesting and slightly contradictory.  Yes, he is living in isolation and left to his own devices, but is he really that isolated?  I mean, Walden Pond is just two miles outside of the village of Concord.  Also, just in the paragraph above, he talks about having social interactions.  While I understand the point of his venture wasn’t to be alone, rather to live a simpler life, it still feels like a bit of a stretch to consider himself a “hermit”.  I feel as though a true hermit would strive to go as far from the outside world as humanly possible and would thrive in isolation.

I find this paragraph really interesting, and there are a lot of things to pay attention to in this paragraph. One point I think he is trying to make is the comparison between things that are necessities for survival and things that are luxuries. Thoreau seems to frequently point out the fact that all you really need are the necessities, and that luxuries just add unneeded materials to your life. He makes sure to discuss how thankful he is to have a fire that cooks his dinner and an oven that bakes his bread, which are necessary for survival. It is clear that Thoreau believes that as long as you are grateful for those things that help you survive, you really don’t need much else, and I find that really interesting.

[I never learned which party was victorious, nor the cause of the war; but I felt for the rest of that day as if I had had my feelings excited and harrowed by witnessing the struggle, the ferocity and carnage, of a human battle before my door]

I think Thoreau’s extended comparison between this battle of ants and human history provides interesting commentary on the nature of society. Throughout Walden, Thoreau highlights the importance of nature and wildlife to express the desire for simplistic living. In this example, however, I think this comparison isn’t necessarily used to praise the ants but rather to bring humans down to a more microscopic level and comment on their cruel tendencies. Thoreau mentions the “ferocity and carnage” of the ants fighting each other and constantly refers to it as war. This is also affirmed by the simile Thoreau makes between the ants and the battle of Bunker Hill. By drawing these similarities and exaggerating the brutality of the ants, Thoreau highlights how we as humans are just as violent as bugs and how it is almost in our animalistic nature to be violent towards one another.

I asked ChatGPT why this paragraph is significant and why it may be misunderstood. ChatGPT said that Thoreau is doing more than just describing the scenery. He instead goes deeper by explaining that nature is complete and self-sufficient, and he subtly criticizes human interference. He says that nature is timeless, and ultimately morally and spiritually far superior to human adaptation. ChatGPT explores the idea of why this paragraph may be misunderstood by explaining that some may read this paragraph as simply a calm description, and not as a philosophical argument that nature is complete and should be left alone. Additionally, some readers may interpret this passage with an anti-human tone, but Thoreau is more condemning the careless domination of nature.