Rachelle Koenen and Dr. Kerry Soper, Humanities
The knowledge that I have of Thoreau began with an interest early in my life, developed into a Thesis Proposal one year ago, and intensified with research at Walden Pond in Concord, Massachusetts. In addition to the research I did there, I also spent upwards of 40 hours reading and talking with professors about this man. Initially I wanted to discover the “true” Thoreau—find out what he was really saying and disprove all other theories—but I quickly realized that the subject was too complex and that at best all I could to would be to present the complexity and do my best to interpret it. The idea that I started with for this thesis has been modified so many times that it is almost unrecognizable as a finished product, but it is much more refined, focused, and articulate. The following is a quick summary of my research over the past year.
Henry David Thoreau was first and foremost a writer, arguably one of the best in American literary history. Contemporary environmental authors have applied his writings to their body of literature, and they have creatively applied his writings to further political argument, conservation proposals, etc., resulting in his current position as the father of eco-criticism. This is not surprising since Thoreau was obviously writing with a hope to change people’s worldviews. However, it was my belief when starting this paper that Thoreau’s purpose was not as complex as the uses to which his experience are put; in other words, he did not advocate many of the things his words are being used to support today. In addition, the American public views the Walden experience as a solitary one, which is detrimental to their enjoyment of nature within a community of people. Because of this incorrect assumption, environmental literature contains a deeply embedded bias that to feel at peace or at one with nature one must be completely alone.
The body of my paper contains four different sections: 1) Background about Thoreau’s early history and the natural history of the pond; 2) Examples of incorrect and correct usage of Thoreau; 3) An in-depth review of the pop-culture reactions to Walden and Walden Pond; 4) Conclusion. I presented the third section at two different academic conferences, first at the BYU Humanities Symposium and then in Texas at Austin College’s “Nature and the Humanities” Symposium. The third section proved most interesting to me because it examines the issue of acceptance of the human presence in nature. I hope to continue research in this area during my Masters and PhD work. The following paragraph is a summary of the third section.
People will continue to visit Walden Pond because it does represent a retreat from the city. It is wise and judicious for the state of Massachusetts to protect this beautiful place. But it is important to remember the implications of Thoreau’s legacy. Because the text includes both solitude and references to a human presence, it is confusing to most people whether Thoreau believed solitude to be the best state for attaining peace and serenity in nature. But he did not take a firm stance, and it does not seem useful to hold to a theory that has no real basis. Thoreau offers a tempting misreading more than anyone else because he was confused himself. However, instead of allowing for that confusion, he seems to take one stance and then the other throughout the body of Walden. Since then, American environmentalist authors have examined and reexamined his words, first agreeing with one stance and then the other, until it has created a divided camp-out of opinion. I believe that there is a beauty in rich tension, and that it will be to our benefit to continue striving for a balance between a search for wild beauty in nature and an acceptance of our home in a city surrounded by others. We need a nature ethic that allows people to enjoy the company of their fellow man even while endeavoring to find God or peace in the natural environment.
Overall, my findings regarding Thoreau were very complex. I could not make a firm decision as to what Thoreau would have his readers do, however, I made an educated guess and presented it in context. It is clear that Thoreau has had a large impact on contemporary environmentalist writing and will continue to do so. Just as the author that lived there, Walden Pond has taken front stage on a number of environmental issues and will continue to be a repository for debate regarding them. But its is no longer necessary that the public and many contemporary authors continue to ignore the fact that Thoreau was not the environmentalist that he is represented as today, just as it is not necessary to ignore the fact that the Walden experience was not one of solitude. This outdated belief is detrimental to the environmental community and a growing American public.
As I have studied and read about Thoreau, I have gained respect for him as a writer. I have also gained an appreciation for his efforts to live simply, write purely, and to share with the world his passion for living close to nature. Granted, Thoreau was the first nature writer in American history. He will remain important for that reason. But I also firmly believe that Thoreau was not the father of the conservationist movement, he was not a survivalist, he was not a naturalist, nor an ecologist. And since his time many more writers have published books, articles, essays, and poetry regarding the subject of nature.
When the environmental community continues to ignore the words of newer, more informed, more environmentally educated authors they ignore the growth that could take place as they build upon the years. When they insist on continually referring to Thoreau in their arguments, whether or not he has anything to do with their arguments, they discredit themselves. Authors, organizations, the public—everyone who can’t give up Thoreau as “Father Nature” are clinging to a childhood Santa Claus. I am very grateful to ORCA for the funds given me. They helped with transportation costs to conferences, cost of printing, computer usage, and research materials. I am also very grateful to my Advisor, Kerry Soper, and my Reader, George Handley, for the many drafts that they were kind enough to revise. And finally, this comic represents the mythic appeal that Thoreau holds for most Americans.