LITR 4232 2002 UHCL sample student research project

LITR 4232: American Renaissance
University of Houston-Clear Lake, spring 2002
Index to Student Research Projects

Elizabeth Webb Little
Professor White
Literature 4232
April 18, 2002

Thoreau and Dickinson: Nature's Influence

Emily Dickinson and Henry David Thoreau both found nature to be a profoundly moving source for truth in the world around them. One writer chose the path of the wild unpredictable woods as the other chose a safer path within the confines of home. Nature’s reach into the respective realms of these writers is just as powerful for both, but different in its size, appearance, and boundaries. These writers were alike in their recognition of the importance of ultimate truths, discovered by way of unrelenting investigation and exploration. Differences between their views of man’s situation can seem subtle because of their shared pursuit for independence and their constant questioning of our world, but these are in fact quite distinct. When viewed together these diversities can strengthen the communication of their themes to readers, who also come to the works of these writers with their own understandings. Within the wildness of Thoreau and the safe harbor of Dickinson exists a like element that brings these two people together; they both choose the solitude of their own company. Readers can associate with this aspect of the works of these writers, and when their two paths are explored readers are left with a wider view of similar themes experienced on differing routes. Two paths to the same place that support and resist one another teach us more about the different ways in which we can develop our own understanding of a conflicted existence: a responsible member of society vs. an emotional, spiritual, and intellectual individual. Their differences encompass more of each

man’s world, and together they speak not just of the truths of the powerful world around us, but the one within us as well.

In the works of both writers birds suffice as a symbol of a powerful limitless nature that can exist within or without boundaries. They are able to interject their music into a private, domesticated world as well as that of the open wilds of nature. The overarching messages of

birds call to both poets regardless of the different settings of isolation in which each preferred to live. It is certainly imaginable that Dickinson and Thoreau could have been “awakened” to nature’s voice by this transitory and soaring character, and it is here that both of the writer’s views together show differences within the same symbol. These differences define the writer’s perspectives and also give the reader a wider range of the way in which human beings can view these symbolic creatures in our world. Thoreau’s “ Brave Chanticleer” (Walden 199-200) and Dickinson’s “prompt - executive…Magistrate” blue jay (Poems 1177) are simple birds that represent power in distinct ways. While the rooster is a domesticated bird, Thoreau’s uses him as an ultimate alarm to stir the drowsy world to freedom. This bird is Thoreau as Mark Van Doren says in Henry David Thoreau A Critical Study, calling Thoreau “…this chanticleer of the nineteenth century.” (14) Thoreau’s significant relationship to this bird can be seen in a quote taken from the text of “Walden” with which Thoreau chose to introduce to readers his intention “…to brag as lustily as chanticleer in the morning, standing on his roost, if only to wake my neighbors up.” {Walden 106). Within the text Thoreau goes into detail about the rooster’s song, saying “…it would soon become the most famous sound in our woods, surpassing the clangor of the goose and the hooting of the owl…” The rooster would be heard “clear and shrill for miles over the resounding earth, drowning out feebler notes of other birds…It would put nations on the

alert.” (199-200) This bird does not seem a likely symbol for freedom because of its domesticated role, but this may be precisely why the writer chose him. His song or call is louder than most other birds, but he also is held in captivity. If he were to be set free in the wild, he would symbolize man’s freedom from civilized drudgery more than birds already wild. The rooster can wake up the world if we follow him into the wilderness out of structured everyday

duty to rise, and follow his morning call as an alarm to rise in wild beauty. Thoreau’s rooster is a contrast to Dickinson’s blue jay who is wild but is transformed into an image that is more expressive of a defined power and conventional human authority. In poem 1177 the singing “Jay” is characterized as “executive, a Brigadier, and Magistrate.” (Poems 523) While Thoreau’s bird sings a call to freedom, Emily’s bird’s song is likened to a “Bailiff’s Hymn.”(Poems 523) Thoreau longs to free a domesticated bird, and Dickinson places confining images of civilized authority on a wild bird, but each is singing a “bold” or “courageous” song. Through wild freedom or a more structured system of power these animals still serve as messengers of truth to man. While it is evident that these two writer’s found inspiration of their own from birds, they also believed that the world needed to be stirred from their ignorance by these lofty messengers. An outstanding vision of heavenliness on earth from “Walden” is that of the Hawk. This bird’s flight is portrayed as “ethereal.” Alone in the world of the sky it needs nothing else, and the poet below is left feeling lonely while he witnesses this soaring content creature. The bird is companionless, heavenly and intangible “…as if it had never set foot on terra firma…” (338). Dickinson relates this vision of a heavenly bird in her poem 774, with a bird song that gives listeners, “a lonesome Glee-/ Yet sanctifies the Mind” all this being “A matter of the Skies”(Poems 378). While Thoreau sets up the image of unearthly

ascendance, he describes the loneliness we feel with having to stay below and witness something so free. Dickinson gives us a song of a bird that is not even within view, but only heard. She recognizes that although left “lonesome” by it, we have “Glee” and our minds are purified by this melody. We do not have to join it or even see it; our feelings of loneliness can be moved to joy because we have experienced this song. While Thoreau in his vast wandering feels lonely

and restricted, Dickinson surpasses this loneliness and restriction and soars within her mind.

Emily Dickinson is a paradoxical figure; one who found truth in nature’s beauty, but ultimately seemed more comfortable pulling that power within her self. Albert Gelpi in his essay “Seeing New Englandly” describes Dickinson’s view of a “precious” nature through which man and “God or the Life Spirit” are connected. He refers to her love of the silence in “the core of the Woods” and the “noiseless noise in the Orchard,” which Dickinson wrote about to Thomas Wentworth Higginson as she tried to explain her personal beliefs of man finding a connection to God in these solitary natural places (MCV 50). While it is easy to place Dickinson in the quiet orchard, it is sometimes harder to picture her in the deep secluded wild woods. Dickinson’s poem, 1255, begins: “Longing is like the Seed / That wrestles in the Ground” and ends “What Constancy must be achieved / Before it see the Sun!” (Poems 549). In Robert Weisbuch’s essay “A Quest Fiction” Dickinson’s struggle for answers is characterized as a dark one in which she is unsure of the outcome (86-87). The poet’s journey seems to be heavy with the qualities of isolated inwardness, and the image of the seed within the earth seems appropriate for a poet who preferred the exploration of the self. Themes of self-discovery are predominant ones for Dickinson. In her poem, 1354, the emotions and intellect are together a “single continent,” and an individual should look within himself in order to find “This ecstatic Nation.”(Poems, 585) In

poem, 832, a similar message in the form of a command exclaims, “Explore thyself! / Therein thyself shalt find / The “Undiscovered Continent”- / No Settler had the Mind.” The word “mind”

is key as Dickinson makes vast land out of her emotions in her writing, but ultimately her mind becomes her wilderness much like Thoreau’s “Walden”. Joanne Feit Diehl suggests in her essay, “Emerson, Dickinson, and the Abyss,” that when compared to the transcendentalist theorists

Emily rejects nature as a source of whole truth, and says that it cannot be relied upon as such because it will not always reveal answers even if “we read it right.” Dickinson seems to be saying that our quest for truth among nature alone will be thwarted as “nature guards its final lesson.” Diehl goes on to say, “…nature becomes not a sacred ground but a place that fails to protect, from which she must withdraw to ask other kinds of questions.” (MCV,146) Nature is an important theme in Dickinson’s writing. It offers truth, but in its own wild way. The poet seems to reject this uncertainty and take the power of nature inward in order to structure it more to her liking, adapt it in order to explore life’s mysteries in a more confined environment: her mind. And, if it is true that nature “failed” her in not revealing enough, it did not fail to open doors that led her to deep exploration within herself, that is her self contained “continent.”

In contrast to an introverted Dickinson, Thoreau’s nature is a wild, open, and unprotected adventure. Thoreau sought for wonder in the immense natural world, but he did not feel that intuitive experience should come in any organized or finished form. In his book Thoreau as Romantic Naturalist, James McIntosh defines Thoreau’s nature as one that is “that part of man that is external to the human mind and not altered by it – thus nature may include a man’s body, his wildness, and his unconscious.” (26) Nature in this view does not need to be explained in any intellectual way, but should be experienced by instinct. Thoreau wants his readers to plunge into

this question provoking world and explore. In “Walden” he commands men to “Rise free from care before the dawn, and seek adventures.”(259) It is the trip and not the destination for Thoreau, who will not be disappointed by unsolved mysteries of nature, but will embrace them. He insists that man “…should come home from far, from adventures, and perils, and discoveries every day, with new experiences and character.” (259-260) This seems to suggest that man is

never done with searching, and that he should not expect to be done. This is in contrast to Dickinson, who seemed very much to want to complete her quest with solid answers. Gelpi points out that Thoreau transcends past spiritual theorists with their “labels” and “abstractions” as he lives his beliefs in receiving truth. In Thoreau’s words “I see, smell, taste, hear, feel, that everlasting Something to which we are all allied…” (MCV 53). Thoreau is a proponent for getting off the sidelines. He urges people to not just appreciate nature, but to interact with it in an equal way and accept it: wild and unexplained. A vision of Thoreau in his boundless world is one from a story he tells in “Walden” of leaving the town after a night of visiting to go fishing. As his mind is lost in the stars above, he is brought back by a “faint jerk, which came to interrupt [his] dreams and link [him] to Nature again.” He felt as if he could “cast [his] line upward…” into the starry sky no different from the water. (234-235) Here he is connected to mysterious depths below him and is pulled from the cosmos, a vast expanse of wonder. There are no finite structures necessary, and possibly no explanation desired, as far as Thoreau is concerned there a no certainties needed - the bigger the world, and the more mystery and depth the better. In the book, Thoreau As A Romantic Naturalist, the author points out an important aspect of Thoreau’s writing: “Something occurs occasionally in his writing…that is his willingness to be ‘lost.’” (299). It does not appear that Thoreau is looking for answers so much as he is looking for more

questions. This is a path that did not need to end for him; he felt satisfaction with the open questions left in his mind.

Thoreau and Dickinson strike a similar tone when certain themes are pulled out of each of their prose and verse. In “Walden” Thoreau instructs man to follow his own voice from within, his “genius.” Readers should go above the norm and find their own way of understanding and

living in the world. (265) In Dickinson’s poem, 435, she denounces following the group and says that which is considered sanity – that which the group deems reasonable- is in fact insanity. In the poem, not only is the act deemed sane by society because of its popularity, a person who follows is also considered sane merely by virtue of following: “Assent – and you are sane- / Demur – you’re straightway dangerous and handled with a Chain.” (Poems 209) In these examples, it is easy to see that both writers resent the majority’s ability to rule on what is valid in life, and what is not. In referring to groups, both poets believe that one’s own company is best. Thoreau remarks in “Walden” the company of men is “soon wearisome and dissipating” while solitude is the best companion. (205) Dickinson expresses the same view in her poem 746, “Never for Society / He shall seek in vain- / Who His own acquaintance / Cultivate – of Men / Wiser Men may weary…” (Poems, 366). Both poets prefer their own company, which is more enduring and rewarding than the engagement of their fellow man.

When the works of both writers are joined the reader experiences two powerful ways of viewing nature. The wilderness turns into a pond or glass of water, a vast outdoors or a garden, the deep wood or your own deep thoughts. In the book Thoreau as Romantic Naturalist by McIntosh, Thoreau’s taste for nature is described as that of one for the wildest aspects of the woods, as the author points out “…he must dissociate himself from conventional human

prejudices.” These “human prejudices” are those of the more adverse or the least accommodating features of the woods such as the swamp about which Thoreau is quoted here as saying, “Would it not be a luxury to stand up to one’s chin in some retired swamp for a whole summer’s day…” (95). McIntosh presents Thoreau’s passion as one for the “unorganized organic chaos” of nature, preferring “…also night to day, unconscious murkiness to conscious clarity.” (95) The idea of a clear structured mental or physical environment is opposing to Thoreau’s ideal paradise or desired level of understanding. He is satisfied by the confusion in the wild that stirs more questions, and does not ask for answers. Dickinson finds longing in humanness that is not quenched by nature’s wisdom, as Charles Anderson explains in his essay “Despair.” He explains that she used her mind to achieve “balance” between longing and love, life and questions of death; with her intellect she could “…maneuver her emotions into forms.” (MCV 34). While Dickinson’s poetry like Thoreau’s was a constant question more representative of creativity that was fueled by nature’s unpredictable presence, she seemed to seek comfort in knowledge she could count on. In her book, Lunacy of Light, Wendy Barker reveals the contrast of Thoreau’s and Dickinson’s worlds as she explains that as a woman Dickinson had to journey into her “Self.” Barker says, “Just as Thoreau plumbed the depths of Walden Pond…so too does Dickinson journey to another place. (75-76). Verses from Dickinson’s poem, 761, speak of a mechanical way of life, a life of indifference to the action one takes: “From Blank to Blank- / A Threadless Way” and finally “I shut my eyes – and groped as well / Twas lighter – to be Blind.” (Poems, 373) These lines are supportive and resistant to those of Thoreau’s themes of an oblivious and civilized mankind that abound in “Walden”. As Foerster explains in his book, Nature in American Literature, Thoreau’s objective is “to be alive

or wide awake, and in Walden he made it his business to wake others…” He presents Thoreau’s words and view of men who are buried in monotonous daily task and when they are confronted with questions of awe and wonder they will open their eyes only for a moment and go back to sleep. (97-98) It is interesting to see the exact idea in each writer’s works of the robotic characteristic of daily life, and then have them come to such opposing conclusions. Dickinson will withdraw within herself and be “Blind” while Thoreau will insist that his and other’s eyes must open wide. Readers are then left with two views of self and the civilization in which they are entwined. They can more deeply explore these realms through Dickinson, who beckons the individual to withdraw and rely on your own wisdom, and through Thoreau who commands them to plunge into life wide awake and accept the world’s ever changing lessons. While two these two writers can be so opposed, they support the reader who can combine both views and experience life within themselves and in the untamed external world.

Perhaps seeking the external world was not an option for Dickinson. While Thoreau could escape social structures and run from the “man…with the conscious design of doing me good…,” his counterpart, “Dickinson cannot ‘run for her life’ to escape from such expectations, for she in fact is expected to be one of those who will try to do a man good.” (Lunacy of Light, 44). Women are the care givers for the most part, and are not expected to follow their inner voice out into the woods. In “Walden” Thoreau’s landscape is described as that which lay before his cabin having “No yard! But unfenced Nature reaching up to your very sills…-no gate – no front-yard, - and no path to the civilized world.” (200) His safe harbor from the town has no boundaries, and it is here that he can feel secure in infinite space. Much to the contrary

Dickinson’s works often speak of the “orchard” or “garden” these forms of nature are symbolic of her need of structure, and her place at home. Like Thoreau she recognizes nature’s powerful messages and influence, but she also desires a more measurable environment. In Emily’s second poem, 2, she beckons to her brother, Austin, “There is another sky…/ Though it be darkness there; / Never mind faded forests, Austin…/ Into my garden come! (Poems 4). Here

Dickinson chose the darkness of her mind to that of a boundless and unsatisfying wild nature. Here is her sanctuary. A striking comparison can be made of the different ways these writers see infinite power within the element of water. In “Walden” Thoreau describes his pond as “fair” and “pure” and praises its wondrous ability to resist the destruction of time for its “quicksilver will never wear off…” No natural force can permanently mark its surface as “Nature continually repairs…” it to its former state. Its existence is beyond man’s power and that of time.” (245) Dickinson achieves this same awe with a glass of water in her poem, 1400, “A neighbor from another world / Residing in a jar…/ Whose limit none have ever seen…/ Like looking every time you please / In an abyss’s face!” (Poems 599) Thoreau would lead a reader to believe that nothing miraculous or even real could happen from a glass of water. The depth of truth that his “Walden” has given him cannot be replaced or even glanced at in town, yet Dickinson is safely nestled within her family’s home holding an “abyss” in her hand. Perhaps not all of the people in town were as desperately hopeless as Thoreau thought.

Although Dickinson and Thoreau’s words are interwoven with much opposition, their words have a great deal in common. Emily recognized the beauty of nature and man’s power to intuit deeper truths from this source. While Dickinson’s worlds are more structured, and Thoreau’s the antithesis to that structure, each poet valued the creative truths that are possible in life. If

Dickinson in her solitary state of wondering can be likened to a seed struggling in the dark underground, Thoreau is the wild animal roaming above. For readers the plying together of the two like and different ideologies can be helpful. While we are instructed by Thoreau to “Go and explore,” everyday continuously returning renewed, we are reminded by Emily that wilderness and the power of nature is within. Within the works of both writers one can find similar truths

and can also see these truths probed on the separate routes of the private rebel or the mutinous explorer. Limitless nature is bound with limitless man’s imagination and the power of the poet is clearly left in the mind of the explorer.

Works Cited

Anderson, Charles R. “Despair.” Modern Critical Views: Emily Dickinson. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1985.

Barker, Wendy. Lunacy of Light: Emily Dickinson and the Experience of Metaphor. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press, 1987.

Dickinson, Emily. The Complete Poems of Emily Dickinson. Ed. Thomas H. Johnson. Boston and Toronto: Little, Brown and Company, 1960.

Diehl, Joanne Feit. “Emerson, Dickinson, and the Abyss.” Modern Critical Views: Emily Dickinson. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1985.

Foerster, Norman. Nature In American Literature. New York: 1950.

Gelpi, Albert, “Seeing New Englandly.” Modern Critical Views: Emily Dickinson. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1985.

McIntosh, James. Thoreau as Romantic Naturalist. New York: Cornell University Press Ltd., 1974.

Thoreau, Henry David. Walden and Other Writings. Ed. Joseph Wood Krutch. New York: Bantam Books, 1962.

Van Doren, Mark. Henry David Thoreau: A Critical Study. New York: Russell & Russell, 1961.

Weisbuch, Robert. “A Quest Fiction.” Modern Critical Views: Emily Dickinson. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1985.