LITR 5535: American Romanticism

Student Presentation on Reading Selections, fall 2003

Sheila Newell

21 October 2003 

Nature Writing

(Class Presentation Summary)

Objective 1c: The Romantic Period—“co-emergence of Romanticism with the rise of the middle class, the city, industrial capitalism, consumer culture, and the nation-state.”

The definition of “nature writing” is found under the title of “ecocriticism,” in the Bedford handbook, on page 125. Additionally, I found a web site that is also helpful in defining “nature writing:” Association for the Study of Literature and Environment-Introduction to Ecocriticism -Nature 101 at <http://www.asle.umn.edu/archive/intro/sierra.html>. On the web site, Joan Hamilton, editor-in-chief of Sierra and the author of this article, sums up a literature and environmental class taught by Professors Robert Hass and Greg Gilbert at the University of California at Berkeley. From this article “nature writing” is defined as “observe[ing] as accurately as scientists and as creatively as poets. Word choice is crucial. [...] we should view nature not as a commodity but as part of our community. […] with nature serving not as the backdrop for human drama, but as the big story itself” (pg 3 par(s) 11 & 15).

            Thoreau uses “nature writing” to discuss the affects of the Industrial Revolution. He contrasts the natural with the artificial. The Industrial Revolution is in full swing, and Thoreau returns to nature to contemplate how the world is changing, he thinks, for the worse. One way to juxtapose the fast-paced life of the city with the calmer, purer, better life in nature is to write from one’s experience within nature, which is what Thoreau does. But he does more than write experientially, Thoreau uses a microcosm and macrocosm point of view to discuss the Industrial Revolution’s affect on humanity. Our first passage is on page 910 in the Norton Anthology, the first full paragraph, four lines down, beginning with the sentence: “I am refreshed….” Thoreau’s sarcasm suggests his disapproval of the train. There was some discussion in class as to whether this passage was sarcasm or irony. However, I believe that Thoreau extends the irony into sarcasm to ridicule society’s passive acceptance of the Industrial Revolution. Others in the class agreed that Thoreau might be using sarcasm.

            Another passage that suggests Thoreau’s dissatisfaction with the Industrial Revolution is found on page 909, about three-quarters of the way down, the sentence begins: “We are all educated….” Again using the train as his metaphor, Thoreau suggests to his reader that it is better to think for ones self than to follow the tracks of others.

To continue our discussion, I asked the class two questions: Do you think Thoreau’s writing is too idealistic? And do you think it is reasonable to suggest that society needs to slow down and experience nature? The class discussion follows:

MARY A.: I visited both Concord and Walden Pond.  The tour guide ruined Thoreau for me because she told us that his mother lived only a mile away.

DR. WHITE:  It shows that our image of the story differs from the actual text, similar to slave narratives.

SHEILA:  He does say that he doesn’t live far.

DR. WHITE:  Yes, he does go in and out of the cabin, and he knows when people have been there.  It violates the image he’s created.

MARY A.:  The reader imagines him getting his own food.

APRIL P.:  I heard his mother and sister brought him baskets with food and treats.

ROSALYN:  Well, you can’t expect the man to go out there and starve.

DR. WHITE:  The heroic individualism is undermined.

SHEILA:  He knows and realizes that society is moving on; he wasn’t too idealistic.

SHERRY:  I think he was pampered and needs to speak for himself.  It seems like he’s telling us that this is how we should do it.

EMILY M:  I did get a sense of callousness from him.

ROSALYN:  It was a luxury for him to be able to escape to the cabin.  The poor have to work.  He is very idealistic.  But I do see his point that the people who live in the city and are industrialized do need to take the time to see what they have.

THERESA:  I feel like I’m walking on both sides of the track.  I like that he was telling people to think for themselves, but on the other side, I think that people had to do what they had to do; they can’t just sit back and not plow their fields for a day to enjoy nature.

KRISTY:  I think he made is point then took it one step too far.  He even say he wishes he was “good.”

MARY A:  Emerson makes the same points, but is less confrontational.

SHEILA:  Why do you think he was confrontational?

MARY A:  His style – more forthright.  His idea of good seems to represent social conventions.

DR. WHITE:  Emerson is an expansive writer; he inspires.  Thoreau has more details and follows them through; he has more descriptions.

ROSALYN:  He seems to order.

SHEILA:  He did a lot of cataloging.

DR. WHITE:  I noticed that too.

SHEILA:  He has a long list on page 910.

KRISTY:  In regards to your definition from the website – He makes himself the main

event instead of nature.

SHEILA:  He’s a transition to Dillard.

DR. WHITE:  Every time I read Thoreau, it’s like I’ve never read him before.  He comes across as annoying, but he is still widely read.  He always provides us with fresh material, but it is very tied up with personality.

FYI: Another web page that might be helpful to you is “Perspectives in American Literature” (PAL) at <www.csustan.edu/english/reuben/home.htm>. Professor Paul P. Ruben of California State University, Stanislaus, keeps it going.