Self Reliance — or Selfishness?

After reading Ralph Waldo Emerson’s biography and understanding Transcendentalism better, I assumed that Emerson would be a bit of a hypocrite. I thought he would stand by his religion since he was a priest at one point in his life. I assumed this free thought attitude would not be possible if you believe everything religion tells you, but that was not the case. He almost immediately surprised me when he said this, “‘But these impulses may be from below, not from above.’ I replied: ‘They do not seem to me to be such; but if I am the Devil’s child, I will live then from the Devil.’” (Emerson, 1841). This would not be the only thing that surprised me about Emerson’s ideology, but many of these surprises shed light on the type of person he was and most are not admirable traits. Emerson also used so many literary devices my head started to spin. He loved repetition of words, comparisons, and anything that would bring more emphasis to his argument.

One of the literary devices I noticed the most were allegories. Here he used the same word from over and over again, “..is not diverse from things, from space, from light, from time, from man, but one with them,” (Emerson, 1841). Again, he uses it here with w, “When we discern justice, when we discern truth, we do nothing of ourselves,” (Emerson, 1841). Again, here when he repeatedly uses “you”,”… you shall not discern the footprints of any other; you shall not see the face of man; you shall not hear any name; — the way, the thought, the good”. (Emerson, 1841). He also threw in some caesura for additional emphasis. Caesura is another literary device found throughout, like in another example where he placed the dash strategically, “Speak your latent conviction, and it shall be the universal sense;[149] for the inmost in due time becomes the outmost, — and our first thought is rendered back to us by the [80]trumpets of the Last Judgment.” (Emerson, 1841). He also liked to compare things, like when he said, “The voyage of the best ship is a zigzag line of a hundred tacks”. (Emerson, 1841). Here he used this metaphor to describe a great voyage. Another use of this comparison practice was allusion where he said, “Leave your theory, as Joseph his coat in the hand of the harlot, and flee…” (Emerson, 1841). Another metaphor where he outright said, “Society is a wave.” (Emerson, 1841). He also used analogies, amplification, anecdotes, antithesis, archetypes, connotation, juxtaposition, and hyperbole.

Although he still appears to have believed many teachings from religion, which is not quite in line with free thought. These teachings are usually ingrained in young children and we hold them as fact. He does seem to have maintained those teachings regardless of his free thought. I also realized that he shuns philanthropy or empathy for slaves. I couldn’t help but think of Ebenezer Scrooge when I read this line, “’Are they my poor? I tell thee, thou foolish philanthropist, that I grudge the dollar, the dime, the cent, I give to such men as do not belong to me and to whom I do not belong.’” (Emerson, 1841). He basically goes on to say that he only cares about people that are like minded like him. If this is how transcendentalists think, I find them to be selfish and arrogant. Maybe this type of thought was inspiration for Charles Dicken’s story, “A Christmas Carol” that was written only two years after Emerson’s publication.

I find it a bit of a paradox that he is promoting free thought but is coercing others to see his point of view and abolish their free thoughts while they accept his ideology. Emerson doesn’t agree people banding together or instilling their ideologies onto other, but that is exactly what he seems to be doing with this transcendentalism movement essay.

He also seems to spend a great deal of time explaining his selfish attitude as if he is trying to explain the guilt away. He must know that not many people are as callus and selfish as himself so he feels the need to justify his thoughts and actions. Although I do agree with his general attitude that he puts forth, like when he said this, “What I must do is all that concerns me, not what the people think.” (Emerson, 1841). I feel he has taken it to a whole new level of selfishness. His arrogance comes to light when he compares himself to great philosopher’s when he says, “’Ah, so you shall be sure to be misunderstood.’ — Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood? Pythagoras[186] was misunderstood, and Socrates,[187] and Jesus, and Luther,[188] and Copernicus,[189] and Galileo,[190] and Newton,[191] and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood.”(Emerson, 1841). He truly believes that his philosophy will become widely accepted one day, but during the time of his writing, he was foolishly doubted.

It’s not always good to let other people’s opinions sway you, but it’s also good to keep an open mind, others may have better ideas than yours or they might be more morally in the right. It’s a shame that this movement took off in a direction of selfishness. I like free thought, but not if it means turning your back to help others or infringes on civil liberties. He is also very against any kind of grouping where people share similar thoughts. I agree this can turn people into lemmings at times, but it seems rather isolationist to not congregate with like-minded people that they enjoy spending time with.

Throughout much of this reading I was beginning to draw a modern-day comparison with hipsters, beatniks, and hippies and transcendentalists of the 1840's. There seems to be equivalent types of groups of people that scorn convention, social graces, organized society, and popular culture throughout the ages. The word hipster is now often used to refer to someone who is trendy, hippies also became a large group, but the irony is they all became something they didn’t want to become. They became mainstream, they clustered in groups, bars/clubs, or other gathering spaces with like minded people and fed off of others’ ideas. It’s natural for people to want to relate to others, share their ideas, and pass on their philosophies that transcend. Human’s long for this and I don’t think any kind of transcendentalism or hipster philosophy will hold up long because unless you are an isolationist, everyone’s thoughts will always impact other people in some way.