Honestly, when I read Ralph Waldo Emerson's essay called "Self Reliance," i was a little apprehensive and offended. He explains that I am paying a lot of money to get a degree from this prestigious university for "the education at college of fools." OK, maybe I am taking this line out of context because he is trying to criticize society and building robots of society, but he preaches of self reliance, and I would say that going to school to become self educated is far better than sitting at home and becoming a spec in society. The more someone learns and questions, the more self reliance they can get. He tells the reader to tell say what you feel and do not reject any of your ideas as foolish because "in every work of genius we recognize our own rejected thoughts." What better place to say how you feel than in a classroom at college.
Emerson rejects society and feels it is "in conspiracy against the manhood of every one of its members. He feels that you must act on your own accord and show "genuine action... Your conformity explains nothing." Emerson goes on to criticize the law and explains that "no law can be sacred to me but that of my nature." I disagree totally with his feelings here. Without law there would be chaos, without society there would be no civilization and why would we want to convert to old primitive ways of life? I feel that Emerson makes a contradiction in his essay when he asks, "Is the acorn better than the oak which is its fulness and completion?" when referrring to the power of God over people. If he can say this, why then can we not ask: Are individuals better than society which is its fullness and completion?
In a way I feel like Emerson is just trying to preach a new religion to everyone. He says not to follow society, but follow him instead? Hmmm that really makes me wonder about him. He refers a lot to religion and his way of doing things. For example, he says people should pray in private, but if everyone started doing that, it would become a societal norm again and there is just NO getting around it.
Posted by TrishaWehrle at October 10, 2004 06:33 PMTrisha, great blog! I can understand where Emerson is coming from, in some regards, although I do not believe that any vision of a perfect society, in which his viewpoints may develop into more than just an interesting read, would ever exist, simply because everyone is different, for the good and the bad. If, as people, we could accept and respect everyone, 100% of the time, live in a utopia of love and paradise, perhaps this would make more sense. His religious tendencies also make me wonder what he's really getting at, for at times it does seem to be all about power and control issues... perhaps he is making up for some kind of shortcomings in his life?
hmm...
mike
Posted by: mike sichok at October 10, 2004 11:05 PM