Thursday, October 21, 2010

The American Scholar

As opposed to writing seven or so separate blogs about different parts of Ralph Waldo Emerson's "The American Scholar," I feel it would be more efficient to simply write one very long, comprehensive blog on the entire work–an essay if you will.

     Ralph Waldo Emerson is commonly referred to as the Father of American Literature. It is not difficult to see why. During a time when there was not yet a true "American" identity, Emerson stepped up to the plate to try to move people to create one. In "The American Scholar," Emerson outlines the way he thinks American, if not all human society should work. This work describes how all different members of society should act, but it is particularly aimed toward the scholar (hence the name of the essay). In essence, "The American Scholar" serves as a guide for intellectualism comprising of three parts: an overview of an individual's proper place in society, the proper methods and sources for learning, and a description of the duties of an American scholar.
     The first section of "The American Scholar" can be summed up quite simply as "know your place and stay there." Emerson goes to great lengths to stress the important differences between man and Man. The lowercase former denotes and individual man of no particular of exceptional importance; the uppercase latter denotes mankind as a whole, collectively describing all lowercase "men" working together. Emerson stresses that it is very important that we are all working together, towards the same goal. He uses the human body as a metaphor for societal "Man," asserting that "the state of society is one in which the members have suffered amputation from the trunk, and strut about so many walking monsters, — a good finger, a neck, a stomach, an elbow, but never a man." Like a man's individual body parts would not be exceptionally useful were they disconnected and just haphazardly strewn about the ground, Man's individual parts, which are in fact individuals themselves, cannot do anything truly useful on their own or working against one another. For example, one random farmer in the middle of nowhere working solely for himself is no more useful to society than a random arm lying on the floor is useful to a person on the other side of the room. According to Emerson, only by working together as a species, or at least as a nation can we truly make any forward progress.
    The second section of this work deals with how a scholar should go about learning. Emerson says that there are three sources that the aspiring intellectual should look to for knowledge and enlightenment. The first and most important is nature. By simply observing and analyzing the world around us, we can learn a great deal about it. Although man's natural instinct is to try to categorize and compartmentalize the things that he observes, Emerson instructs the scholar to instead try to discover the interconnectedness of all things in the universe.
     The second source of knowledge, both in order of appearance and in importance, is the "mind of the past." This is more or less just learning from already has been made known. The best and most obvious example of the mind of the past is books. Emerson has conflicting feelings towards books. On the one hand, books are  wonderful "jumping off points"–a places from which the scholar can draw inspiration and insight into the world around them and into themselves. On the other hand, one must steer clear of falling into the trap of emulating or mimicking the style or ideas of previous thinkers. Emerson even goes so far as to state that "[it is] better [to] never see a book, than to be warped by its attraction clean out of [one's] own orbit, and made a satellite instead of a system." This warning means that while it is important for the scholar to be aware of the work of previous thinkers, he should under no circumstances imitate them.
     The last and least important way for a scholar to attain knowledge, according to Emerson, is through action. It is not acceptable for the intellectual to just hole away in his room and do nothing but study all the time; he must also actively contribute to society in one way or another. One must avoid the pitfalls of bookwormery and valetudinarianism. To put it concisely, pure raw information by itself is useless, to the individual and even more to society. One must have experience to go along with knowledge to make it practical and meaningful.
     The final section of "The American Scholar" explains the duties of the scholar. Emerson quickly makes known that he is aware of the difficulty of the situation into which he is directing the intellectual. Regardless, he explicitly demands that the scholar put his heart and soul into everything he does. It is both selfish and illogical to forgo the pursuance of new information and knowledge for reasons of personal angst or tiredness. The scholar must work long hours, alone and likely miserable, just to produce a work that may or may not be accepted by society. Furthermore, and perhaps above all, the scholar should never withhold information or be afraid to discover it because of societal taboos or stigmas. He should adamantly risk reputation and life alike to put forth new ideas into the world. Emerson say that "in self-trust, all the virtues are comprehended. Free should the scholar be, — free and brave. Free even to the definition of freedom." He should pursue his own individual thoughts and ideas and not be influenced by anyone or anything else, especially a government.
     Throughout "The American Scholar," there seem to be an ever-present paradox–that of the individual versus the masses, man versus Man. The solution to this apparent dilemma is balance. A scholar must be a part of the whole, but not like the other parts. To connect back to the body part analogy, if one's body was made up entirely of just one structure, like a hand, the body would be just as useless as if the parts were not connected at all. What Emerson is ultimately trying to stress is that ideas and ways of thinking should be very much individualized, but the the ideas and information should be put to uses that benefit all of society. By putting all the unique thoughts and inventions of different people together, the end result is a massively diverse store of knowledge and wisdom and technology that is hugely rewarding to society as a whole.

--Wald der Völlig

Wednesday, October 20, 2010

William Apess' "An Indian's Looking Glass for the White Man" and Samson Occom's "A Short Narrative of My Life"

William Apess' "An Indian's Looking Glass for the White Man" is a work written to defend the Native Americans against discrimination by white people. Apess uses a combination of logical and religious reasoning to appeal to his readers. Most of the logical reasons he states involve exposing the white man's hypocrisy and evil, such as when he mentions asks if "different skins were put together, and each skin had its national crimes written upon it—which skin do you think would have the greatest?"By asking this, Apess is bringing attention to the fact that not only do white people have an inordinately high number of crimes commited by their race, but also the fact that the Native Americans have an inordinately low number. Apess' religious reasoning consisted of him referencing Bible verses in which the equality of all people is mentioned and also logically defending the status of other races using religious logic. He states that if other races besides white are disgraceful to God, then "it appears that he has disgraced himself a great deal—for he has made fifteen colored people to one white and placed them here upon this earth."

Occom's work is a stark contrast of Apess' work. Occom seems to make no attempt to defend his people or bring attention to the evils of the white man. His aptly named autobiography seems to simply detail some key events of his life. Of course, the entirely thing is absolutely inundated in religion and religious exclamation. The only way this work seems to try to appeal to people to look at Native Americans in a new light is through pity, in such lines as "I believe it is because I am a poor Indian... [that] I Can’t help that God has made me So."
 --Wald der Eins