(this one has a different introduction than mine and comes with annotations for some reason). Written by Henry Thoreau in 1850's Massachusetts, it was a book far, far ahead of it's time. I would go as far as to say that this is definitely a classic that should be read by everyone. It's not an easy read. It took me about 20 days to consume this 330 page book, which is quite some time for even me. There are two reasons that it's a tough read. It is written in 1850's language and prose. Some sentences are literally a page long and therefore easy to start zoning out or to get lost. I do like the old language, though I found I had to look up a few words that are out of fashion today. The other reason that this book is a tough read is that it's heady or heavy, requiring breaks every so often to contemplate. The plot of this book is that the author, Henry, decides to head off to live "in the woods" for a couple years. That's really it. He writes about his experiences and philosophies about things.
What makes this book good:
He does an incredible job of nature writing. Some of his descriptions, which are very unique, are the best I've ever read, or heard. Not only can you tell that he is deeply in love with nature without him directly saying (he does say it additionally) and not only is it so well written that the reader, me, can actually see this world, but love it with the same depth that he does. It's infectious and brilliant:
"One afternoon I amused myself by watching a barred owl sitting on one of the lower dead limbs of a white-pine, close to the trunk, in broad daylight, I standing within a rod of him. He could hear me when I moved and cronched the snow with my feet, but could not plainly see me. When I made noise he would stretch out his neck, and open his eyes wide; but their lids soon fell again, and he began to nod. I too felt a slumberous influence after watching him half an hour, as he sat thus with his eyes half open, like a cat,winged brother of the cat. There was only a narrow slit left between their lids, by which he preserved a peninsular relation to me; thus, with halfshut eyes, looking out from the land of dreams, and endeavoring to realize me, vague object or mote that interrupted his visions. At length, on some louder noise or my nearer approach, he would grow uneasy and sluggishly turn about on his perch, as if impatient at having his dreams disturbed; and when he launched himself off and flapped through the pines, spreading his wings to unexpected breadth, I could not hear the slightest sound from them."
The other thing that I really admire about the book is that he is making the case for simple living and inwardness, which fits perfectly with what I've been promoting. However, he does it from a practical, how to do it way. What makes it even more amazing though, is that some of his predictions have come true and most of his arguments for simple living have become even more meaningful. His observations on society and life even more true. He was an advocate of nature, sure, but even more an advocate of simple living and self improvement or inward focus. When he writes about how the farmers house or tools own him, enslave him, it means more because we've gone even more extreme today; we are even more materialistic, in more debt, and work longer hours to maitain this lifestyle. He has observations on the news, claiming that it is a distraction not worth the ink. What is the point of the news? We spend all our time listening to what is, year by year, more akin to gossip and fiction than to anything important. Henry advocates that we can spend that time listening to ourselves, learning about ourselves and becoming a more solidified person. Which he also later says is the highest type of philanthropy out there, and I am apt to agree with him.
What I didn't like:
Henry, came from a wealthy family, so he never had to concern himself with money. In the first chapter he talks about economics - how much money he spent/makes. Besides criticizing those who work every day, hard, and for long hours so that they can afford their houses, he ignores the fact that his math doesn't add up. First, he came to Concord with what I think was a decent amount of money in those those times (he has enough to buy a house in Concord just to use the wood to build his out in the woods). He never says where this money came from and blows it off as irrelevant. However, I have a hard time when he criticizes the farmers trying to make and hopefully save some money. He acts as if everyone should have some magical lump sum of money that they can tap at will. Sorry, some have to work to get that lump sum before they can up and move to the woods. Also, if you follow his little cash flow chart, he spends more money than he makes, but then says he made enough money in six weeks to survive off of for a year. Not without that magical sum of money he had though, but again, everyone has a magic purse.
Next, I had quite a problem with his agenda on god and food. Enough so, that I wrote at the beginning of the book, "Ignore all references to god and food. [the chapter] Higher Laws was complete bullshit". My complaint on god is that, like many, he is writing as if Christian god is proven and that everyone accepts that as an obvious truth. But, what I especially don't understand is why everyone and their dog thinks they need to give their two cents on food. It doesn't seem to matter if the book is a fictional novel, philosophy, spiritual, travel, etc. Everything I seem to read, the authors take it upon themselves to describe what we should and should not eat, even if they have no idea what they are talking about. 99% of the time they are completely wrong. Henry feels that we should be vegetarians, though he does eat meat himself when it's easy enough to get. One of his arguments is that it takes more effort to collect, clean, and cook the animal than it's worth. However, he talks about how simple fishing is and how uplifting it is to the soul to spend that time leisurely awaiting a bite, and how he must till the soil constantly for his beans. To me those two arguments conflict. I won't get into what we should and shouldn't eat, I think most are aware of where I stand, I just wish all these people would shut the fuck up about food. Esp. when they try to advocate vegetarianism from some sort of moral high ground - don't worry I have a post coming out on that soon.
His tone throughout the book is I am smarter than you and better cause I lived way out in the woods, but he was squatting on his friend's land near a town (Concord). Just like the magical purse thing, he seems to believe that everyone has friends that own massive pieces of mostly unsullied land that they can just up and live on whenever they feel like it. He, conveniently, never mentions that he got permission to do this from his friend and without the reading John Updike's introduction I'd have never known that. Not only that, the property wasn't really out in the woods. He was within a couple hours walk to Concord and was close to a road and neighbors. It's more like he's living in a neighborhood where the plots of land are a hundred acres or so and undeveloped. He seems to overly glorify that he is out in, and living off of, the wild-erness. He still is part of his little Concord society that he talks shit about. He wants to have his cake and eat it too. No dice, Henry, you don't get off that easy.
However, my biggest criticism is his view on travel. He believes that one can learn everything they need to know about themselves and the universe by living by oneself in the woods. He says that it is pointless to "travel to Calcutta to count the cats" (which sounds like it could be full of adventure). But that's a very narrow, limited view. When he talks about his woods, he is a "life's a journey" type, but when he talks about those who journey abroad, he's a destination/solitary goal point of view. I don't think he gets it cause he hasn't done it. He's just as scared as everyone else. In fact, the two - living simply in the woods vs. longterm travel - have many similarities esp. in the living simply and living deliberately department. I'm not going to go into detail why since it's all over the rest of my blog, but I'll say that I believe that not only can you accomplish the exact same things by traveling, but also much much more than what he did. Travel has all the elements that living simply in the woods does, but with additional elements such as language barriers, cultural differences, or new points of view to experience. These two experiences are, in reality, compliments to one another.
Even with those criticisms, the book was definitely a must read. Just remember to ignore the references to god and food...
No comments:
Post a Comment