Having discussed Emerson's Self-Reliance, I picked up on something during class and would like to inquire about it. Towards the end of class, Mr. Lazarow reminded us that the Transcendentals emphasized the notion that nonconformity and individualism were necessary for progress. However, on the second-to-last page of Self-Reliance, Emerson notes that:
"All men plume themselves on the improvement of society, and no man improves. Society never advances. It recedes as fast on one side as it gains on the other...For every thing that is given, something is taken."
I am confused about this particular belief because I had initially assumed that the Transcendentals believed in progress - simply a kind of progress which could only be attained through increased spirituality and nonconformity (the latter of which we discussed as an explanation of the movement's ultimate failure). The above quote flatly states, though, that progress is not attainable because society cannot improve. If this is what the Transcendentals generally believed (about which I could be utterly mistaken), then how can we explain the discrepancy between this belief and the belief that progress results, not from conformism, but from nonconformity? How can progress result from anything at all if "society NEVER advances"? Should Emerson have qualified this statement, or was his belief perhaps uncommon among other Transcendentals?
Is this perhaps another contradiction or example of hypocrisy in the Transcendental movement? What are your thoughts?
(Janet Lee)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Maybe this passage may be interpreted slightly differently. It could be that Emerson means to say that men want to progress, yet they go about doing so incorrectly. "Plume" is a loaded word that implies a sense of snobbish approach. Because men of society are approaching progress selfishly (one side gains, while another loses), there is no net change in society. Progress is attainable, but if a society cannot acheive it correctly, it remains latent. After all, "Ne te quaesiveris extra." If we look to others to find inner peace and success, we are headed down the wrong tunnel.
I know I already cited the last paragraph in class, but I'm dazzled by it...
So use all that is called Fortune. Most men gamble with her, and gain all, and lose all, as her wheel rolls. But do thou leave as unlawful these winnings, and deal with Cause and Effect, the chancellors of God. In the Will work and acquire, and thou hast chained the wheel of Chance, and shalt sit hereafter out of fear from her rotations. A political victory, a rise of rents, the recovery of your sick, or the return of your absent friend, or some other favorable event, raises your spirits, and you think good days are preparing for you. Do not believe it. Nothing can bring you peace but yourself. Nothing can bring you peace but the triumph of principles.
When we gamble with what we've been given, there's always a high possibility that we might lose every last bit of it. We take our chances, and are great at picking up false signs of improvement. By what you cited, Janet, I believe that Emerson is merely telling us that progress is not possible given the current circumstances of the times, not that it is impossible to attain.
(Sam Maliha)
I can't seem to find my packet, but thank goodness for Google! Anyhow, I interpreted this as is a rather pessimistic approach to the changes wrought by the passage of time. Everyone knows that balance must exist in nature - for instance, if you breed dogs to become stronger, they will lose in a different area (i.e. speed etc.). Emerson projects this view onto mankind, offsetting the advances of the age with the losses.
It would be wrong, however, to say that progress is no longer occurring. In a sense, Emerson is looking at the *net* progress rather than the *total* progress attained. Say, for example, you're traveling somewhere but have to double back to get something from your home. Emerson views the doubling back as a loss and subtracts it from the distance traveled. Nevertheless, doubling back, while ostensibly a "loss", is still traveling.
Humans are far from stagnant - something the model I advocated above illustrates. Simply because we have weakened in some respects does not cancel out other achievements. It is simply nature balancing things out.
P.S. Sorry for the math reference. T-T
I actually think this quote describes the transcendental movement quite nicely. There is no progress really in because you can't learn anything unless you experience it by yourself. Therefore, the experiences of past generations are not transferred down to you to learn from as they are in modern society, but rather you go out to find things out for yourself. This is anti-progress because everyone must continue to find out the same things until they die. Therefore, at least in this manner, transcendentalism does not promote progress.
(Arvind Kalidindi)
I think of this quote in a similar way to Arvind.I believe Emerson is talking about the loss of innocence from childhood. The romantics had a belief that the innocent stage of childhood was the highest form of living. Therefore, as we try to advance ourselves through experience, and try to better society by our experiences we in essence destroy our innocence. Therefore, there is no way for society and humans to progress, because the innocence of childhood will always be lost.
(Kevin Trainer)
My interpretation of the quote Janet cited is that Emerson's belief in progress reflects his idea of social balance. He did not say that humans never improve. He only said a society never improves because for every progress, there is a retrogress. This idea reminds me of Newton's theory of relativity which states that for every action, there is a reaction. Emerson probably believed in temporary individual advancement. However, he also might have believed that humans make mistakes of equal significance which actually cancels out the progress in the end.
Jennifer Park
Emerson seems to saying that progress never comes without a cost. After all, despite the positive connotations of the word, "progress" doesn't necessarily always mean improvement. What we take to be progress from our perspective may actually cause the deterioration of something else. Certainly, we have vastly increased our food supply by genetically engineering plants to be hardy and fruitful. On the other hand, we have lost much genetic diversity in our plants, and if a sudden plague were to strike, many of our crops could die out at the same time.
Something always has to be given up in order to move forward. What matters is whether what we gain is worth more than what we lose.
-Eric W
Post a Comment