Journal #27

Michelle Romero
English 48A
Final Question #1

Theoreau agrees with Emerson in many ways. For one, Norton editors describe both men as antislavery and in each of their works, we can read their expressions of skepticism:

Emerson:
"Society never advances....It undergoes continual changes: it is barbarous, it is civilized, it is christianized, it is rich, it is scientific; but this change is not amelioration. For everything that is given, something is taken" (Self-ReliIance 1178).

Thoreau:
"In other words, when a sixth of the population of a nation which has undertaken to be the refuge of liberty are slaves, and a whole country is unjustly overrun....I think it is not too soon for honest men to rebel and revolutionize" (Resistance to Civil Government 1859).

In the first quote by Emerson, it is evident that he feels a loss of hope for the future when he says society "never advances." It is also an undercut to the image American society was trying to portray. He basically was saying that despite all these fancy things we talk about: science or religion, none of these make us better. Then, he turns to his philosophical spin on this by saying that what society has done is not to ameliorate or to soothe human suffering, but rather he implies that it has perhaps even been the cause of human suffering at times: "For everything that is given, something is taken away." This statement shows he is antislavery because a pro-slavery person would not look at the situation in terms of what is wrong about the society. Instead, they would comment on how good slavery or other circumstances that have been made, help the society or help the economy. Emerson clearly disagrees with that.

Likewise, Thoreau makes a clear statement against slavery through his frank tone. His blunt reasoning kind of throws the slavery issue in his readers' faces. In fact, he even says that when a sixth of the population is oppressed they have a right to revolt. He sides with the slaves. He sides with those who want equal treatment. The best part is that he contrasts the slaves' oppression in American to the symbolic refuge of America in a way that criticizes American society as hypocritical and ironic.

In essence, both authors were anti-slavery and shared their views in their writing and lecturing, but Thoreau perhaps (given the examples) may have been a bit more bold or blunt about his views.