Ex Post Facto

[NOTE: 2008 American Thought students: Save this post to read alongside "Self-Reliance" for 10/14. You don't need to read it for 10/9.]

Reading: Ralph Waldo Emerson’s “Self-Reliance,” in The American Transcendentalists: Essential Writings, ed. Lawrence Buell (New York: Modern Library, 2006), 210-31.

In his famous 1841 essay “Self-Reliance,” Ralph Waldo Emerson called traveling “a fool’s paradise.” He explained by declaring “place is nothing” (227). Place was nothing because one could not escape oneself. As Emerson put it: “My giant goes with me wherever I go” (228). This phrasing seems quite apt. Emerson did bestow upon the self — both his own and the self generally — gigantic proportions. His various disquisitions on the self thus left him open to charges of “transcendental selfishness,” to use the phrase of Orestes Brownson. Although Brownson’s accusation has some merit, Emerson proposed to trust the self because he believed that the self was infused with a divine intelligence.

When Emerson told his listeners and readers to assert “godlike independence,” to “trust thyself,” or to “go alone,” he enjoined them to reject conformity and to transcend the inherited wisdom of the past (212, 211, 223). In short, he encouraged people to think, feel, and act for themselves, without being limited by social pressures, aged institutions, or yellowing texts.

Emerson’s individualistic ethos often led him to issue bold statements. Defending his resolution to follow his impulses, he told a friend: “If I am the devil’s child, I will live then from the devil” (213). Swatting at the do-gooders who knocked on his door, he declared:

[D]o not tell me . . . of my obligation to put all poor men in good situations. Are they my poor? I tell thee, thou foolish philanthropist, that I grudge the dollar, the dime, the cent I give to such men as do not belong to me and to whom I do not belong. (213-14)

By making such statements, Emerson seemed to be showing his readers that he did not concern himself with worrying about what people would think about what he said.

Although some of Emerson’s comments might sound like pure selfishness, he repeatedly argued that the self was a conduit to a higher and divine spirit. He joked that he would write “Whim” above his door, but he also hoped “it is somewhat better than whim as last” (213). He recommended that “A man should learn to detect and watch that gleam of light which flashes across his mind from within,” precisely because he believed that inner gleam had origins outside of the self (210). He perhaps explained this phenomenon best when he said: “We lie in the lap of immense intelligence, which makes us organs of its activity and receivers of its truth. When we discern justice, when we discern truth, we do nothing of ourselves, but allow a passage to its beams” (219). He wanted Americans to open themselves to these truths that he believed would emerge from within.

Emerson was neither the first nor the last American thinker to promote such inward searching. Although his individualistic gospel has influenced American culture — notice the number of famous or familiar lines in this essay — many of his contemporaries continued to believe in the need for collective effort, and the crisis over slavery even led Emerson himself to somewhat modify his position.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, October 10th, 2007 at 2:56 pm and is filed under American Thought. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

11 Responses to “Emerson’s Giant”

Jan Cheney Says:
October 11th, 2007 at 12:29 pm
I admire Emerson’s ability to stand alone and think for himself. However, he has such a need for autonomy that he seems to push other people out of the equation for happiness. I do believe that people should love themselves and think for themselves, but we are social beings. We can accomplish so much more when we work together than when we stand alone. Personally, my own life is better because of the unconditional love and support I receive from family and friends.
Chase Hedrick Says:
October 11th, 2007 at 3:40 pm
Reading Emerson is often a challenge and I can understand some people’s annoyance with his lyrical style. With that said, I do appreciate his perspective. Though Emerson stresses individuality and “self reliance,” I do not think he is promoting selfishness or egotism. Though if one was simply convinced otherwise, there would be plenty of evidence in Emerson’s writing to support this perspective. I however feel that scrutinized more closely, Emerson is in fact promoting society. Though this perceived society is one that to my knowledge, has never fully existed.
Emerson’s persistent call for insight and individuality is completely contrary to what he sees as normal conformity in society. Emerson felt that we should trust our “gut” feelings and act on them accordingly. By doing so, I don’t feel people would make rash selfish decisions, but instead would make decisions based on an innate sense of right and wrong. Emerson would probably further argue that this innate sense of right and wrong was divine, but would have to be discovered personally and not simply told. This idea is heavily reliant on Enlightenment and Transcendentalist ideas that human nature is ultimately good, which Emerson undoubtedly believed.
Considering that everyone in a society had gained personal insight, and understood themselves, and their oneness and ultimate likeness to each other, for God has incarnated himself in all of us, not just Jesus, selfishness and egotism would not exist. People would not stand idly by to such an institution as slavery, because the innate sense of right and wrong would persuade us otherwise.
Ultimately, I feel that Emerson may have been an idealist. He believed that maybe through guidance we could all personally discover this divine influence, and then establish a society accordingly. Although, I am not sure what that society would look like.
Erica Spurgeon Says:
October 12th, 2007 at 7:43 am
I adore the works of Emerson because he, just like myself, likes to give a different perspective on life and how it should be lived. I believe that when Emerson tells us to learn to love ourselves before anyone else, I think he’s telling the community he lived in at that time that maybe they were destroying eachother because they weren’t taking their personal feelings into consideration–instead they were considering what was good for the community even if it wasn’t good for them.

I believe that our society very much lives under Emerson’s terms today. Our world has a dog-eat-dog, you’re out on your own kind of perspective. Schools, jobs, media, repect–all of these things have to be fought for and it’s even harder now than before. In order to do survive in this day in age, I feel that we really have to apply Emersons ideas to “trust theyself” and think of yourself in God like terms.
Chris Gould Says:
October 16th, 2007 at 1:00 pm
Although I have a hard reading Emerson I do respect what he has to say. I agree with Jan in that I admire how Emerson wants people to stand alone but also why not have a support group like a family. I can respect the fact that you have to find yourself to be truly happy, but I would think it would be easier to find oneself it they had others to turn to.
Eric Bansemar Says:
October 17th, 2007 at 5:00 pm
On a few levels, I do admire Emerson’s emphasis on the self and individual effort. However, it occurs to me that Emerson perhaps thought of this life philosophy without considering all of its consequences. This could be seen in Emerson’s thoughts on slavery. Although he generally resisted concering himself too much with the poor fortunes of those around him, i.e. “are they MY poor?,” slavery proved to be too strong for Emerson to maintain his original individualist position. Emerson’s position of self-reliance is an admirable one, however, as the issue of slavery proved, it must be tempered at certain points to avoid true selfishness.
Meghan Winter Says:
October 17th, 2007 at 7:49 pm
I like the fact that Emerson made statements and wrote pieces that had shock value, but did not just say these things to shock his contemporaries. Telling people to rely on their own instincts and soul was a very radical times in a turbulent period of American history. Although I do not agree with all his statements in “Self-Reliance”, I do appreciate the original mind behind them. I also think that Emerson enjoyed his standard of living and comfortable life too much to get involved in more depth on issues of the poor.
William Schwartz Says:
October 19th, 2007 at 11:29 am
I agree with Chris and Erica. We have to look at life differently. If you do not love your self, how can you love others? But you also need support from your friends and family. We live in a world in which no one cares about anybody else.
Matt Streckenbach Says:
October 22nd, 2007 at 9:11 pm
Ok with the question how do you love others without loving yourself? I have had many friends whom have had depression problems in that they literally have no respect for themselves. Yet they are able to love others such as family an friends because they are there support system of which they rely upon. The too are independent factor’s. I may love myself but that doesnt’ mean I love other’s. There are a number of different ways which make people “click” these factor’s determine who a person is.
Adam Klug Says:
October 27th, 2007 at 7:10 pm
I agree with Meghan, I think Emerson was unconcerned with the plight of the poor because he lived a step or two above them. Without actually having experienced it for himself it is easy for him to say that everyone needs to have self reliance in themselves. When you do not have enough to sustain a good life though the poor needed to fall back on one another so to an extent I agree we need to think for ourselves, but sometimes we all need someone to help us out.
Brian Knaak Says:
October 29th, 2007 at 6:25 am
In examining Emerson’s position it appears that Orestes Bronson’s position concerning Emerson is valid. Before examining Bronsons criticism it is vital to understand Emerson position. The notion that the individual, according to Emerson, must put himself/herself above all others is a central theme which runs through many of Emerson’s writings. It is only through this exacting attention to personal self can a person understand their inherent divinity.
Orestes Bronson, in his review of Emerson, charges that Emerson is practicing a system of “pure” or “transcendental egotism”. As Bronson stated, “The highest good they recognize is an individual good, the realization of order in their own individual souls. Everything by them is estimated according to its power to contribute to this end.” It is precisely that the individual and his personal interpretations are an end in and of themselves that Emerson begins to tread on shakey ground. Essentially Bronson argues that because people are seen as an end in and of themselves that nobody can have any type of obligation to society. Furthermore, all acts of alturism seem to fly out the window. This is due to the fact that people are not doing things for the sake of the societal good, rather they are only required to act according to their individual self.
In conclusion it is possible to see how Orestes Bronson’s arguement does carry some legitimate weight in refuting this type of “Transcendental Individualism.” This is especially true on the philosophical level.
Ryan Heck Says:
October 29th, 2007 at 1:43 pm
I beleive with the majority of the people here. Emerson brings up good points, but we can not work alone. In almost every aspect one must know the self, but one must get past that and function in the community

Print This Post

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.

Emerson’s Giant

11 Responses to “Emerson’s Giant”

Leave a Reply