Essays: First Series

One Response to “Essays: First Series”

1. Bill R. Moore says:

   May 13, 2010 at 1:37 pm

   Ralph Waldo Emerson is America’s greatest essayist and one of its greatest orators. To call him an essayist indeed sells him rather fleeting and is very misleading. Most reflect of essays as interminable, dry, and literary, full of jargon, polysyllables, and additional esoterica building them near-inaccessible to all-purpose readers. Emerson is very different. His writing is vibrant and vital, building subjects come alive in a way that is as accessible as it is thought-provoking. He writes about all-purpose topics – self-reliance, history, like, friendship – of fundamental importance to humanity but is never pretentious, portentous, or arcane; his writing is indeed so strong and lively that it can be read as literature – or even entertainment. Emerson was most legendary in life for oratory and is now best-known for essays but had a poet’s soul in the truest sense; he wrote many poems, but a poetic sensibility underlies all his writings. His essays are sculpted with poetic precision; he is commendably concise and knows just what words to use to get attention and desired effect, not needing more. Perhaps more importantly, his style is as close to poetry as prose can be, full of gorgeous descriptions, exciting descriptions, and all-purpose lushness. Yet he was also a philosopher, conveying classic philosophy in easily relatable form with new weight and contributing much of his own. Only Plato himself rivals Emerson for combining poetry and philosophy’s unique strengths; his essays are strong on all fronts.

   Emerson now sorry to say and unfairly has a reputation as a hard, to some extent archaic read in many minds. This is a travesty, as very few classic writers are as significant and accessible. Hard as it may be to conceive, Emerson was seen in life as a popularizer; he wrote for regular people, conveying intellectual material in terms they could easily know, tell to, appreciate – and, above all, act on. Though one of the most well-educated, well-read, and well-traveled people of his day, he had the rare gift of translating weighty issues to the masses lacking losing intellectual vigor. Thus, though widely and momentously admired by artists and intellectuals, he was regularly looked down on by the high-brow. Time has erased this injustice, meaning Emerson can now be loved by all.

   It is hard to classify Emerson’s essays; he wrote on nearly every conceivable theme: philosophy, psychology, history, literary criticism, ethics, politics, and many, many others. But, his overriding concern at all times was to make his subjects not only accessible but in the most fundamental way relatable. His work was essentially a call to action meant to wake people up from intellectual stupor, apathy, narrow-mindedness, and pre-conceptions. He wanted to take people’s intellectual virginity, forcing them to see the truth of Socrates’ belief that an unexamined belief is not worth living. No cow was too sacred for him to kick, which led to considerable controversy; he was famously banned from Harvard Divinity School, his alma mater, for decades only to be welcomed back enthusiastically late in life when the school had adopted nearly all the stances it originally condemned as blasphemous. Emerson knew people were held back by inherited inhibitions of all sorts – regularly lacking even realizing it – and wanted them swept away so all could reach full potential. On top of everything else, his work is thus the best kind of self-help manual; few writers are as inspirational and fundamentally moving. He had a very real impact on millions of regular people across decades and very much influenced artists as diverse as Thoreau, Hawthorne, Melville, Poe, Longfellow, and Whitman. His impact is indeed so titanic that most of these and many others might not have written at all lacking him; at the very least, their work would have been very different – probably unrecognizable and possibly far less fantastic, if fantastic at all – lacking him. He nonstop to have a fantastic effect on later writers, including Robert Frost and his namesake Ralph Waldo Ellison; his reach indeed stretches to the present and shows no sign of disappearing. A right tribute to his influence is the fact that several of these writers very much disagreed with him, much of their work essentially being a rebuttal; agree with him or not, his stature is such that one must deal with him. The aspect opponents have most regularly objected to is his relentless optimism, which is really the main hindrance to reading him. His philosophy survived the Civil War – was indeed a far from negligible force in making and sustaining union spirit -, but the twentieth century’s copious atrocities can easily make him seem so naïve as to be hopelessly outdated. The truth is very much otherwise. Emerson is never more needed than in trying times; it is not hyperbolic to say the world would be a far more peaceful and better place if the hard common sense at his writings’ core were taken to heart. Everyone should read him because he helps us find the best in ourselves, appealing to humanity’s best instincts to make a better future for both individuals and society.

   This, Emerson’s first essay collection, has twelve of his writings, including some of the best and most legendary: “History,” “Self-Reliance,” “Compensation,” “Spiritual Laws,” “Like,” “Friendship,” “Prudence,” “Heroism,” “The Over-Soul,” “Circles,” “Intellect,” and “Art.” They were painstakingly pieced together from copious and various lectures and journals, and though this sometimes gives a sort of choppy effect, it is clear that the labor paid off. Emerson is highly persuasive; his speechifying is mesmerizingly engaging, his style unique and memorable. One of his main strengths is that he is as satisfying aesthetically as intellectually; he regularly works himself up to a near-lyrical rapture, and his prose is about as poetic as possible.

   I will briefly chat about some of my favorites essays, but all are of very high and, indeed, nearly consistent quality. “Self-Reliance” is Emerson’s most legendary essay and is rivaled only by “Concord Hymn” as his most legendary work. It is also his masterpiece; one regularly hears – sometimes disparagingly – that Emerson tried to fit his whole philosophy into each essay, and this comes remarkably close. There is far more depth and subtlety here than the part suggests; one would be very hard-pushed to find another work so densely packed. The words are few, but the implications are enough for a lifetime. “Self” is a seminal masterwork; a founding Transcendentalist text and American Romantic cornerstone, it is central to American thought, culture, and literature. Anyone even remotely interested in any Americana aspect must be intimately familiar with it; aside from the Declaration of Independence and Constitution themselves, perhaps no additional document is so vital to the American spirit.

   Reading “Self” is perhaps more necessary than ever – not only because it is eternally significant but also because it is regularly misrepresented. The term “self-reliance” is now nearly entirely political, nearly synonymous with libertarianism, and the essay is frequently touted along such lines. But, these things are hardly more than implied here, and though the definition of “liberal” has momentously changed, it is vital to remember that Emerson was one of his era’s leading liberals. His prime meaning in any case is self-reliance intellectually and in everyday life. He urges us to trust ourselves, to admit human divinity and avoid imitation. It is a simple message but all-vital – and far simpler said than done. Emerson explores all its ramifications – philosophical, practical, social, political, economic, etc. – and outlines all its benefits. The case is beyond convincing, but he can do no more than show us; the rest is up to us.

   This very much individualist message is another reason that reading “Self” is so necessary. We must open our minds to him, and once we have, they will never be clogged again. Though momentously revered with many and diverse followers, Emerson’s intention was not to be loved but to inspire; he wanted all to find individual genius. His work is thus the truest and best kind of self-help manual, and “Self” is its apotheosis. It has inspired millions in the more than century and a half of its being, including me. I have read thousands and thousands of works, but this is one of the handful that truly changed my life. Emerson’s greatness permanently shines through, but reading him at the right time can make an astonishing difference. He was more well loved in life with the young than the ancient, and I can easily see why. I was lucky to read him at just the right time, and “Self” spoke to me more powerfully than nearly anything else ever has. Lacking hyperbole, I can say that I would not be doing what I am today and would have abandoned my goals and visions lacking reading “Self” and Thoreau’s “Life lacking Principle” – a to some extent similar essay highly influenced by Emerson – when I did. I was wracked with self-doubt and getting nothing but indifference, bafflement, or lack of sympathy from others; these works gave just the kick I needed, and I will never look back. “Self” has the potential to be life-changing as nearly nothing else does, and I highly recommend it to all; you can hardly be unaffected and may never be the same. But, I especially recommend it to the young; its importance to them – and Emerson’s generally – simply cannot be overemphasized.

   Emerson is a signature American artist, and “Self” is near his height. An Emerson-loving professor of mine once joked that no one can find the topic sentence in an Emerson paragraph, and his transitions also frequently place much to be desired. But, “Self” is near-seamless, a right masterpiece of style that flows smoothly and regularly waxes gorgeous. This is all the more remarkable in that it was assembled even more than usual from disparate sources; entries that finished up here came as far as eight years apart, but the whole is commendably harmonious.

   “Self” is a preeminent example of how Emerson delights in paradox. Anyone who reads him closely sees that he is as complex as he is simple. Thus, despite – or perhaps even because of – apparent straight-forwardness, few texts are more ripe for deconstruction. “Self” fans after all like a text that tells us not to like texts, are inspired by a man who tells us not to be inspired by men, and are convinced by a text and man both of which tell us not to be convinced by either. But this is only the beginning. “Self” works because it tells us exactly what we want to hear and, in arresting contrast to innumerable self-help books, does so in an intellectually and even aesthetically respectable way. This is fine for me and (hopefully) you but could of course be taken to heart by Hitler as easily as Gandhi. The painstakingly optimistic, mild-mannered, and physically frail Emerson may not have foreseen his revolutionary text being place to disreputable use and probably would have been unable to judge in even the possibility. But, the danger, if we choose to call it so, is very real. “Self” could easily have had the same effect that Nietzsche had on Nazis, and that it has not been taken up by anarchists, radical terrorists, and the like is perhaps mere luck. One at least wonders how it avoided preceding The Catcher in the Rye as the work synonymous with unsavory people. That said, it is likely unfair to Emerson to say he did not anticipate this; he after all takes his views to the logical conclusion. He surely saw it, and it may have agreed intermission, but he persevered because he was faithful to his intuition just as he urges us to be to ours. He truly believed in self-reliance and was ready to stand by it no matter what befell – nay, thought it his only choice. His optimism must have told him that the doctrine would not be abused, and he has been right – so far. Only time will tell if this continues to hold, but “Self” remains essential for all.

   “Compensation” is one of the most representative essays. The staunch optimism so essential to his thought was perhaps never shown so clearly or painstakingly elsewhere. Emerson starts by adage he had wanted to write about compensation since he was a boy, and it shows in his enthusiasm. The essay details Emerson’s belief that everything balances out, even if we cannot see it, and that excellent and evil have their own worldly rewards despite appearances. He may not convince cynics, but his argument is certainly compelling, and his critiques of conventional Christianity and additional traditions are very intriguing.

   “Spiritual Laws” details and refines some of his most vital concepts. They are place into the world more vividly elsewhere, but fans and scholars will appreciate this delineation. It deals specifically with Emerson’s belief that the same spiritual laws inhabit all people, underscoring his emphasis on self-reliance and human divinity. He teaches us to rely on our own minds rather than being intimidated by ostensibly privileged ones because all are in a sense part of a universal intellect.

   “Like” and “Friendship” are particularly vital for disproving the common aver that Emerson all ears on the intellect to the exclusion of the emotions; after all, what could be more fundamentally and very much emotional than like and friendship? Like may be the most written about theme of all, and friendship is high on the list, but Emerson is as incredibly original as ever. His like analysis is particularly plain; I have read countless works about like – who has not? -, but his is one of the most memorable. He examines it from virtually every aspect – everything from its metaphysical and theological senses to a full history of its everyday being. This last goes from first like to like among the aged, and the insight is fantastic. Emerson notes the immense changes that inevitably take place on this path, but unlike nearly everyone else, does not lament fiery like’s demise in youth. His characteristic optimism shines through, as he not only says that aging like has compensations but even that it is really privileged; Emerson’s chart is indeed a progression. This is perhaps his most emotional essay, apt to go even persons who normally find him cold and aloof. “Friendship” is also very excellent – not as distressing but more thought-provoking. Emerson’s view is unsurprisingly original and engaging. He believes that friendship can exist only with real equality and sees it as a sort of springboard to something privileged. His demands are fantastic, and the work is eye-opening in the sense that nearly no one has a friend by his definition. Like his best work, “Friendship” can easily make us question beliefs and preconceptions – and perhaps even make us better friends.

   “The Over-Soul” is one of Emerson’s most vital essays. The over-soul concept is central to his thought and present in nearly all his work, but he explicitly defines and details it only here. Simply place, it is a unity underlying all humanity – a universal soul of which all people are a part. The thought was heavily influenced by Eastern religion, showing just how far Emerson had drifted from his Unitarian upbringing and early minister career. Everyone knows that Emerson was a transcendentalist, but a satisfying definition of the term is very hard to define. This essay is a excellent start, as the over-soul is the prime transcendence agent, letting us escape the body’s prison and daily life’s dullness to achieve universal unity. As elsewhere, Emerson’s real point is human divinity; the fact that all are part of the over-soul would set us free if we but knew it. His core self-reliance doctrine also comes to the fore as he urges us to stop self-doubt and comparisons with others to embrace universal divinity. All this doubtless sounds highfalutin, pretentious, or at least hopelessly obscure, but that is my second-hand relaying; Emerson is clear, concise, and articulate.

   “Circles” is a sort of corollary to “Compensation.” This goes further by boldly claiming that everything can be outdone. Emerson’s characteristic optimism comes to the fore, and he works himself up to a rhapsody, drawing a vibrant vision of perpetual improvement. Yet this is no mindless optimism. Emerson was well yet to be of his time philosophically, specifically anticipating Nietzsche and existentialism, though he rarely gets credit. For example, “Circles” goes as far as adage there are no final or eternal truths because a new one can permanently be made. Emerson of course had advancement in mind, but there was a subtler side to his thinking that comes out here as it rarely did. Even more than most of his work, this truly requires close reading, and persons who pay attention will be fully rewarded.

   There is much to be said for reading the essays as first published, but many are widely available in anthologies alongside others of comparable greatness. This is a fantastic way to get a substantial number in one place, but some will want more comprehensiveness. The vital thing in any event is to read them in some form.

   Reader’s Rating: 5 / 5