Compare 2 of the following excerpts in relation to their ideas on Nature and/or Wilderness:
“The road grew wilder and drearier and more faintly traced, and vanished at length, leaving him in the heart of the dark wilderness, still rushing onward with the instinct that guides mortal man to evil. The whole forest was peopled with frightful sounds, — the creaking of trees, the howling of wild beasts, and the yell of Indians; while sometimes the wind tolled like a distant church-bell, and sometimes gave a broad roar around the traveller, as if all Nature were laughing him to scorn." -- Nathanael Hawthorne, "Young Goodman Brown", 1835
"Crossing a bare common, in snow puddles, at twilight, under a clouded sky, without having in my thoughts any occurrence of special good fortune, I have enjoyed a perfect exhilaration. I am glad to the brink of fear. In the woods too, a man casts off his years, as the snake his slough, and at what period soever of life, is always a child. In the woods, is perpetual youth. Within these plantations of God, a decorum and sanctity reign, a perennial festival is dressed, and the guest sees not how he should tire of them in a thousand years. In the woods, we return to reason and faith.There I feel that nothing can befall me in life,— no disgrace, no calamity, (leaving me my eyes,) which nature cannot repair. Standing on the bare ground, — my head bathed by the blithe air, and uplifted into infinite space, — all mean egotism vanishes. I become a transparent eye-ball; I am nothing; I see all; the currents of the Universal Being circulate through me; I am part or particle of God. The name of the nearest friend sounds then foreign and accidental: to be brothers, to be acquaintances, — master or servant, is then a trifle and a disturbance. I am the lover of uncontained and immortal beauty. In the wilderness, I find something more dear and connate than in streets or villages. In the tranquil landscape, and especially in the distant line of the horizon, man beholds somewhat as beautiful as his own nature."
Ralph Waldo Emerson, "Nature" (1836)
"The Indian and the white man sense things differently because the white man has put distance between himself and nature; and assuming a lofty place in the scheme of order of things has lost for him both reverence and understanding. (...) Many times the Indian is embarrassed and baffled by the wine man's allusions to nature in such terms as crude, primitive, wild, rude, untamed, and savage. For the Lakota, mountains, lakes, rivers, springs, valleys, and woods were all finished beauty; winds, rain, snow, sunshine, day, night, and change of seasons brought interest, birds, insects, and animals filled the world with knowledge that defied the discernment of man."
Luther Standing Bear, "Nature", in Land of the Spotted Eagle, 1933
"Take this quote from Howard Nemerov, a good poet anda decent man:
Civilization, mirrored in the language, is the garden where relations grow; outside the garden is the wild abyss.
The unexamined assumptions here are fascinating. They are, at work, crystallizations of the erroneous view that enable the developed world to display Third and Fourth world peoples and overexploit nature golly. Nemerov here proposes that language is somehow implicitly civilized or civilizing that civilization is orderly, that intrahuman relations are the pinnacle of experience (as though all of us, and all life on the planet, were not interrelated), and that 'wild' means 'abyssal,' disorderly and chaotic."
Gary Snyder, "Unnatural Writing," in A Place in Space, 1996.
"Young Goodman Brown" is a metaphor for the fall of man. There's a relation between Eve in the book of Genesis and Goodman Brown where he cannot help himself but be curious about the mysteries of the forest. Hawthorne uses the forest to symbolize the wild world of nature. Home represents safety and faith while the forest represents evil and the devil himself.
ReplyDeleteRalph Waldo Emerson talks about transcendentalism in "Nature" where it suggests that God permeates nature and that reality is understood by studying nature.
Comparing these two excerpts we can see how both authors have distinct views on nature. While Hawthorne sees it as a place of evil and fear, Emerson sees it as a place for the divine and a place for commodity, beauty, language and discipline.
"Young Goodman Brown" story takes place around the time of the infamous Salem witch trail of 1692. The heavily wooded forest used as setting is the key symbol. The dark and wild forest is associated with fear and evil. “Evil is the nature of mankind.”p115 “there is no good on earth” p111 According to Brown, the world belongs to the devil.
ReplyDeletewhereas in "Nature" by Ralph Waldo Emerson, “Nature is the symbol of spirt”p40, “ Nature is thoroughly meditate” p 44. Nature and spirt are the components of the universe. For Emerson Nature is not the devil but the body of God´s soul.
In his essay, Nature, Emerson talks about being in nature, about being one with nature and with that, being with God, for he believed that God can be found everywhere in Nature (including people). In Hawthornes Young Goodman Brown, however, the nature the titular Goodman Brown finds himself in, is sinister, and leads men (and women) away from God.
ReplyDeleteWhile religion is used by both authors, Hawthorn uses it in a more moral way (throughout the text Christianity is often put above all else, and being a good christian is a priority for Goodman Brown; the moral superiority of Christianity is likely the influence of European writers). Emerson on the other hand, sees religion in a less moral and more natural sense. He talks about God being found in nature. Hawthornes narrator feels removed from God when he is in the forest, Emersons feels closer to him.
Many have been the texts written about Nature and its effect on humans with many different perspectives, at times, diametrically opposite, which, in turn, shape the way Man regards and, most of all, how Man behaves towards Nature. Looking at Emerson’s Nature and Hawthorne’s Young Goodman Brown one might initially think their views are quite disparate ranging from associating Nature with Hell or Paradise itself. Despite these more prevalent differences, both texts share some similitudes that will be analysed in this short essay.
ReplyDeleteStarting with their contact points, the idea of a walk or a journey through Nature guides both texts: in Hawthorne, a journey to one’s inner Evil and in Emerson, a journey to find one’s inner Goodness. Hereof, one extrapolates their most obvious similitude: proximity towards Religion and Spirituality, manifesting itself as Transcendentalism in Emerson and Puritanism in Hawthorne. The way both authors frame Nature in this portrait is, of course, diametrically opposite.
On the one hand, for Hawthorne, Nature, embodied in “Young Goodman Brown” as a dark forest, demonstrates several connections towards Hell. This link is clearly brought to light in the choice of words: “wilder”, “drearier”, “faintly”, “vanished”, “dark”, “rushing”, “instinct” (as opposed to rational), “frightful”, “creaking”, “yell”, “howling”, “beasts”, “roar”, “scorn” and most importantly “evil”. All these give a sense of Nature, as in the 19th Century fairy tales, a dark and suspicious place. There is an inherent restlessness that brings discomfort whilst being around Nature. For this reason, all senses are much more acute, especially hearing.
On the other hand, Nature is believed to be an embodiment of Goodness, in which there is “no disgrace, no calamity (…) which [it] cannot repair”. The words here too matter, most showing a relation towards virtue and God such as “perfect exhilaration, “sanctity reign”, and “reason and faith”. Contrasting with Hawthorne’s dystopic vision, Nature is a utopia of unchanging order created by God. Since God is Good, then so is its pure untouched Creation. Hence, Emerson believes that, by being in contact with it, he is “a particle of God”, reaching closer to the Almighty.
Secondly, it is also worth noting the contrast between this bucolic idyllic scenery and the urban areas, regarding the latter in a Romantic ideal of decadence and a reminder of the Fallen Man. Thirdly, the sense of “perpetual youth” contrasts with the elderly Young Goodman Brown at the end of Hawthorne’s short story. Whereas, for one, the contact with Nature fills Man with energy and youth, for the other, it only deteriorates Man’s Spirit.
Finally, there is an inherent contraction in Emerson’s text as the subject and the main protagonist is supposed to be Nature, but the author focuses more on what Nature makes him feel rather than what Nature is, going so far as to write the famous quote: “I become a transparent eye-ball”, a pun on “eye” which sees and give most of the data in reality and “I”, the individual who takes in all this data and transforms it into information. Whether reliable or not, that is for the Philosophers to decide. It becomes then silly to say “all mean egotism vanishes”, when such a focus is given to the individual and not, say, the community, as is the case of Hawthorne, for the better or worse.
Thus, it is possible to notice that the themes which set apart both texts are far greater than what unites them. The intricacies in both lead to radically different conclusions diametrically opposite. Whether Nature is inherently Good or Evil is up to the reader, as a way to better understand this World, a choice that has drastic consequences on how it is perceived.
In text 3 Standing Bear emphasizes on the differences between the white man and the Indian through the use of language. From a white man’s perspective, nature is seen negatively. For the Indians, nature is very positive and filled with knowledge.
ReplyDeleteIn text 4 Snyder zooms out and explains how language is the only means for civilization to build and grow relationships, as if we’re not part of all life on planet. Only by speaking language can you be seen as civilized, it’s only human so says how humans are superior over the other parts of nature.
So, Snyder explains how then the way of life of the Indian way of life, as explained by Standing Bear, is no civilized way of life. According to Standing Bear, Indians gain knowledge from their surroundings in nature, the white man does this through language and acts as if all life on the planet is not interrelated.
- Sophie Dijkman
In "Unnatural Writing", Snyder criticizes Nemerov's views on what constitutes civilization. Nemerov implies that "intrahuman relations are the pinnacle experience", thus completely diregarding any interrelation between humans and the world that surrounds them.
ReplyDeleteNemerov's view is directly opposed to that of Luther Standing Bear's in "Nature". Furthermore, it serves as a great example of his assessment of the "white man". Nemerov thinks of the wilderness as "disorderly and chaotic", ignoring nature's beauty, as well as its influence on human life, and vice-versa.
Considering the two excerpts from Young Goodman Brown by Nathanael Hawthorne and Nature by Ralph Waldo Emerson we can find similarities and differences between the two. How do two texts regarding Nature present such contrast and similarities? Both texts share the thought of nature as a journey or a walk, despite viewing it from distinct perspectives (good and bad). We can also point out the religious and spiritual aspects present in both excerpts but with a bigger predominance in the second. Where do they meet and where do they part ways?
ReplyDeleteAs we can understand from the analysis of the two texts, both authors express different relationships with Nature. Hawthorne writes about a feeling of restlessness while being in contact with the wilderness and that feeling conveys an undesirable sentiment towards said wilderness. To contrast the idea of restlessness and unpleasantry Emerson builds a relationship between human being and nature that comes from tranquillity. In Nature being in the wilderness is an experience to connect with the surroundings and appreciate them. There is no rush to reach a destination and instead what matters the most is the path taken and the discovering journey in itself.
The first author, Hawthorne, describes nature as a journey, although that from his perspective it is a frightful one and we can depict that the protagonist’s desire is to reach his final destination as quick as possible since he is surrounded by “dark wilderness” and various sounds of the wilderness itself, animals and even humans that make him uneasy. We can see that sound is the dominant sense through the use of the verbs “creaking”, “howling”, “yell” and “roar” and that Nature embodies the Evil in Young Goodman Brown.
On the second excerpt, R. W. Emerson portrays Nature as a good journey (positive experience) and one that allows admiring the surrounding environment and think introspectively (“I have enjoyed a perfect exhilaration”). There is a notorious spiritual presence in Nature which is confirmed by the following quotations: “plantations of God”, “sanctity reign”, “reason and faith”, and “I am part or particle of God”. Emerson delivers Nature as the embodiment of Good and shows the close proximity connection between human and “wildlife”. The idea we can take from Emerson is that Nature is the cleansing tool human beings need to better themselves: “There I feel that nothing can befall me in life, no disgrace, no calamity, (leaving me my eyes,) which nature cannot repair.”
Another interesting contrast between the excerpts is in how the authors view Nature and urban spaces. Although Hawthorne’s protagonist’s opinion on urban spaces and life is not explicitly written, we can imagine that the “city life” is the preferable scenario to Young Goodman Brown since he engages in an environment where he does not belong and experiences fear and discomfort all throughout the journey. With Emerson’s Nature we can see the exact opposite. There is a certain despise towards “city life” seeing as it goes against the idea of Nature purifying humans “In the wilderness, I find something more dear and connate than in streets or villages.”
It was interesting to see Nature as the Embodiment of Evil and Good and how the authors stuck to that perspective in the excerpts presented and never steered away from it. We do not see Hawthorne praising Nature and, following that line of analysis, we do not see Emerson criticizing Nature. Both authors present their antagonistic ideas regarding Nature and “wildlife,” and it is alluring to see how they both agree to see Nature as a journey/walk but they disagree on what lens to view it from. Since the two arguments are valid, it is up to the readers’ critical analysis to decide which side they resonate with the most. Is Nature a mean of “transport” and a way to get to places or is there something hiding beneath the surface?