5 Responses to Pieces
Nature: I think Ralph Waldo Emerson’s “Nature” is the best and most interesting out of all the pieces we read about transcendentalism. Emerson’s work is also my personal favorite. Additionally, I think it achieves the idea of simplicity most out of all essays. “Nature” is sweet, short and easy to understand – like Emerson’s writing style and language. Conversely, I feel, Thoreau's pieces are long, confusing and overextended in terms of tone and language. “Nature” it not overly full of high flown metaphors and literary devices. Instead, “Nature” is aimed at the common men, not philosophers. It's trying to show the ideas to everyone and share the concepts with the world. “Nature” uses ideas that can easily be grasped by anyone. Emerson writes that if you walk on a common green while on a break that's experiencing nature the way I want you to I agree with “Nature” the most out of all the essays. It might just be because I was confused by Thoreau's complicated explanations; but, I also think the ideas convened in the short essay really are the core of Transcendentalism, which is "to experience nature every day". That's all Emerson is trying to show to the reader. Emerson is not trying to completely change their outlook on life, or make them live in a forest. Emerson is a lot less radical than Thoreau, and stayed relatively conservative in his writings. To put it in modern day “gamer terms,” Emerson is the basic and structure package and Thoreau is the complicated booster pack. Emerson writes, "Crossing a bare common, in snow puddles" meaning anywhere there is something natural and open, you can have the experience there. I agree completely.
Word Count: 298
Walden: I didn't really like Walden that much. I feel like Thoreau takes extreme viewpoints and rambles in his writing a lot. Also, it was confusing and hard to understand the point he was trying to make in comparison to Emerson. To me, it felt like Thoreau repeated himself over and over again, in a sort of never-ending cycle. In Walden, Thoreau went off to live in a forest by himself, which I think is a very extreme interpretation of Transcendentalism. Like I stated in the first response, I really think Transcendentalism is about just experiencing nature everyday, like walking in a park on your break time. But Thoreau take it to the deep end. I think his example about the trains doesn't really make any sense either. He tries to say if no one wants the trains then we won't need them. He writes, "if we stay at home and mind our business who will want railroads?" and, "but to go tinkering upon our lives to improve them?" Here I think Thoreau is being ridiculous and very over-the-top ideologically. I think nobody needs the trains, they just like them. Trains make life easier and are faster. Trains help people to survive and make a living. Trains are also sometimes enjoyable and help give people food and clothing. It's not a matter of necessity, but a matter of want and desire. I think most people don't desire to leave everything and live alone in a forest. We desire to better our existences and why is that bad? Thoreau I think just tried expanding on something that didn't really require expansion. The philosophies of Transcendentalism are short and simple and that's the point of them. You don't need an over-complicated essay to explain them.
Word Count: 293
The Most Sublime Spectacle on Earth: I enjoyed “The Most Sublime Spectacle on Earth” by John Wesley Powell a lot. Mainly, I enjoyed Powell’s writing because it was really descriptive in word choices and he created beautiful language I also enjoyed Powell’s work because it didn't talk about Transcendentalism or how you "should" or "need" to experience nature. Rather, Powell just painted a brilliant picture for you to enjoy any way you wanted. Powell’s writing style left more of the thinking and interpreting work up to you. You could compare it to a painting masterpiece of the written style. I think the author's little analogies about the Grand Canyon were really clever and help the picture become vivid in your mind. For instance, Powell’s analogy comparing the sound of the water to beautiful music was terrific, he stated "It is a land of music. The river thunders, swelling in floors of music." Powell then went on to explain the music and tides, etc. which I think lets you go even farther in your own imagination. The way the author expresses his awe and amazement really made me feel like I was there with him and the Canyon was so incredible I couldn't speak. His vocabulary choice is amazingly rich too, ranging from words like “tempest” to “multifarious.” These word choices help with the painting of the picture as well. Mostly, this is a really well written piece that I enjoyed thoroughly in class. I really find it interesting because most of the things we read were telling you to go out and be with nature or experience, etc. However, Powell’s essay had no aim in mind but to share an amazing experience with you. I think that's really considerate of the author to share something like that with the world and his readers. I appreciate that Powell put that much work into his writing (versus preaching). He's not trying to prove a point, just entertain you (and maybe, subtly then let you come to your own conclusions).
Word Count: 336
Snowbound: I think Snowbound is an interesting poem. It tells a story about a family stuck in a deadly winter storm on their farm. I think the author took something relatively boring and uneventful and turned it into a great poem. I like how quickly it changes from fear and cold to warmth in the house. It always seems to be jumping between amazement of the snow and fear of the cold. I think however, some parts of the poem need to be a bit more clarified. It may just be is artistic style or choice but I think the parts about the animals are confusing and left relatively blank and bland. I also found it hard in the second paragraph to understand the pain of the people and what the cold was actually doing to them. The part later on where the father talks to the children and sort of interacts with them isn't really described either. I feel like I don't know anything about this family and I'm not that invested in their survival of this storm. On the other hand, I really liked his description of the snowflakes. I though comparing them to a "whirl-dance" was very descriptive and showed in the reader's head how quick the snow flurries were moving.
Word Count: 215
Thanatopsis: I really liked William Cullen Bryant’s poem,“Thanatopsis.” I thought it had great and interesting ideas that it talked about in clever and well-veiled ways. I thought it got a bit repetitive at times, in many of the same ways Thoreau's work was repetitive. But, I think Bryant kept the ideas fresh and the story interesting through the shifting focus and all the benefits he gave to death. It's a bit creepy in that sense and I feel like Bryant was obsessed with death (or crazy), because in the poem he praised death for all its amazing effects and how great it would be to die and live with kings and nature. It almost seemed like he was pointing out all the bad things in life and all the "great" things in death. I think Bryant was a little biased though and not really accepting all the good things about life. I kind of just want to yell at him, "Do you know what death is?" But, I do think that the poem was very well written, even if its topic was controversial. Bryant used a lot of great descriptions about the sun and the rocks, as well as other natural decorations. For instance he wrote, "The venerable woods-rivers that mover in majesty, are but solemn decorations of the great tomb of man." I think that quote was a really descriptive way to convey Bryant’s point. His point was that even in death, you live on through the plants, trees, rocks, rivers, etc.
Word Count: 253
No comments:
Post a Comment