Analyzing Emerson and Thoreau’s Writings to Answer Major Questions in Transcendental Studies

Since my research in the field of AMERICAN LITERATURE focuses distinctly on writing from the AMERICAN TRANSCENDENTALISTS, the objects of study are condensed to writings created during a span of only a few years.  While this may seem like a relatively small body of time and work, there are still immense literary annals devoted to writers from this period of time who dabbled with transcendental philosophies.  Writers such as Margaret Fuller, Bronson Alcott, Louisa May Alcott, Theodore Parker, and even Nathaniel Hawthorne and Walt Whitman, all published works of transcendental literature; however, my explicit study focuses on RALPH WALDO EMERSON and HENRY DAVID THOREAU’S contributions.  Historically, these two men produced the most essential works of transcendental literature, so their writings represent the most widely accepted objects of study in relation to American transcendental studies.  Even more specifically, my study looks at Emerson and Thoreau’s political works, and many of these works can be found in the Transcendentalist Club’s distinct publication, THE DIAL, where the transcendentalists were able to “communicate and exert their influence” from 1840-1844 (Gould 1652).

Click on the image of Thoreau and Emerson to learn more about the Association for Global New Thought.
Click on the image of Thoreau and Emerson to learn more about the Association for Global New Thought.

When scholars analyze Emerson and Thoreau’s political essays and other literary contributions, there are myriad studies performed.  Many scholars choose to analyze specific essays in order to identify contradictions, paradoxes, and incongruities among Emerson or Thoreau’s ideas.  For example, Shawn St. Jean examined Thoreau’s “Resistance to Civil Government,” “Slavery in Massachusetts,” and the John Brown essays in order to deviate from normal perceptions and show that Thoreau actually shows consistency in his beliefs, even if those beliefs are altered by political and social upheavals (354).  Meanwhile, although analyzing each writer’s potential inconsistencies is a common mode of study, there are plenty of other critics who analyze the writings of the time period in order to show how transcendental literature relates to other historic movements in the United States and the rest of the world.  Myriad critics link America’s period of transcendentalism to the European Renaissance, England’s Restoration, America’s Southern Renaissance, or the Puritan influence, yet others see America’s renaissance as its own unique entity, one that is a revolt or completely groundbreaking in its approach.  Nevertheless, after reviewing a majority of the objects of study, the more collective opinion is that the transcendentalist age was not a birth; instead, it was a renaissance that gathered inspiration from numerous previous ages while generating some of its own novel nuances (Fulton 407).

While some of these areas may be touched upon in my own research, my primary goal is to analyze Emerson and Thoreau’s works from a POSTCOLONIAL standpoint. While performing this research, looking at transcendental literature through a CULTURAL STUDIES lens is required.  Since cultural/postcolonial studies are tied to the inception of the NEW CRITICISM in America, analyzing the transcendental works to identify how they fit into the New Criticism approach is necessary.  Furthermore, in order to accomplish these tasks, the importance of the history of American literature studies also needs to be addressed to show how transcendental studies can help answer some of the major questions posed by scholars of both postcolonial and New Criticism studies.  One of the major questions related to the New Criticism focuses on what works of literature were revived after WWI.  As Gregory Paine notes, Emerson and Thoreau were two of the authors whose works rose in the “literary firmament” during the 1930s (631).  This augmentation fits well with the New Criticism’s objectives to become a cultural and historical method where continuity could be charted in literary traditions in writings from the Puritans, Transcendentalists, and Romantics (Graff 217).

While this connection between the New Criticism, the Transcendentalists, and cultural studies may seem obvious, the inclusion of transcendental studies is often debated.  Graff continues by noting that New Criticism’s emergence created a revival in unpopular writers like Melville and Thoreau, for the critics were attempting to scorn everything academic (213).  The main hurdle here is that Emerson and Thoreau’s political works were often viewed by many scholars as primarily academic, and a major question as to transcendentalism’s place as a conservative or liberal movement must be posed.  Obviously, most critics refer to the movement as liberal; however, certain elements of Emerson’s writings in particular display more conservative approaches that are unique but not radical.  As Thomas P. Miller writes, “The New Criticism was instrumental in distancing literary studies from the more politically engaged schools of criticism that were popular in the Progressive era—those of “Leftists, or Proletarians…” (162). Miller’s statement muddies the water further, for it seems nearly impossible that the New Criticism can praise Thoreau while having contempt for academic and political literature.

The connections between the New Criticism and American transcendentalism are quite hazy, but most scholars find or consider major connections between transcendentalism and postcolonial studies.  According to Kropf, “American literature, in contrast and uniquely among national literatures, defines itself according to geographical and political criteria” (21).  This is precisely what transcendentalist writings do, and postcolonial studies remain part of this realm too.  Perhaps Renu Juneja sums up postcolonial studies best when she says, “This is a literature that veritably forces on our consciousness, and at all various levels, the fact that ways of thinking are altered by this contact between two different cultures” (65). While this summation clearly articulates the value of postcolonial studies, it can simultaneously be used to define exactly what transcendental writers like Emerson and Thoreau endeavored to accomplish.

Works Cited

Fulton, Joe B. “Reason for Renaissance: The Rhetoric of Reformation and Rebirth in the Age of     Transcendentalism.” The New England Quarterly 80.3 (2007): 383-407. JSTOR. Web. 21 October 2016.

Gould, Rebecca Kneale. “Transcendentalism.” Encyclopedia of Religion and Nature. ed. Bron      Taylor. New York: Bloomsbury Academic Publishing, 2010, Print.

Graff, Gerald.  “The Promise of American Literature Studies.”   Professing Literature: An Institutional History.  Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987, pp. 209-25.  Print.

Juneja, Renu. “Pedagogy of Difference.” College Teaching 41.2 (1993): 64-70. EBSCOhost: Education Research Complete. Web. 18 October 2016.

Kropf, Carl R. “The Nationalistic Criticism of Early American Literature.” Early American Literature 18.1 (1983): 17-30. JSTOR. Web. 13 September 2016.

Miller, Thomas P. The Evolution of College English: Literacy Studies from the Puritans to the             Postmoderns.  Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2011. Print.

Paine, Gregory. “Trends in American Literary Scholarship with Reviews of Some Recent Books.” Studies in Philology 29.4 (1932): 630-43. JSTOR. Web. 28 October 2016.

St. Jean, Shawn. “Thoreau’s Radical Consistency.” Massachusetts Review 39.3 (1998): 341-57. JSTOR. Web. 24 October 2016.

Transcendental Theories Pervading the Field of Study

Although there are myriad theories associated with the study of AMERICAN TRANSCENDENTALISM, two of the most prevalent theories used to generate knowledge in the field focus on apparent contradictions found in transcendental writings and the transcendental period’s existence as it relates to the past, present, and future.  Typically, both of these studies center on the two most illustrious writers of the time, RALPH WALDO EMERSON and HENRY DAVID THOREAU.  Using the political and philosophical writings of these two men, along with records of their political oratories, these objects of study are paramount in order to emphasize and extend theoretical frameworks.   While using these objects of study to generate knowledge, various stances have been established among critics, trends have been identified, and connections to American literature’s history have become evident.

Studies of the transcendental period ebb and flow, for there have been times in history where transcendental criticism has been conspicuously absent and other moments where numerous studies have been conducted.  Joe B. Fulton notes that there have always been informed discussions about transcendentalism’s influence ever since the TRANSCENDENTAL CLUB’S first meeting in 1836 (383).  However, as Gregory Paine indicates, the magnitude of transcendental studies is not always abundant, and the area of study begins to excel after WWI (631).  Of course, this is not surprising, considering that all studies in American literature also exploded after the war.  One valuable study, conducted by F.O. Matthiessen in 1941, helped shape the theoretical framework of transcendental criticism.  When researching Thoreau’s writings, which became a source of “critical bemusement and controversy in America since interest in them revived” early in the twentieth century, Matthiessen reflected on the writings’ contradictions and causal relationship to the past (St. Jean 341).  In his work, Matthiessen mentioned, but blatantly avoided, in-depth analysis of Thoreau’s paradoxes of social thought; however, this avoidance instigated a range of responses and studies.  “Later critics have been less gun-shy, but Matthiessen’s crisp assessment of Thoreau’s incongruity has defined a central point of contention among their analysis of the work that comprises Thoreau’s political canon” (St. Jean 341).

Click on the image of Thoreau's works of literature and navigate the Thoreau Society's website.
Click on the image of Thoreau’s works of literature and navigate through the Thoreau Society’s website.

While studying Thoreau’s works, a majority of scholars have accepted and advanced a theory articulating Thoreau’s contradictions; for example, even his individual works have been labeled as a “tissue of self-contradiction” (St. Jean).  This more authoritative view seems to make sense, for as Gregory Paine concedes, ignorance abounds because there are so many fascinating paradoxes about Thoreau, not just in his writings, but the man, too (632).  Meanwhile, on the other end of the spectrum, critics like St. Jean feel like a majority of scholars prefer to call Thoreau inconsistent rather than focusing on how he maintains his overall philosophies while adjusting to certain scenarios (350).  Nevertheless, Thoreau is not the only writer of the time period whose work is analyzed to identify apparent contradictions, for Emerson can often be evaluated in the same manner, and even the whole concept of transcendentalism can be hazy at times.  For instance, one critic, Professor Gohdes, presented his analyses of transcendental principles, but he was confused by the numerous definitions of the movement; therefore, he articulated that transcendentalism was not primarily a philosophy or a reform, just a spiritual attitude and new school of thought that emphasized leaders and activities (Paine 639-40).  Gohdes, like numerous other scholars, contemplates the transcendental period’s existence as it relates to the past, present, and future.

Attempting to define transcendentalism and its philosophies is the other paramount focus of study worth noting; the theories associated with whether transcendentalism mimics the past or whether it is its own novel entity help contribute to the field of study as a whole.  Looking back at Matthiessen, he theorized that the New England philosophical movement produced its own renaissance (Fulton 384).  However, this theory is the antithesis of what a majority of critics endorse; in fact, the more authoritative approach is that transcendentalism sparked a rebirth of the European Reformation and Renaissance (Fulton 390).  Even though this stance takes precedence among critics, other scholars identify the transcendental movement as a revolt against Lockean Philosophy, a revolution against American values, or a mystical evolution (Pendery 53).

For further information regarding John Locke's philosophies and literary contributions, click his image.
For further information regarding John Locke’s philosophies and literary contributions, click his image.

Essentially, some scholars look deeper into other cultures of the past in order to theorize about American transcendentalism, some look at solely American influences, such as the Puritans, some focus specifically on the time period when the transcendentalist thinkers thrived, and others examine and compare future resurgences that took place after transcendental principles dissipated. Identifying how the New England movement impacted future renaissances has been most commonly studied in the last decade; for example, some critics value MARGARET FULLER’S contributions to the transcendental movement as essential precursors to the Feminist movement (Miller 102).  Meanwhile, David Pendery has analyzed the connections between the transcendentalism’s initial “American Renaissance” and the twentieth-century “Nashville Agrarian Southern Renaissance” (41).  As indicated, the theories and methods utilized to generate knowledge in the field of American transcendental studies may vary; however, they have generated authoritative trends, reflected on a variety of histories, and have continuously scoped Emerson and Thoreau’s works as the primary objects of study.

Works Cited

Fulton, Joe B. “Reason for Renaissance: The Rhetoric of Reformation and Rebirth in the Age of     Transcendentalism.” The New England Quarterly 80.3 (2007): 383-407. JSTOR. Web. 21 October 2016.

Miller, Thomas P. The Evolution of College English: Literacy Studies from the Puritans to the             Postmoderns.  Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2011. Print.

Paine, Gregory. “Trends in American Literary Scholarship with Reviews of Some Recent Books.” Studies in Philology 29.4 (1932): 630-43. JSTOR. Web. 28 October 2016.

Pendery, David. “A Comparative Study of Two American Cultural Renaissances.” Fu Jen            Studies: Literature & Linguistics 47 (2014): 39-60. Gale: Literature Resource Center.  Web. 28 October 2016.

St. Jean, Shawn. “Thoreau’s Radical Consistency.” Massachusetts Review 39.3 (1998): 341-57. JSTOR. Web. 24 October 2016.