Thoreau vs.

Crane Essay
Garrett Anderson
Monday, November 23, 2015
Dr. Simel, Green Group

Henry David Thoreau, in Walden, and Stephen Crane, in Maggie: A Girl of the Streets,
compare their views on philanthropists; however, they share opposing views on fate and selfreliance. Walden is a memoir of the time Thoreau spent living on his own at Walden Pond,
exploring the concept of self-reliance. Maggie: A Girl of the Streets is a realistic fictional novel
that tells the tale of a poor girl raised in the tenement homes of New York City during the Gilded
Age, her struggles to survive, and eventual descent into prostitution. The key difference between
the two authors is that Thoreau is a transcendentalist, and Crane is a realist. This is reflected by
each authors writings. Thoreau spends much of Walden discussing the defection of civilized
society, and Crane writes of the harsher elements of life in Maggie: A Girl of the Streets.
If Thoreau and Crane could meet, they would share views on philanthropists. Both men
believe that philanthropy is a noble, righteous cause, but that philanthropists themselves are
neither noble nor righteous. They both think that there is no true selfless act of philanthropy, as
the philanthropists of their time would only give aid to others in attempt to make people think
higher of them, or to feel better about themselves. They both see philanthropists as selfish, and
Thoreau even goes as far as to say Philanthropy is not love for ones fellow man in the broadest
sense (61,62). Here, Thoreau claims that philanthropists are not selfless in their acts of
philanthropy. Thoreau also later claims, I have never heard of a philanthropic meeting in which
it was sincerely proposed to do any good to me, or the likes of me (62). In claiming this, he
shows that at no point do philanthropists truly put a higher value on the help of others. Crane
backs this point up in his novel, using the clergy as the example of philanthropists. After her
family has disowned her, her boyfriend dumps her, and having no one left to turn to, Maggie sees
a church minister on the street. In a last, desperate hope, Maggie stumbles toward him. As
Maggie grows closer, the minister gave a convulsive movement and saved his respectability by

a vigorous side step (Crane 87). The minister has no one around him; so when presented with an
opportunity to help someone, he steps away in order to save his respectability. In another
attack of the clergy, Crane writes of a mission church run by a particularly rude minister. While
the poor are desperate for food and shelter, the minister composed his sermons of yous, and
attacked the poor, telling them you are damned (46). It appears to the public that the minister is
doing an honorable deed, but truthfully it is just a performance to make people think higher of
the clergy. Both of these quotes show that the clergy, and most other philanthropists, never
honestly give away aid to the poor purely to help them. Both Thoreau and Crane think that
philanthropists only help the poor when doing so helps themselves.
While Thoreau and Crane may have shared the same stance on philanthropists, their
views on fate would clash. Thoreau thinks that there is no such thing as fate, and that a person
can write his/her own story in life. He shows this throughout the entire book Walden, as the story
is about self-discovery and reliance. He writes, I desire that there be as many different persons
in the world as possible, but I would have each one be very careful to find out and pursue his
own way, and not his fathers or his mothers of his neighbors instead (Thoreau 59). Here,
Thoreau clearly expresses his desire that each person be himself or herself, showing his belief
that such a thing could be possible. Elsewhere, Thoreau writes, It is what a man thinks of
himself, that is which determines, or rather, indicates, his fate (10,11). Thoreau thinks that a
person can be and do anything that he/she wants to be and do. Crane, on the other hand, believed
that the environment into which a person is born dictates his/her entire life. He expresses this
belief at various points throughout the story. Of Maggie, Crane writes, The girl, Maggie,
blossomed in a mud puddle (49). He compares Maggies abnormally beautiful and innocent
characteristics as a flower, and her rough environment to a mud puddle. Maggie, on her own,

would be a beautiful flower, but growing up in the tenements with a dysfunctional family takes
this away, and instead makes her delicate and ugly. In the beginning of the story, Maggie is
tasked with caring for her little brother, Tommie. After just weeks, the babe, Tommie died
(Crane, 46). Tommie never has a chance to live because of the family into which he was born. He
isnt given the proper amount of care, and he is often shoved around. Because of this, he dies,
and isnt even given a proper funeral. Thoreau claims that a person is in complete control of
his/her own destiny, encouraging him/her to choose his/her own path, whereas Crane believed
that environment controls ones fate.
Thoreau and Crane would also have contradicting views on self-reliance. Thoreau, being
a transcendentalist, believes that self-reliance is the solution to nearly everything, and that
everyone can be self-reliant. At one point, Thoreau discusses a basket weaver who is frustrated
by the fact that no one wants to buy his baskets. Thoreau describes his own experience with
basket weaving, and that instead of trying to sell his baskets, he studied rather, how to avoid the
necessity of selling [the baskets] (19). Instead of attempting to sell the baskets for money and
becoming frustrated, Thoreau learns how to use the baskets for himself, and in doing so,
becomes self-reliant. This leaves him far more satisfied that the basket weaver. Thoreau later
states, I desire that [every man] find out and pursue his own way In saying this, Thoreau
confesses his desire that every person be self-reliant, as he believes that everyone doing so would
make the world a better place. Crane points out, through Maggie, that not everyone can be selfreliant. Maggie, being raised in such harsh conditions, doesnt have the opportunity to become
self-reliant. Instead of focusing on being self reliant, Maggie has to focus on her day-to-day
struggle to stay alive. She has to hide from her mother, who often beats Maggie and her siblings.
At one point her mother becomes so infuriated with Maggies younger brother for getting in a

fight, that in a drunken state she dragged him to an unholy sink, and soaking a rag in water,
began to scrub his lacerated face with it (Crane 41), leaving him screaming in pain. She also
always looks an excuse to beat Maggie, and even does so without one. Maggie also has to
struggle to care for herself and her siblings, as she receives almost no support from her parents.
This lack of care causes the death of her youngest brother, and leaves her and her remaining
brother to seek shelter at a mission church [where] they got warm at the stove, and spent
much of their time waiting for soup tickets (Crane 46). Maggies life is in constant danger,
which takes away the luxury of self-reliance.
Thoreau and Crane have two different views on life. Thoreau is a transcendentalist, and
Crane is a realist. They both believe that philanthropists arent truly selfless, but rather that they
are closer to being selfish in helping others, seeing that they only do so when it make them feel
better about themselves, or others think higher of them. They dont share views on fate. Thoreau
thinks fate can be set by actions, and Crane thinks fate is dictated by environment. The two also
clash on their views on self-reliance, as Thoreau believes that self reliance is the solution to
almost every problem in civilized society, and Crane believed that it isnt, seeing as though there
are people who cannot become self-reliant.

Works Cited
Crane, Stephen. Maggie: A Girl of the Streets. Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 1892. Print.
Thoreau, Henry David. Walden. New York: Barnes & Noble, 1854. Print.