Thoreau/Crane Essay

Benjamin Yokoyama CAP English 9 Red Group 10/28/13

Henry David Thoreau in Walden and Stephen Crane in Maggie: A Girl of the Streets, share views on philanthropy and material acquisitions, but disagree in their views on selfreliance. Walden is an autobiographical account of Thoreaus stay in the wilderness of Walden Pond, a few miles outside of Boston. He shows others that he can not only survive with very little in his life, but also thrive and lead a desirable life. Maggie: A Girl of the Streets tells the story of Maggie, a young girl living in a poor neighborhood in New York City, who is forced into prostitution after her disloyal boyfriend and her unforgiving family leave her to live alone, eventually drowning herself. The 2 books written in 2 different time periods express the same views of philanthropy and material acquisitions and disagree on self-reliance.

Thoreau and Crane share views on philanthropy. They believe that philanthropy is overrated, and that while it helps people right then and there, it does not save people from poverty. Philanthropists in both stories try to help the poor people by feeding them or donating money to their cause. In Walden a philanthropist is giving money to a poor man in Concord, but Thoreau thinks that this philanthropist, and all other philanthropists, are simply exploiting what is wrong with society. Thoreau thinks The philanthropist too often surrounds mankind with the remembrance of his own cast-off griefs as an atmosphere, and calls it sympathy (63 Walden), and that these kind people are wrong for helping less wealthy people because they are wasting money by giving it to people who dont know how to use it. Because [Philanthropy] is a charity that hides a multitude of sins (63 Walden), the rich should keep what they earn because they know how to properly use it, and these materials should not be given away. Philanthropists, to Thoreau, are kind people

performing generous acts that are unnecessary because the poor should not be given help so as to not show the world the low class in America. Stephen Crane tells of a pastor in a soup kitchen with many poor people waiting for their food. The pastor is continuously talking about where these sinners stood next to God, while they warm next to the stove, and Many of the sinners were impatient over the pictured depths of their degradation (46 Maggie). The sinners just want their food, but the pastor or philanthropist criticizes them saying you are damned And the reader of sounds might have seen the reply go forth from the ragged people: Wheres our soup? (46 Maggie). This philanthropist, while giving them food, a necessity for survival, is just judging them the whole time, telling them they will never succeed in life, while really the preacher is just being used to get food. Thoreau says that philanthropists are not needed because they bring out the worst in society and exploit what is wrong. Crane writes about how philanthropists, even when trying to get a point across, are only being used for free materials. Authors Thoreau and Crane both share a sharp dislike for philanthropists.

Henry David Thoreau was a simple man, and he did not require much to survive. He shows in Walden that an overflow of materials is not necessary for survival, and only the essentials: Food, Shelter, Clothing, and Fuel were necessities. He takes pride in showing how life can easily be led with those simple things, so that the floor does not give way under the visitor while he is admiring the gewgaws (33 Walden). Thoreau says that people would rather show off to visitors rather than build a sturdy structure for their house. Ones materials for a home should not consist of things that will not help the owner live simply. Gewgaws are just extra things to dust and will never be used. In Maggie: A Girl of the

Streets, Maggie becomes a prostitute and eventually kills herself because of the strains on her mental and physical health. Although she kills herself, she has all the necessities for survival. At the beginning of the novel she has a home, a source of food, clothing and fuel in the house. Maggie has the essential materials, but does not use them, and ruins herself. She leaves and goes with Pete instead. Come ahn and well have a hell of a time the room filled with a chaotic mass of debris (65 Maggie). If she had stayed with her steady materials at her home, instead of going away with Pete, who has materials as well, she would have had the necessities for survival. In the end her mother does not allow her back into her house and Pete dumps her and she loses both of her sources for materials, which leads to her demise. Both Thoreau and Crane show that a very limited amount of materials are needed when it comes to simple living, at Walden Pond or in the tenements of New York. Henry David Thoreau, a Transcendentalist, promotes the idea of self-reliance, which shows in Walden when he lives alone off of only his own work. He succeeds through only himself. On the other hand, Crane was an influential Realist who wrote of young Maggie, a girl that goes into prostitution and eventually kills herself because she is abandoned by everyone she loved. Maggie needs her family, although not realizing this when she goes off with Pete, and when she returns home they are not there for her. Crane implies that her death is because she did not have enough emotional support to help her through her pains. Thoreau lives alone at Walden Pond to provide evidence that self-reliance is the best way to live. He brings self-reliance to the extreme by isolating himself, but makes his point. Although Thoreau shows that in living alone and isolated, some have asked what I got to eat; if I did not feel lonesome; if I was not afraid; and the like (7 Walden). He becomes self-

reliant and he has a better, calmer, more peaceful life than he has previously. He wants to start over and show readers that living self-reliantly is replenishing. In Cranes story, Maggie kills herself because she thinks she can survive by being more self-reliant, but it is shown that she cannot. She leaves her mother and her home in favor of Pete, who ends up not helping her. When Maggie returns from her dating Pete, her family members did not help her get over the loss of Pete, and instead banished her for being ruined by him. Jimmie especially does not approve, [he] had an idea it wasnt common courtesy for a friend to come to ones home and ruin ones sister (65 Maggie). Her family has nothing to offer but hate and disgrace, no condolences are given to her. Maggie is left alone on the streets and becomes a prostitute, and then becomes so depressed that she subsequently kills herself. If she was given support instead of hate when she returned home she would have felt better about getting over Pete and less disappointed about it. Thoreau supports self-reliance, and proves it works for him, but Crane writes about how Maggie is led to her death while trying to be self-reliant, something she cannot do; she needs support from other people in her life.

Walden, written by Henry David Thoreau, and Maggie: A Girl of the Streets, written by Stephen Crane have similarities regarding philanthropy and the acquisition of materials, and have differences regarding self-reliance. Both men believe philanthropists are unhelpful because the people who receive their gifts do not know how to properly use the money. Thoreau and Crane think that lives should be led simply and with limited materials. Only the bare necessities of life are needed for survival in any environment, whether the pond or the city. They have contradicting views on self-reliance. Thoreau believed that everyone should become more self-reliant to truly be living life to its fullest, while Crane

shows a lost Maggie, without family or friends for support. Thoreau and Crane, both inspirational men of their times, share opinions on philanthropy, and the acquisition of materials, but have different views on self-reliance.

Bibliography Works Cited Crane, Stephen. Maggie: A Girl of the Streets. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Print. Thoreau, Henry David. Walden. N.p., 1854. Print.