an astute evaluation to decide whether Thoreau ’ s proposed redirection and concerns are led with a social conscience , or by his own romantic ideals .
To understand the meaning of Thoreau ’ s emphasis on individualism and placing moral intuition above governing institutions , it is important to acknowledge Ralph Waldo Emerson ’ s essay , ‘ Self-Reliance ’. 4 Emerson defines individualism as a profound trust for one ’ s own intuition : “ To believe your own thought , to believe that what is true for you in your private heart , is true for all men – that is genius .” 5 The constitution of ‘ genius ’ ( having confidence in one ’ s own intuitive truth ) is at the heart of Thoreau ’ s principles . For instance , he repetitively uses rhetorical questions to make the reader question governing institutions . He asks , “ Shall we be contented to obey [ unjust laws ], or shall we endeavour to amend them […] or shall we transgress them at once ?” ( p . 958 ), going onto critique majoritarianism . His assertiveness encapsulates Emerson ’ s call for men to find a genius within themselves . The use of the plural pronoun , “ we ”, creates a sense of familiarity with the reader , highlighting Thoreau ’ s confidence in his own intuition ; his language also creates an allusion that Thoreau is speaking to a social conscience . The use of the verbs , “ obey ”, “ amend ” and “ transgress ” highlights Thoreau ’ s push for new direction away from unjust laws . His inciteful language and attempt to implement a more morally driven society shows hope for the future .
Nonetheless , Thoreau ’ s inconsistencies must be underpinned , and it is important to differentiate between Thoreau and Emerson ’ s views . Leigh Kathryn Jenco insightfully argues that Thoreau ’ s outlook is “ more militant ” and “ more morally centred ” than his mentor Emerson . 6 Whilst Emerson ’ s solution to the social state of America is for people to “ renovate life and our social state ”, Thoreau moves beyond this and presses upon his reader the need to refuse the state in order to incite the abolition of slavery and redirect the future of the nation . 7 Nancy Rosenblum compounds Jenco , noting that “ anger , challenge , and insistence on change ” accompany militancy , as well as “ a feeling of political insignificance and actual powerlessness ”. 8 These feelings problematise Thoreau ’ s ideas by making his pacifist views seem contradictory to his underlying aggressive attitude .
For instance , the use of belligerent language and fixation with violence and power questions whether his proposed solution reflects a social conscience , or a romantic soul that is too selfabsorbed in a conquest for identity and redemption . 9 Whilst Emerson called for and maintained an ‘ armed neutrality ’, Thoreau chose antagonism : “ I quietly declare war with the State after my fashion ” ( p . 965 ). His support for violence can be seen throughout his life , for example , ten years after the publication of ‘ Civil Disobedience ’, he demonstrated willingness to support John Brown ’ s 1859 raid on Harper ’ s Ferry . Despite arguing that the best way to refute slavery is to deny the state ’ s authority by refusing to pay taxes (“[…] those who call themselves abolitionists should at once effectually withdraw their support , both in person and property , from this government …”), his militance makes his views increasingly elusive and self-contradictory ( p . 959 ). Thoreau undeniably reflected a real concern for the injustices and problems in society , as well as a concern over its future , but his essay becomes more projective of a manifestly aggressive , militant spirit .
The notable shift in extremity leads readers to believe that Thoreau ’ s objective is to impose his conscience and ‘ genius ’ onto others as a powerful force for amendment . He imperatively asks of his reader : “ Cast your whole vote , not a strip of paper merely , but your whole influence ” ( p . 957 ). Thoreau develops a challenge against
SCHOOL OF THE ARTS 2021 / 2022
107