Wednesday 26/05/21
‘Self-Reliance’ by Ralph Waldo Emerson
The Birds by Daphne du Maurier (pdf)
My thoughts:
I love how e.e.cummings has taken the tropes found in many love poems (from The Song of Solomon to Shakespeare's sonnets), and subverted it. Sometimes far raunchier than expected, sometimes quite romantic, it keeps us on our toes. I think my wife might kill me, however, if I refer to her vagina as "a pleasant song".
I don't enjoy the essay anywhere as much. For Emerson to suggest Plato thought for himself is baffling, and the whole thing has too much celebration of "originality" and relativism with no attempt to question either. I wonder what Emerson would have thought of Asimov's "shoulders of giants" comment?
I understand Emerson has come from a place where he wants to praise self reliance, but in today's context of "fake news" and "skepticism", this essay does not stand up well. Emerson intends to praise self reliance, and instead praises selfishness and aversion to critical thinking.
But hey, at least he doesn't hide from himself:
Then, again, do not tell me, as a good man did to-day, of my obligation to put all poor men in good situations. Are they my poor? I tell thee, thou foolish philanthropist, that I grudge the dollar, the dime, the cent, I give to such men as do not belong to me and to whom I do not belong.
Men do what is called a good action [...] Their works are done as an apology or extenuation of their living in the world,--as invalids and the insane pay a high board. Their virtues are penances.
This essay is far more, let's say, kind towards Emerson and his thesis, suggesting "that Emerson’s self-reliance was part of an optimistic current in American thought that went hand in hand with material abundance and westward expansion." If the world is full of abundance, and everyone has the same access to said abundance, perhaps Emerson's philosophy would not be so horrifying.
The Birds, of course, is the short story that Hitchcock's film is loosely based on. Somehow I hadn't read it until today, so was excited to. Not having read any criticism of the work, I wonder how different people take certain moment. The birds coming together when they normally wouldn't, for example. Do the birds represent something specific? Is it a comment about fearing "the masses"? It would be tempting today to see the environmental message within. Whatever it is, I'm a sucker for this kind of speculative fiction and loved reading it.
I do find humor in the fact that most writing groups today would have crucified Du Maurier over this passage:
Nat had forgotten it was Tuesday. This showed how the events of the preceding night had shaken him.
On the other hand, this passage is a masterpiece:
She poured out a plateful of the Triggs’ soup, cut him a large slice of the Triggs’ bread, and spread their dripping upon it.
That constant reminder of who's property they used, and why adds so much tension.