Self-Reliance by Ralph Waldo Emerson

He mentions slavery and Abolition, for example, non to argue that slavery is wrong, which he obviously believes, but to shake light on the hypocrisy of any person who would party favour the freeing of the slaves and then treat his family or neighbor with less(prenominal) than a loving attitude (123). His rare mention of sex activity (or even the incident that the effeminate of the species exists) has to do with, over again, non gender at all but the need for any student--male or female--to grow beyond the teacher and think for herself or himself (140).

The electrical outlet of class finds more frequent mention, but once again the point is not class encroach but conflict between the individualist and the conformist. For example, he writes of his aversion to philanthropists, to give to the little whom he does not even know: "Are they my short? I tell thee, thou foolish philanthropist, that I repugnance the dollar . . . I give to such men as do not belong to me and to whom I do not belong" (124). Emerson here seems to be espousing a most blimpish sociopolitical philosophy, declaring that it is up to the individual and his or her family to take care of themselves. He shows no compassion for the needy, and hates the fact that he still finds himself giving to charities against his will.

The approach of Emerson's self-reliance certainly reflects the basic tenets of conservative Republicanism. He argues that each individual should take care of himself or herself, and if unity find

Thoreau would prefer a ball club entirely free of government, free of any interference in the life of the individual, but he recognizes that men are not "prepared" for such freedom (222). Until they are, he suggests that they recognize that " all(prenominal) man has a conscience . . . that we should be men first, and subjects subsequently" (223). In other words, human beings should see themselves, and be seen by whatever government is absolutely necessary, as individuals, not mechanical, conforming parts of a social or political or economic machine. It is also the duty of the individual to resist, and to refuse to be a participant in, the government which treats other individuals not as individuals but as things.

In general, Thoreau is referring here to any and every(prenominal) individual, for it is the government's very purpose, in Thoreau's view, to crush individuality. Specifically, Thoreau does not address the thin of gender, but he does speak to race.

Hawthorne did not likely set a blatantly political aspect to his story, but peradventure that makes the issue of gender even more important to politics. The fact that Hawthorne and most readers probably take for granted that no cleaning lady would ever likely act as Wakefield did tells us more than about society in which male dominance and female passivity is taken for granted. Would a Mrs. Wakefield in the late twentieth century so automatically take back her preserve? In fact, Hawthorne does at one point note that Wakefield is congregating to his wife and holds for her "all the affectionateness of which his heart is capable, while he is slowly fading out of hers" (295). The suggestion is that he was incompetent of much affection to start with, and it was a selfish affection in any case, while her love is fading course because that is what love inevitably does when it is abandoned as hers was. Hawthorne's story is a warning to us, perhaps primarily to men, that the love we find in this world is a gift which should be received and given up back freely, in faith t
Order your essay at Orderessay and get a 100% original and high-quality custom paper within the required time frame.