Part 9

Urged thereto by his generous friend Alexander Ireland of the Manchester ‘Examiner,’ who took on himself all the business responsibilities, Emerson (in 1847) made a lecturing trip to England. He spoke in Manchester, Edinburgh, London, and elsewhere. The lectures were ‘attacked by the clergymen,’ and the attacks met with ‘pale though brave defences’ by Emerson’s friends. After a few weeks in Paris, then in the throes of the revolution, the lecturer returned by way of England to America.

The crisis in the anti-slavery conflict was approaching. Emerson, in spite of his philosophical attitude towards reformers, became more and more identified with the Abolitionists. During a political speech at Cambridge he was repeatedly hissed by students. According to an eye-witness, he ‘seemed absolutely to enjoy it.’ As late as 1861 he was received with marked hostility by the audience which gathered at the annual meeting of the Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society. ‘The Mob roared whenever I attempted to speak, and after several beginnings I withdrew.’ The breaking out of the war in a way relieved him. Now people knew where they stood.

His chief source of income was cut off for a time. The public was not in the mood for lectures such as his. Later he found it possible to resume his courses, and he continued to lecture effectively until within a few years of his death.

Emerson’s principal books are: _Nature_, 1836; _Essays_, 1841; _Essays_, ‘second series,’ 1844; _Poems_, 1847; _Miscellanies_, 1849 (lectures and addresses, together with a reprint of _Nature_); _Representative Men_, 1850; _English Traits_, 1856; _Conduct of Life_, 1860; _May-Day and Other Pieces_, 1867; _Society and Solitude_, 1870; _Letters and Social Aims_, 1876; _Lectures and Biographical Sketches_, 1884; and _Natural History of Intellect_, 1893. He edited a number of Carlyle’s books, contributed several chapters to the _Memoirs of Margaret Fuller Ossoli_ and compiled a poetic anthology, _Parnassus_, 1875. _The Correspondence of Thomas Carlyle and Ralph Waldo Emerson_ (edited by C. E. Norton), 1883, contains two hundred of Emerson’s letters.

In 1863 Emerson was one of the ‘visitors’ to the Military Academy at West Point. In 1866 he was Phi Beta Kappa orator at Harvard, and the following year received from his college the degree of LL. D.

From 1867 to 1879 he was an overseer of Harvard. In 1870, before a little audience of students from the advanced classes, he gave a course on the ‘Natural History of Intellect,’ the subject in the handling of which he had hoped to write his master work. One of the surprises of his later life was his nomination for the office of Lord Rector of Glasgow University by the independent party (1874). There were two other candidates. Emerson polled five hundred votes. Disraeli was victor with seven hundred votes.

Emerson’s memory failed gradually, but the defect was not much noticed until after the shock consequent on the burning of his house (1872). A trip to Egypt did much to restore his health and he never lost the ‘royal trait of cheerfulness.’ He died, after a brief illness, on April 27, 1882.

II

EMERSON’S CHARACTER

The praise which Emerson gives to character at the expense of luxurious surroundings was sincere. His own tastes were very simple. ‘Can anything be so elegant as to have few wants and to serve them one’s self, so as to have something left to give, instead of being always prompt to grab?’ Acknowledging himself enmeshed in the conventionalities of ‘civilized’ life and no more responsible than his fellow victims, he nevertheless did what he could to follow out his theory. He would at least not be one of the infirm people of society, who, if they miss any one of their comforts, ‘represent themselves as the most wronged and most wretched persons on earth.’ Emerson did not live in the woods on twenty-seven cents a week, but he had no objection to a friend’s living that way if the friend found it profitable. For himself he would not be ‘absurd and pedantic in reform.’

No characteristic is more marked than his spirit of tolerance. It was not of a smooth, purring sort, growing out of eagerness to please or unwillingness to offend, but rather an aggressive tolerance. Emerson would not merely grant to every man ‘the allowance he takes,’ but would even force him to take it. He was patient with the most obnoxious of reformers. And he could be tolerant with those who could tolerate nothing.

With pronounced and original views he had little solicitude to impose his views on others. He was without egotism. To state the truth as he apprehended it and to let the world come to his ideas if the world could and would, contented him. But he had no quarrel with the order of things. His good humor and smiling patience are manifest in everything he has written.

Emerson held firmly to the doctrine of the brotherhood of man, yet with no touch of the unctuous fraternizer. He had the rebuffs that all must encounter who try to break down the partition wall between classes. In an attempt to solve, according to the Golden Rule, the problem of a servant’s status in the household, he was thoroughly beaten and laughingly acknowledged it. He did his share, but the servant refused to fraternize.

He was a good citizen, an excellent neighbor, prompt in the acknowledgment of all homely duties. His was a large-souled, benignant, and gracious nature. There was something healing in his mere presence, though no word was spoken.

III

THE WRITER

Emerson gave sound advice on the art of writing, like a professor of rhetoric. He commended the sentences that would stand the test of the voice. This is applying physiology to literature. He laughed at the habit of exaggeration, though he also said, ‘The superlative is as good as the positive if it be alive.’ His rules are excellent, and if followed must give distinction to whatever page of writing they are applied. But while they go no deeper than other suggestions, they point out the obvious characteristics of his style.

For example, Emerson thought clarity all-important. He aimed at it, and attained it. He believed in the use of the right word, and was dissatisfied unless it could be found. The right word is always illuminating, and as a result Emerson’s English is full of surprises. Even when the term employed shocks by its unexpectedness, we presently feel that after all the choice was not grotesque. In practice Emerson was no spendthrift of words, that currency which loses weight and value in the ratio of one’s prodigality, but delighted in economy. No doubt his style is aphoristic--that is a natural result of writing aphorisms. But if no less aphoristic, it is far more logical than is commonly reported. The want of sequence in Emerson’s work has been exaggerated, often to the point of absurdity.

There are writers who have two distinct literary styles, as they have two faces, one to be photographed in, and one for natural wear. Emerson had one style, which was dual-toned, each tone taking the color of his prevailing thought, and each shading imperceptibly into the other. A dozen pages picked at random from his best essays will hardly fail to show how sublimated his diction could be at times. Then does it come near to the line dividing poetry from prose, from which it presently falls away to the level of everyday need. Poetic as Emerson’s diction frequently is, it is always controlled. On the other hand, when it sinks to plain prose it never loses the air of distinction and breeding.

IV

_NATURE, ADDRESSES, AND LECTURES_

In the introduction of his first book, _Nature_, Emerson announces his favorite doctrine, the necessity of seeing the world through our own eyes, of being original, not imitative. He then proceeds with his interpretation. Nature not only exalts man, giving him a pleasure so tonic that it admonishes to temperance, but also renders him certain services. They may be classified under Commodity, Beauty, Language, and Discipline. The first, albeit the lowest, is perfect in its kind; men everywhere comprehend the ‘steady and prodigal provision’ that has been made for their comfort. Beauty is the second, and meets a nobler want. ‘Nature satisfies by its loveliness,’ and ‘without any mixture of corporeal benefit.’ ‘Give me health and a day, and I will make the pomp of emperors ridiculous.’ This is not enough, there must be a spiritual element. Such element is found in the will and virtue of man. An act of truth or heroism ‘seems at once to draw to itself the sky as its temple.’ Beauty in Nature also becomes an object of the intellect. It reforms itself in the mind, leads to a new creation, and hence Art.

Nature is the source of language, words being the signs of natural facts. But ‘every natural fact is a symbol of some spiritual fact.’ In brief, ‘the world is emblematic.’ Nature is a discipline of the understanding, devoting herself to forming the common-sense. Nature is the discipline of the will, after which she becomes the ally of Religion. In short, so great is the part played by Nature in disciplining man that the ‘noble doubt’ perpetually arises ‘whether the end be not the Final Cause of the Universe; and whether nature outwardly exists.’

What then? It makes no difference ‘whether Orion is up there in heaven or some god paints the image in the firmament of the soul.’ Culture has the uniform effect of leading us to regard nature as a phenomenon, not a substance. Nature herself gives us the hint of Idealism. The poet teaches the same lesson. The philosopher seeking, not Beauty, but Truth, dissolves the ‘solid seeming block of matter’ by a thought. Intellectual science begets ‘invariably a doubt of the existence of matter.’ Ethics and religion have the same effect of degrading ‘nature and suggesting its dependence on spirit.’

Back of all nature, then, is spirit. ‘The world proceeds from the same spirit as the body of man. It is a remoter and inferior incarnation of God.’ At present man has not come into his whole kingdom. He depends on his understanding alone. Let him apply all his powers, the reason as well as the understanding.

Brief as it is, this little book shows to perfection the richness of Emerson’s thought, his skill in the apothegm, his economy of phrase, the poetic cast of his mind, and the beauty of his diction.

Nine addresses and lectures are printed along with _Nature_ in the definitive edition of Emerson’s writings. The first is the Phi Beta Kappa Oration, ‘The American Scholar,’ in which Emerson sounds with resonant tone that note of independence so marked in all his teaching. It was time, he thought, for the ‘sluggard intellect’ of America to ‘look from under its iron lids’ and prove itself equal to something more than ‘exertions of mechanical skill.’ We have been too long the bond slave of Europe.

True emancipation consists in freedom from the idea that only a few gifted ones of the earth are privileged to learn truth at first hand. Let us not be cowed by great men.

Emerson notes three influences acting upon the scholar. First, nature, always with us and taking the impress of our minds. Second, books, which, noble as they are in theory, have their danger: ‘I had better never see a book than be warped by its attraction clean out of my own orbit.’ Third, life, everything which is the opposite of mere thinking. ‘If it were only for a vocabulary the scholar would be covetous of

## action. Life is our dictionary.’

Above all, he praises the obscure scholar who without hope of visible reward, reckoning at true value the seesaw of public whim and fancy, patient of neglect, patient of reproach, ‘is happy if he can satisfy himself alone that this day he has seen something truly.’

‘The Divinity Address,’ as it is called, was thought in its day nothing short of outrageous radicalism. The now well-known Emersonian plea for a noble individuality is made in terms the most inspiring. He bewails the helplessness of mankind. ‘All men go in flocks to this saint or that poet, avoiding the God who seeth in secret.’ Emerson would drive out the spirit which prompts a man to content himself with being ‘an easy secondary to some Christian scheme, or sectarian connection, or some eminent man.’ He would have men follow no one leader, however distinguished or gifted, but seek truth at first hand, know God face to face. And while he grants that nothing is of value in comparison with the soul of a good and great man, even a great man becomes a source of danger if we propose to rest in the shadow of his achievement rather than develop our own gift.

‘The Method of Nature’ is a rhapsody in praise of the spontaneous and unreasoning as over against the logical and definite. Nature looks to great results, not to little ones, to the type rather than the individual.

In ‘Man the Reformer’ Emerson preaches another favorite doctrine, the necessity of manual work. There is nothing fanciful in his view. He did not set himself against division of labor. He did not insist that every man should be a farmer ‘any more than that every man should be a lexicographer.’ His ‘doctrine of the Farm’ is that ‘every man ought to stand in primary relations with the work of the world.’

This address should be read in connection with the one on ‘The Times,’ which supplements it. The ideal reformer is not he who has some cause at heart in comparison with which all other causes are naught. The reformer is the ‘Re-maker of what man has made; a renouncer of lies, a restorer of truth and good, imitating that great Nature which embosoms us all, and which sleeps no moment on an old past.’

A reading of this address ought to be followed by a reading of the one entitled ‘The Conservative.’ As he had advised reformers of the danger to which they were exposed, he now warns conservatives not to forget that they are the retrograde party. By their theory of life sickness is a necessity and the social frame a hospital. Yet in a planet ‘peopled with conservatives one Reformer may yet be born.’

In the lecture on ‘The Transcendentalist’ Emerson comes to a tempered defence of his own. He defines the new movement; it is merely Idealism as it shows itself in 1840--an old thing under a new name. He is very patient with the Transcendentalists, whose chief idiosyncrasy is that they have ‘struck work.’ ‘Now every one must do after his kind, be he asp or angel, and these must.’ American literature and spiritual history will profit by the turmoil. This heresy will leave its mark, as any one will admit who knows ‘these seething brains, these admirable radicals, these talkers who talk the sun and moon away.’

V

_THE ESSAYS_, _REPRESENTATIVE MEN_, _ENGLISH TRAITS_, _CONDUCT OF LIFE_

When the _Essays_ appeared, Emerson found a larger audience. He now spoke through the medium of a recognized literary form. If all readers do not read essays, they at least know what they are and stand in no fear of them. Some buyers may have been tempted by the table of contents. Titles such as ‘Self-Reliance,’ ‘Compensation,’ ‘Friendship,’ ‘Heroism,’ had an encouraging sound and promised useful advice.

In the essay on ‘History,’ Emerson reaffirms the doctrine of the unity of human nature. There is ‘one mind,’ history is its record. What we possess in common with the men of the past enables us to comprehend and interpret the actions of the men of the past. The facts must square with our own experience.

The theme is continued in ‘Self-Reliance.’ As there is one mind common to all men, and as what belongs to greatness of the Past belongs also to us, it is suicide to descend to imitation. ‘Speak your latent conviction and it shall become the universal sense.’ The whole essay is a glowing exhortation to men to live largely and stand on their own feet, facing the world with the nonchalance begotten of health, good humor, and the sense of possession.

In ‘Compensation’ the essayist notes those inexorable forces by which a balance is kept in the world, the laws by virtue of which ‘things refuse to be mismanaged long.’ In ‘Spiritual Laws’ he shows the importance of living the life of nature. Let no man import into his mind ‘difficulties which are none of his.’ The essay on ‘Love’ is a prose poem in honor of that passion which ‘makes the clown gentle, and gives the coward heart.’ Following it is the essay on ‘Friendship’ with its austere definitions. ‘I do not wish to treat friendships daintily, but with roughest courage.’ ‘Friendship implies sincerity, and sincerity is the luxury allowed, like diadems and authority, only to the highest rank.’

Emerson writes on ‘Prudence’ in order to balance those fine lyric words of Love and Friendship with words of coarser sound. Prudence considered in itself is naught; but recognized as one of the conditions of existence, it deserves our utmost attention. It keeps a man from standing in false and bitter relations to other men. Emerson had no patience with people who, because they have genius or beauty, expect an exception of the laws of Nature to be made in their case. Notwithstanding their gifts, they must toe the mark.

‘Heroism,’ the eighth essay in this volume, contains a definition of the hero which does not coincide with the popular conception. We are so accustomed to seeing our heroes crowned with wreaths and overwhelmed with lecture engagements the day following the act of valor that we are surprised to read: ‘Heroism works in contradiction to the voice of mankind.’ Emerson gives a new turn to the old phrase ‘the heroic in everyday life.’ Life, he says, has its ‘ragged and dangerous front.’ It is full of evils against which the man must be armed. ‘Let him hear in season that he is born into a state of war.’ To this ‘militant attitude of the soul’ Emerson gave the name of heroism. In its rudest form it is ‘contempt for safety and ease.’

To some readers the essay on ‘The Over-Soul’ is at once the clearest and the most darkened, the plainest and the most enigmatic of the essays in this book. But there is no misapprehending the value of this effort to put, not in rigid scientific terms, but in glowing and lofty imagery, the dependence of man on the Infinite, the marvel of that Immensity which is the background of our being. ‘From within or from behind, a light shines through us upon things, and makes us aware that we are nothing, but the light is all.’ It is the universal mind by which all being is enveloped and interpenetrated.

The essay on ‘Circles’ contains this thought: Outside every circle another may be drawn. Opinion seeks to crystallize at a certain limit, to insist that there is nothing beyond. The soul bursts these barriers to set new limits, which in turn are good only for a time. Man must therefore keep himself always open to the conception of a larger circle. Let him ‘prefer truth to his past apprehension of truth.’

How to seek truth is the subject of the next essay, ‘Intellect,’ a tribute to the spontaneous action of the mind. We do not control our thoughts but are controlled by them. All we can do is to clear away obstructions and ‘suffer the intellect to see.’ Pursue truth and it avoids you. Relax the energy of your pursuit and it comes to you; yet the pursuit was as necessary as the subsequent relaxation.

In the final essay, on ‘Art,’ the large, simple, and homely elements are praised, the qualities which appeal to universal human nature. In the paintings of the Old World one thinks to be astonished by something new and strange, and he is struck by the familiar look. He is reminded of what he had always known.

The second series of _Essays_ treats of ‘The Poet,’ ‘Experience,’ ‘Character,’ ‘Manners,’ ‘Gifts,’ ‘Nature,’ ‘Politics,’ of ‘Nominalist and Realist;’ there is also a lecture on ‘New England Reformers.’ Emerson notes the shallow nature of a theory of poetry busied only with externals. Neither is that poetry which is written ‘at a safe distance from our own experience.’ The poet is representative. ‘He stands among common men for the complete man, and apprises us not of his wealth but of the commonwealth.’

‘Experience’ is in praise of a mode of life which consists in living without making a fuss about it, filling the time, taking hold where one can and exhausting the possibilities. Only fanatics say it is not worth while. ‘Let us be poised, and wise, and our own, to-day. Let us treat the men and women well; treat them as if they were real; perhaps they are.’

‘Character’ and ‘Manners’ are related studies. There is a moral order in the world. Nothing can withstand it. ‘Character is this moral order seen through the medium of an individual nature.’ Society has raised certain artificial distinctions. But they must be recognized. Society is real, and grows out of a genuine need. ‘The painted phantasm Fashion casts a species of derision on what we say. But I will neither be driven from some allowance to Fashion as a symbolic institution, nor from the belief that love is the basis of courtesy.’

‘Gifts’ is a fine bit of paradox. ‘The gift, to be true, must be the flowing of the giver unto me, correspondent to my flowing unto him. When the waters are at level, then my goods pass to him, and his to me.’ To give useful things denies the relation. Hence the fitness of beautiful things.

There is bold imagery in the essay on ‘Nature.’ ‘Plants are the young of the world, but they grope ever upward toward consciousness; the trees are imperfect men, and seem to bemoan their imprisonment, rooted to the ground. The animal is the novice and probationer of a more advanced order. The men though young, having tasted the first drop from the cup of thought, are already dissipated: the maples and ferns are still uncorrupt; yet no doubt when they come to consciousness they too will curse and swear.’ Thus does Emerson describe that glimpse he had of a ‘system in transition.’

A healthy optimism pervades the essay on ‘Politics.’ In spite of meddling and selfishness the foundations of the State are very secure. ‘Things have their laws, as well as men; and things refuse to be trifled with.’ By a higher law property will be protected. The same necessity secures to each nation the form of governing best suited to it. Yet all forms are defective. Good men ‘must not obey the laws too well.’ Perfect government rests on character at last. There are dreamers who do not despair of seeing the State renovated ‘on the principle of right and love.’

_Representative Men_ consists of lectures on Plato, Swedenborg, Montaigne, Shakespeare, Napoleon, and Goethe, together with an introduction on the ‘Uses of Great Men.’

Plato is the man who makes havoc with originalities, the philosopher whose writings have been for twenty-two hundred years the Bible of the learned, but who has his defects. Intellectual in aim, and therefore literary, he attempts a system of the universe and fails to complete it or make it intelligible.

Swedenborg is the representative of mysticism, great with its power, weak with its defects.