Lecture Read before the Mechanics’ Apprentices Library Association, Boston, Jan 25, 1841

The cynical take on this lecture is: if man is so great at reform, then why are Emerson’s themes still so pertinent, if not more so?

Emerson laments that to make a decent living a Bostonian or American of 1841 must:

“sacrifice all the brilliant dreams of boyhood and youth as dreams; he must forget the prayers of his childhood; and must take on him the harness of routine and obsequiousness.”

And:

“the general system of our trade is a system of selfishness.”

He reinforces this idea with:

“Each finds a tender and very intelligent conscience a disqualification for success.”

His version of “not my problem”:

“none feels himself accountable. He did not create the abuse; he cannot alter it. What is he? an obscure private person who must get his bread. That is the vice, — that no one feels himself called to act for man, but only as a fraction of man.”

I admire Emerson and his ideas but on this next bit I’m going to be a little cynical.

“But it is said, `What! will you give up the immense advantages reaped from the division of labor, and set every man to make his own shoes, bureau, knife, wagon, sails, and needle? This would be to put men back into barbarism by their own act.’ I see no instant prospect of a virtuous revolution; yet I confess, I should not be pained at a change which threatened a loss of some of the luxuries or conveniences of society, if it proceeded from a preference of the agricultural life out of the belief, that our primary duties as men could be better discharged in that calling. Who could regret to see a high conscience and a purer taste exercising a sensible effect on young men in their choice of occupation, and thinning the ranks of competition in the labors of commerce, of law, and of state? It is easy to see that the inconvenience would last but a short time. This would be great action, which always opens the eyes of men. When many persons shall have done this, when the majority shall admit the necessity of reform in all these institutions, their abuses will be redressed, and the way will be open again to the advantages which arise from the division of labor, and a man may select the fittest employment for his peculiar talent again, without compromise.”

What strikes me as either insincere or absurdly optimistic is:

“It is easy to see that the inconvenience would last but a short time.”

If I hang up the keyboard and become a farmer I’m very sure that the “inconvenience” would not be a trifle and would “last but a long time” and I might not survive it.

Maybe in the first half of the 19th century it was easier to imagine that a person could change professions more readily. A sailor or “hideodogher” (the footnote explains: a “coastal vessel trading in hides” or “the master of such a vessel.”) I can imagine tilling the field for a season or two, or vice versa. But today…

It’s hard enough for me to imagine many people switching professions and farming but then on top of that Emerson seems to expect me to believe that there would be enough time in a person’s life to not only switch, but to then switch back to their original profession more suited to one’s “peculiar talents.”

These quotes I just thought stood out:

“We must have a basis for our higher accomplishments, our delicate entertainments of poetry and philosophy, in the work of our hands.”

“Manual labor is the study of the external world.”

Emerson is particularly critical of and expresses some pity for the rich man’s son and his wealth and possessions Emerson explains:

“To him they are not means, but masters.”

In the parlance of our times:

“Mo money mo problems”

The Notorious B.I.G.

If you ever find yourself bitter that you were not born with a trust friend then remember Emeson’s description:

“we have now a puny, protected person, guarded by walls and curtains, stoves and down beds, coaches, and men-servants and women-servants from the earth and the sky, and who, bred to depend on all these, is made anxious by all that endangers those possessions, and is forced to spend so much time in guarding them, that he has quite lost sight of their original use, namely, to help him to his ends, — to the prosecution of his love; to the helping of his friend, to the worship of his God, to the enlargement of his knowledge, to the serving of his country, to the indulgence of his sentiment, and he is now what is called a rich man, — the menial and runner of his riches.”

Do you agree that:

“Every man ought to have this opportunity to conquer the world for himself.”

And:

“Can anything be so elegant as to have few wants and too serve them one’s self?”

And like every person ever, he laments the impiety of the his and the next generation:

“The Americans have many virtues, but they have not Faith and Hope. I know no two words whose meaning is more lost sight of. We use these words as if they were as obsolete as Selah and Amen. And yet they have the broadest meaning, and the most cogent application to Boston in 1841. The Americans have no faith. They rely on the power of a dollar; they are deaf to a sentiment. They think you may talk the north wind down as easily as raise society; and no class more faithless than the scholars or intellectual men.”

And to continue my cynicism, he concludes a bit on the “touchy feely” as opposed to the practical side stating that the panacea for the world is the:

“sentiment of love. This is the one remedy for all ills, the panacea of nature. We must be lovers, and at once the impossible becomes possible. Our age and history, for these thousand years, has not been the history of kindness, but of selfishness. Our distrust is very expensive. The money we spend for courts and prisons is very ill laid out. We make, by distrust, the thief, and burglar, and incendiary, and by our court and jail we keep him so. An acceptance of the sentiment of love throughout Christendom for a season, would bring the felon and the outcast to our side in tears, with the devotion of his faculties to our service.”

I lean left and I think we put too many people in prison for too long and it’s a system driven by profit and fear more than the aspiration to reform, but even for me, a modern liberal, it’s a bit much to think that we could shut down the prisons so long as we showered those within with love and gave them a field to till.

“We complain that the politics of masses of the people are controlled by designing men, and led in opposition to manifest justice and the common weal, and to their own interest. But the people do not wish to be represented or ruled by the ignorant and base. They only vote for these, because they were asked with the voice and semblance of kindness. They will not vote for them long. They inevitably prefer wit and probity.”

Donald Trump. I could mention some others: Bolsonaro. Modi. I don’t like the far right but I don’t like the far left either, as the two grow farther apart and ideas seem to be debated less and less… People instead relying on their identity to guide their decisions – we read so many headlines in today’s social media world but I don’t get the feeling that we’re reading the whole articles, much less books and Emerson lectures.

I don’t think 1 in 100 people today could define “probity” and much less do “the masses” prefer it. (Probity: the quality of having strong moral principles; honesty and decency)

“The state must consider the poor man, and all voices must speak for him. Every child that is born must have a just chance for his bread.”

Hear hear!

“This great, overgrown, dead Christendom of ours still keeps alive at least the name of a lover of mankind. But one day all men will be lovers; and every calamity will be dissolved in the universal sunshine.”

“Universal sunshine is a bit much Ralph Waldo. And I’m not sure about this sentiment, as I have not seen many people giving up much of anything, let alone elevation. I like the poetry of “universal sunshine” and I think that Emerson might be correct when he advocates for a simpler more agricultural and more spiritual life, not for the benefit of anyone else, but for one’s own benefit. He may be right, but I would say the majority do not believe him so, and there aren’t a lot of people turning down higher paying jobs in today’s marketplace.

“so is the great man very willing to lose particular powers and talents, so that he gain in the elevation of his life. The opening of the spiritual senses disposes men ever to greater sacrifices, to leave their signal talents, their best means and skill of procuring a present success, their power and their fame, — to cast all things behind, in the insatiable thirst for divine communications. A purer fame, a greater power rewards the sacrifice.”

Au contraire… the older I get, the more I seem to find myself amazed at how many fall under the spell of money. We seem to believe that “rich” and “intelligent” are interchangeable words. Mistaking “rich” and “morally correct” is even worse. While I think this last mix up is more subconscious, it also seems to me more widespread, precisely because it is unconscious and escapes our self-critical consciences. We believe ourselves objective and not susceptible to such a grievous mix up.

I remind myself of this experiment where people predicted they would be more critical of wealthier people when in fact the opposite was true. (I think this is the original study)

I picked out way too many quotes there… maybe I should have copy pasted the whole lecture. This is only my fourth blog post so a learning experience; I promise to be more selective with my Emerson quotes going forward.

On the whole, this lecture was uplifting. As I read I found myself playing with idea of buying a plot of land a little farther from the city and spending more time tending the garden. But… I did find Emerson to be a overly optimistic at man’s ability to reform anything, and much less so, the human behaviors long shaped by evolution.

Both our virtues and our vices are perhaps equally prevalent today as 200 years ago.

P.S. This lecture reminded me of something else I read recently; Carl Jung’s description of his “Tower” where

“There is nothing to disturb the dead, neither electric light or telephone.”

“I have done without electricity, and tend the fireplace and stove myself. Evenings, I light the old lamps. There is no running water, and I pump the water from the well. I chop the wood and cook the food. These simple acts make man simple; and how difficult it is to be simple!”

– Carl Jung, Memories Dreams Reflections, The Tower chapter

P.S.S. I ordered “A Book of Nonsense” and “The Man Who Knew Too Much” by G.K. Chesterton today. Coming soon…