Overarching Themes Compare and Contrast Essay: Walden and Maggie: A Girl of the Streets

Anna ODriscoll Blue Group December 4, 2012 CAP English 9

Anna ODriscoll Blue Group

In the Economy chapter of Walden, Thoreau discusses his reasons for leaving his town and moving to the woods, and includes some critical comments about civilization during his time period. Maggie is about a girl who, after being abused as a child, falls in love with a man who does not love her back. When he leaves her for another woman, Maggie makes the choice to become a prostitute, and then dies. In the books Walden by Henry David Thoreau and Maggie: A Girl of the Streets by Stephen Crane, the two authors discuss and agree on the overarching themes of the importance of philanthropy and the lack of need for possessions, but disagreeing on the theme of the achievability of self-reliance, with Thoreau thinking that self-reliance is something for which to strive, and Crane thinking self-reliance is impossible. Both authors believe that there is not enough pure-hearted philanthropy in the world. Thoreau thinks that the people who call themselves philanthropists only engage in this activity to get something out of it for themselves. The philanthropists make themselves feel better by using the remembrance of his own cast-off griefs as an atmosphere, and call[ing] it sympathy (Thoreau, 63-64). Thoreau also thinks that one should give the poor the aid they need most (Walden, 62). If that needs to be money, one should make sure that it is not merely abandon[ed] to them (Walden, 62). Instead, he thinks that real philanthropy is engaging with the person and making sacrifices (Thoreau, 60) for them, actually helping them solve their problem. Real philanthropy is also doing something without getting anything out of it for yourself. This, to him, is the only philanthropy that should exist in the world, but he doesnt think that any people actually engage in that form of philanthropy. Thoreau thinks that most people are self-centered, believing there is no use in philanthropy unless the philanthropy do[es] help [them] (Thoreau, 62). Stephen Crane would agree with this, stating that real philanthropy is doing something even when you dont get anything out of the action. Pete, for example, only

Anna ODriscoll Blue Group

wants to be with Maggie because he is stuck on [her] shape (Crane, 52), and not because he actually likes her. Pete takes Maggie under his arm, and starts to provide some things for her. This does not end well for Maggie, because Pete leaves her with nothing, showing how Crane thinks that philanthropy done for an ulterior motive is not real philanthropy. He also believes that real philanthropists arent the people that one would normally think of as a philanthropist, or as one with a lot of morals. When Maggies mother finds out that she has become a prostitute, she kicks Maggie out of the house. Maggie is left with no place to stay, but her downstairs neighbor says that Maggie can come in an stay teh-night (Maggie, 84). The old woman here exhibits true qualities of a philanthropist to both men. She is giving Maggie a place to stay in her time of need, even though the old woman wont get anything. Pete has more social morals that the old lady, but his philanthropy doesnt help Maggie at all. Both authors agree that when somebody engages in a truly philanthropic action, he/she expects nothing in return. According to both Thoreau and Crane, one should try to own as few unnecessary possessions as possible. Thoreau thinks that possessions weigh the bearer down and that men
have become the tools of their tools (Walden, 33). The person holding the possession becomes so

obsessed with their possession that they forget to live. People spend too much time worrying about material objects that their minds get cluttered, and they cant stay mentally organized. For example, if somebody were to have an object, they would be more preoccupied with dust[ing] daily, when the furniture of [ones] mind [is] all undusted still (Walden, 32). This means that possessions get in the way of thinking, and preoccupy the holder of the object, keeping them from the important parts of life. Thoreau thinks that the only things that are needed are the ones that keep you alive. These, according to Thoreau, may be distributed under the several heads of Food, Shelter, Clothing and Fuel (Walden, 14). He even thinks that sometimes Fuel is

Anna ODriscoll Blue Group

unnecessary, showing how simply Thoreau thinks one should live. When one is living simple, there is more time to concentrate on tasks that make one happy, and the sensible things in life. Crane agrees with Thoreau on this idea. When Maggie wants to impress Pete, she buys a lambrequin to decorate her living room. When Maggie comes home, she finds that her mother has vented some phase of drunken fury upon the lambrequin (Maggie, 54). In this example, Maggie wastes money she cant afford to spend on an item that Pete doesnt even get to see. Crane reveals his belief that materiel objects keep people from necessary things in life. Maggie is more concerned with Pete thinking she and her house look nice, instead of her personality. This shows how Crane thinks that it is ridiculous to spend money on material objects. Both authors agree that possessions are distractions to everyday life. The two authors disagree on the achievability of self-reliance. Henry David Thoreau thinks that when one is totally self-reliant, then you will be truly happy. Throughout Walden, he talks about how he is by himself, not having to rely on other people to get him what he needs. He is proud for completing his house, all of which was done by [him]self (Walden, 41-42). He thinks that it is possible to complete most things solitarily. Crane does not think that selfreliance is possible, therefore disagreeing with Thoreau. Crane thinks that it would be silly to strive for something that isnt actually possible. Cranes view is shown in his book because Maggie is always relying on others. Throughout her entire life, she relies on others for support because she is not capable of supporting herself. When she falls in love with Pete, she becomes completely reliant on him, and feels the need to be with him at all times. When he leaves her, she doesnt know what to do with herself. Even when she becomes a prostitute and has her own job, she is still relying on her customers for money. If nobody takes her offer, she will starve. Thoreau himself actually accidently proves Cranes theory that self-reliance is impossible.

Anna ODriscoll Blue Group

When Thoreau is telling the reader how he built his house, he says that he borrowed an axe (Walden, 35). This shows how when Thoreau wants to become completely self-reliant, he has to borrow from other people before he can start on his own. Crane says that complete self-reliance is not truly possible, and even though Thoreau unconsciously proves Cranes point, he himself believes that self-reliance is the key to happiness. Crane and Thoreau agree that there is not enough pure-hearted philanthropy in the world and those who do engage in philanthropy are not necessarily moral. Both men also agree that one should strive to stay away from unnecessary possessions because they take away from the important parts of life. Thoreau believes that it is important to be as self-reliant as possible because only then can one be truly happy. Crane, in contrast, believes that self-reliance is not possible to achieve. In the books Walden by Henry David Thoreau and Maggie: A Girl of the Streets by Stephen Crane, the two authors discuss and agree on the overarching themes of the importance of philanthropy and the lack of need for possessions, but disagree on the theme of the achievability of self-reliance, with Thoreau thinking that self-reliance is something for which to strive, and Crane thinking self-reliance is impossible.