Friday, January 6, 2012
Walden Journey # 2
On page 20 Thoreau asks, "Would the savage be wise to exchange his wigwam for a palace on these terms?" What do you think his answer might be? On another note, in what manner is Thoreau using rhetorical questions throughout Walden thus far? (respond to both questions in separate paragraphs with a minimum of 16 sentences between the two)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
According to Thoreau's diction, and the allegory behind it, his answer to such a rhetorical question would be no. He would decline the chance to, what some people would call 'the best living arrangement' because he is such a simple man. After all, between the first two chapters, he repeats that life should be simple. One without hard labor with no form of extraordinary reward in the end. A deeper interpretation of what Thoreau is trying to say is that everything that glitters isn't gold. The idea of trading a home some humble and comfortable for an extravagant palace is sickening. Once a person made the exchange from a wigwam to a palace, they may later be faced with beggars, thieves, and other types of non-trustworthy people. Therefore, it is evident that Thoreau is very transcendent, and would not find this housing exchange wise at all.
ReplyDeleteThroughout Walden (not able to italicize), Thoreau uses different types of tones to ask rhetorical questions. Some questions were in the form of a hyperbole; exaggerating his thought just enough to get the reader to think. He also uses imperative language to sort of manipulate his readers. He wants them to analyze the kind of lifestyle they have, and think of changing it. Instead of changing for something very materialistic, and pleasing to the eye, it should be an exchange for something simple. An example of one of the hyperbole rhetorical question is the one asked above, "Would the savage be wise to exchange his wigwam for a palace on these terms?" He uses these types of questions in a manner to expand the reader's mind, and expose them to a new life sytle opportunity.
Based on Throeau's reasoning, he would say no. All Thoreau cares about is living simple, which means to avoid the complications that life gives us. Everyone wants the luxuries of life, which include money, fame, and power. However. Thoreau knows that by gainning these things, complications will arise that will make life difficult. By gainning these common wants, anyone can attract unwanted attnetion, such as the media and criminals. Thoreau is just one of those guys that doesn't want to go through that, even if it means not getting what most common people desire.
ReplyDeleteThoreau uses rhetorical questions that forces the reader to actual think about life. These questions are over exaggerated to the point where no one can just answer yes or no. The reader really has to evaluate what exactly is being asked. These questions help give the reader new approaches towards different life styles. Most people only want things that are materialistic. Instead, vowing to obtain a simple life should be more important. Besides, having expensive things is nice, but the moral value is no where near having a good life. This is something that Thoreau truly addresses in thb book, but of course not straight forward. This concept is more so something the reader has to relies while answering these questions.
-Shaun
Thoreau's answer to the question would be no. He's the type of person who likes the simple life. He thinks that living in luxury is a waste of time because you only need food, clothes and shelter to survive, not to look fancy. He believes to truly become successful in life, you don't need all of the luxurious things. For example, the philosophers that he mentions were barely fed, sheltered, nor clothed. However, he became successful because he believed in what he did and had faith. Thoreau lives by faith and thinks that faith will lead you through life without everything that you own being expensive. He also believes that those who would buy expensive items are stuck-up. Life is too short to be stuck-up which is why he chooses to live simply.
ReplyDeleteThe rhetorical questions that Thoreau uses is to make the reader actually stop and think and say "wow, you're right". He usually puts many questions by each other to show how strongly he feels about the cause or how the reader should portray the issue. By him asking these questions, he wants the reader to think like him. Some rhetorical questions are in fact hyperboles so he could get his point across. Usually his questions are sarcastic complaints about how other people are living. He wonders why people don't live simply like he does because it's so much easier and less stressful. These rhetorical questions just add on to his style of writing.
Thoreau would answer no. If the savage already became use to his wigwam, then why would he leave it to start a new way of life in which he has to pay instead of just live life comfortably. He wouldn't be use to this way of life and would be out of sorts if he went to this new one. Its like taking a wild animal into the city. They'll go through many problems before they get use to the new way.
ReplyDeleteThoreau is using rhetorical questions throughout Walden so far by asking questions in a scenario that would make you think or say hmmm. His questions put a type of sarcasm on what he's saying. He makes you question the simple way of life as more than what it seems,even though it is. He takes out what we all normal way of life and make you see it through new eyes as if an outsider.
Thoreau might have been a little considerate when asked this question.I think he would have said no.This is because he had built his own one room house,not having to worry about spending more money on housing.I think her realize the benefit of him having to build his house using his own body strength,skill and time.Thoreau do not want anything complicated,anything that will cause him trouble or anything that would cause him to have a headache to occur in his life.So that is why he built his own place.
ReplyDeleteThe first few chapters of Walden are rhetorically intense largely because Thoreau uses proverbs,a rhetorical form that have oral
roots in order to shape his readers responses.
Putting into account the issues discussed in Walden, Thoreau's response to this topic would be, no. Thoreau's tone throughout "Economy", so far reflects his views on a complex society. On concludes that he a Transcendentalist. Therefore,he objects to the expenses and the irrelevancy of the "Stuff" that we have holding us back. He feels that Humans can sustain a balanced and efficient lifestyle, omitting all the extra expenses and style. He portrays the Savage as one who lives a simple life, one that folds to nature, and instead of demanding more,embraces it and uses to their advantage. The "Savage" that lives in a mansion constantly worries about their financial stature regarding payment for all the unnecessary "stuff", as Thoreau refers them as. In Walden, he expresses the convenience of the Savages; their simple homes that are built with their bare hands, allows them to feel like the rich guy living in his mansion. Thoreau's response to this question would essentially reflect his views expressed through his diction throughout Walden.
ReplyDeleteOn pages 32-33, Thoreau effectively puts to use, Rhetorical questioning. On these pages he introduces the idea of students, in a sense, being responsible for than just the obvious. The questions their awareness of the world around them, and essentially their effort towards responsibility. These pages reflects his views on education and using rhetorical questioning, Thoreau brings forth and understandable point. This allowed him to question the role of education in Society and how certain education prepares us for the real world. "How could youths better learn to live than by at once trying the experiment of living?" (pg33)
Casia
Anyone who has actually read Walden would know that Thoreau would say no to such question.From reading the novel so far,Thoreau reflects on examples of seemingly instinctual seeking of shelter, as by children entering caves and Indians building wigwams. Others are "needlessly poor" because they compare their homes to those of rich people rather than to what is necessary.Comparing the rich to pharaohs who spent their lives building their tombs, Thoreau wishes people could live with simplicity of the Indians in their wigwams or the early American settlers who built dugouts in hillsides.Therefore, he's a simple man who just wants to live a simple lithe fe without any complexity to mess anything up.
ReplyDeleteThoreau rhetorical questions sought not only to express his ideas, but to communicate them with the same condition he had experienced, so that his readers could, at least partially, recreate living ideas. Even though he questions them,he wants the reader to sought through their minds to find some truth behind them.
-Aphnie
I believe Thoreau's answer to his own question would be no. He thinks it strange to trade something simple yet functional, like the wigwam, for an extravagant [but useless and hardly long-lasting] mansion. Thoreau himself has done the reverse of the situation he has asked; he has traded materialistic city life for a sojourn in the woods, living only by the basics. This lifestyle, rudimentary and revolved around nature, is very much like that of the "savage." As a transcendentalist, he is against superfluity, advocating frugality instead. He is one of the last people to trade a sturdy wigwam for a luxurious palace.
ReplyDeleteOn another note, Thoreau is using rhetorical questions like the one stated above to get his audience thinking. While his tone is somewhat complaining at times, this method works as it has the reader questioning what kind of life they are leading, all the unnecessary situations and complications that make life difficult, and so on. His questions regarding education also bring about valid points. He asks why the common man does not devote more of his time to literature, and will happen to learning. Will it decline? Will the quality of the education we receive decrease? These questions are relevant in the 21st century because of the falling standards of education in inner-city areas. The use of rhetorical questions also gives reader a sense of comfort. Upon reading Thoreau's prying questions, we see that he is human as well and does not know everything. He hopes the audience can find their own answers.
Thoreau would have found this choice completely stupid. Because he is a transcendentalist, he believes live of simplicity. Prior to his arrival at the woods, his life was shameful. He has so many jobs and received no credit from anyone in town, which I believe pushed him to go to woods. Regardless, he infers that shelter is not included in the necessities of life, referring back to the Indians and their lifestyle. I found that completely irrelevant because shelter provides you the safety and security of yourself from everyone else. You can't just change your clothes outside with your whole town watching, that's primitive. Although I do agree with and relate to most of his points and opinions, this was just the most foolish that he expressed.
ReplyDeleteIn Walden, I think Thoreau uses a supernumerary amount of rhetorical questions. It was like with my paper, at the end of every paragraph I used a rhetorical questions. As useful as it can be, it would be more florid if he exercised different a literary device such as a hyperbole. They do allow me to think more in depth about what he is saying in his passages but he was no style or charisma to keep my attention. He has a very monotone style that is boring and I think the rhetorical questions are like my pat on the back to wake me up.
` "Would the savage be wise to exchange his wigwam for a palace on these terms?" What do you think his answer might be? On another note, in what manner is Thoreau using rhetorical questions throughout Walden thus far?
ReplyDelete` The answer will be no, because he lives in simplicity and he doesn't believe in terms like these. There would be no reason to be savage towards anything and anyone when everything surrounds you, you just need to learn how to use it. That's what Walden is all about. Finding the answers, and taking deep thoughts about the world around you. The rhetorical question that he made, was just implied so that way we would think about it deeper, even though Thoreau knew the answer. He uses rhetorical questions in the beginning of a text/passage before he wants to make a point. Also he uses it, when he wants the reader to go deeper in the text, to create imagery, so you can think of a possible outcome.
Thoreau's answer to this would definitely be no. He believes that complexity only breeds complications and simplicity would be the obvious solution to that problem. In the text he makes an analogy to a farmer, whose profession, he believes, only makes his life more difficult. He mentions the cons that come with a complex society, a few of which is that clothes have been deemed more importance than they actually are and that many people lack shelter. He has made it clear that he regards a complex society if not with scorn, with a keen disapproval. In addition, he isolated himself from society (no one forced him) so obviously he didn't think much of "his palace". If that hadn't been the case, and if he had come to the conclusion that he was stupid for ostracizing himself from society and living simply, he would have returned. But he didn't. I mean he makes it pretty clear, that a simple life reaps more rewards than a complex one.
ReplyDeleteThoreau's answer to this would definitely be no. He believes that complexity only breeds complications and simplicity would be the obvious solution to that problem. In the text he makes an analogy to a farmer, whose profession, he believes, only makes his life more difficult. He mentions the cons that come with a complex society, a few of which is that clothes have been deemed more importance than they actually are and that many people lack shelter. He has made it clear that he regards a complex society if not with scorn, with a keen disapproval. In addition, he isolated himself from society (no one forced him) so obviously he didn't think much of "his palace". If that hadn't been the case, and if he had come to the conclusion that he was stupid for ostracizing himself from society and living simply, he would have returned. But he didn't. I mean he makes it pretty clear, that a simple life reaps more rewards than a complex one.