Thoreau and Crane Essay (revised)

Jedediah Grady
Cap English Blue Group
December 23, 2014

Thoreau Crane Essay

Henry David Thoreau, in Walden, and Stephen Crane, in Maggie, A Girl

of the Streets, compare in their views on philanthropy, but contrast in their

views on philanthropist and self-reliance. Walden is an autobiography written

by transcendentalist Henry David Thoreau. The book explores Thoreaus
experiences of the two year, two month, and two day period of time he spent
isolated in a cabin near Walden Pond in Concord, Massachusetts. Thoreau
shows others that he can live a very enjoyable life without having much at all.
Maggie, A Girl of the Streets is a story about a young girl named Maggie who
struggles to find her way in a life full of misery and poverty. She grows up in a
poor neighborhood in New York with an alcoholic mother and is helplessly
nave. Although the two pieces were written in different time periods, they
are in a way similar, and share some of the same view on some subjects, and
disagree on others.

Both Henry David Thoreau and Stephen Crane agree on the subject of
philanthropy and how it is. In the first chapter, Economy, Thoreau writes
about how Philanthropy is almost the only virtue which is sufficiently
appreciated by mankind. Nay, it is greatly overrated; and it is our selfishness
which overrates it. (63) Thoreau believes that philanthropy is needed and
that when it is given, it is greatly appreciated. Although it is needed
however, peoples selfishness ruin it. Thoreau also tells the readers to Be
sure that you give the poor the aid they most need. (62) This is just Thoreau
showing how he supports the idea of philanthropy and sees the good it does
but understands that some people can ruin it. Stephen Crane agrees. The
one time Maggie goes and asks for help, she is avoided with a vigorous sidestep. (87) The ironic thing is that the man who avoided Maggie was a pastor,
whose job is to help others. The man wanted to save his respectability.

Philanthropy itself is very helpful, but when people like the pastor only really
care about themselves, what good is philanthropy? Both Henry David Thoreau
and Stephen Crane understand this.

Although Henry David Thoreau and Stephen Crane agree on the

subject philanthropy, they disagree on the subject of philanthropist. As seen
from previous quotes, Thoreau supports the idea of philanthropy. He writes
that he wound not subtract any thing from the praise that is due to
philanthropy He thinks it is needed and is god for mankind. Thoreaus views
on philanthropist are all but the same. He says that most so-called
philanthropists are fake, and that all they do is commit partial and transitory
acts. (63) He also states The philanthropist too often surrounds mankind
with the remembrance of his own cast-off griefs as an atmosphere, and calls
it sympathy. (63-64) What Thoreau is saying is that most people who call
themselves philanthropist really dont give that much, for their acts are
partial. He also means that when most philanthropist do something for
somebody in need, it is just too build themselves up and to make them seem
great. Thoreau does not believe those real philanthropists exist. Stephen
Crane disagrees. Although it is rare to see, Crane shows people showing
kindness even if they do not have much. When tommy dies, he clutch[ed]
a flower that the girl Maggie had stolen from an Italian. This was a true act
of philanthropy. Maggie didnt have anything, but she still found a way to give
to the less fortunate. She did not do this to get recognized by anyone, she
just did it to be kind. Another example is when after Maggie was rejected out
of her own home, an old alcoholic lady says to Maggie, well come in an stay

wi me tehnight. The old lady didnt have much, but she still offered help to
somebody in need. Crane shows how true philanthropy does exist, and not all
of it is for personal gain. Philanthropists dont need to be big and rich, they
just need to have the right incentive to help others. Henry David Thoreau
and Stephen Crane agreed on philanthropy, but not philanthropist.

Another topic that Henry David Thoreau and Stephen Crane disagree
on is the subject of self-reliance. Thoreau is very passionate about this
subject. His entire book Walden, is about his own self-reliance in the woods.
Thoreau chose to live alone and to rely on nobody but himself for a little over
two years. He also talks about self-reliance in the chapter Economy. Thoreau
believes that it is easier to gain self reliance and to live a happy life when you
live simple and wisely. (53) Thoreau goes on to say that to maintain ones
self esteem on this earth is not a hardship but a pastime. (53) What he is
saying is that life becomes better and easier when people just let it happen
and when they only rely on themselves. He also thinks there is no need to try
and work hard to maintain ones self esteem when it can happen naturally
and doesnt have to be so troublesome. Stephen Crane does not agree.
Although he doesnt state it exactly, throughout the book, we see the main
character Maggie struggling to find her way through life because there was
nobody around to the help that she needed. As a result, Maggie has to resort
to prostitution to make a living. The reader can see how difficult it is to live a
successful or nice life without ever being showed compassion or help. Maggie
has nobody to show her how to become a wonderful young lady. Her mother

was a drunkard and would frequently roar at her (59) Also, Maggies father
and youngest brother died, and her surviving brother Jimmy eventually tells
Maggie to go the hell. Another huge person in Maggies life, her boyfriend
Pete, also let her down when she most needed him. She was pale. From her
eyes had been plucked all look of self-reliance. She leaned with a dependent
air toward her companion. (73) Maggie devoted so much of her time and
trust into Pete, for she thought she would help her, which he didnt. In the
end, Pete just cheated on Maggie, then left her. After all of this pain in
Maggies life, Maggie committed suicide and died away into a silence. (89)
Crane believes that a lack of help and support can ruin ones life, and that
self-reliance ends terribly.

Henry David Thoreau, in Walden, and Stephen Crane, in Maggie, A Girl

of the Streets, compare in their views on philanthropy, but contrast in their
views on philanthropist and self-reliance. Thoreau and Crane both believe
that philanthropy is needed, but greatly overrated. Although they agree on
that subject, they disagree on philanthropist and self-reliance. Thoreau
believes that all philanthropist only care about themselves and that selfreliance is the best way to live while Crane believes that true philanthropist
are real and that self-reliance is impossible and will get you nowhere.

Works Cited
Crane, Stephen. Maggie A Girl of the Streets. Ed. Kevin J. Hayes. N.p.:
Bedford Cultural Editions, 1999. Print.Thoreau, Henry David. "Walden,
Economy."

Walden and Other Writings by Henry David

Thoreau. Ed. Joseph Wood Krutch. 1854. N.p.: Bantam Books, 1962.
107-65. Print.