Civil Disobedience (Thoreau)

Resistance to Civil Government, also called On the Duty of Civil Disobedience or Civil
Disobedience for short, is an essay by American transcendentalist Henry David Thoreau that
was first published in 1849. In it, Thoreau argues that individuals should not
permit governments to overrule or atrophy their consciences, and that they have a duty to
avoid allowing such acquiescence to enable the government to make them the agents
of injustice. Thoreau was motivated in part by his repulsion of slavery and the Mexican–
American War (1846–1848).

Title
In 1848, Thoreau gave lectures at the Concord Lyceum entitled "The Rights and Duties of the
Individual in relation to Government"

The word civil has several definitions. The one that is intended in this case is "relating to
citizens and their interrelations with one another or with the state", and so civil
disobedience means "disobedience to the state". Sometimes people assume that civil in this
case means "observing accepted social forms; polite" which would make civil
disobedience something like polite, orderly disobedience. Although this is an acceptable
dictionary definition of the word civil, it is not what is intended here. This misinterpretation
is one reason the essay is sometimes considered to be an argument for pacifism or for
exclusively nonviolent resistance. For instance, Mahatma Gandhi used this interpretation to
suggest an equivalence between Thoreau's civil disobedience and his own satyagraha.[4]

Background
The slavery crisis inflamed New England in the 1840s and 1850s. The environment became
especially tense after the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850. A lifelong abolitionist, Thoreau
delivered an impassioned speech which would later become Civil Disobedience in 1848, just
months after leaving Walden Pond. The speech dealt with slavery and at the same time
excoriated American imperialism, particularly the Mexican–American War.[5]

Summary
Thoreau asserts that because governments are typically more harmful than helpful, they
therefore cannot be justified. Democracy is no cure for this, as majorities simply by virtue of
being majorities do not also gain the virtues of wisdom and justice. The judgment of an
individual's conscience is not necessarily inferior to the decisions of a political body or
majority, and so "[i]t is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the
right. The only obligation which I have a right to assume is to do at any time what I think
right.... Law never made men a whit more just; and, by means of their respect for it, even the
well-disposed are daily made the agents of injustice."[6] He adds, "I cannot for an instant
recognize as my government [that] which is the slave's government also."[7]

The government, according to Thoreau, is not just a little corrupt or unjust in the course of
doing its otherwise-important work, but in fact the government is primarily an agent
of corruption and injustice. Because of this, it is "not too soon for honest men to rebel and
revolutionize".[8]

Political philosophers have counseled caution about revolution because the upheaval of
revolution typically causes a lot of expense and suffering. Thoreau contends that such a
cost/benefit analysis is inappropriate when the government is actively facilitating an injustice
as extreme as slavery. Such a fundamental immorality justifies any difficulty or expense to
bring it to an end. "This people must cease to hold slaves, and to make war on Mexico, though
it cost them their existence as a people."[9]

Thoreau tells his audience that they cannot blame this problem solely on pro-
slavery Southern politicians, but must put the blame on those in, for instance, Massachusetts,
"who are more interested in commerce and agriculture than they are in humanity, and are not
prepared to do justice to the slave and to Mexico, cost what it may... There are thousands who
are in opinion opposed to slavery and to the war, who yet in effect do nothing to put an end
to them."[10] (See also: Thoreau's Slavery in Massachusetts which also advances this
argument.)

He exhorts people not to just wait passively for an opportunity to vote for justice, because
voting for justice is as ineffective as wishing for justice; what you need to do is to actually be
just. This is not to say that you have an obligation to devote your life to fighting for justice,
but you do have an obligation not to commit injustice and not to give injustice your practical
support.

Paying taxes is one way in which otherwise well-meaning people collaborate in injustice.
People who proclaim that the war in Mexico is wrong and that it is wrong to enforce slavery
contradict themselves if they fund both things by paying taxes. Thoreau points out that the
same people who applaud soldiers for refusing to fight an unjust war are not themselves
willing to refuse to fund the government that started the war.

In a constitutional republic like the United States, people often think that the proper response
to an unjust law is to try to use the political process to change the law, but to obey and respect
the law until it is changed. But if the law is itself clearly unjust, and the lawmaking process
is not designed to quickly obliterate such unjust laws, then Thoreau says the law deserves no
respect and it should be broken. In the case of the United States, the Constitution itself
enshrines the institution of slavery, and therefore falls under this condemnation. Abolitionists,
in Thoreau's opinion, should completely withdraw their support of the government and stop
paying taxes, even if this means courting imprisonment, or even violence.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also a
prison.... where the State places those who are not with her, but against her,—the only house
in a slave State in which a free man can abide with honor.... Cast your whole vote, not a strip
of paper merely, but your whole influence. A minority is powerless while it conforms to the
majority; it is not even a minority then; but it is irresistible when it clogs by its whole weight.
If the alternative is to keep all just men in prison, or give up war and slavery, the State will
not hesitate which to choose. If a thousand men were not to pay their tax bills this year, that
would not be a violent and bloody measure, as it would be to pay them, and enable the State
to commit violence and shed innocent blood. This is, in fact, the definition of a peaceable
revolution, if any such is possible. [...] But even suppose blood should flow. Is there not a
sort of blood shed when the conscience is wounded? Through this wound a man's real
manhood and immortality flow out, and he bleeds to an everlasting death. I see this blood
flowing now.[11]

Because the government will retaliate, Thoreau says he prefers living simply because he
therefore has less to lose. "I can afford to refuse allegiance to Massachusetts.... It costs me
less in every sense to incur the penalty of disobedience to the State than it would to obey. I
should feel as if I were worth less in that case."[12]

He was briefly imprisoned for refusing to pay the poll tax, but even in jail felt freer than the
people outside. He considered it an interesting experience and came out of it with a new
perspective on his relationship to the government and its citizens. (He was released the next
day when "someone interfered, and paid that tax".)[13]

Thoreau said he was willing to pay the highway tax, which went to pay for something of
benefit to his neighbors, but that he was opposed to taxes that went to support the government
itself—even if he could not tell if his particular contribution would eventually be spent on an
unjust project or a beneficial one. "I simply wish to refuse allegiance to the State, to withdraw
and stand aloof from it effectually."[14]

Because government is man-made, not an element of nature or an act of God, Thoreau hoped
that its makers could be reasoned with. As governments go, he felt, the U.S. government, with
all its faults, was not the worst and even had some admirable qualities. But he felt we could
and should insist on better. "The progress from an absolute to a limited monarchy, from a
limited monarchy to a democracy, is a progress toward a true respect for the individual.... Is
a democracy, such as we know it, the last improvement possible in government? Is it not
possible to take a step further towards recognizing and organizing the rights of man? There
will never be a really free and enlightened State until the State comes to recognize the
individual as a higher and independent power, from which all its own power and authority
are derived, and treats him accordingly."[15]

An aphorism often erroneously attributed to Thomas Jefferson,[16] "That government is best

which governs least...", was actually found in Thoreau's Civil Disobedience. Thoreau was
apparently paraphrasing the motto of The United States Magazine and Democratic Review:
"The best government is that which governs least"[17] which might also be inspired from the
17th verse of the Tao Te Ching by Laozi: "The best rulers are scarcely known by their
subjects."[18] Thoreau expanded it significantly:

I heartily accept the motto,—"That government is best which governs least;" and I should like
to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this,
which I also believe,—"That government is best which governs not at all;" and when men are
prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have. Government is at
best but an expedient; but most governments are usually, and all governments are sometimes,
inexpedient.— Thoreau, Civil Disobedience[19]
The American Scholar

"The American Scholar" was a speech given by Ralph Waldo Emerson on August 31, 1837,
to the Phi Beta Kappa Society of Harvard College at the First Parish in Cambridge in
Cambridge, Massachusetts. He was invited to speak in recognition of his groundbreaking
work Nature, published a year earlier, in which he established a new way for America's
fledgling society to regard the world. Sixty years after declaring independence, American
culture was still heavily influenced by Europe, and Emerson, for possibly the first time in the
country's history, provided a visionary philosophical framework for escaping "from under its
iron lids" and building a new, distinctly American cultural identity.

Summary
Emerson introduces Transcendentalist and Romantic views to explain an American scholar's
relationship to nature. A few key points he makes include:
★We are all fragments, "as the hand is divided into fingers", of a greater creature, which is
mankind itself.
★An individual may live in either of two states. In one, the busy, "divided" or "degenerate"
state, he does not "possess himself" but identifies with his occupation or a monotonous action;
in the other, "right" state, he is elevated to "Man", at one with all mankind.
★To achieve this higher state of mind, the modern American scholar must reject old ideas
and think for him or herself, to become "Man Thinking" rather than "a mere thinker, or still
worse, the parrot of other men's thinking", "the victim of society", "the sluggard intellect of
this continent".
★"The American Scholar" has an obligation, as "Man Thinking", within this "One Man"
concept, to see the world clearly, not severely influenced by traditional and historical views,
and to broaden his understanding of the world from fresh eyes, to "defer never to the popular
cry."
★The scholar's education consists of three influences:
I. Nature, as the most important influence on the mind
II. The Past, manifest in books
III. Action and its relation to experience
The last, unnumbered part of the text is devoted to Emerson's view on the "Duties" of the
American Scholar who has become the "Man Thinking".
★"The scholar must needs stand wistful and admiring before this great spectacle. He must
settle its value in his mind."

"Self-Reliance" is an 1841 essay written by American transcendentalist philosopher Ralph

Waldo Emerson. It contains the most thorough statement of one of his recurrent themes: the
need for each person to avoid conformity and false consistency, and follow his or her own
instincts and ideas. It is the source of one of his most famous quotations:
Ralph Waldo Emerson's essay called for staunch individualism.
 "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and
philosophers and divines."[1]
This essay is an analysis into the nature of the "aboriginal self on which a universal reliance
may be grounded".[2] Emerson emphasizes the importance of individualism and its effect on
a person's satisfaction in life, explaining how life is "learning and forgetting and learning
again".[3]

Themes
Emerson's themes include the authority of the individual, according to Anne Marie Hacht.
Nothing has authority over the self, she says. One particular temptation is to find
enlightenment in history but Emerson argues that it can only come from individual searching.
He believes that truth is inside a person and this is an authority, not institutions like
religion.[8]
Emerson's essay focuses and consistently relates back to one major theme: "Trust
thyself".[11]
One of the most prevalent themes in the essay is nonconformity. Emerson states,

"Whoso would be a man must be a nonconformist".[8]

He counsels his readers to do what they think is right no matter what others think.[8]
Haijing Liang, in her analysis of "Self-Reliance", explains how Emerson "encourages the
readers to free themselves from the constraints of conformity and give themselves back to
their nature".[3]
Solitude and the community appear within the essay multiple times. Emerson wrote how the
community is a distraction to self-growth, by friendly visits, and family needs. He advocates
more time being spent reflecting on one's self. This can also happen in the community through
strong self-confidence. This would help the counseled to not sway from his beliefs in groups
of people.[8] Emerson mentions "but the great man is he who in the midst of the crowd keeps
with perfect sweetness the independence of solitude."[11]
Spirituality, specifically the idea that truth is within one's self, is a recurring theme in
Emerson's essay. Emerson posits that reliance upon institutionalized religion hinders the
ability to grow mentally as an individual.[8]
The theme of individualism is often proposed within "Self-Reliance." Emerson explains the
ultimate form of happiness is achieved when a person learns and adapts an individualistic
lifestyle based on their own values.[12][3] Emerson emphasizes, "Nothing can bring you
peace but yourself. Nothing can bring you peace but the triumph of principles."[11]
The conflict between originality and imitation is often an oscillating theme in the essay.
Emerson emphasizes that "Envy is ignorance, imitation is suicide."[11][3] Near the end, he
encourages society: "Insist on yourself; never imitate."[11]
Criticism
Herman Melville's Moby-Dick[13] has been read as a critique of Emerson's philosophy of
self-reliance, embodied particularly in the life and death of Ahab. Melville's critique of self-
reliance as a way of life is seen to lie in its destructive potential, especially when taken to
extremes. Richard Chase writes that for Melville,
"Death – spiritual, emotional, physical – is the price of self-reliance when it is pushed
to the point of solipsism, where the world has no existence apart from the all-sufficient
self."[14]
In that regard, Chase sees Melville's art as antithetical to that of Emerson's thought, in that
Melville

"[points] up the dangers of an exaggerated self-regard, rather than, as ... Emerson

loved to do, [suggested] the vital possibilities of the self."[14]
Newton Arvin further suggests that self-reliance was, for Melville, really the

"[masquerade in kingly weeds of] a wild egoism, anarchic, irresponsible, and

destructive."[13]
Although never directly stated, Emerson's "Self-Reliance" has religious influences tied into
the values and beliefs presented. Critics argue that Emerson believes the Universe is not
complete without "The Spirit". Without some form of spirituality or religious tendencies,
society and the universe "is sad, hopeless, and largely meaningless."[15] In his work, the
transcendentalist argues that no person, specifically individuals who are self-reliant, exists
without a slight connection to a higher power. Mark Cladis, author of a published religious
analysis of "Self-Reliance", argues individuals are
"intimately connected to that which is greater than the self alone."[15]
Emerson encourages his readers to understand that self-reliance is

"freedom in a spiritual universe that is just as rule-governed as the Newtonian physical

universe".[15]
Cladis explains that individuals are not expected to endure life alone; achieving self-reliance
is understanding that

"we are surrounded by helps and aids of all kinds, supporting us, sustaining us,
journeying always with us."[15]

I Have a Dream Speech

In his “I Have a Dream” speech, minister and civil rights activist Martin Luther King Jr.
outlines the long history of racial injustice in America and encourages his audience to hold
their country accountable to its own founding promises of freedom, justice, and equality.

King begins his speech by reminding his audience—the 250,000+ attendees at the March on
Washington in August of 1963—that it has been over a century since the Emancipation
Proclamation was signed into law, ending slavery in America. But even though Black
Americans are technically free from slavery, they are not free in any larger sense—the “chains
of discrimination” and the “manacles of segregation” continue to define the Black experience
in America. It is time, King argues, for Black Americans to “cash [the] check” they were
promised a century ago and demand “the riches of freedom and the security of justice.” There
is no more time to waste in pursuit of a gradual solution to racism, King says—it is the
“sweltering summer of the Negro’s legitimate discontent,” and the country has reached its
boiling point.

Even though King calls for the “whirlwinds of revolt” to spin into action, he urges those on
the front lines of the civil rights movement not to let “bitterness and hatred” define their
actions. They cannot to let their movement for justice “degenerate into physical violence.”
King reminds his listeners to remain in the “majestic heights” of nonviolent resistance and
also to not see their white allies as enemies. In order to bring true justice about, King says,
Americans of all races will need to unite and remain true to the values of nonviolent solidarity.

King acknowledges the long and difficult struggles that many of his listeners have already
faced—he knows that those involved in the movement for civil rights have been beaten,
insulted, and incarcerated. Still, he urges them to return home from the march to wherever
they may live, be it in the sweltering South or in the “ghettos of the northern cities,” confident
in the value and promise of their fight.

Then King invokes the dream he has for America: a dream that one day the country will “live
out the true meaning of its creed” and make it a reality that “all men are created equal.” He
dreams that his children will one day live in a society where they will be judged not “by the
color of their skin but by the content of their character” and that, in the future, Black children
and white children will join hands as sisters and brothers.

King urges his listeners to take their faith in meaningful change back to their hometowns—
they must continue to struggle together, face incarceration together, and “stand up for freedom
together” in order to truly make America a great nation. He calls for freedom to ring out across
the country, from the highest mountains of Colorado, to Stone Mountain of Georgia, to “every
hill and molehill of Mississippi.” When America collectively allows freedom to ring across
its hills and valleys, he says, only then will “black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles,
Catholics and Protestants” be able to sing truthfully and honestly the words of the old Negro
spiritual: “Free at last, free at last; thank God Almighty, we are free at last.”

'I Have a Dream' is one of the greatest speeches in American history. Delivered by Martin
Luther King, Jr. (1929-68) in Washington D.C. in 1963, the speech is a powerful rallying cry
for racial equality and for a fairer and equal world in which African Americans will be as free
as white Americans.

If you’ve ever stayed up till the small hours working on a presentation you’re due to give the
next day, tearing your hair out as you try to find the right words, you can take solace in the
fact that as great an orator as Martin Luther King did the same with one of the most
memorable speeches ever delivered.
He reportedly stayed up until 4am the night before he was due to give his ‘I Have a Dream’,
writing it out in longhand.

‘I Have a Dream’: background

The occasion for King’s speech was the march on Washington, which saw some 210,000
African American men, women, and children gather at the Washington Monument in August
1963, before marching to the Lincoln Memorial.

They were marching for several reasons, including jobs (many of them were out of work),
but the main reason was freedom: King and many other Civil Rights leaders sought to remove
segregation of black and white Americans and to ensure black Americans were treated the
same as white Americans.

1963 was the centenary of the Emancipation Proclamation, in which then US President
Abraham Lincoln (1809-65) had freed the African slaves in the United States in 1863. But a
century on from the abolition of slavery, King points out, black Americans still are not free
in many respects.

‘I Have a Dream’: summary

King begins his speech by reminding his audience that it’s a century, or ‘five score years’,
since that ‘great American’ Abraham Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation. This
ensured the freedom of the African slaves, but Black Americans are still not free, King points
out, because of racial segregation and discrimination .

America is a wealthy country, and yet many Black Americans live in poverty. It is as if the
Black American is an exile in his own land. King likens the gathering in Washington to
cashing a cheque: in other words, claiming money that is due to be paid.

Next, King praises the ‘magnificent words’ of the US Constitution and the Declaration of
Independence. King compares these documents to a promissory note, because they contain
the promise that all men, including Black men, will be guaranteed what the Declaration of
Independence calls ‘inalienable rights’: namely, ‘life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness’.
King asserts that America in the 1960s has ‘defaulted’ on this promissory note: in other words,
it has refused to pay up. King calls it a ‘sacred obligation’, but America as a nation is like
someone who has written someone else a cheque that has bounced and the money owed
remains to be paid. But it is not because the money isn’t there: America, being a land of
opportunity, has enough ‘funds’ to ensure everyone is prosperous enough.

King urges America to rise out of the ‘valley’ of segregation to the ‘sunlit path of racial
justice’. He uses the word ‘brotherhood’ to refer to all Americans, since all men and women
are God’s children. He also repeatedly emphasises the urgency of the moment. This is not
some brief moment of anger but a necessary new start for America. However, King cautions
his audience not to give way to bitterness and hatred, but to fight for justice in the right
manner, with dignity and discipline.

Physical violence and militancy are to be avoided. King recognises that many white
Americans who are also poor and marginalised feel a kinship with the Civil Rights movement,
so all Americans should join together in the cause. Police brutality against Black Americans
must be eradicated, as must racial discrimination in hotels and restaurants. States which forbid
Black Americans from voting must change their laws.

Martin Luther King then comes to the most famous part of his speech, in which he uses the
phrase ‘I have a dream’ to begin successive sentences (a rhetorical device known as
anaphora). King outlines the form that his dream, or ambition or wish for a better America,
takes.

His dream, he tells his audience, is ‘deeply rooted’ in the American Dream: that notion that
anybody, regardless of their background, can become prosperous and successful in the United
States. King once again reminds his listeners of the opening words of the Declaration of
Independence: ‘We hold these truths to be self-eviden Qwt, that all men are created equal.’

In his dream of a better future, King sees the descendants of former Black slaves and the
descendants of former slave owners united, sitting and eating together. He has a dream that
one day his children will live in a country where they are judged not by the colour of their
skin but by the content of their character...

Even in Mississippi and Alabama, states which are riven by racial injustice and hatred, people
of all races will live together in harmony. King then broadens his dream out into ‘our hope’:
a collective aspiration and endeavour. King then quotes the patriotic American song ‘My
Country, ’Tis of Thee’, which describes America as a ‘sweet land of liberty’..

King uses anaphora again, repeating the phrase ‘let freedom ring’ several times in succession
to suggest how jubilant America will be on the day that such freedoms are ensured. And when
this happens, Americans will be able to join together and be closer to the day when they can
sing a traditional African-American hymn: ‘Free at last. Free at last. Thank God almighty, we
are free at last.’
.
 Seize The Day : Saul Bellow | Fiction | Novel | Adult | Published in 1956
Plot Summary
Seize the Day is a literary novel by Saul Bellow. Published in 1956, it received a nomination
for the 1957 National Book Award for Fiction. The book spans one day, following a jaded
man as he searches for his purpose in life. Critics praise the book for its depiction of
humanity. Bellow was a bestselling writer known for his short plays and novels. He won
various awards, including the 1975 Pulitzer Prize and the International Literary Prize.
During WWII, he served in the Merchant Marines, and he later worked for Newsday as a
war correspondent.

The protagonist, Tommy Wilhelm, is an unhappy forty-something-year-old man living in

New York City with his father, Dr. Adler. They live in the Hotel Gloriana on the Upper West
Side. Tommy’s neighbors are elderly and frail, and he doesn’t have many friends. He doesn’t
have any romantic prospects and he often feels alone. Approaching fifty, Tommy never
imagined his life turning out this way.

As the novel opens, Tommy plans to take breakfast with his father on the twenty-third floor.
On the way, he stops, staring into a newspaper stand and contemplating his life. A failed
actor, he subsequently made bad investments in the stock market. More than anything,
Tommy wants God to give him another chance to prove himself.

Before Tommy faces Dr. Adler at breakfast, he retrieves his mail—overdue bills and debt
letters. Tommy doesn’t have any money, and so he hides the letters before Dr. Adler sees
them. By the time Tommy reaches the restaurant, he is tired and miserable. There is no
chance to sit down before Dr. Adler criticizes his clothes and his appearance. Tommy
despairs because his father is cruel and unfeeling, but there is no point in arguing with him.

Another man, Mr. Perls, joins them for breakfast. Dr. Adler introduces his son as an ex-
salesman for a prestigious furniture company. This impresses Mr. Perls, even if it makes
Tommy cringe. He hates it when his father talks about him, because the conversation always
circles back to Tommy’s poor career choices. He knows he should not have left the cushy
sales job—he doesn’t need Dr. Adler’s constant reminders.

Eventually, Mr. Perls leaves the table. Dr. Adler complains because Tommy is not looking
after himself. He doesn’t wash properly and he is lazy. He sends all his money to his ex-
wife, Margaret, who is bleeding him dry. Dr. Adler advises him to stop sending her child
support and return to the marital home instead. Margaret’s influence, Dr. Adler says, is good
for him.

Tommy cannot stand Margaret and he does not plan to go home. He admits that he cheated
on her because he doesn’t love her anymore. Ashamed of Tommy, Dr. Adler tells him to
leave the table. He will not give Tommy any financial help because only no-good men cheat
on their wives. Dr. Adler acts as though he is perfect all the time, and Tommy hates him for
it.

In the meantime, Dr. Tamkin arrives. Tamkin holds a power of attorney over Tommy’s
dwindling savings. If Tommy’s latest land investment falls through, there won’t be any
money left for Tamkin to manage. Tamkin takes everything in his stride because he is an
eternal optimist and he enjoys studying Tommy’s pessimistic personality.

Tamkin finally tells Tommy to stop worrying because it’s no good for the soul. He drags
Tommy down to the brokerage office to see how the investments are going. Some prices are
down, but others hold steady. Tamkin explains that he recently invested some money in a
hedge of rye, and this should offset some unexpected losses. Tommy wonders why he gives
Tamkin so much power over his finances because his investments never turn out well.

Buoyed by a morning at the brokerage office, Tamkin takes Tommy for lunch. They talk
about Margaret, Dr. Adler, and Olive, Tommy’s mistress. Tommy loves Olive but he cannot
divorce Margaret. After distracting Tommy with life and love advice, Tamkin leaves Tommy
with the expensive lunch bill before excusing himself temporarily.

An hour or so passes, and Tamkin never returns. Tommy gives up waiting and heads back
to the brokerage office. Here, everything falls apart. The rye price dropped, and now there
is nothing left. Tommy is officially bankrupt. Tamkin disappeared without a trace because
he had always planned to waste Tommy’s money.

Broken and penniless, Tommy returns to the hotel. He begs his father to cover this month’s
rent bill, but Dr. Adler refuses. He says that it is time Tommy went home to Margaret or got
a proper job. Tommy calls Margaret, but all she cares about is maintenance money. She does
not want him home unless he returns to the sales job.

Tommy cannot stand the thought of working in sales again, and so he hangs up the phone.
He recognizes that he is alone in the world. No one cares what happens to him. He wanders
the streets, finding himself caught up in a funeral procession. When he realizes the deceased
is barely older than him, he sees his own life passing him by. Now, he must seize the day.

Death of a Salesman - Arthur Miller

Play Summary

Death of a Salesman takes place in New York and Boston. The action begins in the home of
Willy Loman, an aging salesman who has just returned from a road trip. Willy is having
difficulty remembering events, as well as distinguishing the present from his memories of the
past. His wife, Linda, suggests that he request a job in New York rather than travel each week.
Linda and Willy argue about their oldest son Biff.
Biff and his brother, Happy, overhear Willy talking to himself. Biff learns that Willy is usually
talking to him (Biff) during these private reveries. Biff and Happy discuss women and the
future. Both are dissatisfied with their jobs: Biff is discontent working for someone else, and
Happy cannot be promoted until the merchandise manager dies. They contemplate buying a
ranch and working together.

At this point, Willy relives several scenes from his past, including the time when, during high
school, Biff admits to stealing a football and promises to throw a pass for Willy during the
game. Willy also remembers his old dream of the boys visiting him in Boston during a road
trip. Finally in his reverie, he relives the time that Bernard, son of the next-door neighbor
Charley, informs Willy that Biff is failing math and will not graduate unless his scores
improve. In this last scene, Willy listens but dismisses the important news because Biff is
"well-liked," and Bernard is not.

Willy remembers a conversation with Linda in which he inflates his earnings but is then
forced to admit he exaggerated when Linda calculates his commission. Willy recalls
complaining about his appearance and remembers Linda assuring him that he is attractive. At
this point, Willy's memories begin to blend together. While he is reliving his conversation
with Linda, he begins to remember his conversation with the Woman (a woman with whom
he had an affair). He is unable to separate memories of Linda from the Woman.

The play continues in the present with his neighbor Charley coming over to play cards.
However, Uncle Ben appears to Willy while he is playing cards with Charley, and Willy
relives an old conversation with Ben while simultaneously talking with Charley. As a result,
Willy becomes confused by the two different "discussions" he is having — one in the present,
one in the past — and he accuses Charley of cheating. After Charley leaves, Willy relives
Ben's visit and asks Ben for advice because he feels insecure since he did not really know his
own father. Willy also remembers instructing Biff and Happy to steal some supplies from the
construction site in order to remodel the porch so that he can impress Ben.

The play once again returns to the present, in which Biff and Happy talk with Linda about
Willy. Biff and Happy learn that Willy is on straight commission and has been borrowing
money from Charley in order to pay bills. Linda criticizes her sons for abandoning their father
in order to pursue their own selfish desires, and she gives Biff a choice: Respect your father
or do not come home. Biff decides to stay in New York, but he reminds Linda that Willy
threw him out of the house. He also tells Linda that Willy is a "fake." It is at this point that
Linda informs her sons that Willy is suicidal.

Willy overhears his wife and sons talking, and he and Biff argue. When Happy describes
Biff's plan to open his own business, Willy directs Biff on what to do during his interview
with Bill Oliver. Willy remembers Biff's football games. Before Linda and Willy go to bed,
Linda questions Willy: She wants to know what Biff is holding against him, but Willy refuses
to answer. Biff removes the rubber tubing Willy hid behind the heater.

The next morning Willy prepares to visit his boss Howard to ask him for a job in New York.
During the meeting, Howard informs Willy that there are no positions available in New York.
Willy reminds Howard that he named him, and he was a very successful salesman when he
worked for Howard's father. Howard remains impassive and instead fires him.

Upon being fired, Willy begins freefalling into his memories of the past. Willy recalls Ben's
visit once again. This time, Willy asks for advice because things are not going as he planned.
He remembers Ben offering him a job in Alaska. He accepts, but Linda intervenes and
reminds him of Dave Singleman. Willy shifts from his memory of Ben to Biff's last football
game. Willy recalls Charley pretending he is unaware of Biff's game, and this infuriates Willy.
Willy's daydream ends when he arrives at Charley's office.

Bernard is waiting for Charley in his office. Willy and Bernard discuss Biff and consider
possible reasons for his lack of motivation and success. Bernard says Biff changed right after
high school when he visited Willy in Boston. Bernard questions Willy about what happened
when Biff went to visit him. Willy becomes defensive. Bernard is on his way to present a
case before the Supreme Court. Bernard's success both pleases and upsets Willy. Charley
gives Willy money for his insurance payment and offers him a job, an offer that Willy refuses.

At a restaurant where Willy, Biff, and Happy are to meet, Happy flirts with a young prostitute,
and Biff is upset because Oliver did not remember him. Then Biff realizes that he was never
a salesman for Oliver; instead, he was a shipping clerk. Willy tells his sons that he has been
fired. Biff attempts to explain what happened with Oliver (after seeing Oliver, Biff sneaked
back into his office and stole Oliver's pen); however, Willy is reliving the past, recalling
Bernard informing Linda that Biff has failed math and will not graduate. Willy then
remembers Bernard telling her Biff has taken a train to Boston.

Willy relives the time when Biff finds out about Willy's affair with the Woman: Biff comes
to Willy's hotel room in Boston to tell Willy that he will not graduate unless Willy can
convince Mr. Birnbaum to pass him. Willy recalls his own desperate attempts to hide the
Woman in the bathroom. When the Woman comes out of the bathroom with Biff in the room,
Willy's plan to conceal the affair is ruined. Willy's final memory is of Biff calling him a "fake"
before walking out the door.

The play continues in the present when Stanley reappears, and Willy realizes he is actually
still in the restaurant. Willy returns home and begins building a garden, even though it is
night. Linda throws Happy and Biff out of the house. Ben appears to Willy while he is
planting seeds. At this point, Willy does not remember a previous conversation with Ben, as
he does several times earlier in the play. Instead, he and Ben discuss his plan to commit
suicide. Willy and Ben converse in the present, but they are talking about the future. Ben
warns Willy that the insurance company might refuse to pay a settlement and Biff might never
forgive him.

Biff approaches Willy in the garden to tell him he is leaving home for good. Biff and Willy
argue, and Biff confronts Willy with the rubber hose, saying he will not pity him if he commits
suicide. According to Biff, the Lomans have never been truthful with one another or
themselves. Biff believes that he and Willy are ordinary people who can easily be replaced.
Biff and Willy reconcile. Ben reappears to Willy and reminds him of the insurance policy.
Willy drives away. The Lomans, Charley, and Bernard gather at Willy's grave.

When Lilacs Last in the Dooryard Bloom'd

"When Lilacs Last in the Dooryard Bloom'd" is a long poem written by American poet
Walt Whitman (1819–1892) as an elegy to President Abraham Lincoln. It was written in the
summer of 1865 during a period of profound national mourning in the aftermath of the
president's assassination on 14 April of that year.

Summary and Analysis: When Lilacs Last in the Dooryard Bloom'd

"When Lilacs Last in the Dooryard Bloom'd- is an elegy on the death of Abraham Lincoln,
though it never mentions the president by name. Like most elegies, it develops from the
personal (the death of Lincoln and the poet's grief) to the impersonal (the death of "all of you"
and death itself); from an intense feeling of grief to the thought of reconciliation. The poem,
which is one of the finest Whitman ever wrote, is a dramatization of this feeling of loss. This
elegy is grander and more touching than Whitman's other two elegies on Lincoln's death, "0
Captain! My Captain!" and "Hush'd Be the Camps To-day." The form is elegiac but also
contains elements found in operatic music, such as the aria and recitative. The song of the
hermit thrush, for example, is an "aria."

Abraham Lincoln was shot in Washington, D.C., by Booth on April 14, 1865, and died the
following day. The body was sent by train from Washington to Springfield, Illinois. As it
crossed the continent, it was saluted by the people of America. Whitman has not only men
and women but even natural objects saluting the dead man.

The first cycle of the poem, comprising sections 1-4, presents the setting in clear perspective.
As spring returns, the lilacs blossom, and the planet Venus "nearly dropp'd in the western
sky," the poet mourns the loss "of him I love." He mourns the "powerful western fallen star"
now covered by "black murk" in the "tearful night," and he is "powerless" and "helpless"
because the cloud around him "will not free my soul." He observes a lilac bush, is deeply
affected by its perfume, and believes that "every leaf [is] a miracle." He breaks off a small
branch with "heart-shaped Leaves." A shy, solitary thrush, like a secluded hermit, sings a
song which is an expression of its inmost grief. It sings "death's outlet song of life."

This first section of the poem introduces the three principal symbols of the poem — the lilac,
the star, and the bird. They are woven into a poetic and dramatic pattern. The meaning of
Whitman's symbols is neither fixed nor constant. The star, Venus, is identified with Lincoln,
generally, but it also represents the poet's grief for the dead. Lilacs, which are associated with
everreturning spring, are a symbol of resurrection, while its heartshaped Leaves symbolize
love. The purple color of the lilac, indicating the passion of the Crucifixion, is highly
suggestive of the violence of Lincoln's death. The bird is the symbol of reconciliation with
death and its song is the soul's voice. "Death's outlet song of life" means that out of death will
come renewed life. Death is described as a "dark mother" or a "strong deliveress," which
suggests that it is a necessary process for rebirth. The emotional drama in the poem is built
around this symbolic framework. The continual recurrence of the spring season symbolizes
the cycle of life and death and rebirth. The words "ever-returning spring," which occur in line
3 and are repeated in line 4, emphasize the idea of rebirth and resurrection. The date of
Lincoln's assassination coincided with Easter, the time of Christ's resurrection. These two
elements provide the setting to the poem in time and space.
The second stanza of the poem describes the poet's intense grief for the dead. Each line begins
with "O," an exclamation which is like the shape of a mouth open in woe.

The second cycle of the poem comprises sections 5-9. It describes the journey of the coffin
through natural scenery and industrial cities, both representing facets of American life. The
thrush's song in section 4 is a prelude to the journey of the coffin which will pass "over the
breast of the spring" through cities, woods, wheat fields, and orchards. But "in the midst of
life we are in death," as it says in the Book of Common Prayer, and now the cities are "draped
in black" and the states, like "crape-veil'd women," mourn and salute the dead. Somber faces,
solemn voices, and mournful dirges mark the journey across the American continent.

To the dead man, the poet offers "my sprig of lilac," his obituary tribute. The poet brings fresh
blossoms not for Lincoln alone, but for all men. He chants a song "for you 0 sane and sacred
death" and offers flowers to "the coffins all of you 0 death."

The poet now addresses the star shining in the western sky: "Now I know what you must have
meant." Last month the star seemed as if it "had something to tell" the poet. Whitman
imagines that the star was full of woe "as the night advanced" until it vanished "in the
netherward black of the night." Whitman calls upon the bird to continue singing. Yet the poet
momentarily lingers on, held by the evening star, "my departing comrade."

The symbols are retained throughout this section. The poet bestows, as a mark of affection, a
sprig of lilac on the coffin. The association of death with an object of growing life is
significant. The star confides in the poet — a heavenly body identifies itself with an earthly
being. The star is identified with Lincoln, and the poet is still under the influence of his
personal grief for the dead body of Lincoln, and not yet able to perceive the spiritual existence
of Lincoln after death. The song of the hermit thrush finally makes the poet aware of the
deathless and the spiritual existence of Lincoln.

In the third cycle of the poem, sections 10-13, the poet wonders how he shall sing "for the
large sweet soul that has gone." How shall he compose his tribute for the "dead one there I
loved"? With his poem he wishes to "perfume the grave of him I love." The pictures on the
dead president's tomb, he says, should be of spring and sun and Leaves, a river, hills, and the
sky, the city dense with dwellings, and people at work — in short, "all the scenes of life." The
"body and soul" of America will be in them, the beauties of Manhattan spires as well as the
shores of the Ohio and the Missouri rivers — all "the varied and ample land." The "gray-
brown bird" is singing "from the swamps" its "loud human song" of woe. The song has a
liberating effect on the poet's soul, although the star still holds him, as does the mastering
odor" of the lilac.
In this cycle the description of natural objects and phenomena indicates the breadth of
Lincoln's vision, and the "purple" dawn, "delicious" eve, and "welcome" night suggest the
continuous, endless cycle of the day, which, in turn, symbolizes Lincoln's immortality.

Sections 14-16 comprise a restatement of the earlier themes and symbols of the poem in a
perspective of immortality. The poet remembers that one day while he sat in the peaceful but
"unconscious scenery of my land," a cloud with a "long black trail" appeared and enveloped
everything. Suddenly he "knew death." He walked between "the knowledge of death" and
"the thought of death." He fled to the bird, who sang "the carol of death." The song of the
thrush follows this passage. It praises death, which it describes as "lovely," "soothing," and
"delicate." The "fathomless universe" is adored "for life and joy" and "sweet love." Death is
described as a "dark mother always gliding near with soft feet." To her, the bird sings a song
of "fullest welcome." Death is a "strong deliveress" to whom "the body gratefully" nestles.

The thrush's song is the spiritual ally of the poet. As the bird sings, the poet sees a vision:
"And I saw askant the armies." He sees "battle-corpses" and the "debris of all the slain
soldiers." These dead soldiers are happy in their resting places, but their parents and relatives
continue to suffer because they have lost them. The suffering is not of the dead, but of the
living.

The coffin has now reached the end of its journey. It passes the visions," the "song of the
hermit bird," and the "tallying song" of the poet's soul. "Death's outlet song" is heard, "sinking
and fainting," and yet bursting with joy. The joyful psalm fills the earth and heaven. As the
coffin passes him, the poet salutes it, reminding himself that the lilac blooming in the
dooryard will return each spring. The coffin has reached its resting place in "the fragrant pines
and the cedars dusk and dim." The star, the bird, and the lilac join with the poet as he bids
goodbye to Lincoln, his "comrade, the dead I loved so well."

The poet's realization of immortality through the emotional conflict of personal loss is the
principal theme of this great poem, which is a symbolistic dramatization of the poet's grief
and his ultimate reconciliation with the truths of life and death.

A trinity of symbols: "Lilac and star and bird twined"

Whitman's poem features three prominent motifs or images, referred to as a "trinity" of
symbols, which biographer David S. Reynolds describes as autobiographical:[72][73]
1. the lilacs represent the poet's perennial love for Lincoln;
2. the fallen star (Venus) is Lincoln; and
3. the hermit thrush represents death, or its chant

Summary and Analysis: Crossing Brooklyn Ferry

This poem was originally called "Sun-Down Poem" (1856), and the present title was given it
in 1860. It was substantially revised in 1881.
The major image in the poem is the ferry. It symbolizes continual movement, backward and
forward, a universal motion in space and time. The ferry moves on, from a point of land,
through water, to another point of land. Land and water thus form part of the symbolistic
pattern of the poem. Land symbolizes the physical; water symbolizes the spiritual. The
circular flow from the physical to the spiritual connotes the dual nature of the universe.
Dualism, in philosophy, means that the world is ultimately composed of, or explicable in
terms of, two basic entities, such as mind and matter. From a moral point of view, it means
that there are two mutually antagonistic principles in the universe — good and evil. In
Whitman's view, both the mind and the spirit are realities and matter is only a means which
enables man to realize this truth. His world is dominated by a sense of good, and evil has a
very subservient place in it. Man, in Whitman's world, while overcoming the duality of the
universe, desires fusion with the spirit. In this attempt, man tries to transcend the boundaries
of space and time.

The ferry symbolizes this spatial and temporal movement. It is also associated with the groups
of men and women who ride it, who have ridden it, and who will ride it. The coming together
of these men and women symbolizes the spiritual unity of men in this world.

The poet first addresses the elements — the tide, the clouds, and the sun — saying, "I see you
face to face." He next observes the crowds of men and women on the ferryboats: "How
curious you are to me" he says, for he thinks of these people in relation to those who "shall
cross from shore to shore years hence." The poet meditates on the relationships between the
various generations of men.

This first section establishes the setting of the poem. The poet is on the bank, and he observes
the ferry as well as the passengers, whom he expands to symbolize the large united self of
mankind. The tide, the cloud, and the sun become integral characters in this spiritual drama
between the poet and the elements. The poet first responds to natural objects and then to
people with the ultimate aim of bringing about an imaginative fusion between himself and
the reader.

In the second section, the men and women on the ferryboat become the eternal "impalpable
sustenance" of the poet. He thinks of "the simple, compact, well-join'd scheme" of the
universe and believes himself to be "disintegrated yet part of the scheme." He thinks again
about all the people of the future who will enter the gates of the ferry and cross from shore to
shore."

The poet thinks about his role in relation to the nature of the universe. To him, the universe
seems compact, harmonious, and well-adjusted. He is part of the multitude of men, part of
the eternal processes of birth, life, and death. Whitman probes into the future and identifies
himself with persons who will cross the river "a hundred years hence." Thus a link is
established between the poet and the "others" — including future readers.

In section 3, Whitman declares that neither time nor place really matter, for he is part of this
generation and of many generations hence. He speaks to future generations and tells them
that their experiences are not new: "I too many and many a time cross'd the river of
old,/Watched the Twelfth-month sea-gulls, . . . /Saw the reflection of the summer sky in the
water." He, too, saw the ships arriving, "the sailors at work," and "the flags of all nations."
He, too, saw "the fires from the foundry chimneys burning high and glaringly into the night."

This third section reveals the poet's desire to transcend time, place, and distance in order to
establish contact with people of future generations. His own experience is similar to that of
the reader years from now.

The description of the journey on the river is very vivid. The movement of the day from
morning until midnight is parallel to the movement of the poet from one side of the river to
another and from the physical to the spiritual.

In section 4, Whitman declares his deep love for the cities, the river, and the people. This
section is transitional and marks the beginning of the change of the poet's attitude toward men
and objects. For the first time (in this poem) he becomes emotionally involved in his
relationships with other people and things. The reference to the future is prophetic and
anticipates the growth of spiritual kinship between the poet and the reader.

The poet, in section 5, poses a question about the relationship between himself and the
generations to come. Even if there are hundreds of years between them, they are united by
things which do not change. He, too, lived in Brooklyn and walked the Manhattan streets. He,
too, "felt the curious abrupt questionings" stir within him. He believes that his body, his
physical existence, has become a ferry uniting him with all mankind.

Thus section 5 is the central core of the poem. The poet, in seeking his own physical and
spiritual identity, endeavors to unite his sensibility with that of his reader. His experience
transcends the limits of the Brooklyn ferry and is universalized. His quest now becomes more
intellectual than before; the "curious abrupt questionings" are no longer emotional. Wishing
to suggest the quality of spiritual unification, Whitman has used the metaphor of a chemical
solution: "The float forever held in solution" is the infinite ocean of spiritual life which
contains the "potential" of all life. The spiritual solution is the source of one's being. The use
of the term "solution" is significant because it indicates the merging of man's existence with
his spirit. Spiritually, he is united with future generations and with all of mankind.

In section 6 the poet tells us that he has been engulfed by the same "dark patches" of doubt
which have engulfed the reader. His best actions have appeared "blank" and "suspicious." He,
too, has known "what it was to be evil" and he, too, "blabb'd, blush'd, resented, lied, stole,
grudg'd,/Had guile, anger, lust, hot wishes I dared not speak." But life, finally, is what we
make it — "the same old role . . . as great as we like,/Or as small as we like." The "old knot
of contrariety" the poet has experienced refers to Satan and his evil influence on man, which
creates the condition of contraries, of moral evil and good in human life. The poet suffered
from these evil influences, as have all men. So, the poet implies, do not feel alone because
you have been this way — one must accept both the pure and the impure elements of life.

In section 7, the poet, addressing his reader, says: "Closer yet I approach you." The poet is
thinking as much of the reader-yet-unborn as the reader, while he reads, is now thinking of
the poet. And perhaps now, though he cannot be seen, the poet is watching the reader. The
poet is trying to establish a link between himself and his future readers. The link is not only
of location (as on the ferry) but of thought processes as well. These thought processes will
eventually lead to the mystical fusion between the poet and the reader.

In section 8, Whitman describes the beauty of the Manhattan harbor, the sunset on the river,
the seagulls, and the twilight. He realizes that the bonds between himself and other people
are subtle but enduring. Between himself and the person who "looks in my face" is the subtlest
bond. The union between himself and others cannot be understood in ordinary terms, by
teaching, or by preaching — it is more mystical and intuitive. Recalling the scene of the river
and the people with whom he was associated, he evokes the spiritual bond that links man with
his fellow men. The reference to fusion ("which fuses me into you now") is the basic ideal
the poet sought in the beginning. The union with the reader is mystical and beyond the bounds
of rational thought or philosophy.

In section 9, the poet invokes the river to flow "with the flood-tide," the clouds to shower
upon him and the other passengers, and the "tall masts of Mannahatta" to stand up. He calls
on everything — the bird, the sky, and the water — to keep on fulfilling their function with
splendor, for everything is part of the universal life flow. The poet desires that the "eternal
float of solution" should suspend itself everywhere. Physical objects, like "dumb, beautiful
ministers," wait for their union with the poet's soul. Thus, at the end of the poem, Whitman
addresses himself to material objects, which are also part of the life process because they are
useful to man.

This section is significant in that it uses the language of incantation. The poet invokes the
images of his experiences to suggest the flowing of time. The physical existence of man is
like a ferry plying between the two shores of mortality and immortality. He and his fancy (his
imagination) use objects to express the idea of the search for the eternal beyond the transient.
This search, or the function of fancy, is exemplified by the ferry ride which moves from a
point in the physical world to a destination in the spiritual world. This journey of the spirit
can take place easily in a universe which is harmonious and well adjusted.