Analysis Of Walden Life In The Woods By Henry David Thoreau

Walden, Life in the Woods by Henry David Thoreau contains many assertions about what mankind needs to survive, or truly live in the essence of what ‘man’ is in itself. I, the reader, agree with some of the ideas that Thoreau proposes, however, in some cases I think the author takes it too far. Although today’s society is technology based, I do not think it is impossible to give it up to live a simplistic lifestyle. Many readers would state that Thoreau’s views are a bit over the top, comparing a mosquito’s buzz to the sound of a trumpet, or throwing a paperweight out a window to prevent having to dust it. Today, mankind is heavily dependent on technology. The millennials, arguably more dependent on technology than past generations, have never …show more content…
Thoreau argues that the reason we need clothing is so that we can stay warm and to “cover our nakedness”. Whereas I agree with the statement that we need clothing to keep warm, I disagree with the argument that we need to “cover our nakedness”. Our ancestors were naked, and in the debate where evolution is real (I personally believe so, but I know not everyone agrees) if it was such an issue, why did we not evolve to develop hair to cover our bodies? Arguably, being naked is the truest form of the human fashion. On the topic of fashion, Thoreau has his ‘two cents’ about that. He mentions to “Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes, and not rather a new wearer of clothes. If there is not a new man, how can the new clothes be made to fit?… Perhaps we should never procure a new suit, however ragged or dirty the old, until we have so conducted, so enterprises or sailed in some way, that we feel like new men in the old, and that to retain it would be like keeping new wine in old bottles.” (Walden p877) meaning, don’t get a job which would require a new uniform (a suit in particular) because old clothes are already tailored to your body, and that the people hiring you care more about how you dress than you as a worker. New clothes not only cost money, but are inferior to the comfort of old clothing which he compares to as wine, and only get better with age. As a bit of a …show more content…
For example, if you own a farm, in a sense the farm owns you, and you are not free. By tying yourself down with responsibilities and labor, you cannot leave to explore the world or do the things you want because you’ll be feeding the cows or shoveling piles of horse dung. In a way I can relate to this, as I feel the same way about having pets. Although I love my cats at home, and wouldn 't trade them for anything, when I lived in Dallas I couldn 't do things after school because I had to take care of them. However, Thoreau takes this to the extreme, when, as mentioned in the introduction, he decides to throw his paperweights out the window after finding dusting them to be too tedious. Although I agree with the statement that major commitments, such as a family or job, tie you down, I disagree with the idea that even the small things like sweeping or dusting, which take less than a minute to do, are too much time to commit in everyday life. Thoreau mentions how he believes in self-sufficiency, not just because it’s cheaper but because being reliant on others means that in another way you are tied down, and therefore not free. In the book, Frugality plays a big role in how Thoreau makes his decisions. He ate rice, because it was filling and (more importantly) cheap. He built his own house because it was it cost very little in comparison to other houses. He states that he has no issue