Zewde Ingram 11/12/12 Blue- Dr.

Simel Walden and Maggie Compare and Contrast Essay Authors Stephen Crane and Henry David Thoreau both convey their differing and similar themes on the ability to be self-reliance, the feasibility of escape and the true nature of philanthropy. Stephen Cranes novella Maggie ventures into complex life of Maggie, a nave, abused, common girl who is taken advantage by a wealthy Pete who then is casts her off, forcing the abandoned Maggie to become a prostitute. Soon after, Maggie dies as a fallen women buried underneath shame and sadness. In his piece Crane explores how dependence is inevitable, how escape is an unreachable dream and how philanthropy is a selfish cause. In Thoreaus book, Walden, he recounts his journey away from society and the typical duties of daily life. He learns to support himself and become a free spirit. In his writings, Thoreau advocates self-reliance, escape from society and possessions as well as an end to philanthropy because of its harm to the lower class and its selfish circumstances. Both Crane and Thoreau share similarities and differences in the reoccurring themes in their literature. In Stephen Cranes Maggie, the protagonist, Maggie, is dependent on others for her success as well as her survival. Throughout the story, Maggie clings to Pete for reassurance. She believes that because of his higher class he will give her a better life, one without hunger or poverty. She described him as a beau ideal of a man (Crane 52). Before Pete came along, Maggie was working a low wage job at a collar factory. She couldnt control her pay or how long she was forced to work. She relied on her bosses for income and for survival, without the wages she would be left on the street, forced to face starvation and disease. One night, Pete treats Maggie to dinner at a lavish place with an orchestra, wealthy men and risqu women. Maggie begins to feel awe over the surrounding higher class, and looks to Pete as a way to enter this

Zewde Ingram 11/12/12 Blue- Dr. Simel crowd. Crane writes, Maggie was pale. From her eyes had been plucked all look of selfreliance. She leaned with a dependent air toward her companion. She was timid, as if fearing his anger or displeasure. She seemed to beseech tenderness of him (Crane 73). Maggie becomes so dependent on Pete she turns her back on her own family, Three weeks had passed since the girl had left home. The air of spaniel-like dependence had been magnified and showed its direct effect in the peculiar off-handedness and ease of Pete's ways toward her (Crane 78). Maggie had become Petes pet, she was both loyal to him and followed his every move, to an extent were his pleasure was all that mattered. Her dependency on him had allowed her to experience an easier life, without poverty and the ability to attain luxury. At the end of the novel, Maggie is rejected by both Pete and her family and is forced to live alone on the streets as a prostitute which ultimately leads to her death. Cranes writing conveys the idea of dependency as the only way to survive, especially those facing poverty. A second theme in Cranes writing of Maggie is that there was no escape from poverty. Maggie wanted to use Pete , a relatively wealthier and more sophisticated man, as an escape from her tragic life. Although in the end, she failed and ends up back in poverty. Maggie aches to leave behind her life of poverty and she wanted to be able have possessions like the wealthy, She began to note with more interest, the well-dressed she met on the avenues. She envied the elegance and soft palms. She craved the adornments of person which she saw everyday on the street (Crane 59) Maggie also wanted to escape her life of neglect and abuse. Crane explains Maggies feeling that She thought many of the women and girls she chanced to meet, smiled with serenity as though forever cherished and watched over by those they loved (Crane 59). Pete was the only person who showed her any attention, by taking her to balls and concerts.

Zewde Ingram 11/12/12 Blue- Dr. Simel However, Petes attention was only temporary and Maggies taste at a higher class lifestyle completely vanished. At the end of the novel, Maggie is tossed back on to the streets, stripped of her innocence and forced to become a prostitute. Crane portrayed clearly his belief that it was nearly impossible to escape from poverty. He personified poverty as a trap or a cage where failure to escape was inevitable. Stephen Crane also asserts through his writing that philanthropy is for the self-benefit of the philanthropist. In Maggie many of the citys poor gathered at a local church, While they got warm at the stove, he told his hearers just where he calculated they stood with the Lord. Many of the sinners were impatient over the pictured depths of their degradation. They were waiting for soup-tickets. (Crane 46) Although it may seem that only the poor are benefiting from the generous actions of the church, but the preacher was also gaining an audience and an opportunity to spread his ideas by delivering sermons to the crowds of people waiting for soup. Also, during the story there was continuous motif of Petes philanthropy to Maggie. It seemed that Petes philanthropic actions towards Maggie such as taking her out to nice dinners, buying her lavish gift and taking her to sophisticated balls were for the benefit of Maggie and for her to have a better life. However, all of his actions where only so he could manipulate Maggie into trusting him so he could take advantage of her sexually. Once Pete was reunited with the more beautiful and lavish prostitute Nellie he simply cast off Maggie because he had no use for her and something better had come along. Pete never even thought about Maggie because with the lingering thoughts of the woman [Nellie] of brilliance and audacity (Crane 85). Pete also admitted that He never was never very much interested in the girland his tastes in women

Zewde Ingram 11/12/12 Blue- Dr. Simel were only temporary (Crane 85). He never had intentions to help Maggie and Crane uses this as support for his theme that philanthropy is only for the benefit of the philanthropist. Crane and Thoreau both shared similar and differing themes in their writings. Unlike Crane who believed dependency in certain circumstances was inevitable, in Walden, Henry David Thoreau, he argues that self-reliance can be achieved in any circumstance, regardless of class. Thoreaus sole purpose of venturing into the woods was to lead a life simplicity and independence, he wrote, I went to the woods because I wished to live deliberately, to front only the essential facts of life (Thoreau 7). Thoreau wrote Walden as an account of him surviving off of his own labors. Thoreau claims that people are unsuccessful due to their ignorance, their lack of initiative and their dependency. In Walden, Thoreau tells a story of an Indian trying to sell a basket to a wealthy lawyer who refuses to buy it. The Indian believes that when he had made the baskets he had done his part, and it would be the white mans to buy them (Thoreau 19).Thoreau means to use this anecdote as an analogy, that people are too reliant, such as the Indian on the buyers of his baskets. Thoreau also pushes for self-reliance so the working man is not dependent on his or her creditors who scam them and leave them in debt and poverty. Thoreau writes You have come to this page to spend borrowed or stolen time, robbing your creditors of an hour. It is very evident what mean and sneaking lives many of you live; always on the limits, trying to get into business and trying to get out of debt. Thoreau is trying to prove that the dependency on their creditors changes nothing, but continues there struggles with debt and failure. Crane and Thoreau both share a general idea of escape; only Thoreau believes that all people can be freed from society and poverty by releasing themselves from their possessions

Zewde Ingram 11/12/12 Blue- Dr. Simel bosses. Thoreau argues a person can escape from society or poverty regardless of their circumstances. Contrary to Thoreau, Crane believes escape from society is almost impossible, especially for the lower class. Thoreau claimed that what was holding back men from freedom were possession. He claimed men in his time had become tools of their tools (Thoreau 33), meaning that a person was then forced to conform to the specialization of society. By ridding himself of his possessions, Thoreau alleged that his self-reliant and simplistic lifestyle had allowed him to be more independent than any farmer in concord for [he] was not anchored to a house or farm (Thoreau 47). He personified possessions as a form of bondage and wrote, How many a poor immortal soul have I met well-nigh crushed and smothered under its load, creeping down the road of life, pushing before it a barn seventy-five feet by forty!(Thoreau 8). Lastly, Thoreau believes if a person simply has enough willpower and self-trust, they can abandon their possessions and conformist ways of life and become independent from society. Thoreau is writes Most men are so occupied with the factitious cares and superfluously coarse labors of life that its finer fruits cannot be plucked. Their fingers, from excessive toil, are too clumsy and tremble too much for that. ..He has no time to be anything but a machine. (Thoreau 9). Here Thoreau explains that the key to escape from society or poverty, a person must relieve themselves from societys bearings and summon enough willpower in order to become independent. The last major theme portrayed in Walden is that philanthropy is for the benefit of the philanthropist and is useless to the working class. Both Thoreau and Crane share the same idea and both of their literary pieces. However, Thoreau differs with Crane because he believes that many philanthropists do have good intentions and that philanthropy is not completely bad. He

Zewde Ingram 11/12/12 Blue- Dr. Simel even admits he has participated in it as well. However, he adds that many times it is for the benefit of the philanthropist, even if it is simply to make the philanthropist feel like a goodhearted person. He calls Philanthropy very selfish and continues on to say I confess that I indulged very little in philanthropic enterprises. I have made some sacrifices to a sense of duty, and among others have sacrificed for this pleasure also (Thoreau 61). Also, Thoreau believes that philanthropy does not help, but actually hurts the lower class and they sometimes do not make use of the charity. Thoreau includes a specific example in Walden, where he writes It is partly his [the poor mans] taste, and not merely his misfortune. If you give him money, he will perhaps buy more rags with it (Thoreau 59). Similarly, in Maggie, Crane portrays many of the lower class characters as drunkards such as Maggies father and mother, as well as Pete who passed out at the end of the story from drinking too much. It seems as if in Cranes story the poor were spending their bare wages on something so unnecessary as alcohol rather than spending their wages on something that could better their lives. Both Thoreau and Crane think of philanthropy as a bad and one must be wary if he or she participates it. Maggie and Walden share both similarities and differences on the themes of self-reliance, escape and philanthropy. Crane advocates that is impossible not to be dependent in poverty. He also uses Maggies failed attempt at a wealthy life to emphasize that escape from poverty is relatively non-existent. Furthermore, Crane believes that philanthropy is most desirable for the philanthropist and usually does not help the person who receives the help. Contrary to Crane, Thoreau believes that self-reliance and independence is key. In Walden, Thoreau believes in the ease of escape from society as long as you are independent a free yourself from possessions. Similar to Crane, Thoreau also explains that Philanthropy is mainly for self-interest. Authors

Zewde Ingram 11/12/12 Blue- Dr. Simel Stephen Crane and Henry David Thoreau both convey their differing and similar themes on the ability to be self-reliance, the ability to escape and the morality of philanthropy.