Thoreau v.

Crane Comparison
Essay
Isabel Fenton
Green Group
11/16/14

Thoreau and Crane

In both Walden, by Henry David Thoreau and Maggie: Girl of the

Streets, by Stephen Crane, the two authors have similar views on
philanthropy. However, they have differing ideas about self-reliance and the

importance of one's belongings. Walden is about Thoreau's experience after

building a cabin far from society, and living there for over two years. Walden
contains Thoreau's thoughts on living a simple life that is free of luxuries, his
thoughts on morality, home economics, and many other subjects. Maggie:
Girl of the Streets is a fictional story about an immigrant girl who grows up in
an impoverished section of New York. Her parents don't take proper care of
her and her siblings, one of whom, dies as a baby. Maggie desires only to
impress others and to be luxurious. After being introduced to her brother's
friend Pete, she attempts to conform to society and elevate her status for
him. This results in her turning to prostitution and she ends up constantly
being a disappointment to her family, or being disappointed by the betrayal
of others who she confided her trust in. This book explores the harsh realities
of life in these areas.
Henry David Thoreau and Stephen Crane both share similar ideas on
philanthropy. The opinions of the two authors on this subject are very clear.
They agree that acts of philanthropy are respectable, however philanthropists
are completing these acts for their own benefit. Henry David Thoreau states,
"Nay, it [philanthropy] is greatly overrated; and it is our selfishness that
overrated it" (63). He is saying that he believes people applaud
philanthropists too much because they only do philanthropic deeds for selfish
reasons, it is never to solely to help others without the intention of helping
themselves. "This is a charity that hides a multitude of sins. The
philanthropist too often surrounds mankind with the remembrance of his own
cast off griefs as an atmosphere, and calls it sympathy" (63,64). Thoreau

means that philanthropists only do charitable things to relieve themselves of

their worries and then asks to be commended for them. Stephen Crane,
similar to Thoreau believes that philanthropists are greedy. "His eyes shone
good will. But as the girl timidly accosted him, he made a convulsive
movement and saved his respectability by a vigorous side-step" (71). Crane
is making a statement about philanthropists in this quote. The man is a
symbol of "good will" and one might expect, as a philanthropist, that he
might attempt to help Maggie. However, he decides to save his
"respectability" and ignore her. This proves that Crane does not think highly
of philanthropists. "The varied sound of life, made joyous by distance and
seeming unapproachableness, came faintly and died away to a silence" (75).
In this quote, Maggie is surrounded by people who are living their lives and
are happy, but "unapproachable." She knows that no one, even a
philanthropist, or one who considers themselves someone who performs good
deeds, would condescend to assist her even in this dark moment.
Thoreau and Crane have different views on self-reliance. Thoreau
states, "In short, I am convinced both by faith and experience, that to
maintain one's self on this earth is not a hardship but a pastime..." (59).
Thoreau indicates that he sees self-reliance as not only important, but
mandatory. He perceives self-reliance as a "pastime. Not only this, but he
sees it as a way of life. He explains that by relying on others you are
"...contracting yourselves into a nutshell of civility" (10). The diction used in
this sentence heightens what he is trying to convey. One is "contracting"
themselves, making themselves smaller. This puts a negative connotation on

reliance on others. He also thinks that anyone can be self-reliant and pick
themselves up, no matter the situation. Crane however, sees self-reliance
differently. He believes that some people are destined to their fate and no
amount of self-reliance can help them. "From her eyes had been plucked all
look of self-reliance" (52). Despite Maggie's continuous efforts, she is still
unable to recover from her situation. Crane also writes, "Jimmy grew large
enough to take the vague position of head of family. As incumbent of that
office, he stumbled upstairs late at night, as his father had done before him"
(21). He proceeds to talk about how Jimmy acts just as his father did.
Although his upbringing forced Jimmy to be self-reliant, he still ends up very
much like his father, and remains in the same unfortunate situation.
Henry David Thoreau and Stephen Crane have contrasting views on
the importance of one's belongings. Thoreau views objects as unimportant
and unnecessary for life. To Thoreau, objects are a waste of space. "Men have
become tools of their tools" (33). He is saying that people have become too
obsessed with possessions that are not essential for living. He believes that
these objects clutter up people's homes. "I wonder that the floor does not
give way under the visitor...while he is admiring the gewgaws upon the
mantel-piece, and let him through the cellar, to some solid and honest though
earthy foundation" (33). Crane however, is of the opinion that possessions
have the ability to enrich ones life. "She spent some of her week's pay in the
purchase of flowered cretonne for a lambrequin" (26). Maggie spent a decent
amount of money simply for one furnishing in order to make her house
appear nicer. The thought of this would be highly questionable to Thoreau.

Maggie also begins seeing her house as not good enough in the presence of
Pete whom she admires. She had previously placed an object "...to freshen
the appearance of a dingy curtain, she now saw as piteous" (25). She had
thought that an object could make the appearance of her home better, and
now even that single object wasn't enough. Maggie views posessions as
important for brightening her home.
Henry David Thoreau and Stephen Crane both have, whether they
agree or disagree, very strong and unyielding opinions on the subjects of
philanthropy, self-reliance, and the importance of possessions. The two
authors come to the consensus that philanthropists are overrated and selfish.
These views were expressed with the quotes from each book. They differ in
views about self-reliance, Thoreau believing it is the way to form one's life,
while Crane believes that one cannot avoid their destiny. They also have
different opinions on the importance of belongings. The fact that Thoreau
refers to household items as "gewgaws" makes it clear that he finds most
possessions to be ostentatious, and worthless. Whereas, Crane approves of
these objects, and sees them as impressive. Both authors have strong
reasons for believing what they do, making Walden and Maggie: Girl of the
Streets both interesting books with different perspectives.

Works Cited
Thoreau, Henry David. Walden and Civil Disobedience. New York: Fine
Creative Media, 1854. Print.
Crane, Stephen. Maggie a Girl of the Streets. Ed. Kevin Hayes, J. N.p., 1893.
Print.