Thoreau Crane Paper

Olivia Gonzalez
CAP English 9
December 21st, 2014
Blue Group

Henry David Thoreau, in Walden, and Stephen Crane, in Maggie:

A Girl of the Streets, express different views on philanthropy and selfreliance, but similar opinions on philanthropists. Throughout the
Economy section of Walden, a non-fiction story, Thoreau expresses
his views that possessions are useless, and that clothing, shelter, food,
and fuel are the only things needed for survival. Thoreau also strongly
supports self-reliance. He feels that everyone should have to work,
make his or her own living, and not rely on the support of others to get
by in life. Crane, in Maggie: A Girl of the Streets, shows an opposing
perspective regarding the need for self-reliance. Maggie is the story of
an extremely poor, nave girl who lives in a tenement in New York at
the turn of the 19th century. Maggie comes from a dysfunctional family
and is constantly being mistreated by her mother, so she turns to her
boyfriend Pete. He steals her innocence and breaks her heart, forcing
her to turn to prostitution.

Henry David Thoreau and Stephen Crane would disagree

regarding their views of philanthropy, as shown in Walden and Maggie.
Thoreau feels that philanthropy is unnecessary, and that no one should
rely on anyone elses help to survive. Thoreau advises not to stay to
be an overseer of the poor, but [to] endeavor to become one of the
worthies of the world (65). Thoreau also thinks that just because

someone helps someone else out, that does not mean that he or she is
going to appreciate it, or do the right thing with it.

According to

Thoreau, If you give him money, he will perhaps buy more rags with
it (62). Crane, on the other hand, thinks that people like Maggie would
not be able to survive without philanthropy. In the passage where the
preacher is talking to a group of ragged people, some of them ask,
Wheres our soup? (Crane 46). These incredibly poor, people,
battered by life, dont have enough money to buy food on their own
and are relying on philanthropic people to give them soup tickets.
Crane also thinks that an act of kindness cannot hurt anyone. This is
shown when Crane, talking about Jimmie, writes when he had a dollar
in his pocket his satisfaction with existence was the greatest thing in
the world (47). Crane supports philanthropy through his characters
because he shows that, in extreme cases, when there is no hope for
people, a kind gesture can help them survive.

Henry David Thoreau and Stephen Crane would also disagree on

their views of self-reliance. Thoreau was all for it, and his decision to
move to Walden Pond required him to be self-reliant. He had to build a
house and provide for himself. Thoreau says that finding that my
fellow-citizens were not likely to offer me any room in the courthouse,
or living any where else, but I must shift for myself, I turned my face
more exclusively than ever to the woods, where I was better known

(19). Thoreau believes that self-reliance is a rare quality, yet he argues

that it is necessary for survival because the man who has actually
paid for his farm with labor on it is so rare that every neighbor can
point to him(29). While Thoreau feels that self-reliance is the key to
survival, Crane shows that in some cases such as Maggies, it is
impossible to be self-reliant. Crane thinks that people in a similar
situation to Maggie cant survive without the help of others. Maggies
family members are dirt poor. They are not able to afford health care or
medicine for their child, and as a result, [t]he babe, Tommie, died
(Crane 46). Crane is showing the danger of what can happen when a
society is based on self-reliance. Crane also demonstrates, through the
character of Maggie, the difficulties of being self-reliant when one does
not have family support. Maggie endeavors for years to find comfort in
her family, but is constantly being yelled and put down by them,
causing her to feel isolated. Because of her lack of family support,
Maggie yearns for the support of her boyfriend Pete. In the scene
where Maggie and Pete go to the orchestra, Crane captures this feeling
by saying that [f]rom her eyes had been plucked all look of selfreliance. (73). In this scene, Crane illustrates the need that Maggie
has for Pete, who she leaned [on] with a dependent air and seemed
to beseech tenderness of (73). He is representing how Maggie is
dependent on Pete, because she does not have the ability or support to
be self-reliant.

While Henry David Thoreau and Stephen Crane would contrast

opinions on philanthropy and self-reliance, they would share similar
opinions when it comes to philanthropists. Both authors agree that
philanthropists are hypocrites. Thoreau feels that most philanthropists
do good things because they want something out of it. Thoreau writes,
While my townsmen and women are devoted in so many ways to the
good of their fellows, I trust that one at least may be spared to other
and less humane pursuits (60). A true act of philanthropy to Thoreau
is something that is done out of the good of ones heart rather than for
personal gain. Thoreau expresses that [h]is goodness must not be a
partial and transitory act, but a constant superfluity, which costs him
nothing and of which he is unconscious (63). Through the character
Pete, Crane is showing his agreement with Thoreau. Pete is, in some
ways, a philanthropist to Maggie, since he helps her when shes going
through a hard time. Pete, however, has other intentions, as he
asserted at once that he never was very much interested in the girl
(Crane 85). In another example, Maggie, right before she dies,
approaches a clergyman for help, [b]ut as the girl timidly accosted
him, he gave a convulsive movement and saved his respectability by a
vigorous side-step (Crane 87). Clergymen are supposed to be there to
help those in need, but this man decides that he is too good to help

this ghost of a girl. This emphasizes Cranes point that philanthropists

are hypocrites.

Henry David Thoreau and Steven Crane express different

opinions regarding philanthropy and self-reliance, but share ideas when
it comes to philanthropists. Thoreau believes that philanthropy is
unnecessary, that people should have to work for everything
themselves, and that people should not rely on others. Crane believes
that people in situations such as that of Maggie cannot survive without
philanthropy. Thoreau also believes that everyone should be selfreliant, and that self-reliance is the key to a successful life. Crane,
however, believes that even if people such as Maggie try to be selfreliant, they are still going to need help from others. The two authors
do, however, agree when it comes to philanthropists. Both Thoreau and
Crane think that philanthropists are hypocrites, and that they often
have other intentions, such as personal gain, when they are helping
someone.

Works Cited

Crane, Stephen. Maggie: A Girl of the Streets. 1999 ed. Boston, MA: Bedford/St.
Martin's, 1893. Print.

Thoreau, Henry David. Walden. 2003 ed. New York, NY: Barnes & Noble Classics, 1854.
Print.