Maggie and Walden Comparative Essay Redo Nika Seider English Blue Group December 18, 2013

Stephen Cranes Maggie: A Girl of the Streets and Henry David Thoreaus Walden

contain similar main ideas- differing views of self-reliance and simplicity, but they do share similar views regarding philanthropy. Cranes Maggie follows a young girl lead down the wrong path and Walden is Thoreaus story of living in a cabin by himself. The books, seemingly unrelated, both have very distinct, repetitive themes. While both Crane and Thoreau mention self-reliance and discuss it in great detail, they have contrasting opinions on whether full independence is truly attainable for all. Crane does not believe that all people can be self-reliant when they are in a particular environment or are brought up a certain way. Maggie grows up in a disturbing, hostile household and was never taught how to be self-reliant. Maggie grows up to be fragile and easily manipulated, especially by Pete. She becomes completely dependant on him. Crane describes her eyes, as though they had been plucked all look of selfreliance(73). Crane displays his opinion by ultimately killing off Maggie. This shows that once she is forced to be on her own, and left with no one to turn to, there is no possible way she can survive. He does not believe that everyone can be absolutely self-reliant. Thoreau, however, has opposing thoughts on self-reliance, believing it necessary to be capable of being on ones own. Thoreau moves into a cabin in the woods, with little resources to demonstrate that being self-sufficient is extremely important and very obtainable. He encourages people to experiment with self reliance and protests that everyone is capable of being self-reliant, no matter where they are from. Thoreau states, The man who goes alone can start today; but he who travels with another must wait till that other is ready, and it may be a long time before they get

off (60). This implies that Thoreau believes that people are better off on their own. Maggie and Walden both have convincing arguments on whether they believe that everyone has what it takes to be fully self-reliant. Crane makes it very clear that he believes that having very few possessions is a hardship while Thoreau views material possessions as unnecessary. Maggie grows up impoverished, and her life is difficult and full of obstacles that are excruciating to overcome. Maggie does not have many items- and just barely the necessities, because her parents have never looked after her. Crane is a realist- he writes about things how they actually are, and does not sugarcoat. Crane shows that living simply is a nice fantasy but in reality, is not always so uncomplicated. Maggie and those in her impoverished state, cannot live a healthy life on such a sparse number of assets-, which he again demonstrates by having Maggie die. Thoreau, on the other hand, completely contradicts Crane, as he is a fond advocate for simplicity, with his motto being to Simplify, simplify (70)! Thoreau bases his experiment on this concept, and believes in only having the four necessities in life; food, shelter, clothing and fuel. According to Thoreau, once one has attained possession of these necessities, one will be set to live a happy, healthy, simple life. Thoreau does not, however, address the negative consequences of having too few objects, including a lack of future opportunities; misfortune and all around despair, similar to what Maggie went through. Thoreau finds it to be vain and greedy if one has so many unnecessary belongings. Crane and Thoreau are very contradictive when it comes to their views on simplicity.

Despite their many differences, Crane and Thoreau do agree that the concept and process of philanthropy is flawed. Both believe that philanthropists are hypocrites, and help others only to feel good about themselves. They also agree that the idea of philanthropy itself is honorable. In Maggie, many of the characters are selfish, especially regarding Pete and Maggies mother, Mrs. Johnson. They both do absolutely nothing to help her, and turn her away when she needs them the most. Due to their actions, Maggie ends up working as a prostitute since she has nowhere to stay, and no one to assist her. Pete abuses his power over Maggie to make her feel as though he is trying to help her, when in reality, he is simply trying to manipulate Maggie. [Pete] responded in tones of philanthropy, which deceives Maggie into thinking he is genuine and kind (73). This demonstrates that Crane does not feel the need to shed a positive light onto philanthropy, which is typically found to be more positive than negative. According to Thoreau, who agrees with Crane, Philanthropy is greatly overrated; and it is our selfishness which overrates it (63). Thoreau believes that philanthropists are more motivated by selfishness than generosity. Both Crane and Thoreau find that the idea of philanthropy is noble, but philanthropists themselves, however, are not as efficient, humble or truly charitable as they should be. Maggie and Walden have various differences and similarities, which define Crane and Thoreau and what they stand for. Crane and Thoreaus differing views on simplicity is depicted in both their stories, Cranes more subtly and Thoreau praising it with enthusiasm. Crane and Thoreau also have clashing opinions on the notion of self-reliance and if it is

truly attainable for all. The one matter both authors seem to agree on is the theme regarding philanthropy. Walden and Maggie include many relevant ideas to their time and even today, making convincing arguments on how to live life.

Works Cited

Crane, Stephen. Maggie: A Girl of the Streets. New York: Bedford/St. Martins, 1893. Print. Thoreau, Henry David. Walden, N.P.: Barnes & Noble Classics, 1854. Print.