In retrospect, it was an easy trap to fall into. The loss of my father when I was nine-years old ignited in me the zeal to survive. I mowed lawns. I shoveled sidewalks and driveways. I delivered papers. I once even walked down to a local shop to ask for a job. I had no idea what they produced, but I assured the bearded man that I could sweep up the sawdust – keep the place tidy. I was turned away, of course. I remember crying all the way home.
It was in high school that I first discovered Emerson. Emerson’s essay “Self-Reliance” was a treasure trove of excellent advice, and, at the time, it gave me a framework for how to envision my life. On my own, I would make it. On my own, I would find success. Emerson writes, “trust thyself; every heart vibrates to that iron string.” And that is what I did: trusted myself. Emerson writes, “nothing can bring you peace but yourself.” And I took that as gospel. I looked inward. Focused on myself. Understood myself in opposition to the world. To be sure, Emerson’s notion that “Society everywhere is in conspiracy against the manhood of every one of its members” made me look upon every institution with disdain. What were traditions to me but vestiges of another person’s worldview – old conclusions, ancient ideas. I finished high school, I went to college and graduate school after that, letting Emerson’s ideas continue to shape who I was and, more importantly, who I wanted to become.
The profound irony behind the fact that I was not alone in this endeavor escaped me.
Emerson’s impact on American culture continues to be enormous. This is the land of DYI or Do It Yourself, after all. What age and circumstance has taught me, though, is that the “foolish consistency” that Emerson argues is the “hobgoblin of little minds” might really be something else altogether. I am decidedly not saying that independent critical thinking should be avoided. On the contrary, it should be embraced; I try to impart this message daily with my students. I am, however, suspicious of grouping every consistency under the heading “foolish.” Does the wheel always have to be reinvented, or can we – indeed, should we – find peace in trails that have long been blazed? If it is true that we are standing on the shoulders of those who came before us, then why would we deem their contributions useless, silly, or otherwise undeserving of our careful attention?
I was guilty of adopting this arguably arrogant approach, and I suffered the humbling consequences. Thank God. But I wonder about a society that is still very much energized by this particular ethic. Does it need its own come to the altar moment – some submissive event? Historically, wars and economic collapse served this purpose. They remind us that we need one another – that we were made for one another and that doing it – life – all by yourself in the name of avoiding being a “little mind” pushes a person toward self-destruction. The world is simply too big. The problems, too complex. Absolute self-reliance, therefore, is a pitfall we should all work diligently to steer clear of. It is good to think for oneself. It is bad to think of only oneself. Casual observers would likely point out that our society is too far from the former and too close to the latter. The result? History would tell us if we would only stop willfully ignoring it.
