lawrenceindestin wrote:I also have to warn you I found my Cliff Notes from college (which were written just after Thoreau worte Walden) so I'll have some real ammo to agree with you.

Lawrence, I believe your copy of the Walden Cliffsnotes is available at

http://www.cliffsnotes.com/WileyCDA/Lit ... d-159.html

This guide by Joseph R. McElrath is copyrighted 1971 -- the era of war protest, riot, student takeover of campuses, communes. You remember: live in the woods and be natural like HDT, supposedly. Walden was the hippy equivalent of the Little Red Book. Considering how trying the times must have been for him, I think McElrath's work is good, but be warned: his dominant attitude is resentment and his expression sarcastic.

I suspect that at the time McElrath was a poor, liberal arts Ph.D and grit his teeth and did the work because he needed the money. He did no work on Thoreau afterward that I have been able to find.

http://www.english.fsu.edu/faculty/jmcelrath.htm

This little book is the most significant thing McElrath wrote, and it is conspicuously missing from his list of Representative Publications.

Tom

Tom, my Cliff Notes were printed before McIlrath wore diapers. Since this thread seems to be me and you, have your read 'Harlan Hubbard" by Wendal Berry. For more than 40 years he and his wife Anna lived on a house boat, then a cabin on the river in Kentucky. It is a sweet read and I obviously think you would enjoy it. Harlan respected Thoreau. A quote from the book at page 91

(Barry talking) In 1976, I wrote a forward for a new addition of "Shantyboat" (Harlan was the author). I sent Harlan a copy of the manuscript and then in a few days I went to Payne Hollow to see if any changes needed to be made. I found that there was indeed a change I would have to make. Something that I had said about Thoreau (I no longer remember what) seemed to Harlan to be disrespectful, and I would have to take it out. I agreed to take it out, without any protest at all; it was perfectly all right with me. But though I made no attempt to test Harlan's determination, I remember feeling, through his characteristic quietness and politeness, that his determination was absolute:he would see my forward and his new addition sunk in the river before his workwould be made the occasion of any disrespect to Thoreau. By then I had read both of Harlan's published books and was pretty well acquainted with his way of living. I knew that there was bound to be in him a resoluteness of the staunchest sort, and I was not surprised to meet it.

lawrenceindestin wrote:Tom, my Cliff Notes were printed before McElrath wore diapers.

If you will, Lawrence, look at the title page of your copy and give me the name of the author. Cliffsnotes is important because it influences the understanding and attitude of hundreds of thousands. If it's written under contract, the copyright owner may not be the author.

Beginning in the last 24 hours, I have ceased to receive email notices of new posting to Booktalk. I would not have realized that there were new postings if I hadn't seen the new posting scroll when going to your blog.

I didn't know about Harlan Hubbard at all and have some catching up to do:

http://www.harlanhubbard.com/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harlan_Hubbard

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wendell_Berry

Tom

The author of my Cliff's notes is Robert J. Milch, B.A. Brooklyn College. I must have bought it when I was in law school. The copyright date is 1964 by c.k. hillegross.

I'm glad I introduced you to Harlan Hubbard. You will have a pleasant trip with them.

FYI, pm Chris and tell him. He's having trouble with the server.

Thomas Hood, I'm a bit chagrined you haven't sent me a Happy Birthday wish on the 191st anniversary of our friend Henry David Thoreau. I waited as long as I could before I one uped you. Love, Lawrence

lawrenceindestin wrote:Thomas Hood, I'm a bit chagrined you haven't sent me a Happy Birthday wish on the 191st anniversary of our friend Henry David Thoreau. I waited as long as I could before I one uped you. Love, Lawrence

Thank you, Lawrence. I am oneuped. I did pm Chris and have begun to receive Topic Reply Notification again.

Tom

Will, I have never claimed that anything was true simply because I said it. What I do claim about Thoreau's allusive language is that it is a fact because I can point out examples. Really, all a doubting person needs do is examine the notes in Harding's or Cramer's annotated edition, or go to Ann Woodlief's site.

Tom, I expressed myself poorly there. I meant that claiming that Thoreau is a master of allusion doesn't support any particular passage being read as allusive. That would be a tautology. And I think, by the way, that the term allusion isn't a good substitute for "symbolism" in cases where you are pointing out an extended parallel, such as Collins' shanty to a cathedral.

I appreciate the invitation to read the annotated edition. Maybe I will one day. For now, I choose to have a different relationship toward this book. I use it as a primary furnishing for my own mental house. The particulars of the annotators are not essential to this purpose. I feel I am on solid Thoreauvian ground here, by the way.

Yes, if a person does not understand all that Thoreau intends, he is both misreading and impoverishing the text.

Ah, but this matter of intention has always been sticky, not even in good repute with some. Annotators certainly have no corner on this market. What's more, Tom, I get the strong impression that through supposedly knowing the author's intention, you think you will arrive at the correct reading. But does such a reading exist? I would say not. There are both plausible and implausible statements about any text, but a perfect reading is a chimera. The cliche is true: literature suggests many different, plausible, readings to different people at different times in their lives.

A last thing. Aren't you being a little tough on Robert regarding the non-wildness of Walden Pond? Sure, it wasn't wilderness, and HDT never represents it as such, or his life at the cabin as isolated. But Walden was not a "slum," either (which suggests crowding). It served HDT quite well for the purposes intended. It was only necessary that it be a place apart, and it was.

DWill

The cliche is true: literature suggests many different, plausible, readings to different people at different times in their lives.

Thank you, DWill! How could it be otherwise.

Saffron

DWill wrote:Ah, but this matter of intention has always been sticky, not even in good repute with some. Annotators certainly have no corner on this market. What's more, Tom, I get the strong impression that through supposedly knowing the author's intention, you think you will arrive at the correct reading. But does such a reading exist?

Yes, Will, there is a true intention Also sense, feeling, and tone. Look, Thoreau's annotators are good people. I like them and the work they do, although Ann Woodlief is looking for huguenots under every bush or under every tree. Jeff Cramer has taken my continual emendations (nothing I enjoy more than finding an error in Cramer) with good graces. Besides, Ann Woodlief is your fellow Virginian and her work is free.

I think I sometimes discover the author's intention by close reading of the text. I do not suppose that anyone finds an author's intention by woolgathering with a book open.

Tough on Robert? I hope not. Robert is the profound one among us.

Tom

[quote="Thomas Hood] Yes, Will, there is a true intention Also sense, feeling, and tone. Look, Thoreau's annotators are good people. [/quote]

A true intention amounting to a Correct Reading? You don't specify. Isn't it also a given that once the author's words are on their way to the reader, whatever he intended or didn't is not often to be discovered by anyone? I agree certainly about sense, feeling, and tone. This would be the reason I could not accept Collins' shanty as cathedral--out of keeping with the charcteristic sense, feeling, and tone of Throeau. But I don't have any doubt about the goodness of his annotators!

Will