Books I Loathed discussion

68 views
Loathed Titles > "Walden, or Life in the Woods"

Comments Showing 1-14 of 14 (14 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Jeremy (new)

Jeremy (jbgryffindor) | 1 comments Although Henry David Thoreau did bring about quite a few accurate points about the greediness of humankind and the fast-paced, egocentric nature of today's society, the book is presented in such a manner that the reader is engulfed in ennui at the first page, and is never released out of this documentary's filthy clutches. I can honestly say that the most entertaining section of this book concerns a showdown with a hedgehog, who makes a persistent point to terrorize Thoreau's bean fields. Has anyone else read this book? Do you agree?


Abigail (42stitches) | 29 comments I haven't got through all of it in the 10 years since I started it (had to read the first chapter for school) but every time I pick it up, I laugh myself stupid.


message 3: by Emily (new)

Emily  O (readingwhilefemale) | 76 comments It annoys me that he didn't even really live in the woods. He was like maybe 10 miles from town, had someone come and do his laundry, and left just about every weekend.
Lame.
also, he's a bit self important.

All in all, Emerson is better.


message 4: by Kate (new)

Kate (katiebobus) | 136 comments Mod
Totally with you on that, Emily!


message 5: by Janet (new)

Janet I agree with you also, Emily. He was just playing in the woods. I thought that he was on a self-indulgent vacation, exploring nature and horticulture for the first time. I tried to read a page a day....but I found the writing too insipid.


message 6: by Rhett (new)

Rhett (rhettwp) | 1 comments I had to write an English Term paper about "Walden, or Life in the Woods". I hated the book and have been unable to read anything by Thoreau.

I feel “Walden, or Life in the Woods” is like many people's tweets on twitter; so much to say about nothing.


message 7: by Emily (new)

Emily  O (readingwhilefemale) | 76 comments What really annoys me about him is that he can only do what he does because he's relatively well off. He doesn't have to worry about starving to death, supporting a family, paying for school, or taking care of sick parents, so he can go and mess around in the woods all he wants with no worries. He thinks he's so special and so enlightened because he thinks he's doing something that other people won't do, when really he's doing something that other people might not be able to do. That's a big difference.


message 8: by NancyL (new)

NancyL Luckey | 21 comments Hear! Hear!


message 9: by Toni (new)

Toni berkshire (starcookie2verizonnet) | 32 comments Go, Emily! You made me laugh out loud with that one. Never heard anyone describe Emerson as 'messing around in the woods' before.


message 10: by Marie (new)

Marie (mariethea) | 3 comments Yep, his parents were rich and made pencils (I think it was them-I was reading a book about pencils awhile ago, it was really interesting, much more interesting than Thoreau). Pretty sure I read it for English Lit classes as an English major, but I think it says something that I can't even remember it.


message 11: by Mary Ann (new)

Mary Ann | 19 comments Emily, this is precisely why "Eat, Pray, Love" irked me.


message 12: by NancyL (new)

NancyL Luckey | 21 comments I won't even read "Eat, Pray, Love" nor see the movie for this reason.


message 13: by Shad (new)

Shad (shadrach) | 6 comments Yes, he is incredibly self-important and really the book is a big snooze-fest.

Emily, your take is spot on!


message 14: by Ellie (new)

Ellie (elliearcher) And I thought I was the only person in the world irritated by Thoreau. It would be so easy to live a simple life if I didn't have children or needed to work & HAD a cabin (however "simple") in the woods. Let alone having a servant who cooked my food & left it at the door! How bogus is this: a book about complete solitude by a man who isn't even grateful to all the people his lifestyle depends completely upon. He's not even hypocritical, just oblivious-& then arrogant as well.


back to top