Recomposition: Emerson’s Original Quotation

English: Photo of American Transcendentalist, ...

English: Photo of American Transcendentalist, writer, and minister Ralph Waldo Emerson. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Emerson has long been known as a sort of patron saint of originality in American culture. The primary location for this message is his essay “Self-Reliance” (1841). The argument of that essay would seem to be, from the title onward, that the individual and his/her genius is of utmost importance. There are many famous lines and passages in the essay that suggest this, including, perhaps most famous: “imitation is suicide.”

Believe it or not, that line and some others from the essay were used in a Reebok commercial in the 1980s. Reebok was just starting and trying to knock Nike–the shoes that everyone else was wearing. The logic was, strangely: be yourself and buy our shoes; don’t imitate Nike (imitate us).

Given this tradition of Emersonian originality, what should we make of Emerson’s later essay, “Quotation and Originality,” in which he declares surprisingly, “all minds quote”? Is this view of writing and reading and, more broadly, thinking, as some form of quotation a contradiction of his earlier views of self-reliance and “creative reading?” Does this break from the earlier essays, or somehow extend the vision?

Emerson, mid-way through the essay, seems to admit his own contradiction when he begins to voice a challenge to what he has been saying of quotation. That voice sounds much like the Emerson from “Self-Reliance”: “Quotation confesses inferiority.” Is this just a case of Emerson contradicting himself, being willfully or whimsically inconsistent? (In “Self-Reliance he claims famously: “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.”)

Emerson, however, has always had a more complicated vision of originality–much as the notion of originality in writing and thinking is more complicated than conventionally presented in schools. Emerson’s vision of original quotation speaks to the essay tradition and its philosophy of relating the personal and ordinary in the world of the writer to the public world of the reader. A good essayist needs to work through quotation, and consider the relation between the quotation and originality of thinking. A better context for understanding the tension between originality and quotation, I suggest, is a rhetorical tradition Emerson was familiar with. The rhetorical context for this essay, for any essay Emerson might have in mind, opens up contradiction as a strong potential for an essay, when handled honestly. Contradiction becomes counterargument; the logic in the essay moves (is not fixed), is dialectical or dynamic. Think, as Emerson liked to think, of the natural analogy of polarity. And so thought, and thinking in writing, when it accurately reflects its contexts as a natural process, moves between positive and negative poles. All things, as Emerson says, are in flux.

Composition and decomposition are the natural poles. Recomposition is the form of writing that generates from this. Reading such writing, as we also see by the end of the essay, participates in the recomposition by being inventive. Invention is a concept of classical rhetoric that speaks to the paradoxical but necessary tension between the originality of our ideas and argument and the given, quoted, borrowed structures and contexts that those ideas must live in. There is no pure originality. Of course, this line from a late Emerson essay (1868) takes us back to Emerson’s “American Scholar” thirty years before: “One must be an inventor to read well.” Thus Emerson quotes himself originally.

How does Emerson’s vision of recomposition inform David Shields’ project in Reality Hunger? How does Emerson’s vision of original quotation compare to your emerging philosophy of the essay?

My annotated (inventive? quotational?) reading of “Quotation and Originality”

Advertisements

The Essay: Theater of the Brain

Essay.

Noun: A short piece of writing on a particular subject.

Verb: Attempt or try: “essay a smile”.

Synonyms: noun.  attempt – try – trial – test – experiment – assay;

verb.  try – attempt – assay – test – sample – endeavor

I have as motto for this course, which studies the creative reading and critical writing of the nonfiction genre of the essay, David Shields’s succinct definition: “Essay: theater of the brain.” That’s a line from his book Reality Hunger, a contemporary version of a longstanding essayists tool, the commonplace notebook or journal. On that same page, Shields cites another definition of the essay from John D’Agata (another writer we will be reading):

“Essay” is a verb, not just a noun; “essaying” is a process.

D’Agata, as you will discover in the course, could have cited Emerson or Montaigne, or Didion and Dillard, as well as the dictionary. This understanding of the process of the essay–dramatic, dynamic, verb as well as noun–indicates what I assume for you might be very new and unfamiliar territory.  These are connotations not usually associated with the word: the essay as dynamic and dramatic form for thinking through and exploring and performing ideas and arguments in writing. It also indicates that some of the work we have in front of us, as both critics and creators of the form (what I mean by “creative reading,” borrowed from Emerson), will be to rethink our assumptions about what this “essay” is and does, assumptions largely shaped by past experience in schools. I assume that all of us have encountered, if not (alas) directly experienced the way essays are presented as punishment in the premise for the film The Breakfast Club [see clip]. The essay not as tool for the student’s (or the writer’s) thinking; rather, the essay as detention, as something in the way, something to be dreaded.

At some level, this will mean rethinking and further exploring, complicating–like any good essay will–our understanding of what it means to think. William James, the influential American psychologist and philosopher (a careful reader of Emerson and himself an essayist), describes consciousness and thinking in his Principles of Psychology not only as a “stream” but in these dramatic terms: “the mind is at every stage a theatre of simultaneous possibilities” (Principles 1: 277).

In my own effort, my own assay (attempt, trial, experiment) to grasp this fluid and dynamic form of nonfiction writing first hand, without being able or wanting to classify it fully, turn it forever into a noun, when the essay as verb is so much more engaging…toward this end without an end, I have organized our exploration around the following rubric: philosophy, rhetoric, poetics. The critic and rhetorician Kenneth Burke categorizes thinking into one of these three categories, modeled upon the classical curriculum (logic, rhetoric, grammar). He thinks of all thinking and language (and the writing and expression that follows from both, or with both) as symbolic action, where

Philosophy suggests symbolic action used for discussion of ideas, first principles;

Rhetoric suggests symbolic action used for persuasion and identification with an audience–moving, informing or entertaining another;

Poetics suggests symbolic action in an for itself, with an emphasis on form.

  • “Rhetoric, Poetics, and Philosophy.”  Rhetoric, Philosophy and Literature: an Exploration.  Ed. Don M. Burks.  West Lafayette: Purdue UP, 1978.  15-33.

Burke himself, like essayists before and after him, emphasizes that the symbolic nature of such thinking and writing is dramatic and dynamic. So, these are not separate categories; an essay that is philosophical will also entail elements of the rhetorical and poetic. However, as a way to get a better grasp as writers and critical readers of the genre of the essay, we will give more particular attention to each of these categories as we work our way through the readings of the course, moving from the philosophy of the essay, to the rhetoric, to the poetics of the essay. In the final project, you will take up the challenge of joining Burke and Emerson and Montaigne and Didion and Dillard and many others, writing and publishing an essay that effectively expresses all three in the symbolic action of your language and form and thinking.

You will walk upon the stage of this theater of the brain and see where the essay’s possibilities lead you.

To get started, read “The Essay, an Exercise in Doubt,” an essay on the essay by Phillip Lopate. It will get us started in rethinking some conventional views of the essay you have learned from school.

For a better sense of the essays–and the nonfiction–that is all around us (just probably didn’t think you were reading an essay), browse this listing of great essays, articles, and other works of nonfiction.