According to Emerson, gifts should not be given to cater to the needs of the recipient. Gifts should come from a person’s heart and pertain to the giver’s profession or relationship with the recipient. Emerson states that gifts which only satisfy one’s needs are too easy for someone to give. Also, the giver should not overindulge in the satisfaction that sometimes comes from giving. If a giver is too satisfied with the feeling of giving, the giver is not actually giving but receiving.
A recipient, according to Emerson, should never show hatred for the gifts that he or she receives. However, a recipient should not be overly pleased with the gift that is received, as that would convey that the relationship can be represented by something material. Also, recipients should not try to “flatter their benefactors” after receiving a gift.
Emerson, through talking about the acceptance and giving of gifts, comments on the desire of Americans to want everything in sight when he discusses the negative feeling that Americans have about the lack of receiving gifts. Also, Emerson mentions the desire of Americans to be self sustained and individualist.
Emerson is critiquing the materialistic tendencies of relationships in the United States at the time. Emerson displays disapproval for the common idea that Americans accuse society of not giving gifts to others as if it were a crime. Not all of Emerson’s commentary, however, is necessarily negative. Emerson does not necessarily put down American society when he says that “The hand that feeds us is in danger of being bitten,” meaning that Americans, in Emerson’s mind, are self-sustaining and individualist, two values that are constantly praised by transcendentalists like Emerson.
I cannot think of an Emersonian gift that I have given or received off hand. At the current moment, I think that the best gift I could give someone is one of the two board games that I have designed in the past two years. Even if the recipient does not enjoy board games, these board games are a product of my interests and therefore could be considered Emersonian gifts. When played, the players can see (with enough experience) the characteristics they share with other board games and with the books I have read. Although this gift does have the potential to be an "easy" gift, as in many cases it may satisfy one's desires, many recipients probably would not have wanted a game of any kind above other possible gifts.
One problem with this gift, however, is that it is hard to not expect something in return. I might expect the recipient to try the game or to react to its concept. From their comments, I might receive more help or important information than I gave the recipient in the game. I think that this principle might apply to all gifts. It is hard, if not impossible, to follow all of Emerson's principles when giving someone a gift.
Monday, November 24, 2008
Friday, November 21, 2008
Self Reliance
I personally believe that Emerson is not considering the whole picture when he says "The centuries are conspirators against the sanity of the soul." In other words, "Emerson is claiming that history should be considered the enemy of the idealistic self-relying person. One must always consider failures and successes of the past in order to make informed decisions about the future.
As we suffer from an enormous economic depression, we must realize that it could have been either avoided of decreased in magnitude by preventing the wildly high amounts of speculation and the unregulated amount of credit. We, as a nation, should have realized that these factors have caused almost every economic depression in American history in both the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, especially in 1929. However, learning from history is not just beneficial in economics. After World War I, France, Europe, and the US failed to consider the benefits of bargaining for a conciliatory peace with Germany, in disagreement with the diplomatic approach that the victorious countries in the Napoleonic Wars had taken towards defeated France. Due to the victorious powers' ignorance, an angered Germany was guided towards hostility in the form of another world war. The ignorance in history has led to social disasters, including numerous genocides in Darfur, Cambodia, Uganda, Rwanda, and Bosnia since the Holocaust. From the perspective of a national leader, history has consistently proven to be a helpful advisor, not a conspirator, that has been ignored too often. The "soul" of a country can only be helped by remembering past centuries.
On a personal level, Emerson's point still has many flaws. A person should not forget the bad relationships that they have had with someone. After failing in an endeavor, including an attempt to get a job, one should not forget about the event, as they probably will not succeed in attaining employment if they try again with the exact same application and resume as before. A potential employee should first think about the parts of his or her application that he or she can improve from the past and only then submit it to another company. A person should not only learn from his or her own history, but should also learn from the perspective of other people. Without considering the perspective of interest groups, socioeconomic classes, or historical figures who do not agree with a person, that person cannot formulate a well informed decision that will support his or her goals. Therefore, ignorance in past centuries on a personal level can lead to disastrous personal consequences.
There are times, however, when Emerson is correct to imply that the ideal representative of transcendentalism should not dwell on the past. Focusing on one's failures can lead to a leak of confidence in oneself, which leads to a lack determination and can ruin one's prospects in life. On the contrary, it is also inadvisable to think solely about successes in one's past. One should apply the happiness that they receive from a victory to success in another endeavor. Time that is used to dwell on either successes or failures can lead to distraction from "authority of the soul." In this sense, Emerson is justified in stating that a person's past can damage one's work ethic and therefore one's self-efficiency and self-reliance.
Although Emerson does have some validity with his statement, I disagree with the notion that history or one's past can be an enemy to personal development.
As we suffer from an enormous economic depression, we must realize that it could have been either avoided of decreased in magnitude by preventing the wildly high amounts of speculation and the unregulated amount of credit. We, as a nation, should have realized that these factors have caused almost every economic depression in American history in both the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, especially in 1929. However, learning from history is not just beneficial in economics. After World War I, France, Europe, and the US failed to consider the benefits of bargaining for a conciliatory peace with Germany, in disagreement with the diplomatic approach that the victorious countries in the Napoleonic Wars had taken towards defeated France. Due to the victorious powers' ignorance, an angered Germany was guided towards hostility in the form of another world war. The ignorance in history has led to social disasters, including numerous genocides in Darfur, Cambodia, Uganda, Rwanda, and Bosnia since the Holocaust. From the perspective of a national leader, history has consistently proven to be a helpful advisor, not a conspirator, that has been ignored too often. The "soul" of a country can only be helped by remembering past centuries.
On a personal level, Emerson's point still has many flaws. A person should not forget the bad relationships that they have had with someone. After failing in an endeavor, including an attempt to get a job, one should not forget about the event, as they probably will not succeed in attaining employment if they try again with the exact same application and resume as before. A potential employee should first think about the parts of his or her application that he or she can improve from the past and only then submit it to another company. A person should not only learn from his or her own history, but should also learn from the perspective of other people. Without considering the perspective of interest groups, socioeconomic classes, or historical figures who do not agree with a person, that person cannot formulate a well informed decision that will support his or her goals. Therefore, ignorance in past centuries on a personal level can lead to disastrous personal consequences.
There are times, however, when Emerson is correct to imply that the ideal representative of transcendentalism should not dwell on the past. Focusing on one's failures can lead to a leak of confidence in oneself, which leads to a lack determination and can ruin one's prospects in life. On the contrary, it is also inadvisable to think solely about successes in one's past. One should apply the happiness that they receive from a victory to success in another endeavor. Time that is used to dwell on either successes or failures can lead to distraction from "authority of the soul." In this sense, Emerson is justified in stating that a person's past can damage one's work ethic and therefore one's self-efficiency and self-reliance.
Although Emerson does have some validity with his statement, I disagree with the notion that history or one's past can be an enemy to personal development.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
