Brooke Kihle
Seminar in Composition
Dr. Adam Johns
September 17, 2014
Throughout the entire book, Desert Solitaire, Abbey contradicts himself.
At first I couldn’t tell what type of contradiction or even what Abbey was
trying to say, but eventually it became clear Abbey thinks he’s funny. Through
hypocritical metaphors and images as well as contrasting ideals Abbey creates a
humorous atmosphere in his text. This is key when dealing with Abbey’s distinct
misanthropy. Specifically, when interpreting wither to take Abbey literal or
metaphorical, I say both; Abbey uses a combination of each to portray his
overall idea; that he is a paradox. Abbey
can’t truly hate mankind if he himself is a man.
In the highlighted passage on pages
154-5 Abbey separates himself from “the tool-making breed” insinuating
misanthropy directly by exploiting the man for all his flaws that Abbey finds
in mankind. Then he goes right around to state, “We hope to discover something
quite different, to renew our affection for ourselves and the human kind in
general by a temporary, legal separation from the mass” (Abbey 154-5). This is
so outrageously hypocritical that it can only be viewed but humorous because
honestly what else is Abbey stating besides the backward idea that he hopes to love
all that he hates of mankind by separating himself from such things. This makes
us go in two directions at once: Abbey displaying strong, literal ideals of
misanthropy contrasting to Abbey displaying metaphorical, deep desires to want
to love mankind. Abbey creates this humorous atmosphere by his portrayals of
such outrageous contrasts.
“Look here Newcomb, do you think
it’s fitting that you and I should be here in the wilds, risking our lives
amidst untold hardships, while our wives and loved ones lounge at their ease
back in Albuquerque… yes” (Abbey 159). Abbey uses the emotional connection of
family and loved ones to hint that he doesn’t truly think mankind as less than
him for not following his ideals. Also, Newcomb’s clear short, yes gives a tone
of humor further detailing Abbey’s message of his paradoxical struggle: he
instinctually loves mankind for what he himself is while hating the destructive
and unintelligent characteristics of civilization.
To simply state that Abbey overall
hates mankind by his dark and negative images of men, is naive of Abbey’s
overall voice. “The beavers had to go and build another goddamned dam on the
Colorado” (Abbey 151). This quote not only displays Abbeys sense of style but
also an example of his humor. Abbey doesn’t singularly portray men as “evil”
and nature as “good”; instead his message is much more ambiguous. He struggles
with viewing either as a clear symbol (this includes himself), which can be
shown by Abbey’s anger towards the beaver’s dam which he sees as harmful to
nature overall. Also the alliteration “goddamned dam” is not a coincidence but
Abbey’s touch to prove he isn’t completely serious.
Abbey continues to contrast the
image of nature and humanity, “If necessary, we agree, a man could live out his
life in this place, once he had adjusted his nervous system to the awful
quietude, the fearful tranquility” (Abbey 160). Earlier in the chapter of “Down
the River” Abbey makes it clear that he wants quietude and tranquility yet
describes such environments negatively now. This just shows that Abbey
continues to struggle with which is better, nature or humanity. He exaggerates
the idea of living completely isolated and driven insane with such solitude
versus the chaos and confusion that is the problems of current civilization.
Neither can be deemed perfect and I hypothesis that Abbey will explore this
deeper and try to choose. Plus, Abbey continues to use humor within his search
by drinking to the exaggerated conclusion Newcomb and he is forever doomed.
Abbey hates what humanity does to
nature, destroys, yet appreciates qualities in himself that make him humane,
strength, intelligence, and the ultimate predator. This will be predominate in
Abbey’s internal struggle which he tries to solve through humor. The literal
and metaphorical analysis of exaggerated contrasts such as Abbey’s direct
separation from mankind yet being a man himself, display all that Abbey
questions- who is he? I believe this will be a continue search for Abbey following
to the end of Desert Solitaire.
Works cited:
Abbey, Edward. Desert Solitaire: The First Morning & A
Season in the Wilderness. New York:
Touchstone, 1990.
I found the central argument in this paper to be that Abbey is both literal and metaphorical in his hatred for humanity, and he displays this paradox often through his humor, which also invokes an internal struggle. I thought this was a great point, and it was well developed, especially seen in the "goddamned damn" reference. I also thought it was great that essay ended in a sort of question that can only be developed on in further reading. I could have used a bit more at the end of the second to last paragraph when Abbey and Newcomb being "doomed" is discussed. I can see where it's going, however perhaps adding a bit more on this choice you think Abbey will have to make between nature and humanity and how that plays into his misanthropy would make that portion stronger. I think all of the support for Abbey struggling with who he is is strong, however perhaps condensing paragraphs 3 and 4 would allow for a better flow, because they are essentially getting at similar points, so you could perhaps more effectively build off of them better by including them in the same paragraph.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteI basically like your introduction, but I'd like it better if you clarified the role of humor here. Is his misanthropy basically a running joke, or does the humorous excess of it serve a serious purpose? The 2nd paragraph is basically an extension of the 1st. It's all solid, but maybe slightly repetitive. The third paragraph continues in the same vein. You continue to refine and clarify what you're saying - "Also, Newcomb’s clear short, yes gives a tone of humor further detailing Abbey’s message of his paradoxical struggle: he instinctually loves mankind for what he himself is while hating the destructive and unintelligent characteristics of civilization." - but I'd like to see some clearer direction by this point. You've nailed the paradox - but what does it mean?
I like the paragraph on beavers and people. Your attention to detail is excellent. And yet, I still want you to move more clearly forward in some direction - any direction! - of your own.
The final couple paragraphs don't really make any forward progress.
Overall: This is an excellent, focused start. But what does the paradox mean? I understand that you're hesitant to answer that question now (since you see it as basically a question about identity), but I think you could have taken some initial steps. If it was me, I probably would have turned from his paradoxic love/hate relationship with humanity to his doomed attempt to understand the Juniper tree. Or maybe I'd delve into his reading (anti-reading?) of Kant, although that would be painful. What I'm getting at is that you're ready Abbey quite well - well enough that I want to see more interpretation - in a sense, more of *you*. If you feel like the end of the book gives you the right ways to expand on the problem of Abbey's identity, this essay offers rich opportunities for revision.