Economy

In the Economy chapter, Thoreau discusses how the majority of people are too focused on their money and financial status. The meaning of necessity has been changed to convenient in American culture. Thoreau describes necessity as food and shelter. Most of the population has food and shelter or could obtain it if they didn’t spend their money on other items that they also consider necessities.

The tone in this piece is a frustrating and incredulous one. He seems to be confused as to why people put all this work in to live an unrewarding life, for there is a minute amount that become rich by work rather than having family money passed down to them. Thoreau states that he especially saw this in Concord where “the inhabitants have appeared to me to be doing penance in a thousand remarkable ways” (Thoreau 1). Frustration also shows through when he uses bold statements such as, “But men labor under a mistake” (Thoreau 1). He has very strong viewpoints on the fact that Americans overwork themselves for an ideological goal that’s almost unattainable. He includes this personal account of Concord to further prove to the reader that he has experienced what they are going through, but he still finds it ludicrous. If he hadn’t included this paragraph a predictable response to this whole piece would be that “he doesn’t know where the citizens are coming from.” On the contrary, he knows very well what they are going through and it was one of the many reasons he turned his back on society. Without this paragraph, this piece would be less credible and less effective.

The purpose of him writing this piece was to point out to people that most of their efforts don’t produce enough reward and to present that they can lead a much more fulfilling life without the strains they experience daily. When he says, “The better part of the man is soon plowed into the soil for compost” (Thoreau 1), it shows that Thoreau believes that such repeatedly laborious work eats away at the good of a man. In this chapter he provides pages of evidence that show people can live gratifying lives if they would just change their perception of what a necessity is. The people that he tries to reach out to would be all of those that aren’t in the upper class but dream to be in it and slave most of their lives away to try to obtain that status. He attempts to show them through this paper that there is no need to live a life of constant discontent when they can just let go of the non-necessities and then be able to put food on the table for their families. The piece even says, “…to the mass of men who are discontented, and idly complaining of the hardness of their lot or the times, when they might improve them” (Thoreau 4).

Thoreau really emphasizes on the word “necessity.” It frequently comes up in the piece because he is trying to get the point across of what is really necessity and what is just considered necessity by society. He also gets a bit sarcastic towards the end. Thoreau talks about how people think fire places are necessary, but they aren’t because as long as enough food is consumed, the body will make enough body heat. He then talks about how the rich will have four fireplaces in one house because they consider it a “necessity,” when it’s definitely not. Just to show off their money, the rich will sometimes have many fires going at once and “…are not simply kept comfortably warm, but unnaturally hot…they are cooked, of course a la mode.” (Thoreau 4). He throws in the sarcastic comment about “a la mode” because he’s trying to put down the foolish perspective of society and tries to show people that there isn’t a great reason to want to be rich.

The title of “Economy” interests the reader because that is where most of their nagging questions about Thoreau lifestyle are rooted. He even takes time in the first two paragraphs to address common questions such as “what did he eat?” and “did you feel lonesome?” The title also sets him up for the point he is going to discuss and the reason it was so easy for him to survive was that he could let go of the conveniences and only focus on the true necessities. From there he goes into what the true necessities are and then tries to convince the readers of the better life they are able to live if they would only consider his points.

Overall this piece was very interesting, and the points he makes within it are have validity and grounds to back them up. Though he offers a very convincing argument, what he suggests to the readers is something most won’t take advantage of because the dramatic changes they would have to go through. This pieces main purpose is not to convince them to take advantage of this though, its mearly to suggest a way out of the discontent life they live.