Author: OwenPitts

As a writer of an autobiography about life in the woods, would you spend more pages describing an ant war or loons? Why? (It is said like this because I have recently read the autobiography Walden written by Henry David Thoreau. According to Google, “Thoreau was an American naturalist, essayist, poet, philosopher, and a leading transcendentalist.” “As a transcendentalist, Thoreau believed that reality existed only in the spiritual world, and the solution to people’s problems was the free development of emotions (“Transcendentalism”).” He is most known for his autobiography entitled “Walden”.) I have no favorite between ant wars and loons. I would spend about a couple pages writing about both. I think that they are both very interesting. Here are what they are and why I like them.

According to Google, “Ant Wars are a direct, aggressive interaction between ants of different colonies. Ants are engaged in competition with other ants. For example, if one colony monopolizes the supply of food, this source is unavailable to other ants – that is an indirect form of competition.” So ant wars are wars between ants or other species that begin because of territory or food problems for one species and wealth and domination for another species. If there is a problem like this, than yes, there will most likely be an ant war between the two species. Just like it says in Google, “Ants may fight to protect their own nests or food storage from enemies or when they try to take over nests or seize food of not only other ant species, but also other colonies of the same species.” According to “Serious Science”, “If you look at Ants as societies, there are two ways that they can engage in what we call “Wars”. One of them is more similar to the way that humans think of having wars – battles among the colonies of the same species. The other type involves interactions between different species of ants. Both of these kinds of conflicts are important to ant biology.” Ant wars are crazy wars between ants vs. ants, or ants vs. another species.

Now for loons. According to “Wilderness North”, “Loons are water birds like ducks, geese, and grebes, but they are classified separately by scientists. The five species are Red-throated Loon Gavia stellata, Pacific Loon Gavia pacifica, Arctic Loon Gavia arctica, Yellow-billed Loon Gavia adamsii, and Common Loon Gavia immer.” According to “Ask Difference”, “The main difference between Duck and Loon is that the Duck is a common name for many species in the bird family Anatidae which go QUAB and Loon is a genus of birds. … Ducks are sometimes confused with several types of unrelated water birds with similar forms, such as loons or divers, grebes, gallinules, and coots. Loons are beautiful, however, they can become very aggressive. It has been documented that one loon even killed a eagle! Now that, is an aggressive bird.

Both ant wars and loons I would find very interesting if I lived in the woods.

How important is it for a person to summarize his philosophy of life in an early chapter of an autobiography? Most autobiographies do not need to say the writer’s beliefs or philosophy or what they believe in, but some do. I myself think that summarizing your beliefs at the beginning of an autobiography is very beneficial and important to understanding the book and more about the person to understand the book better. An autobiography is supposed to be about you. It is also supposed to be about your beliefs and philosophy and what you believe in. If you were to write an autobiography and you did not include your beliefs or philosophy or what you believe in, than it might be hard for your readers to understand anything about you.

After you give the reader a brief summary about your beliefs and philosophy and what you believe in, then, as the writer and author of the book, it is your job to remind the reader once in a while about your beliefs and philosophy and what you believe in so that the readers can stay on track with the book and understand it better. In Henry David Thoreau’s book “Walden”, he tried to use some what subtle reminders of his beliefs and philosophy, however, he failed. Instead, he ended up making himself look a little contradictory. Throughout his autobiography Thoreau would express just how much he was against something. Then later, in a much different chapter, he would try to justify what he had said in an earlier chapter. Because of this weird behaver he made himself look just extremely hypocritical and narcissistic.

For some autobiographies, it is important for the book to have background information on what the book is about. One such example is the autobiography “Walden”, written by Henry David Thoreau. In his autobiography he conducted an experiment, and the purpose was to connect with nature. This was actually his purpose for going to Walden Pond which is where he built himself a little shack and lived there for twenty-six months of his life doing his little experiment. He talked about his life on Walden Pond and his experiment.

I would not worry about it if somebody did not include their beliefs and philosophy and what they believe in, however, I would highly recommend it that you put your beliefs and philosophy and what you believe in in your autobiography, just so that people get a good understanding about your autobiography and your life. I would definitely put my beliefs and philosophy and what I believe in in my autobiography if I were to write one. I would recommend it that you put in your beliefs and philosophy and what you believe in it too, but you do not have to do it if it is too much work for you. I honestly do not care if anybody puts in their beliefs and philosophy and what you believe in in their autobiography, but I recommend that you do put in your beliefs and philosophy and what you believe in in your autobiography if you were to write one.

Would Walden have been a better book if Thoreau had supplied more background information on his life? First, I would like to tell you who Thoreau was. Thoreau’s full name was Henry David Thoreau. According to Google, “Thoreau was an American naturalist, essayist, poet, philosopher, and a leading transcendentalist.” “As a transcendentalist, Thoreau believed that reality existed only in the spiritual world, and the solution to people’s problems was the free development of emotions (“Transcendentalism”).” He is most known for his autobiography entitled “Walden”. It tells of his life living on Walden Pond. In his autobiography he wrote “I lived alone, in the woods, a mile from any neighbor, in a house which I had built myself, on the shore of Walden Pond, in Concord, Massachusetts, and earned my living by the labor of my hands only. I lived there two years and two months. At present I am a sojourner in civilized life again.” He also wrote his purpose for going to live at Walden Pond. He wrote “My purpose in going to Walden Pond was not to live cheaply nor to live dearly there, but to transact some private business with the fewest obstacles; to be hindered from accomplishing which for want of a little common sense, a little enterprise and business talent, appeared not so sad as foolish.” He also said “I have thought that Walden Pond would be a good place for business, not solely on account of the railroad and the ice trade; it offers advantages which it may not be good policy to divulge; it is a good port and a good foundation.”

So, back to the question, Would Walden have been a better book if Thoreau had supplied more background information on his life? Well, I think that the answer is no. Why? Well, let me tell you why. Thoreau’s autobiography is about his life as an adult, as a workman, and his life on Walden Pond. There would be no need to add anything about his background. If he did than that would just make the story boring. It would make no sense to put in extra details that do not go with the story.

Also, the question, Would Walden have been a better book if Thoreau had supplied more background information on his life, also means the answer yes. Why? Again, let me tell you why. First, the autobiography begins with “When I wrote the following pages, or rather the bulk of them, I lived alone, in the woods, a mile from any neighbor, in a house which I had built myself, on the shore of Walden Pond, in Concord, Massachusetts, and earned my living by the labor of my hands only. I lived there two years and two months. At present I am a sojourner in civilized life again.” It would make a lot more sense if he began telling the story as a brief summary of his childhood and what he did before he went to live on Walden Pond.

Was Thoreau dependent on the division of labor while he was living on Walden Pond? First of all, I would like to tell you who Thoreau was and what the division of labor was. His full name was Henry David Thoreau. According to Google, “Thoreau was an American naturalist, essayist, poet, philosopher, and a leading transcendentalist.” “As a transcendentalist, Thoreau believed that reality existed only in the spiritual world, and the solution to people’s problems was the free development of emotions (“Transcendentalism”).” He is most known for his autobiography entitled “Walden”. It tells of his life living on Walden Pond. In his autobiography he wrote “I lived alone, in the woods, a mile from any neighbor, in a house which I had built myself, on the shore of Walden Pond, in Concord, Massachusetts, and earned my living by the labor of my hands only. I lived there two years and two months. At present I am a sojourner in civilized life again.” He also wrote his purpose for going to live at Walden Pond. He wrote “My purpose in going to Walden Pond was not to live cheaply nor to live dearly there, but to transact some private business with the fewest obstacles; to be hindered from accomplishing which for want of a little common sense, a little enterprise and business talent, appeared not so sad as foolish.” He also said “I have thought that Walden Pond would be a good place for business, not solely on account of the railroad and the ice trade; it offers advantages which it may not be good policy to divulge; it is a good port and a good foundation.” Next, the division of labor. According to Google, the division of labor is “the assignment of different parts of a manufacturing process or task to different people in order to improve efficiency”.

So, back to the question, was Thoreau dependent on the division of labor while he was living on Walden Pond? The answer is, yes, he was. In the first quote from his book, he said that he built his house himself so he bought his things to build his house from a store. Now, all of the merchandise found in stores come from factories which use the division of labor. He also needed to buy food at the store which also uses the division of labor, just like the lumber he used to build his house. He also fished for some of his food and I think that he got his fishing gear from the store which also uses the division of labor. All stores use the division of labor. He said about fishing “At night there was never a traveler passed my house, or knocked at my door, more than if I were the first or last man; unless it were in the spring, when at long intervals some came from
the village to fish for pouts—they plainly fished much more in the Walden Pond of their own natures, and baited their hooks with darkness—but they soon retreated, usually with light baskets, and left “the world to darkness and to me,” and the black kernel of the night was never profaned by any human neighborhood.” He was a very interesting man.

How could I adopt Northup’s technique of using contrasts? First, I would like to tell you who Solomon Northup was. Solomon Northup was born as a free man in New York. While in New York he had a family. He was very proud to be a free man. But, he was soon robbed of his papers that showed that he was a free man and was soon sold into slavery. How did this happen? Well, he was a violinist so some men asked him if he wanted to be a part in a circus. Now, his family was on a trip at that time so when he said yes (because he did) he did not think that he had to write a note to leave at his house to tell his family where he was when they got back because he thought that he would be back before they got home. Now, it turned out that the people were the people that sold him into slavery! After he arrived at the designated spot where he was supposed to meet the men, the captured him, took his papers, and sold him into slavery. And when his family arrived home and noticed that he was missing they could not find him because he did not leave a note. He tried many times to convince his “master” that he was a free man, but how could he without his papers? And his “master” threatened him that if he spoke of being a free man again, he would beat him with a wipe very, very hard.

Northup’s contrasts were so good that it makes the reader want to read more of the book. One of the largest contrasts in the book was regarding the positive and the negative sanctions against the slaves (which I wrote about in an earlier essay). I am a big reader, so I should know. It just makes me want to read more. He also shared small stories which would later in the book grow into a bigger story. Like stories not just of himself, but of other slaves as well. Like the sad story of the slave Eliza. If you have read the book, than you must have thought that Northup wrote this book from memory, and you are right! Northup could not have written his autobiography while he was in slavery, so he wrote it when he got out of slavery, though it sounds like he wrote it while was in slavery. He must have had a great memory. Also, if he could not write his autobiography in slavery and he wrote his autobiography, that means that he must have gotten out of slavery!

Now back to the topic: How could I adopt Northup’s technique of using contrasts? I could observe for more contrasts I could adopt from movies, or books, or even from my own life. I could also note important events that took place in my life (also known as journaling). There are several different ways that I can adopt contrasts.