I nt erdi sci pl i nar y

SOCIAL
SCIENCES
www.Soci al Sci ences-Journal .com
JOURNAL
THE I NTERNATI ONAL
of
Volume 5, Number 1
Literary Art as a Form of Self-Inquiry in Thoreaus
Walden
Forough Barani and Wan Roselezam Wan Yahya



















THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY SOCIAL SCIENCES
http://www.SocialSciences-Journal.com

First published in 2010 in Champaign, Illinois, USA by Common Ground Publishing LLC
www.CommonGroundPublishing.com.

2010 (individual papers), the author(s)
2010 (selection and editorial matter) Common Ground

Authors are responsible for the accuracy of citations, quotations, diagrams, tables and
maps.

All rights reserved. Apart from fair use for the purposes of study, research, criticism or
review as permitted under the Copyright Act (Australia), no part of this work may be
reproduced without written permission from the publisher. For permissions and other
inquiries, please contact
<cg-support@commongroundpublishing.com>.

ISSN: 1833-1882
Publisher Site: http://www.SocialSciences-Journal.com

THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY SOCIAL SCIENCES is
peer-reviewed, supported by rigorous processes of criterion-referenced article ranking
and qualitative commentary, ensuring that only intellectual work of the greatest
substance and highest significance is published.

Typeset in Common Ground Markup Language using CGCreator multichannel
typesetting system
http://www.commongroundpublishing.com/software/
Literary Art as a Form of Self-Inquiry in Thoreaus
Walden
Forough Barani, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia
Wan Roselezam Wan Yahya, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor,
Malaysia
Abstract: In his non-fction work Walden, Henry David Thoreaus internal dialogues and meditations
reveal to us his self as embodied in his literary work. While in this selected work there is a close
analogy between self and the text, which both are a series of inner voices juxtaposed with and often
contradicting one another, in order to decipher the artists persona, this study frames its analysis
within two perspectives: the sociolinguistics (Bakhtins Dialogism) and psychology (Hermans
Dialogical Self ). This attempt to investigate the aesthetic and ideological statements of the narrator
of Walden explores the extent of natures infuence on him as an alienated writer; and examines the
cultural heritage in the context of American society of Thoreau to identify the roots of the broken ties
between self and the society to shed light on the individual and social self of the narrator in
Walden. This study concludes that this selected non-fction work is not just a monological poetic
meditation of its author but a polyphonic contemplation of internal voices carnivalizing the social
ideologies of its time embodied in his art as a pursuit of self inquiry.
Keywords: Psychology, Self, Society, Subpersonalities
Introduction
M
ANY A TIME we have heard a voice within ourselves speaking. It is a part of
us that may denote a negative or positive experience within us and we wonder
what has got into us. At times we feel an inner temptation or desire that acts
or behaves unusual against our interests or morals. This is why at different situ-
ations we feel as if different personalities inside us are in dialogue, think and behave differ-
ently fromwhat we normally perceive ourselves to be. Rowan (1990) in his Subpersonalities:
The People Inside Us, describes this phenomenon as the interplay of subpersonalities, and
defnes it as a semi-permanent and semi-autonomous region of the personality capable of
acting as a person.
1
According to Rowan subpersonalities have a range of relative dissociation
in that they take us even sometimes gently and other times more forcefully. Marie-Louise
Von Franz, a Jungian psychotherapist, for instance, describes herself and her subpersonalities
that clearly highlight the above mentioned phenomenon:
1
Very close to Rawdons discussion of the working of subpersonalities is the systemof psychosynthesis introduced
by Alberto Assagioli (1910) in Italy. Psychosynthesis assumes the existence of different subpersonalities in close
interaction to one another and argues that growth in ones personality can be achieved by recognizing them all. He
considers fve phases, recognition, acceptance, coordination, integration and fnally synthesis. For more explanation
refer to chapter 3, the Plays of Subpersonalities, Dialogical Self: Meaning as Movement by Hubert J. M. Hermans
and Harry J. G. Kempen (1993).
The International Journal of Interdisciplinary Social Sciences
Volume 5, Number 1, 2010, http://www.SocialSciences-Journal.com, ISSN 1833-1882
Common Ground, Forough Barani, Wan Roselezam Wan Yahya, All Rights Reserved, Permissions:
cg-support@commongroundpublishing.com
I could give you a whole list of the persons I can be. I am an old peasant woman who
thinks of cooking and the house. I am a scholar who thinks about deciphering manu-
scripts. I am a psychotherapist who thinks about how to interpret peoples dreams. I
am a mischievous little boy who enjoys the company of a ten-year-old and playing
mischievous tricks on adults, and so on. I could give you twenty more such characters.
They suddenly enter you but if you see what is happening you can keep them out of
your system, play with them and put them aside again. But if you are possessed they
will enter you involuntary and you act them out involuntary (Rowan 9).
Aim of the Study
This study specifcally aims to unravel the existence of diverse subpersonalities in Henry
David Thoreaus self in referring to his Walden (1854). Indeed, one can detect different
facets of Thoreaus self in the same way that Marie-Louise Von Franz has defned her
diverse selves; Thoreau the poet, the naturalist, observer, recorder and reporter of the nature
and on the other hand, Thoreau the socialist, reformer, satirist, Poet-prophet. To maintain
ones cohesive self one should come to know his actual and potential selves.
William James (1890) in his Principles of Psychology identifes the multiplicity of
identity and refers to the common notion of ones personal characteristics and feelings as
well as ones social roles and status. As it was clear in naming Thoreaus subpersonalities,
two general lines of his self can be traced in referring to him: Thoreau, the naturalist poet
and Thoreau, the social critic. James describes the self as a unitary and multi-faced
phenomenon. This concept can be explained more clearly in his distinction between I and
me which he considers as the two basic components of the self. In James argument, the
I is defned as the purely subjective facet of the self while on the other hand, the me is
quite objective and is known as the empirical self. He later assumes that self is not an
entity closed off fromthe world and having an existence in itself, but, rather, extended toward
specifc aspects of the environment (Hermans & Kempen, 1993: 44).
In line with James consideration of the self is Meads (1934) assertion about the self divi-
sions that is me which social roles are ascribed to and on the other hand, the I that innov-
ative act of personality comes from. The innovative artist apparent in the poetic contemplation
and description of nature in Waldens Thoreau is the actual outcome of the I facet of
Thoreaus self. His poetic imagination is apparent in the metaphor he uses, What should
we think of the shepherds life if his focks always wandered to higher pastures than his
thoughts? (59) Thoreaus unconventionality in establishing his specifc voice and language
in a disagreement with the established norms of the society indicates his personal innate
personality, I, against that of conventionally rule-governed, me, the generalized other
(Hermans & Kempen, 1993:108). The generalized other, that is an integral part of the self,
is responsible for ones social and rational conducts. Although there are multitude of selves
in ones personality, this generalized other by refecting the unity and structure of the social
process as a whole, brings unity to the self. The generalized other, as a part of a community
will take the norms of its adopted social group:
Unsocialized, the individual would founder in irrational selfshness; partially socialized,
he would founder in the multiplicity of fragmentary selves; fully socialized, he becomes
rational and moral, and the interests of his multiple selves are consolidated into a super-
40
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY SOCIAL SCIENCES
ordinate self-interest, which in its turn has been coordinated with the interests of all
(Gregg, qtd. in Hermans & Kempen, 1993: 111).
Dialogism as a Conceptual Theory
Dialogue is a manifold phenomenon, but we can characterize it with three basic elements:
a dialogue is composed of an utterance, a reply and a relation between the two (Holquist,
2002:38). To elaborate this statement in Bakhtinian explanation, the third element is con-
sidered to have the greatest importance since nothing is anything in itself and without this
relation the two other would have no meaning. Bakhtin (1973) further asserts that in a dialo-
gical give and take as soon as the word is uttered, it is considered as double-voiced. So
when speaking, a word tends toward two points in place and time; at one moment it tends
toward an object of speech and simultaneously toward another word that is originated in
another persons speech. In the light of the aroused issue referring to Thoreaus Walden one
can trace many examples of such conversational interaction of Thoreaus self with imagined
or real other. In these cases the words of the other is quite present in the act of speaking,
even those seemingly monological speeches, in the way that the infuence and contributions
of this seemingly absent other in form and content of the conversation is quite evident.
Bakhtin further underlines that, the authors intention makes use of another persons word
in the direction of its own aspiration (Hermans & Kempen, 1993:42).
In the following passage from Walden, Thoreau implicitly provides a form of question
and response in a sense that one gives a list of social norms while the other is the interpretation
and answer to those norms. This passage can be written in a dialogic form as denoting the
interaction between Thoreau as the critic and the reader that beholds the socially defned
standards:
Reader: We meet at very short intervals,
Thoreau: not having had time to acquire any new value for each other
Reader: We meet at meals three times a day
Thoreau: and give each other a new taste of that old musty cheese that we are
Reader: We have had to agree on a certain set of rules, called etiquette and politeness
Thoreau: to make this frequent meeting tolerable and that we need not come to open
war (Walden, 91).
In order to criticize the society that is commonly too cheap, Thoreau avoids the direct
formof question and response which creates a double-voicedness as the organizing quality
of the speech of a single speaker that is equivalent to what Bakhtin means by his defnition
of hidden dialogicality, in which the second interlocutor is invisibly present and the
profound traces of his determine all of the frst interlocutors word. Although only one person
is speaking, we feel that this is a conversation, and a most intense one, since every word that
is present answers and reacts with its every fber to the invisible interlocutor (Bakhtin,
1973: 163-4).
This approach to dialogue and the infuence of the unseen but present interlocutor emphat-
ically illustrates that for Bakhtin the notion of dialogue is not identical with explicitly spoken
conversation. In this light dialogue is present in every form of thought. Bakhtins analysis
of the microdialogues will be a help to have a better understanding of what Bakhtin means
41
FOROUGH BARANI, WAN ROSELEZAM WAN YAHYA
by dialogue. This model serves for an interior dialogue in which the other participant in
the dialogue is present even when the thinker is alone. Bakhtins defnition demonstrates
the idea that dialogue is present in every word, giving rise to conficts and interruptions of
one voice by another, even if the other person is not actually talking (Hermans & Kempen,
1993:43).
In relation to the role of the self in the narrative works, Mancuso and Sarbin (1983) con-
tributed their theory of I as author and me as actor to the psychology of the self. They
suggest that the uttered pronoun I stands for the author and the me for the actor or nar-
rative fgure. Such an approach to the self and its constituents is particularly feasible to the
study of non-fction works like Walden when the author as the I constructs a story that the
me as the actor is its protagonist. Thoreaus I-author in this light relates and reconstructs
his past and present and respectively imagines his future life. Julian Janes(1976) also asserts
that this kind of narrativization is present in all the individuals behavior and activities as
purpose and cause inextricably woven into the spatialization of behavior in consciousness
in a way that in the dynamics of consciousness the I always perceives the me as the
main fgure in the story of ones life.
2
In the light of Sarbins theory(1986) the self-narrative in Walden depicts the life story of
Thoreaus I which sees his me acting his two years life in Walden Pond, here is life,
an experiment to a great extend untried by me (5). This can be further elaborated with
Bakhtins idea of polyphony in which the self can live in a multiplicity of worlds while
each of these worlds have its own independent author with its independent story that is
completely different in tone and subject matter fromother worlds. Accordingly these authors
with their individual authority and unique perspective may interact dialogically with each
other. In this respect the voice of Thoreau in the chapter Society and its preoccupation is
completely different with that of, for instance, The Pond : each can be seen as a different
world in which different world views are presented. This can be generalized in referring to
other chapters that are even in dialogic relation in which one is in a form of a response to
the other: Reading and Sound, Solitude and Visitors, The Pond and The Pond
in Winter.
This distinction emphasizes the role of the other people in the interplay between I and
me. Therefore, the existence of the social self which has the capacity of taking the role
of the other in Meads words, indicates the infuence of the other that can be decisive in
the self function,
There are parts of the self which exists only for the self in relationship to itself. We divide
ourselves up in all sorts of different selves with reference to our acquaintances. We
discuss politics with one and religion with another (Mead, 1934:142).
2
To clarify his explanation, Julian Janes provides an example when one plans to visit his/her friend. All the way
to his/her home the I is imagining the me talking and conversing with his/her friend. The Origin of Consciousness
in the Breakdown of The Bicameral Mind. Boston: Houghton Miffin, 1976.
42
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY SOCIAL SCIENCES
Analysis and Findings
Two Facet of the Same Self: Thoreaus I in Dialogue with Thoreaus Me
In dealing with Thoreau the naturalist one can easily recognize that he is mostly preoccupied
with the nature and seasonal cycle rather than society and its ideology. Fromthis perspective
Thoreaus Walden is seen as the records of unconscious, (Chodat, 1995:26). Thus in this
non-fction work the apparent multi-voicedness is embodied within the fgure of the author
himself rather than the characters. Thoreaus inner child addresses and contemplates his
mother Nature. In the extended metaphor of seasons he spiritually exemplifes his symbolic
inner growth from innocence to experience and then again back to innocence but this time
with knowledge. The records of the self-conscious mind of the author is not static rather it
is dynamic and in motion: every moment is subject to change and revise, seeking different
aspects and perspectives in the way to come to the ultimate truth of the self. Robert Chodat
fully exploits the movements of the mind in Walden and asserts, Reading Walden, one
senses a mind committed to an exploration of the present moment, with each moment evincing
a voice of its own. The voice of a given moment might fully contradict the previous one,
but both are given a place in the text (1995: 26).
Thoreaus Walden is more likely a spiritual autobiography in which diversity of voices
with diversity of ideologies come into a dialogic interaction which fnally at the end of this
rather long contemplation a unifed whole emerges out of the chaos, The creation of cosmos
out of chaos, the realization of the Golden Age of his self, while in the pleasant spring
morning all mens sin are forgiven (Walden, 207). He celebrates his innocence recovered
in the end of his chapter Spring by the advent of new life in nature herself. This pattern
of life, death and rebirth that goes beyond the linear time links Thoreau to the tradition of
Natural Supernaturalism of Romanticism. This is the notion of divided vision in Walden
that intensifes the play of Thoreaus subpersonalities, his objective and subjective modes
of perception. Thoreau is not a mere observer and recorder of nature but also an encourager
of his part of self that idealizes and contemplates the inner truth of nature. Thoreaus objective
vision is mostly depicted in his detailed explanations of the external world, namely in the
chapter The Pond, when he for a while puts aside his personal and poetic subjectivity and
adopts the language and voice of a scientist and presents his observations in a common
manner as in a natural science textbooks. In the following excerpt from The Pond this
double-voicedness is quite evident. Thoreau in reviewing his experience in Walden Pond
presents his detailed study of some of its fsh:
Nevertheless, this pond is not very fertile in fsh. Its pickerel, though not abundant, are
its chief boast. I have seen at one time lying on the ice pickerel of at least three different
kinds: a long and shallowone, steel-colored, most like those caught in the river; a bright
golden kind, with greenish refections and remarkably deep, which is the most common
here; and another, golden-colored, and shaped like the last, but peppered on the sides
with small dark brown or black spots, intermixed with a few faint blood-red ones, very
much like a trout. The specifc name reticulatus would not apply to this; it should be
guttatus rather (123).
This thorough description of three different kinds of fsh inhabiting the Walden Pond reminds
reader of the preciseness of scientifc explanation that later on is followed by the naturalists
43
FOROUGH BARANI, WAN ROSELEZAM WAN YAHYA
descriptiveness of its reporter when comparing the fshes of Walden, which are cleaner,
handsomer and frmer-feshed, to the other nearby Ponds. He continues to report his obser-
vations:
You may see from a boat, in calm weather, near the sandy eastern shore, where the
water is eight or ten feet deep, and also in some other parts of the pond, some circular
heaps half a dozen feet in diameter by a foot in height, consisting of small stones less
than a hens egg in size, where all around is bare sand (124).
Unexpectedly after this another completely different voice with a quite different tone im-
merges:
Alake is the landscapes most beautiful and expressive feature. It is earths eye; looking
into which the beholder measures the depth of his own nature. The fuviatile trees next
the shore are the slender eyelashes which fringe it, and the wooded hills and cliffs
around are its overhanging brows (125).
This description of the lake unravels another voice in Thoreaus self that announces his po-
etic subjectivity. His poetic imagination goes so far that sees the lake as the earths eye while
the trees are its eyelashes and the bulge of the hills and cliffs are its eyebrow. This dialogical
interplay of the inner voices between the scientifc naturalism and the romantic naturalism
is the key concept in defning Thoreaus contemplations, in Bakhtins terms, the constant
give and take in a dialogical relation between mind and nature in the form of inner speech.
Thoreau being aware of the diversity of his subpersonalities and their unique voices
within his own self, knows that each of them is striving to express his own attitudes. He will
come to maturity and growth when he can recognize and accept the existence of these per-
sonalities and attempt to discover the so-called transpersonal self, that functions as a unifed
entity. So in this case different subpersonalities are merging into an integrative whole to lead
him to his highest level of growth and let him fnd the ultimate truth of his being.
In his attempt to question and then parody the established ideology of his society and the
mass of men as his main readers, Thoreau adopts the voice of the beholders of this authorial
and materialistic world views. These voices come to envision a dialogicality that will permit
a free play of diverse, unrepressed voices (Schueller, 1986: 34). Thoreau creates a counter
ideology which values democratic and free play of individual opinion against the social
norms and by arousing laughter in Bakhtins terms, carnivalizes these norms. In the
Carnivalistic life, that is life turned inside out, the laws, prohibitions, and restrictions that
determine the structure and order of ordinary, that is noncarnival, are suspended during
carnival (Bakhtin, 1973:143). In this sense Thoreau breaks the conventions of language
and thought of totalitarian society and invites his readers to participate in his newly founded
worldwhich adheres freedomof thought fromany formof fnal formulation. In The Bean
Field Thoreau pretends to adopt the voice of an agricultural specialist who mostly cares
about the farm and the mercantile activities. He works from 5 oclock in the morning till
noon, (108) gives instructions of how to [p]lant the common small white bush about the
frst of June, in rows three feet by eighteen inches apart, being careful to select round and
unmixed seed, (163) and later gives a full account of his income and expenses. But imme-
diately after this another voice, again that of Thoreau, merges into the voice of the prudent
44
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY SOCIAL SCIENCES
farmer that follows a thoroughly different ideology, the voice that is concerned more with
planting such seeds as sincerity, truth, simplicity, faith, innocence and the like (110).
In a dialogic opposition, planting is now changed from the ideology of proft and loss to
advocate instead the ideology of self-culture.
This dialogism later on is completely resolved when Thoreau explicitly unmasks himself
and let his other self speaks: why should not the New Englander try new adventures, and
not try new adventures, and not lay so much stress on his grain. Why concern ourselves
so much about our beans for seed, and not be concerned at all about a new generation of
men? (110) By doing so Thoreau de-authorizes the social language of the America of his
time and redefnes language in his counter ideology, a moral reform in which language is
free of hierarchy. Stanley Cavell (1972), to reaffrm this view refers to Thoreaus attempt
to recreate the nations scripture and recommends that such writing must assume the
conditions of language as such; re-experiencethe fact that there is such a thing as language
at all and assume responsibility for it until the nation is capable of serious speech again
(33).
In a dialogical relation the communication is expressed through two distinct voices which
may be in the state of agreement or disagreement. In the case of Thoreaus double-voicedness
the disagreement of his ideology with that of society is presented in his inner speech with
his authorial voice and his adopted persona of the socially bounded reader which in the end
at a very ironic twist the carnivalization of the ideology of society is resolved. This mode
of dialogism can be further explained in referring to many examples of direct and indirect
question and answer in the Walden, Shall the world be confned to one Paris or one Oxford
forever? Cannot students be boarded here and get a liberal education under the skies of
Concord? Can we not hire some Abelard to lecture to us? (73) In these rhetorical questions
Thoreau challenges the other social voices and attempts to break down the socially encoded
standards. He expresses his disagreement in a dialogic manner to reveal the falsity of what
society holds as virtue.
In his most controversial chapter Society, Thoreau criticizes those of his readers who
are the slave-driver of their selves (4), and later continues his speech when referring to
the olds, their experiments and their advises, The greater part of what my neighbors call
good I believe in my soul to be bad (4). In a counter argument Thoreau afterwards refers
to an internal voice that speaks inside his own self, I hear an irresistible voice which invites
me away from all that. One generation abandons the enterprises of another like stranded
vessels (7).
In his discussion of clothes in chapter Society Thoreau explicitly points to this
SHOULD and SHOULD NOT that society in the name of fashion has determined for its
people. He says about his encounter with his tailor:
When I ask for a garment of a particular form, my tailoress tells me gravely, They do
not make themso now, not emphasizing the They at all, as if she quoted an authority
as impersonal as the Fates, and I fnd it diffcult to get made what I want, simply because
she cannot believe that I mean what I say, that I am so rash (16).
He wonders and lets the reader read his thought: how they are related to me? and asks
what authority they may have in an affair which affects me so nearly? [original italics].
After this inner speech he answers his tailor, without emphasizing the word they as the
45
FOROUGH BARANI, WAN ROSELEZAM WAN YAHYA
tailor did, It is true, they did not make them so recently, but they do now (16). And fnally
in a very explicit form he mocks the cheap norms and empty standards of his society: The
head monkey at Paris puts on a travelers cap, and all the monkeys in America do the same
(17).
Discussion
Unfinalizability of Meaning: Thoreau in Search of His Supper Addressee
The dialogicality is closely related to the realization between logical and dialogical re-
lationship. In a logical relationship there is a defnite and closed conclusion while no
interpretation can go beyond the limits of the defned rules of the relationship. In Bakhtins
dialogical view, however, consciousness is never self suffcient; it always fnds itself in an
intense relationship with another consciousness. The heros every experience and his every
thought is internally dialogical, polemically colored and flled with opposing forces[] open
to inspiration fromoutside itself (Bakhtin, 1973:26). This explanation emphasizes the notion
of unfnalization and open-endedness.
3
The concept of unfnalization can be fully traced in the time, place and language of
Walden. The passage of the time as it is shown in the form of seasonal cycle in every
chapter is the ongoing progression of time. This timelessness is depicted even in the
openness of the assumed seasonal cycle, while at the end of the text, Thoreau is going to
experience Spring and begin a new life. Although Thoreau refers to his younger self and
feels that he has become more experienced comparing to his past self, he does not see his
present self in a defnite time and place to judge and defne his past self as a fnalized and
godlike fgure, so he attributes the quality and process of becoming to his own self; in re-
miniscing Walden Pond he says, it is itself unchanged, the same water which my youthful
eyes fell on, all the change is in me(128). He accepts his self to be unfnished and the subject
of change. At the end of his contemplation he feels the change in his self and knows that
this change is to be continued in the future. This dialogical give and take between Thoreaus
self in past, present and future is very noteworthy in his developing self toward self-discovery.
He has the courage to explore the private sea, the Atlantic and Pacifc Ocean of ones being
alone (212). Untrodden ways to future still lay in front of Thoreau when he eventually
leaves Walden Pond. Living his life two years near Walden Pond was not his fnal answer
to his ongoing exploration of his self, he remarks in his conclusion he leaves Walden since
he has several more lives to live (213).
Within such a concept of the self as depicted as a highly dynamic process, Higgins
(1987) distinguishes three different possibilities for self, the actual self (by which he refers
to what one actually possesses); the ideal self (by which he refers to what one ideally pos-
sesses); and the ought self (by which he refers to what one should or ought to possesses).
Higgins (1987) explains that the distinguishing point for these dimensions is different kinds
of emotional status of self which is aroused by the various external situations.
4
3
In taking about Dostoevsky, Bakhtin notes every thought of Dostoevskys heroes feels itself to be a speech in
an uncompleted dialogue (27). He continues the genuine life of the personality can be presented only dialogically,
and only when it mutually and voluntarily opens itself.
4
This interpretation can be the justifcation for the dynamic point of view of the self. Higgins, E.T. (1987) Self-
discrepancy: A Theory Relating Self and Effect. Psychological Review. 94, 319-340.
46
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY SOCIAL SCIENCES
So in this case while the self is deconstructed into diversity of subselves, in Walden at
different moments in time and place a specifc subself of Thoreau addresses his reader, who
is also situated in a different time and place. So speaking these dialogical interactions of the
subselves of the author with each other on the one hand, with the subselves of his reader on
the other hand, creates multiplicity of meaning. This rejection of the notion of fxity that this
time is associated with the language and the text rather than the self itself is another confrm-
ation for the unfnalizability of Thoreaus assertions. Derrida in his deconstructive theory
of language challenges the entire notion of authorship by holding that every text suffers
from textuality. In his discussion Derrida points out that: every piece of writing gets its
meaning only in the context of the discourse dominant in a particular era (Hermans &
Kempen, 1993:34). His main premise was that different readers read the text in different
time and place with their own perception of the signifers that is dominant in the meaning
system of their own time. Bakhtin in his discussion of the text and language moved from
formalism to deconstruction to identify this open system. Although as it was mentioned
earlier Thoreau carnivalizes the established language of his society and attempts to redefne
it but this redefnition is not an ultimate form since he mostly emphasizes on the free play
of language without restricting it to any specifc ideology. As far as Thoreau is navigating
his self in search of reality, in Bakhtinian conception, this reality cannot be grasped in
any absolute or fnal form [] neither textual reality nor other forms of reality have an un-
changeable absolute base (Hermans & Kempen, 1993:35).
Thoreaus preoccupation with his readers emphasizes the role of the other or possible
addressee outside the domain of his self. Holquist (2002) states that the tripartie nature of
dialogue bears within it the seeds of hope. In so far as my I is dialogic, it insures that
my existence is not a lonely event but part of a larger whole. So as claimed earlier the self
of the authors or poets at different time and place may be understood differently as they ad-
dress different addressees. They may not fnd their ideal addressee therefore they are mostly
in the hope that outside the tyranny of present there may be an other who will understand
them. This will foreclose the possibility of the signifcant other or supper addressee that
is conceived in different ways at different times by different persons (Hermans &Kempen,
1993:38). This can be more elaborated by referring to Thoreaus reader, present addressee
or the future onewho are capable of understanding and responding to his ideology. He
discriminates his readers from the very beginning of his speech in the chapter Society,
I do not mean to prescribe rules to strong and valiant natures, who will mind their own
affairs whether in heaven or hell, and perchance build more magnifcently and spend
more lavishly than the richest, without ever impoverishing themselves, not knowing
how they liveif, indeed, there are any such, as has been dreamed; nor to those who
fnd their encouragement and inspiration in precisely the present condition of things,
and cherish it with the fondness and enthusiasm of loversand, to some extent, I
reckon myself in this number; I do not speak to those who are well employed, in
whatever circumstances, and they know whether they are well employed or not;but
mainly to the mass of men who are discontented, and idly complaining of the hardness
of their lot or of the times, when they might improve them (10).
At times very hopelessly Thoreau confesses that his reader is not a qualifed one, demands
his appropriate reader and waits for a visitor that never comes (Walden, 179). Consequently
47
FOROUGH BARANI, WAN ROSELEZAM WAN YAHYA
Holquist emphasizes the relation between the subject and the object and continues that in a
dialogic world [] I fnd myself plunged into constant interaction with others and with
myself (Hermans & Kempen, 1993:39). This is how when Thoreau in his dialogic world
is disappointed with his present readers, addresses his own self, my thinking for myself
(31) and in a form of even direct question and answers plays a dialogic communication with
his generalized other. Can we not do without the society of our gossips a little while under
these circumstanceshave our own thoughts to cheer us? and immediately after this he
brings a quotation from Confucius to answer his own question, Virtue does not remain as
an abandoned orphan; it must of necessity have neighbors. And later he elaborates his way
of inner speech by, with thinking we may be beside ourselves in a sane sense (90).
Meaning as Signs, Sociolinguistic Nature of Thoreaus Inner Speeches
In dialogism meaning emerges through the medium of signs since it is the life expressed
through the language. This premise will link dialogism to linguistics. Self in this sense can
be analogous to a sign which like a linguistic sign has not an absolute meaning in itself. The
meaning of the self is relative and for its rather precise meaning depends on the other.
Dialogue in this explanation is itself a differential relationship, the self and the other keep
different positions in time and place when communicating each other dialogically. The
mutuality of differences, according to Holquist, makes dialogue Bakhtins master concept
for it is present in exchanges at all levels, between words in language, people in society, or-
ganisms in ecosystems, and even between processes in the natural world (Holquist, 2002:41).
This interplay of differences is comparable to Saussures concept of differences and is as-
sumed to be due Saussures claim of unavoidable social nature of language. In this respect
Bakhtins phenomenology of self/other relationship with its emphasis on social factors, more
increasingly seems to be related to sociology and linguistics (Holquist, 2002:43). Thus said,
Bakhtin affrms that meaning comes about in individual psyche as inner experience and in
shared social outer experience through the mediumof sign, since in both cases understanding
take place as a response to a sign with a sign
5
(Bakhtin,1973:28).
According to the above mentioned premises Bakhtin more specifcally discloses two basic
categories in his study of dialogue that is very crucial in our understanding of Thoreauvian
perspective and voices in Walden, objective psychology and inner speech. He defnes
the former in Marxism and Philosophy of Language (Voloshinov, 1973) as the psychology
with a new subject of analysis: the psyche not of individual, but of the individual as strained
by the social. The domain of objective psychology is the study of the relation of inner to
outer speech in specifc time and place. In the case of this study it is rather signifcant to
bear in mind that dialogismlays under all perceptions and is achieved through sign operation,
even in higher formof perception that is thinkinga recurrent pattern in the Walden. Human
consciousness operates through words the medium which is the most sensitive and at the
same time the most complicated refraction of governance. The reader can trace Thoreaus
stream of thought in his inner speeches as a murmuring sound meditating with his own self
and in other times as a form of manifestation loudly presented to a particular audience
(Holquist, 2002:51) in a very crucial passage in the chapter Solitude. Thoreau confrms
5
For more discussion of Saussureian sociolinguistic theories and its relation to Bakhtins theory of Dialogism refer
to chapter 3, Language and Dialogue, Dialogism.
48
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY SOCIAL SCIENCES
the whole spirit of the self/other relation in his writing and refers to his consciousness of the
presence of the imagined other within him and the actual audience outside him:
I only know myself as a human entity; the scene, so to speak, of thoughts and affections;
and am sensible of a certain doubleness by which I can stand as remote from myself as from
another. However intense my experience, I am conscious of the presence and criticism of a
part of me, which, as it were, is not a part of me, but spectator, sharing no experience, but
taking note of it, and that is no more I than it is you. When the play, it may be the tragedy,
of life is over, the spectator goes his way. It was a kind of fction, a work of the imagination
only, so far as he was concerned. This doubleness may easily make us poor neighbors and
friends sometimes [italics added] (91).
One form of language that occurs due to inability to mediate between inner speech and
social dimension of language is offcial discourse. Its beholders consider it as the utopian
language so every one is compelled to speak the same language. It does not recognize
otherness and in its most extreme form, these totalitarian discourse, abhor differences
and aims for a single, collective self, they assume no other selves rather than their own and
they consider the frst pronoun I as the normative, therefore, their monological voice is
heard in every institution. But while it was fully elaborated the self/other relation in Thoreaus
interior dialogues is evident in every formof his speech. His inner voice advocates freedom
of individual from any form of must and ought to. One is to be free, be an azad, or free
man, like the cypress
6
(53). Feel azad to reject any form of totalitarianism in socially
coded language, To act collectively is according to the spirit of our institutions (74). The
path to individual self-government begins with ones ability to cut oneself loose from dis-
tracting social forces and the illusory values they impose (Lane, 2005:291).
Conclusion: Unfinalized Alleys to Higher Life
In the context of the aforementioned issues one can detect the roots of dialogism in a social
struggle in affrming meaning, or as Holquist puts in revolution, civil war, the terror of
the purges and exile (2002:39). Thoreaus two year chosen life in exile is an example of
the alienated artist that seeks freedom of thought and speech in the society of his time. He
meditates and contemplates about different issues with his own self, his present reader and
his supper addressee in a form of debate in search of meaning. In his last chapter Conclu-
sion, Thoreau explicitly identifes the purpose of his long meditation in Walden, as Socrates
says to know thyself (Walden, 203). He explored his self to reach to a unity. As Thoreau
walks home in the forest after the rain in chapter Baker Farm, and fnd the weather cleansed
while the rainbow is over his shoulders, he hears the voice of his Good Genius addressing
him,
Go fsh and hunt far and wide day by dayfarther and widerand rest thee by many
brooks and hearth-sides without misgiving. Remember thy Creator in the days of thy
youth. Rise free from care before the dawn, and seek adventures. Let the noon fnd thee
by other lakes, and the night overtake thee everywhere at home. There are no larger
6
This image taken from one of the parables of Gulistan, or Flower Garden, by one of the eminent Persian poets,
Sheik Sadi of Shiraz, also advocates for simplicity and freedom. Cypress among all other trees is the most celebrated
by God and is called azad, since it bears no fruit in any seasons of the year, and even in the absence of continuance,
is fresh and blooming. Thoreau promotes: Fix not thy heart on that which is transitory (53).
49
FOROUGH BARANI, WAN ROSELEZAM WAN YAHYA
felds than these, no worthier games than may here be played. Grow wild according to
thy nature, like these sedges and brakes, which will never become English bay. Let the
thunder rumble; what if it threaten ruin to farmers crops? That is not its errand to thee.
Take shelter under the cloud, while they fee to carts and sheds. Let not to get a living
be thy trade, but thy sport. Enjoy the land, but own it not. Through want of enterprise
and faith men are where they are, buying and selling, and spending their lives like serfs
(138)
In his later contemplations, Thoreau, after talking about animal within ones self and ad-
vocating scrutinizing ones self to avoid the evil insidesince the evil that we do lives
after us (45), he prescribes goodness is the only involvement that never fails (145). But
meanwhile Thoreau reminds that you must have genius for charity, since there is no odor
so bad as that which arises from the goodness tainted (50). He continues by stating that
subsequently this charity can hide multitudes of sins and leads one to discover a micro-
cosm in ones own self that is a true discovery (52). Then much later in the Higher
Laws, Thoreau confrms that, I found in myself, and still fnd, an instinct toward a higher,
or, as it is named, spiritual life, as do most men, and another toward a primitive rank and
savage one, and I reverence themboth. I love the wild not less than the good (140). Thoreau
in this sense has come into terms with this level of his own self and seems to achieve his
most original part of himself [his self] and metaphorically has found the seeds of a better
life (141).
He learned by his experiment that if one advances confdently in the direction of his
dreams and endeavors the life which he had imagined, [] new universal and more liberal
laws will begin to establish themselves around and within him (214). Later he declares that
as one simplifes his life, the laws of the universe will appear less complex and solitude
will not be solitude, nor poverty poverty, nor weakness weakness (214).This idealized self
is seen as a centralized ego forming a singular unite of mastery and a pluralistic decentralized
manyness (Hermans & Kempen, 1993:34). As it is quite apparent in the case of Thoreau,
this centralized ego lives in harmony with nature and environment I found myself suddenly
neighbor to the birds; not by having imprisoned one, but having caged myself near them,
(58) while it has the other and the nature as his friend, Every little pine needle expanded
and swelled with sympathy and befriended me (89). In another register, Thoreau has pro-
duced a cohesive and harmonic equilibriuminside his self and outside with his surroundings.
Thoreau aims to share his experience as he says I do not propose to write an ode to de-
jection, but to brag as lustily as chanticleer in the morning, standing on his roost, if only to
wake my neighbors up (57). He meant to shed light on the ignored path of self-recognition,
to maintain ones self on this earth is not a hardship but a pastime, if we will live simply
and wisely (48). Every individual in his own existence is free to hold different ideologies
from that of the others to maintain a higher life. To look at Thoreaus inner speeches from
this perspective, one will fnd that the seemingly monologicality of Walden is a sheer real-
istic dialogismin which heterogeneous inner voices fnd freedomto utter their own ideologies
at different levels of self/other relation ship: self/nature, self/man and self/generalized other.
50
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY SOCIAL SCIENCES
References
Bakhtin, Mikhail. Problems of Dostoevskys Poetics. 2
nd
ed. Transl. R. W. Rotsel. Ann Arbor, MI:
Ardis, 1973.
Cavell, Stanley. The Senses of Walden. New York: Viking, 1972.
Chodat, Robert. Games of Circles: Dialogic Irony in Carlyles Sartor Resartus, Melvilles Moby
Dick, and Thoreaus Walden. Diss. McGill U. 1995.
Hermans, Hubert J.M. and Harry J.G. Kempen. Dialogical Self: Meaning as Movement. Nijmegen:
Academic Press, Inc., 1993.
Higgins, E.T. Self-discrepancy: ATheory Relating Self and Effect. Psychological Review94 (1987):
319-340.
Holquist, Michael. Dialogism: Bakhtin and His World. London: Routledge, 2002.
James, William. Principles of Psychology (Vol. 1). London: Mcmillan, 1890.
Janes, Julian. The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of The Bicameral Mind. Boston: Houghton
Miffin, 1976.
Lane, Ruth. Standing Aloof from the State: Thoreau on Self-Government. The Review of Politics
67 (Spring, 2005): 283-310.
Mancuso, J.C. and Sarbin, T.R. The Self-narrative in the Enactment of Roles. Studies in Social
Identity. T.R. Sarbin and K.E. Scheibe (Eds.). New York: Praeger Publishers, 1983: 233-53.
Mead, G. H. Mind, Self and Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1934.
Morris, Pam. The Bakhtin Reader. London: Routledge, 1994.
Rowan, J. Subpersonalities: The People Inside Us. London: Routledge, 1990.
Sarbin, T.R. (ed.) Narrative Psychology: the Storied Nature of Human Conduct. New York: Praeger
Publishers, 1986.
Schueller, Malini. Carnival Rhetoric and Extra-Vagance in Thoreaus Walden. American Literature
58.1 (Mar., 1986): 33-45.
Thomas, Owen. Ed., Walden and Civil Disobedience. New York: Norton & Company Inc., 1966.
Voloshinov, V.N. Marxism and the Philosophy of Language. New York & London: Seminar Press.
1973.
About the Authors
Forough Barani
Forough Barani obtained her Bachelor of Arts Degree in English Literature from Guilan
University in Iran in 2005. Her major felds of interest are Dialogism and Dialogical Self
in both modern and contemporary philosophy. She is also interested in the application of
other theories to literature such as psychoanalysis and linguistics. At present she is pursuing
her Master of Arts degree in English Literature in University Putra Malaysia. The topic of
her Masters thesis is The Dialogical Self in Selected American Non-fction Works.
Dr. Wan Roselezam Wan Yahya
Wan Roselezam Wan Yahya is a Senior Lecturer in English Literature at the Faculty of
Modern Languages and Communication, Universiti Putra Malaysia. She is involved in sev-
eral researches dealing with literature & culture, psychoanalysis & literature, literature in
ESL, and diasporic literature.
51
FOROUGH BARANI, WAN ROSELEZAM WAN YAHYA




EDITORS
Mary Kalantzis, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, USA.
Bill Cope, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, USA.



EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD
Patrick Baert, Cambridge University, Cambridge, UK.
Norma Burgess, Syracuse University, Syracuse, USA.
Bill Cope, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, USA.
Peter Harvey, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia.
Vangelis Intzidis, University of the Aegean, Rhodes, Greece.
Paul James, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia.
Mary Kalantzis, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, USA.
Gerassimos Kouzelis, University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
Massimo Leone, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Alexandros-Andreas Kyrtsis, University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
Jos Luis Ortega Martn, Universidad de Granada, Granada, Spain.
Bertha Ochieng, University of Bradford, Bradford, UK.
Francisco Fernandez Palomares, Universidad de Granada, Granada, Spain.
Miguel A. Pereyra, Universidad de Granada, Granada, Spain.
Constantine D. Skordoulis, University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
Chad Turnbull, ESADE Business School, Barcelona, Spain.
Chryssi Vitsilakis-Soroniatis, University of the Aegean, Rhodes, Greece.





















Please visit the Journal website at http://www.SocialSciences-Journal.com
for further information about the Journal or to subscribe.
THE UNIVERSITY PRESS JOURNALS



www.Arts-Journal.com

www.Book-Journal.com

www.Climate-Journal.com

www.ConstructedEnvironment.com

www.Design-Journal.com

www.Diversity-Journal.com

www.GlobalStudiesJournal.com

www.Humanities-Journal.com
www.OnTheImage.com

www.Learning-Journal.com

www.Management-Journal.com

www.Museum-Journal.com

www.ReligionInSociety.com

www.Science-Society.com

http://www.SocialSciences-Journal.com

www.SpacesAndFlows.com

www.SportAndSociety.com

www.Sustainability-Journal.com

www.Technology-Journal.com

www.ULJournal.com

www.Universities-Journal.com


FOR SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT
subscriptions@commongroundpublishing.com