Pond Scum (The New Yorker, published online as “The Moral Judgments of Henry David Thoreau”)

Kathryn Schulz · 12 Oct 2015

The piece opens with

Their wordsThis vision cannot survive any serious reading of “Walden.”

Kathryn Schulz did not write this page.

Every claim below was made in this piece, quoted word for word and numbered in the order the piece makes them, so you can read it there rather than take our word for it. The sentence above each quote is our reading of the claim, not their wording. Each quote was checked against a stored copy of the page at build time; where the two differ, the quote is the fact.

Our reading
The popular inspirational image of Thoreau cannot survive a serious reading of Walden

Their wordsThis vision cannot survive any serious reading of “Walden.”
Our reading
Walden is less environmental literature than a fantasy about rustic life and escaping responsibilities to other people

Their wordsBut “Walden” is less a cornerstone work of environmental literature than the original cabin porn: a fantasy about rustic life divorced from the reality of living in the woods, and, especially, a fantasy about escaping the entanglements and responsibilities of living among other people.
Our reading
Living in great fear of the slippery slope is a sign of having no sense of balance

Their wordsOnly those with no sense of balance must live in so much fear of the slippery slope.
Our reading
Following one's conscience is no safe theory of governance, because private moral compasses err and disagree

Their wordsPeople routinely perpetrate wrongs out of obedience to their conscience, even in situations when the law mandates better behavior. (Consider the Kentucky county clerk currently refusing to issue marriage licenses to gay couples.) Like public institutions, private moral compasses can err, and different ones frequently point in different directions.
Our reading
Democracy exists to settle conflicting claims of conscience by means other than decree or force

Their wordsIt is the point of democracy to adjudicate among such conflicting claims through some means other than fiat or force, but Thoreau was not interested in that process.
Our reading
Basing beliefs on personal intuition and revelation substitutes anecdote and authority for evidence and reason

Their wordsAnd that is the second problem with basing one’s beliefs on personal intuition and direct revelation: it justifies the substitution of anecdote and authority for evidence and reason.
Our reading
Rejecting every certainty but one's own is zealotry, and issuing contradictory decrees on whim is despotism

Their wordsTo reject all certainties but one’s own is the behavior of a zealot; to issue contradictory decrees based on private whim is that of a despot.

Keep reading

The other pieces are the ones whose claims are worded most like this one's. That measures language, not agreement: they may argue the opposite.