Emerson has strong opinions about the nature of giving and receiving. According to him, gifts should be given as a piece of the giver, and they should not feel complete gratitude, because for another's gain, they must feel a loss. When a gift is given in necessity, it is easy. The only gifts that should be given, are ones that are a piece, or a representation of yourself. "Therefore the poet brings his poem; the shepherd, his lamb; the farmer, corn; the miner, a gem; the sailor, coral and shells; the painter, his picture; the girl, a handkerchief of her own sewing."
In Emerson's eyes, the act of receiving a gift, is itself a major challenge. He states that you should not show too much joy when receiving gifts, because the giver may conclude that you "love his commodity, and not him." He adds social commentary about giving something of necessity to the poor. Emerson believes that the act of charity to the less fortunate, is selfish when the giver receives more gratitude than the receiver. The most striking modern example is that Emerson believes "our tokens of compliment and love are for the most part barbarous. Rings and other jewels are not gifts, but apologies for gifts." Clearly he believes that the materialistic wants and needs of society, are not simply a gift, but rather the replacement, or apology that you have nothing better to give.
The final idea that Emerson states, is the innate quality that the nature of humans is to condemn society, especially if it does not provide that which we desire. He is supporting the idea that people give to others to make themselves feel good, and that gifts are only sincere if the giver is losing something for another's gain.
3 comments:
Sarah- I really like the way you summed up Emerson and his gift giving rules. You did a great job taking his intricate detail and putting it into your own words. The rules of Emerson, and gift giving were very confusing to me. If you read my blog, my thoughts are all over the place. But something i picked up on when reading your blog, was the fact that we aren't really supposed to show emotion when receiving gifts, which is confusing. I know he says that, but I'm still trying to figure out what he means because I would feel bad not showing any emotion if i were opening a gift. I wish that he gave more specific ideas about how to receive gifts, because it is nearly impossible, as well as rude to show no emotion in my opinion.
Another point that you touched on that I enjoyed, was Emerson's point of giving gifts that are necessary, and how that makes things easier.I find this aspect of his essay to be totally true. It is much easier, and more practical to give someone what they need. The only problem with this is that what if we can't provide what they need? Then that interferes with Emerson's idea that we need to produce the gift ourselves. This was one of the main parts of his essay I was unsure about.
In conclusion, I think you did a magnificent job touching on all of Emerson's main points in his Gifts essay. I especially liked how you pulled in quotes to help specify your points, and it seems like you had really good understanding of what you read! -Liza :)
Sarah - The best line in your post was, "The act of charity to the less fortunate, is selfish when the giver recieves more gratitude than the reciever. I think this statement summarizes what Emerson is trying to say through his work. When an act of charity gives more reward to the gift giver, it is probably not really an act of charity because the gift giver is not losing anything. According to Emerson, the gift giver is supposed to lose part of himself to give the gift. Also, the act of gift-giving is supposed to draw attention to the reciever so that they can be recognized for some accomplishment or act of kindness.
Now, to clarify, I want everyone to know that the giver deserves credit for taking the time and resources to give the gift, but he/she should not recieve more praise than the reciever of the gifts.
Sarah, your blog says according to Emerson, "the act of recieving a gift is itself a major challenge." I want to argue that under Emerson's definition, gift giving is harder. This is because one cannot just pick something off a shelf at a store under Emerson's definition. They have to think about something that really connects the two people and is symbolic of their relationship and figure out how to do it. Most of the time, things this personal do not come on shelves.
Emerson has a very unique definition of gifts and the acts of gift giving and gift recieving
Sarah, i really liked reading this. You did a really good job of summarizing what Emerson was trying to get across. My blog is nowhere near as direct as yours, I went waaaay off topic. I agree with you much more than I agree with the opinions of some of the other people who's blogs I commented on. Thanks for sharing!
Post a Comment