Emerson essay

Here's my Emerson essay. Prompt:  use Frederic Edwin Church's painting Heart of the Andes as a jumping board for Emerson's thoughts on nature in his essay "Nature" or other essays. I received a B+ on the paper, since my paper was under the page limit.

My abstract: Both Emerson and Church show that nature is but an illusion to an average man.  An educated man, one that is skilled in lessening Reason to see Beauty, will see images of nature whether in nature or on canvas, and in his own mind will translate these sights into the divinity that nature encapsulates.    

My essay:

Finding Grace

Emerson’s man may not find truth in nature, but with open eyes he may see the landscape of God’s grace.  Emerson’s essay “Nature” is littered with references to inaccessible points of beauty—inaccessible not for lack of availability, but impermeable due to an educated man’s overly complex Reason.  A single innocent child, one without developed reason in his head, has a better chance at seeing the grace in nature than a mob of men. However, Emerson argues that a truly educated man with an open mind to may find nature’s “kindred impression”.   A truly educated man will translate the images of beauty and find not their secrets, but their divine grace.

Emerson is dismissive of most men, for, “To speak truly, few adult persons can see nature (5).”  On the contrary, Federic Edwin Church ushered in thousands of these adult persons to see his version of nature.   The Heart of the Andes was the most widely seen painting in Church’s era, and it’s no accident that his painting depicts a far away land while it was stationed squarely in America.  Church offers up a hyperreal depiction of nature, one that audiences could view in a dark room and be transported in their minds to a land where fairy tales might reside.  His vision of nature is a nature that few of the viewers would ever attempt to travel in person to see, though of course, his depiction of nature is not of a real singular place.  This exhibit of nature was a commodity; a chance to travel without leaving one’s neighborhood.  Emerson might have believe that these thousands of customers were not truly experiencing nature for what nature can be for, “Nature never [becomes] a toy to a wise spirit (5)”.   An Emersonian educated viewer of The Heart of The Andes would not see it as a representation of land and trees and lakes, but would experience the painting with a sort of reverence of nature’s divine spirit.

Eat Pray Love movie review

When you’re watching a movie and find yourself realizing that you enjoy the ravioli’s personality better than the lead actor’s, you know you have a problem. 

Julia Roberts does all she can to glow and smile, and crunch up her forehead in desperation when called for, but she can’t save this movie from it self-indulgence.

The story of Elizabeth (Liz) Gilbert has been talked about in book clubs since 2004’s Eat Pray Love first hit the best-seller’s list.  In the book, Liz comes across as a humbled friend with a self-deprecating wit and real passion for travel.  In the movie, Liz is a fun but utterly spoiled brat enjoying a nice vacation.

The movie opens with a gorgeous shot of Roberts pedaling through the lush scenery of Bali.  Cut to New York a few years earlier and a more drab, but no less fabulous Roberts enjoying the middle-rich life of a published travel writer on her second novel, a beautiful husband, funny and successful friends, not to mention a trendy apartment.

So…what is her plight exactly?  She has everything but feels trapped.  This theme has been on the big screen lately with “chronically dissatisfied” Cristina from Vicky Cristina Barcelona (Scarlet Johansson), and desperately unhappy with the American dream April Wheeler from Revolutionary Road (Kate Winslet).  So why did Johansson and Winselt do so much better in the same topic?

Much of the movie’s faults begin in the first opening minutes.  We never truly understand what’s eating Gilbert, Liz.  She suggests that since she “was fifteen I was either in a relationship with a man or breaking up with one.  I haven’t had two weeks to deal with myself.”  So why does she fall into a steamy relationship with young actor (James Franco) about 15 minutes into the movie?  It’s a mid-life crisis calling itself a journey. 

Look, I don’t want to rain on a pretty girl’s parade, but if I’m watching a movie about a person running away from something so profound she needs to leave the country for a year I’d like to at least understand why she’s running.

However, I am glad that she ran to Italy first.  The rich Italian food and the splendor of the ancient city are shot with such passion it’s nearly pornographic.  In Italy, Liz finds friends, and wine, and quiet solitude of all things beautiful.  Roberts is never as warmly magnetic as she is while setting a crisp asparagus on her plate in this city of fairy tales.  We wish we could join her.  Then again, if we were there she’d probably ignore us.  Much happens in the lives of her friends in Italy but Liz is never shown being a part of it.  She is the center of her own universe.

On friends cheating

Unfortunately, I’ve been waiting for that inevitable time when someone in my life cheating on their partner.  I wasn’t sure exactly how I would react, and now that’s it’s here I have some thoughts.

The thing is, I’m highly aware that we are biological creatures aiming to be rational ones.  Our impulses are highly animalistic—we want cry aloud in public if we stub our toe, want to physical harm people when we’re angry, we want to have sex with an attractive people who gives us attention, we want to run away when we are embarrassed, ect.  We want these things, but we are rational people, and we try our hardest to say no.  We say no to showing weakness in public, no to violence, no to cheating, and no to fleeing.  At least we try not to be overly biological.  Because being rational, and kind, and respectful is what our humanity is made of, and how we maintain relationships in this society structure.

Could I lie?  Steal? Cheat? Hurt? And not give a fuck?  Oh yes, I do have that capacity, and so do you.  But if I did these things, I could not belong in this social ethical environment, for I have too much value on love, too much value in trust, and an overcompensated value on personal respect.  Ethics is a code of behavior, which has both rewards and consequences.  Morality is personal ethics code of how we interpret right from wrong. 

Let me tie this together with friends cheating: I am a moral person so if I were to cheat I would have the remorse of hurting the person I’m dating plus those who respect me as an honorable person (including my own self-respect), furthermore, I am an ethical person and if I were to cheat I would lose the societal rewards of love, respect, and compassion because society cannot risk everyone cheating, for it would lead to a lack of trust within the trade-based society.  How could business, love, and commerce function if every time a trade based on faith of trust was broken?  There would be no trust for further trade to happen.  No structure, no society, no protection and kindness.  Of course, if society was based on a hook-up based structure things would be less stringent and cheating would not be a problem since there were no ties to break to begin with.  Society would be perhaps more spontaneous, but less stable, and in my opinion, less loving.  I couldn’t live in a world without both romantic and friendly love.  In conclusion of this paragraph, society cannot afford cheaters and on a personal basis I could never be a cheater.