Walden Pond and Rum Alley

Henry David Thoreaus Walden compared and contrasted with Stephen Cranes
Maggie: A Girl of the Streets
Megan Burke
November 24, 2015
Dr. Simel, Red Group

Henry David Thoreaus Walden and Stephen Cranes Maggie: A Girl of the
Streets show contrasting themes on self-reliance and destiny, but hold similar points of
view on human hypocrisy. Walden describes Thoreaus own experiment with selfreliance and solitude. It tells the story of Thoreaus experience living at Walden Pond
while also outlining Thoreaus philosophies on life. Maggie: A Girl of the Streets tells a
story of a young immigrant girl living in a tenement in turn of the century New York.
Due to an abusive home life and crippling poverty, she becomes a prostitute before
eventually ending her own life.
Henry David Thoreau and Stephen Crane would disagree on their view of selfreliance. Thoreau claims that all people should be self reliant, while Crane shows that for
many, it is impossible. In Walden, Thoreau argues against human reliance on anything,
whether it is possessions or other humans. To show how reliant humans have become on
possessions, he writes, Humans have become the tools of their tools (33). Thoreau
believes that one should not be reliant on other people. He tells a story of a basket maker
who tries to sell baskets to a wealthy lawyer. The basket maker is shocked when the
white man refuses to buy any, thinking that when he had made the baskets he would
have done his part, and then it would be the white mans to buy them (19). Crane, on the
other hand, believes that depending on the circumstances, achieving self-reliance can be
impossible. This seems to be true for Maggie in Maggie: A Girl of the Streets. She is
abused by her mother and father at home, as shown when she drops a plate, and her

mothers eyes glittered on her child with sudden hatred (42). She meets a man named
Pete, and, [f]rom her eyes had been plucked all look of self-reliance. She leaned with a
dependent air towards her companion (73). These life circumstances turn Maggie into a
reliant and timid person, of no fault of her own. It is then impossible for her to become
fully self-reliant.
Thoreau and Crane would disagree on their views of destiny. Thoreau believes
that destiny is decided only by oneself, that one can control her destiny based on the
decisions she makes. This is demonstrated several times in Walden, where Thoreau
writes, what a man thinks of himself, that is what determines, or rather indicates, his
fate (10-11). This shows that Thoreau believes a man is fully in charge of his own fate.
Thoreau also writes, Every path but your own is the path of fate. Keep on your own
track, then (95). Thoreau implores the reader to control his or her own life, and not let it
be taken by fate. Crane, on the other hand, believes that fate and destiny play a large role
in peoples lives. He implies heavily that Maggie cannot control the inevitability of her
eventually becoming a prostitute. After Pete leaves her, Maggie has no direction in her
life, and decides to return home. There, she is ridiculed and turned out by her mother and
Jimmie, who calls her a hell of a ting (83). She then visits Pete at the bar where he
works. He rebuffs her and she asks, but where kin I go? (86). He tells her to go to hell
and she leaves, without a home or a place to go. This implies that Maggie is so beaten
down by her life that she essentially has no say in her future, and that she has to become a
prostitute to survive. Although Maggie is utterly helpless for the majority of her life, in

one of the last scenes of the story, she seizes control by taking her own life. Crane writes,
The varied sounds of life, made joyous by distance and seeming unapproachableness,
came faintly and died away to a silence (89). This shows that Maggie finally gains the
strength to be in control of her own future.
While Henry David Thoreau and Stephen Crane would contrast on their views of
self-reliance and destiny, they would agree on their views of human hypocrisy. Both
Thoreau and Crane believe that philanthropy has the opposite effect of its intention.
Thoreau writes in Walden, I never heard of a philanthropic meeting that was sincerely
proposed to do any good to me, or the like of me (62). Thoreau is saying that
philanthropy is rarely intended to do good, nay, [philanthropy] is greatly overrated, and
it is our selfishness which overrates it (63). By this Thoreau means that philanthropy is
greatly rooted in selfishness. He writes several times that most philanthropists have their
motives rooted in religion, in the desire to get into heaven. Crane agrees that
philanthropists are largely hypocritical. As Maggie walks down the road, she comes upon
a man of the church, whose eyes shone good will (86). Maggie attempts to get his
attention, but as the girl timidly accosted him, he gave a convulsive movement and
saved his respectability by a vigorous side-step (87). This emphasizes the selfishness of
some philanthropists. After Maggies abusive mother finds out about Maggies
impurity, she is horrified. She claims, When a girl is bringed up deh way I bringed
up Maggie, how kin she go teh deh devil? (75), when in reality, Maggies mother is both

verbally and physically abusive, and never sober enough to actual bring her daughter up.
This, again, exemplifies human hypocrisy.
Both Walden and Maggie: A Girl of the Streets have contrasting points of view
regarding self-reliance and destiny, but contain similar themes about human hypocrisy.
Thoreau shows in Walden that he is in strong support of self-reliance, believing it to be
necessary for all those of the human race. Crane in Maggie, on the other hand,
demonstrates that self-reliance is not always possible. Maggie could not become selfreliant due to her background dealing with abuse and heartbreak. Thoreau writes that a
man should control his own destiny, instead of trusting fate with his future. Crane
disagrees with this by showing Maggies inability to control her future. In the final scenes
of Maggie, Crane writes Maggie as finally taking control of her destiny. Both authors
agree on the topic of human hypocrisy. Thoreau writes about the hypocrisy of
philanthropy, saying that philanthropists rarely want what is best for others, instead only
concerned with themselves. He writes that many philanthropists only perform good deeds
to be respected by others and themselves. Crane also writes of the hypocrisy of
philanthropists. He tells of Maggies experience attempting to gain the help of a supposed
philanthropist, who ignores her to save his own dignity. Crane writes about Maggies
abusive mother, who is ashamed of Maggies life path, although Maggies mother has
done nothing to bring Maggie up right. Although the authors disagree regarding self-

reliance and destiny, they agree with regard to human hypocrisy, especially regarding
philanthropy.

Works Cited
Crane, Stephen. Maggie: A Girl of the Streets. Boston/New York: Bedford/St. Martin's,
1999. Print.
Thoreau, Henry David. Walden. New York: Barnes & Noble, 1854. Print.