Vocation & Books

Emerson on Vocation:

Emerson implicitly draws upon an all time favorite word among those of Messiah College namely, vocation. He writes about vocation, though never using the term, in relation to a distribution of functions. In the distribution of functions the scholar serves as the delegated intellect. Accordingly, “In the right state he is, Man Thinking. In the degenerate state, when the victim of society, he tends to become a mere thinker, or, still worse, the parrot of other men’s thinking.” I would suggest that here Emerson is writing about something that is relevant to present day. Often, the work of a scholar is looked down upon as if to suggest that scholars are those who lack any or all practical skills. This as if to say that the work of merely reading books is easy and true work demands physical labor. Though in observation such are the ideas of many who can barely stand the mental work of academia or lack the ability to even attempt scholarly work at any capacity. I have a bitter distaste for the extremes of both academic and practical work. I’m all about attempting to find a balance between the two, similar to my seeking a balance between orthodoxy and orthopraxy. Though this balance might appear to be in relation to completely different subjects, I would contend that they are really quite similar.

Emerson on Books:

“The theory of books is noble. The scholar of the first age received into him the word around; brooded thereon; gave it the new arrangement of his own mind, and uttered it again. It came into him, life; it went out from him, truth. It came him short-lived actions; it went out form him, immortal thoughts. It came to him business; it went from him, poetry. It was dead fact; now, it is quick thought. It can stand, and it can go. It now endures, it now flies, it now inspires. Precisely in proportion to the depth of mind from which it issued, so high does it soar, so long does it sing.”

Clearly, Emerson is skeptical about reading and perhaps about writing as well. Though it can be noted that essentially the writer is the one who brings meaning and life to recorded word. However, this statement makes me wonder how fact is misconstrued through the imagination of the poet writer. The writer takes from the old and creates the new, so how is the reader to sort fact from fiction? Though pity those who suggest that we should neither read nor write. Surely, that would defy learning from the past, and ultimately we would be far less advanced an all aspects of life and society. Books are something that we seldom think about in relation to any form of theory. Books as theory, the theory of books, are something we might want to consider.

Video Emerson- Check it!:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Cas9bBd3cJU