Introduction
The relationship between people and the environment is an ongoing subject of discussion. In 1968, Eric Hoffer wrote the essay “Nature and the City,” which discussed the relationship between an individual and nature. In the essay, Hoffer uses various rhetorical devices to make his point and argues that urban living is more typical for people. The purpose of this paper is to analyze Hoffer’s essay, focusing on his argumentation, rhetorical devices, and overall intention, and compare Hoffer’s views with those expressed by Chief Seattle in “Selling Our Land” and William Wordsworth in “The Tables Turned” and other poems.
Analysis of Eric Hoffer’s “Nature and the City”
Hoffer’s argumentation in “Nature and the City” primarily focuses on the idea that cities provide a natural habitat for people. He believes that urbanism has helped humans to oppose uncomfortable natural conditions by providing shelter, food, and protection. One rhetorical device Hoffer used in his essay is ethos, as he provides arguments for his statements, referring to his credibility and experience as a working person who had to leave farms to find more comfortable conditions. Thus, Hoffer tends to use repetitions of the phrase “I knew” to emphasize his subjective experience (91).
The author also applies pathos as he explains humans’ necessity to build cities, appealing to the emotion of home because nature is a hostile environment, and only cities can be real homes for humans. He uses the method of contrasting in this case, accentuating the harshness of wild nature with the safety and comfort of the city for people. Hoffer aims to dispute the idealized portrayal of nature commonly found in literature and American culture. He believes the idea of a pristine, untouched natural world is a myth, and humans have always been in conflict with nature (Hoffer 91). Hoffer argues that it is only through the development of cities that humans have been able to overcome the challenges posed by nature.
Comparison to Other Writers
While comparing Hoffer’s ideas and Chief Seattle’s “Selling Our Land” (1854), it is possible to state that they present different perspectives on the relationship between humans and nature. Seattle argues that nature and humans are interconnected and that the destruction of nature will ultimately lead to the destruction of humans. He argues that nature is a sacred entity that must be respected and protected. Unlike Hoffer, Seattle does not see nature as an enemy to be conquered but rather as a partner to be respected (1).
William Wordsworth’s poems, including “The Tables Turned,” also present a different perspective on nature. Wordsworth sees nature as a source of beauty and inspiration. He argues that too much focus on books and learning can lead to people’s disconnecting from nature. He encourages the reader to spend time in nature and let nature become one’s teacher (Wordsworth 34). Thus, in contrast to Hoffer, Wordsworth celebrates the beauty and power of nature and argues that it is a source of joy and wonder for people.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Eric Hoffer’s essay “Nature and the City” claims humans have thrived by taming nature by building cities. He believes that cities have provided safety, comfort, and progress for individuals to oppose the wildness of nature. Hoffer uses ethos and pathos as rhetorical devices to highlight the benefits of cities and the challenges of the romanticized view of nature often present in literature. As a result, Hoffer’s views differ from the traditional perspectives of Chief Seattle and William Wordsworth.
Works Cited
Hoffer, Eric. “Nature and the City.” The Los Angeles Times, 1968, p. 91.
Seattle, Chief. “Selling Our Land”. 1854. Speech.
Wordsworth, William. The Prelude, The Recluse & The Excursion. Read Books Limited, 2020.