Machiavelli and Thoreau are very
different especially when it comes to writing, what their writing about is not
so different, it is just about making your life better for you. They go about
doing this two completely different ways, at first it seems like they have
nothing similar but they do but they have different target audiences. In Civil
Disobedience its directed to those for do not agree with the government. But in
Machiavelli’s it’s directed toward those who will be at the top of the
government or who aim to be there.
Machiavelli is not the guy you go
to help you when you fall down, he would be the guy to tell you this is why you
tripped. He’s all about helping yourself before you do something that will
cause your downfall. Also Machiavelli doesn't care about the people, the
everyday people, he says most men are “ungrateful, fickle, liars and deceivers,
fearful of danger and greedy for gain,”(Mach 461). Machiavelli only cares for
his intended audience, the princes, but from what power Machiavelli says they
have then they are actually kings and only calling them princes to compliment
them, which is very possible to compensate for the snobby know it all tone he
seems to be giving off.
Where as Thoreau is not using a
snobby tone, although he is still giving of this you should be selfish vibe.
Thoreau’s intended audience is anything but the people attempting to get in
power, he’s a rebel not paying his taxes and living how he wants to live, maybe
that's admirable considering he’s though of to be ideological and well known by
many all over the world. He is noble compared to Machiavelli, in fact
Machiavelli said being noble and chasing virtue will be your downfall. Where as
Thoreau is saying to rid yourself of things that affect and do harm to your
honor and will bring shame to you, Thoreau cares less about the people’s
opinion and more about yourself. Machiavelli does not care for the people but
cares about the people’s opinion in order to maintain power.
These two writers are very different
in their beliefs of how to live your life whether it be as a free man or as a “good”
prince. How they achieve there goals are not to different in the sense of being
selfish or maybe its just caring for ones well being. Machiavelli goal is to
maintain power no matter how you must act, and Thoreau is more to maintain ones
clear conscience and being good to yourself not to others.
Hi, Megan:
ReplyDeleteYou raise some excellent points about both Thoreau and Machiavelli, and have done a solid reading of both. Watch your sentences--tighten them up a bit and fix those run-ons--and play around with organization. Could you organize this by idea and not by text?