In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Counter Frictions Writing and Activism in the Work of Abbey and Thoreau s u s a n m . l u c a s  Words on a page do not accomplish anything by themselves; but words taken to heart, words carried in mind, may lead to action. — Alison Hawthorne Deming, Richard Nelson, Scott Russell Sanders, ‘‘Letter to Orion Readers’’ In American nature writing, two of the most vehement, influential voices to inspire environmental activism belong to Henry David Thoreau and Edward Abbey. Though writing a century apart and about different regions , Abbey and Thoreau openly advocate individual resistance to institutional oppression through jeremiadic rhetoric and acts of civil disobedience . Environmental groups have adopted them as ideological leaders or figureheads for their organizations and have used their words as indictments against land developers, miners, politicians, and others who would injure the environment. The images of Thoreau as hermit of Walden Pond and of Abbey as ecoranger of Arches National Monument continue to dominate their literary legacies and fuel the perceptions of Thoreau as wilderness advocate and Abbey as expert monkey wrencher. While these ‘‘green’’ portraits celebrate the importance of these men to the modern environmental movement, they also misrepresent Abbey and Thoreau as environmental leaders. For both of these writers, the site of resistance occurs primarily on the page, contrary to their glorified images as environmental crusaders in the field. My discussion examines how these portraits distort the actual physical and literary activism of Thoreau and Abbey and how these writers’ opposition emerges from the pen rather than through collective protests, petitions, laws, or acts of sabotage. 266 Writer Wendell Berry compares Abbey with Thoreau, particularly regarding their dubious roles as environmental leaders. Berry explains that ‘‘Thoreau was an environmentalist in exactly the same sense that Edward Abbey is: he was for some things that environmentalists are for. And in his own time he was just as much an embarrassment to movements, just as uncongenial to the group spirit, as Edward Abbey is. . . . As a political activist [Thoreau] was a poor excuse.’’1 Berry questions the political value of Thoreau’s reform writings and suggests that we need not take them seriously. Berry quotes several lines and leaves others out of Thoreau’s poem ‘‘Great God, I Ask for No Meaner Pelf,’’ attempting to convince us that Thoreau is too self-absorbed to be politically diplomatic. His criticism of Thoreau follows the familiar pattern of those who also criticize Abbey, choosing lines out of context and using them to undermine any of his serious statements. Thoreau’s poem actually anticipates themes he will continually revisit in his prose: namely, living according to principle, following one’s calling, and rejecting others’ expectations of him. In particular, Thoreau’s writings on slavery and John Brown are important and enlarge our view of him as a literary figure beyond his environmental writing to include his ideas on social reform. Environmentalists and ecocritics often disregard these works since they have less to do with nature and more to do with society — a position that assumes the social (human) world does not affect our perceptions of the natural world. Thoreau’s own political position is difficult to pin down, but it remains important to acknowledge that he was a man involved in his culture, not simply self-absorbed and living in solitude. Many of his literary projects overlapped with his involvement in social issues: his incarceration described in ‘‘Civil Disobedience’’ occurred while he was living at Walden Pond, and during the time he was revising proofs of Walden, he delivered one of his most caustic speeches against slavery on July 4, 1854. Berry’s criticism of Thoreau’s political activism also applies to Abbey’s environmental activism. In ‘‘Monkey Wrenching, Environmental Extremism , and the Problematical Edward Abbey,’’ Daniel Payne examines Abbey’s efficacy as an environmental polemicist, observing that while Abbey’s literary devices of paradox and ambiguity may enhance his literary work for students, scholars, and critics, they ultimately undercut the effectiveness of his environmental rhetoric. Further, Payne observes that Abbey’s combative tone and ‘‘non-liberal stances on immigration, gun control, and other social issues’’ have aroused antagonism from the public and criticism from the environmental movement.2 In ‘‘A Writer’s Writing and Activism in Abbey and Thoreau 267 Credo,’’ Abbey explains that a writer should be political and ‘‘speak the truth — especially unpopular truth . . . truth that offends.’’3 Moreover, he says the role of the writer in a free...

Share