Showing posts with label civil disobedience. Show all posts
Showing posts with label civil disobedience. Show all posts

21/06/2023

Dreaming of a New Iran : Diaries From Three Young Women

 





The uprising began in September, after a 22-year-old Kurdish woman, 
Mahsa Amini, died in the custody of Iran’s morality police.  She had been arrested on accusations of violating mandatory-hijab rules, and a gruesome photo and video of her unconscious in a hospital bed went viral, sparking outrage and grief. The protest movement — known as Woman, Life, Freedom — quickly morphed into broader demands for an end to the Islamic Republic’s rule.
 
Marches, led by women, spread across the country from September to January, and the government has cracked down violently. Authorities have also dismantled the morality police and are trying new methods to enforce the dress code.
 
To this day, acts of civil disobedience continue. Women and girls appear in public without the hijab. At night, Iranians chant antigovernment slogans from their rooftops.
 
To better understand how daily life in Iran has transformed, we asked three young women to keep a diary for five weeks. Their entries have been edited for length and clarity, and their last names are being withheld for their safety. Like many Iranians, they are trying to figure out what their lives should look like as they continue to fight for, and dream of, change.
 
 
March 4
 
Ghazal, a 20-year-old college student living in Tehran:
 
It was my friend’s birthday today. When I got into the car service, the driver asked me if I had anything to cover my hair with. I replied, sternly, “No, I don’t.” He then explained that drivers can be fined for passengers without proper hijab. I later thought about what he said — if I wore a hijab in his car, I would be surrendering. If I didn’t, the poor driver could be penalized. I was really confused. But I realized that looking out for one another is the most important thing, so I’ve decided to cover my hair in taxis.
 
March 11

Parnian, a 23-year-old recent college graduate who lives in Tehran and works multiple jobs:
 
There were at least 40 of us in the train’s women-only carriage. I could feel the bag of the passenger behind me pressing against my waist. It was hot, and there was no oxygen. Once the train door closed, people started talking. I couldn’t see her, but a woman was selling well-priced cosmetics inside the carriage. One passenger passed her credit card, from hand to hand, to the woman, who then took the card and shouted, “What’s your PIN code?”
 
The passenger’s reply came from another side, “2-5-4-2.” Several people repeated the code until it finally reached the seller’s ear. She then sent the card and a new mascara back to the other end of the carriage. A tube of mascara was sold with the help of several people, and the train hadn’t even moved yet.
 
March 12
 
Kimia, a 23-year-old graduate student who lives in Kurdistan Province:

I thought I would have fun after my master’s entrance exam, but now there is nothing to do. I used to enjoy going to cafes once a week, but it has become so expensive. Now I can afford to go only once or twice a month. I can’t even download a movie or check social media properly with our stupid slow internet. Pretty much every application you want to use in Iran is blocked, and to get around the restrictions, we use virtual private networks. It takes hours. I have to use multiple VPNs, and they disconnect several times. You have to keep trying and trying.
 
Ghazal: 
 
 Something very strange and interesting happened at the hair salon today. A woman came in with head scarves and shawls for sale. One of the salon’s stylists jokingly told her that people don’t buy scarves anymore, that it is no longer profitable and that she should change her job. In response, the woman said that was not true and that certain people are trying to promote secularism and prostitution in society. We were all stunned, but nobody said anything to her.
 
Parnian :
 
 I feel good for no reason. Ever since the start of the Woman, Life, Freedom revolution, there has been so much pain that feeling good seems bizarre. Yet I feel great today. I wonder why. The lightness is weird.
 
One of the most disturbing manifestations of the government’s crackdown has been the executions of protesters. For months, the Revolutionary Court has staged trials and charged some protesters with “moharebe,” or waging war against God. At least a dozen have been sentenced to death by hanging. Protests have become sporadic and limited to occasions when the public has an excuse to congregate, such as at funerals or outside prisons to demand a halt to the imminent executions.
 
March 13
 
Parnian :
 
 As I stepped outside today onto one of Tehran’s busiest streets, I was taken aback. In 10 years of living in this neighborhood, I have never seen it as dim and quiet. All the shops around the metro station were closed. There were police officers and special forces everywhere, waving their batons in the air, ushering people to move along.
 
One of the police officers had a hilarious expression. He tried to look serious but seemed incredibly idiotic. Seeing that face, the stern gaze and the amount of stupidity nestled in that uniform made me want to laugh. As I kept walking, my chest suddenly started burning, and I felt short of breath. I must have walked into tear gas.
 
One officer told a teenage girl to move and stand somewhere else. The young girl looked at him coldly and said, “Are we bothering you?” Another guy came and said to the policeman, “Reza, let it go,” and took him away. I looked at the young girl and blew her a kiss. She blew a kiss back.
 
March 13
 
Kimia:
 
The execution of Mohammad Mehdi Karami still breaks my heart. He was a protester and national karate champion. We were around the same age, and I also have a black belt in karate. I feel very close to him, more than any of the other protesters who have been killed. I look at his picture often and try to imagine his life as a young athlete. What motivated him to go out and protest? Did he just want a better life?
 
There was a call to protest today, tomorrow and the day after tomorrow. There were riots in several cities tonight, but the big day is tomorrow. Let’s see how it goes.
 
At night I heard people chanting “death to the dictator” and the constant sound of explosions. It went on until 1 a.m. I couldn’t tell if it was gunfire or firecrackers. Boom, boom, boom.
 
Ghazal:
 
My friend and I have found an exciting cafe on Enghelab Street that screens foreign films and shows. I watch this show, “The Last of Us,” which I love. This week it was part of the cafe’s program, so my friend and I made a reservation. You know, we don’t get to watch foreign films and TV shows together with friends, grab a bite and enjoy ourselves. And that cafe made it possible for us.
 
Most of the customers were our age, and we shared the same vibe. It felt great to watch the show and react to different scenes collectively. Nobody told us to keep it down. To be honest, it felt like freedom.
 
March 14
 
Kimia :
 
My friend’s brother was arrested during the protests in a city in Kurdistan and has been imprisoned for several months. This morning, I learned that he tried to kill himself. My friend told me that he had been fed up with living in limbo — he had not been put on trial or formally charged.
 
I’m much less hopeful than I was at the beginning of this movement. The Islamic Republic will be gone one day, but I’m not sure it’ll happen this time around. We have seen this cycle before: We get our hopes up and think that this time will be different, that change is coming, that we will win, and then nothing happens. I was really convinced that the regime would be toppled this time, but when I saw the brutal crackdowns and all the killings, I realized this wasn’t it, either.
 
Parnian : 
 
On Tuesdays and Wednesdays, I work from home. Today one of my colleagues called, sounding nervous. “Are you OK?” she asked. That morning, the metro on the Tajrish line, my main daily commute, had stopped at a station for a while because of a technical issue, and then one of the carriages caught fire. Official reports did not mention injuries. I thanked my colleague for letting me know and hung up. I thought about the people on the train. How scared were they? Did they scream a lot?
 
For years we have grown accustomed to the fact that anyone, anywhere can be unsafe. We have gotten used to shrinking our comfort zones. Back when the morality police were active, almost every time we met with friends, one of the boys went ahead, scoped out the situation and told us which way to go in order to avoid the forces. Now, in the absence of the morality police, there is more freedom, but also more anxiety. People meet near their workplaces, homes or schools. Nobody talks about it, but we’re afraid to explore new areas.
 
Iran’s economy has steadily declined over the past few years as a result of U.S. economic sanctions and the government’s systematic corruption and mismanagement. Inflation is skyrocketing, and the Iranian currency has devalued against the American dollar by 20 to 30 percent since the beginning of this year. Middle-class and working-class families are buying less, eliminating essentials like meat, chicken and dairy from their grocery lists. Many people work two or three jobs to get by. It has become common for employees — even those working for the government, like teachers and factory workers — to go several months without a paycheck.
 
March 15
 
Kimia :
 
We went to the market to do some shopping for Nowruz, the Persian New Year. Pastry shops were packed. Boy, how expensive everything is! My mom wanted to buy pistachios and roasted nuts, but it cost over 1.2 million tomans, more than three times the price they were last year. We ended up buying a small box of sugar candies from a cheaper place.
 
 
Parnian :
 
The company I work for has been in financial trouble for over eight months and cannot pay the employees’ salaries. Several employees at my work resigned and left. The ones who stayed, including me, are mostly young and single. Some of my colleagues are spending their savings; others are borrowing money. I have no intention of dipping into my savings, and I’m too proud to borrow, so I have taken translation jobs on the side, working late after my regular hours.
 
Today I was having my third cup of coffee, struggling with a headache and insomnia, when the door opened. In came my colleague, looking upset. “Look, Parnian, my girlfriend is a modern person and doesn’t think providing money is a man’s duty, but I’m just tired,” he told me. “She has been paying for everything for several months, and her support makes me feel worse. The harder I try, the poorer I become.” After staring at the kitchen floor for a few seconds, he said, “I feel useless.”
I hugged him and whispered in his ear: “You will get through this. Don’t forget that our only weapon is our thick skin. Be a rhino!”
 
 
Ghazal :
 
 A few friends and I somehow ended up talking about the protests and how the Mahsa movement has died down. But I don’t believe the movement has ended.
 
This movement is not just about people coming to the streets, chanting, fighting and getting killed. I am witnessing so many other changes. Now we can eat in restaurants without wearing the hijab, and not a single person says, “Madam, put your hijab back on.” The university security no longer pesters students about their attire. People don’t defend this regime in classes anymore. It doesn’t matter that we don’t protest in the streets. People are kinder and look out for one another every day. If a guard or a security person bothers a student, everyone will come to the rescue. I think it’s beautiful.
 
 
March 16
 
Kimia :
 
We haven’t turned on state television in years. The news is all lies, and it has no entertainment. So my mom and I stay up every Thursday and Friday to watch “The Voice Persia,” a singing-competition show broadcast from MBC Persia, one of the satellite channels. We guess which songs will be performed and which contestants will get ahead. Our favorite is a guy from Mashhad, a city in northeast Iran, who now lives in Turkey and sings alternative rock. I hope he wins.
 
Parnian :
 
I felt like running today. I went to the park near my house for some fresh spring air. Almost two years ago, they opened a women-only park in front of the old mixed one. I do not like gender segregation, but I like the new park more than the mixed one
 
Last autumn, fewer women were without a head scarf, and they were wearing sports caps to cover their hair instead. Most days, I either endured the heavy gaze of a hijabi woman or I was directly scolded, told to have shame and cover my hair. But today, many women didn’t have a hijab, and those who did exercised alongside them in peace.
 
There was one beautiful girl with short blond hair. At the start of the uprising, women were cutting off their hair as an act of protest and a sign of mourning. Seeing her got me emotional. For years we had fantasized about the day we would take off our scarves and let the wind blow through our hair. But now that we can be unveiled, we no longer have our long hair. We cut it for that very basic freedom. Our dreams are always one step ahead of us.
 
March 18
 
Kimia :
 
I went to the market with a friend. It was very crowded, with many street vendors selling items for Nowruz. A musician was playing an instrument, and shops were playing loud music, too. As I was waiting to cross the street, I started dancing subtly to the rhythm of the music. A police officer nodded at me and laughed. There were several girls and women, including myself, without head scarves. I finally got into the Nowruz mood.
 
Parnian :
 
I was checking the news on Twitter when I came across a picture of a man dressed in brown. The tweet said that the families of prisoners on death row have gathered outside the Urmia Central Prison. Mohayeddin Ebrahimi, a political prisoner, would be executed tomorrow with the morning call to prayer. “Let’s be the voice of our countrymen,” the tweet read.
 
Executions have become an all-consuming issue; people follow the cases closely, and when they hear that a protester will be executed at dawn, they rush to the prison and stand outside the walls all night.
 
I was about to retweet it so that others, too, could become the voice of Mohayeddin, when I saw the date of the tweet. It was exactly one day old. That meant they had probably hanged Mohayeddin.
I closed the Twitter app, disconnected my VPN, locked the phone screen and stared at the darkness in my room.
 
The government has struggled with how to respond to the most visible and enduring result of the uprising: women refusing to wear a hijab. After abolishing the morality police in December, officials said they would find alternative methods for enforcing the hijab law. Some of the new policies would include using surveillance cameras and facial recognition to identify women, which could result in fines or the denial of civic services. Many women, for their part, continue to disobey the law.
 
 
March 19
 
Kimia :
 
Today we went to the bank with my father. I was waiting for my turn when I heard someone behind me say, “Madam, put your scarf on.” Turning around, I saw only the shadow of a veiled woman pass by. She came back a few minutes later and repeated the same thing. Again, I ignored her. A while later, the bank’s deputy manager came and asked me apologetically to wear my hijab. He said that they were told to tell clients to comply and apologized once more. So I said OK and wore it.
 
Then, at another stand at the bank, my shawl slipped down. In came the manager again, asking me to fix my hijab. At that moment, I saw the veiled woman sneak out of the bank. I was so pissed off.
The branch manager of the bank told my dad that the veiled women were with the government. It turns out that they go to banks, warning them not to serve hijabless women or assume the consequences. I saw the woman again out on the street, telling another girl to fix her hijab.
 
 
March 21
 
Parnian :
 
Until recently, I wasn’t big on praying. I considered prayer an insult to my intelligence. But things have changed. We have been in an extraordinary situation, bearable only with divine help and a lot of patience. Tonight I closed my eyes and prayed from the bottom of my heart: “Dear God, spare families from the pain of losing a child.” Then I broke into tears: “Let us be a little happy. … Give us a little bit of happiness. … Just a little bit. …”
 
 
Kimia :
 
Today I was talking to my family about how much people check you out in Iran and how much time you spend thinking about what to wear. It feels like you’re under constant surveillance. But I’ve noticed a change in attitude among men. Before this movement, if I went out with my red hair showing or wearing a cool outfit, some men would follow or harass me. Cars would slow down and honk their horns. Now we go out without hijab, we wear what we want and men don’t say anything. They nod in approval. They smile.
 
 
March 23
 
Ghazal :
 
I saw a beautiful graffiti message on my way to a stationery store today that said, “Move on but don’t forget,” with a Mahsa Amini hashtag underneath. In order to succeed, we have to keep our spirits up as much as possible. We must not stop living or lose hope. We shouldn’t feel guilty for being happy. The government’s sole aim is to take our joy away, and we can’t allow that.
 
 
March 25
 
Parnian :
 
We came up with a new rule at home: No daily news during Nowruz. You could call it something like compassion-fatigue syndrome. The volume of bad news is numbing.
 
 
March 28
 
Ghazal :
 
On a group chat today, my friends and I discussed our summer attire; the head scarf is, of course, out, but the long manteau or coat we must wear is also hijab. We brainstormed about its replacement. One said we could wear long T-shirts. Another said, No, that’s not my style; I prefer long dress shirts. It felt great to know that months after this movement started, people are not backing down.
 
March 29
 
Kimia :
 
I’m in Turkey on holiday to see friends and relatives, and I’m enjoying myself. I wear whatever I want, not worried about getting arrested. People can get together here without being bothered by anyone. And there are so many fun places to go.
 
The streets are in good shape. The traffic lights work properly. Shops have a wide variety of items, and you can easily find what you are looking for. Twitter, YouTube, Instagram open easily here. God knows what we go through to open them in Iran. The trains are fast, comfortable, clean and on time. All this is happening only a few kilometers from Iran.
 
It’s a difficult decision, and I don’t like it, but I may have to leave Iran.
 
 
March 31
 
Parnian :
 
We were in a taxi on the way to the airport after spending some time in Kurdistan. The driver was a warm and chatty man, so we took advantage and asked him about Kurdish dances. “A friend of mine got married a few months ago, but they didn’t celebrate with music and dance out of respect for the victims of the Woman, Life, Freedom movement,” I told him.
 
He asked if we knew how to do Kurdish dances. We all shook our heads, so he pulled over, played a Kurdish song and told us to get out of the car. “Don’t be shy,” he said. “The road is empty. No one will see you.”
 
We stood in a line, and he showed us how to move our hands and feet to the rhythm of the music. We did our best. After we got back in the car, he said: “Men and women are the same for us. We are all one.” His tone was serious. “We stand in a line, one man and one woman, and hold each other’s hands. We are not men or women. We are brothers and sisters.”
 
April 1
 
Parnian :
 
There’s a funny old story I read in elementary school. I don’t remember the details; I only remember that it was about a dry, barren desert, once a beautiful and glamorous city, whose people got so involved in their daily lives that they gradually stopped noticing their surroundings. Ultimately, beauty disappears when no one is left looking for it. But the truth was, it did exist. Invisibility does not mean absence.
 
April 4
 
Parnian :
 
We were stopped at one of the busiest metro stations, and a lady dressed in a work uniform was leaning against the train’s wall, frowning at every passenger who got on. The carriage was packed. She was quietly checking her phone when a beautiful young girl with curly blond hair got on, covering half of the woman’s face with her hair.
 
The lady politely asked the young girl, “My dear, can you put your scarf on?”
 
The young girl blurted loudly: “It’s because of people like you that we live this way. When are you going to learn to mind your own business? Do we have no other problems? Do I tell you what to wear?”
 
The woman listened to her calmly, turned back to her phone and said: “As you like. You are very close to me. Your hair is in my nose.” People started laughing.
 
April 7
 
Kimia:
 
On my way to the airport to go back to Iran, I wore a shawl around my neck so I wouldn’t have to look for it in my backpack when I arrived. Once I put the damn thing around my neck, my anxiety returned. I was still in Turkey, yet the stress crept back into my body.
 
April 8
 
Parnian:
 
A Twitter friend posted something interesting. Until four or five years ago, he wrote, he never missed a single prayer, but now every time he hears the call to prayer, he starts cursing. Many people around me are turning away from Islam. Some religious families have stopped practicing and even asked the women in their families to take off their hijabs. What will happen to those who no longer pray and are irritated by the call to prayer? Or those who even make fun of religion? How are they going to feel once their anger has subsided? What will happen when people are no longer humiliated and threatened in the name of Islam? When religion is merely a matter of the heart?
 
Since November, hundreds of schools across Iran have reported mysterious incidents of poisoning with toxic gas. The attacks have mainly targeted girls, some of whom have been hospitalized with respiratory and neurological symptoms. After not responding to the crisis for months, the government said in March that it had arrested more than 100 people. It still remains unclear who was behind the attacks and what motivated them. Education for girls has never been contested by the Islamic Republic, and women constitute more than 50 percent of university students and about 18 percent of the work force. Health officials have said that some of the attacks involved toxins, but they have also blamed stress, claiming that a majority of the cases were a result of psychogenic illness.
 
April 11
 
Parnian:
 
My colleague sent me a photo of mothers sitting outside a school, guarding the children against possible poisonings. After the student demonstrations and school gassings, many urged people not to send their kids to school. They argued that nothing would happen if the children didn’t attend school for one year.
 
The truth is, I didn’t learn anything worthwhile in 12 years of school and four years of university. If we ever objected to what we were learning, we were immediately sent to the principal’s office. They taught us about Aristotle and the elements of logic, but using them was considered a crime.
Reading classical novels for 12 years is more useful than going to school. What better teacher than Shakespeare or Mark Twain? They aren’t taught in Iranian schools, either.
Instead, I remember reading poems by some idiot pro-regime poet.
 
Ghazal:
 
I went to my grandmother’s house for Iftar, when Muslims break their fasts at sundown during Ramadan. She invited the whole family for a big dinner of chicken and saffron rice with barberries. My mom’s family is very religious. My grandmother and all my aunts wear a full hijab chador. My mom does not typically wear the hijab, but in front of them she covers her hair. At family gatherings, I’m the only woman without a hijab. I don’t pretend anymore. At first, my aunts would try to politely persuade me to cover my hair, but for the past few months, they don’t dare ask.
 
At the dinner, one of my mom’s distant relatives started talking about the hijab, saying that people must be free to choose their attire and that it is no one’s business what they wear. He was basically in favor of our movement. But later on, when I was talking to his wife, she said she really liked short, over-the-knee coats but couldn’t wear them because her husband wouldn’t allow it.
 
The same guy lecturing about women’s rights and freedom didn’t let his own wife dress the way she wanted. This type of person really annoys me, and unfortunately there are many of them — people who babble on about freedom without knowing its real meaning.
 
April 13
 
Parnian :
 
I woke up to the sound of two girls, a 6-year-old and a 3-year-old, gleefully riding their bikes in the backyard. The older one asked her mother for something, first begging then growing irritated. The mother patiently refused. While the older kid was grumbling, the 3-year-old was biking around happily.
 
They rented the apartment downstairs over a year ago. I have never met them in person. The mother is roughly my age, and her husband died from Covid. He was a victim of a decision made by the highest political authority: to ban the import of British and American vaccines for coronavirus, saying they would harm Iranians. The widowed young mother, patiently pampering her older daughter, whispered something in her ear. The 6-year-old girl laughed from the bottom of her heart and joined her younger sister in biking around.
 
Kimia :
 
Stepping foot back in Iran always means being confronted with bad news: They plan on enforcing the hijab law by fining women who don’t cover their hair. They won’t be giving social services to unveiled women, and they will be barred from entering universities. There is also a call for protest soon.
 
 
April 14
 
Parnian :
 
Never in my life have I been so eager for a day to come. The government has announced that as of tomorrow, women cannot appear in public without a hijab, and those who do will be dealt with brutally. The problem is that they cannot force us anymore. I can’t wait for tomorrow.
 
April 15
 
Parnian :
 
Today was just a normal day, like any other. Not only were there just as many women without the hijab, but many had deliberately let their long hair fall over their shoulders.
 
The government’s threat was a bluff, and a funny one. The number of hijabless women is increasing by the day. Boys are coming out with shorts now, too. People boycott stores that don’t offer services to unveiled women. The shawls that women used to have around their necks in case they were spotted by security forces are now in the back of wardrobes. Short shirts are replacing long coats. Skirts are replacing pants. Short pants are replacing long ones. There is more and more unity. People have the upper hand. The other side is nothing but bluffs.
 
Ghazal :
 
I saw several women on motorbikes today. Usually, men ride bikes, and women sit behind them. But this time it was the other way around.
 
 
April 16
 
Parnian :
 
I like taking buses. Watching people’s lives on the street from afar truly fascinates me: a pissed-looking teenage girl and her mother; a young boy about 17 years old selling balloons, wandering between cars, clearly exhausted; a woman taking off her head scarf and giving the middle finger to the car next to her; a female driver wiping her tears while eating behind the wheel; a male driver sitting with his back straight and both hands on the wheel; three people dressed in black with somber faces in a car with a big white bouquet on its roof.
 
April 17
 
Kimia :
 
I went out with my friends this evening and had ice cream. I had a shawl in my bag, just in case. Inside the shopping mall, we were thanked for observing the mandatory hijab on loudspeakers every few minutes. We just laughed at them.
 
April 19
 
Ghazal :
 
There is a very popular show in Iran called “The Lion Skin,” a crime drama about a father and a daughter. The father thinks his daughter has been murdered and hunts down the criminal, but then he discovers she is alive. When they see each other, they hug. We were stunned when we saw this scene, replaying it a few times. Men and women who are not related are not supposed to touch each other physically. And here was a male actor and a young female actress hugging each other.
Today was the first screening for the public, and one of the actresses attended the premiere without a hijab. Afterward, the manager of the movie theater was fired for not telling her to cover herself. They didn’t post her hijabless picture on the series’ Instagram page, but I posted it.
 
April 21
 
Parnian :
 
 While eating her salad, my friend asked, “What will Iran look like after liberation?”
“Imagine having only one job and being able to save money!” she said. “That way, we can also buy whatever we want. We should go on a nice trip.”
“In a free Iran, women will not be discriminated from management jobs,” I said. “Your mother will finally be able to become the bank director.”
“So many things will happen!” she said excitedly. “Imagine, things would actually work!”
“We are used to working multiple jobs and always being busy,” I said. “What will we do if we don’t have money issues?”
“We will find the most suitable job.”
“What do we do for the rest of the day?” I said. “We’ll get bored.”
“You’re right,” she said. “We’ll get bored. … Wow, free Iran will be something! I can’t wait to turn the page.”
 
 
 
In the weeks since the three young women chronicled their experiences, the government has engaged in diplomatic outreach to project stability. In April, the government restored ties with Saudi Arabia, mediated by China. In May, the country conducted prisoner swaps with European countries. Within Iran, crackdowns continue. Businesses have been shuttered for catering to unveiled women, including a government administrative office in northern Tehran. Women say they are heartened by the solidarity they receive from men, including shopkeepers who defy orders and give unveiled women discounts. Three more protesters have been executed, bringing the total to seven. Prices of everyday goods are still climbing, with the government’s statistics office announcing 47 percent inflation in a recent report.
For many in the country, including Ghazal, Kimia and Parnian, a desire for a better life in a new, free Iran remains.
 
 
 
May 24

Ghazal :
 
 The executions are heartbreaking. There is nothing I can do. Everyone feels the same way. We post stories on Instagram. So what? How does that help? They get executed anyway.
 
I detest the call to the morning prayer — that’s when they execute those young kids who did nothing but fight for their rights. I have begun to question Islam. I believe that our generation doesn’t truly believe in it, a religion that for so many years, in school, in the university, was imposed on us. If we are fighting them, then why should we believe in the same things they do?
 
May 27
 
Kimia :
 
I cannot fathom the executions. There is a story in the Shahnameh, a revered epic poem, about a king named Zahhak who ascends to the throne with the help of Iblis, the devil. The devil kisses him on each shoulder, out of which grow two snakes. The only way to keep Zahhak alive is to feed the snakes the brains of two young boys every day. It’s a perfect allegory to Iran’s current situation.
I have started to play sports again after a few years. And it feels great to go to the gym; at least I’m doing something worthwhile. I am also studying English to prepare for the TOEFL exam.
 
The other day, I went to a governmental office wearing a scarf, a man’s shirt and jeans. The guard at the entrance said, “I have no problem with what you are wearing, but the woman inside will bug you.” I entered, and indeed the woman told me that my coat was too short and that I should wear a chador. So I went outside and borrowed a long one from someone.
 
It feels terrible — being deprived of things because of where you were born.
 
Parnian :
 
A few days ago, I saw a new banner with something like a mirror in the center surrounded by pictures of five martyrs of the war in Syria. What was the message? See yourself in the mirror amid these men and feel shame for not having sacrificed your life for Islam? I didn’t know any of the “martyrs.” They were among the poor youths sent to fight in Syria in the name of helping the Islamic Republic gain more power and expand its territory.
 
A few teenage girls with long hair hanging over their shoulders were standing in front of the banner, taking selfies in the mirror, without the hijab. It made me laugh. I rejoiced at their beauty and courage, in their simple and harmless way of exclaiming, “I exist!” The government is not afraid of women’s hair or the length of their skirts. They are afraid of our existence.
 
This is a simple revolution: Do not mock or restrain people for their gender, orientation, nationality, religion. Don’t kill. Don’t rape. Don’t attack. Don’t threaten. We don’t want things to be perfect overnight. We simply don’t want to be invisible. We want to be ordinary people, not subjects. We want to make decisions, even mistakes. We want to exist.
 
 
 


Farnaz Fassihi is the United Nations bureau chief for The Times. She has been writing about Iran for over two decades. She was previously a senior writer for The Wall Street Journal, based in the Middle East and covering conflicts and uprisings. She is the author of a book on the Iraq war and a recipient of the Ellis Island Medal of Honor.
Fernando Norat, also known as Tropiwhat, is an illustrator from Aibonito, Puerto Rico, and a Ph.D. candidate in Caribbean history at Brown University. Most of his illustration work relates to themes of solitude and humor as resistance in the Puerto Rican context.
 
 
Dreaming of a New Iran. By  Farnaz Fassihi.  The New York Times Magazine, June 14, 2023




















12/09/2020

The Revolutionary David Thoreau

 



What most people know about Henry David Thoreau comes down to this:
 
In 1845, he retreated from civilized life for two years and two months and “lived alone, in the woods, a mile from any neighbor… on the shore of Walden Pond, in Concord, Massachusetts.” He was in his late twenties. The land was owned by his benefactor, the transcendentalist Ralph Waldo Emerson. Several years after the experiment ended, he published a version of the journals he kept during this time. The book was called Walden.
 
People might also know that he did not, in fact, spend the entire year alone and that he had some occasional help sustaining himself. His mother, for example, did his laundry.
 
“Walden” has entered the American English vocabulary as a synonym either for voluntary isolation, self-sufficiency, and harmonious co-existence with Nature, or for hypocrisy and entitlement, depending upon whom you ask, but the popular use of the word has less to do with the book than is generally assumed. Of course, it is the record of voluntary isolation and relative self-sufficiency, but Thoreau also has much to say about things that are decidedly not a part of the nineteenth-century pastoral imagination.
 
Although it is a narrative of withdrawal, Walden is better understood as a reflection on industrial progress and how an individual inhabits a society increasingly defined by its economic relations. Writing in the middle of the nineteenth century, Thoreau was observing the ever-more complex entanglements of modern life even as he tried to imagine a way out. His later, more explicitly political writings have their origins in the thinking worked out in his account of his social seclusion.
 
His answer to the question of how to live in a world that demands unacceptable moral compromises and how a citizen should resist systemic oppression was decided, in large part, by the experiment in living that is Walden. And so, exhibiting all of the virtues and all of the problems of American liberalism, Thoreau came to encapsulate their central contradiction in this desire to solve structural social and economic problems through heroic individualism and moral rigor.
 
*
 
When it became clear, back in March, that our habitual patterns of production and consumption would be severely constrained and that those of us with the means to do so would be spending a lot of time in our homes, many people started casting about for texts that might explain, or at least describe in even approximate terms, the physical, psychological, and political terrain of a quarantine. Among the myriad references to apocalypse movies and plague novels, Walden, too, began to appear in editorials and social media posts as a way to brighten the long stretch of isolation that lay ahead of us. These invocations were generally insipid, but Walden might not be as irrelevant as these self-help style citations made it seem. It certainly isn’t as sunny. Given that “Walden” is popularly reduced to the biographical conditions of its writing, it might also be noted that Thoreau may still have been in mourning when he embarked on his woodland adventure. His brother John had died, suddenly, of tetanus in 1842.
 
Thoreau understood that he was not so geographically remote. He received visitors (there is a chapter called “Visitors”) and took trips to the nearby village (there is also a chapter called “The Village”). He was, of course, interested in living off of the land and having a regular and intimate relationship with Nature. But he was equally interested in what he was leaving behind: the “fool’s life” of perpetual debt, in which men have “no time to be anything but a machine.” This other existence—this place where “a stereotyped but unconscious despair is concealed even under what are called the games and amusements”—is an indispensable, if negative, narrative and philosophical presence in the woods. Walden is not a summary rejection of quotidian reality: reminders of human society and industry do not violently intrude upon the landscape but comfortably inhabit the margins of his vision: “I have my horizon bounded by woods all to myself; a distant view of the railroad where it touches the pond on the one hand, and of the fence which skirts the woodland road on the other.”
 
The reason, perhaps, that Thoreau is not put off by the proximity of trains and farms is that he was not seeking solitude for solitude’s sake. He was attempting to extract himself from a society that he found deeply troubling. Thoreau does not begin his record of life alone with the naturalist observations that we have come to associate with him (and at which he excelled). Instead, Walden begins with trenchant critique of “progress.” Thoreau’s aversion to the rapid technological changes brought about by industrialization did not issue from a Romantic attachment to unspoiled Nature. In fact, he quite likes the sound of the trains, or is, at the very least, resigned to their permanent integration into the landscape. In the chapter on “Sounds,” he describes train whistles as well as birdcalls. “I watch,” he writes “the passage of the morning cars with the same feeling that I do the rising of the sun.”
 
Nature, for Thoreau, was never an abstract or idealized entity. It was concrete, material, specific. In its nineteenth-century manifestation, therefore, it always appears circumscribed by culture, and this seems to have been acceptable, not objectionable, to the author. What mattered was not his literal, physical distance from civilization or the purity of the landscape. What Thoreau wanted was a spiritual or philosophical distance from society—and the retreat to Walden facilitated a modicum of non-participation.
 
Generations of critics and readers have chosen to emphasize the spiritual communion with Nature described by Thoreau and, of course, this was important to him. But we would do better to shift our attention to what Thoreau was withdrawing from. In this alternate light, one senses that Nature’s value lies primarily in this contrast to the social world—that its true value to him is as a means of retreat. Read in this way, Walden is not primarily a record of the so-called “natural” world but a social commentary.
 
There are, to be sure, birdcalls as well as disquisitions on the pointlessness of telegraphs, but the beginning of Walden is taken up with an all-too-familiar, particularly modern form of discomfort that we have, a hundred and fifty years on, learned to live with but have yet to fully dispel: the knowledge that we are trapped in a social and economic system that was not of our making, that we have in no real way chosen to inhabit, and that we cannot hope to escape from. Or, put another way, a system that we often fantasize about quitting for good. This is, I suspect, the appeal of apocalypse narratives—wishes disguised as fears. It is also a more plausible or at least interesting explanation for the perennial return to Walden. The idea of our own private Walden is less a desire to be “in nature” than a desperate longing to get out of this awful place. We don’t want to live serenely by a pond rather than a city park so much as we want to stop contributing to a system that requires others suffer so that we might enjoy what we suspect are merely compensatory amusements.
 
*
 




Thoreau delivered his famous essay Resistance to Civil Government as a lyceum lecture in January of 1848. It was published roughly a year later. The title by which it is most often referred to, “Civil Disobedience,” was bestowed by Thoreau’s sister Sophia, who also oversaw the publication of a posthumous 1866 edition of his reform papers and anti-slavery writings. Given the current use of the word “civil,” the 1866 title is slightly misleading. The main argument advanced in Resistance was that a person had not only a right but also a moral obligation to flout the authority of an unjust government. This resistance may have been passive, in the sense that Thoreau did not advocate armed rebellion—though he came close to doing so—but it was not simply the nonviolent protest of our understanding. He went further than suggesting that a citizen should disobey unjust laws. The very legitimacy and authority of civil government as a whole was at issue here. Thoreau did not, he announced, recognize the United States government as fit to govern him. For, in 1848, the United States was a country where, by Thoreau’s estimate, four million people were held as slaves.
 
Resistance begins with uninspiring libertarian boilerplate; its opening passages are cantankerous and suspect in their invocation of individual moral agency. But the argument Thoreau develops becomes both more satisfying and more challenging. He was not adopting a conventional “small government” position. He differentiates himself from “those who call themselves no-government men.” What he wants, and what he wants his fellow abolitionists to demand, is “at once a better government.” It is not government in general that fails to command legitimacy but unjust government, and a government that legally sanctions slavery is rotten at its core:
 
     ‘’If one were to tell me that this was a bad government because it taxed certain foreign commodities brought to its ports, it is most probable that I should not make an ado about it, for I can do without them. All machines have their friction.’
 
Slavery, by contrast, is a machine designed wholly for the production of “friction.” This makes any strategic, limited refusal to participate impossible. Most citizens, he argued, were simply bodies in the service of this machine whose main function seemed to be the expansion of slavery. “There are thousands,” he writes, “who are in opinion opposed to slavery and to the war [in Mexico], who yet in effect do nothing to put an end to them.” In fact, most people do much worse than nothing: they actively “postpone the question of freedom to the question of free trade… They hesitate, and they regret, and sometimes they petition,” but they are too invested in the notion of reform through a legal structure that is broken and, more to the point, too deeply invested in a slave economy, to do anything about it. Living in the North or even belonging to abolitionist societies did not exonerate one:
 
     ‘’Practically speaking, the opponents to a reform in Massachusetts are not a hundred thousand politicians at the South but a hundred thousand merchants and farmers here, who are more interested in commerce and agriculture than they are in humanity and are not prepared to do justice to the slave and to Mexico cost what it may.’
 
The “the question of freedom and the question of free trade” and the abdication of freedom for the false freedom of social “progress” were fundamental and pervasive social problems that found their most reprehensible expression in support for slavery and imperial expansion.
 
This was why Walden was important. Progress required that citizens yoke themselves to an immoral economy in ever more complex ways. Progress could enlist well-meaning people in any number of unethical enterprises by the subtle blandishments of daily practices and basic comforts. Thoreau, however, does not believe that we can have our cake and eat it too. The more dependent we are on the fruits of economic progress the less likely we are to think, let alone act, against the political and moral system that such an economy has created.
 
This stakes out what would become an unpopular position—involving too much emphasis on lifestyle for the marxisant left and too little room for redemption for liberals seeking to rehabilitate capitalism. But I don’t think Thoreau’s point can be so easily dismissed. Ideology, after all, is not a system of beliefs but a set of practices. It is not politics but the daily, barely noticeable, conditions that make a certain set of beliefs about the world possible. Walden implicitly recognized this.
 
Thoreau’s more explicitly political writings inherit the insights produced at Walden; they are of a piece with them. And along with these insights, these works instantiate an irresolvable tension between Thoreau’s quasi-sociological worldview and his transcendentalist preoccupation with the individual. In 1849, he wrote in his journal that he “learned this by my experiments in the woods, of more value perhaps than all the rest—that if one will advance confidently in the direction of his dreams… he shall walk securely, perfect success will attend him.” Thoreau believed that an escape from the system was possible if only we would exercise sufficient moral and intellectual rigor.
 
*
 
So what is to be done? It is all well and good to suggest that white men of means might get their head on straight by taking a principled vacation from the snares of consumption, but placing the real burden of social change on an individual—locating the mechanism of structural reforms in individual attitudes or even individual actions—is at best problematic and at worst dangerous. The demands made of individual men by the argument in Resistance verge on absurd. This is not because Thoreau could not account for power but because of where he located it. He sincerely believed, in a manner that was transparently Christian and messianic, that purity of belief and access to higher laws would allow a man to become, in his formulation, “a majority of one.”
 
Setting aside the obvious critique of the radical independence and individualism championed by the transcendentalists—that it structurally excludes, women, African Americans, the poor, and anyone else in a subordinate position—heroism as social solution doesn’t bear much scrutiny. If the machine “requires you to be the agent of injustice,” Thoreau writes, then you must “let your life be a counter friction to stop the machine.” It is paramount “that [one doesn’t] lend [themselves] to the wrong which [they] condemn.” For anyone with a conscience, this is a familiar fantasy, but it is difficult to see how it might be fulfilled by anything short of one’s civic or physical annihilation. How else could anyone take themselves out?

Enter John Brown.
 
In 1859, the abolitionist John Brown and twenty-two followers raided a federal armory at Harpers Ferry, Virginia. This was supposed to be the first act in a general revolt against slavery across the South, but Brown and his small band were easily defeated by a contingent of US Marines. Brown was swiftly sentenced to death. Within a week of the raid, Thoreau announced that he would be giving a lecture in Brown’s defense. When Thoreau’s fellow abolitionists advised him that this was premature and ill-considered, he responded that he had not sent for advice but simply to announce that he would be speaking. In Brown’s “peculiar doctrine that a man has a perfect right to interfere by force with the slaveholder, in order to rescue the slave,” Thoreau recognized the “majority of one” that seemed lacking in polite society.
 
Thoreau should be commended for his principled position in the face of a hypocritical pacifism that refused to recognize what we might today call “structural violence”—in A Plea for Captain John Brown, Thoreau pointed out that “we preserve the so called ‘peace’ of our community by deeds of petty violence every day.” But Brown, though seen by many as “on the right side of history,” is a problematic character. The logic of his willingness to use personal violence to oppose structural violence led him to some dark places. In 1856, during the guerrilla fighting of the pre-Civil War conflict known as “Bloody Kansas,” Brown led what has become known as the Pottawatomie Massacre. Along with four of his sons, a son-in-law, and two other followers, Brown descended on a small pro-slavery settlement in Kansas and murdered and mutilated five men. And Brown’s certitude about the rightness of his actions was underwritten by a fanatical religious faith: as with the raid on Harper’s Ferry, these killings were decreed by Almighty God.
 





Though Thoreau chose to defend it, Brown’s armed insurrection was by no means the only form of resistance to slave power in the 1850s: the country saw real and effective collective action against slavery in many Northern and border states that went beyond genteel legal petitioning. In 1850, Congress had passed the Fugitive Slave Act as part of the Missouri Compromise, a law that in effect demanded that citizens and governments of non-slave states actively participate in the capture and extradition of escaped slaves. Furthermore, the act stipulated that the national treasury was responsible for the entire cost of rendition, thus implicitly enlisting all taxpayers in the project of slavery. The reaction to the Fugitive Slave Law was widespread and intense; opposition to it ranged from legal challenges to its constitutionality in state courts to forcible resistance against slave-owners and slave catchers. Well-organized, armed vigilance committees were formed by free blacks with and without the assistance of white supporters.
 
These organizations, too, thus fulfilled Thoreau’s call to defy the law and they succeeded in preventing slave catchers from operating in certain towns and even entire counties. John Brown himself contributed to the formation of a number of these committees. But unlike the raid on Harpers Ferry, the work of these committees formed a larger, organized, and far more effective movement to check the extension of slave power—without requiring any single hero or individual figurehead.
 
*
In our own, present period of relative isolation, it did seem for several weeks as though something had shaken loose. In the wake of George Floyd’s murder, the scale and scope of the nationwide uprising against racist policing made a relationship between a Walden-like social dislocation and a new political radicalism seem plausible. The partial collapse of society’s business-as-usual has surely made even the more comfortable citizens think differently about its purported progress. And this, as Thoreau surmised, has had an effect on the willingness of citizens to take principled action against an unjust government.
 
We might also see, in the calls for defunding the police and prison abolition, something similar to his idea that gradualist, piecemeal reform is inadequate. And we can certainly see, in vandalized police stations, looted luxury stores, and toppled statues, an echo of Thoreau’s disdain for mere petitioning. But his championing of John Brown, dismissed as either insane or criminal by much of polite society, suggests a tension that was present in his work and in the development of his ideas. On the one hand, it showed how a distance from the day-to-day operations of economic progress can produce a salutary radicalism. On the other, it indicates the grave limitations of a political and philosophical investment in individual heroism—the danger inherent in the voluntarism of identifying political efficacy with moral purity and deeply held convictions.
 
Belief systems and abstract commitments are, of course, indispensable to social change. But when this isolated interiority becomes the sovereign justification for political action, there are only two possible conclusions: either a quietist withdrawal for endless self-reflection or a dangerous willingness to achieve political ends through violent means.
 
The desire to confront political problems with personal integrity runs deep, but the writer of both Walden and A Plea can only take us so far: for all the self-reflection and political conviction in the world, the individual conscience doesn’t necessarily translate into the collective action and the political demands needed to challenge an unjust system.
 
The Revolutionary David Thoreau. By  R.H. Lossin . The New York Review of Books.  September 4, 2020



Sic Vita
 
(“It is but thin soil where we stand; I have felt my roots in a richer ere this. I have seen a bunch of violets in a glass vase, tied loosely with a straw, which reminded me of myself”
— A Week on the Concord and Merrimack Rivers)
 
I am a parcel of vain strivings tied
By a chance bond together,
Dangling this way and that, their links
Were made so loose and wide,
Methinks,
For milder weather.
 
Advertisement
A bunch of violets without their roots,
And sorrel intermixed,
Encircled by a wisp of straw
Once coiled about their shoots,
The law
By which I’m fixed.
 
A nosegay which Time clutched from out
Those fair Elysian fields,
With weeds and broken stems, in haste,
Doth make the rabble rout
That waste
The day he yields.
 
And here I bloom for a short hour unseen,
Drinking my juices up,
With no root in the land
To keep my branches green,
But stand
In a bare cup.
 
 
Sign up for Bookmarks: discover new books in our weekly email
 Read more
Some tender buds were left upon my stem
In mimicry of life,
But ah! the children will not know,
Till time has withered them,
The woe
With which they’re rife.
 
But now I see I was not plucked for naught,
And after in life’s vase
Of glass set while I might survive,
But by a kind hand brought
Alive
To a strange place.
 
That stock thus thinned will soon redeem its hours,
And by another year,
Such as God knows, with freer air,
More fruits and fairer flowers
Will bear,
While I droop here.
 
 
Henry David Thoreau (1817 – 1862) was an American renaissance man - writer, naturalist, flower-lover, reformer, philosopher, land surveyor. Walden remains his most famous work, the account of his two years “in the woods” at Walden Pond, a lake in Concord, Massachusetts. He was profoundly influenced by the transcendentalist thinker and poet Ralph Waldo Emerson, friend, mentor and owner of the land where he built his lakeside cabin.
 
Transcendentalism grew from English and German Romanticism, invigorating and broadening its ideals of human perfectibility. Thoreau’s poem, written in the early 1840s, reveals additional roots. The title abbreviates Sic vita est hominum – “man’s life is thus” – and refers to the eponymous poem by Henry King. King was a friend of John Donne and Ben Jonson and his graceful little praise song to flowers suggests another possible source. Thoreau’s reading clearly went back further than the celandines and daffodils of Wordsworth. He sets himself a challenge with Sic Vita, but works his way beyond what might risk being a young man’s narcissistic metaphysical pastiche, extending the “cut flowers” symbolism to an intense statement of his own truth.
 
The metaphor doesn’t arrive fully formed until the second stanza, although it’s hinted in some slightly off-key diction in the first. Persevere, and the speaker’s keenly felt dislocation finds its workable image. Theological concerns are secondary. Thoreau’s images are based on earthbound observation. The cut flowers are “arranged” in their vase with a certain aesthetic awareness, which only emphasises the artificiality imposed on them: “A bunch of violets without their roots, / And sorrel intermixed, / Encircled by a wisp of straw / Once coiled about their shoots.” The speaker’s turmoil and sense of pointless entrapment, focused by the first stanza, and poignantly returning in the fourth, suggest an uncomfortable prelude to self-discovery. Thoreau was to abandon poetry, and find less constrained forms of thought and existence. Sic Vita contains the blueprint of his development.
 
Although the note of personal pessimism returns in the last line of the poem, the ecologist has won the argument with the melancholy Romantic. He knows that the stock from which the violets were cut hasn’t been terminally damaged by the pruning, but strengthened. It’s a shift of perspective in the metaphorical narrative which sees that human interference in nature may be positive, or at least that to view it as inescapably negative would be sentimental. Scientific thinking becomes the poem’s saving grace, the practical transcendentalism that is the core of Thoreau’s genius.
 
He devoted serious thought to the definition of poetry. “No definition,” he wrote, “is adequate unless it be poetry itself. The most accurate analysis by the rarest wisdom is yet insufficient, and the poet will instantly prove it false by setting aside its requisitions. It is indeed all that we do not know. The poet does not need to see how meadows are something else than earth, grass, and water, but how they are thus much. He does not need discover that potato blows are as beautiful as violets, as the farmer thinks, but only how good potato blows are. The poem is drawn out from under the feet of the poet, his whole weight has rested on this ground. It has a logic more severe than the logician’s. You might as well think to go in pursuit of the rainbow, and embrace it on the next hill, as to embrace the whole of poetry even in thought.”

 Sic Vita has mysterious origins: it was apparently “written on a sheet of paper wrapped round a bunch of violets, tied loosely with a straw, and thrown into the window of a friend”. It was read at Thoreau’s funeral by his friend, the writer and reformer Bronson Alcott, father of the novelist Louisa May.



Poem of the week: Sic Vita by Henry David Thoreau. By Carol Rumens. The Guardian, July 6, 2020.



During most of his life Henry David Thoreau was, by conventional standards of success, a failure. He rarely left the farm town of Concord, Mass., where he was born in 1817. There he was viewed by at least some of his neighbors as a marginal figure, standoffish, politically radical, a loner, a crank. As a member of the New England literary world he cut a graceless figure and had an inauspicious professional start.

 His first book, “A Week on the Concord and the Merrimack River,” self-published in 1849, was a bust. He sold a mere fraction of its 1,000-copy press run. When the printer dumped the remainders on him, Thoreau stacked them up in his bedroom and wrote in his journal: “I now have a library of nearly nine hundred volumes, over seven hundred of which I wrote myself.”
 
His second book, “Walden; or, Life in the Woods,” based on his experience of living in a one-room cabin and in a state of rural semi-self-quarantine, found more readers. And, crucially, they were ardent ones. From the book’s first appearance in 1854 his star began to rise. And within 10 years of his death in 1862, at 44, he was famous enough to be honored with a public monument.
 
An odd monument it was: a loose pile of stones set on the site of the one-room cabin Thoreau built at Walden Pond. The pile, usually referred to as a cairn, seems to have begun as an improvisation. In the summer of 1872, the suffragist Mary Newbury Adams, a Thoreau fan, visited Concord and asked to be taken to Walden. Her guide was the utopian thinker Bronson Alcott, one of Thoreau’s oldest friends. By this point, any physical trace of Thoreau was long gone and there was nothing to signal the site’s significance. Adams wanted to change that.
 
In his diary Alcott writes: “Mrs. Adams suggests that visitors to Walden shall bring a small stone for Thoreau’s monument and she begins the pile by laying stones on the site of his hermitage.” He too added a stone that day, as did members of a local church group who happened to be picnicking nearby. Word went out and the custom spread as, over the years, more pilgrims came. (I was one of them.) The heap of stones, most harvested from the pond’s edge, is still growing (and shrinking; some people take stones away as souvenirs). Like many religious shrines, it’s organic, in perpetual flux.
 
There are many different Thoreaus to commemorate: the environmentalist, the abolitionist, the ethnologist, the globalist, the anti-imperialist, the Yankee saint who earned the devotion of Tolstoy and Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. But to me, as a visitor to Walden since childhood, the cairn means most as the marker of an event: Thoreau’s two-year-plus experiment in self-isolation. It’s a condition many of us are experiencing during the present pandemic moment. And we can learn a lot from what Thoreau created from it: constructive solitude.
 
It’s important to note that his isolation was not the sheltering-in-place kind. It was not enforced (unless you consider life-style decisions made by a driven personality and deeply principled thinker to be beyond free choice). And his apartness was far from total. He went into Concord several times a week to catch up on gossip and have dinner with his relatives. At Walden, he entertained guests and enjoyed regular chats with Irish laborers who worked on a railroad line close to the pond.
 
At the same time, social distancing came naturally to him. He was, or could be, an irritable and thin-skinned guy, someone for whom the human species was a problem. (“I do not value any view of the universe into which man and institutions of man enter very largely,” he wrote.) When he was in a misanthropic mood, six to eight feet of separation wasn’t nearly enough. Try a mile and a half, which was the approximate distance from Walden to the center of town.

But if the Walden cabin, about the size of a garden shed, was in some sense a retreat, a refuge from “the noise of my contemporaries,” it had many more positive functions: it was a studio, a laboratory, an observatory, and a watchtower. Reading “Walden” — or, better, his more lucidly written journals — as I have done these last weeks, we sense that Thoreau viewed the Walden outpost less as a defensive necessity than as a place of opportunity where he could do what he could not easily do in the everyday world: namely, concentrate, focus, which I’ve always suspected was a way for him to handle incipient anxiety and despondency.
 
For one thing, he had that first book to write — an account of a boat trip he had taken several years earlier with his older brother John. The book would be Thoreau’s first attempt at the blend of field research, philosophy and autobiography that would become his signature mode. More important, the book would be a memorial to his beloved brother whose death from tetanus at 27 — he had nicked himself while shaving — shadowed Thoreau’s life.
 
He used his semi-seclusion at Walden, which began in July 1845 and ended in September 1847, to pursue an intensive course in self-education, one that required undistracted reading. “Books must be read as deliberately and reservedly as they were written,” he wrote. The list he compiled was long, ambitious and culturally far-reaching, stretching from Classical Greece to Vedic India.
 
In a letter to a friend he wrote: “The yogi, absorbed in contemplation, contributes in his degree to creation; he breathes a divine perfume, he hears wonderful things. To some extent, and at rare intervals, even I am a yogi.” He made his time at Walden one of those intervals.
 
(Interestingly, during the present lockdown, several of my friends have returned to a practice of meditation that their pre-pandemic lives had left little time for.)
 

The education further entailed a total immersion in Nature — in plants, in seasons, in stars, in all creatures four-legged, winged and scaled. For Thoreau, Nature was a communicating consciousness, and he wanted to make himself available to it, antennas raised. Full receptivity required removal from ego-driven clamor, which was how, in his most stressed moments, he viewed human discourse.
 
Finally, he used his set-aside time at Walden to clarify his political thinking. For Thoreau, revolution began at home, one person at a time. “We must first succeed alone,” he wrote, “that we may enjoy our success together.” It was while living at Walden that he spent a night in jail for refusing to pay taxes that he saw as contributing to a warmongering, slavery-supporting government. At Walden he wrote the lecture that he would later shape into the essay known as “Civil Disobedience.”
 
Thoreau left Walden in 1847 to take a job as a caretaker in the household of his off-and-on friend Ralph Waldo Emerson, who owned the land on which Thoreau had built his cabin. His departure was both sudden and logical. “I left the woods for as good a reason as I went there. Perhaps it seemed to me that I had several more lives to live, and could not spare any more time for that one.”
 
And he did have more lives, many; he once listed some of them: “I am a Schoolmaster — a Private Tutor, a Surveyor — a Gardener, a Farmer — a Painter, I mean a House Painter, a Carpenter, a Mason, a Day-Laborer, a Pencil-Maker, a Writer, and sometimes a Poetaster.” And this makes no mention of the activist, the naturalist, the moral philosopher, the self-exile and the utopian-community-of-one — that is, the Thoreau we care most about now.
  
You might think of each stone on the Walden cairn as commemorating one of these identities or several intertwined. In his view, purposeful solitude and justice-minded community were codependent, the source of long-term social health. He knew what his view was up against: among other things, America’s antsy addiction to distraction and its led-by-the-nose, corporation-fed faith in utopian technology.
 
And the call for civil resistance — individual and collective — that issued from his Walden shelter? It is still hot-to-the-touch. Thoreau was not a pacifist. He vehemently supported the armed raid led by the abolitionist John Brown at Harpers Ferry. When Brown was hanged, Thoreau delivered a furious public speech in Concord, standing under an upside-down United States flag. Surely the Civil War, underway when he died, came as no surprise.
 
But the monument of stones at Walden is the opposite of angry, or declarative or, for that matter, monumental. It speaks of aloneness-within-solidarity — a message we need to hear these days — in a homely down-to-earth way, one that Thoreau, who scorned all pomp and eye-baiting elegance (he once described himself as a “stuttering, blundering clod/hoper”) might have approved of.
 
It’s a monument designed by no one, built by everyone. It’s assembled one piece at a time, over time, by individuals who will never meet, but who, in our devotion, form a community of souls. It’s a monument that honors the dead, but is living, changing, growing. During the present crisis that is isolating us, this monument has the potential to bring us together: It is an instructive emblem to contemplate, and a consoling one.
 
Lessons in constructive solitude from Thoreau.  By Holland Cotter. The New York Times, April 9, 2020