Anthropology Dept. Forms Eight Committees in Response to Harassment and Gender Bias Concerns
Harvard Cancels Summer 2021 Study Abroad Programming
UC Showcases Project Shedding Light on How Harvard Uses Student Data
Four Bank Robberies Strike Cambridge in Three Weeks
After a Rocky Year, Harvard Faces an Uncertain Economic Climate in 2021, Hollister Says
Mr. Copeland began his lecture last evening by dividing the consideration of his subject into three parts-first, Emerson and Carlyle as men; second, as writers; third as moralists and teachers. The two men were widely different in the circumstances of their birth, ancestry, and early life. Emerson, the well-bern and liberally-trained, descendant of a long line of New England ministers, belonged definitely to the class of gentle-folk. Carlyle, although he was a graduate of Edinburgh University, and became the chief English man of letters, was a Scottish peasant by birth, and remained in some ways a peasant to the last. Emerson's life, by temperament and by circumstances, was one of almost unbroken peace and calm. Carlyle's experience was full of storm and trouble.
Mr. Copeland then spoke at some length on the writings of the two men. He said in conclusion that, although Emerson is a great writer, his chief glory lies in the fact of his having been above all other writers of the century "the friend and aider of those who would five in the spirit." Carlyle, although he often befriends and aids seekers after the life of the spirit, enjoys his highest fame as the principle man of letters of our time.
Mr. Copeland expressly disclaimed any attempt to expound either Emerson or Carlyle with authority. He acknowledged a debt to several books and to the illuminating conversation of Professor J. B. Thayer, who, upon Arnold's comparison of Marcus Aurelius and Emerson as moralists, made the important comment that, although Marcus Aurelius gives the world morality, Emerson gives it morality kindled.
Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.