artin Heidegger offered a different interpretation, suggesting that Emerson’s grief “demonstrates the limits of human experience in terms of the ontological gap between the subjectivity of the mourner and the objectivity of the deceased, who had seemed to be a part of himself” (O’Keefe 119). In other words, this passage illustrates Emerson’s continuing struggle to maintain a rational objectivity and put the tragedy in a realistic perspective. The use of the word caducous implies that grief is temporary, and may be shaken off in time, just as leaves fall off the trees in nature during autumn. Emerson then wrote, “I grieve that grief can teach me nothing, nor carry me one step into real nature. The Indian who was laid under a curse, that the wind should not blow on him, nor water flow to him, nor fire burn him, is a type of us all.” Here is an example of Ralph Waldo Emerson, the quintessential naturalist. Man is, in essence, nothing more than a creature of nature. In grief, there are no lessons that move him closer to living harmoniously with nature. The Indian, who continued to live in nature, believing in superstition, did not question why tragedy had befallen him, writing it off as a curse of the gods. Dissecting an issue does not necessary bring one closer to understanding. “The dearest events are summer rain, and we the Para coats that shed every drop.” Again, Emerson is reassuring both himself and his readers that faith in nature will enable man to persevere over any of life’s calamities. As long as there is a faith in the constancy of nature, grief cannot leave an indelible imprint. In other words, as long as man wears a raincoat when he goes out for a walk, he won’t get too wet. Emerson concluded his paragraph with the lines; “Nothing is left us now but death. We look to that with a grim satisfaction, saying, there at least is reality that will not...
