Contradictions in Emerson

In our discussion on Thursday, we brought up the preaching quality in Emerson's writing. What's interesting to me about reading Emerson's essays is that he insists on finding one's true self through solitude and without teaching, yet his writing style almost contradicts this. He tells us in 'Self-Reliance' that "Shakespeare will never be made by the study of Shakespeare," but assumes that as readers of his writing, we will follow his advice (284). By "studying" his ideas of self-reliance among other things, he seems to imply that this will lead us to find our true selves. However, by preaching this ideology, does Emerson himself go against what he suggests? Is he himself attempting to teach when he just argued against it? Emerson places emphasis on trusting oneself and relying on intuitive reason, but I found that his insistence on his ideology makes it difficult to rely on my own thoughts.

More specifically, he spends a great deal discussing how "traveling is a fool's paradise" (283). He notes that "our minds travel when our bodies are forced to stay at home" (283). However, I personally disagree with these statements and feel that my mind expands from drawing inspiration from seeing new things. I feel that I learn new things about myself from experience rather than relying purely on self-reflection. I don't think that travel distracts from finding my "true self" but rather facilitates it. In this way, I find that Emerson's ideas are almost contradictory to how he communicates them. Basically, it seems like Emerson is trying to say "the best way to find out about yourself is to be alone with your own thoughts and only listen to them, but you should also do what I'm telling you to do." I wonder if other people felt similarly conflicted when reading Emerson's work, and if others felt that his insistent writing style detracted from his otherwise interesting ideas.