Emerson's Theories About Innovation and Social Progress

In “The Divinity School Address,” Emerson rejects imitation in his firm statement, “let me admonish you, first of all, to go alone; to refuse the good models” (266). Furthermore, he writes that “imitation cannot go above the model” and that “the imitator dooms himself to hopeless mediocrity” (266). These strong statements again highlight contradictions in Emerson’s writing; he rejects imitation but is simultaneously writing to encourage others to imitate his way of life and his unique and superior relationship to nature. Beyond the hypocrisy in Emerson’s writing, his staunch disapproval of drawing from past inventions makes me wonder how Emerson believes society can progress without consideration of and reference to the past.

Scientific and technological development and even new and emerging writing styles build off of and simultaneously make reference to past creations. The laptop, for example, is in many ways just a portable computer, but does that mean its inventor should be dismissed as a mediocre imitator? While Emerson seems to suggest that it is impossible to make a better version of something already envisioned, I perceive technological innovation as continuously evolving from and improving knowledge and insights previously discovered by others.

Emerson’s theory about imitation also makes me wonder what he would have said about James Fenimore Cooper’s writing. As we discussed in class, Cooper imitated Sir Walter Scott’s writing style and employed a literary device—the use of disguise—common in Shakespeare’s writing; however, Cooper’s The Last of the Mohicans is also unique in that it is a distinctly American story about European and Native American relations and the “taming” of new land. Cooper complicates Emerson’s strict notion of “copying” by drawing from previous writing styles and simultaneously producing new and innovative content.

Emerson’s statements in “The Divinity School Address” are also complicated by his theory on social progress expressed in “Self Reliance.” Emerson writes that “no man improves” and that “society never advances” but instead “recedes as fast on one side as it gains on the other” (284). These radical statements answer my previous question about Emerson’s beliefs about social progress, but if society never advances, what is the point of introducing new innovations? What are they doing to improve or contribute to society?