Samuel Johnson's 'The Solitude of the Country'

     I decided to read Samuel Johnson's 'The Solitude of the Country' because, as an introverted person, I believed that the essay would discuss what being in the country alone could do for a person in a positive sense. It has always been a personal sort of dream to retire to the country when I'm a little older, close enough to a town or city to be able to find things to do when I want to, but generally out in the quiet and peacefulness of a secluded nature home. Instead, when I read this essay, I was met with Johnson's reasoning for why certain people should not retire to the country, and these reasons resonated with me.

     Johnson utilizes his essay to describe the different types of people who seek out the solitude of the country, and while normally their reasons for doing so won't be fulfilled by retiring or would be a bad thing overall to do. He states that, "The greater part of the admirers of solitude, as of all other classes of mankind, have no higher or remoter view, than the present gratification of their passions" (Johnson 141). People of arrogance will seek out solitude to avoid avoid repaying others the regard which they receive themselves, but find that solitude means they are not praised and powerful as they are in company. People who avoid the failures of other and are sensitive to the grossness of the world will find they must succumb to personal reflection while in solitude, and they will scramble for other people to focus on. 

     Two major points Johnson had stuck out to me, and they pertained to those who seek solitude for learning and those who seek solitude for religious reasons. Johnson says that, "He has learned to no purpose, that is not able to teach; and he will always teach unsuccessfully, who cannot recommend his sentiments by his diction or address" (Johnson 143). I have found myself thinking in the past that if I was removed from society, I would have time to do all the thins I don't have time for now such as reading more books, writing more, teaching myself more things. Johnson argues that this learning is for no purpose if you are in complete solitude and cannot discuss with others what you have sought out to learn, and I would agree with this. He also wonders whether those students who ache for solitude wouldn't find themselves sleeping instead of learning, and in my personal case this would definitely happen.

     As for religion, Johnson believes that some who lack the ability to avoid temptation should seclude themselves to save themselves from ruin. However, he believes that of those where, "the world passes before them without influence or regard" (Johnson 144), they possess a rare gift where they are able to lead a moral example of a life without being corrupted by others. In this case, those people should surround themselves with others and not the nature, so as to be a guardian of mankind, a light, and if they withdraw to solitude then they, "desert the station which Providence assigned them" (Johnson 144). I agree heavily with his ideas on those hidden away for religious reasons, and personally having known priests and sisters who refuse to hide away to avoid all of the evils of the world but instead go out in the world to fight the evil with their good, I see them as great beacons of light in a vast darkness.

     As for the actual writing of the essay, I enjoy Johnson's style. His diction is nothing more difficult than Austen or Shakespeare, which is refreshing given he was only alive during the 1700s. His writing does employ too many commas, and I wonder if this is a reflection of the writing style of the time or just a personal choice. In either case it can make the writing very choppy, forcing the reader to pause when a pause is actual unnatural. He argues with precision and just the right amount of detail to make his points, and my one complaint about the essay is that I would like to see more on the subject. Johnson ends his essay with the talk of the religious people. However within the second paragraph he talks of people who believe, "that the assistance which we may derive from one another, is not equivalent to the evils which we may fear" (Johnson 141), but doesn't argue that point any further. I would have enjoyed reading what he had to say on such a matter, and while he does touch upon that topic in all of his arguments, I would like to see that focused on.

Overall, I recommend everyone to read this essay by Johnson. My lackadaisical summary and flimsy appraisals don't do the piece justice, and I look forward to reading more Johnson in the future.