In “Civil Disobedience,” Henry David Thoreau indicates that justice will come with a price in order to be achieved. He argues, “a people, as well as an individual, must do justice, cost what it may” (3). Henry Thoreau believed that the government is the best when it doesn’t govern at all. Thoreau advocates that in order to be successful in achieving justice you may have to sacrifice your own well-being. It is in my opinion that Thoreau would agree, to a certain degree, with author James Alan McPherson’s portrayal of justice in his short story, “A Loaf of Bread”. While Thoreau wouldn’t have agreed with McPherson’s storyline idea of having the protagonist, Mr. Green, a grocer selling higher priced items in a community that is already struggling to make ends meet, he might’ve agreed with Green’s decision to temporarily give away all items in his store for free as a remedy. The reasoning for this is because it shows a sign of self-sacrificing and it removes the thought of Harold Green profiting off poor. Even though Mr. Green wasn’t satisfied with the end result, he felt it was his only option for his business and family; this is supported when Mr. Green says, “All day,” the grocer laughed, not quiet hysterically now, “all day long I have not made a single cent of profit” (210).
In James Alan McPherson’s “A Loaf of Bread,” and Henry David Thoreau’s essay “Civil Disobedience,” both authors display a world where one person faces off against an entire community. Each scenario is based on one’s perception of what justice is and who pays the cost. In spite of the fact that McPherson and Thoreau define these words differently, readers understand the impact of selflessness.
In “A Loaf of Bread,” McPherson’s main character Harold Green, owns multiple grocery stores throughout the area and is being picketed because he is over pricing items in a particular community. Members of that community believe that he is over pricing to gain profit. However, Mr. Green argues that he prices the items higher because he has additional cost that he must cover to ensure his business runs appropriately. If that was simply the case, the members of the struggling and predominantly minority community wouldn’t question why then Mr. Green did not raise the prices in ALL of his stores. Including the one in his own neighborhood where those who inhabit it are more “financially stable”. The people demand a change and seek justice via picketing the store as well as Mr. Green’s children’s school. However, it is not through the picketers that readers find the meaning of the cost of justice. Instead it is through grocer, Mr. Green himself.
When Mr. Green says, “Free! Free! Free! Free! Free! Free!” […] pushed his head out, and screamed to the confused crowd, “Free!” then ran back to the counter and stood behind it, like a soldier at attention” (207). With Mr. Green shouting that everything in the store was free, he showed signs of relief and happiness given the community’s reaction. Even though there was confusion amongst some, as a store owner giving away anything for free is unheard of, everyone started swarming in to gather items they wanted until the shelves were cleared. It is my belief that Mr. Green made the items in his store free simply to appease the masses in hopes that they forget him ever having overpriced them to begin with. While making your store one big free for all doesn’t necessarily seem like a form of justice to the readers, in the eyes of Mr. Green this was the most self-sacrificing act one in his position could make. During the story, McPherson informs the reader on how stubborn Mr. Green was about not giving in to the community. When Mr. Green says, “I will not knuckle under,” he said “I will not give” (187). We can see how important it was for Mr. Green to stand his ground on not wanting to concede. Mr. Green did not see yielding as an option because he truly believed he wasn’t doing anything wrong; this is supported when he says, “I am not a dishonest man” (186). He is insinuating the he has done nothing unjustly with having higher prices than his other locations. Attributing the way, he runs his business to that of the learned behavior from his father. In the end, it is Mr. Green who both figuratively and monetarily “pays the price” once justice served and balanced restored.
In “Civil Disobedience,” Thoreau defines the cost of justice as an act of integrity. Thoreau would rather be placed in jail than to pay his taxes because he wasn’t willing to compromise his moral uprightness to support the Mexican American War or slavery. Thoreau says, “I can afford to refuse allegiance to Massachusetts, and her right to my property and life. It costs me less in every sense to incur the penalty of disobedience to the state, than it would be to obey” (11.) What Thoreau conveys with this statement is that nothing, not even imprisonment, is worth more than his willingness to justice, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. If Civil Disobedience could take physical form it would be Henry David Thoreau. By definition, his refusal to comply with the law is a civil disobedience; despite how most can be inequitable. “Unjust laws Exist: shall we be content to obey them, or shall we endeavor to amend them, and obey them until we have succeeded, or shall we transgress them at once? (7). Thoreau openly states that there are laws that are unfair and in order to combat that injustice, one must go against the government even if the cost is sacrificing yourself. Although Thoreau ultimately had his taxes paid off, after spending a single night in prison, he didn’t want to be released because he felt his point still had not been proven. Thoreau being a firm person, whose belief that if people were to risk action, to risk imprisonment, then change and eventually justice would occur.
As is evident, one person’s perception of how justice is served and what the cost of justice is, differs from person to person. However, one thing we all can agree on, both Henry David Thoreau and James Alan McPherson included, is that individuals set the precedent for what is right and what is wrong, and should be held responsible for the injustices they participate in.
References
- Thoreau, H.D. (1993). Civil Disobedience, and Other Essays. New York: Dover Publications
- Mcpherson, J.A (1977). Elbow Room, A loaf of Bread
