Reflection: Thoreau vs. Gandhi

In my opinion, Gandhi was a much better writer than Thoreau, when looking at the two pieces of "Civil Disobedience" and "On the Eve of the Historic Dandi March". In "Civil Disobedience", Thoreau spends much more time on describing his surroundings than on the thoughts and beliefs that brought him to jail. In "On the Eve of the Historic Dandi March", however, Gandhi details why it is important that his followers and associates continue the march even if he is unable to, rather than describing the march plans themselves. Gandhi's writing seems more logical to me. I really got what he was trying to say much better than what Thoreau was talking about.
Gandhi's tone is also much more serious than Thoreau's. Gandhi even starts his speech with the very serious "In all probability this will be my last speech to you" (Gandhi 229). Gandhi's speech sounds like Gandhi is ready to be imprisoned for his cause and accepts that fate as long as his followers will still carry on. Thoreau's anecdote is just that- an amusing anecdote. When I read it, I remembered the night he spent in jail more clearly than the reason he was in jail.
These two works are obviously different in the style and circumstances aspects, but they are also similar in some ways. Though they were written by completely different people from different worlds, they both carry that air of dissatisfaction with the government and the state of the world. Both authors wrote these pieces with the aim of righting what they saw as a wrong. Despite my opinion on who wrote better, I can still see that much. For Thoreau it was the poll tax, and for Gandhi it was the English and salt.
Another comparison between the two is that both Thoreau and Gandhi were very detailed in their writing. A point of contrast, however, is what area their details went to. Thoreau's descriptiveness went to painting a picture of his surroundings and detailing his night spent in jail. Gandhi's went to giving his followers specific instructions for carrying on the march with or without him present. Gandhi also gives the reader a clear idea on how he is feeling by using his descriptive language.
All in all, I enjoyed reading Thoreau's "Civil Disobedience" much more than Gandhi's "On the Eve of the Historic Dandi March". Even though Thoreau's lack of focus on his political point he was trying to make completely annoyed me, structure and language wise, I thought his was better. Gandhi's work was clearly written as a speech, and I find that format boring. I did appreciate how articulate he was on his points. It almost looked like Rationalism writing with it's clear and orderly statements of opinions and support. I could understand his writing and the point he was trying to make so much better than I could with Thoreau. It is for that reason that I believe Gandhi to be the better writer in this case. I can see that, even though I personally may not enjoy reading his works.


Gandhi, Mahatma. "On the Eve of the Historic Dandi March." American Literature. Comp. Jeffory Willhelm. Columbus: McGraw Hill, 2009. 229-30. Print.

Thoreau, Henry D. "Civil Disobedience." American Literature. Comp. Jeffory Willhelm. Columbus: McGraw Hill, 2009. 222-27. Print.